Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Notices 42303 

1 The comment must be accompanied by an 

explicit request for confidential treatment, 

including the factual and legal basis for the request, 

and must identify the specific portions of the 

comment to be withheld from the public record. 

The request will be granted or denied by the 

Commission’s General Counsel, consistent with 

applicable law and the public interest. See FTC 

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

includes whether the acquisition of the 

nonbanking company complies with the 

standards in section 4 of the BHC Act 

(12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise 

noted, nonbanking activities will be 

conducted throughout the United States. 

Additional information on all bank 

holding companies may be obtained 

from the National Information Center 

website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. 

Unless otherwise noted, comments 

regarding each of these applications 

must be received at the Reserve Bank 

indicated or the offices of the Board of 

Governors not later than September 17, 

2009. 

A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas 

City (Todd Offenbacker, Assistant Vice 

President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas 

City, Missouri 64198–0001: 

1. Bern Bancshares, Inc., Bern, 

Kansas; to acquire up to an additional 

1.57 percent, for a total of 6.48 percent, 

of the voting shares of UBT Bancshares, 

Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire 

additional voting shares of United Bank 

& Trust, both in Marysville, Kansas. 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, August 18, 2009. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Deputy Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. E9–20110 Filed 8–20–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210–01–S 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission for OMB 

Review; Comment Request; Extension 

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 is seeking public 

comments on its proposal to extend 

through September 30, 2012, the current 

PRA clearance requirements contained 

in the FTC Red Flags/Card Issuers/ 

Address Discrepancies Rules (‘‘Red 

Flags Rule’’ or ‘‘Rule’’). The current 

clearance expires on September 30, 

2009. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before September 21, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 

invited to submit written comments 

electronically or in paper form. 

Comments should refer to ‘‘Red Flags 

Rule, PRA Comment, P095406’’ to 

facilitate the organization of comments. 

Please note that comments—including 

your name and your state—will be 

placed on the public record of this 

proceeding—including on the publicly 

accessible FTC website, at (http:// 

www.ftc.gov/os/publiccoments/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 secrets and commercial or 

financial information obtained from a 

person and 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 material for which 

confidential treatment is requested must 

be filed in paper form, must be clearly 

labeled ‘‘Confidential,’’ and must 

comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 

4.9(c).1

Because paper mail addressed to the 

FTC is subject to delay due to 

heightened security screening, please 

consider submitting your comments in 

electronic form. Comments filed in 

electronic form should be submitted by 

using the following weblink: (http:// 

secure.commentworks.com/ftcRedFlagsPRA) (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 

(http://secure.commentworks.com/ftcRedFlagsPRA). If this Notice appears at 

(http://www.regulations.gov/search/ 

index.jsp), you may also file an 

electronic comment through that 

website. The Commission will consider 

all comments that regulations.gov 

forwards to it. You may also visit the 

FTC website at http://www.ftc.gov to 

read the Notice and the news release 

describing it. 

A comment filed in paper form 

should include the ‘‘Red Flags Rule, 

PRA Comment, P095406’’ reference both 

in the text and on the envelope, and 

should be mailed or delivered to the 

following address: Federal Trade 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 

Room H-135 (Annex J), 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, 

DC 20580. The FTC is requesting that 

any comment filed in paper form be sent 

by courier or overnight service, if 

possible, because U.S. postal mail in the 

Washington area and at the Commission 

is subject to delay due to heightened 

security precautions. 

The FTC Act and other laws the 

Commission administers permit the 

collection of public comments to 

consider and use in this proceeding as 

appropriate. The Commission will 

consider all timely and responsive 

public comments that it receives, 

whether filed in paper or electronic 

form. Comments received will be 

available to the public on the FTC 

website, to the extent practicable, at 

(http://www.ftc.gov/os/ 

publiccoments.shtm). As a matter of 

discretion, the Commission makes every 

effort to remove home contact 

information for individuals from the 

public comments it receives before 

placing those comments on the FTC 

website. More information, including 

routine uses permitted by the Privacy 

Act, may be found in the FTC’s privacy 

policy, at (http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/ 

privacy.shtm). 

All comments should additionally be 

submitted to: Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, Office of 

Management and Budget, Attention: 

Desk Officer for Federal Trade 

Commission. Comments should be 

submitted via facsimile to (202) 395- 

5167 because U.S. postal mail at the 

OMB is subject to delays due to 

heightened security precautions. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Toporoff, Attorney, Bureau of 

Consumer Protection, (202) 326-2252, 

Federal Trade Commission, 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, 

DC 20580. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 

24 2009, the FTC sought comment on 

the information collection requirements 

associated with the Red Flags Rule, 16 

CFR Part 681 (Control Number: 3084- 

0137). 74 FR 18709. No comments were 

received. 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 the 

existing paperwork clearance for the 

Rule. All comments should be filed as 

prescribed in the ADDRESSES section 

above, and must be received on or 

before September 21, 2009. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
42304 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Notices 

2 The Rule refers to the definition of ‘‘financial 

institution’’ that is found in the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 

§ 1681a(t). 

3 The Rule defines ‘‘credit’’ and ‘‘creditor’’ by 

referring to the definition found in the FCRA, 15 

U.S.C. § 1681a(r)(5) which, in turn, refers to section 

702 of the ECOA. 

4 As of December 31, 2005, there were 3,302 statechartered federally-insured credit unions and 362 

state-chartered nonfederally insured credit unions. 

See (www.ncua.gov/news/quick_facts/ 

quick_facts.html) and ‘‘Disclosures for NonFederally Insured Depository Institutions under the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 

Improvement Act (FDICIA),’’ 70 FR 12823 (Ma. 16, 

2005). As of 2007, there were 3,913 property, 

casualty and life, and health insurance companies. 

See Insurance Department Resources Report 2007, 

published by the National Association of Insurance 

Commissioners (NAIC). As of September 2007, 

there were 4,733 registered investment companies. 

See Securities and Exchange Commission, Proposed 

Regulation S-P, at 13709 (March 13, 2008). As of 

December 31, 2007, there were 5,561 broker-dealers. 

See Securities and Exchange Commission, 

Amendments to Regulation SHO, Release No. 34- 

58773, at 45 (Oct. 14, 2008) (available at 

www.sec.gov/rules/final/2008/34-58773.pdf). As of 

November 2008, there were 39,408 money service 

businesses. See Department of the Treasury 

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network MSB 

Registration List (available at (www.msb.gov/pdf/ 

msb_registration_list.pdf)). 

5 See infra notes 7 and 8 accounting for this sum 

total. 

I. Overview of the Rule 

The Rule implements sections 114 

and 315 of the Fair and Accurate Credit 

Transactions Act of 2003 (‘‘FACT Act’’). 

These sections amend the Fair Credit 

Reporting Act of 1970 (‘‘FCRA’’), 15 

U.S.C. 1681 et seq., to require 

businesses to undertake measures to 

prevent identity theft and to increase 

the accuracy of consumer reports. 

Specifically, section 114 amends 

section 615 of the FCRA to require 

creditors and financial institutions to 

develop and implement written Identity 

Theft Prevention Programs. Section 114 

also mandates specific regulations that 

require credit and debit card issuers to 

assess the validity of notifications of 

changes of address under certain 

circumstances. Section 315 of FACT Act 

adds section 605(h) to the FCRA and 

requires regulations that provide 

guidance on what users of consumer 

reports must do when they receive a 

notice of address discrepancy from a 

nationwide consumer reporting agency 

(‘‘CRA’’). 

II. Description of Collections of 

Information 

A. Section 114 

The Rule requires financial 

institutions and creditors to develop 

and implement a written Identity Theft 

Prevention Program (‘‘Program’’) to 

detect, prevent, and mitigate identity 

theft in connection with existing 

accounts or the opening of new 

accounts. Under the Rule, creditors and 

financial institutions must conduct a 

periodic risk assessment to determine if 

they maintain ‘‘covered accounts.’’ The 

Rule defines that term as either (1) a 

consumer account that is designed to 

permit multiple payments or 

transactions, or (2) any other account for 

which there is a reasonably foreseeable 

risk of identity theft. Each financial 

institution and creditor that has covered 

accounts must create a written Program 

that contains reasonable policies and 

procedures to identify relevant 

indicators of the possible existence of 

identity theft (‘‘Red Flags’’); detect Red 

Flags that have been incorporated into 

the Program; respond appropriately to 

any Red Flags that are detected to 

prevent and mitigate identity theft; and 

update the Program periodically to 

ensure it reflects changes in risks to 

customers. 

The Rule also requires financial 

institutions and creditors to: (1) obtain 

approval of the initial written Program 

by the board of directors, a committee 

thereof or, if there is no board, an 

appropriate senior employee; (2) ensure 

oversight of the development, 

implementation, and administration of 

the Program; (3) train staff, as needed, 

to implement the Program; and (4) 

exercise appropriate and effective 

oversight of service provider 

arrangements. In addition, the Rule 

implements the section 114 requirement 

that financial institutions or creditors 

that issue debit or credit cards (‘‘card 

issuers’’) generally must assess the 

validity of change of address 

notifications. Specifically, if the card 

issuer receives a notice of change of 

address for an existing account and, 

within a short period of time (during at 

least the first 30 days), receives a 

request for an additional or replacement 

card for the same account, the issuer 

must follow reasonable policies and 

procedures to assess the validity of the 

change of address through one of three 

methods. 

B. Section 315 

The Rule also implements section 315 

of the FACT Act and requires each user 

of consumer reports to have reasonable 

policies and procedures in place to 

employ when the user receives a notice 

of address discrepancy from a CRA. 

Specifically, each user of consumer 

reports must develop and implement 

reasonable policies and procedures to: 

(1) enable the user to form a reasonable 

belief that a consumer report relates to 

the consumer about whom it has 

requested the report, when the user 

receives a notice of address discrepancy; 

and (2) furnish an address for the 

consumer that the user has reasonably 

confirmed is accurate to the CRA from 

which it received a notice of address 

discrepancy if certain conditions are 

met. 

III. Burden Estimates 

Rounded to the nearest thousand, 

overall estimated burden hours for 

sections 114 and 315, combined, total 

6,151,000 and the associated estimated 

labor cost is $169,000,000. Staff assumes 

that affected entities will already have 

in place, independent of the Rule, 

equipment and supplies necessary to 

carry out the tasks necessary to comply 

with it. 

A. Section 114 

1. Estimated Hours Burden - Red Flags 

Rule 

As noted above, the Rule requires 

financial institutions and creditors with 

covered accounts to develop and 

implement a written Program. Under the 

Rule, a ‘‘financial institution’’ is ‘‘a State 

or National bank, a State or Federal 

savings and loan association, a mutual 

savings bank, a State or Federal credit 

union, or any other person that, directly 

or indirectly, holds a transaction 

account (as defined in section 19(b) of 

the Federal Reserve Act) belonging to a 

consumer.’’2 Under the Rule, ‘‘creditor’’ 

has the same meaning as in section 702 

of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act 

(ECOA). Section 702 defines ‘‘creditor’’ 

as any person who ‘‘regularly extends, 

renews or continues credit; any person 

who regularly arranges for the 

extension, renewal, or continuation of 

credit; or any assignee of any original 

creditor who participates in the decision 

to extend, renew, of continue credit.’’ 

‘‘Credit’’ means an arrangement by 

which you defer payment of debts or 

accept deferred payment for the 

purchase of property or services.3

Given the broad scope of entities 

covered, it is difficult to determine 

precisely the number of financial 

institutions and creditors that are 

subject to the FTC’s jurisdiction. There 

are numerous small businesses under 

the FTC’s jurisdiction, and there is no 

formal way to track them; moreover, as 

a whole, the entities under the FTC’s 

jurisdiction are so varied that there are 

no general sources that provide a record 

of their existence. 

Nonetheless, FTC staff estimates that 

the Rule’s requirement to have a written 

Program affects over 57,000 financial 

institutions4 and almost 2 million 

creditors.5 This is a revised estimate of 

the number of covered financial 

institutions within the FTC’s 

jurisdiction. In the PRA burden 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Notices 42305 

6 In general, high-risk entities may provide 

consumer financial services or other goods or 

services of value to identity thieves such as 

telecommunication services or goods that are easily 

convertible to cash, whereas low-risk entities may 

do business primarily with other businesses or 

provide non-financial services or goods that are not 

easily convertible in cash, such as healthcare 

providers. 

7 This is the number of high-risk entities 

implementing section 114 as previously reported 

(266,602) in the preamble to the Rule, 72 FR at 

63742, increased by the additional institutions 

(including insurance and investment companies, 

broker-dealers, and money service businesses) 

accounted for herein at note 4 and the 

accompanying text. 

8 This figure is derived from an analysis of a 

database of U.S. businesses based on NAICS codes 

for businesses that market goods or services to 

consumers or other businesses, reduced to the 

number of creditors subject to the FTC’s jurisdiction 

(10,813,525), and reduced further by an estimated 

subset of which comprise anticipated low-risk 

entities not having covered accounts under the final 

rule (9,191,496). 

9 In addition to the 3,664 state-chartered credit 

unions and 100 retailers under the FTC’s 

jurisdiction, as of 2007, there were 4,314 colleges 

and universities. See Digest of Education Statistics 

published by the National Center for Education 

Statistics (available at (http://nces.ed.gov/programs/ 

digest/d07/tables/dt07_255.asp)). As of November 

2008, there were 39,408 money service businesses. 

See Department of the Treasury Financial Crimes 

Enforcement Network MSB Registration List 

(available at (http://www.msb.gov/pdf/ 

msb_registration_list.pdf)). Finally, as of November 

2006, there were 5,428 telecommunication 

companies. See Federal Communications 

Commission, Industry Analysis and Technology 

Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, Trends in 

Telephone Service, August 2008, Table 5.3 

(available at (http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/ 

attachmatch/DOC-284932A1.pdf)). 

estimates set forth in the preamble to 

the Final Rule, the Commission stated 

that there were 3,664 financial 

institutions within the FTC’s 

jurisdiction, namely 3,664 statechartered credit unions. See 72 FR 

63718, 63741 n.61 and accompanying 

text (Nov. 9, 2007). This estimate 

misstated the scope of the FTC’s 

jurisdiction. Under the FCRA, the 

financial institutions over which the 

FTC has jurisdiction include not only 

state-chartered credit unions, but other 

entities that hold consumer transaction 

accounts, excluding banks, savings and 

loan associations, and federal credit 

unions, which are subject to oversight 

by the federal bank regulatory agencies 

and the National Credit Union 

Administration. In fact, the financial 

institutions within the FTC’s 

jurisdiction include, but are not limited 

to, certain insurance companies, 

investment companies, broker-dealers, 

and money service businesses. 

To estimate burden hours for the Red 

Flags Rule under section 114, FTC staff 

divided affected entities into three 

categories, based on the nature of their 

businesses: (1) entities that are subject 

to a high risk of identity theft; (2) 

entities that are subject to a low risk of 

identity theft, but have covered 

accounts that will require them to have 

a written Program; and (3) entities that 

are subject to a low risk of identity theft, 

but do not have covered accounts.6

a. High-Risk Entities 

FTC staff estimates that high-risk 

entities will each require 25 hours to 

create and implement a written 

Program, with an annual recurring 

burden of one hour. FTC staff 

anticipates that these entities will 

incorporate into their Programs policies 

and procedures that they likely already 

have in place. Further, FTC staff 

estimates that preparation of an annual 

report will require each high-risk entity 

four hours initially, with an annual 

recurring burden of one hour. Finally, 

FTC staff believes that many of the highrisk entities, as part of their usual and 

customary business practices, already 

take steps to minimize losses due to 

fraud, including conducting employee 

training. Accordingly, only relevant staff 

need be trained to implement the 

Program: for example, staff already 

trained as part of a covered entity’s antifraud prevention efforts do not need to 

be re-trained except as incrementally 

needed. FTC staff estimates that training 

in connection with the implementation 

of a Program of a high-risk entity will 

require four hours, and recurring annual 

training thereafter will require one hour. 

Thus, estimated hours burden for 

high-risk entities is as follows: 

∑320,217 high-risk entities7 subject to 

the FTC’s jurisdiction at an average 

annual burden of 13 hours per entity 

[average annual burden over 3-year 

clearance period for creation and 

implementation of Program ((25+1+1)/ 

3), plus average annual burden over 3- 

year clearance period for staff training 

((4+1+1)/3), plus average annual burden 

over 3-year clearance period for 

preparing annual report ((4+1+1)/3)], for 

a total of 4,162,821 hours. 

b. Low-Risk Entities 

Entities that have a minimal risk of 

identity theft, but that have covered 

accounts, must develop a Program; 

however, they likely will only need a 

streamlined Program. FTC staff 

estimates that such entities will require 

one hour to create such a Program, with 

an annual recurring burden of five 

minutes. Training staff of low-risk 

entities to be attentive to future risks of 

identity theft should require no more 

than 10 minutes in an initial year, with 

an annual recurring burden of five 

minutes. FTC staff further estimates that 

these entities will require, initially, 10 

minutes to prepare an annual report, 

with an annual recurring burden of five 

minutes. 

The Rule does not require entities that 

determine that they do not have any 

covered accounts to create a written 

Program. Thus, such entities will not 

incur PRA burden. 

Thus, the estimated hours burden for 

low-risk entities is as follows: 

∑1,622,029 low-risk entities8 that have 

covered accounts subject to the FTC’s 

jurisdiction at an average annual burden 

of approximately 37 minutes per entity 

[average annual burden over 3-year 

clearance period for creation and 

implementation of streamlined Program 

((60+5+5)/3), plus average annual 

burden over 3-year clearance period for 

staff training ((10+5+5)/3), plus average 

annual burden over 3-year clearance 

period for preparing annual report 

((10+5+5)/3)], for a total of 1,000,251 

hours. 

2. Estimated Hours Burden - Card 

Issuers Rule 

As noted above, section 114 also 

requires financial institutions and 

creditors that issue credit or debit cards 

to establish policies and procedures to 

assess the validity of a change of 

address request, including notifying the 

cardholder or using another means of 

assessing the validity of the change of 

address. FTC staff estimates that the 

Rule affects as many as 52,914 card 

issuers. This is a revised estimate of the 

number of card issuers within the FTC’s 

jurisdiction. In the PRA burden 

estimates set forth in the preamble to 

the Final Rule, the Commission stated 

that there were as many as 3,764 card 

issuers (consisting of state-chartered 

credit unions and retailers) within the 

FTC’s jurisdiction. See 72 FR at 63742. 

This estimate understated the scope of 

the FTC’s jurisdiction. The FTC has 

jurisdiction over additional categories of 

card issuers, including certain 

universities, money service businesses, 

and telecommunication companies.9

-FTC staff believes that most of these 

card issuers already have automated the 

process of notifying the cardholder or 

are using another means to assess the 

validity of the change of address, such 

that implementation will pose no 

further burden. Nevertheless, taking a 

conservative approach, FTC staff 

estimates that it will take each card 

issuer 4 hours to develop and 

implement policy and procedures to 

assess the validity of a change of 

address request for a total burden of 

211,656 hours. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
42306 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Notices 

10 This estimate is based on (http://www.bls.gov/ 

ncs/ncswage2007.htm) (National Compensation 

Survey: Occupational Earnings in the United States 

2007, US Department of Labor released August 

2008, Bulletin 2704, Table 3 (‘‘Full-time civilian 

workers,’’ mean and median hourly wages) for the 

various managerial and technical staff support 

exemplified above. 

11 This estimate is derived from an analysis of a 

database of U.S. businesses based on NAICS codes 

for businesses in industries that typically use 

consumer reports from CRAs described in the Rule, 

which total 1,658,758 users of consumer reports 

subject to the FTC’s jurisdiction. 

12 Report to Congress Under Sections 318 and 319 

of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions of 

2003, Federal Trade Commission, 80 (Dec. 2004) 

available at (http://www.ftc.gov/reports/facta/ 

041209factarpt.pdf). 

13 Staff further assumes that this estimate is 

representative of new entrants in any given threeyear PRA clearance cycle. 

14 Based generally on the National Compensation 

Survey: Occupational Earnings in the United States, 

2007, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor 

Statistics released August 2008, Bulletin 2704, 

Table 3 (‘‘Full-time civilian workers,’’ mean and 

median hourly wages), available at (http:// 

www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/sp/nctb0300.pdf). Clerical 

estimates are derived from the above source data, 

applying roughly a mid-range of mean hourly rates 

for potentially applicable clerical types, e.g., 

computer operators, data entry and information 

processing workers. 

Thus, the total average annual 

estimated burden for Section 114 is 

5,377,328 hours. 

3. Estimated Cost Burden - Red Flags 

and Card Issuers Rules 

FTC staff estimates labor costs by 

applying appropriate estimated hourly 

cost figures to the burden hours 

described above. It is difficult to 

calculate with precision the labor costs 

associated with compliance with the 

Rule, as they entail varying 

compensation levels of management 

(e.g., administrative services, computer 

and information systems, training and 

development) and/or technical staff 

(e.g., computer support specialists, 

systems analysts, network and computer 

systems administrators) among 

companies of different sizes. FTC staff 

assumes that for all entities, 

professional technical personnel and/or 

management personnel will create and 

implement the Program, prepare the 

annual report, and train employees, at 

an hourly rate of $35.00.10

Based on the above estimates and 

assumptions, the total annual labor cost 

for all categories of covered entities 

under the Red Flags and Card Issuers 

Rules for Section 114 is $156,615,480 

[4,162,821 hours + 1,000,251 hours + 

211,656 hours) x $35.00)]. 

B. Section 315 - The Address 

Discrepancy Rule 

As discussed above, the Rule’s 

implementation of section 315 provides 

guidance on reasonable policies and 

procedures that a user of consumer 

reports must employ when a user 

receives a notice of address discrepancy 

from a CRA. Given the broad scope of 

users of consumer reports, it is difficult 

to determine with precision the number 

of users of consumer reports that are 

subject to the FTC’s jurisdiction. As 

noted above, there are numerous small 

businesses under the FTC’s jurisdiction, 

and there is no formal way to track 

them; moreover, as a whole, the entities 

under the FTC’s jurisdiction are so 

varied that there are no general sources 

that provide a record of their existence. 

Nonetheless, FTC staff estimates that the 

Rule’s implementation of section 315 

affects approximately 1.66 million users 

of consumer reports subject to the FTC’s 

jurisdiction.11 Approximately 10,000 of 

these users will, in the course of their 

usual and customary business practices, 

have to furnish to CRAs an address 

confirmation upon notice of a 

discrepancy.12

FTC staff estimates that the average 

annual information collection burden 

during the three-year period for which 

OMB clearance is sought will be 

776,334 hours. The estimated burden is 

$12,421,344. 

1. Estimated Hours Burden 

Although section 315 created a new 

obligation for CRAs to provide a notice 

of address discrepancy to users of 

consumer reports, prior to the FACT Act 

enactment, users of consumer reports 

could compare the address on the 

consumer report to the address provided 

by the consumer and discern for 

themselves any discrepancy. As a result, 

FTC staff believes that many users of 

consumer reports have developed 

methods of reconciling address 

discrepancies, and the following 

estimates represent the incremental 

amount of time users of consumer 

reports may require to develop and 

comply with the policies and 

procedures for when they receive a 

notice of address discrepancy. 

Due to the varied nature of the entities 

under the FTC’s jurisdiction, it is 

difficult to determine precisely the 

appropriate burden estimates. 

Nonetheless, FTC staff estimates that it 

would require an infrequent user of 

consumer reports no more than 16 

minutes to develop and comply with the 

policies and procedures that it will 

employ when it receives a notice of 

address discrepancy, while a frequent 

user might require one hour. Similarly, 

FTC staff estimates that, during the 

remaining two years of clearance, it may 

take an infrequent user no more than 

one minute to comply with the policies 

and procedures it will employ when it 

receives a notice of address discrepancy, 

while a frequent user might require 45 

minutes. Taking into account these 

extremes, FTC staff estimates that, 

during the first year, it will take users 

of consumer reports under the 

jurisdiction of the FTC an average of 38 

minutes [the midrange between 16 

minutes and 60 minutes] to develop and 

comply with the policies and 

procedures that they will employ when 

they receive a notice of address 

discrepancy. FTC staff also estimates 

that the average recurring burden for 

users of consumer reports to comply 

with the Rule will be 23 minutes [the 

midrange between one minute and 45 

minutes]. 

Thus, for these 1.66 million entities, 

the average annual burden for each of 

them to perform these collective tasks 

will be 28 minutes [(38 + 23 + 23) ÷ 3]; 

cumulatively, 774,667 hours. 

For the estimated 10,000 users of 

consumer reports that will additionally 

have to furnish to CRAs an address 

confirmation upon notice of a 

discrepancy, staff estimates that these 

entities will require 30 minutes to 

develop related policies and procedures. 

But, these 10,000 affected entities13

likely will have automated the process 

of furnishing the correct address in the 

first year of a three-year PRA clearance 

cycle. Thus, allowing for 30 minutes in 

the first year, with no annual recurring 

burden in the second and third years of 

clearance, yields an average annual 

burden of 10 minutes per entity to 

furnish a correct address to a CRA, for 

a total of 1,667 hours. 

2. Estimated Cost Burden 

FTC staff assumes that the policies 

and procedures for compliance with the 

address discrepancy part of the Rule 

will be set up by administrative support 

personnel at an hourly rate of $16.14

Based on the above estimates and 

assumptions, the total annual labor cost 

for the two categories of burden under 

section 315 is $12,421,344 [(774,667 

hours + 1,667 hours) x $16.00]. 

C. Burden Totals for Sections 114 and 

315 

Cumulatively, then, estimated burden 

is 6,151,062 hours (5,374,728 hours for 

section 114 and 776,334 hours for 

section 315) and $169,036,824 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Notices 42307 

15 These figures correct mathematical errors that 

appeared in the related preceding Federal Register 

notice. 74 FR at 18712. 

($156,615,480 and $12,421,344, 

respectively)15 in associated labor cost. 

Willard Tom 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. E9–20141 Filed 8–20–09: 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–S 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

[OMB Control No. 9000–0080] 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; 

Submission for OMB Review; Integrity 

of Unit Prices 

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DOD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Notice of reinstatement request 

for an information collection 

requirement regarding an existing OMB 

clearance. 

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation, Regulatory 

Secretariat (VPR) will be submitting to 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) a request to reinstate a 

previously approved information 

collection requirement concerning 

Integrity of Unit Prices. 

Public comments are particularly 

invited on: Whether this collection of 

information is necessary; whether it will 

have practical utility; whether our 

estimate of the public burden of this 

collection of information is accurate, 

and based on valid assumptions and 

methodology; ways to enhance the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and ways in 

which we can minimize the burden of 

the collection of information on those 

who are to respond, through the use of 

appropriate technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before 

September 21, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments regarding 

this burden estimate or any other aspect 

of this collection of information, 

including suggestions for reducing this 

burden, to: FAR Desk Officer, OMB, 

Room 10102, NEOB, Washington, DC 

20503 and a copy to the General 

Services Administration, Regulatory 

Secretariat (VPR), 1800 F Street NW., 

Room 4041, Washington, DC 20405. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Edward Chambers, Procurement 

Analyst, Contract Policy Division, GSA, 

(202) 501–3221 or e-mail 

Edward.chambers@gsa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Purpose 

FAR 15.408(f) and the clause at FAR 

52.215–14, Integrity of Unit Prices, 

require offerors and contractors under 

Federal contracts that are to be awarded 

without adequate price competition to 

identify in their proposals those 

supplies which they will not 

manufacture or to which they will not 

contribute significant value. The 

policies included in the FAR are 

required by section 501 of Public Law 

98–577 (for the civilian agencies) and 

section 927 of Public Law 99–500 (for 

DOD and NASA). The rule contains no 

reporting requirements on contracts 

with commercial items. 

B. Annual Reporting Burden 

Respondents: 1,000. 

Responses per Respondent: 10. 

Annual Responses: 10,000. 

Hours per Response: 1 hour. 

Total Burden Hours: 10,000. 

Obtaining Copies of Proposals: 

Requesters may obtain a copy of the 

information collection documents from 

the General Services Administration, 

Regulatory Secretariat (VPR), 1800 F St., 

NW., Room 4041, Washington, DC 

20405, telephone (202) 501–4755. Please 

cite OMB Control No. 9000–0080, 

Integrity of Unit Prices. 

Dated: August 14, 2009. 

Al Matera, 

Director, Office of Acquisition Policy. 

[FR Doc. E9–20174 Filed 8–20–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

[Document Identifier: CMS–10174, CMS– 

10287 and CMS–R–305] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Submission for OMB 

Review; Comment Request 

AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services. 

In compliance with the requirement 

of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services (CMS), Department of Health 

and Human Services, is publishing the 

following summary of proposed 

collections for public comment. 

Interested persons are invited to send 

comments regarding this burden 

estimate or any other aspect of this 

collection of information, including any 

of the following subjects: (1) The 

necessity and utility of the proposed 

information collection for the proper 

performance of the Agency’s function; 

(2) the accuracy of the estimated 

burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and (4) the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology to 

minimize the information collection 

burden. 

1. Type of Information Collection 

Request: Revision of the currently 

approved collection. 

Title of Information Collection: 

Collection of Drug Event Data From 

Contracted Part D Providers for 

Payment. 

Use: In December 2003, Congress 

enacted the Medicare Prescription Drug, 

Improvement, and Modernization Act of 

2003 referred to as the Medicare 

Modernization Act (MMA). The 

Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit 

program (Part D) was established by 

section 101 of the MMA and is codified 

in section 1860D–1 through 1860 D–41 

of the Social Security Act. Effective 

January 1, 2006, the Part D program 

establishes an optional prescription 

drug benefit for individuals who are 

entitled to Medicare Part A and/or 

enrolled in Part B. Part D plans have 

flexibility in terms of benefit design. 

This flexibility includes, but is not 

limited to, authority to establish a 

formulary that limits coverage to 

specific drugs within each therapeutic 

class of drugs, and the ability to have a 

cost-sharing structure other than the 

statutorily defined structure (subject to 

certain actuarial tests). Coverage under 

the new prescription drug benefit is 

provided predominately through private 

at-risk prescription drug plans that offer 

drug-only coverage (PDPs), Medicare 

Advantage (MA) plans that offer 

integrated prescription drug and health 

care coverage (MA–PD plans) or through 

Cost Plans that offer prescription drug 

benefits. 

The transmission of the data will be 

in an electronic format. The information 

users will be Pharmacy Benefit 

Managers (PBM), third party 

administrators and pharmacies and the 

PDPs, MA–PDs, Fallbacks and other 

plans that offer coverage of outpatient 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES