Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Television Sets

FederalRegulations

Ask Donna

How this section applies to your facts.

Federal Register › Vol. 77 › 77 FR 2830

This text was captured on Aug 14, 2026. It is a snapshot, not a live feed, so check the official code before relying on it.

Text

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Part 430 [Docket No. EERE-2010-BT-TP-0026] RIN 1904-AC29 Energy Conservation Program: Test Procedure for Television Sets AGENCY:

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy.

ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY:

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposes to establish a new test procedure for television sets (TVs). DOE repealed the prior Federal test procedure for TVs on October 20, 2009, due to petitions from the California Energy Commission (CEC) and the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA). CEC and CEA petitioned for the repeal in light of the June 13, 2009, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) transition from analog to digital broadcast transmissions for TVs. In their petitions, the CEC requested repeal of the regulatory provisions establishing the test procedure and defining “television set,” and the CEA petitioned for DOE's adoption of the International Electrochemical Commission's (IEC's) test procedure IEC Standard 62087-2008, “Methods of measurement for the power consumption of audio, video and related equipment.” DOE is proposing a new test procedure for TVs that was developed from existing industry test procedures including those by IEC, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and CEA. Additionally, DOE will hold a public meeting to receive and discuss comments on the proposal.

DATES:

DOE will hold a public meeting on a date that is to be determined, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., in Washington, DC. Once a public meeting date is selected, that date can be found at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/tv_sets.html . The meeting will also be broadcast as a webinar. See section V, “Public Participation,” for webinar registration information, participant instructions, and information about the capabilities available to webinar participants

.m., in Washington, DC. Once a public meeting date is selected, that date can be found at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/tv_sets.html . The meeting will also be broadcast as a webinar. See section V, “Public Participation,” for webinar registration information, participant instructions, and information about the capabilities available to webinar participants.

DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) before and after the public meeting, but no later than April 3, 2012. See section V, “Public Participation,” for details.

ADDRESSES:

The public meeting will be held at the U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585. To attend, please notify Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945. Please note that foreign nationals visiting DOE Headquarters are subject to advance security screening procedures. Any foreign national wishing to participate in the meeting should advise DOE as soon as possible by contacting Ms. Brenda Edwards at (202) 586-2945 to initiate the necessary procedures.

Any comments submitted must identify the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) for the TV Test Procedure, and provide docket number EERE-2010-BT-TP-0026 and/or regulatory information number (RIN) number 1904-AC29. Comments may be submitted using any of the following methods:

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov . Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

2. Email: Televisions-2010-TP-0026@ee.doe.gov . Include the docket number EERE-2010-BT-TP-0026 and/or RIN 1904-AC29 in the subject line of the message.

3. Mail: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. If possible, please submit all items on a CD. It is not necessary to include printed copies.

4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S

e docket number EERE-2010-BT-TP-0026 and/or RIN 1904-AC29 in the subject line of the message.

4. Hand Delivery/Courier: Ms. Brenda Edwards, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, 950 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Suite 600, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 586-2945. If possible, please submit all items on a CD. It is not necessary to include printed copies.

For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see section V, “Public Participation,” of this document.

Docket: The docket is available for review at regulations.gov, including Federal Register notices, framework documents, public meeting attendee lists and transcripts, comments, and other supporting documents/materials. All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. However, not all documents listed in the index may be publicly available, such as information that is exempt from public disclosure.

A link to the docket web page may be found at: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/tv_sets.html . This Web page will contain a link to the docket for this notice on the regulations.gov site. The regulations.gov Web page will contain simple instructions on how to access all documents, including public comments, in the docket. See section V for information on how to submit comments through regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Victor Petrolati, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Program, EE-2J, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 586-2192. Email: Victor.Petrolati@ee.doe.gov .

Ms. Celia Sher, U.S

t. See section V for information on how to submit comments through regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Celia Sher, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, GC-71, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone: (202) 287-6122. Email: Celia.Sher@hq.doe.gov .

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Authority and Background A. General B. Test Procedure Rulemaking Process C. Rulemaking Background II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking III. Discussion A. Effective Date and Compliance Date of Test Procedure B. Existing Television Test Procedures C. Scope 1. Products Covered by This Rulemaking 2. Definition of Television Sets 3. Other Definitions a. Definitions Incorporated From IEC 62087-2011 b. Definitions Incorporated From ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 c. New Definitions for Incorporation D. Testing Conditions and Instrumentation 1. Accuracy and Precision of Measurement Equipment a. Power Supply b. Power Meter c. Light Measurement Devices 2. Test Room and Set-Up Criteria a. Dark Room Conditions b. Ambient Temperature and Humidity c. Signal Source and Generation E. Test Measurements 1. Picture Settings To Test 2. Testing Order 3. Luminance a. Warm-Up and Stabilization b. Method for Testing Luminance c. Video Signals d. Number of Luminance Measurements e. Measurement Distances and Angles for Luminance Testing 4. On Mode a. IEC 62087-2011 Dynamic Broadcast-Content Video Signal b. Testing of Television Sets Shipped With Automatic Brightness Control Enabled c. Television Sets Shipped Without Automatic Brightness Control Enabled d. Three Dimensional Display Testing 5. Standby and Off Modes a. Additional Functions b. Power Saving Technologies c. Standby Modes d. Off Mode 6

s and Angles for Luminance Testing 4. On Mode a. IEC 62087-2011 Dynamic Broadcast-Content Video Signal b. Testing of Television Sets Shipped With Automatic Brightness Control Enabled c. Television Sets Shipped Without Automatic Brightness Control Enabled d. Three Dimensional Display Testing 5. Standby and Off Modes a. Additional Functions b. Power Saving Technologies c. Standby Modes d. Off Mode 6. Energy Efficiency Metric(s) for Televisions IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 D. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 E. Review Under Executive Order 13132 F. Review Under Executive Order 12988 G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 1999 I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 J. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 K. Review Under Executive Order 13211 L. Review Under Section 32 of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 V. Public Participation A. Attendance at Public Meeting B. Procedure for Submitting Prepared General Statements for Distribution C. Conduct of Public Meeting D. Submission of Comments E. Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comment VI. Approval of the Office of the Secretary I. Authority and Background

A. General

Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6291, et seq.; “EPCA” or, “the Act”) sets forth a variety of provisions designed to improve energy efficiency. (All references to EPCA refer to the statute as amended through the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), Public Law 110-140 (Dec. 19, 2007)). Part B of Title III (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309), which was subsequently redesignated as Part A for editorial reasons, establishes the “Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles.” This includes television sets (TVs), the subject of this notice

to the statute as amended through the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA 2007), Public Law 110-140 (Dec. 19, 2007)). Part B of Title III (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309), which was subsequently redesignated as Part A for editorial reasons, establishes the “Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products Other Than Automobiles.” This includes television sets (TVs), the subject of this notice. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(12))

Under EPCA, this program consists essentially of three parts: (1) Testing, (2) labeling, and (3) Federal energy conservation standards. The testing requirements consist of test procedures that manufacturers of covered products must use (1) as the basis for certifying to DOE that their products comply with the applicable energy conservation standards adopted under EPCA, and (2) for making representations about the efficiency of those products. Similarly, DOE must use these test requirements to determine whether the products comply with any relevant standards promulgated under EPCA.

B. Test Procedure Rulemaking Process

In 42 U.S.C. 6293, EPCA sets forth the criteria and procedures DOE must follow when prescribing or amending test procedures for covered products. Specifically, if DOE determines that a test procedure should be prescribed or amended, it must publish the proposed test procedure in the Federal Register and give interested parties an opportunity to provide public comment on the procedures. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2)) EPCA also provides that the test procedure shall be reasonably designed to produce test results which measure energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product during a representative average use cycle or period of use, and shall not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3))

EISA 2007 amended EPCA to require DOE to implement a standby and off mode energy consumption measurement, if technically feasible, in test procedures where not previously present

re energy efficiency, energy use, or estimated annual operating cost of a covered product during a representative average use cycle or period of use, and shall not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3))

EISA 2007 amended EPCA to require DOE to implement a standby and off mode energy consumption measurement, if technically feasible, in test procedures where not previously present. Otherwise, DOE must prescribe a separate standby and off mode energy test procedure, if technically feasible. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(2)(A)) EISA 2007 also requires any final rule to establish or revise a standard for a covered product, adopted after July 1, 2010, to incorporate standby mode and off mode energy use into a single amended or new standard, if feasible. (42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(3)(A)) DOE recognizes that the standby and off mode conditions of operation apply to the product covered by this rulemaking. In response to this requirement, DOE proposes adopting provisions in the test procedures to address standby and off mode as discussed in section III.E.5 of this proposed rulemaking.

C. Rulemaking Background

DOE adopted a test procedure for TVs on June 29, 1979, codified at 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix H. 44 FR 37938. In May 2008, DOE received petitions from both the California Energy Commission (CEC) and the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA), which were drafted in light of the June 13, 2009, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) transition from analog to digital broadcast transmissions for TVs. 1 As of June 12, 2009, the Digital Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005 required that all broadcasting stations transmit in digital to make analog frequencies available for public safety communications. 2 Both the CEC and the CEA petitioned for repeal of the regulatory provisions establishing the test procedure

Commission (FCC) transition from analog to digital broadcast transmissions for TVs. 1 As of June 12, 2009, the Digital Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005 required that all broadcasting stations transmit in digital to make analog frequencies available for public safety communications. 2 Both the CEC and the CEA petitioned for repeal of the regulatory provisions establishing the test procedure. CEC's petition stated that the old test procedure was not capable of accurately measuring the energy consumption of modern TVs because TV broadcasting is no longer transmitted via an analog signal. 3 In addition, the CEA petitioned for DOE's adoption of the International Electrochemical Commission's (IEC) test procedure IEC 62087-2008, “Methods of measurement for the power consumption of audio, video and related equipment.” 74 FR 53641. In light of these petitions, and the fact that the previous test procedure was largely obsolete for today's products because of the mandated transition from analog to digital signal transmission, DOE repealed the test procedure on October 20, 2009. The test procedure DOE is proposing today seeks to rectify the problem with the old test procedure by allowing for accurate measurement of the energy consumption of modern TVs.

1 Energy Conservation Program: Repeal of Test Procedures for Televisions. 74 FR 53640 http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/pdfs/74fr53640.pdf .

2 Digital transition mandated by Public Safety Act of 2005 http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/digitaltv.html .

3 Chamberlain, William M., “Petition of the California Energy Commission to Repeal the Test Method for Television Sets in 10 CFR. Part 430 Subpart B.” May 23, 2008. http://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/2008rulemaking/documents/2008-05-15_workshop/other/Petition_Of_The_CEC_To_Repeal_The_Test_Method_For_Television_Sets_In_10_CFR_Part_430_Subpart_B.pdf .

DOE notes that the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (Pub. L

f the California Energy Commission to Repeal the Test Method for Television Sets in 10 CFR. Part 430 Subpart B.” May 23, 2008. http://www.energy.ca.gov/appliances/2008rulemaking/documents/2008-05-15_workshop/other/Petition_Of_The_CEC_To_Repeal_The_Test_Method_For_Television_Sets_In_10_CFR_Part_430_Subpart_B.pdf .

DOE notes that the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113) directs Federal agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in lieu of Government standards whenever possible. Consequently, as described in today's NOPR, DOE incorporates by reference in its test procedures the generally accepted test procedures or recognized industry standards, such as those issued by the IEC, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), or the CEA, that provide either specific aspect(s) of the test procedure, or complete test procedures, for the specified modes.

As the first step in this rulemaking to establish a new test procedure, DOE published a Request for Information on September 3, 2010, 75 FR 54048, (the 2010 RFI) requesting stakeholders to provide information and views on DOE utilizing both the IEC 62087-2008 and the ENERGY STAR Program Requirements for Televisions, Version 4.1 (ENERGY STAR v. 4.1) as reference standards for the basis of a new DOE test procedure. 4 DOE also solicited

4 When the RFI was published, the most current version of EPA's test procedure was ENERGY STAR v. 4.1 and the most recent version of the IEC-62087 was 2008. Since then, EPA has published an updated version, “ENERGY STAR Program

(1) An appropriate method for ensuring screen brightness,

(2) Utilizing the nine point video signal,

(3) An appropriate method for measuring screen luminance,

(4) Requiring testing on all preset viewing modes,

(5) Testing multiple illuminance levels (specifically 10, 100, 150, and 200 lux),

(6) An appropriate method for generating illuminance,

(7) The best possible signal source and connection to that signal source,

suring screen brightness,

(2) Utilizing the nine point video signal,

(3) An appropriate method for measuring screen luminance,

(4) Requiring testing on all preset viewing modes,

(5) Testing multiple illuminance levels (specifically 10, 100, 150, and 200 lux),

(6) An appropriate method for generating illuminance,

(7) The best possible signal source and connection to that signal source,

(8) An appropriate stabilization time for luminance and power measurements,

(9) An appropriate method of testing 3D energy consumption,

(10) Measuring download acquisition mode (DAM) power,

(11) Measuring internet connectivity power,

(12) Measuring power saving technology energy (including presence sensors, display power management systems (DPMS), and high-definition multimedia interface consumer electronic controls (HDMI-CEC)), and

(13) The scope of coverage for the rulemaking. 75 FR 54048.

II. Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

In today's NOPR, DOE is proposing a new test procedure for determining the energy use of TVs. The proposed test procedure includes measuring screen luminance and testing energy consumption for active (on mode), standby, and off modes.

The luminance test is proposed to be performed by measuring the screen luminance while the TV is displaying the IEC 62087-2011 three bar video signal in both the home and retail picture settings. The luminance test is being proposed to allow the ENERGY STAR program to utilize the measurement. The on mode test will measure on mode energy consumption when the TV is displaying the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal. If the TV is shipped with an automatic brightness control (ABC) sensor enabled by default, on mode will be tested at various room illuminance levels. If the TV does not have an ABC sensor or the sensor is disabled by default, the test would be performed while the TV is in the home picture setting

nergy consumption when the TV is displaying the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal. If the TV is shipped with an automatic brightness control (ABC) sensor enabled by default, on mode will be tested at various room illuminance levels. If the TV does not have an ABC sensor or the sensor is disabled by default, the test would be performed while the TV is in the home picture setting.

DOE's proposed standby test procedure incorporates both IEC 62087-2011 “Methods of measurement for the power consumption of audio, video and related equipment” and the CEA “Procedure for DAM Testing: For TVs” (CEA DAM test procedure). DOE's proposed off mode test procedure incorporates IEC 62087-2011.

Although DOE is aware of TVs with additional modes, DOE is not proposing to require testing these, but rather is simply considering these modes and requesting comment on them. These modes include:

(1) On mode tests for TVs with internet connectivity; (2) 3D mode, if capable; and (3) Standby-active, low mode (when the internet is enabled but the TV is in standby, and the TV is not sending or receiving external data, for those TVs with internet access). To supports its efforts in developing a Federal test procedure, DOE conducted various tests, the results of which can be found on the DOE Web site. 5 The information found on the DOE Web site helps support this NOPR by providing additional data and clarification. DOE conducted testing at two different testing facilities and therefore some of the data is organized according to where that data was collected. The data from test facility one is denoted with numerical values, while the data from test facility two is denoted with alphabetical letters. The test facilities were determined to produce similar results as indicated in the Round Robin Test Program Final Report for Televisions. This information, found on the DOE Web site, 6 includes the following:

5 The DOE Web site: Appliance and Commercial Equipment Standards: Television Sets. U.S. Department of Energy

ues, while the data from test facility two is denoted with alphabetical letters. The test facilities were determined to produce similar results as indicated in the Round Robin Test Program Final Report for Televisions. This information, found on the DOE Web site, 6 includes the following:

5 The DOE Web site: Appliance and Commercial Equipment Standards: Television Sets. U.S. Department of Energy. August 2, 2011. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/tv_sets.html .

6 Id.

(1) Television Test Procedure Comparison Chart which compares key aspects of various TV standards including IEC 62087-2011, CEA 2037-2010, ENERGY STAR version 5.1, CEC, BS EN 62087 “Methods of measurement for the power consumption of audio, video, and related equipment”, and EN 62087 “Methods of measurement for the power consumption of audio, video, and related equipment”.

(2) Video Signal of Test Patterns Comparison Table which compares the different advantages and disadvantages of particular video signals including the 3-bar, 9-point, DOE 5-point, and dynamic video signals. DOE assessed these video signals based on their availability, impact on average picture level (APL), affect on power limiting, and interested party input among other features.

(3) Room Illuminance Measurements During TV Viewing: Pilot Study which summarizes a pilot study that DOE conducted to continuously measure room illuminance in nine homes over a period of a week or more as well as taking discrete one-off measurements at different locations in the room. This document also sets out the detailed methodology that DOE used for its pilot study.

a. Room Illuminance Measurements During TV Viewing: Pilot Study Data which includes the source data which was analyzed to develop the conclusions in the pilot study.

m illuminance in nine homes over a period of a week or more as well as taking discrete one-off measurements at different locations in the room. This document also sets out the detailed methodology that DOE used for its pilot study.

a. Room Illuminance Measurements During TV Viewing: Pilot Study Data which includes the source data which was analyzed to develop the conclusions in the pilot study.

(4) Round Robin Test Program Final Report for Televisions that summarizes a round robin test study to assess the repeatability and reproducibility of TV energy test results. This round robin study utilized the ENERGY STAR version 5.1 test procedure across three labs and compares their results.

(5) Television Energy and Luminance Test Data Set which includes the energy and luminance data for all of the TVs on which DOE conducted testing.

(a) Television Luminance Data which includes test results for luminance testing using the 9-point (both perpendicular and off-axis measurements), 5-point Video Electronics Standards Association (VESA), and DOE 5-point video signals. DOE conducted luminance testing based on the ENERGY STAR version 5.1 test procedure but altered the video signal to determine which video signal was most appropriate. DOE used the 3-bar static video signal specified in IEC 62087 Ed. 2.0 as well as the 9-point, VESA 5-point, and DOE 5-point video signals as specified in this NOPR.

(b) Television Luminance Stabilization Period Data which includes graphs indicating how TV screen luminance changes over time and with respect to different stabilization periods. DOE took measurements of screen luminance after different stabilization periods to determine the most appropriate method for conducting luminance testing. DOE initially warmed-up the TVs using the method from IEC 62087-2011 and then displayed the video signal for 15 minutes to conduct the luminance measurement. The second luminance measurement was taken after a 10 minute warm-up period followed by 2 minutes of a black screen

een luminance after different stabilization periods to determine the most appropriate method for conducting luminance testing. DOE initially warmed-up the TVs using the method from IEC 62087-2011 and then displayed the video signal for 15 minutes to conduct the luminance measurement. The second luminance measurement was taken after a 10 minute warm-up period followed by 2 minutes of a black screen. DOE tested this stabilization period for both the IEC 3-bar and 9-point video signals.

(c) Television Power Data that includes test results for power consumption testing while TVs are in various different modes. DOE conducted this testing according to the ENERGY STAR version 5.1 test method, but adjusted specific aspects on the TV to determine the energy consumption associated with that particular feature including volume, ABC, and internet connectivity.

(d) Television Internet Standby Data which is comprised of data indicating the energy consumption when TVs are in standby mode and connected to various external sources including HDMI, cable, Ethernet, and wireless internet. DOE conducted power consumption testing according to the ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 standby test procedure while alternating the specific internet connections present on the TV.

(e) Television 9-point Video Signal Comparison Data that includes data depicting the difference between perpendicular and off-axis measurements while the TV is displaying the 9-point video signal. Luminance results were collected according to the ENERGY STAR version 5.1 test procedure, except that DOE altered the video signal to the 9-point video signal specified in this NOPR.

resent on the TV.

(f) Television On Mode Automatic Brightness Control Data which includes the power and luminance data for TVs tested by DOE with ABC enabled by default across various room illuminance levels. A PowerPoint which charts some of this data is also included to demonstrate the range of implementation of ABC among TVs tested by DOE. DOE conducted power consumption testing according to the ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 (with additional room lighting levels) using the IEC dynamic test clip specified in IEC 62087 Ed. 2.0. Luminance results were collected according to the ENERGY STAR version 5.1 test procedure, using the 3-bar static test pattern specified in IEC 62087 Ed. 2.0.

(g) Television Download Acquisition Mode Data which includes data indicating the energy consumption associated with DAM mode. DOE conducted this testing on two TVs by configuring the internal electronic program guide (not enabled by default) and connecting to a subscription cable service by (1) coaxial cable only, (2) Ethernet only and (3) cable and Ethernet together. Results over a 24 hour period were recorded and charted for each connection configuration.

ata indicating the energy consumption associated with DAM mode. DOE conducted this testing on two TVs by configuring the internal electronic program guide (not enabled by default) and connecting to a subscription cable service by (1) coaxial cable only, (2) Ethernet only and (3) cable and Ethernet together. Results over a 24 hour period were recorded and charted for each connection configuration.

(h) Television 3D Mode Data that contains data as to TV energy consumption while in various 3D modes. This testing was conducted on five TVs under the following modes: When the TV is displaying a 3D video signal, when the TV is up-converting a 2D video signal to 3D, and when the TV is receiving a video signal from a Blu-ray player that has up-converted a 2D video signal to 3D.

DOE believes that the proposed test procedure will accurately represent the energy consumption of TVs by capturing the annual energy consumption in on mode, standby mode, and off mode. However, DOE requests comments from interested parties on improvements or changes to the proposed test procedure. DOE will consider modifications that improve the accuracy, precision of language, or other elements of the procedure and/or decrease the testing burden. In submitting comments, interested parties should state the nature of the recommended modification and explain how it would improve upon the test procedure proposed in this NOPR. Interested parties should also submit data, if any, to support their positions.

III. Discussion

A. Effective Date and Compliance Date of Test Procedure

If adopted, the effective date for this test procedure would be 30 days after publication of the test procedure final rule in the Federal Register . At that time, the new metrics and any other measure of energy consumption which depends on these metrics may be represented pursuant to the final rule. Compliance with the new test procedure for representation purposes would be required 180 days after the date of publication of the test procedure final rule

uld be 30 days after publication of the test procedure final rule in the Federal Register . At that time, the new metrics and any other measure of energy consumption which depends on these metrics may be represented pursuant to the final rule. Compliance with the new test procedure for representation purposes would be required 180 days after the date of publication of the test procedure final rule. On or after that date, any such representations, including those made on marketing materials and product labels, must be based upon results generated under the final test procedure proposed to be included in Appendix H to Subpart B of 10 CFR part 430.

Furthermore, EPCA requires the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to prescribe labeling rules for certain covered products including TVs. (42 U.S.C. 6294(a)(2)(I)) Hence, the final DOE test procedure is required to be utilized by the FTC for labeling requirements and shall be utilized or referenced by other organizations, such as the EPA for its ENERGY STAR specification for TVs. This test procedure must also be referenced by the CEC in California and any other state regulation providing for the disclosure of information with respect to any measure of TV energy consumption once the test procedure becomes effective 30 days after the test procedure final rule publication. The final rule would supersede any existing state test procedure for TVs to the extent the state regulation requires testing in a manner other than that required by the final DOE test procedure. (42 U.S.C. 6297(a)(1))

B. Existing Television Test Procedures

While developing the proposed test procedure for TVs, DOE researched existing industry test procedures that measure TV energy consumption, as discussed in its 2010 RFI. 75 FR 54048, 54049. Among the most widely accepted are the IEC 62087-2011 and EPA's “ENERGY STAR Program Requirements for Televisions, Version 5.3” (ENERGY STAR v. 5.3)

mandating different test procedures for energy consumption, different standards, or different labels, will confuse consumers with conflicting or unclear information, and ultimately be counterproductive. (CERC, No. 10 at p. 1) CERC urged DOE to adopt a single federal test procedure for TV energy consumption, because it will better inform the public and better show energy savings. (CERC, No. 10 at p. 2) Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) asked that DOE develop a test procedure that allows flexibility for policy makers when setting standards such as allowing policy makers to require testing at different pre-set picture settings and establishing desired luminance ratios. (NRDC, No. 5 at p. 1)

Environment Northeast (ENE) also had general recommendations for DOE's proposed TV test procedure and suggested that the test procedure should be designed so that the test results reflect energy consumption in the field to the maximum extent possible. (ENE, No. 2 at p. 1) It urged DOE to develop a test procedure that only promotes energy management features that deliver significant savings in the field. (ENE, No. 2 at p. 1) ENE commented that energy consumption should be measured under a range of values (rather than using average values for ambient illumination, viewing distances and angles, and user adjustments to settings) and that the average expected energy consumption of a model in the field be calculated. (ENE, No. 2 at p. 1) ENE believes that a test procedure that adheres to its direction will provide more accurate results and reduce the likelihood of manufacturers “designing to the test”. (ENE, No. 2 at p. 1) Finally, ENE urged DOE to design a test procedure that does not discourage innovation. (ENE, No. 2 at p. 1)

Other interested parties commented that DOE should use existing test procedures when developing its test procedure

that a test procedure that adheres to its direction will provide more accurate results and reduce the likelihood of manufacturers “designing to the test”. (ENE, No. 2 at p. 1) Finally, ENE urged DOE to design a test procedure that does not discourage innovation. (ENE, No. 2 at p. 1)

Other interested parties commented that DOE should use existing test procedures when developing its test procedure. NRDC stated that DOE should review and adopt key portions of IEC 62087-2008 but noted that aside from the IEC 62087-2008 dynamic broadcast-content video signal, the remaining sections of the IEC 62087-2008 test procedure are either incomplete or need revision. (NRDC, No. 5 at p. 2) CEA believes that future ENERGY STAR specifications should conform to the DOE test procedure, and that CEA-2037-2009 is suitable for adoption now with specified discrete changes, although the CEA did not specify these discrete changes. (CEA, No. 13 at p. 2) CEA also urged DOE to adopt CEA-2037-2009 to avoid the federal government using and promoting two different test procedures. (CEA, No. 13 at p. 3) CERC commented that the CEA-2037-2009 test procedure is the best test procedure because it is most familiar to manufacturers and retailers and added that it provides a reasonably accurate, practicable, and cost-effective test procedure. (CERC, No. 10 at p. 2) SHARP urged the DOE to utilize IEC 62087-2008 and CEA-2037-2009 as a basis for its test procedure. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 1) Finally, Mitsubishi requested that DOE adopt CEA-2037-2009 as its fundamental TV test procedure, and commented that if DOE finds that CEA-2037-2009 test procedure is inadequate, then it should base its test procedure on IEC 62087-2008. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 2)

quate, then it should base its test procedure on IEC 62087-2008. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 2)

Sony and CEC asked DOE to consider how its test procedure will affect state regulations and test procedures. Sony recommended that DOE create a test procedure that supersedes state regulations, while CEC believes that DOE should consider how its test procedure will preempt CEC's test procedure. (Sony, No. 8 at p. 4) Specifically, CEC urged DOE to measure on mode power, standby-passive power, power factor, and luminance to ensure that the CEC can also require this testing. (CEC, No. 15 at p. 4)

In addition to considering stakeholder comments, DOE also conducted research and validation testing, which consisted of on, standby, and off mode energy consumption testing as well as luminance testing. The results of this research indicated that the IEC 62087-2011 could be utilized with some modifications as it would adequately measure TV energy consumption. 8 DOE proposes a test procedure for TVs that uses IEC 62087-2011 as a basis, with additional detail and modifications, most of which are seen in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. DOE believes this is consistent with the requests of many commenters, who recommended using IEC 62087-2011 and CEA-2037-2009, which references the IEC 62087 test procedure. DOE based the proposed luminance measurement on the one found in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3.

8 The DOE Web site: Appliance and Commercial Equipment Standards: Television Sets. U.S. Department of Energy. August 2, 2011. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/tv_sets.html.

C. Scope

1. Products Covered by This Rulemaking

vered by This Rulemaking

In the 2010 RFI, DOE requested comments on the scope of the TV test procedure rulemaking. DOE received comments highlighting the similarities and differences between displays, TVs, and digital picture frames and the coverage of the test procedure. Unlike TVs, displays and digital picture frames do not have a TV tuner and therefore cannot receive digital broadcast content. While all of these technologies have the ability to display digital content they do have some differences. DOE notes that these differences are subtle, and therefore considered the possibility of including all displays in this rulemaking.

Display and TV technologies have started to converge and have become more similar in their capabilities. Given the convergence of display and TV technologies, PG&E, and the California IOUs advocated that the coverage of displays be explored in this rulemaking. They supported DOE's research into whether displays should be incorporated into the test procedure and specifically stated that DOE should study the category of displays less than 30 inches in greater detail as well as displays greater than 60 inches. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 4; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 4)

Other stakeholders opposed the inclusion of displays in the scope of the rulemaking. Sony asserted that TVs and displays are different in the following ways and therefore need to be tested differently. TVs have different resolutions than displays because rate conversion circuits operate differently in the two products; resolution affects power consumption in displays but not in TVs; and TVs with computer inputs do not fully comply with the VESA DPMS requirements established for displays. (Sony, No. 8 at p. 4) Rather, Sony recommended that DOE use the same definition for TVs that is used in the ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. 9 (Sony, No. 8 at p. 4) Panasonic also does not recommend combining TVs and displays, as they believe these are two distinct products. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p

in TVs; and TVs with computer inputs do not fully comply with the VESA DPMS requirements established for displays. (Sony, No. 8 at p. 4) Rather, Sony recommended that DOE use the same definition for TVs that is used in the ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. 9 (Sony, No. 8 at p. 4) Panasonic also does not recommend combining TVs and displays, as they believe these are two distinct products. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 9) CERC commented that the scope of the test procedure should not encompass all types of TVs because professional and retail displays require high luminance, sharpness, and performance. (CERC, No. 10 at p. 3) CERC further commented that displays are designed differently than TVs due to their primary use; namely, TVs are meant to be viewed from further distances than displays. (CERC, No. 10 at p. 3) Finally, CEA commented that

9 ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 defines TV as: A commercially available electronic product designed primarily for the reception and display of audiovisual signals received from terrestrial, cable, satellite, Internet Protocol TV (IPTV), or other digital or analog sources. A TV consists of a tuner/receiver and a display encased in a single enclosure. The product usually relies upon a cathode-ray tube (CRT), liquid crystal display (LCD), plasma display panel (PDP) which are examples of the more common display technologies.

DOE believes that some products can only be identified as TVs or displays on the basis of marketing. Some manufacturers ( e.g., Samsung and LG) make identical products that are marketed separately as a display and TV. 10 Moreover, there exist high-definition displays sold with the option of purchasing an external tuner or speakers, which enable the customer to use the product as a TV. Modern TVs can also typically be connected to computers and function as monitors. Despite some overlap, DOE agrees with stakeholders who suggested that TVs and displays are designed differently in most instances ( e.g. TVs are equipped with a tuner and displays are not)

displays sold with the option of purchasing an external tuner or speakers, which enable the customer to use the product as a TV. Modern TVs can also typically be connected to computers and function as monitors. Despite some overlap, DOE agrees with stakeholders who suggested that TVs and displays are designed differently in most instances ( e.g. TVs are equipped with a tuner and displays are not). Although TVs and displays may be used interchangeably, they are designed to perform different tasks. Displays have different screen resolutions that allow for clearer text reading and are typically set up in a 4:3 aspect ratio, as opposed to TVs which are primarily set up in 16:9 aspect ratio which is optimal for displaying video. DOE acknowledges that despite the increasing overlap between these products, which may increase in the future, they currently have different usage patterns ( e.g. they are used in different lighting conditions and locations as well as have different hours of operation).

10 Personal Communication, DisplaySearch at SID Conference, May 22, 2011.

The presence of a tuner is not an unequivocal distinguishing factor between TVs and other displays; however, DOE still considers it a suitable way of broadly separating products which are generally intended to be used as displays or digital picture frames from those generally intended to be used as TVs (particularly in the smaller sizes). Accordingly, DOE proposes to define TVs with reference to displays but excluding displays if they are sold without tuners. Further, DOE believes that this effectively excludes from the proposed TV test procedure most displays and digital picture frames currently on the market.

TVs, unlike displays, often contain a tuner, which historically cost about $5.50 to the manufacturer and were projected to cost around $2.70 by the end of 2010

with reference to displays but excluding displays if they are sold without tuners. Further, DOE believes that this effectively excludes from the proposed TV test procedure most displays and digital picture frames currently on the market.

TVs, unlike displays, often contain a tuner, which historically cost about $5.50 to the manufacturer and were projected to cost around $2.70 by the end of 2010. 11 Modern TVs have similar inputs to displays, and their uses are increasingly similar, with the latest TVs having USB ports, PC inputs, video inputs, Ethernet cable inputs, and inputs enabling connection with cameras and MP3 players (e.g., Samsung, Panasonic, Sony). Moreover, the latest display connection technology, High-Definition Multimedia Interface (HDMI), is expressly designed to work with both TVs and displays and does not differentiate between the two. DOE is monitoring marketplace convergence and will consider updating the definitions and scope of the TV rulemaking in the future.

11 Quarterly LCD TV Cost & Price Forecast Model Report: Q1'11 History with Q2'11-Q4'15 Forecast. Rep. DisplaySearch, 2010.

Consequently, DOE is proposing to include in the scope of this rulemaking only displays of 15 inches and above which are sold with a tuner. DOE acknowledges interested party comments stating that TVs and displays capable of showing moving images are not similar in all ways. However, DOE believes that displays which are sold with a tuner are used in the same manner as TVs, and is also taking into consideration that EPA requires displays to be tested with IEC 62087 Dynamic broadcast content. DOE welcomes comment on the proposed scope of this rulemaking, particularly the inclusion of certain types of displays. (See Issue 1 in section V. E “Issues On Which DOE Seeks Comment”).

2. Definition of Television Sets

TVs are a covered product under 42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(12) of EPCA. DOE has the authority to adopt test procedures for such covered products under 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2) of EPCA. Further, 42 U.S.C

comment on the proposed scope of this rulemaking, particularly the inclusion of certain types of displays. (See Issue 1 in section V. E “Issues On Which DOE Seeks Comment”).

2. Definition of Television Sets

TVs are a covered product under 42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(12) of EPCA. DOE has the authority to adopt test procedures for such covered products under 42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(2) of EPCA. Further, 42 U.S.C. 6295(l)(3) of EPCA specifically grants DOE the authority to promulgate energy conservation standards for TVs. There are no statutory definitions for TVs under EPCA. In 1979 DOE adopted the following regulatory definitions for TVs (44 FR 39798, June 29, 1979), which are set forth in 10 CFR 430.2:

Television set means a color television set or a monochrome television set.

Color television set means an electrical device designed to convert incoming broadcast signals into color television pictures and associated sound.

Monochrome television set means an electrical device designed to convert incoming broadcast signals into monochrome television pictures and associated sound.

Similar to DOE's recently repealed test procedure (74 FR 53640, October 20, 2009), the current DOE definitions for TVs, developed in 1979, are no longer appropriate and are proposed to be updated as part of this rulemaking. The definition refers to both color TVs and monochrome TVs (also known as black-and-white TVs, which are rarely produced for the mass market today) and with the evolution of technology, these definitions are too broad to adequately define the products covered by this rulemaking. Since the digital switch-over in 2009, analog TVs can no longer receive broadcast signals without an external digital tuner. Accordingly, the definitions require updating in order to reflect the realities of modern TVs and technological developments, including the convergence of display and TV technology, and to avoid the proposed rule being rendered ineffective

roducts covered by this rulemaking. Since the digital switch-over in 2009, analog TVs can no longer receive broadcast signals without an external digital tuner. Accordingly, the definitions require updating in order to reflect the realities of modern TVs and technological developments, including the convergence of display and TV technology, and to avoid the proposed rule being rendered ineffective.

DOE notes that at the time the Department repealed the test procedure for TVs (74 FR 53640, October 20, 2009), it also considered amending the definition of TVs on the basis of the transition to digital TV and found this factor in isolation to be an insufficient reason to amend the definition. At that time, the Department had not taken into account other factors, including, rapid technology changes, the changing focus away from transmission towards display technology and the phenomenon of TV and display technology convergence. The combination of these factors which are currently evident in this product market have led DOE to preliminarily determine that a revised definition of TVs is required.

CEA asked that DOE develop a definition of TVs that excludes battery-powered TVs because they inherently are designed for efficiency so as to improve battery life. CEA stated that battery-powered TVs are different from typical TVs that require AC or main power supplies in their technology and usage patterns. (CEA, No. 13 at p. 9) Additionally, CEA commented that displays used for commercial applications and those that fully function on battery-power should not be included in the scope of coverage. CEA further observed that portable and handheld displays are designed to be power efficient and should therefore not be included in the scope of coverage

ower supplies in their technology and usage patterns. (CEA, No. 13 at p. 9) Additionally, CEA commented that displays used for commercial applications and those that fully function on battery-power should not be included in the scope of coverage. CEA further observed that portable and handheld displays are designed to be power efficient and should therefore not be included in the scope of coverage.

In today's NOPR, after reviewing TV, display, digital picture frame market trends, and accessory technologies, as well as other industry definitions from IEC, EPA, and CEA, DOE is proposing an updated definition for TVs; one that it believes will not become obsolete with rapid changes in technology. 12 to watch dynamic visual information. Consequently, DOE proposes the following definition to subpart A of 10 CFR 430.2:

12 The Nielsen Company, LLC (2011).

Television set (also referred to as “TV”): A product designed to be powered primarily by mains power having a diagonal screen size of fifteen inches or larger that is manufactured with a TV tuner, and that is capable of displaying dynamic visual information from wired or wireless sources including but not limited to:

(1) Broadcast and similar services for terrestrial, cable, satellite, and/or broadband transmission of analog and/or digital signals; and/or

(2) Display-specific data connections, such as Video Graphics Array (VGA), Digital Visual Interface (DVI), High-Definition Multimedia Interface (HDMI), DisplayPort, used typically for a computer or workstation that is not physically attached to the display; and/or

(3) Media storage devices such as a USB flash drive, a memory card, or a DVD; and/or

sion of analog and/or digital signals; and/or

(3) Media storage devices such as a USB flash drive, a memory card, or a DVD; and/or

(4) Network connections, usually using Internet Protocol, typically carried over Ethernet or WiFi.

A TV may contain, but is not limited to, one of the following display technologies: Liquid crystal display (LCD), light-emitting diode (LED), cathode-ray tube (CRT), and plasma display panel (PDP). TVs also include TV Combination Units that DOE has further defined in appendix H to subpart B of this part.

DOE notes that this proposed definition also includes TV combination units which are TVs that incorporate additional devices such as a digital video disc (DVD) player, Blu-ray player, hard disk drive (HDD), or videocassette recorder (VCR).These products maintain the general purpose of a TV but are combined with additional features.

3. Other Definitions

DOE's proposed test procedure for TVs incorporates definitions from IEC 62087-2011 and ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. DOE is also proposing to add its own definitions, which were neither addressed by IEC 62087-2011 nor ENERGY STAR v. 5.3, and feels the proposed definitions are necessary.

Specifically, DOE proposes to include the following defined terms found in IEC 62087-2011: “additional functions,” “off mode,” “standby-active, high mode,” “standby-active, low mode,” and “standby-passive mode.” DOE is aware that section 42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1) of EPCA defines on, standby, and off modes, but believes that the proposed IEC 62087-2011 definitions provide added clarification to the test procedure. Second, DOE proposes to include the following defined terms found in ENERGY STAR v

itional functions,” “off mode,” “standby-active, high mode,” “standby-active, low mode,” and “standby-passive mode.” DOE is aware that section 42 U.S.C. 6295(gg)(1) of EPCA defines on, standby, and off modes, but believes that the proposed IEC 62087-2011 definitions provide added clarification to the test procedure. Second, DOE proposes to include the following defined terms found in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3: “download acquisition mode,” “luminance,” “on mode,” and “TV combination unit.” For the reasons discussed below, DOE also proposes to develop new definitions for “home picture setting” and “retail picture setting.”

a. Definitions Incorporated From IEC 62087-2011

DOE is proposing to define “additional functions” using the definition found in IEC 62087-2011. DOE is proposing to define “additional functions” because many TVs are now equipped with a wide variety of features, such as DVD players, memory card readers, music player inputs, that are not standard among different manufacturers and models. Furthermore, DOE believes that this definition from IEC 62087-2011 is appropriate because it is clear, concise and widely accepted as an industry definition. The definition for additional functions found in IEC 62087-2011 also has not been redefined by any of the later published TV industry standards. Accordingly, DOE is proposing to define this term in section 2.1 (additional functions) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 as follows:

Additional functions: Additional functions are functions that are not required for the basic operation of the device. Additional functions include, but are not limited to a VCR unit, a DVD unit, a HDD unit, a FM-radio unit, a memory card-reader unit, or an ambient lighting unit.

ut are not limited to a VCR unit, a DVD unit, a HDD unit, a FM-radio unit, a memory card-reader unit, or an ambient lighting unit.

DOE is proposing to define “off mode” using the definition found in IEC 62087-2011, rather than the definition provided in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. Although ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 also defines off mode, DOE believes the definition is too broad. Specifically, the ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 definition requires that an indicator be present that shows that the product is in off mode, a clause that is not included in the IEC 62087-2011 definition. Accordingly, DOE is proposing to define this term in section 2.9 (off mode) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 as follows:

Off mode: Off mode is the mode where the appliance is connected to a power source, produces neither sound nor picture and cannot be switched into any other mode with the remote control unit, an external or internal signal.

DOE is proposing a test for standby-passive mode in this NOPR and thus provides a definition for the mode. DOE is proposing to define “standby-passive mode” by using the IEC 62087-2011 definition for standby-passive. This standby-passive mode test is being proposed to capture the energy consumption associated with the TV when it produces neither sound nor picture. DOE believes that IEC has clearly and appropriately defined standby-passive mode. DOE is proposing to define this term in section 2.12 (standby-passive mode) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 as follows:

Standby-passive mode: Standby-passive mode is the mode in which the appliance is connected to a power source, produces neither sound nor picture but can be switched into another mode with the remote control unit or an internal signal.

appliance is connected to a power source, produces neither sound nor picture but can be switched into another mode with the remote control unit or an internal signal.

DOE is proposing to define “standby-active, high mode” consistent with the IEC 62087-2011 definition for standby-active, high. IEC's definition clearly and accurately captures the state of the TV while in standby-active, high mode. DOE is proposing a definition for standby-active, high, since DOE is also proposing a test in the standby-active, high mode. Standby-active, high mode would cover TVs when they are switched off with a remote, but remain active in some manner. This includes TVs that are downloading information from the internet or cable while switched into standby mode. Accordingly, DOE is proposing to define this term in section 2.13 (standby-active, high mode) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 as follows:

Standby-active, high mode: The appliance is connected to a power source, produces neither sound nor picture but can be switched into another mode with the remote control unit or an internal signal and can additionally be switched into another mode with an external signal and is exchanging/receiving data with/from an external source.

DOE is proposing to define “standby-active, low mode” consistent with the

Standby-active, low mode: The appliance is connected to a power source, produces neither sound nor picture but can be switched into another mode with the remote control unit or an internal signal and can additionally be switched into another mode with an external signal.

b. Definitions Incorporated From ENERGY STAR v. 5.3

rporated From ENERGY STAR v. 5.3

DOE proposes to include a definition for “download acquisition mode” (otherwise known as DAM) in its test procedure that is identical to the definition found in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. The DAM involves a TV's download of data while it produces neither sound nor picture. The definition allows readers to more clearly understand the DAM energy consumption test procedure. The energy consumption associated with DAM is measured when the TV is downloading information from an electronic program guide (EPG). DOE also believes that the ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 definition is appropriate because it is a widely accepted industry definition and the term is not defined in IEC 62087-2011. Accordingly, DOE is proposing to define this term in section 2.3 (download acquisition mode) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 as follows:

Download acquisition mode: Download acquisition mode is the power mode in which the product is connected to a mains power source, produces neither sound nor picture, and is actively downloading data. Data downloads may include channel listing information for use by an electronic programming guide, TV setup data, channel map updates, firmware updates, monitoring for emergency messaging/communications or other network communications.

DOE is proposing to define “luminance” by incorporating the definition found in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. DOE believes that the ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 definition is appropriate because it is widely accepted within the industry and the term is not defined in IEC 62087-2011. Further, the ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 definition is appropriate because DOE is proposing the luminance ratio so that it may be used in the ENERGY STAR test procedure. The ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 definition is clear and concise and provides the manufacturer with a thorough understanding of what is meant by luminance to allow for luminance testing

hin the industry and the term is not defined in IEC 62087-2011. Further, the ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 definition is appropriate because DOE is proposing the luminance ratio so that it may be used in the ENERGY STAR test procedure. The ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 definition is clear and concise and provides the manufacturer with a thorough understanding of what is meant by luminance to allow for luminance testing. Accordingly, DOE is proposing to define this term in section 2.8 (luminance) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 as follows:

Luminance: Luminance is the photometric measure of the luminous intensity per unit area of light traveling in a given direction, expressed in units of candelas per square meter (cd/m2).

DOE is proposing to define “on mode” using the definition found in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3, rather than the definition provided in IEC 62087-2011. ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 defines “on mode” more broadly, stating that the TV can be providing “one or more of its primary functions.” On the other hand, the IEC 62087-2011 definition specifies that the TV must be producing both sound and picture. Although many TVs will produce sound and picture, DOE's proposed scope may include units that are not able to produce sound (e.g. computer monitor that does not include speakers). Because DOE does not want to prevent those products from being tested in the “on mode”, DOE is proposing to exclude any references to sound consistent with the definition from ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 in section 2.10 (on mode) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 as follows:

On mode: On mode is the power mode in which the product is connected to a mains power source, has been activated, and is providing one or more of its principal functions.

ode is the power mode in which the product is connected to a mains power source, has been activated, and is providing one or more of its principal functions.

DOE is proposing to define “TV combination unit” using the definition found in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. IEC 62087-2011 defines multi-function equipment, which may be considered similar to TV combination unit, but this term is not specific to TVs. Defining the term TV combination unit provides clarity to the test procedure since these particular TVs may require special consideration when being tested. Accordingly, DOE is proposing to define this term in section 2.16 (TV combination unit) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 as follows:

TV combination unit: TV combination unit is a television in which the TV and one or more additional devices (e.g., DVD player, Blu-ray Disc player, Hard Disk Drive) are combined into a single enclosure, and which meets the following criteria: a) it is not possible to measure the power of the individual components without removing the product housing; and b) the product connects to a wall outlet via a single power cord.

c. New Definitions for Incorporation

DOE is proposing to define “home picture setting” in its test procedure. DOE developed this definition because neither IEC 62087-2011 nor ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 provides a definition for this particular setting. ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 does reference a home mode (or default mode), as the mode in which the TV is shipped. In order to eliminate confusion between picture settings and testing modes (such as on mode, standby mode, and off mode), defining home picture setting helps clarify how to conduct both the luminance and on mode tests since home picture setting is utilized for conducting part of the luminance test as well as the on mode test. DOE believes that defining home picture setting will improve the consistency in which products are tested across labs

re settings and testing modes (such as on mode, standby mode, and off mode), defining home picture setting helps clarify how to conduct both the luminance and on mode tests since home picture setting is utilized for conducting part of the luminance test as well as the on mode test. DOE believes that defining home picture setting will improve the consistency in which products are tested across labs. DOE is proposing to define this term in section 2.4 (home picture setting) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 as follows:

Home picture setting: (or default picture setting) is the picture setting which is recommended by the manufacturer from the initial set up menu or the mode that the television comes shipped in if no setting is recommended.

Finally, DOE is proposing to define “retail picture setting” in its proposed test procedure. Retail picture setting is a picture setting present on most TVs and corresponds to the brightest preset selectable picture setting. Although ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 uses the term retail mode in its specification, it does not provide a definition of this mode. So as not to confuse picture settings with testing modes (such as on mode, standby mode, and off mode), DOE is proposing to utilize the term “retail picture setting” instead of the term “retail mode”. In the proposed DOE test procedure, retail picture setting is one of the two picture settings that the TV is set to for luminance testing. Therefore, DOE believes that defining retail picture setting clarifies the requirements of the test procedure. DOE is proposing to define this term in section 2.11 (retail picture setting) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 as follows:

Retail picture setting: is the preset picture setting in which the TV produces the highest luminance during the on mode conditions.

D. Testing Conditions and Instrumentation

1. Accuracy and Precision of Measurement Equipment

ements of the test procedure. DOE is proposing to define this term in section 2.11 (retail picture setting) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 as follows:

Retail picture setting: is the preset picture setting in which the TV produces the highest luminance during the on mode conditions.

D. Testing Conditions and Instrumentation

1. Accuracy and Precision of Measurement Equipment

a. Power Supply

In this NOPR, DOE is proposing a slightly modified version of the power supply specifications from IEC 62087-2011. DOE proposes to limit the input voltage and frequency used in its test procedure to 115 V at 60 Hz, rather than including a general requirement that the TV be tested at “the nominal voltage of the region,” as in IEC 62087-2011. DOE is also proposing to add a power factor measurement requirement. The power factor measurements are based on those found in IEC 62087-2011 as well as ENERGY STAR v. 5.3.

DOE is also proposing certain specifications for test tolerances. First, DOE is proposing to incorporate tolerances for voltage and frequency identical to those in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3, which specifies that the voltage and frequency be maintained at ± 1 percent rather than ± 2 percent, as required by IEC 62087-2011. DOE believes that this will not impose undue burden because many interested parties are already accustomed to these more stringent specifications required to meet ENERGY STAR specifications. Second, DOE is proposing to add a tolerance of power measurements consistent with that in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. As mentioned above, ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 refers the reader to ENERGY STAR v. 4.2 where these specifications can be found. Third, DOE is proposing to add the requirements for total harmonic distortion (THD) consistent with that in IEC 62087-2011, which requires that the harmonic components not vary by more than 5 percent. While ENERGY STAR v

er measurements consistent with that in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. As mentioned above, ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 refers the reader to ENERGY STAR v. 4.2 where these specifications can be found. Third, DOE is proposing to add the requirements for total harmonic distortion (THD) consistent with that in IEC 62087-2011, which requires that the harmonic components not vary by more than 5 percent. While ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 has requirements for THD that are more stringent (2 percent), DOE believes that these requirements may impose undue burden on manufacturers by requiring the purchase of more expensive equipment. DOE believes that the cost of more expensive equipment (e.g., a power supply unit as found by market research) outweighs the benefits of stricter THD requirements, therefore less stringent requirements are being proposed. DOE believes that the requirements that it is proposing to incorporate are accepted within industry and are sufficient to ensure a repeatable and reproducible test procedure. THD impacts the quality and stability of the electricity being received by the TV which can impact energy consumption. High levels of THD can increase current draw on TVs resulting in high circuitry temperatures and inefficiencies. The language proposed to ensure that the correct power is being supplied to the TV is being incorporated in section 3.1.1 (power supply) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 is as follows:

Carry out measurements using a power supply providing voltage of 115 V at 60 Hz.

The fluctuation of the voltage supplied during the tests shall not exceed ± 1 percent. The frequency fluctuation and the harmonic components of the supplied power shall not exceed ± 1 percent and 5 percent respectively.

b. Power Meter

cent. The frequency fluctuation and the harmonic components of the supplied power shall not exceed ± 1 percent and 5 percent respectively.

b. Power Meter

DOE is proposing to incorporate specifications for the power meter used to collect the power data for the TV test. DOE plans to slightly modify the specification found in IEC 62087-2011 to include more guided instructions on the sampling rate. Rather than setting the sampling rate “high enough to achieve an accurate measurement” as required in IEC 62087-2011, DOE is proposing that samples be taken once per second or more frequently. This sampling rate is generally accepted by the industry and found in IEC 62301-2011. This sampling rate should not be difficult to accomplish and produces a more repeatable power measurement than the measurement specified in IEC 62087-2011. Specifying the proposed sampling rate decreases the chances of missing trends and power spikes. The duration of testing remains the same and typically only a few changes to the data acquisition program are required to modify the sample rate. The language proposed to ensure that the correct power measurements are taken is being incorporated in section 3.1.2 (power meter) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 is as follows:

The measurement shall be carried out directly by means of a wattmeter, a wattmeter with averaging function, or a watt-hour meter, by dividing the reading by the measuring time. For TVs for which the input video signal varies over time, use a wattmeter with an averaging function to carry out the measurement.

The language proposed to ensure that the correct sampling rate for which the power measurements shall be taken is being incorporated in section 3.1.2.1 of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 is as follows:

The sampling rate of the watt-hour meter or wattmeter with averaging function shall be one measurement per second or more frequent

an averaging function to carry out the measurement.

The sampling rate of the watt-hour meter or wattmeter with averaging function shall be one measurement per second or more frequent.

The language proposed describing the power measurement uncertainty is being incorporated in section 3.1.2.3 of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 is as follows:

Power measurements of 0.5 W or greater shall be made with an uncertainty of less than or equal to 2 percent (at the 95 percent confidence level). Measurements of power of less than 0.5 W shall be made with an uncertainty of less than or equal to 0.01 W (at the 95 percent confidence level). The power measurement instrument shall have a resolution of:

• 0.01 W or better for power measurements of 10 W or less;

• 0.1 W or better for power measurements of greater than 10 W up to 100 W;

• 1 W or better for power measurements of greater than 100 W.

DOE is also proposing to require that, as part of the test procedure, the power factor of the TV be recorded while in “on mode” consistent with that in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. DOE believes that requiring a power factor measurement will not impose undue burden on manufacturers because the ability to measure power factor is widely available on power meters. The power factor measurement only requires that the power factor be recorded while the on, standby, and off modes are measured. DOE is proposing to require this measurement because power quality can impact energy consumption and measuring the power factor will allow other regulating bodies the flexibility to consider requirements for power quality

power factor is widely available on power meters. The power factor measurement only requires that the power factor be recorded while the on, standby, and off modes are measured. DOE is proposing to require this measurement because power quality can impact energy consumption and measuring the power factor will allow other regulating bodies the flexibility to consider requirements for power quality. The language proposed to ensure that the power factor and real power consumed are taken is being incorporated in section 3.1.2.2 of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430 is as follows:

The power measurement instrument used shall measure the power factor and the real power consumed regardless of the power factor of the device under test.

c. Light Measurement Devices

i. Luminance Contact and Distance Meters

Light measurement devices (LMDs) are used to measure the luminance of the TV screen. DOE is aware of two primary categories of LMDs that are used to make luminance measurements: contact meters and distance meters. In response to the 2010 RFI, DOE received comments advocating that the DOE test procedure for TVs allow the use of the contact meter to measure luminance. Panasonic stated that although there are many valid methods of measurement, a contact measurement is easier to comply with since it prevents ambient light from interfering with the measurement and eliminates the need for a dark room. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 4) NRDC also supports the contact method of measuring luminance as it simplifies the performance of the test due to it being unnecessary to adjust the room lighting levels. (NRDC, No. 5 at pp. 4-5)

t due to it being unnecessary to adjust the room lighting levels. (NRDC, No. 5 at pp. 4-5)

In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to allow the use of either a distance meter or a contact meter to measure luminance for purposes of the DOE test procedure, so long as the meter meets the specifications detailed in section III.D.1.c.ii of the NOPR. DOE is aware that each type of meter has specific advantages. While distance LMD meters are typically less accurate and require the use of a dark room for luminance measurements, they are less expensive than contact LMD meters. DOE is also aware that the use of a dark room adds burden to the procedure by increasing both cost and set-up time. Alternatively, the use of a contact LMD meter would reduce set up time (with regard to both aligning the meter as well as removing the need for a dark room) and will have a more accurate measurement since these meters typically have a higher accuracy; however, contact meters themselves are more expensive. Through testing, DOE has learned that the two types of meters yield similar results when used to test TVs. 13 Therefore, in section 3.1.3 (light measurement device) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430, the test procedure allows the use of either meter as long as it meets the specifications outlined below. By allowing the use of different meters it provides more flexibility, while ensuring the accuracy of the measurement and providing comparable results.

13 This similarity of results can be found in the Round Robin Test Program Final Report for: Television at the DOE Web site: Appliance and Commercial Equipment Standards: Television Sets. U.S. Department of Energy. August 2, 2011. < http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/tv_sets.html >.

ii. Light Measurement Device Specifications

sion Sets. U.S. Department of Energy. August 2, 2011. < http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/tv_sets.html >.

ii. Light Measurement Device Specifications

In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to incorporate specifications for the LMDs used in performing the test procedure. Neither IEC 62087-2011 nor ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 provides specific requirements with respect to LMDs. Consequently, DOE has developed proposed specifications for today's NOPR. To develop these, DOE researched existing test procedures and standards that provide LMD specifications. DOE has found that the VESA Flat Panel Display Measurements Standard v. 2 provides tolerances for LMDs. VESA specifies that the luminance must be within ± 5 percent and repeatability must be less than ± 0.5 percent of the luminance or the uncertainty introduced by any digitalization over a five minute period. DOE also researched available LMDs for testing to develop the following proposed requirements.

DOE is proposing, in section 3.1.3 (light measurement device) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430, that all LMDs have an accuracy of ± 2 percent (± 2 digits) of the digitally displayed value and repeatability within 0.4 percent (± 2 digits) value. DOE is also proposing that the LMD should have an acceptance angle of 3 degrees or less. To determine the precision of a measured number, the displayed value on the measuring device needs to be taken into consideration. The increment of the last significant digit is said to be the accuracy of the display and 2 digits is twice the interval. The overall tolerance of LMDs is found by taking (+/−) the absolute sum of 2 percent and 2 significant digits of the measured value.

DOE believes that these criteria are sufficiently stringent to ensure that measurements will be repeatable and accurate, without imposing burden on manufacturers by requiring overly precise measurement devices. However, DOE welcomes comments on the proposed LMD specifications

tolerance of LMDs is found by taking (+/−) the absolute sum of 2 percent and 2 significant digits of the measured value.

2. Test Room and Set-Up Criteria

DOE received comments from interested parties requesting that it clarify how to set up the TV for testing. Specifically, NRDC requested that DOE review the requirements in IEC 62087-2008 and urged DOE to provide sufficient clarity on preparing the TV before testing. (NRDC, No. 5 at p. 2) DOE has analyzed IEC 62087-2008 as NRDC requested and found that the requirements in IEC 62087-2008 are similar to those found in IEC 62087-2011. PG&E and California IOUs also requested that DOE require a standard test set-up that ensures the most robust results possible. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 3; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 3) DOE has analyzed both IEC 62087-2011 and IEC 62087-2008, and has evaluated other existing TV test procedures to develop proposals for creating dark room conditions, ambient temperature and humidity, THD, and signal source generation, with the goal of ensuring repeatable results. The proposals are discussed in detail in the following sections.

a. Dark Room Conditions

DOE is proposing that, if the lab technician elects to use a distance meter for luminance testing, it must make the measurements in dark room conditions, similar to the requirement in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. DOE is proposing, in section 4.2 (dark room conditions) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430, language from the requirement in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3, which (with minor modification), states: “All luminance testing shall be performed in dark room conditions

nce meter for luminance testing, it must make the measurements in dark room conditions, similar to the requirement in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. DOE is proposing, in section 4.2 (dark room conditions) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430, language from the requirement in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3, which (with minor modification), states: “All luminance testing shall be performed in dark room conditions. Display screen illuminance * * * as measured with the UUT in [o]ff [m]ode shall be less than or equal to 1.0 lux.”

b. Ambient Temperature and Humidity

DOE is proposing ambient conditions consistent with IEC 62087-2011 and ENERGY STAR v. 5.3, which both require that ambient temperature be 23 °C ± 5 °C. ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 further specifies that relative humidity must be between 10 and 80 percent, which DOE is also proposing to require in its test procedure. Because these are both widely accepted test methods, and each of the temperate and humidity ranges is quite large, these requirements should be reproducible across a wide range of test laboratories. These ambient condition requirements are being proposed in sections 4.3 (ambient temperature conditions) and 4.4 (ambient relative humidity conditions) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430.

c. Signal Source and Generation

In the 2010 RFI, DOE requested feedback from interested parties regarding the signal source as well as the input cable to be used when testing. 75 FR 54048, 54050. As discussed below, interested parties were generally in agreement that the input cable should be HDMI, if the TV has an HDMI input. If the TV does not have an HDMI input, DOE has proposed a list of alternative connections in the order in which they should be used to conduct testing, which can be found below. Interested parties were also in support of using a Blu-ray player as the signal source for testing.

Mitsubishi, Sony, LG, NRDC, Panasonic, CEA, CEC, PG&E, and California IOUs were all in support of DOE using HDMI as its preferred input cable

ve an HDMI input, DOE has proposed a list of alternative connections in the order in which they should be used to conduct testing, which can be found below. Interested parties were also in support of using a Blu-ray player as the signal source for testing.

Mitsubishi, Sony, LG, NRDC, Panasonic, CEA, CEC, PG&E, and California IOUs were all in support of DOE using HDMI as its preferred input cable. Mitsubishi recommended that DOE require an HDMI cable be used if the input exists and component cables be used if HDMI inputs do not exist. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 5) Sony similarly commented that a HDMI input cable should be the preferred input cable, and if it not available, the next highest resolution input should be used. (Sony, No. 8 at p. 3) LG supported using an HDMI input cable because it has a digital signal and other sources have calibration issues. (LG, No. 3 at p. 1) NRDC recommended that DOE use a HDMI input cable if the input is 14

14 Calwell, Chris, Mercier, Catherine, & Foster-Porter, Suzanne. Assessment of Options for Improving Energy Efficiency Test Procedures for Display. (Last accessed July 26, 2011). http://www.efficientproducts.org/%5Creports%5Ctvs%5CEcos_Display%20Test%20Procedure%20Report_FINAL.pdf.

As outlined above, comments from all interested parties agreed that an HDMI input should be the preferred input. Some interested parties also advocated that alternative inputs should be allowed if an HDMI input is not available. DOE acknowledges that all TVs may not be shipped with an HDMI input available, and therefore is proposing the following order for inputs: HDMI/DVI, VGA, component, S-Video, and finally composite. If none of these inputs are available, the highest resolution input must be used. DOE believes that by proposing an input format hierarchy, it will ensure consistency and repeatability between tests without imposing undue burden upon manufacturers. However, DOE welcomes comments on the purposed input formats hierarchy

wing order for inputs: HDMI/DVI, VGA, component, S-Video, and finally composite. If none of these inputs are available, the highest resolution input must be used. DOE believes that by proposing an input format hierarchy, it will ensure consistency and repeatability between tests without imposing undue burden upon manufacturers. However, DOE welcomes comments on the purposed input formats hierarchy. (See issue 14 in section V.E “Issues on Which DOE Seeks Comments”)

DOE also received comments on the signal source to be used for testing. NRDC commented that a signal should not be generated by a personal computer (PC). NRDC preferred that a standard method of generating signal be used, but did not specify what the preferred method should be. (NRDC, No. 5 at p. 6) Panasonic believes that the Blu-ray player is the most appropriate device to supply the IEC 62087-2008 dynamic broadcast-content video signal, which is the same as the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 6) CEC concurs with the recommendations made in the report done by Ecos Consulting regarding signal sources, which recommends a signal generator with an HDMI input connection. (CEC, No. 15 at p. 3) PG&E and California IOUs also cited the report done by Ecos Consulting, but commented that DOE should conduct additional testing on various size TVs with different display technologies to confirm the proper signal source. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 3; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 3) SHARP recommended that DOE not require a specific signal source like CEA-2037-2009. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 7) SHARP commented that there should be no dependency on the nature of the source (Blu-ray player, computer, etc), as long as the decoder and signal are properly implemented according to existing and well-known standards. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 7)

The IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal, which is discussed further in section III.E.3.a of this NOPR, is supplied in two formats for testing, DVD and Blu-ray

there should be no dependency on the nature of the source (Blu-ray player, computer, etc), as long as the decoder and signal are properly implemented according to existing and well-known standards. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 7)

The IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal, which is discussed further in section III.E.3.a of this NOPR, is supplied in two formats for testing, DVD and Blu-ray. DOE acknowledges interested party comments recommending that a particular signal source should not be used but believes that establishing a specific signal source will increase repeatability and reproducibility. As some commenters requested, DOE is proposing to require testing using a Blu-ray player. The TV market is moving towards watching TV in high-definition, as evidenced by increased production of high definition TVs and broadcasting of high definition channels. Blu-ray players produce a 1080p image that yields far more detail than the 480p image provided by DVD; therefore, DOE is proposing that it be used for testing. DOE welcomes comments on the signal source and generation specifications proposed in this NOPR. (See Issue 3 in section V.E “Issues On Which DOE Seeks Comment”).

E. Test Measurements

As previously mentioned, DOE is proposing a test procedure largely based on IEC 62087-2011, with some modifications to improve the repeatability as well as tailor the procedure to the U.S. market. DOE is proposing that the following test measurements be taken as described in the following sections.

1. Picture Settings to Test

In the 2010 RFI, DOE requested comment on testing the TV in multiple power consuming modes. For luminance testing, ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 requires that the TV be tested in two picture settings: home mode and retail mode. As stated earlier, DOE is proposing to replace the terms home mode and retail mode (as used in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3) with home picture setting and retail picture setting. This is to distinguish the luminance picture setting from the testing modes for energy consumption

modes. For luminance testing, ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 requires that the TV be tested in two picture settings: home mode and retail mode. As stated earlier, DOE is proposing to replace the terms home mode and retail mode (as used in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3) with home picture setting and retail picture setting. This is to distinguish the luminance picture setting from the testing modes for energy consumption. IEC 62087-2011 does not reference luminance testing. Alternatively, for power testing, both IEC 62087-2011 and ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 require that TVs be tested only in the home picture setting. DOE received comments and is considering testing energy consumption in picture settings other than the home picture setting.

Numerous commenters informed DOE that only a limited number of consumers switch their TVs out of the home picture setting, and therefore DOE should only require testing in the home picture setting. Other interested parties suggested that DOE analyze all preset picture settings to determine the energy consumption of all possible picture settings. Mitsubishi commented that manufacturer statistics show that less than 5 percent of TV viewers ever utilize non-default display settings. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 2) PG&E and California IOUs stated that DOE should collect and analyze available technologies (e.g., LCD, plasma) in several selectable preset picture settings: the dimmest setting, home setting, and retail setting. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 1; California IOUs, No. 9 at pp. 1-2) PG&E and California IOUs also urged DOE to develop the test procedure such that any preset picture setting may be measured using the procedure. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 2) Finally, they suggested that the DOE should obtain and analyze data on consumer home viewing habits. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; California IOUs, No. 9 at p

o. 12 at p. 1; California IOUs, No. 9 at pp. 1-2) PG&E and California IOUs also urged DOE to develop the test procedure such that any preset picture setting may be measured using the procedure. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 2) Finally, they suggested that the DOE should obtain and analyze data on consumer home viewing habits. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 2) SHARP commented that because consumers do not adjust their TV settings and it is not possible to predict the popularity of each picture setting, multiple picture settings should not be tested. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 4)

DOE also received comments desiring that only the home picture setting should be used for testing. SHARP stated that there are no reliable data on the popularity of modes that can be applied across the industry, and, therefore, the out-of-the-box setting remains the best predictor of actual power use. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 3) Sony commented that there is little information regarding consumer preferences for preset picture settings. Sony's call center data indicates that more than 95 percent of returned sets remain in the home picture setting when received, while information

In this NOPR, DOE is proposing that luminance measurements be taken in both the home and retail picture settings, and that power measurements (for TVs without ABC enabled) only be taken in the home picture setting. As many interested parties commented, most consumers do not switch their TVs out of the picture setting in which they are shipped. Therefore, requiring power measurements in the retail picture setting or any other alternative picture settings may cause unnecessary burden on manufacturers by increasing testing time. A luminance measurement in both the home and retail picture setting must still be taken in order to generate a luminance ratio, which is utilized by other regulatory programs such as ENERGY STAR

h they are shipped. Therefore, requiring power measurements in the retail picture setting or any other alternative picture settings may cause unnecessary burden on manufacturers by increasing testing time. A luminance measurement in both the home and retail picture setting must still be taken in order to generate a luminance ratio, which is utilized by other regulatory programs such as ENERGY STAR. However, DOE is also considering testing on mode energy consumption in picture settings other than the home picture setting. DOE is aware of some TVs that are equipped with remotes that have easy-to-access shortcuts that enable the user to switch from the home picture setting to other preset picture settings (sport, vivid, movie, etc.), without requiring that the user enter the main menu. Although interested parties commented that consumers do not switch between picture settings, DOE believes that if TV remotes are designed with shortcuts to switch between preset picture settings, more consumers may do so, either accidently or intentionally. For this reason, DOE is considering whether this should be taken into account in the test procedure. In particular, DOE is considering testing on mode energy consumption in some of these additional preset picture settings. Possible approaches could include testing in the highest and lowest energy consuming preset picture settings, while displaying the IEC 62087-20011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal, or the brightest and dimmest preset picture settings. An additional approach could include testing in all preset picture settings. DOE invites comments on testing in additional preset picture settings, particularly the balance between a representative and not overly burdensome test procedure. (See Issue 4 in section V.E “Issues On Which DOE Seeks Comment”).

2. Testing Order

In today's NOPR, DOE is proposing to require that testing be conducted in the following order: luminance, on mode power, standby mode power, and off mode power tests

ments on testing in additional preset picture settings, particularly the balance between a representative and not overly burdensome test procedure. (See Issue 4 in section V.E “Issues On Which DOE Seeks Comment”).

2. Testing Order

In today's NOPR, DOE is proposing to require that testing be conducted in the following order: luminance, on mode power, standby mode power, and off mode power tests. This is not consistent with the test procedure prescribed in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3, which specifies on mode tests be conducted prior to luminance tests. DOE is aware that some TVs are unable to operate in the retail picture setting once the TV has been switched into the home picture setting. Therefore, it is necessary to measure luminance in the retail picture setting before switching to the home picture setting to ensure that the retail picture setting luminance is captured. For this reason, DOE is proposing to perform luminance testing prior to on mode power testing in section 5.3.1 (luminance test) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. DOE does not believe that this alternative testing order will increase the testing burden or cause any issues with test results, but will ensure that all TVs are adequately tested in each prescribed mode.

3. Luminance

Although IEC 62087-2011 does not include a luminance test, ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 requires a test of the screen luminance. The luminance test is included to ensure that TVs are not shipped in an overly dim picture setting in order to achieve a lower measured on mode power value, since under ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 TVs are tested in “as shipped” condition. In the 2010 RFI, DOE asked interested parties for comments on multiple facets of luminance testing. Specifically, DOE requested input on (a) whether testing luminance should be required, and (b) the different display patterns that can be used to adequately test luminance. 75 FR 54048, 54049. Many interested parties provided feedback regarding the need for luminance testing

“as shipped” condition. In the 2010 RFI, DOE asked interested parties for comments on multiple facets of luminance testing. Specifically, DOE requested input on (a) whether testing luminance should be required, and (b) the different display patterns that can be used to adequately test luminance. 75 FR 54048, 54049. Many interested parties provided feedback regarding the need for luminance testing. Several interested parties supported luminance testing. NRDC stated that screen luminance is important to include in the test procedure because it often has a direct impact on TV on mode power use and future energy conservation standards might include these parameters in the rulemaking; thus, including a test for screen luminance would allow policy makers the ability to add luminance requirements to their standards. (NRDC, No. 5 at pp. 2-3) It further clarified that the luminance test method should include details on (a) the video signal being used; (b) the type of instrument and its precision; (c) the angle and location of the measurement points; and (d) the ambient lighting conditions, if necessary. (NRDC, No. 5 at p. 5) Finally, NRDC stated that it believes the DOE luminance testing could require: (a) Testing in “as shipped” conditions in home or retail picture settings; (b) ability to measure either a luminance ratio or a power ratio; and (c) TVs to be set at a specified luminance prior to measurement. (NRDC, No. 5 at pp. 3-4)

LG supported the ENERGY STAR luminance test method, which involves measuring the luminance while displaying the IEC 62087-2011 three bar video signal. This test is conducted twice, once while the TV is in the home picture setting and again when the TV is in the retail picture setting. After both measurements are taken, the ratio of the two luminance measures is calculated. LG believes that it is an acceptable and representative measure of luminance and provides consistency across state and federal programs. (LG, No. 3 at p

hree bar video signal. This test is conducted twice, once while the TV is in the home picture setting and again when the TV is in the retail picture setting. After both measurements are taken, the ratio of the two luminance measures is calculated. LG believes that it is an acceptable and representative measure of luminance and provides consistency across state and federal programs. (LG, No. 3 at p. 1) SHARP does not support luminance testing, but asserts that, if DOE must define a luminance measurement procedure, it should follow the ENERGY STAR v. 4.1 (which remained unchanged in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3) test procedure in detail. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 5) Similarly, Sony believes that the luminance requirement as defined by ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 is an unnecessary test, but finds the method itself provides a rather simple solution to a complex subject. (Sony, No. 8 at p. 2)

Alternatively, CEA and some manufacturers strongly opposed requiring a luminance measurement, with primary arguments including that default TV picture settings are not too dim, and DOE should not regulate a performance metric. CEA stated that a luminance requirement is unnecessary, premature and essentially not energy related. (CEA, No. 13 at p. 3) CEA also commented that any proposal to impose limits on luminance and/or tie luminance levels to power levels is speculative and a performance requirement should not be embedded within the test procedure as it may not be authorized by EPCA. (CEA, No. 13 at p. 4) Mitsubishi stated that DOE should not set standards that assure that

SHARP stated that DOE should not specify a luminance measurement and observed that the 65 percent home to retail ratio required by ENERGY STAR specifications may be encouraging TVs to have a brighter home picture setting than they otherwise would. SHARP did not believe that setting a lower bound for luminance would address the issue of shipping a TV too dim to decrease its power consumption for home mode testing. (SHARP, No. 14 at p

cify a luminance measurement and observed that the 65 percent home to retail ratio required by ENERGY STAR specifications may be encouraging TVs to have a brighter home picture setting than they otherwise would. SHARP did not believe that setting a lower bound for luminance would address the issue of shipping a TV too dim to decrease its power consumption for home mode testing. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 3) SHARP wrote that IEC did not set luminance requirements because manufacturers will not ship overly dim TVs and risk product returns. Additionally, SHARP commented that there is no consensus on how to measure brightness levels, and setting a lower bound on home mode brightness is a performance requirement rather than an energy requirement. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 2) SHARP further noted that if performance requirements force minimum luminance levels to be set too high, potential energy savings are lost. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 3) Lastly, SHARP commented that any static video signal can be detected and circumvented, and therefore DOE should not implement a luminance measurement. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 3) It stated that IEC 62087-2008 (which is the same as IEC 62087-2011) was not based on prescribed luminance levels for the following reasons:

(1) Consumers generally do not adjust their TVs from the default settings,

(2) Relatively few consumers have their TVs professionally calibrated,

(3) There is no consensus on how to measure perceived brightness levels,

(4) Perceived brightness is often related to contrast ratio as it is related to pure brightness,

(5) Some TV technologies have a non-linear relationship between power and brightness,

(6) Variation in consumer illuminance levels make the ideal brightness difficult to determine, and

their TVs professionally calibrated,

(3) There is no consensus on how to measure perceived brightness levels,

(4) Perceived brightness is often related to contrast ratio as it is related to pure brightness,

(5) Some TV technologies have a non-linear relationship between power and brightness,

(6) Variation in consumer illuminance levels make the ideal brightness difficult to determine, and

(7) Humans have poor acuity for discerning absolute brightness levels, and there is no data that identifies the level of brightness to which the average person would adjust a television by hand. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 2)

In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to include a luminance test as part of its test procedure. In recognition of interested parties' concerns, DOE clarifies that the proposed luminance test is included in the test procedure solely for the purpose of supporting the ENERGY STAR program; the Department is not proposing to include the luminance measurements in its final metrics for measuring the energy efficiency or consumption of TVs. Including a luminance test as part of the test procedure for TVs will allow other programs such as ENERGY STAR to utilize the results. The sections, below, describe the different aspects of this proposal, as well as comments from interested parties on these aspects.

a. Warm-Up and Stabilization

As mentioned in section III.E.2, above, DOE is proposing to require that luminance tests be conducted prior to on mode testing. Due to the change in luminance testing order (conducting testing in the retail picture setting prior to the home mode picture setting), DOE considered both warming-up the TV with respect to power and stabilizing the TV for luminance. However, in today's notice, DOE is proposing that the TV be warmed-up but not be stabilized prior to measuring display luminance.

IEC 62087-2011 and ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 both require that the TV be warmed-up prior to energy measurement but do not include a recommended or minimal time period

setting), DOE considered both warming-up the TV with respect to power and stabilizing the TV for luminance. However, in today's notice, DOE is proposing that the TV be warmed-up but not be stabilized prior to measuring display luminance.

IEC 62087-2011 and ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 both require that the TV be warmed-up prior to energy measurement but do not include a recommended or minimal time period. Rather, they state that energy measurements be taken “after the TV has achieved a stable condition with respect to power consumption.” With respect to luminance testing, ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 requires the three bar video signal be displayed for 10 minutes to stabilize a TV prior to conducting a measurement. DOE received comments from interested parties on the appropriate time required to warm-up and stabilize a TV prior to conducting testing. 75 FR 54048, 54051

Mitsubishi commented that measurements of power consumption should be taken after the TV has reached normal operating temperature. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 5) Mitsubishi further commented that warm-up times vary by model and it is difficult to identify a minimally sufficient warm-up time, but it is also unnecessary. It continued by adding that it is sufficient to require that before testing begins, the device under test has reached thermal equilibrium, and that the test procedure need not indicate a specific time but rather a minimum. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 6) PG&E and California IOUs stated that the warm-up time should be sufficient to reflect real-world conditions while also aiming not to be too long so as to become overly burdensome. (PG&E, No.12 at p. 3; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 3) SHARP, Sony, Panasonic, and CEA recommended that DOE refer to the IEC 62087-2008 test procedure for warm-up periods. The warm-up periods remained unchanged in IEC 62087-2011. (SHARP, No 14 at p. 7; Sony, No. 8 at p. 3; Panasonic, No. 6 at p.7; CEA, No. 13 at p

ld conditions while also aiming not to be too long so as to become overly burdensome. (PG&E, No.12 at p. 3; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 3) SHARP, Sony, Panasonic, and CEA recommended that DOE refer to the IEC 62087-2008 test procedure for warm-up periods. The warm-up periods remained unchanged in IEC 62087-2011. (SHARP, No 14 at p. 7; Sony, No. 8 at p. 3; Panasonic, No. 6 at p.7; CEA, No. 13 at p. 7)

DOE acknowledges all stakeholder comments and is proposing to incorporate language that the TV be warmed-up consistent with that in IEC 62087-2011, with the addition of a minimum warm-up period requirement. In this NOPR, DOE is proposing TVs be warmed-up using the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal for at least one hour in section 5.2 (warm-up) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. DOE conducted testing to determine if this warm-up was appropriate. 15 Although the power did not change drastically over the one hour for any of the TVs tested, DOE believes that because no interested party commented on the desire to reduce the duration, a one hour warm-up period was still appropriate. DOE will further propose that the TVs can be warmed-up for longer than one hour if the TV does 16 who had similar findings. 17 Although DOE plans to specify that a one hour warm-up period be used, there is flexibility to utilize a longer warm-up period for the TV to reach a stable energy consuming state. For luminance stabilization, DOE is not proposing that the TV be stabilized prior to conducting luminance measurements, rather that luminance measurements be taken immediately upon displaying the three bar video signal. Luminance measurements are made immediately to prevent automatic image correction programs from revising the luminance of the observed test pattern.

15 The warm up period data can be found on the DOE Web site: Appliance and Commercial Equipment Standards: Television Sets. U.S. Department of Energy. August 2, 2011

nance measurements be taken immediately upon displaying the three bar video signal. Luminance measurements are made immediately to prevent automatic image correction programs from revising the luminance of the observed test pattern.

15 The warm up period data can be found on the DOE Web site: Appliance and Commercial Equipment Standards: Television Sets. U.S. Department of Energy. August 2, 2011. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/tv_sets.html .

16 Keith Jones, Managing Director, Australian Digital Testing and Bob Harrison, Principal Scientist, UK Government Market Transformation Programme Consumer Electronics and Information and Communication Technologies.

17 The stabilization period can be seen to stabilize within one hour based on the data found in the Luminance Period document which can be found on the DOE Web site: Appliance and Commercial Equipment Standards: Television Sets. U.S. Department of Energy. August 2, 2011. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/tv_sets.html .

DOE received a comment from Panasonic recommending that DOE adopt the luminance measurement test procedure in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3, which requires that luminance be measured immediately following the on mode test, ensuring that the TV is sufficiently stabilized with respect to power prior to conducting the luminance test. Panasonic also stated that it does not object to increasing the 10 minute stabilization periods if it is felt to be necessary. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 7) No other interested parties commented on the topic.

ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 requires that the TV display the three bar video signal for 10 minutes prior to conducting a luminance measurement. As part of today's NOPR, DOE is proposing to require that luminance measurements be taken immediately after displaying the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal from the warm-up period in section 5.4.1 of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. DOE conducted extensive research to determine the appropriate stabilization period and has preliminarily determined that taking luminance measurements immediately after displaying the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal is the most technology neutral method. 18 DOE's research also found that the luminance of some TV technologies drops as the same image remains on the screen and luminance with other TV technologies increases as the same image remains on the screen. 19 Taking an immediate measurement helps to mimic actual operating conditions, in which images are changing constantly.

18 The appropriate stabilization period and drop off in luminance compared to time can be seen in the Luminance Stabilization Period document found on the DOE Web site: Appliance and Commercial Equipment Standards: Television Sets. U.S. Department of Energy. August 2, 2011. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/tv_sets.html .

19 Id.

Specifically, taking measurements according to this method ensures that TVs, particularly plasmas, do not enter into an automatic brightness limiting (ABL) state prior to luminance testing. ABL is a technology that is used on phosphor based TV screens (CRT and plasma) that is designed to limit the luminance of the screen to a level that will avoid damage to the phosphors. This type of protection is not necessary in LCD technology as high luminance levels cannot cause damage to the display elements

not enter into an automatic brightness limiting (ABL) state prior to luminance testing. ABL is a technology that is used on phosphor based TV screens (CRT and plasma) that is designed to limit the luminance of the screen to a level that will avoid damage to the phosphors. This type of protection is not necessary in LCD technology as high luminance levels cannot cause damage to the display elements. Measuring the luminance immediately after displaying the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal, without allowing a substantial period of delay, will ensure that TVs do not require additional stabilization time while displaying the IEC 62087-2011 three bar video signal which would result in some TVs entering an ABL state. This method will promote more consistent testing across products. Taking measurements according to this method also ensures that TVs, particularly LCDs with cold cathode fluorescent lamp (CCFL) technology, have been stabilized. DOE welcomes comments on the stabilization and warm-up periods proposed in this NOPR. (See Issue 6 in section V.E “Issues On Which DOE Seeks Comment”).

b. Method for Testing Luminance

As mentioned above, many TVs have multiple preset viewing settings. Again, the retail picture setting is typically used in showrooms, whereas the home picture setting is intended to be more suited for typical home viewing conditions. ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 uses a luminance ratio test that compares these two picture settings. However, DOE is aware of alternative methods for ensuring that the TV does not have an overly dim home picture setting such as power ratios and absolute luminance measurements, and therefore in the 2010 RFI, DOE requested feedback on testing by using luminance ratios, power ratios and absolute luminance. 75 FR 54048, 54049.

Many commenters believed that power cannot be measured to determine the brightness of the TV

e of alternative methods for ensuring that the TV does not have an overly dim home picture setting such as power ratios and absolute luminance measurements, and therefore in the 2010 RFI, DOE requested feedback on testing by using luminance ratios, power ratios and absolute luminance. 75 FR 54048, 54049.

Many commenters believed that power cannot be measured to determine the brightness of the TV. Panasonic commented that the relationship between power and luminance is often non-linear and is highly variable between TV technologies, specifically in TVs with “local dimming” and “power on demand”. Panasonic believes that this non-linear relationship makes a power ratio an unfair measurement of screen brightness. Panasonic believes that the measurement of the power would not result in the goal of determining whether a TV is “too dim.” (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 2) Panasonic commented that though they recognized all of DOE's concerns pertaining to a luminance ratio, they support its inclusion in the test procedure. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 2) Mitsubishi commented that different display technologies have different luminance and power characteristics, and these two aspects of TVs should not be conflated. Mitsubishi also noted that luminance variation across the screen is unrelated to energy consumption. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 2) Mitsubishi also believes that measuring power rather than a luminance ratio does not satisfy the “goal” of preventing manufacturers from producing devices that are not useful in the home picture setting. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 3) Finally, Mitsubishi commented that some TV display technologies have a power consumption that correlates significantly with the content displayed rather than the display luminance. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 3) SHARP stated that a fixed luminance level is not prescribed for power measurements made with CEA-2037-2009 and IEC 62087-2008 (nor in IEC 62087-2011), and therefore DOE does not need to implement a luminance measurement. (SHARP, No. 14 at p

y technologies have a power consumption that correlates significantly with the content displayed rather than the display luminance. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 3) SHARP stated that a fixed luminance level is not prescribed for power measurements made with CEA-2037-2009 and IEC 62087-2008 (nor in IEC 62087-2011), and therefore DOE does not need to implement a luminance measurement. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 3) Sony also does not support measuring power consumption at prescribed luminance levels or picture settings. Sony believes that picture settings are performance settings and are not directly tied to luminance. (Sony, No. 8 at p. 2)

CEC presented an alternative method for using power to ensure the TV is not shipped in an overly dim picture setting. CEC suggested that a power ratio be taken between home and retail

SHARP also suggested an alternative method for ensuring that TVs are shipped in a picture setting that satisfies consumer viewing desires. SHARP commented that DOE should set a requirement based on a “floor,” which would be a fixed percentage of the power of the most consumptive setting, and recommends that the floor be 40 percent of the most power consuming setting. This approach will help ensure that home picture setting is not overly dim as well as cap the maximum power consumption of a TV regardless of the picture setting. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 5) SHARP supports the maximum power ratio approach, given that the allowable home to retail picture settings power ratio is no more than 40 percent. SHARP believes that unlike the luminance ratio approach, which is a performance requirement, setting a threshold for reported power is part of the power measurement process. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 3) P.R. China suggests implementing an efficiency ratio of the output power and input power that includes luminance in the nominator, multiplied by the screen size, and divided by the input power. (China, No. 16 at p. 3)

PG&E, California IOUs, and CEC requested a flexible test procedure with respect to luminance

ld for reported power is part of the power measurement process. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 3) P.R. China suggests implementing an efficiency ratio of the output power and input power that includes luminance in the nominator, multiplied by the screen size, and divided by the input power. (China, No. 16 at p. 3)

PG&E, California IOUs, and CEC requested a flexible test procedure with respect to luminance. PG&E and California IOUs recommended that the test procedure be designed so that policy-makers could consider luminance or power ratios between different preset picture settings. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 2) CEC urged DOE to adopt a test procedure which includes both power and luminance testing at a minimum picture setting and the retail picture setting, but provides enough flexibility that the policy makers can decide how these numbers are used to set standards. (CEC, No. 15 at p. 2)

Interested parties also offered comments discouraging the possible inclusion of an absolute luminance measurement. Panasonic believes that absolute luminance does not provide enough data to determine if the TV is providing a “satisfactory consumer viewing.” Panasonic noted that many TV calibrators and video post production engineers consider the contrast ratio to be more important than absolute luminance. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 2) Panasonic also commented that when measuring luminance, the method must provide accurate results across all technologies, which is much easier with a ratio than with absolute luminance measurements. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 2) Finally, Panasonic commented that using a relative ratio is more tolerant of non-calibrated luminance meters, measurement distances and angles and the measurement location because the error cancels out between the two measurements. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 3)

In this NOPR, DOE is proposing measuring luminance to allow the ENERGY STAR program to utilize the measurement in section 5.3.1 (luminance test) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430

ratio is more tolerant of non-calibrated luminance meters, measurement distances and angles and the measurement location because the error cancels out between the two measurements. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 3)

In this NOPR, DOE is proposing measuring luminance to allow the ENERGY STAR program to utilize the measurement in section 5.3.1 (luminance test) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. As mentioned in section III.E.1 above, DOE is proposing to test the TV in home and retail picture settings. DOE is proposing to include a luminance ratio, as is done in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. DOE believes that by taking a ratio, less error is introduced than if taking an absolute luminance measurement. Further, ratios have been used in many other TV efficiency measures. For example, ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 requires that home picture setting shall not be less than 65 percent of the peak luminance of the retail picture setting. The European Parliament requires a luminance ratio of at least 65 percent in the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No. 642/2009. Australia's government requires a 50 percent luminance ratio in AS/NZS 62087.2.2:201. Although DOE does not currently intend to include the luminance measurements in its final metrics for measuring energy efficiency or consumption, testing for a luminance ratio will allow DOE's TVs test procedure to support the requirements of the ENERGY STAR Program and allow other regulating bodies to include a luminance ratio in their test procedures. DOE invites comments on luminance testing and including a luminance ratio. (See Issue 5 in section V.E “Issues On Which DOE Seeks Comment”).

c. Video Signals

To test luminance, ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 requires that a static video signal be displayed, and a measurement be taken using an LMD

e ENERGY STAR Program and allow other regulating bodies to include a luminance ratio in their test procedures. DOE invites comments on luminance testing and including a luminance ratio. (See Issue 5 in section V.E “Issues On Which DOE Seeks Comment”).

c. Video Signals

To test luminance, ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 requires that a static video signal be displayed, and a measurement be taken using an LMD. In the 2010 RFI, DOE asked for comments on the use of two video signals: The IEC 62087-2008 three bar video signal, which is the same as the IEC 62087-2011 three bar video signal, and the Chinese TV test procedure's nine point video signal (hereafter referred to as the nine point video signal). 75 FR 54048, 54050. As mentioned, IEC 62087-2011 does not require luminance testing, whereas ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 requires that a single luminance measurement be taken while the TV is displaying the three bar video signal.

DOE believes that an ideal TV luminance video signal should represent actual broadcast content as closely as possible so that the measured luminance is an accurate reflection of the luminance produced under real-world operating conditions and is technology-neutral. DOE recognizes that it is possible that an ideal video signal may vary depending on the purpose for which it will be used. DOE envisions that the three bar luminance video signal proposed in today's NOPR would be used as part of a luminance ratio. The table below lists the various video signals that DOE is considering as well as their perceived advantages and disadvantages. It should be noted that a number of stakeholder comments appear to equate the number of white areas in the video signal with the number of measurements. DOE wishes to clarify that these are two separate issues (for example, the nine point video signal could be used to test at anywhere between one and nine points); the number of measurements and related test burden are discussed in a following section

should be noted that a number of stakeholder comments appear to equate the number of white areas in the video signal with the number of measurements. DOE wishes to clarify that these are two separate issues (for example, the nine point video signal could be used to test at anywhere between one and nine points); the number of measurements and related test burden are discussed in a following section. Any of the following video signals could be measured at a single point or multiple points.

Three key features of plasma TV technology impact the brightness of white areas on their screens. These features, therefore, need to be taken into consideration in evaluating and selecting an appropriate technology-neutral video signal. Most plasma technology TVs limit brightness for very bright parts of the screen. As mentioned above, this feature called ABL is intended to protect the screen. Although the intention of ABL is to protect the screen, ABL functions differently across TVs. The protection is, however, generally based on the size of the bright area. For very small areas such as tiny spots seen on firework displays, ABL is likely to have little effect and the spots,

DOE recognizes that none of the video signals currently under consideration is ideal. Each has advantages and disadvantages which are described below. Until a markedly improved video signal is made available, DOE is not inclined to change the status quo. DOE understands that IEC is contemplating a pattern with a dynamic video signal which may have significant advantages. DOE supports IEC's development of this potentially improved pattern and would consider incorporating it in future TV test procedures.

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P EP19JA12.000

f this potentially improved pattern and would consider incorporating it in future TV test procedures.

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P EP19JA12.000

BILLING CODE 6450-01-C DOE received comments on each of the video signals (see sections, below), described above as well as alternative suggestions for luminance testing, including the number of measurements to take while displaying a particular video signal. In response to commenters' concerns, DOE considered multiple video signals when developing its NOPR. DOE considered the three bar, the nine point, and a DOE developed dynamic video signal. In this NOPR, DOE is proposing to test luminance using the three bar video signal in section 5.3.1.2 (three bar video signal measurement) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430, but is also considering using the other two signals.

20 This pattern was created using the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic content video signal with black and white squares in the center of the screen as measurement points.

i. Three Bar Video Signal

The three bar video signal was developed by the IEC and published in the third edition of its TV broadcast transmission test procedure, IEC 60107-1997 Ed. 3.0 “Methods of measurement on receivers for TV broadcast transmissions—Part 1: General considerations—Measurements at radio and video frequencies.” The three bar video signal is found in IEC 62087-2011, and is used to measure luminance in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. It is the most 1/6 of the nominal horizontal width of the picture. The three bar video signal has an APL of 50 percent. A higher APL can cause some plasma TVs to enter more quickly into a power limiting state to prevent screen burn-in caused by displaying a bright screen for an extended period of time.

tate to prevent screen burn-in caused by displaying a bright screen for an extended period of time.

In response to the 2010 RFI, many commenters expressed desire for DOE to use the three bar video signal for testing luminance. CERC, CEA, Sony, Mitsubishi, and Panasonic supported the use of the three bar video signal. (CERC, No. 10 at p. 3; CEA, No. 13 at p. 4; Sony, No. 8 at p. 2; Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 3; Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 3) Mitsubishi believes that the three bar video signal is adequate. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 4) Sony commented that the 3-bar test pattern is used in IEC and ENERGY STAR test procedures. Changing it will add complexity to an already complex subject. (Sony, No. 8 at p. 2) CEA stated that DOE should institute the ENERGY STAR test method of using the three-bar measurement procedure. (CEA, No. 13 at p. 4) Panasonic supports the use of the 3 bar pattern, as it is used by ENERGY STAR, CEA, CEC, and Australia. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 3)

Conversely, SHARP commented that the three bar video signal is ineffective for plasma TVs, giving an advantage to the technology and is not necessarily “unpredictable for LED backlit TVs,” as DOE stated in the 2010 RFI. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 4)

Although DOE is proposing that luminance testing be conducted with the three bar video signal, DOE acknowledges that there are drawbacks associated with its use. The APL of the three bar video signal is 50 percent, which is greater than that of typical broadcast content. The three bar video signal also does not have a reference point to vertically center the luminance meter readings which requires additional time to establish where the measurement should be taken. Another drawback to the three bar video signal is a static video signal which is not representative of typical TV program content. The final disadvantage to the three bar video signal is that it results in a quick ABL for plasma TVs due to the amount of white space on the screen

y center the luminance meter readings which requires additional time to establish where the measurement should be taken. Another drawback to the three bar video signal is a static video signal which is not representative of typical TV program content. The final disadvantage to the three bar video signal is that it results in a quick ABL for plasma TVs due to the amount of white space on the screen. Although, the three bar video signal has disadvantages, DOE is currently unaware of a truly technology neutral video signal that isn't affected by the type of TV technology. Video signals can have differing affects on TV technologies resulting in higher power consumption in some technologies and lower power consumption in other technologies. Because the three bar video signal is the current industry standard, it is used as a basis for comparison for the other video signals considered in the sections below.

ii. Nine Point Video Signal

The nine point video signal is used in the Chinese TV test procedure ICS 27.010. The video signal was developed to measure variations in luminance across the screen and account for local dimming. This video signal consists of nine white rectangular boxes symmetrically arranged in a three by three grid. The nine point video signal is also a static video signal which does not improve upon the current three bar video signal and can also result in some ABL for plasma TVs. The average APL for the nine point video signal is 17 percent which is lower than typical broadcast content. (P.R. China, No. 16 at p. 3) Because the nine point video signal has a lower APL than the three bar video signal, it alters the luminance ratio between home and retail picture settings for some TVs which would force policy makers to alter their respective luminance ratio requirements. DOE found that at least four different plasma TVs, which would have met ENERGY STAR requirements for luminance ratio with the three bar video signal, had a ratio below 65 percent when displaying the nine point video signal

gnal, it alters the luminance ratio between home and retail picture settings for some TVs which would force policy makers to alter their respective luminance ratio requirements. DOE found that at least four different plasma TVs, which would have met ENERGY STAR requirements for luminance ratio with the three bar video signal, had a ratio below 65 percent when displaying the nine point video signal.

Panasonic discouraged DOE from using the nine point video signal and Digital Video Essential (DVE) window (a VESA industry video signal) because Panasonic believes these patterns do not prevent some TVs from power limiting; therefore they are not technology neutral. Panasonic did not provide any comment on how the video signals impact the TV's power limiting. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 4)

Alternatively, P.R. China recommended that DOE utilize the nine point video signal because the APL is 17 percent, it is technology neutral, and it accounts for non-uniform screen luminance. (P.R. China, No. 16 at p. 3)

DOE conducted various tests utilizing the nine point video signal. After interpreting data, the absolute luminance values obtained while using the DOE nine point video signal were generally higher in the retail picture setting and lower in the home picture setting than those obtained while using the three bar video signal, particularly in plasma TVs. DOE believes these results can be attributed to the lower APL of the nine point video signal, which prevents the TV from quickly entering ABL. This video signal might than disproportionately disadvantage plasma TVs. DOE also determined that changing the video signal will also impact the luminance ratio. Due to the change in absolute luminance values obtained while using the DOE nine point video signal, luminance ratios generally decreased for plasma TVs when compared to displaying the three bar video signal

TV from quickly entering ABL. This video signal might than disproportionately disadvantage plasma TVs. DOE also determined that changing the video signal will also impact the luminance ratio. Due to the change in absolute luminance values obtained while using the DOE nine point video signal, luminance ratios generally decreased for plasma TVs when compared to displaying the three bar video signal. DOE did not find any other major trends in size or brand for the TVs in which the ratio differed when using the nine point video signal as opposed to the three bar video signal. Due to the reasons stated above, DOE has determined not to propose utilizing the nine point video signal in this NOPR.

iii. DOE Five Point Video Signal

As mentioned above, DOE developed a five point video signal that has an APL identical to typical consumer broadcast content (34 percent). This video signal is based largely on the VESA five point video signal and consists of five white rectangular boxes arranged with one box in the center of the screen and one box in each corner.

Upon testing, DOE found that the absolute luminance values obtained while using the DOE five point video signal were generally lower than those obtained while using the three bar video signal. DOE believes these results are due to the fact that the five measurements took into account the perimeter of the screen which is typically dimmer than the center. Similar to the nine point and the VESA five point video signal, this can also be attributed to the location of the measurements taken, as the center of the screen is typically brighter than the edges. With testing, DOE determined that this video signal also displayed some ABL for some plasma TVs regardless of the fact that the APL is 34 percent. DOE did not find any major trends in size or brand for the TVs in which the ratio differed when using the DOE five point video signal as opposed to the three bar video signal other than changes in the luminance ratio for some TVs.

r than the edges. With testing, DOE determined that this video signal also displayed some ABL for some plasma TVs regardless of the fact that the APL is 34 percent. DOE did not find any major trends in size or brand for the TVs in which the ratio differed when using the DOE five point video signal as opposed to the three bar video signal other than changes in the luminance ratio for some TVs.

iv. DOE Dynamic Video Signal

Finally, DOE is interested in the development of a video signal that it believes may be more representative of actual consumer use, and may be more technology neutral. A technology neutral video signal was requested by numerous interested parties in response to DOE's 2010 RFI.

Some interested parties expressed a general desire for a technology neutral video signal or one that has an APL more similar to the IEC 62087-2008 dynamic broadcast-content video signal, which is the same as the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal. PG&E and California IOUs encouraged DOE to develop a video signal that has an APL that is more similar to the IEC 62087-2008 dynamic broadcast-content video signal than the three bar video signal. This will help ensure that the luminance measurements are more reflective of actual TV usage. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 2) PG&E and the California IOUs also commented that the video signal should not favor one type of display technology over another. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 2) Panasonic agreed that the goal of a technology neutral video signal is certainly appropriate, though they feel that such a pattern has been elusive. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 3) NRDC encourages DOE to track the IEC development effort that is in progress, because IEC may be considering a potentially more technology neutral video signal including the nine point video signal used in China. (NRDC, No. 5 at p

onic agreed that the goal of a technology neutral video signal is certainly appropriate, though they feel that such a pattern has been elusive. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 3) NRDC encourages DOE to track the IEC development effort that is in progress, because IEC may be considering a potentially more technology neutral video signal including the nine point video signal used in China. (NRDC, No. 5 at p. 4) Finally, CEC supported DOE's investigation to identify a suitable video signal and recommends one that has an APL close to that of the IEC 62087-2008 dynamic broadcast-content video signal. (CEC, No. 15 at p. 2) P. R. China agrees that an alternative video signal with an APL more similar to the IEC 62087-2008 dynamic broadcast-content video signal should be developed. (P.R. China, No. 16 at p. 3) P.R. China suggests that TVs be adjusted using the “8-gray scale mode” and then be tested using the nine point video signal. (P.R. China, No. 16 at p. 3)

Panasonic also suggested alternative language found in the EuP 642/2009 21 to conduct luminance testing. The EuP 642/2009 allows for different video signals for various TV technologies and only specifies that the video signal must be a “full screen,” which does not exceed the APL point where power limiting occurs. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 3) Panasonic commented that the European Union recognizes that each technology has a different, non-linear methodology for determining the brightness of individual images and therefore has prescribed different video signals for various technologies to meet the criteria of having a video signal that is not “power limiting” or dimming the screen as more pixels are required to be illuminated. Panasonic believes that both of these methods are also valid approaches of measuring luminance. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 3)

21 Directive 2005/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to ecodesign requirements for televisions http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:191:0042:0052:EN:PDF>

imming the screen as more pixels are required to be illuminated. Panasonic believes that both of these methods are also valid approaches of measuring luminance. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 3)

Alternatively, Mitsubishi commented that the APL is irrelevant to the goal of measuring luminance, which is to determine if the home picture setting luminance is overly dim. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 3)

To address interested party comments, DOE's subject matter experts 22 have recommended development of a video signal that simulates the apparent brightness of a picture as well as an APL similar to the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal. The proposed video signal would consist of a black rectangle (with an APL of zero percent) and a white rectangle (with an APL of 100 percent) placed at the center of the IEC 62087-2008 dynamic broadcast-content video signal. These rectangles will maintain the video signal's APL at approximately 34 percent, which is similar to typical broadcast content. Each rectangle would be approximately 1 × 1 inch for a 26 inch TV. The purpose of the small size of the rectangles is to minimize the overall impact they have on the APL of the video signal but allow for a white section to measure the luminance. Also, to help ensure that the TV does not detect the squares as stationary objects, the squares will alternate places with each other every minute.

22 Keith Jones, Managing Director, Australian Digital Testing and Bob Harrison, Principal Scientist, U.K. Government Market Transformation Programme ICT and CE products.

every minute.

22 Keith Jones, Managing Director, Australian Digital Testing and Bob Harrison, Principal Scientist, U.K. Government Market Transformation Programme ICT and CE products.

DOE hopes that this video signal will not unfairly benefit any specific technology, because it will simulate the state that the TV enters when displaying the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal. This video signal may also prevent the TV from APL, because it is a dynamic video signal which neither the three bar nor nine point video signal are capable of preventing.

In summary, DOE understands the issues associated with the three bar video signal as well as all static video signals, but is utilizing the three bar video signal as the tentative default video signal for this NOPR while it continues to investigate other video signals and receive comments about them. Although DOE is proposing to require the three bar video signal, it would appreciate any comments on measuring luminance while displaying either the nine point or dynamic video signal that DOE also considered for incorporation in this rulemaking. (See Issue 7 in section V.E “Issues On Which DOE Seeks Comment”).

d. Number of Luminance Measurements

In addition to the particular video signal displayed during luminance testing, the number of measurements and how those measurements are taken is important. In the 2010 RFI, DOE asked for comments on a nine point test measurement versus a single point test measurement. 75 FR 54048, 54050. Given the interested party feedback and additional testing discussed below, DOE is proposing to only require a single point luminance measurement.

In response to the 2010 RFI, many commenters expressed desire for DOE to only require one luminance measurement if a luminance measurement is required

omments on a nine point test measurement versus a single point test measurement. 75 FR 54048, 54050. Given the interested party feedback and additional testing discussed below, DOE is proposing to only require a single point luminance measurement.

In response to the 2010 RFI, many commenters expressed desire for DOE to only require one luminance measurement if a luminance measurement is required. Mitsubishi stated that the variation of luminance across the screen, which they believe is the purpose of measuring multiple points while displaying the nine point video signal, does not relate to the goal of ensuring that TVs do not have a home picture setting that is overly dim. Mitsubishi added that, for this reason, taking nine measurements using the nine point video signal adds unnecessary burden. (Mitsubishi, No. 7 at p. 4) Sony believes that using a video signal other than the three bar video signal and measuring multiple points will add complexity to an already complex subject. (Sony, No. 8 at p. 2) Panasonic commented that the nine point video signal offers no benefit over the three bar video signal, noting that a nine points measurement requires more time, is more difficult to perform, and is less repeatable. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 3) Sony similarly stated that manufacturers in China suggested that measuring luminance while utilizing the nine point video signal is lengthy and complex when measuring multiple points, and it does not provide more meaningful energy information than measuring a single point, though Sony did not explicitly state which Chinese manufacturers provided this comment. (Sony, No. 8 at p. 2) CEA also strongly opposed replacing the single point luminance measurement with the nine point video signal measurement, because taking nine measurements adds burden without giving more meaningful results. (CEA, No. 13 at p. 5) SHARP believes that a single point measurement is adequate for a ratio test

id not explicitly state which Chinese manufacturers provided this comment. (Sony, No. 8 at p. 2) CEA also strongly opposed replacing the single point luminance measurement with the nine point video signal measurement, because taking nine measurements adds burden without giving more meaningful results. (CEA, No. 13 at p. 5) SHARP believes that a single point measurement is adequate for a ratio test. SHARP added that the Chinese test procedure uses a nine point video signal since it outputs an absolute luminance.

Other commenters urged DOE to adopt a luminance test that required multiple measurements, rather than a single measurement as currently required in ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. PG&E and California IOUs recommended DOE collect and analyze data using multiple point video signals to account for variations of luminance levels on different areas of a screen. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 2) PG&E and California IOUs acknowledged that adding a multiple measurement video signal will add test variation; however, they believe that luminance measurements from multiple points may be needed. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 2) NRDC did not specify a particular video signal to be used, but they prefer a method that requires multiple measurements rather than a single measurement. (NRDC, No. 5 at p. 4)

DOE conducted testing with the nine point video signal in order to determine the drawbacks and benefits of measuring luminance at multiple locations compared to measuring at only one point. Testing using this video signal was conducted using two separate methods: (1) Perpendicularly realigning the LMD to the center of each of the nine white squares (hereinafter referred to as the DOE nine point method); and (2) aligning the LMD perpendicularly with the center white square, maintaining the LMD fixed position, and angling the meter to measure eight off-axis white squares (hereinafter referred to as the Chinese nine point method)

d using two separate methods: (1) Perpendicularly realigning the LMD to the center of each of the nine white squares (hereinafter referred to as the DOE nine point method); and (2) aligning the LMD perpendicularly with the center white square, maintaining the LMD fixed position, and angling the meter to measure eight off-axis white squares (hereinafter referred to as the Chinese nine point method). A distance luminance measurement is required to test off-axis measurements, but both a distance and contact meter can be used to take the perpendicular measurements. These nine measurements can be averaged to arrive at the overall screen luminance, ensuring that the brightness across the entire screen is accounted for in the measurement. Although the results for individual points varied across the screen when measuring luminance at multiple locations, DOE notes that measuring the additional locations would not impact the luminance ratio as the ratio would remain similar between TVs. DOE found that each of the individual measurement points across the TV screen maintained a similar ratio in the home and retail picture setting. DOE therefore believes that its proposed method of measuring luminance at a single location is sufficient for this test procedure. DOE's test results show that the ratio from the average of the nine locations and only the central location are exactly the same on all but one TV tested which had ratios that were within three percent. 23 Because luminance is calculated as a ratio, multiple location measurements serve to decrease the measurement accuracy and repeatability of measurement.

23 The luminance ratio data indicates that the ratio from any one particular location (regardless of location) is similar between home and retail settings. This data can be found on the DOE Web site: Appliance and Commercial Equipment Standards: Television Sets. U.S. Department of Energy. August 2, 2011. < http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/residential/tv_sets.html >

ment.

In summary, DOE is proposing that only one luminance measurement be taken in each home and retail picture setting in section 5.3.1.2 (three bar video signal measurement) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. Taking multiple measurements, specifically with a distance meter, greatly increases the test burden and this burden outweighs the potential benefits of measuring multiple locations around the screen. Measuring only one location will also harmonize the DOE test procedure with other TV test procedures that manufacturers currently use to evaluate products. Although DOE is proposing to only require one luminance measurement per picture setting, DOE is seeking comments on taking a single measurement versus multiple measurements when testing for luminance, along with any testing data that supports or refutes DOE's proposed method.

e. Measurement Distances and Angles for Luminance Testing

In the 2010 RFI, DOE considered requiring that luminance measurements be taken at various distances and angles, rather than perpendicular to the center of the screen as required by ENERGY STAR v. 5.3. 75 FR 54048, 54050. However, after further investigation and input from interested parties, DOE is proposing that luminance measurements be taken perpendicular to the center of the screen, similar to the approach in the ENERGY STAR test procedure.

rements be taken perpendicular to the center of the screen, similar to the approach in the ENERGY STAR test procedure.

PG&E and California IOUs believe that the angle needs to be specifically defined and that a perpendicular angle may be appropriate; they also recommend that DOE acquire test results using different angles to inform the decision. (PG&E, No. 12 at p. 2; California IOUs, No. 9 at p. 2) Sony questioned the need to measure at angles and the benefits it provides in a test procedure, stating that the optimal distances to take luminance measurements are described in the LMD specifications. (Sony, No. 8 at p. 2) Similarly, Panasonic recommended that a single luminance measurement be taken perpendicular to the center of the screen. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 4) They believe that the contrast will vary with the room ambient light and the viewing angles. (Panasonic, No. 6 at p. 2) CEA also stated that the measurement distances and angles are not as important as making the measurements in a consistent manner. (CEA, No. 13 at p. 5) P.R. China measures luminance from a distance of three times the height of a high-definition TV screen and four times the height of a standard display TV screen because it simulates consumer viewing conditions. (P.R. China, No. 16 at p. 4) Finally, SHARP commented that luminance measurements at various distances and angles would only be appropriate if absolute luminance measurements were the goal. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 4) SHARP also commented that a perpendicular measurement is adequate, if a luminance measurement is required. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 4) SHARP stated that the correct distance for the measurement is dictated by the measurement tool, rather than the TV. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 4)

Taking nine perpendicular measurements using a distance measure greatly increases testing burden as it requires that the meter be aligned nine times, once for the measurement of each white square

f a luminance measurement is required. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 4) SHARP stated that the correct distance for the measurement is dictated by the measurement tool, rather than the TV. (SHARP, No. 14 at p. 4)

Taking nine perpendicular measurements using a distance measure greatly increases testing burden as it requires that the meter be aligned nine times, once for the measurement of each white square. The Chinese nine point method also increased burden as it requires nine measurements rather than a single one. Although the luminance meter only needs to be positioned once, the additional off-angle measurements still increase the burden of the test method. In addition, the Chinese nine point method eliminates the ability to use a contact LMD.

As stated, above, DOE is proposing that luminance measurements be taken perpendicular to the center of the screen in section 5.3.1.1 (LMD setup) of appendix H to subpart B of 10 CFR part 430. DOE believes that measuring multiple locations on off-axis angles will add unnecessary variation to measurements made, will likely reduce the repeatability of the test and increase testing time. DOE is also proposing that the distance for which these measurements are taken are in accordance to the set specifications for the luminance measurement device, which can be found in III.D.1.c.ii of this NOPR.

4. On Mode

DOE is proposing to use the IEC 62087-2011 on mode test procedure. This test procedure displays the widely accepted IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal while the TV is in the on mode. Consistent with ENERGY STAR v. 5.3, DOE is considering testing on mode differently depending on whether ABC is enabled or disabled when the TV is shipped. If the TV is shipped with ABC enabled by default, the TV would be tested at multiple room illuminance levels, and if the TV is without ABC enabled by default, it would only be tested in the home picture setting. However, DOE wishes to continue to encourage manufacturers to ship TVs with ABC enabled

testing on mode differently depending on whether ABC is enabled or disabled when the TV is shipped. If the TV is shipped with ABC enabled by default, the TV would be tested at multiple room illuminance levels, and if the TV is without ABC enabled by default, it would only be tested in the home picture setting. However, DOE wishes to continue to encourage manufacturers to ship TVs with ABC enabled. Although DOE is proposing to measure on mode without being connected to the internet, DOE is also interested in receiving feedback on potentially measuring on mode while the TV is connected to the internet. See section 11 of this NOPR.

a. IEC 62087-2011 Dynamic Broadcast-Content Video Signal

IEC 62087-2011 and ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 both require the use of the IEC 62087 dynamic broadcast-content video signal for on mode testing, which is the same in both the 2008 and 2011 versions of the test procedure. This video signal displays a variety of clips that have an average APL equivalent to typical broadcast content. DOE received a comment from NRDC supporting the use of the IEC 62087-2008 dynamic broadcast-content video signal. (NRDC, No. 5 at p. 2) Although no other interested party explicitly stated that the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal should be incorporated, no interested party opposed the use of the video signal. Moreover, a number of parties suggested that the clip should be the basis for any 3D test procedure, affirming its wide acceptance. In this NOPR, DOE is proposing that the IEC 62087-2011 dynamic broadcast-content video signal be used to measure on mode energy consumption in 2D mode on all TVs.

b. Testing of Television Sets Shipped With Automatic Brightness Control Enabled

ABC is a power saving feature in which the TV automatically adjusts the screen luminance to account for the ambient lighting conditions (room illuminance). IEC 62087-2011 and ENERGY STAR v. 5.3 require TVs with ABC

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.