[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 180 (Monday, September 18, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48075-48078]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-23043]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 418
Rule Concerning Deceptive Advertising and Labeling as to Length
of Extension Ladders
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (``Commission'') announces the
commencement of a rulemaking proceeding for the trade regulation rule
concerning Deceptive Advertising and Labeling as to Length of Extension
Ladders (``Extension Ladder Rule'' or ``Rule''), 16 CFR Part 418. The
proceeding will address whether or not the Extension Ladder Rule should
be repealed. The Commission invites interested parties to submit
written date, views, and arguments on how the Rule has affected
consumers, businesses and others, and on whether there currently is a
need for the Rule. This notice includes a description of the procedures
to be followed, an invitation to submit written comments, a list of
questions and issues upon which the Commission particularly desires
comments, and instructions for prospective witnesses and other
interested persons who desire to participate in the proceeding.
DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before October 18,
1995.
[[Page 48076]]
Notifications of interest in testifying must be submitted on or
before October 18, 1995. If interested parties request the opportunity
to present testimony, the Commission will publish a notice in the
Federal Register stating the time and place at which the hearings will
be held and describing the procedures that will be followed in
conducting the hearings. In addition to submitting a request to
testify, interest parties who wish to present testimony must submit, on
or before October 18, 1995, a written comment or statement that
describes the issues on which the party wishes to testify and the
nature of the testimony to be given.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and requests to testify should be submitted
to Office of the Secretary, Federal Trade Commission, Room H-159, Sixth
Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580, telephone
number 202-326-2506. Comments and requests to testify should be
identified as ``16 CFR Part 418--Comment--Extension Ladder Rule'' and
``16 CFR Part 418--Request to Testify--Extension Ladder Rule,''
respectively. If possible, submit comments both in writing and on a
personal computer diskette in Word Perfect or other word processing
format (to assist in processing, please identify the format and version
used). Written comments should be submitted, when feasible and not
burdensome, in five copies.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
John A. Crowley, Attorney, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Division of
Service Industry Practices, Room H-200, Sixth Street and Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580, telephone number 202-326-3280.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
On May 23, 1995 the Commission published an Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (``ANPR'') seeking comment on the proposed repeal
of the Extension Ladder Rule, 60 FR 27245. In accordance with mandates
of section 18 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (``FTC Act''), 15
U.S.C. 57a, the ANPR was sent to the Chairman of the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation, United States Senate and the
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Hazardous
Materials, United States House of Representatives. The ANPR comment
period closed on June 22, 1995. The Commission received no public
comments.
Pursuant to the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 41-58, and the Administrative
Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 551-59, 701-06, by this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (``NPR'') the Commission initiates a proceeding to consider
whether the Extension Ladder Rule should be repealed or remain in
effect, and solicits public comments.\1\ The Commission is also
interested in comments on whether the Rule should be streamlined or
otherwise amended. If the Commission determines, based on the data,
views and arguments submitted, that the Commission should consider
additional alternatives, it will publish a supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking and will request public comments on those
alternatives.
\1\ In accordance with mandates of section 18 of the FTC Act, 15
U.S.C. 57a, the Commission submitted this NPR to the Chairman of the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, United States
Senate, and the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and
Hazardous Materials, United States House of Representatives, 30 days
prior to publication of the NPR.
The Commission is undertaking this rulemaking proceeding as part of
the Commission's ongoing program of evaluating trade regulation rules
and industry guides to determine their effectiveness, impact, cost and
need. This proceeding also responds to President Clinton's National
Regulatory Reinvention Initiative, which, among other things, urge
agencies to eliminate obsolete or unnecessary regulations.
II. Background Information
The Extension Ladder Rule regulates the advertising, labeling and
marking of extension ladders. The Commission had found that the
industry practice of representing the sizes or lengths of their
products in terms of the total length of their component sections,
e.g., a ``20-foot'' or ``20-foot size'' extension ladder consisting of
two 10-foot sections, tended to mislead the general public into the
erroneous belief that such represented sizes or lengths were the
maximum working or useful lengths of the products so described. To
correct this misconception, the Commission in 1969 promulgated the
Extension Ladder Rule, which makes it an unfair or deceptive act or
practice and an unfair method of competition to represent the size or
length of such product, in terms of the total length of the component
sections thereof, unless:
(a) Such size or length representation is accompanied by the words
``total length of sections'' or words with similar meanings which
clearly indicate the basis of the representation; and,
(b) Such size or length representation is accompanied by a
statement in close proximity to the size or length representation which
clearly and conspicuously shows the maximum length of the product when
fully extended for use (i.e., excluding the footage lost in
overlapping) along with an explanation for the basis of such
representation.\2\
\2\ The rule then gives an example of proper length
representation when the product consists of two ten foot sections:
``maximum working length 17', total length of sections 20''' or
``17' extension ladder''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission, as part of its oversight responsibilities, reviews
rules and guides periodically. These reviews seek information about the
costs and benefits of the Commission's rules and guides and their
regulatory and economic impact. The information obtained assists the
Commission in identifying rules and guides that warrant modification or
rescission. Accordingly, on April 19, 1993, the Commission published in
the Federal Register a request for public comments on its Trade
Regulation Rule on Advertising and Labeling As To Length of Extension
Ladders, 16 C.F.R. Part 418. 58 FR 21125.
In its Request for Comment, the Commission indicated that if this
rule is retained, the Commission intended to revise the examples
contained in the rule to include ``metric'' measurements. The
Commission then asked commenters to address questions relating to the
costs and benefits of the Rule, the burdens it imposes, and the basis
for assessing whether it should be retained, or amended.
Six specific comments were received. One commenter, a consumer,
opined that the only label that should be on ladders is the ``maximum
working length'' since consumers should not have to do any figuring to
determine the length of the ladder that would meet their needs.
Of the other five commenters, four are manufacturers or suppliers
of ladders and one is a trade association. A number of these comments
refer to the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard A14,
which governs the labeling of ladders. ANSI standard A14 details the
requirements for labeling portable wood ladders, portable metal
ladders, fixed ladders, job made ladders and portable reinforced
plastic ladders. The ANSI standard requires specification of the
maximum working length of extension ladders, as well as several other
pieces of information not required by the Extension Ladder Rule,
including the total length of the ladder's sections and the highest
standing level of the ladder. Compliance with the ANSI standard
therefore ensures compliance with the labeling requirements of the
Extension Ladder
[[Page 48077]]
Rule. Several commenters noted this overlap in coverage of the
Extension Ladder Rule and ANSI standard, A14, and recommended that the
Rule be retained unchanged.
Another commenter stated that the Rule has imposed minor,
incremental costs, but opined that the benefits have been significant
in that consumers have a better understanding of extension ladder
length. The commenter questioned whether there was a continuing need
for this Rule given the existence of ANSI standard A14 and UL Standard
184.
In addition to these specific comments, one general comment,
applicable to several rules being reviewed, was received from an
advertising agency association. This organization recommended
rescission of the Extension Ladder Rule because the general
prohibitions of Section 5 of the FTC Act covering false and deceptive
advertising apply to the ladder industry, and thus the Rule creates
unnecessary administrative costs for the government, industry members
and consumers. This commenter did not submit any analysis or data
relating to the imposition of unnecessary administrative costs on
affected industry members, government or consumers.
Commission staff also engaged in an informal review of industry
practices by examining the marking of length on extension ladders
available for retail sale at several chain stores. That review
indicated general compliance with the requirements of the Rule.
Additionally, a check of Commission records failed to find any
complaints regarding non-compliance with the Rule, or any initiation of
law enforcement actions alleging violations of the Rule's requirements.
60 FR 27245.
On May 23, 1995, the Commission issued an Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (``ANPR'') based on a review of the submissions
received in response to the Request for Comment. The Commission
determined that there may no longer be a need to continue the Extension
Ladder Rule in light of the apparent changes in industry practices and
the existence of standards mandating the point-of-sale disclosures
required by the Rule. 60 FR 27246. No comments were received in
response to this request.
III. Rulemaking Procedures
The Commission finds that the public interest will be served by
using expedited procedures in this proceeding. First, there do not
appear to be any material issues of disputed fact to resolve in
determining whether to repeal the Rule. Second, the use of expedited
procedures will support the Commission's goal of eliminating obsolete
or unnecessary regulations without an undue expenditure of resources,
while ensuring that the public has an opportunity to submit data, views
and arguments on whether the Commission should repeal the Rule.
The Commission, therefore, has determined, pursuant to 16 CFR 1.20,
to use the procedures set forth in this notice. These procedures
include: (1) Publishing this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; (2)
soliciting written comments on the Commission's proposal to repeal the
Rule; (3) holding an informal hearing, if requested by interested
parties; (4) obtaining a final recommendation from staff and (5)
announcing final Commission action in a notice published in the Federal
Register.
IV. Invitation to Comment and Questions for Comment
Interested persons are requested to submit written data, views or
arguments on any issue of fact, law or policy they believe may be
relevant to the Commission's decision on whether to repeal the Rule.
The Commission requests that commenters provide representative factual
data in support of their comments. Individual firms' experiences are
relevant to the extent they typify industry experience in general or
the experience of similar-sized firms. Commenters opposing the proposal
repeal of the Rule should explain the reasons they believe the Rule is
still needed and, if appropriate, suggest specific alternatives.
Proposals for alternative requirements should include reasons and data
that indicate why the alternatives would better protect consumers from
unfair or deceptive acts or practices under section 5 of the FTC Act,
15 U.S.C. 45.
Although the Commission welcomes comments on any aspect of the
proposed repeal of the Rule, the Commission is particularly interested
in comments on questions and issues raised in this Notice. All written
comments should state clearly the question or issue that the commenter
is addressing.
Before taking final action, the Commission will consider all
written comments timely submitted to the Secretary of the Commission
and testimony given on the record at any hearings scheduled in response
to requests to testify. Written comments submitted will be available
for public inspection in accordance with the Freedom of Information
Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, and Commission regulations, on normal business days
between the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the Federal Trade
Commission, Public Reference Room, Room H-130, Federal Trade
Commission, Sixth Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20580, telephone number 202-326-2222.
Questions
(1) Does the existence of the ANSI standard governing the labeling
of extension ladders eliminate or greatly lessen the need for the Rule?
(2) What are the benefits and the costs of the Rule to consumers?
(3) What are the benefits and the costs of the Rule to firms
subject to the Rule's requirements?
(4) Are there other federal or state laws or regulations, or
private industry standards, that eliminate a need for the Rule?
(5) Does the Rule overlaps or conflict with other federal, state,
or local government laws or regulations?
(6) Is there a continuing need for the Rule or should the Rule be
repealed?
V. Requests for Public Hearings
Because there does not appear to be any dispute as to material
facts or issues raised by this proceeding and because written comments
appear adequate to present the views of all interested parties, a
public hearing has not been scheduled. If any person would like to
present testimony at a public hearing, he or she should follow the
procedures set forth in the DATES and addresses sections of this
Notice.
VI. Preliminary Regulatory Analysis
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA''), 5 U.S.C. 601-11, requires
an analysis of the anticipated impact of the proposed repeal of the
Rule on small businesses.\3\ The analysis must contain, as applicable,
a description of the reasons why action is being considered, the
objectives of and legal basis for the proposed action, the class and
number of small entities affected, the projected reporting,
recordkeeping and other compliance requirements being proposed, any
existing federal rules which may duplicate, overlap or conflict with
the proposed action, and any significant alternatives to the
[[Page 48078]]
proposed action that accomplish its objectives and, at the same time,
minimize its impact on small entities.
\3\ Section 22 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 57b-3, also requires
the Commission to perform ``regulatory impact analyses'' of a
proposed rule, but only if the rule will have certain
``significant'' economic or regulatory effects. The Commission has
determined that a preliminary regulatory analysis is not required by
section 22 in this proceeding because the Commission has no reason
to believe that repealing the Rule will have a ``significant''
economic or regulatory impact, either beneficial or detrimental,
upon persons subject to the Rule or upon consumers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A description of the reasons why action is being considered and the
objectives of the proposed repeal of the Rule have been explained
elsewhere in this Notice. Repeal of the Rule would appear to have
little or no effect on any small business. The Commission is not aware
of any existing federal laws or regulations that would conflict with
repeal of the Rule.
In light of these reasons, the Commission certifies, pursuant to
section 605 of RFA, 5 U.S.C. 605, that if the Commission determines to
repeal the Rule that action will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. To ensure that no substantial
economic impact is being overlooked, however, the Commission requests
comments on this issue. After reviewing any comments received, the
Commission will determine whether it is necessary to prepare a final
regulatory flexibility analysis.
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Extension Ladder Rule does not impose ``information collection
requirements' under the Paperwork Reduction Act (``PRA''), 44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq. The Rule, however, does contain disclosure requirements,
which specify that when the size or length of an extension ladder is
represented in terms of the total length of the component section such
fact must be noted and a statement must be placed in close proximity to
the notation which clearly and conspicuously discloses the maximum
length of the product when fully extended for use.\4\ Accordingly,
repeal of the Rule would eliminate any burdens on the public imposed by
these disclosure requirements.
\4\ Under amendments to the P.R.A. in the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 109 Stat. 163, to be codified at 44
U.S.C. 3501-20), which will become effective on October 1, 1995,
these third-party disclosures may constitute a ``collection of
information'' for which OMB clearance must be sought.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VIII. Additional Information for Interested Persons
A. Motions or Petitions
Any motions or petitions in connection with this proceeding must be
filed with the Secretary of the Commission.
B. Communications by Outside Parties to Commissioners of Their Advisors
Pursuant to Rule 1.18(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice, 16
CFR 1.18(c), communications with respect to the merits of this
proceeding from any outside party to any Commissioner or Commissioner's
advisor during the course of this rulemaking shall be subject to the
following treatment. Written communications, including written
communications from members of Congress, shall be forwarded promptly to
the Secretary for placement on the public record. Oral communications,
not including oral communications from members of Congress, are
permitted only when such oral communications are transcribed verbatim
or summarized at the discretion of the Commissioner or Commissioner's
advisor to whom such oral communications are made, and are promptly
placed on the public record, together with any written communications
relating to such oral communications. Memoranda prepared by a
Commissioner or Commissioner's advisor setting forth the contents of
any oral communications from members of Congress shall be placed
promptly on the public record. If the communication with a member of
Congress is transcribed verbatim or summarized, the transcript or
summary will be placed promptly on the public record.
List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 418
Advertising, Trade practices, Extension ladders.
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 41-58.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-23043 Filed 9-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M
