[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 180 (Monday, September 18, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48075-48078]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-23043]



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


FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 418

Rule Concerning Deceptive Advertising and Labeling as to Length 
of Extension Ladders
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (``Commission'') announces the 
commencement of a rulemaking proceeding for the trade regulation rule 
concerning Deceptive Advertising and Labeling as to Length of Extension 
Ladders (``Extension Ladder Rule'' or ``Rule''), 16 CFR Part 418. The 
proceeding will address whether or not the Extension Ladder Rule should 
be repealed. The Commission invites interested parties to submit 
written date, views, and arguments on how the Rule has affected 
consumers, businesses and others, and on whether there currently is a 
need for the Rule. This notice includes a description of the procedures 
to be followed, an invitation to submit written comments, a list of 
questions and issues upon which the Commission particularly desires 
comments, and instructions for prospective witnesses and other 
interested persons who desire to participate in the proceeding.

DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before October 18, 
1995.

[[Page 48076]]

    Notifications of interest in testifying must be submitted on or 
before October 18, 1995. If interested parties request the opportunity 
to present testimony, the Commission will publish a notice in the 
Federal Register stating the time and place at which the hearings will 
be held and describing the procedures that will be followed in 
conducting the hearings. In addition to submitting a request to 
testify, interest parties who wish to present testimony must submit, on 
or before October 18, 1995, a written comment or statement that 
describes the issues on which the party wishes to testify and the 
nature of the testimony to be given.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and requests to testify should be submitted 
to Office of the Secretary, Federal Trade Commission, Room H-159, Sixth 
Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580, telephone 
number 202-326-2506. Comments and requests to testify should be 
identified as ``16 CFR Part 418--Comment--Extension Ladder Rule'' and 
``16 CFR Part 418--Request to Testify--Extension Ladder Rule,'' 
respectively. If possible, submit comments both in writing and on a 
personal computer diskette in Word Perfect or other word processing 
format (to assist in processing, please identify the format and version 
used). Written comments should be submitted, when feasible and not 
burdensome, in five copies.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
John A. Crowley, Attorney, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Division of 
Service Industry Practices, Room H-200, Sixth Street and Pennsylvania 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580, telephone number 202-326-3280.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction

    On May 23, 1995 the Commission published an Advance Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (``ANPR'') seeking comment on the proposed repeal 
of the Extension Ladder Rule, 60 FR 27245. In accordance with mandates 
of section 18 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (``FTC Act''), 15 
U.S.C. 57a, the ANPR was sent to the Chairman of the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation, United States Senate and the 
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Hazardous 
Materials, United States House of Representatives. The ANPR comment 
period closed on June 22, 1995. The Commission received no public 
comments.
    Pursuant to the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 41-58, and the Administrative 
Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 551-59, 701-06, by this Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (``NPR'') the Commission initiates a proceeding to consider 
whether the Extension Ladder Rule should be repealed or remain in 
effect, and solicits public comments.\1\ The Commission is also 
interested in comments on whether the Rule should be streamlined or 
otherwise amended. If the Commission determines, based on the data, 
views and arguments submitted, that the Commission should consider 
additional alternatives, it will publish a supplemental notice of 
proposed rulemaking and will request public comments on those 
alternatives.

    \1\ In accordance with mandates of section 18 of the FTC Act, 15 
U.S.C. 57a, the Commission submitted this NPR to the Chairman of the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, United States 
Senate, and the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and 
Hazardous Materials, United States House of Representatives, 30 days 
prior to publication of the NPR.
    The Commission is undertaking this rulemaking proceeding as part of 
the Commission's ongoing program of evaluating trade regulation rules 
and industry guides to determine their effectiveness, impact, cost and 
need. This proceeding also responds to President Clinton's National 
Regulatory Reinvention Initiative, which, among other things, urge 
agencies to eliminate obsolete or unnecessary regulations.

II. Background Information

    The Extension Ladder Rule regulates the advertising, labeling and 
marking of extension ladders. The Commission had found that the 
industry practice of representing the sizes or lengths of their 
products in terms of the total length of their component sections, 
e.g., a ``20-foot'' or ``20-foot size'' extension ladder consisting of 
two 10-foot sections, tended to mislead the general public into the 
erroneous belief that such represented sizes or lengths were the 
maximum working or useful lengths of the products so described. To 
correct this misconception, the Commission in 1969 promulgated the 
Extension Ladder Rule, which makes it an unfair or deceptive act or 
practice and an unfair method of competition to represent the size or 
length of such product, in terms of the total length of the component 
sections thereof, unless:
    (a) Such size or length representation is accompanied by the words 
``total length of sections'' or words with similar meanings which 
clearly indicate the basis of the representation; and,
    (b) Such size or length representation is accompanied by a 
statement in close proximity to the size or length representation which 
clearly and conspicuously shows the maximum length of the product when 
fully extended for use (i.e., excluding the footage lost in 
overlapping) along with an explanation for the basis of such 
representation.\2\

    \2\ The rule then gives an example of proper length 
representation when the product consists of two ten foot sections: 
``maximum working length 17', total length of sections 20''' or 
``17' extension ladder''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission, as part of its oversight responsibilities, reviews 
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 assists the 
Commission in identifying rules and guides that warrant modification or 
rescission. Accordingly, on April 19, 1993, the Commission published in 
the Federal Register a request for public comments on its Trade 
Regulation Rule on Advertising and Labeling As To Length of Extension 
Ladders, 16 C.F.R. Part 418. 58 FR 21125.
    In its Request for Comment, the Commission indicated that if this 
rule is retained, the Commission intended to revise the examples 
contained in the rule to include ``metric'' measurements. The 
Commission then asked commenters to address questions relating to the 
costs and benefits of the Rule, the burdens it imposes, and the basis 
for assessing whether it should be retained, or amended.
    Six specific comments were received. One commenter, a consumer, 
opined that the only label that should be on ladders is the ``maximum 
working length'' since consumers should not have to do any figuring to 
determine the length of the ladder that would meet their needs.
    Of the other five commenters, four are manufacturers or suppliers 
of ladders and one is a trade association. A number of these comments 
refer to the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard A14, 
which governs the labeling of ladders. ANSI standard A14 details the 
requirements for labeling portable wood ladders, portable metal 
ladders, fixed ladders, job made ladders and portable reinforced 
plastic ladders. The ANSI standard requires specification of the 
maximum working length of extension ladders, as well as several other 
pieces of information not required by the Extension Ladder Rule, 
including the total length of the ladder's sections and the highest 
standing level of the ladder. Compliance with the ANSI standard 
therefore ensures compliance with the labeling requirements of the 
Extension Ladder 

[[Page 48077]]
Rule. Several commenters noted this overlap in coverage of the 
Extension Ladder Rule and ANSI standard, A14, and recommended that the 
Rule be retained unchanged.
    Another commenter stated that the Rule has imposed minor, 
incremental costs, but opined that the benefits have been significant 
in that consumers have a better understanding of extension ladder 
length. The commenter questioned whether there was a continuing need 
for this Rule given the existence of ANSI standard A14 and UL Standard 
184.
    In addition to these specific comments, one general comment, 
applicable to several rules being reviewed, was received from an 
advertising agency association. This organization recommended 
rescission of the Extension Ladder Rule because the general 
prohibitions of Section 5 of the FTC Act covering false and deceptive 
advertising apply to the ladder industry, and thus the Rule creates 
unnecessary administrative costs for the government, industry members 
and consumers. This commenter did not submit any analysis or data 
relating to the imposition of unnecessary administrative costs on 
affected industry members, government or consumers.
    Commission staff also engaged in an informal review of industry 
practices by examining the marking of length on extension ladders 
available for retail sale at several chain stores. That review 
indicated general compliance with the requirements of the Rule. 
Additionally, a check of Commission records failed to find any 
complaints regarding non-compliance with the Rule, or any initiation of 
law enforcement actions alleging violations of the Rule's requirements. 
60 FR 27245.
    On May 23, 1995, the Commission issued an Advance Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (``ANPR'') based on a review of the submissions 
received in response to the Request for Comment. The Commission 
determined that there may no longer be a need to continue the Extension 
Ladder Rule in light of the apparent changes in industry practices and 
the existence of standards mandating the point-of-sale disclosures 
required by the Rule. 60 FR 27246. No comments were received in 
response to this request.

III. Rulemaking Procedures

    The Commission finds that the public interest will be served by 
using expedited procedures in this proceeding. First, there do not 
appear to be any material issues of disputed fact to resolve in 
determining whether to repeal the Rule. Second, the use of expedited 
procedures will support the Commission's goal of eliminating obsolete 
or unnecessary regulations without an undue expenditure of resources, 
while ensuring that the public has an opportunity to submit data, views 
and arguments on whether the Commission should repeal the Rule.
    The Commission, therefore, has determined, pursuant to 16 CFR 1.20, 
to use the procedures set forth in this notice. These procedures 
include: (1) Publishing this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; (2) 
soliciting written comments on the Commission's proposal to repeal the 
Rule; (3) holding an informal hearing, if requested by interested 
parties; (4) obtaining a final recommendation from staff and (5) 
announcing final Commission action in a notice published in the Federal 
Register.

IV. Invitation to Comment and Questions for Comment

    Interested persons are requested to submit written data, views or 
arguments on any issue of fact, law or policy they believe may be 
relevant to the Commission's decision on whether to repeal the Rule. 
The Commission requests that commenters provide representative factual 
data in support of their comments. Individual firms' experiences are 
relevant to the extent they typify industry experience in general or 
the experience of similar-sized firms. Commenters opposing the proposal 
repeal of the Rule should explain the reasons they believe the Rule is 
still needed and, if appropriate, suggest specific alternatives. 
Proposals for alternative requirements should include reasons and data 
that indicate why the alternatives would better protect consumers from 
unfair or deceptive acts or practices under section 5 of the FTC Act, 
15 U.S.C. 45.
    Although the Commission welcomes comments on any aspect of the 
proposed repeal of the Rule, the Commission is particularly interested 
in comments on questions and issues raised in this Notice. All written 
comments should state clearly the question or issue that the commenter 
is addressing.
    Before taking final action, the Commission will consider all 
written comments timely submitted to the Secretary of the Commission 
and testimony given on the record at any hearings scheduled in response 
to requests to testify. Written comments submitted will be available 
for public inspection in accordance with the Freedom of Information 
Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, and Commission regulations, on normal business days 
between the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the Federal Trade 
Commission, Public Reference Room, Room H-130, Federal Trade 
Commission, Sixth Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 
20580, telephone number 202-326-2222.

Questions

    (1) Does the existence of the ANSI standard governing the labeling 
of extension ladders eliminate or greatly lessen the need for the Rule?
    (2) What are the benefits and the costs of the Rule to consumers?
    (3) What are the benefits and the costs of the Rule to firms 
subject to the Rule's requirements?
    (4) Are there other federal or state laws or regulations, or 
private industry standards, that eliminate a need for the Rule?
    (5) Does the Rule overlaps or conflict with other federal, state, 
or local government laws or regulations?
    (6) Is there a continuing need for the Rule or should the Rule be 
repealed?

V. Requests for Public Hearings

    Because there does not appear to be any dispute as to material 
facts or issues raised by this proceeding and because written comments 
appear adequate to present the views of all interested parties, a 
public hearing has not been scheduled. If any person would like to 
present testimony at a public hearing, he or she should follow the 
procedures set forth in the DATES  and addresses sections of this 
Notice.

VI. Preliminary Regulatory Analysis

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA''), 5 U.S.C. 601-11, requires 
an analysis of the anticipated impact of the proposed repeal of the 
Rule on small businesses.\3\ The analysis must contain, as applicable, 
a description of the reasons why action is being considered, the 
objectives of and legal basis for the proposed action, the class and 
number of small entities affected, the projected reporting, 
recordkeeping and other compliance requirements being proposed, any 
existing federal rules which may duplicate, overlap or conflict with 
the proposed action, and any significant alternatives to the 

[[Page 48078]]
proposed action that accomplish its objectives and, at the same time, 
minimize its impact on small entities.

    \3\ Section 22 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 57b-3, also requires 
the Commission to perform ``regulatory impact analyses'' of a 
proposed rule, but only if the rule will have certain 
``significant'' economic or regulatory effects. The Commission has 
determined that a preliminary regulatory analysis is not required by 
section 22 in this proceeding because the Commission has no reason 
to believe that repealing the Rule will have a ``significant'' 
economic or regulatory impact, either beneficial or detrimental, 
upon persons subject to the Rule or upon consumers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A description of the reasons why action is being considered and the 
objectives of the proposed repeal of the Rule have been explained 
elsewhere in this Notice. Repeal of the Rule would appear to have 
little or no effect on any small business. The Commission is not aware 
of any existing federal laws or regulations that would conflict with 
repeal of the Rule.
    In light of these reasons, the Commission certifies, pursuant to 
section 605 of RFA, 5 U.S.C. 605, that if the Commission determines to 
repeal the Rule that action will not have a significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. To ensure that no substantial 
economic impact is being overlooked, however, the Commission requests 
comments on this issue. After reviewing any comments received, the 
Commission will determine whether it is necessary to prepare a final 
regulatory flexibility analysis.

VII. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Extension Ladder Rule does not impose ``information collection 
requirements' under the Paperwork Reduction Act (``PRA''), 44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq. The Rule, however, does contain disclosure requirements, 
which specify that when the size or length of an extension ladder is 
represented in terms of the total length of the component section such 
fact must be noted and a statement must be placed in close proximity to 
the notation which clearly and conspicuously discloses the maximum 
length of the product when fully extended for use.\4\ Accordingly, 
repeal of the Rule would eliminate any burdens on the public imposed by 
these disclosure requirements.

    \4\ Under amendments to the P.R.A. in the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 109 Stat. 163, to be codified at 44 
U.S.C. 3501-20), which will become effective on October 1, 1995, 
these third-party disclosures may constitute a ``collection of 
information'' for which OMB clearance must be sought.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VIII. Additional Information for Interested Persons

A. Motions or Petitions

    Any motions or petitions in connection with this proceeding must be 
filed with the Secretary of the Commission.

B. Communications by Outside Parties to Commissioners of Their Advisors

    Pursuant to Rule 1.18(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice, 16 
CFR 1.18(c), communications with respect to the merits of this 
proceeding from any outside party to any Commissioner or Commissioner's 
advisor during the course of this rulemaking shall be subject to the 
following treatment. Written communications, including written 
communications from members of Congress, shall be forwarded promptly to 
the Secretary for placement on the public record. Oral communications, 
not including oral communications from members of Congress, are 
permitted only when such oral communications are transcribed verbatim 
or summarized at the discretion of the Commissioner or Commissioner's 
advisor to whom such oral communications are made, and are promptly 
placed on the public record, together with any written communications 
relating to such oral communications. Memoranda prepared by a 
Commissioner or Commissioner's advisor setting forth the contents of 
any oral communications from members of Congress shall be placed 
promptly on the public record. If the communication with a member of 
Congress is transcribed verbatim or summarized, the transcript or 
summary will be placed promptly on the public record.

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 418

    Advertising, Trade practices, Extension ladders.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 41-58.

    By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-23043 Filed 9-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M