Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 3, 2000 / Notices 58997

OMB Control number: 7100–0284.

Frequency: Event-generated.

Reporters: Foreign banks.

Annual reporting hours: 600 hours.

Estimated average hours per response:

40 hours.

Number of respondents: 15.

Small businesses are not affected.

General description of report: This

information collection is required to

obtain or retain a benefit sections 7 and

10 of the International Banking Act (12

U.S.C. 3105 and 3107). The applying

organization has the opportunity to

request confidentiality for information

that it believes will qualify for a

Freedom of Information Act exemption.

Abstract: Foreign banks are required

to obtain the prior approval of the

Federal Reserve to establish a branch,

agency, or representative office or to

acquire ownership or control of a

commercial lending company in the

United States or to change the status of

any existing office in the United States.

The Federal Reserve needs the

information to fulfill its statutory

obligation to supervise foreign banking

organizations with offices in the United

States.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve

System, September 27, 2000.

Jennifer J. Johnson,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 00–25317 Filed 10–2–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Board of

Governors of the Federal Reserve

System.

TIME AND DATE: 11 am, Tuesday, October

10, 2000.

PLACE: Marriner S. Eccles Federal

Reserve Board Building, 20th and C

Streets, NW., Washington, DC 20551.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

1. Personnel actions (appointments,

promotions, assignments,

reassignments, and salary actions)

involving individual Federal Reserve

System employees.

2. Any items carried forward from a

previously announced meeting.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Lynn S. Fox, Assistant to the Board;

202–452–3204.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: You may

call 202–452–3206 beginning at

approximately 5 pm two business days

before the meeting for a recorded

announcement of bank and bank

holding company applications

scheduled for the meeting; or you may

contact the Board’s Web site at http://

www.federalreserve.gov for an

electronic announcement that not only

lists applications, but also indicates

procedural and other information about

the meeting.

Dated: September 29, 2000.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 00–25491 Filed 9–29–00; 3:26 pm]

BILLING CODE 6210–01–P

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Requests Extension

AGENCY: Federal Trade 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 Federal Trade

Commission (FTC) is soliciting public

comments on its proposal to extend

through January 31, 2004 the current

PRA clearance for information

collection requirements contained in its

Mail or Telephone Order Merchandise

Trade Regulation Rule, 16 CFR Part 435

(MTOR or ‘‘Rule’’). That clearance

expires on January 31, 2001.

DATES: Comments must be filed by

December 4, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to

Secretary, Federal Trade Commission,

Room H–159, 600 Pennsylvania Ave.,

NW., Washington, DC 20580. All

comments should be captioned ‘‘Mail or

Telephone Order Merchandise Trade

Regulation Rule: Paperwork comment.’’

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Requests for additional information

should be addressed to Joel N. Brewer,

Attorney, Division of Enforcement,

Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal

Trade Commission, Room S–4632, 601

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,

DC 20580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the

PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), Federal

agencies must obtain approval from

OMB for each collection of information

they conduct or sponsor. ‘‘Collection of

information’’ means agency requests or

requirements that members of the public

submit reports, keep records, or provide

information to a third party. 44 U.S.C.

3502(3), 5 CFR 1320.3(c). As required by

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

FTC is providing this opportunity for

public comment before requesting that

OMB extend the existing paperwork

clearance for the MTOR.

The FTC invites comments on: (1)

Whether the proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

agency, including whether the

information will have practical utility;

(2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate

of the burden of the proposed collection

of information, including the validity of

the methodology and assumptions used;

(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility,

and clarity of the information to be

collected; and (4) ways to minimize the

burden of the collection of information

on those who are to respond, including

through the use of appropriate

automated, electronic, mechanical, or

other technological collection

techniques or other forms of information

technology, e.g., permitting electronic

submission of responses.

The Mail Order Merchandise Rule

(MOR) 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 MOR 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

amended the MOR, effective on March

1, 1994, to include merchandise ordered

by telephone, including by telefax or by

computer through the use of a modem,

and renamed the Rule to cover ‘‘Mail or

Telephone Order Merchandise.’’ The

Rule therefore includes orders placed

through the Internet.

Generally, the MTOR 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.

The notice provisions in the Rule

require a merchant who is unable to

ship within the promised shipment time

or 30 days to notify the consumer of a

revised date and 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

58998 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 3, 2000 / Notices

1Most of the estimated start-up time relates to the

development and installation of computer systems

geared to more efficiently handle customer orders.

2Statistical Abstract of the United States, 119th

edition, 1999, U.S. Department of Commerce,

Economics and Statistics Administration.

3Under the OMB regulation implementing the

PRA, burden is defined to exclude any effort that

would be expended regardless of any regulatory

requirement. 5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2).

4Projecting sales for ‘‘non-store catalogue and

mail order houses’’ and ‘‘non-store direct selling

establishments’’ (according to the 1999 Statistical

Abstract) to all merchants subject to the MTOR,

staff estimates that direct sales to consumers in

1999 would have been $109.45 billion. Thus, the

labor cost of compliance by existing and new

businesses in 1999 would have amounted to .07%

of sales.

Rule requires the merchant to make a

refund and the consumer has paid by

credit card, the Rule 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 that will

result in a charge.

Burden Statement

Estimated total annual hours burden:

2,753,000 hours (rounded up to the

nearest thousand).

In its 1997 PRA notice and

submission to OMB regarding the Rule,

FTC staff estimated that 71,560

established companies each spend an

average of 50 hours per year on

compliance with the Rule, and that

approximately 1,000 new industry

entrants spend an average of 230 hours

(an industry estimate) for compliance

measures associated with start-up.1 62

FR 63717 (December 2, 1997). Thus, the

total estimated hours burden was

3,808,000 hours [(71,560 × 50 hours) +

(1,000 × 230 hours)].

No provisions in the Rule have been

amended or changed in any manner

since staff’s 1997 PRA submission to

OMB. Thus, all of the requirements

relating to disclosure and notification

remain the same. However, while staff’s

estimate of average time required by

companies to comply with the Rule is

unchanged, staff has reduced its

estimate of total industry hours based

on more current data revealing a smaller

industry population than it previously

accounted for. Based on 1999 Statistical

Abstract data (the most current industry

data available),2 there are approximately

45,919 existing establishments subject

to the Rule.

Staff, however, has increased its

estimate of the number of new

companies that enter the market each

year from 1,000 to 1,985. This, too, is

based on 1999 Statistical Abstract data.

Thus, the current total of affected firms

consists of approximately 47,904

established and new companies.

Accordingly, staff estimates total

industry hours to comply with the

MTOR is ((45,919 × 50 hours) + (1,985

× 230 hours)).

This is a conservative estimate.

Arguably much of the estimated time

burden for disclosure-related

compliance would be incurred even

absent the Rule. Industry trade

associations and individual witnesses

have consistently taken the position that

compliance with the Rule is widely

regarded by direct marketers as being

good business practice. The Rule’s

notification requirements would be

followed in any event by most

merchants to meet consumer

expectations regarding timely shipment,

notification of delay, and prompt and

full refunds. Providing consumers with

notice about the status of their orders

fosters consumer loyalty and encourages

repeat purchases, which are important

to direct marketers’ success. Thus, it

appears that much of the time and

expense associated with Rule

compliance may not constitute

‘‘burden’’ under the PRA 3 although the

above estimates account for it as such.

In estimating PRA burden, staff

considered ‘‘the total time, effort, or

financial resources expended by persons

to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or

provide information to or for a Federal

agency.’’ 5 CFR 1320.3(b)(1). This

includes ‘‘developing, acquiring,

installing, and utilizing technology and

systems for the purpose of disclosing

and providing information.’’ 5 CFR

1320.3(b)(1)(iv). Although not expressly

stated in the OMB regulation

implementing the PRA, the definition of

burden arguably includes upgrading and

maintaining computer and other

systems used to comply with a rule’s

requirements. Conversely, to the extent

that these systems are used in the

ordinary course of business

independent of the Rule, their

associated upkeep would fall outside

the realm of PRA ‘‘burden.’’

The mail order industry has been

subject to the basic provisions of the

Rule since 1976 and the telephone order

industry since 1994. Thus, businesses

have had several years (and some have

had decades) to integrate compliance

systems into their business procedures.

Since 1997 many businesses have

upgraded the information management

systems they need, in part, to comply

with the Rule, and to more effectively

track orders. These upgrades, however,

mostly were needed to deal with

growing consumer demand for

merchandise resulting, in part, from

increased public acceptance of making

purchases over the telephone and, more

recently, the Internet.

Accordingly, most companies now

maintain records and provide updated

order information of the kind required

by the Rule in their ordinary course of

business. Nevertheless, staff

conservatively assumes that the time

devoted to compliance with the Rule by

existing and new companies remains

the same as in 1997.

Estimated labor costs: $31,136,000,

rounded to the nearest thousand.

Labor costs are derived by applying

appropriate hourly cost figures to the

burden hours described above.

According to the 1999 Statistical

Abstract, average payroll for ‘‘non-store

catalogue and mail order houses’’ and

‘‘non-store direct selling

establishments’’ rose $0.322 per hour

per year between 1991 and 1996. In

1996, average payroll was $10.34 per

hour. Assuming average payroll

continued to increase $0.322 per hour

per year, in 1999 average payroll would

have reached $11.31 per hour. Because

the bulk of the burden of complying

with the MTOR is borne by clerical

personnel, staff believes that the average

hourly payroll figure for non-store

catalogue and mail order houses and

non-store direct selling establishments

is an appropriate measure of a direct

marketer’s average labor cost to comply

with the Rule. Thus, the total annual

labor cost to new and established

businesses in 1999 for Rule compliance

is approximately $31,136,000 (2,753,000

hours × $11.31/hr.). Relative to direct

industry sales, this total is negligible.4

Estimated annual non-labor cost

burden: $0 or minimal.

The applicable requirements impose

minimal start-up costs, as businesses

subject to the Rule generally have or

obtain necessary equipment for other

business purposes, i.e., inventory and

order management, customer relations.

For the same reason, staff anticipates

printing and copying costs to be

minimal, especially given that

telephone order merchants have

increasingly turned to electronic

communications to notify consumers of

delay and to provide cancellation

options. Staff believes that the above

requirements necessitate ongoing,

regular training so that covered entities

stay current and have a clear

understanding of federal mandates, but

that this would be a small portion of

and subsumed within the ordinary

training that employees receive apart

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 3, 2000 / Notices 58999

from that associated with the

information collected under the Rule.

Debra A. Valentine,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 00–25299 Filed 10–2–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Statement of Organization, Functions

and Delegations of Authority; Program

Support Center

Part P (Program Support Center) of the

Statement of Organization, Functions

and Delegations of Authority for the

Department of Health and Human

Services (60 FR 51480, October 2, 1995

as amended most recently at 64 FR

55731, October 14, 1999) is amended to

reflect changes in Chapter PB within

Part P, Program Support Center,

Department of Health and Human

Services. The Program Support Center is

reorganizing and realigning the division

level structure of the Human Resources

Service, specifically those divisions

performing information technology (IT)

activities. The realignment will include

the abolishment of three existing

Divisions and the establishment of three

new Offices: the Office of Systems

Management, the Office of Legacy

Systems Oversight, and the Office of

Enterprise Human Resource and Payroll

Systems. 

Program Support Center

Under Part P, Section P–20,

Functions, change the following:

Under Chapter PB, Human Resources

Service (PB) delete the titles and

functional statements for the Systems

Design and Analysis Division (PBB);

Systems Engineering and Maintenance

Division (PBC); and Systems Networking

Division (PBH) in their entirety. The

functions of these divisions will be

realigned within the Office of Legacy

Systems Oversight (PBW).

Establish the Office of Systems

Management (PBU) and enter the

functional statement as follows:

Office of Systems Management (PBU)

(1) Provides leadership in the

development and management of the

technology environment which supports

the HRS human resource information

and payroll systems; (2) Develops shortand long-range information technology

plans, identifying HRS’ goals and

objectives, budget requirements,

acquisition plans and anticipated future

needs; (3) Provides leadership and

overall direction for configuration

management services including systems

designed to reduce errors and support

parallel and concurrent development of

system; (4) Oversees software

acceptance testing, quality assurance

and quality control functions for all new

systems/subsystems, major

enhancements and systems changes for

human resource information systems;

(5) Provides HRS-wide systems security

support including contingency

planning, system and network

safeguards, and employee awareness;

and (6) Provides administrative support

to the HRS systems and payroll

divisions and offices.

Establish the Office of Enterprise

Human Resource and Payroll Systems

(PBV) and enter the functional

statement as follows:

Office of Enterprise Human Resource

and Payroll Systems (PBV)

(1) Provides overall program

leadership and direction to enterprise

human resource and payroll systems for

the Department; (2) Provides oversight

in developing and implementing new

human resources and payroll systems;

(3) Plans, organizes and directs highpriority projects or initiatives which

cross-cut HRS business lines; and (4)

Represents the Department on

Interagency Groups.

Establish the Office of Legacy Systems

Oversight (PBW) and enter the

functional statement as follows:

Office of Legacy Systems Oversight

(PBW)

(1) Provides overall program

leadership and direction to the

operation of the current legacy

personnel and payroll system; (2)

Conducts analysis and design of systems

changes, enhancements and new

requirements; (3) Provides the full range

of automated data processing support

activities associated with the

development and maintenance of the

civilian personnel/payroll processing

and reporting systems; (4) Provides

automation services for the HHS

automated personnel and payroll

systems and subsystems; (5) Manages

the operation of production for the

civilian personnel and payroll

processing systems; and (6) Provides

human resource and human resource

systems customer liaison services to

resolve issues and improve customer

services.

Under the heading Personnel and Pay

Systems Division (PBG) rename the

Personnel and Pay Systems Division

(PBG) the Division of Payroll (PBG);

delete ‘‘and the Social Security

Administration’s’’ under item (1); delete

item (2) in its entirety and renumber the

remaining items in sequence.

Dated: September 21, 2000.

Lynnda M. Regan,

Director, Program Support Center.

[FR Doc. 00–25285 Filed 10–2–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4168–17–M

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Secretary

Privacy Act of 1974; New System of

Records

AGENCY: Workplace Violence Prevention

Team, Office of Human Resources,

Office of the Assistant Secretary for

Management and Budget, Office of the

Secretary, HHS.

ACTION: Notification of a new system of

records.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

requirements of the Privacy Act, HHS is

giving notice that it is publishing a

notice of a new system of records, 09–

90–1200, ‘‘Workplace Violence

Prevention Team Records.’’ We are also

proposing routine uses for this new

system.

DATES: OHR invites interested parties to

submit comments on the proposed

internal and routine uses on or before

November 13, 2000. OHR sent a Report

of a New System to the Congress and to

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) on September 20, 2000. The new

system of records will be effective 40

days from the date submitted to OMB

unless OHR receives comments that

would result in a contrary

determination.

ADDRESSES: Address comments to the

Privacy Act Officer, Office of the

Secretary, 200 Independence Avenue,

SW, Room 645F, Washington, DC

20201. Comments received will be made

available for public inspection at the

above address during normal business

hours, 8:30 a.m.–5 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Workplace Violence Prevention Team

Leader, Work and Family Program, 330

C Street, SW, Room 1250, Washington,

DC 20201. Telephone number is 202–

690–1441 or 202–690–8229. These are

not toll-free numbers.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office

of Human Resources (OHR) proposes to

establish a new system of records: 09–

90–1200, ‘‘Workplace Violence

Prevention Team Records.’’ This system

of records will be used by members of

the HHS Workplace Violence

Prevention Teams (WVPT) to assist