[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 216 (Tuesday, November 10, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57950-57970]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-27036]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 10, 2009 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 57950]]
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 305
[RIN 3084-AB03]
Appliance Labeling Rule
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission (``FTC'' or ``Commission'').
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; request for public comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Section 321 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007 requires the Commission to conduct a rulemaking to consider the
effectiveness of current labeling requirements for lamps (commonly
referred to as ``light bulbs'') and to consider alternative labeling
approaches. After reviewing public comments and consumer research, the
Commission seeks comments on proposed changes to the existing labeling
requirements for lamp products.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 28,
2009.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments
electronically or in paper form by following the instructions in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Comments in electronic form
should be submitted by using the following weblink: (https://public.commentworks.com/ftc/lampamendmentsNPRM) (and following the
instructions on the web-based form). Comments filed in paper form
should be mailed or delivered to the following address: Federal Trade
Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-135(Annex N), 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580, in the manner detailed
in the Request for Comment part of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hampton Newsome, (202) 326-2889, or
Lemuel Dowdy, (202) 326-2981, Attorneys, Division of Enforcement,
Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, Room NJ-2122,
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Background
III. Current FTC Labeling
IV. Consumer Research
V. Effectiveness of Current Labeling Requirements
VI. Proposed Rule Changes
A. Proposed Product Coverage
B. Proposed Package Labeling
1. Front and Rear Panel Format
2. Required Package Disclosures
a. Brightness/ Light Output
b. Energy Use/ Efficiency
c. Life
d. Color Appearance
e. Voltage
f. Mercury Disclosure
3. Affirmative Disclosures for Energy Cost and Life Claims on
Package
4. Total Lifecycle Cost (Not Proposed for Label)
5. Color Rendering Index (Not Proposed for Label)
C. Product Labeling
D. Reporting Requirements
E. Website and Paper Catalog Requirements
VII. Consumer Education
VIII. Section by Section Description of Proposed Changes
IX. Request for Comment
X. Communications by Outside Parties to the Commissioners or Their
Advisors
XI. Paperwork Reduction Act
XII. Regulatory Flexibility Act
XIII. Proposed Rule Language
I. Introduction
In accordance with the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
(Pub. L. 110-140) (``EISA''), the Commission has considered the
effectiveness of current requirements and alternative approaches for
labeling lamps, commonly referred to as light bulbs.\1\ After reviewing
public comments and conducting consumer research, the Commission now
proposes amendments to the Appliance Labeling Rule (16 CFR Part 305)
that would require light bulb packages to display brightness and energy
cost information on the front panel and a detailed ``Lighting Facts''
label on the side or rear. The proposed amendments also would require
certain disclosures on the bulbs. These new labeling requirements
should help consumers choose energy efficient bulbs that meet their
lighting needs. The Commission seeks comments on these proposed
changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This Notice uses the terms lamp, light bulb, and bulb
interchangeably.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To facilitate comment, this Notice provides background on the EISA
provisions, the current labeling requirements, the public comments, and
the FTC consumer research; details the proposed changes to the
labeling, reporting, website and catalog requirements; discusses
proposed consumer education measures; provides a section by section
description of the proposed changes; and analyzes the impact of the
proposed changes pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act and the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
II. Background
EISA directs the Department of Energy (``DOE'') to issue stringent
energy efficiency standards for lighting products. These standards will
eliminate low efficiency incandescent light bulbs from store shelves.
The remaining high efficiency light bulbs will include products widely
available now, such as compact fluorescent lamps (``CFLs''), as well as
products that are likely to become increasingly available in the future
such as improved incandescent bulbs and very high efficiency solid-
state lighting (e.g., light-emitting diode (LED) products).
Given these changes, Congress directed the FTC to consider the
effectiveness of its current light bulb disclosure requirements and
possible alternative labeling disclosures that could help consumers
understand new high-efficiency bulbs and help them choose bulbs that
meet their needs.\2\ In particular, the law directs the Commission to
consider labeling disclosures that address consumer needs for
information about lighting level, light quality, lamp life, and total
lifecycle cost. The Commission must complete this effort by June
2010.\3\ EISA (section 321(c)) also requires DOE, in cooperation with
the FTC and other agencies, to conduct a ``proactive
[[Page 57951]]
national program of consumer awareness, information, and education'' to
help consumers understand new light bulb labels and make energy-
efficient lighting choices that meet their needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Section 321(b) of EISA amends section 324(a)(2)(C) of the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) (42 U.S.C. 6294(a)(2)(C)).
Additional amendments in EISA redesignate 6294(a)(2)(C) as
6294(a)(2)(D) (see section 324(d) of EISA).
\3\ Section 321(b) of EISA (42 U.S.C. 6294(a)(2)(D)) also gives
the Commission the discretion to ``consider reopening the rulemaking
not later than 180 days before the effective dates of the standards
for general service incandescent lamps [implemented by DOE], if the
Commission determines that further labeling changes are needed to
help consumers understand lamp alternatives.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To begin fulfilling this mandate, the Commission published an
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``ANPR'') on July 18, 2008 (73
FR 40988) seeking comment, and then held a public roundtable on
September 15, 2008.\4\ Commenters and roundtable participants discussed
the effectiveness of current labeling requirements, as well as whether
labeling alternatives would help consumers in their purchasing
decisions. Using this information, the Commission conducted a consumer
research study to aid in determining what revisions, if any, it should
make to existing labeling requirements.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The comments received in response to the ANPR are at (http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/lightbulbs/index.shtm). A transcript of the
Roundtable can be found at (http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/lamp/transcript.pdf).
\5\ See 73 FR 72800 (Dec. 1, 2008); 74 FR 7894 (Feb. 20, 2009).
See comments at (http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/lampstudypra2/index.shtm).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Current FTC Labeling
Current FTC regulations require that most incandescent and compact
fluorescent lamp packages display information about the product's light
output (in lumens), energy use (in watts), and lamp life (in hours).\6\
The package disclosures also must provide the following statement: ``To
save energy costs, find the bulbs with the light output you need, then
choose the one with
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO09.067
Figure 1
Example of Current Disclosures
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The FTC issued the current lighting disclosure requirements
in 1994 (see 16 CFR Sec. Sec. 305.15(a), (b), & (c)). See 59 FR
25176 (May 13, 1994). Figure 1 contains a sample of the current
label.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the lowest watts.'' Additionally, catalog retailers (including
websites) must disclose this information for the covered lamps they
sell.\7\ The current rule provides manufacturers flexibility regarding
the size, font, and style in which the information is presented, but
otherwise mandates the wording, relative size, and order of the
disclosures.\8\ Figure 1 provides one example of how the disclosures
required by the current rule may appear on the package.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 16 CFR 305.20.
\8\ In addition to the requirements for common household (medium
screw base) light bulbs, the rule directs manufacturers of
fluorescent lamp ballasts and luminaires, metal halide lamp
fixtures, and certain tube-type (``general service'') fluorescent
lamps to mark their products with an encircled ``E,'' a symbol
signifying compliance with DOE minimum efficiency standards. See 16
CFR 305.15. Packages for incandescent reflector lamps must also
display the encircled ``E'' as well as information on light output,
energy use, and watts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The current rule also requires manufacturers to possess and rely
upon a reasonable basis consisting of competent and reliable scientific
tests to substantiate the information on their labels. For lamp life
and light output representations, the rule states that the Commission
will accept as substantiation data derived from applicable IES
(``Illuminating Engineering Society'') test protocols.\9\ The rule,
however, does not require manufacturers to use these protocols.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See 16 CFR 305.5. For fluorescent lamp ballasts, the rule
requires manufacturers to derive energy consumption information
using specific DOE test procedures (10 CFR Part 430, subpart B,
430.23(q)). There were no DOE test procedures available for other
lighting products when the FTC first published the lamp labeling
rules in 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Consumer Research
In its ANPR, the Commission requested that commenters provide
consumer research related to lighting disclosures. However, no
commenters submitted or identified any recent, comprehensive consumer
studies. Therefore, the FTC, through a contractor, conducted a consumer
focus group about various light bulb attributes in October 2008.\10\
After considering the results of this focus group, the FTC conducted a
quantitative label study in the Spring of 2009.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ A report on the focus group (``FTC Focus Group Report''),
prepared by FTC's contractor, Synovate, Inc., is available at
(http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/lightbulbs/index.shtm).
\11\ The Commission announced this study in a December 1, 2008
notice (73 FR 72800) and provided details regarding the research in
a February 20, 2009 notice (74 FR 7894). Comments received in
response to the February 20, 2009 notice are available at (http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/lampstudypra2/index.shtm).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 57952]]
The label study employed standard consumer survey methodologies,
including choice experiments, to explore how different disclosure
approaches impact consumer decision-making.\12\ The FTC analyzed the
data using a multi-variate probit model to determine which disclosure
approaches were most successful in helping respondents choose correct
answers, holding other factors constant.\13\ The study did not generate
information about national public opinion and did not provide
nationally representative results. Instead, the results provided the
FTC with information about the comparative effectiveness of various
label approaches.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The FTC's contractor administered questions over the
Internet to a sample of approximately 5,600 respondents who were at
least 18 years old and were recent or likely future light bulb
purchasers.
\13\ A probit analysis is a statistical technique that uses
several independent variables to predict the probability of some
outcome, such as the probability that a correct answer will be
selected. In some cases, the FTC staff also performed Pearson's chi-
squared tests to test for significant differences across treatment
groups in the proportion of respondents selecting the correct
answer.
\14\ The complete results (``Lamp Labeling Consumer Research
Supplement to Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Related to the
Effectiveness of the Current Lamp Labeling Requirements (16 CFR Part
305)''), including the questionnaire and all other study details,
are available at (www.ftc.gov/energy).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the FTC research, the Commission considered
concurrent research conducted in 2009 by Natural Resources Canada
(``NRCan'').\15\ NRCan's research sought to gather information on
`Canadians' knowledge, perceptions and understanding of household
lighting, both in terms of the product and the terminology used to
describe it.'' Specifically, NRCan conducted ten focus groups and an
online survey. The survey explored Canadian consumers' experiences with
different bulb types, their understanding of energy efficiency related
to lighting options, their understanding of lighting terminology, the
criteria they use in the selection of light bulbs, and their reaction
to different labeling concepts.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ ``Lighting Survey: Combined Executive Summary,'' Sage
Research Corporation (prepared for the Canadian Electricity
Association and Natural Resources Canada) (``NRCan Lighting
Survey'') May 2009, at 2.
\16\ See generally NRCan Lighting Survey.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Effectiveness of Current Labeling Requirements
In considering the effectiveness of the current label, the
Commission reviewed comments, information provided at the fall
roundtable, and the consumer research. The review yielded two primary
conclusions. First, the use of watts in the required disclosure is
problematic because consumers tend to use watts (instead of lumens) as
a measure of brightness. Second, the current FTC disclosures do not
provide some types of information that may be important to consumers.
The comments and research show that consumers interpret wattage to
measure brightness even though wattage is a measure of energy use. For
instance, the Focus Group Report concluded that ``respondents
mistakenly understood the measure of brightness to be wattage, and this
was how they selected bulbs.''\17\ In the FTC label study, respondents
viewing label variations including watts on the front panel, who were
asked to choose the brightest bulb, were somewhat more likely to pick
the incorrect bulb than respondents viewing labels with other energy
descriptors.\18\ Thus, a significant number of respondents viewing
those variations appear to have based their brightness determination on
wattage information, rather than criteria intended to communicate light
output. Similarly, the Canadian research concluded that the majority of
respondents in Canada think of ``watts as a measure of brightness or
both as a measure of brightness and energy use.''\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ FTC Focus Group Report at 6.
\18\ Question 201 asked respondents to choose the bulb that
would fill their room with as much light as possible. Question 202
asked them to give their second choice. Of the respondents who
viewed watts as the only descriptor on the front panel, 59.28% and
49.72% correctly answered Questions 201 and 202, respectively;
whereas 66.72% and 52.92% of respondents who did not view watts on
the front panel correctly answered Questions 201 and 202,
respectively. See Consumer Research Supplement at 356.
\19\ The NRCan research study states: ``When asked to describe
in their own words their understanding of ``watts,'' less than half
(42%) of respondents mentioned something approximating the correct
definition of energy/power use, while 64% mentioned brightness (or
synonyms).'' NRCan Lighting Survey at 17. The NRCan research also
found that the majority of Canadians ``still have an incandescent
mindset in how they tend to think about lighting choices, the
terminology they use, and the criteria they use to make decisions
about what they buy.'' NRCan Lighting Survey at 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consumers' use of watts, and not lumens, to gauge light output
worked in a market dominated by incandescent bulbs because the wattage
(i.e., energy use) of incandescent lamps provides a consistent proxy
for brightness (i.e., light output). For example, a ``100-watt''
incandescent bulb typically provides enough light for reading while a
``40-watt'' incandescent bulb typically provides sufficient brightness
to light a hallway or utility room. However, a wattage based approach
does not work in a market that includes different high efficiency bulbs
because the wattage needed to attain a particular light output can
differ substantially across these technologies.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ For example, a traditional, standard incandescent bulb
typically uses 100 watts to provide 1,600 lumens of light output. A
CFL, on the other hand, can provide the same light output using only
25 watts, while an LED lamp may use even less energy to produce the
same light output.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to concerns about wattage disclosures, the Commission's
review identified three types of important information the current
disclosures do not address. First, the current disclosures do not
provide consumers with energy cost information. Many commenters
identified energy cost as important information for the FTC label.\21\
Second, the current rule does not require color temperature information
(i.e., the cool or warm appearance of a bulb's light). Color
temperature garnered significant attention in the comments and during
the roundtable because, as more color temperature variations become
available, particularly for high efficiency bulbs, uniform color
temperature information may become increasingly important.\22\ Finally,
some commenters noted that there are no current federal disclosures
regarding the mercury content in CFLs.\23\ They argued that such
information is important to help consumers understand how to safely use
and dispose of these products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See, e.g., sample labels from Philips, GE, OSRAM, and NRDC
at (http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/lamp/index.shtml).
\22\ For example, session two of the Roundtable addressed color
disclosures. See (http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/lamp/index.shtml).
\23\ See GE (540385-00002) and NEMA (540385-
00005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Proposed Rule Changes
The Commission is proposing significant changes to its light bulb
labeling requirements. These changes affect the rule's product
coverage, the required package and product disclosures, reporting, and
website (catalog) disclosures. In drafting these requirements, the
Commission considered the severe space limitations on typical light
bulb packaging and sought to propose simple, straightforward
disclosures.
A. Proposed Product Coverage
The proposed amendments apply to common household (medium screw
base) light bulbs, including general service incandescent bulbs and
CFLs. These two technologies are the most commonly available bulbs
presently on the market. The amendments also would apply to medium
screw base light emitting diode (LED) lamps, which
[[Page 57953]]
are likely to become widely available over the next few years.\24\
Though the EISA amendments do not expressly require labeling for LEDs
(42 U.S.C. 6294),\25\ the Commission proposes to cover them using its
general authority to label consumer products under 42 U.S.C.
6294(a)(6).\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ LED products are more efficient and last longer than both
incandescent and CFL bulbs and can replace those bulbs in common
residential fixtures. The U.S. Department of Energy (``DOE'') is
currently supporting domestic research and development for new
solid-state lighting technologies. For more information about DOE's
efforts and LED technology in general, see (http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/ssl/).
\25\ The EISA amendments included definitions for solid-state
lighting products (e.g., LED), but did not alter the scope of
lighting products for which labeling is required. Therefore, the
current law does not specifically direct the FTC to require labeling
for solid-state lighting products. (See 42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(BB-DD)
and 42 U.S.C. 6294(a)).
\26\ Section 6294(a)(6) gives the Commission authority to
require disclosures for consumer products not subject to specific
labeling requirements in section 6294 (i.e., products ``not
specified'' under existing labeling requirements). The law defines
``consumer product'' as any article (other than an automobile) which
``in operation consumes, or is designed to consume energy'' and
``which, to any significant extent is distributed in commerce for
personal use or consumption by an individual.'' 42 U.S.C. 6291(1).
The Commission believes that labeling for LED bulbs is likely to
assist consumers in their purchasing decisions because they are
substitutes for incandescents and CFLs and are likely to become
increasingly available for household use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To effect the coverage of these three bulb types, the proposed rule
requires the new labels for any ``general service lamp,'' a term
defined in the proposed rule to include any medium screw base lamp that
is a general service incandescent, CFL, or general service LED.\27\
This proposed coverage is consistent with commenter suggestions urging
the Commission to require consistent disclosures for lamps regardless
of technologies.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ The Commission also plans to use section 6294(a)(6) to
require labeling for two types of incandescent bulbs: reflector
lamps and 3-way incandescent lamps. Prior to EISA, the Commission's
rules covered such products because they fell under the statutory
definition of ``general service incandescent lamp.'' The EISA
amendments, however, appear to have inadvertently removed these
products from the labeling section by excluding them from the
definition of ``general service incandescent lamps.'' See 42 U.S.C.
6291(30)(D). The Commission proposes to continue required labeling
for reflector lamps and 3-way incandescent lamps because they have
been labeled by the FTC for more than a decade, because they remain
common products for which continued labeling would assist consumers,
and because no comments suggest any reason for excluding them. The
Commission seeks comment on this proposal, including any reasons why
these lamps should not be subject to the labeling requirements.
\28\ See, e.g., Phillips (536795-00015), Energy
Solutions (536795-00010), NRDC (536795-0003), and
CEE (536795-00011). The Commission also seeks comment on
whether there are other types of consumer lamps that the Commission
should include under the new labeling requirements proposed in this
Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Proposed Package Labeling
The proposed package labeling amendments create a two-panel
labeling format: a front panel with brightness and energy cost
information and a Lighting Facts label with additional information on
the side or rear panel (see Figure 2). This two-panel approach benefits
consumers by providing the most important information in a simple-to-
read format on the package front and more detailed information on the
side or rear panel. The proposed required disclosures are brightness,
energy cost, life, color appearance, wattage, mercury content, and, for
non-standard voltage bulbs, voltage information. The proposed
amendments also allow manufacturers the discretion to provide the
ENERGY STAR logo (if applicable). Additionally, the amendments expand
the current rules for voluntary cost and life claims, and do not
require manufacturers to make disclosures regarding a light bulb's
lifecycle or its color rendering index. Finally, in addition to
changing the disclosures on package labels, the amendments would
require the bulbs themselves to display brightness and mercury
information.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO09.068
[[Page 57954]]
FRONT PANEL
REAR PANEL
Figure 2
Front Panel and Lighting Facts
1. Front and Rear Panel Format
Under the proposed rule, the front panel displays brightness in the
form of lumens and energy information in the form of annual energy
cost. Brightness and energy information warrant placement on the front
panel because both are particularly important to consumers.
Participants in the FTC focus group identified ``brightness'' as the
most important bulb attribute.\29\ In the FTC label study, respondents
gave high scores to the importance of brightness as well as energy
information.\30\ Similarly, the NRCan research indicated that the ``two
top pieces of information people look for on light bulb packaging are
brightness and energy usage or efficiency.''\31\ The prominent
disclosure of these two key pieces of information on the front panel
should allow consumers to make quick comparisons in the store.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ FTC Focus Group Report at 6.
\30\ Respondents in the FTC label study also scored bulb life
high in terms of importance. However, the Canadian research
indicated that consumers refer to bulb life only ``on occasion''
when buying light bulbs and ranked life below brightness and energy
efficiency as a descriptor that ``must'' appear on the label. NRCan
Lighting Survey at 13. Given the contradictory research results and
the need to minimize disclosures on the front package, the
Commission proposes to require life information on the Lighting
Facts label, but not on the package front.
\31\ NRCan Lighting Survey at 13. When asked what information
must appear on the label, the Canadian opinion survey results
indicated an 83% response rate for brightness, 74% for energy
efficiency, and 69% for bulb life.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rear or side panel features a more detailed Lighting Facts
label similar in format to the ``Nutrition Facts'' and ``Drug Facts''
labels required by the Food and Drug Administration. Each of these
proposed disclosures is discussed in detail in Section B.2. To ensure
uniformity, the proposed rule limits the permissible disclosures on the
Lighting Facts label.
The Lighting Facts label has several benefits.\32\ First, it
provides a format consistent with other government mandated labels,
which should help consumers find information to compare bulbs. Second,
the label reinforces the brightness and cost information on the front
of the package, including detail about the electricity rate and usage
assumptions underlying the energy cost estimate. Third, the label
provides detailed information in a small space, which is a particular
concern given the size of typical light bulb packages. Finally, it
provides uniform information that online sellers would be able to use
to comply with the catalog disclosure requirements (section 305.20).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ ``Lighting Facts'' is a trademark held by the U.S.
Government through the DOE solid-state lighting program. During the
Roundtable and in comments, several commenters suggested a uniform
label consistent with the ``Nutrition Facts.'' See, e.g., Roundtable
Tr. at 107, 108, 120, and 121; Philips 536795-00015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission considered requiring only a Lighting Facts label
(with no required disclosures on the front of the package). In the FTC
label study, however, the label variation which contained only the
Lighting Facts label did not perform as well as two-panel variations in
aiding respondents to answer questions regarding light output.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ Question 201 asked respondents to choose the bulb that
would fill their room with as much light as possible. Question 202
asked them to give their second choice. Of respondents who viewed
the Lighting Facts label only, 52.56% and 39.49% correctly answered
Questions 201 and 202, respectively; whereas 66.17% and 53.17% of
respondents who viewed two panel label formats correctly answered
the questions, respectively. See Consumer Research Supplement at
357.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission seeks comment on whether the rule should require a
front and back label format as proposed. The Commission also seeks
comment on whether the Lighting Facts label will fit on existing
packages and whether the FTC needs to specify an alternative format for
packages that are too small for the proposed label.
2. Required Package Disclosures
The proposed amendments require six mandatory disclosures on the
package: brightness, energy cost, bulb life, color temperature
(appearance), wattage, and, in some cases, voltage and mercury
information.
a. Brightness/Light Output
Two significant problems with the current labeling requirements
shaped the Commission's approach to light output disclosures. First, as
discussed in section V, the current label highlights bulb wattage on
the front of the package as an energy descriptor, but consumers tend to
use it to measure light output. Second, many consumers do not
understand that lumens provides a consistent measurement of light
output. For example, in the FTC label study, even when provided with
lumens information, roughly one-fifth of respondents mistakenly chose
the dimmest bulb when asked to choose the brightest model.\34\
Similarly, the majority of respondents in the NRCan study did not
understand that ``lumens'' or even ``light output'' convey
brightness.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ In Question 201, 17.9% of all respondents chose the dimmest
bulb when asked to choose the bulb that would fill their room with
the most light. See Consumer Research Supplement at 89.
\35\ NRCan Lighting Survey Combined Executive Summary at 17. The
NRCan focus group report indicated that ``quite a few'' participants
``said they were not sure what `light output' means.'' Lighting
Research Focus Groups Final Report, Sage Research Corporation (for
NRCan and the Canadian Electrical Association), May 20, 2009
(``NRCan Focus Group Report'') at 22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address these two concerns and enhance consumer understanding of
the light output of high efficiency bulbs, the Commission proposes two
changes to the labeling requirements. First, the amended rule would
remove mandatory wattage information from the front of the package,
while maintaining a prominent lumens disclosure. This change should
help consumers focus on lumens, instead of watts, to determine light
output. A less prominent wattage disclosure would appear on the
Lighting Facts label for consumers and professionals who want to know
the wattage of a bulb. Second, the proposed amendments change the term
describing lumens from ``light output'' to ``brightness.''\36\ Both the
FTC focus group and NRCan research suggest that consumers prefer the
term ``brightness'' to ``light output,''\37\ and participants at the
FTC's Roundtable routinely used the term ``brightness'' when describing
the light output of lamps.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ The Commission recognizes that the technical term to
describe a light source's lumen output is ``luminous flux,'' not
``brightness'' (or even ``light output''). However, this technical
distinction is unlikely to be material to consumers.
\37\ FTC Focus Group Report at 3; and NRCan Lighting Survey at
17. The FTC Focus Group Report concluded that: ``All respondents
agreed that `Brightness' was a far superior communication than
`Light Output.' `Brightness' was direct, easy to understand, and
most importantly, the word respondents already use when referring to
this attribute.'' The NRCan survey report recommended that lumen
disclosures be prefaced with a widely understood term such as
``brightness.'' The NRCan focus group indicated that several
participants stated that they would have paid more attention to
package information it if had been labeled ``brightness'' because
that is a much more familiar term. NRCan Focus Group Report at 22.
\38\ See, e.g., Roundtable Tr. at 32, 35, 41, 67, and 121.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to these labeling changes, the Commission recommends
education efforts to help consumers understand how to use lumens. When
properly understood, lumens permit consumers to determine whether a
bulb provides sufficient light to meet their needs across technologies.
The DOE-led consumer education programs required by section
321(c)(1)(C) of EISA provide an opportunity to improve consumer
understanding of lumens, and the FTC plans to work with DOE as it
implements these programs. In addition, the FTC may develop its own
consumer education materials and strategies.
[[Page 57955]]
The Commission also considered whether to require watt equivalence
information to help consumers compare the light output of high
efficiency bulbs to incandescent bulbs. Manufacturers routinely
communicate light output on CFL packages by providing conspicuous
comparisons to incandescent lamps (e.g., ``this bulb is a `100-watt'
equivalent'' or ``13W=60W'').\39\ Although both industry practice and
the NRCan research suggest that watt equivalence information aids
consumers in understanding the brightness of high efficiency bulbs,\40\
the proposed rule does not require such information for two reasons.
First, watt-equivalence information is likely to become much less
important as the new DOE energy standards render most incandescent
bulbs obsolete. Indeed, by the time any new FTC labeling rules become
effective, the DOE standards eliminating traditional low efficiency
incandescent bulbs will be close at hand. Second, mandatory wattage
equivalence information could perpetuate consumer reliance on outdated
incandescent watt information and hinder their transition to using
lumens.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Several comments recommend that the FTC require watt-
equivalence information on the label. See, e.g., CEE
(536795-00011), NRDC (536795-00003), and ACEEE
(536795-00012). In addition, NRDC urged the Commission to
set standards for watt equivalence claims. NRDC (536795-
0003). NRDC also suggested the creation of categories similar to
batteries (such as A, AAA, C, etc.), to describe light output.
Roundtable Tr. at 29 (Horowitz). However, the Commission believes it
is better to focus on educating consumers about lumens, a descriptor
that already exists and may have some consumer recognition, rather
than to create an entirely new system.
\40\ NRCan Lighting Survey at 13. In the FTC label study,
wattage equivalent information included on the Lighting Facts labels
did not make a difference in respondents' ability to choose the
brightest bulb. The study, however, did not explore whether such
information helped consumers relate CFL brightness to their
experience with the wattage (and associated brightness) of
incandescent bulbs.
\41\ The Commission expects that, in the short term,
manufacturers will continue to make watt equivalence representations
voluntarily. As the market rapidly changes over the next few years,
manufacturers can adjust such voluntary representations to evolving
consumer understanding and reevaluate the need for watt equivalence
disclosures with greater flexibility than the Commission can through
rulemaking. Nevertheless, to avoid consumer confusion, when making
such claims manufacturers should ensure that the incandescent bulb
they are comparing is similar to the CFL (or LED) they are selling
not only in brightness, but also in other material respects such as
bulb type and color appearance. Manufacturers, of course, must also
substantiate all other material claims they make about the product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Energy Use/Efficiency
As discussed in Section VI.b.1., a bulb's energy information is
important to consumers whether they are concerned about their
electricity bills, improving the environment by using less energy, or
both. The current rule provides energy information to consumers in the
form of watts. However, the FTC looked for an alternative because of
consumers' tendency to equate watts with brightness.
Commenters suggested three alternatives: annual energy cost, lumens
per watt, and a five-star rating system.\42\ In general, annual energy
cost is a measure of energy use while lumens per watt and the star
rating are measures of energy efficiency (i.e., energy the product uses
for a given light output). More specifically, annual energy cost
communicates a bulb's energy use by converting watts to dollars per
year based on a given electricity rate and daily usage estimate; lumens
per watt communicates a bulb's energy efficiency by providing the
number of lumens the bulb produces for a single watt of energy; and the
five-star system communicates the energy efficiency of the bulb by
assigning a star rating (e.g., three stars) to a bulb's energy
efficiency (as measured in lumens per watt). The FTC consumer research
explored each of these approaches in conjunction with the ENERGY STAR
logo, which also communicates energy efficiency information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ See sample labels from Philips, GE, OSRAM, and NRDC at
(http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/lamp/index.shtml). See also, e.g.,
EPA comments (536795-00006), NRDC comments (suggesting five
star system and energy cost) (536795-00003), and NEMA
(suggesting energy cost) (536795-00007). Some comments also
suggested consideration of lifetime cost (see, e.g., NEMA
(536795-00007). However, the Commission has not explored
lifetime cost in detail because the tremendous variability of bulb
life makes it a confusing descriptor. For example, an efficient bulb
that lasts 20 years and costs $1 per year to operate would have a
lifetime cost of $20 whereas a lower efficiency bulb that last 2
years and costs $2 per year to run would have a lifetime cost of $4.
The labels in this scenario could lead consumers to choose the lower
efficiency bulb simply because the cost printed on its label is
lower.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After considering the research results and the comments, the
Commission proposes to require annual energy cost as the primary energy
disclosure on the front package panel and on the rear (or side panel)
Lighting Facts label. Specifically, the proposed rule would require
that the front panel display ``estimated energy cost'' in an annual
dollar figure (e.g., $7.49 per year). The proposed Lighting Facts label
also provides this information with rate and usage assumptions (i.e., 3
hours per day and 11.4 cents per kWh),\43\ and a disclosure that actual
cost depends on a consumer's electricity rates and usage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ The general consensus at the Roundtable was that 3 hours
per day was a reasonable figure to use for such estimates.
Roundtable Tr. at 54. The electricity cost figure is based on 2009
DOE data. See 74 FR 26675 (June 3, 2009). Consistent with the
Commission's approach on the EnergyGuide label (16 CFR 305.10), the
Commission would change the cost rate every five years based on DOE
data. This approach minimizes label changes while ensuring that cost
information is based on a reasonable estimate of national average
electricity costs. However, as with appliance labeling, the
Commission may revisit the energy cost estimate sooner than five
years should such costs change significantly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission has decided to propose requiring annual energy cost
for three reasons. First, estimated annual energy cost provides a
simple way to convey how much energy a bulb is likely to use.\44\ In
essence, the disclosure is a conversion of wattage to the amount of
money the bulb costs to operate in a year. Second, in the label study,
compared to the five-star rating and the lumens per watt disclosure,
energy cost information performed well in enabling respondents to
answer energy questions correctly.\45\ Specifically, for questions
asking respondents to pick the bulb that used the least (or, for some
questions, most) energy, the energy cost descriptor somewhat
outperformed the five-star rating and substantially outperformed the
lumens per watt disclosure.\46\ For most questions asking respondents
to pick the most energy efficient bulb, energy cost performed as well
as the
[[Page 57956]]
five-star rating and substantially better than lumens per watt.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ The NRCan Focus Group Report stated that ``some
participants liked the idea of expressing energy usage in terms of
operating cost per year, as they felt dollar figures are tangible,
easily understood, and motivating.'' NRCan Focus Group Report at 8.
\45\ Respondents in the label study who viewed watts were
somewhat more likely to answer correctly most energy-related
questions in the FTC labeling study (Questions 213, 213.1, 214,
214.1, 215, 216, and 216.1) than respondents who viewed other energy
descriptors. See Consumer Research Supplement at 360-362. However,
the proposed rule does not require such information on the front of
the package because of the significant confusion it causes related
to light output as discussed in Section IV.A.2.b. The proposed rule
retains a less prominent watts disclosure on the Lighting Facts
label because such precise wattage information may be important to
some consumers.
\46\ Two questions (213 and 215) asked respondents to view three
bulbs and choose the one that used the least amount of energy. In
Question 213, the percentage of respondents who answered the
question correctly, grouped by front-panel energy descriptor, were:
energy cost (74.5%); stars (69.94%); and lumens per watt (50.62%).
For Question 215, the results were: energy cost (79.9%); stars
(70.42%); and lumens per watt (41.71%). Two other questions (214 and
216) asked respondents to view three bulbs and choose the one that
used the most energy. In Question 214, the percentage of respondents
who answered the question correctly, grouped by front-panel energy
descriptor, were: energy cost (71.83%); stars (67.58%); and lumens
per watt (47.68%). For Question 216, the results were: energy cost
(71.61%); stars (68.34%); and lumens per watt (48.91%). See Consumer
Research Supplement at 363-366.
\47\ For example, Question 213.1 asked respondents to view three
bulbs and choose the most energy efficient one. The percentage of
respondents who answered that question correctly, grouped by front-
panel descriptor, were: stars (81.66%); energy cost (81.09%); and
lumens per watt (63.22%). Both Questions 214.1 and 216.1 asked
respondents to choose the least efficient bulb (though each question
displayed a different set of bulbs). The percentage of respondents
who answered Question 214.1 correctly were: energy cost (77.17%);
stars (76.28%); and lumens per watt (57.91%). For Question 216.1,
the results were: stars (80.25%); energy cost (78.02%); and lumens
per watt (63.51%). The differences between the cost and star
descriptor results, however, are not statistically significant. See
Consumer Research Supplement at 367-371.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, unlike efficiency ratings, an energy cost disclosure should
help consumers avoid buying bulbs that are brighter than necessary. In
many cases, a higher energy efficiency rating for a particular bulb
equates to lower energy costs or energy use - but not always. For
example, a bright bulb with a high efficiency rating may cost much more
to operate than a dimmer bulb with a lower efficiency rating.\48\ Thus,
reliance on efficiency information alone may lead consumers, in some
cases, to purchase bulbs that are brighter than needed and thus use
more energy and pay more money than necessary. The annual energy cost
descriptor helps avoid this problem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ For example, compare the characteristics of high efficiency
bulb ``A'' to lower efficiency bulb ``B''. Bulb A= 1750 lumens, 26
watts, 67 lumens per watt, and $3.25 per year (assuming 11.4 cents
per kWh) and Bulb B= 825 lumens, 13 watts, 63 lumens per watt, and
$1.62. Therefore, bulb ``A'' has a higher efficiency rating in
lumens per watt but uses more energy and thus costs more to operate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule also allows manufacturers to place the ENERGY
STAR logo on the Lighting Facts label if the product meets ENERGY STAR
criteria. This approach is consistent with the EnergyGuide label for
appliances and allows manufacturers to place relevant information about
the product in one place.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ Manufacturers would continue to have the discretion to
place the ENERGY STAR logo elsewhere on the package consistent with
EPA's criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission is not proposing to require lumens per watt on the
Lighting Facts label. As discussed above, in the FTC label study,
respondents viewing lumens per watt information were less likely to
provide correct answers to most energy use and efficiency questions
(e.g., accurately pick the most efficient bulb) than respondents
viewing the other energy descriptors. Additionally, as discussed above,
lumens per watt information could lead consumers to choose bulbs that
are brighter than needed. Lumens per watt, however, is a common
efficiency metric used in the lighting industry and serves as the
yardstick for the DOE efficiency standards and for performance criteria
in the ENERGY STAR program. It also appears on the existing Lighting
Facts label developed by DOE under its LED program. Therefore, the
Commission seeks comment on whether lumens per watt should appear as an
energy descriptor on the Lighting Facts label either as a mandatory or
voluntary disclosure.
The Commission also is not proposing to include a five-star rating
system on the Lighting Facts Label even though the FTC's research
suggests some benefits to this approach. Specifically, respondents
viewing this descriptor were somewhat more likely to spend more for a
higher efficiency bulb; in addition, all respondents scored this
descriptor 's usefulness and trustworthiness somewhat higher than other
descriptors.\50\ However, four problems with the five-star rating
system outweigh these benefits. First, the star-system did not perform
better than energy cost in helping consumers answer the energy
questions in the label study. Second, the star system may have a
greater tendency inadvertently to communicate quality information.
Specifically, in the label study, respondents viewing the five-star
label were somewhat more likely than other respondents to say one bulb
was more reliable than the others, even though the label did not
contain information about reliability.\51\ Third, the five-star system
potentially would create confusion over time as bulb technology
changes. For instance, after 2012, the FTC would have to reconfigure
the star levels as inefficient incandescent bulbs leave the market,
which could confuse consumers. Finally, the five-star system may raise
problems in terms of its interaction with ENERGY STAR. Specifically,
respondents viewing the five-star label were more likely to identify
incorrectly a bulb as ENERGY STAR qualified even when the question
displayed no bulbs with the ENERGY STAR logo.\52\ Given these issues,
the Commission sees no compelling need to create a five level energy
efficiency rating system.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ In the FTC label study, respondents answered questions
about whether they would be willing to pay more for a higher
efficiency bulb of similar brightness (Questions 217). The
percentages of respondents willing to pay more, grouped by energy
descriptor, were: stars (73.16%); energy cost (68.65%); watts
(66.57%); and lumens per watt (65.02%). See Consumer Research
Supplement at 372-373.
The questionnaire also asked respondents who indicated they
would pay more how much they would pay for the higher efficiency
bulb (Question 218). Even though the more efficient bulb could save
over $6.00 in energy cost during the first year, and about $140 over
the entire life of the bulb, the average price that all subjects in
the various treatment groups were willing to pay were as follows, as
grouped by front-panel energy descriptor: star ($2.92); energy cost
($2.58); lumens per watt ($2.42); and watts ($2.16). The difference
between the star ($2.92) and energy cost ($2.58) willingness-to-pay
numbers is not statistically significant. See Consumer Research
Supplement at 377-378.
Respondents also scored the ``usefulness'' of various energy
descriptors (Question 220b) on a 1 to 10 scale. The average scores
were: stars (8.69); energy cost (8.53); and lumens per watt (8.21).
Additionally, on average, respondents scored the ``trustworthiness''
of the same information (Question 220c) as follows: stars (8.04);
lumens per watt (7.80); and energy cost (7.60). See Consumer
Research Supplement at 379-380.
\51\ Likewise, when asked to identify the most reliable bulb
(Question 701), respondents who viewed the star descriptor on the
front panel were somewhat less likely than respondents who viewed
other energy descriptors to provide correct responses, which were
``can't tell'' or ``not sure.'' The percentages of respondents who
correctly answered Question 701, grouped by front-panel energy
descriptor, were: energy cost (29.36%), lumens per watt (26.16%),
and stars (21.83%). See Consumer Research Supplement at 376.
\52\ Question 403 asked respondents to review three bulb labels
and identify the ENERGY STAR models. None of the models, however,
displayed the ENERGY STAR logo. The rates at which respondents
mistakenly identified at least one of the bulbs as an ENERGY STAR
were as follows, as grouped by front panel: stars (48.87%); energy
cost (37.59%); and lumens per watt (37.44%). There were no
significant differences in correct responses, however, between stars
and other treatments when the ENERGY STAR logo appeared on bulbs
(Question 402). See Consumer Research Supplement at 374-375.
\53\ This conclusion is consistent with prior Commission
consideration of the five-star rating in the context of EnergyGuide
labels for appliances. 72 FR 6836, 6844-6846 (Feb. 13, 2007). At
that time, the Commission concluded that the FTC label should
complement, not detract from, the ENERGY STAR program. The
Commission explained that the combination of the FTC label and the
ENERGY STAR program appears to provide a sound framework for
conveying energy information to consumers and promoting energy
efficiency. The FTC label displays detailed energy information about
all products regardless of energy efficiency. ENERGY STAR provides
the U.S. Government's imprimatur for high efficiency products. This
system, as a whole, provides a robust source of energy efficiency
information to consumers. The consumer research on light bulb
labeling reinforces these earlier findings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Life
Bulb life information helps consumers compare the value of
competing bulbs. For instance, if two bulbs have the same purchase
price and energy use, the longer lasting bulb provides a better value.
Bulb life information also helps consumers reduce the time spent
replacing bulbs, particularly those located in remote areas. The
current rule (Sec. 305.15(b)) requires bulb life to be expressed in
hours. However, several
[[Page 57957]]
commenters urged the Commission to consider requiring bulb life in
years.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See, e.g., NEMA (536795-00007); Philips
(536795-00015); and GE (540385-00005). Roundtable
participants appeared to be comfortable with using 3 hours as a
usage pattern for expressing life in years. Roundtable Tr. at 54.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the label study, consumers correctly identified longer lasting
bulbs whether life was expressed in years or hours. However, when asked
about the usefulness of life information (Question 208b), respondents
showed a slight preference for life in years (8.74) over life in hours
(8.31). In addition, the NRCan research noted that consumers ``find it
difficult to relate stated numbers of hours to actual experience of
bulb life'' (NRCan Labeling Survey at 14). Therefore, the Commission is
proposing to require a ``life in years'' disclosure on the Lighting
Facts label based on a usage rate of three hours per day.
d. Color Appearance
Some bulbs have a warm appearance while others have a cooler
appearance. Different color appearances are scientifically expressed as
correlated color temperature (``CCT'').\55\ While many consumers are
unfamiliar with color appearance, it may become a more important factor
for consumers as new products with a wide variety of color temperatures
increasingly become available.\56\ Several comments noted the growing
importance of color appearance and suggested the FTC include on the
label a uniform method of communicating color temperature.
Specifically, some commenters suggested the label require a consistent
set of terms for conveying color temperature (e.g., ``soft white'' or
``daylight'') (DOE (536795-00001) and NRDC (536795-
00003).\57\ Others urged consideration of a graphical approach for
color temperature such as a range (GE (536795-00005) or the
color scale system considered in earlier research funded by DOE and
EPA.\58\ Accordingly, the Commission explored three approaches for
communicating color temperature: a word descriptor (e.g., soft white
and daylight), a simple ``warm-cool'' black and white scale, and a
color scale consisting of six colored boxes.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ Light color measurements, expressed in Kelvin (``K''),
range generally from 2700K to 6500K. A bulb with lower kelvin
numbers (e.g., 2700K or 3000K) produces light that has a yellowish
appearance, such as light provided by traditional incandescent
bulbs. Bulbs with higher Kelvin numbers produce light that is whiter
(e.g., 4100K) or blueish (e.g., 6500K).
\56\ The research results suggest that consumers are generally
unfamiliar with color temperature. For example, the FTC's focus
group indicated there was little awareness of ``color'' among
respondents. And, according to the focus group report, respondents
``had no idea of how light color was measured'' and were largely
unfamiliar with the term ``color temperature'' and entirely
unfamiliar with the Kelvin scale. FTC Focus Group Report at 3.
However, after exposure to color appearance concepts in the FTC
label study, respondents on average assigned color appearance a
score of 7.6 on a 10 point scale designed to rate the importance of
particular light bulb attributes (0 = not important; 10 = very
important) (Question 211). This suggests that, once consumers become
aware of color appearance, it is an important issue.
\57\ It is common for bulb packages to provide various
descriptions of color temperature or appearance on their packages
and in marketing materials, such as ``soft white,'' ``cool white,''
and ``daylight.''
\58\ See Leslie, R., and Rea, M., ``A System for Communicating
Color: What Do Consumers Think,'' Lighting Research Center,
Rensselaer Polytechnical Institute (http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/lightingTransformation/colorCommunication/pdf/whatDoConsumersThink.pdf).
\59\ In the label study, respondents viewed three photographs of
a table lamp, each displaying a bulb with a different color
temperature. The questionnaire then asked respondents to pick the
bulb label that would provide the light displayed in each
photograph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After considering these approaches, the Commission proposes to
require a black and white warm-cool scale with a Kelvin number on the
Lighting Facts Label. In the FTC label study, a scale performed
somewhat better than word descriptors.\60\ Moreover, unlike word
descriptors, a scale provides both an empirical Kelvin measurement that
consumers can use to compare bulbs across technologies, as well as
information about whether that Kelvin rating is associated with a
``warmer'' or ``cooler'' appearance. Manufacturers would have the
discretion to non-deceptively supplement the required scale with word
descriptors elsewhere on the package or in other marketing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ Questions 209 and 210 asked respondents to match the color
appearance of several photographs to specific labels bearing color
appearance information. Of respondents who viewed a scale
communicating color appearance information, 48.30% and 43.89%
correctly answered Questions 209 and 210, respectively; whereas
30.58% and 34.47% of respondents who viewed the color appearance
word descriptor on the front panel correctly answered Questions 209
and 210, respectively. See Consumer Research Supplement at 358.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission proposes a black and white warm-cool scale, instead
of a color scale, because the former holds down costs.\61\ The color
scale, however, performed somewhat better in the label study.\62\
Therefore, the Commission seeks comment on whether the FTC should
require a scale printed in color, including any benefits of a color
scale and any costs or other burdens associated with a color scale,
particularly for small manufacturers. The Commission also seeks comment
on whether the label should use the term ``Light Appearance'' on the
label instead of ``Color Appearance'' to minimize the possibility that
consumers will interpret the label to convey information about colored
lights (e.g., red, green, etc.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ Because there is no test procedure in DOE's regulations for
measuring color temperature, the proposed rule requires
manufacturers to substantiate their CCT and color appearance claims
with competent and reliable evidence. Should DOE publish applicable
test procedures in the future, the Commission will consider amending
its rules.
\62\ Of respondents who viewed the color scale on the front
panel, 53.4% and 48.58% correctly answered Questions 209 and 210
(questions related to color appearance), respectively; whereas
46.84% and 42.54% of respondents who viewed the black and white
warm-cool scale on the front panel correctly answered Questions 209
and 210, respectively. See Consumer Research Supplement at 359.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 57958]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO09.069
Figure 3
Proposed (Left) and Alternative (Right) Color Appearance Scales\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ Color versions of these graphics are available at
www.ftc.gov/energy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. Voltage
Voltage is a measure of the electromotive force of electricity and
can affect the operation of a light bulb.\64\ For instance, for a given
bulb, the higher the voltage, the higher the light output in lumens,
the higher the wattage, and the shorter the life. In the U.S.
residential market, the voltage provided by electric utilities for
lighting purposes is primarily 120 volts. As a result, under the
current rule, manufacturers do not have to disclose the design voltage
of a bulb unless it is other than 120.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ See discussion at 59 FR 25184 (May 13, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments urged the FTC to amend this approach. Accordingly, the
amendments would maintain the current rule's requirements. If the
manufacturer must disclose voltage under the rule, because it is not
120, it must do so on the Lighting Facts panel. For 120 volt bulbs for
which no voltage disclosure is required, manufacturers may disclose
voltage voluntarily elsewhere on the package. The Commission seeks
comment on whether the voluntary disclosure of 120 volts also should be
permitted on the Lighting Facts label.
f. Mercury Disclosure
Mercury is an essential component of compact fluorescent light
bulbs (CFLs).\65\ CFLs do not release mercury when the bulbs are intact
(not broken) or in use, but they can release mercury vapor, and thus
create environmental concerns, if they break after being dropped,
roughly handled, or disposed of improperly.\66\ Therefore, two
commenters urged the FTC to consider requiring mercury disclosures for
CFL bulbs. GE (540385-00002) wrote that ``a uniform national
approach is needed for mercury content labeling'' and the FTC should
consider a consistent notice that would clearly convey mercury content.
NEMA (540385-00005) also encouraged the FTC to require a
nationwide mercury label and suggested that the FTC require the
disclosure NEMA recommends for its members (i.e., the symbol ``Hg,'' a
statement such as ``Manage in accordance with disposal laws,'' and a
link to NEMA's website ``www.lamprecycle.org'').\67\ NEMA noted that
their disclosure is consistent with state requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ Although lighting manufacturers have greatly reduced the
amount of mercury used in CFLs over the past 20 years, they have not
eliminated it. Currently, on average, CFLs contain about 5
milligrams or about 1/100th of the amount of mercury found in a
mercury fever thermometer. Therefore, CFLs can affect the
environment during disposal. See (http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/wastetypes/universal/lamps/basic.htm).
\66\ EPA provides consumers with recommendations for cleaning up
and disposing of broken bulbs to help minimize any exposure to
released mercury vapor. It also encourages consumers to recycle
burned out fluorescent bulbs rather than dispose of them in regular
household trash. According to EPA, ``[r]ecycling of burned out CFLs
is one of the best ways to help prevent the release of mercury to
the environment by keeping mercury out of landfills and
incinerators.'' See (http://epa.gov/mercury/consumerinfo.htm#cfl).
\67\ See, NEMA, ``The Labeling of Mercury Containing Lamps,
October 2004,'' (http://www.nema.org/gov/env_conscious_design/lamps/upload/Labeling%20White%20Paper%20Final%2010%2004-2.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the mercury content of CFLs, it is important for consumers to
have access to information about proper disposal and handling of these
products. Thus, the Commission proposes requiring disclosures for light
bulbs containing mercury.\68\ The proposed language would appear on the
Lighting Facts label (see Figure 4) as follows: ``Contains Mercury:
Manage in accordance with local, state, and federal disposal laws. For
more information see epa.gov/bulbrecycling or call 1-800-XXX-XXXX. Hg
[encircled].'' This language is consistent with disclosures that
already appear on many packages as a result of existing ENERGY STAR
criteria and language recommended by NEMA to its members.\69\
Accordingly, the Commission expects that most manufacturers already
provide information about mercury on their packages. In addition, as
detailed in subsection C below, the proposed amendments require a
shorter mercury disclosure on the bulbs themselves to help consumers
properly dispose of CFLs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ The EISA amendments provided the Commission with general
authority to consider ``alternative labeling approaches that will
help consumers to understand new high efficiency lamp products''
including CFLs. See 42 U.S.C. 6294(a)(2)(D)(iii)(I)(bb).
\69\ ENERGY STAR, which covers a large majority of CFLs in the
market, requires all participating manufacturers to label their
packages with:
(1) the symbol ``Hg'' within a circle;
(2) ``Lamp Contains Mercury''; and
(3) (www.epa.gov/bulbrecycling). ENERGY STAR provides
manufacturers the option of using (www.lamprecycle.org) instead of
the EPA website. NEMA recommends that its members use the following
language: ``Hg - LAMP CONTAINS MERCURY; MANAGE IN ACCORD WITH
DISPOSAL LAWS; See (www.lamprecycle.org).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unlike NEMA's disclosure, which uses the website
www.lamprecycle.org, the proposed FTC language directs consumers to
EPA's website and EPA's telephone hotline. This link would ensure that
the disclosure leads consumers to information provided by the U.S.
government. Such an approach is consistent with the FTC's alternative
fuel vehicle label which directs
[[Page 57959]]
consumers to EPA's website for information on vehicle emissions.\70\
Finally, the Commission notes that several states have issued mercury
disclosure requirements. The Commission intends for the proposed rule
to be as consistent with state requirements for mercury disclosure as
possible. Therefore, the Commission seeks comment on the impact of the
proposed labeling on existing state requirements. Further, if any
inconsistencies exist between the proposed disclosure and existing
state requirements, the Commission seeks comment on whether, how, and
why the Commission should address such inconsistencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ See 16 CFR Part 309 (Appendix A, Figure 4).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO09.070
Figure 4
Lighting Facts with Mercury Disclosure
3. Affirmative Disclosures for Energy Cost and Life Claims on Package
The Commission is concerned that consumer confusion and deception
could arise from voluntary claims on bulb packages about energy cost
savings and life that are based on different assumptions than those
used for the required disclosures. In particular, if the assumptions
behind an energy cost-related claim are different from those used for
the Lighting Facts label, consumers may have difficulty comparing
claims across products. For instance, if a manufacturer makes an energy
saving claim using a significantly higher electricity rate than the
rate used for the mandatory energy cost disclosures, consumers may be
confused or even misled regarding the energy performance of that
bulb.\71\ To address this concern, some commenters urged the Commission
to create uniform requirements for cost and life-related claims made by
manufacturers.\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ The current rule (section 350.14(b)(4)) already contains a
provision that requires manufacturers to disclose the assumptions
upon which any operating cost claim is based, including, for
example, purchase price, unit cost of electricity, hours of use, and
patterns of use.
\72\ See, e.g., NEMA 536795-00007 and NRDC
536795-00003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After considering these comments, the Commission is not proposing
to require uniform cost and life-related assumptions because it does
not appear that such claims would be deceptive in all cases. However,
the proposed rule\73\ requires manufacturers that make any energy cost-
related claim based on an electricity rate or usage rate other than the
rate required on the Lighting Facts label to make an equally
conspicuous disclosure calculated using the required electricity
rate.\74\ This approach should ensure that consumers can easily compare
voluntary energy cost-related claims across products. The same
rationale also applies to life claims. Specifically, if a manufacturer
provides any life claim based on an annual usage rate other than the
rate required on the label, the manufacturer also must provide, equally
conspicuously, the bulb life calculated with the usage rate required on
the Lighting Facts label (i.e., 3 hours per day).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ Proposed section 305.15(c)(4).
\74\ The FTC's Guide Concerning Fuel Economy Advertising for New
Automobiles follows a similar approach for mileage claims based on
non-EPA test procedures. See 16 CFR 259.2(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Total Lifecycle Cost (Not Proposed for Label)
The EISA amendments directed the Commission to consider total
lifecycle cost disclosures in developing alternative labeling
approaches.\75\ After consideration, the Commission has decided not to
propose such a requirement. Several participants at the Roundtable
suggested that the numerous potential criteria related to assessing
lifecycle cost make attaining an accurate, uniform measurement
problematic at this time. For example, one participant explained that
different retail prices, alone, severely impede any effort to
accurately communicate a useful disclosure of total lifecycle cost
(Roundtable Tr., Horowitz at 50). Another participant explained that
differences in disposal costs similarly hamper efforts to present an
accurate measurement.\76\ Given these concerns and the absence of
comments urging the Commission to explore this issue in detail, the
proposed amendments do not require total lifecycle cost disclosures
[[Page 57960]]
on the label. However, if manufacturers and other sellers make
advertising claims related to lifecycle costs, they must have competent
and reliable scientific evidence to support such claims.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\75\ See 42 U.S.C. 6294(a)(2)(D)(iii)(I)(bb).
\76\ Roundtable Tr. 58 (Karney); see also Roundtable Tr. at 59
and NEMA Comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Color Rendering Index (Not Proposed for Label)
The color rendering index (``CRI'') measures how the colors of an
object look when the object is illuminated by a particular bulb using a
rating of 0 to 100.\77\ A standard incandescent bulb has a CRI of 100.
In the ANPR and at the Roundtable, the FTC sought comments about the
inclusion of CRI on the required labels. Commenters explained there is
no need for mandatory CRI disclosures because EISA sets a minimum CRI
standard of 80 for all bulbs beginning in 2012 and distinctions between
the CRIs of bulbs at such high ratings are not significant enough to
warrant mandatory disclosures.\78\ Therefore, the Commission is not
proposing to require such a disclosure, but seeks comment on whether
the rule should allow manufacturers to place CRI information on the
proposed Lighting Facts label.\79\ The Commission seeks comment on what
benefits and costs such voluntary information would provide to
consumers, as well as on whether consumers will understand its meaning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ Under the current law (EPCA), the term ``color rendering
index'' or ``CRI'' means ``the measure of the degree of color shift
objects undergo when illuminated by a light source as compared with
the color of those same objects when illuminated by a reference
source of comparable color temperature.'' (42 U.S.C. 6291(30)(J)).
\78\ See Roundtable Tr., Horowitz at 91 (``Within the lighting
industry, it's assumed if you're 80, you're giving at least pretty
good color rendering.''); Howley at 100. See 42 U.S.C.
6295(i)(B)(ii).
\79\ Several commenters, however, did suggest that CRI should be
allowed as a voluntary disclosure. NRDC (540385-00003); and
Roundtable Tr., Horowitz at 83; Karney at 100; Howley at 100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Product Labeling
In addition to the proposed package labeling requirements, some
commenters suggested that the FTC require manufacturers to include
light output on the bulb itself. For example, NRDC (536795-
00003) explained that ``[p]utting the light output directly on the bulb
will help the consumer when they need to replace the existing bulb when
it fails.'' NRDC also indicated that manufacturers already disclose a
bulb's energy use in watts on the glass and that it should not be
difficult also to include lumens information. Similarly, Energy
Solutions (536795-00010) stated that lumens information on the
bulb will ``ensure that consumers can find a product of equivalent
light output when returning to the store to replace a burned out
bulb.''
The Commission agrees that having lumens information on the bulb
should help consumers in purchasing appropriate replacement bulbs. It
also should reinforce the importance of lumens as the key measure of
light output for high efficiency bulbs. Because bulbs already typically
display information such as watts, the addition of lumens should not
impose a significant burden on manufacturers so long as they are given
sufficient time to implement such changes. Therefore, the proposed rule
requires that bulbs be labeled with lumens.
As discussed above, the proposed rule also requires manufacturers
of mercury-containing lamps to print somewhere on the product itself
the following information: ``Contains MERCURY. See epa.gov/bulbrecycling or 1-800-XXX-XXXX.'' Because it is highly unlikely
consumers will have the package available to them when a bulb burns
out, mercury information on the bulb itself will be useful to them at
the time of disposal.\80\ The Commission seeks comment on these
proposals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ The FTC's current labeling requirements apply to the bulb
package and not the product itself (see 42 U.S.C. 6294(a)(2)(C)). In
passing EISA, however, Congress directed the Commission to consider
``alternative labeling approaches.'' This broad directive provides
the Commission with authority to consider requiring labeling on the
bulb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Reporting Requirements
EPCA indicates that each manufacturer of a labeled product ``shall
annually, at a time specified by the Commission,'' supply to the
Commission relevant data respecting energy consumption or water use
developed in accordance with ``applicable DOE test procedures.''\81\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\81\ 42 U.S.C. 4296(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission's current rule does not require such reporting
because the Commission stayed the reporting requirement (section 305.8)
for lighting products in 1994 due to the absence of a DOE test
procedure. See 59 FR 25176, 25201-25202 (May 13, 1994). Since then, DOE
has issued test procedures for general service incandescent lamps and
medium base compact fluorescent lamps (see 10 CFR Subpart B, App. R and
W). Accordingly, the Commission now proposes requiring energy data
reporting for CFL and incandescent lighting products.\82\ To minimize
burden, the proposed rule requires these reports beginning in 2012 to
coincide with the effective date of DOE standards (which will require
the same testing). The reports will be due on March 1 of each year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ In conjunction with lifting the stay on reporting
requirements for CFLs and general service incandescent lamps, the
Commission proposes to amend the testing provisions in section 305.5
to make them consistent with DOE test procedures in 10 CFR Part 430
covering general service incandescent lamps, general service
fluorescent lamps, and medium base CFLs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission seeks comments on whether the specific reporting
requirements, which are currently stayed, should be modified. The
current rule indicates that annual reports for CFLs and incandescent
lamps should include: (1) the name and address of the manufacturer; (2)
all trade names under which the lamps are marketed; (3) the model or
other identification numbers; (4) the starting serial number, date
code, or other means of identifying the date of manufacture (date of
manufacture information must be included only with the first submission
for each basic model or type); and (5) the test results for the wattage
and light output ratings of each lamp model or type, and for each model
or type of covered fluorescent lamp, test results for the color
rendering index, measured according to the DOE test procedure.\83\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ The DOE tests currently do not include procedures for
measuring correlated color temperature. Therefore, consistent with
42 U.S.C.6296(b), the proposed rule would not require reporting for
such information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Website and Paper Catalog Requirements
Section 305.20 of the current rule requires any manufacturer,
distributor, retailer, or private labeler who advertises a covered
product in a catalog, including a website that qualifies as a catalog,
to disclose energy information about the product to consumers. For lamp
products, the current rule (section 305.20(c)) requires catalog sellers
to disclose the information that is required on the package label
(except for the number of units in the package).\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ EPCA indicates that catalogs must ``contain all information
required to be displayed on the label, except as otherwise provided
by the rule of the Commission.'' (42 U.S.C. 6296(a)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule requires website and paper catalog sellers to
disclose the same information that appears on the proposed Lighting
Facts label.\85\ This requirement should ensure that online consumers
have the same information available in stores. To encourage uniform
disclosures and reduce burden on catalog sellers, the proposed rule
would allow catalog sellers to comply
[[Page 57961]]
with the rule by posting the manufacturer's Lighting Facts label for
each covered lamp model. The rule currently allows this approach for
appliances (see section 305.20(a)). The Commission seeks comments on
this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\85\ The Commission is not proposing to require the same two-
panel disclosure for websites or catalogs that is being proposed for
product packages. Although the two-panel format will be helpful for
consumers examining physical packages in stores, the format is
likely to be repetitive and cumbersome for consumers navigating
information on the internet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. Consumer Education
Section 321(c) of EISA directs the Department of Energy, in
cooperation with the FTC and other agencies, to conduct a proactive
national program of ``consumer awareness, information, and education''
to help consumers understand light bulb labels and make energy-
efficient lighting choices that meet their needs. In response, the
Commission is considering ways to communicate general consumer guidance
that does not fit easily on the average lamp package. In particular,
such education material could include a detailed watt-equivalence scale
as suggested in comments (e.g., NRDC (536795-00003)) and a
detailed color temperature scale similar to that considered in NRCan's
research and currently used under the Department of Energy's solid-
state lighting program.\86\ Figure 5 contains a draft of such
information. The Commission seeks comments on such an approach, how
such information should be presented, and whether there is additional
information that can be provided to consumers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\86\ See http://www.lighting-facts.com/.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO09.071
Figure 5
Sample Graphs for Consumer Education Materials\87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\87\ Color versions of these graphics are available at
www.ftc.gov/energy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VIII. Section by Section Description of Proposed Changes
Lamp Coverage (section 305.3): The proposed labeling requirements
apply to medium screw base general service incandescent (including
halogen and reflector), compact fluorescent, and LED lamps. The
proposed amendments group these products under the term ``general
service lamp.''
Front Package Panel (section 305.15(b) & (c)): The proposed
amendments require two disclosures on the front package panel:
brightness in lumens and energy cost in dollars per year.
Rear or Side Package Panel (section 305.15(b) & (c)): The back (or
side) panel contains detailed disclosures in the form of a Lighting
Facts label similar to the Nutrition Facts label required on food
packaging. The disclosures on the Lighting Facts label would detail
brightness, energy cost, life, color temperature, watts, and, in some
cases, voltage, and mercury information. Cost and Life Claims on
Packages (section 305.15(c)): Manufacturers that make a cost or life-
related claim on the package based on an electricity cost figure or
usage rate other than that required on the Lighting Facts label have to
include an equally clear and conspicuous disclosure of the same
information using the electricity cost figure and usage assumption on
the Lighting Facts label.
Product Labeling (section 305.15(b)): The proposed amendments
require manufacturers to print the lumen output and, where applicable,
mercury information on the product.
Catalog Requirements (section 305.20): Catalog sellers (including
websites) have to provide, for each bulb, the same information required
on the Lighting Facts label.
[[Page 57962]]
Substantiating Required Disclosures (section 305.5): Effective
January 1, 2012, the proposed amendments require manufacturers to
follow DOE test procedures if such procedures are applicable to their
products to substantiate claims required by the rule. For lamp types or
information not covered by the DOE test procedure but required by the
rule, manufacturers would have to possess and rely upon competent and
reliable scientific tests to substantiate their representations on the
label.
Testing, Reporting, and Sampling Requirements (section 305.5,
305.6, and 305.8): Beginning in 2012, manufacturers would have to
submit data for their labeled lamps based on applicable DOE test
procedures. The amendments also contain a minor change to the terms
used in the sampling requirements.
IX. Request for Comment
The Commission invites interested persons to submit written
comments on any issue of fact, law, or policy that may bear upon the
Commission's lamp labeling requirements. These issues include the
overall effectiveness of existing disclosures on lamp labels,
alternative labeling disclosures, and the labeling of lamp types not
currently covered by the rule. Please provide explanations for your
answers and supporting evidence where appropriate.
All comments should be filed as prescribed below, and must be
received on or before December 28, 2009. In addition to the questions
and requests for comment found throughout this Notice, the Commission
also asks that commenters address the following questions: What costs
or burdens, and any other impacts, would the proposed requirements
impose, and on whom? What regulatory alternatives to the proposed
requirements are available that would reduce the burdens and/or
increase the benefits of the proposed requirements?
Interested parties are invited to submit written comments
electronically or in paper form. Comments should refer to ``Proposed
Lamp Labeling Amendments, P084206'' to facilitate the organization of
comments. Please note that your comment - including your name and your
state - will be placed on the public record of this proceeding,
including on the publicly accessible FTC website, at (http://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm).
Because comments will be made public, they should not include any
sensitive personal information, such as any individual's Social
Security Number; date of birth; driver's license number or other state
identification number, or foreign country equivalent; passport number;
financial account number; or credit or debit card number. Comments also
should not include any sensitive health information, such as medical
records or other individually identifiable health information. In
addition, comments should not include ``[t]rade secret or any
commercial or financial information which is obtained from any person
and which is privileged or confidential'' as provided in Section 6(f)
of the Federal Trade Commission Act (``FTC Act''), 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and
FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2). Comments containing matter for
which confidential treatment is requested must be filed in paper form,
must be clearly labeled ``Confidential,'' and must comply with FTC Rule
4.9(c).\88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ The comment must be accompanied by an explicit request for
confidential treatment, including the factual and legal basis for
the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment
to be withheld from the public record. The request will be granted
or denied by the Commission's General Counsel, consistent with
applicable law and the public interest. See FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR
Sec. 4.9.(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because paper mail addressed to the FTC is subject to delay due to
heightened security screening, please consider submitting your comments
in electronic form. Comments filed in electronic form should be
submitted using the following weblink: (https://public.commentworks.com/ftc/lampamendmentsNPRM) (and following the
instructions on the web-based form). To ensure that the Commission
considers an electronic comment, you must file it on the web-based form
at the weblink (https://public.commentworks.com/ftc/lampamendmentsNPRM). If this Notice appears at (http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#home), you may also file an
electronic comment through that website. The Commission will consider
all comments that regulations.gov forwards to it. You may also visit
the FTC Website at (http://www.ftc.gov) to read the Notice and the news
release describing it.
A comment filed in paper form should include the ``Proposed Lamp
Labeling Amendments, P084206'' reference both in the text and on the
envelope, and should be mailed or delivered to the following address:
Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-135 (Annex
N), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is
requesting that any comment filed in paper form be sent by courier or
overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the
Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to
heightened security precautions.
Comments on any proposed filing, recordkeeping, or disclosure
requirements that are subject to the paperwork burden review under the
Paperwork Reduction Act should additionally be submitted to: Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget
(``OMB''), Attention: Desk Officer for Federal Trade Commission.
Comments should submitted via facsimile to (202) 395-5167 because U.S.
postal mail at the OMB is subject to delays due to heightened security
precautions.
The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit
the collection of public comments to consider and use in this
proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and
responsive public comments that it receives, whether filed in paper or
electronic form. Comments received will be available to the public on
the FTC website, to the extent practicable, at (http://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm). As a matter of discretion, the FTC makes every
effort to remove home contact information for individuals from the
public comments it receives before placing those comments on the FTC
website. More information, including routine uses permitted by the
Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC's privacy policy, at (http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm).
Because written comments appear adequate to present the views of
all interested parties, the Commission has not scheduled an oral
hearing regarding these proposed amendments. Interested parties may
request an opportunity to present views orally. If such a request is
made, the Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register
stating the time and place for such oral presentation(s) and describing
the procedures that will be followed. Interested parties who wish to
present oral views must submit a hearing request, on or before November
30, 2009, in the form of a written comment that describes the issues on
which the party wishes to speak. If there is no oral hearing, the
Commission will base its decision on the written rulemaking record.
X. Communications by Outside Parties to the Commissioners or Their
Advisors
Written communications and summaries or transcripts of oral
communications respecting the merits of this proceeding, from any
outside party to any Commissioner or Commissioner's advisor, will be
placed
[[Page 57963]]
on the public record. See 16 CFR 1.26(b)(5).
XI. Paperwork Reduction Act
The rule contains disclosure requirements that constitute
``information collection requirements'' as defined by 5 CFR Sec.
1320.7(c), the regulation that implements the Paperwork Reduction Act
(``PRA'').\89\ OMB has approved the rule's existing information
collection requirements through May 31, 2011 (OMB Control No. 3084-
0069). The proposed amendments make changes in the current rule's
labeling requirements.\90\ Accordingly, the Commission has submitted
this proposed rule and a Supporting Statement to OMB for review under
the PRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\89\ 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521.
\90\ Although the current reporting requirements in the rule for
these products is currently stayed (as discussed in section IV.D. of
this notice), the existing PRA clearance for the rule's information
collection requirements includes burdens associated with those
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burden estimates for the proposed rule are based on data previously
submitted by manufacturers to the FTC under the Rule's existing
requirements and on the staff's general knowledge of manufacturing
practices.
Package and Product Labeling: The proposed rule requires
manufacturers to change their light bulb packages and light bulbs to
include new disclosures. The new requirements would require a one-time
change for manufacturers. The Commission estimates that this one-time
change will take 80 hours per manufacturer. Annualized for a single
year reflective of a prospective 3-year clearance, this averages to
26.67 hours per year. Therefore, the label design change will result in
cumulative burden of 1,334 hours (50 manufacturers x 26.67 hours). In
estimating the associated labor cost, the Commission assumes that the
label design change will be implemented by graphic designers at an
hourly wage rate of $22.70 per hour based on Bureau of Labor Statistics
information.\91\ Thus, the Commission estimates labor cost for this new
label design change will total $30,282 (1,334 hours x $22.70 per hour).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\91\ See (http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ncswage2008.htm#Wage_Tables)
(National Compensation Survey: Occupational Earnings in the United
States 2008, U.S. Department of Labor (August 2009), Bulletin
272004, Table 3 (``Full-time civilian workers,'' mean and median
hourly wages), at 3-12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Color Temperature: The proposed rule may require additional testing
for correlated color temperature, if such testing has not already been
conducted in the normal course of business. Although the Commission
expects that many manufacturers conduct such testing for other purposes
(e.g., ENERGY STAR criteria), the Commission assumes, based on past
estimates of basic models, that manufacturers will have to test 2,100
basic models at 0.5 hours for each model for a total of 1,050 hours. In
calculating the associated labor cost estimate, the Commission assumes
that the label design change will be implemented by electrical
engineers at an hourly wage rate of $39.79 per hour based on Bureau of
Labor Statistics information (see footnote 90). Thus, the Commission
estimates that the new label design change will result in associated
labor cost of approximately $41,780 (1,050 hours x $39.79 per hour).
Accordingly, the estimated total burden of the proposed amendments
is 2,384 hours (1,334 hours for packaging and labeling + 1,050 hours
for additional testing for correlated color temperature).
The Commission invites comments that will enable it to: (1)
evaluate whether the proposed collections of information are necessary
for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission,
including whether the information will have practical utility; (2)
evaluate the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collections of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) minimize the burden
of the collections of information on those who must comply, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological techniques or other forms of information
technology.
XII. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA''), 5 U.S.C. 601-612,
requires that the Commission provide an Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (``IRFA'') with a proposed rule and a Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (``FRFA''), if any, with the final rule, unless
the Commission certifies that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. See 5 U.S.C.
603-605.
The Commission does not anticipate that the proposed rule will have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The Commission recognizes that some of the affected
manufacturers may qualify as small businesses under the relevant
thresholds. However, the Commission does not expect that the economic
impact of the proposed amendments will be significant. In any event, to
minimize any burden, the Commission plans to provide manufacturers with
ample time to implement the proposed changes.
The Commission estimates that these new requirements will apply to
about 50 product manufacturers and an additional 150 online and paper
catalog sellers of covered products. The Commission expects that
approximately 150 qualify as small businesses.
Accordingly, this document serves as notice to the Small Business
Administration of the FTC's certification of no effect. To ensure the
accuracy of this certification, however, the Commission requests
comment on whether the proposed rule will have a significant impact on
a substantial number of small entities, including specific information
on the number of entities that would be covered by the proposed rule,
the number of these companies that are ``small entities,'' and the
average annual burden for each entity. Although the Commission
certifies under the RFA that the rule proposed in this notice would
not, if promulgated, have a significant impact on a substantial number
of small entities, the Commission has determined, nonetheless, that it
is appropriate to publish an IRFA in order to inquire into the impact
of the proposed rule on small entities. Therefore, the Commission has
prepared the following analysis:
A. Description of the Reasons That Action by the Agency Is Being Taken
Section 321(b) of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
(Pub. L. 110-140) requires the Commission to conduct a rulemaking to
consider the effectiveness of the lamp labeling and to consider
alternative labeling approaches.
B. Statement of the Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the Proposed
Rule
The objective of the proposed rule is to improve the effectiveness
of the current lamp labeling program. EISA directs the Commission to
consider whether alternative labeling approaches would help consumers
better understand new high-efficiency lamp products and help them
choose lamps that meet their needs. In particular, the law directs the
Commission to consider labeling disclosures that address consumer needs
for information about lighting level, light quality, lamp lifetime, and
total lifecycle cost. The
[[Page 57964]]
Commission must complete this effort by June of 2010.\92\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\92\ Section 321(b) of EISA (42 U.S.C. 6294(a)(2)(D)) also gives
the Commission the discretion to ``consider reopening the rulemaking
not later than 180 days before the [statutorily mandated] effective
dates of the standards for general service incandescent lamps
established under section 325(i)(1)(A) [and implemented by DOE], if
the Commission determines that further labeling changes are needed
to help consumers understand lamp alternatives.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Small Entities to Which the Proposed Rule Will Apply
Under the Small Business Size Standards issued by the Small
Business Administration, lamp manufacturers qualify as small businesses
if they have fewer than 1,000 employees (for other household appliances
the figure is 500 employees). Lamp catalog sellers qualify as small
businesses if their sales are less than $8.0 million annually. The
Commission estimates that there are approximately 150 entities subject
to the proposed rule's requirements qualify as small businesses. The
Commission seeks comment and information with regard to the estimated
number or nature of small business entities for which the proposed rule
would have a significant economic impact
D. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance Requirements
The Commission recognizes that the proposed labeling rule will
involve some increased drafting costs and reporting requirements for
appliance manufacturers. As discussed in this notice, the increase
reporting burden should be de minimis. The transition to the use of a
new label design should represent a one-time cost that will not be
substantial. The Commission does not expect that the labeling
requirements will impose significant additional costs on catalog
sellers. All of these burdens are discussed in Section XI of this
notice and there should be no difference in that burden as applied to
small businesses. The Commission invites comment and information on
these issues.
E. Duplicative, Overlapping, or Conflicting Federal Rules
The Commission has not identified any other federal statutes,
rules, or policies that would duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
proposed rule. The Commission invites comment and information on this
issue.
F. Significant Alternatives to the Proposed Rule
The Commission seeks comment and information on the need, if any,
for alternative compliance methods that, consistent with the statutory
requirements, would reduce the economic impact of the rule on small
entities. As one alternative to reduce the burden, the Commission could
delay the rule's effective date to provide additional time for small
business compliance. The Commission could also consider further
reductions in the amount of information catalog sellers must provide.
If the comments filed in response to this notice identify small
entities that are affected by the rule, as well as alternative methods
of compliance that would reduce the economic impact of the rule on such
entities, the Commission will consider the feasibility of such
alternatives and determine whether they should be incorporated into the
final rule.
XIII. Proposed Rule Language
List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 305
Advertising, Energy conservation, Household appliances, Labeling,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out above, the Commission proposes the
following amendments to 16 CFR Part 305:
PART 305--RULE CONCERNING DISCLOSURES REGARDING ENERGY CONSUMPTION
AND WATER USE OF CERTAIN HOME APPLIANCES AND OTHER PRODUCTS
REQUIRED UNDER THE ENERGY POLICY AND CONSERVATION ACT (``APPLIANCE
LABELING RULE'')
1. The authority citation for Part 305 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6294.
2. In Sec. 305.3, paragraphs (l) and (m) are revised, paragraphs
(n), (o), (p), (q), (r), (s), and (t) are redesignated as (r), (s),
(t), (u), (v), (w), and (x) respectively, and new paragraphs (n), (o),
(p), and (q) are added to read as follows:
Sec. 305.3 Description of covered products.
* * * * *
(l) General service lamp means:
(1) A lamp that is:
(i) A general service incandescent lamp;
(ii) A medium base compact fluorescent lamp;
(iii) A general service light-emitting diode (LED or OLED) lamp; or
(iv) Any other lamp that the Secretary of Energy determines is used
to satisfy lighting applications traditionally served by general
service incandescent lamps.
(2) Exclusions. The term general service lamp does not include--
(i) Any lighting application or bulb shape described in paragraphs
(n)(3)(A) through (T) of this section; and(ii) any general service
fluorescent lamp.
(m) Medium base compact fluorescent lamp means an integrally
ballasted fluorescent lamp with a medium screw base, a rated input
voltage range of 115 to 130 volts and which is designed as direct
replacement for a general service incandescent lamp; however, the term
does not include--
(1) Any lamp that is--
(i) Specifically designed to be used for special purpose
applications; and
(ii) Unlikely to be used in general purpose applications, such as
the applications described in the definition of ``General Service
Incandescent Lamp'' in this paragraph (n)(3)(ii) of this section; or
(2) Any lamp not described in the definition of ``General Service
Incandescent Lamp'' in this section that is excluded by the Department
of Energy, by rule, because the lamp is--
(i) Designed for special applications; and
(ii) Unlikely to be used in general purpose applications.
(n) Incandescent lamp: (1) Means a lamp in which light is produced
by a filament heated to incandescence by an electric current, including
only the following:
(i) Any lamp (commonly referred to as lower wattage nonreflector
general service lamps, including any tungsten-halogen lamp) that has a
rated wattage between 30 and 199 watts, has an E26 medium screw base,
has a rated voltage or voltage range that lies at least partially
within 115 and 130 volts, and is not a reflector lamp;
(ii) Any lamp (commonly referred to as a reflector lamp) which is
not colored or designed for rough or vibration service applications,
that contains an inner reflective coating on the outer bulb to direct
the light, an R, PAR, or similar bulb shapes (excluding ER or BR) with
E26 medium screw bases, a rated voltage or voltage range that lies at
least partially within 115 and 130 volts, a diameter which exceeds 2.75
inches, and is either--
(A) A low(er) wattage reflector lamp which has a rated wattage
between 40 and 205 watts; or
(B) A high(er) wattage reflector lamp which has a rated wattage
above 205 watts;
(iii) Any general service incandescent lamp (commonly referred to
as a high- or higher-wattage lamp) that has a rated wattage above 199
watts (above 205 watts for a high wattage reflector lamp); but
(2) Incandescent lamp does not mean any lamp excluded by the
Secretary of Energy, by rule, as a result of a
[[Page 57965]]
determination that standards for such lamp would not result in
significant energy savings because such lamp is designed for special
applications or has special characteristics not available in reasonably
substitutable lamp types; and
(3) General service incandescent lamp means
(i) In general, a standard incandescent or halogen type or
reflector lamp that--
(A) Is intended for general service applications;
(B) Has a medium screw base;
(C) Has a lumen range of not less than 310 lumens and not more than
2,600 lumens; and
(D) Is capable of being operated at a voltage range at least
partially within 110 and 130 volts.
(ii) Exclusions.--The term `general service incandescent lamp' does
not include the following incandescent lamps:
(A) An appliance lamp as defined at 42 U.S.C. 6291(30);
(B) A black light lamp;
(C) A bug lamp;
(D) A colored lamp as defined at 42 U.S.C. 6291(30);
(E) An infrared lamp;
(F) A left-hand thread lamp;
(G) A marine lamp;
(H) A marine signal service lamp;
(I) A mine service lamp;
(J) A plant light lamp;
(K) A rough service lamp as defined at 42 U.S.C. 6291(30));
(L) A shatter-resistant lamp (including a shatter-proof lamp and a
shatter-protected lamp);
(M) A sign service lamp;
(N) A silver bowl lamp;
(O) A showcase lamp;
(P) A traffic signal lamp;
(Q) A vibration service lamp as defined at 42 U.S.C. 6291(30);
(R) A G shape lamp (as defined in ANSI C78.20-2003 and C79.1-2002)
with a diameter of 5 inches or more;
(S) A T shape lamp (as defined in ANSI C78.20-2003 and C79.1-2002)
and that uses not more than 40 watts or has a length of more than 10
inches; or
(T) A B, BA, CA, F, G16-1/2, G-25, G30, S, or M-14 lamp (as defined
in ANSI C79.1-2002 and ANSI C78.20-2003) of 40 watts or less.
(4) Incandescent reflector lamp means a lamp described in paragraph
(n)(1)(ii) of this section; and
(5) Tungsten-halogen lamp means a gas-filled tungsten filament
incandescent lamp containing a certain proportion of halogens in an
inert gas.
(o) Light-emitting diode (LED) means a p-n junction solid state
device the radiated output of which is a function of the physical
construction, material used, and exciting current of the device. The
output of a light-emitting diode may be in--
(1) The infrared region;
(2) The visible region; or
(3) The ultraviolet region.
(p) Organic light-emitting diode (OLED) means a thin-film light-
emitting device that typically consists of a series of organic layers
between 2 electrical contacts (electrodes).
(q) General service light-emitting diode (LED or OLED) lamps means
any light-emitting diode (LED or OLED) lamp that:
(1) Is intended for general service applications;
(2) Has a medium screw base;
(3) Has a lumen range of not less than 310 lumens and not more than
2,600 lumens; and
(4) Is capable of being operated at a voltage range at least
partially within 110 and 130 volts.
3. In Sec. 305.5, paragraphs (a)(12), (13), and (14) are added and
paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:
Testing
Sec. 305.5 Determinations of estimated annual energy consumption,
estimated annual operating cost, and energy efficiency rating, and of
water use rate.
(a) * * *
(12) General Service Incandescent Lamps - Sec. 420.23(r)
(Beginning Jan. 1, 2012).
(13) General Service Fluorescent Lamps - Sec. 420.23(r) (Beginning
Jan. 1, 2012).
(14) Medium Base Compact Fluorescent Lamps - Sec. 420.23(w)
(Beginning Jan. 1, 2012).
(b) Unless otherwise provided in paragraph (a), manufacturers and
private labelers of any covered product that is a general service
fluorescent lamp, general service lamp, or metal halide lamp fixture,
must, for any representation required by this Part including but not
limited to of the design voltage, wattage, energy cost, light output,
life, correlated color temperature, or color rendering index of such
lamp or for any representation made by the encircled ``E'' that such a
lamp is in compliance with an applicable standard established by
section 325 of the Act, possess and rely upon a reasonable basis
consisting of competent and reliable scientific tests substantiating
the representation. For representations of the light output and life
ratings of any covered product that is a general service lamp, unless
otherwise provided by paragraph (a), the Commission will accept as a
reasonable basis scientific tests conducted according to the following
applicable IES test protocols that substantiate the representations:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For measuring light output (in
lumens):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Service Fluorescent IES LM 9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compact Fluorescent IES LM 66
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Service Incandescent (Other IES LM 45
than Reflector Lamps)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Service Incandescent IES LM 20
(Reflector Lamps)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For measuring laboratory life (in IES LM 40
hours): General Service
Fluorescent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compact Fluorescent IES LM 65
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Service Incandescent (Other IES LM 49
than Reflector Lamps)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Service Incandescent IES LM 49
(Reflector Lamps)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
4. Section 305.6 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 305.6 Sampling.
(a) For any covered product (except general service fluorescent
lamps or general service lamps), any representation with respect to or
based upon a measure or measures of energy consumption incorporated
into Sec. 305.5 shall be based upon the sampling procedures set forth
in Sec. 430.24 of 10 CFR part 430, subpart B.
(b) For any covered product that is a general service lamp, any
representation required by Sec. 305.15 and, for any covered product
that is a general service fluorescent lamp or incandescent reflector
lamp, any representation made by the encircled ``E'' that such lamp is
in compliance with an applicable standard established by section 325 of
the Act, shall be based upon tests using a competent and reliable
scientific sampling procedure. The Commission will accept ``Military
Standard 105--Sampling Procedures and Tables for Inspection by
Attributes'' as such a sampling procedure.
5. Section 305.8 is amended as follows:
a. In paragraph (a)(1), remove the phrase ``medium base compact
fluorescent lamps or general service incandescent lamps including,
incandescent reflector lamps'' wherever
[[Page 57966]]
it appears and add in its place ``and general service lamps;''
b. In paragraph (a)(3), remove the phrase ``medium base compact
fluorescent lamp, or general service incandescent lamp (including an
incandescent reflector lamp)'' wherever it appears and add in its place
``and general service lamps.''
c. Revise paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 305.8 Submission of data.
* * * * *
(b)(1) All data required by Sec. 305.8(a) except serial numbers
shall be submitted to the Commission annually, on or before the
following dates:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Product category Deadline for data submission
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Refrigerators Aug. 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Refrigerators-freezers Aug. 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freezers Aug. 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Central air conditioners July 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heat pumps July 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dishwashers June 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water heaters May 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Room air conditioners May 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furnaces May 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pool heaters May 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clothes washers Oct. 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fluorescent lamp ballasts Mar. 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Showerheads Mar. 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Faucets Mar. 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Water closets Mar. 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ceiling fans Mar. 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Urinals Mar. 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metal halide lamp fixtures Sept. 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Service Fluorescent lamps Mar. 1 (beginning 2012)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medium Base Compact Fluorescent Lamps Mar. 1 (beginning 2012)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Service Incandescent Lamps Mar. 1 (beginning 2012)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
6. Section 305.15 is amended as follows:
a. Paragraph (c) is redesignated as paragraph (e).
b. Paragraphs (b) is revised and paragraphs (c) and (d) are added
to read as follows:
Sec. 305.15 Labeling for lighting products.
* * * * *
(b) General Service Lamps -- (1) Principal Display Panel Content:
Any covered product that is a general service lamp shall be labeled
clearly and conspicuously on the product's principal display panel with
the following information:
(i) The light output of each lamp included in the package,
expressed as ``Brightness'' in average initial lumens; and
(ii) The estimated annual energy cost of the lamp, expressed as
``Estimated Energy Cost'' in dollars and based on usage of 3 hours per
day and 11.4 cents ($0.114) per kWh.
(2) Principal Panel Format: The light output (brightness) and
energy cost of any covered product that is a general service lamp shall
appear in that order and with equal clarity and conspicuousness on the
product's principal display panel. The format, terms, specifications,
and minimum sizes shall follow the specifications and minimum sizes
displayed in Prototype Label 5 to Appendix L.
(3) Lighting Facts Label Content: Any covered product that is a
general service lamp shall be labeled clearly and conspicuously on the
product's side or rear display panel with a Lighting Facts label that
contains the following information in the following order:
(i) The light output of each lamp included in the package,
expressed as ``Brightness'' in average initial lumens.
(ii) The estimated annual energy cost of the lamp based on the
average initial wattage, a usage rate of 3 hours per day and 11.4 cents
($0.114) per kWh and explanatory text as illustrated in Prototype
Labels 6 and 7 to Appendix L.
(iii) The life, as defined in Sec. 305.2(w), of each lamp included
in the package, expressed in years (based on 3 hours operation per
day).
(iv) The correlated color temperature, as measured in degrees
Kelvin and expressed as ``Color Appearance'' and by a number and a
marker in the form of a scale as illustrated in Prototype Labels 6 and
7 to Appendix L placed proportionately on the scale where the left end
equals 2,600 K and the right end equals 6,600 K;
(v) The wattage, as defined in Sec. 305.2(hh), for each lamp
included in the package, expressed as energy used in average initial
wattage;
(vi) The ENERGY STAR logo as illustrated in Prototype Label 7 to
Appendix L for qualified products, if desired by the manufacturer. Only
manufacturers that have signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the
Department of Energy or the Environmental Protection Agency may add the
ENERGY STAR logo to labels on qualifying covered products; such
manufacturers may add the ENERGY STAR logo to labels only on those
products that are covered by the Memorandum of Understanding.
(vii) The design voltage of each lamp included in the package, if
other than 120 volts.
(viii) For any general service lamp containing mercury, the
following statement: Contains Mercury ``Hg [Encircled]: Manage in
accordance with local, state, and federal disposal laws. For
information: epa.gov/bulbrecycling or 1-800-XXX-XXXX.''
(ix) No marks or information other than that specified in this part
shall appear on the Lighting Facts label.
(4) Lighting Facts Label Format: Information specified in
subsection (b)(3) shall be presented on covered lamp packages in the
format, terms, explanatory text, specifications, and minimum sizes as
shown in Prototype Labels 6 and 7 to Appendix L. The text and lines
shall be all black or one color type, printed on a white or other
neutral contrasting background whenever practical.
(i) The Lighting Facts information shall be set off in a box by use
of hairlines and shall be all black or one color type, printed on a
white or other neutral contrasting background whenever practical.
(ii) All information within the Lighting Facts label shall utilize:
(A) Arial or an equivalent type style,
(B) Upper and lower case letters,
(C) Leading as indicated in Prototype Labels 6 and 7 to Appendix L,
(D) Letters should never touch,
(E) The box and hairlines separating information as illustrated in
Prototype Labels 6 and 7 to Appendix L.
(F) The minimum font sizes and line thicknesses as illustrated in
Prototype Labels 6 and 7 to Appendix L. No information on the Lighting
Facts label shall be in type smaller than 6 point.
(5) Product Labeling: Any general service lamp shall be labeled
legibly on the product itself with the following information:
(i) The lamp's average initial lumens, expressed as a number
followed by the word ``lumens''; and
(ii) For general service lamps containing mercury, the following
statement: ``Contains Mercury. See epa.gov/bulbrecycling or 1-800-XXX-
XXXX.''
[[Page 57967]]
(c)(1) The required disclosures of any covered product that is a
general service lamp shall be measured at 120 volts, regardless of the
lamp's design voltage. If a lamp's design voltage is 125 volts or 130
volts, the disclosures of the wattage, light output and life ratings
shall in each instance be:
(i) At 120 volts and followed by the phrase ``at 120 volts.'' In
such case, the labels for such lamps also may disclose the lamp's
wattage, light output and life at the design voltage (e.g., ``Light
Output 1710 Lumens at 125 volts''); or
(ii) At the design voltage and followed by the phrase ``at (125
volts/130 volts)'' if the ratings at 120 volts are disclosed clearly
and conspicuously on another panel of the package, and if all panels of
the package that contain a claimed light output, wattage or life
clearly and conspicuously identify the lamp as ``(125 volt/130 volt),''
and if the principal display panel clearly and conspicuously discloses
the following statement:
This product is designed for (125/130) volts. When used on the
normal line voltage of 120 volts, the light output and energy
efficiency are noticeably reduced. See (side/back) panel for 120 volt
ratings.
(2) For any covered product that is an incandescent reflector lamp,
the required disclosures of light output shall be given for the lamp's
total forward lumens.
(3) For any covered product that is a compact fluorescent lamp, the
required light output disclosure shall be measured at a base-up
position; but, if the manufacturer or private labeler has reason to
believe that the light output at a base-down position would be more
than 5% different, the label also shall disclose the light output at
the base-down position or, if no test data for the base-down position
exist, the fact that at a base-down position the light output might be
more than 5% less.
(4) For any covered product that is a general service incandescent
lamp and operates with multiple filaments, the light output, energy
cost, and wattage disclosures required by Sec. 305.15(b) must be
provided at each of the lamp's levels of light output and the lamp's
life provided on the basis of the filament that fails first. The
multiple numbers shall be separated by a ``/'' (e.g., 800/1600/2500
lumens).
(5) A manufacturer or private labeler who distributes general
service fluorescent lamps, or general service lamps without labels
attached to the lamps or without labels on individual retail-sale
packaging for one or more lamps may meet the package disclosure
requirements of this section by making the required disclosures, in the
manner and form required by those paragraphs, on the bulk shipping
cartons that are to be used to display the lamps for retail sale.
(6) Any manufacturer or private labeler who makes any
representation, other than those required by this section, on a package
of any covered product that is a general service fluorescent lamp or
general service lamp regarding the cost of operation or life of such
lamp shall clearly and conspicuously disclose in close proximity to
such representation the assumptions upon which it is based, including,
e.g., purchase price, unit cost of electricity, hours of use, patterns
of use. If those assumptions differ for those required for cost and
life information on the Lighting Facts label (11.4 cents per kWh and 3
hours per day), the manufacturer or private labeler must also disclose,
with equal clarity and conspicuousness, the same representation based
on those required on the Lighting Facts label.
(d)(1) Any covered product that is a general service fluorescent
lamp or an incandescent reflector lamp shall be labeled clearly and
conspicuously with a capital letter ``E'' printed within a circle and
followed by an asterisk. The label shall also clearly and conspicuously
disclose, either in close proximity to that asterisk or elsewhere on
the label, the following statement:
*[The encircled ``E''] means this bulb meets Federal minimum
efficiency standards.
(A) If the statement is not disclosed on the principal display
panel, the asterisk shall be followed by the following statement:
See [Back, Top, Side] panel for details.
(B) For purposes of this paragraph, the encircled capital letter
``E'' shall be clearly and conspicuously disclosed in color-contrasting
ink on the label of any covered product that is a general service
fluorescent lamp and will be deemed ``conspicuous,'' in terms of size,
if it appears in typeface at least as large as either the
manufacturer's name or logo or another logo disclosed on the label,
such as the ``UL'' or ``ETL'' logos, whichever is larger.
(2) Instead of labeling any covered product that is a general
service fluorescent lamp with the encircled ``E'' and with the
statement described in paragraph (d)(1) of this section, a manufacturer
or private labeler who would not otherwise put a label on such a lamp
may meet the disclosure requirements of that paragraph by permanently
marking the lamp clearly and conspicuously with the encircled ``E''.
(3) Any cartons in which any covered products that are general
service fluorescent lamps and general service lamps are shipped within
the United States or imported into the United States shall disclose
clearly and conspicuously the following statement:
These lamps comply with Federal energy efficiency labeling
requirements.
* * * * *
Sec. 305.19 [Amended]
7. In Sec. 305.19, remove the phrase ``medium base compact
fluorescent lamps, or general service incandescent lamps including
incandescent reflector lamps'' and add in its place ``general service
lamps'' wherever it appears.
8. Section 305.20 is amended as follows:
a. In paragraph (a)(1), remove the phrase ``medium base compact
fluorescent lamps, general service incandescent lamps including
incandescent reflector lamps'' and add in its place ``general service
lamps'' wherever it appears;
b. In paragraph (a)(3), remove the phrase ``medium base compact
fluorescent lamp, or general service incandescent lamp (including an
incandescent reflector lamp)'' and add in its place ``general service
lamps'' wherever it appears.
c. Revise paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 305.20 Paper catalogs and websites.
* * * * *
(c)(1) Any manufacturer, distributor, retailer, or private labeler
who advertises in a catalog a covered product that is a general service
fluorescent lamp or general service lamp shall disclose clearly and
conspicuously in such catalog:
(i) On each page listing any covered product that is a general
service lamp, all the information concerning that lamp required by
Sec. 305.15 of this part to be disclosed on the lamp's label either in
the form of the manufacturer's Lighting Facts label prepared pursuant
to Sec. 305.15 or otherwise in a clear and conspicuous manner; and
(ii) On each page listing a covered product that is a general
service fluorescent lamp or an incandescent reflector lamp, all the
information required by Sec. 305.15 of this part to be disclosed on
the lamp's label according to the following format:
(A) The encircled ``E'' shall appear with each lamp entry; and
[[Page 57968]]
(B) The accompanying statement described in Sec. 305.15(d)(1)
shall appear at least once on the page.
* * * * *
Sec. 305.21 [Amended]
9. In Sec. 305.21, add the term ``correlated color temperature,''
after the term ``energy usage.''
10. In Appendix L:
a. Add Prototype Labels 5 through 7; and
b. Remove all sections labeled Lamp Packaging Disclosures
The Additions read as follows:
Appendix L to Part 305
Sample Labels
* * * * *
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO09.072
PROTOTYPE LABEL 5
FRONT PACKAGE DISCLOSURE FOR GENERAL SERVICE LAMPS
[[Page 57969]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO09.073
PROTOTYPE LABEL 6
LIGHTING FACTS LABEL FOR GENERAL SERVICE LAMPS NOT CONTAINING MERCURY
[[Page 57970]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN10NO09.074
PROTOTYPE LABEL 7
LIGHTING FACTS LABEL FOR GENERAL SERVICE LAMP CONTAINING MERCURY
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-27036 Filed 11-9-09; 2:25 pm]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-S