Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request, 53500-53503 [E9-25030]
Download as PDF
53500
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 200 / Monday, October 19, 2009 / Notices
can be obtained by contacting FASAB at
(202) 512–7350.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Wendy Payne, Executive Director, at
(202) 512–7350.
Authority: Federal Advisory Committee
Act, Public Law 92–463.
Dated: October 14, 2009.
Charles Jackson,
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E9–25104 Filed 10–16–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1610–02–P
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
Sunshine Act Notices
DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, October 20,
2009, at 10 a.m.
PLACE: 999 E Street, NW., Washington,
DC.
STATUS: This meeting will be closed to
the public.
ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED:
Compliance matters pursuant to 2
U.S.C. 437g.
Audits conducted pursuant to 2 U.S.C.
437g, 438(b), and Title 26, U.S.C.
Matters concerning participation in civil
actions or proceedings or arbitration.
Internal personnel rules and procedures
or matters affecting a particular
employee.
PERSON TO CONTACT FOR INFORMATION:
Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone:
(202) 694–1220.
Darlene Harris,
Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9–25050 Filed 10–16–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715–01–M
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Change in Bank Control Notices;
Acquisition of Shares of Bank or Bank
Holding Companies
The notificants listed below have
applied under the Change in Bank
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and
§ 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12
CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank
holding company. The factors that are
considered in acting on the notices are
set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12
U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
The notices are available for
immediate inspection at the Federal
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices
also will be available for inspection at
the office of the Board of Governors.
Interested persons may express their
views in writing to the Reserve Bank
indicated for that notice or to the offices
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:51 Oct 16, 2009
Jkt 220001
of the Board of Governors. Comments
must be received not later than
November 3, 2009.
A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas
City (Todd Offenbacker, Assistant Vice
President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas
City, Missouri 64198–0001:
1. The Bonita M. Hegemann
Irrevocable Trust, Newman Grove,
Nebraska, and Bonita M. Hegemann,
Lindsay, Nebraska, and James B.
Hegemann, Newman Grove, Nebraska,
as trustees; to acquire voting shares of
Lindsay State Company, and thereby
indirectly acquire voting shares of Bank
of Lindsay, both of Lindsay, Nebraska.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, October 14, 2009.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E9–25045 Filed 10–16–09; 8:45 am]
Governors not later than November 13,
2009.
A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas
City (Todd Offenbacker, Assistant Vice
President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas
City, Missouri 64198–0001:
1. BancFirst Corporation, Oklahoma
City, Oklahoma; to acquire 100 percent
of the voting shares of First Jones
Bancorporation, Inc., and thereby
indirectly acquire voting shares of First
State Bank, both of Jones, Oklahoma.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, October 14, 2009.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E9–25044 Filed 10–16–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210–01–S
BILLING CODE 6210–01–S
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request
Formations of, Acquisitions by, and
Mergers of Bank Holding Companies
The companies listed in this notice
have applied to the Board for approval,
pursuant to the Bank Holding Company
Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.)
(BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part
225), and all other applicable statutes
and regulations to become a bank
holding company and/or to acquire the
assets or the ownership of, control of, or
the power to vote shares of a bank or
bank holding company and all of the
banks and nonbanking companies
owned by the bank holding company,
including the companies listed below.
The applications listed below, as well
as other related filings required by the
Board, are available for immediate
inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank
indicated. The applications also will be
available for inspection at the offices of
the Board of Governors. Interested
persons may express their views in
writing on the standards enumerated in
the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the
proposal also involves the acquisition of
a nonbanking company, the review also
includes whether the acquisition of the
nonbanking company complies with the
standards in section 4 of the BHC Act
(12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise
noted, nonbanking activities will be
conducted throughout the United States.
Additional information on all bank
holding companies may be obtained
from the National Information Center
website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
Unless otherwise noted, comments
regarding each of these applications
must be received at the Reserve Bank
indicated or the offices of the Board of
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission
(‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’).
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The information collection
requirements described below will be
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) for review, as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act (‘‘PRA’’). The FTC seeks public
comments on its proposal to extend
through January 31, 2013 the current
OMB clearance for information
collection requirements contained in its
Mail or Telephone Order Merchandise
Trade Regulation Rule (‘‘MTOR’’ or
‘‘Rule’’). That clearance expires on
January 31, 2010.
DATES: Comments must be filed by
December 18, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
invited to submit written comments
electronically or in paper form by
following the instructions in the
Request for Comments part of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section below. Comments in electronic
form should be submitted by using the
following weblink: (https://
public.commentworks.com/ftc/
MTORpra) (and following the
instructions on the web-based form).
Comments filed in paper form should be
mailed or delivered to the following
address: Federal Trade Commission,
Office of the Secretary, Room H-135
(Annex J), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue,
N.W., Washington, DC 20580, in the
manner detailed in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section below.
E:\FR\FM\19OCN1.SGM
19OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 200 / Monday, October 19, 2009 / Notices
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information
should be addressed to Jock Chung,
Attorney, Division of Enforcement,
Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal
Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania
Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580,
(202) 326-2984.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Request for Comments:
Interested parties are invited to
submit written comments electronically
or in paper form. Comments should
refer to ‘‘Mail or Telephone Order
Merchandise Trade Regulation Rule:
FTC File No. R511929,’’ 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://www.ftc.gov/os/
publiccomments.shtm).
Because comments will be made
public, they should not include any
sensitive personal information, such as
any 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 health information, such as
medical records or other individually
identifiable health information. In
addition, comments should not include
‘‘[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 Federal Trade Commission
Act (‘‘FTC Act’’), 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and
FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2).
Comments containing matter 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
Because paper mail addressed to the
FTC is subject to delay due to
heightened security screening, please
consider submitting your comments in
electronic form. Comments filed in
electronic form should be submitted
using the following weblink: (https://
public.commentworks.com/ftc/
MTORpra) (and following the
instructions on the web-based form). To
1 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 FTC
Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:51 Oct 16, 2009
Jkt 220001
ensure that the Commission considers
an electronic comment, you must file it
on the web-based form at the weblink
(https://public.commentworks.com/ftc/
MTORpra). If this Notice appears at
(www.regulations.gov/search/index.jsp),
you may also file an electronic comment
through that website. The Commission
will consider all comments that
regulations.gov forwards to it. You may
also visit the FTC Website at (https://
www.ftc.gov) to read the Notice and the
news release describing it.
A comment filed in paper form
should include the reference ‘‘Mail or
Telephone Order Merchandise Trade
Regulation Rule: FTC File No.
R511929,’’ 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 J), 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, DC 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.
The FTC Act and other laws that the
Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to
consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. The Commission will
consider all timely and responsive
public comments that it receives,
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. 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.shtm).
Under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521,
federal agencies must obtain approval
from OMB for each collection of
information they conduct or sponsor.
‘‘Collection of information’’ means
agency requests or requirements that
members of the public submit reports,
keep records, or provide information to
a third party. 44 U.S.C. 3502(3); 5 CFR
1320.3(c). As required by section
3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the FTC is
providing this opportunity for public
comment before requesting that OMB
extend the existing paperwork clearance
for the regulations noted herein.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
53501
The FTC invites comments on: (1)
whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden of the proposed collection
of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (4) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information
technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses.
Background:
The MTOR, 16 CFR Part 435, was
promulgated in 1975 in response to
consumer complaints that many
merchants were failing to ship
merchandise ordered by mail on time,
failing to ship at all, or failing to provide
prompt refunds for unshipped
merchandise. A second rulemaking
proceeding in 1993 demonstrated that
the delayed shipment and refund
problems of the mail order industry
were also being experienced by
consumers who ordered merchandise
over the telephone. Accordingly, the
Commission amended the Rule,
effective on March 1, 1994, to include
merchandise ordered by telephone,
including by telefax or by computer
through the use of a modem (e.g.,
Internet sales), and the Rule was then
renamed the ‘‘Mail or Telephone Order
Merchandise Rule.’’
Generally, the MTOR requires a
merchant to: (1) have a reasonable basis
for any express or implied shipment
representation made in soliciting the
sale; (2) ship within the time period
promised and, if no time period is
promised, within 30 days; (3) notify the
consumer and obtain the consumer’s
consent to any delay in shipment; and
(4) make prompt and full refunds when
the consumer exercises a cancellation
option or the merchant is unable to meet
the Rule’s other requirements.2
The notice provisions in the Rule
require a merchant who is unable to
ship within the promised shipment time
2 The MTOR does not impose a recordkeeping
requirements per se. 16 CFR § 435.1(d) provides
that, in an action for noncompliance, the absence
of records that establish that a respondent-seller
uses systems and procedures to assure compliance
will create a rebuttable presumption that the seller
was not compliant, but the MTOR does not require
a compliant seller to maintain any records.
E:\FR\FM\19OCN1.SGM
19OCN1
53502
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 200 / Monday, October 19, 2009 / Notices
Assuming this growth rate continues,
the average number of established
businesses during the three-year period
for which OMB clearance is sought for
the Rule would be 41,760.7
Accordingly, staff estimates industry
hours to comply with the MTOR during
each year of the three-year OMB
clearance period by then will be:
Burden Statement:
Estimated total annual hours burden:
2,401,000 hours (rounded to the nearest
thousand)
In its 2006 PRA-related FEDERAL
REGISTER Notices3 and corresponding
submission to OMB, FTC staff estimated
that established companies each spend
an average of 50 hours per year on
compliance with the Rule, and that new
industry entrants spend an average of
230 hours (an industry estimate) for
compliance measures associated with
start-up.4 Thus, the total estimated
hours burden was calculated by
multiplying the estimated number of
established companies x 50 hours,
multiplying the estimated number of
new entrants x 230 hours, and adding
the two totals.
No provisions in the Rule have been
amended or changed since staff’s prior
submission to OMB. Thus, the Rule’s
disclosure requirements remain the
same. Since then, however, the number
of businesses engaged in the sale of
merchandise by mail or by telephone
has changed. Data from the U.S.
Department of Commerce 2009
Statistical Abstract5 indicates that
between 2000 and 2005 the number of
businesses subject to the MTOR grew
from 26,800 to 33,600, or an average
increase of 1,360 new businesses a year
[(33,600 businesses in 2005 - 26,800
businesses in 2000) ÷ 5 years].6
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
or 30 days to notify the consumer of a
revised date and his or her right to
cancel the order and obtain a prompt
refund. Delays beyond the revised
shipment date also trigger a notification
requirement to consumers. When the
MTOR requires the merchant to make a
refund and the consumer has paid by
credit card, the Rule also requires the
merchant to notify the consumer either
that any charge to the consumer’s charge
account will be reversed or that the
merchant will take no action that will
result in a charge.
3 71 FR 60530 (Oct. 13, 2006); 71 FR 77751 (Dec.
27, 2006).
4 Most of the estimated start-up time relates to the
development and installation of computer systems
geared to more efficiently handle customer orders.
5 See Table 1008, ‘‘Retail Trade Establishments,
Employees and Payroll: 2000 and 2005,’’ U. S.
Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United
States: 2009 (128th Edition), Washington, DC, 2008
((https://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/tables/
09s1008.pdf)).
6 Conceptually, this might understate the number
of new entrants in that it does not factor in the
possibility that established businesses from an
earlier year’s comparison might have exited the
market preceding the later year of measurement.
Given the virtually unlimited diversity of retail
establishments, it is very unlikely that there is a
reliable external measure of such exit; nonetheless,
as in the past, the Commission invites public
comment that might better inform these estimates.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:51 Oct 16, 2009
Jkt 220001
Year:
Established
Businesses
New Entrants
2010
40,400
1,360
2011
41,760
1,360
2012
43,120
1,360
Average:
41,760
1,360
In an average year during the threeyear OMB clearance period, staff
estimates that established businesses
and new entrants will devote 2,401,000
hours, rounded to the nearest thousand,
to comply with the MTOR [(41,760
established businesses x 50 hours) +
(1,360 new entrants x 230 hours) =
2,400,800].
The estimated PRA burden per
merchant to comply with the MTOR is
likely overstated. The mail-order
industry has been subject to the basic
provisions of the Rule since 1976 and
the telephone-order industry since 1994.
Thus, businesses have had several years
(and some have had decades) to
integrate compliance systems into their
business procedures. Moreover,
arguably much of the estimated time
burden for disclosure-related
compliance would be incurred even
absent the Rule. Industry trade
associations and individual witnesses
have consistently taken the position that
compliance with the MTOR is widely
regarded by direct marketers as being
good business practice. Providing
consumers with notice about the status
of their orders fosters consumer loyalty
and encourages repeat purchases, which
are important to direct marketers’
success. Accordingly, the Rule’s
notification requirements would be
followed in any event by most
merchants to meet consumer
expectations regarding timely shipment,
notification of delay, and prompt and
full refunds. Thus, it appears that much
of the time and expense associated with
7 As noted above, the existing OMB clearance for
the Rule expires on January 31, 2010 and the FTC
is seeking to extend the clearance through January
31, 2013. The average number of established
businesses during the three-year clearance period
was determined as follows: [(33,600 businesses in
2005 + (1,360 new entrants per year x 5 years)) +
(33,600 businesses in 2005 + (1,360 new entrants
per year x 6 years)) + (33,600 businesses in 2005
+ (1,360 new entrants per year x 7 years))]÷3 years.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Rule compliance may not constitute
‘‘burden’’ under the PRA.8
Estimated labor costs: $47,108,000
(rounded to the nearest thousand)
FTC staff derived labor costs by
applying appropriate hourly cost figures
to the burden hours described above.
According to the most recent mean
hourly income data available from the
Bureau of Labor and Statistics, average
payroll in 2008 for miscellaneous sales
and related workers was $19.62/hr.
Because the bulk of the burden of
complying with the MTOR is borne by
clerical personnel, staff believes that the
average hourly payroll figure for
miscellaneous sales and related workers
is an appropriate measure of a direct
marketer’s average labor cost to comply
with the Rule. Thus, the total annual
labor cost to new and established
businesses for MTOR compliance
during the three-year period for which
OMB approval is sought would be
approximately $47,108,000 (2,401,000
hours x $19.62/hr.), rounded to the
nearest thousand. Relative to direct
industry sales, this total is negligible.9
Estimated annual non-labor cost
burden: $0 or minimal
The applicable requirements impose
minimal start-up costs, as businesses
subject to the Rule generally have or
obtain necessary equipment for other
business purposes, i.e., inventory and
order management, and customer
relations. For the same reason, staff
anticipates printing and copying costs to
be minimal, especially given that
telephone order merchants have
increasingly turned to electronic
communications to notify consumers of
delay and to provide cancellation
options. Staff believes that the above
requirements necessitate ongoing,
regular training so that covered entities
8 Conceivably, in the three years since the FTC’s
most recent clearance request to OMB for this Rule,
many businesses have upgraded the information
management systems needed to comply with the
Rule and to track orders more effectively. These
upgrades, however, were primarily prompted by the
industry’s need to deal with growing consumer
demand for merchandise (resulting, in part, from
increased public acceptance of making purchases
over the telephone and, more recently, the Internet).
Accordingly, most companies now provide updated
order information of the kind required by the Rule
in their ordinary course of business. Under the
OMB regulation implementing the PRA, burden is
defined to exclude any effort that would be
expended regardless of any regulatory requirement.
5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2).
9 Based on a $13.786 billion average yearly
increase in sales for ‘‘electronic shopping and mailorder houses’’ from 2000 to 2007 (according to the
2009 Statistical Abstract), staff estimates that total
mail or telephone order sales to consumers in the
three-year period for which OMB clearance is
sought will average $265.5 billion. Thus, the
projected average labor cost for MTOR compliance
by existing and new businesses for that period
would amount to less than 0.018% of sales.
E:\FR\FM\19OCN1.SGM
19OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 200 / Monday, October 19, 2009 / Notices
stay current and have a clear
understanding of federal mandates, but
that this would be a small portion of
and subsumed within the ordinary
training that employees receive apart
from that associated with the
information collected under the Rule.
David C. Shonka,
Acting General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E9–25030 Filed 10–16–09: 10:32
am]
Billing code: 6750–01–S
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
[File No. 092 3139]
Onyx Graphics, Inc.; Analysis of
Proposed Consent Orders To Aid
Public Comment
Federal Trade Commission.
Proposed Consent Agreement.
AGENCY:
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this
matter settles alleged violations of
federal law prohibiting unfair or
deceptive acts or practices or unfair
methods of competition. The attached
Analysis to Aid Public Comment
describes both the allegations in the
draft complaint and the terms of the
consent order — embodied in the
consent agreement — that would settle
these allegations.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before November 5, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
invited to submit written comments
electronically or in paper form.
Comments should refer to ‘‘Onyx
Graphics, File No. 092 3139’’ 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://www.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
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:51 Oct 16, 2009
Jkt 220001
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), 16 CFR 4.9(c).1
Because paper mail addressed to the
FTC is subject to delay due to
heightened security screening, please
consider submitting your comments in
electronic form. Comments filed in
electronic form should be submitted by
using the following weblink: (https://
public.commentworks.com/ftc/
onyxgraphics) 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 weblink:
(https://public.commentworks.com/ftc/
onyxgraphics). If this Notice appears at
(https://www.regulations.gov/search/
index.jsp), you may also file an
electronic comment through that
website. The Commission will consider
all comments that regulations.gov
forwards to it. You may also visit the
FTC website at (https://www.ftc.gov/) to
read the Notice and the news release
describing it.
A comment filed in paper form
should include the ‘‘Onyx Graphics,
File No. 092 3139’’ 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 D), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW, Washington, DC 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.
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
1 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 FTC
Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c).
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
53503
(https://www.ftc.gov/os/
publiccomments.shtm). As a matter of
discretion, the Commission makes every
effort to remove home contact
information for individuals from the
public comments it receives before
placing those comments on the FTC
website. 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.shtm).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Molly Crawford (202-326-3076) or Katie
Ratte’ (202-326-3514), Bureau of
Consumer Protection, 600 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20580.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade
Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.
46(f), and § 2.34 the Commission Rules
of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is
hereby given that the above-captioned
consent agreement containing a consent
order to cease and desist, having been
filed with and accepted, subject to final
approval, by the Commission, has been
placed on the public record for a period
of thirty (30) days. The following
Analysis to Aid Public Comment
describes the terms of the consent
agreement, and the allegations in the
complaint. An electronic copy of the
full text of the consent agreement
package can be obtained from the FTC
Home Page (for October 6, 2009), on the
World Wide Web, at (https://
www.ftc.gov/os/actions.shtm). A paper
copy can be obtained from the FTC
Public Reference Room, Room 130-H,
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,
Washington, D.C. 20580, either in
person or by calling (202) 326-2222.
Public comments are invited, and may
be filed with the Commission in either
paper or electronic form. All comments
should be filed as prescribed in the
ADDRESSES section above, and must be
received on or before the date specified
in the DATES section.
Analysis of Agreement Containing
Consent Order To Aid Public Comment
The Federal Trade Commission
(‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) has accepted,
subject to final approval, a consent
agreement from Onyx Graphics, Inc.
(‘‘Onyx Graphics’’).
The proposed consent order has been
placed on the public record for thirty
(30) days for receipt of comments by
interested persons. Comments received
during this period will become part of
the public record. After thirty (30) days,
the Commission will again review the
agreement and the comments received,
and will decide whether it should
withdraw from the agreement and take
E:\FR\FM\19OCN1.SGM
19OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 200 (Monday, October 19, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53500-53503]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25030]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 will
be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for
review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (``PRA''). The FTC
seeks public comments on its proposal to extend through January 31,
2013 the current OMB clearance for information collection requirements
contained in its Mail or Telephone Order Merchandise Trade Regulation
Rule (``MTOR'' or ``Rule''). That clearance expires on January 31,
2010.
DATES: Comments must be filed by December 18, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments
electronically or in paper form by following the instructions in the
Request for Comments part of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below. Comments in electronic form should be submitted by using the
following weblink: (https://public.commentworks.com/ftc/MTORpra) (and
following the instructions on the web-based form). Comments filed in
paper form should be mailed or delivered to the following address:
Federal Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-135 (Annex
J), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580, in the manner
detailed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below.
[[Page 53501]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information
should be addressed to Jock Chung, Attorney, Division of Enforcement,
Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326-2984.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments:
Interested parties are invited to submit written comments
electronically or in paper form. Comments should refer to ``Mail or
Telephone Order Merchandise Trade Regulation Rule: FTC File No.
R511929,'' 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://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm).
Because comments will be made public, they should not include any
sensitive personal information, such as any 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 health information, such as medical
records or other individually identifiable health information. In
addition, comments should not include ``[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 Federal Trade Commission Act (``FTC Act''), 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and
FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2). Comments containing matter 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\ 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 FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR
4.9(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because paper mail addressed to the FTC is subject to delay due to
heightened security screening, please consider submitting your comments
in electronic form. Comments filed in electronic form should be
submitted using the following weblink: (https://public.commentworks.com/ftc/MTORpra) (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
weblink (https://public.commentworks.com/ftc/MTORpra). If this Notice
appears at (www.regulations.gov/search/index.jsp), you may also file an
electronic comment through that website. The Commission will consider
all comments that regulations.gov forwards to it. You may also visit
the FTC Website at (https://www.ftc.gov) to read the Notice and the news
release describing it.
A comment filed in paper form should include the reference ``Mail
or Telephone Order Merchandise Trade Regulation Rule: FTC File No.
R511929,'' 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 J), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, DC 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.
The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission administers permit
the collection of public comments to consider and use in this
proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely and
responsive public comments that it receives, 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. 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.shtm).
Under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501-3521, federal agencies must obtain
approval from OMB for each collection of information they conduct or
sponsor. ``Collection of information'' means agency requests or
requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records,
or provide information to a third party. 44 U.S.C. 3502(3); 5 CFR
1320.3(c). As required by section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, the FTC is
providing this opportunity for public comment before requesting that
OMB extend the existing paperwork clearance for the regulations noted
herein.
The FTC invites comments on: (1) whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the agency, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses.
Background:
The MTOR, 16 CFR Part 435, was promulgated in 1975 in response to
consumer complaints that many merchants were failing to ship
merchandise ordered by mail on time, failing to ship at all, or failing
to provide prompt refunds for unshipped merchandise. A second
rulemaking proceeding in 1993 demonstrated that the delayed shipment
and refund problems of the mail order industry were also being
experienced by consumers who ordered merchandise over the telephone.
Accordingly, the Commission amended the Rule, effective on March 1,
1994, to include merchandise ordered by telephone, including by telefax
or by computer through the use of a modem (e.g., Internet sales), and
the Rule was then renamed the ``Mail or Telephone Order Merchandise
Rule.''
Generally, the MTOR requires a merchant to: (1) have a reasonable
basis for any express or implied shipment representation made in
soliciting the sale; (2) ship within the time period promised and, if
no time period is promised, within 30 days; (3) notify the consumer and
obtain the consumer's consent to any delay in shipment; and (4) make
prompt and full refunds when the consumer exercises a cancellation
option or the merchant is unable to meet the Rule's other
requirements.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The MTOR does not impose a recordkeeping requirements per
se. 16 CFR Sec. 435.1(d) provides that, in an action for
noncompliance, the absence of records that establish that a
respondent-seller uses systems and procedures to assure compliance
will create a rebuttable presumption that the seller was not
compliant, but the MTOR does not require a compliant seller to
maintain any records.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The notice provisions in the Rule require a merchant who is unable
to ship within the promised shipment time
[[Page 53502]]
or 30 days to notify the consumer of a revised date and his or her
right to cancel the order and obtain a prompt refund. Delays beyond the
revised shipment date also trigger a notification requirement to
consumers. When the MTOR requires the merchant to make a refund and the
consumer has paid by credit card, the Rule also requires the merchant
to notify the consumer either that any charge to the consumer's charge
account will be reversed or that the merchant will take no action that
will result in a charge.
Burden Statement:
Estimated total annual hours burden: 2,401,000 hours (rounded to
the nearest thousand)
In its 2006 PRA-related Federal Register Notices\3\ and
corresponding submission to OMB, FTC staff estimated that established
companies each spend an average of 50 hours per year on compliance with
the Rule, and that new industry entrants spend an average of 230 hours
(an industry estimate) for compliance measures associated with start-
up.\4\ Thus, the total estimated hours burden was calculated by
multiplying the estimated number of established companies x 50 hours,
multiplying the estimated number of new entrants x 230 hours, and
adding the two totals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 71 FR 60530 (Oct. 13, 2006); 71 FR 77751 (Dec. 27, 2006).
\4\ Most of the estimated start-up time relates to the
development and installation of computer systems geared to more
efficiently handle customer orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
No provisions in the Rule have been amended or changed since
staff's prior submission to OMB. Thus, the Rule's disclosure
requirements remain the same. Since then, however, the number of
businesses engaged in the sale of merchandise by mail or by telephone
has changed. Data from the U.S. Department of Commerce 2009 Statistical
Abstract\5\ indicates that between 2000 and 2005 the number of
businesses subject to the MTOR grew from 26,800 to 33,600, or an
average increase of 1,360 new businesses a year [(33,600 businesses in
2005 - 26,800 businesses in 2000) / 5 years].\6\ Assuming this growth
rate continues, the average number of established businesses during the
three-year period for which OMB clearance is sought for the Rule would
be 41,760.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Table 1008, ``Retail Trade Establishments, Employees and
Payroll: 2000 and 2005,'' U. S. Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract
of the United States: 2009 (128th Edition), Washington, DC, 2008
((https://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/tables/09s1008.pdf)).
\6\ Conceptually, this might understate the number of new
entrants in that it does not factor in the possibility that
established businesses from an earlier year's comparison might have
exited the market preceding the later year of measurement. Given the
virtually unlimited diversity of retail establishments, it is very
unlikely that there is a reliable external measure of such exit;
nonetheless, as in the past, the Commission invites public comment
that might better inform these estimates.
\7\ As noted above, the existing OMB clearance for the Rule
expires on January 31, 2010 and the FTC is seeking to extend the
clearance through January 31, 2013. The average number of
established businesses during the three-year clearance period was
determined as follows: [(33,600 businesses in 2005 + (1,360 new
entrants per year x 5 years)) + (33,600 businesses in 2005 + (1,360
new entrants per year x 6 years)) + (33,600 businesses in 2005 +
(1,360 new entrants per year x 7 years))]/3 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, staff estimates industry hours to comply with the MTOR
during each year of the three-year OMB clearance period by then will
be:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New
Year: Established Businesses Entrants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010.............................................. 40,400............................................ 1,360
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011.............................................. 41,760............................................ 1,360
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012.............................................. 43,120............................................ 1,360
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average:.......................................... 41,760............................................ 1,360
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In an average year during the three-year OMB clearance period,
staff estimates that established businesses and new entrants will
devote 2,401,000 hours, rounded to the nearest thousand, to comply with
the MTOR [(41,760 established businesses x 50 hours) + (1,360 new
entrants x 230 hours) = 2,400,800].
The estimated PRA burden per merchant to comply with the MTOR is
likely overstated. The mail-order industry has been subject to the
basic provisions of the Rule since 1976 and the telephone-order
industry since 1994. Thus, businesses have had several years (and some
have had decades) to integrate compliance systems into their business
procedures. Moreover, arguably much of the estimated time burden for
disclosure-related compliance would be incurred even absent the Rule.
Industry trade associations and individual witnesses have consistently
taken the position that compliance with the MTOR is widely regarded by
direct marketers as being good business practice. Providing consumers
with notice about the status of their orders fosters consumer loyalty
and encourages repeat purchases, which are important to direct
marketers' success. Accordingly, the Rule's notification requirements
would be followed in any event by most merchants to meet consumer
expectations regarding timely shipment, notification of delay, and
prompt and full refunds. Thus, it appears that much of the time and
expense associated with Rule compliance may not constitute ``burden''
under the PRA.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Conceivably, in the three years since the FTC's most recent
clearance request to OMB for this Rule, many businesses have
upgraded the information management systems needed to comply with
the Rule and to track orders more effectively. These upgrades,
however, were primarily prompted by the industry's need to deal with
growing consumer demand for merchandise (resulting, in part, from
increased public acceptance of making purchases over the telephone
and, more recently, the Internet). Accordingly, most companies now
provide updated order information of the kind required by the Rule
in their ordinary course of business. Under the OMB regulation
implementing the PRA, burden is defined to exclude any effort that
would be expended regardless of any regulatory requirement. 5 CFR
1320.3(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated labor costs: $47,108,000 (rounded to the nearest
thousand)
FTC staff derived labor costs by applying appropriate hourly cost
figures to the burden hours described above. According to the most
recent mean hourly income data available from the Bureau of Labor and
Statistics, average payroll in 2008 for miscellaneous sales and related
workers was $19.62/hr. Because the bulk of the burden of complying with
the MTOR is borne by clerical personnel, staff believes that the
average hourly payroll figure for miscellaneous sales and related
workers is an appropriate measure of a direct marketer's average labor
cost to comply with the Rule. Thus, the total annual labor cost to new
and established businesses for MTOR compliance during the three-year
period for which OMB approval is sought would be approximately
$47,108,000 (2,401,000 hours x $19.62/hr.), rounded to the nearest
thousand. Relative to direct industry sales, this total is
negligible.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Based on a $13.786 billion average yearly increase in sales
for ``electronic shopping and mail-order houses'' from 2000 to 2007
(according to the 2009 Statistical Abstract), staff estimates that
total mail or telephone order sales to consumers in the three-year
period for which OMB clearance is sought will average $265.5
billion. Thus, the projected average labor cost for MTOR compliance
by existing and new businesses for that period would amount to less
than 0.018% of sales.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated annual non-labor cost burden: $0 or minimal
The applicable requirements impose minimal start-up costs, as
businesses subject to the Rule generally have or obtain necessary
equipment for other business purposes, i.e., inventory and order
management, and customer relations. For the same reason, staff
anticipates printing and copying costs to be minimal, especially given
that telephone order merchants have increasingly turned to electronic
communications to notify consumers of delay and to provide cancellation
options. Staff believes that the above requirements necessitate
ongoing, regular training so that covered entities
[[Page 53503]]
stay current and have a clear understanding of federal mandates, but
that this would be a small portion of and subsumed within the ordinary
training that employees receive apart from that associated with the
information collected under the Rule.
David C. Shonka,
Acting General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E9-25030 Filed 10-16-09: 10:32 am]
Billing code: 6750-01-S