Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 126 / Friday, June 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 33651

1 61 FR 6801.

(2) Remove bus power control unit 20PC

and replace it with a new improved unit

having part number 106–000–3.

(b) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager,

Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA,

Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators

shall submit their requests through an

appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance

Inspector, who may add comments and then

send it to the Manager, Standardization

Branch, ANM–113.

Note 2: Information concerning the

existence of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Standardization Branch,

ANM–113.

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

(d) The removals and replacements shall be

done in accordance with Dornier Service

Bulletin SB–328–24–061, Revision 1, dated

November 3, 1994, which contains the

following effective pages:

Page No.

Revision

level

shown on

page

Date shown on

page

1, 3 ............... 1 .............. Nov. 3, 1994.

2 ................... Original .... Oct. 14, 1994.

This incorporation by reference is approved

by the Director of the Federal Register in

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

part 51. Copies may be obtained from Dornier

Luftfahrt GmbH, P.O. Box 1103, D–82230

Wessling, Germany. Copies may be inspected

at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite

700, Washington, DC.

(e) This amendment becomes effective on

August 8, 1996.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 19,

1996.

Darrell M. Pederson,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–16245 Filed 6–27–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

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.

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) issues

final amendments to the Appliance

Labeling Rule (‘‘the Rule’’) to permit the

placement of energy use labels required

by the Canadian and Mexican

governments in a location ‘‘directly

adjoining’’ the Rule’s required

‘‘EnergyGuide’’ label. Previously the

Rule prohibited the affixation of nonrequired information ‘‘on or directly

adjoining’’ the EnergyGuide. The

relaxation of this prohibition will

further the goal of the North American

Free Trade Agreement (‘‘NAFTA’’) to

make compatible the standards-related

measures of the signatories to facilitate

trade in a good or service among the

parties. Moreover, the amendment will

result in considerable savings for the

appliance manufacturing industry.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 28, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James G. Mills, Attorney, Division of

Enforcement, Federal Trade

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20580

(202–326–3035).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. The Request by Whirlpool

In July, 1995, the Whirlpool

Corporation (‘‘Whirlpool’’) requested

permission to use hang tag EnergyGuide

labels that have the corresponding

Canadian ‘‘EnerGuide’’ appliance

energy use label printed on the reverse

side, and/or permission to use a single

stick-on or hang tag label consisting of

the Commission’s EnergyGuide

immediately next to (or above) the

appropriately corresponding Canadian

EnerGuide. Whirlpool also asked for

permission to label in the same manner

using the appliance energy use label

required by Mexico, or using all three

labels.

In support of its request, Whirlpool

stated that the continued existence of

separate appliance labeling

requirements among the United States,

Canada, and Mexico represents an

obstacle to free trade among the

signatories to NAFTA. Whirlpool

contended that the ability to print the

labels required by the three countries

next to each other on a single piece of

label stock would mitigate the impact of

that obstacle. Whirlpool also stated that

using such labels would save Whirlpool

significant resources—by reducing the

number of separate U.S. and Canadian

models of appliances that Whirlpool

produces and by reducing labeling

expenses.

B. Applicable Sections of the Appliance

Labeling Rule

Section 305.11(a)(5)(i)(K) of the Rule,

16 CFR 305.11(a)(5)(i)(K), states that: No

marks or information other than that

specified in this Part shall appear on or

directly adjoining [the EnergyGuide]

label except for a part or publication

number identification, as desired by the

manufacturer. * * * [emphasis added]

The language in this section pertains

to labels for refrigerators, refrigeratorfreezers, freezers, dishwashers, clothes

washers, water heaters, and room air

conditioners. Identical language appears

in two other sections relating to labels

for furnaces and pool heaters (16 CFR

305.11(a)(5)(ii)(I)) and central air

conditioners (16 CFR

305.11(a)(5)(iii)(H)(1)). The purpose of

this prohibition was to avoid having

other information detract from the

Energy Guide label.

C. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

The Commission agreed that

permitting manufacturers to use side-byside or back-to-back labeling that

included the energy use labels of the

three NAFTA signatories could further

the goals of NAFTA and could reduce

the cost of compliance with the Rule.

The Commission, therefore, on February

22, 1996, issued a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (‘‘NPR’’) proposing

amendments to the above-referenced

sections of the Rule.1

In the NPR, the Commission

addressed whether permitting this type

of labeling would result in consumer

confusion. The Commission reasoned

that, because the EnergyGuide is the

only one of the three labels that is

exclusively in English, and because

there are two disclosures on it stating

that the information is derived from

U.S. government tests and utility costs,

U.S. consumers may realize that only

one label is pertinent to them. Further,

the United States and Canada, and, to a

slightly lesser extent, Mexico, use

compatible test procedures for

identifying energy use, and require

information to be reported in terms of

kilowatt-hour use per year. Thus, the

Commission concluded preliminarily

that the similarity of the information

being disclosed on each country’s label

may make the possibility of confusion

less likely. Moreover, U.S. consumers

are already seeing Canadian labels on

some appliances (especially in the

northern states), and possibly Mexican

labels, although not directly adjoining

the EnergyGuide. Finally, the

Commission pointed out that, on many
33652 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 126 / Friday, June 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

2The comments are found on the Public Record

at the Federal Trade Commission in Washington,

D.C., under Rulemaking Record Number R611004

(Appliance Labeling Rule). They are numbered

B19229500001–B19229500004. The numerical

prefix ‘‘B192295’’ identifies the comments as being

in response to the NPR. In this notice, the

comments are cited by an identification of the

commentor, the last two digits of the comment

number, and the relevant page number(s), e.g.,

‘‘Whirlpool, 02, 2–3.’’ The four comments were

from: The Association of Home Appliance

Manufacturers (‘‘AHAM, 01’’); The Whirlpool

Corporation (‘‘Whirlpool, 02’’); White Consolidated

Industries, Inc. (‘‘White, 03’’); and, W.C. Wood

Company, Inc. (‘‘Wood, 04’’).

3Wood, 04; Whirlpool, 02; White, 03.

4AHAM, 01.

5AHAM, 01, 2; Whirlpool, 02, 1.

6AHAM, 01, 2; White, 03, 1; Wood, 04, 2.

7 Id.

6AHAM, 01, 1–2; Whirlpool, 02, 1, 3; Wood, 04,

1.

9Wood, 04, 1.

10AHAM, 01, 3, 4; Whirlpool, 02, 2; White, 03,

1; Wood, 04, 2.

11Whirlpool, 02, 2.

12AHAM, 01, 3–4; Whirlpool, 02, 1–2; White, 03,

1; Wood, 04, 2.

13White, 03, 1.

packages, instruction manuals, and

labels that accompany products

destined for multiple countries,

consumers are presented with

information in more than one language.

Thus, the Commission tentatively

determined that consumers are not

likely to be confused or misled by the

presence of multiple appliance energy

use labels, as long as they can clearly

distinguish which is intended for the

U.S. audience.

The Commission noted in the NPR

that it has worked closely with

representatives of the Canadian

EnerGuide program over the past two

years to explore regulatory

harmonization under NAFTA. This

work has centered around each

country’s recent review of its respective

appliance labeling rule, with both

considering each other’s research and

proposed changes. More recently,

representatives of the Mexican

government have joined in this

dialogue. The Commission stated its

intention to continue this cooperative

pursuit of tri-lateral harmonization to

determine whether a single label can be

designed that effectively fulfills the

requirements of all three countries, and

characterized the proposed amendments

as an interim measure to provide

manufacturers greater labeling

flexibility to facilitate trade.

To obtain more information regarding

its proposal, the Commission posed the

following questions in the NPR:

1. Would allowing energy use labels

required by the Canadian or Mexican

governments to be placed next to the

U.S. EnergyGuide be likely to detract

from the effectiveness of the

EnergyGuide or cause consumer

confusion?

2. Should the Commission limit the

information that the amendments would

permit to be placed ‘‘directly adjoining’’

the EnergyGuide only to energy use

disclosures required by the governments

of Canada and Mexico? For example,

should the amendments permit

additional information required by the

governments of Canada and Mexico,

such as environmental or safety-related

information, also to be placed ‘‘directly

adjoining’’ the EnergyGuide?

3. Should the Commission limit the

amendments to apply to energy use (or

other) information required only by the

governments of Canada and Mexico, or

should the amendments permit energy

use (or other) information required by

the governments of all other nations?

II. Discussion of Comments

The Commission received four

comments in response to the NPR.2

Three comments were from

manufacturers of major household

appliances,3 and one was from a trade

association representing

manufacturers.4 All the comments

supported the proposed amendments.

A. Amending the Rule To Permit

Placement of Canadian and Mexican

Energy Use Labels in Close Proximity to

the EnergyGuide

AHAM and Whirlpool agreed with the

Commission that the proposed

amendments would promote the intend

of NAFTA to facilitate the free flow of

commerce across North American

international boundaries.5 AHAM,

White, and Wood agreed that the

proposed amendments would benefit

appliance manufacturers until the

Commission’s Rule could be

harmonized with the energy use

regulations of Canada and Mexico.6

These comments commended the

Commission for its continuing efforts at

harmonization and its goal of

developing a single energy use label that

meets the requirements of all three

NAFTA signatories.7

AHAM, Whirlpool, and Wood stated

that the proposed amendments would

enable manufacturers to comply with

the Rule more efficiently and

economically.8 Wood explained:

Allowing the placement of any two or all

three of the energy labels on applicable

models side by side, above and below or on

a single label or hang tag will allow our

company to reduce the number of [stockkeeping units) required to be built and

tracked. The reason for this is that a great

many of the appliances going to Canada and

Mexico are identical to that produced for the

domestic market, with the only difference

being the energy’ label. In order to build this

change on the production line and keep track

of the ‘energy’ label through the warehouse

and distribution chain, a separate and unique

model is built.

The appliance industry is a very

competitive market and with NAFTA it is a

very competitive North American market. A

relaxation in the current labeling rules will

provide our company with real economic

benefits.9

B. Would the Proposed Amendments Be

Likely To Result in Consumer Confusion

or Detraction From the EnergyGuide?

The comments unanimously

concluded that placement of Canadian

and/or Mexican energy use labels next

to the EnergyGuide would not detract

from the Commission’s label and would

not confuse consumers.10 Whirlpool’s

reasoning was representative of all the

comments:

The primary energy descriptors are

identical for all three nations and the U.S.

label is the only one written entirely in

English. Also, the FTC label notes that energy

consumption estimates are based on U.S.

government standard tests. Furthermore, we

submit that consumers are becoming more

and more sophisticated in quickly identifying

the differences in instructional and point of

purchase labels since an increasing number

of such materials are being written in

multilingual script to accommodate world

marketing trends.11

C. Should the Proposed Amendments Be

Limited To Apply Only to Energy Use

Labels? Should the Proposed

Amendments Be Limited To Apply Only

to Information Required by the

Canadian and Mexican Governments?

All four comments agreed that the

proposed amendments should apply

only to energy use disclosure labels.12

They reasoned that too many unrelated

labels next to the EnergyGuide would

detract from its message and cause

information overload and confusion. As

suggested by White, other information

may be more appropriate communicated

in care and use manuals:

[We] urge that the content remain energy

information only, consistent with the familiar

Energy Guide. Diverse information detracts

from the important energy information and

the industry guards against the appliance

becoming a ‘‘billboard.’’ Literature included

with the appliance and intended as a

continuous guide for safe use and

maintenance is more appropriate for

including other information.13

Moreover, as AHAM pointed out,

some safety and environmental

disclosures are voluntary in some of the
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 126 / Friday, June 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 33653

14AHAM, 01, 4.

15Whirlpool, 02, 2.

16AHAM, 01, 4. 17Whirlpool,02, 3.

countries, and mandatory in others,

while energy use information is

required by law in all three.14

Whirlpool suggested that the

proposed amendments be expanded to

apply to the energy use labels required

by countries in Europe, Latin America,

and Asia, in addition to Canada and

Mexico, even though total

harmonization of labels of all the

countries in these areas may be decades

away. In support of this proposal,

Whirlpool stated that the Commission

should take the lead in permitting

multinational labeling to avoid future

conflicts as the appliance industry

markets its produces worldwide.

Whirlpool provided regulatory language

with its comment that would

accomplish this end.15

AHAM, advocated a more

conservative approach, stating:

There will likely come a time when a

common international ‘‘energy use

disclosure’’ is appropriate and desired, as

U.S. product exports increase to countries

throughout the world. However, at this time,

AHAM does not recommend other countries’

information be permitted in conjunction with

the EnergyGuide label.16

The Commission agrees with AHAM

in this regard. While there may be

sufficient similarity between the

Commission’s Rule and the labeling

requirements of other nations at some

future time to justify including them in

this section of the Rule, the present

record does not contain evidence to

justify an expansion of the proposed

amendments as Whirlpool has

suggested.

III. Conclusion

The record contains unanimous

support for the proposed amendments.

Moreover, with the exception of

Whirlpool’s suggestion to allow the

placement of the energy use labels of

other countries, in addition to those of

Canada and Mexico, ‘‘on or directly

adjoining’’ the EnergyGuide, the record

also supports the form and language of

the proposed amendments as they

appear in the NPR. The Commission,

therefore, amends the Appliance

Labeling Rule as proposed in the NPR.

Manufacturers are still prohibited from

placing other information on or directly

adjoining the EnergyGuide.

Section A—Regulatory Flexibility Act

In the NPR, the Commission

concluded, on a preliminary basis, that

the provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act relating to an initial

Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis (5

U.S.C. 603–604) were not applicable to

this proceeding because the

amendments, if promulgated, would not

have a ‘‘significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities’’

(5 U.S.C. 605). The Commission

concluded, therefore, that a regulatory

flexibility analysis was not necessary.

To determine whether a final

regulatory flexibility analysis would be

necessary, however, in the NPR the

Commission requested information on

whether the proposed amendments

would have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities. No

comments were received on this issue.

In light of the above, and because the

amendments do not impose any new

obligations on entities regulated by the

Appliance Labeling Rule, the

Commission certifies, under Section 605

of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 605(b)), that the amendments

announced today will not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities.

Section B—Paperwork Reduction Act

In the NPR, the Commission stated

that the amendments would not expand

the Appliance Labeling Rule’s existing

recordkeeping and reporting

requirements, and that the Commission,

therefore, was not requesting that the

Office of Management and Budget adjust

the existing clearance for the Appliance

Labeling Rule (OMB No. 3084–0069)

under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). To substantiate the

accuracy of its reporting burden

estimate, however, the Commission

requested comment on the extent of the

reporting and recordkeeping burden

associated with the amendments.

The Commission received one

comment on this issue. Whirlpool

agreed with the Commission’s

conclusion that the amendments would

not expand existing recordkeeping and

reporting requirements. Whirlpool

stated, ‘‘In fact, granting of this proposal

would reduce recordkeeping and

reporting among the regulated

community.’’ 17

Accordingly, the Commission

reaffirms its prior determination that the

amendments do not alter the Rule’s

recordkeeping or reporting requirements

and that they do not, therefore, require

OMB clearance.

Text of Amendments

For the reasons discussed above, the

Commission amends 16 CFR Part 305 to

permit (but not require) appliance

manufacturers to place the energy use

disclosure labels required by the

governments of Canada and Mexico in

a location directly adjoining the

Commission’s EnergyGuide, as follows

below:

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 305

Advertising, Energy conservation,

Household appliances, Labeling,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

PART 305—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 305

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6294.

2. Section 305.11(a)(5)(i)(K), (a)(5)(ii)

(I), and (a)(5)(iii)(H)(1) are revised to

read as follows:

§ 305.11 Labeling for covered products.

(a) * * *

(5) * * *

(i) * * *

(K) No marks or information other

than that specified in this Part shall

appear on or directly adjoining this

label, except a part or publication

number identification may be included

on this label, as desired by the

manufacturer, and the energy use

disclosure labels required by the

governments of Canada or Mexico may

appear directly adjoining this label, as

desired by the manufacturer. If a

manufacturer elects to use a part or

publication number, it must appear in

the lower right-hand corner of the label

and be set in 6-point type or smaller.

(ii) * * *

(I) No marks or information other than

that specified in this Part shall appear

on or directly adjoining this label,

except a part or publication number

identification may be included on this

label, as desired by the manufacturer,

and the energy use disclosure labels

required by the governments of Canada

or Mexico may appear directly adjoining

this label, as desired by the

manufacturer. If a manufacturer elects to

use a part or publication number, it

must appear in the lower right-hand

corner of the label and be set in 6-point

type or smaller.

* * * * *

(iii) * * *

(H) * * *

(1) No marks or information other

than that specified in this Part shall

appear on or directly adjoining this

label, except a part or publication

number identification may be included

on this label, as desired by the

manufacturer, and the energy use

disclosure labels required by the

governments of Canada or Mexico may

appear directly adjoining this label, as
33654 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 126 / Friday, June 28, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

desired by the manufacturer. If a

manufacturer elects to use a part or

publication number, it must appear in

the lower right-hand corner of the label

and be set in 6-point type or smaller.

* * * * *

By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–16476 Filed 6–27–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 172

[Docket No. 94F–0405]

Food Additives Permitted for Direct

Addition to Food for Human

Consumption; Aspartame

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,

HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug

Administration (FDA) is amending the

food additive regulations to provide for

the safe use of aspartame as a general

purpose sweetener. This action is in

response to a petition by the NutraSweet

Co., and will simplify the existing

regulation by replacing most of the 23

currently listed uses of aspartame with

a single use category for food.

DATES: The regulation is effective June

28, 1996. Submit written objections and

requests for a hearing by July 29, 1996.

The Director of the Office of the Federal

Register approves the incorporation by

reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C.

552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 of a certain

publication in 21 CFR 172.804(c)(2),

effective June 28, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit written objections to

the Dockets Management Branch (HFA–

305), Food and Drug Administration,

12420 Parklawn Dr., rm. 1–23,

Rockville, MD 20857.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Blondell Anderson, Center for Food

Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS–

207), Food and Drug Administration,

200 C St. SW., Washington, DC 20204,

202–418–3106.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a notice

published in the Federal Register of

December 8, 1994 (59 FR 63368), FDA

announced that a food additive petition

(FAP 5A4439) had been filed by the

NutraSweet Co., 1751 Lake Cook Rd.,

Deerfield, IL 60015–5239, proposing

that the food additive regulations be

amended in § 172.804 Aspartame (21

CFR 172.804) to provide for the safe use

of aspartame as a general purpose

sweetener.

I. Background

Aspartame is currently approved for

use in a large number of processed foods

under § 172.804 (21 CFR 172.804) (20

permitted uses as a sweetener and 3

permitted uses as a flavor enhancer).

The regulation has resulted from the

approval of 27 separate food additive

petitions (FAP’s).

The acceptable daily intake (ADI) of

50 milligrams per kilogram body weight

per day (mg/kg/day) was established for

aspartame as a result of the agency’s

review of FAP 2A3661, which requested

use of aspartame in carbonated

beverages (48 FR 31376, July 8, 1983).

The ADI is the level of consumption

that has been determined to be safe for

human consumption every day over an

entire lifetime. The agency’s review of

all petitions submitted subsequent to

aspartame’s approval in carbonated

beverages involved primarily: (1) An

assessment of the estimated exposure

from each additional use; and (2) a

determination of whether the

cumulative estimated exposure,

including the newly requested use,

would cause the acceptable daily

intakes for aspartame and for its major

breakdown product, diketopiperazine

(DKP), to be exceeded over a lifetime by

individuals consuming aspartame at the

90th percentile level. The 90th

percentile intake (which represents high

exposure) is the level of consumption at

which 90 percent of the population (a

selected population subgroup)

consumes the ingredient at or below the

indicated value.

NutraSweet is now requesting that the

aspartame regulation be amended to

allow its use as a general purpose

sweetener at levels determined by

current good manufacturing practice

(CGMP). FDA’s CGMP regulation for

food additives requires, among other

things, that the level of an additive used

in food not be higher than that level

required to accomplish the intended

functional effect (21 CFR 172.5(a)(1)).

This level has not, in general, been set

by the agency except when there

appears to be a specific need to do so.

In the case of the agency’s review of

FAP 7A4044, which requested the use

of aspartame in baked goods and baking

mixes, the maximum level of use of

aspartame that would be consistent with

CGMP was set at 0.5 percent by weight

of ready-to-bake products or of finished

formulations prior to baking. In that

decision, the agency imposed a use limit

that can be verified by an analytical

method that is incorporated by reference

into the regulation. That requirement is

maintained in this regulation. For all

other uses of aspartame the agency has

determined that CGMP levels of use

need not be specified.

The practical effect of the amendment

requested in the current petition would

be to simplify the existing regulation in

§ 172.804 by replacing most of the 23

currently listed uses of aspartame with

a single use category for food. As

discussed below, the permitted uses of

aspartame are sufficiently broad that

including any additional category not

allowed by the current regulation will

not cause human exposure to change

significantly.

II. Petition for Use of Aspartame as a

General Purpose Sweetener

To support the proposed amendment,

NutraSweet has submitted a summary of

postmarket aspartame intake surveys

performed by the Market Research Corp.

of America (MRCA) between 1984 and

1992. These surveys (which measure the

actual amount of aspartame consumed

by individuals) track the quantity of

aspartame-sweetened foods that are

consumed over a 2-week period.

According to the July 1991 to June 1992

survey, the intake of aspartame for

individuals who consume aspartame at

the 90th percentile (‘‘eaters only’’) is 3.0

mg/kg/day (6 percent of the ADI) for the

‘‘all ages’’ population group and is 5.2

mg/kg/day (10.4 percent of the ADI) for

children in the 0-month to 5-year-old

subgroups (the groups that consume the

highest amounts of aspartame per kg of

body weight). NutraSweet states in the

petition that aspartame intake from the

potential new uses is not expected to

significantly increase aspartame

consumption above current levels. This

is because: (1) Its intake from the major

use category (e.g., beverages) has

stabilized and the potential new uses

will have, at most, a minor effect on

total consumption; and (2) the permitted

uses of competing high-intensity

sweeteners continue to be broadened.

III. Exposure Estimates

The agency focused its safety

evaluation on whether human exposure

to aspartame as a general purpose

sweetener would exceed the ADI of 50

mg/kg/day; and whether human

exposure to DKP, the aspartame

decomposition product, would exceed

the ADI of 30 mg/kg/day (Ref. 1).

A. Aspartame

In the Commissioner’s 1981 decision

to approve aspartame (46 FR 38285, July

24, 1981), several methods were

described for projecting the level of