Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 222 / Thursday, November 18, 2010 / Notices 70675 

1The 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). 

Reason: Failed to maintain a valid 

bond. 

License Number: 010182N. 

Name: Cargo Specialists International, 

Inc. 

Address: 241 Forsgate Drive, Suite 

108, Jamesburg, NJ 08831. 

Date Revoked: October 22, 2010. 

Reason: Surrendered license 

voluntarily. 

License Number: 017975N. 

Name: Johnny Air Cargo, Inc. 

Address: 69–04 Roosevelt Avenue, 

Woodside, NY 11377. 

Date Revoked: October 20, 2010. 

Reason: Surrendered license 

voluntarily. 

License Number: 18050F. 

Name: Trident Forwarding Service, 

Inc. 

Address: 6980 NW. 43rd Street, 

Miami, FL 33166. 

Date Revoked: October 29, 2010. 

Reason: Failed to maintain a valid 

bond. 

License Number: 019728NF. 

Name: MHX International LLC. 

Address: 300 David Lane, Roselle, IL 

60172. 

Date Revoked: October 27, 2010. 

Reason: Failed to maintain valid 

bonds. 

License Number: 020760F. 

Name: AAA Cuban Transportation 

Cargo & Logistics, Inc. 

Address: 6025 West 12th Avenue, 

Hialeah, FL 33012. 

Date Revoked: October 27, 2010. 

Reason: Failed to maintain a valid 

bond. 

License Number: 021720N. 

Name: Logicargo ASL Int’l Corp. 

Address: 7707 NW. 46th Street, Doral, 

FL 33166. 

Date Revoked: October 27, 2010. 

Reason: Failed to maintain a valid 

bond. 

Sandra L. Kusumoto, 

Director, Bureau of Certification and 

Licensing. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29069 Filed 11–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6730–01–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission for OMB 

Review; 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 December 31, 2013 the current 

OMB clearance for information 

collection requirements contained in its 

Affiliate Marketing Rule (or ‘‘Rule’’). 

That clearance expires on December 31, 

2010. 

DATES: Comments must be filed by 

December 20, 2010. 

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:// 

ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ 

AffiliateMarketingPRA2 (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–113 (Annex J), 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20580, in the manner 

detailed in the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information 

should be addressed to Anthony 

Rodriguez, Attorney, Division of Privacy 

and Identity Protection, Bureau of 

Consumer Protection, Federal Trade 

Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326– 

2757. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Comments 

Interested parties are invited to 

submit written comments. Comments 

should refer to ‘‘Affiliate Marketing 

Rule: FTC File No. P105411’’ 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 Web site, at http:// 

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:// 

ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ 

AffiliateMarketingPRA2 (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:// 

ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ 

AffiliateMarketingPRA2. If this Notice 

appears at http://www.regulations.gov/ 

search/index.jsp, you may also file an 

electronic comment through that Web 

site. The Commission will consider all 

comments that regulations.gov forwards 

to it. 

All comments should additionally be 

sent to OMB. Comments may be 

submitted by U.S. Postal Mail to: Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget, 

Attention: Desk Officer for Federal 

Trade Commission, New Executive 

Office Building, Docket Library, Room 

10102, 725 17th Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20503. Comments, 

however, should be submitted via 

facsimile to (202) 395–5167 because 

U.S. Postal Mail is subject to lengthy 

delays 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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

70676 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 222 / Thursday, November 18, 2010 / Notices 

2 ‘‘The public disclosure of information originally 

supplied by the Federal government to the recipient 

for purpose of disclosure to the public is not 

included within [the definition of collection of 

information].’’ 5 CFR 1320.3(c)(2). 

3Exceptions include, for example, having a 

preexisting business relationship with a consumer, 

using information in response to a communication 

initiated by the consumer, and solicitations 

authorized or requested by the consumer. 

4No clerical time was included in staff’s burden 

analysis for GLBA entities as the notice would 

likely be combined with existing GLBA notices. 

available to the public on the FTC Web 

site, to the extent practicable, at http:// 

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 

Web site. More information, including 

routine uses permitted by the Privacy 

Act, may be found in the FTC’s privacy 

policy, at http://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. 

Background 

The Affiliate Marketing Rule, 16 CFR 

Part 680, was issued by the FTC under 

section 214 of the Fair and Accurate 

Credit Transactions Act (‘‘FACT Act’’), 

Public Law 108–159 (December 6, 

2003). The FACT Act amended the Fair 

Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681 et 

seq., which was enacted to enable 

consumers to protect the privacy and 

accuracy of their consumer credit 

information. As mandated by the FACT 

Act, the Rule specifies disclosure 

requirements for certain affiliated 

companies subject to the Commission’s 

jurisdiction. Except as discussed below, 

these requirements constitute 

‘‘collections of information’’ for 

purposes of the PRA. Specifically, the 

FACT Act and the Rule require covered 

entities to provide consumers with 

notice and an opportunity to opt out of 

the use of certain information before 

sending marketing solicitations. The 

Rule generally provides that, if a 

company communicates certain 

information about a consumer 

(‘‘eligibility information’’) to an affiliate, 

the affiliate may not use that 

information to make or send 

solicitations to the consumer unless the 

consumer is given notice and a 

reasonable opportunity to opt out of 

such use of the information and the 

consumer does not opt out. 

To minimize compliance costs and 

burdens for entities, particularly any 

small businesses that may be affected, 

the Rule contains model disclosures and 

opt-out notices that may be used to 

satisfy the statutory requirements. The 

Rule also gives covered entities 

flexibility to satisfy the notice and optout requirement by sending the 

consumer a free-standing opt-out notice 

or by adding the opt-out notice to the 

privacy notices already provided to 

consumers, such as those provided in 

accordance with the provisions of Title 

V, subtitle A of the GLBA. In either 

event, the time necessary to prepare or 

incorporate an opt-out notice would be 

minimal because those entities could 

either use the model disclosure 

verbatim or base their own disclosures 

upon it. Moreover, verbatim adoption of 

the model notice does not constitute a 

PRA ‘‘collection of information’’ 2

On July 28, 2010, the FTC sought 

comment on the information collection 

requirements associated with the Rule, 

16 CFR Part 680. 75 FR 43526. No 

comments were received. Accordingly, 

apart from updates to its labor cost 

estimates tied to more recent available 

Department of Labor data, the FTC 

retains its previously published burden 

estimates. 

Pursuant to the OMB regulations, 5 

CFR Part 1320, that implement the PRA, 

44 U.S.C. 3501–3521, the FTC is 

providing this second opportunity for 

public comment while seeking OMB 

approval to extend its existing PRA 

clearance for the Rule. All comments 

should be filed as prescribed herein, 

and must be received on or before 

December 20, 2010. 

Burden Statement 

Except where otherwise specifically 

noted, staff’s estimates of burden are 

based on its knowledge of the consumer 

credit industries and knowledge of the 

entities over which the Commission has 

jurisdiction. This said, estimating PRA 

burden of the Rule’s disclosure 

requirements is difficult given the 

highly diverse group of affected entities 

that may use certain eligibility 

information shared by their affiliates to 

send marketing notices to consumers. 

The estimates provided in this burden 

statement may well overstate actual 

burden. As noted above, verbatim 

adoption of the disclosure of 

information provided by the Federal 

government is not a ‘‘collection of 

information’’ to which to assign PRA 

burden estimates, and an unknown 

number of covered entities will opt to 

use the model disclosure language. 

Second, an uncertain, but possibly 

significant, number of entities subject to 

the FTC’s jurisdiction do not have 

affiliates and thus would not be covered 

by section 214 of the FACT Act or the 

Rule. Third, Commission staff does not 

know how many companies subject to 

the FTC’s jurisdiction under the Rule 

actually share eligibility information 

among affiliates and, of those, how 

many affiliates use such information to 

make marketing solicitations to 

consumers. Fourth, still other entities 

may choose to rely on the exceptions to 

the Rule’s notice and opt-out 

requirements.3

As in the past, FTC staff’s estimates 

assume a higher burden will be incurred 

during the first year of a prospective 

OMB three-year clearance, with a lesser 

burden for each of the subsequent two 

years because the opt-out notice to 

consumers is required to be given only 

once. Institutions may provide for an 

indefinite period for the opt-out or they 

may time limit it, but for no less than 

five years. Given this minimum time 

period, Commission staff did not 

estimate the burden for preparing and 

distributing extension notices by 

entities that limit the duration of the 

opt-out time period. The relevant PRA 

time frame for burden calculation is the 

three-year span between expiring OMB 

clearances (i.e., December 31, 2010– 

December 31, 2013). The five-year 

notice period, however, will not begin 

until October 1, 2013 (five years 

removed from the Rule’s effective date), 

very close to the end of the applicable 

period covered by the instant clearance 

request. 

Staff’s labor cost estimates take into 

account: Managerial and professional 

time for reviewing internal policies and 

determining compliance obligations; 

technical time for creating the notice 

and opt-out, in either paper or 

electronic form; and clerical time for 

disseminating the notice and opt-out.4

In addition, staff’s cost estimates 

presume that the availability of model 

disclosures and opt-out notices will 

simplify the compliance review and 

implementation processes, thereby 

significantly reducing the cost of 

compliance. Moreover, the Rule gives 

entities considerable flexibility to 

determine the scope and duration of the 

opt-out. Indeed, this flexibility permits 

entities to send a single joint notice on 

behalf of all of its affiliates. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 222 / Thursday, November 18, 2010 / Notices 70677 

5This estimate is derived from an analysis of a 

database of U.S. businesses based on SIC codes for 

businesses that market goods or services to 

consumers, which included the following 

industries: Transportation services; communication; 

electric, gas, and sanitary services; retail trade; 

finance, insurance, and real estate; and services 

(excluding business services and engineering, 

management services). See http://www.naics.com/ 

search.htm. This estimate excludes businesses not 

subject to the FTC’s jurisdiction and businesses that 

do not use data or information subject to the rule. 

To the resulting sub-total (6,677,796), staff applies 

a continuing assumed rate of affiliation of 16.75 

percent, see 69 FR 33324, 33334 (June 15, 2004), 

reduced by a continuing estimate of 100,000 entities 

subject to the Commission’s GLBA privacy notice 

regulations, see id., applied to the same assumed 

rate of affiliation. The net total is 1,101,780. 

6The associated labor cost is based on the labor 

cost burden per notice by adding the hourly mean 

private sector wages for managerial, technical, and 

clerical work and multiplying that sum by the 

estimated number of hours. The classifications used 

are ‘‘Management Occupations’’ for managerial 

employees, ‘‘Computer and Mathematical Science 

Occupations’’ for technical staff, and ‘‘Office and 

Administrative Support’’ for clerical workers. See 

National Compensation Survey: Occupational 

Earnings in the United States 2009, U.S. 

Department of Labor, released August 2010, 

Bulletin 2738, Table 3 (‘‘Summary: Full-time 

civilian workers: Mean and median hourly, weekly, 

and annual earnings and mean weekly and annual 

hours’’) http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/sp/ 

nctb1346.pdf. The respective private sector hourly 

wages for these classifications are $43.99, $36.07, 

and $16.45. Estimated hours spent for each labor 

category are 7, 2, and 5, respectively. Multiplying 

each occupation’s hourly wage by the associated 

time estimate, labor cost burden per notice equals 

$462.32. This subtotal is then multiplied by the 

estimated number of non-GLB business families 

projected to send the affiliate marketing notice 

(220,356) to determine cumulative labor cost 

burden for non-GLBA entities ($101,874,986). 

7 3,084,984 hours ÷ 3 = 1,028,328; $101,874,986 

÷ 3 = $33,958,329. 

8Financial institutions must provide a privacy 

notice at the time the customer relationship is 

established and then annually so long as the 

relationship continues. Staff’s estimates assume that 

the affiliate marketing opt-out will be incorporated 

in the institution’s initial and annual notices. 

9As stated above, no clerical time is included in 

the estimate because the notice likely would be 

combined with existing GLBA notices. 

10Based on the previously stated estimates of 

100,000 GLBA business entities (see supra note 5) 

at an assumed rate of affiliation of 16.75 percent 

(16,750), divided by the presumed ratio of 5 

businesses per family, this yields a total of 3,350 

GLBA business families subject to the Rule. For 

simplicity, staff assumes that all of these entities are 

new establishments and/or newly integrating the 

affiliated opt-out notice with the GLBA notice in 

the first year of the prospective three-year clearance 

period; thus, the higher estimate of hours assigned 

to the first year. This, too, then, would effectively 

overstate actual burden. 

11 3,350 GLBA entities × [($43.99 × 5 hours) + 

($36.07 × 1 hour)] = $857,667. 

12 3,350 GLBA entities × [($43.99 × 3 hours) + 

($36.07 × 1 hour)] = $562,934. 

Estimated total average annual hours 

burden: 1,043,961 hours. 

Based, in part, on industry data 

regarding the number of businesses 

under various industry codes, staff 

estimates that 1,101,780 non-GLBA 

entities under FTC jurisdiction have 

affiliates and would be affected by the 

Rule.5 Staff further estimates that there 

are an average of 5 businesses per family 

or affiliated relationship, and that the 

affiliated entities will choose to send a 

joint notice, as permitted by the Rule. 

Thus, an estimated 220,356 non-GLBA 

business families may send the affiliate 

marketing notice. Staff also estimates 

that non-GLBA entities under the 

jurisdiction of the FTC would each 

incur 14 hours of burden during the 

prospective requested three-year PRA 

clearance period, comprised of a 

projected 7 hours of managerial time, 2 

hours of technical time, and 5 hours of 

clerical assistance. 

Based on the above, total burden for 

non-GLBA entities during the 

prospective three-year clearance period 

would be approximately 3,084,984 

hours. Associated labor cost would total 

$101,874,986.6 These estimates include 

the start-up burden and attendant costs, 

such as determining compliance 

obligations. Non-GLBA entities, 

however, will give notice only once 

during the clearance period ahead. 

Thus, averaged over that three-year 

period, the estimated annual burden for 

non-GLBA entities is 1,028,328 hours 

and $33,958,329 in labor costs.7

Entities that are subject to the 

Commission’s GLBA privacy notice 

regulation already provide privacy 

notices to their customers.8 Because the 

FACT Act and the Rule contemplate 

that the affiliate marketing notice can be 

included in the GLBA notices, the 

burden on GLBA regulated entities 

would be greatly reduced. Accordingly, 

the GLBA entities would incur 6 hours 

of burden during the first year of the 

clearance period, comprised of a 

projected 5 hours of managerial time 

and 1 hour of technical time to execute 

the notice, given that the Rule provides 

a model.9 Staff further estimates that 

3,350 GLBA entities under the FTC’s 

jurisdiction would be affected,10 so that 

the total burden for GLBA entities 

during the first year of the clearance 

period would approximate 20,100 hours 

and $857,667 in associated labor 

costs.11 Allowing for increased 

familiarity with procedure, the PRA 

burden in ensuing years would decline, 

with GLBA entities each incurring an 

estimated 4 hours of annual burden (3 

hours of managerial time and 1 hour of 

technical time) during the remaining 

two years of the clearance, amounting to 

13,400 hours and $562,934 in labor 

costs in each of the ensuing two years.12

Thus, averaged over the three-year 

clearance period, the estimated annual 

burden for GLBA entities is 15,633 

hours and $661,178 in labor costs. 

Cumulatively for both GLBA and nonGLBA entities, the average annual 

burden over the prospective three-year 

clearance period is 1,043,961 burden 

hours and $34,619,507 in labor costs. 

GLBA entities are already providing 

notices to their customers so there are 

no new capital or non-labor costs, as 

this notice may be consolidated into 

their current notices. For non-GLBA 

entities, the Rule provides for simple 

and concise model forms that 

institutions may use to comply. Entities 

that already have on-line capabilities 

will offer consumers the choice to 

receive notices via electronic format 

(e.g., computer equipment and 

software), and covered entities are 

already equipped to provide disclosures 

(e.g., computers with word processing 

programs, copying machines, mailing 

capabilities). Thus, any capital or nonlabor costs associated with compliance 

for these entities are negligible. 

Willard K. Tom, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29048 Filed 11–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Agency for Healthcare Research and 

Quality 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request 

AGENCY: Agency for Healthcare Research 

and Quality, HHS. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

intention of the Agency for Healthcare 

Research and Quality (AHRQ) to request 

that the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) approve the proposed 

information collection project: 

‘‘Evaluation of the National Guideline 

ClearinghouseTM.’’ In accordance with 

the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 

3501–3520, AHRQ invites the public to 

comment on this proposed information 

collection. 

This proposed information collection 

was previously published in the Federal 

Register on September 17th, 2010 and 

allowed 60 days for public comment. No 

comments were received. The purpose 

of this notice is to allow an additional 

30 days for public comment. 

DATES: Comments on this notice must be 

received by December 20, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be submitted to: AHRQs OMB Desk 

Officer by fax at (202) 395–6974 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES