Trade Regulation Rule Concerning Cooling-Off Period for Sales Made at Homes or at Certain Other Locations, 18170-18172 [E9-9135]
Download as PDF
18170
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 75 / Tuesday, April 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
• Federal e Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit electronic
comments via the Federal e Rulemaking
Portal rather than by e-mail;
• Mail: Debra Malek, NOAA, Office of
National Marine Sanctuaries, 1305 EastWest Highway, (N/NMS2), 11th Floor,
Silver Spring, Maryland 20910.
Copies of the interim policy and
permit guidance for submarine cable
projects may be viewed and
downloaded at https://
sanctuaries.noaa.gov/.
Paperwork burden: Submit written
comments regarding the burden-hour
estimates or other aspects of the
information collection requirements
contained in this proposed rule by email to Diana Hynek at
dHynek@doc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Debra Malek, (301) 713–3125, ext. 262.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
tjames on PRODPC75 with PROPOSALS
Background
The NOAA Office of National Marine
Sanctuaries (ONMS) manages a system
of thirteen national marine sanctuaries
(NMSs or sanctuaries) that protect
special, nationally significant areas of
the marine environment under the
authority of the National Marine
Sanctuaries Act (NMSA; 16 U.S.C. 1431
et seq.). The ONMS, along with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service and the State
of Hawaii, also manages the
Papahanaumokuakea Marine National
Monument under the Antiquities Act.
Sanctuaries and the monument protect
a variety of marine habitats and cultural
resources including coral reefs,
mangrove forests, seagrass beds, deepsea canyons, kelp beds, marine mammal
feeding and breeding grounds, and
historic shipwrecks and other
submerged cultural resources.
In the late 1990s, the ONMS received
applications to install and maintain
telecommunication submarine cables
through the Olympic Coast National
Marine Sanctuary and the Stellwagen
Bank National Marine Sanctuary.
Experience gained through the
consideration and issuance of permits
for those projects highlighted the need
for more clarity on how such projects
would be handled in the future.
The Department of Commerce
convened a workshop in February 2000
with representatives from the
telecommunications and fishing
industries, environmental and
conservation organizations, and state
agencies. A white paper with key issues
and guiding principles was distributed
prior to, and discussed at, the
workshop. The proposed guiding
principles included: Analysis of habitat
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:16 Apr 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
types appropriate or inappropriate for
cable laying, analysis of individual
sanctuary regulations, and parameters
for evaluating proposals for cable
installations.
In August 2000, NOAA published an
advance notice of proposed rulemaking
(ANPR) on Installing and Maintaining
Commercial Submarine Cables in
National Marine Sanctuaries in the
Federal Register (65 FR 51264, Aug. 23,
2000). A second ANPR was published in
November 2000 at the request of the
industry for additional time to comment
(65 FR 70537, Nov. 24, 2000). The
ANPR requested comments on both the
guiding principles contained in the
white paper and on the issues raised at
the workshop.
Specifically, the ANPR requested
comments on:
• Whether changes to existing ONMS
regulations or some form of policy
guidance was necessary to clarify
NOAA’s decision-making process
regarding the installation and
maintenance of commercial submarine
cables within NMSs;
• If changes or additional guidance
were appropriate, what those changes or
guidance should contain; and
• Whether there were comments on
the proposed principles on the
installation of commercial submarine
cables with the marine and coastal
environment.
The ONMS received 36 comments
from the telecommunications industry,
the Department of Defense, the
environmental community, State
government, and various interested
individuals.
General comments on the ANPR
included the following:
• The telecommunications industry
believed that existing regulations are
adequate in NMSs.
• The environmental community
urged NOAA to prohibit cables within
NMSs, and to develop stringent permit
application criteria, including removal
of out-of-service cables.
• The industry and the environmental
community did not a support a
Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statement (PETS) or the concept of
approving projects in the planning
stage.
• The environmental community
supported the idea of cable corridors
while the industry opposed it.
• The industry wanted improved
consultation between NOAA and other
cable permitting authorities, such as the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the
Federal Communications Commission,
etc., and more specific, user-friendly
criteria for permit applications.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
These comments, in addition to direct
experience related to cables installed in
sanctuaries, were factors that led to
NOAA’s decision not to pursue
rulemaking at this time, but, rather to
develop and issue interim permit
guidelines. The ONMS believes that
cable permit guidelines will ensure that
applications to install and maintain
submarine cables in sanctuaries are
reviewed consistently and in a manner
that adheres to the NMSA and ONMS
regulations (15 CFR part 922).
John Dunnigan,
Assistant Administrator for Ocean Services
and Coastal Zone Management.
[FR Doc. E9–8945 Filed 4–20–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–NK–M
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 429
Trade Regulation Rule Concerning
Cooling-Off Period for Sales Made at
Homes or at Certain Other Locations
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission
(‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’).
ACTION: Request for public comment.
SUMMARY: The Commission requests
public comment on its Trade Regulation
Rule Concerning Cooling-Off Period for
Sales Made at Homes or at Certain Other
Locations (‘‘Cooling-Off Rule’’ or
‘‘Rule’’). The Commission is soliciting
public comment as part of the FTC’s
systematic review of all current
Commission regulations and guides.
DATES: Written comments concerning
the Cooling-Off Rule must be received
no later than June 22, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
invited to submit written comments
electronically or in paper form.
Comments should refer to ‘‘Cooling-Off
Rule Regulatory Review, 16 CFR 429,
Comment, Project No. P087109’’ to
facilitate the organization of comments.
Please note that your comment—
including your name and your state—
will be placed on the public record of
this proceeding, including on the
publicly accessible FTC website, at
(https://ftc.gov/os/
publiccomments.shtm.)
Because comments will be made
public, they should not include any
sensitive personal information, such as
an individual’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. Comments
also should not include any sensitive
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 75 / Tuesday, April 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
tjames on PRODPC75 with PROPOSALS
health information, such as medical
records or other individually
identifiable health information. In
addition, comments should not include
any ‘‘[t]rade 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 Commission Rule 4.10(a)(2),
16 CFR 4.10(a)(2). Comments containing
material for which confidential
treatment is requested must be filed in
paper form, must be clearly labeled
‘‘Confidential,’’ and must comply with
FTC Rule 4.9(c).1
A comment filed in paper form
should include the ‘‘Cooling-Off Rule
Regulatory Review, 16 CFR 429,
Comment, Project No. P087109’’
reference both in the text and on the
envelope, and should be mailed or
delivered to the following address:
Federal Trade Commission/Office of the
Secretary, Room H-135 (Annex M), 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20580. The FTC is
requesting that any comment filed in
paper form be sent by courier or
overnight service, if possible, because
U.S. postal mail in the Washington area
and at the Commission is subject to
delay due to heightened security
precautions.
You also may consider submitting
your comments in electronic form.
Comments filed in electronic form
should be submitted by following the
instructions on the web-based form at
the weblink (https://
secure.commentworks.com/ftc-coolingoffrulereview). To ensure that the
Commission considers an electronic
comment, you must file it on that webbased form. If this Notice appears at
(https://www.regulations.gov/search/
index.jsp), you also may file an
electronic comment through that
website. The Commission will consider
all comments that regulations.gov
forwards to it. You also may visit the
FTC website at https://www.ftc.gov to
read the Notice and the news release
describing it.
The Federal Trade Commission Act
(‘‘FTC Act’’) and other laws the
Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to
consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. The Commission will
1 See also FTC 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 request 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),
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:16 Apr 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
consider all timely and responsive
public comments that it receives,
whether filed in paper or electronic
form. Comments received will be
available to the public on the FTC
website, to the extent practicable, at
(https://www.ftc.gov/os/
publiccomments.shtm.) As a matter of
discretion, the FTC makes every effort to
remove home contact information for
individuals from the public comments it
receives before placing those comments
on the FTC website. To read our policy
on how we handle the information you
submit—including routine uses
permitted by the Privacy Act—please
review the FTC’s privacy policy, at
(https://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.shtm.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sana Coleman Chriss, Attorney, (404)
656-1364, Federal Trade Commission,
Southeast Region, 225 Peachtree Street,
NE, Suite 1500, Atlanta, Georgia 30303.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Cooling-Off Rule was
promulgated by the Commission on
October 26, 1972, and it was last
amended on October 20, 1995.2 The
Rule, as amended, declares it an unfair
and deceptive practice for a seller
engaged in a ‘‘door-to-door sale’’3 of
consumer goods or services, with a
purchase price of $25 or more, to fail to
provide the buyer with certain oral and
written disclosures regarding the
buyer’s right to cancel the contract
within three business days from the date
of the sales transaction.4 The Rule also
requires such sellers, within 10 business
days after receipt of a valid cancellation
notice from a buyer, to honor the
buyer’s cancellation by refunding all
payments made under the contract,
returning any traded-in property,
cancelling and returning any security
interests created in the transaction, and
notifying the buyer whether the seller
2 37 FR 22933 (Oct. 26, 1972); 60 FR 54180 (Oct.
20, 1995).
3 A ‘‘door-to-door sale’’ includes sales made at a
place other than the place of business of the seller
(e.g., sales at the buyer’s residence or at facilities
rented on a temporary or short term basis, such as
hotel or motel rooms, convention centers,
fairgrounds and restaurants, or sales at the buyer’s
workplace or in dormitory lounges). 16 CFR
429.0(a).
4 As a basis for promulgating the Rule, the
Commission identified five categories of complaints
directed to the industries utilizing door-to-door
marketing techniques: (1) deceptive tactics for
getting in the door; (2) high pressure sales tactics;
(3) misrepresentation of price, quality, and
characteristics of the product; (4) high prices for
low quality merchandise; and (5) the nuisance
created by the uninvited salesperson. 37 FR 22937940 (Oct. 26, 1972).
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
18171
intends to repossess or abandon any
shipped or delivered goods.
In addition, the Rule requires door-todoor sellers to furnish the buyer with a
completed receipt, or a copy of the sales
contract, containing a summary notice
informing the buyer of the right to
cancel the transaction, which must be in
the same language as that principally
used in the oral sales presentation.
Door-to-door sellers also must provide
the buyer with a completed cancellation
form, in duplicate, captioned either
‘‘Notice of Right to Cancel’’ or ‘‘Notice
of Cancellation,’’ one copy of which can
be returned by the buyer to the seller to
effect cancellation.
The Rule provides for certain
exemptions and excludes certain
transactions from the definition of the
term ‘‘door-to-door sale.’’ Specifically,
the Rule exempts: (1) sellers of
automobiles, vans, trucks or other motor
vehicles sold at auctions, tent sales or
other temporary places of business,
provided that the seller is a seller of
vehicles with a permanent place of
business; and (2) sellers of arts and
crafts sold at fairs or similar places. The
Rule also excludes certain transactions,
including, for example, transactions
conducted and consummated entirely
by mail or telephone, and without any
other contact between the buyer and
seller or its representative prior to the
delivery of goods or performance of
services; transactions pertaining to the
sale or rental of real property, to the sale
of insurance, or to the sale of securities
or commodities by a broker-dealer
registered with the Securities and
Exchange Commission; and transactions
in which the consumer is accorded the
right of rescission by the provisions of
the Consumer Credit Protection Act (15
U.S.C. 1635) or its regulations.
Finally, the Rule expressly preempts
any state laws or municipal ordinances
that are directly inconsistent with the
Rule, including, for example, state laws
or ordinances that impose a fee or
penalty on the buyer for exercising his
or her right under the Rule, or that do
not require the buyer to receive a notice
of his or her right to cancel the
transaction in substantially the same
form as provided in the Commission’s
Rule.
II. Regulatory Review of the Cooling-Off
Rule
The Commission periodically reviews
each of its rules and guides to seek
information about their costs and
benefits and their regulatory and
economic impact. The information
obtained during these periodic reviews
assists the Commission in identifying
rules and guides that either should be
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
18172
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 75 / Tuesday, April 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
tjames on PRODPC75 with PROPOSALS
retained without modification,
amended, or rescinded. This Notice
commences the Commission’s review of
the Cooling-Off Rule.
As part of its review, the Commission
seeks comment on a number of general
issues, including the continuing need
for the Rule, its economic impact, and
the effect of any technological,
economic, or industry changes on the
Rule.
III. Issues for Comment
The Commission requests written
comment on any or all of the following
questions. The Commission asks
commenters to make their responses as
specific as possible and to include both
a reference to the question being
answered and any references to
empirical data or other evidence
wherever available and appropriate.
(1) Is there a continuing need for the
Rule? Why or why not?
(2) Are there practices addressed by
the Rule for which regulation is no
longer needed? If so, explain and
provide supporting evidence.
(3) What benefits has the Rule
provided to consumers? What evidence
supports the asserted benefits?
(4) What modifications, if any, should
be made to the Rule to increase its
benefits to consumers?
(a) What evidence supports the
proposed modifications?
(b) How would these modifications
affect the costs and benefits of the Rule
for consumers?
(c) How would these modifications
affect the costs and benefits of the Rule
for businesses, and in particular for
small businesses?
(5) What impact has the Rule had on
the flow of truthful information to
consumers and on the flow of deceptive
information to consumers? What
evidence supports the impact that you
have identified?
(6) What significant costs has the Rule
imposed on consumers? What evidence
supports the asserted costs?
(7) Should any modifications be made
to the Rule to reduce the costs imposed
on consumers?
(a) What evidence supports the
proposed modifications?
(b) How would these modifications
affect the costs and benefits of the Rule
for consumers?
(c) How would these modifications
affect the costs and benefits of the Rule
for businesses, and in particular for
small businesses?
(8) Is the cancellation notice language
provided in the Rule easy for consumers
to read and understand? Why or why
not? Should the language be modified in
any way to improve consumers’
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:16 Apr 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
understanding of their rights and
obligations under the Rule? If so, how?
(9) What benefits has the Rule
provided to businesses, and in
particular to small businesses? What
evidence supports the asserted benefits?
(10) Should any modifications be
made to the Rule to increase its benefits
to businesses, and in particular to small
businesses?
(a) What evidence supports your
proposed modifications?
(b) How would these modifications
affect the costs and benefits of the Rule
for consumers?
(c) How would these modifications
affect the costs and benefits of the Rule
for businesses?
(11) What significant costs, including
costs of compliance, has the Rule
imposed on businesses, and in
particular on small businesses? What
evidence supports the asserted costs?
(12) Should any modifications be
made to the Rule to reduce the costs
imposed on businesses, and in
particular on small businesses?
(a) What evidence supports the
proposed modifications?
(b) How would these modifications
affect the costs and benefits of the Rule
for consumers?
(c) How would these modifications
affect the costs and benefits of the Rule
for businesses?
(13) What evidence is available
concerning the degree of industry
compliance with the Rule?
(14) Should the Rule be modified to
reflect any technological changes in
communications methods or methods
for buying and selling goods and
services, including, for example,
changes in the use of the Internet,
electronic mail, or mobile
communications? If so, how? What
evidence supports the proposed
modification?
(15) Have there been any significant
industry or economic changes since
1995 that warrant modifying the types
of sellers that are exempt from the Rule?
(16) What potentially unfair or
deceptive door-to-door sales practices, if
any, are not covered by the Rule that
should be? Provide evidence to support
the assertion.
(17) Does the Rule overlap or conflict
with other federal, state, or local laws or
regulations? If so, how?
(a) What evidence supports the
asserted conflicts?
(b) With reference to the asserted
conflicts, should the Rule be modified?
If so, why, and how? If not, why not?
(c) Is there evidence concerning
whether the Rule has assisted in
promoting national consistency with
respect to the regulation of door-to-door
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
sales? If so, please provide that
evidence.
(18) Have there been any significant
changes since 1995 in U.S. consumer
credit protection laws or other laws that
warrant modification of the Rule? If so,
explain and provide evidence to support
the proposed modification.
List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 429
Sales Made at Homes or at Certain
Other Locations; Trade practices.
Authority: Sections 1-23, FTC Act, 15
U.S.C. 41-58.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary
[FR Doc. E9–9135 Filed 4–20–09: 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Office of Labor-Management
Standards
29 CFR Parts 403 and 408
RIN 1215–AB62
Labor Organization Annual Financial
Reports
AGENCY: Office of Labor-Management
Standards, Employment Standards
Administration, Department of Labor.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking;
request for comments.
SUMMARY: This Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking proposes to withdraw a rule
published in the Federal Register on
January 21, 2009, pertaining to the filing
by labor organizations of the Form LM–
2, an annual financial report required by
the Labor-Management Reporting and
Disclosure Act of 1959, as amended
(LMRDA). On February 3, 2009, the
Department’s Employment Standards
Administration (ESA) Office of LaborManagement Standards (OLMS)
published a request for comments about
issues of law and policy raised by this
rule (74 FR 5899), consistent with
directions from the new Administration
to review all regulations that had not yet
become effective. On February 20, 2009,
the Department of Labor postponed the
effective date of this rule until April 21,
2009, to allow additional time for the
Department to review comments
received pursuant to the earlier notice,
which were due by March 5, 2009, and
to permit labor unions to delay
development and implementation of
costly changes to their accounting and
recordkeeping systems and procedures
pending this review. A further extension
of the rule’s effective date and an
E:\FR\FM\21APP1.SGM
21APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 75 (Tuesday, April 21, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18170-18172]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-9135]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 429
Trade Regulation Rule Concerning Cooling-Off Period for Sales
Made at Homes or at Certain Other Locations
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission (``FTC'' or ``Commission'').
ACTION: Request for public comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission requests public comment on its Trade Regulation
Rule Concerning Cooling-Off Period for Sales Made at Homes or at
Certain Other Locations (``Cooling-Off Rule'' or ``Rule''). The
Commission is soliciting public comment as part of the FTC's systematic
review of all current Commission regulations and guides.
DATES: Written comments concerning the Cooling-Off Rule must be
received no later than June 22, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments
electronically or in paper form. Comments should refer to ``Cooling-Off
Rule Regulatory Review, 16 CFR 429, Comment, Project No. P087109'' to
facilitate the organization of comments. Please note that your
comment--including your name and your state--will be placed on the
public record of this proceeding, including on the publicly accessible
FTC website, at (https://ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm.)
Because comments will be made public, they should not include any
sensitive personal information, such as an individual'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. Comments also
should not include any sensitive
[[Page 18171]]
health information, such as medical records or other individually
identifiable health information. In addition, comments should not
include any ``[t]rade 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 Commission Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2).
Comments containing material for which confidential treatment is
requested must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled
``Confidential,'' and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See also FTC 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 request 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),
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A comment filed in paper form should include the ``Cooling-Off Rule
Regulatory Review, 16 CFR 429, Comment, Project No. P087109'' reference
both in the text and on the envelope, and should be mailed or delivered
to the following address: Federal Trade Commission/Office of the
Secretary, Room H-135 (Annex M), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20580. The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in
paper form be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible,
because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission
is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions.
You also may consider submitting your comments in electronic form.
Comments filed in electronic form should be submitted by following the
instructions on the web-based form at the weblink (https://secure.commentworks.com/ftc-cooling-offrulereview). To ensure that the
Commission considers an electronic comment, you must file it on that
web-based form. If this Notice appears at (https://www.regulations.gov/search/index.jsp), you also may file an electronic comment through that
website. The Commission will consider all comments that regulations.gov
forwards to it. You also may visit the FTC website at https://www.ftc.gov to read the Notice and the news release describing it.
The Federal Trade Commission Act (``FTC Act'') and other laws the
Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to
consider and use in this proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will
consider all timely and responsive public comments that it receives,
whether filed in paper or electronic form. Comments received will be
available to the public on the FTC website, to the extent practicable,
at (https://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm.) As a matter of
discretion, the FTC makes every effort to remove home contact
information for individuals from the public comments it receives before
placing those comments on the FTC website. To read our policy on how we
handle the information you submit--including routine uses permitted by
the Privacy Act--please review the FTC's privacy policy, at (https://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.shtm.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sana Coleman Chriss, Attorney, (404)
656-1364, Federal Trade Commission, Southeast Region, 225 Peachtree
Street, NE, Suite 1500, Atlanta, Georgia 30303.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Cooling-Off Rule was promulgated by the Commission on October
26, 1972, and it was last amended on October 20, 1995.\2\ The Rule, as
amended, declares it an unfair and deceptive practice for a seller
engaged in a ``door-to-door sale''\3\ of consumer goods or services,
with a purchase price of $25 or more, to fail to provide the buyer with
certain oral and written disclosures regarding the buyer's right to
cancel the contract within three business days from the date of the
sales transaction.\4\ The Rule also requires such sellers, within 10
business days after receipt of a valid cancellation notice from a
buyer, to honor the buyer's cancellation by refunding all payments made
under the contract, returning any traded-in property, cancelling and
returning any security interests created in the transaction, and
notifying the buyer whether the seller intends to repossess or abandon
any shipped or delivered goods.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 37 FR 22933 (Oct. 26, 1972); 60 FR 54180 (Oct. 20, 1995).
\3\ A ``door-to-door sale'' includes sales made at a place other
than the place of business of the seller (e.g., sales at the buyer's
residence or at facilities rented on a temporary or short term
basis, such as hotel or motel rooms, convention centers, fairgrounds
and restaurants, or sales at the buyer's workplace or in dormitory
lounges). 16 CFR 429.0(a).
\4\ As a basis for promulgating the Rule, the Commission
identified five categories of complaints directed to the industries
utilizing door-to-door marketing techniques: (1) deceptive tactics
for getting in the door; (2) high pressure sales tactics; (3)
misrepresentation of price, quality, and characteristics of the
product; (4) high prices for low quality merchandise; and (5) the
nuisance created by the uninvited salesperson. 37 FR 22937-940 (Oct.
26, 1972).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Rule requires door-to-door sellers to furnish the
buyer with a completed receipt, or a copy of the sales contract,
containing a summary notice informing the buyer of the right to cancel
the transaction, which must be in the same language as that principally
used in the oral sales presentation. Door-to-door sellers also must
provide the buyer with a completed cancellation form, in duplicate,
captioned either ``Notice of Right to Cancel'' or ``Notice of
Cancellation,'' one copy of which can be returned by the buyer to the
seller to effect cancellation.
The Rule provides for certain exemptions and excludes certain
transactions from the definition of the term ``door-to-door sale.''
Specifically, the Rule exempts: (1) sellers of automobiles, vans,
trucks or other motor vehicles sold at auctions, tent sales or other
temporary places of business, provided that the seller is a seller of
vehicles with a permanent place of business; and (2) sellers of arts
and crafts sold at fairs or similar places. The Rule also excludes
certain transactions, including, for example, transactions conducted
and consummated entirely by mail or telephone, and without any other
contact between the buyer and seller or its representative prior to the
delivery of goods or performance of services; transactions pertaining
to the sale or rental of real property, to the sale of insurance, or to
the sale of securities or commodities by a broker-dealer registered
with the Securities and Exchange Commission; and transactions in which
the consumer is accorded the right of rescission by the provisions of
the Consumer Credit Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 1635) or its regulations.
Finally, the Rule expressly preempts any state laws or municipal
ordinances that are directly inconsistent with the Rule, including, for
example, state laws or ordinances that impose a fee or penalty on the
buyer for exercising his or her right under the Rule, or that do not
require the buyer to receive a notice of his or her right to cancel the
transaction in substantially the same form as provided in the
Commission's Rule.
II. Regulatory Review of the Cooling-Off Rule
The Commission periodically reviews each of its rules and guides to
seek information about their costs and benefits and their regulatory
and economic impact. The information obtained during these periodic
reviews assists the Commission in identifying rules and guides that
either should be
[[Page 18172]]
retained without modification, amended, or rescinded. This Notice
commences the Commission's review of the Cooling-Off Rule.
As part of its review, the Commission seeks comment on a number of
general issues, including the continuing need for the Rule, its
economic impact, and the effect of any technological, economic, or
industry changes on the Rule.
III. Issues for Comment
The Commission requests written comment on any or all of the
following questions. The Commission asks commenters to make their
responses as specific as possible and to include both a reference to
the question being answered and any references to empirical data or
other evidence wherever available and appropriate.
(1) Is there a continuing need for the Rule? Why or why not?
(2) Are there practices addressed by the Rule for which regulation
is no longer needed? If so, explain and provide supporting evidence.
(3) What benefits has the Rule provided to consumers? What evidence
supports the asserted benefits?
(4) What modifications, if any, should be made to the Rule to
increase its benefits to consumers?
(a) What evidence supports the proposed modifications?
(b) How would these modifications affect the costs and benefits of
the Rule for consumers?
(c) How would these modifications affect the costs and benefits of
the Rule for businesses, and in particular for small businesses?
(5) What impact has the Rule had on the flow of truthful
information to consumers and on the flow of deceptive information to
consumers? What evidence supports the impact that you have identified?
(6) What significant costs has the Rule imposed on consumers? What
evidence supports the asserted costs?
(7) Should any modifications be made to the Rule to reduce the
costs imposed on consumers?
(a) What evidence supports the proposed modifications?
(b) How would these modifications affect the costs and benefits of
the Rule for consumers?
(c) How would these modifications affect the costs and benefits of
the Rule for businesses, and in particular for small businesses?
(8) Is the cancellation notice language provided in the Rule easy
for consumers to read and understand? Why or why not? Should the
language be modified in any way to improve consumers' understanding of
their rights and obligations under the Rule? If so, how?
(9) What benefits has the Rule provided to businesses, and in
particular to small businesses? What evidence supports the asserted
benefits?
(10) Should any modifications be made to the Rule to increase its
benefits to businesses, and in particular to small businesses?
(a) What evidence supports your proposed modifications?
(b) How would these modifications affect the costs and benefits of
the Rule for consumers?
(c) How would these modifications affect the costs and benefits of
the Rule for businesses?
(11) What significant costs, including costs of compliance, has the
Rule imposed on businesses, and in particular on small businesses? What
evidence supports the asserted costs?
(12) Should any modifications be made to the Rule to reduce the
costs imposed on businesses, and in particular on small businesses?
(a) What evidence supports the proposed modifications?
(b) How would these modifications affect the costs and benefits of
the Rule for consumers?
(c) How would these modifications affect the costs and benefits of
the Rule for businesses?
(13) What evidence is available concerning the degree of industry
compliance with the Rule?
(14) Should the Rule be modified to reflect any technological
changes in communications methods or methods for buying and selling
goods and services, including, for example, changes in the use of the
Internet, electronic mail, or mobile communications? If so, how? What
evidence supports the proposed modification?
(15) Have there been any significant industry or economic changes
since 1995 that warrant modifying the types of sellers that are exempt
from the Rule?
(16) What potentially unfair or deceptive door-to-door sales
practices, if any, are not covered by the Rule that should be? Provide
evidence to support the assertion.
(17) Does the Rule overlap or conflict with other federal, state,
or local laws or regulations? If so, how?
(a) What evidence supports the asserted conflicts?
(b) With reference to the asserted conflicts, should the Rule be
modified? If so, why, and how? If not, why not?
(c) Is there evidence concerning whether the Rule has assisted in
promoting national consistency with respect to the regulation of door-
to-door sales? If so, please provide that evidence.
(18) Have there been any significant changes since 1995 in U.S.
consumer credit protection laws or other laws that warrant modification
of the Rule? If so, explain and provide evidence to support the
proposed modification.
List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 429
Sales Made at Homes or at Certain Other Locations; Trade practices.
Authority: Sections 1-23, FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 41-58.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary
[FR Doc. E9-9135 Filed 4-20-09: 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-S