Presentation Transcript

1. Key Accomplishments Record number of applications processed and participating manufacturers – 2,456 applications, with 571 manufacturers having a qualified product. Record number of products added to QPL—17,511 Very successful 2nd Annual Stakeholder Meeting Development and implementation of Lab Policy Development and implementation of requirements V2.0 and 2.1 1
2. Applications Received by Type 2,456 applications received in 2013 2
3. Applications Passed and Failed 93.85% of applications passed review 3
4. 4
5. Products Qualified by Application Type 17,511 products qualified in 2013 5
6. Products Qualified by Category 6
7. Total Qualified Products and Manufacturers, 2012 and 2013 7
8. Questions Received in the DLC Inbox All questions were answered within 2 business days 8
9. Updated Application Instructions Added “Completing the Application Form” instructions Updated General Application Instructions to include more detail Created “Product Eligibility” section Added additional notes to Technical Requirements Table Added Tolerance Table 9
10. Updated Application Instructions Updated Single and Product Family Application Forms New validations limit information manufacturers need to provide Product Family Application Form resembles Single Product form to reduce confusion Scaled Performance Table provides better data for Members 10
11. Qualified Products List –Updates Qualified Products List Updated weekly, sometimes more frequently 11
12. Qualified Products List – Maintenance QPL Excel file updated to accommodate 7 new product categories French translations added or updated for 15 categories Manufacturer names consolidated to facilitate analysis for Version 2.0 transition 12
13. Version 2.0 Transition Analyzed QPL category by category to identify products that failed V2.0 requirements and their family members 18,950 total models identified 2,065 parent models identified Alerted all 304 affected manufacturers, highlighted the products that failed and the reasons they failed, and provided instructions for resubmission After processing resubmitted applications, 16,336 products disqualified 13
14. Specification Revision Overview Began September 2012 Continued until April 2013 Phase I: Non-efficacy metrics Phase II: Efficacy 14
15. Specification Revision, Phase I Phase I: Non-efficacy metrics Goal: Get specs “right” Ensure quality metrics are sufficient to provide consumer satisfaction Phase I process: Discussions with advisors on outstanding issues (January/February) Revised drafts distributed (February) Comments received, commenters call held (March) Finalized with TC Committee, final announced (April 5) 15
16. Specification Revision, Phase I Phase I: Summary of key changes Aligned CRI, CCT for indoor and outdoor categories Reclassified tube-shaped products as lamps Aligned all retrofit kit and luminaire criteria Amended light output, L70, and distribution requirements for troffers Created Low-Bay category Amended distribution requirements for wall-washers Provided small uplight tolerance on outdoor luminaires Eliminated bifurcation of horizontal case lighting 16
17. Specification Revision, Phase II Phase II: Efficacy metrics Goal: Push the market Ensure products will save energy relative to incumbent Phase II: Process Conducted analysis on potential impacts of efficacy levels on QPL (January/February) Discussed goals and principles with TC (late February) Distributed draft efficacy requirements (early March) Comments received, commenters call held (late March) Finalized with TC Committee, final announced (April 5) 17
18. Specification Revision, Phase II Phase II: Summary of key changes Raised efficacy levels for all 32 categories Raised 5-25 lm/W, depending on category Better aligned similar categories (all troffers, all high/low-bay) Pushed efficacies significantly in troffers to better compete with fluorescent Had apparent attrition of 20%-40%+ from efficacy changes alone Family effects estimated to be significant 18
19. Specification Revision, Transition Multi-step transition process: Final announcement: April 5, 2013 Detailed transition guidance included Webinars April 11, April 16 Grace periods Products eligible under v2.0 requirements immediately Final day to submit products under v1.7 requirements: June 7 All products on QPL meet v2.0 requirements: January 1, 2014 (Products no longer qualified, still searchable) Two sessions at Stakeholder Meeting dedicated to providing transition guidance Full analysis and communication in September 2013 Outreach to more than 300 affected manufacturers 19
20. Category Development Process # 20
21. Category Development Overview 40+ categories on 2013 “wish list” Prioritization process: Gave presentation to and held discussion with Members and Technical Committee on monthly conference calls Assisted in development of member survey and analysis of results Analyzed estimated level of effort for development of each category Made recommendations for development, based on level of effort, member interest, and market potential Investigated and provided proposed category requirements for: Linear Ambient Lighting Indoor Commercial Spaces; Strip Lighting Replacement lamps 2-foot and U-bend Expanded Retrofit Kits Pole/Arm Mounted Area, Decorative, Fuel Pump Canopy Higher-lumen LED Area Lights Splitting existing category by lumen output # 21
22. Category Development Results Development cycle – April-October Proposals for 8 new categories and 3 expanded categories distributed mid-July Feedback through open comment, Stakeholder Meeting session, commenters call, discussions with Membership and Technical Committee. Final criteria announced September 27 Added 4 categories of linear ambient lighting, including strip lighting and 2-foot replacement lamps Expanded retrofit kits for Outdoor Area, Decorative, and Fuel Pump Canopy Announced to industry that Outdoor Area category will be split by light output in 2014 # 22
23. Category Development Rollout Final criteria announced September 27 Webinars on October 2 and 8 Updated web content Updated application forms Updated administrative database tools First products qualified in new categories October 23 # 23
24. DLC Category Development 24
25. Meetings with NEEP Weekly meetings with key staff Discuss ongoing activities Identify priority issues Track status of deliverables Bi-weekly program management check-in meetings Discuss performance under contract Discuss contract funding Identify areas for improvement where necessary 25
26. Meetings with NEEP 26
27. FAQ Development FAQ review process began in January 2013 Completed review and revision of 27 existing FAQs and brainstormed FAQ additions to address common areas of confusion Sent 17 new FAQs to NEEP for review Updated FAQs on website 27
28. FAQ Development 28
29. Laboratory RequirementsOverview Need to evaluate policy identified at DLC Stakeholder Meeting (October 2012) Interim LM-79 policy adopted in response (December 17, 2012) Initial review of entire policy (January – June 2013) 1st Proposal released (July 2013) Discussion at Laboratory Accreditation Concurrent Session at 2013 Stakeholder Meeting Industry comment period through August 8 Presented proposal and feedback to Technical Committee and Members 2nd Proposal released (September 2013) Industry comment period through October 4 Final requirements and implementation timeline released (October 2013) Informational webinar (October 29) 29
30. Laboratory RequirementsRevision Process Identified policy evaluation needs Update requirements to reflect industry development Ensure impartial requirements Guiding principles Stakeholder needs Data integrity Adequate access to testing services Industry consistency Process Research into accreditation organizations and requirements of similar programs Discussion with industry experts Testing laboratories and OSHA NRTLs Review and incorporation of industry feedback 30
31. Laboratory RequirementsLM-79 & LM-80 Proposal and Feedback Proposed references to similar program requirements LM-79 Adoption of Interim Policy: Laboratory listed in LED Lighting FactsApproved Labs List LM-80 Require laboratory be accredited for LM-80 testing Reference ENERGY STAR Recognized Laboratories for LM-80 Testing list Feedback generally supportive Industry identified need for laboratory proficiency testing and qualified product verification testing ® ® 31
32. Laboratory RequirementsISTMT Proposal and Feedback Proposed expansion to requirements Additional allowance for laboratories participating in OSHA NRTL data acceptance programs Industry feedback required revised proposal Supportive of data acceptance expansion, but not existing NVLAP LM-79 accreditation option Suggestions to review specific accreditations to relevant temperature measurement methods Second proposal replaced NVLAP LM-79 Accreditation to relevant temperature measurement methods UL 1598, CSA C22.2 No. 250.08 accreditation through ILAC-MRA Signatory Feedback generally supportive Suggestions for additional temperature test methods determined less relevant than second proposal 32
33. Laboratory RequirementsFinal Requirements and Implementation 33
34. Manufacturer’s Guide DLC’s first Manufacturer’s Guide Published July 19, 2013 Announced at Stakeholder Meeting 3 revisions made since original release 34
35. Manufacturer’s Guide - Updates 35
36. Reviewer’s Handbook Reviewer’s Guide -- to ensure program integrity and consistency with every application that goes through the review process 36
37. 37
38. Stakeholder Meeting Agenda Development Agenda development March - July Participated in 18 agenda planning conference calls with NEEP Provided brainstorming ideas for sessions, recommendation on breakout structure, etc. Planned and recruited speakers for: One pre-conference educational session Two topical and Technical Panels Two highlighted Concurrent Sessions Four repeating Concurrent Sessions 38
39. Stakeholder Meeting Presentations Presentations given at the Stakeholder Meeting: One pre-conference educational session (sole presenter) One Technical Panels (presenter, moderator) Two highlighted Concurrent Sessions (presenter, moderator) Four repeating Concurrent Sessions (sole presenter) 39
40. Stakeholder Value Answered member requests throughout the year 13 member utilities made 29 requests 9 concerned product qualification status 5 related to accessing the QPL on the new website PG&E made 9 requests NYSERDA made 4 requests 40
41. 41
42. Logo Violations Formalized logo violations process with NEEP Developed and implemented Logo Violations Tracker to document each manufacturer’s logo violations Incorporated logo violations review into each application review; manufacturers required to correct incorrect usage of DLC logo in product spec sheet prior to adding products to the QPL Expanded Logo Guidelines, included Style Guide Addressed logo violations in person at LightFair Held weekly calls with the DLC Product Logo Team to discuss outstanding violations and new developments 42
43. Website Updated policy content and application documents Revised and new FAQs for updated policies Updated product category definitions Developed Qualification Confirmation and Rejection letters for distribution following application review Updated new Self-Certification Statement with acknowledgement of: Application instructions Technical requirements Logo Guidelines Developed new application forms Single product form with LED Lighting Facts requirement information Family Grouping form to formalize process and reduce workload on reviewers ® 43
44. Website Reviewed program information and application instructions Revised flow of instructions to follow step-by-step process Created navigation mimicking the previous website Created individual pages for single product applications, family grouping applications, private labeling applications, and LED Lighting Facts® information Updated “About NEEP” page with icons linking to various NEEP social media efforts Incorporated member logos into website at NEEP request Updated information throughout the year as new policies and requirements were introduced 44
45. Regional and National Conferences Attended eight conferences in support of DLC: DOE SSL R&D (250 attendees) DOE SSL Market Intro (200) LightFair International (26,000) IES Street and Area Lighting Conference (600) International Energy Program Evaluation Conference (450) Intertek Lighting Technical Seminar (50) E-Source Annual Forum (400) DLC Stakeholder Meeting (200) 45
46. Website Webinars Hosted two “New DLC Website Orientation” webinars Highlighted improvements from previous website and provided navigation instructions Searchable database Appropriate use of search criteria Understanding search results Ability to save, share, and download searches and results Updated resources Finding category definitions, application instructions, application forms, and FAQs Identified upcoming additional functionality Improved online application process, including all application types and easier supporting documentation upload Application status tracking 46
47. 2013 Stakeholder Meeting – Highlights Second Annual Stakeholder Meeting successful on many levels 179 attendees (excluding D&R and NEEP staff) Significant increase in sponsors and sponsorship dollars 20 sponsors in 2013 (up from 7 in 2012) $40K increase in sponsorship funds raised Overall rating for 2013 meeting was even higher than for 2012 meeting (4.1/5 in 2012, 4.35/5 in 2013) Made a profit 47
48. 2013 Stakeholder Meeting –Background Held in Chicago, July 22 – 25, 2013 179 attendees (excluding DLC staff) Increase of 49% from 2012 Included representatives from DLC member programs, other utility programs, DLC manufacturer partners, ESCOs, and testing labs 59% of organizations that attended in 2012 also attended in 2013 Overall financial goals met Agenda included CEU courses Topical panel discussions Concurrent sessions Keynote panel Structured Networking Unstructured networking time 48
49. 2013 Stakeholder Meeting – Key Tasks Meeting planning and logistics Recommending and contracting with hotel Recommending and contracting with off-site reception location Recruiting sponsors Managing registration Managing meeting finances Staffing the meeting Agenda development Recommending topics and speakers Organizing panels and recruiting speakers Organizing and managing Structured Networking sessions 49
50. 2013 Stakeholder Meeting – Detailed Financial Results 50
51. 2013 Stakeholder Meeting – Agenda Details 23 topics addressed (some topics were repeated) 45 speakers 20 separate Structured Networking sessions included 14 manufacturers Topics included: DLC: DLC 101, Advanced DLC, DLC Lab Policy, DLC Specs, DLC Manufacturers Guide, DLC Logo Guidelines Technologies: Outdoor lighting; LED Tubes Topics: Safety CEU Courses: Lighting Controls; Light, Sight and Vision 51
52. 2013 Stakeholder Meeting – Attendees 52
53. New DLC Online QPL and Website New web-based portal for the DLC program Access to online qualified product database that provides enhanced search features Updated DLC policies, procedures, and news Online application and payment submittal Members-only section 53
54. New DLC Online QPL and Website Site launched on July 19, 2013 Included online QPL, new DLC website, and enhanced search features Did not include online application and payment submission or back-end administrative functionality Additional functionality went live in November 11/1 – Administrative tools - user, organization, product, attribute, and category management 11/22 – Application process tools – manufacturer user account creation and management, manufacturer application creation and status review, application fee payment system, and administrator application review management Though delayed, site is now functional but continuing to be optimized 54
55. New DLC Online QPL and Website Improvements More granular, flexible search of the QPL Real-time updates to QPL – reflects new products as they are processed Easier online application and payment submission process for manufacturers Still offers the full Excel file of the QPL, but QPL now much easier to use Easier to post news items for DLC stakeholders Site has better look and feel and is more stable 55
56. 56
57. Planning for 2014 Provided projections and level-of-effort estimates to assist 2014 planning process: Provided 3 projections for product submissions and revenue for 2014: Base case of 2,259 submissions, $1.964 million in revenue Conservative case of 1,993 submission, $1.728 million in revenue High-growth case of 2,479 submissions, $2.150 million in revenue Provided level-of-effort estimates for 2014 program activities: Verification testing/QA – Scoping and Planning (~0.25 FTE) Tier QPL – Scoping and Planning (~0.15 FTE) Delisting of old products – Scoping (~0.025 FTE) and Development of System (~0.15 FTE) 57
58. Satisfaction Metrics Contract between NEEP and D&R identifies two key performance metrics related to stakeholder satisfaction 85% of industry stakeholders are satisfied with technical support provided by Contractor in the application review process and in response to individual requests 90% of DLC members are satisfied with technical support provided by Contractor in response to individual requests or through contractor participation in member meetings and webinars NEEP surveyed members and stakeholders to gather data to address these issues 22 members responded to the member survey 75 stakeholders responded to the stakeholder survey # 59
59. Member Satisfaction Reaction to DLC Staff Overall, these responses indicate that DLC members have a very high level of satisfaction with DLC staff with room for improvement. 60
60. Member Satisfaction Reaction to DLC Resources 61
61. Stakeholder Satisfaction Survey indicates that Most respondents asked multiple questions of the DLC staff 84% received a prompt response from DLC staff 95% say DLC staff understood the issue 77% received a complete response to their request on the first reply Only 10% indicated they were not satisfied with the service they received from DLC staff. 62
62. Qualified Products List –Maintenance Summary of issues addressed and errors corrected Modified the QPL to make it more user-friendly and easier to view on small screens Corrected or revised performance metrics Corrected typographical errors or misplaced values Improved French translations for product categories 63
63. Category Development Developed requirements for 8 new categories and 3 expanded categories during 2013 Category Development Cycle: Linear Ambient: Indirect Indirect-Direct Replacement Lamps 2-foot linear replacement lamps U-bend linear replacement lamps Outdoor Area Lighting Light output >10,000 and <25,000 lumens Light output >25,000 lumens Expansions to Retrofit Kit Categories: For Outdoor Decorative Lighting For Outdoor Area Lighting For Fuel Pump Canopy Luminaires Direct-Indirect Direct 64
64. Submission Review Timeliness and Accuracy 1,900+ submissions processed to date 57% completed within 14 days of receipt Average time (for all submissions) from initial receipt of submission to completion -- 18 days Note: this is turnaround from initial receipt, not from receipt of complete and accurate submission 42% of submissions had at least one issue for manufacturer to resolve (e.g., missing or incorrect test data) No legal challenges to review results in 2013 # 65
65. Responsiveness Responded to more than 4,800 inquiries (through October) sent to info@designlights.org in 2013 Info@ Responses by Month # 66
66. Responsiveness D&R established protocols for communication and to ensure inquiries are handled properly: D&R phone number on DLC website D&R phone system hunt group; D&R DLC-specific voicemail box Direct all inquiries to info@designlights if possible, multiple monitors Explicitly tracking of all application submissions Staying in communication with Lighting Facts on specific submissions (LF processing affects total turnaround time) Defined lines of communication based on experience within review team Vacation and out-of-office protocols Additional requirements for follow-up with upset stakeholders established by NEEP: Do not apologize unnecessarily in writing Keep NEEP program managers on cc: line # 67
67. Application Projections 68
68. Additional Funding Original contract was for $291,500 An additional $80,000 was provided in September 2013 Initial budget estimate did not include several key deliverables included in 2013 Scope of Work Lab Accreditation Policy Manufacturers Guide Reviewer’s Guide Annual Report Significantly increased number of applications for QPL requires significantly higher level of support to manufacturing partners 70
69. Financial Performance 71
70. Financial Performance 72