17492 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 66 / Thursday, April 6, 1995 / Proposed Rules

wattage, lumen and life rating

disclosures required by the Rule, (2)

require for the year 1970–71 all lamp

labels to explain the meaning of the

word ‘‘lumen’’ whenever it is used, (3)

define the term ‘‘general service

incandescent lamp’’ to mean all A-type

bulbs and all other incandescent bulbs

substantially the same as A-type bulbs,

and (4) define the meaning of the Rule’s

term ‘‘clear and conspicuous’’ with

respect to the minimum type sizes

necessary for required disclosures and

the minimum number of times the

required disclosures must be made on

lamps and/or their labels.

B. Issues for Comment

At this time, the Commission solicits

written public comments on the

following questions:

1. Is there a continuing need for the

Rule?

a. What benefits has the Rule

provided to purchasers of the products

or services affected by the Rule?

b. Has the Rule imposed costs on

purchasers?

c. Does the light Bulb Rule provide

any benefits not provided by the

provisions of the Appliance Labeling

Rule relating to lamps?

2. What changes, if any, should be

made to the Rule to increase the benefits

of the Rule to purchasers?

a. How would these changes affect the

costs the Rule imposes on firms subject

to its requirements?

3. What significant burdens or costs,

including costs of compliance, has the

Rule imposed on firms subject to its

requirements?

a. Has the Rule provided benefits to

such firms?

4. What changes, if any, should be

made to the Rule to reduce the burdens

or costs imposed on firms subject to its

requirements?

a. How would these changes affect the

benefits provided by the Rule?

5. Does the Rule overlap or conflict

with other federal, state, or local laws or

regulations?

6. Since the Rule was issued, what

effects, if any, have changes in relevant

technology or economic conditions had

on the Rule?

7. Should the Commission retain, or

modify in any way, the particular

provisions of the existing Rule that

define the term ‘‘clear and conspicuous’’

to mean certain minimum sizes for

required disclosures and certain

minimum numbers of times that those

required disclosures must be made on

lamps and/or their labels?

8. Should the Commission retain, or

modify in any way, the particular

provisions of the existing Rule that

require all comparative energy

consumption or operating cost claims,

all comparative light output claims, and

all comparative life expectancy claims

to be accompanied by clear and

conspicuous disclosures of particular

comparison data for both the lamps

being sold and the lamps with which

the comparison is being made?

9. Should the Commission retain, or

modify in any way, those provisions of

the existing Rule that duplicate or

overlap provisions in the Appliance

Labeling Rule pertaining to lamps?

10. The Light Bulb Rule requires

wattage, light output and life

expectancy ratings to be disclosed at the

bulbs’ design voltage whereas the

Appliance Labeling Rule requires the

disclosures at 120 Volts regardless of the

bulbs’ design voltage.

a. For general service incandescent

bulbs with design voltage other than 120

Volts, should the Commission continue

to require ratings disclosures at both 120

Volts and design voltage?

b. What percentage of the total

quantity of general service incandescent

lamps sold in this country is comprised

of lamps with design voltages other than

120 Volts?

(1) Describe how, for such lamps, the

light output, wattage and expected life

ratings differ when the lamp is used at

120 Volts from when used at the design

voltage.

(2) In what areas of the country are

lamps with design voltages other than

120 Volts routinely sold and in what

proportions compared with lamps with

design voltages of 120 Volts?

(3) To whom are lamps with design

voltages other than 120 Volts sold and

for what uses?

(4) Do purchasers of such lamps also

routinely purchase lamps with design

voltages of 120 Volts and, if so, what are

the percentages of their lamp purchases

for each category?

(5) How might the market for lamps

with design voltages other than 120

Volts be expected to change in the

future?

c. At what line voltages is electricity

delivered in the United States? What

areas receive electricity at voltages other

than 120 Volts? Describe. Are there any

private electricity delivery systems (e.g.,

industrial plants), that provide

electricity internally at voltages other

than 120 volts? Describe.

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 409

Advertising, Consumer protection,

Energy conservation, Household

appliances, Labeling, Lamp products,

Trade practices.

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 41–58.

By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–8472 Filed 4–5–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

16 CFR Part 460

Trade Regulation Rule; Labeling and

Advertising of Home Insulation

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule and request for

public comments.

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade

Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) is

requesting public comments about the

overall costs and benefits and the

continuing need for its Trade Regulation

Rule Concerning the Labeling and

Advertising of Home Insulation (the ‘‘Rvalue Rule’’ or ‘‘Rule’’), 16 CFR part

460, as well as whether the Rule, if

retained, should be amended to include

new test procedures or specific

requirements for new products, as a part

of its systematic review of all current

Commission regulations and guides. In

addition, the Commission seeks

comments on whether to adopt a nonsubstantive amendment to the Rule that

would permit the use of an additional

test procedure to determine the R-values

of home insulation products. All

interested persons are hereby given

notice of the opportunity to submit

written data, views and arguments

concerning the Commission’s review of

the R-value Rule and the proposed nonsubstantive amendment.

DATES: Written comments will be

accepted until June 6, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

directed to: Secretary, Federal Trade

Commission, Room H–159, Sixth Street

and Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,

Washington, DC 20580. Comments

about the R-value Rule should be

identified as ‘‘R-value Rule, 16 CFR part

460—Comment.’’

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kent C. Howerton, Attorney, Federal

Trade Commission, Room S–4631, Sixth

Street and Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,

Washington, DC 20580, telephone (202)

326–3013, FAX (202) 326–3259.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

The Commission requests public

comments about the overall costs and

benefits of the R-value Rule, and its

overall regulatory and economic impact,

as well as whether the Rule should be

updated to included new test

procedures or specific requirements for
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 66 / Thursday, April 6, 1995 / Proposed Rules 17493

1The test procedures are ASTM C–177 and

ASTM C–518 (which use hot and cold ‘‘plates’’ to

determine R-values for homogeneous ‘‘mass’’

insulation products, like fiberglass batts and loosefill cellulose), and ASTM C–236 and ASTM C–976

(which use ‘‘hot boxes’’ to determine R-values for

heterogeneous insulation systems, like multi-panel

aluminum foil products and insulation systems).

2The Commission has brought seven civil penalty

actions against manufacturers, one against a testing

laboratory, and three against retailers. It also has

brought one consumer redress action against a

professional installer.

3Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., operates

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (‘‘ORNL’’) as a

contractor for the U.S. Department of Energy.

4The Petition, plus attachments, have been

placed on the public record of the R-value Rule and

can be inspected at the Commission’s Public

Reference Room, room 130, Sixth and Pennsylvania

Ave., NW, Washington, DC.

5The testing apparatus used at ORNL is referred

to as the Unguarded Thin Heater Apparatus

(‘‘UTHA’’).

new products, as a part of it systematic

review of all current Commission

regulations and guides. In addition, the

Commission proposes adopting a nonsubstantive amendment to the Rule that

would allow use of an additional test

procedure to determine the R-value of

home insulation products. The

Commission also solicits comments

concerning the proposed nonsubstantive amendment.

II. Background

The Commission promulgated the Rvalue Rule under Section 18 of the FTC

Act in 1979. The Rule became effective

on September 30, 1980. Among other

things, the Rule requires that

manufacturers disclosed the R-value

(‘‘thermal performance’’) of each one

insulation product, based on tests

conducted according to one of four

specified American Society of Testing

and Materials (‘‘ASTM’’) test

procedures.1 When the Commission

promulgated the Rule, it determined

that ASTM R-value test procedures C–

177, C–236, and C–518 were highly

accurate and reproducible steady-state

methods for determining the R-values of

home insulation products. 44 FR 50218,

at 50226 note 189. In the original Rule,

the Commission stated that it also

would accept the use of C–976 once it

was adopted as an ASTM test

procedure. ASTM adopted C–976 in

1982. The Rule, therefore, now officially

recognizes tests using any of these four

test procedures.

The Commission conducted a review

of the rule under the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., in

1984. During the review, the

Commission solicited comments on

whether the Rule had had a significant

economic impact (costs and benefits) on

a substantial number of small

businesses, whether there was a

continuing need for the Rule, and what

changes, if any, should be made to the

Rule to minimize the economic effect on

small entities. 49 FR 22104 (1984).

Based upon the comments submitted,

the Commission determined that it had

no basis to conclude that the R-value

Rule had a significant economic impact

upon a substantial number of small

entities. The Commission determined

not to amend the Rule following the

Regulatory Flexibility Act review. 50 FR

13246, at 13247 (1985).

Since the Rule was promulgated, the

Commission has brought 12 actions to

enforce its provisions.2 The Commission

also has granted three partial or

conditional exemptions relating to

specific provisions, issued one Advisory

Opinion allowing use of an alternative

testing procedure, and adopted three

non-substantive amendments (one that

allowed manufactures to add to their

insulation fact sheets specific

information required by other

government agencies; a second, in

response to an industry request, that

adopted a revised settled density test

procedure for loose-fill cellulose

insulation; and a third that adopted

revised versions of the ASTM R-value

test procedures).

III. Regulatory Review Program

The Commission has determined, as

part of its oversight responsibilities, to

review all current Commission 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 will assist the Commission in

identifying rules and guides that

warrant modification or recision.

At this time, therefore, the

Commission solicits comments on,

among other things, the economic

impact of and the continuing need for

the R-value Rule, possible conflict

between the Rule and state, local or

other federal laws, and the effect on the

Rule of any technological, economic, or

other industry changes. No Commission

determination on the need for or the

substance of the Rule should be inferred

from this request for comments.

IV. Non-Substantive Amendment

The Commission has received a

petition from Mr. Ronald S. Graves,

Research Staff Member, Materials

Analysis Group, at Martin Marietta

Energy Systems, Inc. (‘‘Petition’’).3 The

petition requests that the Commission

include an additional (fifth) ASTM Rvalue test procedure (‘‘ ASTM Standard

Test Method for Steady-State Thermal

Transmission Properties by Means of

the Thin-Heater Apparatus,’’ ASTM C–

1114–92), as an approved test method

for compliance with Section 460.5(a) of

the R-value Rule.4 The test method is

under the jurisdiction of ASTM

Committee C–16 on Thermal

Measurements (which is the Committee

responsible for the other R-value test

procedures required by the R-value

Rule), and is the direct responsibility of

Subcommittee C16.30 on Thermal

Measurements. Mr. Graves is the

Chairman of the Thin Heater Task

Group within C16.30 that meets

semiannually to maintain and keep C–

1114 current.

According to the Petition, tests

conducted in 1983 and 1990 on two

standard reference materials (‘‘SRMs’’)

obtained from the National Institute of

Standards and Technology show

apparent thermal conductivity values

for the SRMs to be within the most

probable uncertainty of ±1.2 percent

between 25 °C (77 °F) and 50 °C (132

°F). The Petition states that results with

single-sided heat flow up or down and

double-sided heat flow agreed to ±0.2

percent. It asserts that these test results

at ORNL5 demonstrate that ASTM C–

1114–92 is an appropriate test

procedure for obtaining accurate

apparent thermal conductivity values on

insulation products.

The accuracy of the ASTM C–1114–92

test procedure, therefore, appears to rate

favorably compared to the accuracy of

the other ASTM R-value test procedures

the Commission has adopted under the

R-value Rule. Evidence in the original

rulemaking proceeding demonstrated

that, if properly performed: (1)

Measurements under C–177 could

achieve results within ±2 percent of the

specimen’s actual thermal value, and a

precision of one percent or better is

normally attained; (2) measurements

under C–518 should come within at

least ±5 percent of absolute accuracy,

with a reproducibility rate of ±2 percent;

and (3) measurements under C–236 can

measure thermal resistance values

within ±2 percent of absolute accuracy.

See 44 FR 50218, at 50226 note 189.

Thus, the Commission is considering

adopting a non-substantive amendment

to § 460.5 of the Rule, 16 CFR 460.5(a),

to include ASTM C–1114–92 as an

optional, but not required, test

procedure for determining the R-values

of home insulation products. Because

the amendment would not impose any

new obligations upon parties covered by

the Rule (but merely would recognize

the use of an additional, optional, Rvalue test procedure), and because the

apparent accuracy of the test procedure
17494 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 66 / Thursday, April 6, 1995 / Proposed Rules

6The test procedure already is recognized by the

industry as an accurate and appropriate test

procedure, having been adopted as an official

ASTM procedure after going through ASTM’s

consensus approval process.

7For loose-fill cellulose insulation, the R-value

tests must be conducted on test specimens prepared

at the product’s long-term, or settled, density,

determined according to paragraph 8 of ASTM C–

739–88 (‘‘Standard Specification for Cellulosic

Fiber (Wood-Base) Loose-Fill Thermal Insulation,’’

approved Oct. 25, 1988, published April 1989). For

loose-fill mineral wool insulation, the R-value tests

must be conducted on test specimens that fully

reflect the effect of settling on the product’s Rvalue. For polyurethane, polyisocyanurate, and

extruded polystyrene insulation, the R-value tests

must be conducted on test specimens that fully

reflect the effect of aging on the product’s R-value,

for example, specimens aged according to the

procedure in paragraph 4.6.4 of General Services

Administration (GSA) Specification HH–I–530A, or

another reliable procedure.

8For single sheet reflective foil home insulations,

the Rule allows manufacturers to determine R-value

according to two options: By conducting R-value

tests according to ASTM C–236–87 or ASTM C–

976–82; or by measuring the emissivity (reflectivity)

of the product according to ASTM E–408 (or

another test method that provides comparable

results), and then determining the R-value for the

measured emissivity level, and the air space and

direction of heat flow for the intended application,

using the tables in the most recent edition of the

American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and AirConditioning Engineers’ (ASHRAE) handbook

(using the R-value shown for 50 °F, with a

temperature differential of 30 °F).

compares favorably to the test

procedures already required by the Rule

(so the amendment likely would not

lessen consumer protection),6 the

proposed amendment appears to be

non-substantive under Section

18(d)(2)(B) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C.

57a(d)(2)(B). Because the amendment

appears to be non-substantive, the

Commission believes that it does not

need to solicit public comment or

follow the lengthy rulemaking

proceedings that would be required for

a substantive amendment to the rule. On

the other hand, because the Commission

is soliciting comments as part of its

regulatory review of the Rule, the

Commission has determined in its

discretion to solicit comments on the

proposed amendment.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

A. Regulatory Review

As part of its on-going regulatory

review program for all its rules and

guides, the Commission solicits public

comments on the following questions:

(1) Is there a continuing need for the Rvalue Rule?

(a) What benefits has the Rule

provided to purchasers of the

products or services affected by the

Rule?

(b) Has the Rule imposed costs on

purchasers?

(2) What changes, if any, should be

made to the Rule to increase the

benefits of the Rule to purchasers?

(a) How would these changes affect

the costs the Rule imposes on firms

subject to its requirements?

(3) What significant burdens or costs,

including costs of compliance, has

the Rule imposed on firms subject

to its requirements?

(a) Has the Rule provided benefits to

such firms?

(4) What changes, if any, should be

made to the Rule to reduce the

burdens or costs imposed on firms

subject to its requirements?

(a) How would these changes affect

the benefits provided by the Rule?

(5) Does the Rule overlap or conflict

with other federal, state, or local

laws or regulations?

(6) Since the Rule was issued, what

effects, if any, have changes in

relevant technology or economic

conditions had on the Rule?

In addition to the questions raised

above, the Commission solicits

comments on the following issues. First,

should the Rule be revised to require the

use of different test procedures or

specifications than those currently

specified for certain types of products?

In addition to specifying R-value test

procedures, the Rule currently specifies

procedures that must be followed in

preparing specimens of certain types

and forms of home insulation for testing

under the R-value test procedures.7 The

Rule also contains specific requirements

for determining the R-values of

reflective home insulation products

(which perform as thermal insulation

only when installed as a system with

one or more air spaces).8 The

Commission thus solicits comments

concerning whether the Rule should be

amended to specify different or

additional test procedures or

specifications for insulation products

specifically addressed in the Rule.

Second, are the insulation products

for which the Rule does not sufficiently

address product-specific issues relating

to testing or preparation of test

specimens? As noted, in some instances

the Rule provides particular procedures

to be followed in preparing specimens

for R-value testing where the

Commission found there was postinstallation effects (e.g., settling of

loose-fill insulation products, aging of

certain cellular plastics insulation

products) that need to be considered.

During the period since the Commission

promulgated the Rule, additional home

insulation products designed to slow

down heat flow have been developed

and automatically have been covered by

the Rule. However, because these

products did not exist when the Rule

was issued, the Rule currently contains

no specific test specimen preparation

provisions for these new products. The

Commission, therefore, solicits

comments on whether the Rule should

be revised to specify the manner in

which specimens of new products

should be prepared for R-value testing

to ensure that R-values and related

information are accurate and based on

uniform standards.

B. Non-Substantive Amendment

The Commission solicits comments

concerning the Petition and the

Commission’s proposal to adopt a nonsubstantive amendment to the Rule that

would recognize ASTM C–1114–92 as

an acceptable test method for

determining the R-value of home

insulation products under Section 460.5

of the R-value Rule, 16 CFR 460.5.

Interested parties are invited to submit

any data or other information relevant to

whether the Commission should adopt

the proposed amendment.

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 460

Advertising, Incorporation by

reference, Insulation, Labeling, Trade

practices.

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.

By the direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–8471 Filed 4–5–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

27 CFR Parts 55, 72, 178, and 179

[Notice No. 807]

RIN 1512–AB35

Implementation of Public Law 103–322,

the Violent Crime Control and Law

Enforcement Act of 1994 (94F–022P)

AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco

and Firearms (ATF), Department of the

Treasury.

ACTION: Proposed rulemaking cross

referenced to temporary regulations.

SUMMARY: In the Rules and Regulations

portion of this Federal Register, the

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and

Firearms (ATF) is issuing temporary

regulations regarding the

implementation of Public Law 103–322,

the Violent Crime Control and Law

Enforcement Act of 1994. These

regulations implement the law by

restricting the manufacture, transfer,

and possession of certain semiautomatic

assault weapons and large capacity