[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 143 (Wednesday, July 27, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45047-45052]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-16071]
[[Page 45047]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (``FTC'' or ``Commission'') seeks
public comment on proposed amendments to the Trade Regulation Rule
Relating to Power Output Claims for Amplifiers Utilized in Home
Entertainment Products (``Amplifier Rule'' or ``Rule''). The proposal
requires sellers making power-related claims to calculate power output
using uniform testing methods to allow consumers to easily compare
amplifier sound quality. Additionally, the Commission seeks comment on
the normal usage of multichannel home theater amplifiers.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 26,
2022. Parties interested in an opportunity to present views orally
should submit a request to do so as explained below, and such requests
must be received on or before September 26, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a comment online or on paper by
following the instructions in the Request for Comment part of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Write ``Amplifier Rule Review,
Project No. P974222'' on your comment and file your comment online
through https://www.regulations.gov. If you prefer to file your comment
on paper, mail your comment to the following address: Federal Trade
Commission, Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite
CC-5610 (Annex A), Washington, DC 20580.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jock Chung, Attorney, (202) 326-2984,
[email protected], Division of Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection,
Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC
20580.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Commission promulgated the Amplifier Rule in 1974 to address
sellers' failure to provide essential pre-purchase information.\1\
Specifically, manufacturers of home entertainment amplifiers described
their products' performance through power output claims (e.g., ``25
Watts.''). However, because manufacturers tested amplifiers under a
variety of conditions and used incompatible procedures, consumers could
not effectively use the wattage claims to compare the power
characteristics of different brands or determine how individual
amplifiers would perform. The Commission noted ``[s]ince the mid-50's
the [audio] industry'' had failed ``to agree upon a single industry
standard which is meaningful to the consumer.'' \2\ Accordingly, the
Rule standardized the measurement and disclosure of some, but not all,
performance characteristics of power amplification equipment to permit
consumers to ``assure that all performance characteristics are based
upon conditions of normal use by the consumer, i.e., conditions which
are encountered in the home.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 39 FR 15387 (May 3, 1974).
\2\ 39 FR 15388.
\3\ 39 FR 15392. Merely testing amplifiers under identical test
conditions will not produce useful consumer information if the test
conditions differ significantly from normal use conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the Rule, sellers making certain power claims (i.e., for
power output, power band or power frequency response, or distortion
characteristics) must disclose power output measured under specified
test conditions; for example, amplifiers must be tested at an ambient
air temperature of at least 77 [deg]F (25 [deg]C).\4\ The Rule,
however, does not specify values for three test conditions that
strongly affect power output measurements: load impedance,\5\ rated
power band or power frequency response,\6\ and Total Harmonic
Distortion (THD).\7\ Instead, it requires sellers to disclose these
conditions when making certain power claims in product brochures and
manufacturer specification sheets.\8\ The original Rule required these
disclosures wherever sellers made these claims; \9\ however, in 2000,
the Commission eliminated disclosure requirements in ``media
advertising.'' \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ This requirement prevents testing with cooling equipment
while driving amplifiers to high power outputs that would overheat
amplifiers during normal use. 16 CFR 432.3(d).
\5\ The current Amplifier Rule, as amended, sets a default load
impedance of 8 ohms for measuring power output, but permits
measurement at a different load impedance if the amplifier is
designed primarily for that impedance. 16 CFR 432.2(a). ``[T]he
lower the load impedance utilized in testing . . . equipment, the
higher the output of the amplifier.'' 39 FR 15387, 15390 (May 3,
1974). For example, an amplifier that outputs 550 watts into 2 ohms
might only output 350 watts into 4 ohms and 215 watts into 8 ohms.
See https://geoffthegreygeek.com/speaker-impedance-changes-amplifier-power/.
\6\ High quality amplifiers can output a broad range of
frequencies, such as the sounds of all the instruments in an
orchestra, at high power. Lower quality amplifiers can only output
certain frequencies, such as 1 kHz (e.g., the sound of a trumpet),
at high power, and output lower frequencies (e.g., a timpani or
bass) or higher frequencies (e.g., a piccolo) at lower power. Power
output measurements made at a single frequency or over a limited
power band do not permit consumers to distinguish such amplifiers.
The Commission has stated ``a measurement [on a 1 kHz test signal]
is inherently deceptive to the consumer who expects that a piece of
equipment represented as being capable of a stated power output will
deliver that power output across its full audio range.'' 39 FR
15387, 15390 (May 3, 1974).
\7\ The output of an amplifier driven to higher power will
distort and sound different from the original performance. When the
Commission promulgated the Rule, it received evidence that
distortion limits during testing affect power output measurements;
for example, the same amplifier might output 20 watts if driven only
until the output reached 0.5% THD, and output 30 watts when driven
to 5% THD. The Rule requires disclosure of the THD during testing so
consumers can determine the value of power output measurements. 39
FR 15387, 15391-92 (May 3, 1974).
\8\ 16 CFR 432.2(b).
\9\ 16 CFR 432.2 (1974).
\10\ 65 FR 81232 (Dec. 22, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the Rule requires manufacturers to fully drive all
``associated'' channels to the rated per channel power when measuring
the power output of sound amplification equipment designed to amplify
two or more channels simultaneously.\11\ When the Commission
established the Rule, stereo amplifiers were the only equipment subject
to this requirement, and, importantly, normal consumer use drove both
``associated'' channels equally. This requirement prevented
manufacturers from deceiving consumers by driving only one channel in
testing, and thus inflating power output.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Associated channels are channels driven continuously during
normal consumer usage, so measuring power output with associated
channels fully driven reflects normal consumer usage. 65 FR 81232,
81236 (Dec. 22, 2000).
\12\ Most amplifiers distribute power from one power supply to
all channels being driven (playing sound) at a particular moment, so
the total power output of multiple channels is limited by that power
supply. A stereo amplifier tested with one channel fully driven
would distribute all of the power from its power supply to that one
channel. The power supply would not be able to direct twice as much
power to two channels, as consumers might expect from a measurement
made on only one channel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The introduction of ``home theater'' equipment with five or more
channels improved consumer amplification choices but raised questions
regarding which of these new channels were ``associated'' under the
Rule.\13\
[[Page 45048]]
Consequently, in 2000 the Commission issued a supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (``SNPR'') soliciting evidence on which channels
multichannel amplifiers fully drive during normal usage.\14\ The
Commission also sought comment on its proposal to amend the definition
of ``associated channels'' to reflect real-world use. The Commission
received only one comment in response. The Consumer Electronics
Association (``CEA'') noted there was no industry consensus regarding
measuring power output of multichannel amplifiers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ When the Commission promulgated the Rule, it noted the
possibility of amplifiers with more than two channels and the
importance of testing such amplifiers appropriately. It stated ``4-
channel sound systems have been introduced which, if rated according
to their total power output, would, in the Commission's view, have
an even greater tendency to deceive the average consumer.'' 39 FR
15388, 15390 (May 3, 1974).
\14\ 65 FR 80798 (Dec. 22, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 15, 2002, at CEA's request, the Commission deferred
action to allow industry to form a consensus on procedures for testing
multichannel amplifiers.\15\ Although CEA subsequently issued a
standard, designated EIA/CEA-490-A, ``Test Methods of Measurement for
Audio Amplifiers,'' the Commission did not find widespread adoption of
this standard. With no industry standard in place and only CEA's
comment on the record, the Commission decided not to amend the Rule. 72
FR 13052 (March 20, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 67 FR 1915 (Jan. 15, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 27, 2008, the Commission published notification in the
Federal Register seeking comment on the Amplifier Rule as part of its
periodic review of the Rule to determine its effectiveness and
impact.\16\ Sony Electronics Inc. (``Sony'') urged the Commission not
to amend the Rule to define all channels of a multichannel home theater
system as ``associated.'' Sony explained ``the additional channels in
today's 5.1 and 7.1 home theater systems are designed to carry vastly
different sounds at vastly different levels.'' Thus, Sony asserted
driving all channels simultaneously during testing would not represent
actual use and would drive up consumer prices.\17\ On January 26, 2010,
based on the record at that time, the Commission again retained the
Rule in its current form, finding a continuing need for the Rule and
that it imposed minimal costs on industry. Although the Commission did
not amend the test procedures for multichannel amplifiers, it provided
guidance confirming it would be a violation of the Rule to make power
output claims for multichannel amplifiers utilized in home
entertainment products unless those representations are substantiated
by measurements made with, at a minimum, the left front and right front
channels driven to full rated power.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 73 FR 10403 (Feb. 27, 2008).
\17\ Sony, https://www.ftc.gov/policy/public-comments/comment-534789-00003.
\18\ 75 FR 3985, 3987 (Jan. 26, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to its ongoing regulatory review schedule, on December 18,
2020, the Commission published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking
(ANPR) seeking comment on the Amplifier Rule. 85 FR 82391 (Dec. 18,
2020). The ANPR sought comments regarding possible Rule improvements,
its continuing need, costs and benefits, and whether, and how,
technological or economic changes have affected the Rule.
II. Comments Received in Response to the ANPR
The Commission received 530 unique comments in response to its
ANPR.\19\ The commenters primarily consisted of amplifier and speaker
manufacturers, amplifier sellers and purchasers, and engineers or
journalists in the audio field.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ These comments are available at https://www.regulations.gov/document/FTC-2020-0087-0001/comment. In this
document, commenters are referred to by name and the number assigned
to each comment; for example, the comment from Garry Grube, assigned
ID FTC-2020-0087-0187 on www.regulations.gov, is referred to as
``Garry Grube (187).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Support for Retaining the Rule
All but one commenter supported retaining the Rule.\20\ Commenters
explained the Amplifier Rule enables consumers to make informed,
``apples-to-apples'' comparisons, and creates incentives for
manufacturers to produce superior amplifiers.\21\ Commenters further
asserted if the Commission were to rescind the Rule, the audio
amplifier marketplace would return to the ``Wild West'' conditions that
initially led to its promulgation.\22\ Additionally, commenters noted
the Rule imposes insignificant or no costs on industry.\23\ Commenters
noted changes in the audio marketplace have increased the need for the
Rule. For example, Garry Grube (187) stated the shift from purchases in
stores, where consumers could listen to amplifiers, to online purchases
increases consumers' reliance on power output measurements. David R.
(424) stated larger modern living spaces require more powerful
amplifiers, increasing the importance of reliable power output ratings.
Based on this near universal support, the Commission concludes there is
a continuing need for the Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ The one commenter did not provide a substantive comment.
\21\ See, e.g., Norman Parks (105) (``Without these FTC
guidelines in effect, consumers have no possible way of honestly
comparing products at time of purchase. In addition, retailers and
manufacturers are not able to present products fairly to consumers,
and might be inclined to sell inferior products with inflated
specifications, harming consumers.'') and John Richardson (524)
(``In 1974 the FTC dragged all manufacturers, the world over,
kicking and screaming, to the honesty table. No longer could they
brazenly advertise fictitious and deceptive power output and other
claims if they were to sell their products in the US. . . .
[C]onsumers the world over benefitted from that Gold Standard in
truth. A golden age of quality products were [sic] built and
marketed, which still stand the test of time and remain highly
coveted by collectors and people interested in sustainable, high
performance electronics. The 1974 Amplifier rule created a level
playing field for manufacturers and a requirement to comply with
straightforward, easily understood and meaningful set of
parameters.'').
\22\ See, e.g., Richard Swerdlow (15) (``At present, buyers of
these products can only compare their power output because they are
rated by the same method. If that is abandoned, there would be no
standard method. Manufacturers would be free to invent their own
rating methods. Buyers would be unable to compare products from
different manufacturers, and they would be easily misled by
advertising exaggerations.'') and Thomas Estell (128) (``As someone
who was a consumer of home entertainment products in the 1960s and
1970s, I urge you to renew this consumer protection rule and avoid
the `Wild West' marketplace that created this rule.'').
\23\ See, e.g., comment from Toby Montezuma (549) (``[T]his Rule
itself does of course impose some additional cost compared to simply
making up big numbers in the marketing department. However, the
costs of equipment and time to make simple power tests are quite
minimal and indeed are inherent in the process of designing
amplifiers, so we can say there is really no additional cost at
all.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Recommended Amendments
Although commenters overwhelmingly supported the Amplifier Rule,
some recommended amendments. Specifically, commenters asked the
Commission to specify values for load impedance, power band, and THD
during testing; and to define the associated channels in multichannel
amplifiers used for home theaters.
a. Comments Recommending Specifying Test Conditions
Numerous commenters urged the Commission to require uniform power
band, load impedance, and THD limits for measuring amplifier power
output. Specifically, one hundred and seventy three commenters proposed
standardizing testing with at least one of the following
specifications: a load impedance of 8 ohms, a power band of 20 Hz to 20
kHz, and a THD limit of less than 0.1%.\24\ These commenters generally
asserted that uniform test conditions would address consumer confusion
resulting from advertising of
[[Page 45049]]
unrealistic power outputs.\25\ For example, commenter David Rich (548)
noted ``online product literature is showing values up to twice the
power'' compared to tests conducted under conditions that reflect
normal consumer usage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Twenty-seven commenters recommended specifying the load
impedance; 36 recommended specifying the power band to be 20 Hz to
20 kHz; 26 recommended specifying a THD or requiring a low THD, and
159 recommended, in conjunction with a recommendation regarding
multichannel amplifier testing, specifying values for all three test
conditions.
\25\ Alan Mcconnaughey [sic] (5) commented ``[m]ore rules should
be [enacted] to require 8 ohm ratings so everything is apples do
[sic] apples.'' Jim Mccabe [sic] (378) commented that amplifiers
should be tested ``driven from 20 to 20k'' to ``stop the lying.''
Danny Anonymous (4325) commented ``[t]o eliminate confusion, just
use Output Watts@1%THD.'' See also, e.g., comments from Dennis
Murphy, Philharmonic Audio (525) and David Rich (548).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with these comments, FTC staff found this problem was
ubiquitous in the marketplace. Specifically, staff found dozens of
examples of the same equipment advertised with significantly different
power output (e.g., some sellers advertised a particular model with 45
watts output per channel, while others advertised the same model with
100 watts per channel \26\). Using specification sheets on
manufacturers' websites, staff confirmed these widely divergent output
claims result from different testing parameters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See, e.g., https://www.crutchfield.com/p_580TX8220/Onkyo-TX-8220.html. (viewed on Oct. 1, 2021); https://www.amazon.com/Onkyo-TX-8220-Channel-Receiver-Bluetooth/dp/B075P831VY/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Onkyo+TX-8220&qid=1633096775&sr=8-1
(viewed on Oct. 1, 2021; advertisement subsequently revised).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the comments and staff's review, the Commission finds
consumers are unlikely to understand the complex power output
disclosures marketers are making under the current Rule.\27\
Specifically, FTC staff's review of advertisements shows, in some
cases, amplifiers are advertised with widely differing power outputs
due to testing conditions. For example, FTC staff reviewed
advertisements for two amplifiers and found that--when tested under
identical conditions \28\--Amplifier A (75 watts) had a higher power
output than Amplifier B (45 watts).\29\ However, staff's review found
advertisements in which Amplifier B was advertised as outputting 100
watts because it was tested under more favorable conditions.\30\ These
types of confusing disclosures are likely to deceive many consumers
who, when comparing two amplifiers, are likely to reasonably conclude
that an amplifier advertised as outputting ``75 watts'' is less
powerful than an amplifier advertised as outputting ``100 watts.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Staff has surveyed numerous academic articles finding
consumers are not able to effectively comprehend highly technical
disclosures; no surveyed research found to the contrary. See, e.g.,
The Failure of Mandated Disclosure, Omri Ben-Shahar and Carl E.
Schneider, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 159, No. 3
(February 2011), pp. 647-749, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41149884.
The Commission promulgated the Rule so consumers would not need to
perform complex calculations to derive useful power ratings. It
found prior to the Rule, consumers had to ``deduct 10 to 25 percent
[from the ``music power'' ratings previously claimed] and divide by
2'' to derive power ratings that reflected normal usage. 39 FR
15387, 15388 (May 3, 1974). Additionally, the Commission has
previously concluded ``an insufficient number of consumers . . .
understand the meaning and significance of . . . disclosures
concerning power bandwidth and impedance'' 63 FR 37238 (July 9,
1998).
\28\ The manufacturer's specification sheets indicated the
testing conditions were 8 ohms, 20 Hz to 20 kHz, 0.08% THD, which
several commenters have recommended as standard testing conditions
the Commission should incorporate into the Rule.
\29\ See Amplifier A, at https://www.bestbuy.com/site/denon-avr-s650h-audio-video-receiver-5-2-channel-150w-x-5-4k-uhd-home-theater-surround-sound-2019--streaming-black/6333563.p?skuId=6333563 (viewed
on Oct. 1, 2021; advertisement subsequently revised); Amplifier B
specification sheet, at https://www.onkyousa.com/product/tx-8220/
(viewed on Oct. 1, 2021).
\30\ See Amplifier B, at https://www.amazon.com/Onkyo-TX-8220-Channel-Receiver-Bluetooth/dp/B075P831VY/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Onkyo+TX-8220&qid=1633096775&sr=8-1
(viewed on Oct. 1, 2021; advertisement subsequently revised).
Compare https://www.denon.com/en-us/product/av-receivers/avr-s650h?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI9L67n5ax8wIVweDICh3obgLAEAAYASAAEgLGAfD_BwE
(viewed on Oct. 4, 2021) with https://www.onkyousa.com/product/tx-8220/ (viewed on Oct. 1, 2021). In this case, Amplifier A was
measured with a load impedance of 8 ohms, a power band of 20 Hz to
20 kHz, and a Total Harmonic Distortion limit of 0.08%, while
Amplifier B was measured as outputting 100 watts with a load
impedance of 6 ohms, a power band of 1 kHz, and a THD limit of 10%.
However, Amplifier B outputs only 45 watts when measured under the
same conditions as Amplifier A (8 ohms 20 Hz to 20 kHz,, 0.08% THD).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the past, the Commission has attempted to rectify this problem
by requiring sellers to disclose load impedance, rated power band or
power frequency response, and Total Harmonic Distortion (THD). The Rule
first required these disclosures in all ``media advertising'' and later
just in brochures and specification sheets. However, returning to this
stricter disclosure regime is unlikely to adequately address the
problem in the modern marketplace. Specifically, given the technical
nature of the disclosed terms, and the complex calculations needed to
convert the disclosure into apples-to-apples comparisons of power
output claims, these disclosures are unlikely to prevent most consumers
from being deceived. The problem is amplified because consumers shop
online more frequently, providing fewer opportunities to listen to
equipment before purchasing it.
Therefore, to eliminate widespread claims regarding power output
that are likely to confuse or deceive consumers, the Commission
proposes amending the Amplifier Rule to simplify power output
measurements by standardizing test parameters. Specifically, the
Commission proposes requiring the following standard testing
parameters: load impedance of 8 ohms, a power band of 20 Hz to 20 kHz,
and a THD limit of less than 0.1%. Staff's review found amplifiers are
generally designed to drive a nominal load impedance of 8 ohms; 20 Hz
to 20 kHz covers the normal range of human hearing; \31\ and 0.1% THD
does not audibly distort a signal. Several commenters suggested these
parameters, and many manufacturers' specification sheets already
disclose power outputs tested at 8 ohms, 20 Hz to 20 kHz, and at THD
limits of or slightly below 0.1%, e.g., at 0.08%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ The Commission further proposes to exclude amplifiers in
self-powered subwoofers used in systems that employ two or more
amplifiers dedicated to different portions of the audio frequency
spectrum from being tested over a power band of 20 Hz to 20 kHz. The
Commission has previously recognized that while ``stand-alone . . .
amplifiers . . . must reproduce signals covering the full musical
frequency bandwidth,'' ``self-powered subwoofer systems . . .
incorporate crossover circuitry that filters out frequencies above
the bass range,'' and the amplifiers in self-powered subwoofer
systems only amplify bass frequencies. 64 FR 38610, 38613-4 (July
19, 1999). Consequently, the Commission proposes to limit the power
band for testing self-powered subwoofer amplifiers to the
frequencies within those amplifiers' intended operating bandwidth.
The proposed amendments would require testing amplifiers in self-
powered full-range loudspeakers, such as full-range Bluetooth
speakers that output more than two watts, over a power band of 20 Hz
to 20 kHz.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Comments Recommending Amending the Definition of Associated Channels
for Testing Multichannel Home Theater Amplifiers
Numerous commenters recommended amending the Rule to clarify which
channels are associated for testing multichannel home theater
amplifiers. Several commenters recommended defining all channels of a
multichannel amplifier as associated, i.e., testing with all channels
fully driven.\32\ However, they failed to explain how fully driving all
channels related to normal usage.\33\ As noted above, in 2010, the
Commission considered and rejected a similar amendment because home
theater systems are designed to carry different sounds at different
levels on different channels. Therefore, driving all
[[Page 45050]]
channels simultaneously during testing would not represent normal use,
potentially incentivizing manufacturers to overbuild systems and raise
prices without any consumer benefit.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Forty-six commenters recommended defining all channels of a
multichannel amplifier as associated.
\33\ For example, Jayanath Gomes (140) commented ``[a]ll
Channels driven simultaneously is the best measure for multi-channel
AV receivers or Multi-Channel amplifiers.'' Larry Hyvonen (507)
commented the proposed amendment would let consumers ``know the true
power output of all channels driven continually.'' Dennis Dugger
(448) commented that amending the Rule to require all channels
driven would stop manufacturers from ``making false and misleading
output claims.''
\34\ Sony commented during the earlier rule review that ``to
maintain the same power ratings if it were necessary to drive all
channels simultaneously during testing, virtually all manufacturers
would have to change the sound platform of their amplifiers and
receivers to be able to sustain such output,'' which ``would drive
up the costs of production considerably, [and] in turn drive up the
ultimate cost to consumers.'' 75 FR 3985, 3987 (Jan. 26, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other commenters recommended driving the three front channels to
full rated power and all other channels to one-eighth rated power.\35\
Again, however, these comments did not provide evidence that these
parameters approximated normal use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ One hundred fifty-nine commenters recommended this
specification. For example, Jason Hines (18) stated ``I wish the FTC
to . . . amend the rule for today's multi-channel amplifier products
with the following measurement: 3CH driven, full power bandwidth, 8
ohms, at specified % THD+N (max 0.1% THD+N) with remaining channels
driven at 1/8th power.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, the Commission seeks evidence regarding:
(1) Which channels multichannel amplifiers fully drive
simultaneously during normal usage?
(2) Which channels multichannel amplifiers partially drive during
normal usage, and how hard such amplifiers drive these channels?
(3) What test procedures would best measure multichannel amplifier
power output during normal usage? \36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ The Commission has stated ``[t]he controlling consideration
in determining the proper interpretation of `associated channels' is
whether audio/video receivers and amplifiers would, when operated by
consumers in the home at high playback volume, be required to
deliver full rated power output in all channels simultaneously, or
whether such maximum stress conditions would more likely be
restricted at any given moment of time to certain sub-groupings of
available channels.'' 65 FR 80798, 80800 (Dec. 22, 2000). In that
notification, the Commission tentatively proposed three designations
for ``associated channels'' and stated that any Rule amendment would
be based upon a determination by the Commission of which channels
multichannel home theater amplifiers drive to full rated power
simultaneously when reproducing multichannel program material in the
home at high playback volume.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
XI. Request for Comments
The Commission seeks comments on all aspects of the proposed
requirements, including the likely effectiveness of the proposed
amendments in helping the Commission combat unfair or deceptive
practices in the marketing of amplifiers utilized in home entertainment
equipment. The Commission also seeks comment on various alternatives to
the proposed regulation, to further address disclosures. It also seeks
comment on other approaches, such as the publication of additional
consumer and business education. The Commission seeks any suggestions
or alternative methods for improving current requirements. Commenters
should provide any available evidence and data that supports their
position, such as empirical data, consumer perception studies, and
consumer complaints.
You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to
consider your comment, we must receive it on or before September 26,
2022. Include ``Amplifier Rule Review, Project No. P974222'' on your
comment. Your comment, including your name and your state, will be
placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the
extent practicable, on the https://www.regulations.gov website.
Because of the public health emergency in response to the COVID-19
outbreak and the agency's heightened security screening, postal mail
addressed to the Commission will be subject to delay. We strongly
encourage you to submit your comments online through the https://www.regulations.gov website. To ensure that the Commission considers
your online comment, please follow the instructions on the web-based
form.
If you file your comment on paper, write ``Amplifier Rule Review,
Project No. P974222'' on your comment and on the envelope, and mail
your comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office
of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite CC-5610 (Annex A),
Washington, DC 20580.
Because your comment will be placed on the publicly accessible
website, https://www.regulations.gov, you are solely responsible for
making sure that your comment does not include any sensitive or
confidential information. In particular, your comment should not
include any sensitive personal information such as your or anyone's
Social Security number, date of birth, driver's license number or other
state identification number or foreign country equivalent, passport
number, financial account number, or credit or debit card number. You
are also solely responsible for making sure your comment does not
include any sensitive health information, such as medical records or
other individually identifiable health information. In addition, your
comment should not include any ``[t]rade secret or any commercial or
financial information which . . . is privileged or confidential''--as
provided in section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and FTC Rule
4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)--including in particular competitively
sensitive information such as costs, sales statistics, inventories,
formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing processes, or customer
names.
Comments containing material for which confidential treatment is
requested must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled
``Confidential,'' and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c). In particular,
the written request for confidential treatment that accompanies the
comment must include the factual and legal basis for the request, and
must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from
the public record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c). Your comment will be kept
confidential only if the General Counsel grants your request in
accordance with the law and the public interest. Once your comment has
been posted publicly at www.regulations.gov--as legally required by FTC
Rule 4.9(b)--we cannot redact or remove your comment, unless you submit
a confidentiality request that meets the requirements for such
treatment under FTC Rule 4.9(c), and the General Counsel grants that
request.
Visit the FTC website to read this request for comment and the news
release describing it. The FTC Act and other laws the Commission
administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and
use in this proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will consider all
timely and responsive public comments it receives on or before
September 26, 2022. For information on the Commission's privacy policy,
including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy.
XII. Rulemaking Procedures
The Commission finds that using expedited procedures in this
rulemaking will serve the public interest. Expedited procedures will
support the Commission's goals of clarifying and updating existing
regulations without 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 Amplifier Rule. Pursuant to 16
CFR 1.20, the Commission will use the following procedures: (1)
publishing this notice of proposed rulemaking; (2) soliciting written
comments on the Commission's proposals to amend the Rule; (3) holding
an informal hearing, if requested by interested parties; and (4)
announcing final Commission action in a document published in the
Federal Register.
[[Page 45051]]
The Commission, in its discretion, has not chosen to schedule an
informal hearing and has not made any initial designations of disputed
issues of material fact necessary to be resolved at an informal
hearing. Interested persons who wish to make an oral submission at an
informal hearing must file a comment in response to this notification
and submit a statement identifying their interests in the proceeding
and describing any proposals regarding the designation of disputed
issues of material fact to be resolved at the informal hearing, on or
before September 26, 2022. 16 CFR 1.11. Such requests, and any other
motions or petitions in connection with this proceeding, must be filed
with the Secretary of the Commission.
XIII. Preliminary Regulatory Analysis and Regulatory Flexibility Act
Requirements
Under Section 22 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 57b-3, the Commission
must issue a preliminary regulatory analysis for a proceeding to amend
a rule if the Commission: (1) estimates the amendment will have an
annual effect on the national economy of $100 million or more; (2)
estimates the amendment will cause a substantial change in the cost or
price of certain categories of goods or services; or (3) otherwise
determines the amendment will have a significant effect upon covered
entities or upon consumers. The Commission has preliminarily determined
the proposed amendments to the Amplifier Rule will not have such
effects on the national economy, on the cost of sound amplification
equipment, or on covered businesses or consumers. In developing these
proposals, the Commission has sought to minimize prescriptive
requirements and provide flexibility to sellers in meeting the Rule's
objectives. The Commission, however, requests comment on the economic
effects of the proposed amendments.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA''), 5 U.S.C. 601-612,
requires that the Commission conduct an analysis of the anticipated
economic impact of the proposed amendment on small entities. The
purpose of a regulatory flexibility analysis is to ensure that an
agency considers potential impacts on small entities and examines
regulatory alternatives that could achieve the regulatory purpose while
minimizing burdens on small entities. The RFA requires the Commission
provide an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (``IRFA'') with a
proposed rule and a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (``FRFA'')
with a final rule, if any, unless the Commission certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
The Commission believes the proposed amendment would not have a
significant economic impact upon small entities, although it may affect
a substantial number of small businesses. Specifically, the proposed
change in the disclosure requirements should not significantly increase
the costs of small entities that manufacture or import power
amplification equipment for use in the home. Therefore, based on
available information, the Commission certifies that amending the Rule
as proposed will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small businesses. Although the Commission
certifies under the RFA the proposed amendment would not, if
promulgated, have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities, the Commission has determined, nonetheless, it is appropriate
to publish an IRFA to inquire into the impact of the proposed amendment
on small entities. Therefore, the Commission has prepared the following
analysis:
A. Description of the Reasons That Action by the Agency Is Being Taken
The Commission proposes amending the Rule to standardize testing
parameters to assist consumers in understanding power output
disclosures for amplifiers and to eliminate claims regarding power
output that are likely to deceive consumers.
B. Statement of the Objectives of, and Legal Basis for, the Proposed
Amendment
The Commission promulgated the Rule pursuant to section 18 of the
FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 57a. The proposed amendment would standardize
testing parameters for amplifiers to prevent deceptive claims regarding
power output and assist consumers in understanding power output
disclosures.
C. Small Entities to Which the Proposed Amendments Will Apply
The Rule covers manufacturers and importers of power amplification
equipment for use in the home. Under the Small Business Size Standards
issued by the Small Business Administration, audio and video equipment
manufacturers qualify as small businesses if they have 750 or fewer
employees.\37\ The Commission's staff estimates a substantial number of
the entities covered by the Rule likely qualify as small businesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ U.S. Small Business Administration, Table of Size Standards
(Eff. Aug. 19, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
The Commission is proposing amendments designed to simplify the
Rule and provide clearer amplifier power output measurements for
consumers to use to compare products. While the amendments modify the
Rule's testing requirements, FTC staff do not anticipate these changes
will result in higher costs for covered entities because manufacturers
already test power output for their amplifiers, in many cases testing
amplifiers under the conditions specified by the proposed amendments.
E. Duplicative, Overlapping, or Conflicting Federal Rules
The Commission has not identified any other Federal statutes,
rules, or policies that would duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the
proposed amendment.
F. Significant Alternatives to the Proposed Amendment
The Commission has not proposed any specific small entity exemption
or other significant alternatives because the proposed amendment would
not impose any new requirements or compliance costs.
XIV. Paperwork Reduction Act
The current Rule contains various provisions that constitute
information collection requirements as defined by 5 CFR 1320.3(c), the
definitional provision within the Office of Management and Budget
(``OMB'') regulations implementing the Paperwork Reduction Act
(``PRA''). OMB has approved the Rule's existing information collection
requirements through April 30, 2024 (OMB Control No. 3084-0105). As
described above, the Commission is proposing amendments to simplify
power output measurements by standardizing test parameters. The
amendments do not change the frequency of the testing or disclosure
requirements specified under the Rule. Accordingly, FTC staff do not
anticipate this change will result in additional burden hours or higher
costs for manufacturers who already test power output for their
amplifiers, in many cases testing amplifiers under the conditions
specified by the proposed amendments. Therefore, the amendments do not
require further OMB clearance.
[[Page 45052]]
XVI. Communications by Outside Parties to the Commissioners or Their
Advisors
Pursuant to FTC Rule 1.18(c)(1), the Commission has determined that
communications with respect to the merits of this proceeding from any
outside party to any Commissioner or Commissioner's advisor shall be
subject to the following treatment. Written communications and
summaries or transcripts of oral communications shall be placed on the
rulemaking record if the communication is received before the end of
the comment period. They shall be placed on the public record if the
communication is received later. Unless the outside party making an
oral communication is a member of Congress, such communications are
permitted only if advance notice is published in the Weekly Calendar
and Notice of ``Sunshine'' Meetings.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ See 15 U.S.C. 57a(i)(2)(A); 16 CFR 1.18(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 432
Amplifiers, Home entertainment products, Trade practices.
For the reasons stated above, the Commission proposes to amend part
432 of title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 432--POWER OUTPUT CLAIMS FOR AMPLIFIERS UTILIZED IN HOME
ENTERTAINMENT PRODUCTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 432 continues to read:
Authority: 38 Stat. 717, as amended; (15 U.S.C. 41-58).
0
2. Revise Sec. 432.2 to read as follows:
Sec. 432.2 Required disclosures.
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,
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.
0
3. Revise Sec. 432.3(e) to read as follows:
Sec. 432.3 Standard test conditions.
* * * * *
(e) Rated power shall be obtainable at all frequencies within the
rated power band of 20 Hz to 20 kHz without exceeding 0.1% of total
harmonic distortion after input signals at said frequencies have been
continuously applied at full rated power for not less than five (5)
minutes at the amplifier's auxiliary input, or if not provided, at the
phono input. Provided, however, that for amplifiers utilized as a
component in a self-powered subwoofer in a self-powered subwoofer-
satellite speaker system that employs two or more amplifiers dedicated
to different portions of the audio frequency spectrum, the rated power
shall be obtainable at all frequencies within the subwoofer amplifier's
intended operating bandwidth without exceeding 0.1% of total harmonic
distortion after input signals at said frequencies have been
continuously applied at full rated power for not less than five (5)
minutes at the amplifier's auxiliary input, or if not provided, at the
phono input.
* * * * *
By direction of the Commission.
April J. Tabor,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-16071 Filed 7-26-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P