8114 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Notices 

of Integrated Mortgage Loan Disclosure 

Forms’’— to: 

• Agency: Bureau of Consumer 

Financial Protection (Attention: Darrin 

King, PRA Office), 1700 G Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20552; (202) 435–9575; 

and CFPB_Public_PRA@cfpb.gov. 

• OMB: Shagufta Ahmed, Office of 

Management and Budget, New 

Executive Office Building, Room 10235, 

Washington, DC 20503; (202) 395–7873. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information 

should be directed to the Bureau of 

Consumer Financial Protection 

(Attention: PRA Office), 1700 G Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20552, (202) 435– 

9575, or through the internet at 

CFPB_Public_PRA@cfpb.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Quantitative Testing of 

Integrated Mortgage Loan Disclosure 

Forms. 

OMB Number: 3170–XXXX. 

Type of Review: New Clearance 

Request. 

Abstract: This is a request by the 

CFPB for clearance from OMB to collect 

information as part of quantitative 

research related to residential mortgage 

loan disclosures. The Dodd-Frank Wall 

Street Reform and Consumer Protection 

Act, Public Law 111–203, Title X, 

requires the CFPB to publish disclosures 

that integrate separate disclosures 

concerning residential mortgage loans 

that are required under the Truth in 

Lending Act (TILA) and Real Estate 

Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA). 

The Bureau conducted qualitative 

testing of prototype integrated 

disclosures, see OMB No. 1505–0233 

and OMB No. 3170–0003, prior to 

issuing a proposed rule regarding such 

disclosures. See 77 FR 51116 (Aug. 23, 

2012). The proposed information 

collection will involve quantitative 

testing of the integrated disclosures 

proposed by the Bureau that would be 

given in connection with the 

application and consummation of the 

mortgage loan transaction. The purpose 

of the quantitative testing will be to 

examine whether the disclosures aid 

consumers in understanding the terms 

of the mortgage loan that is the subject 

of the disclosure. 

The quantitative research will involve 

testing the mortgage loan disclosures 

currently provided under TILA and 

sections 4 and 5 of RESPA, to assess the 

performance of the proposed integrated 

disclosures in comparison to the current 

disclosure. The CFPB will collect 

quantitative data through the use of a 

structured questionnaire that consists of 

multiple choice and open-ended 

questions regarding several sample 

disclosures. The quantitative data will 

inform the Bureau’s evaluation of the 

proposed integrated disclosures. The 

research will result in an assessment of 

the performance of the integrated 

disclosures with respect to 

comprehension, comparison, and choice 

of mortgage loan transactions. 

The research activities will be 

conducted primarily by external 

contractors employing quantitative 

research methodologies. The contractors 

will select participants via screening 

questionnaires to ensure they qualify for 

the study according to specified criteria. 

All information will be collected on a 

voluntary basis. This approach has been 

demonstrated to be feasible and 

valuable by other Federal agencies in 

developing disclosures and other forms. 

The planned research activities will be 

conducted during FY 2013 through FY 

2014 with the goal of creating effective 

disclosures. 

Affected Public: Individuals or 

Households. 

Process 

Estimated 

number of respondents 

Estimated average burden 

per response 

(minutes) 

Total estimated burden 

hours 

Study Respondents ..................................................................................................................... 850 60 850 

Screening ..................................................................................................................................... 3,000 10 500 

Travel Time and Administration at Site ....................................................................................... 900 80 1,200 

Total: ..................................................................................................................................... ........................ ........................ 2,550 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a respondent is not 

required to respond to, an information 

collection unless the information 

collection displays a currently valid 

OMB control number. 

The Bureau issued a 60-day Federal 

Register notice on March 28, 2012, 77 

FR 18793. Comments were solicited and 

continue to be invited on: (a) Whether 

the collection of information is 

necessary for the proper performance of 

the functions of the Bureau, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

Bureau’s estimate of the burden of the 

collection of information, including the 

validity of the methodology and the 

assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (d) 

ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated, electronic, mechanical, or 

other technological collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. 

Dated: January 29, 2013. 

Chris Willey, 

Chief Information Officer, Bureau of 

Consumer Financial Protection. 

[FR Doc. 2013–02427 Filed 2–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P 

BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL 

PROTECTION 

[Docket No. CFPB–2013–0003] 

Request for Information Regarding 

Financial Products Marketed to 

Students Enrolled in Institutions of 

Higher Education 

AGENCY: Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection. 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

information. 

SUMMARY: Section 1021 of the DoddFrank Wall Street Reform and Consumer 

Protection Act of 2010 (Dodd-Frank Act) 

charges the Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau (Bureau or CFPB) 

with ‘‘collecting, researching, 

monitoring and publishing information’’ 

about consumer financial products and 

services. The Bureau seeks information 

on how current and future partnerships 

or other arrangements between 

institutions of higher education 

(including their affiliated entities) and 

financial institutions could be 

structured to promote positive financial 

decision-making among young 

consumers. We also seek information to 

develop a clearer picture of the financial 

products and services that are being 

offered to college students, as well as 

consumers’ experiences using those 

products and services. The Bureau 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Notices 8115 

encourages comments from the public; 

including student and parent 

consumers, institutions of higher 

education, and financial institutions. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 18, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit responsive 

information and other comments, 

identified by Docket No. CFPB–2013– 

0003, by any of the following methods: 

• Electronic: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: 

Monica Jackson, Office of the Executive 

Secretary, Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau, 1700 G Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20552. 

Instructions: The Bureau encourages 

the early submission of comments. All 

submissions must include the document 

title and docket number. Because paper 

mail in the Washington, DC area and at 

the Bureau is subject to delay, 

commenters are encouraged to submit 

comments electronically. Please note 

the number associated with any 

question to which you are responding at 

the top of each response (you are not 

required to answer all questions to 

receive consideration of your 

comments). In general, all comments 

received will be posted without change 

to http://www.regulations.gov. Please do 

not include personal information in 

your comment that you do not wish to 

be made publicly available. In addition, 

comments will be available for public 

inspection and copying at 1700 G Street 

NW., Washington, DC 20552, on official 

business days between the hours of 10 

a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. 

You can make an appointment to 

inspect the documents by telephoning 

202–435–7275. 

All submissions, including 

attachments and other supporting 

materials, will become part of the public 

record and subject to public disclosure. 

Sensitive personal information, such as 

account numbers or Social Security 

numbers, should not be included. 

Submissions will not be edited to 

remove any identifying or contact 

information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

general inquiries, submission process 

questions or any additional information, 

please contact Monica Jackson, Office of 

the Executive Secretary, at 202–435– 

7275. 

Authority: 12 U.S.C. 5511(c). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

1021 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street 

Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 

2010 (Dodd-Frank Act) charges the 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 

(Bureau or CFPB) with ‘‘collecting, 

researching, monitoring and publishing 

information’’ about consumer financial 

products and services. The Bureau seeks 

information on how current and future 

partnerships or other arrangements 

between institutions of higher education 

(including their affiliated entities) and 

financial institutions can be structured 

to promote positive financial decisionmaking and building of money 

management skills among young 

consumers. We also seek information to 

develop a clearer picture of the financial 

products and services that are being 

offered to college students, as well as 

consumers’ experiences using those 

products and services. The deadline for 

submission of comments is March 18, 

2013. 

The Bureau encourages comments 

from the public, including: 

• Student and parent consumers; 

• Institutions of higher education; 

• Alumni associations; 

• Providers of financial aid 

disbursement services; 

• Financial institutions; and 

• Other interested parties. 

The Bureau is interested in receiving 

comments that could bear on its 

analysis of the student financial product 

and services market. The Bureau is 

therefore interested in responses to the 

questions outlined below. 

Please note that the Bureau is not 

soliciting individual student account 

information in response to this notice 

and request for information, nor is the 

Bureau seeking personally identifiable 

information (PII) regarding student 

accounts from the parties or any third 

party. Responses should not contain 

account numbers, Social Security 

numbers or other personal information 

that could be used to reveal personally 

identifiable information. Below are 

some general areas for which 

information is being sought. Please feel 

free to respond to any or all of the 

questions below: 

(1) Products marketed through 

campus affinity relationships. 

Campus affinity products are 

generally financial products and 

services that carry an endorsement 

(either explicit or implicit) or mark of an 

institution of higher education. 

Examples of these products include 

those that that display the name or mark 

of the institution, are bundled with 

student identification cards, and cards 

on which students can receive 

disbursements of financial aid or other 

funds from the institution of higher 

education. 

In the past, relationships between 

financial institutions and institutions of 

higher education have drawn scrutiny 

and led to legislative action. For 

example, in 2007, former New York 

Attorney General Andrew Cuomo 

pursued action to address the steering of 

students to certain lenders of federal 

and private student loans in exchange 

for remuneration. For years, institutions 

of higher education provided access to 

financial institutions to market credit 

cards to students. Congress addressed 

school preferred lender arrangements 

and marketing of campus credit cards 

on college campuses in legislation 

enacted in 2008 and 2009. 

However, institutions of higher 

education may be uniquely positioned 

to create a beneficial environment for 

students in the selection of financial 

products and services. The Bureau is 

interested in better understanding the 

types of campus affinity products being 

offered, how institutions of higher 

education are defining these 

relationships, and the experience of 

students using these products. The 

Bureau seeks information on how 

partnerships between institutions of 

higher education (including their 

affiliated entities) and financial 

institutions might be structured to 

promote positive financial decisionmaking among young consumers. 

(a) What types of campus affinity 

products are being offered to students 

(e.g., financial aid disbursement 

accounts, student banking, prepaid 

cards, and credit cards)? 

(b) What are the features of these 

campus affinity products (e.g., online 

bill pay, mobile check deposit)? 

(c) In what ways are campus-affiliated 

products marketed to students (e.g., 

included in campus admissions and/or 

financial aid offer letters, orientation 

materials, advertising at college sporting 

events)? 

(d) What information about students 

is provided by institutions of higher 

education to financial institutions (e.g., 

email address, date of birth, program of 

study)? 

(e) How are card or other products 

offered to students (e.g., mandatory, optout, opt-in)? Does the student have a 

choice to decline the product? If so, 

what steps are required to exercise that 

choice? Are there any consequences to 

the student for declining the product? 

(f) What percentage of students at a 

college or university use the affinity 

product (e.g., financial aid 

disbursement, student checking 

accounts)? What percentage of financial 

aid recipients use the affinity product? 

(g) To what extent are students able to 

choose a product other than the affinity 

banking product associated with the 

institution of higher education? What 

percentage of students do so? 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
8116 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Notices 

1FDIC, FDIC Study of Bank Overdraft Programs 

November 2008, 79 (2008). 

(h) What types of fees are being 

charged in association with these 

products (e.g., overdraft and/or swipe 

fees)? What are the typical fee amounts? 

What are the terms and conditions of 

these products? 

(i) To what extent are students able or 

not able to readily access funds from 

affinity products while on campus? 

Does the financial institution provide 

multiple ATMs? Where are those ATMs 

located (e.g., on campus, near campus)? 

Are ATMs also located on branch 

campuses? Do ATMs charge fees for 

withdrawal? If so, what are the fees and 

how are they assessed? 

(j) What is the nature, number, and 

frequency of complaints related to these 

campus affinity products? Please do not 

include account numbers, Social 

Security numbers or other personal 

information that could be used to reveal 

personally identifiable information. 

(k) Please describe the student 

experience in contacting the providers 

of campus affinity products with 

questions, errors, concerns, and 

complaints. What level of service do 

students receive? Have students been 

treated in a fair, clear, and timely 

manner? Please provide examples. 

(l) What challenges do institutions of 

higher education face when setting up 

these agreements? 

(m) What terms do institutions of 

higher education agree to when they 

affiliate with a financial institution to 

offer students financial products and 

services? Please feel free to submit 

copies of any specific affinity 

agreements. Please ensure that any 

specific agreements do not contain any 

personally identifiable information. 

(n) What types of limitations, if any, 

do these affinity agreements include 

with respect to the fees that will be 

charged to student users of the 

products? 

(o) What additional information 

would have been helpful to the 

institution of higher education before 

setting up an affinity agreement? 

(p) How much revenue do institutions 

of higher education generally receive 

annually in connection with these 

agreements? How does that revenue 

break down between student checking 

accounts, credit cards and other 

products and services? Is the revenue 

based on a per student basis, by number 

and/or volume of transactions by 

students, level of student account 

balances, fee revenue, or other 

measures? 

(q) Does an institution of higher 

education save in operating costs or 

generate revenue by contracting with a 

financial aid disbursement vendor? If 

so, in what amounts? 

(r) What are best practices or model 

terms for institutions that are looking to 

set up and/or renegotiate an agreement 

with financial institutions to offer 

products and services? 

(s) What types of incentives do 

affinity agreements offer institutions of 

higher education? 

(t) What types of incentives, if any, do 

students receive for choosing an affinity 

product? 

(u) To what extent do institutions of 

higher education solicit requests for 

proposal for affinity agreements? What 

are some examples of an institution’s 

request for proposal? 

(v) Do institutions of higher education 

provide access to campus property to 

financial institutions in order to market 

products or provide workshops? 

(w) To what extent are financial 

products bundled with student ID 

cards? What percentage of students 

utilize these bundled financial products 

(e.g., a student ID card that doubles as 

a debit card, or closed-loop meal card 

accepted by local business)? Are there 

any charges or fees associated with the 

use of the bundled financial product? If 

yes, how are they assessed? 

(x) To what extent are affinity 

financial products also bundled with 

financial education programs? What is 

the utilization of these education 

programs and how does it affect student 

behavior? 

(y) How do campus affinity products 

compare with banking products 

available to college students that are 

offered by financial institutions not 

affiliated with the institution of higher 

education? 

(2) Other financial products marketed 

to students. 

For many students, choosing a bank 

account is one of their first significant 

financial decisions, especially since the 

first banking relationship may last long 

after graduation. Students who 

understand how banking products work 

and when fees will be charged can save 

hundreds of dollars in fees each year. 

For example, according to a 2008 FDIC 

report, while half of young Americans 

manage to avoid overdraft fees, the other 

half incurs approximately seven 

overdrafts each per year.1

(a) What types of financial products 

are tailored to the student consumer 

segment? 

(b) What factors do students and 

parents consider when choosing 

financial products tailored for students? 

Which are the most important factors? 

(c) What type of information is 

helpful in making that decision? 

(d) How do financial institutions 

market these products to students and 

parents? Do financial institutions 

purchase enrollment information from 

third parties? Do financial institutions 

engage marketing consultants who 

specialize in the student consumer 

segment? 

(e) What types of discounts and 

benefits are offered to students who sign 

up for a student banking account? 

(f) What percentage of students sign 

up for student banking from banks and 

credit unions that are located on or in 

close proximity to the campus? 

(g) What types of issues/complaints 

do students/parents have with these 

accounts? 

(h) On average, how much does a 

student pay in fees per year? 

(i) Which fees do students get charged 

most often? 

(j) What are the features of the 

different types of financial products and 

services that banks and credit unions 

offer to students? Are these financial 

products marketed as free checking for 

students? 

(k) What restrictions do consumers 

need to satisfy in order to qualify for the 

student banking product or services? 

For example, does a student need to be 

enrolled in school full time or attend a 

particular institution? How is a 

student’s status verified (e.g., student 

ID, transcript, notice of enrollment)? 

(l) Are the terms and conditions of 

student banking products (including, for 

example, amount and frequency of fees 

or penalties) clearly disclosed, disclosed 

in a timely manner, and easy to 

understand? Have students had 

difficulty understanding and/or 

complying with these terms and 

conditions? Please provide examples. 

(m) What percentage of student 

accounts have parents and/or family 

members as co-signers or joint account 

holders? 

(n) To what extent do students use 

general purpose reloadable cards? How 

do institutions of higher education and 

financial institutions market these cards 

to students? 

(o) How many students opt in to 

overdraft coverage? 

(p) Do students usually sign up for 

their new account online or through a 

live interaction? 

(q) How many student account 

holders do financial institutions serve? 

(r) What percentage of students 

maintain an account or relationship 

with the financial institution after 

graduation or separation from college? 

After a student graduates or separates 

from college how does their relationship 

with their financial institution change 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 24 / Tuesday, February 5, 2013 / Notices 8117 

(e.g., do they sign up for additional 

products and services)? 

Dated: January 30, 2013. 

Garry Reeder, 

Chief of Staff, Bureau of Consumer Financial 

Protection. 

[FR Doc. 2013–02428 Filed 2–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4810–AM–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

[CPSC Docket No. 13–C0003] 

Whalen Furniture Manufacturing, Inc., 

d/b/a Bayside Furnishings, Provisional 

Acceptance of a Settlement Agreement 

and Order 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: It is the policy of the 

Commission to publish settlements 

which it provisionally accepts under the 

Consumer Product Safety Act in the 

Federal Register in accordance with the 

terms of 16 CFR 1118.20(e). Published 

below is a provisionally-accepted 

Settlement Agreement with Whalen 

Furniture Manufacturing, Inc., d/b/a 

Bayside Furnishings, containing a civil 

penalty of $725,000.00, within twenty 

(20) days of service of the Commission’s 

final Order accepting the Settlement 

Agreement. 

DATES: Any interested person may ask 

the Commission not to accept this 

agreement or otherwise comment on its 

contents by filing a written request with 

the Office of the Secretary by February 

20, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to 

comment on this Settlement Agreement 

should send written comments to the 

Comment 13–C0003, Office of the 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, 4330 East West Highway, 

Room 820, Bethesda, Maryland 20814– 

4408. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mary B. Murphy, Assistant General 

Counsel, Division of Compliance, Office 

of the General Counsel, Consumer 

Product Safety Commission, 4330 East 

West Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 

20814–4408; telephone (301) 504–7809. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of 

the Agreement and Order appears 

below. 

Dated: January 31, 2013. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

In the Matter of: WHALEN FURNITURE 

MANUFACTURING, INC. d/b/a Bayside 

Furnishings 

CPSC Docket No.: 13–C0003 

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 

1. In accordance with 16 C.F.R. 

§ 1118.20, Whalen Furniture 

Manufacturing, Inc., d/b/a Bayside 

Furnishings (‘‘Whalen’’), and the staff 

(‘‘Staff’’) of the United States Consumer 

Product Safety Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) hereby enter into this 

Settlement Agreement (‘‘Agreement’’) 

under the Consumer Product Safety Act, 

15 U.S.C. §§ 2051–2089 (‘‘CPSA’’). The 

Agreement and the incorporated 

attached Order resolve the Staff’s 

allegations set forth below. 

THE PARTIES 

2. The Staff is the staff of the 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

an independent federal regulatory 

agency established pursuant to, and 

responsible for, the enforcement of the 

CPSA, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2051–2089. 

3. Whalen is a corporation organized 

and existing under the laws of the State 

of California, with its principal 

corporate office located at 1578 Air 

Wing Road, San Diego, California, 

92154. 

STAFF ALLEGATIONS 

4. Between January 2006 and April 

2008, Whalen imported and distributed 

into the United States approximately 

7,739 juvenile beds in the shape of a 

boat (‘‘Boat Beds’’) under the Bayside 

Furnishings brand. The Boat Beds were 

sold nationwide, for between $699.00 

and $999.00. 

5. The Boat Beds included toy chests 

located as the ‘‘bow’’ of each unit with 

a 20 pound lid that could be placed up 

and remain in a fully opened or closed 

position. The Boat Beds are ‘‘consumer 

products’’ ‘‘distributed in commerce,’’ 

as those terms are defined or used in 

sections 3(a)(5), (8) and (11) of the 

CPSA, 15 U.S.C. § 2052(a)(5), (8) and 

(11). 

6. The Boat Beds are defective 

because the toy chest lid hinge support 

mechanism could fail during use, 

allowing the lid to fall down rapidly. 

This poses a serious trauma and 

strangulation hazard and risk of death. 

7. On November 2, 2007, Whalen 

received a report that a toddler died 

when a toy chest lid fell on his head, 

trapping his neck and head inside the 

toy chest. 

8. Whalen obtained sufficient 

information to reasonably support the 

conclusion that the Boat Beds contained 

a defect which could create a substantial 

product hazard, or created an 

unreasonable risk of serious injury or 

death. Whalen failed to immediately 

inform the Commission of such defect 

or risk as required by sections 15(b)(3) 

and (4) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 

§§ 2064(b)(3) and (4). 

9. Despite having information 

regarding the Boat Bed’s defect, Whalen 

did not file its Full Report with the 

Commission until March 20, 2008, after 

the Staff directed Whalen to do so. 

Whalen knowingly violated section 

19(a)(4) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 

§ 2068(a)(4) as the term ‘‘knowingly’’ is 

defined in section 20(d) of the CPSA, 15 

U.S.C. § 2069(d). 

10. Pursuant to section 20 of the 

CPSA, 15 U.S.C. § 2069, Whalen is 

subject to civil penalties for its knowing 

failure to report as required under 

section 15(b) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 

§ 2064(b). 

RESPONSE OF WHALEN FURNITURE 

MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC. 

11. Whalen denies the Staff’s 

allegations, including but not limited to, 

that the Boat Beds contained a defect 

that could create a substantial product 

hazard or create an unreasonable risk of 

serious injury or death and that Whalen 

failed to timely notify the Commission 

in accordance with section 15(b) of the 

CPSA, 15 U.S.C. § 2064(b). 

12. Whalen believed that the report it 

received did not represent a legitimate 

incident. Whalen was aware of no prior 

injuries involving the lid hinge. The 

products were tested by a third-party 

testing agency and passed toy chest 

safety tests. 

AGREEMENT OF THE PARTIES 

13. Under the CPSA, the Commission 

has jurisdiction over this matter and 

over Whalen. 

14. In settlement of the Staff’s 

allegations, Whalen shall pay a civil 

penalty in the amount of seven hundred 

twenty-five thousand dollars 

($725,000.00) within twenty (20) 

calendar days of receiving service of the 

Commission’s final Order accepting the 

Agreement. The payment shall be made 

electronically to the CPSC via 

www.pay.gov. 

15. The parties enter into this 

Agreement for settlement purposes only. 

Neither the Agreement, nor the fact of 

entering into this Settlement Agreement, 

constitutes the evidence of, or an 

admission of, any fault, liability, or 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES