[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 22, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15198-15199]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7059]




[[Page 15197]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part V





Federal Trade Commission





_______________________________________________________________________



16 CFR Part 305



Energy Consumption and Water Use of Certain Home Appliances and Other 
Products; Final Rule and Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 22, 1995 / 
Rules and Regulations 
[[Page 15198]] 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

16 CFR Part 305


Rule Concerning Disclosures Regarding Energy Consumption and 
Water Use of Certain Home Appliances and Other Products Required Under 
the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (``Appliance Labeling Rule'')

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Final rule, policy statement delaying enforcement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission, in response to a petition, 
issues an Enforcement Policy Statement under which the Commission will 
avoid taking law enforcement actions against manufacturers of general 
service incandescent lamps (including reflector lamps) not in 
compliance with the labeling disclosure requirements of the Appliance 
Labeling Rule until December 1, 1995.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 22, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent C. Howerton, Attorney, Division 
of Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Room S-4631, Federal 
Trade Commission, Washington, DC 20580, telephone 202/326-3013.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On May 13, 1994, the Commission published amendments to the 
Appliance Labeling Rule to bring certain lamp products under the Rule's 
coverage.<SUP>1 The amendments will become effective on May 15, 1995. 
The Commission promulgated the amendments in response to a directive in 
the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (``EPA 92'').<SUP>2 In a petition dated 
January 31, 1995 (``Petition''), the Lamp Section of The National 
Electrical Manufacturers Association (``NEMA'')<SUP>3 requested that 
the Commission allow manufacturers of specific types of incandescent 
lamp products an option as to where on the package specific disclosures 
must be made, and stay compliance with the Rule through November 30, 
1995. In a document published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal 
Register, the Commission proposes amendments to the lamp labeling 
requirements of the Appliance Labeling Rule and requests comments on 
the amendments. The Commission responds to NEMA's request for a stay 
below.

    \1\Final rule and Statement of Basis and Purpose (``SBP''), 59 
FR 25176. On December 29, 1994, the Commission published minor, 
technical amendments to resolve certain inconsistencies in paragraph 
numbering and language that had arisen during the course of four 
recent proceedings amending the Rule. 59 FR 67524.
    \2\Pub. L. No. 102-486, 106 Stat. 2776, 2817-2832 (Oct. 24, 
1992) (codified at 42 U.S.C. 6201, 6291-6309).
    \3\NEMA is a trade association representing the nation's largest 
manufacturers of lamp products. Its members produce more than 90 
percent of the lamp products subject to the lamp labeling 
requirements of the Appliance Labeling Rule. Petition at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. NEMA's Request for a Stay

    NEMA's Petition requests that the Commission stay, through November 
30, 1995, ``compliance against manufacturers who, in good faith and 
despite the exercise of due diligence, are unable to change all of 
their lamp packages prior to the May 15, 1995 effective date of the 
Lamp Labeling Rule.'' In support of its request for a stay, NEMA 
asserts that manufacturers must change by May 15, 1995, a large number 
of packaging designs and equipment for many stock-keeping units 
(``SKUs'').<SUP>4 The extent of the changes to the lamp packages, the 
number of product-types affected, and the need to coordinate energy 
efficiency disclosures with other marketing information, such as logos, 
names, and comparative representations, has resulted in a more time-
consuming and costly conversion process than NEMA and its members 
initially projected. The lamp labeling amendments have had the effect 
of requiring manufacturers to undertake substantial redesign of the 
lamp package. According to NEMA, some manufacturers have undertaken 
extensive market research to determine the most effective placement of 
required disclosures in conjunction with other marketing information. 
Because the marketing significance of a lamp package is much greater 
than that of a yellow EnergyGuide attached to a larger and more 
expensive home appliance, the redesign of lamp packages entails much 
more than merely adding a disclosure box and some explanatory 
statements.<SUP>5

    \4\NEMA's counsel informed the Commission's staff that its 
members produce over two thousand SKUs that will be covered by the 
lamp labeling requirements of the Appliance Labeling Rule.
    \5\Petition at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, NEMA asserts that, because of ambiguities in the lamp 
labeling requirements of the Appliance Labeling Rule and the different 
requirements of the preexisting Light Bulb Rule, 16 CFR Part 409, it 
has been necessary for manufacturers to seek various clarifications and 
other advice from the Commission's staff before manufacturers could 
finalize package designs for their entire inventory.<SUP>6 NEMA states 
that, while the Commission's staff offered informal advice on many 
occasions, NEMA believes it needs formal, written guidance concerning 
specific issues.<SUP>7 Because of the number of issues involved, NEMA 
asserts that manufacturers have been unable in many respects to 
complete their packaging designs, or to order new printing plates and 
paper stock pending resolution of specific issues. NEMA contends, 
therefore, that even acting in good faith and exercising due diligence, 
manufacturers are unlikely to be able to complete the changeover of 
their entire packaging inventory prior to the May 15, 1995, effective 
date.<SUP>8 Accordingly, NEMA requests that the Commission stay 
compliance of the lamp labeling provisions of the Appliance Labeling 
Rule for all lamps other than general service fluorescent lamps for six 
months, through November 30, 1995.<SUP>9

    \6\Petition at 8.
    \7\Id. at 2 note 1, 8. NEMA has consolidated and limited the 
issues on which it requests written advice in a letter to the 
Commission's staff dated January 30, 1995. The Commission's staff 
responded to the issues raised in that letter in a separate, written 
staff opinion letter.
    \8\Id.
    \9\Id. at 9-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Enforcement Policy Statement

    The Commission has determined that it would not be appropriate for 
the Commission to stay the effective date of the lamp labeling 
amendments to the Appliance Labeling Rule because the effective date is 
set by the EPA 92 amendments to EPCA and the statute does not authorize 
the Commission to extend the effective date. 42 U.S.C. 
6294(a)(2)(C)(i). The Commission, however, has determined to grant 
manufacturers of incandescent lamps the additional time petitioner 
requests.
    In light of the amendments to the Rule the Commission proposes 
today elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register in response to 
the Petition from NEMA and the apparent uncertainties among 
incandescent lamp manufacturers regarding their compliance 
responsibilities under the combined requirements of the Appliance 
Labeling Rule and the Light Bulb Rule, 16 CFR Part 409, and in order to 
minimize relabeling costs, the Commission has determined to not take 
law enforcement actions until December 1, 1995, against manufacturers 
of incandescent lamp products not in compliance with the lamp labeling 
requirements of the Appliance Labeling Rule. Petitioner, however, has 
not demonstrated why a similar delay should apply to the labeling 
disclosure requirements for medium base compact fluorescent lamps, as 
requested in the Petition. The Commission, therefore, 
[[Page 15199]] has determined that the delay in taking law enforcement 
actions will not apply to the labeling requirements for medium base 
compact fluorescent lamps.<SUP>10

    \10\No evidence was presented in the original rulemaking record 
concerning the effect, if any, of different voltages on compact 
fluorescent lamps, which operate through the use of a ballast that 
regulates the lamp current during operation, or that medium base 
compact fluorescent lamps are produced or marketed with design 
voltages other than 120 volts. Similarly, the delay will not apply 
to the labeling disclosure requirements for general service 
fluorescent lamps, for which petitioner did not request a stay.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 305

    Advertising, Consumer protection, Energy conservation, Household 
appliances, Labeling, Lamp products, Penalties, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-7059 Filed 3-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P