[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 87 (Monday, May 6, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26289-26292]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10580]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

16 CFR PART 23


Guides for the Jewelry, Precious Metals, and Pewter Industries: 
Public Roundtable

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission (``FTC'' or ``Commission'').

ACTION: Announcement of public roundtable.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (``FTC'' or ``Commission'') will 
hold a public roundtable on June 19, 2013 to examine possible 
modifications to the FTC's Guides for the Jewelry, Precious Metals, and 
Pewter Industries (``Jewelry Guides'' or ``Guides''). This Notice 
describes the issues the roundtable will examine and invites comments 
regarding the questions to be addressed.

DATES: The roundtable will be held on Wednesday, June 19, 2013, from 
9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at the FTC's Satellite Building Conference 
Center, located at 601 New Jersey Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20001. 
Prior to the roundtable, the Commission will publish an agenda and 
further information on its Web site. Comments will be accepted until 
June 5, 2013.
    Registration Information: The roundtable is open to the public, and 
there is no fee for attendance. For admittance to the Conference 
Center, all attendees will be required to show a valid photo 
identification, such as a driver's license. The FTC will accept pre-
registration for this roundtable. Pre-registration is not necessary to 
attend, but is encouraged so that we may better plan this event. To 
pre-register, please email your name and affiliation to lkoss@ftc.gov. 
When you pre-register, we will collect your name, affiliation, and your 
email address. This information will be used to estimate how many 
people will attend. We may use your email address to contact you with 
information about the roundtable.
    Under the Freedom of Information Act (``FOIA'') or other laws, we 
may be required to disclose to outside organizations the information 
you provide. For additional information, including routine uses 
permitted by the Privacy Act, see the Commission's Privacy Policy at 
www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm. The FTC Act and other laws the Commission 
administers permit the collection of this contact information for 
consideration and use for the above purposes.

ADDRESSES: The submission of comments is not required for attendance at 
the roundtable. Interested parties may file comments online or on paper 
by following the instructions in the Request for Comments part of the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. Write ``Jewelry Guides 
Roundtable, 16 CFR Part 23, Project No. G711001'' on your comment, and 
file your comment online at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/jewelryguidesroundtable by following the instructions on the web-based 
form. If you prefer to file your comment on paper, mail or deliver your 
comment to the following address: Federal Trade Commission, Office of 
the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex O), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20580.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reenah L. Kim, Attorney, (202) 326-
2272, or Laura D. Koss, Attorney, (202) 326-2890, Division of 
Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 
600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Mailstop M-8102B, Washington, DC 20580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    The FTC commenced its regulatory review of the Jewelry Guides on 
July 2, 2012 with the publication of a Federal Register Notice (``2012 
Notice'') seeking public comments on the Guides.\1\ After review of 
comments received in response, the FTC has determined that a public 
roundtable will help it address possible revisions to the Guides. 
Accordingly, the Commission will hold such a roundtable on June 19, 
2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 77 FR 39201 (July 2, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To facilitate a productive roundtable, this announcement first 
provides background on the Jewelry Guides and the regulatory review 
process, including comments received in response to the 2012 Notice. It 
then provides a brief description of the issues the upcoming roundtable 
will explore, outlines questions to be addressed, and invites comments 
for further discussion of these issues.

A. Background Information

    The Jewelry Guides address claims made about precious metal, 
pewter, diamond, gemstone, and pearl products. 16 CFR Part 23. The 
Guides explain how to avoid making deceptive claims and, for certain 
products, discuss when disclosures should be made to avoid unfair or 
deceptive trade practices.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission issues industry guides to help the industry 
conduct its affairs in conformity with legal requirements. 16 CFR 
Part 17. Industry guides are administrative interpretations of the 
law; they do not have the force of law and are not independently 
enforceable. Failure to follow industry guides may result, however, 
in enforcement action under the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 45. In any such 
action, the Commission must prove that the act or practice at issue 
is unfair or deceptive in violation of Section 5 of the FTC Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Jewelry Guides Regulatory Review

    The 2012 Notice commenced the decennial review of the Jewelry 
Guides.\3\ The Notice solicited public comments in response to 
questions about the Guides' costs, benefits, and effectiveness. It also 
posed specific questions based on inquiries received by Commission 
staff in recent years suggesting that technological developments and 
related changes in industry standards and practice may affect certain 
provisions of the Jewelry Guides.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ To ensure that its regulations and guides continue to 
achieve their intended goals without unduly burdening commerce, the 
Commission systematically reviews its regulations and guides on a 
ten-year cycle; i.e., the Commission schedules its reviews ten years 
after implementation and ten years after the completion of each 
review. Since completing its last review of the Jewelry Guides in 
1996, the Commission revised sections of the Guides and addressed 
other issues raised in petitions from jewelry trade associations. 
See Federal Trade Commission: Guides for the Metallic Watch Band 
Industry and Guides for the Jewelry Industry: Final guides, 61 FR 
27178 (May 30, 1996); Federal Trade Commission: Guides for the 
Jewelry, Precious Metals, and Pewter Industries: Final guides, 62 FR 
16669 (Apr. 8, 1997); Federal Trade Commission: Guides for the 
Jewelry, Precious Metals, and Pewter Industries: Revision of the 
Guides for the Jewelry, Precious Metals, and Pewter Industries, 64 
FR 33193 (June 22, 1999); Federal Trade Commission: Guides for the 
Jewelry, Precious Metals, and Pewter Industries: Final guides, 65 FR 
78738 (Dec. 15, 2000); Federal Trade Commission: Guides for the 
Jewelry, Precious Metals, and Pewter Industries: Final Guides 
Amendments, 75 FR 81443 (Dec. 28, 2010). The Commission therefore 
scheduled the Guides for another comprehensive review in 2011, but 
postponed it due to resource constraints. Federal Trade Commission: 
Notice Announcing Ten-Year Regulatory Review Schedule and Request 
for Public Comment on the Federal Trade Commission's Regulatory 
Review Program, 76 FR 41150 (Jul. 13, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Issues and Questions for Discussion at the Roundtable

    In response to the 2012 Notice, the Commission received 20 comments 
addressing a range of issues.\4\ Many commenters proposed revisions to

[[Page 26290]]

various provisions of the Jewelry Guides, which the Commission is 
considering as part of its review. Comments in two areas merit further 
exploration prior to making Commission proposals: (1) The marketing of 
alloy products containing precious metals in amounts below the Guides' 
minimum thresholds; and (2) surface applications of precious metals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Available at http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/jewelryguidesreview/index.shtm. Citations to comments below identify 
the commenter by name and assigned comment number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Marketing of Alloy Products Containing Precious Metals in Amounts 
Below Minimum Thresholds

    The 2012 Notice asked whether the Commission should amend the 
Jewelry Guides to provide particular guidance on how to describe non-
deceptively the content of alloy products that contain precious metals 
in amounts below the Guides' minimum thresholds. Currently, Section 
23.4 provides that it may be misleading to use the word ``gold'' or any 
abbreviation, or a quality mark implying gold content, to describe all 
or part of an industry product that is composed throughout of an alloy 
of gold that is less than 10 karats. Similarly, Section 23.6 provides 
that it is unfair or deceptive to mark, describe, or otherwise 
represent all or part of an industry product as ``silver,'' or to use a 
related abbreviation, unless it is at least 925/1,000ths pure silver. 
Section 23.7 suggests a minimum of at least 500 parts per thousand pure 
platinum for use of the word ``platinum'' or related abbreviation to 
mark or describe an industry product.
    Five commenters responded to the Commission's specific questions 
regarding the marketing of alloy products that contain precious metals 
in amounts below the Guides' thresholds.\5\ These commenters generally 
concurred that industry members should accurately describe the 
composition of these products to avoid consumer confusion. As one 
commenter pointed out, for example, complete and accurate information 
about a product's composition would allow consumers to make informed 
purchasing decisions regarding gold alloy jewelry that is not marked 
with a quality stamp indicating karat fineness (e.g., ``9 karat''), but 
nonetheless resembles gold jewelry in appearance, feel, and price.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ MJJ Brilliant Jewelers (MJJ), Comment 560895-00009; Jewelers 
Ethics Association (JEA), Comment 560895-00013; Jewelers Vigilance 
Committee (JVC), Comment 560895-00027; Jewelry Television (JTV), 
Comment 560895-00017; and Wayne Schenk (Schenk), Comment 560895-
00008.
    \6\ MJJ, Comment 560895-00009 at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Three commenters recommended revisions that would specify how to 
describe alloy products containing precious metals below the minimum 
thresholds.\7\ The commenters differed, however, on how this might be 
accomplished. JTV stated that the Guides should specifically authorize 
the stamping of karat fineness on a gold alloy containing less than 10 
karats, and permit use of the word ``gold'' to describe such a product. 
JTV further stated that, if the Guides continue to prohibit use of the 
word ``gold,'' sellers should be allowed to market the alloy under a 
trade name, as long as the product is stamped with an accurate 
disclosure of karat fineness.\8\ No other commenters recommended 
allowing quality marks to be stamped on such products.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See MJJ, Comment 560895-00009 at 4; JTV, Comment 560895-
00017 at 4; JVC, Comment 560895-00027 at 4. In contrast, JEA stated 
that the current Guides provisions concerning precious metals are 
clear and concise, and do not require revision. JEA, Comment 560895-
00013 at 10.
    \8\ JTV, Comment 560895-00017 at 4.
    \9\ Indeed, Schenk expressly opposed any revision that would 
allow the stamping of alloys containing less than 10 karats of gold 
with a quality mark implying gold content, and also opposed any 
revision that would allow the stamping of alloys containing below-
standard amounts of silver (other than the stamping of ``coin 
silver'' on alloys comprising at least 90% silver, as provided in 
Section 23.6(c) of the Guides). Schenk, Comment 560895-00008 at 3. 
Similarly, JVC stated that it did not recommend any changes to the 
minimum standard amounts, and JEA stated that revisions to the 
Guides' provisions concerning precious metals are not needed. JVC, 
Comment 560895-00027 at 4; JEA, Comment 560895-00013 at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MJJ and JVC both stated that the Guides should allow industry 
members to provide complete and accurate descriptions of below-standard 
alloy products by identifying their actual precious metal content, such 
as through methods other than stamping. MJJ recommended including an 
example of non-deceptive markings and descriptions for such products, 
but did not propose specific language.\10\ JVC recommended allowing 
sellers to indicate in descriptive marketing materials (e.g., 
advertisements, labels, tags) that a below-standard product contains a 
precious metal--as long as they accurately disclose the quantity of the 
metal by percentage.\11\ Specifically, JVC proposed a note be added to 
Sections 23.4 (gold), 23.6 (silver), and 23.7 (platinum group metals) 
stating that, for products containing less than the minimum standard 
amounts, sellers may identify the product with the name of the precious 
metal, but only if it is preceded by the percentage of the precious 
metal in the product (e.g., ``8% Gold + 4% Palladium,'' ``40% 
Platinum,'' ``70% Silver + 30% Copper'').\12\ JVC argued, however, that 
sellers should not be allowed to stamp the name of the below-standard 
precious metal on the product itself (e.g., with a quality mark).\13\ 
The roundtable will help the Commission assess whether JVC's proposal 
would provide adequate guidance for sellers to avoid consumer deception 
when marketing below-standard alloy products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ MJJ, Comment 560895-00009 at 4.
    \11\ JVC, Comment 560895-00027 at 4.
    \12\ JVC, Comment 560895-00027 at 20, 39-40.
    \13\ JVC, Comment 560895-00027 at 20, 39-40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Surface Applications of Precious Metals

    Four commenters raised issues concerning the surface-layer 
application of precious metals on jewelry industry products.\14\ The 
current Guides discuss certain aspects of surface applications in 
Sections 23.4 (gold), 23.5 (vermeil), and 23.6 (silver), but do not 
comprehensively set specific minimum standards for the use of terms 
indicating a precious metal application. In some circumstances, the 
Guides advise that surface-platings be ``of such thickness and extent 
of surface coverage that reasonable durability is assured,'' \15\ or 
that ``all significant surfaces of the product or part contain a 
plating or coating . . . that is of substantial thickness.'' \16\ In 
addition, Section 23.4(c) gives examples reflecting minimum thicknesses 
and weights for certain terms used to describe surface applications of 
gold or gold alloy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Sudhir Jadhav (Jadhav), Comment 560895-00011; Jewelers 
Vigilance Committee (JVC), Comment 560895-00027; Sterling Jewelers 
Inc./Richline Group, Inc. (Sterling/Richline), Comments 560895-00021 
& 560895-00022; and TSI Holding Company (TSI), Comment 560895-00016.
    \15\ See Sec.  23.4(b)(4) (regarding use of the terms ``gold 
plate'' and ``gold plated'') and Sec.  23.4(b)(5) (regarding use of 
the terms ``gold filled,'' ``rolled gold plate,'' ``rolled gold 
plated,'' and ``gold overlay'').
    \16\ See Sec.  23.6(d) (regarding representations that all or 
part of an industry product is ``plated or coated with silver'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the commenters, the high price of precious metals has 
led to an increase in products containing a surface-layer application 
of precious metal over a less expensive metal. The precious metals used 
in these surface applications include not only gold and silver, but 
also platinum, palladium, rhodium, and ruthenium. Commenters stated the 
lack of standards in the Guides for products with surface applications 
of a precious metal other than gold or silver creates the risk of 
deception and confusion. For example, one commenter notes it is common 
industry practice to apply a surface layer of rhodium (a white precious 
metal) on gold products that are marketed as white gold; the surface 
coating is often not disclosed even

[[Page 26291]]

though it may wear off over time, revealing the underlying yellow or 
off-white gold. Moreover, products that have insubstantial amounts of 
precious metal applied over a less expensive metal may be marketed at 
higher prices than justified.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ JVC, Comment 560895-00027 at 12-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The commenters generally agreed the Guides should take a unified 
approach in providing guidance regarding surface applications of 
precious metals. Among other things, commenters argued such an approach 
would simplify the nomenclature and standards used, such as by setting 
explicit minimums (by weight ratio or thickness of coating, depending 
on the method of application) for common terms. In addition, JVC and 
Sterling/Richline proposed guidance that would encompass all of the 
precious metals used in coatings on jewelry products.\18\ They also 
proposed that, if the minimum standards are not met, the Guides should 
require a disclosure stating that durability of the application is not 
assured.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Specifically, JVC and Sterling/Richline recommended an 
approach that expressly covers surface applications of platinum, 
iridium, palladium, ruthenium, rhodium, and osmium, in addition to 
gold and silver. JVC, Comment 560895-00027at 13-14; Sterling/
Richline, Comments 560895-00021 & 560895-00022 at 2. TSI focused on 
gold and silver, and did not discuss surface applications of other 
precious metals. TSI, Comment 560895-00016 at 2-3. Similarly, Jadhav 
focused solely on the issue of gold plating over silver, without 
referring to other precious metals. Jadhav, Comment 560895-00011 at 
1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The commenters diverged, however, concerning the particulars of the 
proposed approach. Specifically, commenters disagreed about whether 
standards for certain gold electrolytic plating applications should be 
stated in terms of ``fine gold'' (which has a 23.5 karat minimum), 
without allowing for electrolytic applications of gold alloy (implying 
the presence of at least 10 karats).\19\ Commenters also disagreed on 
whether, when using the terms ``plate,'' ``plated,'' ``electroplate,'' 
and ``electroplated'' to describe a product with rhodium surface-
plating, the Guides should specify different minimum thickness 
standards depending on whether the rhodium is applied over a non-white 
or white metal.\20\ In addition, one commenter recommended the deletion 
of ``overlay'' as a term that may be used to disclose the amount of 
precious metal in a surface application, whereas another commenter 
retained this term in its proposal for revising the provisions that 
concern gold and silver surface applications.\21\ Lastly, one commenter 
recommended the Guides include the term ``over'' in a revised provision 
regarding use of the terms ``plate,'' ``plated,'' ``electroplate,'' and 
``electroplated.'' \22\ The Commission will use the public roundtable 
to evaluate whether any change or additional guidance is necessary to 
prevent consumer deception and, if so, the level of detail the 
Commission should include in the Guides.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Sterling/Richline recommended that all standards for 
electrolytic plating applications of gold (as reflected in proposed 
guidance regarding use of the terms ``plate,'' ``plated,'' 
``electroplate,'' ``electroplated,'' ``heavy electroplate,'' ``heavy 
electroplated,'' and ``vermeil'') be stated in terms of ``fine 
gold;'' similarly, Jadhav recommended that gold plating over 
sterling silver only be permitted for gold greater than 23 karats. 
Sterling/Richline, Comments 560895-00021 & 560895-00022 at 1-2; 
Jadhav, Comment 560895-00011 at 1. By contrast, the JVC proposal 
provides for electrolytic surface applications of gold alloy. JVC, 
Comment 560895-00027 attach. at 9.
    \20\ JVC's proposed guidance provided a minimum thickness of 
three millionths of an inch. JVC, Comment 560895-00027 attach. at 
10. By contrast, Sterling/Richline proposed minimum thickness 
standards of three millionths of an inch for an application of 
rhodium over non-white metal, and two millionths of an inch for an 
application over white metal. Sterling/Richline, Comments 560895-
00021 & 560895-00022 at 3.
    \21\ TSI included ``overlay'' in its recommendations regarding 
gold and silver surface applications. TSI, Comment 560895-00016 at 
2. JVC stated it did not address ``overlay'' in its proposed 
revisions to the Guides because the term is superfluous. JVC, 
Comment 560895-00027 at 15.
    \22\ See Sterling/Richline, Comments 560895-00021 & 560895-00022 
at 4. No other commenters discussed use of the term ``over.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Request for Comments

    The Commission's roundtable will address the issues raised by 
commenters concerning the marketing of below-standard precious metal 
alloys and precious metal surface applications. The Commission also 
invites written comments on the questions to be addressed, as outlined 
below:
    1. JVC recommended a revision to the Guides that would allow 
sellers to indicate in descriptive marketing materials (e.g., 
advertisements, labels, tags) that a product contains a precious metal 
in an amount below the standard, as long as they accurately disclose 
the quantity of the metal by percentage. It also stated that sellers 
should not be allowed to stamp the name of the below-standard precious 
metal on the product itself with a quality mark. Does JVC's proposal 
provide adequate guidance for marketers to avoid consumer deception?
    (a) If so, why? If not, why not?
    (b) Provide any evidence supporting your position.
    2. Would stamping a quality mark on an alloy jewelry product to 
convey information about its precious metal content be more likely to 
lead to consumer deception than if such information were included in 
descriptive marketing materials such as advertisements, labels, and 
tags?
    (a) If so, why? If not, why not?
    (b) Provide any evidence supporting your position.
    3. Is it sufficient to disclose the precious metal content of an 
alloy by percentage, or are other disclosures or qualifications 
necessary to avoid consumer deception?
    (a) Why or why not?
    (b) Provide any evidence supporting your position.
    4. Would consumers fully comprehend the meaning of a gold content 
disclosure that is stated as a percentage, rather than karats (e.g., 
``33% gold'' versus ``8 karats'')?
    (a) Provide any evidence supporting your position.
    5. Should the Guides address surface-layer applications of precious 
metals other than gold and silver (e.g., platinum, palladium, iridium, 
rhodium, ruthenium, or osmium)?
    (a) If so, why? What guidance would be necessary to avoid consumer 
deception?
    (b) If not, why not?
    (c) Provide any evidence supporting your position.
    6. Section 23.4(c)(3) of the Guides states that a marketer can mark 
or describe a product as ``rolled gold plate,'' without also disclosing 
as a fraction the portion of the weight of the metal accounted for by 
the plating in the entire article, when such plating constitutes at 
least 1/20th of the weight of the metal in the entire article and when 
the term is appropriately marked with a karat fineness designation. 
JVC, however, suggested that marketers should be able to describe a 
product as ``rolled gold plate'' when such plating constitutes at least 
1/40th of the weight of the metal in the entire article.
    (a) What amount of plating on a product described as ``rolled gold 
plate'' is necessary to assure reasonable durability of coverage?
    (b) How do consumers comprehend the term ``rolled gold plate''?
    (c) Provide any evidence supporting your position.
    7. Is the term ``rolled plate'' used to describe surface 
applications of other precious metals, such as silver or platinum group 
metals?
    (a) If so, what amount of plating is necessary to assure reasonable 
durability of coverage on such products?
    (b) Does the amount of plating needed to assure durability differ 
depending on the metals used?
    (c) How do consumers comprehend the term ``rolled plate'' when used 
to describe surface applications of other precious metals?

[[Page 26292]]

    (d) Provide any evidence supporting your position.
    8. The current Guides do not address the term ``bonded.'' JVC 
stated this term ``indicates a durable product with a mechanically 
applied application of gold or gold alloy over a base of sterling 
silver that is at least 1/40th of the weight of the article,'' and 
proposed that use of the term also be permitted for surface 
applications of precious metals other than gold.
    (a) Is the term ``bonded'' used to describe surface applications of 
other precious metals, such as silver or platinum group metals?
    (b) What amount of plating on a product described as ``bonded'' is 
necessary to assure reasonable durability of coverage?
    (c) Does the amount of plating needed to assure durability differ 
depending on the metals used? If so, how does it differ?
    (d) How do consumers comprehend the term ``bonded''?
    (e) Provide any evidence supporting your position.
    9. The current Guides do not address the term ``clad.'' JVC 
recommended marketers state a product is ``[precious metal] clad'' when 
the applied precious metal is at least 1/20th of the weight of the 
article.
    (a) What amount of plating on a product described as ``clad'' is 
necessary to assure reasonable durability of coverage?
    (b) Does the amount of plating needed to assure durability differ 
depending on the metals used? If so, how does it differ?
    (c) How do consumers comprehend the term ``clad''?
    (d) Provide any evidence supporting your position.
    10. Should the Guides continue to provide guidance on use of the 
terms ``flashed,'' ``washed,'' ``overlay,'' ``Duragold,'' ``Diragold,'' 
``Noblegold,'' ``Goldine,'' or ``layered gold''?
    (a) If so, why? If not, why not?
    (b) How do consumers comprehend these terms?
    (c) Provide any evidence supporting your position.
    11. Sterling/Richline suggested that standards for certain terms 
used to describe gold electrolytic plating applications (``plate,'' 
``plated,'' ``electroplate,'' ``electroplated,'' ``heavy 
electroplate,'' ``heavy electroplated,'' and ``vermeil'') should be 
stated in terms of ``fine gold,'' which has a 23.5 karat minimum. Do 
the current Guides provisions regarding these terms, which refer to 
platings or coatings of ``gold'' or ``gold alloy of not less than 10 
karat fineness'' create consumer confusion or cause consumer injury?
    (a) If so, how? What is the injury to consumers?
    (b) Provide any evidence supporting your position.
    12. Should the Guides advise marketers to disclose that the 
durability of a surface application of precious metal is not assured if 
suggested thickness or weight minimums are not met?
    (a) If so, why? If not, why not?
    (b) Would the issuance of guidance calling for such disclosure 
affect the costs and benefits of the Guides for consumers and 
businesses, particularly small businesses? If so, how?
    (c) Provide any evidence supporting your position.
    13. To the extent not addressed in your previous answers, please 
explain whether and how the Commission should revise the Guides to 
prevent consumer deception with respect to the marketing and sale of 
jewelry industry products that have a surface-layer application of 
precious metal.

Instructions for Filing Public Comments

    You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to 
consider your comment, we must receive it on or before June 5, 2013. 
Write ``Jewelry Guides Roundtable, 16 CFR Part 23, Project No. 
G711001'' 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 public Commission Web 
site, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of 
discretion, the Commission tries to remove individuals' home contact 
information from comments before placing them on the Commission Web 
site. Because your comment will be made public, you are solely 
responsible for making sure your comment does not include any sensitive 
personal information, such as 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, do not include any ``trade secret or 
any commercial or financial information which is obtained from any 
person and 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). In particular, do not include competitively 
sensitive information such as costs, sales statistics, inventories, 
formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing processes, or customer 
names.
    If you want the Commission to give your comment confidential 
treatment, you must file it in paper form, with a request for 
confidential treatment, and you must follow the procedure explained in 
FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c).\23\ Your comment will be kept 
confidential only if the FTC General Counsel, in his or her sole 
discretion, grants your request in accordance with the law and the 
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 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), 16 CFR 4.9(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Postal mail addressed to the Commission is subject to delay due to 
heightened security screening. Accordingly, we encourage you to submit 
your comments online. To make sure that the Commission considers your 
online comment, you must file it at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/jewelryguidesroundtable by following the instructions on the web-
based form. If this Notice appears at http://www.regulations.gov, you 
also may file a comment through that Web site.
    If you file your comment on paper, write ``Jewelry Guides 
Roundtable, 16 CFR Part 23, Project No. G711001'' on your comment and 
on the envelope, and mail or deliver it to the following address: 
Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex 
O), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20580. If possible, 
submit your paper comment to the Commission by courier or overnight 
service.
    Visit the Commission Web site at http://www.ftc.gov to read this 
Notice and the news release describing it. The FTC Act and other laws 
that 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 that 
it receives on or before June 5, 2013. You can find more information, 
including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, in the 
Commission's privacy policy at http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm.

    By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-10580 Filed 5-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P