Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 2025 / Notices 647 

1 In calculating burden, data from multiple 

sources are used. Some of these sources do not 

allow us to identify only those employers who are 

covered by Title VII (employers with 15 or more 

employees). 

2Source of original data: U.S Census Bureau, 

2021 Statistics of U.S. Businesses (SUSB) (Dec. 

2023). (https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2021/ 

econ/susb/2021-susb-annual.html). Local 

Downloadable CSV data. Select U.S. & states, 6 digit 

NAICS. The original number of employers was 

adjusted to only include those with 15 or more 

employees. 

3Source of original data: 2022 Census of 

Governments: Employment. Individual Government 

Data File (https://www.census.gov/data/datasets/ 

2022/econ/apes/2022.html), Local Downloadable 

Data zip file ‘‘Individual Unit Files’’. The original 

number of government entities was adjusted to only 

include those with 15 or more employees. 

4Source: U.S. Department of Education, National 

Center for Education Statistics, IPEDS, Fall 2022, 

Institutional Characteristics component (provisional 

data). See Table 1, ‘‘Number and percentage 

distribution of Title IV institutions, by control of 

institution, level of institution, and region: United 

States and other U.S. jurisdictions, academic year 

2022–23’’ (https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/search/ 

viewtable?tableId=35945&returnUrl=%2Fsearch). 

5Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Registered 

Apprenticeship National Results Fiscal Year 2021, 

Number of active apprenticeship programs in 2021 

(https://www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/apprenticeship/ 

about/statistics/2021). 

6The EEOC has undertaken measures to enhance 

the agency’s existing EEO–3 data frame (i.e., roster) 

of potentially eligible filers that was most recently 

used during the 2022 EEO–3 data collection. The 

number of referral unions was estimated by 

comparing the EEOC’s 2022 EEO–3 frame to a list 

of active unions from the U.S. Department of 

Labor’s Office of Labor Management Standards 

(OLMS) Online Public Disclosure Room (OPDR) 

database (https://olmsapps.dol.gov/olpdr/). 

7Source of original data: U.S Census Bureau, 

2021 Statistics of U.S. Businesses (SUSB) (Dec. 

2023). (https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2021/ 

econ/susb/2021-susb-annual.html). Local 

Downloadable CSV data. Select U.S. & states, 6 digit 

NAICS. The original number of employers was 

adjusted to only include those with 15 or more 

employees. 

8The average number of applicants per job 

opening in 2023, according to the iCIMS 2024 

January Workforce Report (https://icims.drift.click/ 

January-2024-Workforce-Report). 9Bureau of Labor Statistics Job Openings and 

Labor Turnover Survey, 2023 annual level data 

(seasonally adjusted), (http://www.bls.gov/jlt/ 

data.htm) is the source of the original data. The BLS 

figure includes new hires in both the public and the 

private sectors across all employer sizes. 10Burden hour cost estimates are based on the 

median hourly wage rate of $22.94 for Human 

Resources Assistants, except payroll and 

timekeeping obtained from the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics, May 2023 (see U.S. Department of Labor, 

Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational 

Employment and Wage Statistics, https://

www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes434161.htm). 11Source of original data: U.S Census Bureau, 

2021 Statistics of U.S. Businesses (SUSB) (Dec. 

2023). (https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2021/ 

econ/susb/2021-susb-annual.html). Local 

Downloadable CSV data. Select U.S. & states, 6 digit 

NAICS. The original number of employers was 

adjusted to only include those with 15 or more 

employees. 

12Source of original data: 2021 Economic Census. 

(https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2021/econ/ 

susb/2021-susb-annual.html). Local Downloadable 

CSV data. Select U.S. & states, 6 digit NAICS. The 

original number of employers was adjusted to only 

include those with 15 or more employees. 

13See 29 CFR 1607.15A(1): Simplified 

recordkeeping for users with less than 100 

employees. In order to minimize recordkeeping 

burdens on employers who employ one hundred 

(100) or fewer employees, and other users not 

required to file EEO–1, et seq., reports, such users 

may satisfy the requirements of this section 15 if 

they maintain and have available records showing, 

for each year: (a) The number of persons hired, 

promoted, and terminated for each job, by sex, and 

where appropriate by race and national origin; 

(b)The number of applicants for hire and promotion 

by sex and where appropriate by race and national 

origin; and (c) The selection procedures utilized 

(either standardized or not standardized). 

employers covered under title VII and 

Executive Order 11246 are subject to 

UGESP. However, for the purposes of 

burden calculation, data for all 

employers are counted.1 The number of 

employers with 15 or more employees is 

estimated at 887,869 which combines 

estimates from private employment,2

the public sector,3 colleges and 

universities,4 apprenticeship programs,5

and referral unions.6 Employers with 15 

or more employees represent 

approximately 13.5% of all employers 

in the U.S. and employ about 86.2% of 

all employees in the U.S.7

This burden assessment is based on 

an estimate of the number of job 

applications submitted to all employers 

in one year, including paper-based and 

electronic applications. The total 

number of job applications submitted 

every year to covered employers is 

estimated to be 1,850,752,956 based on 

an average of approximately 26 

applications 8 for every hire and a 

Bureau of Labor Statistics data estimate 

of 71,046,000 annual hires.9 This figure 

also includes 136,806 applicants for 

union membership reported on the 

EEO–3 form for 2022. The employer 

burden associated with collecting and 

storing applicant demographic data is 

based on the following assumptions: 

applicants would need to be asked to 

provide three pieces of information— 

sex, race/ethnicity, and an identification 

number (a total of approximately 13 

keystrokes); the employer may need to 

transfer information received to a 

database either manually or 

electronically; and the employer would 

need to store the 13 characters of 

information for each applicant. 

Recordkeeping costs and burden are 

assumed to be the time cost associated 

with entering 13 keystrokes. 

Assuming that the required 

recordkeeping takes 30 seconds per 

record, and assuming a total of 

1,850,752,956 paper and electronic 

applications per year (as calculated 

above), the resulting UGESP burden 

hours would be 15,422,941. Based on a 

wage rate of $22.94 10 per hour for the 

individuals entering the data, the 

collection and storage of applicant 

demographic data would come to 

approximately $353,802,267 per year. 

The foregoing assumptions likely are 

over-inclusive because many employers 

have electronic job application 

processes that should be able to capture 

applicant flow data automatically. 

While the burden hours and costs for 

the UGESP recordkeeping requirement 

seem large, the average burden per 

employer is relatively small. UGESP 

applies to an estimated 887,869 

employers, or about 13.5% of employers 

in the U.S, and these employers employ 

about 86.2% of employees in the U.S.11

Therefore, the estimated cost per 

covered employer is about $398. 

Additionally, 36.4% of employees work 

for firms with at least 5,000 

employees,12 for which the burden of 

data entry is transferred to the 

applicants via use of electronic 

application systems. Finally, UGESP 

allows for simplified recordkeeping for 

employers with more than 15 but less 

than 100 employees.13

For the Commission. 

Dated: December 31, 2024. 

Charlotte A. Burrows, 

Chair. 

[FR Doc. 2024–31755 Filed 1–3–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6570–01–P 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

Sunshine Act Meetings 

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS

ANNOUNCEMENT: 89 FR 105048. 

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF

THE MEETING: Thursday, January 9, 2025, 

at 10:00 a.m. 

CHANGES IN THE MEETING: The meeting 

was rescheduled for Tuesday, January 

14, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Judith Ingram, Press Officer. Telephone: 

(202) 694–1220. 

(Authority: Government in the Sunshine Act, 

5 U.S.C. 552b) 

Vicktoria J. Allen, 

Deputy Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2025–00017 Filed 1–2–25; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 6715–01–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

[File No. 222 3156] 

accessiBe; Analysis of Proposed 

Consent Order To Aid Public Comment 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES
648 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 2025 / Notices 

ACTION: Proposed consent agreement; 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this 

matter settles alleged violations of 

Federal law prohibiting unfair or 

deceptive acts or practices. The attached 

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to 

Aid Public Comment describes both the 

allegations in the complaint and the 

terms of the consent order—embodied 

in the consent agreement—that would 

settle these allegations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 5, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file 

comments online or on paper by 

following the instructions in the 

Request for Comment part of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below. Please write ‘‘accessiBe; File No. 

222 3156’’ on your comment and file 

your comment online at https://

www.regulations.gov by following the 

instructions on the web-based form. If 

you prefer to file your comment on 

paper, please mail your comment to: 

Federal Trade Commission, Office of the 

Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Mail Stop H–144 (Annex W), 

Washington, DC 20580. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kristin Williams (202–326–2619), 

Division of Advertising Practices, 

Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal 

Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20580. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade 

Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and 

FTC Rule § 2.34, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is 

hereby given that the above-captioned 

consent agreement containing a consent 

order to cease and desist, having been 

filed with and accepted, subject to final 

approval, by the Commission, has been 

placed on the public record for a period 

of 30 days. The following Analysis to 

Aid Public Comment describes the 

terms of the consent agreement and the 

allegations in the complaint. An 

electronic copy of the full text of the 

consent agreement package can be 

obtained at https://www.ftc.gov/newsevents/commission-actions. 

You can file a comment online or on 

paper. For the Commission to consider 

your comment, we must receive it on or 

before February 5, 2025. Write 

‘‘accessiBe; File No. 222 3156’’ on your 

comment. Your comment—including 

your name and your State—will be 

placed on the public record of this 

proceeding, including, to the extent 

practicable, on the https://

www.regulations.gov website. 

Because of heightened security 

screening, postal mail addressed to the 

Commission will be subject to delay. We 

strongly encourage you to submit your 

comments online through the https://

www.regulations.gov website. If you 

prefer to file your comment on paper, 

write ‘‘accessiBe; File No. 222 3156’’ on 

your comment and on the envelope, and 

send it via overnight service to: Federal 

Trade Commission, Office of the 

Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Mail Stop H–144 (Annex W), 

Washington, DC 20580. 

Because your comment will be placed 

on the publicly accessible website at 

https://www.regulations.gov, you are 

solely responsible for making sure your 

comment does not include any sensitive 

or confidential information. In 

particular, your comment should not 

include sensitive personal information, 

such as your or anyone else’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 your 

comment does not include 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 competitively 

sensitive information such as costs, 

sales statistics, inventories, formulas, 

patterns, devices, manufacturing 

processes, or customer names. 

Comments containing material for 

which confidential treatment is 

requested must be filed in paper form, 

must be clearly labeled ‘‘Confidential,’’ 

and must comply with FTC Rule 

§ 4.9(c). In particular, the written 

request for confidential treatment that 

accompanies the comment must include 

the factual and legal basis for the 

request and must identify the specific 

portions of the comment to be withheld 

from the public record. See FTC Rule 

§ 4.9(c). Your comment will be kept 

confidential only if the General Counsel 

grants your request in accordance with 

the law and the public interest. Once 

your comment has been posted on the 

https://www.regulations.gov website—as 

legally required by FTC Rule § 4.9(b)— 

we cannot redact or remove your 

comment from that website, unless you 

submit a confidentiality request that 

meets the requirements for such 

treatment under FTC Rule § 4.9(c), and 

the General Counsel grants that request. 

Visit the FTC website at https://

www.ftc.gov to read this document and 

the news release describing the 

proposed settlement. The FTC Act and 

other laws the Commission administers 

permit the collection of public 

comments to consider and use in this 

proceeding, as appropriate. The 

Commission will consider all timely 

and responsive public comments it 

receives on or before February 5, 2025. 

For information on the Commission’s 

privacy policy, including routine uses 

permitted by the Privacy Act, see 

https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/ 

privacy-policy. 

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To 

Aid Public Comment 

The Federal Trade Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) has accepted, subject to 

final approval, an agreement containing 

a consent order from accessiBe Inc. and 

accessiBe Ltd. (collectively, 

‘‘accessiBe’’). 

The proposed consent order 

(‘‘proposed order’’) has been placed on 

the public record for 30 days for receipt 

of comments by interested persons. 

Comments received during this period 

will become part of the public record. 

After 30 days, the Commission will 

again review the agreement and the 

comments received and will decide 

whether it should withdraw from the 

agreement and take appropriate action 

or make final the agreement’s proposed 

order. 

This matter involves accessiBe’s 

marketing and sale of a web 

accessibility software plug in called 

accessWidget. accessiBe represented 

that accessWidget could make any 

website compliant with the Web 

Content Accessibility Guidelines 

(‘‘WCAG’’), a comprehensive set of 

technical criteria used to assess website 

accessibility. accessiBe advertised these 

claims on its website and social media, 

as well as in articles that were formatted 

as impartial and objective reviews on 

third-party websites. accessiBe also 

failed to disclose its material 

connections with the publishers of those 

third-party articles. 

The proposed complaint alleges that 

accessWidget did not make all websites 

WCAG compliant, and that the 

company’s claims were false, 

misleading, or unsubstantiated. The 

proposed complaint also alleges that 

formatting the third-party articles and 

reviews as independent opinions by 

impartial authors and publishers was 

false and misleading, and that 

accessiBe’s failure to disclose its 

material connections with the 

publishers of those articles was 

deceptive. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 3 / Monday, January 6, 2025 / Notices 649 

1Complaint ¶¶ 77–90. 

2 Id. ¶¶ 52–76, 91–96. 

3See id. ¶ 85. 

4 Id. ¶ 86. 

The proposed order contains 

provisions designed to prevent 

accessiBe from engaging in these and 

similar acts and practices in the future. 

Provision I prohibits accessiBe from 

representing that its automated 

products, including accessWidget’s 

artificial intelligence and other 

automated technology, can make any 

website WCAG compliant, or can ensure 

continued compliance with WCAG over 

time as web content changes, unless the 

company has competent and reliable 

evidence to support the representations. 

Provision II prohibits accessiBe from 

misrepresenting any fact material to 

consumers about any of the company’s 

products or services, such as the value 

or total cost; any material restrictions, 

limitations, or conditions; or any 

material aspect of its performance, 

features, benefits, efficacy, nature, or 

central characteristics. Provision III 

prohibits accessiBe from 

misrepresenting that statements made in 

third-party reviews, articles, or blog 

posts about its automated products, 

including accessWidget’s artificial 

intelligence and other automated 

technology, are independent opinions 

by impartial authors; that an endorser is 

an independent or ordinary user of the 

automated product; or that the endorser 

is an independent organization or is 

providing objective information. 

Provision IV requires accessiBe to 

disclose clearly and conspicuously, and 

in close proximity to representations 

about its automated products, including 

accessWidget’s artificial intelligence 

and other automated technology, any 

unexpected material connection that an 

endorser has to accessiBe, to the 

product or service, or to affiliated 

individuals or entities. Provision V 

requires accessiBe to disclose, in 

connection with representations that 

accessWidget or the company’s other 

artificial intelligence or automated 

products correct accessibility barriers on 

a website, that such products or services 

will not correct barriers on third-party 

web domains or subdomains that may 

be part of the overall user experience, 

unless those domains also use the 

product. Such disclosure must be made 

clearly and conspicuously, and prior to 

the consumer incurring any financial 

obligation. 

Provision VI requires accessiBe to pay 

the Commission $1,000,000 in monetary 

relief. Provision VII describes 

procedures and legal rights related to 

that payment. Provision VIII requires 

accessiBe to provide sufficient customer 

information to enable the Commission 

to efficiently administer consumer 

redress. Provisions IX through XIII are 

reporting and compliance provisions. 

Provision IX mandates that accessiBe 

acknowledge receipt of the order, 

distribute the order to principals, 

officers, and certain employees and 

agents, and obtain signed 

acknowledgments from them. Provision 

X requires accessiBe to submit 

compliance reports to the Commission 

one year after the order’s issuance and 

submit notifications when certain 

events occur. Under Provision XI, 

accessiBe must create certain records for 

10 years and retain them for five years. 

Provision XII requires accessiBe to 

provide information or documents 

necessary for the Commission to 

monitor compliance with the order 

during the period of the order’s effective 

dates. Finally, Provision XIII provides 

the order’s effective dates, including 

that, with exceptions, the order will 

terminate in 20 years. 

The purpose of this analysis is to 

facilitate public comment on the 

proposed order. It is not intended to 

constitute an official interpretation of 

the complaint or proposed order, or to 

modify the proposed order’s terms in 

any way. 

By direction of the Commission. 

April J. Tabor, 

Secretary. 

Concurring Statement of Commissioner 

Andrew N. Ferguson, Joined by 

Commissioner Melissa Holyoak 

Today we vote to approve an 

administrative complaint and proposed 

consent order with accessiBe, which 

advertised its accessWidget as ‘‘the #1 

fully automated ADA [Americans with 

Disabilities Act] and WCAG [Web 

Content Accessibility Guidelines] 

compliance solution,’’ ‘‘always ensuring 

compliance by rescanning and reanalyzing your website every 24 hours 

to remediate new content, widgets, 

pages, and anything else you may add.’’ 

The complaint alleges that accessiBe’s 

automated solution fell far short of its 

promise and failed to correct many 

website accessibility issues.1 The 

complaint also accuses accessiBe of 

misrepresenting that various reviews 

and testimonials of accessWidget were 

independent and impartial when they 

were in fact bought and paid for by 

accessiBe.2

I write separately to clarify my vote in 

favor of the count accusing accessiBe of 

misrepresenting its product’s 

performance. Each subscription to 

accessWidget covers only one domain, 

but websites sometimes depend on 

subdomains or third-party domains for 

critical functionality, like making a 

reservation or processing a payment.3

The complaint alleges that ‘‘[accessiBe] 

also fail[ed] to disclose, or disclose 

adequately, that accessWidget does not 

remediate website content hosted on 

third-party web domains or subdomains 

(unless the third party or subdomains 

also happen to use accessWidget).’’ 4

The consent order requires that 

accessiBe disclose this limitation in the 

future. My vote should not be taken as 

endorsing the position that the ADA, or 

the WCAG, require a website operator to 

ensure that some or all of the third-party 

domains or subdomains with which it 

integrates are accessible. I take no 

position on that question, which 

involves the interpretation of a complex 

law that Congress has tasked other 

agencies with interpreting and 

enforcing. I concur in the deception 

count because the remaining allegations 

involving misrepresentations of the 

product’s ability to bring the user’s own 

domain into compliance are sufficient to 

state a claim of deception against 

accessiBe. Subject to that clarification, I 

concur in the filing of this complaint 

and settlement. 

[FR Doc. 2024–31765 Filed 1–3–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

[File No. 241 0082] 

Planned Companies; Analysis of 

Agreement Containing Consent Order 

To Aid Public Comment 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed consent agreement; 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this 

matter settles alleged violations of 

Federal law prohibiting unfair methods 

of competition. The attached Analysis of 

Proposed Consent Order to Aid Public 

Comment describes both the allegations 

in the complaint and the terms of the 

consent order—embodied in the consent 

agreement—that would settle these 

allegations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 5, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file 

comments online or on paper by 

following the instructions in the 

Request for Comment part of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below. Please write: ‘‘Planned 

Companies; File No. 241 0029’’ on your 

comment and file your comment online 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES