5724 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 25 / Thursday, February 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

1 59 FR 30733 (June 15, 1994). This notice sought

comment about the overall costs and benefits of the

Rule and its overall regulatory and economic

impact as part of the Commission’s systematic

review of all its current rules and guides. This

notice also sought comment on the use of symbols

in lieu of words on care labels and on certain other

issues.

2On December 28, 1995, the Commission

published a notice, 60 FR 67102, seeking comment

on other parts of the Rule and other proposed

changes. The issues raised in the December 1995

notice will be addressed in a separate FRN at a later

time.

3The Commission note that the ASTM ‘‘do not

bleach’’ symbol (an empty triangle with an ‘‘X’’

through it) had a different meaning in Mexico. To

avoid this conflict, the Commission tentatively

decided to accept ASTM Standard D5489–93 with

the exception of this ‘’do not bleach’’ symbol and

the addition of a shaded triangle with an ‘‘X’’

through it. The exception is no longer necessary

because ASTM deleted the empty triangle with an

‘‘X’’ through it. Although ASTM replaced it with a

shaded triangle with an ‘‘X’’ through it, ASTM

subsequently changed the ‘‘do not bleach’’ symbol

again as discussed in part III.A.1.a. of this Notice

infra.

4These changes are described in part III.A.1.a. of

this Notice infra.

5The version of ASTM Standard D5489 discussed

in the November 1995 FRN was adopted by ASTM

in 1993 and officially referred to as ASTM Standard

D5489–93. When ASTM changes a standard, the

suffix is changed to reflect the year of the revision.

Thus, when Standard D5489 was revised in early

1996, it was referred to as ASTM Standard D5489–

96a.

6These minor changes are also described in parts

III.A.1.a. and b. of this Notice infra.

7The commenters included consumers; public

interest-related groups; fiber, textile, or apparel

manufacturers, importers or sellers (or

conglomerates); a federal government agency;

textile and clothing educators; fiber, textile, or

apparel manufacturers, importers or retailers trade

associations, including two associations from

foreign countries; one textile printing company;

four label manufacturers; one association

representing the leather apparel industry; one

supplier of leather cleaning products and

equipment; one Committee formed by industry

members from the countries signatory to NAFTA;

one appliance manufacturers trade association; two

standards-related organizations; and three

representatives from foreign nations. Each comment

was assigned a number. The first time a comment

is cited it is cited by the full name of the commenter

and the assigned number; subsequently, it is cited

by the number and a shortened form of the name.

The comments are available for inspection in the

Public Reference Room, room 130, Federal Trade

Commission, 6th and Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,

Washington, DC, from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

16 CFR Part 423

Concerning Trade Regulation Rule on

Care Labeling of Textile Wearing

Apparel and Certain Piece Goods;

Conditional Exemption From

Terminology Section of the Care

Labeling Rule

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Interim rule, with request for

public comments.

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade

Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) has

reviewed the public comments on a

proposed conditional exemption to its

Trade Regulation Rule on Care Labeling

of Textile Wearing Apparel and Certain

Piece Goods (‘‘the Care Labeling Rule’’

or ‘‘the Rule’’) and has decided to adopt

the conditional exemption. The

conditional exemption will permit the

use of the system of care symbols

developed by the American Society for

Testing and Materials (‘‘ASTM’’) and

designated as ASTM Standard D5489–

96c Guide to Care Symbols for Care

Instructions on Consumer Textile

Products, in lieu of words on the

permanently attached care label, as long

as explanatory information is provided

to consumers for the first 18-month

period after the effective date of the

conditional exemption. The

Commission seeks comments on the

minor changes made in ASTM D5489

since the Commission last sought

comment in November 1995.

DATES: This conditional exemption is

effective July 1, 1997. The incorporation

by reference of the ASTM standard is

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register effective July 1, 1997.

Comments must be received by March

10, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to

Secretary, Room 159, Federal Trade

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20580.

Comments should be identified as ‘‘16

CFR Part 423—Comment.’’ Copies of

this notice can be obtained through the

Public Reference Branch, Room 130,

Federal Trade Commission,

Washington, D.C. 20580; (202) 326–

2222; or through the Commission’s

homepage on the World Wide Web at

http://www.ftc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Constance M. Vecellio or Edwin

Rodriguez, Attorneys, Federal Trade

Commission, Washington, DC 20580,

(202) 326–2966 or (202) 326–3147.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

On June 15, 1994, the Commission

published a Federal Register notice

(‘‘FRN’’), requesting comment on

various aspects of the care Labeling

Rule, including whether the Rule

should be modified to permit the use of

symbols in lieu of words.1 On

November 16, 1995, the Commission

published a FRN, 60 FR 57552,

announcing that the Commission had

tentatively determined to adopt a

proposed conditional exemption to the

Care Labeling Rule to permit the use of

certain care symbols in lieu of words on

the permanently attached care label.2

The Notice sought additional comment

on the specifies of the proposal.

In particular, the November 1995 FRN

stated that the Commission had

tentatively decided to allow the use of

the system of care symbols developed

by ASTM and designated as ASTM

Standard D5489 Guide to Symbols for

Care Instructions on Consumer Textile

Products, with one exception and

addition.3 Certain other modifications to

that system were under consideration by

ASTM at the time the FRN was

published. The FRN described these

possible modifications and sought

comment on them.4 In the FRN, the

Commission noted that the proposed

changes appeared to be useful, and, if

these changes were adopted by ASTM,

the Commission proposed adopting the

ASTM system with those changes.

These changes were adopted by ASTM,

and were reflected in the standard

designated ASTM Standard D5489–

96a.5 Certain additional minor changes

were made later in 1996, and these

changes are embodied in the final

standard designated ASTM Standard

D5489–96c.6

After reviewing the 39 public

comments that were submitted 7

concerning the proposed conditional

exemption, the Commission has now

decided to adopt the exemption and to

allow the use of the symbol system

designated as ASTM Standard D5489–

96c.

II. Background

The Care Labeling Rule was

promulgated by the Commission on

December 16, 1971, 36 FR 23883 (1971),

and amended on May 20, 1983, 48 FR

22733 (1983). The Rule makes it an

unfair or deceptive act or practice for

manufacturers and importers of textile

wearing apparel and certain piece goods

to sell these items without attaching

care labels stating ‘‘what regular care is

needed for the ordinary use of the

product.’’ (16 CFR 423.6 (a) and (b)) The

Rule also requires that the manufacturer

or importer possess, prior to sale, a

reasonable basis for the care

instructions. (16 CFR 423.6(c))

The ‘‘Terminology’’ section of the

Rule, 16 CFR 423.2(b), currently

requires that care instructions be stated

in ‘‘appropriate terms,’’ although it also

states that ‘‘any appropriate symbols

may be used on care labels or care

instructions, in addition to the required

appropriate terms so long as the terms
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 25 / Thursday, February 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 5725

8The ASTM and Ginetex systems use the same

five basic symbols: a washtub to indicate washing

(with a hand in the washtub to indicate hand

washing), a triangle to indicate bleaching, a square

to indicate drying (and a circle within a square to

indicate machine drying), an iron to indicate

ironing, and a circle to indicate drycleaning. An

‘‘X’’ cancelling out the symbol warns against using

the designated cleaning technique, e.g., ‘‘do not

dryclean.’’ The differences in the systems consist in

the manner in which refinements to the basic

processes are conveyed (or are not conveyed).

9The Commission noted that the ISO/Ginetex

system has no symbols for natural drying, the use

of non-chlorine bleach, or the use of steam in

ironing, which are care practices addressed by the

Rule. The Commission also noted that the ISO/

Ginetex system’s symbol for drycleaning does not

address all the warnings required by the Rule for

drycleaning. In the Ginetex system, an underlined

circle warns professional drycleaners generally

about potential harm from ‘‘mechanical action and/

or drying temperature and/or water addition in the

solvent.’’ But the ISO/Ginetex system does not have

a method for providing warnings about which

specific parts of the drycleaning process should be

avoided as required by Section 423.6(b)(2)(ii) of the

Rule. Ginetex (14) stated at p.3 that a symbol that

provides warnings about all potential problems

would be very complicated and difficult to

understand and that professional cleaners should

know what drycleaning process is required

depending on the textile article. But this position

shifts the burden from the manufacturer or importer

subject to the Rule to the cleaner. In adopting the

Rule, the Commission determined that the

manufacturer or importer was in the best position

to obtain information about the components of a

garment and how the garment should be cleaned.

10H.H. Cutler (1) p.1; Salant Corporation (2) p.1;

Ardis W. Koester (3) p.1; National Association of

Hosiery Manufacturers (4) p.1; Kirk’s Suede-Life,

Inc. (5); Consumers Union (7) p.1; Supreme

International (8) p.1; Host Apparel, Inc. (9) p.1;

Cranston Print Works Company (10) p.1; United

States Association of Importers of Textiles and

Apparel (11) p.2; Leather Apparel Association, Inc.

(12); American Textile Manufacturers Institute (13)

p.1; International Association for Textile Care

Labeling (14) p.1; American Apparel Manufacturers

Association (15) p.1; Trilateral Labeling Committee

(16) p.2; Paxar Corporation (17) p.1; Robert D.

Stiehler (18) p.1; Italian Federation of Associations

of Textile and Clothing Industries (19) p.2; National

Knitwear & Sportswear Association (20) p.1;

Warnaco, Inc. (21) p.1; International Fabricare

Institute (22) p.1; Springs Industries, Inc. (23) p.1;

Scott Tag & Label Co., Inc. (25) p.1; Fieldcrest

Cannon, Inc. (26) p.1; National Cotton Council of

America (27) p.1; United States Environmental

Protection Agency (28) p.1; Association of Home

Appliance Manufacturers (29) p.1, 2; Pittsfield

Weaving Co., Inc. (30) p.1; Proctor & Gamble (31)

p.1; Labelize, Inc. (32) p.1; The European Apparel

and Textile Organization (33) p.1; Jo Ann Pullen

(34) p.1; Industry Canada (35) p.1; ASTM

Subcommittee D13.62 on Care Labeling (36) p.1;

American Association of Family and Consumer

Sciences (37) p.1; Embassy of Switzerland (38) p.1;

European Commission, Directorate A (Industrial

Policy) (39) p.1.

11Sheila Settles (6) p.1; Harriet Nelson (24) p.1.

12Comments 5 and 12, respectively.

13Comment 28, p.1.

14Cutler (1) p.1; Koester (3) p.1; NAHM (4) p.1;

ATMI (13) p.1; AAMA (15) p.2; TLC (16) p.2;

Stiehler (18) p.1; NKSA (20) p.1; IFI (22) p.1;

Springs (23) p.1; Fieldcrest (26) p.1; NCCA (27) p.1;

AHAM (29) p.1; Pittsfield (30) p.1; P&G (31) p.2;

Pullen (34) p.1; ASTM (36) p.1. The comments

stated that the ASTM system is more

comprehensive, more consistent with American

technology, and more flexible and easily amended

than the Ginetex system. See NAHM (4) p.1; Pullen

(34) p.1, 5.

15P&G (31) p.2.

fulfill the requirements of this

regulation.’’ (Emphasis added).

The FRN the Commission published

on June 15, 1994 stated that the North

American Free Trade Agreement

(‘‘NAFTA’’) ‘‘has created industry

interest in being permitted to use

symbols in lieu of words to provide care

instructions, and the Commission seeks

comment on the costs and benefits of

such a change.’’ Based on the comments

submitted in response to that notice, the

Commission decided to give further

consideration to the use of symbols. In

a FRN published on November 16, 1995,

the Commission proposed a conditional

exemption to the ‘‘Terminology’’ section

of the Rule to allow the use of care

symbols without language. The

Commission proposed that, for a 12

month period, care labels with

information conveyed only in symbols

must be accompanied by hangtags

explaining the meaning of the symbols.

The Commission examined two

existing symbol systems—the system of

care symbols developed by the

International Association for Textile

Care Labeling (‘‘Ginetex’’) and adopted

by the International Organization for

Standardization (‘‘ISO’’) as International

Standard 3758, and the system of care

symbols developed by ASTM and

designated as ASTM Standard D5489–

93—to identify which conveys all or

most of the information required by the

Rule and meets other important

criteria.8 The Commission concluded

that ASTM Standard D5489 provided

symbols relating to the information

required by the Rule and that it best met

the needs of consumers and industry.

The Commission also concluded that

the ASTM system was compatible with

the care symbol systems used in Canada

and Mexico, and that any difference

among the symbol systems used in these

countries did not pose insurmountable

problems.

The Commission determined that the

use of ISO Standard 3758 was not

appropriate for the United States for

three reasons. The Commission

concluded that the ISO/Ginetex system

does not provide symbols for some of

the basic information required by the

Rule and, therefore, cannot convey all

the information that the Commission

has found to be necessary to prevent the

unfair and deceptive practices that the

Rule was designed to prevent.9 The

Ginetex system also assumes that

washing machines have internal

mechanisms for heating water to a

precise temperature, and it links

symbols for cool-down rinse, reduced

spin, and reduced mechanical action to

precise temperature settings. In

addition, it includes only normal and

low temperature ranges for tumble

drying. Both of these aspects of the

Ginetex system are inconsistent with the

technology of laundry equipment used

in the United States. The Commission

also determined that Ginetex’s assertion

of trademark rights relating to the ISO/

Ginetex symbols weighed against

adoption of that system.

III. Analysis of Comments

The Commission received 39

comments in response to the November

16, 1995 FRN. These comments

overwhelmingly support allowing the

voluntary use of a system of symbols

without language to communicate care

instructions.10 Only two comments

opposed the voluntary use of symbols

without language.11

Some comments noted the need for

additional symbols not found in either

of the symbol systems that were

considered. Kirk’s and Leather stated

there was a need for symbols for the

care of leather wearing apparel.12 The

Care Labeling Rule, however, applies to

textile wearing apparel and certain piece

goods. In the FRN published in

December 1995, the Commission

rejected a proposal to expand the

coverage of the Rule to garments made

completely of leather. 60 FR 67103 n.3

(Dec. 28, 1995). EPA noted the need for

a symbol for professional wet

cleaning.13 In a separate proceeding,

however, the Commission is considering

whether to initiate a rulemaking to

amend the Rule specifically to include

professional wet cleaning. See 60 FR

67103 (Dec. 28, 1995). If the

Commission later determines to amend

the Rule to encompass professional wet

cleaning, it may be appropriate to

amend the conditional exemption to

add a symbol for professional wet

cleaning.

A. Comments Addressing Most

Appropriate Symbols System

1. The ASTM System

Seventeen comments support the use

of the ASTM system of care symbols.14

One comment, however, expressed

concern about the procedures for

amending the ASTM system: that ASTM

will only review ASTM Standard D5489

every five years, and that, as a private

party, ASTM may not respond to

requests from the public regarding

changes to the symbol system.15 ASTM,

however, can amend a standard at any

time, not merely every five years, and it

has already made changes to ASTM
5726 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 25 / Thursday, February 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

16These modifications were discussed in note 45

in the November 1995 FRN. They are: (1) two

additions to the symbols for machine drying [a

circle in the square with no dots to indicate any

heat; a blacked-in circle to indicate air dry only (no

heat)]; and, (2) a change to the refinements to the

drycleaning symbol (a circle) so that lines

indicating refinements to dryccleaning are placed

next to the circle at an acute angle; if all four

refinements were used, the symbol would consist

of a circle surrounded by four lines in a diamond

formation rather than a square, which avoids

conflict with the symbol for machine drying (a

circle in a square).

17Comment 35 p.4–5.

18Comment 35 p.6.

19See n.3 supra.

20Comment 35 at p.5.

21Comment 39 p.2. The comment, which was

from the European Commission, Directorate A

(Industrial Policy), Unit III A/1 (International

Technology and Industrial Relations) responded to

the November 16, 1995 FRN, described above, and

to the December 28, 1995 FRN, which addressed

certain other issues about the Care Labeling Rule,

including definitions of temperatures. The

comment was numbered comment 39 in response

to the November 1995 notice.

22Comment 35 p.6; Care Labeling Rule Appendix

A.1.b.

23The ISO/Ginetex system used in Europe

conveys temperature for wash water by means of a

specific centigrade temperature in the washtub (e.g.,

50 C). ASTM system allows temperature for wash

water to be conveyed by one, two, or three dots; the

Centigrade temperature can also be placed in the

washtub. The dots were originally also defined as

cool, warm, and hot, with a specific temperature

range (identical to that in the Appendix to the Care

Labeling Rule) to precisely define those terms.

However, as noted above, ASTM deleted the word

indicators from its explanatory chart because of

conflicting definitions of those terms in different

countries.

ASTM also changed the definition of ‘‘one dot’’

from the definition in the Appendix to the Care

Labeling Rule (a maximum of 85 Fahrenheit, with

no minimum) to a range from 65 to 85 degrees

Fahrenheit. The reason given for this change was

to educate consumers that detergents ‘‘are not

effective at lower temperatures.’’ ASTM Standard

D5489–96c Note 5. In the advance notice of

proposed rulemaking published on December 28,

1995 (60 FR 67102, 67103), the Commission noted

that changes in the definitions of water temperature

for ‘‘cold,’’ ‘‘warm,’’ and ‘‘hot’’ water may be

necessary. The Commission will address this issue

in a notice in a separate issue of the Federal

Register.

24American washing machines set on ‘‘cool’’ may

deliver water below 65 Fahrenheit in the winter in

many parts of the United States; as noted above, the

Commission will address the issue of whether the

definition of cold water in the Appendix to the Care

Labeling Rule needs to be revised in a later Federal

Register Notice. Under the current provisions of the

Rule, there is no requirement that consumers be

advised that the cold water they use should not be

below 65 Fahrenheit. However, the ASTM system

encourages informing consumers that detergents are

not effective at lower temperatures, and the Rule

would not prohibit any such truthful information.

25The ASTM Standard now specifies that it

allows the use, in addition to the ASTM symbols,

of a washtub symbol without the representation of

the water wave inside the tub and an iron symbol

with a closed handle.

Standard D5489 at the request of

interested parties. Moreover, the

Commission notes that the Commission

itself must authorize changes to

whatever system of symbols the

Commission allows. In addition, the

public may, at any time, file a petition

with the Commission seeking to change

the conditional exemption, and, if

necessary, the Commission can adopt

exceptions and additions to the ASTM

system for the purposes of this Rule.

a. Changes Affecting the Manner in

Which the ASTM Symbol System May

Be Used To Comply With the Rule

The November 1995 FRN described a

specific version of the ASTM system—

ASTM Standard D5489–1993—and

minor modifications that were being

considered by ASTM to that system.16

The FRN sought comment on these

changes, which have already been made

by ASTM.

Only Industry Canada addressed the

proposed changes. Industry Canada

stated that, for clarity, the proposed new

symbol for ‘‘tumble dry, no heat (air

only)’’ should be an empty circle rather

than a blacked-in circle.17 The

Commission believes, however, that

clarity is enhanced by the use of the

blacked-in circle, as originally

proposed. In addition, Industry

Canada’s suggested change would not

improve harmonization with the

Canadian system, which requires that

the tumble dry symbol be either green

[to indicate normal heat] or yellow [to

indicate low heat]. Industry Canada also

opposed having a symbol that means

‘‘any heat,’’ stating that it believes a

temperature should be given for tumble

drying.18 The Rule, however, allows

manufacturers who are conveying

instructions in words to omit a

temperature instruction for drying if the

hottest temperature for drying would

not harm the garment; the symbol for

‘‘tumble dry, any heat’’ is thus

consistent with the Rule.

Industry Canada also suggested a

change to the ASTM ‘‘do not bleach’’

symbol. ASTM previously changed the

‘‘do not bleach’’ symbol from an empty

triangle with an ‘‘X’’ through it to a

shaded triangle with an ‘‘X’’ through it

to prevent confusion with other

systems.19 Industry Canada pointed out

that confusion might nevertheless result

because consumers may interpret the

revised symbol as meaning ‘‘do not use

non-chlorine bleach’’ rather than do not

use any bleach.’’ 20 This concern was

addressed by ASTM, which changed the

‘‘do not bleach’’ symbol to a blacked-in

triangle with an ‘‘X’’ through it to make

clear that no bleach, whether chlorine or

non-chlorine, should be used. The

Commission welcomes public comment

on this change and on the other minor

modifications discussed below.

Many changes made by ASTM to

Standard D5489 solve harmonization

problems that were raised by

commenters. The European Commission

commented that water temperature

indications in words—such as ‘‘very

hot,’’ ‘‘warm,’’ and ‘‘cool/cold,’’—may

be linked to different specific

temperatures in different countries.21

Industry Canada also noted this

problem, and pointed out that in the

Canadian system ‘‘warm’’ is defined as

50 degrees Centigrade, whereas in the

United States ‘‘warm’’ is defined as a

maximum of 43 degrees Centigrade.22

ASTM has changed ASTM Standard

D5489 by deleting the water

temperature word indicators in its

explanatory chart. Thus, a consumer

consulting the ASTM chart to find the

meaning of one, two, or three dots, in

the wash tub would be told the

temperatures in Centigrade and

Fahrenheit that correspond to one, two,

or three dots rather than ‘‘cool,’’

‘‘warm’’ or ‘‘hot.’’ This change in the

ASTM chart solves the problem of, for

example, a Canadian consumer

interpreting warm to mean 50 degrees

Centigrade.23

The Commission notes that this

change in the ASTM explanatory chart

may mean that the chart does not

communicate adequate information

about temperature settings on washing

machines to American consumers.

Commission staff, industry members,

and others, however, are coordinating a

major educational campaign designed to

educate consumers about the care

symbols, and materials distributed

through that campaign will explain the

correlation of the temperature dot

system to dial selections on washing

and drying machines. Moreover, the

conditional exemption requires that, for

the first 18 months after the effective

date of the conditional exemption,

explanatory material ‘‘decoding’’ the

care symbols used on a care label must

be provided to the consumer purchasing

the garment. If a ‘‘machine wash’’

symbol is used with a temperature

indication (e.g., one dot for cold), the

explanatory material provided to the

consumer would have to explain what

washing machine cycle should be

selected.24

Other recent ASTM changes simply

clarify that the symbols used in the

Canadian system of care symbols for a

washtub and an iron are acceptable

although they differ slightly in shape

from the ASTM symbols.25 In addition,

ASTM modified the standard so as to

make clear that instructions for

‘‘permanent press’’ or ‘‘gentle cycle’’

may be reported in symbols (i.e.,
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 25 / Thursday, February 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 5727

26Stiehler (18) stated at p. 1 that the ASTM chart

shows three iron symbols with indications for the

use of steam at 200, 150, or 110 degrees Celsius and

expressed the concern that the use of steam at these

temperatures could be dangerous.

27Comment 35 p. 6.

28Cranston (10) p. 4; GINETEX (14) p. 5;

FEDERTESSILE (19) p. 1–2; EURATEX (33) p. 1;

Switzerland (38) p. 1–2; European Commission (39)

p. 1–2. These comments noted that if the U.S.

adopts the ASTM system, European Community

manufacturers will be obliged to continue to use

different care labels for goods intended for export

to the U.S. and U.S. manufacturers would have to

do the same for goods destined for export to Europe,

which would diminish the utility of symbols.

29Warnaco (21) p. 2.

30USA–ITA (11) p. 2. However, the Commission

has concluded that allowing the use of both systems

at the same time in the United States would result

in the inconsistent use of symbols by manufacturers

and confusion on the part of consumers.

31FEDERTESSILE (19) p. 2, 3; Warnaco (21) p. 2;

EURATEX (33) p. 2.

32Warnaco (21) p. 2.

33Switzerland (38) at p. 2 and European

Commission (39) at pp. 1–2 stated that Article 2.4

of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade

requires that technical regulations be based on

international standards and encouraged the

Commission to adopt the Ginetex/ISO standard

because the adoption of a different system could

create technical barriers to trade. In the Federal

Register notice of November 16, 1995, the

Commission gave careful consideration to ISO

Standard 3758, acknowledging that the Trade

Agreements Act of 1979 encourages federal agencies

to use international standards whenever possible.

But the Commission also noted that the Trade

Agreements Act explicitly identifies several reasons

why basing a standard on an international standard

may not be appropriate, including the prevention of

deceptive practices and fundamental technological

problems. 19 U.S.C. 2532(2)(B)(i).

34 Koester (3) p. 1; USA–ITA (11) p.4; AAMA (15)

p.2; TLC (16) p.2; Springs (23) p.1; NCCA (27) p.1.

Paxar (17) stated at p.8 that consumers might find

a color code easier to understand than underlining.

Industry Canada (35) stated at p.2 that the use of

underlining would probably confuse Canadian

consumers, who would probably find written

instructions for ‘‘Permanent Press’’ or ‘‘Delicate/

Gentle’’ more helpful. The Care Labeling Rule

presently allows the use of symbols and words

together. The conditional exemption does not

change that aspect of the Rule. Thus, ‘‘permanent

Continued

underlining the washtub) or words on a

label with the symbolic instructions for

machine wash or machine dry. This

option can be used by garment

manufacturers who believe that the

underlining might be confusing,

especially to Canadian or Mexican

consumers, whose existing symbol

systems do not include underlining.

ASTM also removed the steam

markings from the iron symbol and has

clarified that the iron symbol may mean

‘‘Iron—dry or steam.’’ This makes the

ASTM system more compatible with the

Canadian, Mexican, and European

systems, none of which contain a

separate symbol for steam ironing.

ASTM, however, also created a

symbol—an iron symbol with steam

markings that have been canceled out by

an ‘‘X’’—that can be used for the

warning ‘‘do not steam.’’ Finally, ASTM

added a statement to the text of the

Standard explaining that ‘‘the iron

symbol may be used with the

drycleaning symbol to report how to

restore the item by ironing after

wearing.’’

b. Other Changes

Other recent ASTM changes relate to

changes in the Standard that are not an

integral part of the symbol system (e.g.,

the Table of Additional Words to Use

with Care Symbols) or that involve

additions to, or linguistic changes in,

the explanatory text of the Standard or

the text appearing under the symbols in

the explanatory chart. These changes

help explain the system but do not

change its use. In addition, one change

relates to the order in which the

symbols should be used. This change is

not relevant to the use of the ASTM

system to fulfill the requirements of the

Care Labeling Rule because the Rule

does not require that instructions appear

in any particular order (though of course

they must be intelligible).

Finally, several changes relate to

safety concerns raised by commenters.

ASTM revised the text in Standard

D5489 that explains the meaning of dots

within the iron symbol to refer to

maximum temperatures for the iron heat

setting rather than simply to ironing

temperatures. This at least partially

addresses safety concerns raised by one

commenter.26 Another safety concern

was raised by Industry Canada, which

commented that, at least theoretically,

the symbol for hand washing could be

combined with the hottest water

temperatures.27 ASTM revised the text

of the Standard to state that the only

water temperatures that may be used

with the hand washing symbol are 40 C

(105 F) or 30 C (85 F).

2. The Ginetex/ISO System

Six comments stated that the

Commission should adopt the Ginetex

care symbol system to harmonize with

the system used in Europe.28 Two

comments recommended either that the

Commission allow ‘‘the use of GINETEX

symbols supplemented by ASTM

symbols for those care labeling elements

required by the FTC but not conveyed

by Ginetex symbols’’ 29 or allow the use

of either the ASTM or the GINETEX

systems until there is a consensus on an

international system.30

Some comments also noted that

trademark issues should not prevent the

Commission from adopting the

GINETEX system, but should become

the focus of investigation and

consultation.31 One comment indicated

that country-specific royalty waivers

may be a possibility.32 Despite this

possibility, the Commission continues

to have concerns about Ginetex’s

assertion of trademark rights over the

ISO/Ginetex system.

After reviewing the comments, the

Commission reaffirms its conclusion

that the use of the ISO standard 3758 is

not appropriate for the United States at

this time.33 The Commission’s concerns

with the comprehensiveness of the ISO/

Ginetex system, with the system’s

inconsistency with U.S. technology, and

with trademark issues have not been

adequately resolved. The Commission

therefore has decided to adopt the

ASTM Standard D5489–96c system of

care symbols for the conditional

exemption. The Commission agrees,

however, that harmonization of the

symbol system adopted in the United

States with the system used in Europe

is very important. The Commission is

aware that representatives of ASTM and

Ginetex have been discussing

harmonization of the two systems, and

a Commission representative has

attended ISO and Ginetex meetings. The

Commission intends to continue its

liaison efforts with Ginetex and ISO in

an effort to promote harmonization. But,

the Commission does not believe it is

necessary to wait for a consensus on an

international system before it allows the

use of symbols without words. Many

countries—Canada, Mexico, and Japan,

among them—allow the use of symbols

without language in the absence of an

international consensus. Efforts to

harmonize the U.S. and European care

symbol systems can continue even

though the Commission has decided to

adopt the ASTM system at this time.

B. Comments Responding to Questions

Posed in the FRN

The November 16, 1995 FRN included

the following questions about the

possible introduction of the ASTM

system in the United States:

1. Will the underlining of the washtub or

the machine drying symbol be confusing to

Canadian and Mexican consumers? Will the

underlining be confusing to American

consumers? If so, should the Commission

‘‘except’’ this part of the ASTM system from

the conditional exemption? Will ‘‘excepting’’

the underlining of symbols reduce the benefit

of symbols or impose costs on

manufacturers?

A few comments stated that

underlining (which denotes what

cycle—i.e., ‘‘gentle’’ or ‘‘permanent

press’’—should be used) may be

confusing to consumers, at least

initially.34 But most of the comments
5728 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 25 / Thursday, February 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

press’’ or ‘‘gentle cycle’’ could be used with

symbols, such as the washtub or drying symbol. (As

noted above, ASTM’s recent revision of Standard

D5489 makes clear that these symbols can be used

with words.)

35 Koester (3) p.1; Cranston (10) p.2; USA–ITA

(11) p.4; ATMI (13) p.1; AAMA (15) p.2; TLC (16)

p.2; IFI (22) p.2; Springs (23) p.1; Fieldcrest (26)

p.1; NCCA (27) p.1; Pittsfield (30) p.1; Pullen (34)

p.1; AAFCS (37) p.1.

36Cranston (10) p.2; Pittsfield (30) p.1.

37Cranston (10) p.2.

38Pullen (34) p.1.

39ATMI (13) p.1; Springs (23) p.1; Pittsfield (30)

p.1; Pullen (34) p.1.

40AAMA (15) p.2.

41 Koester (3) p.1; USA–ITA (11) p.4; ATMI (13)

p.1; AAMA (15) p.2; TLC (16) p.2; IFI (22) p.2;

Springs (23) p.1; NCCA (27) p.1; Pullen (34) p.1;

AAFCS (37) p.1.

42 Koester (3) p.1; Paxar (17) p.3; Pittsfield (30)

p.1.

43Paxar (17) p.14; Pittsfield (30) p.1. Paxar (17)

stated at p.4 that a legibility standard may result in

problems in the international transport of apparel.

44 Koester (3) p.1.

45Pullen (34) p.2.

46 Koester (3) p.1.

47Pittsfield (930) p.1; Pullen (34) p.2. Pittsfield

(30) stated at pp.1–2 that symbol size becomes

critical when both dots and a temperature

designation are used inside the washtub symbol.

48Paxar (17) noted at p.4 that the use of any point

size less than 25pt on woven labels would make the

washing temperature and the lines that indicate

steam in the ironing symbol difficult to read. The

recommended minimum point sizes include only

the basic symbols and not any underlining of

symbols. Koester (3) at p.1 stated that a 20pt type

size would make temperature indications in the

washtub symbol legible, but did not distinguish

between woven and printed labels.

49AHAM (20) p.1.

50Cranston (10) p.2; USA–ITA (11) p.4; ATMI

(13) p.2; AAMA (15) p.2; TLC (16) p.2; NKSA (20)

p.1; Springs (23) p.1; Fieldcrest (26) p.2; NCCA (27)

p.1; AAFCS (37) p.1.

51 GINETEX (14) p.4.

52Comment 35 p.2.

53ATMI (13) p.2; AAMA (15) p.2.

54ATMI (13) p.2; Springs (23) p.1.

55See Section 5(m)(1)(A) of the Federal Trade

Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 45(m)(1)(A); and, the

Care Labeling Rule, 16 CFR 423.1(a), 423.2, and

423.5.

56NAHM (4) p.2; Paxar (17 p.5; Warnaco (21) p.2;

Pullen (34) p.2.

57ATMI (13) p.2.

58Consumers Union (7) p.2; GINETEX (14) p.4;

IFI (22) p.2.

59 Koester (3) p.1; Cranston (10) p.3; AAFCS (37)

p.1.

60Salant (2) p.1.

61P&G (31) pp.2, 3. Consumers Union (7) stated,

at p.2, that explanatory hangtags should be used

until the public is fully aware of what the care

symbols mean; the comment suggested that the

Commission conduct a poll after one year to gauge

public awareness, and issue another call for

comments. Industry Canada (35) stated, at p.3, that

the adequacy of the one year period can only be

assessed in the context of the total campaign

implemented to educate consumers about the

symbols.

stated that the underlining of symbols

will not be confusing and should not be

an exception from the ASTM system.35

Two comments stated that the

elimination of the underlining would

decrease the specificity and

effectiveness of the symbol system.36

For example, eliminating the

underlining may lead some consumers

to wash and dry apparel items in a

normal cycle, which could damage the

items,37 or might require consumers to

interpret the fiber content and finish of

a garment to determine the specific

cycle to use.38 Some comments noted

that deleting the underlining would

require substituting written cycle

instructions, probably in multiple

languages, increasing the label size and

imposing additional costs on

manufacturers.39 One comment stated

that adopting a care symbol system in

phases, with the basic symbols adopted

at one time and the underlining at

another, may confuse consumers.40

Based on these comments, the

Commission has decided to allow the

use of underlining. A comprehensive

educational program, including the use

of explanatory hangtags and other

materials, should convey what the

underlining means.41

2. Should the Commission specify the

minimum size of the symbols or are existing

requirements of legibility sufficient?

A few comments recommended that

the Rule specify a point type size for

symbols 42 in part because a legibility

standard might allow arbitrary judgment

concerning what is legible and what is

not.43 One comment stated that care

instructions often become difficult to

read after repeated cleanings and that

therefore the printing used on care

labels should be large enough to remain

legible through several care cycles; 44

specifying a minimum type size would

help ensure that symbols on both

printed and woven labels remain legible

after repeated washings.45 A few

comments stated that using 20 point

type 46 or a symbol height of not less

than 5mm 47 would ensure legibility of

the more complex symbols, prevent eye

strain and help people with less than

perfect eyesight and senior citizens.

Another comment stated that, because

of the different characteristics of printed

and woven labels, care instructions on

printed labels should be printed in a

minimum 20 point type and

instructions on woven labels should be

printed in a minimum 25 point type.48

One comment stated that the

Commission should work with ASTM to

determine the minimum size necessary

to convey the symbols.49

Nevertheless, many other comments

stated that the existing requirement of

legibility is sufficient and that the

Commission should not specify the

minimum size of the symbols.50 The

GINETEX system does not require a

minimum point size; it requires that the

symbols be legible and proportional to

the size of the textile article.51 Industry

Canada stated that Canada also follows

a legibility standard and does not

specify a minimum size for symbols.52

A few comments stated that the

marketplace will address the needs of

the consumer so that specifying a

minimum print size is not necessary.53

Because different garments have

different label size needs, some

comments stated that requiring a

minimum point size would

unnecessarily restrict manufacturers.54

The Commission finds that the

existing requirement of legibility is

sufficient and that the interim

conditional exemption should not

specify a type size for symbols. The

Commission has no evidence that the

existing legibility standard has caused

problems with written instructions and

no evidence that the legibility standard

would cause problems with the

comprehension of care symbols. The

Commission agrees that the marketplace

will provide incentives for

manufacturers to print legible care

symbols. In addition, the failure to

provide legible symbols would be an

unfair or deceptive practice, and a

violation of the Rule for which the

Commission could seek civil

penalties.55

3. Should explanatory hangtags providing

care information in language be required for

more than one year? Less than one year? How

long would it take for hangtags to be

prepared and affixed to garments?

Some comments stated that requiring

hangtags for at least a twelve month

period is sufficient to introduce the care

symbols 56 because one year would

insure that products with a wide range

of product distribution and life cycles

would reach the market with the

explanatory labels.57 Other comments

stated that one year is not enough for

the public to learn the symbols and get

used to doing without words.58 Several

comments stated that explanatory

hangtags should be required for two

years to help consumers learn the

details of the system, such as the

underlining, and to increase the chances

that consumers who do not buy clothing

frequently, such as the elderly, would

encounter the hangtags explaining the

care symbols.59 One comment stated

that explanatory hangtags should be

required for at least five years.60 Other

comments, while supporting the use of

hangtags did not specify a time period

for their use.61
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 25 / Thursday, February 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 5729

62Cranston (10) p.3; Pittsfield (30) p.2.

FEDERTESSILE (19) stated, at p.2, that requiring

explanatory hangtags would impose significant

costs on manufacturers and that educating

consumers through media outlets and ‘‘ad hoc

activities at points of sale’’ would be more

appropriate and equally effective. Labelize (32) p.1

also considered requiring hangtags an unnecessary

burden on manufacturers.

63USA–ITA (11) p.5; ATMI (13) p.2; AAMA (15)

p.1, 3; TLC (16) p.2; NKSA (20) p.1; Springs (23)

p.1; Fieldcrest (26) p.2; Pittsfield (30) p.2.

64Springs (23) p.2.

65Consumers Union (7) p.1 and Paxar (17) p.1

recommended that care labels contain a

combination of words and care symbols for the

period during which explanatory information will

be required because the explanatory hangtags or

other information may get lost on the selling floor

or misplaced in consumers’ homes, leaving the

consumers without a guide to interpret the symbols.

The Care Labeling Rule permits the joint use of

symbols and written instructions on a care lable.

The conditional exemption permits the use of

symbols alone on care labels. The decision whether

to use both words and symbols on the permanent

care label during the 18 month period during which

explanatory information is required has been left to

the parties subject to the Rule.

66Paxar (17) at p.5 interpreted the requirement

that manufacturers or importers provide

explanatory information as a requirement that they

print the whole care symbol chart.

67Salant (2) p.1; Koester (3) p.2; NAHM (4) p.2;

Cranston (10) p.3; TLC (16) p.2; Paxar (17) p.1, 6,

7; Warnaco (21) p.2; IFI (22) p.1, 2; Springs (23) p.2;

Fieldcrest (26); NCCA (27) p.2: AHAM (29) p.2; P&G

(31) p.3; Pullen (34) p.2; AAFCS (37) p.1, 2.

Consumers Union (7) stated, at p.1, that it will

publish an article in Consumer Reports explaining

the symbols. ATMI (13) stated, at p.3, that it is

willing to participate, by helping to plan an

educational campaign, disseminating information,

compiling a media contact list, providing limited

printing services, and educating trade associations

in Canada and Mexico. GINETEX (14) stated, at p.4,

that, if the Ginetex and the ASTM systems could

be harmonized closely, a common educational

campaign could be developed that would

strengthen the media impact of the new system.

AAMA (15 stated, at p.3, that two of its members

desired to know the scope and cost of an

educational campaign before they would be willing

to endorse it. Paxar stated, at p.7, that it intends ‘‘to

conduct extensive educational programs through

print, electronic and other means of distribution.’’

NKSA (20) stated at p.1 that it ‘‘will assist in

developing and promoting such a consumer

information effort through our Association’s normal

publications, including the Knitting Times.’’

AAFCS stated at p.1 that ‘‘[b]ecause of their

expertise in both the areas of textiles and education,

AAFCS members should be enlisted to provide

nation-wide educational programs * * *. Members

of AAFCS can be of great assistance in educating

the public through the communications channels

they already have in place.’’

68Paxar (17) p.6; AHAM (29) p.2; Industry

Canada (35) p.3.

69 Koester (3) p.2; USA–ITA (11) p.5; Springs (23)

p.2; Pittsfield (30) p.2. AHAM (29) stated at p.1 that

‘‘AHAM members likely will use ASTM-devised

care symbols with equipment use and care booklets

and on the actual washer and dryer equipment.’’

AHAM also stated at pp.1–2 that iron

manufacturers might place the care symbols on iron

control dials so that consumers can refer to them

to interpret the meaning of the ironing care symbols

on garments; AHAM urged the Commission to

consider the value of this measure.

70 Koester (3) p.2; Consumers Union (7) p.1;

Cranston (10) p.3; USA–ITA (11) p.5; Springs (23)

p.2; Pittsfield (30) p.2. ATMI (13) suggested, at p.3,

that home laundering product manufacturers

provide stickers of the chart, so that consumers can

place the chart on or near laundering appliances.

71 Koseter (3) p.2; ATMI (13) p.3; AAFCS (37) p.1.

P&G (31) stated at p.3 that it has educated

consumers on proper garment care through toll free

1–800 numbers and by providing publications to

home economics teachers.

72 Koester (3) p.2; ATMI (13) p.3.

73Parties who would like to participate in such

a meeting but who have not submitted comments

on the Rule in the past two years should contact

staff listed in the information section of this Notice

to receive information about the meeting.

74Cranston (10) p.3; ATMI (13) p.4; Paxar (17)

p.6; IFI (22) p.2; Springs (23) p.2.

75ATMI (13) p.2–3; AAMA (15) p.3; Paxar (17)

p.5, 6; IFI (22) p.2. Koester (3) at p.3 recommended

that the exemption not become effective until 11⁄2

years after the exemption is adopted to allow time

for educators and manufacturers to prepare

Continued

A few comments stated that hangtags

may not be the most effective way of

educating consumers in part because

consumers tend to discard hangtags

after purchasing apparel.62 Many

comments suggested that the

Commission condition the use of

symbols on the provision of explanatory

information without specifying the

means by which that information

should be conveyed, to allow for the use

of stickers, ultrasound and thermal

labeling, and other labeling methods

that are appropriate for different

products.63 One comment noted, for

example, that the use of hangtags on

packaged products is not practical and

may require changes to manufacturing

operations.64

After reviewing these comments, the

Commission has determined that

conditioning the exemption on the

provision of explanatory information for

18 months after the effective date of the

conditional exemption is sufficient to

prevent the unfair or deceptive practices

to which the Rule relates.65 The

conditional exemption does not require

that manufacturers or importers print

the whole chart on the explanatory

information provided to the

consumer.66 The conditional exemption

does not alter the requirements of the

Care Labeling Rule, and the Rule only

requires that the care instruction

indicate ‘‘what regular care is needed

for the ordinary use of the product.’’

Section 423.6(b).

In addition, the Commission has

determined that limiting the

explanatory information to hangtags is

not warranted because other methods of

conveying the meaning of the symbols

would be equally effective. Allowing

manufacturers to determine the best

way to convey the information—

whether by hangtags, stickers, or by

other means—would allow them to

tailor the means of conveying the

information to the textile item and its

packaging.

4. What types of consumer education

should be planned and to what extent are

industry members willing to participate in

such campaigns? How long would it take to

develop and undertake such campaigns?

Many comments expressed the need

for and willingness to participate in a

strong, nationwide consumer education

effort.67 The comments emphasized the

importance of coordinating consumer

education efforts; 68 consumer education

must include the participation of the

textile and apparel industries, drycleaning and laundering industries,

consumer groups, and the government.

The comments suggested many

specific consumer education initiatives.

Many comments suggested that home

laundering equipment manufacturers

include the symbol chart on new

equipment and in instruction

packages.69 Laundry detergent

manufacturers could also print the

symbol charts on laundry detergent

containers.70 A few comments focused

on the importance of home economics

extension programs and other school

programs in educating consumers with

the help of training materials provided

by apparel, equipment, and detergent

manufacturers.71 Many comments stated

that clothing retailers and cleaners can

display and distribute educational

information and can educate their

employees to answer consumer

questions about caring for clothing. Two

comments recommended posting the

care symbol chart at laundromats and

apartment laundry rooms.72

The Commission agrees that a strong

consumer education campaign will be

necessary to educate consumers about

the meaning of the symbols, and intends

to work with all interested parties to

plan and coordinate an educational

campaign. The Commission’s staff will

contact all commenters (and any other

relevant groups and associations) in the

near future to announce a public

meeting to coordinate an educational

campaign.73

5. If the Commission were to grant a

conditional exemption, when should it

become effective?

Numerous comments stated that the

conditional exemption should not

become effective until interested parties

have had the opportunity to prepare a

consumer education campaign.74

Several comments stated that it would

take about 6 to 8 months to prepare

explanatory labels and approximately

six months to one year for

manufacturers to dispose of existing

inventory and to start affixing hangtags

to apparel.75
5730 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 25 / Thursday, February 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

themselves. USA–ITA (11) stated at p.5 that its

members indicated that it would not take longer

than eight months to prepare explanatory labels.

Industry Canada (35) stated at p.3 that conversion

to the use of symbols may take several clothing

seasons because manufacturers consider their

existing label stock and the capacities of their

printing equipment before they convert.

76Pittsfield (30) p. 2; Industry Canada (35) p. 3.

77Cranston (10) p. 4; AHAM (29) p. 2.

78See Conditions for Republishing the ASTM

D5489 Care Symbol Chart, attached to this notice.

79Paxar (17) p. 7.

80Paxar (17) p. 7.

81 Koester (3) p. 3; USA–ITA (11) p. 6; AAMA (15)

p. 3; TLC (16) p. 2; IFI (22) p. 1; Springs (23) p.

2; Fieldcrest (26) p. 2; NCCA (27) p. 2; Pittsfield (30)

p. 2; Pullen (34) p. 2. Industry Canada (35) stated

at p. 4 that if Canadian manufacturers are able to

use the ASTM symbols ‘‘license-free,’’ ASTM’s

copyright would not pose a problem.

82ATMI (13) p. 4; Springs (23) p. 2; Fieldcrest

(26) p. 2; Pullen (34) p. 2.

A few comments noted that the

conditional exemption does not impose

any new labeling requirements and

provides for the voluntary, not

mandatory, use of care symbols, and

that, therefore, the effective date of the

exemption is important only in terms of

the requirement that manufacturers and

importers provide explanatory

information for a certain period.76 The

Commission finds that approximately

six months will be sufficient to allow

manufacturers to prepare explanatory

labels and to allow the coordination of

a consumer education campaign. The

Commission has therefore decided that

the conditional exemption will become

effective July 1, 1997.

6. Does ASTM’s copyright pose a barrier to

the use of the ASTM system?

A few comments stated that ASTM’s

copyright could pose problems to using

the ASTM symbols if, for example,

ASTM requires a reference to the

copyright on clothing labels or hangtags

or if it insists on royalty payments.77

One comment stated that the utility of

a symbol-based system would be

reduced if Condition #2 of the

Conditions for Republishing the ASTM

Standard Care Symbol Chart 78 requires

an ASTM credit line even when the

entire chart is not used; however, the

comment assumed correctly that no

obligation to credit ASTM exists if the

entire ASTM chart is not copied.79 The

same comment correctly assumed that

Condition #3, which permits

duplication of the ASTM chart royaltyfree when the chart is affixed to goods,

would also allow the duplication of the

chart royalty-free for consumer

education programs even though the

chart is not attached to goods.80

Most comments stated that ASTM’s

copyright would not pose a barrier to

the use of the ASTM system.81 A few

comments expressed the opinion that

the five basic care symbols are nonproprietary and in the public domain

and could therefore not be copyrighted

or trademarked in the U.S. and stated

that ASTM’s Conditions for

Republishing the ASTM Standard

D5489 Care Symbol Chart adequately

addresses any concerns regarding

ASTM’s copyright for use of the symbol

system chart.82

The Commission finds that the ASTM

copyright is not an impediment to

adopting the ASTM system. ASTM

holds a copyright on ASTM Standard

D5489 and on the ASTM Care Symbol

Chart, but not on the ASTM symbols.

Although ASTM has placed certain

conditions on the use of its Care Symbol

Chart, the conditional exemption does

not require the use of ASTM’s Care

Symbol Chart. ASTM’s Condition #1

would not allow modified charts or

symbols to be represented as the ASTM

Standard, but modified charts could be

distributed under some other title, thus

avoiding the credit line requirement of

ASTM’s Condition #2. In the event that

manufacturers, or others, wish to use

ASTM’s chart, they must comply with

its conditions. But the Commission does

not believe that those conditions pose

an impediment to adopting the system.

IV. Summary of Commission’s Decision

Section 18(g)(2) of the Federal Trade

Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 57a(d)(2)(B),

provides that ‘‘[i]f * * * the

Commission finds that the application

of a rule prescribed under subsection

(a)(1)(B) to any person or class of

persons is not necessary to prevent the

unfair or deceptive act or practice to

which the rule relates, the Commission

may exempt such person or class from

all or part of such rule.’’ The

Commission now finds that the

provision presently found in the

Terminology section of the Care

Labeling Rule, that appropriate care

symbols may be used on care labels or

care instructions only in addition to the

required appropriate terms, is not

necessary to prevent the unfair or

deceptive act or practice to which the

rule relates. Specifically, the

Commission exempts manufacturers

and importers of textile wearing apparel

who use the system of care symbols

designated ASTM Standard D5489–96c

from the requirement that written care

instructions accompany care

instructions in symbols. The

Commission has not specified a type

size for the symbols, but they must be

legible. The exemption is adopted on

the condition that the parties subject to

the Rule provide explanatory

information with any garment offered

for sale in the period from July 1, 1997

to December 31, 1998 to consumers

regarding the meaning of the care

symbols that appear on the label of that

garment. To implement this conditional

exemption, the Commission revises

Sections 423.2 and 423.8, the

Terminology and Exemptions sections

of the Rule, respectively.

The incorporation by reference of

ASTM Standard D5489–96c was

approved by the Director of the Federal

Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of

ASTM Standard D5489–96c Guide to

Care Symbols for Care Instructions on

Consumer Textile Products may be

obtained from the American Society for

Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor

Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428,

or may be inspected at the Federal

Trade Commission, room 130, 600

Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, DC, or at the Office of the

Federal Register, suite 700, 800 North

Capitol Street, N.W., Washington, DC.

Pursuant to the requirements of

section 18(g) of the Federal Trade

Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 57a(g), and

the provisions of the Administrative

Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b), the

Commission published notices

requesting comment on the proposed

conditional exemption on June 15, 1994

(59 FR 30733) and November 16, 1995

(60 FR 57552). This conditional

exemption is not subject to the

requirements of the Paperwork

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, because

the conditional exemption does not

create requirements for information

collection; rather, it provide an

alternative method of communicating

information. The Regulatory Flexibility

Act, 44 U.S.C. 601(2), does not apply to

this conditional exemption because,

pursuant to section 18(d)(2)(B) of the

Federal Trade Commission Act, 15

U.S.C. 57a(d)(2)(B), an exemption to a

rule under section 18(g) of the Federal

Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C.

57(a)(g), shall not be treated as an

amendment or repeal of a rule. The

conditional exemption will become

effective on July 1, 1997. The

Commission welcomes comment on the

minor changes that have been made in

ASTM D5489 since the Commission last

sought comment on this subject in

November 1995. The Commission will

consider further revision of this interim

conditional exemption, as appropriate.

Such comments may be filed with the

Office of the Secretary until March 10,

1997.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 25 / Thursday, February 6, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 5731

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 423

Labeling; Incorporation by reference;

Textiles; Trade practices.

Appendix to the Preamble—Conditions for

Republishing the ASTM D 5489 Care Symbol

Chart

Upon written request, ASTM will grant

other organizations a royalty-free license for

republication of the Care Symbol Chart

provided the following conditions are agreed

to:

1. Should the chart or the symbols be

modified, then they may not be represented

as being the ASTM standard.

2. The following credit line shall appear on

all copies made of the chart: ‘‘Copyright

American Society for Testing and Materials,

1916 Race St., Philadelphia, PA 19103.’’

3. Copies of the chart shall not be made

available for sale except by separate license

under which royalty payments to ASTM are

required. This would not apply to copies of

the chart affixed to goods such as appliances,

cleaning agents, apparel, or home furnishings

which are in fact sold. In these cases the

chart is being used to convey information

about the care symbol system to the ultimate

consumer.

4. The license for republishing the chart is

for a specific number of copies and for a

specific period of time which is to be agreed

upon by ASTM and the licensee.

5. The original standard or original art

work for the symbols, if needed, may be

purchased separately from ASTM.

6 September 1995, ASTM

Text of Amendments

Accordingly, the Commission amends

16 CFR Part 423 as follows:

PART 423—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 423

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 38 Stat. 717, as amended; (15

U.S.C. 41, et seq.)

2. Section 423.2 is amended by

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 423.2 Terminology

* * * * *

(b) Any appropriate symbols may be

used on care labels or care instructions,

in addition to the required appropriate

terms so long as the terms fulfill the

requirements of this regulation. See

§ 423.8(g) for conditional exemption

allowing the use of symbols without

terms.

* * * * *

3. Section 423.8 is amended by

adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:

§ 423.8 Exemptions

* * * * *

(g) The symbol system developed by

the American Society for Testing and

Materials (ASTM) and designated as

ASTM Standard D5489–96c, Standard

Guide for Care Symbols for Care

Instructions on Textile Products may be

used on care labels or care instructions

in lieu of terms so long as the symbols

fulfill the requirements of this

regulation. In addition, symbols from

the symbol system designated as ASTM

Standard D5489–96c may be combined

with terms so long as the symbols and

terms used fulfill the requirements of

the regulation. Provided, however, that

for the 18-month period following the

effective date of this section, such

symbols may be used on care labels in

lieu of terms only if an explanation of

the meaning of the symbols used on the

care label in terms is attached to, or

provided with, the item of textile

wearing apparel. This incorporation by

reference was approved by the Director

of the Federal Register in accordance

with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.

Copies of ASTM Standard D5489–96c,

Standard Guide for Care Symbols for

Care Instructions on Textile Products

may be obtained from the American

Society for Testing and Materials, 100

Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken,

PA 19428, or may be inspected at the

Federal Trade Commission, room 130,

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, DC, or at the Office of the

Federal Register, suite 700, 800 North

Capitol Street, N.W., Washington, DC.

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 41–58.

By direction of the Commission.

Benjamin I. Berman,

Acting Secretary.

Statement of Commissioner Christine A.

Varney, Conditional Exemption to the Care

Labeling Rule, December 16, 1996

I am voting today to support adopting a

conditional exemption to the Care Labeling

Rule to permit the use of symbols, without

accompanying written instructions, to

convey the care information required by the

Rule. We live in an increasingly global

marketplace, and, by allowing the use of

symbols, the Commission has taken a

positive step towards enhancing global

harmonization.

In moving toward a symbol-based system,

the Commission had the opportunity to

decide which system would be permitted: the

one developed by the American Society of

Testing and Materials (ASTM), the one

adopted by the International Standards

Organization (ISO), currently in use in

Europe, or a hybrid of the two. Although the

two systems are very similar, they are not

identical.

The Commission adopted the ASTM

system over the ISO system because it

believed ASTM was preferable for several

reasons. The ISO system is trademarked,

which could require U.S. companies to pay

royalties, and the ISO system does not

provide all of the information required by the

Rule. The Commission also determined that

allowing manufacturers to use either the

ASTM system or the ISO system (at the

manufacturer’s choice) could confuse

consumers.

Although I understand the Commission’s

rationale for selecting the ASTM system, I am

not convinced that the differences between

the two schemes are so great that some sort

of accommodation could not have been

reached. While I support the current proposal

for achieving harmony with our NAFTA

partners, I nonetheless believe we may have

missed an opportunity to achieve global

consistency.

I understand, however, that staff will

continue to pursue further harmonization

efforts through negotiations with the

International Standards Organization. I

strongly support such efforts.

[FR Doc. 97–3048 Filed 2–5–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–M