Rules and Regulations Under the Wool

57808 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 183 / Friday, September 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules (9) Be received by the TSP record- I. Introduction Regulatory Flexibility and Paperwork keeper not more than 365 calendar days The Wool Products Labeling Act of Reduction Acts, as well as the text of the after the date of the participant’s 1939 (‘‘Wool Act’’) 1 and Rules 2 require proposed amendments. signature. marketers to, among other things, attach II. Summary of Comments * * * * * a label to each covered wool product The Commission received six [FR Doc. 2013–22894 Filed 9–19–13; 8:45 am] disclosing: (1) The percentages by comments 7 in response to its ANPR: BILLING CODE 6760–01–P weight of the wool, recycled wool, and three from individuals; 8 one from the other fibers accounting for 5% or more Bureau Veritas CPS; 9 one from the of the product, and the aggregate of all American Apparel & Footwear FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION other fibers; (2) the maximum Association (‘‘AAFA’’); 10 and a Joint percentage of the total weight of the Comment from five textile industry 16 CFR Part 300 wool product of any non-fibrous matter; associations (‘‘Joint Comment’’).11 In (3) the name under which the RIN 3084–AB29 addition, the Commission has decided manufacturer or other responsible to consider a comment filed in the company does business or, in lieu Rules and Regulations Under the Wool ongoing Textile Rulemaking because it thereof, the registered identification Products Labeling Act of 1939 raises issues relevant to the Wool number (‘‘RN number’’) of such Rules.12 AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. company; 3 and (4) the name of the ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. country where the wool product was A. General Comments 4 processed or manufactured. As part of A number of commenters expressed SUMMARY: Based on comments received its ongoing regulatory review program, general support for the Rules, citing in response to its Advance Notice of the Commission published an Advance their benefits or identifying deceptive Proposed Rulemaking, the Federal Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and practices that they address.13 For Trade Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’ Request for Public Comment (‘‘ANPR’’) example, the Joint Comment noted a or ‘‘FTC’’) proposes amending its rules 5 in January 2012 seeking comment on Cashmere and Camel Hair and regulations under the Wool the economic impact of, and the Manufacturers Institute study finding Products Labeling Act of 1939 (‘‘Wool continuing need for, the Wool Rules. that, between 2004 and 2009, false Rules’’ or ‘‘Rules’’) to: conform to the The ANPR sought comment generally labeling of cashmere and other requirements of the Wool Suit Fabric on the Rules’ benefits to consumers and superfine wool had decreased.14 Labeling Fairness and International burdens on businesses. It also asked Several commenters, however, urged Standards Conforming Act, which about specific issues, including how to modification of the Rules. One revised the labeling requirements for modify the Rules to implement the suggested that the Commission remind cashmere and certain other wool Wool Suit Fabric Labeling Fairness and firms ‘‘that they are responsible for products; and align with the proposed International Standards Conforming Act carrying out all necessary tests amended rules and regulations under 6 (‘‘Conforming Act’’), and the costs and concerning the raw material and its the Textile Fiber Products Identification benefits of certain provisions of the processing if they want to be sure of the Act (‘‘Textile Rules’’). The Commission Wool Act. quality, correct labeling, and seeks comment on these proposals and This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking compliance with the Rules.’’ 15 Another several other issues. (‘‘NPRM’’) summarizes the comments advocated facilitating greater use of DATES: Written comments must be received and explains the Commission’s multi-lingual labeling without received on or before November 25, decision to retain the Wool Rules. It also proposing any specific amendments.16 2013. explains why the Commission proposes Two commenters favored ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a certain amendments and why it declines harmonizing the regulation of wool and comment online or on paper, by to propose others. Additionally, it poses other textile products. One noted that following the instructions in the questions soliciting comment. Finally, having separate Textile and Wool Acts Request for Comment part of the the NPRM sets forth the Commission’s ‘‘leads to confusion and redundancy for SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section regulatory analyses under the U.S. companies.’’ 17 Another advocated below. Write ‘‘Wool Rules, 16 CFR Part 1 300, Project No. P124201’’ on your 15 U.S.C. 68–68j. 7 The comments are posted at http://www.ftc.gov/ 2 Commission’s Rules and Regulations under the comment, and file your comment online os/comments/woolanpr/index.shtm. The Wool Products Labeling Act, 16 CFR part 300, Commission has assigned each comment a number at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ which implement the Wool Act. appearing after the name of the commenter and the ftc/woolrulesnprm by following the 3 Prior to issuing this NPRM, the Commission’s date of submission. This notice cites comments instructions on the web-based form. If staff provided guidance stating that a business using the last name of the individual submitter or you prefer to file your comment on located outside the United States can comply with the name of the organization, followed by the the business name label disclosure requirement by number assigned by the Commission. paper, mail or deliver your comment to disclosing the business name of the wool product 8 Anderson (6), Miller (7), Slavitt (4). the following address: Federal Trade manufacturer or the RN number or business name 9 Hargrave, Bureau Veritas (2). of a company in the United States that is directly Commission, Office of the Secretary, 10 American Apparel & Footwear Association (5). involved with importing, distributing, or selling the 11 Room H–113 (Annex Q), 600 product. For clarity, the Commission notes here that American Manufacturing Trade Action Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, a business located outside the United States that Coalition, American Sheep Industry Association, DC 20580. engages in commerce subject to the Act (e.g., an Cashmere and Camel Hair Manufacturers Institute, exporter engaged in the sale, offering for sale, the National Council of Textile Organizations, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: advertising, delivery, or transportation of a covered the National Textile Association (3). Robert M. Frisby, Attorney, (202) 326– wool product in the United States) may also comply 12 Varley (3), available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/ 2098, Federal Trade Commission, with this requirement by disclosing its own comments/textilerulesanpr/index.shtm. business name on the label. See 15 U.S.C. 68a and 13 AAFA (5), Anderson (6); Joint Comment (3). Division of Enforcement, Bureau of 14 Consumer Protection, 600 Pennsylvania 68b(a)(2)(C) and 16 CFR 300.3. Joint Comment (3). 4 15 U.S.C. 68b(a). 15 Id. Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. 5 77 FR 4498 (January 30, 2012). 16 Miller (7). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 6 Public Law 109–428, 120 Stat. 2913. 17 AAFA (5). VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:10 Sep 19, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 183 / Friday, September 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 57809 requiring disclosure of wool content Union Regulation N. 1007/2011; and (3) small businesses, or that the required only above a known quantity, such as limit the use of ‘‘S’’ numbers to wool.26 disclosures are not important or 3% or 5%, which ‘‘would bring the The Joint Comment, however, reported material to consumers. On the basis of Wool Act closer in line with the Textile the lack of consensus in the trade this record, the Commission concludes Fiber Products Identification Act regarding ‘‘how the S numbers apply in that a continuing need exists for the requirements.’’ 18 It also noted that the case of blends’’ and suggested the Wool Rules and that the public interest doing so ‘‘would eliminate the need for Commission seek further comment and clearly requires retention of the Rules. declaring the wool content when we perhaps conduct an industry Moreover, the Act directs the find wool in a decorative thread in a workshop.27 Commission to issue rules for the garment or . where the presence of disclosure of information required by D. Testing wool is insignificant.’’ 19 the Act. Two comments addressed testing Although the record supports B. Treatment of Particular Fibers issues. Slavitt noted that testing to retaining the Rules, it, along with the Several commenters focused on the determine fiber type is inherently Commission’s experience, supports Rules’ treatment of particular fibers. subjective and that laboratory results for modifying or clarifying a number of One asked that the Rules cover yak a product can vary for a number of sections. In particular, the Wool Rules fiber.20 Similarly, as part of a proposal reasons, especially for blended wool should reflect the Wool Act as amended to standardize animal fiber names, the products containing multiple fiber in 2006 by the Conforming Act and Joint Comment recommended defining types. This commenter explained that align with the proposed amended wool to include fine animal fibers such blended fabrics are difficult to test and Textile Rules.34 Accordingly, the as yak and guanaco.21 The Joint that processing and dyeing can alter the Commission proposes amending the Comment further asked that the Rules fabric. It cited the results of a 2005 test Rules regarding fiber content ‘‘provide for precise classification of conducted by the Cashmere and Camel disclosures, country-of-origin fibers that have come into commercial Hair Manufacturer’s Institute revealing disclosures, and wool guaranties.

Load more