88076 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2023 / Notices 

Title: Section 76.934(e), Petitions for 

Extension of Time. 

Form Number: Not applicable. 

Type of Review: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities; and State, local, or tribal 

governments. 

Number of Respondents and 

Responses: 20 respondents; 10 

responses. 

Frequency of Response: On occasion 

reporting requirement; Third party 

disclosure requirement. 

Estimated Time per Response: 4 

hours. 

Total Annual Burden: 80 hours. 

Total Annual Cost: None. 

Needs and Uses: The information 

collection requirements contained 

under 47 CFR 76.934(e) states that small 

cable systems may obtain an extension 

of time to establish compliance with 

rate regulations provided that they can 

demonstrate that timely compliance 

would result in severe economic 

hardship. Requests for the extension of 

time should be addressed to the local 

franchising authorities (‘‘LFAs’’) 

concerning rates for basic service tiers. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene Dortch, 

Secretary, Office of the Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27902 Filed 12–19–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE 

CORPORATION 

Sunshine Act Meetings 

TIME AND DATE: 2 p.m. on December 20, 

2023. 

PLACE: This Board meeting will be open 

to public observation only by webcast. 

Visit https://www.fdic.gov/news/boardmatters/video.html for a link to the 

webcast. FDIC Board Members and staff 

will participate from FDIC 

Headquarters, 550 17th Street NW, 

Washington, DC. 

Observers requiring auxiliary aids 

(e.g., sign language interpretation) for 

this meeting should email 

DisabilityProgram@fdic.gov to make 

necessary arrangements. 

STATUS: Open to public observation via 

webcast. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Federal 

Deposit Insurance Corporation’s Board 

of Directors will meet to consider the 

following matters: 

Discussion Agenda 

Memorandum and resolution re: 

Proposed 2024 FDIC Operating Budget. 

Memorandum and resolution re: Final 

Rule on FDIC Official Signs and 

Advertising Requirements, False 

Advertising, Misrepresentation of 

Insured Status, and Misuse of the FDIC’s 

Name or Logo. 

Summary Agenda 

No substantive discussion of the 

following items is anticipated. The 

Board will resolve these matters with a 

single vote unless a member of the 

Board of Directors requests that an item 

be moved to the discussion agenda. 

Disposition of Minutes of a Board of 

Directors’ Meeting Previously 

Distributed. 

Summary reports, status reports, and 

reports of actions taken pursuant to 

authority delegated by the Board of 

Directors. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Direct requests for further information 

concerning the meeting to Debra A. 

Decker, Executive Secretary of the 

Corporation, at 202–898–8748. 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b. 

Dated at Washington, DC, on December 14, 

2023. 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

James P. Sheesley, 

Assistant Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2023–28157 Filed 12–18–23; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6714–01–P 

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION 

Notice of Agreements Filed 

The Commission hereby gives notice 

of filing of the following agreements 

under the Shipping Act of 1984. 

Interested parties may submit 

comments, relevant information, or 

documents regarding the agreements to 

the Secretary by email at Secretary@

fmc.gov, or by mail, Federal Maritime 

Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, 

Washington, DC 20573. Comments will 

be most helpful to the Commission if 

received within 12 days of the date this 

notice appears in the Federal Register, 

and the Commission requests that 

comments be submitted within 7 days 

on agreements that request expedited 

review. Copies of agreements are 

available through the Commission’s 

website (www.fmc.gov) or by contacting 

the Office of Agreements at (202) 523– 

5793 or tradeanalysis@fmc.gov. 

Agreement No.: 201325–001. 

Agreement Name: Sealand/Network 

Space Charter Agreement. 

Parties: Maersk A/S; Network 

Shipping, Ltd. 

Filing Party: Wayne Rohde; Cozen 

O’Connor. 

Synopsis: The Amendment changes 

the name of the agreement and deletes 

Panama, El Salvador, Nicaragua and 

Mexico from the geographic scope of the 

agreement. The Amendment changes 

the authority that Maersk had to charter 

space to Network to now authorizing 

Network to charter space to Maersk. The 

Amendment deletes obsolete language 

from the agreement and adds new 

language, revises the notice for 

termination and updates the persons to 

whom the notice is to be provided. The 

Amendment also restates the 

Agreement. 

Proposed Effective Date: 1/26/2024. 

Location: https://www2.fmc.gov/FMC.

Agreements.Web/Public/

AgreementHistory/25450. 

Dated: December 15, 2023. 

Carl Savoy, 

Federal Register Alternate Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27959 Filed 12–19–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6730–02–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request; Extension 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA), the Federal Trade Commission 

(FTC or Commission) is seeking public 

comment on its proposal to extend for 

an additional three years the Office of 

Management and Budget clearance for 

the Contact Lens Rule (the Rule). The 

current clearance expires on December 

31, 2023. 

DATES: Comments must be filed by 

January 19, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file a 

comment online or on paper, by 

following the instructions in the 

Request for Comment part of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below. Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. The reginfo.gov web 

link is a United States Government 

website produced by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) and the 

General Services Administration (GSA). 

Under PRA requirements, OMB’s Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA) reviews Federal information 

collections. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2023 / Notices 88077 

1Final Rule, 85 FR 50668 (Aug. 17, 2020). 

2American Optometric Association (PRA 

Comment #7) available at https://

www.regulations.gov/comment/FTC-2023-0049- 

0007. 

3 16 CFR 315.3(c). In order to provide digital 

copies of prescriptions, the prescriber must first 

obtain a single signed consent-to-electronic-delivery 

from each patient. 

4 16 CFR 315.3(c)(ii). 

5 85 FR 50709. 

6Standards for Privacy of Individually 

Identifiable Health Information, 67 FR 53182, 53261 

Continued 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Spelman, Attorney, Division of 

Advertising Practices, Bureau of 

Consumer Protection, Federal Trade 

Commission, (202) 326–2889, 

pspelman@ftc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Contact Lens Rule (Rule), 16 

CFR part 315. 

OMB Control Number: 3084–0127. 

Type of Review: Extension of a 

currently approved collection. 

The Rule was promulgated by the FTC 

pursuant to the Fairness to Contact Lens 

Consumers Act (FCLCA), Public Law 

108–164 (Dec. 6, 2003), which was 

enacted to enable consumers to 

purchase contact lenses from the seller 

of their choice. The Rule became 

effective on August 2, 2004, and was 

most recently amended in 2020.1 As 

mandated by the FCLCA, the Rule 

requires the release and verification of 

contact lens prescriptions which are 

generally valid for one year and 

contains recordkeeping requirements 

applying to both prescribers and sellers 

of contact lenses. 

Specifically, the Rule requires that 

prescribers provide a copy of the 

prescription to the consumer upon the 

completion of a contact lens fitting, 

even if the patient does not request it, 

and verify or provide prescriptions to 

authorized third parties. The Rule also 

mandates that a contact lens seller may 

sell contact lenses only in accordance 

with a prescription that the seller either: 

(a) has received from the patient or 

prescriber; or (b) has verified through 

direct communication with the 

prescriber. Additional provisions in the 

Rule that constitute collections of 

information as defined by 5 CFR 

1320.3(c) require that sellers who use 

calls containing automated verification 

messages record the entire call, and 

preserve such recordings for at least 

three years. In addition, the Rule 

requires that prescribers either: (a) 

obtain from patients, and maintain for a 

period of not less than three years, a 

signed confirmation of prescription 

release on a separate stand-alone 

document; (b) obtain from patients, and 

maintain for a period of not less than 

three years, a patient’s signature on a 

confirmation of prescription release 

included on a copy of a patient’s 

prescription; (c) obtain from patients, 

and maintain for a period of not less 

than three years, a patient’s signature on 

a confirmation of prescription release 

included on a copy of a patient’s contact 

lens fitting sales receipt; or (d) provide 

each patient with a copy of the 

prescription via online portal, electronic 

mail, or text message, and for three 

years retain evidence that such 

prescription was sent, received, or, if 

provided via an online-patient portal, 

made accessible, downloadable, and 

printable by the patient. For prescribers 

who choose to offer an electronic 

method of prescription delivery, the 

Rule requires that such prescribers 

maintain records or evidence of 

affirmative consent by patients to such 

digital delivery for three years. The Rule 

also requires prescribers to document in 

their records the medical reasons for 

setting a contact lens prescription 

expiration date of less than one year, 

and requires contact lens sellers to 

maintain records for three years of all 

direct communications involved in 

obtaining verification of a contact lens 

prescription, as well as prescriptions, or 

copies thereof, which they receive 

directly from customers or prescribers. 

The information retained under the 

Rule’s recordkeeping requirements is 

used by the Commission to substantiate 

compliance with the Rule and may also 

provide a basis for the Commission to 

bring an enforcement action. Without 

the required records, it would be 

difficult either to ensure that entities are 

complying with the Rule’s requirements 

or to bring enforcement actions based on 

violations of the Rule. 

Likely Respondents: Contact lens 

prescribers and contact lens sellers. 

Estimated Annual Labor Hours 

Burden: 3,104,050 hours (derived from 

2,045,650 contact lens prescriber hours 

+ 1,058,400 contact lens seller hours). 

• Contact Lens Prescribers: 750,000 

hours (45 million contact lens wearers 

× 1 minute per prescription release/60 

minutes) + 187,500 hours (33,750,000 

contact lens wearers × 20 seconds per 

confirmation of prescription release) + 

62,500 hours (11,250,000 contact lens 

wearers × 20 seconds per affirmative 

consent to electronic prescription 

delivery) + 295,650 hours (3,547,800 

verification requests × 5 minutes per 

response/60 minutes) + 750,000 hours 

recordkeeping = 2,045,650 hours. 

• Contact Lens Sellers: 985,500 hours 

(11,826,000 orders × 5 minutes per 

verification/60 minutes) + 72,900 

burden hours (4,374,000 orders × 1 

minute recordkeeping/60 minutes) = 

1,058,400 hours. 

Estimated Total Labor Cost Burden: 

Approximately $117,606,598 (derived 

from ($63.99 × 888,803 optometrist 

hours) + ($127.62 × 156,848 

ophthalmologist hours) + ($19.78 × 

1,000,000 prescribers’ office clerk hours) 

+ ($19.78 × 1,058,400 sellers’ office 

clerk hours). 

Estimated Total Non-Labor Cost 

Burden: $591,300 (11,826,000 × $.05 per 

automated message recording). 

Estimated Total Annual Cost Burden: 

$120,764,786 ($117,606,598 labor cost + 

$591,300 non-labor cost). 

Request for Comment: 

On August 14, 2023, the FTC sought 

public comment on the information 

collection requirements associated with 

the Rule. 88 FR 55044. The FTC 

received one comment germane to the 

issues that the agency sought comment 

on pursuant to the PRA renewal request. 

That comment was from the American 

Optometric Association (‘‘AOA’’), an 

organization representing more than 

50,000 optometrists and optometric 

professionals. In its comment, the AOA 

contends that the 2020 Rule amendment 

requiring that prescribers obtain a 

signed confirmation-of-prescription has 

created a greater compliance burden 

than previously projected by the FTC.2

As noted above, the 2020 Rule 

amendments require that upon 

completion of a contact lens fitting, the 

prescriber must request that a patient 

sign a statement confirming receipt of 

their contact lens prescription (unless a 

digital copy of a prescription is 

provided to the patient via portal, email, 

or text message).3 The prescriber may, 

but is not required to, use the onesentence confirmation statement, ‘‘My 

eye care professional provided me with 

a copy of my contact lens prescription 

at the completion of my contact lens 

fitting’’ to satisfy the requirement, and 

such statement can be on a stand-alone 

document or included on a contact lens 

prescription or exam receipt.4

In approving the Rule amendments in 

2020, the FTC estimated that the time 

required to collect a patient signature 

and confirmation of prescription takes 

ten seconds on average.5 The FTC’s 

estimate of ten seconds was derived 

from two sources. The first was a similar 

previously-approved patientacknowledgment-requirement under 

HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability 

and Accountability Act, which requires, 

among other things, that each health 

provider obtain a patient signature 

confirming receipt of that provider’s 

HIPAA Notice of Privacy Practices.6 The 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
88078 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2023 / Notices 

(Aug. 14, 2002) (implementing 45 CFR 

164.520(c)(2)(ii)). 7 45 CFR 164.520(c)(2)(ii). 

8Standards for Privacy of Individually 

Identifiable Health Information, 67 FR 53182, 

53240–43 (Aug. 14, 2002) (implementing 45 CFR 

164.520(c)(2)(ii)). 

9 Id. at 53240–43, 53260–61. HHS also calculated 

three cents per signed acknowledgment for the cost 

some doctors might incur for the paper. Id. at 

53256. Since 2018, HHS has been considering a 

proposal to eliminate its signed-acknowledgment 

requirement as no longer necessary to compel 

providers to distribute Notices of Privacy Practices 

to patients, but HHS has not determined that the 10- 

second time estimate for obtaining a patient 

signature is inaccurate. Request for Information on 

Modifying HIPAA Rules to Improve Coordinated 

Care, 83 FR 64302, 64302–03 (2018), https://

www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2018-12-14/pdf/ 

2018-27162.pdf#page=1. For a more fulsome 

discussion about the HHS proposal to eliminate its 

signed acknowledgment, and why this has little 

relevance with respect to the Contact Lens Rule, see 

CLR Final Rule, 85 FR 50684–85, footnotes and 

accompanying text. 

10 1–800 CONTACTS (Contact Lens Rule 

Workshop Comment #3207); Laurence C. Baker, 

‘‘Analysis of Costs and Benefits of the FTC 

Proposed Patient Acknowledgment and 

Recordkeeping Amendment to the Contact Lens 

Rule,’’ 11 (2017), https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ 

summaries/initiatives/677/10192017_meeting_

summary_from_mko_for_the_contact_lens_rule_

rulemaking_proceeding.pdf (SSI online survey of 

500 respondents). Twelve seconds was the average, 

the median was 10 seconds. 

11 Id. at 18. 

12 84 FR 24693. 

13AOA (PRA Comment #7), supra note 9. 

14 Id. According to AOA, the survey was 

conducted in-house by its Health Policy Institute 

and Research Departments, and distributed to 

member optometrists via AOA’s weekly email 

newsletter with a link and invite to the survey titled 

‘‘Voice your concerns by Oct. 9: Complying with 

the FTC Contact Lens Rule.’’ Of members who 

responded to the AOA’s link request, 327 

completed the survey. 

15This is officially the Ophthalmic Practice 

Rules, 16 CFR part 456. 

16 ‘‘A Clear Look at the Eyeglass Rule,’’ Public 

Workshop (May 18, 2023), transcript available at 

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/events/2023/05/ 

clear-look-eyeglass-rule [hereinafter ER Workshop 

Transcript]. 

17Montaquila, ER Workshop Transcript at 23–24. 

18National Taxpayers Union (ER NPRM 

Comment #28) available at https://

www.regulations.gov/comment/FTC-2023-0001- 

0028. See also Prine (ER Workshop Comment #38) 

(simply stated that having patients sign a receipt of 

their prescription and then scan that into their chart 

‘‘took a lot of extra time’’) available at https://

www.regulations.gov/comment/FTC-2023-0001- 

0038; Michaels, ER Workshop Transcript at 9 

(stating, ‘‘There’s a lot of time, effort, discussion 

around [the confirmation requirement]. I think that 

is something that is greatly underestimated in terms 

of how long it takes and how effort it takes to go 

through that process.’’). 

19NAROC (ER NPRM Comment #24) available at 

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FTC-2023- 

0001-0024. See also Consumer Action (ER NPRM 

Comment #26) (‘‘we do not believe it is a burden 

on providers to obtain, document, and retain a 

consumer’s affirmative receipt of their 

prescription.’’). 

HIPAA acknowledgment requirement,7

which has been in effect for more than 

20 years, faced objections prior to 

implementation over concerns it would 

be burdensome and costly to 

implement.8 The U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services rejected 

those contentions and determined that 

its signed acknowledgment would 

require just ten seconds to hand out and 

ten seconds to obtain a patient’s 

signature.9

The second source for the FTC’s 

estimate of 10 seconds was a consumer 

survey by the polling firm Survey 

Sampling International (‘‘SSI’’) of how 

long it took consumers to read a 

proposed two-sentence statement, ‘‘My 

eye care professional provided me with 

a copy of my contact lens prescription 

at the completion of my contact lens 

fitting. I understand I am free to 

purchase contact lenses from the seller 

of my choice.’’ The survey found that it 

took consumers, on average, twelve 

seconds to review those two sentences, 

and 90% of respondents read it in 20 

seconds or less.10 Additionally, 90% of 

consumers surveyed indicated they 

understood the proposed 

acknowledgement statement, and 94% 

indicated that they had no follow-up 

questions.11 The Commission’s Final 

Rule did not include the second 

sentence of the surveyed confirmation 

statement, thereby shortening the final 

confirmation statement by nearly half, 

with the expected result that it might 

only take six or seven seconds for 

consumers to read and comprehend. 

Based on the survey average of 12 

seconds to read the previously-proposed 

two-sentence statement, and on the 

approved HHS signed-acknowledgment 

estimate, the Commission, in its Rule 

amendments of 2020, estimated ten 

seconds to read and provide a signature 

for the Rule’s one-sentence 

confirmation-of-prescription-release 

statement.12

In its new PRA comment, however, 

the AOA contends that the FTC 

‘‘significantly underestimated’’ how 

long it would take to confirm 

prescription releases.13 According to the 

AOA, a 2023 survey it conducted of 

some of its member optometrists found 

that 84.8% indicate it takes 30 seconds 

or more to obtain the patient’s signed 

confirmation, not counting additional 

time necessary to address patient 

questions about the form they are 

signing, and 69.9% of prescribers said 

patients ‘‘typically’’ have questions 

regarding the acknowledgment.14

AOA’s comment accords with some 

written and verbal comments provided 

to the Commission during an ongoing 

review of the Eyeglass Rule,15 which 

includes a proposal to add a similar 

confirmation-of-prescription-release 

requirement. The Commission’s 

Eyeglass Rule review has examined, 

among other things, the burden arising 

from the existing Contact Lens Rule’s 

confirmation-of-prescription-release 

requirement, and thus some of the 

comments received during the Eyeglass 

Rule review pertain to the Rule burden 

discussed herein. For instance, at a 2023 

FTC workshop on the Eyeglass Rule,16

panelist Dr. Stephen Montaquila, a 

Rhode Island optometrist, estimated that 

it takes his staff four minutes to 

complete the entire Contact Lens Rule 

process of printing out a patient’s 

prescription, handing it to the patient, 

explaining why it needs to be signed, 

having the patient sign it, making a copy 

of it, and storing the signed copy as a 

record.17 Dr. Montaquila did not break 

down his estimate by task, so it is 

unclear how long he estimates it takes 

for a consumer to simply read and sign 

the confirmation statement, as opposed 

to the time it takes for his staff to print 

out the prescription and confirmation 

and store the confirmation as a record. 

As detailed in this submission, the 

Commission has allowed for one minute 

for prescribers to print out the 

prescription, and an additional minute 

for staff to store the signed confirmation. 

In addition, the National Taxpayers 

Union, an Alexandria, Virginia-based 

advocacy organization, submitted a 

comment to the Eyeglass Rule review 

stating that while it generally supports 

the confirmation requirement, ‘‘[G]iven 

the various reading speeds of customers 

who may be elderly or have limited 

proficiency in English, the 10 second 

estimate [used for the Contact Lens 

Rule’s confirmation requirement] could 

prove low.’’ 18

Some commenters, however, 

disagreed that it takes a significant 

amount of time to obtain a patient’s 

signed confirmation. The National 

Association of Retail Optical Companies 

(‘‘NAROC’’), a trade association 

comprised of retail optical companies 

with co-located eye care services (such 

as LensCrafters, Costco Optical, and 

Walmart Vision Center), commented 

that thousands of optometrists affiliated 

in co-location with NAROC member 

companies ‘‘regularly comply with 

[Contact Lens Rule requirements] with 

little or no added cost or other burden 

on the eye care practice.’’ 19 According 

to NAROC representative and Eyeglass 

Rule Workshop panelist Joseph Neville, 

‘‘I’ve personally witnessed a couple of 

situations where the process for contact 

lenses seemed very easy. . . . the Rx 

was handed over at the front desk by the 

staff person, and the staff person maybe 

a bit simplistically said, ‘‘We’d like to 

ask you to sign this receipt for your 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2023 / Notices 88079 

20Neville, ER Workshop Transcript at 28–29. 

21The Commission also notes that while the AOA 

states that it represents some 50,000 optometric 

professionals, only 327 members responded to 

AOA’s invitation and completed the survey, which 

could indicate that most AOA members do not have 

concerns about complying with the Contact Lens 

Rule. However, there could be other reasons for the 

relatively small number of prescribers (in 

proportion to the total membership) who 

responded, so the Commission will not draw any 

inferences from the low response rate. 

22See AOA Contact Lens Rule Compliance 

Toolkit, sample template, 8, available at https://

documents.aoa.org/Documents/CLCS/Contact-LensRule-Compliance-Toolkit.pdf. 

23 Id. 

24Montaquila, ER Workshop transcript at 23. 

25See supra notes 15–16. 

prescription. We’re required to get your 

signature acknowledging that you’ve 

received it.’’ And a couple of people, 

and again, anecdotes here that I 

witnessed on this, just said, ‘‘Okay, fine, 

thank you.’’ 20

Discussion of the Comments and 

Evidence Regarding the Time Required 

In considering how much time it takes 

to complete the confirmation-ofprescription-release requirement for this 

Paperwork Reduction Act purpose, the 

Commission has evaluated the evidence 

in the record, including the previouslyapproved HHS estimate for a similar 

signed-acknowledgment, the comments 

in response to the PRA request for 

comment in the 60-Day Federal Register 

notice and the Contact Lens Rule and 

Eyeglass Rule rulemakings, and the two 

surveys mentioned above, one of 

consumer read-times and the other of 

prescriber-estimates for staff time. 

The Commission finds none of the 

comments, and neither survey, 

dispositive in and of itself. The surveys, 

in particular, are suggestive but not 

determinative. The SSI survey of 

consumer read-times on a computer 

monitor is helpful, but may not take into 

account elderly patients or those for 

whom English is not their first language. 

It also does not take into account the 

time it takes for prescribers’ staff to 

hand a paper confirmation document to 

the patient and for the patient to sign it 

and hand it back. The AOA survey, 

meanwhile, very likely overestimates 

the time necessary to obtain a 

confirmation because of the manner in 

which the survey solicited its 

respondents. The prescribers were selfselected in response to an AOA 

invitation to ‘‘Voice your concerns’’ 

about complying with the Contact Lens 

Rule. Because the poll only included 

prescribers who responded to this 

invitation, its findings may not be 

representative of the average prescriber. 

In fact, it is probable that a large number 

of those who responded were 

prescribers who have concerns about 

the patient-confirmation requirement 

and the time it takes to obtain a 

confirmation, while prescribers who do 

not have concerns, or have fewer 

concerns, did not bother to respond. By 

framing the survey as an invitation to 

voice concerns about complying with 

the Rule, the survey has been 

transformed from a disinterested 

information-gathering tool into a 

motivating call to action. So while it is 

possible that prescribers who did not 

respond to the survey also share the 

concerns raised by survey respondents, 

that cannot be concluded from the 

survey.21

The Commission also has concerns 

that some of the time prescribers ascribe 

to patients reading and signing the 

confirmation is, in fact, due to nonmandated choices by prescribers with 

respect to the design of the confirmation 

statement. As noted above, the Rule 

merely requires that patients read and 

sign a simple statement confirming 

receipt of their prescription, and the 

Commission allowed that the onesentence statement, ‘‘My eye care 

professional provided me with a copy of 

my contact lens prescription at the 

completion of my contact lens fitting,’’ 

would fully satisfy the requirement. 

According to the AOA survey, nearly 

60% of prescribers use a separate form 

with a statement confirming receipt (as 

opposed to obtaining a patient signature 

on a prescription copy or sales receipt), 

but the survey did not specify or ask 

prescribers what confirmation statement 

they used on their form, making it 

difficult to determine the true average 

time it takes to comply with the 

confirmation-of-prescription-release 

requirement. Moreover, the AOA has 

supplied its members with a model 

template confirmation form that 

includes four additional paragraphs 

consisting of ‘‘important information to 

review prior to receiving your contact 

lens prescription.’’ 22 This information 

includes various recommendations from 

the Centers for Disease Control and the 

Food and Drug Administration about 

healthy contact lens use (such as ‘‘Take 

out your contacts and call your eye 

doctor if you have eye pain, discomfort, 

redness, or blurry vision’’) as well as 

five bullet points listing some of the 

symptoms for an eye infection 

(‘‘Irritated, red eyes, worsening pain in 

or around the eyes,’’ etc.).23 While the 

document is titled ‘‘Contact Lens 

Prescription Acknowledgment Form,’’ 

only at the very end is there a statement, 

‘‘Sign below to acknowledge that you 

were provided a copy of your contact 

lens prescription at the completion of 

your contact lens fitting.’’ 

According to Workshop Panelist Dr. 

Montaquila, the AOA template is a 

common form used to obtain patient 

confirmations.24 If this is indeed the 

case, the Commission is not surprised 

that many prescribers report it takes 

patients 30 seconds or longer to read 

and sign, nor that patients might have 

questions, or be confused, as to why 

they now have to sign and acknowledge 

not just receipt of their prescription, but 

that they read these recommendations 

from the CDC and FDA. The additional 

information from these two other federal 

agencies may be useful for patients, but 

is not required by the Rule, nor 

considered part of the PRA burden of 

compliance. 

Despite the aforementioned concerns 

about the reliability of the AOA survey 

in establishing the time it takes for a 

patient confirmation, the Commission 

does not discount the survey altogether, 

and views it as suggestive, and an 

additional indication that many 

prescribers sincerely believe the 10- 

second estimate does not accurately 

reflect the time required to obtain a 

patient’s signed confirmation. The 

Commission has therefore decided to 

increase the estimated time to obtain a 

patient confirmation signature (and the 

time to collect an affirmative consent to 

electronic delivery, in instances where 

the prescription is provided digitally 

rather than in paper) from 10 to 20 

seconds. The Commission believes that 

20 seconds may better reflect the time 

required for a patient to not just read a 

one-sentence confirmation, but also to 

physically sign and return the document 

to staff, and for any staff explanation as 

to why the patient’s signature is 

required. The 20-second estimate may 

also better align with the original 

HIPAA estimate, which accorded 10 

seconds to hand out the 

acknowledgment and another ten 

seconds to obtain a patient’s signature 

and collect the document.25

Pursuant to OMB regulations, 5 CFR 

part 1320, that implement the PRA, 44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq., the FTC is providing 

this second opportunity for public 

comment while seeking OMB approval 

to renew the pre-existing clearance for 

the Rule. 

Estimated Annual Hours and Labor 

Cost Burden 

Estimated annual hours burden: 

3,104,050 hours. 

This figure is derived by adding 

disclosure and recordkeeping-hours for 

contact lens prescribers to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
88080 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2023 / Notices 

26The 2020 amendments to the Contact Lens Rule 

altered the definition of ‘‘provide to the patient a 

copy’’ of the contact lens prescription to include 

electronic delivery of the prescription, such as via 

email, text, or by uploading it to a patient portal. 

In order to avail themselves of this option, 

prescribers must obtain and maintain evidence of 

the patients’ affirmative consent to electronic 

delivery for three years. 

27Centers for Disease Control, Healthy Contact 

Lens Wear and Care, Fast Facts, https://

www.cdc.gov/contactlenses/fast-facts.html. See also 

U.S. Food & Drug Administration, Focusing on 

Contact Lens Safety, https://www.fda.gov/ 

consumers/consumer-updates/focusing-contactlens-safety. 

28 In the past, some commentators have suggested 

that typical contact lens wearers obtain annual 

exams every 18 months or so, not every year. 

However, because prescriptions under the Rule are 

valid for a minimum of one year, we continue to 

estimate that patients seek exams every 12 months. 

Staff believes a calculation that assumes adherence 

to the Rule will provide the best estimate of the 

Rule’s contemplated burden, even if, in practical 

terms, it overestimates the burden. 

29This assumption may be incorrect, particularly 

in instances where a contact lens fitting is not 

completed during the prescriber’s examination 

itself, but rather after the patient tests out the lenses 

for a few days. Nonetheless, the Commission does 

not have information as to what percentage of 

prescriptions are released by prescribers or by 

prescribers’ staff, and thus will calculate the PRA 

with the assumption that they are all released by 

the prescriber. 

30See Michaels, Workshop Transcript at 18 

(noting that in his office, prescriptions are 

automatically uploaded to a patient portal ‘‘the very 

second the prescription is finalized.’’) 

31 In prior PRA submissions, the task of collecting 

a patient signature on a confirmation-ofprescription-receipt was attributed to prescribers, 

but based on more recent conversations with 

prescribers and others in the industry, the 

Commission now believes that this task is more 

appropriately designated as performed by 

prescribers’ office staff. This is further supported by 

comments during the Eyeglass Rule Workshop, 

such as that of panelist Dr. Montaquila, who noted 

that his staff completes the process ‘‘from 

explaining why we’re doing it to the patient, 

providing them with their prescription, making 

copies, providing their prescription back to them, 

and ultimately storing it. . . . Our staff has to 

explain, ‘You’re signing this for this reason.’’ 

Montaquila, ER Workshop Transcript at 22, 28. See 

also Neville, ER Workshop Transcript at 28 

(commenting that he has observed situations where 

the doctor pushed a button to have the prescription 

printed out at the front desk, the prescription was 

handed over at the desk by the staff person, and the 

staff person obtained the patient’s signature on the 

confirmation.); AOA Report for Complying with the 

FTC Contact Lens Rule, (survey to prescribers, 

Question 3, ‘‘Have you experienced challenges in 

training staff on the new requirements for the 

Contact Lens Rule?’’; Question 9 ‘‘How much time 

per day does your staff spend on addressing patient 

questions with the acknowledgment form and 

process?’’). 32See supra note 40. 

33 Jason J. Nichols & Deborah Fisher, ‘‘2018 

Annual Report,’’ Contact Lens Spectrum, Jan. 1, 

2019, https://www.clspectrum.com/issues/2019/ 

january-2019. 

recordkeeping hours for contact lens 

sellers. 

1. Prescribers and Their Office Staff 

The Rule requires prescribers to 

collect information and make 

disclosures in three ways. Upon 

completing a contact lens fitting, the 

Rule requires that prescribers (1) 

provide a copy of the contact lens 

prescription to the patient,26 (2) collect 

a patient’s signature on either a 

Confirmation of Prescription Release or 

a consent-to-electronic-prescriptionrelease and preserve such record, and 

(3) as directed by any person designated 

to act on behalf of the patient, provide 

or verify the contact lens prescription. 

Prescribers can verify a prescription 

either by responding affirmatively to a 

request for verification, or by not 

responding at all, in which case the 

prescription will be ‘‘passively verified’’ 

after eight business hours. Prescribers 

are also required to correct an incorrect 

prescription submitted by a seller, and 

notify a seller if the prescription 

submitted for verification is expired or 

otherwise invalid. Staff believes that the 

burden of complying with these 

requirements is relatively low. 

The number of contact lens wearers in 

the United States is estimated by the 

Centers for Disease Control to be 

approximately 45 million.27 Therefore, 

assuming an annual contact lens exam 

for each contact lens wearer, 

approximately 45 million people would 

receive a copy of their prescription each 

year under the Rule and be required to 

either sign a Confirmation of 

Prescription Release or consent to 

electronic delivery of their 

prescription.28

At an estimated one minute per 

prescription, the annual time spent by 

prescribers complying with the 

requirement to release prescriptions to 

patients would be approximately 

750,000 hours [(45 million × 1 minute)/ 

60 minutes = 750,000 hours]. Since the 

Rule requires that prescriptions be 

released automatically at completion of 

a fitting, the Commission—for purposes 

of calculating the PRA burden—assumes 

that prescription releases to patients are 

handled by the prescriber rather than 

the prescriber’s office staff.29 In all 

likelihood, this estimate overstates the 

actual burden because it includes the 

time spent by prescribers who already 

release prescriptions to patients in the 

ordinary course of business. 

Furthermore, this estimate allocates the 

same time for both paper and electronic 

delivery of prescriptions, even though 

the latter likely takes less time for the 

prescriber.30

The time required to collect a 

signature from a patient confirming 

release of a prescription is estimated at 

twenty seconds, as discussed above. It is 

estimated that 25% of patients would 

opt for electronic delivery of their 

prescriptions and thus would not need 

to sign a Confirmation of Prescription 

Release. Based on our knowledge of the 

industry and how the medical field 

operates, the Commission believes most 

signed patient confirmations are 

obtained by prescribers’ office staff 

rather than by the prescribers 

themselves.31 The time spent by 

prescribers’ staff complying with the 

requirement to obtain signed 

confirmations from the other 75% of 

patients is approximately 187,500 hours 

annually [(75% × 45 million 

prescriptions yearly × 20 seconds) = 

187,500 hours]. 

As noted above, it is estimated that 

approximately 25% of patients would 

opt for electronic delivery of their 

prescriptions. In order to opt for 

electronic delivery, patients are required 

to sign an affirmative consent to receive 

their prescription via email, text, or 

patient portal. The time required to 

collect an affirmative consent signature 

is estimated at twenty seconds, and the 

annual time spent complying with the 

requirement to obtain such signatures is 

approximately 62,500 hours [(25% × 45 

million prescriptions yearly × 20 

seconds) = 62,500 hours]. Based on our 

knowledge of the industry and how the 

medical field operates, the Commission 

believes most signed patient consents 

are obtained by prescribers’ office staff 

rather than by the prescribers 

themselves.32

As stated above, prescribers may also 

be required to provide or verify contact 

lens prescriptions to sellers. According 

to survey data, approximately 36% of 

contact lens purchases are from a source 

other than the prescriber.33 Assuming 

that each of the 45 million contact lens 

wearers in the U.S. makes one purchase 

per year, this means that approximately 

16,200,000 contact lens purchases (45 

million × 36% = 16,200,000) are made 

from sellers other than the prescriber. 

Based on prior discussions with 

industry, approximately 73% of sales by 

non-prescriber sellers require 

verification, and prescribers 

affirmatively respond (by notifying the 

seller that the prescription is invalid or 

incorrect) to approximately 15% of 

those verification requests. Using a 

response rate of 15%, the FTC therefore 

estimates that prescribers’ offices 

respond to approximately 1,773,900 

verification requests annually 

[(16,200,000 purchases × 73%) × 15% = 

1,773,900 responses]. Additionally, 

some prescribers may voluntarily 

respond to verification requests and 

confirm prescriptions (as opposed to 

simply letting the prescription passively 

verify). Because correcting or declining 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2023 / Notices 88081 

34Notice and Request for Comment, 81 FR 62501 

(Sept. 9, 2016). 

35 85 FR 5709. 

36Press Release, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 

United States Department of Labor, Occupational 

Employment and Wage Statistics—May 2022, 

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ocwage.t01.htm. 

Median salaries for prescribers and clerks are 

slightly lower than average salaries and, 

consequently, would result in a lower overall 

burden imposed by the Rule. It is possible that 

medians are more representative since they do not 

include salary outliers that can distort the average. 

Salaries can also vary significantly by region. 

However, since Contact Lens Rule PRA submissions 

have historically used national salary averages to 

estimate the burden, the FTC will continue to do 

so for this submission. 

37See Proposed Collection Request, 81 FR 31938, 

31940 (May 20, 2016); Proposed Collection Request, 

84 FR 32170, 32172 (July 5, 2019). 

incorrect prescriptions is mandated by 

the Rule and occurs in response to 

approximately 15% of requests, staff 

assumes that prescribers voluntarily 

confirm prescriptions less often, and 

confirm at most an additional 15% of 

prescriptions (and, in all likelihood, 

significantly less). Using a combined 

response rate of 30%, the FTC estimates 

that prescribers’ offices respond to 

approximately 3,547,800 requests 

annually. 

According to prior industry 

comments,34 responding to verification 

requests requires approximately five 

minutes per request. Using that data, we 

estimate that these responses require an 

additional 295,650 hours annually 

[(3,547,800 × 5 minutes)/60 minutes = 

295,650 hours]. Based on investigations 

and anecdotal comments, FTC staff is 

aware that many verification requests 

are handled by office staff rather than by 

the prescribers themselves. FTC staff, 

however, does not possess reliable 

information as to what percentage of 

verification requests are performed by 

prescribers or their staff, and thus will 

allocate all such time to prescribers. 

Lastly, the Rule and FCLCA also 

impose recordkeeping requirements on 

prescribers’ offices. First, they must 

maintain signed confirmations, or 

signed consent to electronic 

prescription delivery and proof that 

such prescriptions were delivered via 

email, text, or patient portal, for a 

period of three years. For purposes of 

PRA analysis, the Commission has used 

the assumption that all prescriber 

offices require a full minute to store and 

maintain each confirmation record, and 

a full minute to store and maintain each 

consent to electronic prescription 

delivery and proof of electronic 

prescription delivery.35 The 

Commission thus allots an additional 

750,000 annual hours for prescribers’ 

offices to store and maintain records of 

patient confirmations and consents. The 

Commission believes these labor hours 

are most likely performed by 

prescribers’ office staff. 

The Rule also requires prescribers to 

document the specific medical reasons 

for setting a contact lens prescription 

expiration date shorter than the oneyear minimum established by the 

FCLCA. This burden is likely to be nil 

because the requirement applies only in 

cases when the prescriber invokes the 

medical judgment exception, which is 

expected to occur infrequently, and 

prescribers are likely to record this 

information in the ordinary course of 

business as part of their patients’ 

medical records. As mentioned 

previously, the OMB regulation that 

implements the PRA defines ‘‘burden’’ 

to exclude any effort that would be 

expended regardless of a regulatory 

requirement. 

Combining all hours spent annually 

disclosing prescriptions to consumers, 

obtaining confirmations of prescription 

release from consumers, obtaining 

affirmative consent to electronic 

prescription delivery from consumers, 

responding to verification requests, and 

maintaining records as required by the 

Rule, we estimate a total of 2,045,650 

hours for all contact lens prescribers to 

comply with the Rule [750,000 

prescription-release hours + 187,500 

confirmation-collection hours + 62,500 

electronic-delivery-consent-collection 

hours + 295,650 verification-response 

hours + 750,000 recordkeeping hours = 

2,045,650 hours]. Of this total, we 

estimate 1,045,650 are prescriber labor 

hours, and 1,000,000 are labor hours 

performed by prescribers’ clerical office 

staff. 

2. Sellers 

As noted above, a seller may sell 

contact lenses only in accordance with 

a valid prescription that the seller has 

(a) received from the patient or 

prescriber, or (b) verified through direct 

communication with the prescriber. The 

FCLCA also requires sellers to retain 

prescriptions and records of 

communications with prescribers 

relating to prescription verification for 

three years. 

As stated previously, there are 

approximately 16,200,000 sales by nonprescriber sellers annually and 

approximately 73% of such sales 

require verification. Therefore, sellers 

verify approximately 11,826,000 orders 

annually and retain two records for such 

sales: the verification request and any 

response from the prescriber. Staff 

estimates that sellers’ verification and 

recordkeeping for those orders will 

entail a maximum of five minutes per 

sale. At an estimated five minutes per 

sale to each of the approximately 

11,826,000 orders, contact lens sellers 

will spend a total of 985,500 burden 

hours complying with this portion of 

the requirement [(11,826,000 × 5 

minutes)/60 minutes = 985,500 hours]. 

Approximately 27% of sales to nonprescriber sellers do not require 

verification and thus require only that 

the seller retain the prescription 

provided. Staff estimates that this 

recordkeeping burden requires at most 

one minute per order (in truth, in many 

cases this retention is electronic and 

automatic and will not require any time) 

for 4,374,000 orders [16,200,000 sales × 

27%], resulting in 72,900 recordkeeping 

burden hours [(4,374,000 orders × 1 

minute)/60 minutes = 72,900 hours]. 

Combining burden hours for all orders 

[985,500 hours + 72,900 hours], staff 

estimates a total of 1,058,400 hours for 

contact lens sellers. It is likely that this 

estimate overstates the actual burden 

because it includes the time spent by 

sellers who already keep records 

pertaining to contact lens sales in the 

ordinary course of business, and those 

whose records are generated and 

preserved automatically when a 

customer orders online, which staff 

believes is the case for many online 

sellers. 

Estimated total labor cost burden: 

Approximately $117,606,598. 

This figure is derived from applying 

hourly wage figures for optometrists, 

ophthalmologists, and office clerical 

staff to the burden hours described 

above. This estimate is higher than the 

$84,548,448 labor cost estimate 

submitted to OMB in 2019 due to new 

information collection and 

recordkeeping requirements in the Rule, 

and to wage increases for optometrists, 

ophthalmologists, and office staff. 

According to Bureau of Labor 

Statistics (BLS), salaried optometrists 

earn an average wage of $63.99 per 

hour, ophthalmologists—which are 

listed by BLS under ‘‘surgeons’’—earn 

an average wage of $127.62 per hour, 

and general office clerks earn an average 

wage of $19.78 per hour.36 Based on our 

knowledge of the industry and the 

number of optometrists and 

ophthalmologists in the United States, 

we assume that of the 1,045,650 

prescriber labor hours relating to the 

Rule, optometrists are performing 85% 

of such hours and ophthalmologists are 

performing the remaining 15% of 

prescriber hours.37 We credit general 

office clerks for performing the 

remaining hours, both for prescribers’ 

offices (1,000,000 hours) and for nonprescriber sellers (1,058,400 hours). 

Based on these assumptions and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1
88082 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 20, 2023 / Notices 

38 85 FR 50711. It is possible this would be a onetime expense for sellers to invest in recording 

equipment, as opposed to an annual outlay. But in 

the absence of information as to how sellers manage 

such recordings, the Commission will assume, for 

the purpose of this PRA analysis, that recording 

expense is a recurring annual cost burden. 

39See https://www.globenewswire.com/en/newsrelease/2022/09/05/2509723/0/en/Contact-LensesMarket-Size-Will-Achieve-USD-17-4-Billion-by2030-growing-at-6-9-CAGR-Exclusive-Report-byAcumen-Research-and-Consulting.html. Some 

estimates already put the U.S. contact lens market 

as high as $17 billion, see https://www.vision

monday.com/business/article/us-optical-retailmarket-estimated-at-765-billion-in-the-visioncouncils-first-comprehensive-market-insightsreport/. 

estimates above, the estimated total 

labor cost attributable to the Rule is 

approximately $117,606,597 [($63.99 × 

888,803 optometrist hours = 

$56,874,504) + ($127.62 × 156,848 

ophthalmologist hours = $20,016,942) + 

($19.78 × 1,000,000 prescribers’ office 

clerk hours = $19,780,000) + ($19.78 × 

1,058,400 sellers’ office clerk hours = 

$20,935,152) = $117,606,598]. 

Capital and Other Non-Labor Costs 

Estimated annual non-labor cost 

burden: $591,300. 

Staff believes that the Rule’s 

disclosure and recordkeeping 

requirements described above impose 

negligible capital or other non-labor 

costs, as the affected entities are likely 

to have the necessary supplies and/or 

equipment already (e.g., prescription 

pads, patients’ medical charts, facsimile 

machines and paper, telephones, and 

recordkeeping facilities such as filing 

cabinets or other storage) to perform 

those requirements. The 2020 Rule 

amendments, however, modified the 

Rule to require that sellers who use 

automated verification messages record 

the calls and preserve the recordings for 

three years. The Commission does not 

believe that requiring sellers who use 

automated messages for verification to 

record the calls and preserve them will 

create a substantial burden. The 

requirement will not require additional 

labor time, since the calls will be for the 

same duration as they were previously, 

but may require capital and other nonlabor costs to record the calls and store 

them electronically. Based on comments 

supplied during the Rule modification 

process, the Commission estimates the 

cost to record each verification call at 

five cents apiece.38

Based on survey data, approximately 

36% of contact lens purchases are from 

a source other than the prescriber. 

Assuming that each of the 45 million 

contact lens wearers in the U.S. makes 

on purchase per year, this would mean 

that approximately 16,200,000 contact 

lens purchases are made annually from 

sellers other than the prescribers. And 

since approximately 73% of sales by 

non-prescriber sellers require 

verification, this means that 

approximately 11,826,000 contact lens 

purchases would require verification 

calls, faxes, or emails. The Commission 

does not possess information as to the 

percentage of verifications completed by 

telephone versus fax or email, and thus 

for purposes of this analysis will assume 

that all verifications are performed via 

phone and deliver automated messages 

that are subject to the call-recording 

requirement. Based on the 

aforementioned assumptions, the 

Commission estimates that the 

requirement to record automated 

telephone verification messages will 

cost sellers, in aggregate, $591,300 

(11,826,000 × $.05). 

Total Costs to the Industry (Including 

Labor and Non-Labor Costs) 

Combining the annual labor cost 

burden with the non-labor cost burden, 

the total cost burden of the Rule is 

estimated at $118,197,898 ($117,606,598 

+ $591,300 = $118,197,898). 

This burden is not insubstantial, but 

to put it in perspective, a recent survey 

estimated the value of the U.S. contact 

lens market at approximately $9.6 

billion (not counting examination 

revenue).39 Therefore, the total cost 

burden estimate of $118,197,898, 

imposed by the Rule, represents a cost 

of approximately 1.2% of the overall 

retail revenue generated through the 

sale of contact lenses. 

Your comment—including your name 

and your state—will be placed on the 

public record of this proceeding. 

Because your comment will be made 

public, you are solely responsible for 

making sure that your comment does 

not include any sensitive personal 

information, such as anyone’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. You are also solely 

responsible for making sure that your 

comment does not include any sensitive 

health information, such as medical 

records or other individually 

identifiable health information. In 

addition, your comment should not 

include any ‘‘trade secret or any 

commercial or financial information 

which . . . is privileged or 

confidential’’—as provided by Section 

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

FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)— 

including in particular competitively 

sensitive information such as costs, 

sales statistics, inventories, formulas, 

patterns, devices, manufacturing 

processes, or customer names. 

Josephine Liu, 

Assistant General Counsel for Legal Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27877 Filed 12–19–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention 

Notice of Closed Meeting 

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 1009(d), notice is 

hereby given of the following meeting. 

The meeting will be closed to the 

public in accordance with the 

provisions set forth in sections 

552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., 

as amended, and the Determination of 

the Director, Office of Strategic Business 

Initiatives, Office of the Chief Operating 

Officer, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 

92–463. The grant applications and the 

discussions could disclose confidential 

trade secrets or commercial property 

such as patentable material, and 

personal information concerning 

individuals associated with the grant 

applications, the disclosure of which 

would constitute a clearly unwarranted 

invasion of personal privacy. 

Name of Committee: Disease, 

Disability, and Injury Prevention and 

Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP)– 

PAR 20–280, Cooperative Research 

Agreements Related to the World Trade 

Center Health Program (U01); RFA–OH– 

24–002, Exploratory/Developmental 

Grants on Lifestyle Medicine Research 

Related to the World Trade Center 

Health Program (R21); RFA–OH–24– 

003, Exploratory/Developmental Grants 

Related to the World Trade Center 

Survivors (R21–No Applications with 

Responders Accepted); and RFA–OH– 

24–004, World Trade Center Health 

Program Mentored Research Scientist 

Career Development Award (K01). 

Dates: March 19–21, 2024. 

Times: 11 a.m.–6 p.m., EDT. 

Place: Video-Assisted Meeting. 

Agenda: To review and evaluate grant 

applications. 

For Further Information Contact: 

Laurel Garrison, M.P.H., Scientific 

Review Officer, Office of Extramural 

Programs, National Institute for 

Occupational Safety and Health, Centers 

for Disease Control and Prevention, 

5555 Ridge Avenue, Cincinnati, Ohio 

45213. Telephone: (513) 533–8324; 

Email: LGarrison@cdc.gov. 

The Director, Office of Strategic 

Business Initiatives, Office of the Chief 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1