Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 106 / Friday, June 4, 2021 / Proposed Rules impacts on consumer utility, potential safety concerns, manufacturing/
production/implementation issues, etc., particularly as to changes that may have occurred since the January 2016 Final Rule.
Issue 15: DOE seeks comment on other technology options that it should consider for inclusion in its analysis and whether these technologies impact product features or consumer utility.
2. Screening Analysis The purpose of the screening analysis is to evaluate the technologies that improve the efficacy of light sources to determine which technologies will be eliminated from further consideration and which will be passed to the engineering analysis for further consideration. DOE determines whether to eliminate certain technology options from further consideration based on the following criteria:
1 Technological feasibility.
Technologies that are not incorporated in commercial products or in working prototypes will not be considered further.

2 Practicability to manufacture, install, and service. If it is determined that mass production of a technology in commercial products and reliable installation and servicing of the technology could not be achieved on the scale necessary to serve the relevant market at the time of the compliance date of the standard, then that technology will not be considered further.
3 Impacts on product utility or product availability. If a technology is determined to have significant adverse impact on the utility of the product to significant subgroups of consumers, or result in the unavailability of any covered product type with performance characteristics including reliability, features, sizes, capacities, and volumes that are substantially the same as products generally available in the United States at the time, it will not be considered further.
4 Adverse impacts on health or safety. If it is determined that a technology will have significant adverse
29959

impacts on health or safety, it will not be considered further.
5 Unique-Pathway Proprietary Technologies. If a design option utilizes proprietary technology that represents a unique pathway to achieving a given efficiency level, that technology will not be considered further due to the potential for monopolistic concerns.
Sections 6c3 and 7b of the Process Rule.
Technology options identified in the technology assessment are evaluated against these criteria using DOE
analyses and inputs from interested parties e.g., manufacturers, trade organizations, and energy efficiency advocates. Technologies that pass through the screening analysis are referred to as design options in the engineering analysis. Technology options that fail to meet one or more of the five criteria are eliminated from consideration.
Table II.4 summarizes the technology options that DOE screened out in the January 2016 Final Rule, and the applicable screening criteria.

TABLE II.4SCREENED-OUT TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS FROM THE JANUARY 2016 FINAL RULE
EPCA criteria X = basis for screening out Lamp type
Screened-out technology option Technological feasibility
CFL
LED

Multi-Photon Phosphors
Colloidal Quantum Dot Phosphors
Improved Emitter Materials

In the January 2016 Final Rule, DOE
considered AC LEDs as a design option.
81 FR 580, 592. AC LEDs remove the need for a driver component, potentially reducing efficiency losses. However, in the March 2016 NOPR for general service lamps, DOE screened out this technology option. DOE concluded that because commercial products were only offered by one company, are not available across a range of lumen packages, and are limited to G-shape lamps, the technology option did not meet the criteria of practicability to manufacture, install, and service and adverse impacts on product utility or product availability. 81 FR 14528, 14566
March 17, 2016. DOE has reviewed the current market and continued to identify only one company that is producing AC LED lamp models. The models are offered with limited characteristics: GU10 base and 400
lumens; candle-shaped and around 260

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:40 Jun 03, 2021

Jkt 253001

Practicability to manufacture, install, and service
Frm 00006

Fmt 4702

Adverse impacts on health and safety
X X
X

lumens; and G-shaped and around 290
lumens.
Issue 16: DOE requests feedback on the technological feasibility of AC LED
lamp productsincluding details on shapes, bases, and lumen ranges. DOE
also requests information on whether other manufacturers already offer or are planning to introduce AC LED lamps to the market.
Issue 17: DOE requests feedback on what impact, if any, the five screening criteria described in this section would have on each of the technology options listed in Table II.3 of this document with respect to their potential use in CFLKs. Similarly, DOE seeks information regarding how these same criteria would affect any other technology options not already identified in this document with respect to their potential use in CFLKs.
Issue 18: With respect to the screenedout technology options listed in Table II.4 of this document, DOE seeks
PO 00000

Adverse impact on product utility
Sfmt 4702

information on whether these options would, based on current and projected assessments regarding each of them, remain screened out under the five screening criteria described in this section. With respect to each of these technology options, what steps, if any, could be or have already been taken to facilitate the introduction of each option as a means to improve the energy performance of CFLKs and the potential to impact consumer utility of the CFLK.
3. Efficiency Analysis DOE typically uses one of two approaches to develop energy efficiency levels for the engineering analysis: 1
Relying on observed efficiency levels in the market i.e., the efficiency-level approach, or 2 determining the incremental efficiency improvements associated with incorporating specific design options to a baseline model i.e., the design-option approach. Using the efficiency-level approach, the efficiency
E:FRFM04JNP1.SGM

04JNP1