Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 31, 2005 / Notices 51817 

1Commission Rule 4.2(d), 16 CFR 4.2(d). The 

comment must be accompanied by an explicit 

request for confidential treatment, including the 

factual and legal basis for the request, and must 

identify the specific portions of the comment to be 

withheld from the public record. The request will 

be granted or denied by the Commission’s General 

Counsel, consistent with applicable law and the 

public interest. See Commission Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 

4.9(c). 

and salary actions) involving individual 

Federal ReserveSystem employees. 

2. Any items carried forward from a 

previously announced meeting. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michelle A. Smith,Director, Office of 

Board Members; 202–452–2955. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: You may 

call202–452–3206 beginning at 

approximately 5 p.m. two businessdays 

before the meeting for a recorded 

announcement of bank and bankholding 

company applications scheduled for the 

meeting; or you may contactthe Board’s 

Web site at http:// 

www.federalreserve.gov for anelectronic 

announcement that not only lists 

applications, but alsoindicates 

procedural and other information about 

the meeting. 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System, August 26, 2005. 

Robert deV. Frierson, 

Deputy Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 05–17396 Filed 8–29–05; 8:51 am] 

BILLING CODE 6210–01–S 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request; Extension 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘FTC’’). 

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’’) (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). The 

FTC is seeking public comments on its 

proposal to extend through August 31, 

2008, the current Paperwork Reduction 

Act clearances for information 

collection requirements contained in 

four Commission rules and one 

clearance covering the Commission’s 

administrative activities. Those 

clearances expire on August 31, 2005. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 30, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 

invited to submit written comments. 

Comments should refer to ‘‘Paperwork 

Comment: FTC File No. P822108’’ to 

facilitate the organization of comments. 

A comment filed in paper form should 

include this reference both in the text 

and on the envelope and should be 

mailed or delivered, with two complete 

copies, to the following address: Federal 

Trade Commission/Office of the 

Secretary, Room H–135 (Annex J), 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20580. Because paper 

mail in the Washington area and at the 

Commission is subject to delay, please 

consider submitting your comments in 

electronic form, (in ASCII format, 

WordPerfect, or Microsoft Word) as part 

of or as an attachment to e-mail 

messages directed to the following 

e-mail box: 

PaperworkComment@ftc.gov. However, 

if the comment contains any material for 

which confidential treatment is 

requested, it must be filed in paper 

form, and the first page of the document 

must be clearly labeled ‘‘Confidential.’’ 1

All comments should additionally be 

submitted to: Office of Management and 

Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the 

Federal Trade Commission. Comments 

should be submitted via facsimile to 

(202) 395–6974 because U.S. Postal Mail 

is subject to lengthy delays due to 

heightened security precautions. 

The FTC Act and other laws the 

Commission administers permit the 

collection of public comments to 

consider and use in this proceeding as 

appropriate. All timely and responsive 

public comments will be considered by 

the Commission and will be available to 

the public on the FTC Web site, to the 

extent practicable, at http://www.ftc.gov. 

As a matter of discretion, the FTC makes 

every effort to remove home contact 

information for individuals from the 

public comments it receives before 

placing those comments on the FTC 

Web site. More information, including 

routine uses permitted by the Privacy 

Act, may be found in the FTC’s privacy 

policy at http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/ 

privacy.htm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information or 

copies of the proposed information 

requirements should be addressed as 

follows: 

For the Negative Option Rule, contact 

Edwin Rodriguez, Attorney, Division of 

Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer 

Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326–3147. 

For the Amplifier Rule, contact Neil 

Blickman, Attorney, Division of 

Enforcement, Federal Trade 

Commission, Bureau of Consumer 

Protection, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326–3038. 

For the Franchise Rule, contact 

Steven Toporoff, Attorney, Division of 

Marketing Practices, Bureau of 

Consumer Protection, Federal Trade 

Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326–

3135. 

For the R-Value Rule, contact 

Hampton Newsome, Attorney, Division 

of Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer 

Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326–2889. 

For the Administrative Activities 

clearance, contact J. Ronald Brooke Jr., 

Attorney, Division of Planning and 

Information, Bureau of Consumer 

Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326–3484. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 

19, 2005, the FTC sought comment on 

the information collection requirements 

associated with the Negative Option 

Rule, 16 CFR part 425 (OMB Control 

Number 3084–0104); the Amplifier 

Rule, 16 CFR part 432 (OMB Control 

Number 3084–0105); the Franchise 

Rule, 16 CFR part 436 (OMB Control 

Number 3084–0107); the R-Value Rule, 

16 CFR part 460 (OMB Control Number 

3084–0109); and the clearance covering 

the FTC’s administrative activities 

(OMB Control Number 3084–0047). 70 

FR 28937. As discussed below, one 

comment relating to the clearance for 

administrative activities was received. 

Pursuant to the OMB regulations that 

implement the PRA (5 CFR part 1320), 

the FTC is providing this second 

opportunity for public comment while 

seeking OMB approval to extend the 

existing paperwork clearance for the 

rule. All comments should be filed as 

prescribed in the ADDRESSES section 

above, and must be received on or 

before September 30, 2005. 

1. The Negative Option Rule, 16 CFR 

Part 425 (OMB Control Number: 3084–

0104) 

The Negative Option Rule governs the 

operation of prenotification subscription 

plans. Under these plans, sellers ship 

merchandise, such as books, compact 

discs, or tapes, automatically to their 

subscribers and bill them for the 

merchandise if consumers do not 

expressly reject the merchandise within 

a prescribed time. The Rule protects 

consumers by: (a) requiring that 

promotional materials disclose the 

terms of membership clearly and 

conspicuously; and (b) establishing 

procedures for the administration of 

such ‘‘negative option’’ plans. 

Estimated annual hours burden: 

15,000 hours. 

51818 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 31, 2005 / Notices 

Staff estimates that approximately 190 

existing clubs require annually about 75 

hours each to comply with the Rule’s 

disclosure requirements, for a total of 

14,250 hours (190 clubs × 75 hours). 

These clubs should be familiar with the 

Rule, which has been in effect since 

1974, with the result that the burden of 

compliance has declined over time. 

Moreover, a substantial portion of the 

existing clubs likely would make these 

disclosures absent the Rule because they 

have helped foster long-term 

relationships with consumers. 

Approximately 5 new clubs come into 

being each year. These clubs require 

approximately 120 hours to comply 

with the Rule, including start- up time. 

Thus, cumulative PRA burden for new 

clubs is about 600 hours. Combined 

with the estimated burden for 

established clubs, total burden is 14,850 

hours or 15,000, rounded to the nearest 

thousand. 

Estimated annual cost burden: 

$490,000, rounded to the nearest 

thousand (solely related to labor costs). 

Based on recent data from the Bureau 

of Labor Statistics, the average 

compensation for advertising managers 

is approximately $36 per hour. 

Compensation for clerical personnel is 

approximately $13 per hour. Assuming 

that managers perform the bulk of the 

work, while clerical personnel perform 

associated tasks (e.g., placing 

advertisements and responding to 

inquiries about offerings or prices), the 

total cost to the industry for the Rule’s 

paperwork requirements would be 

approximately $489,750 [(65 hours 

managerial time × 190 existing negative 

option plans × $36 per hour) + (10 hours 

clerical time × 190 existing negative 

option plans × $13 per hour) + (110 

hours managerial time × 5 new negative 

option plans × $36 per hour) + (10 hours 

clerical time × 5 new negative option 

plans × $13)]. 

Because the Rule has been in effect 

since 1974, the vast majority of the 

negative option clubs have no current 

start-up costs. For the few new clubs 

that enter the market each year, the 

costs associated with the Rule’s 

disclosure requirements, beyond the 

additional labor costs discussed above, 

are de minimis. Negative option clubs 

already have access to the ordinary 

office equipment necessary to achieve 

compliance with the Rule. Similarly, the 

Rule imposes few, if any, printing and 

distribution costs. The required 

disclosures generally constitute only a 

small addition to the materials that a 

prospective subscriber sends to the 

seller to solicit enrollment in a negative 

option plan. Because printing and 

distribution expenditures are incurred 

regardless of the Rule to market the 

product, adding the required disclosures 

to them would result in marginal 

incremental expense. 

2. The Amplifier Rule, 16 CFR Part 432 

(OMB Control Number: 3084–0105) 

The Amplifier Rule assists consumers 

by standardizing the measurement and 

disclosure of power output and other 

performance characteristics of 

amplifiers in stereos and other home 

entertainment equipment. The Rule also 

specifies the test conditions necessary to 

make the disclosures that the Rule 

requires. 

Estimated annual hours burden: 450 

hours (300 testing-related hours; 150 

disclosure-related hours). 

The Rule’s provisions require affected 

entities to test the power output of 

amplifiers in accordance with a 

specified FTC protocol. The staff 

estimates that approximately 300 new 

amplifiers and receivers come on the 

market each year. High fidelity 

manufacturers routinely conduct 

performance tests as part of any new 

product development. As a result, the 

Rule imposes incremental costs only to 

the extent that the FTC protocol is more 

time-consuming than alternative testing 

procedures. Specifically, a warm up 

(‘‘precondition’’) period that the Rule 

requires before measurements are taken 

may add approximately one hour to the 

time testing entails. Thus, staff estimates 

that the Rule imposes approximately 

300 hours (1 hour × 300 new products) 

of added testing burden annually. 

The Rule requires disclosures if a 

media advertisement makes a power 

output claim or if a manufacturer 

specification sheet and product 

brochure for a covered product make a 

power output claim. This requirement 

does not impose any additional costs on 

manufacturers because, absent the Rule, 

media advertisements, as well as 

manufacturer specification sheets and 

product brochures, simply would 

contain a power specification obtained 

using an alternative to the Rule-required 

testing protocol. The Rule, though, also 

requires disclosure of harmonic 

distortion, power bandwidth, and 

impedance ratings in manufacturer 

specification sheets and product 

brochures. The staff’s research suggests 

that approximately 300 new amplifiers 

and receivers are introduced each year. 

The cost of disclosing the ancillary 

distortion, bandwidth, and impedance 

information in the potentially 600 new 

specification sheets and brochures 

produced each year for those products 

(300 × 2) is limited to the time needed 

to draft and review the language 

pertaining to the aforementioned 

specifications. Because this Rule 

became effective in 1974 and because 

members of the industry are familiar 

with its requirements, compliance is 

less burdensome today. Accordingly, 

staff continues to estimate the time 

involved for this task to be a maximum 

of 1⁄4 hour for each new specification 

sheet and brochure (600 × .25 hours), for 

a total annual burden of 150 hours. The 

total annual burden imposed by the 

Rule, therefore, is approximately 450 

burden hours for testing and 

disclosures. 

Estimated annual cost burden: 

$16,000, rounded to the nearest 

thousand (solely relating to labor costs). 

Based on recent data from the Bureau 

of Labor Statistics, the average hourly 

compensation for electronics engineers 

is about $36, and the average hourly 

compensation for advertising and 

promotions managers is about $36. 

Generally, electronics engineers perform 

the testing of amplifiers and receivers 

(300 hours × $36 = $10,800), and 

advertising or promotions managers 

prepare product brochures and 

manufacturer specification sheets 

(including required disclosures) (150 

hours × $36 = $5,400). Based on this 

information, staff estimates industry 

labor costs associated with the Rule of 

approximately $16,000 per year, 

rounded to the nearest thousand. 

The Rule imposes no capital or other 

non-labor costs because its requirements 

are incidental to testing and advertising 

done in the ordinary course of business. 

3. The Franchise Rule, 16 CFR Part 436 

(OMB Control Number: 3084–0107) 

The Franchise Rule requires 

franchisors and franchise brokers to 

furnish to prospective investors a 

disclosure document that provides 

information relating to the franchisor, 

the franchisor’s business, the nature of 

the proposed franchise relationship, as 

well as additional information about 

any claims concerning actual or 

potential sales, income, or profits for a 

prospective franchisee (‘‘financial 

performance claims’’). The franchisor 

must also preserve the information that 

forms a reasonable basis for such claims. 

The FTC is seeking to extend the PRA 

clearance for the existing Rule. In 

addition, the FTC is seeking PRA 

clearance for the rule changes that have 

been proposed in the ongoing 

rulemaking proceeding. 

Estimated annual hours burden for 

existing Franchise Rule: 33,500 hours. 

The Rule’s required disclosure 

document provides franchisees with 

information on broad-ranging subjects 

that affect franchisors and the nature of 

the proposed franchise relationship. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 31, 2005 / Notices 51819 

This includes not only generally 

available information, such as the 

official name and address and principal 

place of business of the franchisor, but 

also less commonly available 

information, such as, among other 

things, the previous five years business 

experience of a franchisor’s current 

directors and executive officers and 

whether any of these individuals have 

been convicted of a felony or fraud or 

have filed for bankruptcy or been 

adjudged bankrupt during the previous 

seven years. All information in the 

disclosure statement must be updated 

and revised according to the express 

time requirements set forth in the Rule. 

Based on a review of the trade 

publications and information from state 

regulatory authorities, staff believes 

that, on average, from year to year, there 

are approximately 5,000 American 

franchise systems, consisting of 2,500 

business format franchises and 2,500 

business opportunity sellers, with 

approximately 500 (or 10%) of the total 

reflecting new entrants who have 

replaced departing businesses. Staff has 

calculated burden based on the above 

estimates. Some franchisors, however, 

for various reasons, are not covered by 

the Rule in certain situations (e.g., when 

a franchisee buys bona fide inventory 

but pays no franchisor fees). Moreover, 

fifteen states have franchise disclosure 

laws similar to the Rule. These states 

use a disclosure document format 

known as the Uniform Franchise 

Offering Circular (‘‘UFOC’’). In order to 

ease compliance burdens on the 

franchisor, the Commission has 

authorized use of the UFOC in lieu of 

its own disclosure format to satisfy the 

Rule’s disclosure requirements. Staff 

estimates that about 95 percent of all 

franchisors use the UFOC format. When 

that format is used, the franchisor is not 

required to prepare an additional federal 

disclosure document. The burden hours 

stated below reflect staff’s estimate of 

the incremental burden that the 

Franchise Rule may impose beyond 

information requirements imposed by 

states and/or followed by franchisors 

who use the UFOC. 

Staff estimates that the 500 or so new 

franchisors (including business 

opportunity ventures) require 

approximately 30 hours each to develop 

a Rule-compliant disclosure document. 

Staff additionally estimates that the 

remaining 4,500 established franchisors 

require no more than approximately 3 

hours each to update the disclosure 

document. The combined cumulative 

burden is 28,500 hours. 

The franchisor may need to maintain 

additional documentation for the sale of 

franchises in non-registration states, 

which could take up to an additional 

hour of recordkeeping per year. This 

yields a cumulative total of 5,000 hours 

per year for affected entities. 

Estimated annual cost burden for 

existing rule: $7,190,000. 

Labor costs are determined by 

applying applicable wage rates to 

associated burden hours. Staff assumes 

that an attorney likely would prepare or 

update the disclosure document. 

Accordingly, staff’s estimate of the labor 

costs attributed to those tasks are as 

follows: (500 new franchisors × $250 per 

hour × 30 hours per franchisor) + (4,500 

established franchisors × $250 per hour 

× 3 hours per franchisor) = $7,125,000. 

Staff anticipates that recordkeeping 

would be performed by clerical staff at 

approximately $13 per hour. At 5,000 

hours per year for all affected entities, 

this would amount to a total cost of 

$65,000. Thus, combined labor costs for 

recordkeeping and disclosure is 

approximately $7,190,000. 

Estimated increase in annual hours 

burden for proposed rule amendments: 

2750 hours. 

The Commission is conducting a 

rulemaking proceeding to amend the 

Franchise Rule. 64 FR 57294 (1999) 

(Notice of Proposed Rulemaking). The 

Staff Report on the Proposed Revised 

Franchise Rule (Aug. 25, 2004) (‘‘Staff 

Report’’), which is available online at 

http://www.ftc.gov, sets forth the staff’s 

recommendations to the Commission on 

various proposed amendments to the 

Franchise Rule. The Commission did 

not review or approve the staff report 

prior to its issuance. See 69 FR 53661 

(2004) (Notice Announcing Publication 

of Staff Report). Among other things, the 

Rule amendments discussed in the Staff 

Report would accomplish five goals. 

First, the staff has recommended that 

the amended Rule address the sale of 

business format and product franchises 

exclusively. The existing requirements 

for business opportunity ventures 

would be renumbered as a separate rule 

limited to business opportunities only. 

See Staff Report at 13 and n.42. 

Accordingly, the burden for business 

opportunity ventures will remain the 

same. 

Second, the amended Rule would 

reduce inconsistencies between federal 

and state disclosure requirements. 

Fifteen states have franchise disclosure 

laws similar to the Rule. These states 

use a disclosure document format 

known as the Uniform Franchise 

Offering Circular (‘‘UFOC’’). Staff 

estimates that about 95 percent of all 

franchisors use the UFOC format. The 

amended Rule would incorporate nearly 

all of the UFOC disclosures, thereby 

harmonizing federal and state disclosure 

laws. 

Third, the amended Rule would 

require the disclosure of more 

information on the quality of the 

franchise relationship. Among other 

things, franchisors would disclose 

litigation initiated against franchisees 

involving the franchise relationship and 

franchisee-specific trademark 

associations. 

Fourth, the amended Rule would 

update the rule to address new 

technologies. Specifically, it would 

permit franchisors to furnish disclosures 

electronically. This includes 

transmission via CD ROM, e-mail, and 

access to a Web site. 

Finally, the amended Rule would 

reduce compliance costs by expanding 

exemptions from disclosure. 

Specifically, the amended Rule would 

create new exemptions for sophisticated 

investors and for sales to managers and 

others within the franchise system who 

are already familiar with the franchise 

system’s operations. 

At the same time, the amended Rule 

would increase franchisors’

recordkeeping obligations. Specifically, 

a franchisor would be required to retain 

copies of receipts for disclosure 

documents, as well as materially 

different versions of its disclosure 

documents. Such recordkeeping 

requirements are consistent with, or less 

burdensome, than those imposed by the 

states. 

Staff estimates the increase in burden 

attributable to the proposed Rule 

amendments as follows: Each year, 

approximately 250 new franchisors will 

require 32 hours each (2 hours more 

than under the existing Rule) to develop 

a Rule-compliant disclosure document 

(increase of 500 hours). Staff also 

estimates that during the first year that 

the amended Rule is effective, the 

remaining 2250 established franchisors 

will require approximately 6 hours each 

(3 hours more than under the existing 

Rule) to update their existing disclosure 

document to comply with the amended 

Rule (increase of 6750 hours for the first 

year). After the first year, however, the 

time required should be the same as 

under the existing Rule, as the new 

disclosure format becomes familiar. 

Accordingly, the increase in the annual 

disclosure burden, averaged over the 

three-year clearance period, will be 

2750 hours (500 hours per year for new 

franchisors + 2250 hours per year for 

established franchisors). 

Estimated increase in annual cost 

burden for proposed rule amendments: 

$688,000, rounded to the nearest 

thousand. 

51820 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 31, 2005 / Notices 

2 In previous requests for clearance under the 

PRA, the FTC staff assumed that the requirements 

related to new home sales contracts require one 

minute per sales transaction. See, e.g., 67 FR 21243, 

21246 (April 30, 2002). The FTC staff now estimates 

that the inclusion of such information should take 

no more than 30 seconds per sales transaction 

because of increased automation, the wide-spread 

use of standard contracts, and the prevalence of 

large firms in the housing market. In addition, there 

was a calculation error in the previous requests that 

significantly overestimated the total burden 

imposed by new home sale contract disclosures. 

Labor costs are determined by 

applying applicable wage rates to 

associated burden hours. Staff assumes 

that an attorney likely would prepare 

the disclosure document. Accordingly, 

staff’s estimate of the increase in labor 

costs that would be attributable to the 

proposed Rule amendments, averaged 

over the three-year clearance period, is 

as follows: (500 hours per year for new 

franchisors × $250 per hour) + (2250 

hours per year for established 

franchisors × $250) = $687,500. 

4. R-Value Rule, 16 CFR Part 460 (OMB 

Control Number: 3084–0109) 

The R-value Rule establishes uniform 

standards for the substantiation and 

disclosure of accurate, material product 

information about the thermal 

performance characteristics of home 

insulation products. The R-value of an 

insulation signifies the insulation’s 

degree of resistance to the flow of heat. 

This information tells consumers how 

well a product is likely to perform as an 

insulator and allows consumers to 

determine whether the cost of the 

insulation is justified. 

Estimated annual hours burden: 

121,000 hours. 

The Rule’s requirements include 

product testing, recordkeeping, and 

third-party disclosures on labels, fact 

sheets, advertisements, and other 

promotional materials. Based on 

information provided by members of the 

insulation industry, staff estimates that 

the Rule affects: (1) 150 insulation 

manufacturers and their testing 

laboratories; (2) 1,615 installers who sell 

home insulation; (3) 125,000 new home 

builders/sellers of site-built homes and 

approximately 5,500 dealers who sell 

manufactured housing; and (4) 25,000 

retail sellers who sell home insulation 

for installation by consumers. 

Under the Rule’s testing requirements, 

manufacturers must test each insulation 

product for its R-value. The test takes 

approximately 2 hours. Approximately 

15 of the 150 insulation manufacturers 

in existence introduce one new product 

each year. The total annual testing 

burden is therefore approximately 30 

hours (15 manufacturers × 2 hours per 

test). 

Staff further estimates that most 

manufacturers require an average of 

approximately 20 hours per year with 

regard to third-party disclosure 

requirements in advertising and other 

promotional materials. Only the five or 

six largest manufacturers require 

additional time, approximately 80 hours 

each. Thus, the annual third-party 

disclosure burden for manufacturers is 

approximately 3,360 hours [(144 

manufacturers × 20 hours) + (6 

manufacturers × 80 hours)]. 

While the Rule imposes 

recordkeeping requirements, most 

manufacturers and their testing 

laboratories keep their testing-related 

records in the ordinary course of 

business. Staff estimates that no more 

than one additional hour per year per 

manufacturer is necessary to comply 

with this requirement, for an annual 

recordkeeping burden of approximately 

150 hours (150 manufacturers × 1 hour). 

Installers are required to show the 

manufacturers’ insulation fact sheet to 

retail consumers before purchase. They 

must also disclose information in 

contracts or receipts concerning the 

R-value and the amount of insulation to 

install. Staff estimates that two minutes 

per sales transaction is sufficient to 

comply with these requirements. 

Approximately 1,520,000 retrofit 

insulations are installed by 

approximately 1,615 installers per year, 

and, thus, the related annual burden 

total is approximately 50,667 hours 

(1,520,000 sales transactions × 2 

minutes). Staff anticipates that one hour 

per year per installer is sufficient to 

cover required disclosures in 

advertisements and other promotional 

materials. Thus, the burden for this 

requirement is approximately 1,615 

hours per year (1,615 installers × 1 

hour). In addition, installers must keep 

records that indicate the substantiation 

relied upon for savings claims. The 

additional time to comply with this 

requirement is minimal—approximately 

5 minutes per year per installer—for a 

total of approximately 135 hours (1,615 

installers × 5 minutes). 

New home sellers must make contract 

disclosures concerning the type, 

thickness, and R-value of the insulation 

they install in each part of a new home. 

Staff estimates that no more than 30 

seconds per sales transaction is required 

to comply with this requirement, for a 

total annual burden of approximately 

14,167 hours (1.7 million new home 

sales × 30 seconds). New home sellers 

who make energy savings claims must 

also keep records regarding the 

substantiation relied upon for those 

claims. Because few new home sellers 

make these claims, and the ones that do 

would likely keep these records 

regardless of the R-value Rule, staff 

believes that the 30 seconds covering 

disclosures would also encompass this 

recordkeeping element.2

The Rule requires that the 

approximately 25,000 retailers who sell 

home insulation make fact sheets 

available to consumers before purchase. 

This can be accomplished by, for 

example, placing copies in a display 

rack or keeping copies in a binder on a 

service desk with an appropriate notice. 

Replenishing or replacing fact sheets 

should require no more than 

approximately one hour per year per 

retailer, for a total of 25,000 annual 

hours, industry-wide. 

The Rule also requires specific 

disclosures in advertisements or other 

promotional materials to ensure that the 

claims are fair and not deceptive. This 

burden is very minimal because retailers 

typically use advertising copy provided 

by the insulation manufacturer, and 

even when retailers prepare their own 

advertising copy, the Rule provides 

some of the language to be used. 

Accordingly, approximately one hour 

per year per retailer should suffice to 

meet this requirement, for a total annual 

burden of approximately 25,000 hours. 

Retailers who make energy savings 

claims in advertisements or other 

promotional materials must keep 

records that indicate the substantiation 

they are relying upon. Because few 

retailers make these types of 

promotional claims and because the 

Rule permits retailers to rely on the 

insulation manufacturer’s substantiation 

data for any claims that are made, the 

additional recordkeeping burden is de 

minimis. The time calculated for 

disclosures, above, would be more than 

adequate to cover any burden imposed 

by this recordkeeping requirement. 

To summarize, staff estimates that the 

Rule imposes a total of 120,624 burden 

hours, as follows: 150 recordkeeping 

and 3,390 testing and disclosure hours 

for manufacturers; 135 recordkeeping 

and 52,282 disclosure hours for 

installers; 14,667 disclosure hours for 

new home sellers; and 50,000 disclosure 

hours for retailers. Rounded to the 

nearest thousand, the total burden is 

121,000 burden hours. 

Estimated annual cost burden: 

$2,738,000, rounded to the nearest 

thousand (solely related to labor costs). 

The total annual labor costs for the 

Rule’s information collection 

requirements is $2,737,902, derived as 

follows: $690 for testing, based on 30 

hours for manufacturers (30 hours × $23 

per hour for skilled technical 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 31, 2005 / Notices 51821 

3The ‘‘law enforcement’’ exception to the PRA 

excludes most items in this subcategory because 

they involve collecting information during the 

conduct of a Federal investigation, civil action, 

administrative action, investigation, or audit with 

respect to a specific party, or subsequent 

adjudicative or judicial proceedings designed to 

determine fines or other penalties. See 44 U.S.C. 

3518(c)(1); 5 CFR 1320.4(a)(1)–(3). 

4This includes Commission Rule of Practice 

4.11(e), 16 CFR § 4.11(e), which establishes 

procedures for agency review of outside requests for 

Commission employee testimony, through 

compulsory process or otherwise, in cases or 

matters to which the agency is not a party. The rule 

requires that a person who seeks such testimony 

submit a statement in support of the request. Staff 

estimates that agency personnel receive roughly 2 

such requests per month or 24 per year, and 

conservatively estimates that it would require up to 

2 hours to prepare the statement, for a cumulative 

total of 24 hours. 

5Because the fraud-related form is closely 

patterned after the general complaint form, burden 

estimates per respondent for each are the same. 

personnel); $3,705 for complying with 

the recordkeeping requirements of the 

Rule, based on 285 hours (285 hours × 

$13 per hour for clerical personnel); 

$43,680 for manufacturers’ compliance 

with third-party disclosure 

requirements, based on 3,360 hours 

(3,360 hours × $13 per hour for clerical 

personnel); and $2,689,827 for 

compliance by installers, new home 

sellers, and retailers (116,949 hours × 

$23 per hour for sales persons). 

There are no significant current 

capital or other non-labor costs 

associated with this Rule. Because the 

Rule has been in effect since 1980, 

members of the industry are familiar 

with its requirements and already have 

in place the equipment for conducting 

tests and storing records. New products 

are introduced infrequently. Because the 

required disclosures are placed on 

packaging or on the product itself, the 

Rule’s additional disclosure 

requirements do not cause industry 

members to incur any significant 

additional non-labor associated costs. 

5. FTC Administrative Activities (OMB 

Control Number: 3084–0047) 

This category consists of: (a) 

applications to the Commission, 

including Applications and notices 

contained in the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice (primarily Parts I, II, and IV); 

(b) the FTC’s consumer complaint 

systems; (c) FTC program evaluation 

activities and (d) Applicant Background 

Form. 

Estimated annual hours burden: 

139,000 hours, rounded to the nearest 

thousand. 

(a) Applications to the Commission, 

including applications and notices 

contained in the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice: 125 hours. 

Most applications to the Commission 

generally fall within the ‘‘law 

enforcement’’ exception to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act.3 Over the last 

decade, the Commission has received 

only one application for an exemption 

under the Fair Debt Collection Practices 

Act provisions. Staff has estimated that 

such a submission can be completed 

well within 50 hours. Applications and 

notices to the Commission contained in 

other rules (generally in Parts I, II, and 

IV of the Commission’s Rule of Practice) 

are also infrequent and difficult to 

quantify. Nonetheless, in order to cover 

any potential ‘‘collections of 

information’’ for which separate 

clearance has not been sought, staff is 

projecting 125 hours as its estimate of 

the time needed to submit any 

applicable responses.4

(b) Complaint Systems: 138,415 

hours. 

Consumer Response Center 

Consumers can submit complaints 

about fraud and other practices to the 

FTC’s Consumer Response Center by 

telephone or through the FTC’s website. 

Telephone complaints and inquiries to 

the FTC are answered both by FTC staff 

and contractors. These telephone 

counselors ask for the same information 

that consumers would enter on the 

applicable forms available on the FTC’s 

Web site. For telephone inquiries and 

complaints, the FTC staff estimates that 

it takes 4.5 minutes per call to gather 

information, somewhat less time than 

the 5 minutes estimated for consumers 

to enter a complaint online.5 The 

burden estimate conservatively assumes 

that all of the phone call is devoted to 

collecting information from consumers, 

although frequently telephone 

counselors devote a small portion of the 

call to providing requested information 

to consumers. 

Complaints Concerning National Do Not 

Call Registry 

To receive complaints from 

consumers of possible violations of the 

rules governing the National Do Not Call 

Registry, 16 CFR 310.4(b), the FTC 

maintains both an online form and a toll 

free hotline with automated voice 

response system. Consumer 

complainants must provide either the 

name or telephone number of the 

company about which they are 

complaining, the phone number that 

was called and the date of the call; they 

may also provide their name and 

address so they can be contacted for 

additional information. The FTC staff 

estimates that the time required of 

consumer complainants is 2.5 minutes 

for phone complaints and 2 minutes for 

online complaints. 

The FTC received a comment from 

T-Mobile USA, Inc. (‘‘T-Mobile’’) 

contending that the FTC should require 

more information from consumer 

complainants in order to reduce the 

burden on companies such as T-Mobile 

investigating complaints against them of 

possible violations of the Registry. 

T-Mobile, which describes itself as a 

nationwide commercial mobile radio 

service carrier that currently serves 

more than 18 million customers as well 

as the largest carrier-owned Wi-Fi 

network in the world, proposes 

increasing the burden on each consumer 

submitting a complaint of an unwanted 

telemarketing call in two ways. 

First, T-Mobile proposes that the FTC 

require consumers to include an 

‘‘express description of the goods or 

services that were offered’’ or other 

similar information about what the call 

was about. T-Mobile asserts it is the 

subject of some consumer complaints 

for exempt calls such as debt collection, 

customer service inquiries, and other 

calls that do not constitute 

telemarketing. Indeed, T-Mobile 

emphasizes that it ‘‘does not conduct 

any outbound telemarketing to anyone 

other than its existing subscribers,’’

which suggests it may also receive 

complaints about calls exempt from the 

Registry due to an established business 

relationship. 

The FTC declines to require this 

proposed field of additional information 

from all consumer complainants in 

order to eliminate a limited set of 

complaints about exempt calls against 

companies like T-Mobile. Preliminarily, 

if it is true that T-Mobile is not engaged 

in telemarketing covered by the 

Registry, T-Mobile’s investigation would 

appear to be a relatively simple matter. 

In addition, the proposed solution is not 

a good fit for the problem asserted. For 

example, if a company such as T-Mobile 

calls for debt collection or a customer 

service inquiry, the consumer 

complainant may describe the call as an 

offer about the company’s goods or 

services. Moreover, it is not at all clear 

that this indirect method of reminding 

consumers that the call must be a 

telemarketing call in order to be covered 

by the Registry would be more effective 

than the FTC announcements on the 

online complaint form and the toll-free 

hotline that already inform consumers 

that certain types of calls are permitted 

by the Registry rules. 

Second, T-Mobile suggests that the 

FTC require consumers to collect, 

record and provide both the name and 

telephone number of the company about 

which they are complaining. Because 

51822 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 31, 2005 / Notices 

consumer complainants may provide 

both pieces of information, and many 

already do so, T-Mobile’s proposal to 

require both imposes an extra 

requirement on precisely those 

consumers who are already indicating 

that providing such additional 

information is burdensome, if not 

impossible. As T-Mobile recognizes in 

its comment, not all consumers have 

Caller ID and they may not have *69 

service. Furthermore, *69 service may 

not always identify the phone number 

from which the call originated. 

Consumers may not record the number 

from which the call originated, 

particularly if the call is received during 

dinner or another inopportune time, 

which is precisely when they should be 

protected from unwanted telemarketing. 

In addition, calls left upon a consumer’s 

telephone answering machine or 

through call waiting service may not be 

the last call received and thus would 

not be identifiable using *69 service. 

Finally, consumer unfamiliarity with 

*69 and concerns about whether it 

would result in a charge to the 

consumer would discourage consumers 

from making complaints at all. 

The FTC, as a law enforcement agency 

that enforces compliance with the 

Registry, is well aware of the 

investigatory burden of investigating Do 

Not Call complaints by beginning with 

the limited information that consumers 

provide. The FTC, as a consumer 

protection agency, is also well aware of 

the importance of providing consumers 

with a convenient means of submitting 

complaints. The FTC must not so 

burden consumers so as to discourage 

the submission of complaints. While 

more information may be helpful in 

some circumstances, that benefit must 

be balanced against the burden of 

requiring all consumers to submit the 

additional information in all 

complaints. The FTC, based on its 

agency experience and familiarity with 

the financial and technical constraints 

of operating the complaint system, has 

concluded that the current complaint 

system collects the appropriate amount 

and type of information from 

consumers. Accordingly, the FTC 

declines to adopt T-Mobile’s suggestions 

at this time. The FTC staff periodically 

considers whether its complaint system 

can be improved as a part of ongoing 

system upgrades and may make changes 

at a future date. 

Identity theft 

To handle complaints about identity 

theft, the FTC must obtain more detailed 

information than is required of other 

complainants. Identity theft complaints 

generally require more information 

(such as a description of actions 

complainants have taken with credit 

bureaus, companies, and law 

enforcement, and the identification of 

multiple suspects) than general 

consumer complaints and fraud 

complaints. In addition, the FTC is 

considering expanding the information 

required on its online complaint form 

(such as collecting additional 

information about the fraudulent 

activity at affected companies and 

creating an attachment summarizing all 

of the fraudulent account activity as 

well as all fraudulent information on the 

consumer’s credit report). Consumers 

would be able to print out a copy of the 

revised form and use it to assist them in 

completing a police report, if 

appropriate, and, as also may be 

necessary, an ID Theft report. See 16 

CFR 603.3 (defining the term ‘‘identity 

theft report’’). The FTC estimates that 

the revised form would take consumers 

up to 13 minutes to complete (instead 

of the 7.5 minutes estimated for the 

current online form). 

The FTC is also planning to make 

some revisions in the information it 

collects from consumers who call the 

Consumer Response Center (CRC) with 

identity theft complaints. Staff estimates 

that it will take 9 minutes per call to 

obtain identity-theft related information 

(instead of the 8 minutes estimated for 

the current call procedure). A 

substantial portion of identity theftrelated calls typically consists of 

counseling consumers on other steps 

they should consider taking to obtain 

relief (which may include directing 

consumers to a revised online complaint 

form). The time needed for counseling 

is excluded from the estimate. 

Surveys 

Consumer customer satisfaction 

surveys give the agency information 

about the overall effectiveness and 

timeliness of the Consumer Response 

Center (CRC). The CRC surveys roughly 

1 percent of complainants who file IDT 

or general consumer complaints. 

Subsets of consumers contacted 

throughout the year are questioned 

about specific aspects of CRC customer 

service. Each consumer surveyed is 

asked several questions chosen from a 

list prepared by staff. The questions are 

designed to elicit information from 

consumers about the overall 

effectiveness of the call center. Half of 

the questions ask consumers to rate CRC 

performance on a scale or require a yes 

or no response. The second half of the 

survey asks more open-ended questions 

seeking a short written or verbal answer. 

Staff estimates that each respondent will 

require 4 minutes to answer the 

questions (approximately 20–30 seconds 

per question). 

Finally, Consumer Sentinel user 

surveys give the agency information 

about the overall effectiveness of its 

Consumer Sentinel Network. Consumer 

Sentinel allows federal, state and local 

law enforcement organizations common 

access to a secure database containing 

over two million complaints from 

victims of consumer fraud and identity 

theft. To date, Consumer Sentinel has 

over 1200 members, including law 

enforcement agencies from Canada and 

Australia. FTC staff plan to survey 

roughly 50% (approximately 2,500 

respondents) of Consumer Sentinel 

users each year about such things as 

overall satisfaction, performance, and 

possible improvements. Generally, the 

surveys should take approximately 10 

minutes per respondent (417 hours 

total). 

What follows are staff’s estimates of 

burden for these various collections of 

information, including the surveys. The 

figures for the online forms and 

consumer hotlines are an average of 

annualized volume for the respective 

programs including both current and 

projected volumes over the 3-year 

clearance period sought and are 

rounded to the nearest thousand. 

Activity Number of 

respondents 

Number of 

minutes/ 

activity 

Total 

hours 

Miscellaneous and fraud-related consumer complaints (phone)* ................................. 315,000 4 .5 23,625 

Miscellaneous and fraud-related consumer complaints (online)** ................................ 135,000 5 11,250 

IDT complaints (phone)* ................................................................................................ 380,000 9 57,000 

IDT complaints (online)** ............................................................................................... 128,000 13 27,733 

Do-Not-Call related consumer complaints (phone) ....................................................... 82,000 2 .5 3,417 

Do-Not-Call related consumer complaints (online) ....................................................... 430,000 2 14,333 

Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire ............................................................................ 9,600 4 640 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 31, 2005 / Notices 51823 

6The Staff of the Bureau of Competition of the 

Federal Trade Commission compiled its findings 

from the study in its report: A Study of the 

Commission’s Divestiture Process, 1999, available 

at http://www.ftc.gov/os/1999/08/divestiture.pdf. 

7To the extent that the staff interviews focus on 

a law enforcement activity (whether the party to the 

order complied with all its obligations), the 

interviews are not subject to the requirements of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act. See supra note 3. 

Activity Number of 

respondents 

Number of 

minutes/ 

activity 

Total 

hours 

Consumer Sentinel User Surveys ................................................................................. 2,500 10 417 

Totals ...................................................................................................................... 1,482,100 .............................. 138,415 

* Number of consumer calls calculated by projecting over the 3-year clearance period sought 5% annual growth and a telephone contractor response rate of 95% (contracted level of service) with regard to consumers who call the toll free lines and opt to talk to a counselor. ** Number of online collections projected from number of consumers who use the FTC’s online complaint forms noted in the text above. These 

figures also assume 5% annual growth for miscellaneous and fraud-related complaints, and 8% annual growth for ID Theft online complaints, 

over the 3-year clearance period requested. 

Annual cost burden: 

The cost per respondent should be 

negligible. Participation is voluntary 

and will not require any labor 

expenditures by respondents. There are 

no capital, start-up, operation, 

maintenance, or other similar costs to 

the respondents. 

(c) Program Evaluations: 355 hours. 

Review of Divestiture Orders 

The Commission issues, on average, 

approximately 10–15 orders in merger 

cases per year that require divestitures. 

As a result of a 1999 study authorized 

by the OMB and conducted by the staffs 

of the Bureau of Competition and the 

Bureau of Economics,6 the Bureau of 

Competition (‘‘BC’’) intends to enhance 

its monitoring of these required 

divestitures by interviewing 

representatives of the Commissionapproved buyers of the divested assets 

within the first year after the divestiture 

is completed. For the first several years 

of this new evaluation process, 

however, BC staff will be focusing on 

older orders and thus anticipates 

reviewing up to 40 divestitures per year. 

BC staff will interview representatives 

of the buyers to ask whether all assets 

required to be divested were, in fact, 

divested;7 whether the buyer has used 

the divested assets to enter the market 

of concern to the Commission and, if so, 

the extent to which the buyer is 

participating in the market; whether the 

divestiture met the buyer’s expectations; 

and whether the buyer believes the 

divestiture has been successful. BC staff 

may also interview other participants, 

including customers or trustee monitors, 

as appropriate. In all these interviews, 

staff will seek to learn about pricing and 

other basic facts regarding competition 

in the markets of concern to the agency. 

Participation by the buyers will be 

voluntary. Each responding company 

will designate the company 

representative most likely to have the 

necessary information; in all likelihood, 

it will be a company executive and a 

lawyer for the company may also be 

present. BC staff estimates that each 

interview will take approximately one 

hour to complete, with no more than an 

hour’s preparation required by each of 

the participants. In some instances, staff 

may do additional interviews with 

customers of the responding company 

or the monitor. Staff conservatively 

estimates that for each interview, two 

individuals (a company executive and a 

lawyer) will devote two hours each to 

responding to our questions for a total 

of four hours. In addition, for 

approximately half of the divestitures, 

staff will seek to question two 

additional respondents, adding four 

participants (a company executive and a 

lawyer for each of the two additional 

respondents) devoting two hours each, 

for a total of eight additional hours. 

Assuming that staff evaluates up to 40 

divestitures per year during the threeyear clearance period, the total hours 

burden for the responding companies 

will be approximately 320 hours per 

year ((40 × 4 hours) + (20 × 8 hours)). 

Using the burden hours estimated 

above, staff estimates that the total 

annual labor cost, based on a 

conservative estimated average of $425/ 

hour for executives’ and attorneys’

wages, would be approximately 

$136,000 (320 hours × $425). 

Review of Competition Advocacy 

Program 

The FTC’s competition advocacy 

program draws on the Commission’s 

expertise in competition and consumer 

protection matters to encourage federal 

and state legislators, courts and other 

state and federal agencies to consider 

the competitive effects of their proposed 

actions. Since June of 2001, the FTC 

Office of Policy Planning (‘‘OPP’’) has 

sent out 51 letters or written comments 

to different government officials, which 

have advocated the passage or repeal of 

various laws or regulations based on 

their likely competitive effects. OPP 

intends to evaluate the effectiveness of 

these advocacy comments. 

The evaluation will target the 

recipients of each of the 51 written 

comments, as well as 18 sponsors of the 

relevant legislation, by means of a 

written questionnaire. Most of the 

questions ask the respondent to agree or 

disagree with a statement concerning 

the advocacy comment that they 

received. Specifically, these questions 

inquire as to the applicability, value, 

persuasive influence, public effect, and 

informative value of the FTC’s 

comments. The questionnaire also 

provides respondents with an 

opportunity to provide additional 

remarks related either to the written 

comments received or the FTC’s 

advocacy program in general. 

Participation is voluntary. 

OPP staff estimates that on average, 

respondents will take 30 minutes or less 

to complete the questionnaire. OPP staff 

does not intend to conduct any followup activities that would involve the 

respondents’ participation. If all 

respondents complete the questionnaire, 

the total hours burden for the evaluation 

will be approximately 35 hours (69 

respondents × .5 hours). OPP staff 

estimates a conservative hourly labor 

cost of $250 for the time of the survey 

participants (primarily state 

representatives and senators). Thus, the 

total annual labor cost would be 

approximately $8750 (35 hours × $250). 

(d) Applicant Tracking Form: 400 

hours. 

The FTC’s Human Resources 

Management Office intends to survey 

job applicants on their ethnicity, race, 

and disability status in order to 

determine if recruitment is effectively 

reaching all aspects of the relevant labor 

pool, in compliance with management 

directives from the Equal Opportunity 

Employment Commission. Response by 

applicants is optional. The information 

obtained will be used for evaluating 

recruitment only and plays no part in 

the selection of who is hired. The 

information is not provided to selecting 

officials. Instead, the information is 

used in summary form to determine 

51824 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 31, 2005 / Notices 

trends over many selections within a 

given occupational or organizational 

area. The information is treated in a 

confidential manner. No information 

from the form is entered into the official 

personnel file of the individual selected 

and all forms are destroyed after the 

conclusion of the selection process. The 

format of the questions on ethnicity and 

race are compliant with OMB 

requirements and comparable to those 

used by other agencies. 

The FTC staff estimates that up to 

5,000 applicants will submit the form as 

part of the new online application 

process and that the form will require 5 

minutes to complete, for an annual 

burden total of approximately 400 

hours. 

Annual cost burden: 

The cost per respondent should be 

negligible. Participation is voluntary 

and will not require any labor 

expenditures by respondents. There are 

no capital, start-up, operation, 

maintenance, or other similar costs to 

the respondents. 

Christian S. White, 

Acting General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 05–17326 Filed 8–30–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

National Committee on Vital and Health 

Statistics: Meeting 

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory 

Committee Act, the Department of 

Health and Human Services (HHS) 

announces the following advisory 

committee meeting. 

Name: National Committee on Vital and 

Health Statistics (NCVHS), Subcommittee on 

Standards and Security (SSS). 

Time and Date: September 21, 2005: 9 

a.m.–5 p.m.; September 22, 2005: 8:30 a.m.–

12 p.m. 

Place: Hubert H. Humphrey Building, 200 

Independence Avenue SW., Room 705A, 

Washington, DC 20201. 

Status: Open. 

Purpose: On the first day the 

Subcommittee will focus on two topics: 

introductory discussions of the issues 

surrounding matching patients with their 

records, and then continued explorations 

into issues around HIPAA Return on 

Investment (ROI). The second day open with 

an overview of the e-prescribing pilots 

required under Medicare Modernization Act 

(MMA) and will move to continued 

discussions on the secondary use of clinical 

data. 

Contact Person for More Information: 

Substantive program information as well as 

summaries of meetings and a roster of 

Committee members may be obtained from 

Maria Friedman, Health Insurance Specialist, 

Security and Standards Group, Centers for 

Medicare and Medicaid Services, MS: C5–

24–04, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, 

MD 21244–1850, telephone: 410–786–6333 

or Marjorie S. Greenberg, Executive 

Secretary, NCVHS, National Center for 

Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention, Room 1100, Presidential 

Building, 3311 Toledo Road, Hyattsville, 

Maryland 20782, telephone: (301) 458–4245. 

Information also is available on the NCVHS 

home page of the HHS Web site: http:// 

www.nevhs.hhs.gov/ where an agenda for the 

meeting will be posted when available. 

Should you require reasonable 

accommodation, please contact the CDC 

Office of Equal Employment Opportunity on 

(301) 458–3EEO (4336) as soon as possible. 

Dated: August 23, 2005. 

James Scanlon, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Science 

and Data Policy, Office of the Assistant 

Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. 

[FR Doc. 05–17345 Filed 8–30–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4151–05–M 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention 

Notice of Meeting 

National Center for Health Statistics 

(NCHS), Classifications and Public 

Health Data Standards announces the 

following meeting. 

Name: ICD–9–CM Coordination and 

Maintenance Committee meeting. 

Times and Dates: 9 a.m.–4 p.m., September 

29, 2005. 9 a.m.–4 p.m., September 30, 2005. 

Place: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid 

Services (CMS) Auditorium, 7500 Security 

Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland. 

Status: Open to the public. 

Purpose: The ICD–9–CM Coordination and 

Maintenance (C&M) Committee will hold its 

final meeting of the 2005 calendar year cycle 

on Thursday and Friday, September 29–30, 

2005. The C&M meeting is a public forum for 

the presentation of proposed modifications to 

the International Classification of Diseases, 

Ninth-Revision, and Clinical Modification. 

Matters to be Discussed: Agenda items 

include: Complex and simple febrile 

seizures, family history of colonic polyps, 

mucositis, newborn post discharge check, 

benign prostatic hypertrophy with lower 

urinary tract symptoms, acute and chronic 

gingival disease, anal sphincter tear, addenda 

(diagnosis), cervical stump prolapse, growthguidance device/8-plate, M-brace dynamic 

spinal stabilization system, implantable 

hemodynamic monitor, injection or infusion 

of Levosimendan, laparoscopic hysterectomy, 

Taylor spatial frame, bifurcated vessel 

procedure, EPS studies, addenda 

(procedures), ICD–10–Procedure Coding 

System (PCS) update. 

For Further Information Contact: Amy 

Blum, Medical Systems Specialist, 

Classifications and Public Health Data 

Standards Staff, NCHS, 3311 Toledo Road, 

Room 2402, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, email alb8@cdc.gov, telephone 301–458–4106 

(diagnosis), Mady Hue, Health Insurance 

Specialist, Division of Acute Care, CMS, 7500 

Security Blvd., Baltimore, Maryland 21244, 

e-mail Marilu.Hue@cms.hhs.gov, telephone 

410–786–4510 (procedures). 

Notice: Because of increased security 

requirements, CMS has instituted stringent 

procedures for entrance into the building by 

non-government employees. Persons without 

a government I.D. will need to show an 

official form of picture I.D., (such as a 

driver’s license), and sign-in at the security 

desk upon entering the building. Those who 

wish to attend a specific ICD–9–CM C&M 

meeting in the CMS auditorium must submit 

their name and organization for addition to 

the meeting visitor list. Those wishing to 

attend the September 29–30, 2005 meeting 

must submit their name and organization by 

September 26, 2005 for inclusion on the 

visitor list. This visitor list will be 

maintained at the front desk of the CMS 

building and used by the guards to admit 

visitors to the meeting. Those who attended 

previous ICD–9–CM C&M meetings will no 

longer be automatically added to the visitor 

list. You must request inclusion of your name 

prior to each meeting you attend. Register to 

attend the meeting on-line at: http:// 

cms.hhs.gov/events. 

Notice: This is a public meeting. However, 

because of fire code requirements, should the 

number of attendants meet the capacity of the 

room, the meeting will be closed. 

The Director, Management Analysis and 

Services Office, has been delegated the 

authority to sign Federal Register notices 

pertaining to announcements of meetings and 

other committee management activities, for 

both CDC and the Agency for Toxic 

Substances and Disease Registry. 

Dated: August 24, 2005. 

B. Kathy Skipper, 

Acting Director, Management Analysis and 

Services Office, Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention. 

[FR Doc. 05–17325 Filed 8–30–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4163–18–M 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention 

National Center for Environmental 

Health/Agency for Toxic Substances 

and Disease Registry 

The Community and Tribal 

Subcommittee of the Board of Scientific 

Counselors (BSC), Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC), National 

Center for Environmental Health/ 

Agency for Toxic Substances and 

Disease Registry (NCEH/ATSDR): 

Teleconference. 

In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of 

the Federal Advisory Committee Act