# Rules Concerning Disclosures of Information About Energy Consumption and Water Use for Certain Home Appliances and Other Products Required Under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act; Final Rule FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-11234 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Uncategorized Document - **Published:** May 13, 1994 ## Text SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (``Commission'') issues final rules that add general service fluorescent lamps, medium base (integrally ballasted) compact fluorescent lamps, and general service incandescent lamps (both reflector and nonreflector) to the list of products subject to provisions of the above referenced rule, commonly referred to as the Appliance Labeling Rule (``Rule''). Lamps often are referred to as ``light bulbs'' or ``electric lights.'' This action is taken pursuant to the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (``EPA 92''), which directed the Commission to prescribe, by April 25, 1994, rules requiring such lamp products to be labeled with disclosures that will enable purchasers to select the most energy efficient lamps that meet their requirements. At the same time, the Commission temporarily stays Sec. 305.8(a)(3) of the Rule, which requires manufacturers to file annual reports, until the U.S. Department of Energy adopts test procedures for lamps under EPA 92. The Commission also exempts from the requirements of Secs. 305.11(e) and 305.14(d) of the Rule, which require disclosures on labels and in catalogs, those lamp products that will be eliminated from the market as of October 31, 1995, by minimum efficiency standards specified in EPA 92. EFFECTIVE DATE: May 15, 1995. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent C. Howerton, James G. Mills, or Terrence J. Boyle, Attorneys, Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Division of Enforcement, Room S-4631, 601 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20580, telephone numbers 202- 326-3013, 202-326-3035, and 202-326-3016, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction EPA 92\1\ amends in several respects the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (``EPCA''), which requires the Commission to prescribe labeling rules for certain major household appliances and other products.\2\ The EPA 92 amendments to EPCA direct the Commission, within 18 months of the statute's enactment, to prescribe rules requiring that certain types of lamp products be labeled with ``such information as the Commission deems necessary to enable consumers to select the most energy efficient lamps which meet their requirements.''\3\ Pursuant to this statutory directive, the Commission published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``NPR'') on November 15, 1993, soliciting written public comments on proposed amendments to the Appliance Labeling Rule (``Rule''), 16 CFR part 305 (1993), to include these categories of lamp products.\4\ The Commission also conducted a Public Workshop-Conference (``Workshop'') on January 19, 1994, to discuss the proposed amendments, and accepted supplemental written comments from the Workshop participants following the completion of the Workshop. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\Public Law 102-486, 106 Stat. 2776, 2817-2832 (Oct. 24, 1992) (codified in 42 U.S.C. 6201, 6291-6309). \2\42 U.S.C. 6291 et seq. EPCA also has been amended by the National Energy Conservation Policy Act of 1978 (``NECPA''), Public Law 95-619, 92 Stat. 3258 (1978); the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act of 1987 (``NAECA 87''), Public Law 100-12, 101 Stat. 103 (1987); and the National Appliance Energy Conservation Amendments of 1988 (``NAECA 88''), Public Law 100-357, 102 Stat. 671 (1988). \3\42 U.S.C.A. 6294(a)(2)(C)(i) (West Supp. 1993). Pursuant to other EPA 92 amendments to EPCA, the Commission also amended the Rule to require the disclosure of water usage rates for certain plumbing products. 58 FR 54955 (1993). \4\58 FR 60147 (1993). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- After evaluating the written comments, the transcript of the Workshop, and the supplemental comments, the Commission is amending the rule to impose labeling and other disclosure requirements for the lamp products referenced in EPA 92. The amendments are discussed in detail in part IV, below. The amendments appear in ``Text of Amendments,'' below. The Commission also has determined that the final rules announced today overlap certain provisions of the Commission's pre- existing Light Bulb Rule pertaining to the required disclosure format for wattage, light output, and laboratory life ratings and to the voltage level at which those ratings are to be tested.\5\ Following this proceeding, the Commission will consider whether any additional action is necessary concerning the Light Bulb Rule. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\Prior to EPA 92, the Commission issued a rule, known as the ``Light Bulb Rule,'' governing the most common types of incandescent lamps. Trade Regulation Rule for the Incandescent Lamp (Light Bulb) Industry, 16 CFR part 409 (1993); see 35 FR 11784 (1970). The labeling rules announced in this notice duplicate certain disclosures required by the Light Bulb Rule. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- II. Background A. Overview of the Appliance Labeling Rule EPCA, enacted in 1975, is generally designed to promote improved energy efficiency of consumer products. 42 U.S.C. 6201 (1988). As amended by EPA 92, it establishes energy consumption standards or water use standards for certain categories of major home appliances and other products, 42 U.S.C.A. 6295 (West Supp. 1993), and directs the U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') to prescribe test procedures to measure the energy consumption or water use of those products. 42 U.S.C.A. 6293 (West Supp. 1993). EPCA also directs the Commission to prescribe, or in some cases to consider prescribing, rules requiring appliances and other products to be labeled with disclosures of estimated annual energy cost, another useful measure of energy usage or efficiency, or of water use rates. 42 U.S.C.A. 6294 (West Supp. 1993). Following enactment of EPCA in 1975, the Commission adopted the Appliance Labeling Rule.\6\ The Rule requires that certain major home appliances, including furnaces, refrigerators and air conditioners, be labeled with EnergyGuides.\7\ In addition, the Rule requires fluorescent lamp ballasts to be labeled or marked with the symbol ``E'' enclosed in a circle, to denote that the ballast meets an energy efficiency standard established under EPCA.\8\ The Rule, as recently amended, also requires showerheads, faucets, water closets and urinals to be marked permanently and/or labeled with certain disclosures about their water use.\9\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\44 FR 66466 (1979). The Commission has amended the Rule on several occasions to add labeling requirements for additional product categories. 52 FR 46888 (1987) (adding a new product category of central air conditioners and heat pumps and two additional subcategories of furnaces, pulse combustion furnaces and condensing furnaces); 54 FR 28031 (1989) (adding a new product category of fluorescent lamp ballasts); and 58 FR 54955 (1993) (adding new product categories of showerheads, faucets, water closets and urinals). \7\For example, labels for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, freezers, clothes washers, dishwashers, and water heaters must disclose the estimated annual operating cost (e.g., ``$240.00''). 16 CFR 305.11(a)(5)(i)(E). Labels for room air conditioners, central air conditioners, heat pumps, and fact sheets for furnaces, by contrast, must disclose the energy efficiency rating (e.g., ``10.5'' for a central air conditioner or ``96.5'' for a furnace). 16 CFR 305.11(a)(5)(i)(E), 305.11(a)(5)(iii)(C), 305.11(b)(3)(v). In two separate proceedings, the Commission is considering proposals to amend the current disclosure requirements for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, freezers, clothes washers, dishwashers, water heaters and room air conditioners, 53 FR 22106 (1988) and 58 FR 12818 (1993), and to issue labeling rules for pool heaters, instantaneous water heaters, and heat pump water heaters, 58 FR 7852 (1993). \8\16 CFR 305.11(d). A fluorescent lamp ballast is a device that is used to start and operate fluorescent lamps by providing a starting voltage and current and limiting the current during normal operations. 16 CFR 305.3(j). \9\58 FR at 54965-66; to be codified at 16 CFR 305.11(e). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Except for fluorescent lamp ballasts, the Rule requires catalogs and point-of-sale promotional materials for products covered by the Rule to contain disclosures of required energy consumption and efficiency information or water use information.\10\ Further, the Rule requires, for furnaces, disclosure of energy usage information on fact sheets, 16 CFR 305.11(b), and, for central air conditioners and heat pumps, similar disclosures on fact sheets or in industry directories, 16 CFR 305.11(c). For fluorescent lamp ballasts, the Rule requires catalogs and point-of-sale promotional materials to contain the same symbol that is required on labels. 16 CFR 305.13(c), 305.14(c). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\58 FR at 54964; to be codified at 16 CFR 305.13(a), .14(a)- (b), (d). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPCA authorizes the Commission to assess monetary civil penalties for violations of the Rule. 42 U.S.C. 6303(a), (d) (1988). The Rule provides that manufacturers or private labelers who knowingly distribute products covered by the Rule that are not properly labeled are subject to a penalty of not more than $100 for each unit. 16 CFR 305.4(a)(1). Manufacturers, distributors, or retailers who knowingly remove or make illegible a required label similarly are subject to a penalty of not more than $100 for each unit. 16 CFR 305.4(a)(2). Manufacturers or private labelers who fail to include required disclosures in their catalog advertising are subject to a penalty of not more than $100 per day. 16 CFR 305.4(b)(5). Manufacturers or private labelers who fail to keep records or provide reports or product samples as specified by the Rule also are subject to a penalty of not more than $100 per day. 16 CFR 305.4(b)(2). EPCA also grants to the U.S. District Courts authority to issue injunctions against such violations. 42 U.S.C. 6304 (1988). B. Lamp Labeling Amendments to Appliance Labeling Rule Required by EPA 92 Amendments to EPCA The EPA 92 amendments to EPCA require that the Commission issue labeling rules no later than April 25, 1994, for ``general service fluorescent lamps,'' ``medium base compact fluorescent lamps,'' and ``general service incandescent lamps,'' as those terms are defined in EPCA. 42 U.S.C.A. 6294(a)(2)(C)(i) (West Supp. 1993). These are the lamps used in the majority of household and commercial settings. See Part IV.A.1.-3, below. The lamp labeling rules must require conspicuous disclosure on the packaging of the lamp of ``such information as the Commission deems necessary to enable consumers to select the most energy efficient lamps which meet their requirements.'' Id. The rules must apply to lamp products manufactured after the twelve month period beginning on the date of publication of the rule. Id. The Commission also is requiring disclosures in catalogs from which these lamp products can be ordered. C. Requirements of Light Bulb Rule The Light Bulb Rule covers, with some exceptions, the category of general service incandescent (nonreflector) lamps.\11\ It does not cover general service fluorescent lamps, medium base compact fluorescent lamps, or general service incandescent reflector lamps. The EPA 92 amendments require the Commission to issue labeling rules for all of these lamps.\12\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\16 CFR 409.1 n. 3. \12\Thus, today's amendments apply to: (1) General service incandescent (reflector and nonreflector) lamps; (2) medium base (integrally ballasted) compact fluorescent lamps; and (3) general service fluorescent lamps. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Light Bulb Rule requires that package containers disclose clearly and conspicuously the enclosed bulb's electrical energy consumption expressed in average initial wattage, light output expressed in average initial lumens, and average laboratory life expressed in hours.\13\ It specifies placement and size of the disclosures on packages.\14\ It also requires that the disclosures of the bulb's wattage, light output, and laboratory life be made in accordance with the requirements of a specific federal purchase specification, and that the disclosures be based upon ``generally accepted and approved test methods and procedures.''\15\ Finally, the Light Bulb Rule prohibits specific claims for these lamp products unless certain conditions are met.\16\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \13\16 CFR at 409.1(a). If lamps are sold without sleeves or packaging, or are sold in universal or interchangeable sleeves or packaging without the information listed above, then all these disclosures must appear clearly and conspicuously on the lamps themselves. Id. at 409.1(a)-(b). \14\Id. at 409.1 n. 4. \15\Id. at 409.1 n. 1. For multiple filament (``three-way'') lamps, it requires that wattage and lumen ratings be disclosed for operation at each level, and that the life rating be based on the life of the first filament that fails. Because the federal purchase specification cited in the Light Bulb Rule does not cover multiple filament lamps, that Rule allows industry members to substantiate wattage, light output, and laboratory life ratings using tests that are based upon generally accepted and approved test methods. It requires disclosure of the specific method used to determine the life rating, for example, that the lamp is burned on all three positions equally or that it is based on the life of the major filament (medium light level) of the lamp. Id. \16\Id. at 409.1(c)-(d). For example, Sec. 409.1(c) prohibits representations that savings either in lamp cost or cost of light will result from the use of certain lamps because of the lamps' life or light output unless specific factors are taken into account and clearly and conspicuously disclosed. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Light Bulb Rule remains effective notwithstanding the labeling rules for lamp products that the Commission now adopts. The Commission does, however, note two provisions of the Light Bulb Rule that are different from the lamp labeling rules. The first concerns the format requirements for disclosing the design wattage, light output and laboratory life ratings of general service incandescent nonreflector lamps. The second provision concerns the Light Bulb Rule's requirement that the testing for, and required disclosures of, wattage, light output and laboratory life ratings of general service nonreflector lamps be at the lamp's design voltage. The rules announced today also prescribe that these required ratings disclosures must be made in a specified manner and must be based on testing at 120 volts, regardless of the design voltage. Manufacturers are permitted to provide these ratings based on the design voltage. Because these different rule provisions are not contradictory, manufacturers will be able to comply with both without incurring significant additional costs.\17\ Following this proceeding, the Commission will decide what further action, if any, it should take concerning the Light Bulb Rule. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \17\The requirement to provide disclosures at 120 volts on lamps that have a different design voltage affects a very small segment of the market. Further, those manufacturers who make 125 or 130 volt lamps have a market incentive to provide the ratings at their design voltages whether or not it is required. Furthermore, the various size specifications set by the Light Bulb Rule only prescribe minimum sizes for these rating disclosures, which prevents the disclosures specified by today's rules from becoming too small. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- D. Procedures Used in Rulemaking Proceeding In the NPR, the Commission invited interested persons to submit by December 30, 1993, written comments on any issue of fact, law or policy that might have bearing upon the proposed lamp labeling rules. The Commission also announced in the NPR that the Commission's staff would conduct a Workshop, with the assistance of a neutral, third-party facilitator, to afford Commission staff and interested parties an opportunity to discuss issues raised in the rulemaking proceeding, particularly areas of significant controversy or divergent opinions that were raised in the written comments. The Commission announced that the discussion during the Workshop would be transcribed and the transcription would be placed on the public record. The NPR directed persons interested in participating in the Workshop to notify the Commission staff by December 15, 1993.18 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\858 FR at 60163. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Workshop was to focus primarily on considering what information might be ``necessary to enable purchasers to select the most energy efficient lamps which meet their requirements,'' where the disclosures should be made, and the manner and layout for making the disclosures. Participants in the Workshop also were to be afforded an opportunity to address additional issues raised in the proceeding. The Workshop, however, was not intended to achieve a consensus among participants or between participants and Commission staff with respect to any issue raised in the rulemaking proceeding. The Workshop instead was intended to elicit information on the basis of which the Commission could determine how to design the lamp labeling rules. The Workshop took place at the Federal Trade Commission, Pennsylvania Avenue and Sixth Street, NW., Washington, DC, on January 19, 1994. With the following exceptions, the proceeding was conducted as explained in the NPR. First, because of the limited number of parties who requested to participate in the Workshop, all parties who timely submitted requests to participate, and timely filed written comments, were selected. Second, the Commission allowed any interested party who attended the Workshop to make limited oral presentations. Third, in response to a petition from the National Electrical Manufacturers' Association (``NEMA''),19 the Commission extended the deadline for participants and others who made oral presentations during the Workshop to submit supplemental written comments from 24 hours to one week following the close of the Workshop.20 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\9Petition dated December 15, 1993, from Mark L. Perlis, Dickstein, Shapiro & Morin, counsel for NEMA. \2\0Order dated Dec. 21, 1993, of Lewis R. Parker, Chief Judge, FTC. See 58 FR at 60164. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- E. Identification of Parties Who Filed Written Comments The Commission received comments responding to the NPR from industry members, trade associations, energy and environmental interest groups, federal and state agencies, utility companies, testing laboratories, private standards-setting organizations, universities and other interested parties. The following parties filed written comments:21 (1) Angelo Brothers Company (``Angelo'') (G-1); (2) American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (``ACEEE'') (GG-1); (3) Inchcape Testing Services, ETL Testing Laboratories, Inc. (``ETL'') (GG-2); (4) General Electric Company (``GE'') (G-2); (5) Henry Gluckstern, Esq. (``Gluckstern'') (GG-3); (6) Green Seal (``Green Seal'') (GG-4); (7) The Home Depot (``Home Depot'') (GG-5); (8) Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (``IES'') (GG-6); (9) Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (``LBL''), University of California (GG- 7); (10) Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General (``MA AG'') (GG- 8); (11) Minnesota Department of Public Service (``MN DPS'') (GG-9); (12) Missouri Department of Natural Resources (``MO DNR'') (GG-10); (13) Dickstein, Shapiro & Morin, on behalf of National Electrical Manufacturers Association (``NEMA'') (G-3); (14) New England Power Service (``NEPS'') (GG-11); (15) Northwest Real Group (``NW REAL''), on behalf of Eugene Water and Electric Board, Grays Harbor Public Utility District, Idaho Department of Water Resources (Energy Division), Idaho Power Company, NW Power Planning Council, Oregon Public Utility Commission, PacifiCorp, Public Power Council, Puget Sound Power and Light Company, Salem Electric, Seattle City Light, and Snohomish County Public Utility District # 1 (GG-12); (16) Oregon Department of Energy (``OR DOE'') (GG-13); (17) Oregon State University (``ORSU'') (GG-14); (18) Osram Sylvania, Inc. (``Osram'') (G-4); (19) Philips Lighting Company (``Philips'') (G-5); (20) Lighting Research Center (``LRC''), Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (GG-15); (21) Scientific Certification Systems, Inc. (``SCS'') (GG-16); (22) Supreme Corporation (``Supreme'') (G-6); (23) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (``US EPA'') (GG-17); (24) Washington State Energy Office (``WA SEO'') (GG-18); (25) Hubbell/ Lighting Division (``Hubbell'') (GG-19); (26) Scientific Certification Systems, Inc. (``SCS'') (GG-20) (revised version of GG-16); (27) Matsushita Electric Corporation of America (``Panasonic'') (G-7). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\1All public documents are filed in the Commission's File No. R611004. Staff submissions for the public record are filed in category ``C. Miscellaneous Staff Materials Assembled After NPR Filed.'' Industry comments are filed in category ``G. Lamp Products Proceeding--Industry Comments.'' Other comments are filed in category ``GG. Lamp Products Proceeding--Comments from Other Sources.'' Documents are numbered sequentially, such as Document No. G-1, Document No. G-2. In this notice, comments are cited by an identification of the commentor, the comment number and the relevant page number(s), e.g., ``Angelo, G-1, 1-3.'' Supplemental comments are designated in addition as: ``(Supp.).'' The Workshop transcript is filed in category ``L. Transcripts of Public Hearings.'' Discussion by more than one party in the transcript is cited by a reference to the transcript and the relevant page number(s), e.g., ``Tr., 15-20.'' Discussion by one party in the transcript is cited by an identification of the party, a reference to the transcript and the relevant page number(s), e.g., ``Osram (Tr.), 80-81.'' Although the following comments were submitted shortly after the initial or supplemental written comment due dates, the Commission has placed them on the public record and considered them as part of the rulemaking record of this proceeding: Panasonic, G-7; Hubbell, GG- 19; SCI, GG-20; and MA AG (Supp.), GG-23. One supplemental comment, NEMA, G-17, was received on March 4. This comment has been placed on the public record of this proceeding, but is not included as part of the rulemaking record. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Philips (G-14), Osram (G-15), and GE (G-16) also filed written comments in response to the separate notice published by the Commission concerning its request to OMB for approval of the collection of information burden hours imposed by the proposed lamp labeling rules under the Paperwork Reduction Act (``PRA'').22 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\258 FR 60652 (1993). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- F. Identification of Parties Who Participated in Workshop and Those Who Filed Supplemental Written Comments The following parties were selected as participants and attended the Workshop: (1) Steven Nadel, Deputy Director, ACEEE. ACEEE is a nonprofit research organization that seeks to promote energy efficiency. (2) Barton Pasternak, Vice President of Corporate Development, Angelo. Angelo Brothers Company is the largest non-manufacturing seller and distributor of incandescent light bulbs in the United States. (3) W. Scott Seeley, Counsel, Gail Cohen, Product Manager for incandescent and three-way lamps, Russ Churchill, Manager, GE Lighting Institute, GE. GE is a full-line manufacturer of lamps. (4) Arthur Weissman, Vice President of Standards and Planning, Green Seal. Green Seal is a nonprofit environmental organization involved in labeling and standards-setting. Green Seal recently issued a standard for compact fluorescent lamps, and has certified several products under that standard. (5) Mark Eisen, Manager of Environmental Marketing, Home Depot. Home Depot is a home center retailer. (6) Rita Harrold, Director of Educational and Technical Development, and Ed Robinson, Regional Vice President, IES. IES disseminates information on the art and science of illumination, through publications and educational programs. (7) Barbara Atkinson, LBL. LBL operates an energy analysis program that provides assistance to the U.S. Department of Energy about federal policy options and the Energy Policy Act. LBL also conducts research on lighting technologies. (8) Bill McAvoy, Assistant Attorney General, MA AG. MA AG works with utilities such as New England Power regarding conservation programs. (9) Mark Perlis, Counsel, NEMA. NEMA is a trade association that includes manufacturers of lamp products. (10) Meredith Miller, NEPS. NEPS is a service company for three retail electric power companies in New England, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts, and New Hampshire. NEPS provides incentives to residential customers to encourage compact fluorescent lamp purchases. (11) Peter Bleasby, Director of Industry Relations and Standards, Osram. Osram manufactures most types of lamp products. (12) Al Rousseau, Manager of Technical Relations, Philips. Philips manufactures most types of lamp products. (13) Bob Davis, Research Assistant Professor, LRC. LRC conducts an efficient lighting research and development program. (14) Bruce Siegal, President, Supreme. Supreme is a small family- owned lamp manufacturer, specializing in the manufacture of long-life lamps specifically designed for vibration service and rough surface applications. (15) William VonNeida, US EPA. US EPA conducts a ``Green Lights'' program as its flagship voluntary pollution prevention program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In the program, US EPA encourages businesses, government, and other organizations to use energy-efficient lighting. In addition to the participants listed above, Larry Galowin, Laboratory Accreditation Program, National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology (``NIST''), U.S. Department of Commerce, also attended and made oral presentations during the Workshop. The following parties who made oral presentations during the Workshop also filed supplemental written comments after the Workshop: ACEEE (GG-21); Angelo (G-8); GE (G-9); LBL (GG-22); NEMA (G-10); Osram (G-11); Philips (G-12); Supreme (G-13); MA AG (GG-24); and NIST (GG- 23). III. Disclosures and Other Requirements Proposed in NPR In informal communications with the Commission's staff during the period after EPA 92 was enacted and before the Commission published the NPR, representatives of several industry members and environmental interest groups suggested various labeling requirements for lamps. Two of the more specific suggestions were described in the NPR, along with the Commission's proposals.23 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\358 FR at 60152-60. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A. NEMA's Proposals NEMA suggested that the Commission adopt particularized disclosure requirements for different types of lamp products.24 For general service fluorescent lamps and incandescent reflector lamps, for which EPCA establishes energy conservation standards, NEMA suggested disclosure only of the encircled capital letter ``E,'' similar to the current requirement for fluorescent lamp ballasts.25 This symbol would designate that the product meets the established energy conservation standards. In support of this proposal, NEMA stated that the performance of all the interchangeable general service fluorescent lamps that will remain on the market after the energy conservation standards established by EPA 92 become effective26 will vary only slightly. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\4NEMA, C-41, C-42. \2\5See Part II.A, above. \2\6The effective dates are April 30, 1995, for some lamp products, and October 31, 1995 for other lamp products. 42 U.S.C.A. 6295(i)(1) (West Supp. 1993). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- NEMA suggested that the designation be indicated in the manufacturer's catalogs and other printed material, and that the encircled ``E'' be etched on the product itself, no smaller than the lamp designation information for wattage. NEMA suggested that, if the Commission cannot require etching on the product, it should require that the packing carton containing one or more lamps be marked with the encircled ``E,'' in color contrasting ink and no smaller than the manufacturer's name or logo. For general service incandescent lamps (other than reflector lamps) and medium base compact fluorescent lamps, NEMA suggested that ``light output'' (in lumens), watts, life, design volts, and bulb quantity contents (i.e., number of bulbs in the package) be disclosed according to specified format requirements on at least one panel of the outer sleeve of the package. One or more of these items also could be disclosed on the remaining panels. For general service incandescent lamps (other than reflector lamps), the term ``lumens,'' in the specified format, would follow beside or below the numerical value for light output. For medium base compact fluorescent lamps, the term ``lumens (base-up)'' would be used instead of ``lumens.''27 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\7See note 136, below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- NEMA also suggested that the labeling rules require an ``energy efficiency index'' (consisting of ``lumens per watt,'' rounded to the next highest number, and ``yearly energy cost'' of operating the lamp) on packages of general service incandescent lamps (other than reflector lamps) and medium base compact fluorescent lamps.28 The energy efficiency index would include the disclosure: ``Lumens per watt.'' The yearly energy cost would include the disclosure: ``At 4 hours per day at $.10 per kilowatt-hour.'' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\8The ``energy efficiency index'' would be a square, at least one inch by one inch, divided in the middle by a horizontal line. The lumens per watt would appear in the top portion of the square, and the yearly energy cost in the bottom. The letters and numbers would be printed in black (or whatever dark color is used in creating the Universal Product Code symbol). See Illustration 1, 58 FR at 60153. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- NEMA further suggested that, if the manufacturer elects to place the energy efficiency label on a panel other than the primary display panel of the package, it should be required to provide an additional ``energy flag'' on the primary display panel. The energy flag would include only the ``energy index'' value (i.e., lumens per watt).29 The designation ``Energy Index'' would be printed with the energy index value inside the flag, and a reference to ``See package back'' would be printed immediately below the flag. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\9The ``energy flag'' would be a right triangle one inch in height and resting on a perpendicular side one and one-half inches in length. See Illustration 2, 58 FR at 60154. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- NEMA also suggested that the Commission require that manufacturers of all lamp products covered by the labeling rules include on the outer (packing) cases in which the lamps are shipped a label or pre-printed message stating: ``Product herein tested and labeled in compliance with the Energy Policy Act of 1992'' or, alternatively, with an approved symbol. NEMA suggested that the advisory statement be integrated with or be placed adjacent to the usual case contents label and included format recommendations. B. ACEEE's Proposals ACEEE also submitted specific labeling suggestions for discussion purposes.30 ACEEE stated that because purchase patterns vary for residential and commercial purchasers, different labeling approaches would probably be warranted. It pointed out that commercial purchasers generally have a greater technical understanding about lamp products, whereas residential purchasers generally know very little about lighting and need information that is non-technical and easily understood. It also noted that residential purchases generally are made through grocery, hardware, and other retail outlets, where products in boxes or other packaging are selected by the purchaser off the shelf in small quantities. ACEEE stated that, in contrast, commercial purchasers generally order medium to large quantities of lamps from lighting distributors, using information in catalogs and sales brochures, as well as information provided orally by sales personnel. These commercial purchases often are shipped in case quantities, and printed packages for individual lamps are rare. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\0ACEEE, C-40. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACEEE suggested that two types of information appear on labels for residential purchasers: annual operating cost and relative light output. It proposed that relative light output be measured by comparing the lumen output of a product to a reference lamp, with a reference lamp defined for each common type and wattage of lamp.31 It also suggested that annual operating cost include both the purchase cost (manufacturer's suggested list price prorated for an assumed annual hours of operation) and annual electricity cost (for average operating hours and electricity cost).32 ACEEE suggested that use of an annual operating cost metric would allow purchasers to compare products with different lives and costs. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\1For example, ACEEE suggested a 60 watt standard incandescent A-lamp as the reference lamp for a 15 watt compact fluorescent lamp. The relative light output of the compact fluorescent lamp might be 88%, based on average light output. \3\2ACEEE, C-40, 3, illustrated this as follows: Assuming 1,000 hours per year of operation and $.08 per kilowatt-hour unit electricity cost, a 15 watt compact fluorescent lamp (with a $20 list price and 10,000 hour rated life) will have an annual operating cost of $3.20 ([$20/{10,000 hour life/1,000 hours per year} + [15 watts X 1,000 hours per year/1,000 Wh/kWh X $.08 per kilowatt hour]). In comparison, a standard 60 watt general service incandescent A-lamp (with a $1.00 list price and 1,000 hour rated life) will have an annual operating cost of $5.80. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACEEE further stated that a lumens-per-watt disclosure probably should not be used for residential purchasers. ACEEE maintained that such a disclosure could encourage residential purchasers to buy higher wattage lamps that have higher lumens-per-watt ratings, when a lower wattage lamp with a lower lumens-per-watt rating might provide sufficient light for their needs and cost less to operate at the lower wattage. For commercial purchasers, on the other hand, ACEEE suggested that a lumens-per-watt rating probably would be acceptable because catalog display space is likely to be very limited and commercial purchasers are more sophisticated. ACEEE supported disclosure of relevant information on lamp packages and other point-of-sale materials that provide information on particular products, such as fact sheets and special displays for residential sales. For commercial sales, it suggested requiring the information in catalogs and other sales materials that provide information on specific products. Finally, ACEEE recommended that the Commission specify label content and size, but that the Commission allow manufacturers to develop their own customized designs, consistent with Commission specifications. C. Commission's Proposals 1. Disclosure Requirements Based on the options discussed in the NPR about the kinds of information purchasers need to select lamp products and the proposals suggested by interested parties (as summarized above), the Commission proposed requiring disclosure of two types of information for lamp products covered by the labeling rules. One category included basic performance information (such as light output, which is needed to select lamp products that meet purchasers' requirements), and the other category included various supplemental disclosures designed to further facilitate selection of the most energy efficient lamp. Each category is discussed below. a. Basic disclosures. The Commission proposed requiring that lamp package labels and catalogs conspicuously disclose the following information: (1) Lumens (whether identified by that term, or another such as ``brightness'' or ``light output''); (2) watts; (3) design volts (if other than 120 volts); (4) average life (in hours); and (5) number of items in the package.33 For multiple filament (``three- way'') general service incandescent lamps, the Commission proposed requiring that lumens, watts, and design volts be disclosed for operation at each level, and that the life rating be based on the life of the first filament that fails. Finally, the Commission proposed that the following statement appear on package labels and in catalogs from which the lamps could be ordered: ``More efficient lamps may have a higher purchase price, but may cost you less overall.'' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\358 FR at 60154-56. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- b. Supplemental disclosures. The Commission proposed requiring, for all lamps to be covered by the labeling rules, that package labels and catalogs from which the lamps may be ordered also make a supplemental disclosure. The Commission proposed two alternatives for primary consideration: (1) A lumens-per-watt disclosure; or, (2) a disclosure of the estimated energy cost of the lamp based on a specified unit energy cost and use period. The NPR explained that a lumens-per-watt disclosure (i.e., the ``Energy Index'' that had been suggested by NEMA) has the advantage of simplicity. But, as ACEEE noted, such a disclosure could lead to lumen over-purchasing because higher wattage bulbs often produce disproportionately more lumens and thus often have a better energy index although they use more energy. The Commission stated that this drawback possibly could be avoided if the Commission required a disclosure such as: ``Select the light output you require before comparing the energy index of different bulbs.'' Alternatively, the Commission stated that it might require a disclosure of the estimated monetary cost of the energy used by the lamp, based on use for a specified usage period, such as a normal average life in hours of a lamp or a length of time based on average usage patterns. The advantage of an operating cost disclosure is that it would reduce to monetary terms the energy cost of a lamp product. At the same time, the Commission stated that it would consider carefully whether such disclosures effectively communicate the extent to which a higher initial bulb cost can be compensated for by lower operating costs over the bulb's life.34 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\4See notes 106, 108, below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission indicated that, although average or estimated usage patterns (e.g., one year) could be used in a monetary cost of operation disclosure, there are no established usage patterns and estimated use will vary depending upon the location of the lamp. In addition, the Commission noted that it would have to determine what unit cost for electricity to use. The Commission explained that, to prevent possible confusion, it might be appropriate to require disclosure of how the estimated energy cost was determined.35 The Commission recognized, however, that additional information could unduly complicate the label and not be useful. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\5Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Because some purchasers may be interested in computing lamp costs comprehensively, including consideration of the initial purchase price and replacement cost, the Commission also proposed requiring that information be provided to purchasers to enable them to determine the ``estimated total operating cost'' of the lamp for a standard time period. But, recognizing that purchasers desiring such information would need to make calculations for each bulb they were considering, the Commission stated that it would consider carefully the extent to which consumers actually would use the proposed disclosures in making a purchase decision. The Commission noted that, as a practical matter, consumers may disregard, or consider too complex, any disclosure requiring computations of this sort, and that any such required disclosures, therefore, may not be useful to consumers in their efforts to choose an energy efficient bulb. 2. Where Disclosures Should Be Made In the NPR, the Commission explained that residential purchasers normally buy lamp products through retail outlets, such as hardware, home center, and grocery stores. Residential purchasers, therefore, normally have the opportunity to examine lamp product packaging prior to purchase. The disclosures proposed for packaged product labels would provide residential purchasers with the information they need to select the most energy efficient lamps that meet their requirements. According to industry representatives, however, some products, such as general service fluorescent lamps, frequently are shipped without individual lamp sleeves or packaging other than the bulk shipping case, whether the shipment is to a commercial purchaser (who purchases through a catalog) or to a local retail store for resale of unpackaged individual lamps to residential purchasers. For these products, the Commission suggested two options. Option One would require the basic and supplemental disclosures (except for the number of items in each package) on an adhesive, hang tag, or similar type of label, attached to each unpackaged product. Option Two would require the manufacturer to include, with each bulk shipping case, statements disclosing all the required information for the enclosed products (except for the number of items in each package). Option Two also would require the retailer to post those statements conspicuously at the point of sale in immediate proximity to the sales floor display of the lamp product. Some sellers also sell lamp products to residential purchasers and commercial purchasers through catalogs. These purchasers will not see the disclosures on the product's packaging until the product is delivered, and may rely primarily (or solely) on information in the catalogs from which the lamps are ordered. For these purchasers, the catalog serves the same informational function as a package does for a retail purchaser. The Commission, therefore, proposed that the basic as well as the supplemental disclosures be made both on package labels and in catalogs each time each different lamp product is listed for sale. 3. Format of Disclosures The Commission explained in the NPR that it could specify that required disclosures be made through use of a flexible standard that requires ``clear and conspicuous'' disclosures. Under this ``performance'' standard, complying firms would be free to design disclosures as they wish in response to market considerations, as long as the disclosures were clear and conspicuous. The Commission stated that, alternatively, it could require that the disclosures comply with a design format specified by the Commission. The Commission indicated that, in choosing a format standard, it would be guided by the need to direct the purchaser's attention to the information that is most important, and the need for the information to be organized so it could be easily understood and acted upon. For example, the Commission stated that it would consider requiring that those items deemed most important to purchasers be featured on the front panel of a package label, perhaps within a graphic box, while permitting other disclosures to be placed elsewhere. 4. Substantiation and Sampling Requirements In the NPR, the Commission proposed requiring that manufacturers follow testing and test specimen sampling procedures to be specified in the final labeling rules to substantiate all disclosures they must make on labels, catalogs and point-of-sale written materials. The Commission stated that when DOE issues testing and sampling procedures for general service fluorescent lamps and general service incandescent reflector lamps, or for any additional lamp products, the Commission would consider whether to adopt the DOE procedures as the required substantiation under the labeling rules.36 The Commission solicited comments about current industry testing and sampling procedures, such as those issued by IES and the American National Standards Institute (``ANSI''), that would be adequate in the interim to substantiate the disclosures it proposed. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\6EPA 92 amended EPCA to establish minimum energy efficiency standards for general service fluorescent lamps and incandescent (reflector) lamps. 42 U.S.C.A. 6295(i) (West Supp. 1993). The amendments require DOE to issue specific testing procedures for these lamp products. 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(6) (West Supp. 1993). EPCA does not establish energy conservation standards or require DOE to issue test procedures for medium base compact fluorescent lamps or general service incandescent lamps (other than incandescent (reflector) lamps). However, DOE has authority to issue test procedures for categories of products that are not specified in EPCA, 42 U.S.C. 6292(b), 6393(b)(1)(B) (1988), and to set minimum efficiency standards for those products, 42 U.S.C.A. 6295(l) (West Supp. 1993). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- To enable the Commission to determine whether required disclosures are accurate, the NPR also proposed requiring that manufacturers, upon request by the Commission, submit, at the manufacturer's expense, a reasonable number of products to any laboratory designated by the Commission. Any charge levied by the laboratory for testing, however, would be paid for by the Commission.37 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\7Based on EPCA, 42 U.S.C. 6296(b)(3) (1988), the Appliance Labeling Rule, 16 CFR 305.16, applies this requirement to other products. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements The Commission proposed requiring that manufacturers of all covered lamp products maintain records to substantiate each item that the final rules required to be disclosed, and proposed requiring manufacturers to submit those records to the Commission within 30 days of a request. The Commission also proposed requiring that lamp manufacturers submit annual reports on or before March 1 each year. As proposed, the yearly reporting requirement would not become effective until after DOE issues test procedures for specific lamp products covered by the labeling rules. The Commission stated that it would publish a notice after DOE had issued test procedures, announcing when the initial reports would be due. The Commission proposed requiring that each report contain the same type of information that currently is required for other categories of products covered by the Appliance Labeling Rule. To minimize the burdens imposed by this reporting requirement, the Commission proposed accepting trade association directories and similar submissions in lieu of individual annual reports, as it does for other product categories. 6. Other Matters The Commission proposed amending Sec. 305.1 of the Appliance Labeling Rule, 16 CFR 305.1, which summarizes the Rule's coverage, to include a description of the disclosures proposed for labels and catalogs. The Commission also proposed amending Sec. 305.2 of the Rule, 16 CFR 305.2, which contains definitions of words used in EPCA, to include definitions for additional words to be used in the Rule, based on definitions in EPCA, as amended by EPA 92, 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30) (West Supp. 1993). IV. Analysis of Disclosures and Other Requirements Adopted by the Commission The Commission received information from the public relating to this rulemaking proceeding from three sources: written comments filed in response to the NPR, testimony during the Workshop, and supplemental written comments following the Workshop. The discussion below includes information from all three sources, as well as documents placed on the public record by the Commission's staff during the rulemaking proceeding. In some cases, participants in the proceeding modified their position on one or more of the issues as the rulemaking progressed. In instances in which the commentor's position on a particular issue changed, the Commission has taken the commentor's most recent comments as its final position on that issue. Similarly, whenever the Commission refers to a commentor's position on a particular issue, if it has changed since its original formulation, the Commission notes that change. A. Lamp Products Covered by Labeling Rules EPCA specifically defines the lamp products that are covered by the Commission's lamp labeling rules. Under EPCA, as amended by EPA 92, the Commission's labeling rules apply only to ``general service fluorescent lamps,'' ``medium base compact fluorescent lamps,'' and ``general service incandescent lamps.'' 42 U.S.C.A. 6294(a)(2)(c)(i) (West Supp. 1993). These lamp products are described in more detail below. 1. General Service Fluorescent Lamps The term ``fluorescent lamp'' means a lamp containing a low pressure mercury electric-discharge source in which a fluorescing coating transforms some of the ultra-violet energy generated by the mercury discharge into light. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(A) (West Supp. 1993). EPCA includes only the following fluorescent lamps: (i) Any straight-shaped lamp (commonly referred to as 4-foot medium bi-pin lamps) with medium bi-pin bases of nominal overall length of 48 inches and rated wattage of 28 or more. (ii) Any U-shaped lamp (commonly referred to as 2-foot U-shaped lamps) with medium bi-pin bases of nominal overall length between 22 and 25 inches and rated wattage of 28 or more. (iii) Any rapid start lamp (commonly referred to as 8-foot high output lamps) with recessed double contact bases of nominal overall length of 96 inches and 0.800 nominal amperes, as defined in ANSI C78.1-1978 and related supplements. (iv) Any instant start lamp (commonly referred to as 8-foot slimline lamps) with single pin bases of nominal overall length of 96 inches and rated wattage of 52 or more, as defined in ANSI C78.3- 1978 (R1984) and related supplement ANSI C78.3a-1985. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(A)(i)-(iv) (West Supp. 1993). The term ``general service fluorescent lamp'' means fluorescent lamps that can be used to satisfy the majority of fluorescent applications. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(B) (West Supp. 1993). The definition specifically excludes fluorescent lamps designed and marketed for specific lighting applications.38 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\8The exclusions are: (i) Fluorescent lamps designed to promote plant growth; (ii) fluorescent lamps specifically designed for cold temperature installations; (iii) colored fluorescent lamps; (iv) impact-resistant fluorescent lamps; (v) reflectorized or aperture fluorescent lamps; (vi) fluorescent lamps designed for use in reprographic equipment; (vii) fluorescent lamps primarily designed to produce radiation in the ultra-violet region of the spectrum; and (viii) fluorescent lamps with a color rendering index of 82 or greater. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(B)(i)-(viii) (West Supp. 1993). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. General Service Incandescent Lamps The term ``incandescent lamp'' means a lamp in which light is produced by a filament heated to incandescence by an electric current. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(C) (West Supp. 1993). The definition includes only the following incandescent lamps: (i) Any lamp (commonly referred to as lower wattage nonreflector general service lamps, including any tungsten-halogen lamp) that has a rated wattage between 30 and 199 watts, has an E26 medium screw base, has a rated voltage or voltage range that lies at least partially within 115 and 130 volts, and is not a reflector lamp. (ii) Any lamp (commonly referred to as a reflector lamp) which is not colored or designed for rough or vibration service applications, that contains an inner reflective coating on the outer bulb to direct the light, an R, PAR, or similar bulb shapes (excluding ER or BR) with E26 medium screw bases, a rated voltage or voltage range that lies at least partially within 115 and 130 volts, a diameter which exceeds 2.75 inches, and is either-- (I) A low(er) wattage reflector lamp which has a rated wattage between 40 and 205 watts; or (II) A high(er) wattage reflector lamp which has a rated wattage above 205 watts. (iii) Any general service incandescent lamp (commonly referred to as a high- or higher-wattage lamp) that has a rated wattage above 199 watts (above 205 watts for a high wattage reflector lamp). 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(C)(i)-(iii) (West Supp. 1993). The term ``general service incandescent lamp'' means any incandescent lamp (other than a miniature or photographic lamp) that has an E26 medium screw base, a rated voltage range at least partially within 115 and 130 volts, and which can be used to satisfy the majority of lighting applications. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(D) (West Supp. 1993). The definition specifically excludes incandescent lamps designed and marketed for specific lighting applications.39 Included within the category of ``general service incandescent lamps'' are incandescent reflector lamps. The term ``incandescent reflector lamp'' means a lamp described in item (ii), above. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(F) (West Supp. 1993). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\9EPCA excludes any ``general service incandescent lamp'' specifically designed for: (i) Traffic signal, or street lighting service; (ii) airway, airport, aircraft, or other aviation service; (iii) marine or marine signal service; (iv) photo, projection, sound reproduction, or film viewer service; (v) stage, studio, or television service; (vi) mill, saw mill, or other industrial process service; (vii) mine service; (viii) headlight, locomotive, street railway, or other transportation service; (ix) heating service; (x) code beacon, marine signal, lighthouse, reprographic, or other communication service; (xi) medical or dental service; (xii) microscope, map, microfilm, or other specialized equipment service; (xiii) swimming pool or other underwater service; (xiv) decorative or showcase service; (xv) producing colored light; (xvi) shatter resistance which has an external protective coating; or (xvii) appliance service. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(D)(i)-(xvii) (West Supp. 1993). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. Medium Base Compact Fluorescent Lamps The term ``medium base compact fluorescent lamp'' means an integrally ballasted fluorescent lamp with a medium screw base and a rated input voltage of 115 to 130 volts and which is designed as a direct replacement for a general service incandescent lamp. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(S) (West Supp. 1993). Thus, the definition does not include other types of compact fluorescent lamps that operate with a separate ballast, even if the lamp or the separate ballast has a medium screw base. B. Disclosures for Lamps Generally Several comments stated that the main purpose of energy labeling for lamps is to encourage purchasers to move towards the purchase of more energy efficient lighting like compact fluorescent lamps.40 The potential for energy savings through the use of more efficient lighting is high, particularly in commercial settings where lighting is the single largest source of electricity consumption. About 41 percent of electricity, and 28 percent of total energy, consumed in the commercial sector is for lighting.41 Fluorescent lamps consume about 55 percent of lighting electricity in the commercial sector,42 with incandescent reflector lamps consuming most of the remainder. In the residential sector, energy use for lighting is small, though not trivial, representing about seven percent of residential energy use.43 Incandescent lamps provide most lighting in residences. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\0See, e.g., NEMA, G-3, 35; Gluckstern, GG-3, 1. \4\1U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Building Energy Efficiency (hereinafter referred to as ``OTA Report''), OTA- E-518 (Washington, DC; U.S. Government Printing Office, May 1992), C-6, 50. Commercial buildings used 12.9 quads of energy at a cost of $68 billion in 1989. About two-thirds of this energy was in the form of electricity. In addition to lighting, space heating and space cooling were the other principal end uses. Id. at 21. \4\2Id. at 54. \4\3Id. at 50-51. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- General service fluorescent lamps provide lighting through a system known as a luminaire. Under EPCA, the term ``luminaire'' means a complete lighting unit consisting of a fluorescent lamp or lamps, together with parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply through a ballast. 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(29)(F) (West Supp. 1993). Compact fluorescent lamps also provide lighting through a system. For compact fluorescent lamps, the system includes the fluorescent lamp and a ballast. Some compact fluorescent lamps are sold for use with separate ballasts. The lamp labeling rules, however, cover only those defined as medium base compact fluorescent lamps, i.e., those that have an integral ballast and medium screw base. Incandescent lamps also have medium screw bases. They provide lighting by heating an internal filament to incandescence by an electric current, and can be used, for example, in table or floor lamp fixtures or in ceiling or wall fixtures. Medium base (integrally ballasted) compact fluorescent lamps are meant for use as replacements for incandescent lamps in these applications. Increasing the efficiency of a lighting system that currently uses incandescent lamps can be accomplished by selecting a more efficient incandescent lamp, such as a more efficient halogen incandescent lamp, or a more efficient medium base compact fluorescent lamp. To the extent the efficiency of general service fluorescent lighting systems can be increased, it can be accomplished by increasing the efficiency of the lamp, the ballast or the luminaire, or a combination of those separate parts. In designing the disclosure requirements for these different lamp types, therefore, the Commission has considered the effect of the minimum energy efficiency standards specified by EPCA on the lamps that will remain on the market after the standards become effective, and how best to provide purchasers with the information necessary for them to select the most efficient lamps that meet their requirements. Several comments stated generally that any labeling requirements for lamps should meet one or more of the following standards: Simple, uniform, comprehensible, cost-effective and based on readily available information.44 In response to a question in the NPR, some comments favored different types of disclosures based on the category of purchaser--residential or commercial. One comment, however, specifically stated that the disclosures should be the same for both categories.45 Most industry members supported a ``bifurcated'' approach to labeling (discussed in detail below), with a requirement for detailed disclosures of performance characteristics on packaging for general service incandescent lamps and compact fluorescent lamps and a requirement for disclosure of only an encircled ``E'' on packaging for general service incandescent reflector lamps and general service fluorescent lamps.46 Several other comments, however, favored requiring the same detailed disclosures of performance characteristics on the packaging of all the lamp types covered by the labeling rules.47 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\4GE, G-2, 4-5, (Tr.), 106; NEMA, G-3, 10-11; Osram, G-4, 2; IES (Tr.), 62; MN DPS, GG-9, 1; OR DOE, GG-13, 1. \4\5See 58 FR at 60158. Comments favoring different types of disclosures: ACEEE, GG-1, 1; IES, GG-6, 1-2; OR DOE, GG-13, 2; WA SEO, GG-18, 3. Specifically recommending identical disclosures for both types: MN DPS, GG-9, 1. \4\6See, e.g., NEMA, G-3; Osram, G-4; Philips, G-5; GE, G-2. \4\7See, e.g., Angelo, G-1; ACEEE GG-1; LBL, GG-7; MN DPS, GG-9; WA SEO, GG-18. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Two of the three categories of lamps covered by the labeling rules have medium size, screw-in bases that fit into standard screw-in lamp receptacles.48 These are: General service incandescent (reflector and nonreflector) lamps, and medium base compact fluorescent lamps. The method of connection to the power source is the same for these types of lamps, and the Commission is prescribing similar labeling requirements for them. The Commission discusses the comments on the proposals for general service incandescent (nonreflector) lamps and medium base compact fluorescent lamps and the labeling rule requirements for them together in Part IV.C, below. The Commission discusses the comments on, and the requirements for, general service incandescent reflector lamps in Part IV.D, below. The comments and final requirements respecting the fourth type of lamp--general service fluorescent lamps--are described in Part IV.E, below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\8The third category, general service fluorescent lamps, are not screwed into lamp receptacles, but have prongs at either end of the lamp tube or receptacles for prongs that are at either end of the lamp fixture. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- C. Disclosures for Medium Base General Service Incandescent (Nonreflector) Lamps and Compact Fluorescent Lamps Virtually all the comments recommended that the Commission require some version of the basic disclosures that the Commission proposed in the NPR for both general service incandescent (nonreflector) lamps and medium base compact fluorescent lamps.49 The disclosures the Commission is requiring, each of which is discussed separately below, are: design voltage (if other than 120 volts), energy used (in terms of watts), light output (in average initial lumens), average laboratory life (in hours), number of items in the package (if more than one), and a supplemental disclosure, consisting of an advisory statement.50 Because the comments usually discussed recommendations regarding the disclosures for these two types of medium screwbase lamps together, and because these lamps are generally interchangeable, the Commission discusses the comments and the final disclosure requirements for these types of medium screw base lamps together in this section. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\958 FR at 60154-55. \5\0See 16 CFR 305.11(e), 305.14(d) in Text of Amendments, below. For descriptions of the items recommended for required disclosures, see, in particular, Angelo, G-1, 2; GE, G-2, 7, (Ans.), 1; NEMA, G-3, 39, (Supp.), G-10, 10-12; Osram, G-4, 2, (Supp.), G- 11, 1-2; Philips, G-5, 1-2, (Supp.), G-12, 1; Panasonic, G-7, 2; ACEEE, GG-1, 1; OR DOE, GG-13, 7-8; LRC, GG-15, 2; WA SEO, GG-18, 1- 2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A few comments recommended that required labeling for compact fluorescent lamps include additional information, such as the lamp's incandescent wattage equivalency, color and temperature ratings, noise and interference factors, and whether the lumen output of the lamp is substantially different in a base-up or base-down installation.51 The Commission discusses these issues in Part IV.C.4, below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\1See, e.g., NW REAL, GG-12, 1; OR DOE, GG-13, 2-7, 7-8; ORSU, GG-14, 2-3; LRC, GG-15, 1-2; MA AG (Supp.), GG-24, 2; Philips (Supp.), G-12, 1; ACEEE (Supp.), GG-21, 3. See also note 136, below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Basic Disclosures a. Voltage. Voltage refers to the electromotive force of electricity.52 In the residential market, the voltage provided by electric utilities in this country for lighting purposes is primarily 120 volts,53 but may range from approximately 115 to 125 volts.54 Voltage is not a characteristic of a lamp product, but the operation of a lamp is affected by the voltage at which it operates. For a given lamp, the higher the voltage, the higher the light output in lumens, the higher the wattage, and the shorter the life.55 In the NPR, the Commission proposed requiring that manufacturers disclose voltage on packaging only if the product's ``design voltage,'' i.e., the voltage at which the lamp was designed to operate, is other than 120 volts. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\2The term ``volt'' (a unit of potential difference and of electromotive force) is defined as the difference of electric potential between two points of a conducting wire carrying a constant current of one ampere, when the power dissipated between those points is equal to one watt. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology, ``The International System of Units (SI),'' NIST Special Publication 330 (1991 edition), August 1991 (hereinafter cited as ``NIST Publication 330''), at 19. \5\3NEPS (Tr.), 37 (for residential consumers, voltage provided by utilities for lighting is predominately 120 volts); ACEEE (Tr.), 38 (120 volts is normal for vast majority of homes); IES (Tr.), 62 (same). Utility companies in some parts of the country, however, such as the Northwest, provide other voltages such as 125 volts, and manufacturers ship lamps with those design voltages to those areas. Osram (Tr.), 51-52 (ships 125-volt lamps to Northwest, which has slightly higher line voltage); GE (Tr.), 60 (Northwest/TVA is 125 volts); Osram (Tr.), 64 (ships 125-volt lamps to Seattle and TVA). In recognition of the predominant demand for lamps that operate at 120 volts, manufacturers design most incandescent lamps for operation at that voltage. GE (Tr.), 37-38 (90% or more). See also Osram (Tr.), 64-65 (no more than 10% of its incandescent lamps have 125 design voltage). \5\4Even within a given locality, the voltage may vary by plus or minus five percent. NEPS (Tr.), 37. \5\5See, e.g., GE (Tr.), 35. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- During the proceeding, commentors explained that lamps produced for use in this country fall into three basic categories, based on their design voltage. The vast majority of lamps have a design voltage of (i.e., are manufactured to operate at) 120 volts.56 A minority of lamps are produced with a different design voltage because they are intended for use in limited areas of the country, such as the Northwest, in which the line voltage is 125.57 The last category includes lamps with a design voltage of 130. These lamps typically are produced with a heavier filament and have longer lives when used at 120 volts (though providing less light) than competing lamps with design voltages of 120 volts. They are generally sold as ``long-life'' products58 and are marketed throughout the country, regardless of the line voltage in the particular area.59 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\6See note 53, above. \5\7Id. \5\8See GE (Tr.), 35-36; Supreme (Tr.), 39. \5\9See, e.g., ACEEE (Tr.), 202. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission's Light Bulb Rule currently requires manufacturers to disclose watts, light output in lumens and average laboratory life in hours for incandescent lamps, based on operation at the lamp's stated design voltage.60 EPCA, as amended by EPA 92, on the other hand, states that: ``Labeling information for incandescent lamps shall be based on performance at 120 volts input, regardless of the rated lamp voltage.'' 42 U.S.C.A. 6294(a)(2((C)(i) (West Supp. 1993).61 The statutory language and the comments received raise two issues that the labeling rules must address concerning voltage. First, should the rules require that the design voltage always be disclosed, or that the design voltage be disclosed only if it is other than 120 volts? Second, what labeling information (i.e., which disclosures) must be based on tests conducted at 120 volts (regardless of the design voltage)? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\016 CFR 409.1 n. 1. \6\1Neither the EPA 92 amendments to EPCA nor the legislative history of the EPA 92 amendments define more specifically the labeling disclosures for incandescent lamps that must be based on operation at 120 volts. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Virtually all the comments that discussed voltage agreed that it is an important element that affects operation of lamp products. Several comments agreed with the Commission's proposal to require that voltage be disclosed if the design voltage of the product (the voltage at which the product was designed by the manufacturer to operate) is other than 120.62 None suggested that disclosure of voltage in labeling is necessary for lamps with a design voltage of 120.63 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\2See, e.g., NEMA (Supp), G-10, 10-11; ACEEE (Tr.), 38; Osram (Supp.), G-11, 1; Philips (Supp.), G-12, 1. \6\3See, e.g., ACEEE, GG-1, 1. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The issue of the voltage at which the required disclosures of watts, light output, life and energy efficiency should be based was the subject of considerable discussion during the Workshop.64 Several industry representatives supported requiring disclosure of wattage, light output in lumens, and average laboratory life based on operation of the lamp at its design voltage, if the design voltage is other than 120.65 They suggested that only the energy index (i.e., lumens per watt) should be disclosed at 120 volts regardless of the lamp's design voltage. They argued that only the efficiency measure is covered by the requirement in EPCA that labeling disclosures for incandescent lamps be measured at 120 volts.66 Other commentors contended, however, that for general service incandescent lamps the labeling rules should require that wattage, light output, life and energy index disclosures be made at 120 volts because most purchasers operate lamps at 120 volts and performance claims should be based on a uniform standard.67 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\4See Tr., 35-65. The discussion of this issue throughout the comments and Workshop transcript usually was directed specifically at general service incandescent lamps. In some instances, it was unclear whether the comments were meant to apply also to other lamp types. But, there are no references to this issue specifically pertaining to compact fluorescent lamps. \6\5NEMA (Tr.), 39-40, 54, (Supp.), G-10, 19-21 (the Commission views these statements as NEMA's final position on the issue); Osram (Tr.), 41, (Supp.), G-11, 2. See also Angelo, G-1, 2 (but note that Angelo later recommends disclosures at 120 volts in the Workshop at Tr. 57); GE, G-2, 7, (Ans.), 1; Osram (Tr.), 41, 58-59, (Supp.), G- 11, 2; ACEEE, GG-1, 1 (ACEEE, too, later recommends in the Workshop that all disclosures be at 120 volts, (Tr.), 59); OR DOE, GG-13, 7; WA SEO, GG-18, 1. \6\6In its supplemental comment, NEMA stated: A question was raised at the Workshop as to whether the last sentence of section (sic) (324(a)(2)(C)(i) of EPCA) should be interpreted to apply only to energy efficiency labeling or to all items required to be disclosed under the Commission's regulations. There is no published legislative history interpreting this provision. However, NEMA representatives were involved in extensive discussions with energy efficiency organizations and congressional staff over the language of the Energy Policy Act. Throughout those discussions, everyone's attention was focused on how best to educate consumers to select the most energy efficient lamp. NEMA representatives sought inclusion of the requirement that all lamps' efficiency ratings be based on a comparable operation at 120 volts. NEMA's objective was to prevent some manufacturers or importers from disguising low efficiency lamps by claiming efficiency ratings at voltages greater than 120 volts. NEMA was concerned that if a consumer faced 120 and 130 volt lamps in the same store, it be clear that the 130 volt lamp would be substantially less efficient when operated at 120 volts (Tr. 40-41). NEMA did not intend to force manufacturers to cease production or alter existing ratings of higher voltage lamps for use in niche markets. Thus, in construing section (sic) (324(a)(2)(C)(i)) of EPCA, NEMA urges that the provision be fairly read in the context of the legislative discussions and that congressional intent is best served by requiring that only lumens per watt measurements be based on 120 volts operation. NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 20-21. See also GE (Supp.), G-9, Ex. 4; Osram (Tr.), 51-52 (most purchasers do not see mix of products based on different voltages on store shelves, but purpose of the statute's requirement was to require efficiency be based on constant voltage for situations when mix of products were on shelves at same time). But see NEMA, G-3, 45 (``Section 324(a)((2))(C)(i) of EPCA requires that labeling information for incandescent lamps be based on performance when operated at 120 volts input, regardless of the rated lamp voltage. The Commission's regulations should expressly require manufacturers of incandescent lamps to disclose all performance characteristics when operated at 120 volts, regardless of the rated voltage.''). \6\7See MN DPS, GG-9, 2; NEPS (Tr.), 44; LRC (Tr.), 44, 54-55; Angelo (Tr.), 57; ACEEE (Tr.), 59; IES (Tr.), 62. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission has determined that the final labeling rules should require that all the specified disclosures be based on operation at 120 volts, but that it should not require disclosure of voltage unless the design voltage is other than 120, since all required lamp disclosures will be based on a uniform voltage.68 For the vast majority of purchasers in the country, lamps will be operated at 120 volts, regardless of the design voltage designated by the lamp manufacturer. For these purchasers, who represent 90% or more of the market for these lamps in the U.S., therefore, disclosures of the lamp's performance in watts, lumens, life and energy efficiency at a different voltage, such as 125 or 130 volts, would misrepresent the performance they receive in actual use.69 The Commission realizes that, for those purchasers whose line voltage is other than 120 volts, disclosure of these performance characteristics at 120 volts will not represent the lamp performance they will experience. These purchasers, however, represent a small minority in the marketplace. For lamps with a design voltage of 130, but expected to be operated at 120 volts, the disclosures will be accurate.70 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\8See 16 CFR 305.11(e)(1)(C) in Text of Amendments, below. If a lamp's design voltage is other than 120 volts, the lamp's required disclosures of wattage, light output, and life must each be followed by the phrase ``at 120 volts.'' Manufacturers of such lamps may also disclose the lamps' wattage, light output and life at the design voltage. In such cases, the disclosures of wattage, light output, and life must each be followed by a phrase indicating the voltage at which the additional disclosures were measured, e.g., ``at 125 volts.'' \6\9See note 53, above. \7\0See Angelo (Tr.), 63: (P)eople may choose life or lumen output but if it's tested at 120 then there's no reason to go through the deception of saying it's a 130-volt lamp. It's simply enough to say that this lamp is going to produce less lumens[,] meaning it's going to have a different filament and it has really nothing to do with design wattage, it has to do with life and lumens. So in the circumstance of the people who were buying it for that reason, why go through a deception? Why not just tell them [it's] at 120 and let it be billed as a 120-volt lamp with less lumens and more life? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The final rules, therefore, require that the disclosures of watts, lumens, and hours of life be based on operation of the lamp at 120 volts. Because medium base compact fluorescent lamps compete directly with incandescent lamps, purchasers often will compare these different lamp types when making purchasing decisions. Therefore, the Commission also is requiring that the performance disclosures for medium base compact fluorescent lamps be based on operation at 120 volts. The labeling rules, however, allow manufacturers who distribute lamps with different design voltages to provide additional information based on the design voltage of the lamps when operated under those other voltages. Because the Commission is allowing manufacturers to provide additional information to purchasers whose line voltage varies from 120 volts, there is no reason to believe that manufacturers will cease production of lamps designed to operate at different voltages, as NEMA speculated.71 See Secs. 305.11(e)(1)(A)(ii) and 305.11(e)(1)(C) in ``Text of Amendments,'' below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\1NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 21. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- b. Wattage. Watt ratings on lamps refer to the unit of electrical power that the lamp will consume.72 In the NPR, the Commission proposed requiring that watts be disclosed. There was no disagreement during the proceeding regarding the need for or appropriateness of requiring disclosure of wattage on labels for general service incandescent (nonreflector) lamps and compact fluorescent lamps.73 This information is often used by residential purchasers as the basis for selecting a lamp because they often associate light output with the wattage ratings of the general service incandescent lamps they currently use. But, wattage information also is important to know for safety reasons. Lamp fixtures often are marked with the maximum wattage lamp the fixture is designed to use. For incandescent lamp fixtures in particular, use of a lamp with a higher wattage than that marked on the fixture can result in a safety hazard created by the higher heat output from the higher wattage lamp. Purchasers, therefore, need wattage information in addition to lumen output when selecting the appropriate lamp to meet their requirements. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\2The term ``watt'' (a unit of power) is defined as the power which in one second gives rise to energy of one joule. NIST Special Publication 330, at 18. In EPCA, as amended by EPA 92, the term ``lamp wattage'' means ``the total electrical power consumed by a lamp in watts, after the initial seasoning period referenced in the appropriate IES standard test procedure and including, for fluorescent, arc watts plus cathode watts.'' 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(O) (West Supp. 1993). \7\3The Light Bulb Rule already requires a wattage disclosure for incandescent lamps. 16 CFR 409.1(a)(1). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Accordingly, the Commission is requiring disclosure of watts on packages. In addition, to help purchasers understand the meaning of watts, the Commission is requiring that the phrase ``energy used'' precede the wattage number and term ``watts.'' The juxtaposition of the ``watts'' and ``energy used'' disclosures, in conjunction with the ``lumens'' and ``light output'' disclosures, discussed in Part IV.C.1.c.i, below, can help educate purchasers on the relationship between the amount of light a lamp produces and the amount of energy used to produce the light. These disclosures, along with the Advisory Disclosure described in Part IV.C.2.c, below, will enable purchasers to select the most energy efficient products that meet their lighting needs. At the same time, the combined disclosures will provide retail purchasers with the ``watt'' information they may be most accustomed to using as the basis for their purchasing decisions, and which they may need to avoid purchasing a lamp product that is inappropriate for the lamp fixture in which it will be used. See Secs. 305.11(e)(1)(A)(iii) and 305.11(e)(1)(B) in ``Text of Amendments,'' below. c. Light output in lumens. The terms ``lumens,'' ``lumen output,'' or ``lumen rating'' refer to a lamp product's light output.74 This information is designed to permit the purchaser to determine whether a given lamp will provide sufficient light to meet the purchaser's requirements and to compare the relative light output of competing lamp products. Some retail purchasers may generally refer to this concept as ``brightness,'' but this term actually means something different from light output, according to accepted industry definitions.75 In the NPR, the Commission proposed requiring that packaging disclose lumens (whether identified by that term, or another such as ``light output''). There was agreement among the participants in the proceeding that light output in lumens should be disclosed. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\4Under EPCA, the term ``lumen output'' means ``total luminous flux (power) of a lamp in lumens, as measured in accordance with applicable IES standards as determined by the Secretary [of DOE].'' 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(Q) (West Supp. 1993). For incandescent lamps, the Light Bulb Rule already requires that light output be disclosed in lumens. \7\5Brightness is measured in candelas and means the intensity of the light, whereas light output, which is measured in lumens, means amount of flow of light. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- i. Emphasis on light output in disclosures. Although light output is the primary descriptor of whether a specific lamp will provide the necessary lighting to meet a particular need, it appears that residential purchasers, at least, often purchase lamps based on the product's rated wattage.76 For these purchasers, different wattages are associated with various lighting needs. There are lamp products with substantially different wattage ratings, however, that can provide almost the same light output in lumens. Stated another way, by choosing lamps on the basis of light output, consumers could meet their lighting needs and use less energy by selecting a lamp of a lower wattage.77 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\6See Part IV.C.1.b, above. \7\7For example, a general service incandescent halogen lamp can provide a greater light output in lumens than a standard general service incandescent lamp of the same wattage rating. In addition, a compact fluorescent lamp can provide the same or greater light output in lumens than a general service incandescent halogen lamp at a significantly lower wattage rating. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Four comments agreed that a key element in getting consumers to purchase more energy efficient lamps is to encourage them to shop for light output in lumens, rather than for energy usage in watts, as they currently are more accustomed to do.78 Several comments favored furthering this objective by making the disclosure of light output (in lumens) as prominent as or more prominent than the wattage disclosure on current packaging.79 Some comments also suggested that, because residential consumers are often unfamiliar with the term ``lumen,'' the disclosure of lumens should be accompanied by a descriptive phrase that would be more familiar, such as ``light output'' or ``brightness.''80 There was, however, information presented at the Workshop indicating that lumens is not an unfamiliar concept to many consumers, even though wattage may be a more significant factor in making purchase decisions.81 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\8Angelo, G-1, 2, (Tr.), 182-183; Osram, G-4, 2; Philips, G-5, 2-3; GE, G-2, 7, (Tr.), 181-182. See Part IV.C.1.b, above. \7\9Angelo (Tr.), 182-183 (``make lumens more prominent''); GE, G-2 (Ans.), 1 (``prominent''); Philips, G-5, 1-2 (``at least 50% that of the wattage''); MO DNR, GG-10, 3 (``more prominently''); WA SEO, GG-18, 1-2 (``of equal size and prominence''). But see GE (Tr.) 181-182 (the change in prominence should be gradual). \8\0GE, G-2, (Ans.), 9 (``brightness (lumens)''); Philips, G-5, 2-3 (``light output''); ACEEE, GG-1, 3 (``light output: XX Lumens''); MO DNR, GG-10, 3 (``brightness (lumens)''). But see OR DOE, GG-13, 3 (``lumen disclosure should be in lumens, not ``brightness'' or ``light output''). \8\1According to research conducted by Conway/Milliken & Associates for GE in July 1992, 55% of all consumers understand the meaning of lumens, even though they may purchase based on wattage. GE (Tr.), 109-10. See GE (Supp.), G-9, 1, Ex. A. But see Angelo (Tr.), 134-35 (disagrees and thinks that most consumers do not know watts are a measurement of energy as opposed to a measurement of light, because, up until now, they have purchased on the basis of watts). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission agrees that the labeling rules should assist purchasers in shopping for lamps on the basis of light output in lumens rather than watts. Because competing lamp products may provide the same lumen output at varying wattage ratings, purchasers can reduce their energy costs for lighting by purchasing lamp products that provide the lumens they need at the lowest wattage ratings. Current packaging generally highlights wattage, and purchasers may be accustomed to selecting lamp products based on wattage instead of lumens (e.g., they simply replace a burned out 100 watt lamp with a new 100 watt lamp). It is in the interest of energy efficiency, therefore, to design labeling information to highlight the importance of light output in lumens. Accordingly, the Commission is requiring that the lumens disclosure be identified primarily as one of ``light output,'' and that this light output disclosure be the first of the three basic performance disclosures appearing on the primary display panel. In addition, to remind consumers that wattage is not a measure of light output, the wattage disclosure will be identified primarily as ``energy used.''82 See Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(B) of the rule in ``Text of Amendments,'' below. Coupled with the educational information currently being provided by manufacturers, utility companies and others in the marketplace, this increased emphasis in labeling on light output and clarification of the meaning of wattage should help educate consumers to save energy costs by purchasing the lowest wattage lamp that provides the light output they need. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\2The Commission is not specifying type size for these disclosures because of the huge variety of packaging styles and sizes, and the need to vary type size according to the package. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ii. Average initial lumens vs. average mean or average lumens. In general, the light output in lumens of a given lamp product is greatest at the beginning of its life (i.e., its ``initial lumens''). Light output in lumens degrades over the lifetime of the lamp. According to generally accepted industry standards, the light output for a lamp can be measured and expressed in terms of average initial lumens (at or near the beginning of the lamp's life), as average or mean lumens over the duration of the lamp's real or projected lifetime, or as a range of lumens. In determining the most appropriate lumen disclosure for each type of lamp product, the Commission has considered the comments concerning the effect of degradation on the different lamp types and the measure of light output in lumens that will give purchasers the most accurate and uniform information on which they can compare competing products and make purchase decisions. There was considerable discussion in the written comments and at the Workshop about how and at what point or points in a lamp's operation light output should be measured.83 Some comments suggested that the required disclosure should be of mean or average lifetime lumens,84 while others believed that lumens should be expressed as initial lumens.85 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\3See, e.g., Tr., 66-86. \8\4Philips (Tr.), 74 (a rating based on a long-term average of tested lumens that would be rounded); NEPS (Tr.), 67, 72; SCS, GG- 16, 1-3 (details reasons for disclosing ``mean lumen output range,'' including differing lumen depreciation and lumen output values and differences in lumen output from differences in fixtures, installations, sensitivity to temperature, and/or ballasts). \8\5See, e.g., Osram (Tr.), 68; NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 15-16; Philips (Supp.), G-12, 2; LBL (Supp.), GG-22, 3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- During the Workshop, representatives of GE and Osram explained in some detail how lumens are measured under current industry methods. One of the issues discussed was the extent to which lumens degrade (or diminish) over the life of a lamp.86 There was general agreement among most of the Workshop participants that the extent of degradation of competing general service incandescent lamps and of medium base compact fluorescent lamps over the average lifetime of a compact fluorescent lamp (10,000 hours) is substantially the same.87 Accordingly, most Workshop participants concluded that it would be appropriate for the Commission to require disclosure of average initial lumens.88 Because it is easier to measure the light output of lamp products as initial lumens, and a requirement to disclose light output in initial lumens is consistent with the requirements of the Light Bulb Rule, the Commission has determined to require disclosure of average initial lumens on the packages of these products.89 See Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(A)(iv) in ``Text of Amendments,'' below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\6See Tr., 66-86. \8\7Because compact fluorescent lamps have longer lives than incandescent lamps, this comparison requires that several general service incandescent lamps be considered for the comparison. Specifically: Over the life span of a compact fluorescent product, generally speaking, after the first hundred hours--and the initial lumens are measured at one hundred hours burning--the product declines in output slowly over a life of perhaps 10,000 hours. If you look at what happens for the equivalent number of incandescent lamps, then obviously every time you replace an incandescent lamp say after 750 hours, your light output goes up to the initial again, and then drops off to some lower figure. If you take the difference in the averages between what you get from that whole bunch of incandescent lamps and what you get from the single curve with the compact fluorescent, it is not a very big percentage. It is perhaps around five percent. That is far less than you will get by differences in light output from incandescent lamps due to fluctuating voltage. Osram (Tr.), 80-81. \8\8See GE (Tr.), 67 (``Whether I would want product A or product B from a light output or an efficiency standpoint, you'll still make the same decision.''); Osram (Tr.), 81 (``Our procedures, both nationally and internationally for rating products at initial value is something that we can live with as an industry, and something that we can measure with some consistency, and can be enforced.''); NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 15-15; LBL (Supp.), GG-22, 3 (``There was considerable discussion at the Workshop on whether initial lumens, or mean or maintained lumens, should be reported on lamp labels. LBL concurs with the position that the difference between the lumen depreciation of general service incandescent lamps and compact fluorescent lamps is small enough that initial lumens (per the standard test procedure) are acceptable.''); Philips (Supp.), G-12, 3. But see MA AG (Supp.), GG-24, 2, fn. 1 (``Manufacturers should disclose if a compact fluorescent lamp or an energy efficient incandescent lamp's lumen degradation is faster or further or both than the degradation of a conventional incandescent lamp.''). \8\9This requirement is consistent with the Light Bulb Rule. 16 CFR at 409.1(a)(2). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- d. Average lamp life. Lamp life refers to the lamp's average life or lifetime, measured under laboratory conditions (i.e., average laboratory life).90 In the NPR, the Commission proposed requiring disclosure of average life (in hours). During the proceeding, two issues emerged relating to the proposed requirement to disclose lamp life: (1) How to determine the life of the product; and (2) whether to express life in years (based on an average usage period, such as three hours per day) or hours. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \9\0In EPCA, as amended by EPA 92, the terms ``life'' and ``lifetime'' mean ``length of operating time of a statistically large group of lamps between first use and failure of 50 percent of the group in accordance with test procedures described in the IES Lighting Handbook-Reference Volume.'' 42 U.S.C.A. 6291(30)(P) (West Supp. 1993). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- i. How to measure lamp life. Laboratory lamp life is determined by measuring the length of time (in hours) the lamp will operate before burning out. The IES standard calls for the lamp to be operated according to an on/off cycling schedule. The life of a lamp is the number of burning hours to failure. Some industry members, however, to save time, will use one or two variations of this standard. In one case, they will use a ``steady burn,'' in which there is no on/off cycle. In the other case, they will burn the lamp at much higher voltages than normal and extrapolate the lamp's laboratory life from the test results.91 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \9\1See Supreme (Tr.), 89-90. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the discussion of lamp life determination during the Workshop, the participants agreed that consistency is of considerable significance for this disclosure. Specifically, it is most important that the estimated life of competing lamp products be measured in a manner that yields comparable results. Participants did not, however, agree that any particular test procedure should be required by the labeling rules. As discussed in Part IV.G, below, the Commission has determined at this time not to require for any of the basic disclosures that any specific test procedure be used. The Commission, however, is requiring that manufacturers have a reasonable basis, consisting of competent and reliable scientific tests, to substantiate these disclosures. To meet this reasonable basis standard for substantiating light output and laboratory life disclosures, manufacturers may rely on tests conducted pursuant to the specific IES test procedure referenced in the Rule. These test procedures, which comments recognized as appropriate test standards used by the industry, require on/off cycling. The Commission concludes that requiring manufacturers to have competent and reliable scientific tests to substantiate laboratory life claims is sufficient to ensure that manufacturers determine average laboratory life in a way that will produce consistent results. See the discussion of substantiation in Part IV.G, below. ii. Years vs. hours. The other issue concerning lamp life pertained to how the lifetime should be expressed. ACEEE originally recommended that life be expressed in years, but later suggested requiring disclosure of both years and hours.92 NEMA recommended that the required disclosure of life be in hours, because a disclosure in years would involve fractions of less than one year for some lamp products and assumptions about average hours of use in a year.93 No commentors were aware of any studies demonstrating average usage periods for either commercial or residential users for particular types of lamps or uses. The Light Bulb Rule currently requires that life of incandescent lamps be disclosed in hours, 16 CFR 409.1(a)(3), and many manufacturers express lamp life in hours for other lamps. Accordingly, the Commission has determined to require a simple disclosure of average laboratory life in hours, rather than years (or both hours and years). The labeling rules, therefore, require that the average laboratory life of lamp products be disclosed in hours. See Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(A)(v) in ``Text of Amendments,'' below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \9\2ACEEE, GG-1, 2, (Supp.), GG-21, 1 (``For example, a label might read: Lamp Life: 1000 hours (0.9 years at 3 hours per day).''). \9\3NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 21 note *. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- e. Quantity of lamps in package. There was no disagreement with the proposal to require the disclosure on packages of the number of bulbs contained in the package if there were more than one. This requirement, therefore, appears in the final labeling rules. See Sec. 305.11(e)(1)(A)(i) in ``Text of Amendments,'' below. 2. Supplemental Disclosure Options To supplement the disclosures of wattage, light output and laboratory life, the Commission proposed in the NPR requiring disclosure of an efficiency measure of each lamp's performance. The Commission proposed two alternatives for primary consideration: (1) An energy efficiency measure such as lumens per watt; and (2) a disclosure of the estimated energy cost of the lamp based on a specified unit energy cost and usage period. The NPR also described similar suggestions made by ACEEE and NEMA. As is further set forth below, the Commission has concluded that neither a lumens-per-watt disclosure nor an operating cost disclosure is likely to increase consumers' abilities to choose the most efficient lamp for their needs. Instead, the Commission has concluded that the basic information required to be disclosed should be supplemented by the Advisory Disclosure described in Part IV.C.2.c, below. a. Energy index. The Commission explained in the NPR that a lumens- per-watt disclosure (i.e., the ``Energy Index'' that had been suggested by NEMA), which would rate the efficiency of a lamp product in converting electric energy into light output, has the advantage of simplicity. It pointed out, however, that such a disclosure could suffer from the drawback identified by ACEEE (i.e., because higher wattage bulbs often have disproportionately greater light output, they often will use more energy as well as have a better energy index). Thus, a lumens-per-watt disclosure alone could lead to lumen and watt over-purchasing. The Commission inquired whether this drawback could be avoided by requiring that the Energy Index be accompanied by a disclosure such as: ``Select the light output you require before comparing the energy index of different bulbs.'' Most of the comments supported requiring a disclosure of the energy efficiency of lamp products in the form of lumens per watt and that it be called an ``energy index.''\94\ One participant compared this to a miles per gallon disclosure for gasoline, which consumers presumably understand.\95\ Although consumers could otherwise ascertain the information from the separately required disclosures of lumens and watts, the energy index reduces this information to a single figure.\96\ Several comments favoring this disclosure also recommended that it be no less than 50% of the size of the light output disclosure and that it be accompanied by a definition or explanation of its meaning on the same or another panel.\97\ Two comments recommended that the Commission require disclosure of a ``range'' of energy indices for available general service incandescent lamps and compact fluorescent lamps like those the Commission requires for other products under the Appliance Labeling Rule, with the performance of the labeled lamp indicated on the range.\98\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \94\See, e.g., NEMA, G-3, 34-35, (Supp.), G-10, 12; Osram (Tr.), 124, (Supp.), G-11, 2; Philips, G-5, 2, (Supp.), G-12, 1; Panasonic, G-7, 2; LBL, GG-7, 1; MN DPS, GG-9, 2; OR DOE, GG-13, 2; LRC, GG-15, 2; US EPA, GG-17, 2-3; WA SEO, GG-18, 2; NEPS, GG-11, 3; GE (Tr.), 110, 140, 155, 198, (Supp.), G-9, 1 (GE would prefer that the Commission require only a disclosure of lumens and watts and no energy index, but would prefer an energy index disclosure over an energy cost disclosure). \95\Osram (Tr.), 124. \96\See Id. at 125. \97\NEMA (Supp.), G-10, 12; Osram (Supp.), G-11, 2; Philips (Supp.), G-12, 1. \98\LBL (Supp.), GG-22, 3; NIST (Supp.), GG-23, 2-3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Two comments opposed an energy index as unnecessary or confusing.\99\ Other comments were concerned with the potential overbuying problem identified by ACEEE (that the disclosure could unintentionally force consumers to ``overbuy'' watts and lumens because higher wattage incandescent lamps tend to have higher energy indices.)\100\ Three comments, however, agreed with the Commission's suggestion that the potential problem might be avoided by requiring the prominent disclosure of wattage next to the energy index disclosure and/or a definition or explanation that informs purchasers to look for the lumens they want and then select the highest energy index.\101\ One comment indicated that the potential overbuying problem was not likely to be a significant one.\102\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \99\IES, GG-6, 2; SCS, GG-16, 4. \100\Angelo, G-1, 2; GE, G-2, (Ans.), 1-2; ACEEE, GG-1, 3, (Supp.), GG-21, 1; MO DNR, GG-10, 2. \101\LRC, GG-15, 2; WA SEO, GG-18, 2. \102\OR DOE, GG-13, 2 (may be a problem for some lamps, but not true in general). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission has determined not to require disclosure of a lumens-per-watt index. Although support was expressed in the rulemaking proceeding for this proposal, disclosing such an index could result in consumers purchasing more watts than they need. This overbuying may occur because a lumens-per-watt index will rise with wattage of incandescent lamps. Thus, a consumer who buys the lamp with the highest lumens-per-watt index may select a lamp that has a higher than required light output and wattage. For example, overbuying may occur if a consumer selects a 100-watt incandescent lamp with a 17 lumens-per-watt index as a replacement for a 60-watt incandescent lamp with a 14 lumens-per-watt index or a 75-watt incandescent lamp with a 16 lumens- per-watt index. An energy index based on lumens per watt also could confuse consumers who understand correctly that higher wattage lamps use more energy. Because a lumens-per-watt index tends to increase with the wattage of incandescent lamps, these consumers might be led to believe that lamps with higher energy index numbers generally cost more to operate. In that event, the much higher energy index numbers that would appear on the labels of compact fluorescent lamps actually could mislead some consumers into believing that these lamps were less energy efficient. In light of these potential disadvantages, the Commission has determined not to adopt a lumen-per-watt index as a supplemental disclosure. The Commission has concluded that the objectives of EPA 92 will be better achieved by supplementing the basic disclosures with the Advisory Disclosure described in Part IV.C.2.c, below, which informs consumers how to use the basic disclosures to select the most efficient lamp for their needs. b. Energy operating cost. Another proposal for conveying lamp efficiency information was to require an energy operating cost disclosure. As described in the NPR, ACEEE suggested requiring disclosure of estimated annual operating cost.\103\ NEMA suggested requiring disclosure of both an estimated annual operating cost and a lumens-per-watt energy index.\104\ Based on these suggestions and other considerations discussed in the NPR, the Commission proposed requiring disclosure of estimated monetary cost of energy information, as an alternative, or in addition to, a lumens-per-watt disclosure of the lamp's energy efficiency.\105\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \103\58 FR at 60154. \104\Id. at 60153. \105\Id. at 61055. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the NPR, the Commission stated that it might require a disclosure of the estimated monetary cost of the energy used by a lamp based on its use for a specified period, such as the lamp's life in hours or a length of time based on average usage patterns. The Commission explained that such a disclosure could be based on the representative average unit cost of electricity, as specified in the Appliance Labeling Rule, 16 CFR 305.9, or on an assumed unit cost. The advantage of an operating cost disclosure is that it would reduce to monetary terms the energy costs of competing lamp products. At the same time, the Commission stated that it would consider carefully whether such disclosures, particularly when the costs are prorated over a period of time that is less than the life of a very energy efficient bulb, communicate effectively the extent to which a higher initial lamp cost can be compensated for by lower operating costs over the lamp's life.\106\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \106\For example, if a monetary cost of operation disclosure were adopted, one usage period for which disclosures could be calculated is 750 hours, which is approximately the life of general service incandescent lamps with the shortest lifetimes. A second option would be to set a longer period (e.g., 1000 hours). But, where this period exceeds the average life of the lamp, the cost of replacement of the lamp might come into play. A third option would be to use a shorter period, such as one hour, 10 hours, or 100 hours. A shorter period, however, might be too small to illustrate sufficiently energy cost differences among competing lamps. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission pointed out in the NPR that, if it adopted a monetary cost of operation disclosure, it would have to base the disclosure on an average or estimated usage pattern (e.g., one year). The Commission noted, however, that there are no established usage patterns, and estimated use will vary depending upon the location and use of the lamp. In addition, the Commission would have to determine what unit cost of electricity to use. The representative average unit cost of electricity, as specified in the Appliance Labeling Rule (16 CFR 305.9), changes annually, and thus could result in consumer confusion if lamps manufactured in different years were available for sale at the same time. To avoid possible confusion, the Commission explained that it might require manufacturers to include an explanation of how the estimated energy cost was determined in immediate proximity to the monetary cost estimate disclosure.\107\ The Commission recognized, however, that the additional information could unduly complicate the label, and therefore not be helpful to purchasers. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \107\This would allow purchasers to compare the energy costs of competing products with different lifetimes based on a time line that is within the lifetime of all the competing products and is large enough to illustrate clearly the differences among energy costs and, therefore, of energy efficiencies. In the alternative, the Commission explained that it could require that monetary cost of operation estimates be based upon a constant unit cost of electricity, such as 10 cents per hour, which although not fully accurate for all purchasers, would facilitate lamp-to-lamp comparisons. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Because some purchasers may be interested in computing lamp costs comprehensively, including the initial purchase price, the Commission proposed requiring information to enable them to make the necessary calculations to determine the ``estimated total operating cost'' of the lamp for a standard time period.\108\ But, recognizing that purchasers would need to make calculations for each lamp they considered, the Commission stated that it would consider carefully the extent to which purchasers actually would use the proposed disclosures in making a purchase decision. As a practical matter, the Commission noted that purchasers, particularly retail consumers, may disregard, or consider too complex, any disclosure requiring computations of this sort, and therefore that such required disclosures may not be useful to purchasers in their efforts to choose an energy efficient lamp. The NPR solicited comments on both the annual operating and total operating cost disclosures proposed by the Commission.\109\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \108\Specifically, the Commission proposed requiring the following statement: IMPORTANT: Energy efficient lamps may have a higher purchase price, but could cost you less overall due to energy savings. The estimated total operating cost of this lamp for 750 hours of use is: ([Figure A] x the purchase price for one light) + [Figure B]). Compare this cost to the estimated total operating costs you calculate for other lamps that provide the same or similar lumens. The manufacturer would determine and preprint Figure A and Figure B in this disclosure. The NPR explained how the manufacturer would calculate these figures and included examples. The Commission proposed a more detailed disclosure for multiple filament general service incandescent lamps. \109\See Questions 3 (``Disclosure of Monetary Cost of Operation'') and 4 (``Disclosure of Estimated Total Operating Cost''), 58 FR at 60158-59. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The 17 comments that addressed cost disclosures were evenly divided. Seven comments recommended that the Commission require some kind of cost disclosure.\110\ Seven comments opposed such a requirement.\111\ Two commentors initially supported cost disclosures, but later recommended against them.\112\ One comment stated that if cost disclosures were required, the NEMA proposal described in the NPR for estimated annual operating cost along with an energy index would be the best.\113\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \110\ACEEE, GG-1, 1-2, (Tr.), 113-114, 149, (Supp.), GG-21, 1; Gluckstern, GG-3, 1; MN DPS, GG-9, 2; MO DNR, GG-10, 2; NEPS, GG-11, 2-3; LRC, GG-15, 2-3; US EPA, GG-17, 3. \111\GE, G-2, 7, (Tr.), 170; NEMA, G-3, 35-38, (Tr.), 131, 133, 139. (Supp.), 13, 23-26; OR DOE, GG-13, 3-5; Osram (Tr.), 131, (Supp.), 3; Philips (Supp.), G-12, 1; Green Seal (Tr.), 159; SCS, GG-16, 4-5. \112\Angelo, G-1, 3 (support), (Tr.), 136, 157, 158 (oppose); LBL, GG-7, 1-2 (support), (Supp.), G-22, 4 (oppose). \113\WA SEO, GG-18, 2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Of the comments favoring a cost disclosure, only one recommended including the purchase price of the lamp in the cost disclosure.114 Most comments that supported cost disclosures, as well as some comments in opposition and some additional comments, opposed requiring disclosure of the ``estimated total operating cost.''115 The objection most often offered was that manufacturers have no control over the retail price of the products they manufacture, which would make it impossible to disclose on packages a meaningful operating cost figure that includes purchase price. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\14NEPS, GG-11, 2-3. But see NEPS (Tr.), 199 (``I have put it in my comments as something to be considered, and I am very willing to back off on [life-cycle cost disclosure].''). \1\15See Angelo, G-1, 3; Osram, G-4, 2; Philips, G-5, 2; Panasonic, G-7, 2; ACEEE, GG-1, 1-2, 4 (retail prices vary too much to require disclosure of estimated total operating cost); MN DPS, GG-9, 2 (price based cost too complicated unless Commission prescribes a table with several fixed prices for both bulb types); MO DNR, GG-10, 2; LRC, GG-15, 2-3 (cost based on purchase price is practically useless); US EPA, GG-17, 3 (life-cycle cost would be the best, but it's too complicated; thus, estimated annual operating cost over a standard time period is the best compromise). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The comments supporting disclosure of estimated annual operating cost favored the approach because they believe that consumers understand dollars and that operating cost would provide useful information.116 Most of these comments recommended using a fixed unit cost for electricity, rather than the national average cost figures published annually by DOE, and a fixed usage period.117 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\16See, e.g., ACEEE (Tr.), 149 (``We think you really need a dollar cost disclosure. People understand dollars.'') \1\17See, e.g., ACEEE (Supp.), GG-21, 1 (But see ACEEE, GG-1, 1- 2, in which ACEEE advocated earlier the use of a rounded version of the DOE annual energy cost.); MN DPS, GG-9, 2; MO DNR, GG-10, 2; LRC, GG-15, 2-3; US EPA, GG-17, 3. Even Philips, which opposed cost disclosure requirements, agreed that, if they were required, they should be based on a fixed energy cost. Philips, G-5, 2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Of those comments opposing required disclosure of operating cost, most contended that cost disclosures would be difficult to develop and would make disclosures too complicated, regardless of whether annual or total costs were used.118 Several comments remarked that cost disclosures in U.S. dollars would result in crowded labels and consumer confusion because of the United States' increased trade with Canada and Mexico under the North American Free Trade Agreement (``NAFTA'').119 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\18See, e.g., SCS, GG-16, 4-5 (``Given that the most accurate presentation of operating costs is utility district based (due to utility rates (affecting operating cost) and rebates (affecting purchase cost)) rather than national, printing operating costs directly on the product package is problematic.'') \1\19IES, GG-6, 2 (``Will labeling requirements necessitate bi- and tri-language packaging to explain the (U.S. cost) information?''); Osram (Tr.), 121; (Supp.), G-11, 3; GE, G-2, (Ans.), 4, (Tr.), 140 (``The result of dollar cost operation on package would force manufacturers to make country-specific packaging. Country-specific packaging means that we are less efficient and we are not as able to meet consumer demands in the three (national) markets.''), 141 (noting that there could be special problems with products bound for Canada, which would need bi-lingual labels and, if cost were required, cost disclosures in both US and Canadian dollars). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Some comments that opposed mandatory cost disclosures recognized that manufacturers might want to disclose some cost information voluntarily in point-of-sale materials.120 Several comments recommended that the Commission regulate how cost disclosures on packaging or in point-of-sale materials should be made, if the manufacturer wishes to make them. Of these, some recommended that the Commission require manufacturers to disclose the product usage period and energy cost assumptions upon which their cost claims were based.121 Other comments suggested that the Commission should prescribe standardized assumptions for any voluntarily-made operating cost disclosures.122 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\20Osram (Supp.), G-11, 2; LBL (Supp.), [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-11234. Public record. Not legal advice.