Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 231 / Tuesday, December 2, 1997 / Notices 63717

P.O. Box 291, Minneapolis, Minnesota

55480-0291:

1. Glacier Bancorp, Inc., Kalispell,

Montana; to acquire 100 percent of the

voting shares of Glacier Bank, Kalispell,

Montana, a de novo bank. In addition,

an existing subsidiary of Glacier

Bancorp, Inc., Glacier Bank, FSB,

Kalispell, Montana, will be merged into

Glacier Bank and Glacier Bank will

become a state member bank.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve

System, November 25, 1997.

Jennifer J. Johnson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 97–31468 Filed 12–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–F

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Notice of Proposals to Engage in

Permissible Nonbanking Activities or

to Acquire Companies that are

Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking

Activities

The companies listed in this notice

have given notice under section 4 of the

Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C.

1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y, (12

CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to

acquire or control voting securities or

assets of a company that engages either

directly or through a subsidiary or other

company, in a nonbanking activity that

is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y (12

CFR 225.28) or that the Board has

determined by Order to be closely

related to banking and permissible for

bank holding companies. Unless

otherwise noted, these activities will be

conducted throughout the United States.

Each notice is available for inspection

at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated.

The notice also will be available for

inspection at the offices of the Board of

Governors. Interested persons may

express their views in writing on the

question whether the proposal complies

with the standards of section 4 of the

BHC Act.

Unless otherwise noted, comments

regarding the applications must be

received at the Reserve Bank indicated

or the offices of the Board of Governors

not later than December 15, 1997.

A. Federal Reserve Bank of New

York (Betsy Buttrill White, Senior Vice

President) 33 Liberty Street, New York,

New York 10045-0001:

1. Credit Commercial de France, S.A.,

Paris, France; to acquire International

Finance Corporation, Paris, France, and

thereby engage in extending credit and

servicing loans, pursuant to §

225.28(b)(1) of the Board’s Regulation Y;

activities related to extending credit,

pursuant to § 225.28(b)(2) of the Board’s

Regulation Y; financial and investment

advisory activities, pursuant to §

225.28(b)(6) of the Board’s Regulation Y;

agency transactional services for

customer investments, pursuant to §

225.28(b)(7) of the Board’s Regulation Y;

and investment transactions as

principal, pursuant to § 225.28(b)(8) of

the Board’s Regulation Y.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve

System, November 25, 1997.

Jennifer J. Johnson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 97–31467 Filed 12–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–F

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade

Commission (FTC or Commission) has

submitted information collection

requirements associated with the Mail

or Telephone Order Merchandise Trade

Regulation Rule, 16 CFR Part 435, to the

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review and clearance under

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). The FTC

previously solicited comments from the

public concerning these information

collection requirements, and provided

the information specified in 5 CFR

1320.5(a)(1)(iv). 62 FR 46498

(September 3, 1997). No comments were

received. The current OMB clearance for

these requirements expires on December

31, 1997. The FTC has requested that

OMB extend the PRA clearance through

December 31, 2000.

DATES: Comments must be filed by

January 2, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, New Executive Office Building,

Room 3228, Washington, D.C. 20530,

ATTN: Edward Clarke, Desk Officer for

the Federal Trade Commission.

Comments may also be sent to Elaine W.

Crockett, Attorney, Office of the General

Counsel, Room 598, 6th St. and

Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. 20580,

telephone: (202) 326–2453; fax: (202)

326–2477; e-mail ecrockett@ftc.gov

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Mail or Telephone Order

Merchandise Trade Regulation Rule, 16

CFR Part 435—(OMB Control Number

3084–0106)—Extension

The Mail Order Merchandise Rule

was promulgated in 1975 in response to

consumer complaints that many

merchants were failing to ship mail

order merchandise on time, failing to

ship at all, or failing to provide prompt

refunds for unshipped merchandise.

The Rule took effect on February 2,

1976. A second rulemaking proceeding

in 1993 demonstrated that the delayed

shipment and refund problems of the

mail order industry were also being

experienced by consumers who ordered

merchandise over the telephone. The

Commission therefore amended the

Rule, effective on March 1, 1994, to

include merchandise ordered by

telephone, including by fax or by

computer through the use of a modem.

Generally, the Rule requires a

merchant to: (1) have a reasonable basis

for any express or implied shipment

representation made in soliciting the

sale; (2) ship within the time period

promised, and if no time period is

promised, within 30 days; (3) notify the

consumer and obtain the consumer’s

consent to any delay in shipment; and

(4) make prompt and full refunds when

the consumer exercises a cancellation

option or the merchant is unable to meet

the Rule’s other requirements.

Under the notice provisions in the

Rule, a merchant who is unable to ship

within the promised shipment time or

30 days must notify the consumer of a

revised date and of his or her right to

cancel the order and obtain a prompt

refund. Delays beyond the revised

shipment date also trigger a notification

requirement to consumers. When the

Rule requires the merchant to make a

refund and the consumer paid by credit

card, it also requires the merchant to

notify the consumer either that any

charge to the consumer’s charge account

will be reversed or that the merchant

will take no action resulting in a charge.

Burden statement: In its 1995 PRA

submission to OMB, the FTC estimated

that 1,897 large businesses and 68,663

small businesses were covered by the

Rule, for a total of 70,560 businesses. As

stated in the agency’s 1995 submission,

the conditional nature of some of the

Rule’s requirements makes it difficult to

quantify the exact PRA burden

involved. Nonetheless, the agency

estimated that, at that time, 70,560

businesses spent an average of 229.78

hours per year on compliance with the

Rule, for a total estimate of 16,213,300

burden hours. In the September 3, 1997,