Agency Information Collection Activities; Request for OMB Review; Comment Request, 73640-73644 [2011-30434]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
73640
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 29, 2011 / Notices
The Federal Reserve will better align
these worksheets with other regulatory
report loan classification schemes,
thereby ensuring no overlap in reporting
requirements across FR Y–14 schedules.
Two commenters requested a change
to the allowance for loan and lease
losses (ALLL) referenced in the Income
Statement worksheet of the Summary
schedule to an allowance for credit loss
(ACL) reference, as that would be in line
with their practice of provisioning for
ALLL and for an allowance for
unfunded credit commitments. In order
to provide greater distinction between
the ALLL and that for off-balance sheet
credit exposures, the Federal Reserve
will add a memorandum item to the
Balance Sheet worksheet and adjust the
Income Statement worksheet to capture
a breakout of this component. These
adjustments will allow BHCs to provide
both pieces of the total allowance.
One commenter noted that, in
addition to net charge-offs, they
provision for neutral items and that the
allowance roll-forward doesn’t allow the
BHC to record these provision-neutral
impacts. The Federal Reserve agrees
with this comment and will add a data
item to the ALLL section to capture nonprovision or charge-off related changes
to the ALLL, making the section more
consistent with Schedule HI–B, Part II
of the FR Y–9C.
One commenter raised concerns about
the legal implications of disclosing
estimated litigation losses on a granular
basis on the Operations Risk worksheet
in the Summary schedule. The Federal
Reserve notes that a number of data
items collected on the FR Y–14A and Q,
including respondents’ projections, may
be considered trade secrets or
confidential supervisory information.
As such, respondents’ estimates of
litigation losses are expected to remain
confidential.7
In response to the comments noted
above related to the inconsistent
treatment of held for sale and held for
investment loans accounted for under a
fair value option, the Federal Reserve
will add a Fair Value Loan worksheet,
and a change to the income statement
instructions to capture the marks taken
on fair value loans. The Fair Value Loan
worksheet will capture the aggregate fair
values and unpaid principal balances of
loans classified as held for sale or held
for investment measured at fair value in
the following asset classes: first lien
7 The confidentiality of information submitted to
the Board under the data schedules and related
materials shall be determined in accordance with
applicable exemptions under the Freedom of
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and the Board’s
Rules Regarding Availability of Information (12 CFR
part 261).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Nov 28, 2011
Jkt 226001
mortgage, home equity line of credit,
credit card, auto loans and leases,
student loans, small business loans, and
other consumer loans. In addition, the
instructions for the Summary schedule
will be clarified to indicate that any
losses related to loans held for sale or
held for investment with the fair value
option should be reported on the
Income Statement worksheet of the
Summary schedule under ‘‘Other
Losses.’’
Finally, the Federal Reserve will
remove data items related to mortgage
servicing rights (MSRs) from the
Trading worksheet of the Summary
schedule to further reduce burden on
respondents. All MSR-related earnings,
including those captured in the trading
book, will be reported on the PPNR
worksheet of the Summary schedule.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System.
November 21, 2011.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2011–30666 Filed 11–28–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210–01–P
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Request for OMB Review;
Comment Request
Federal Trade Commission
(FTC or Commission).
ACTION: Notice and request for comment.
AGENCY:
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). The FTC is seeking public
comments on proposed information
requests to beverage alcohol advertisers
that will seek information concerning,
among other things, sales and marketing
expenditures, compliance with
voluntary advertising placement
provisions, digital marketing practices
and data collection, and lesser-known
media programs.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 29, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may
submit written comments by following
the instructions in the ‘‘Request for
Comments’’ part of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for copies of the collection of
information and supporting
documentation should be addressed to
Janet M. Evans, Attorney, 202–326–
2125, or Carolyn L. Hann, Attorney,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
202–326–2745, Division of Advertising
Practices, Bureau of Consumer
Protection, Federal Trade Commission.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FTC
has previously published reports on
voluntary advertising self-regulation by
the alcohol industry in September 1999,
September 2003, and June 2008.1 The
data contained in the reports were based
on information submitted to the
Commission, pursuant to compulsory
process, by U.S. beverage alcohol
advertisers. The FTC has authority to
compel production of this information
from advertisers under Section 6 of the
Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC
Act), 15 U.S.C. 46. The Commission
believes that it is in the public interest
to: (1) Collect updated data from alcohol
advertisers on sales and marketing
expenditures, compliance with
voluntary advertising placement
provisions, digital marketing practices
and data collection, and lesser-known
media programs; and (2) publish a
report on the data obtained.
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).
On February 25, 2011, the
Commission sought comment on the
information collection requirements
associated with this proposal. 76 FR
10596. (60-Day Notice). As required by
OMB regulations, 5 CFR part 1320, the
FTC is providing this second
opportunity for public comment while
seeking OMB approval for the collection
of information.
A. Public Comments/Consultation
Outside the Agency
The FTC received 71 comments in
response to the 60-Day Notice. Of these,
four comments favored and
substantively addressed the proposed
data collection. These comments were
submitted by: (1) State Attorneys
General representing 23 states and one
territory 2 (State AG); (2) the Center for
1 See FTC, Self-Regulation in the Alcohol Industry
(Sept. 1999), available at https://www.ftc.gov/
reports/alcohol/alcoholreport.shtm; FTC, Alcohol
Marketing and Advertising (Sept. 2003), available at
https://www.ftc.gov/os/2003/09/alcohol08report.pdf;
and FTC, Self-Regulation in the Alcohol Industry
(June 2008) (‘‘2008 FTC Alcohol Report’’), available
at https://www.ftc.gov/os/2008/06/
080626alcoholreport.pdf.
2 The State AGs represented: Arizona,
Connecticut, Delaware, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho,
Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Mississippi, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico,
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 29, 2011 / Notices
Alcohol Marketing and Youth (CAMY);
(3) the Center for Digital Democracy
(CDD); 3 and (4) University of
Connecticut School of Medicine (UConn
Medical School). One comment,
submitted by The Marin Institute,
offered substantive recommendations
but also expressed concerns about selfregulation.4 Two additional comments
offered limited recommendations
regarding the proposed data collection.5
The remaining 64 comments did not
substantively address the proposed data
collection.6
1. General Support for the Data
Collection
In its 60-Day Notice, the FTC sought
comments regarding whether the
proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the FTC.7 The State AG
and CAMY comments expressed strong
support for the FTC’s proposed data
collection. Specifically, they stated that
this information was essential to the
FTC’s performance of its regulatory
duties and in the public interest.
2. Suggestions for Improvements to
Proposed Information Collection
In its 60-Day Notice, the FTC invited
comments regarding ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected.8 The FTC
received substantive suggestions for
enhancing its proposed collection of
alcohol advertising data regarding the
following specifications: (1)
Expenditure data; (2) advertising
placement; and (3) digital marketing and
data collection. The FTC also received
several suggestions that did not fall
within a particular specification.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
a. Expenditure Data
In its 60-Day Notice, the FTC stated
that it would seek company data
regarding expenditures to advertise and
promote beverage alcohol in measured
and non-measured media. The State AG
and CAMY comments exhorted the FTC
to seek advertising and promotional
New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South
Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington,
and Wyoming.
3 CDD, Alcohol Marketing in the Digital Age (May
2010) (‘‘CDD White Paper’’). A private citizen also
submitted the CDD White Paper as an attachment
to her comment.
4 See further discussion about The Marin Institute
comment at Section A.3.c, below.
5 These were submitted by a private citizen in
Michigan (also referenced in note 3, above) and the
Mesilla Valley DWI Resource Center in New
Mexico. The recommendations in these comments
are discussed in notes 11 and 13, below.
6 See discussion at Section A.3., below.
7 See 60-Day Notice, 76 FR 10596, 10597 (Feb. 25,
2011).
8 See 60-Day Notice, id. at 10597.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Nov 28, 2011
Jkt 226001
expenditures from the alcohol industry
on an ‘‘ongoing and regular basis,’’
rather than intermittently. Both
comments explained that the media
landscape is changing daily. To
understand how and where industry is
advertising and to what extent the youth
are exposed, the comments argued, the
FTC should obtain these data from
industry every two to three years, if not
annually.9 The FTC will consider this
recommendation in the course of
developing its report.
b. Advertising Placement Issues
Until very recently, the voluntary
codes of the Beer Institute, the Distilled
Spirits Council of the United States,
and/or the Wine Institute (collectively,
‘‘voluntary codes’’) each stated 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’’).10
In the 60-Day Notice, the FTC stated
that it planned to seek data on
advertising placement, including
industry compliance with the 70%
placement standard.
The State AG and CAMY comments
encouraged the FTC to recommend that
the voluntary codes increase their
placement standard from 70% to 85%.11
Citing a 2004 recommendation by the
Institute of Medicine’s Committee on
Developing a Strategy to Reduce and
Prevent Underage Drinking, the State
AG and CAMY comments argued that
9 While the FTC has not sought these data on an
annual basis, it has been actively monitoring the
alcohol industry. The FTC has collected
expenditure data as part of its ongoing study and
report process since the late 1990s. These studies
have resulted in reports issued in 1999, 2003, and
2008. Since 2008, the staff has engaged in both
formal and informal monitoring of alcohol selfregulatory efforts. For example, between 2009 and
2010, the Commission issued 6(b) Orders to six
mid-sized alcohol companies.
10 On May 26, 2011, the Beer Institute and the
Distilled Spirits Council of the United States
(‘‘DISCUS’’) each announced that they would
increase their placement standard from 70% to
71.6% to reflect the recently published results of
the 2010 U.S. Census data, which showed that 71.6
percent of the U.S. population is 21 years of age and
older. See Beer Institute press release, ‘‘Beer
Institute Revises Advertising Standard Based on
New U.S. Census Data’’ (May 26, 2011), available
at https://www.beerinstitute.org/BeerInstitute/files/
ccLibraryFiles/Filename/000000001167/
Updated%20Ad%20Code%20with%20Census%
20Data%20-%20FINAL%205-26-11.pdf; DISCUS,
‘‘Distilled Spirits Industry Updates Advertising
Guidelines Based on Newly Released Census Data’’
(May 26, 2011), available at https://www.discus.org/
media/press/article.asp?NEWS_ID=631. To date,
the Wine Institute has not announced any changes
to its placement standard.
11 This recommendation to increase the
placement standard to 85% was echoed by a private
commenter from Michigan.
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
73641
youth exposure to alcohol advertising
on television has grown since 2004 at a
rate faster than that of adults or young
adults. The State AG and CAMY
comments also highlighted as an
example Beam Global Spirits & Wine
Inc., an alcohol company that since
2007 has voluntarily and gradually
increased its placement standard to 85%
for its aggregate average by brand and by
medium. The FTC will consider these
recommendations in the course of
developing its report.
The State AG and CAMY comments
recommended that the FTC seek brandspecific placement data and provide a
brand analysis in its upcoming report.
The UConn Medical School comment
also recommended that the FTC seek
data in connection with specific ads or
ad campaigns. The Commission’s
compulsory process orders to alcohol
companies will, as they have in the past,
collect advertising placement data for
each individual ad for individual
brands. In the course of reviewing these
data, the FTC will evaluate whether
specific brands have placement
compliance problems. Nonetheless,
because Section 6(f) of the FTC Act,
15 U.S.C. 46(f), protects confidential
commercial information that is
submitted to the agency, the
Commission cannot publicly identify
advertising data on particular brands or
companies.
c. Digital Marketing and Data Collection
In its 60-Day Notice, the FTC stated
that it would seek information from the
alcohol industry about data collection
efforts, including data collection in
connection with digital and social
media marketing, and efforts to avoid
collection of data from youth under the
legal drinking age of 21. The FTC
received extensive and detailed
recommendations regarding its
proposed collection of digital marketing
and data collection. These
recommendations were provided by the
CDD, the State AGs, CAMY, and The
Marin Institute.
The CDD White Paper expressed
concern that online advertising has
evolved without sufficient public
analysis or regulatory oversight. It
outlined key concepts and practices that
have been guiding the growth of
interactive marketing in the alcohol
industry, including the creation of a
‘‘high-definition media and marketing
ecosystem’’ 12 that integrates
12 It particularly noted three aspects of the highdefinition media and marketing ecosystem: (a)
Engagement, i.e., the creation of a marketing
environment where consumers interact with brands
and integrate them into their personal and social
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
Continued
29NON1
73642
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 29, 2011 / Notices
advertising, editorial content, audience
measurement, and content delivery; the
growth of distribution platforms such as
social media, online video channels,
and virtual worlds; and targeted
marketing to the African-American and
Latino communities.
The State AG comment observed that
alcohol advertising has substantially
increased its presence online. The
comment identified one brand that
advertises solely in social media and
another company that employed
‘‘extensive, world-wide use of social
media’’ for a recent World Cup-related
advertising campaign.13 The CAMY
comment echoed the concerns cited by
the State AG comment.
Accordingly, the CDD, State AG,
CAMY, and The Marin Institute
comments requested that the FTC seek
a variety of information regarding digital
marketing and data collection practices.
These practices included: Marketing
and data collection on both corporatesponsored Web sites as well as Web
sites operated by third parties, ageverification mechanisms on such Web
sites, and marketing practices on social
media sites.
The FTC’s information requests will
take account of the comments and
changing technology and seek
information about alcohol companies’
digital marketing and data collection
practices, including data collected about
consumers on corporate-sponsored Web
sites and those operated by third parties.
The FTC will consider these
commenters’ recommendations about
digital marketing and data collection in
the course of developing its report.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
d. Lesser-Known Media Programs
The UConn Medical School comment
recommended that the FTC specifically
seek expenditure data for product
placements in television and film,
including the type of product depicted
and to whom the compensation was
paid. The FTC’s information requests
will seek expenditure data for product
placements in general, as well as the
type and title of the entertainment
vehicle in which such product
placement appeared, and whether
relationships; (b) data collection and behavioral
targeting, such as digital advertising campaigns that
encourage users to provide their personal
information in order to participate in a design
contest; and (c) a ‘‘360-degree strategy’’ that aims
to keep consumers continuously plugged into their
advertising campaigns, whether they are online or
in the real world.
13 Similarly, the Mesilla Valley DWI Resource
Center comment stated that the FTC should seek
information regarding the extent to which the
alcohol industry is shifting its advertising to the
Internet and to what extent those Web sites and
social media sites are following the voluntary
codes.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Nov 28, 2011
Jkt 226001
compensation was made in the form of
monetary payment or an in-kind
provision (e.g., products or other logoed
items).
e. Other Recommendations About Data
Collection
The UConn Medical School comment
offered many recommendations for the
types of data the FTC should seek in its
data collection. In particular, the
comment suggested gathering specific
data about the voluntary codes’
complaint review procedures and the
composition of their complaint review
boards. For example, the comment
recommended that the FTC seek data
regarding the complaint review process,
such as procedures for evaluating
complaints. The comment also
recommended that the FTC seek
information regarding the qualifications,
compensation, and conflicts of interest
of complaint review board members.14
The Commission agrees that
complaint review procedures are a
critical component of self-regulation. In
past studies, the compulsory process
orders specifically sought information
about the complaint review process
from individual companies; ultimately,
the information was provided
voluntarily by the three alcohol trade
associations. Similarly, for this study,
the Commission plans to seek
information about the complaint review
process and related issues from the
trade associations.
3. Other Comments
As noted earlier, the FTC received 64
comments in response to the 60-Day
Notice that did not address the
proposed data collection. These
comments fall into three broad
categories: (1) Comments opposing the
FTC’s study concept in general; (2)
comments seeking stricter selfregulation; and (3) comments calling for
an end to self-regulation, to be replaced
by a government ban or curtailing of
alcohol advertising.
a. Comments Opposing Study Concept
Three comments expressed
disagreement with the general concept
of studying the alcohol industry. These
were submitted by: (1) One university;
(2) one non-governmental organization;
14 The UConn Medical School comment also
suggested that the FTC gather specific information
about advertising strategy, content, and
substantiation. The comment recommended that the
FTC seek a variety of data, ranging from the ages
of actors who appeared in alcohol advertising for
television and print to substantiation for health
benefits claims made about low-carbohydrate beers.
The Commission believes the level of specificity in
these recommendations exceeds the scope of the
study.
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
and (3) one anonymous commenter.
Each of these commenters offered a
different reason: One argued that there
was no causal connection between
alcohol advertising and youth drinking;
another argued that the damage already
had been done, so the FTC’s study
would come too late; and the final one
argued that ‘‘we are taxed enough’’
without adding anything further other
than requesting confidential treatment.
As noted earlier, the FTC believes that
its information requests are in the
public interest and essential to the
agency’s performance of its regulatory
duties.
b. Comments Seeking Stricter SelfRegulation
Two comments advocated for more
‘‘teeth’’ in self-regulation. First, the
Cambridge Prevention Coalition and
Bluegrass Prevention comments
advocated for objective standards to
judge the content of alcohol advertising.
Second, the Bluegrass Prevention
comment stated that the alcohol
industry should be required to take
reasonable steps to ensure that their
brands are not promoted by fans and
other third parties online (e.g., social
media) in a way that violates the
voluntary codes. The FTC will consider
these recommendations in the course of
developing its report.
c. Comments Calling for an End to SelfRegulation
The vast majority of comments
received—60—called for an end to
alcohol industry self-regulation and
advocated for more active government
regulation. These were submitted by: (1)
Five local government agencies; (2) 24
non-governmental agencies; (3) two
religious organizations; (4) one research
institute; and (5) 28 individuals. The
Marin Institute comment described
industry self-regulation as a ‘‘complete
failure.’’ Marin, along with an
individual commenter, called for the
existing compliance review boards to be
replaced by a ‘‘truly independent third
party review board that includes public
interest representatives.’’ Other
comments, including many submitted
by individuals, called for alcohol
advertising to be banned or curtailed to
reduce the likelihood of youth exposure
to the ads.
B. Information Requests to the Beverage
Alcohol Industry
The FTC proposes to send
information requests to the ultimate
U.S. parent companies of up to fourteen
advertisers of beer, wine, or distilled
spirits (‘‘industry members’’). The
requests will seek, among other
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 29, 2011 / Notices
information, data regarding: (1) Sales of
beverage alcohol; (2) expenditures to
advertise and promote beverage alcohol
in measured and non-measured media;
(3) compliance with the 70% placement
standard contained in the industry’s
self-regulatory codes as of January 1,
2011; (4) digital marketing practices and
data collection, including efforts to
avoid collection of data from youth
under the legal drinking age of 21; and
(5) descriptions of lesser-known media
programs, such as point-of-sale
advertising, product placement, and
social responsibility programs. A
description of the proposed
specifications, subject to further public
comment, is located at https://
www.ftc.gov/fedreg2011/11/
111121alcoholstudypra2supp.pdf.
It should be noted that subsequent to
this notice, 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.
C. Estimated Annual Hours and Labor
Cost Burdens
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
1. Estimated Hours Burden: 8,680 Hours
The staff’s estimate of the hours
burden is based on the time required to
respond to each information request.
Because beverage alcohol companies
vary in size, the number of products
they sell,15 and the extent and variety of
their advertising and promotion efforts,
the staff has provided a range of the
estimated hours burden. As noted
above, each company will receive
information requests pertaining to five
categories of information.
Based upon its knowledge of the
industry, the staff estimates, on average,
that the time required to gather,
organize, format, and produce responses
to the proposed orders will range
between 300 and 620 hours per
company. The total estimated burden
per company is based on the following
assumptions:
(1) Identify, obtain, and organize sales
information, prepare response: 30–70
hours.
(2) Identify, obtain, and organize
information on advertising and
marketing expenditures, prepare
response: 50–130 hours.
15 In 2007, the top 12 alcohol suppliers alone
reported selling 1,133 brands. See 2008 FTC
Alcohol Report, available at https://www.ftc.gov/os/
2008/06/080626alcoholreport.pdf.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Nov 28, 2011
Jkt 226001
(3) Identify, obtain, and organize
placement information, prepare
response: 120–280 hours.
(4) Identify, obtain, and organize
information regarding digital marketing
practices and data collection, prepare
response: 80–100 hours.
(5) Identify, obtain, and organization
information regarding lesser-known
media programs: 20–40 hours.
Conservatively, the staff estimates that
the burden per company for each of up
to fourteen intended recipients will be
620 hours. Accordingly, the staff
estimates a total burden for these
companies of approximately 8,680
hours (14 companies × 620 average
burden hours per company). These
estimates include any time spent by
separately incorporated subsidiaries and
other entities affiliated with the ultimate
parent company that has received the
information request.
2. Estimated Cost Burden: $186,000
It is difficult to calculate with
precision the labor costs associated with
the information requests, as the costs
entail varying compensation levels of
management and/or support staff among
companies of different sizes. Financial,
legal, marketing, and clerical personnel
may be involved in the information
collection process. The staff has
assumed that professional personnel
and outside legal counsel will handle
most of the tasks involved in gathering
and producing responsive information,
and has applied an average hourly wage
of $300/hour for their labor. Thus, the
staff estimates that the total labor costs
per company will range between
$90,000 ($300 × 300 hours) and
$186,000 ($300 × 620 hours).
The staff estimates that the capital or
other non-labor costs associated with
the information requests will be
minimal. Although the information
requests may necessitate that industry
members maintain the requested
information provided to the
Commission, they should already have
in place the means to compile and
maintain business records.
D. Request for Comment
You can file a comment online or on
paper. For the Commission to consider
your comment, we must receive it on or
before December 29, 2011. Write
‘‘Alcohol Reports: Paperwork Comment;
Project No. P114503’’ on your comment.
Your comment—including your name
and your state—will be placed on the
public record of this proceeding,
including, to the extent practicable, on
the public Commission Web site, at
https://www.ftc.gov/os/
publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
73643
discretion, the Commission tries to
remove individuals’ home contact
information from comments before
placing them on the Commission Web
site.
Because your comment will be made
public, you are solely responsible for
making sure that your comment does
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. You also are solely responsible
for making sure that your comment does
not include any sensitive health
information, such as medical records or
other individually identifiable health
information. In addition, do not include
any ‘‘[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 USC
46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR
4.10(a)(2). In particular, do not include
competitively sensitive information
such as costs, sales statistics,
inventories, formulas, patterns, devices,
manufacturing processes, or customer
names.
If you would like the Commission to
give your comment confidential
treatment, you must file it in paper
form, with a request for confidential
treatment, and you must follow the
procedure explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c),
16 CFR 4.9(c). Your comment will be
kept confidential only if the FTC
General Counsel, in his or her sole
discretion, grants your request in
accordance with the law and the public
interest.
Postal mail addressed to the
Commission is subject to delay due to
heightened security screening. As a
result, we encourage you to submit your
comments online, or to send them to the
Commission by courier or overnight
service. To make sure that the
Commission considers your online
comment, you must file it at https://
ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/
alcoholstudy2011pra2, by following the
instructions on the web-based form. If
this Notice appears at https://
www.regulations.gov, you also may file
a comment through that Web site.
If you file your comment on paper,
write ‘‘Alcohol Reports: Paperwork
Comment; Project No. P114503’’ on your
comment and on the envelope, and mail
or deliver it to the following address:
Federal Trade Commission, Office of the
Secretary, Room H–113 (Annex J), 600
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20580. If possible, submit your
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
73644
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 29, 2011 / Notices
paper comment to the Commission by
courier or overnight service.
Visit the Commission Web site at
https://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice
and the news release describing it. The
FTC Act and other laws that the
Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to
consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. The Commission will
consider all timely and responsive
public comments that it receives on or
before December 29, 2011. You can find
more information, including routine
uses permitted by the Privacy Act, in
the Commission’s privacy policy, at
https://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.shtm.
Comments on the information
collection requirements subject to
review under the PRA should also be
submitted to OMB. If sent by U.S. mail,
address comments to: Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget,
Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal
Trade Commission, New Executive
Office Building, Docket Library, Room
10102, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503. Comments sent
to OMB by U.S. postal mail, however,
are subject to delays due to heightened
security precautions. Thus, comments
instead should be sent by facsimile to
(202) 395–5167.
David C. Shonka,
Acting General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2011–30434 Filed 11–28–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Meeting of the Advisory Committee on
Minority Health
Office of Minority Health,
Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Health, Office of the Secretary,
Department of Health and Human
Services.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
As stipulated by the Federal
Advisory Committee Act, the
Department of Health and Human
Services (DHHS) is hereby giving notice
that the Advisory Committee on
Minority Health (ACMH) will hold a
meeting. This meeting is open to the
public. Preregistration is required for
both public attendance and comment.
Any individual who wishes to attend
the meeting and/or participate in the
public comment session should email
acmh@osophs.dhhs.gov.
DATES: The meeting will be held on
Tuesday, January 24, 2012, from 9 a.m.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:20 Nov 28, 2011
Jkt 226001
to 5 p.m. and Wednesday, January 25,
2012, from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
The meeting will be held at
the Doubletree Hotel, 1515 Rhode Island
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20005.
Announcement of Requirements and
Registration for the United States
Surgeon General’s Healthy Apps
Challenge
ADDRESSES:
Ms.
Monica A. Baltimore, Executive
Director, ACMH, Tower Building, 1101
Wootton Parkway, Suite 600, Rockville,
Maryland 20852. Phone: (240) 453–2882
Fax: (240) 453–2883.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
In
accordance with Public Law 105–392,
the ACMH was established to provide
advice to the Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Minority Health in improving the
health of each racial and ethnic
minority group and on the development
of goals and specific program activities
of the Office of Minority Health.
Topics to be discussed during this
meeting will include strategies to
improve the health of racial and ethnic
minority populations through the
development of health policies and
programs that will help eliminate health
disparities, as well as other related
issues.
Public attendance at the meeting is
limited to space available. Individuals
who plan to attend and need special
assistance, such as sign language
interpretation or other reasonable
accommodations, should notify the
designated contact person prior to close
of business December 22, 2011.
Members of the public will have an
opportunity to provide comments at the
meeting. Public comments will be
limited to three minutes per speaker.
Individuals who would like to submit
written statements should mail or fax
their comments to the Office of Minority
Health prior to close of business January
9, 2012. Any members of the public who
wish to have printed material
distributed to ACMH members should
submit their materials to the Executive
Director, ACMH, Tower Building, 1101
Wootton Parkway, Suite 600, Rockville,
Maryland 20852, prior to close of
business January 13, 2012.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: November 16, 2011.
Monica A. Baltimore,
Executive Director, Advisory Committee on
Minority Health, Office of Minority Health,
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health,
Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services.
[FR Doc. 2011–30682 Filed 11–28–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150–29–P
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Office of the Surgeon General,
Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Health, Office of the Secretary,
Department of Health and Human
Services.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Surgeon General’s
Healthy Apps Challenge will encourage
the development and submission of
technology applications that will
complement and enhance two key
aspects of the Surgeon General’s
prevention agenda: The Surgeon
General’s Vision for a Healthy and Fit
Nation (https://www.surgeongeneral.gov/
library/obesityvision/
obesityvision2010.pdf) and the nation’s
first National Prevention Strategy
(https://www.healthcare.gov/prevention/
nphpphc/strategy/report.pdf).
Specifically, the challenge will highlight
the ability of innovative new
technologies to: (1) Provide health
information tailored to the needs of the
user; and (2) empower users (the general
public) to regularly engage in and enjoy
health promoting behaviors related to
fitness and physical activity, nutrition
and healthy eating, and/or physical,
mental and emotional well-being. This
challenge is being conducted in
collaboration with the Office of the
National Coordinator for Health IT.
DATES: Submission period begins: 12:01
a.m., EST, December 2, 2011.
Submission period for initial entries
ends: 11:59 p.m., EST, December 30,
2011.
Judging process for finalists begins:
12:01 a.m., EST, January 2, 2012.
Judging process for finalists ends:
11:59 p.m., EST, January 20, 2012.
Finalist(s) notified: January 23, 2012.
Public announcement: Late January,
2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
Lesley Russell, Senior Public Health
Advisor for Outreach and Policy, Office
of the Surgeon General, U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services. Phone:
(202) 401–8596.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Subject of Challenge Competition
Entrants are asked to develop software
applications (apps) in the following
categories:
Fitness/physical activity: This
category is focused on applications
particularly aimed at recruiting and
E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM
29NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 229 (Tuesday, November 29, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73640-73644]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30434]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
Agency Information Collection Activities; Request for OMB Review;
Comment Request
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Commission).
ACTION: Notice and request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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). The FTC is
seeking public comments on proposed information requests to beverage
alcohol advertisers that will seek information concerning, among other
things, sales and marketing expenditures, compliance with voluntary
advertising placement provisions, digital marketing practices and data
collection, and lesser-known media programs.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 29, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may submit written comments by following
the instructions in the ``Request for Comments'' part of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for copies of the collection
of information and supporting documentation should be addressed to
Janet M. Evans, Attorney, 202-326-2125, or Carolyn L. Hann, Attorney,
202-326-2745, Division of Advertising Practices, Bureau of Consumer
Protection, Federal Trade Commission.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FTC has previously published reports on
voluntary advertising self-regulation by the alcohol industry in
September 1999, September 2003, and June 2008.\1\ The data contained in
the reports were based on information submitted to the Commission,
pursuant to compulsory process, by U.S. beverage alcohol advertisers.
The FTC has authority to compel production of this information from
advertisers under Section 6 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC
Act), 15 U.S.C. 46. The Commission believes that it is in the public
interest to: (1) Collect updated data from alcohol advertisers on sales
and marketing expenditures, compliance with voluntary advertising
placement provisions, digital marketing practices and data collection,
and lesser-known media programs; and (2) publish a report on the data
obtained.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See FTC, Self-Regulation in the Alcohol Industry (Sept.
1999), available at https://www.ftc.gov/reports/alcohol/alcoholreport.shtm; FTC, Alcohol Marketing and Advertising (Sept.
2003), available at https://www.ftc.gov/os/2003/09/alcohol08report.pdf; and FTC, Self-Regulation in the Alcohol
Industry (June 2008) (``2008 FTC Alcohol Report''), available at
https://www.ftc.gov/os/2008/06/080626alcoholreport.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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).
On February 25, 2011, the Commission sought comment on the
information collection requirements associated with this proposal. 76
FR 10596. (60-Day Notice). As required by OMB regulations, 5 CFR part
1320, the FTC is providing this second opportunity for public comment
while seeking OMB approval for the collection of information.
A. Public Comments/Consultation Outside the Agency
The FTC received 71 comments in response to the 60-Day Notice. Of
these, four comments favored and substantively addressed the proposed
data collection. These comments were submitted by: (1) State Attorneys
General representing 23 states and one territory \2\ (State AG); (2)
the Center for
[[Page 73641]]
Alcohol Marketing and Youth (CAMY); (3) the Center for Digital
Democracy (CDD); \3\ and (4) University of Connecticut School of
Medicine (UConn Medical School). One comment, submitted by The Marin
Institute, offered substantive recommendations but also expressed
concerns about self-regulation.\4\ Two additional comments offered
limited recommendations regarding the proposed data collection.\5\ The
remaining 64 comments did not substantively address the proposed data
collection.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The State AGs represented: Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware,
Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Mississippi, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma,
Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont,
Washington, and Wyoming.
\3\ CDD, Alcohol Marketing in the Digital Age (May 2010) (``CDD
White Paper''). A private citizen also submitted the CDD White Paper
as an attachment to her comment.
\4\ See further discussion about The Marin Institute comment at
Section A.3.c, below.
\5\ These were submitted by a private citizen in Michigan (also
referenced in note 3, above) and the Mesilla Valley DWI Resource
Center in New Mexico. The recommendations in these comments are
discussed in notes 11 and 13, below.
\6\ See discussion at Section A.3., below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. General Support for the Data Collection
In its 60-Day Notice, the FTC sought comments regarding whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the FTC.\7\ The State AG and CAMY
comments expressed strong support for the FTC's proposed data
collection. Specifically, they stated that this information was
essential to the FTC's performance of its regulatory duties and in the
public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 60-Day Notice, 76 FR 10596, 10597 (Feb. 25, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Suggestions for Improvements to Proposed Information Collection
In its 60-Day Notice, the FTC invited comments regarding ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected.\8\ The FTC received substantive suggestions for enhancing
its proposed collection of alcohol advertising data regarding the
following specifications: (1) Expenditure data; (2) advertising
placement; and (3) digital marketing and data collection. The FTC also
received several suggestions that did not fall within a particular
specification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 60-Day Notice, id. at 10597.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Expenditure Data
In its 60-Day Notice, the FTC stated that it would seek company
data regarding expenditures to advertise and promote beverage alcohol
in measured and non-measured media. The State AG and CAMY comments
exhorted the FTC to seek advertising and promotional expenditures from
the alcohol industry on an ``ongoing and regular basis,'' rather than
intermittently. Both comments explained that the media landscape is
changing daily. To understand how and where industry is advertising and
to what extent the youth are exposed, the comments argued, the FTC
should obtain these data from industry every two to three years, if not
annually.\9\ The FTC will consider this recommendation in the course of
developing its report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ While the FTC has not sought these data on an annual basis,
it has been actively monitoring the alcohol industry. The FTC has
collected expenditure data as part of its ongoing study and report
process since the late 1990s. These studies have resulted in reports
issued in 1999, 2003, and 2008. Since 2008, the staff has engaged in
both formal and informal monitoring of alcohol self-regulatory
efforts. For example, between 2009 and 2010, the Commission issued
6(b) Orders to six mid-sized alcohol companies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Advertising Placement Issues
Until very recently, the voluntary codes of the Beer Institute, the
Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, and/or the Wine
Institute (collectively, ``voluntary codes'') each stated 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'').\10\ In the 60-Day Notice, the FTC stated that it planned
to seek data on advertising placement, including industry compliance
with the 70% placement standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ On May 26, 2011, the Beer Institute and the Distilled
Spirits Council of the United States (``DISCUS'') each announced
that they would increase their placement standard from 70% to 71.6%
to reflect the recently published results of the 2010 U.S. Census
data, which showed that 71.6 percent of the U.S. population is 21
years of age and older. See Beer Institute press release, ``Beer
Institute Revises Advertising Standard Based on New U.S. Census
Data'' (May 26, 2011), available at https://www.beerinstitute.org/BeerInstitute/files/ccLibraryFiles/Filename/000000001167/Updated%20Ad%20Code%20with%20Census%20Data%20-%20FINAL%205-26-11.pdf; DISCUS, ``Distilled Spirits Industry Updates Advertising
Guidelines Based on Newly Released Census Data'' (May 26, 2011),
available at https://www.discus.org/media/press/article.asp?NEWS_ID=631. To date, the Wine Institute has not announced any changes to
its placement standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State AG and CAMY comments encouraged the FTC to recommend that
the voluntary codes increase their placement standard from 70% to
85%.\11\ Citing a 2004 recommendation by the Institute of Medicine's
Committee on Developing a Strategy to Reduce and Prevent Underage
Drinking, the State AG and CAMY comments argued that youth exposure to
alcohol advertising on television has grown since 2004 at a rate faster
than that of adults or young adults. The State AG and CAMY comments
also highlighted as an example Beam Global Spirits & Wine Inc., an
alcohol company that since 2007 has voluntarily and gradually increased
its placement standard to 85% for its aggregate average by brand and by
medium. The FTC will consider these recommendations in the course of
developing its report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ This recommendation to increase the placement standard to
85% was echoed by a private commenter from Michigan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State AG and CAMY comments recommended that the FTC seek brand-
specific placement data and provide a brand analysis in its upcoming
report. The UConn Medical School comment also recommended that the FTC
seek data in connection with specific ads or ad campaigns. The
Commission's compulsory process orders to alcohol companies will, as
they have in the past, collect advertising placement data for each
individual ad for individual brands. In the course of reviewing these
data, the FTC will evaluate whether specific brands have placement
compliance problems. Nonetheless, because Section 6(f) of the FTC Act,
15 U.S.C. 46(f), protects confidential commercial information that is
submitted to the agency, the Commission cannot publicly identify
advertising data on particular brands or companies.
c. Digital Marketing and Data Collection
In its 60-Day Notice, the FTC stated that it would seek information
from the alcohol industry about data collection efforts, including data
collection in connection with digital and social media marketing, and
efforts to avoid collection of data from youth under the legal drinking
age of 21. The FTC received extensive and detailed recommendations
regarding its proposed collection of digital marketing and data
collection. These recommendations were provided by the CDD, the State
AGs, CAMY, and The Marin Institute.
The CDD White Paper expressed concern that online advertising has
evolved without sufficient public analysis or regulatory oversight. It
outlined key concepts and practices that have been guiding the growth
of interactive marketing in the alcohol industry, including the
creation of a ``high-definition media and marketing ecosystem'' \12\
that integrates
[[Page 73642]]
advertising, editorial content, audience measurement, and content
delivery; the growth of distribution platforms such as social media,
online video channels, and virtual worlds; and targeted marketing to
the African-American and Latino communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ It particularly noted three aspects of the high-definition
media and marketing ecosystem: (a) Engagement, i.e., the creation of
a marketing environment where consumers interact with brands and
integrate them into their personal and social relationships; (b)
data collection and behavioral targeting, such as digital
advertising campaigns that encourage users to provide their personal
information in order to participate in a design contest; and (c) a
``360-degree strategy'' that aims to keep consumers continuously
plugged into their advertising campaigns, whether they are online or
in the real world.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State AG comment observed that alcohol advertising has
substantially increased its presence online. The comment identified one
brand that advertises solely in social media and another company that
employed ``extensive, world-wide use of social media'' for a recent
World Cup-related advertising campaign.\13\ The CAMY comment echoed the
concerns cited by the State AG comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Similarly, the Mesilla Valley DWI Resource Center comment
stated that the FTC should seek information regarding the extent to
which the alcohol industry is shifting its advertising to the
Internet and to what extent those Web sites and social media sites
are following the voluntary codes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, the CDD, State AG, CAMY, and The Marin Institute
comments requested that the FTC seek a variety of information regarding
digital marketing and data collection practices. These practices
included: Marketing and data collection on both corporate-sponsored Web
sites as well as Web sites operated by third parties, age-verification
mechanisms on such Web sites, and marketing practices on social media
sites.
The FTC's information requests will take account of the comments
and changing technology and seek information about alcohol companies'
digital marketing and data collection practices, including data
collected about consumers on corporate-sponsored Web sites and those
operated by third parties. The FTC will consider these commenters'
recommendations about digital marketing and data collection in the
course of developing its report.
d. Lesser-Known Media Programs
The UConn Medical School comment recommended that the FTC
specifically seek expenditure data for product placements in television
and film, including the type of product depicted and to whom the
compensation was paid. The FTC's information requests will seek
expenditure data for product placements in general, as well as the type
and title of the entertainment vehicle in which such product placement
appeared, and whether compensation was made in the form of monetary
payment or an in-kind provision (e.g., products or other logoed items).
e. Other Recommendations About Data Collection
The UConn Medical School comment offered many recommendations for
the types of data the FTC should seek in its data collection. In
particular, the comment suggested gathering specific data about the
voluntary codes' complaint review procedures and the composition of
their complaint review boards. For example, the comment recommended
that the FTC seek data regarding the complaint review process, such as
procedures for evaluating complaints. The comment also recommended that
the FTC seek information regarding the qualifications, compensation,
and conflicts of interest of complaint review board members.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The UConn Medical School comment also suggested that the
FTC gather specific information about advertising strategy, content,
and substantiation. The comment recommended that the FTC seek a
variety of data, ranging from the ages of actors who appeared in
alcohol advertising for television and print to substantiation for
health benefits claims made about low-carbohydrate beers. The
Commission believes the level of specificity in these
recommendations exceeds the scope of the study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission agrees that complaint review procedures are a
critical component of self-regulation. In past studies, the compulsory
process orders specifically sought information about the complaint
review process from individual companies; ultimately, the information
was provided voluntarily by the three alcohol trade associations.
Similarly, for this study, the Commission plans to seek information
about the complaint review process and related issues from the trade
associations.
3. Other Comments
As noted earlier, the FTC received 64 comments in response to the
60-Day Notice that did not address the proposed data collection. These
comments fall into three broad categories: (1) Comments opposing the
FTC's study concept in general; (2) comments seeking stricter self-
regulation; and (3) comments calling for an end to self-regulation, to
be replaced by a government ban or curtailing of alcohol advertising.
a. Comments Opposing Study Concept
Three comments expressed disagreement with the general concept of
studying the alcohol industry. These were submitted by: (1) One
university; (2) one non-governmental organization; and (3) one
anonymous commenter. Each of these commenters offered a different
reason: One argued that there was no causal connection between alcohol
advertising and youth drinking; another argued that the damage already
had been done, so the FTC's study would come too late; and the final
one argued that ``we are taxed enough'' without adding anything further
other than requesting confidential treatment. As noted earlier, the FTC
believes that its information requests are in the public interest and
essential to the agency's performance of its regulatory duties.
b. Comments Seeking Stricter Self-Regulation
Two comments advocated for more ``teeth'' in self-regulation.
First, the Cambridge Prevention Coalition and Bluegrass Prevention
comments advocated for objective standards to judge the content of
alcohol advertising. Second, the Bluegrass Prevention comment stated
that the alcohol industry should be required to take reasonable steps
to ensure that their brands are not promoted by fans and other third
parties online (e.g., social media) in a way that violates the
voluntary codes. The FTC will consider these recommendations in the
course of developing its report.
c. Comments Calling for an End to Self-Regulation
The vast majority of comments received--60--called for an end to
alcohol industry self-regulation and advocated for more active
government regulation. These were submitted by: (1) Five local
government agencies; (2) 24 non-governmental agencies; (3) two
religious organizations; (4) one research institute; and (5) 28
individuals. The Marin Institute comment described industry self-
regulation as a ``complete failure.'' Marin, along with an individual
commenter, called for the existing compliance review boards to be
replaced by a ``truly independent third party review board that
includes public interest representatives.'' Other comments, including
many submitted by individuals, called for alcohol advertising to be
banned or curtailed to reduce the likelihood of youth exposure to the
ads.
B. Information Requests to the Beverage Alcohol Industry
The FTC proposes to send information requests to the ultimate U.S.
parent companies of up to fourteen advertisers of beer, wine, or
distilled spirits (``industry members''). The requests will seek, among
other
[[Page 73643]]
information, data regarding: (1) Sales of beverage alcohol; (2)
expenditures to advertise and promote beverage alcohol in measured and
non-measured media; (3) compliance with the 70% placement standard
contained in the industry's self-regulatory codes as of January 1,
2011; (4) digital marketing practices and data collection, including
efforts to avoid collection of data from youth under the legal drinking
age of 21; and (5) descriptions of lesser-known media programs, such as
point-of-sale advertising, product placement, and social responsibility
programs. A description of the proposed specifications, subject to
further public comment, is located at https://www.ftc.gov/fedreg2011/11/111121alcoholstudypra2supp.pdf.
It should be noted that subsequent to this notice, 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.
C. Estimated Annual Hours and Labor Cost Burdens
1. Estimated Hours Burden: 8,680 Hours
The staff's estimate of the hours burden is based on the time
required to respond to each information request. Because beverage
alcohol companies vary in size, the number of products they sell,\15\
and the extent and variety of their advertising and promotion efforts,
the staff has provided a range of the estimated hours burden. As noted
above, each company will receive information requests pertaining to
five categories of information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ In 2007, the top 12 alcohol suppliers alone reported
selling 1,133 brands. See 2008 FTC Alcohol Report, available at
https://www.ftc.gov/os/2008/06/080626alcoholreport.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon its knowledge of the industry, the staff estimates, on
average, that the time required to gather, organize, format, and
produce responses to the proposed orders will range between 300 and 620
hours per company. The total estimated burden per company is based on
the following assumptions:
(1) Identify, obtain, and organize sales information, prepare
response: 30-70 hours.
(2) Identify, obtain, and organize information on advertising and
marketing expenditures, prepare response: 50-130 hours.
(3) Identify, obtain, and organize placement information, prepare
response: 120-280 hours.
(4) Identify, obtain, and organize information regarding digital
marketing practices and data collection, prepare response: 80-100
hours.
(5) Identify, obtain, and organization information regarding
lesser-known media programs: 20-40 hours.
Conservatively, the staff estimates that the burden per company for
each of up to fourteen intended recipients will be 620 hours.
Accordingly, the staff estimates a total burden for these companies of
approximately 8,680 hours (14 companies x 620 average burden hours per
company). These estimates include any time spent by separately
incorporated subsidiaries and other entities affiliated with the
ultimate parent company that has received the information request.
2. Estimated Cost Burden: $186,000
It is difficult to calculate with precision the labor costs
associated with the information requests, as the costs entail varying
compensation levels of management and/or support staff among companies
of different sizes. Financial, legal, marketing, and clerical personnel
may be involved in the information collection process. The staff has
assumed that professional personnel and outside legal counsel will
handle most of the tasks involved in gathering and producing responsive
information, and has applied an average hourly wage of $300/hour for
their labor. Thus, the staff estimates that the total labor costs per
company will range between $90,000 ($300 x 300 hours) and $186,000
($300 x 620 hours).
The staff estimates that the capital or other non-labor costs
associated with the information requests will be minimal. Although the
information requests may necessitate that industry members maintain the
requested information provided to the Commission, they should already
have in place the means to compile and maintain business records.
D. Request for Comment
You can file a comment online or on paper. For the Commission to
consider your comment, we must receive it on or before December 29,
2011. Write ``Alcohol Reports: Paperwork Comment; Project No. P114503''
on your comment. Your comment--including your name and your state--will
be placed on the public record of this proceeding, including, to the
extent practicable, on the public Commission Web site, at https://www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of discretion, the
Commission tries to remove individuals' home contact information from
comments before placing them on the Commission Web site.
Because your comment will be made public, you are solely
responsible for making sure that your comment does 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. You also are
solely responsible for making sure that your comment does not include
any sensitive health information, such as medical records or other
individually identifiable health information. In addition, do not
include any ``[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
USC 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2). In particular,
do not include competitively sensitive information such as costs, sales
statistics, inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing
processes, or customer names.
If you would like the Commission to give your comment confidential
treatment, you must file it in paper form, with a request for
confidential treatment, and you must follow the procedure explained in
FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). Your comment will be kept confidential
only if the FTC General Counsel, in his or her sole discretion, grants
your request in accordance with the law and the public interest.
Postal mail addressed to the Commission is subject to delay due to
heightened security screening. As a result, we encourage you to submit
your comments online, or to send them to the Commission by courier or
overnight service. To make sure that the Commission considers your
online comment, you must file it at https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/alcoholstudy2011pra2, by following the instructions on the web-
based form. If this Notice appears at https://www.regulations.gov, you
also may file a comment through that Web site.
If you file your comment on paper, write ``Alcohol Reports:
Paperwork Comment; Project No. P114503'' on your comment and on the
envelope, and mail or deliver it to the following address: Federal
Trade Commission, Office of the Secretary, Room H-113 (Annex J), 600
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20580. If possible, submit your
[[Page 73644]]
paper comment to the Commission by courier or overnight service.
Visit the Commission Web site at https://www.ftc.gov to read this
Notice and the news release describing it. The FTC Act and other laws
that the Commission administers permit the collection of public
comments to consider and use in this proceeding as appropriate. The
Commission will consider all timely and responsive public comments that
it receives on or before December 29, 2011. You can find more
information, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, in
the Commission's privacy policy, at https://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.shtm.
Comments on the information collection requirements subject to
review under the PRA should also be submitted to OMB. If sent by U.S.
mail, address comments to: Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for
the Federal Trade Commission, New Executive Office Building, Docket
Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503.
Comments sent to OMB by U.S. postal mail, however, are subject to
delays due to heightened security precautions. Thus, comments instead
should be sent by facsimile to (202) 395-5167.
David C. Shonka,
Acting General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2011-30434 Filed 11-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P