[Federal Register: January 27, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 17)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 3813-3816]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27ja03-7]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 303
Rules and Regulations Under the Textile Fiber Products
Identification Act
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (``Commission'') announces
amendments to rule 7(m) of the Rules and Regulations Under the Textile
Fiber Products Identification Act (``Textile Rules'') to establish a
new generic fiber subclass name and definition for a subclass of olefin
fibers manufactured by the Dow Chemical Company (``Dow''), of Midland,
Michigan. The amendments to rule 7(m) establish the subclass name
``lastol'' as an alternative to the generic name ``olefin'' for a
specific subclass of elastic, cross-linked textile fibers defined in
the amendments, and previously referred to by Dow as ``CEF.''
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 27, 2003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neil Blickman, Attorney, Division of
Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission,
Washington, DC 20580; (202) 326-3038.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. Statutory and Regulatory Framework
Section 4(b)(1) of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act
(``Act'') declares that a textile product will be misbranded unless it
is labeled to show, among other elements, the percentages, by weight,
of the constituent fibers in the product, designated by their generic
names and in order of predominance by weight. 15 U.S.C. 70b(b)(1).
Section 4(c) of the Act provides that the same information required by
section 4(b)(1) (except the percentages) must appear in written
advertisements if any disclosure or implication of fiber content is
made regarding a covered textile product. 15 U.S.C. 70b(c). Section
7(c) directs the Commission to promulgate such rules, including the
establishment of generic names of manufactured fibers, as are necessary
to enforce the Act's directives. 15 U.S.C. 70e(c).
Rule 6 of the Textile Rules (16 CFR 303.6) requires manufacturers
to use the generic names of the fibers contained in their textile
products in making required fiber content disclosures on labels. Rule 7
of the Textile Rules (16 CFR 303.7) sets forth the generic names and
definitions that the Commission has established for synthetic fibers.
Rule 8 (16 CFR 303.8) describes the procedures for establishing new
generic names.
B. Procedural History
Dow applied to the Commission on October 18, 2001, for a new olefin
fiber subclass name and definition, and supplemented its application
with additional information and test data on December 12, 2001, January
16, 2002, and March 19, 2002.\1\ Dow stated that its
[[Page 3814]]
new cross-linked elastic fiber, CEF, is a manufactured olefin textile
fiber with a cross-linked polymer network structure. Dow stated that
CEF meets the broad definition of olefin fiber in the Textile Rules, 16
CFR 303.7(m), but differs from commercially available olefin fibers
because of its elasticity and wide temperature tolerance, and thus is a
good choice for easy-care stretch apparel applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Dow's petition and supplements thereto are on the rulemaking
record of this proceeding. This material is available for public
inspection in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, 5
U.S.C. 552, and the Commission's rules of practice, 16 CFR 4.11, at
the Consumer Response Center, Public Reference Section, Room 130,
Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC. The petition also may be viewed on the Commission's website at
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=www.ftc.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contending that the unique structure and characteristics of fibers
made from CEF are inadequately described under existing generic names
listed in the Textile Rules, Dow petitioned the Commission to establish
a new generic subclass name and definition. After an initial analysis
with the assistance of a textile expert, the Commission determined that
Dow's proposed new fiber technically falls within rule 7(m)'s
definition of ``olefin.'' \2\ The Commission further determined,
however, that Dow's application for a new subclass name and definition
merited further consideration. Accordingly, on May 17, 2002, the
Commission announced that it had issued Dow the designation ``DCC
0001'' for temporary use in identifying CEF fiber pending a final
determination on the merits of its application. The Commission staff
further analyzed the application, and on May 24, 2002 (67 FR 36551),
the Commission published a notice of proposed rulemaking (``NPR'')
detailing the technical aspects of Dow's fiber, and requesting public
comment on Dow's application. On August 12, 2002, the comment period
closed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Rule 7(m) defines ``olefin'' as ``[a] manufactured fiber in
which the fiber-forming substance is any long chain synthetic
polymer composed of at least 85 percent by weight of ethylene,
propylene, or other olefin units, except amorphous (noncrystalline)
polyolefins qualifying under paragraph (j)(1) of this section.'' 16
CFR 303.7(m). Rule 7(j)(1) defines ``rubber,'' in part, as ``[a]
manufactured fiber in which the fiber-forming substance is comprised
of natural or synthetic rubber, including the following categories:
(1) [a] manufactured fiber in which the fiber-forming substance is a
hydrocarbon such as natural rubber, polyisoprene, polybutadiene,
copolymers of dienes and hydrocarbons, or amorphous (noncrystalline)
polyolefins.'' 16 CFR 303.7(j)(1). Dow's petition stated that CEF is
not a rubber because CEF fibers have a low but significant level of
crystallinity, whereas rubber fibers are not crystalline. In
addition, CEF exhibits much higher tensile set (lower elastic
recovery) than rubber when extended to greater than 100% elongation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Fiber and Solicitation of Comments in the NPR
A. The Commission's Criteria for Granting a New Generic Fiber Subclass
Name and Definition, and Related Issues
In the NPR, the Commission solicited comment on whether Dow's
application meets the Commission's criteria for granting applications
for new generic fiber subclass names. Specifically, does the proposed
subclass fiber: (1) Have the same general chemical composition as an
established generic fiber category; (2) have distinctive properties of
importance to the general public as a result of a new method of
manufacture or substantially differentiated physical characteristics,
such as fiber structure; and (3) do the distinctive feature(s) make the
fiber suitable for uses for which other fibers under the established
generic name would not be suited, or would be significantly less well
suited? \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The criteria for establishing a new generic subcategory are
different from the criteria to establish a new generic category. The
Commission's criteria for granting applications for new generic
names are as follows: (1) The fiber for which a generic name is
requested must have a chemical composition radically different from
other fibers, and that distinctive chemical composition must result
in distinctive physical properties of significance to the general
public; (2) the fiber must be in active commercial use or such use
must be immediately foreseen; and (3) the granting of the generic
name must be of importance to the consuming public at large, rather
than to a small group of knowledgeable professionals such as
purchasing officers for large Government agencies. The Commission
believes it is in the public interest to prevent the proliferation
of generic names, and will adhere to a stringent application of
these criteria in consideration of any future applications for
generic names, and in a systematic review of any generic names
previously granted that no longer meet these criteria. The
Commission announced these criteria on Dec. 11, 1973, at 38 FR
34112, and later clarified and reaffirmed them on Dec. 6, 1995, 60
FR 62353, on May 23, 1997, 62 FR 28343, on Jan. 6, 1998, 63 FR 447
and 63 FR 449, and on Nov. 17, 2000, 65 FR 69486, on Feb. 15, 2002,
67 FR 7104, and on May 24, 2002, 67 FR 36551.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Within the established 24 generic names for manufactured fibers,
there are four cases where such generic name alternatives may be used:
(1) Pursuant to rule 7(c), 16 CFR 303.7(c), within the generic category
``polyester,'' the term ``elasterell-p'' may be used as an alternative
generic description for a specifically defined subcategory of polyester
fiber; (2) pursuant to rule 7(d), 16 CFR 303.7(d), within the generic
category ``rayon,'' the term ``lyocell'' may be used as an alternative
generic description for a specifically defined subcategory of rayon
fiber; (3) pursuant to rule 7(e), 16 CFR 303.7(e), within the generic
category ``acetate,'' the term ``triacetate'' may be used as an
alternative generic description for a specifically defined subcategory
of acetate fiber; and (4) pursuant to rule 7(j), 16 CFR 303.7(j),
within the generic category ``rubber,'' the term ``lastrile'' may be
used as an alternative generic description for a specifically defined
subcategory of rubber fiber.
Although the Commission's NPR announced that Dow's fiber
technically falls within rule 7(m)'s definition of olefin, it noted
that Dow's application may meet the Commission's standard for a
subclass name. Alternatively, the Commission stated that CEF may fit
within the current definition of olefin in rule 7(m), with or without
need for clarification. Therefore, the Commission requested public
comment on whether to: (1) Broaden rule 7(m)'s definition of olefin to
better describe the allegedly unique molecular structure and physical
characteristics of CEF and any similar fibers (without creating a new
subclass for CEF); (2) amend rule 7(m)'s definition of olefin by
creating a separate subclass name and definition for CEF and other
similar qualifying fibers within the olefin category; or (3) deny Dow's
application because CEF fiber fits within rule 7(m)'s definition of
olefin without need for any change.
B. The NPR
1. Fiber Description and Proposed Subclass Name and Definition
The NPR provided a detailed description, taken from Dow's
application, of CEF's chemical composition and physical and chemical
properties.\4\ As a result of CEF's fiber structure, Dow maintained
that CEF has the following distinctive properties that would be
significant to consumers: (1) Stretch and recovery power that is far
superior to that of any olefin fiber; (2) shape retention at
temperatures in excess of 170[deg] C, which enables CEF to survive
rigorous manufacturing and consumer care processes; and (3) chemical
resistance to solvents that typically dissolve conventional olefins.
Dow asserted that olefin, widely recognized as a dependable carpet
fiber that has no stretch or elastic recovery and poor high temperature
stability, is an inappropriate categorization for the elastic olefin
fiber, CEF, which is targeted for apparel applications. Dow stated that
CEF will offer consumers a wider choice in garments containing stretch
fabric, and contended that it would be confusing to consumers if CEF is
called simply ``olefin.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 67 FR 36551, at 36552-36554 (May 24, 2002). For brevity's
sake, the Commission is providing a simplified description of the
fiber in this notice, and refers those who wish to see detailed
technical information about the fiber to the NPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dow, therefore, petitioned the Commission to establish the generic
name ``lastol'' as an alternative to, and a subclass of, ``olefin.'' In
addition, Dow proposed that the Commission add the following sentence
to the current definition of olefin in rule 7(m) to define CEF and
similar fibers as a subclass of olefin:
[[Page 3815]]
Where the fiber is a manufactured cross-linked elastic fiber in
which (a) the fiber-forming substance is a synthetic polymer, with
low but significant crystallinity, composed of at least 99 percent
by weight of ethylene and at least one other olefin unit, and (b)
the fiber exhibits substantial elasticity and heat resistance
properties not present in traditional olefin fibers, the term lastol
may be used as a generic description of the fiber.
The effect of Dow's proposed amendment would be to allow use of the
name ``lastol'' as an alternative to the generic name ``olefin'' for
the subcategory of olefin fibers meeting the further criteria contained
in the sentence added by the proposed amendment.
2. Public Comments
The Commission received no comments on the NPR.
3. Discussion of the Three Criteria for Granting New Generic Subclass
Names
a. CEF Fiber's Chemical Composition
The Commission has concluded that the materials Dow submitted show
that although CEF has the same general chemical composition as other
olefin fibers, it also has a molecular and fiber structure that differs
from typical olefins. CEF is founded on metallocene-based polyolefin
elastomer chemistry and is manufactured using a melt spinning process.
After spinning, the fiber is cross-linked in order to prevent
dissolution and impart high-temperature dimensional stability. After
the cross-linking process, the polymer chains in the fiber are linked
to one another via covalent bonds.
The interpolymer \5\ in CEF has been made from ethylene and,
typically, octene in excess of 30 weight percent using a constrained
geometry catalyst, a member of the metallocene family. The catalyst
allows precise control of the molecular architecture of the polymer,
which prior to cross-linking has a narrow molecular weight
distribution. As a result, the molecules in CEF are very similar in
size and composition to each other. In contrast, typical olefin fiber
manufactured today results from conventional multi-site catalyst
technology (such as Ziegler-Natta catalysts). Consequently, typical
olefin fiber has a broad compositional molecular weight distribution,
and low or no comonomer content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Interpolymer refers to polymers prepared by the
polymerization of at least two different types of monomers,
typically ethylene and octene.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result of CEF's unique chemical structure, its high comonomer
content, CEF has lower crystallinity and density than conventional
olefin fibers. Unlike conventional olefin fiber where the polymer
crystals are in lamellae form,\6\ the crystals in the CEF fiber-forming
substance are in fringed micelle form.\7\ The fringed micellar
crystalline morphology and the low, but significant, level of
crystallinity in CEF, which differentiates it from rubber, impart
elastic properties not seen in typical olefin fibers. Thus, Dow's
application meets the first criterion for granting a new generic fiber
subclass name.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ In lamellae form, the polymer chains are folded in the
crystalline or ordered regions.
\7\ In fringed micelle form, the polymer chains are extended and
parallel to each other in the crystalline regions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. CEF's Distinctive Properties Are a Result of a New Method of
Manufacture or Substantially Differentiated Physical Characteristics,
Such as Fiber Structure
1. Elasticity. The materials Dow submitted also show that the most
notable characteristic (and of greatest importance to consumers) of CEF
is its elasticity, which is superior to that of conventional olefin
fiber. CEF's favorable stretch (at least five times its original length
before breaking) and elasticity (stretching to twice its length and,
when released, recovering to within 25 percent of its original length)
are a direct result of its low level of crystallinity and its fringed
micellar crystal form. As a result, CEF can be successfully used in
clothing applications where stretch is desirable.
In contrast, conventional olefin fiber is more stiff and less
elastic than CEF. Typical olefin fibers (in their manufactured,
``drawn,'' form) exhibit low elongation before breaking (typically less
than 50%) and, therefore, cannot be used as successfully as CEF in
apparel markets for stretch clothing.
2. High Temperature Stability. CEF's covalent cross-links connect
adjacent polymer chains into a contiguous three-dimensional polymer
network. Dow's materials show that this cross-linked polymer network
structure allows CEF to maintain its shape and mechanical integrity
above its crystalline melting temperature.\8\ It appears that CEF
retains its shape at temperatures up to 220[deg] C, in excess of
conventional olefin's melting point, which occurs at or below 170[deg]
C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ CEF's cross-linked polymer network structure also allows CEF
to maintain its integrity in solvents that typically dissolve
conventional olefins.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CEF's ability to withstand high temperatures has advantages for
textile manufacturers who can use dye and process methods requiring
temperatures in excess of 170[deg] C. CEF also has advantages for
consumers because they will be able to repeatedly wash, dry, and iron
fabrics containing CEF at typical temperatures (up to 210[deg] C)
without destroying CEF's stretch properties. In contrast, since
conventional olefin fiber loses its shape and mechanical integrity at
temperatures ranging from 105-170[deg] C, it cannot withstand as well
as CEF the rigors of high heat and repeated launderings.
c. CEF's Distinctive Features Make the Fiber Suitable for Uses for
Which Other Olefin Fibers Would Not Be Suited, or Would Be
Significantly Less Well Suited
Based on Dow's submission, the Commission has concluded that
conventional olefins are not suitable, or not as suitable, for
imparting the significant elasticity to certain apparel fabrics, such
as knits and wovens, that consumers may expect or desire, and that CEF
is a suitable stretch component. Thus, Dow's application has satisfied
the Commission that CEF is suitable for uses for which other olefin
fibers are not suited, or not as well suited. Accordingly, the
Commission agrees with Dow that the granting of a generic subclass name
to describe CEF is of importance to the general public, and not just a
few knowledgeable professionals. A new generic subclass name will
enable consumers to identify textile fiber products containing CEF (and
other elastic olefin fibers) that exhibit significant stretch,
elasticity, and heat resistance.
4. Conclusion
Based on its review of the materials submitted by Dow, and in
consultation with its expert, the Commission has concluded that CEF:
(1) Has the same general chemical composition as an established generic
fiber category (olefin); (2) has distinctive properties of importance
to the general public as a result of a new method of manufacture or
substantially differentiated physical characteristics, such as fiber
structure (e.g., elasticity and heat resistance); and (3) that its
distinctive feature(s) make the fiber suitable for uses for which other
fibers under the established olefin generic name would not be suited,
or would be significantly less well suited. Consequently, the
Commission has determined that there are sufficient differences between
CEF and conventional olefins to merit a new subclass designation.
Therefore, the Commission is amending rule 7(m) to adopt and define the
generic subclass name ``lastol,'' and to allow use of the name
``lastol'' as an alternative to the generic name ``olefin'' for that
subclass of fiber. Other companies that
[[Page 3816]]
manufacture fibers satisfying the definition also may use the subclass
name in making required fiber content disclosures on labels.
The Commission has decided to simplify slightly the definition of
``lastol'' that Dow proposed and the Commission published for comment.
The definition the Commission is adopting, however, is consistent with
the definition, as proposed, as well as with the definition of
``olefin'' in rule 7(m). The new definition of ``lastol'' defines the
fiber generically in terms of its chemical composition, and identifies
its physical elasticity and heat resistance characteristics. In
addition, the Commission is reducing the minimum percentage by weight
of ethylene and other olefin unit constituting the polymer in the final
definition of ``lastol'' from 99 percent, as proposed, to 95 percent to
account for a small percentage of inorganic molecules in the fiber
that, according to Dow, are not included in the polymer.
Accordingly, for the reasons discussed above, the Commission amends
rule 7(m) of the Textile Rules by adding the following sentence at the
end:
Where the fiber-forming substance is a cross-linked synthetic
polymer, with low but significant crystallinity, composed of at
least 95 percent by weight of ethylene and at least one other olefin
unit, and the fiber is substantially elastic and heat resistant, the
term lastol may be used as a generic description of the fiber.
III. Effective Date
The Commission is making the amendments effective today, January
27, 2003, as permitted by 5 U.S.C. 553(d), because the amendments do
not create new obligations under the rule; rather, they merely create a
fiber name and definition that the public may use to comply with the
rule.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act
In the NPR, the Commission tentatively concluded that the
provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act relating to an initial
regulatory analysis, 5 U.S.C. 603-604, did not apply to the proposal
because the amendments, if promulgated, would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The
Commission believed that the proposed amendments would impose no
additional obligations, penalties, or costs. The amendments simply
would allow covered companies to use a new generic name as an
alternative to an existing generic name for that defined subclass of
fiber, and would impose no additional labeling requirements. To ensure,
however, that no substantial economic impact was overlooked, the
Commission solicited public comment in the NPR on the effects of the
proposed amendments on costs, profits, competitiveness of, and
employment in small entities. 67 FR 36551, at 36554 (May 24, 2002).
No comments were received on this issue. Accordingly, the
Commission hereby certifies, pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that the amendments promulgated today will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
These amendments do not constitute ``collection[s] of information''
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-13, 109 Stat.
163, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35 (as amended), and its implementing
regulations, 5 CFR part 1320 et seq. Those procedures for establishing
generic names that do constitute collections of information, 16 CFR
303.8, have been submitted to OMB, which has approved them and assigned
them control number 3084-0101.
List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 303
Labeling, Textile, Trade practices.
VI. Text of Amendments
For reasons set forth in the preamble, 16 CFR part 303 is amended
as follows:
PART 303--RULES AND REGULATIONS UNDER THE TEXTILE FIBER PRODUCTS
IDENTIFICATION ACT
1. The authority citation for part 303 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Sec. 7(c) of the Textile Fiber Products
Identification Act (15 U.S.C. 70e(c)).
2. In Sec. 303.7, paragraph (m) is amended by adding a sentence at
the end, to read as follows:
Sec. 303.7 Generic names and definitions for manufactured fibers.
* * * * *
(m) * * * Where the fiber-forming substance is a cross-linked
synthetic polymer, with low but significant crystallinity, composed of
at least 95 percent by weight of ethylene and at least one other olefin
unit, and the fiber is substantially elastic and heat resistant, the
term lastol may be used as a generic description of the fiber.
* * * * *
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 03-1739 Filed 1-24-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P