Date post: | 31-Mar-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | santino-musslewhite |
View: | 213 times |
Download: | 1 times |
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
Key Accomplishments
1
Applications Received by Type
2
2,456 applications received in 2013
93.85% of applications passed review
Applications Passed and Failed
3
4
Products Qualified by Application Type
5
17,511 products qualified in 2013
Products Qualified by Category
6
Total Qualified Products andManufacturers, 2012 and 2013
7
All questions were answered within 2 business days
Questions Received in the DLC Inbox
8
Updated Application Instructions
9
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
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
Qualified Products List Updated weekly, sometimes
more frequently
Qualified Products List –Updates
11
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
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
Version 2.0 Transition
13
Began September 2012
Continued until April 2013
Phase I: Non-efficacy metrics
Phase II: Efficacy
Specification Revision Overview
14
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)
Specification Revision, Phase I
15
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
Specification Revision, Phase I
16
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)
Specification Revision, Phase II
17
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
Specification Revision, Phase II
18
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
Specification Revision, Transition
19
Category Development Process
#20
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
Category Development Overview
#21
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
Category Development Results
#22
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
Category Development Rollout
#23
DLC Category Development
24
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
Meetings with NEEP
25
Meetings with NEEP
26
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 website27
FAQ Development
28
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)
Laboratory RequirementsOverview
29
Laboratory RequirementsRevision Process
30
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
Laboratory RequirementsLM-79 & LM-80 Proposal and Feedback
31
Proposed references to similar program
requirements
LM-79 Adoption of Interim Policy: Laboratory listed in LED Lighting Facts
Approved 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
®
®
Laboratory RequirementsISTMT Proposal and Feedback
32
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
Laboratory RequirementsFinal Requirements and Implementation
33
Manufacturer’s Guide
DLC’s first Manufacturer’s Guide
Published July 19, 2013
Announced at Stakeholder Meeting
3 revisions made since original release
34
Manufacturer’s Guide - Updates
35
Reviewer’s Handbook
Reviewer’s Guide -- to ensure program integrity and consistency with every application that goes through the review process
36
37
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
Stakeholder Meeting Agenda Development
38
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)
Stakeholder Meeting Presentations
39
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
Stakeholder Value
40
41
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
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
Website
43
®
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
Website
44
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)
Regional and National Conferences
45
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
Website Webinars
46
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
2013 Stakeholder Meeting –Highlights
47
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
2013 Stakeholder Meeting –Background
48
• Keynote panel
• Structured Networking
• Unstructured networking time
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
2013 Stakeholder Meeting – Key Tasks
49
2013 Stakeholder Meeting – Detailed Financial Results
50
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
2013 Stakeholder Meeting – Agenda Details
51
2013 Stakeholder Meeting –
Attendees
52
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
New DLC Online QPL and Website
53
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
New DLC Online QPL and Website
54
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
New DLC Online QPL and Website
55
56
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)
Planning for 2014
57
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
Reaction to DLC Staff
Member Satisfaction
Overall, these responses indicate that DLC members have a very high level of satisfaction with DLC staff with room for improvement.
60
Member Satisfaction
61
Reaction to DLC Resources
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.
Stakeholder Satisfaction
62
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
Qualified Products List –Maintenance
63
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
Category Development
64
• Direct-Indirect• Direct
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
Submission Review Timeliness and Accuracy
#65
Responded to more than 4,800 inquiries (through October) sent to [email protected] in 2013
Responsiveness
#
Info@ Responses by Month
66
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
Responsiveness
#67
Application Projections
68
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
Additional Funding
70
Financial Performance
71
Financial Performance
72