40288 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 144 /Tuesday, July 28, 1998 / Notices

1 15 U.S.C. 2301 et seq.

2 16 CFR 701.

3 16 CFR 702.

the consent agreement, and the

allegations in the complaint. An

electronic copy of the full text of the

consent agreement package can be

obtained from the FTC Home Page (for

July 22, 1998), on the World Wide Web,

at ‘‘http://www.ftc.gov/os/

actions97.htm.’’ A paper copy can be

obtained from the FTC Public Reference

Room, Room H–130, Sixth Street and

Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20580, either in

person or by calling (202) 326–3627.

Public comment is invited. Such

comments or views will be considered

by the Commission and will be available

for inspection and copying at its

principal office in accordance with

Section 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of the Commission’s

Rules of Practice (16 CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii).

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to

Aid Public Comment

The Federal Trade Commission has

accepted an agreement to a proposed

consent order from Gateway 2000, Inc.

(‘‘Gateway’’), a manufacturer and direct

marketer of personal computers.

The proposed consent order has been

placed on the public record for sixty

(60) days for the reception of comments

by interested persons. Comments

received during this period will become

part of the public record. After sixty (60)

days, the Commission will again review

the agreement and will decide whether

it should withdraw from the agreement

or make final the agreement’s propose

order.

The Commission’s complaint charges

that the proposed respondent violated

Section 5 of the FTC Act by deceptively

advertising its provision of on-site

warranty service and its refund policy,

and by its use of deceptive language in

its written warranties. Additionally, the

complaint alleges that Gateway has

violated the Magnuson-Moss Warranty

Act (‘‘Warranty Act’’) 1 and two Rules

promulgated thereunder: the Rule

concerning the Disclosure of Written

Consumer Product Warranty Terms and

Conditions (‘‘Disclosure Rule’’),2 and

the Rule concerning the Pre-Sale

Availability of Written Warranty Terms

(‘‘Pre-Sale Rule’’).3 Under Section

110(b) of the Warranty Act, U.S.C.

2310(b), violations of the Act or its

Rules are also violations of Section 5 of

the FTC Act.

The draft Complaint charges that

Gateway violated section 5 of the FTC

Act in three ways. First, that the

respondent falsely advertised its policy

of ‘‘money-back’’ guarantees by

deducting a shipping charge from a full

refund to the consumer. Second, that

the respondent falsely advertised that

consumers would be provided with free

‘‘on-site service’’ upon request. Third,

the draft Complaint charges the

respondent with falsely representing, in

its written warranties, the remedies

available to a consumer seeking

incidental or consequential damages.

The draft Complaint also alleges: that

the respondent violated the Pre-Sale

Rule by failing to make the text of the

written warranty readily available to

prospective buyers prior to sale through

one or more of the means specified by

the Rule; that Gateway failed to comply

with requirements of the Disclosure

Rule that certain language be included

in written warranties pertaining to the

exclusion or limitation of consequential

or incidental damages, and a notice that

the rights of the purchaser with respect

to the warranty may vary from state to

state such that the exclusion or

limitation may not apply to a particular

consumer; and, that Gateway’s

warranties disclaimed all implied

warranties and, therefore, failed to

comply with the Warranty Act’s

prohibition against the disclaimer of

implied warranties, 15 U.S.C. 2308.

Gateway has agreed to a one-time

payment to the U.S. Treasury of

$289,429.05 to settle allegations that it

falsely and deceptively advertised that a

consumer’s shipping charges would be

refunded if they exercised their 30-day

money-back guarantee option. The draft

Order prohibits the respondent from

failing to make a full refund of the

purchase price unless it has disclosed,

in close proximity to the guarantee, that

deductions will be made. The draft

Order prohibits the respondent from

misrepresenting its provision of ‘‘on-site

service.’’ The draft Order prohibits the

respondent from failing to make the text

of the written warranty readily available

to prospective buyers prior to sale

through one or more of the means

specified in 16 CFR 702.3(c). The draft

Order prohibits the respondent from

failing to comply with the provisions of

the Disclosure rule, 16 CFR Part 701.3

and from failing to comply with the

provisions of U.S.C. 2308.

The proposed Consent order contains

provisions designed to remedy the

violations charged and to prevent the

proposed respondent from engaging in

similar acts and practices in the future.

The remainder of the proposed order

consists of a five year record keeping

provision and other standard

compliance provisions.

The purpose of this analysis is to

facilitate public comment on the

proposed order, and is not intended to

constitute an official interpretation of

the agreement and proposed order, or to

modify in any way their terms.

By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–20105 Filed 7–27–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE

Extension of Terms of Members of the

Medicare Payment Advisory

Commission

AGENCY: General Accounting Office.

ACTION: Notice of extension of terms.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

Balanced Budget Act of 1997, the

Comptroller General appointed the 15

members of the Medicare Payment

Advisory Commission. This notice

announces the extension of the terms of

all current members for an additional 7

months.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 28, 1998.

ADDRESSES: The General Accounting

Office is at 441 G St. NW., Washington,

DC 20548. The Office of the Chairman

of the Medicare Payment Advisory

Commission is at Suite 800, 1730 K St.,

Washington, DC 20006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

General Accounting Office: Walter S.

Ochinko, 202–512–7157. Medicare

Payment Advisory Commission: Murray

N. Ross, 202–653–7220.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

1805 of the Social Security Act, as

added by section 4022 of the Balanced

Budget Act of 1997 (Pub. L. 105–33, 111

Stat. 251, 350) provided for creation of

the Medicare Payment Advisory

Commission, comprising 15 members

appointed by the Comptroller General.

Appointments generally are to be for 3

years, except that the Comptroller

General was authorized to designate

staggered terms for the initial members.

Pursuant to that authority, all

appointments were effective October 1,

1997, but were staggered so that five

were to end on September 30, 1998, five

on September 30, 1999, and five on

September 30, 2000. These

appointments were announced in an

earlier notice. 62 FR 52131, October 6,

1997.

In consultation with the Commission,

GAO has concluded members’ terms

should be changed to match more

closely the Commission’s business

cycle. The present October 1 to

September 30 terms are out of phase

with that cycle; the Commission begins

planning future work during the
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 144 /Tuesday, July 28, 1998 / Notices 40289

summer and generally produces reports

in the spring, while members now begin

and end their service in the fall. Terms

that begin May 1 and end April 30

would coincide more closely with the

Commission’s work schedule and thus

make Commission operations more

efficient and effective.

In order to achieve this, the terms of

all current members are hereby

extended for 7 months. The following

members’ terms will expire on April 30,

1999: P. William Curreri, Anne B.

Jackson, Spencer Johnson, Donald T.

Lewers, and Janet G. Newport. The

following members’ terms will expire on

April 30, 2000: Peter Kemper, Judith R.

Lave, Hugh W. Long, William A.

MacBain, and Gerald M. Shea. The

following members’ terms will expire on

April 30, 2001: Gail R. Wilensky, Joseph

P. Newhouse, Woodrow A. Myers, Alice

F. Rosenblatt, and John W. Rowe.

Subsequent appointments will be for

3 years.

James F. Hinchman,

Acting Comptroller General of the United

States.

[FR Doc. 98–20101 Filed 7–27–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1610–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Administration on Aging

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Submission for OMB

Review; Comment Request

SUBJECT: Public Information Collection

Requirement Submitted to the Office of

Management and Budget for Clearance.

AGENCY: Administration on Aging.

The Administration on Aging,

Department of Health and Human

Services, is submitting the following

proposal for the collection of

information in compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (Pub. L. 96–

511): Certification of Maintenance of

Effort Form Title III of the Older

Americans Act, Grants for State and

Community Programs on Aging.

Type of Request: ‘‘Reinstatement,

without change’’.

Use: To continue an existing

information collection, Supplemental

Form to the Financial Status Report,

from Title III grantees to use in reporting

information on programs funded by

Title III as required under Section 309(c)

of the Older Americans Act, as

amended;

Frequency: Annually.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Certification of Maintenance of

Effort.

Description: The Certification of

Maintenance of Effort form will be used

by the Administration on Aging to

verify the amount of State expenditures

and make comparisons with the three

previous years’ expenditures to assure

that the States are in compliance with

45 CFR 1321.49. This information will

be used for federal oversight of the Title

III Program.

Respondents: State Agencies on

Aging.

Number of Respondents: 57.

Average Number of Responses per

Respondent: 1.

Average Burden Hours: 1⁄2 hour per

State Agency.

Additional Information: Written

comments and recommendations for the

proposed information collection should

be sent to the following address within

30 days of the publication of this notice:

Office of Regulatory Affairs, ATTN:

Allison Herron Eydt, OMB Desk Officer,

Room 10325 Washington, DC.

Jeanette C. Takamura,

Assistant Secretary for Aging.

[FR Doc. 98–20074 Filed 7–27–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4150–04–M

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention

[30DAY–18–98]

Agency Forms Undergoing Paperwork

Reduction Act Review

The Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of

information collection requests under

review by the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) in compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

Chapter 35). To request a copy of these

requests, call the CDC Reports Clearance

Officer at (404) 639–7090. Send written

comments to CDC, Desk Officer; Human

Resources and Housing Branch, New

Executive Office Building, Room 10235;

Washington, DC 20503. Written

comments should be received within 30

days of this notice.

Proposed Projects

1. An Epidemiologic Study of the

Relation Between Maternal and Paternal

Preconception Exposure to Ionizing

Radiation and Childhood Leukemia

(0920–0364), Revision.

The National Center for

Environmental Health proposes an

extension of a case-control study of the

relation between maternal and paternal

preconception exposure to ionizing

radiation and childhood leukemia. The

study is designed to determine whether

preconception gonadal doses from

ionizing radiation are higher in the

parents of children with leukemia than

in parents of healthy children. This

hypothesis is based on previous study

findings that, compared with control

groups, children with leukemia were

more likely to have fathers who worked

at the Sellafield nuclear facility in Great

Britain and to have received higher

doses of ionizing radiation prior to the

conception of the child. Funding for the

study is being provided to the

University of Colorado Health Sciences

Center by the National Center for

Environmental Health of the Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention.

The study is designed as a multi

center case-control study. Cases will be

children with leukemia and controls

will be children without leukemia

selected at random from the same

population as the cases. In addition, the

next older sibling will be used in a

second control group. The main

exposure of interest, paternal and

maternal gonadal absorbed doses from

ionizing radiation during the six-month

time period before conception, will be

quantified by taking detailed histories

from the parents about medical,

occupational, and environmental

exposures that they had during the time

period of interest. Gonadal doses will be

estimated from the documentation of

each exposure. By calculating the doses

of ionizing radiation each parent

received, we can compute odds ratios

and confidence intervals for paternal

and maternal doses separately and

combined. These findings will clarify

whether the previously determined risks

can be detected in other populations

with similar exposures. Consistency in

the results of this study with those of a

similar study in Great Britain would

have a major impact on current medical

practice and occupational exposure

standards. If this study does not detect

an elevated risk for leukemia, it will be

unlikely that preconception gonadal

doses from ionizing radiation that are

received by the general public are

related to childhood leukemia. Total

annual burden hours are 1,125.