60696 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 14, 2008 / Notices 

Item 

No. Bureau Subject 

1 Media .............................................................. Title: Amendment of Parts 73 and 74 of the Commission’s Rules to Establish Rules for 

Digital Low Power Television, Television Translator, and Television Booster Stations 

and to Amend Rules for Digital Class A Television Stations. 

Summary: The Commission will consider an Order, Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and Memorandum Opinion and Order considering issues with respect to the 

low power television digital transition. 

2 Public Safety & Homeland Security ............... Title: Improving Public Safety Communications in the 800 MHz Band; Relinquishment By 

Sprint Nextel of Channels in the Interleaved, Expansion, and Guard Bands. 

Summary: The Commission will consider an Order addressing Sprint Nextel’s June 17, 

2008 Petition for Relief regarding its 800 MHz spectrum holdings in the Interleaved 

Band (809–815/854–860 MHz), Expansion Band (815–816/860–861 MHz) and Guard 

Band (816–187/861–862 MHz). 

3 Wireless Tele-Communications ..................... Title: Promoting Efficient Use of Spectrum Through Elimination of Barriers to the Development of Secondary Markets (WT Docket No. 00–230). 

Summary: The Commission will consider a Second Order on Reconsideration concerning 

the Secondary Markets proceeding. 

4 Wireless Tele-Communications ..................... Title: Amendment of Part 90 of the Commission’s Rules To Provide for Flexible Use of the 

896–901 MHz and 935–940 MHz Band Allotted to the Business and Industrial Land 

Transportation Pool. 

Summary: The Commission will consider a Report and Order whether to adopt geographic 

service licensing and competitive bidding rules for spectrum presently unencumbered 

within the spectrum currently allotted at 900 MHz for Business/Industrial Land Transportation (B/ILT) use. The Commission will also consider appropriate interference protection standards and whether the Commission should lift the ‘‘freeze’’ placed on applications for new 900 MHz B/ILT authorizations. 

5 Wireless Tele-Communications ..................... Title: EFL Realty Trust, Applications for New Licenses In the Non-SMR 900 MHz Band for 

Industrial/Business Pool, Trunked (YU) Stations at Multiple Locations. 

Summary: The Commission will consider an Order addressing the dismissal of thirteen 

applications filed by EFL Realty Trust, proposing non-Specialized Mobile Radio trunked 

service in the Industrial/Business Pool 900 MHz band. 

6 International .................................................... Title: 2000 Biennial Regulatory Review—Streamlining and Other Revisions of Part 25 of 

the Commission’s Rules Governing the Licensing of, and Spectrum Usage by, Satellite 

Network Earth Stations and Space Stations. 

Streamlining the Commission’s Rules and Regulations for Satellite Applications and Licensing Procedures. 

Summary: The Commission will consider an Eighth Report and Order and Order On Reconsideration concerning issues raised in the Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in this proceeding, IB Docket No. 00–248. 

7 International .................................................... Title: Second Annual Report and Analysis of Competitive Market Conditions with Respect 

to Domestic and International Satellite Communications Services 

Summary: The Commission will consider a Second Annual Report to the United States 

Congress on the status of competition in the markets for domestic and international satellite communications services, as required by Section 703 of the Communications Satellite Act of 1962, as amended. 

*The summaries listed in this notice are intended for the use of the public attending open Commission meetings. Information not summarized 

may also be considered at such meetings. Consequently these summaries should not be interpreted to limit the Commission’s authority to consider any relevant information. 

Open captioning will be provided for 

this event. Other reasonable 

accommodations for people with 

disabilities are available upon request. 

Include a description of the 

accommodation you will need including 

as much detail as you can. Also include 

a way we can contact you if we need 

more information. Make your request as 

early as possible; please allow at least 5 

days advance notice. Last minute 

requests will be accepted, but may be 

impossible to fill. Send an e-mail to: 

fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202– 

418–0530 (voice), 202–418–0432 (tty). 

For a fee this meeting can be viewed 

live over George Mason University’s 

Capitol Connection. The Capitol 

Connection also will carry the meeting 

live via the Internet. To purchase these 

services, call (703) 993–3100 or go to 

http://www.capitolconnection.gmu.edu. 

Copies of materials adopted at this 

meeting can be purchased from the 

FCC’s duplicating contractor, Best Copy 

and Printing, Inc. (202) 488–5300; Fax 

(202) 488–5563; TTY (202) 488–5562. 

These copies are available in paper 

format and alternative media, including 

large print/type; digital disk; and audio 

and video tape. Best Copy and Printing, 

Inc. may be reached by e-mail at 

FCC@BCPIWEB.com. 

Additional information concerning 

this meeting may be obtained from 

Audrey Spivack or David Fiske, Office 

of Media Relations, (202) 418–0500; 

TTY 1–888–835–5322. Audio/Video 

coverage of the meeting will be 

broadcast live with open captioning 

over the Internet from the FCC’s Audio/ 

Video Events Web page at http:// 

www.fcc.gov/realaudio. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Marlene H. Dortch, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E8–24412 Filed 10–9–08; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission for OMB 

Review; Comment Request; Extension 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘FTC’’). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The information collection 

requirements described below will be 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 14, 2008 / Notices 60697 

1 FTC 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 FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). 

2 73 FR 40580. 

3 72 FR 15444 et seq. 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (‘‘OMB’’) for review, as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (‘‘PRA’’). The FTC is seeking public 

comments on its proposal to extend 

through October 31, 2011, the current 

PRA clearance for information 

collection requirements contained in its 

Trade Regulation Rule on Disclosure 

Requirements and Prohibitions 

Concerning Franchising (‘‘Franchise 

Rule’’). That clearance expires on 

October 31, 2008. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before November 13, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are 

invited to submit written comments 

electronically or in paper form. 

Comments should refer to ‘‘Franchise 

Rule, PRA Comment, FTC File No. 

P094400’’ to facilitate the organization 

of comments. Please note that comments 

will be placed on the public record of 

this proceeding—including on the 

publicly accessible FTC website, at 

(http://www.ftc.gov/os/ 

publiccomments.shtm)—and therefore 

should not include any sensitive or 

confidential information. In particular, 

comments should not include any 

sensitive personal information, such as 

an individual’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. Comments 

also should not include any sensitive 

health information, such as medical 

records or other individually 

identifiable health information. In 

addition, comments should not include 

any ‘‘[t]rade secrets and commercial or 

financial information obtained from a 

person and privileged or 

confidential. . . .,’’ as provided in Section 

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

Commission Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 

4.10(a)(2). 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).1

Because paper mail addressed to the 

FTC is subject to delay due to 

heightened security screening, please 

consider submitting your comments in 

electronic form. Comments filed in 

electronic form should be submitted by 

using the following weblink: (http:// 

secure.commentworks.com/ftcfranchiserule) (and following the 

instructions on the web-based form). To 

ensure that the Commission considers 

an electronic comment, you must file it 

on the web-based form at the weblink 

(http://secure.commentworks.com/ftcfranchiserule). If this Notice appears at 

(http://www.regulations.gov/search/ 

index.jsp), you may also file an 

electronic comment through that 

website. The Commission will consider 

all comments that regulations.gov 

forwards to it. You may also visit the 

FTC website at http://www.ftc.govto 

read the Notice and the news release 

describing it. 

A comment filed in paper form 

should include the ‘‘Franchise Rule, 

PRA Comment, FTC File No. P094400’’ 

reference both in the text and on the 

envelope, and should be mailed or 

delivered to the following address: 

Federal Trade Commission, Office of the 

Secretary, Room H-135 (Annex J), 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, 

DC 20580. The FTC is requesting that 

any comment filed in paper form be sent 

by courier or overnight service, if 

possible, because U.S. postal mail in the 

Washington area and at the Commission 

is subject to delay due to heightened 

security precautions. 

All comments should additionally be 

submitted to: Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs of OMB, 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. The Commission will 

consider all timely and responsive 

public comments that it receives, 

whether filed in paper or electronic 

form. Comments received will be 

available to the public on the FTC 

website, to the extent practicable, at 

(http://www.ftc.gov/os/ 

publiccomments.shtm). As a matter of 

discretion, the Commission makes every 

effort to remove home contact 

information for individuals from the 

public comments it receives before 

placing those comments on the FTC 

website. 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.shtm). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information or 

copies of the proposed information 

requirements for the Franchise Rule 

should be addressed to Craig Tregillus, 

Staff Attorney, Division of Marketing 

Practices, Bureau of Consumer 

Protection, Federal Trade Commission, 

Room H-238, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., 

N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580, (202) 

326-2970. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 

15, 2008, the FTC sought comment on 

the information collection requirements 

associated with the Franchise Rule, 16 

CFR Part 436 (Control Number: 3084- 

0107).2 No comments were received. 

Pursuant to the OMB regulations, 5 CFR 

Part 1320, that implement the PRA, 44 

U.S.C. 3501-3521, 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 November 13, 

2008. 

The Franchise Rule ensures that 

consumers who are considering a 

franchise investment have access to the 

material information they need to make 

an informed investment decision 

provided in a format that facilitates 

comparisons of different franchise 

offerings. The Rule requires that 

franchisors disclose this information to 

consumers and maintain records to 

facilitate enforcement of the Rule. 

Revisions to the Rule promulgated on 

March 30, 2007,3 which took final effect 

on July 1, 2008, after a one-year phasein, largely merged the Rule’s disclosure 

requirements with the Uniform 

Franchise Offering Circular (‘‘UFOC’’) 

disclosure format accepted by 15 states 

that have franchise registration and 

disclosure laws. This should 

significantly minimize any compliance 

burden beyond what is now required by 

state law. 

As amended, the Rule requires 

franchisors to furnish to prospective 

purchasers a disclosure document that 

provides information relating to the 

franchisor, its business, the nature of the 

proposed franchise, and any 

representations by the franchisor about 

financial performance regarding actual 

or potential sales, income, or profits 

made to a prospective franchise 

purchaser. The franchisor must preserve 

materially different copies of its 

disclosures and franchise agreements, as 

well as information that forms a 

reasonable basis for any financial 

performance representation it elects to 

make. These requirements are subject to 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
60698 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 199 / Tuesday, October 14, 2008 / Notices 

4 The current clearance under OMB Control 

Number 3084-0107 covers the disclosure and 

recordkeeping requirements of the original 

Franchise Rule, 16 CFR Part 436, which applied 

both to the sale of franchises and of business 

opportunity ventures. The disclosure and 

recordkeeping requirements applicable to business 

opportunity ventures are now separately set forth in 

16 CFR Part 437, and are covered under recently 

assigned OMB Control Number 3084-0142. The 

portion of the prior clearance applicable to business 

format franchisors under Part 436 retains the preexisting OMB Control Number 3084-0107. 

5 This is one-half of the number used in the 2005 

clearance request, when both franchises and 

business opportunities were covered by the Rule, 

and reflects the fact that business opportunities are 

now separately covered by Part 437 and a separate 

OMB clearance. This number appears to be 

consistent with the number of business format 

franchise offerings registered in compliance with 

state franchise laws, and listed in franchise 

directories. 

6 Staff estimates that about 95 percent of all 

franchisors use the UFOC format because the 

original Franchise Rule authorized use of the UFOC 

in lieu of the Rule disclosure format to satisfy the 

Rule’s disclosure requirements and reduce 

compliance burdens. 

7 16 CFR 436.8(a)(5). This exemption was added 

by the amended Rule. 

8 70 FR 28937, 28940 (May 19, 2005); 70 FR 

51817, 51819 (Aug. 31, 2005) (‘‘2005 Notices’’); 72 

FR 15444, 15542 (Mar. 30, 2007). Although the 2005 

Notices and the amended Rule’s SBP assumed that 

additional time (cumulatively, 2,750 hours) would 

be required to prepare disclosures during the 

transition to compliance with the amended Rule, 

the one-year transition period ended on July 1, 

2008, when the amended Rule took full effect. 

the PRA, and for which the Commission 

seeks to extend existing clearance.4

Estimated annual hours burden: 16,750 

hours 

Based on a review of trade 

publications and information from state 

regulatory authorities, staff believes 

that, on average, from year to year, there 

are approximately 2,500 sellers of 

franchises covered by the Rule, with 

perhaps about 10% of that total 

reflecting an equal amount of new and 

departing business entrants.5 Staff’s 

burden hour estimate reflects the 

incremental burden that part 436 may 

impose beyond the information and 

recordkeeping requirements imposed by 

state law and/or followed by franchisors 

who have been using the UFOC 

disclosure format nationwide.6 This 

estimate likely overstates the actual 

incremental burden because some 

franchisors, for various reasons, may not 

be covered by the Rule (e.g., they sell 

only franchises that qualify for the 

Rule’s large franchise investment 

exemption of at least $1 million).7

For October 31, 2008 to October 31, 

2009, the first twelve months of 

prospective 3-year renewed PRA 

clearance, staff estimates that the 

average annual disclosure burden to 

update existing disclosure documents 

will be three hours each year for the 

2,250 established franchisors, or 6,750 

hours, and 30 hours each year for the 

250 or so new entrant franchisors to 

prepare their initial disclosure 

documents, or 7,500 hours. These 

estimates for the amended Rule are 

based on staff’s prior estimates for the 

original Rule, and further adopt the 

analysis of the 2005 clearance request 

and the Statement of Basis and Purpose 

(‘‘SBP’’) for the amended Rule.8

As discussed in the 2005 Notices and 

the SBP, as under the original Rule, 

covered franchisors also 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 an additional 

cumulative total of 2,500 hours per year 

for covered franchisors (1 hour x 2,500 

franchisors). 

Part 436 of the amended Rule would 

also 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, however, 

are consistent with, or less burdensome, 

than those imposed by the states. 

Thus, staff estimates the average 

hours burden for new and established 

franchisors during the three-year 

clearance period ahead would be 16,750 

((30 hours of annual disclosure burden 

x 250 new franchisors = 7,500 hours) + 

(3 hours of average annual disclosure 

burden x 2,250 established franchisors = 

6,750 hours) + (1 hour of annual 

recordkeeping burden x 2,500 

franchisors = 2,500 hours)). 

Estimated annual labor cost burden for 

part 436: $3,595,000 

Labor costs are derived by applying 

appropriate hourly cost figures to the 

burden hours described above. The 

hourly rates used below are estimated 

averages. 

As stated in the 2005 Notices, staff 

believes that an attorney will prepare 

the disclosure document, and at an 

estimated $250 per hour. Accordingly, 

staff estimates that 250 new franchisors 

will each annually incur $7,500 in labor 

costs (30 hours x $250 per hour) and 

2,250 established franchisors will each 

incur $750, annually, in labor costs (3 

hours x $250 per hour). 

Further, staff anticipates that 

recordkeeping under part 436 will be 

performed by clerical staff at 

approximately $13 per hour. Thus, 

2,500 hours of recordkeeping burden 

per year for all covered franchisors will 

amount to a total annual labor cost of 

$32,500. 

Cumulatively, then, total estimated 

labor costs under part 436 is $3,595,000 

(($7,500 attorney costs x 250 new 

franchisors = $1,875,000) + ($750 

attorney costs x 2,250 established 

franchisors = $1,687,500) + ($13 clerical 

costs x 2,500 franchisors = $32,500)). 

Estimated non-labor costs for part 436: 

$8,000,000 

As an initial matter, in developing 

cost estimates, Commission staff 

consulted with practitioners who 

prepare disclosure documents for a 

cross-section of franchise systems. 

Accordingly, the Commission believes 

that its cost estimates are representative 

of the costs incurred by franchise 

systems generally. In addition, many 

franchisors establish and maintain 

websites for ordinary business purposes, 

including advertising their goods or 

services and to facilitate communication 

with the public. Accordingly, any costs 

franchisors would incur specifically as 

a result of electronic disclosure under 

part 436 appear to be minimal. 

As set forth in the 2005 Notices, staff 

estimates that the non-labor burden 

incurred by franchisors under part 436 

will differ based on the length of the 

disclosure document and the number of 

disclosure documents produced. Staff 

estimates that 2,000 franchisors (80% of 

total franchisors covered by the Rule) 

will print and mail 100 disclosure 

documents at $35 each. Thus, these 

franchisors will each incur $3,500 in 

printing and mailing costs. Staff 

estimates that the remaining 20% of 

covered franchisors (500) will transmit 

50% of their 100 disclosure documents 

electronically, at $5 per electronic 

disclosure. Thus, these franchisors will 

each incur $2,000 in distribution costs 

(($250 for electronic disclosure [$5 for 

electronic disclosure x 50 disclosure 

documents]) + ($1,750 for printing and 

mailing [$35 for printing and mailing x 

50 disclosure documents])). 

Accordingly, the cumulative annual 

non-labor costs for part 436 of the 

amended Rule is approximately 

$8,000,000 (($3,500 printing and 

mailing costs x 2,000 franchisors = 

$7,000,000) + ($250 electronic 

distribution costs + $1,750 printing and 

mailing costs) x 500 franchisors = 

$1,000,000)). 

William Blumenthal, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. E8–24232 Filed 10–10–08: 8:45 am] 

[BILLING CODE: 6750–01–S 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES