Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request, 62261-62266 [E6-17790]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 205 / Tuesday, October 24, 2006 / Notices
Disciplinary Actions
Under the existing laws, the Board
retains the right, where appropriate, to
discipline an employee for conduct that
is inconsistent with Federal
Antidiscrimination Laws up to and
including removal. Nothing in the No
FEAR Act alters existing laws or permits
an agency to take unfounded
disciplinary action against an employee
or to violate the procedural rights of an
employee who has been accused of
discrimination.
Additional Information
For further information regarding the
No FEAR Act regulations, refer to 5 CFR
part 724, as well as the appropriate
office within the Board (the EEO
Programs office). Additional
information regarding Federal
antidiscrimination and retaliation laws
can be found at the EEOC Web site—
https://www.eeoc.gov, and the EEO
Programs Office Web page (accessible by
current employees only through Inside
the Board).
Existing Rights Unchanged
Pursuant to section 205 of the No
FEAR Act, neither the Act nor this
notice creates, expands or reduces any
rights otherwise available to any
employee, former employee or applicant
under the laws of the United States.
By order of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, acting through the
Board’s Administrative Governor under
delegated authority, October 18, 2006.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E6–17730 Filed 10–23–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210–01–P
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission
(FTC or Commission).
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The information collection
requirements described below are being
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) for review, as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act (‘‘PRA’’), 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520. The
FTC is seeking public comments on
proposed information requests to
beverage alcohol advertisers. The FTC
proposes to issue compulsory process
orders to beverage alcohol advertisers
for information concerning, inter alia,
compliance with voluntary advertising
placement provisions, sales and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:25 Oct 23, 2006
Jkt 211001
marketing expenditures, and the status
of third-party review of complaints
regarding compliance with voluntary
advertising codes.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before November 24, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
invited to submit written comments.
Comments should refer to the ‘‘Alcohol
Reports: Paperwork Comment, FTC File
No. P064505’’ to facilitate the
organization of the comments. A
comment filed in paper form should
include this reference both in the text
and on the envelope and should be
mailed or delivered, with two complete
copies, to the following address: Federal
Trade Commission/Office of the
Secretary, Room H–135 (Annex J), 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20580. Because paper
mail in the Washington area and at the
Commission is subject to delay, please
consider submitting your comments in
electronic form, as prescribed below.
However, if the comment contains any
material for which confidential
treatment is requested, it must be filed
in paper form, and the first page of the
document must be clearly labeled
‘‘Confidential.’’ 1 The FTC is requesting
that any comment filed in paper form be
sent by courier or overnight service, if
possible.
Comments filed in electronic form
should be submitted by clicking on the
following weblink: https://
secure.commentworks.com/
FTC_Alcohol_Reports and following the
instructions on the web-based form. To
ensure that the Commission considers
an electronic comment, you must file it
on the web-based form at the https://
secure.commentworks.com/
FTC_Alcohol_Reports weblink. If this
notice appears at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may also file
an electronic comment through that
Web site. The Commission will consider
all comments that regulations.gov
forwards to it.
All comments should additionally be
submitted to: Office of Management and
Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the
Federal Trade Commission. Comments
should be submitted via facsimile to
(202) 395–6974 because U.S. Postal Mail
is subject to lengthy delays due to
heightened security precautions.
1 Commission Rule 4.2(d), 16 CFR 4.2(d). The
comment must be accompanied by an explicit
request for confidential treatment, including the
factual and legal basis for the request, and must
identify the specific portions of the comment to be
withheld from the public record. The requst will be
granted or denied by the Commission’s General
Counsel, consistent with applicable law and the
public interest. See Commission Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR
4.9(c).
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62261
The FTC Act and other laws the
Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to
consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. All timely and responsive
public comments, whether filed in
paper or electronic form, will be
considered by the Commission, and will
be available to the public on the FTC
Web site, to the extent practicable, at
https://www.ftc.gov. As a matter of
discretion, the FTC makes every effort to
remove home contact information for
individuals from public comments it
receives before placing those comments
on the FTC Web site. More information,
including routine uses permitted by the
Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC’s
privacy policy, at https://www.ftc.gov/
ftc/privacy.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information
should be addressed to Janet Evans or
Phyllis H. Marcus, Attorneys, Division
of Advertising Practices, Bureau of
Consumer Protection, Federal Trade
Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW., NJ–3212, Washington, DC 20580;
telephone: (202) 326–2125 or (202) 326–
2854.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
September 1999 and September 2003,
the FTC published reports on voluntary
advertising self-regulation by the
alcohol industry based on information
U.S. beverage alcohol advertisers
submitted to the Commission, pursuant
to compulsory process. The FTC has
authority to compel production of this
information from advertisers under
Section 6 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46.
The Commission believes it is in the
public interest to: (1) Collect updated
data from U.S. beverage alcohol
advertisers on sales and marketing
expenditures, compliance with the
industry’s self regulatory code
provisions concerning advertising
placement and the status of third-party
review of complaints regarding
compliance with the industry’s selfregulatory advertising standards; and (2)
publish a report on the data obtained.
The Commission intends to address
its information requests to the corporate
entities responsible for the majority of
alcohol advertising in the U.S.,
including their affiliated and subsidiary
companies. Because the number of
separately incorporated companies
affected by the Commission’s requests
will exceed ten entities, the Commission
seeks OMB clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (‘‘PRA’’).
On March 8, 2006, the FTC published
a Federal Register Notice seeking
comments from the public concerning
the proposed collection of information
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
62262
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 205 / Tuesday, October 24, 2006 / Notices
from beverage alcohol advertisers. See
71 FR 11659 (‘‘March 8 Notice’’). Under
the OMB regulations that implement the
PRA (5 CFR part 1320), the FTC is
providing this second opportunity for
public comment while requesting that
OMB provide clearance for the proposed
collection of information. All comments
should be filed as prescribed in the
ADDRESSES section above, and must be
received on or before November 24,
2006.
A. Public Comments/Consultation
Outside the Agency
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
The FTC received 1,299 comments in
response to the March 8 Notice.2 While
six comments did not specifically
address the proposed data collection,3
1,292 comments expressly favored it.
These were submitted by: (1) Three
members of Congress; 4 (2) members of
the National Association of Attorneys
General’s Youth Access to Alcohol
Committee (‘‘NAAG Committee’’); (3) 48
organizations engaged in advocacy
regarding public health, including the
Center for Science in the Public Interest
(‘‘CSPI’’), Consumer Federation of
America, Join Together, and the
Leadership to Keep Children Alcohol
Free Initiative (hereafter ‘‘the 48organizations comment’’); (4) six
comments (five from public health
organizations and one from an
individual) that were nearly identical to
the 48-organizations comment; (5) the
American Medical Association
(‘‘AMA’’); (6) Pacific Institute for
Research and Evaluation (‘‘PIRE’’); (7)
National Council on Alcoholism and
Drug Dependence, Inc., Sacramento
Region Affiliate (‘‘NCADD/
Sacramento’’); (8) Center on Alcohol
Marketing and Youth (‘‘CAMY’’); (9)
Prevention Network (referencing and
reiterating points made in the CAMY
comment); (10) Marin Institute; and (11)
approximately 1,283 individually
submitted form letters (‘‘Form Letters’’).
The Miller Brewing Company submitted
the only comment from the alcohol
industry; it did not oppose data
collection but requested that it be
2 The comments are available at https://
www.ftc.gov/os/comments/alcoholmanufacadstudy/
index.htm.
3 Among these, one opposed any government
action on alcohol advertising. See comment by
Stanford Owen (May 2, 2006). The other five either
expressed concerns about alcohol advertising or
supported a new FTC report about alcohol
advertising. See Comments by Ziming Xuan (May
9, 2006); Independent State Store Union (ISSU)
(May 5, 2006); Fred Reid (May 4, 2006); William
Bailey (May 2, 2006); and Abigail Pederson (April
17, 2006).
4 These are: Representatives Lucille RoybalAllard, Jose E. Serrano, and Frank R. Wolf.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:25 Oct 23, 2006
Jkt 211001
limited to reduce the burden on the
companies.5
1. General Support for Data Collection
The NAAG Committee comment
stated that it is in the public interest for
the FTC to collect updated data from
advertisers. The 48-organizations
comment stated that the information
previously collected from the alcohol
companies and reported on by the FTC
has increased understanding of alcohol
advertising issues and the role of the
industry in regulating its own
advertising practices. This comment
noted that entities that use this
information include Federal and state
government legislative and regulatory
bodies, law enforcement and legal
officials, administrative health agencies,
public health organizations, academia,
the news media, and the general public.
CAMY stated that, given the risks of
teen drinking, the proposed information
requests are integral to the FTC’s
consumer protection mission and
provide useful information not only to
the Commission but to parents, policy
makers, and the public health field.
2. Sales Data
In its March 8 Notice, the FTC stated
that it would seek company data
showing alcohol sales. Only one
comment appeared to address this
request. Miller Brewing Company stated
that the FTC should not request brandspecific information, as such collection
would greatly increase the company’s
burden without furthering the FTC’s
purpose. This background information,
however, will enable the FTC, in its
report, to better describe the nature of
the industry, including the number of
brands, volume sold, and the dollar
value of those sales. Accordingly, the
proposed Section 6 Orders will request
such information, asking each company
to identify by name each individual
alcohol brand or variety that it sold
during the calendar year 2005, and for
each brand or variety, state total sales in
dollars and in number of 9-liter or 2.25
gallon cases sold.
As a related matter, PIRE, CAMY, and
the Form Letters requested that the FTC
also seek any information the
companies have collected or received
regarding use of their brands by persons
below the legal drinking age. The FTC
will request that the companies submit
5 On July 13, 2006, CSPI submitted a letter to FTC
Chairman Deborah Platt Majoras requesting that the
FTC’s planned study include examination of
alcohol sponsorship at NASCAR racing events.
Although the CSPI letter is not characterized as a
formal comment on the Federal Register Notice, the
FTC took CSPI’s request into consideration in
preparing the proposed Section 6 Orders.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
any unpublished data they possess
showing the brands of alcohol
consumed by persons under the legal
drinking age in the United States. The
request will exclude publicly available
data (such as data published by CSPI,
the AMA, and others).
3. Expenditure Data
In the March 8 Notice, the FTC stated
that it would seek information about
expenditures to advertise and promote
beverage alcohol in both measured and
unmeasured media. Many of the
comments offered suggestions regarding
collection of this expenditure data.
The letter from the three
Congressional representatives
recommended that the report include
information on measured media
advertising, sponsorships and
promotions, broken down by state, race,
and ethnicity of the target audience. It
also asked for a report on brand-specific
expenditures. The NAAG Committee
requested that the FTC seek detailed
data on the percentage of company
advertising budgets expended on each
type of media and, specifically, where
ads are placed (e.g., which television
and radio shows, in which movies,
during which events).
The 48-organization comment urged
the FTC to seek information on:
Promotional allowance and retail valueadded expenditures; advertising in
Spanish-language and other ethnic
media; sports-related and college sportsrelated advertising and marketing
(including telecasts, sponsorships, local
print and promotional expenditures,
and stadium signage); college marketing
and promotional activities and
expenditures (including spring break
promotions in the U.S. and at popular
off-shore spring break destinations);
marketing, promotions, and brand
awareness activity that utilize popular
music, celebrities, and/or internet games
and sponsorship of community events;
and newer avenues of beverage alcohol
marketing through ‘‘non-traditional’’
media, such as cell phones, mobile
television, podcasts, and brand tie-ins
with popular Web sites. The 48organization comment also asked that
the data be broken down state-by-state,
company- and brand-specific (subject to
relevant trade secret and confidentiality
provisions), and by ethnicity of the
target audience. Marin Institute joined
the 48-organization comment and
further requested that the FTC collect
data on producer and wholesaler
sponsorship of community events and
non-profit organizations, and that it
measure use of emerging electronic
media, such as text messaging, mobile
television, and podcasting. The AMA
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 205 / Tuesday, October 24, 2006 / Notices
suggested that the data be modeled on
information requests the FTC has issued
to cigarette companies, which seek
information on 26 categories of
expenditures.
The AMA requested that the FTC
collect data on measured and
unmeasured media, including
sponsorship, retail incentives, point-ofpurchase, and product placement fees.
PIRE requested that the Section 6 Orders
seek: Expenditures by media type
regarding Internet advertising,
sponsorship, text messaging, other new
marketing techniques, price discounting
and promotional allowances paid to
third parties; data on expenditures for
educational campaigns and youth
consumption prevention; and grants to
third parties to promote prevention and
treatment. It also asked that the data
break out expenditures for sports-related
marketing and college marketing.
CAMY requested that the FTC seek
two or more years of data for measured
media advertising, by media type
(including broadcast network, cable
network, spot, local/regional cable,
interconnects, and Hispanic television);
magazine advertising, broken down by
full-run and demographic editions; spot
and network radio; Internet advertising
(including web advertising, email,
company Web sites, and IM
sponsorships); and ‘‘out-of-home’’
advertising. Regarding unmeasured
media, CAMY urged the FTC to seek, at
a minimum, data on the kinds of
expenditures sought in the 2003 Section
6 Orders to the cigarette companies
(including price discounting,
promotional allowances, educational
campaigns). CAMY suggested that the
FTC obtain data on industry spending
on ‘‘social aspects organizations’’ such
as International Center on Alcohol
Policies and the Century Council). It
also requested that the agency seek
expenditures for ‘‘new media,’’ for
example, ‘‘pixting’’ (i.e., picture, or
multimedia, messaging) and ‘‘texting’’
(i.e., text messaging) on mobile phones,
podcasting, and online viral marketing.
Finally, CAMY asked that the data break
out aggregate spending on sports and
college marketing across all categories.
Miller Brewing Company asked that
the Commission not request
expenditures on a brand-specific basis.
It stated that such a request would
greatly increase the burden in collecting
the data and would not further the
agency’s stated purpose. It noted that
the FTC’s prior alcohol reports
published data on an aggregate basis,
and urged that the data be collected that
way. Miller Brewing Company also
requested that the agency seek
expenditure data for measured media
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:25 Oct 23, 2006
Jkt 211001
(television, radio, print, outdoor) only,
noting that measured media can be
tracked, reported, and compared with
reasonable precision. Miller stated that
unmeasured media does not have a
universally accepted definition, and that
certain expenditures in this group may
bear no relation to marketing. For
example, Miller noted that sports
sponsorships include fees for ticket
allotments, suites, and use of facilities,
and that the expenditures are not broken
down as to whether they are marketingrelated. Miller stated that collection of
unmeasured media data will be
burdensome, but did not provide a cost
estimate.
The FTC’s 1999 Report estimated that
measured marketing expenditures may
account for only one-third of alcohol
brand promotional budgets. The
proposed Section 6 Orders are designed
to enable the FTC to better understand
how alcohol industry promotional
dollars targeted to consumers are spent
and how much current self-regulatory
efforts aptly address legitimate public
concerns about alcohol promotion. See
section B. 1.a of this notice detailing
what the Commission will seek on
expenditure data through its Section B
Orders.
4. Advertisement Placement
The voluntary advertising guidelines
of the beer, wine, and distilled spirits
industries each state that alcohol
advertising should be placed in
television, radio, and print
communications only where at least
70% of the audience is reasonably
expected to be above the legal purchase
age (the ‘‘70% placement standard’’). In
the March 8 Notice, the FTC stated that
it planned to seek data on compliance
with this standard.
The comment from the three
Congressional representatives expressed
the hope that the FTC’s analysis of
alcohol industry placement practices
will not be limited to reporting on what
percentage of ads comply with the 70%
placement standard, and specifically
requested information that would allow
the Commission to determine whether
ads targeted to the Hispanic community
comply with the current placement
standard. The NAAG Committee
comment urged the FTC to collect
detailed data showing whether alcohol
companies have complied with the 70%
placement standard, including data
showing where advertisements are
placed (e.g., what shows, movies, or
events) and the demographics of the
audience, including data showing what
percentage of the audience falls within
the following age groups: 12–20, 21–24,
and 21–34. The NAAG Committee
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62263
further suggested that the FTC collect
data on other efforts made by the
companies to ensure compliance,
including whether they use ‘‘no buy’’
lists, follow higher-than-required
standards, and audit past placements.
The 48-organization comment urged the
FTC to seek information on magazine
and television advertising in
publications or programs with youth
readership or viewership rates over 15
percent, or 2 million, youth readers.
PIRE requested that the FTC obtain data
evaluating adherence to the 70%
placement standard, by specific brand.
In that regard, it asked that the agency
seek data used for planning media
placement, as well as actual gross
advertising impressions, gross ratings
points, and audience delivery for each
target audience, audience ages 12–20,
and total audience age 12 and above.
NCADD/Sacramento asked that the FTC
seek information that will allow it to
compare voluntary advertising
compliance among industry members
and to identify magazine and television
advertising where youth constitute more
than 15% of the audience. CAMY asked
that the FTC seek data that will allow
it to evaluate compliance with the 70%
placement standard on a per-brand
basis; to collect data on primary and
secondary target audiences (age, gender,
etc.), gross ad impressions, gross ratings
points, and audience delivery (reach
and frequency) for audience ages 12–20
and total audience 12 and above. CAMY
also requested that: advertisement
placement data be provided on a local
market basis for local placements; data
be reported as planned and as achieved;
companies report on what media and
channels they have audience
composition data and, where data is
unavailable, that they specify sources
and standards for audience estimates.
The scope of the Orders specifically
regarding advertisement placement is
detailed in Part B.1.b. of this notice.
5. External Review of Code Compliance
The trade associations representing
the three segments of the beverage
alcohol industry—the Distilled Spirits
Counsel of the United States
(‘‘DISCUS’’), Beer Institute (‘‘BI’’), and
Wine Institute (‘‘WI’’)—each have
adopted a mechanism for considering
whether member ads comply with the
association’s voluntary advertising code.
The FTC’s March 8 Notice stated that
the proposed Section 6 Orders would
seek data regarding those external
compliance review mechanisms. No
comments opposed this request. The
comment from the three Congressional
representatives urged the Commission
to evaluate the effectiveness of the
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
62264
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 205 / Tuesday, October 24, 2006 / Notices
compliance review process among the
various segments of the alcohol
industry, including the outcomes of
complaints filed with the industry
review boards. CAMY requested that the
FTC also consider how ‘‘independent’’
such external review programs are, by
analyzing their degree of transparency,
the breadth of their purview, and their
timeliness. The NAAG Committee asked
that the FTC also collect data on the
percentage of industry members having
pre-publication third-party review, the
percentage of proposed ads that fail
review and why, the number of ads that
pass but are later the subject of
complaints, and the way companies
respond to complaints.
The scope of the Orders specifically
regarding external review of code
compliance is detailed in Part B.1.c. of
this notice.
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
6. Other Requests Contained in
Comments
Many of the comments filed in
response to the March 8 Notice
addressed what ongoing action the FTC
should take after its initial data
collection. Some of the comments
suggested that the agency collect
information from the alcohol companies
and issue annual or bi-annual reports.
The FTC plans to complete the current
study before considering this proposal.
Some comments suggested that the
FTC evaluate other issues, such as
alcohol product placement in movies
and underage access to beverage alcohol
websites. The proposed Section 6
Orders will seek information about
expenditures for product placements
and website advertising but will not
seek information on the extent that
these media expose minors to
promotions. The goal of the current
study is to conduct a comprehensive
review of: alcohol advertising and
marketing expenditures; industry
compliance with current placement
standards as they pertain to television,
radio, magazine, and newspaper
advertising over the stated period of
time; and third-party review of
complaints. The FTC expects that
focusing its efforts in this manner will
produce a study of the highest possible
quality. It is committed to ongoing
monitoring of this subject area,
however, and anticipates that it will
address other issues raised by alcohol
advertising and marketing in the future.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:25 Oct 23, 2006
Jkt 211001
B. Information Requests to the Beverage
Alcohol Industry
1. Description of the Collection of
Information and Proposed Use
The FTC proposes to send
information requests to up to twelve
parent companies (‘‘industry members’’)
responsible for domestic advertising of
beer, wine, or distilled spirits The
information requests will seek, to the
extent industry members possess it, data
and information regarding: (1) Company
sales of beverage alcohol on a per brand
basis, in both dollars and units sold; (2)
company expenditures to advertise,
market, and promote beverage alcohol
in the United States; (3) compliance
with the 70% placement standard
contained in the industry’s selfregulatory codes; and (4) the status of
external mechanisms to review
complaints about code compliance.
Note: With this publication any
destruction, removal, mutilation, alteration,
or falsification of documentary evidence that
may be responsive to this information
collection, within the possession or control
of a person, partnership, or corporation
subject to the FTC Act, may be subject to
criminal prosecution. 15 U.S.C. 50; see also
18 U.S.C. 1505.
Confidentiality: Section 6(f) of the
FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), bars the
Commission from publicly disclosing
trade secrets or confidential commercial
or financial information it receives from
persons pursuant to, among other
methods, special orders authorized by
section 6(b) of the FTC Act. Such
information also would be exempt from
disclosure under the Freedom of
Information Act. 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4).
Moreover, under section 21(c) of the
FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 57b–2(c), a submitter
who designates a submission as
confidential is entitled to 10 days’
advance notice of any anticipated public
disclosure by the Commission,
assuming that the Commission has
determined that the information does
not, in fact, constitute 6(f) material.
Although materials covered under one
or more of these various sections are
protected by stringent confidentiality
constraints, the FTC Act and the
Commission’s rules authorize disclosure
in limited circumstances (e.g., official
requests by Congress, requests from
other agencies for law enforcement
purposes, or administrative or judicial
proceedings). Even in those limited
contexts, however, the Commission’s
rules may afford protections to the
submitter, such as advance notice to
seek a protective order in litigation.
See 15 U.S.C. 57b–2; 16 CFR 4.9–4.11.
The information presented in the
study will not reveal company-specific
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
data. See 15 U.S.C. 57b–2(d)(1)(B).
Rather, the Commission anticipates
presenting information on an
anonymous or aggregated basis, in a
manner sufficient to protect individual
companies’ confidential information.
a. Information About Expenditure Data
The proposed Section 6 Orders will
seek expenditures for advertising,
merchandising, or promotion of alcohol
during calendar year 2005. The Orders
require that the expenditures be broken
down into 22 categories.6 Thus, the
proposed Section 6 Orders seek
comprehensive information about
expenditures to promote alcohol to
consumers, including most of the
information suggested in the
comments.7 This information will help
the agency evaluate how industry
members allocate their promotional
expenditures, so as to better determine
the degree industry self-regulatory codes
address the various kinds of promotions
employed by the industry. The
categories are carefully defined to
facilitate compliance with the requests.
The Commission agrees with Miller
Brewing Company, however, that it is
not necessary for the alcohol companies
to report such information on a brandby-brand basis. Given the substantially
expanded scope of this request, brandby-brand reporting may pose an
unnecessary additional burden on the
companies without meaningfully
increasing the FTC’s understanding how
promotional dollars are directed on an
industry-wide basis.
The proposed Section 6 Orders do not
seek a breakdown of expenditures by
race or ethnicity of the target audience.
The agency is concerned that reporting
specific expenditure data by race or
ethnicity might produce potentially
misleading results due to the difficulty
of separating targeted advertising from
6 These are: Television advertising; radio
advertising; magazine advertising; newspaper
advertising; transit advertising; other outdoor
advertising; direct mail advertising; companysponsored Internet sites; other Internet site
advertising; other digital advertising; specialty item
distribution; public entertainment events: not
sports-related; sponsorship of sporting events,
sports teams or individual athletes; other point-ofsale advertising and promotions; spring break
promotions; product placements; retail value-added
expenditures; telemarketing; promotional
allowances; and total reportable expenditures. In
addition, the proposed Section 6 Orders will seek
cross-category totals for sports and sporting events
and social responsibility programs and messages.
7 Some of the suggested requests are more
extensive than needed for the FTC’s current
purposes. For example, the FTC does not propose
to require the companies to allocate magazine
advertising expenditures among ‘‘full run’’ and
‘‘demographic’’ editions. The burden of collecting
such data is likely to outweigh the benefits to the
FTC and the public of obtaining it.
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 205 / Tuesday, October 24, 2006 / Notices
general advertising that may have the
same or broader reach to a particular
racial or ethnic group. The Commission
will, however, seek advertisement
placement data that will help the FTC
to evaluate whether ads targeted to an
Hispanic or African-American audience
comply with industry placement
standards, as further discussed below.8
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
b. Information About Advertising
Placement
The proposed Section 6 Orders will
require the companies to provide, for
each instance of advertising
dissemination between January 1 and
June 30, 2006, on television, on radio in
measured markets, in magazines, and in
newspapers: the advertisement’s name;
the brand advertised; the name of the
media and location of dissemination;
the date and time that the advertisement
appeared; the name of the show during
or in conjunction with the
advertisement appeared; and the
demographics of the audience (persons
under 21, and persons 21 and over), in
absolute numbers and percentages, for
that dissemination.9 The proposed
Section 6 Orders also will require the
companies to provide a company-wide
summary of this data to facilitate
analysis. This data will permit the
Commission to measure the extent that
the youth audience for each ad
placement exceeded 30% of the total
audience, or whether they complied
with existing industry codes.10 Further,
given concerns about whether
advertisements targeted primarily to
Hispanic or African-American
consumers are more likely than others
8 The proposed orders also will not seek
information on expenditures for slotting allowances
or price discounts; such information does not
enhance the agency’s understanding of selfregulation. The requests focus on expenditures for
advertising and promotions that may be seen by
underage consumers. Payments for shelf space,
payments to wholesalers, and price discounts to
wholesalers and retailers do not provide such
information. Given the expanded nature of this
request, seeking data on them would be
unnecessarily burdensome.
9 Two sets of demographics are relevant to
Evaluating compliance with placement standards:
the historical demographics used by a company for
planning purposes when purchasing ad time, and
audience demographics when a placement actually
occurred. The proposed Section 6 Orders seek the
latter data. To illustrate, for an ad placed on
television, the Orders require the companies to
provide the average demographic data for the
program during which the show ran, over the threemonth period (the ‘‘quarter’’) when the placement
appeared. If program-specific data is unavailable (as
is often the case with cable), the Orders seek the
quarterly average data for the daypart during which
the ad appeared.
10 This data also will permit the Commission to
evaluate the audience for televised NASCAR events,
in connection with CSPI’s request that the FTC
review the degree that NASCAR promotions reach
a youth audience.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:25 Oct 23, 2006
Jkt 211001
to reach underage consumers, the
Commission will require that the
companies identify such ads so that the
agency can evaluate this concern.
The Commission’s proposed Section 6
Orders also seek a narrative description
of: the steps taken when placing ads to
reduce the proportion of persons under
21 in the audience, including the
demographic databases relied on in
making placement decisions; how often
post-placement data are reviewed to
verify that a placement complied with
the placement guidelines and the steps
taken if a compliance shortfall is
identified; and the additional safeguards
in place (e.g., use of ‘‘no buy’’ lists and
higher placement standards, media
content review) to reduce the likelihood
of reaching underage audiences. This
will permit the Commission to obtain a
clear and detailed picture of the alcohol
industry’s advertising placement
practices during the period at issue.
The proposed Section 6 Orders will
not require the companies to identify,
for each ad, the gross rating points and
the breakdown of consumers aged 12–
20, 21–24, and 21–34 in the audience.
Given the significantly expanded scope
of the current requests, such
requirements would be unnecessarily
burdensome and the information not
fully relevant to compliance with the
placement standard contained in the
industry’s voluntary advertising codes.
c. Information About External Review of
Code Compliance
The proposed Section 6 Orders will
require the alcohol companies to
describe in detail the enforcement
mechanism(s) available as of December
31, 2006 for possible violations of the
DISCUS, BI, and WI voluntary
advertising codes. The response to this
aspect of the Section 6 Orders will not
be due until January 10, 2007, to allow
the FTC time to receive and evaluate
whole-year information regarding thirdparty review. The proposed Orders also
will require, for each complaint about
the company’s advertising, promotion,
or marketing forwarded for independent
review between January 1, 2006 and
December 31, 2006, that the company
provide a copy of the complaint, any
document reflecting the reviewer’s
decision or recommendation, and
describe what action, if any, the
company took in response to the
reviewer’s decision or recommendation.
These requests will enable the
Commission to evaluate the efficacy of
current advertising review mechanisms.
Currently, the Commission does not
plan to ask about pre-publication review
of proposed ads by third parties, or the
number of ads that pass but are later the
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
62265
subject of complaints, and the way
companies respond to complaints. The
goal of this section of the proposed
Section 6 Orders is to evaluate how the
various segments of the industry have
responded to the FTC’s
recommendation that they adopt
systems for external, post-publication
review of complaints about advertising
code compliance.
2. Estimated Hours Burden
FTC staff’s estimate of the hours
burden is based on the time required to
respond to each information request.
The Commission intends to issue the
information requests to the 12 largest
beverage alcohol advertisers. Because
these companies vary greatly in size, in
the number of products that they sell,
and in the extent and variety of their
advertising and promotion, staff has
provided a range of the estimated hours
burden. Based upon its knowledge of
the industry, the staff estimates that the
time required to identify, obtain,
organize, and prepare responses to each
of the four information categories will
range, on average, between 15 and 120
hours for most companies. Staff
anticipates, however, that the largest
companies may require up to 280 hours
for the most time-consuming category,
advertising placement information. The
total estimated burden per company is
based on the following assumptions:
Identify, obtain, and organize sales
information; prepare response: 15–35
hrs.
Identify, obtain, and organize
information on advertising and
marketing expenditures; prepare
response: 40–65 hrs.
Identify, obtain, and organize
placement information; prepare
response: 150–280 hrs.
Identify, obtain, and organize
information regarding compliance
review; prepare response: 15–20 hrs.
FTC staff anticipates that the
cumulative hours burden to respond to
the information requests will be
between 220 hours and 400 hours per
company. Nonetheless, staff
conservatively assumes that the burden
per company for each of the twelve (12)
intended recipients will be 400 hours.
Accordingly, cumulative estimated
burden is 4,800 hours. These estimates
include any time spent by separately
incorporated subsidiaries and other
entities affiliated with the parent
company that received the information
requests.
3. Estimated Cost Burden
It is difficult to calculate precisely
labor costs associated with this data
production. Labor costs entail varying
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
62266
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 205 / Tuesday, October 24, 2006 / Notices
compensation levels of management
and/or support staff among companies
of different sizes. Although financial,
marketing, legal, and clerical personnel
may be involved in the information
collection process, FTC staff has
assumed that mid-management
personnel and outside legal counsel will
handle most of the tasks involved in
gathering and producing responsive
information, and has applied an average
rate of $250/hour for their labor. FTC
staff anticipates that the labor costs per
company will range between $55,000
(220 hours x $250/hour) and $100,000
(400 hours x $250/hour). Nonetheless,
as a conservative measure, staff
estimates that the total labor costs per
company will be $100,000.
FTC staff believes that the capital or
other non-labor costs associated with
the information requests are minimal.
Although the information requests may
require industry members to maintain
the requested information the
Commission seeks, they should already
have in place the means to compile and
maintain it.
John D. Graubert,
Acting General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E6–17790 Filed 10–23–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Secretary’s Advisory Committee on
Human Research Protections
rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES1
AGENCY: Office of Public Health and
Science, Office of the Secretary, HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 10(a) of
the Federal Advisory Committee Act,
U.S.C. Appendix 2, notice is hereby
given that the Secretary’s Advisory
Committee on Human Research
Protections (SACHRP), will hold its
eleventh meeting. The meeting will be
open to the public. Due to unanticipated
issues during preparation for the
November meeting of SACHRP, this
notice will not meet the 15-day
requirement for publication in the
Federal Register.
DATES: The meeting will be held on
Thursday, November 2, 2006 from 8:30
a.m. until 3 p.m. and Friday, November
3, 2006 from 8:30 a.m. until 12:30 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The Sheraton National
Hotel, 900 South Orme Street,
Arlington, VA, 22204. Phone: (703) 521–
1900.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bernard Schwetz, D.V.M., Ph.D.,
Director, Office for Human Research
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:25 Oct 23, 2006
Jkt 211001
Protections (OHRP), or Catherine
Slatinshek, Executive Director,
Secretary’s Advisory Committee on
Human Research Protections;
Department of Health and Human
Services, 1101 Wootton Parkway, Suite
200, Rockville, MD 20852; (240) 453–
8139; fax: (240) 453–6909; e-mail
address: sachrp@osophs.dhhs.gov.
Under the
authority of 42 U.S.C. 217a, Section 222
of the Public Health Service Act, as
amended, SACHRP was established to
provide expert advice and
recommendations to the Secretary of
Health and Human Services and the
Assistant Secretary for Health on issues
and topics pertaining to or associated
with the protection of human research
subjects.
On November 2, 2006, SACHRP will
receive and discuss updated
information and a report from the
Subpart A Subcommittee and issues
involving the application of subpart A
of 45 CFR part 46 in the current research
environment. This subcommittee was
established by SACHRP at its October
4–5, 2004 meeting.
On November 3, 2006, the Committee
will discuss future topics and issues
that will be considered by the
Subcommittee on Research Involving
Individuals with Impaired DecisionMaking Capacity. This subcommittee
was established by SACHRP at its July
31–August 1, 2006 meeting. In addition,
the Committee will hear presentations
and invite discussions from several
representatives on a panel on issues
related to research involving subjects
with impaired decision-making
capacity.
Public attendance at the meeting is
limited to space available. Individuals
who plan to attend the meeting and
need special assistance, such as sign
language interpretation or other
reasonable accommodations, should
notify the designated contact persons.
Members of the public will have the
opportunity to provide comments on
both days of the meeting. Public
comment will be limited to five minutes
per speaker. Any members of the public
who wish to have printed materials
distributed to SACHRP members for this
scheduled meeting should submit
materials to the Executive Director,
SACHRP, prior to the close of business
Friday, October 27, 2006. Information
about SACHRP and the draft meeting
agenda will be posted on the SACHRP
Web site at: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/
sachrp/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: October 18, 2006.
Catherine Slatinshek,
Executive Director, Secretary’s Advisory
Committee on Human Research Protections.
[FR Doc. E6–17743 Filed 10–23–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150–36–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality
Agency Information Collection
activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
AGENCY: Agency for Healthcare Research
and Quality, Department of Health and
Human Services.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: This notice announces the
intention of the Agency for Healthcare
Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request
that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) allow the proposed
information collection project:
‘‘Evaluation of the Implementation and
Impact of Pay-for-Quality Programs.’’ In
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–
13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), AHRQ
invites the public to comment on this
proposed information collection.
DATES: Comments on this notice must be
received by December 26, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should
be submitted to: Doris Lefkowitz,
Reports Clearance Officer, AHRQ, 540
Gaither Road, Room # 5036, Rockville,
MD 20850.
Copies of the proposed collection
plans, data collection instruments, and
specific details on the estimated burden
can be obtained from AHRQ’s Reports
Clearance Officer.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doris Lefkowitz, AHRQ, Reports
Clearance Officer, (301) 427–1477.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Proposed Project
‘‘Evaluation of the Implementation
and Impact of Pay-for-Quality (P4Q)
Programs.’’
The P4Q Evaluation is a multi-method
research project designed to evaluate the
implementation and impact of P4Q
programs on physicians across three
programs operating in health care safety
net settings. The P4Q programs
participating in the evaluation are
offering their health care providers
financial incentives to achieve
predefined quality targets. Data
collected as part of this evaluation will
have direct operational relevance to
E:\FR\FM\24OCN1.SGM
24OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 205 (Tuesday, October 24, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62261-62266]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-17790]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Commission).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The information collection requirements described below are
being submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for
review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (``PRA''), 44 U.S.C.
3501-3520. The FTC is seeking public comments on proposed information
requests to beverage alcohol advertisers. The FTC proposes to issue
compulsory process orders to beverage alcohol advertisers for
information concerning, inter alia, compliance with voluntary
advertising placement provisions, sales and marketing expenditures, and
the status of third-party review of complaints regarding compliance
with voluntary advertising codes.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 24, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments.
Comments should refer to the ``Alcohol Reports: Paperwork Comment, FTC
File No. P064505'' to facilitate the organization of the comments. A
comment filed in paper form should include this reference both in the
text and on the envelope and should be mailed or delivered, with two
complete copies, to the following address: Federal Trade Commission/
Office of the Secretary, Room H-135 (Annex J), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20580. Because paper mail in the Washington area
and at the Commission is subject to delay, please consider submitting
your comments in electronic form, as prescribed below. However, if the
comment contains any material for which confidential treatment is
requested, it must be filed in paper form, and the first page of the
document must be clearly labeled ``Confidential.'' \1\ The FTC is
requesting that any comment filed in paper form be sent by courier or
overnight service, if possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Commission Rule 4.2(d), 16 CFR 4.2(d). The comment must be
accompanied by an explicit request for confidential treatment,
including the factual and legal basis for the request, and must
identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from
the public record. The requst will be granted or denied by the
Commission's General Counsel, consistent with applicable law and the
public interest. See Commission Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments filed in electronic form should be submitted by clicking
on the following weblink: https://secure.commentworks.com/FTC_
Alcohol_Reports and following the instructions on the web-based form.
To ensure that the Commission considers an electronic comment, you must
file it on the web-based form at the https://secure.commentworks.com/
FTC_Alcohol_Reports weblink. If this notice appears at https://
www.regulations.gov, you may also file an electronic comment through
that Web site. The Commission will consider all comments that
regulations.gov forwards to it.
All comments should additionally be submitted to: Office of
Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Trade
Commission. Comments should be submitted via facsimile to (202) 395-
6974 because U.S. Postal Mail is subject to lengthy delays due to
heightened security precautions.
The FTC Act and other laws the Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. All timely and responsive public comments, whether filed
in paper or electronic form, will be considered by the Commission, and
will be available to the public on the FTC Web site, to the extent
practicable, at https://www.ftc.gov. As a matter of discretion, the FTC
makes every effort to remove home contact information for individuals
from public comments it receives before placing those comments on the
FTC Web site. More information, including routine uses permitted by the
Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC's privacy policy, at https://
www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information
should be addressed to Janet Evans or Phyllis H. Marcus, Attorneys,
Division of Advertising Practices, Bureau of Consumer Protection,
Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., NJ-3212,
Washington, DC 20580; telephone: (202) 326-2125 or (202) 326-2854.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In September 1999 and September 2003, the
FTC published reports on voluntary advertising self-regulation by the
alcohol industry based on information U.S. beverage alcohol advertisers
submitted to the Commission, pursuant to compulsory process. The FTC
has authority to compel production of this information from advertisers
under Section 6 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46. The Commission believes
it is in the public interest to: (1) Collect updated data from U.S.
beverage alcohol advertisers on sales and marketing expenditures,
compliance with the industry's self regulatory code provisions
concerning advertising placement and the status of third-party review
of complaints regarding compliance with the industry's self-regulatory
advertising standards; and (2) publish a report on the data obtained.
The Commission intends to address its information requests to the
corporate entities responsible for the majority of alcohol advertising
in the U.S., including their affiliated and subsidiary companies.
Because the number of separately incorporated companies affected by the
Commission's requests will exceed ten entities, the Commission seeks
OMB clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act (``PRA'').
On March 8, 2006, the FTC published a Federal Register Notice
seeking comments from the public concerning the proposed collection of
information
[[Page 62262]]
from beverage alcohol advertisers. See 71 FR 11659 (``March 8
Notice''). Under the OMB regulations that implement the PRA (5 CFR part
1320), the FTC is providing this second opportunity for public comment
while requesting that OMB provide clearance for the proposed collection
of information. All comments should be filed as prescribed in the
ADDRESSES section above, and must be received on or before November 24,
2006.
A. Public Comments/Consultation Outside the Agency
The FTC received 1,299 comments in response to the March 8
Notice.\2\ While six comments did not specifically address the proposed
data collection,\3\ 1,292 comments expressly favored it. These were
submitted by: (1) Three members of Congress; \4\ (2) members of the
National Association of Attorneys General's Youth Access to Alcohol
Committee (``NAAG Committee''); (3) 48 organizations engaged in
advocacy regarding public health, including the Center for Science in
the Public Interest (``CSPI''), Consumer Federation of America, Join
Together, and the Leadership to Keep Children Alcohol Free Initiative
(hereafter ``the 48-organizations comment''); (4) six comments (five
from public health organizations and one from an individual) that were
nearly identical to the 48-organizations comment; (5) the American
Medical Association (``AMA''); (6) Pacific Institute for Research and
Evaluation (``PIRE''); (7) National Council on Alcoholism and Drug
Dependence, Inc., Sacramento Region Affiliate (``NCADD/Sacramento'');
(8) Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth (``CAMY''); (9) Prevention
Network (referencing and reiterating points made in the CAMY comment);
(10) Marin Institute; and (11) approximately 1,283 individually
submitted form letters (``Form Letters''). The Miller Brewing Company
submitted the only comment from the alcohol industry; it did not oppose
data collection but requested that it be limited to reduce the burden
on the companies.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The comments are available at https://www.ftc.gov/os/
comments/alcoholmanufacadstudy/index.htm.
\3\ Among these, one opposed any government action on alcohol
advertising. See comment by Stanford Owen (May 2, 2006). The other
five either expressed concerns about alcohol advertising or
supported a new FTC report about alcohol advertising. See Comments
by Ziming Xuan (May 9, 2006); Independent State Store Union (ISSU)
(May 5, 2006); Fred Reid (May 4, 2006); William Bailey (May 2,
2006); and Abigail Pederson (April 17, 2006).
\4\ These are: Representatives Lucille Roybal-Allard, Jose E.
Serrano, and Frank R. Wolf.
\5\ On July 13, 2006, CSPI submitted a letter to FTC Chairman
Deborah Platt Majoras requesting that the FTC's planned study
include examination of alcohol sponsorship at NASCAR racing events.
Although the CSPI letter is not characterized as a formal comment on
the Federal Register Notice, the FTC took CSPI's request into
consideration in preparing the proposed Section 6 Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. General Support for Data Collection
The NAAG Committee comment stated that it is in the public interest
for the FTC to collect updated data from advertisers. The 48-
organizations comment stated that the information previously collected
from the alcohol companies and reported on by the FTC has increased
understanding of alcohol advertising issues and the role of the
industry in regulating its own advertising practices. This comment
noted that entities that use this information include Federal and state
government legislative and regulatory bodies, law enforcement and legal
officials, administrative health agencies, public health organizations,
academia, the news media, and the general public. CAMY stated that,
given the risks of teen drinking, the proposed information requests are
integral to the FTC's consumer protection mission and provide useful
information not only to the Commission but to parents, policy makers,
and the public health field.
2. Sales Data
In its March 8 Notice, the FTC stated that it would seek company
data showing alcohol sales. Only one comment appeared to address this
request. Miller Brewing Company stated that the FTC should not request
brand-specific information, as such collection would greatly increase
the company's burden without furthering the FTC's purpose. This
background information, however, will enable the FTC, in its report, to
better describe the nature of the industry, including the number of
brands, volume sold, and the dollar value of those sales. Accordingly,
the proposed Section 6 Orders will request such information, asking
each company to identify by name each individual alcohol brand or
variety that it sold during the calendar year 2005, and for each brand
or variety, state total sales in dollars and in number of 9-liter or
2.25 gallon cases sold.
As a related matter, PIRE, CAMY, and the Form Letters requested
that the FTC also seek any information the companies have collected or
received regarding use of their brands by persons below the legal
drinking age. The FTC will request that the companies submit any
unpublished data they possess showing the brands of alcohol consumed by
persons under the legal drinking age in the United States. The request
will exclude publicly available data (such as data published by CSPI,
the AMA, and others).
3. Expenditure Data
In the March 8 Notice, the FTC stated that it would seek
information about expenditures to advertise and promote beverage
alcohol in both measured and unmeasured media. Many of the comments
offered suggestions regarding collection of this expenditure data.
The letter from the three Congressional representatives recommended
that the report include information on measured media advertising,
sponsorships and promotions, broken down by state, race, and ethnicity
of the target audience. It also asked for a report on brand-specific
expenditures. The NAAG Committee requested that the FTC seek detailed
data on the percentage of company advertising budgets expended on each
type of media and, specifically, where ads are placed (e.g., which
television and radio shows, in which movies, during which events).
The 48-organization comment urged the FTC to seek information on:
Promotional allowance and retail value-added expenditures; advertising
in Spanish-language and other ethnic media; sports-related and college
sports-related advertising and marketing (including telecasts,
sponsorships, local print and promotional expenditures, and stadium
signage); college marketing and promotional activities and expenditures
(including spring break promotions in the U.S. and at popular off-shore
spring break destinations); marketing, promotions, and brand awareness
activity that utilize popular music, celebrities, and/or internet games
and sponsorship of community events; and newer avenues of beverage
alcohol marketing through ``non-traditional'' media, such as cell
phones, mobile television, podcasts, and brand tie-ins with popular Web
sites. The 48-organization comment also asked that the data be broken
down state-by-state, company- and brand-specific (subject to relevant
trade secret and confidentiality provisions), and by ethnicity of the
target audience. Marin Institute joined the 48-organization comment and
further requested that the FTC collect data on producer and wholesaler
sponsorship of community events and non-profit organizations, and that
it measure use of emerging electronic media, such as text messaging,
mobile television, and podcasting. The AMA
[[Page 62263]]
suggested that the data be modeled on information requests the FTC has
issued to cigarette companies, which seek information on 26 categories
of expenditures.
The AMA requested that the FTC collect data on measured and
unmeasured media, including sponsorship, retail incentives, point-of-
purchase, and product placement fees. PIRE requested that the Section 6
Orders seek: Expenditures by media type regarding Internet advertising,
sponsorship, text messaging, other new marketing techniques, price
discounting and promotional allowances paid to third parties; data on
expenditures for educational campaigns and youth consumption
prevention; and grants to third parties to promote prevention and
treatment. It also asked that the data break out expenditures for
sports-related marketing and college marketing.
CAMY requested that the FTC seek two or more years of data for
measured media advertising, by media type (including broadcast network,
cable network, spot, local/regional cable, interconnects, and Hispanic
television); magazine advertising, broken down by full-run and
demographic editions; spot and network radio; Internet advertising
(including web advertising, email, company Web sites, and IM
sponsorships); and ``out-of-home'' advertising. Regarding unmeasured
media, CAMY urged the FTC to seek, at a minimum, data on the kinds of
expenditures sought in the 2003 Section 6 Orders to the cigarette
companies (including price discounting, promotional allowances,
educational campaigns). CAMY suggested that the FTC obtain data on
industry spending on ``social aspects organizations'' such as
International Center on Alcohol Policies and the Century Council). It
also requested that the agency seek expenditures for ``new media,'' for
example, ``pixting'' (i.e., picture, or multimedia, messaging) and
``texting'' (i.e., text messaging) on mobile phones, podcasting, and
online viral marketing. Finally, CAMY asked that the data break out
aggregate spending on sports and college marketing across all
categories.
Miller Brewing Company asked that the Commission not request
expenditures on a brand-specific basis. It stated that such a request
would greatly increase the burden in collecting the data and would not
further the agency's stated purpose. It noted that the FTC's prior
alcohol reports published data on an aggregate basis, and urged that
the data be collected that way. Miller Brewing Company also requested
that the agency seek expenditure data for measured media (television,
radio, print, outdoor) only, noting that measured media can be tracked,
reported, and compared with reasonable precision. Miller stated that
unmeasured media does not have a universally accepted definition, and
that certain expenditures in this group may bear no relation to
marketing. For example, Miller noted that sports sponsorships include
fees for ticket allotments, suites, and use of facilities, and that the
expenditures are not broken down as to whether they are marketing-
related. Miller stated that collection of unmeasured media data will be
burdensome, but did not provide a cost estimate.
The FTC's 1999 Report estimated that measured marketing
expenditures may account for only one-third of alcohol brand
promotional budgets. The proposed Section 6 Orders are designed to
enable the FTC to better understand how alcohol industry promotional
dollars targeted to consumers are spent and how much current self-
regulatory efforts aptly address legitimate public concerns about
alcohol promotion. See section B. 1.a of this notice detailing what the
Commission will seek on expenditure data through its Section B Orders.
4. Advertisement Placement
The voluntary advertising guidelines of the beer, wine, and
distilled spirits industries each state that alcohol advertising should
be placed in television, radio, and print communications only where at
least 70% of the audience is reasonably expected to be above the legal
purchase age (the ``70% placement standard''). In the March 8 Notice,
the FTC stated that it planned to seek data on compliance with this
standard.
The comment from the three Congressional representatives expressed
the hope that the FTC's analysis of alcohol industry placement
practices will not be limited to reporting on what percentage of ads
comply with the 70% placement standard, and specifically requested
information that would allow the Commission to determine whether ads
targeted to the Hispanic community comply with the current placement
standard. The NAAG Committee comment urged the FTC to collect detailed
data showing whether alcohol companies have complied with the 70%
placement standard, including data showing where advertisements are
placed (e.g., what shows, movies, or events) and the demographics of
the audience, including data showing what percentage of the audience
falls within the following age groups: 12-20, 21-24, and 21-34. The
NAAG Committee further suggested that the FTC collect data on other
efforts made by the companies to ensure compliance, including whether
they use ``no buy'' lists, follow higher-than-required standards, and
audit past placements. The 48-organization comment urged the FTC to
seek information on magazine and television advertising in publications
or programs with youth readership or viewership rates over 15 percent,
or 2 million, youth readers. PIRE requested that the FTC obtain data
evaluating adherence to the 70% placement standard, by specific brand.
In that regard, it asked that the agency seek data used for planning
media placement, as well as actual gross advertising impressions, gross
ratings points, and audience delivery for each target audience,
audience ages 12-20, and total audience age 12 and above. NCADD/
Sacramento asked that the FTC seek information that will allow it to
compare voluntary advertising compliance among industry members and to
identify magazine and television advertising where youth constitute
more than 15% of the audience. CAMY asked that the FTC seek data that
will allow it to evaluate compliance with the 70% placement standard on
a per-brand basis; to collect data on primary and secondary target
audiences (age, gender, etc.), gross ad impressions, gross ratings
points, and audience delivery (reach and frequency) for audience ages
12-20 and total audience 12 and above. CAMY also requested that:
advertisement placement data be provided on a local market basis for
local placements; data be reported as planned and as achieved;
companies report on what media and channels they have audience
composition data and, where data is unavailable, that they specify
sources and standards for audience estimates.
The scope of the Orders specifically regarding advertisement
placement is detailed in Part B.1.b. of this notice.
5. External Review of Code Compliance
The trade associations representing the three segments of the
beverage alcohol industry--the Distilled Spirits Counsel of the United
States (``DISCUS''), Beer Institute (``BI''), and Wine Institute
(``WI'')--each have adopted a mechanism for considering whether member
ads comply with the association's voluntary advertising code. The FTC's
March 8 Notice stated that the proposed Section 6 Orders would seek
data regarding those external compliance review mechanisms. No comments
opposed this request. The comment from the three Congressional
representatives urged the Commission to evaluate the effectiveness of
the
[[Page 62264]]
compliance review process among the various segments of the alcohol
industry, including the outcomes of complaints filed with the industry
review boards. CAMY requested that the FTC also consider how
``independent'' such external review programs are, by analyzing their
degree of transparency, the breadth of their purview, and their
timeliness. The NAAG Committee asked that the FTC also collect data on
the percentage of industry members having pre-publication third-party
review, the percentage of proposed ads that fail review and why, the
number of ads that pass but are later the subject of complaints, and
the way companies respond to complaints.
The scope of the Orders specifically regarding external review of
code compliance is detailed in Part B.1.c. of this notice.
6. Other Requests Contained in Comments
Many of the comments filed in response to the March 8 Notice
addressed what ongoing action the FTC should take after its initial
data collection. Some of the comments suggested that the agency collect
information from the alcohol companies and issue annual or bi-annual
reports. The FTC plans to complete the current study before considering
this proposal.
Some comments suggested that the FTC evaluate other issues, such as
alcohol product placement in movies and underage access to beverage
alcohol websites. The proposed Section 6 Orders will seek information
about expenditures for product placements and website advertising but
will not seek information on the extent that these media expose minors
to promotions. The goal of the current study is to conduct a
comprehensive review of: alcohol advertising and marketing
expenditures; industry compliance with current placement standards as
they pertain to television, radio, magazine, and newspaper advertising
over the stated period of time; and third-party review of complaints.
The FTC expects that focusing its efforts in this manner will produce a
study of the highest possible quality. It is committed to ongoing
monitoring of this subject area, however, and anticipates that it will
address other issues raised by alcohol advertising and marketing in the
future.
B. Information Requests to the Beverage Alcohol Industry
1. Description of the Collection of Information and Proposed Use
The FTC proposes to send information requests to up to twelve
parent companies (``industry members'') responsible for domestic
advertising of beer, wine, or distilled spirits The information
requests will seek, to the extent industry members possess it, data and
information regarding: (1) Company sales of beverage alcohol on a per
brand basis, in both dollars and units sold; (2) company expenditures
to advertise, market, and promote beverage alcohol in the United
States; (3) compliance with the 70% placement standard contained in the
industry's self-regulatory codes; and (4) the status of external
mechanisms to review complaints about code compliance.
Note: With this publication any destruction, removal,
mutilation, alteration, or falsification of documentary evidence
that may be responsive to this information collection, within the
possession or control of a person, partnership, or corporation
subject to the FTC Act, may be subject to criminal prosecution. 15
U.S.C. 50; see also 18 U.S.C. 1505.
Confidentiality: Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), bars
the Commission from publicly disclosing trade secrets or confidential
commercial or financial information it receives from persons pursuant
to, among other methods, special orders authorized by section 6(b) of
the FTC Act. Such information also would be exempt from disclosure
under the Freedom of Information Act. 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4). Moreover,
under section 21(c) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 57b-2(c), a submitter who
designates a submission as confidential is entitled to 10 days' advance
notice of any anticipated public disclosure by the Commission, assuming
that the Commission has determined that the information does not, in
fact, constitute 6(f) material. Although materials covered under one or
more of these various sections are protected by stringent
confidentiality constraints, the FTC Act and the Commission's rules
authorize disclosure in limited circumstances (e.g., official requests
by Congress, requests from other agencies for law enforcement purposes,
or administrative or judicial proceedings). Even in those limited
contexts, however, the Commission's rules may afford protections to the
submitter, such as advance notice to seek a protective order in
litigation.
See 15 U.S.C. 57b-2; 16 CFR 4.9-4.11.
The information presented in the study will not reveal company-
specific data. See 15 U.S.C. 57b-2(d)(1)(B). Rather, the Commission
anticipates presenting information on an anonymous or aggregated basis,
in a manner sufficient to protect individual companies' confidential
information.
a. Information About Expenditure Data
The proposed Section 6 Orders will seek expenditures for
advertising, merchandising, or promotion of alcohol during calendar
year 2005. The Orders require that the expenditures be broken down into
22 categories.\6\ Thus, the proposed Section 6 Orders seek
comprehensive information about expenditures to promote alcohol to
consumers, including most of the information suggested in the
comments.\7\ This information will help the agency evaluate how
industry members allocate their promotional expenditures, so as to
better determine the degree industry self-regulatory codes address the
various kinds of promotions employed by the industry. The categories
are carefully defined to facilitate compliance with the requests. The
Commission agrees with Miller Brewing Company, however, that it is not
necessary for the alcohol companies to report such information on a
brand-by-brand basis. Given the substantially expanded scope of this
request, brand-by-brand reporting may pose an unnecessary additional
burden on the companies without meaningfully increasing the FTC's
understanding how promotional dollars are directed on an industry-wide
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ These are: Television advertising; radio advertising;
magazine advertising; newspaper advertising; transit advertising;
other outdoor advertising; direct mail advertising; company-
sponsored Internet sites; other Internet site advertising; other
digital advertising; specialty item distribution; public
entertainment events: not sports-related; sponsorship of sporting
events, sports teams or individual athletes; other point-of-sale
advertising and promotions; spring break promotions; product
placements; retail value-added expenditures; telemarketing;
promotional allowances; and total reportable expenditures. In
addition, the proposed Section 6 Orders will seek cross-category
totals for sports and sporting events and social responsibility
programs and messages.
\7\ Some of the suggested requests are more extensive than
needed for the FTC's current purposes. For example, the FTC does not
propose to require the companies to allocate magazine advertising
expenditures among ``full run'' and ``demographic'' editions. The
burden of collecting such data is likely to outweigh the benefits to
the FTC and the public of obtaining it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed Section 6 Orders do not seek a breakdown of
expenditures by race or ethnicity of the target audience. The agency is
concerned that reporting specific expenditure data by race or ethnicity
might produce potentially misleading results due to the difficulty of
separating targeted advertising from
[[Page 62265]]
general advertising that may have the same or broader reach to a
particular racial or ethnic group. The Commission will, however, seek
advertisement placement data that will help the FTC to evaluate whether
ads targeted to an Hispanic or African-American audience comply with
industry placement standards, as further discussed below.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The proposed orders also will not seek information on
expenditures for slotting allowances or price discounts; such
information does not enhance the agency's understanding of self-
regulation. The requests focus on expenditures for advertising and
promotions that may be seen by underage consumers. Payments for
shelf space, payments to wholesalers, and price discounts to
wholesalers and retailers do not provide such information. Given the
expanded nature of this request, seeking data on them would be
unnecessarily burdensome.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Information About Advertising Placement
The proposed Section 6 Orders will require the companies to
provide, for each instance of advertising dissemination between January
1 and June 30, 2006, on television, on radio in measured markets, in
magazines, and in newspapers: the advertisement's name; the brand
advertised; the name of the media and location of dissemination; the
date and time that the advertisement appeared; the name of the show
during or in conjunction with the advertisement appeared; and the
demographics of the audience (persons under 21, and persons 21 and
over), in absolute numbers and percentages, for that dissemination.\9\
The proposed Section 6 Orders also will require the companies to
provide a company-wide summary of this data to facilitate analysis.
This data will permit the Commission to measure the extent that the
youth audience for each ad placement exceeded 30% of the total
audience, or whether they complied with existing industry codes.\10\
Further, given concerns about whether advertisements targeted primarily
to Hispanic or African-American consumers are more likely than others
to reach underage consumers, the Commission will require that the
companies identify such ads so that the agency can evaluate this
concern.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Two sets of demographics are relevant to Evaluating
compliance with placement standards: the historical demographics
used by a company for planning purposes when purchasing ad time, and
audience demographics when a placement actually occurred. The
proposed Section 6 Orders seek the latter data. To illustrate, for
an ad placed on television, the Orders require the companies to
provide the average demographic data for the program during which
the show ran, over the three-month period (the ``quarter'') when the
placement appeared. If program-specific data is unavailable (as is
often the case with cable), the Orders seek the quarterly average
data for the daypart during which the ad appeared.
\10\ This data also will permit the Commission to evaluate the
audience for televised NASCAR events, in connection with CSPI's
request that the FTC review the degree that NASCAR promotions reach
a youth audience.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission's proposed Section 6 Orders also seek a narrative
description of: the steps taken when placing ads to reduce the
proportion of persons under 21 in the audience, including the
demographic databases relied on in making placement decisions; how
often post-placement data are reviewed to verify that a placement
complied with the placement guidelines and the steps taken if a
compliance shortfall is identified; and the additional safeguards in
place (e.g., use of ``no buy'' lists and higher placement standards,
media content review) to reduce the likelihood of reaching underage
audiences. This will permit the Commission to obtain a clear and
detailed picture of the alcohol industry's advertising placement
practices during the period at issue.
The proposed Section 6 Orders will not require the companies to
identify, for each ad, the gross rating points and the breakdown of
consumers aged 12-20, 21-24, and 21-34 in the audience. Given the
significantly expanded scope of the current requests, such requirements
would be unnecessarily burdensome and the information not fully
relevant to compliance with the placement standard contained in the
industry's voluntary advertising codes.
c. Information About External Review of Code Compliance
The proposed Section 6 Orders will require the alcohol companies to
describe in detail the enforcement mechanism(s) available as of
December 31, 2006 for possible violations of the DISCUS, BI, and WI
voluntary advertising codes. The response to this aspect of the Section
6 Orders will not be due until January 10, 2007, to allow the FTC time
to receive and evaluate whole-year information regarding third-party
review. The proposed Orders also will require, for each complaint about
the company's advertising, promotion, or marketing forwarded for
independent review between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2006, that
the company provide a copy of the complaint, any document reflecting
the reviewer's decision or recommendation, and describe what action, if
any, the company took in response to the reviewer's decision or
recommendation. These requests will enable the Commission to evaluate
the efficacy of current advertising review mechanisms. Currently, the
Commission does not plan to ask about pre-publication review of
proposed ads by third parties, or the number of ads that pass but are
later the subject of complaints, and the way companies respond to
complaints. The goal of this section of the proposed Section 6 Orders
is to evaluate how the various segments of the industry have responded
to the FTC's recommendation that they adopt systems for external, post-
publication review of complaints about advertising code compliance.
2. Estimated Hours Burden
FTC staff's estimate of the hours burden is based on the time
required to respond to each information request. The Commission intends
to issue the information requests to the 12 largest beverage alcohol
advertisers. Because these companies vary greatly in size, in the
number of products that they sell, and in the extent and variety of
their advertising and promotion, staff has provided a range of the
estimated hours burden. Based upon its knowledge of the industry, the
staff estimates that the time required to identify, obtain, organize,
and prepare responses to each of the four information categories will
range, on average, between 15 and 120 hours for most companies. Staff
anticipates, however, that the largest companies may require up to 280
hours for the most time-consuming category, advertising placement
information. The total estimated burden per company is based on the
following assumptions:
Identify, obtain, and organize sales information; prepare response:
15-35 hrs.
Identify, obtain, and organize information on advertising and
marketing expenditures; prepare response: 40-65 hrs.
Identify, obtain, and organize placement information; prepare
response: 150-280 hrs.
Identify, obtain, and organize information regarding compliance
review; prepare response: 15-20 hrs.
FTC staff anticipates that the cumulative hours burden to respond
to the information requests will be between 220 hours and 400 hours per
company. Nonetheless, staff conservatively assumes that the burden per
company for each of the twelve (12) intended recipients will be 400
hours. Accordingly, cumulative estimated burden is 4,800 hours. These
estimates include any time spent by separately incorporated
subsidiaries and other entities affiliated with the parent company that
received the information requests.
3. Estimated Cost Burden
It is difficult to calculate precisely labor costs associated with
this data production. Labor costs entail varying
[[Page 62266]]
compensation levels of management and/or support staff among companies
of different sizes. Although financial, marketing, legal, and clerical
personnel may be involved in the information collection process, FTC
staff has assumed that mid-management personnel and outside legal
counsel will handle most of the tasks involved in gathering and
producing responsive information, and has applied an average rate of
$250/hour for their labor. FTC staff anticipates that the labor costs
per company will range between $55,000 (220 hours x $250/hour) and
$100,000 (400 hours x $250/hour). Nonetheless, as a conservative
measure, staff estimates that the total labor costs per company will be
$100,000.
FTC staff believes that the capital or other non-labor costs
associated with the information requests are minimal. Although the
information requests may require industry members to maintain the
requested information the Commission seeks, they should already have in
place the means to compile and maintain it.
John D. Graubert,
Acting General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E6-17790 Filed 10-23-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P