Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 78179 

Actions Compliance Procedures 

(ii) For groups 2, 4, and 6 airplanes: Follow 

Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH Service Bulletin TM TAE 601–1001 P1, Revision 8, 

dated October 14, 2010. 

(2) For all airplanes: Replace the FADEC 

backup battery. 

Within 12 calendar months after doing the 

modification required in paragraph (f)(1) of 

this AD and repetitively thereafter within 12 

calendar months after the previous replacement. 

(i) For groups 1, 3, and 5 airplanes: Follow 

page 8 of Chapter 20–AMM–24–01–US, 

Issue 2, Revision No.: 2, dated October 8, 

2010, of Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH 

Supplement Airplane Maintenance Manual 

Cessna 172 & Reims F172 TAE 125–01, 

Doc. No.: AMM–20–01 (U.S.-Version) 

Version: 2/4. 

(ii) For groups 2, 4, and 6 airplanes: Follow 

page 7 of Chapter 20–AMM–24–02–US, 

Issue: 1, Rev. No: 1, dated October 8, 

2010, of Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH 

Supplement Airplane Maintenance Manual 

Cessna 172 & Reims F172 CENTURION 

2.0 (TAE 125–02–99), Doc. No.: AMM–20– 

02 (U.S.-Version) Version: 1/1. 

(3) For groups 1 and 2 airplanes: Incorporate 

Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH Supplemental 

Airplane Flight Manual or Pilot’s Operating 

Handbook and FAA Approved Airplane Flight 

Manual Supplement (as applicable), TAE– 

No.: 20–0310–21042, Issue 2–1, dated October 4, 2010, into the pilot’s operating handbook. 

Before further flight after doing the modification required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD. Not applicable. 

(4) For groups 3 and 4 airplanes: Incorporate 

Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH Supplemental 

Airplane Flight Manual or Pilot’s Operating 

Handbook and FAA Approved Airplane Flight 

Manual Supplement (as applicable), TAE– 

No.: 20–0310–20042, Issue 2–1, dated October 4, 2010, into the pilot’s operating handbook. 

Before further flight after doing the modification required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD. Not applicable. 

(5) For groups 5 and 6 airplanes: Incorporate 

Thielert Aircraft Engines GmbH Supplemental 

Pilot’s Operating Handbook and FAA Approved Airplane Flight Manual Supplement, 

TAE–No.: 20–0310–22042, Issue 2–1, dated 

October 4, 2010, into the pilot’s operating 

handbook. 

Before further flight after doing the modification required in paragraph (f)(1) of this AD. Not applicable. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(g)(1) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, 

send your request to your principal inspector 

or local Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your Principal Maintenance Inspector 

or Principal Avionics Inspector, as 

appropriate, or lacking a principal inspector, 

your local Flight Standards District Office. 

Related Information 

(h) For more information about this AD, 

contact Richard Rejniak, Aerospace Engineer, 

Wichita ACO, FAA, 1801 Airport Road, 

Room 100; phone: (316) 946–4128; fax: (316) 

946–4107; e-mail: richard.rejniak@faa.gov. 

(i) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Thielert Aircraft Engines 

Service GmbH, Platanenstra+e 14, D–09350 

Lichtenstein, Deutschland; telephone: +49 

(37204) 696–1474; fax: +49 (37204) 696– 

1910; Internet: http://www.thielert.com/. You 

may review copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Small Airplane 

Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

816–329–4148. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 

December 9, 2010. 

John Colomy, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31428 Filed 12–14–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 310 

RIN 3084–AB19 

Telemarketing Sales Rule 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission 

(‘‘FTC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’). 

ACTION: Advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking; request for public 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Commission requests 

public comment on provisions of the 

FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule 

concerning caller identification services 

and disclosure of the identity of the 

seller or telemarketer responsible for 

telemarketing calls. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before January 28, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 

invited to submit written comments 

electronically or in paper form, by 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

78180 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

1 68 FR 4579, 4672 (2003) (codified at 16 CFR 

310.4(a)(7)). 

2See S. Rept. 96, 111th Cong., 1st Sess. 1–2 

(2009); Hearing before the House Subcomm. on 

Telecomm. and the Internet, Truth in Caller ID Act, 

110th Cong., 1st Sess. Ser. No. 110–8, 9–10 (2007) 

(test. of Kris Monteith); H. Sengar, D. Wijesekera, 

S. Jojodia, Authentication and Integrity in 

Telecommunication Signaling Network, 

Proceedings of the 12th IEEE Intern. Conf. and 

Workshops on the Eng. of Computer-Based Systems 

(2005). 

3See Ed Norris and Harry Hetz, ‘‘Caller ID 

Integrity Attacks,’’ The ISSA J. 6 (Jan. 2004). 

4 16 CFR 310.4(d), (e). 

5 47 CFR 64.1600(c), (d) (2009). 

6 47 CFR 64.1601(a), (d). 

7Rules and Regulations Regarding Calling 

Number Identification Service—Caller ID, 10 FCC 

Rcd. 11700, 11705 ¶9 (1994) (‘‘Second Report’’). 

8 68 FR at 44,166; Second Report, 10 FCC Rcd. at 

11708–09¶21. 

9Telephone service providers also offer call trace 

or ‘‘customer-originated trace’’ services that enable 

a subscriber to initiate a trace of the last call 

received. The subscriber initiates the trace by 

disconnecting the call and dialing a code that 

prompts the service provider to capture information 

that may assist law enforcement in tracing the 

origin of the call. The call trace may involve the use 

of CPN and automatic number service information. 

See 47 CFR 64.1601(d)(4)(iii) (exempting legally 

authorized call tracing or trapping procedures from 

restrictions on CPN delivery); 47 CFR 

64.1602(a)(3)(iv) (allowing disclosure of 

information from automatic number service or 

charge number service for the purpose of complying 

with applicable law or legal process). 

10Second Report, 10 FCC Rcd. at 11708, 11746; 

Powers, Calling Name Delivery, IEEEE International 

Conference on Communications, 1908 (Chicago, IL, 

1992); R. Robrock, II, ‘‘The Many Faces of the LIDB 

Database,’’ IEEE Intern. Conf. Comm., 1903, 1904 

(Chicago, IL, 1992); see, e.g., Cisco Systems, Inc., 

Calling Name Delivery (CNAM) (2007), available at 

http://www.cisco.or.at/en/US/docs/voice_ip_comm/ 

pgw/9/feature/module/9.7_3_/cnam.pdf. 

11Telephony protocols other than SS7 may 

transmit caller name information directly from the 

originator of the call, without relying on a query to 

a separate database. See Session Initiation Protocol, 

¶ 6.2 (Internet Working Group 1999), available at 

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2543.txt (describing 

optional ‘‘display-name’’ parameter in Internet 

telephony protocol). 

following the instructions in the 

Request for Comment part of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below. Comments in electronic form 

should be submitted at https:// 

ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ 

tsrcalleridanprm (and following the 

instructions on the Web-based form). 

Comments in paper form should be 

mailed or delivered to the following 

address: Federal Trade Commission, 

Office of the Secretary, Room H–113 

(Annex Q), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20580, in the 

manner detailed in the Request for 

Comment part of the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Tankersley, (202) 326–2991, 

Attorney, Division of Marketing 

Practices, Bureau of Consumer 

Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20580. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Summary 

When the Commission amended the 

Telemarketing Sales Rule (‘‘TSR’’ or 

‘‘Rule’’) in 2003, it added a requirement 

that telemarketers transmit identifying 

information to caller identification 

(‘‘Caller ID’’) services.1 Most companies 

that offer basic telephone service also 

offer services that will display to the 

recipient of the call the telephone 

number and name for the calling party. 

Traditional Caller ID services rely upon 

telecommunications signals that allow 

the caller’s local telephone exchange to 

send a telephone number of the calling 

party, and a code that signals whether 

or not the caller wants its number to be 

blocked. Enhanced Caller ID services— 

which, as the name implies, go beyond 

basic display of the calling party’s 

number—use directories or databases to 

associate the calling party number with 

a name. Thus, the ‘‘Caller ID’’ 

information provided to consumers may 

include both a telephone number and 

name for the originator of an incoming 

call. 

The use of Caller ID information, 

however, has changed with the growing 

availability of technologies that allow 

callers to alter the number that appears 

on the recipient’s Caller ID display. 

Many businesses now have access to 

technologies that allow them to transmit 

Caller ID numbers that are not 

associated with their geographical 

location, or that, when dialed, connect 

the caller to a voice mail service. Users 

of these technologies also have the 

ability to cause the recipient’s Caller ID 

equipment to display a telephone 

number that is not in service as the 

source of the call, or create the 

appearance that the call is coming from 

someone who is not affiliated with the 

actual caller.2 In addition, these 

advanced technologies also enable 

callers to control and manipulate the 

name information displayed by Caller 

ID services.3

The Commission solicits comments 

on whether changes should be made to 

the TSR to reflect the current use and 

capabilities of Caller ID technologies. In 

particular, the Commission is interested 

in whether the TSR should be amended 

to better achieve the objectives of the 

Caller ID provisions—including namely, 

to enable consumers and law 

enforcement to use Caller ID 

information to identify entities 

responsible for illegal telemarketing 

practices. The Commission also solicits 

comment on whether it should amend 

the TSR specifically to regulate services 

that misrepresent, conceal, or obscure 

the identity of telemarketers or sellers, 

or should expand the provisions of the 

TSR that require oral disclosure of the 

identity of the seller or charitable 

organization on whose behalf a call is 

being made to require additional or 

more specific disclosures.4

I. How Caller Identification Services 

Work 

Caller identification services rely 

upon identifying information 

transmitted with the signaling codes 

that accompany a telephone 

transmission. Telephone calls on the 

public switch telephone network are 

routed to their destinations by means of 

a specialized protocol called ‘‘signaling 

system seven,’’ or ‘‘SS7.’’ SS7 includes a 

calling party number (‘‘CPN’’) that is 

intended to identify the telephone 

number of the caller, and a privacy code 

that indicates whether access to this 

information should be restricted.5

Carriers using SS7 are generally 

required to transmit the CPN associated 

with an interstate call.6

The CPN is used in a number of 

services provided to consumers. If a 

consumer subscribes to a Caller ID 

service and has Caller ID-capable 

equipment, the telephone number 

identified as the source of the call will 

be displayed with the incoming call.7

Telephone service providers also use 

CPN to offer consumers call-return 

service. This feature provides call 

recipients who press *69 after receiving 

a telephone call either: (1) Information 

regarding the last incoming call, and the 

option to dial the caller back, or (2) the 

ability to return the last incoming call.8

Consumers can also purchase services 

or equipment that selectively blocks 

incoming calls, or selectively forwards 

calls based on the CPN transmitted with 

a call.9

Enhanced Caller ID services provide 

additional information by associating 

the CPN with a caller name. The caller 

name is typically obtained by the call 

recipient’s service provider sending a 

query to a centralized calling name 

(‘‘CNAM’’) database or directory that 

associates telephone numbers with 

names of up to 15 characters. If the 

database returns an associated name, the 

name, or both the name and the number, 

are displayed by the call recipient’s 

equipment while the call is ringing, 

unless a privacy code indicates that 

access to the name is blocked.10 The 

name information may come directly 

from telephone carriers or from database 

compilers that are not carriers.11

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 78181 

12See Rules and Policies Regarding Caller 

Number Identification Service, 9 FCC Rcd. 1764, 

1772–73 (1994) (‘‘First Report’’). ANI’s original 

purpose was to enable carriers to bill customers for 

calls. 

13Rules and Regulations Implementing the 

Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) of 

1991, 68 FR 44,144, 41,167 (2003). 

14Second Report, 10 FCC Rcd. at 11707 ¶ 17 & 

n.14. 

15 47 CFR 64.1602. 

16 47 CFR 64.1601(b). 

17Second Report, 10 FCC Rcd. at 11705 ¶ 10. 

These regulations require that carriers recognize 

*67 as a request for privacy when CPN would 

otherwise be transmitted to the recipient of the call. 

Dialing *67 before placing a call, referred to as ‘‘per 

call blocking,’’ allows subscribers to block their 

numbers from transmission to the public switched 

network. Telephone service providers may also 

block the transmission of CPN for particular lines, 

and carriers must recognize *82 as a request by the 

caller that the CPN be transmitted on an otherwise 

blocked line. See 47 CFR 64.1601(b); Rules and 

Policies Regarding Calling Number Identification 

Service—Caller ID, Third Report and Order, 

Memorandum Opinion and Order on Further 

Reconsideration, and Memorandum Opinion and 

Order on Reconsideration, FCC 97–103, CC Docket 

No. 91–281, 12 FCC Rcd 3867, 3870 (1997); Second 

Report, 10 FCC Rcd. at 11719, 11728–34. 

18 16 CFR 310.4(a)(7). 

19 Id. 

20 16 CFR 310.2(d). 

21 68 FR at 4624, 4626. 

22 Id. at 4626 n.534. 

23 Id. at 4627 (citing statement of commenter 

DialAmerica that, ‘‘[d]elivery of Caller ID 

information, that will be displayed on a consumer’s 

Caller ID device or that can be accessed through 

such services as *69, is essential to create 

accountability in the outbound telemarketing 

industry.’’). 

24 Id. 

25 Id. In adopting its regulations concerning Caller 

ID information, the FCC also noted that benefits of 

transmitting Caller ID information are not limited 

to consumers who subscribe to caller ID services: 

Consumers can also use the *69 feature to obtain 

caller ID information transmitted by a telemarketer. 

The *69 feature, available through many 

subscribers’ telephone service providers, provides 

either: (1) Information regarding the last incoming 

call, and the option to dial the caller back, or (2) 

the ability to return the last incoming call. Call 

information, however, would not be available for an 

incoming call, if the caller failed to transmit caller 

ID information or blocked such information. Caller 

ID also should increase accountability and provide 

an important resource for the FCC and FTC in 

pursuing enforcement actions against TCPA and 

TSR violators. 

68 FR at 44166. 

26See 68 FR 44144, 44179 (2003) (codified at 47 

CFR 64.1601(e)). 

27 47 CFR 64.1601(e)(i); see also 47 CFR 

64.1600(c) (defining CPN); id. 64.1600(b) (defining 

ANI). 

It is important to note that the CPN is 

not the same as the calling party’s 

‘‘charge number’’ or ‘‘automatic number 

identification’’ (‘‘ANI’’).12 ANI and its 

SS7-based equivalent, the charge 

number, refer to the delivery of the 

calling party’s billing number for billing 

and routing purposes.13 Although the 

CPN and the ANI/charge number for a 

given call may be the same, the CPN and 

ANI/charge number may differ and 

often do differ in calls from business 

lines.14

The CPN and ANI/charge number are 

also subject to different regulatory 

restrictions. Federal Communications 

Commission (‘‘FCC’’) regulations impose 

tighter restrictions on carriers’ 

disclosure of the ANI or charge number 

on interstate calls than the disclosure of 

CPN. These regulations, with exceptions 

that are not applicable to consumers 

receiving telemarketing calls, prohibit 

disclosure, reuse or sale of the 

telephone number or billing information 

without first notifying the originating 

telephone subscriber and obtaining 

affirmative consent of the subscriber for 

such reuse or sale.15 By contrast, 

privacy protection for the CPN depends 

upon a privacy indicator in the 

signaling protocol that allows the 

calling party to prevent the CPN from 

being revealed to the recipient of the 

call.16 FCC regulations protect the 

ability of calling parties to use this 

parameter to conceal CPN on a per-line 

or per-call basis. If the party originating 

a call has requested that the CPN not be 

transmitted, these regulations prohibit 

carriers from revealing the calling 

party’s name or number, and prohibit 

carriers from allowing the called party 

to automatically return the call.17

II. Current Requirements Concerning 

Caller Identification 

As amended in January 2003, the TSR 

provides that it is an abusive 

telemarketing act or practice for any 

seller or telemarketer to engage in 

‘‘[f]ailing to transmit or cause to be 

transmitted the telephone number, and, 

when made available by the 

telemarketer’s carrier, the name of the 

telemarketer, to any Caller ID service in 

use by a recipient of a telemarketing 

call.’’ 18 The Rule also permits the 

substitution of ‘‘the name of the seller or 

charitable organization on behalf of 

which a telemarketing call is placed, 

and the seller’s or charitable 

organization’s customer or donor service 

telephone number, which is answered 

during regular business hours.’’ 19

‘‘Caller identification service’’ is defined 

as ‘‘a service that allows a telephone 

subscriber to have the telephone 

number, and, where available, name of 

the calling party transmitted 

contemporaneously with the telephone 

call, and displayed on a device in or 

connected to the subscriber’s 

telephone.’’ 20

In the Statement of Basis and Purpose 

adopting the TSR, the Commission 

explained that requiring telemarketers 

to transmit information used by Caller 

ID services has three benefits. First, 

requiring the transmission of Caller ID 

information promotes consumers’ 

privacy by allowing them to screen out 

unwanted calls and identify companies 

that have contacted them so that they 

can place ‘‘do-not-call’’ requests to those 

companies.21 Indeed, many consumers 

subscribe to Caller ID to identify 

incoming calls from telemarketers and 

screen out unwanted telemarketing 

calls.22

Second, eliminating anonymity in 

telemarketing benefits both consumers 

and industry by promoting increased 

accountability.23 Caller ID information 

provides a record of identification that 

is available to the consumer after the 

telemarketing call is complete. Without 

such a record, consumers who have 

received unlawful telemarketing calls— 

such as abandoned calls or prerecorded 

solicitations—find it difficult, if not 

impossible, to ascribe these calls to a 

particular telemarketer.24 Accurate 

Caller ID information increases the 

ability of consumers to distinguish 

between businesses that are responsible 

for deceptive and abusive telemarketing, 

and businesses that adopt effective 

measures to prevent such calls. 

Finally, requiring the transmission of 

Caller ID information by telemarketers 

benefits law enforcement. The 

transmission of telemarketers’ Caller ID 

information should help identify sellers 

and telemarketers that fail to honor ‘‘donot-call’’ requests by consumers or 

abandon calls, and reduce fraud before 

it occurs by enabling consumers to 

contact government agencies or the 

Better Business Bureau to verify the 

legitimacy of a telemarketer or seller.25

In July 2003, six months after the 

Commission adopted these 

requirements in the TSR, the FCC 

adopted regulations pursuant to the 

Telephone Communications Privacy Act 

(‘‘TCPA’’), 47 U.S.C. 227, that provide 

that any person or entity who engages 

in telemarketing must transmit ‘‘caller 

identification information.’’ 26 The text 

of the FCC regulations is not identical, 

but is substantially similar to 16 CFR 

310.4(a)(7). The FCC regulations specify 

that ‘‘caller identification information 

must include either CPN or ANI, and, 

when made available by the 

telemarketer’s carrier, the name of the 

telemarketer.’’ 27 Like the TSR, the FCC’s 

regulations also allow the person or 

entity making the call to fulfill this 

obligation by transmitting the ‘‘name of 

the seller on behalf of which the 

telemarketing call is placed and the 

seller’s customer service telephone 

number.’’ Id. Furthermore, ‘‘the 

telephone number so provided must 

permit any individual to make a do-notmstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

78182 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

28See, e.g., Anti-Caller ID Spoofing Act, La. Rev. 

Stat. tit. 51, ch.19–C; Ok. Stat. Ann. §§ 776.22, 

776.23; Internet Caller Identification Act, Ill. Comp. 

Stat. § 517/10. 

29See La. Rev. Stat. § 844.2.A.(1) (telemarketer 

must have identification code that will correctly 

identify the name of the telephone solicitor); Mont. 

Code Ann. § 30–14–1412 (telemarketer may 

substitute ‘‘name and number that accurately 

identify the entity causing the call to be made and 

a working telephone number at which the entity’s 

personnel can be contacted.’’); N.H. Rev. Stat. § 359– 

E:5–a (telemarketer may not prevent ‘‘caller 

identification information for telephone solicitor’s 

lines used to make telephone calls’’ from being 

shown by caller identification device); Tex. Bus. & 

Comm. Code Ann. § 304.151(b)(2) (telemarketer 

may not fail to provide caller identification 

information in a manner that is accessible by a 

caller identification service if the telemarketer is 

capable of providing the information in that 

manner); Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. § 413/15(c) (live 

operator soliciting sale of goods or services may not 

impede display of ‘‘the solicitor’s telephone 

number’’); 2010 Tenn. Pub. Acts, Ch. 684 (requiring 

that automatic dial announcing devices display the 

number utilized by the dialing equipment, unless 

the device displays a telephone number that has an 

area code within the state or a toll-free number that 

is answered during regular business hours and the 

name of the person is displayed along with the 

telephone number). 

30 16 CFR 310.4(d)(1)–(3); see also 15 U.S.C. 

6102(3)(C) (statute directs Commission to adopt 

rules that include ‘‘a requirement that any person 

engaged in telemarketing for the sale of goods or 

services shall promptly and clearly disclose to the 

person receiving the call that the purpose of the call 

is to sell goods or services and make such other 

disclosures as the Commission deems appropriate, 

including the nature and price of the goods and 

services.’’). 

If a prize promotion is offered, the telemarketer 

must also disclose that no purchase or payment is 

necessary to be able to win a prize or participate 

in a prize promotion and that any purchase or 

payment will not increase the person’s chances of 

winning. Id. 16 CFR 310.4(d)(4). FCC regulations 

also require verbal disclosure of the identity of the 

caller in addition to the transmission of Caller ID 

information. See 47 CFR 64.1200(e)(iv) (2009); 68 

FR at 44,167 (‘‘Provision of Caller ID information 

does not obviate the requirement for a caller to 

verbally supply identification information during a 

call.’’). 

31 16 CFR 310.4(e); see also 15 U.S.C. 6102(3)(D) 

(statute directs Commission to adopt rules that 

include ‘‘a requirement that any person engaged in 

telemarketing for the solicitation of charitable 

contributions, donations, or gifts of money or any 

other thing of value, shall promptly and clearly 

disclose to the person receiving the call that the 

purpose of the call is to solicit charitable 

contributions, donations, or gifts, and make such 

other disclosures as the Commission considers 

appropriate, including the name and mailing 

address of the charitable organization on behalf of 

which the solicitation is made.’’). 

32 68 FR at 4648. 

33 47 CFR 64.1200(d)(4). 

34 15 U.S.C. 1692d(6). 

35Knoll v. Allied Interstate, Inc., 502 F. Supp. 2d 

943, 946 (D. Minn. 2007) (allegation that debt 

collector arranged for false caller name ‘‘Jennifer 

Smith’’ to be displayed on caller identification 

device stated a claim for violation of 15 U.S.C. 

1692d(6)). 

36FTC v. EMC Mortgage Comp., C.A. No. 4:08– 

cv–338, Complaint (E.D. Tex. Sept. 9, 2008). The 

defendants, EMC Mortgage Corporation and The 

Bear Stearns Companies LLC, agreed to the entry of 

a stipulated judgment that settled this claim and 

other claims in the complaint without admission or 

adjudication of liability. Id., Stipulated Final 

Judgment and Order (filed Sept. 9, 2008). 

37H. Rep. 461, Truth in Caller ID Act of 2010, 

111th Cong., 2d Sess. 7 (2010) (describing legitimate 

reasons for manipulation of Caller ID information 

in business and non-business calls). 

38For example, the Commission has received tens 

of thousands of complaints concerning 

telemarketing calls to telephone numbers listed on 

the National Do Not Call Registry for which the 

calling numbers transmitted with calls are not valid 

telephone numbers but, rather, a string of digits that 

does not correspond to any operating telephone 

number (e.g., 000–000–0000). Commission 

call request during regular business 

hours.’’ Id. Although the FCC’s 

regulations generally permit a caller to 

protect its anonymity by blocking Caller 

ID information, Section 64.1601(e)(2) 

unequivocally prohibits telemarketers 

from blocking the transmission of such 

information. In adopting these 

requirements, the FCC explained: 

Consistent with the FTC’s rules, CPN can 

include any number associated with the 

telemarketer or party on whose behalf the 

call is made, that allows the consumer to 

identify the caller. This includes a number 

assigned to the telemarketer by its carrier, the 

specific number from which a sales 

representative placed a call, the number for 

the party on whose behalf the telemarketer is 

making the call, or the seller’s customer 

service number. 

68 FR at 44167. 

Many states have also adopted laws 

aimed at prohibiting the transmission of 

deceptive Caller ID information or 

requiring telemarketers to transmit 

specified information. These state 

requirements include recently adopted 

statutes that specifically prohibit the use 

of computers or Internet telephone 

equipment to insert false information 

into Caller ID systems.28 While most 

state statutes simply prohibit blocking 

or interfering with Caller ID services, 

several state laws impose obligations on 

telemarketers to transmit specific 

information, such as codes that identify 

the name of the telemarketer, or a 

telephone number at which consumers 

can contact personnel of the entity 

responsible for the telephone call.29

Independent of the Caller ID 

provisions of the TSR, the Rule also 

requires that telemarketers orally 

disclose the seller and purpose of the 

call. Specifically, the TSR mandates that 

‘‘a telemarketer in an outbound 

telephone call or internal or external 

upsell to induce the purchase of goods 

or services’’ disclose truthfully, 

promptly, and in a clear and 

conspicuous manner: (1) The identity of 

the seller; (2) that the purpose of the call 

is to sell goods or services; and (3) the 

nature of the goods or services.30 In a 

call to solicit charitable solicitations, the 

telemarketer must similarly disclose the 

charitable organization on behalf of 

which the request is being made, and 

the purpose of the telephone call.31

When the Commission adopted these 

provisions in 2003, it rejected proposals 

that it add the telephone number of the 

seller or charitable organization to this 

list of introductory oral disclosures, in 

part, because it believed that the 

requirement to transmit Caller ID 

information would help mitigate the 

problems identified by those who 

advocated requiring oral disclosure of 

the seller’s telephone number at the 

outset of an outbound telephone call.32

By contrast, while FCC regulations 

adopted pursuant to the Telephone 

Communications Privacy Act also 

require that a person making a 

telemarketing call disclose ‘‘the name of 

the person or entity on whose behalf the 

call is being made,’’ they further require 

disclosure of ‘‘a telephone number or 

address at which the person or entity 

may be contacted.’’33

The Commission also has addressed 

the manipulation of Caller ID 

information in the context of debt 

collection. The Federal Debt Collection 

Practices Act provides that debt 

collectors may not, in connection with 

the collection of a debt, place telephone 

calls ‘‘without meaningful disclosure of 

the caller’s identity.’’34 Courts have 

affirmed that this obligation applies to 

the information transmitted to Caller ID 

services when a debt collector places 

such calls.35 In 2008, the Commission 

charged that a debt collector violated 

this provision of the statute by making 

collection calls that did not display the 

debt collector’s name, and manipulating 

the calling party number so that it 

would display a telephone number with 

the borrower’s local area code.36

III. Caller Identification Spoofing and 

Abuse 

Current telecommunications 

technologies make it possible for 

telemarketers to select the numbers that 

are transmitted to Caller ID services. 

Telemarketers also can make 

arrangements to control the calling 

names in databases used by Caller ID 

services. These technologies can be used 

to serve legitimate interests of 

telemarketers, sellers, and charitable 

organizations in altering the caller 

number and name displayed by Caller 

ID services.37

The increasingly common 

manipulation of Caller ID information, 

however, also has undermined the 

ability of consumers and law 

enforcement to identify the entities 

responsible for illegal telemarketing 

practices.38 When telemarketers that 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 78183 

enforcement actions also have uncovered evidence 

that telemarketers engaged in abusive and deceptive 

practices have transmitted valid telephone numbers 

that are not associated with the telemarketer or 

seller responsible for the calls. Since 2005, the 

Commission has brought or referred to the 

Department of Justice ten enforcement actions that 

included charges that a telemarketer had violated 

the TSR by failing to transmit appropriate caller 

identification information. See United States v. 

Srikanth Venkataraman, Civ. No. 3:06–cv–01928– 

MLC–JJH (D. N.J. filed Apr. 26, 2006); United States 

v. Civic Development Group, LLC, Civ. No. 2:07–cv– 

04593–FSH–PS (D.N.J. filed Sept. 25, 2007); United 

States v. Global Mortgage Funding, Inc., Civ. No. 

8:07–cv–1275 (C.D. Cal. filed Oct. 30, 2007); United 

States v. Guardian Communications, Inc., Civ. No. 

4:07–cv–04070–MMM–JAG (C.D. Ill. filed Nov. 6, 

2007); FTC v. MCS Programs, LLC, Civ. No. 09–cv– 

5380–RJB (W.D. Wash. filed June 25, 2009); FTC v. 

JPM Accelerated Services, Inc., Civ. No. 6:09–CV– 

2021–ORL–28–KRS (M.D. Fla. filed Nov. 30, 2009); 

FTC v. 2145183 Ontario, Inc., Civ. No. 1 09–CV– 

3307 (N.D. Ill. filed Nov. 30, 2009); FTC v. 

Economic Relief Technologies, LLC, Civ. No. 09C– 

7423 (N.D. Ga. filed Nov. 30, 2009); FTC v. 

Transcontinental Warranty, Inc., Civ. No. 

09CV2927 (N.D. Ill., filed May 13, 2009); FTC v. 

Voice Touch, LLC, Civ. No. 09CV2929 (N.D. Ill. filed 

May 13, 2009). 

39Complaint ¶ 17, United States v. Srikanth 

Venkataraman (d/b/a/Scorpio Systems), Civ. No. 

3:06–cv–01928–MLC–JJH (D. N.J. filed Apr. 26, 

2006) (defendant transmitted phony caller 

identification number 234–567–8923). 

40Arkansas v. SVM, Inc., Civ. No. 4:09–cv– 

00456–BSM (E.D. Ark. filed Dec. 22, 2009); see also 

Complaint ¶ 22, United States v. Guardian 

Communications, Inc., Civ. No. 4:07–cv–04070– 

MMM–JAG, (C.D. Ill. filed Nov. 6, 2007) (defendant 

caused ‘‘Cust Service,’’ ‘‘Services, Inc.,’’ ‘‘Card 

Services,’’ ‘‘DWC,’’ or ‘‘LTR’’ to be transmitted as the 

name of the caller). 

make improper robocalls or repeatedly 

call persons who have made do-not-call 

requests use ‘‘spoofed’’ calling party 

numbers, consumers cannot identify the 

source of the calls and, therefore, cannot 

take effective action to stop them. 

Moreover, false or misleading Caller ID 

information frustrates law enforcement 

investigations seeking to hold 

telemarketers responsible for illegal 

conduct, and harms the reputation of 

telemarketers and sellers who are not 

responsible for the unlawful telephone 

calls. 

In addition to allowing telemarketers 

to ‘‘spoof’’ the names and numbers 

transmitted to Caller ID services, these 

technologies also have been used to 

manipulate Caller ID in other ways that 

frustrate the purpose of the TSR’s 

requirements regarding Caller ID. For 

example, telemarketers have transmitted 

calling party numbers that are valid 

telephone numbers but have only an 

attenuated connection to the 

telemarketer or seller and cannot readily 

be used by consumers to identify the 

source of a call.39 The telephone 

numbers transmitted in telemarketing 

campaigns often are not associated with 

the telemarketer or the seller in any 

publicly available directory, or even in 

carrier databases that identify the 

subscriber to whom the telephone 

number is assigned. Similarly, 

telemarketers have arranged for the 

transmission of caller name information 

that does not identify the telemarketer 

or seller by name, and provides 

consumers with only cryptic 

abbreviations or generic terms, such as 

‘‘Warranty Alert,’’ that do not allow the 

consumer to identify the telemarketer or 

seller.40 In another example, consumers 

who attempt to identify the entity 

responsible for a call by telephoning the 

telephone numbers transmitted to a 

Caller ID service have been unable to do 

so because their calls are not connected 

to a live representative of the 

telemarketer or seller. Instead, calls to 

the number displayed by the Caller ID 

service are answered by a recording that 

offers to accept a do-not-call request but 

does not identify the telemarketer or the 

seller that initiated the telephone call. 

The Commission anticipates that the 

manipulation of Caller ID information 

may become more prevalent as 

advanced telecommunications and 

networking technologies become more 

ubiquitous and continue to develop. In 

the past, manipulating Caller ID 

information required special phone 

connections and expensive equipment. 

The barriers to manipulating Caller ID, 

however, have been reduced by 

advances in technology and the 

increasing availability of services such 

as Voice over Internet Protocol, or 

Internet protocol-enabled (‘‘IP-enabled’’) 

voice services. Moreover, telemarketers 

can obtain access to the telephone 

network through service providers who 

offer the ability to spoof Caller ID 

numbers or names. 

At the same time, the Commission 

recognizes that advances in 

communications technologies may 

afford consumers more control over 

whether and how they receive 

telephone calls, including calls from 

telemarketers. Effective regulation of 

Caller ID may promote the development 

of technologies that increase consumers’ 

ability to prevent or minimize the harms 

from abusive telemarketing practices. 

IV. Request for Comment 

The Commission requests comments 

on whether it is possible to amend the 

Caller ID provisions of the TSR to 

promote the delivery of more reliable or 

specific Caller ID information. The 

Commission seeks information on how 

Caller ID is being used by consumers 

and regulated parties, and how 

telemarketers and their service 

providers may use Caller ID 

technologies in ways that are benign or 

abusive. The Commission is particularly 

interested in information concerning 

recently introduced or soon to be 

introduced technologies that affect the 

ability of consumers and law 

enforcement to use Caller ID 

information. Commenters should 

provide detailed, factual information to 

support their observations or proposals. 

The Commission solicits comments 

on the following specific questions: 

(1) What services exist to assist 

consumers in identifying the source of 

deceptive or abusive calls in which the 

telemarketer does not truthfully disclose 

the name of the telemarketer, seller, or 

charitable organization at the outset of 

the call or abandons a call without 

identifying the source of the call? Are 

these services dependent on reliable 

transmission of CPN or equivalent 

information? How much does it cost 

consumers to use these services? 

(2) How widespread is consumer use 

of Caller ID services to screen unwanted 

calls? Do consumers use other services 

that rely on transmission of CPN, such 

as call-blocking equipment, to avoid or 

block unwelcome telemarketing calls? 

(3) Would changes to the TSR 

improve the ability of Caller ID services 

to accurately disclose to consumers the 

source of telemarketing calls, or 

improve the ability of service providers 

to block calls in which information on 

the source of the call is not available or 

has been spoofed? If so, what specific 

amendments should be made to the 

TSR? 

(4) Should the Commission amend the 

Caller ID provisions of the TSR to 

recognize or anticipate specific 

developments in telecommunications 

technologies relating to the transmission 

and use of Caller ID information? If so, 

what specific amendments should the 

Commission make? 

(5) What role do telephone service 

providers (including those that are not 

common carriers) play in providing 

services, equipment or software that 

allows telemarketers, sellers and 

charitable organizations to manipulate 

the caller number and name information 

in telemarketing calls? The TSR 

provides that it is a violation of the Rule 

for a person to provide substantial 

assistance or support to any seller or 

telemarketer when that person knows or 

consciously avoids knowing that the 

seller or telemarketer is engaged in any 

act or practice that violates enumerated 

provisions of the Rule. Is this provision 

adequate to regulate service providers 

that assist telemarketers and sellers in 

manipulating caller number and name 

information? 

(6) When the Commission adopted the 

Caller ID provisions of the TSR in 2003, 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

78184 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

41The Commission observed that ‘‘[a] very small 

number of telemarketers may be located in areas of 

the country that are served only by telephone 

companies that are not capable of transmitting 

Caller ID information or assigning a telephone 

number to the telemarketer that can be transmitted 

to a called consumer.’’ 68 FR at 4626. In July 2003, 

the FCC made similar observations concerning the 

feasibility of telemarketers transmitting caller ID 

information and stated that a telemarketer could 

transmit ANI as an alternative to CPN. 68 FR at 

44,167. 

42 In adopting 16 CFR 310.4(a)(7), the 

Commission observed that this regulation is not 

inconsistent with the FCC’s regulations concerning 

Caller ID blocking to protect privacy because those 

regulations are designed to address specific calling 

situations where protecting the caller’s anonymity 

is warranted, such as undercover law enforcement 

operations and calls placed from battered women’s 

shelters. 68 FR at 4627. No such privacy 

justification applies to telemarketing calls. Id.; 

accord 68 FR at 44,167 (FCC concludes that ‘‘the 

caller ID requirements for commercial telephone 

solicitation calls do not implicate the privacy 

concerns associated with blocking capability for 

individuals’’ and that it ‘‘has determined to prohibit 

any request by a telemarketer to block caller ID 

information or ANI.’’). The Commission does not 

anticipate proposing any changes to the TSR that 

would be inconsistent with the FCC regulations 

which, since 2004, have expressly prohibited any 

person or entity engaged in telemarketing, other 

than a tax-exempt nonprofit organization, from 

blocking the transmission of Caller ID information. 

47 CFR 64.1601(e)(2). 

43See North American Numbering Plan, 

Geographic NPAs In Service Sorted by Number, 

available at http://www.nanpa.com/nas/public/ 

npasInServiceByNumberReport.do?method=display

NpasInServiceByNumberReport. 

44Cf. Organization for Economic Cooperation and 

Development, Guidelines for Consumer Protection 

in the Context of Electronic Commerce, Part III.A 

(1999), available at http://www.oecd.org/document/ 

51/0,2340,en_2649_34267_1824435_

1_1_1_1,00.html (businesses engaged in electronic 

commerce should provide accurate, clear and easily 

accessible information about themselves sufficient 

to allow, at a minimum, ‘‘prompt, easy and effective 

consumer communication with the business’’). 

it acknowledged the possibility that a 

small number of telemarketers may not 

have access to telecommunications 

systems capable of transmitting calling 

number information.41 Do all 

telemarketers now have access to 

technology that allows them to transmit 

or arrange for the transmission of such 

information? Should the Commission 

amend the Caller ID provisions of the 

TSR to specify that telemarketers, 

sellers, and charitable organizations 

must use technology that causes the 

CPN to be transmitted with all 

telemarketing calls? Commenters should 

address whether there are currently 

areas that are served only by telephone 

companies that are not capable of 

transmitting Caller ID information or, 

more specifically, not capable of 

transmitting CPN. If services that 

transmit CPN are available to a 

telemarketer, is there any justification 

for giving such a telemarketer the option 

of using technology that does not 

transmit CPN, but transmits ANI or 

some other identifier? Specifically, is it 

more expensive to use a service that 

transmits CPN than one that does not? 

If so, how much more expensive? 

(7) Should the Commission amend the 

Caller ID provisions of the TSR to 

require, without qualification, that 

telemarketers use technologies or 

subscribe to services that provide caller 

name identification to recipients who 

use enhanced Caller ID services? Are 

there any telemarketers that do not have 

access to services that cause caller name 

information to be transmitted to Caller 

ID services? What portion of consumers 

receive caller name information through 

Caller ID services? Would requiring 

telemarketers to use technologies or 

services that provide caller name 

information increase telemarketers’ 

costs? If so, how much does it cost to 

use these technologies or services? 

(8) Should the Commission amend the 

Caller ID provisions of the TSR to 

further harmonize the TSR with the 

regulations promulgated by the FCC 

pursuant to the TCPA? Have differences 

in the language in 16 CFR 310.4(a)(7) 

and 47 CFR 64.1601(e) caused problems 

in industry compliance?42

(9) Should the Commission amend the 

Caller ID provisions of the TSR to 

further specify the characteristics of the 

telephone number transmitted to any 

Caller ID service? For example, should 

the TSR require that the telephone 

number transmitted be: 

(a) a number that is listed in publicly 

available directories as the telephone 

number of the telemarketer, seller, or 

charitable organization? 

(b) a number with an area code and 

prefix that are associated with the 

physical location or principal place of 

business of the telemarketer or the 

seller?43

(c) a number that is answered by live 

representatives or automated services 

that identify the telemarketer, seller, or 

charitable organization by name? 

(d) a number that provides for prompt 

and easy communication with the live 

representatives of the telemarketer, 

seller, or charitable organization?44 or 

(e) a number that is the same as the 

telephone number that is listed in direct 

mail solicitations or other advertising 

(such as Internet or broadcast media) as 

the telephone number for the 

telemarketer, seller, or charitable 

organization? 

(10) Should the Commission amend 

the Caller ID provisions of the TSR to 

permit a seller or telemarketer to use 

trade names or product names, rather 

than the actual name of the seller or 

telemarketer, in the caller name 

provided to Caller ID services? Should 

the Commission allow the use of 

acronyms or abbreviations? If so, are 

there circumstances in which the use of 

an acronym, abbreviation, trade name or 

product name should be prohibited? 

(11) Do consumers benefit from 

provisions in the TSR that give calling 

parties the option of substituting the 

number and name of the seller or 

charitable organization for the number 

and name of the telemarketer? Should 

the Commission amend the Caller ID 

provisions of the TSR to require that the 

name provided to Caller ID services be 

the name of the seller or charitable 

organization on behalf of which a 

telemarketing call is placed? Should the 

Commission amend the TSR to allow 

telemarketers to cause Caller ID services 

to display the number of the 

telemarketer, but display the name of 

the seller? 

(12) In general, what benefits has the 

Rule provided to consumers, 

telemarketers, sellers, and charitable 

organizations? What evidence supports 

the asserted benefits? 

(13) Could the benefits that the Rule 

has provided to consumers, 

telemarketers, sellers, and charitable 

organizations be achieved through less 

burdensome or less restrictive means? 

(14) In considering amendments to 16 

CFR 310.4(a)(7), should the Commission 

also consider amendments to 16 CFR 

310.4(d) and (e), which describe the oral 

disclosures that must be made to 

identify the seller or charitable 

organization at the outset of an 

outbound telephone call or upsell? 

Interested parties are invited to 

submit written comments electronically 

or in paper form. Comments should 

state ‘‘Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking Concerning Caller 

Identification, Matter P104405’’ both in 

the text and on the envelope. 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 

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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 240 / Wednesday, December 15, 2010 / Proposed Rules 78185 

45The comment must also be accompanied by an 

explicit request for confidential treatment, 

including the factual and legal basis for the request, 

and must identify the specific portions of the 

comment to be withheld from the public record. 

The request will be granted or denied by the 

Commission’s General Counsel, consistent with 

applicable law and the public interest. See 

Commission Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). 

1Commission regulations referred to herein are 

found at 17 CFR Ch. 1 (2010). They are accessible 

on the Commission’s Web site at http:// 

www.cftc.gov. 

from any person and which is privileged 

or confidential,’’ as provided in Section 

6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and 

Commission Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 

4.10(a)(2). Comments containing 

material for which confidential 

treatment is requested must be filed in 

paper form and clearly labeled 

‘‘Confidential.’’ 45

Because mail delivered to the FTC by 

the United States Postal Service 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:// 

ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ 

tsrcalleridanprm (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/tsrcalleridanprm. 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. You may also visit the FTC Web 

site at http://www.ftc.gov to read the 

Notice and the news release describing 

it. 

A comment filed in paper form 

should reference the ‘‘Advance Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking Concerning 

Caller Identification, Matter P104405’’ 

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–113 (Annex Q), 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20580. The FTC 

requests 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 Web 

site, to the extent practicable, at 

http://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 

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. 

By direction of the Commission. 

Donald S. Clark, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31390 Filed 12–14–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Parts 1, 21, and 39 

RIN 3038–AC98 

Information Management 

Requirements for Derivatives Clearing 

Organizations 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (Commission or 

CFTC) is proposing regulations to 

implement certain core principles for 

derivatives clearing organizations 

(DCOs) as amended by Title VII of the 

Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 

Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank 

Act). The proposed regulations would 

establish standards for compliance with 

DCO Core Principles J (Reporting), K 

(Recordkeeping), L (Public Information), 

and M (Information Sharing). 

Additionally, the Commission is 

proposing technical amendments to 

parts 1 and 21 in connection with the 

proposed regulations. Finally, the 

Commission also is proposing to 

delegate to the Director of the Division 

of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight 

the Commission’s authority to perform 

certain functions in connection with the 

proposed regulations. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

February 14, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by RIN number 3038–AC98, 

by any of the following methods: 

• Agency Web site, via its Comments 

Online process: http:// 

comments.cftc.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

through the Web site. 

• Mail: David A. Stawick, Secretary of 

the Commission, Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission, Three Lafayette 

Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20581. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as 

mail above. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.Regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

All comments must be submitted in 

English, or if not, accompanied by an 

English translation. Comments will be 

posted as received to http:// 

www.cftc.gov. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. If you wish the 

Commission to consider information 

that you believe is exempt from 

disclosure under the Freedom of 

Information Act, a petition for 

confidential treatment of the exempt 

information may be submitted according 

to the procedures established in 

§ 145.9.1

The Commission reserves the right, 

but shall have no obligation, to review, 

pre-screen, filter, redact, refuse or 

remove any or all of your submission 

from http://www.cftc.gov that it may 

deem to be inappropriate for 

publication, such as obscene language. 

All submissions that have been redacted 

or removed that contain comments on 

the merits of the rulemaking will be 

retained in the public comment file and 

will be considered as required under the 

Administrative Procedure Act and other 

applicable laws, and may be accessible 

under the Freedom of Information Act. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Phyllis P. Dietz, Associate Director, 

202–418–5449, pdietz@cftc.gov, or Jacob 

Preiserowicz, Attorney-Advisor, 202– 

418–5432, jpreiserowicz@cftc.gov, 

Division of Clearing and Intermediary 

Oversight, Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 

1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20581. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Proposed Regulations 

A. Reporting Requirements 

1. Information Required on a Daily Basis 

2. Information Required on a Quarterly 

Basis 

3. Information Required on an Annual 

Basis 

4. Event-Specific Reporting 

(a) Decrease in Financial Resources 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS