[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 247 (Friday, December 22, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81232-81240]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-32392]



[[Page 81231]]

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

Part VIII





Federal Trade Commission





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



16 CFR Part 432



Trade Regulation Rule Relating to Power Output Claims for Amplifiers 
Utilized in Home Entertainment Products; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 247 / Friday, December 22, 2000 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 81232]]


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

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

16 CFR Part 432


Trade Regulation Rule Relating To Power Output Claims For 
Amplifiers Utilized in Home Entertainment Products

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (``Commission'' or ``FTC''), 
pursuant to section 18 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, issues 
final amendments to its Trade Regulation Rule on Power Output Claims 
for Amplifiers Utilized in Home Entertainment Products (``Amplifier 
Rule'' or ``Rule''). The Commission amends the Rule to: exempt sellers 
who make power output claims in media advertising from the requirement 
to disclose total rated harmonic distortion and the associated power 
bandwidth and impedance ratings; clarify the manner in which the Rule's 
testing procedures apply to self-powered subwoofer-satellite 
combination speaker systems; and reduce the preconditioning power 
output requirement from one-third of rated power to one-eighth of rated 
power. This document constitutes the Commission's Statement of Basis 
and Purpose for the amendments.

EFFECTIVE DATES: This Rule is effective on February 20, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the amended Rule and the Statement of 
Basis and Purpose should be sent to the Consumer Response Center, 
Federal Trade Commission, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., 
Washington, DC 20580.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Murphy, Economist, Division of 
Consumer Protection, Bureau of Economics, (202) 326-3524, or Neil 
Blickman, Attorney, Division of Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer 
Protection, (202) 326-3038, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, DC 
20580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Statement of Basis and Purpose

Part A--Introduction

    This document is published pursuant to section 18 of the FTC Act, 
15 U.S.C. 57a et seq., the provisions of Part 1, Subpart B of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 1.14, and 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq. 
This authority permits the Commission to promulgate, modify, and repeal 
trade regulation rules that define with specificity acts or practices 
that are unfair or deceptive in or affecting commerce within the 
meaning of section 5(a)(1) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 45(a)(1). The 
Commission undertook 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.
    The Amplifier Rule was promulgated on May 3, 1974 (39 FR 15387), to 
assist consumers in purchasing power amplification equipment for home 
entertainment purposes by standardizing the measurement and disclosure 
of various performance characteristics of the equipment. On April 7, 
1997, the Commission published a Federal Register Notice (``FRN'') 
seeking comment on the Rule as part of an ongoing project to review all 
Commission rules and guides to determine their current effectiveness 
and impact (62 FR 16500). This FRN sought comment on the costs and 
benefits of the Rule, what changes in the Rule would increase its 
benefits to purchasers and how those changes would affect compliance 
costs, and whether technological or marketplace changes have affected 
the Rule. The FRN also sought comment on issues related to the Rule's 
product coverage, test procedures, and disclosure requirements.
    The comments in response to the FRN generally expressed continuing 
support for the Rule, stating that it has given consumers a 
standardized method of comparing the power output of audio amplifiers, 
and has created a level playing field among competitors. The comments 
also suggested that there have been technological and marketplace 
changes that may warrant modifications to the Rule's testing and 
disclosure requirements, and a clarification of the Rule's 
applicability to self-powered loudspeakers for use with personal 
computers and home stereo systems. Certain comments also recommended 
that the Commission expand the Rule's coverage to include automotive 
sound amplification products. On the basis of this review, the 
Commission determined to retain the Rule, but to seek additional 
comment on possible amendments to the Rule.
    The Commission published an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(``ANPR'') on July 9, 1998 (63 FR 37238), seeking public comment on 
whether it should initiate a rulemaking proceeding by publishing a 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (``NPR'') under section 18 of the FTC 
Act, 15 U.S.C. 57a. The ANPR solicited specific comment on whether the 
Commission should (1) eliminate certain disclosure requirements in 
media advertising; (2) clarify testing procedures for self-powered 
speakers; and (3) amend certain required test procedures that may 
impose unnecessary costs on manufacturers. The ANPR also announced that 
the Commission had determined not to initiate a proceeding to amend the 
Rule to cover power ratings for automotive sound amplification 
equipment. Finally, the Commission published elsewhere in the July 9, 
1998 Federal Register a Notice of Final Action announcing a non-
substantive technical amendment to the Rule clarifying that the Rule 
covered self-powered loudspeakers for use in the home (63 FR 37234).
    The ANPR elicited five comments.\1\ Based on the comments 
responding to the ANPR, and on other evidence discussed below, the 
Commission published an NPR on July 19, 1999 (64 FR 38610).\2\ In the 
NPR, the Commission proposed amending the Rule to (1) exempt sellers 
who make power output claims in media advertising from the requirement 
to disclose total rated harmonic distortion and the associated power 
bandwidth and impedance rating; (2) clarify the manner in which the 
rule's testing procedures apply to self-powered subwoofer-satellite 
combination speaker systems; and (3) reduce the preconditioning power 
output requirement from one-third of rated power to one-eighth of rated 
power.\3\ The NPR elicited five comments.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The commenters were: Consumer Electronics Manufacturers 
Association (CEMA)(1); Wass Audio~Digital (Wass)(2); Sonance 
(Sonance)(3); PHI Acoustics (PHI)(4); and Velodyne Acoustics, Inc. 
(Velodyne)(5).
    \2\ In accordance with 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 Committee on Commerce, United States House of 
Representatives, 30 days prior to its publication in the Federal 
Register.
    \3\ The Commission solicited public comments on its NPR until 
September 17, 1999. In response to a request from the Consumer 
Electronics Manufacturers Association, however, the Commission 
granted an extension of the comment period until October 15, 1999 
(64 FR 51087 (Sept. 21, 1999)). CEMA recently changed its name to 
the Consumer Electronics Association.
    \4\ The commenters were: EKSC (EKSC)(1); Audio Research (Audio 
Research)(2); QSC Audio (QSC)(3); Thomson Consumer Electronics, Inc. 
(Thomson)(4); and Consumer Electronics Manufacturers Association 
(CEMA)(5). The comments on the Commission's ANPR and NPR are cited 
as ``(Name of Commenter), (designated comment number), p.__.'' All 
Rule ANPR and NPR comments are on the public record and are 
available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room, Room 
130, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, 
Washington, DC, from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except federal holidays.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the NPR, the Commission also announced that pursuant to 16 CFR

[[Page 81233]]

1.20, it would follow expedited procedures in this proceeding, and (1) 
publish an NPR; (2) solicit written comments on the Commission's 
proposals to amend the Rule; (3) hold an informal hearing, if requested 
by interested parties; (4) obtain a final recommendation from staff; 
and (5) announce final Commission action in a notice published in the 
Federal Register.\5\ There were no requests for hearings in the five 
comments received in response to the NPR. The Commission, therefore, 
did not hold public hearings in this matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 64 FR 38610, 38614. The Commission stated that using 
expedited procedures would support the agency's goals of clarifying 
existing regulations, when necessary, and eliminating obsolete or 
unnecessary regulation 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 amend the Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Part B--Analysis of Amendments

1. Amendment to Required Disclosures Section of the Amplifier Rule
    a. Background. Section 432.2 of the Rule requires disclosure of 
maximum rated total harmonic distortion (``THD''), power bandwidth, and 
impedance whenever a power claim is made in any advertising, including 
advertising by retail stores, direct mail merchants, and manufacturers. 
In the ANPR, the Commission concluded tentatively that improvements in 
amplifier technology since the Rule's promulgation in 1974 appeared to 
have reduced the benefits to consumers of disclosure of THD in media 
advertising. In the ANPR, the Commission also concluded tentatively 
that an insufficient number of consumers would understand the meaning 
and significance of the remaining triggered disclosures concerning 
power bandwidth and impedance to justify their publication in media 
advertising. Accordingly, the ANPR sought comment on whether the 
Commission should initiate a rulemaking proceeding to amend the Rule to 
exempt media advertising, including advertising on the Internet, from 
disclosure of THD and the associated power bandwidth and impedance 
ratings when a power output claim is made. In the ANPR, the Commission 
tentatively concluded further that the proposed exemption should be 
conditioned on the requirement that the primary power output 
specification disclosed in any advertising distributed through the 
media be the manufacturer's rated minimum sine wave continuous average 
power output, per channel, at an impedance of 8 ohms, or, if the 
amplifier is not designed for an 8-ohm impedance, at the impedance for 
which the amplifier is primarily designed.
    Finally, the ANPR explained the Commission's tentative conclusion 
that publication of all other power output claims currently subject to 
the Rule, including those appearing in manufacturer specification 
sheets that are either in print or reproduced on the Internet, should 
continue to trigger the requirement that the seller provide the full 
complement of disclosures concerning power bandwidth, maximum harmonic 
distortion, and impedance, so that interested consumers could obtain 
this information prior to purchase.
    The Commission received four comments on the tentatively proposed 
exemption of THD, bandwidth, and impedance disclosures in media 
advertising. CEMA, the principal trade association for the electronics 
industry, supported the proposed exemption, including the requirement 
that the primary power output specification disclosed in media 
advertising be continuous per-channel output at an 8-ohm impedance 
(unless the amplifier is designed primarily for a different impedance 
level).\6\ Velodyne, a manufacturer of powered loudspeakers, also 
supported the exemption of THD and bandwidth disclosures in media 
advertising, stating that they contain little useful information for 
today's consumer.\7\ This commenter suggested, however, that the 
standardized impedance value for power output claims be 4 ohms rather 
than the proposed 8 ohms.\8\ No explanation was provided for this 
suggestion. Wass opposed elimination of the required THD, bandwidth, 
and impedance disclosures in advertising, stating that sellers could 
take unfair advantage of the consumer through in-store sales techniques 
that obscure the true performance capabilities of an amplifier.\9\ 
Sonance stated simply that the relationship between power and 
distortion is vital to specifying power output, and recommended against 
the tentatively proposed exemption.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ CEMA, (1), pp.2-3.
    \7\ Velodyne, (5), p.1.
    \8\ Id.
    \9\ Wass, (2), p.3.
    \10\ Sonance, (3), p.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on its review of the comments on its ANPR, the Commission 
stated in the NPR that it had reason to believe that the disclosure of 
THD, power bandwidth, and impedance in media advertising that contains 
a triggering power output claim no longer provided sufficient consumer 
benefit to justify the associated increase in advertising costs. The 
Commission concluded in both the ANPR and the NPR that very few 
amplifiers in today's market generate high levels of THD (e.g., more 
than one percent) using the FTC testing protocol. Further, the 
Commission concluded that those few amplifiers that do generate 
appreciable levels of THD tend to be very expensive vacuum tube designs 
that are sold to a specialized group of consumers that may not consider 
THD specifications an important consideration in their purchase 
decisions. Thus, it did not appear that sales personnel at retail 
stores would have an appreciable incentive to mislead consumers 
concerning the distortion characteristics of an amplifier. Finally, the 
Commission concluded that consumers who are interested in the Rule's 
THD, power bandwidth, and impedance specifications would be able to 
find such information relatively easily in product brochures at retail 
stores or on the Internet.
    Commenters on the ANPR did not agree on which impedance value 
should serve as the standard for power output claims in media 
advertising under the tentatively proposed disclosure exemption. CEMA 
endorsed the value of 8 ohms suggested in the ANPR. Velodyne, however, 
commented that the standardized impedance value should be 4 ohms. The 
Commission concluded in the NPR that, under the proposed exemption, for 
amplifiers designed to drive a specific loudspeaker in an integrated 
powered configuration, the seller could base power output claims on an 
impedance of 4 ohms, if the amplifier is powering a loudspeaker that is 
rated at a nominal impedance of 4 ohms. Although the Commission stated 
in the NPR that it had reason to believe that the majority of non-
powered loudspeakers are rated at a nominal impedance of 8 ohms, and 
that this value should therefore be adopted as the basis for power 
output claims in media advertising for separate stand-alone amplifiers, 
the NPR solicited further comment on whether the Commission's tentative 
conclusion on this issue was correct.
    Accordingly, in the NPR the Commission proposed amending section 
432.2 of the Rule to exempt advertising disseminated through the media, 
including advertising on the Internet, from disclosure of total rated 
harmonic distortion and the associated power bandwidth and impedance 
ratings when a power output claim is made. The Commission further 
proposed that the exemption for advertising disseminated through the 
media be conditioned on

[[Page 81234]]

the requirement that the primary power output specification disclosed 
in any media advertising be the manufacturer's rated minimum sine wave 
continuous average power output, per channel, at an impedance of 8 
ohms, or, if the amplifier is not designed for an 8-ohm impedance, at 
the impedance for which the amplifier is primarily designed. 
Publication of all other power output claims currently subject to the 
Rule, including those appearing in manufacturer specification sheets 
that are either in print or reproduced on the Internet, would continue 
to trigger the requirement that the seller provide the full complement 
of disclosures concerning maximum harmonic distortion, power bandwidth, 
and impedance, so that interested consumers could obtain this 
information prior to purchase.
    b. Discussion of NPR Comments. The Commission received four 
comments on the proposed exemption of THD, bandwidth, and impedance 
disclosures in media advertising. Thomson Consumer Electronics, which 
markets audio and video equipment under the RCA and ProScan brand 
names, supported the proposed exemption, stating that ``* * * the 
consumer typically understands little from these disclosures.'' \11\ 
Thomson recommended, however, that the Commission monitor developments 
once the exemption is in place to ensure that industry members do not 
take advantage of the disclosure requirements to inflate power output 
claims.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Thomson, (4), p.1.
    \12\ Id., pp. 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Audio Research Corporation, a manufacturer of electronic audio 
equipment specializing in vacuum tube designs, opposed the proposed 
exemption, stating that ``[c]onsumers are a lot more sophisticated than 
consumers were when the original rules were issued'' and, therefore, 
understand the THD disclosures.\13\ Audio Research agreed, however, 
that the Commission should select an impedance of 8 ohms as the basis 
for primary power output specifications in the event the Commission 
adopts the proposed exemption of THD disclosures in media 
advertising.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Audio Research, (2), p.1.
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    QSC Audio Products, a manufacturer of professional audio power 
amplifiers, did not believe that the currently required distortion and 
power bandwidth disclosures were sufficiently burdensome to justify the 
proposed exemption in media advertising. Like Audio Research, however, 
QSC supported an impedance value of 8 ohms as the basis for primary 
power output specifications in media advertising should an exemption be 
adopted, stating that 8 ohms ``* * * is a reasonable value for typical 
impedance.'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ QSC, (3), p.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CEMA reversed its position taken in earlier comments in this 
rulemaking proceeding and opposed the proposed exemption. According to 
CEMA, members recently have ``* * * expressed concerns about 
inconsistent power output claims in retail advertising for amplifiers 
and receivers, especially multichannel products.'' \16\ These members 
report that certain relatively low cost multichannel receivers, for 
which distortion information in advertising is not disclosed, have 
distortion levels well in excess of one percent at rated power. 
Although CEMA continues to regard total harmonic distortion levels 
below one percent are inaudible to consumers, CEMA stated that levels 
above that amount can become significant. As a result, CEMA stated that 
``* * * consumers are unable to make accurate price-versus-performance 
comparisons for such multichannel audio products.'' \17\ CEMA did not 
provide the Commission with any specific examples of such problematic 
advertisements for multichannel amplifiers. Nor did CEMA state that 
they were aware of any similar advertisements for conventional 
monophonic or two-channel stereo amplifiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ CEMA, (5), p.2.
    \17\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CEMA proposed that the Commission help consumers make ``apples-to-
apples'' comparisons of amplifiers by setting certain minimum 
requirements for the various elements of the current THD 
disclosures.\18\ CEMA maintained that such standardization would 
prevent power output claims from becoming ``* * * qualitative 
measurements used by manufacturers (or retailers) to differentiate 
products with respect to consumer's perceptions of quality.'' \19\ 
Specifically, CEMA recommended that total harmonic distortion be 
disclosed as ``less than or equal to one percent.'' Under CEMA's 
recommendation, ``(M)anufacturers and retailers would continue to be 
free to make secondary, qualitative claims of lower distortion in order 
to differentiate their products further (e.g., ``0.5% THD,'' ``.01% 
THD,'' etc.).'' \20\ CEMA did not indicate what form of disclosure 
would be required in the event an amplifier's THD at rated power was 
greater than one percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Id., p.3.
    \19\ Id.
    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To further standardize distortion disclosures, CEMA proposed that 
the ``power bandwidth'' associated with the rated THD disclosure be the 
single frequency 1000 Hz, rather than the customary 20Hz-20kHz. CEMA 
commented that ``* * * claims concerning bandwidth, especially claims 
about wide bandwidth, could be regarded as qualitative claims to the 
consumer.''\21\ CEMA recommended that the Commission adopt 1000 Hz as 
the basis for primary power output claims, and allow advertisers to 
make secondary qualitative claims, such as ``Ultra-wide Bandwidth'' or 
``20-20 kHz'' in advertising or at the point of sale for purposes of 
product differentiation.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Id., pp.2-3.
    \22\ Id., p. 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, in addressing the issue of the appropriate impedance value 
for primary power output claims, CEMA stated that `` * * * loudspeakers 
today typically exhibit impedances of 4 to 8 ohms.''\23\ CEMA 
recommended that primary power output claims be based on an impedance 
value of 6 ohms. CEMA did not specify whether most loudspeakers are 
rated at an impedance of 8 ohms, 4 ohms, or some impedance value within 
that range.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    c. Rule Amendment and Reasons Therefor. Based on its review of the 
comments and other evidence contained in this rulemaking proceeding, 
the Commission has reason to believe that the disclosure of THD, power 
bandwidth, and impedance in media advertising that contains a 
triggering power output claim no longer provides sufficient consumer 
benefit to justify the associated increase in advertising costs. One 
commenter on the NPR supported the proposed exemption. Two other 
commenters opposed the proposed exemption, but did not provide any 
evidence that consumers typically understand the significance of the 
THD, power bandwidth, and impedance disclosures.
    Finally, although CEMA had supported the proposed exemption in its 
comment on the ANPR, it opposed the proposed exemption in its comment 
on the NPR. The basis for this change in position was based on its 
allegation that power output claims in certain advertising for multi-
channel theater amplifiers were based on very high levels of total 
harmonic distortion. CEMA did not provide any evidence or suggest that 
advertisements for conventional monophonic or

[[Page 81235]]

stereophonic amplifiers contain power output claims based on similarly 
high levels of THD.
    The Commission presented evidence in the ANPR indicating that very 
few amplifiers in today's market generate appreciable levels of THD 
(e.g., more than one percent) at rated power using the FTC testing 
protocol for monophonic or stereophonic amplifiers. The Commission is 
publishing elsewhere in this Federal Register a Supplemental Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking that addresses testing and disclosure issues 
specific to multi-channel amplifiers such as those used in home theater 
applications. The Commission believes that the concerns raised by CEMA 
will be addressed more appropriately in that rulemaking proceeding. The 
Commission does not believe that CEMA's comment provides a basis for 
rejecting the proposed exemption of THD, power bandwidth, and impedance 
disclosures in media advertising for conventional monophonic and 
stereophonic amplifiers. Similarly, the Commission does not believe 
CEMA has provided evidence that would provide a basis for altering the 
current requirements governing the format of THD disclosures or the 
choice of power bandwidth for power output claims for conventional 
monophonic and stereophonic amplifiers.
    Two of the commenters on the NPR supported the proposal to base 
power output claims on a nominal impedance of 8 ohms, or on the nominal 
impedance for which the amplifier is primarily designed. CEMA proposed 
a value of 6 ohms, but did not provide any evidence that this value was 
more representative of loudspeakers currently in use than was the 
proposed value of 8 ohms.
    Accordingly, the Commission is amending section 432.2 of the Rule 
to exempt advertising disseminated through the media, including 
advertising on the Internet, from disclosure of total rated harmonic 
distortion and the associated power bandwidth and impedance ratings 
when a power output claim is made. The exemption for advertising 
disseminated through the media is conditioned on the requirement that 
the primary power output specification disclosed in any media 
advertising be the manufacturer's rated minimum sine wave continuous 
average power output, per channel, at an impedance of 8 ohms, or, if 
the amplifier is not designed for an 8-ohm impedance, at the impedance 
for the amplifier is primarily designed. Publication of all other power 
output claims currently subject to the Rule, including those appearing 
in any product brochure or manufacturer specification sheets that are 
either in print or reproduced on the Internet, will continue to trigger 
the requirement that the seller provide the full complement of 
disclosures concerning maximum total harmonic distortion, power 
bandwidth, and impedance, so that interested consumers can obtain this 
information prior to purchase.

2. Amendment Relating to Self-Powered Loudspeakers

    a. Background. When the FRN was published, the Rule did not 
specifically mention self-powered speakers as an example of sound 
amplification equipment manufactured or sold for home entertainment 
purposes. In the FRN, the Commission solicited comment on its tentative 
conclusion that the Rule covers: (A) Self-powered speakers for use with 
(1) home computers, (2) home sound systems, (3) home multimedia 
systems; and (B) other sound power amplification equipment for home 
computers. On July 9, 1998, the Commission published in the Federal 
Register a non-substantive technical amendment to the Rule to clarify 
that the Rule applies to the types of self-powered loudspeakers 
enumerated above (63 FR 37234).
    In the ANPR published elsewhere in the July 9, 1998 Federal 
Register (63 FR 37238), the Commission explained that comments received 
in response to the FRN indicated that a clarification was needed 
concerning the testing procedure that should be followed in applying 
the Rule's continuous power rating protocol to self-powered subwoofer-
satellite combination speaker systems that employ two or more power 
amplifiers sharing a common power supply. These comments recommended 
two alternative approaches for such combination self-powered speakers. 
The first proposed procedure was for power measurements to be made with 
all associated channels of both the subwoofer and satellite amplifiers 
driven simultaneously to full power using a test tone at the system's 
crossover frequency. The second proposal was to allow manufacturers of 
such equipment to test the subwoofer and satellite amplifiers 
separately over their respective frequency bandwidth.
    In the ANPR, the Commission sought comment on its tentative 
conclusion that the second procedure was more appropriate, given the 
types of power demands combination self-powered speakers would most 
likely encounter in actual home use. The Commission received three 
comments on its proposal to amend section 432.2 of the Rule to include 
a note stating that, for self-powered combination speaker systems that 
employ two or more amplifiers dedicated to different portions of the 
audio frequency spectrum, only those channels dedicated to the same 
audio frequency spectrum need be fully driven to rated per channel 
power under section 432.2(a)(2).
    CEMA supported the Commission's clarification, stating that this 
approach would allow self-powered subwoofers to be rated over their 
operating frequency range and at their appropriate impedance value.\24\ 
Sonance also endorsed the tentative proposal to restrict the power 
tests of such equipment to each amplifier's intended operating 
range.\25\ Velodyne disagreed with the Commission's proposal and stated 
that power rating tests for self-powered combination subwoofer-
satellite loudspeakers should be conducted with all channels operating 
simultaneously. It proposed that the amplifiers driving the subwoofer 
and satellites should be given a test signal within each amplifier's 
typical range, and suggested a combination 60Hz-1,000Hz tone.\26\ 
Velodyne stated that the power supply was the most costly and critical 
component determining an amplifier's continuous power output 
capability, and that the primary quantitative measurement of interest 
to consumers is the amount of watts the power supply can deliver.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ CEMA, (1), p. 3.
    \25\ Sonance, (3), p. 1.
    \26\ Velodyne, (5), p. 3.
    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the comments submitted in response to the FRN and the 
ANPR, the Commission tentatively concluded in the NPR that the most 
appropriate method of testing self-powered combination subwoofer-
satellite loudspeaker systems under the Rule was to require 
simultaneous operation only of those channels dedicated to the same 
portion of the audio frequency spectrum. The Commission stated in both 
the ANPR and the NPR that it did not have sufficient evidence to 
conclude that in-home use, under even strenuous conditions, typically 
would place maximum continuous power demands simultaneously on both the 
subwoofer and satellite amplifiers at the crossover frequency. Rather, 
the Commission concluded in the NPR that such demands would be more 
likely to occur in portions of the audio spectrum that would be 
assigned primarily either to the subwoofer amplifier or the satellite 
amplifier. In contrast, conventional stand-alone stereo amplifiers, 
which incorporate left and right-channel amplifiers that must reproduce 
signals

[[Page 81236]]

covering the full musical frequency bandwidth, would more commonly be 
required to meet simultaneous continuous power demands that are present 
in both channels (such as might occur when a pipe organ plays a 
sustained pedal tone in the deep bass).
    In addition, the Commission stated in the NPR that a simultaneous 
power test of both the subwoofer and the satellite amplifiers would, 
from a practical standpoint, require a single test signal at the 
crossover frequency, or a single combination set of tones, such as the 
60Hz-1,000Hz composite signal suggested by Velodyne. The Commission 
concluded that the resulting power and THD specifications might not be 
valid over the full frequency range over which each amplifier was 
designed to operate.
    Accordingly, in the NPR the Commission proposed amending section 
432.2(a)(2) of the Rule to include a clarifying note stating that, when 
measuring maximum per channel output of self-powered combination 
speaker systems that employ two or more amplifiers dedicated to 
different portions of the audio frequency spectrum, only those channels 
dedicated to the same audio frequency spectrum need be fully driven to 
rated per channel power.
    b. Discussion of NPR Comments. The Commission received five 
comments concerning the proposed clarification of testing procedures 
for self-powered combination speaker systems. Thomson Consumer 
Electronics and Audio Research endorsed the proposal without 
qualification.\28\ QSC Audio stated that it had no strong opinion on 
the proposed clarification, and was ``* * * willing to support the 
proposed regime of loading only one frequency range at a time.'' \29\ 
QSC noted, however, that a ``rational'' standard for powered speakers 
would rate maximum acoustic output, distortion, and frequency bandwidth 
as a system, ``* * * without regard for internal details such as 
amplifier power and driver impedance.'' \30\ QSC cautioned, however, 
that such acoustic measurements initially ``* * * will not be familiar 
to consumers and such specifications tend to be overly detailed.'' \31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Thomson, (4), p. 2; Audio Research, (2), p. 2.
    \29\ QSC, (3), p. 1.
    \30\ Id., pp. 1-2.
    \31\ Id., p. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Two other commenters explicitly favored a testing protocol based on 
the acoustic output of the self-powered speaker system over a protocol 
limited to the performance of the amplifier(s) alone. These commenters 
proposed testing procedures that would apply to all self-powered 
speaker systems, whether individual powered subwoofers, powered 
satellite speakers, or self-powered combination subwoofer-satellite 
speakers that share a common power supply. Specifically, EKSC commented 
that the separate testing of amplifiers contained in self-powered 
speakers ``* * * does the consumer little good.'' \32\ EKSC proposed a 
two-part test procedure that would measure (1) the total harmonic 
distortion produced by a self-powered loudspeaker when producing a 
sound pressure level of 96 decibels, and (2) the maximum sound pressure 
level the loudspeaker could produce without exceeding 10 percent 
harmonic distortion. According to EKSC, results from the first test 
would allow consumers to compare the harmonic distortion 
characteristics of self-powered loudspeaker systems when producing a 
standard level of sound pressure. The second test would provide 
consumers with comparative information on the maximum sound pressure 
self-powered speaker systems could produce prior to the onset of severe 
distortion.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ EKSC, (1), p. 1.
    \33\ Id., pp. 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CEMA also favored a test protocol based on acoustic output 
measurements for self-powered loudspeaker systems. CEMA commented that 
an amplifier power rating in isolation ``* * * inherently ignores the 
performance capability of the acoustical portion of the system, and 
hence is incomplete and inaccurate as a performance comparison tool.'' 
\34\ CEMA stated that an appropriate acoustical output standard would 
measure such performance characteristics as the sensitivity of the 
loudspeaker system (expressed as sound pressure output level per input 
volt), and the maximum sound pressure output that the system can 
achieve within specified frequency bandwidth and distortion limits.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ CEMA, (5), p. 4.
    \35\ Id., pp. 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    c. Rule Amendment and Reasons Therefor. Based on the comments 
submitted in response to the NPR, the Commission concludes that the 
most appropriate method of testing self-powered combination subwoofer-
satellite loudspeaker systems under the Rule is to restrict 
measurements to the electrical performance of the component 
amplifier(s) alone, and to require simultaneous operation only of those 
channels dedicated to the same portion of the audio frequency spectrum. 
Three commenters endorsed this procedure or found it acceptable. None 
of the commenters recommended any alternative method of measuring the 
power output characteristics of amplifiers contained in such self-
powered speaker systems.
    Two commenters recommended that the Commission reject any test 
protocol limited to measuring the power output of the amplifier alone, 
and proposed instead that the Commission develop and adopt a testing 
and disclosure methodology based on the acoustic output of the entire 
self-powered speaker system. The Commission does not necessarily 
disagree that, at least in principle, such a protocol would provide 
more complete and meaningful comparative performance information for 
consumers than would a protocol limited to the power and distortion 
performance of the amplifier(s) alone. The Commission does not, 
however, have the necessary expertise and resources to undertake such a 
complex and uncertain rulemaking proceeding. The Commission believes 
that the development of an acoustic output measurement and disclosure 
protocol for self-powered loudspeakers would be, more appropriately, 
the responsibility of industry members and their trade associations.
    Further, many marketers of self-powered loudspeakers may well 
continue to advertise separate power output measurements for the 
component amplifiers in these systems before, and even after, any such 
acoustic output protocol is formulated. Thus, there would still be a 
need to clarify the testing procedure for self-powered combination 
satellite and subwoofer loudspeakers under the Rule so that consumers 
will not be confused by conflicting power output claims. The Commission 
believes, therefore, that the Rule's continuous power output protocol 
and any future industry acoustic output protocol could coexist in a 
complementary fashion.
    Accordingly, the Commission is amending section 432.2(a)(2) to 
include a clarifying note stating that, when measuring maximum per 
channel output of self-powered combination speaker systems that employ 
two or more amplifiers dedicated to different portions of the audio 
frequency spectrum, only those channels dedicated to the same audio 
frequency spectrum need be fully driven to rated per channel power.
3. Amendments to the Amplifier Rule Preconditioning Requirement
    a. Background. Section 432.3(c) of the Rule specifies that an 
amplifier must be preconditioned by simultaneously operating all 
channels at one-third of

[[Page 81237]]

rated power output for one hour using a sinusoidal wave at a frequency 
of 1,000 Hz. The ANPR sought comment on whether the Commission should 
amend the Rule to reduce the preconditioning power output requirement 
from one-third of rated power to a lower figure, such as one-eighth of 
rated power.
    CEMA supported reducing the preconditioning power output 
requirement to below the current one-third power, stating that the 
current requirement is ``beyond what can be expected through normal use 
in the home'' and is ``harsh and unrealistic.'' \36\ CEMA claimed that 
in order to meet the physical conditions presented by the Rule's 
existing preconditioning requirement, manufacturers must design and 
incorporate in amplifiers larger and costlier heat sinks.\37\ CEMA 
listed several alternative solutions, including operation at idle 
during preconditioning, operation at a small fixed power representative 
of average power during typical in-home operation, or preconditioning 
at one-eighth power. CEMA further stated that the one-eighth power 
option ``has the virtue of being consistent with current industry and 
international testing specifications.'' \38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ CEMA, (1), p. 2.
    \37\ Id.
    \38\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Velodyne stated that a preconditioning period is not really 
necessary, but that the Commission should follow Underwriters 
Laboratories' (``UL'') one-eighth power requirement if the 
preconditioning requirement is retained.\39\ Velodyne did not provide 
any explanation for its conclusion that no preconditioning period of 
any kind was necessary under the Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ Velodyne, (5), p. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Wass concluded, from a series of calculations, that reducing the 
preconditioning requirement from one-third to one-eighth power would 
reduce the thermal stress (expressed in ``watts of heat'' delivered to 
an amplifier's heatsink) by approximately 24 percent.\40\ Wass, 
however, opposed amending the Rule to provide such a reduction in 
specified preconditioning power output because the consumer would get 
``a poorer unit.'' \41\ Wass did not provide any evidence, however, 
that would allow the Commission to compare the magnitude of the alleged 
reduction in amplifier quality with the magnitude of the associated 
reduction in manufacturing costs resulting from the one-eighth power 
preconditioning standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Wass, (2), p. 2.
    \41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, Sonance stated that the one-third power preconditioning 
requirement should be retained and enforced evenly.\42\ Sonance saw no 
technical problem with the requirement, stating that many generations 
of consumer electronic products have been built to this standard.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ Sonance, (3), p. 1.
    \43\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the comments, the Commission tentatively concluded that 
the current one-third power preconditioning requirement imposed 
unnecessary costs on amplifier manufacturers and was not needed to 
measure amplifiers accurately under conditions that represent actual 
in-home use. Accordingly, in the NPR the Commission proposed amending 
section 432.3(c) of the Rule by reducing the specified per-channel 
power output during preconditioning from one-third of rated power 
output for one hour to one-eighth of rated power output for one hour.
    b. Discussion of NPR Comments. The Commission received four 
comments on the proposed amendment. Audio Research opposed the proposed 
amendment, stating that ``the purpose of the original rule-making was 
to insure an acceptable level of quality (the \1/3\ power, 1 hour pre-
conditioning test) as well as a reasonable level of static 
performance.'' \44\ The remaining three commenters all supported the 
proposed reduction in the preconditioning power output requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Audio Research, (2), p. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    QSC stated that ``we strongly support reducing the pre-conditioning 
power level to \1/8\ of rated power.'' QSC noted that this power output 
level matches that ``* * * used by safety agencies to assess AC current 
draw and component temperature rise, and also corresponds to the 
highest likely average program level, where some attempt is made to 
limit gross clipping.'' \45\ Thomson Consumer Electronics stated that 
the proposed one-eighth power level for preconditioning would provide 
``* * * a more realistic condition to that experienced in typical 
operation of the amplifier and represents a reasonable manner in which 
to precondition for testing.'' \46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ QSC, (3), p. 2.
    \46\ Thomson, (4), p. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CEMA reiterated its earlier support for this amendment, citing 
attendant reductions in manufacturing and testing costs.\47\ CEMA also 
stated that the proposed reduction in the preconditioning power output 
requirement would facilitate preconditioning at an impedance of four 
ohms, and thus allow more manufacturers of high power amplifiers to 
provide realistic power output specifications for this impedance 
load.\48\ Finally, CEMA commented that the proposed amendment would 
render the preconditioning requirement more consistent with testing 
protocols for UL and the European Union, which ``* * * typically 
specify amplifier preconditioning at one-eighth of rated power for a 
period of less than one hour.'' \49\ In this regard, CEMA proposed that 
the Commission reduce the required preconditioning period from one hour 
to thirty minutes.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ CEMA, (5), p. 5.
    \48\ Id.
    \49\ Id.
    \50\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    c. Rule Amendment and Reasons Therefor. Based on the comments 
submitted in response to the NPR, the Commission concludes that the 
current one-third power preconditioning requirement imposes unnecessary 
costs on amplifier manufacturers and should be reduced to one-eighth of 
rated power. All but one of the commenters on the NPR supported this 
reduction. The dissenting commenter was concerned that lowering the 
preconditioning power requirement would jeopardize the Rule's intended 
purpose of helping assure an acceptable level of quality in the 
amplifier market.
    The Commission believes that the proposed amendment is consistent 
with the original intent of the Rule. The preconditioning requirement 
was not imposed as a quality-assurance mechanism that would place 
maximum stress on an amplifier's heat dissipation capabilities. This 
requirement merely was intended to bring an amplifier to normal 
operating temperature and to stabilize its components so that the 
subsequent power output tests would provide performance specifications 
representative of the performance consumers could expect in normal 
operation in the home. Indeed, at the time the Rule was promulgated in 
1974, the Commission was not aware that preconditioning at one-third of 
rated power would place such severe thermal stress on solid state 
amplifiers, particularly high power units operating into a resistive 
load of four ohms.
    Only one of the NPR comments, and none of the comments received in 
connection with earlier phases of this proceeding, recommended a 
preconditioning period shorter than one hour. The one commenter that 
recommended a shorter preconditioning

[[Page 81238]]

period of thirty minutes did not provide any technological 
justifications for the proposed reduction in preconditioning time. 
Thus, the Commission does not believe that the Rulemaking record 
provides an adequate basis for amending the one-hour preconditioning 
period prescribed by the Rule.
    Accordingly, the Commission is amending section 432.3(c) of the 
Rule by reducing the specified per-channel power output during 
preconditioning from one-third of rated power output for one hour to 
one-eighth of rated power output for one hour.
    d. Additional Preconditioning Amendment. As discussed in Part B(2) 
above, in the NPR the Commission proposed amending the Rule to clarify 
the manner in which power tests should be conducted for self-powered 
subwoofer-satellite combination loudspeaker systems. In reviewing the 
technical issues related to this proposed amendment, the Commission 
tentatively concluded in the NPR that clarification also was required 
concerning the manner in which powered subwoofers should be 
preconditioned under the Rule.
    Section 432.3(c) of the Rule specifies a preconditioning sinusoidal 
test tone of 1,000Hz. The Commission stated in the NPR that most self-
powered subwoofer systems incorporate crossover circuitry that filters 
out frequencies above the bass range. Depending upon the crossover 
frequency and the steepness of the crossover slope, such crossover 
circuitry may severely attenuate a test tone of 1,000Hz and prevent the 
subwoofer amplifier from being driven to one-third rated power (as 
required by the Rule at the time the NPR was published), or even to 
one-eighth of rated power (as required by the amended Rule). Thus, it 
appeared to the Commission that testers of self-powered subwoofers 
would need to select a preconditioning frequency considerably lower 
than 1,000Hz.
    The Commission, therefore, tentatively concluded in the NPR that 
the Rule should be amended to clarify the preconditioning procedure for 
self-powered subwoofers. The Commission also concluded, however, that 
any such amendment should not specify the precise frequency of the test 
tone that is to be used in preconditioning powered subwoofers. The 
Commission stated that powered subwoofers may differ widely in the 
portion of the bass spectrum over which they are designed to operate, 
and, consequently, there may not be a single preconditioning frequency 
that is appropriate for all powered subwoofers. The Commission 
tentatively concluded in the NPR, therefore, that testers of powered 
subwoofers should have the flexibility to choose for the sinusoidal 
preconditioning signal any frequency within the intended operating 
bandwidth of the subwoofer amplifier that will allow the amplifier to 
be driven for one hour to the required proportion of rated power 
output.
    Accordingly, in the NPR the Commission proposed amending section 
432.3(c) of the Rule by adding an explanatory note stating that for 
amplifiers utilized as a component in a self-powered subwoofer system, 
the sinusoidal wave used as a preconditioning signal may be any 
frequency within the amplifier's intended operating bandwidth that will 
allow the amplifier to be driven to one-eighth of rated power for one 
hour.
    e. Discussion of NPR Comments. The Commission received only one 
comment that directly addressed the choice of preconditioning frequency 
for self-powered subwoofer systems. Audio Research supported the 
proposed amendment, stating that such subwoofers should be 
preconditioned ``* * * at any frequency within the claimed bandwidth.'' 
\51\ Another commenter on the NPR, QSC Audio, stated that powered 
speakers should be preconditioned using ``band-limited pink noise.'' 
\52\ QSC, however, did not distinguish between subwoofers and other 
types of powered loudspeaker systems, and did not specify which 
frequency ranges should be selected as appropriate band-limited pink 
noise test signals. Finally, CEMA and EKSC restricted their comments on 
self-powered speakers to the need for acoustic output tests of the 
entire speaker system, and did not address the choice of 
preconditioning test signal frequency for the amplifiers contained in 
self-powered subwoofers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ Audio Research, (2), p. 2.
    \52\ QSC, (3), p. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    f. Rule Amendment and Reasons Therefor. Based on its review of the 
NPR comments, the Commission has concluded that testers of self-powered 
subwoofers should have the flexibility to choose for the sinusoidal 
preconditioning signal any frequency within the intended operating 
bandwidth of the subwoofer amplifier that will allow the amplifier to 
be driven for one hour to one-eighth of rated power output. No comments 
stated that this approach was technologically flawed or otherwise 
undesirable. One commenter specifically endorsed the proposed 
preconditioning amendment. Accordingly, the Commission is amending 
section 432.3(c) of the Rule by adding an explanatory note stating that 
for amplifiers utilized as a component in a self-powered subwoofer 
system, the sinusoidal wave used as a preconditioning signal may be any 
frequency within the amplifier's intended operating bandwidth that will 
allow the amplifier to be driven to one-eighth of rated power for one 
hour.

Part C--Regulatory Analysis And Regulatory Flexibility Act 
Requirements

    Under section 22 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 57b, the Commission must 
issue a preliminary regulatory analysis for a proceeding to amend a 
rule only when it (1) estimates that the amendment will have an annual 
effect on the national economy of $100,000,000 or more; (2) estimates 
that the amendment will cause a substantial change in the cost or price 
of certain categories of goods or services; or (3) otherwise determines 
that the amendment will have a significant effect upon covered entities 
or upon consumers. A final regulatory analysis is not required because 
the Commission finds that the amendments to the Rule will not have such 
effects on the national economy, on the cost of sound amplification 
equipment, or on covered businesses or consumers.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA''), 5 U.S.C. 601-12, requires 
that the agency conduct an analysis of the anticipated economic impact 
of the proposed amendments on small businesses. The purpose of a 
regulatory flexibility analysis is to ensure that the agency considers 
impact on small entities and examines regulatory alternatives that 
could achieve the regulatory purpose while minimizing burdens on small 
entities. Section 605 of the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 605, provides that such an 
analysis is not required if the agency head certifies that the 
regulatory action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    Since the Amplifier Rule covers manufacturers and importers of 
power amplification equipment for use in the home, the Commission 
preliminarily concluded in the NPR that any amendments to the Rule may 
affect a substantial number of small businesses. Nevertheless, the 
Commission concluded that the proposed amendments would not have a 
significant economic impact upon such entities. Specifically, the 
Commission stated that the proposed change in the preconditioning 
protocol and the proposed exemption of disclosure of THD, bandwidth, 
and impedance specifications in media advertising would allow a 
moderate reduction in

[[Page 81239]]

amplifier manufacturing and advertising costs that would benefit both 
small and large businesses. The Commission also concluded that the 
proposed clarification of testing procedures for combination subwoofer-
satellite self-powered loudspeaker systems was the least burdensome 
application of the Rule among the alternative proposals suggested by 
commenters, and would not have a significant or disproportionate impact 
on the testing costs of small manufacturers of such power amplification 
equipment.
    Based on available information, therefore, in the NPR the 
Commission certified under the RFA that the proposed amendments to the 
Amplifier Rule, if promulgated, would not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small businesses. To ensure that no 
significant economic impact was being overlooked, however, the 
Commission requested comments on this issue. The Commission received no 
comments on this aspect of its NPR. Consequently, the Commission 
concludes that a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required, and 
certifies, under section 605 of the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 605, that the Rule it 
has adopted will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

Part D--Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Amplifier Rule contains various information collection 
requirements for which the Commission has obtained clearance until 
August 31, 2002, under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq., Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') Control Number 3084-
0105. In the NPR, the Commission preliminarily concluded that the 
proposed amendments to the Rule to clarify the manner in which the 
Rule's testing procedures apply to self-powered subwoofer-satellite 
combination speaker systems, and reduce the preconditioning power 
output requirement from one-third of rated power to one-eighth of rated 
power, if enacted, would not increase or alter the paperwork burden 
associated with the Rule's requirements. The Commission stated in the 
NPR that these amendments would not increase the paperwork burden for 
businesses because for purposes of performing the tests necessary for 
affected entities to make the disclosures required under the Rule 
amplifiers must continue to be preconditioned for one hour. In the NPR, 
the Commission also preliminarily concluded that the proposed amendment 
of the Rule to exempt from media advertising disclosure of an 
amplifier's total rated harmonic distortion and the associated power 
bandwidth and impedance ratings when a power output claim for an 
amplifier is made would reduce the Rule's paperwork burden. Although 
the exemption for media advertising would be conditioned on the 
requirement that the amplifier's primary power output specification 
continue to be disclosed in any media advertising, the Commission 
stated that the net effect of the proposed amendment would be to reduce 
the Rule's paperwork burden for businesses. To ensure that no 
significant paperwork burden was being overlooked, however, the 
Commission requested comments on this issue. The Commission received no 
comments on this aspect of its NPR.
    Thus, the Commission concludes on the basis of the information now 
before it that the amendments to the Amplifier Rule will decrease the 
paperwork burden associated with compliance with the Rule. As 
discussed, the Rule requires disclosures if an advertisement makes a 
power output claim. The Commission has estimated that approximately 
1,200 advertisements annually would be required to carry the FTC 
disclosures. The cost of these disclosures is limited to the time 
needed to draft and review the language pertaining to power output 
specifications. The Commission has estimated the time involved for this 
task to be a maximum of one hour per advertisement, for a total burden 
of 1,200 hours.\53\ Because the Commission is amending the Rule to 
exempt from media advertising disclosure of an amplifier's total rated 
harmonic distortion and the associated power bandwidth and impedance 
ratings, the Commission estimates the time involved for the 
aforementioned tasks to be a maximum of 45 minutes per advertisement, 
for a total burden of 900 hours. Thus, the net effect of the amendment 
is to reduce the Rule's paperwork burden for businesses by 900 hours. 
In addition, since there were no additional ``collection of 
information'' requirements included in the proposed amendments to the 
Rule, the Commission was not required to submit them to OMB during this 
proceeding for clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ 64 FR 36877, 36879 (July 8, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 432

    Amplifiers, Home entertainment products, Trade practices.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 16 CFR Part 432 is amended 
as follows:

PART 432--POWER OUTPUT CLAIMS FOR AMPLIFIERS UTILIZED IN HOME 
ENTERTAINMENT PRODUCTS

    1. The authority citation for part 432 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 38 Stat. 717, as amended; (15 U.S.C. 41-58).


    2. Section 432.2 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 432.2  Required disclosures.

    (a) Whenever any direct or indirect representation is made of the 
power output, power band or power frequency response, or distortion 
characteristics of sound power amplification equipment, the following 
disclosure shall be made clearly, conspicuously, and more prominently 
than any other representations or disclosures permitted under this 
part: The manufacturer's rated minimum sine wave continuous average 
power output, in watts, per channel (if the equipment is designed to 
amplify two or more channels simultaneously) at an impedance of 8 ohms, 
or, if the amplifier is not designed for an 8-ohm impedance, at the 
impedance for which the amplifier is primarily designed, measured with 
all associated channels fully driven to rated per channel power. 
Provided, however, when measuring maximum per channel output of self-
powered combination speaker systems that employ two or more amplifiers 
dedicated to different portions of the audio frequency spectrum, such 
as those incorporated into combination subwoofer-satellite speaker 
systems, only those channels dedicated to the same audio frequency 
spectrum should be considered associated channels that need be fully 
driven simultaneously to rated per channel power.
    (b) In addition, whenever any direct or indirect representation is 
made of the power output, power band or power frequency response, or 
distortion characteristics of sound power amplification equipment in 
any product brochure or manufacturer specification sheet, the following 
disclosures also shall be made clearly, conspicuously, and more 
prominently than any other representations or disclosures permitted 
under this part:
    (1) The manufacturer's rated power band or power frequency 
response, in Hertz (Hz), for the rated power output required to be 
disclosed in paragraph (a) of this section; and
    (2) The manufacturer's rated percentage of maximum total harmonic 
distortion at any power level from 250 mW to the rated power output, 
and its corresponding rated power band or power frequency response.

[[Page 81240]]

    3. Section 432.3(c) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 432.3  Standard test conditions.

* * * * *
    (c) The amplifier shall be preconditioned by simultaneously 
operating all channels at one-eighth of rated power output for one hour 
using a sinusoidal wave at a frequency of 1,000 Hz; provided, however, 
that for amplifiers utilized as a component in a self-powered subwoofer 
system, the sinusoidal wave used as a preconditioning signal may be any 
frequency within the amplifier's intended operating bandwidth that will 
allow the amplifier to be driven to one-eighth of rated power for one 
hour;
* * * * *

    By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-32392 Filed 12-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P