18762 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Notices

statements, affidavits, depositions, or MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Federal other state identification number, or other documents or that the nature of Mine Safety and Health Review foreign country equivalent; passport the matters in issue is such that an oral Commission will consider and act upon number; financial account number; or hearing and cross-examination are the following in open session: Secretary credit or debit card number. Comments necessary for the development of an of Labor v. Cumberland Coal Resources, also should not include any sensitive adequate record; LP, Docket No. PENN 2008–189. (Issues health information, such as medical It is further ordered, That Worldwide include whether the judge erred in records or other individually Logistics Co., Ltd. is designated determining that four violations of 30 identifiable health information. In Respondent in this proceeding; CFR 75.380(d)(7)(iv), which requires addition, comments should not include It is further ordered, That the effective escapeway lifelines, were not any ‘‘[t]rade secret or any commercial or Commission’s Bureau of Enforcement is ‘‘significant and substantial.’’) financial information which is obtained designated a party to this proceeding; Any person attending this meeting from any person and which is privileged It is further ordered, That notice of who requires special accessibility or confidential * * * as provided in this Order be published in the Federal features and/or auxiliary aids, such as Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. Register, and a copy be served on parties sign language interpreters, must inform 46(f), and Commission Rule 4.10(a)(2), of record; the Commission in advance of those 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2).’’ Comments It is further ordered, That other needs. Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) containing material for which persons having an interest in and 2706.160(d). confidential treatment is requested must participating in this proceeding may file CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO: Jean be filed in paper form, must be clearly petitions for leave to intervene in Ellen (202) 434–9950/(202) 708–9300 labeled ‘‘Confidential,’’ and must accordance with Rule 72 of the for TDD Relay/1–800–877–8339 for toll comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR Commission’s Rules of Practice and free. 4.9(c).1 Procedure, 46 CFR 502.72; Because paper mail addressed to the It is further ordered, That all further Emogene Johnson, FTC is subject to delay due to notices, orders, and/or decisions issued Administrative Assistant. heightened security screening, please by or on behalf of the Commission in [FR Doc. 2011–8129 Filed 4–1–11; 11:15 am] consider submitting your comments in this proceeding, including notice of the BILLING CODE 6735–01–P electronic form. Comments filed in time and place of hearing or prehearing electronic form should be submitted by conference, shall be served on parties of using the following weblink: https:// record; FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ googlebuzz and following the It is further ordered, That all [File No. 102 3136] documents submitted by any party of instructions on the web-based form. To record in this proceeding shall be Google, Inc.; Analysis of Proposed ensure that the Commission considers directed to the Secretary, Federal Consent Order To Aid Public Comment an electronic comment, you must file it Maritime Commission, Washington, DC on the web-based form at the weblink: 20573, in accordance with Rule 2 of the AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. https://ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ Commission’s Rules of Practice and ACTION: Proposed Consent Agreement. ftc/googlebuzz. If this Notice appears at Procedure, 46 CFR 502.2 (formerly http://www.regulations.gov/search/ § 502.118), and shall be served on SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this index.jsp, you may also file an parties of record; and matter settles alleged violations of electronic comment through that Web It is further ordered, That in federal law prohibiting unfair or site. The Commission will consider all accordance with Rule 61 of the deceptive acts or practices or unfair comments that regulations.gov forwards Commission’s Rules of Practice and methods of competition. The attached to it. You may also visit the FTC Web Procedure, the initial decision of the Analysis to Aid Public Comment site at http://www.ftc.gov/ to read the Administrative Law Judge shall be describes both the allegations in the Notice and the news release describing issued by March 29, 2012 and the final draft complaint and the terms of the it. decision of the Commission shall be consent order—embodied in the consent A comment filed in paper form issued by July 27, 2012. agreement—that would settle these should include the ‘‘Google, File No. 102 allegations. 3136’’ reference both in the text and on By the Commission. the envelope, and should be mailed or Karen V. Gregory, DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 2, 2011. delivered to the following address: Secretary. ADDRESSES: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the [FR Doc. 2011–7999 Filed 4–4–11; 8:45 am] Interested parties are invited to submit written comments Secretary, Room H–113 (Annex D), 600 BILLING CODE 6730–01–P electronically or in paper form. Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Comments should refer to ‘‘Google, File Washington, DC 20580. The FTC is No. 102 3136’’ to facilitate the requesting that any comment filed in FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH organization of comments. Please note paper form be sent by courier or REVIEW COMMISSION that your comment—including your overnight service, if possible, because name and your state—will be placed on U.S. postal mail in the Washington area Sunshine Act Notice the public record of this proceeding, and at the Commission is subject to including on the publicly accessible March 30, 2011. 1 FTC Web site, at http://www.ftc.gov/os/ The comment must be accompanied by an TIME AND DATE: explicit request for confidential treatment, 11 a.m., Tuesday, April publiccomments.shtm. 12, 2011. including the factual and legal basis for the request, Because comments will be made and must identify the specific portions of the PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing public, they should not include any comment to be withheld from the public record. Room, 9th Floor, 601 New Jersey The request will be granted or denied by the sensitive personal information, such as Commission’s General Counsel, consistent with Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. an individual’s Social Security Number; applicable law and the public interest. See FTC STATUS: Open. date of birth; driver’s license number or Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:18 Apr 04, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05APN1.SGM 05APN1 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Notices 18763

delay due to heightened security Analysis of Agreement Containing Part I of the proposed order prohibits precautions. Consent Order To Aid Public Comment Google from misrepresenting the The Federal Trade Commission Act privacy and confidentiality of any The Federal Trade Commission has ‘‘ ’’ (‘‘FTC Act’’) and other laws the covered information, as well as the accepted, subject to final approval, a company’s compliance with any Commission administers permit the consent agreement from Google Inc. privacy, security, or other compliance collection of public comments to (‘‘Google’’). program, including but not limited to consider and use in this proceeding as The proposed consent order has been the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Framework. appropriate. The Commission will placed on the public record for thirty ‘‘Covered information’’ is defined consider all timely and responsive (30) days for receipt of comments by broadly to include an individual’s: (a) public comments that it receives, interested persons. Comments received First and last name; (b) home or other whether filed in paper or electronic during this period will become part of physical address, including street name form. Comments received will be the public record. After thirty (30) days, and city or town; (c) email address or available to the public on the FTC Web the Commission will again review the other online contact information, such site, to the extent practicable, at agreement and the comments received, as a user identifier or screen name; (d) http://www.ftc.gov/os/ and will decide whether it should persistent identifier, such as IP address; publiccomments.shtm. As a matter of withdraw from the agreement and take (e) telephone number, including home discretion, the Commission makes every appropriate action or make final the telephone number and mobile telephone effort to remove home contact agreement’s proposed order. number; (f) list of contacts; (g) physical information for individuals from the On February 9, 2010, Google launched location; or any other information from public comments it receives before a social networking service called or about an individual consumer that is placing those comments on the FTC Google Buzz (‘‘Google Buzz’’ or ‘‘Buzz’’) combined with (a) through (g) above. Web site. More information, including within Gmail, its web-based email Part II of the proposed order requires Google to give Google users a clear and routine uses permitted by the Privacy product. Google Buzz is a platform that prominent notice and to obtain express Act, may be found in the FTC’s privacy allows users to share updates, affirmative consent prior to sharing the policy, at http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/ comments, photos, videos, and other ‘‘ ’’ Google user’s information with any privacy.shtm. information through posts or buzzes made either publicly or privately to third party in connection with a change, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: individuals or groups of users. Google addition or enhancement to any product Kathryn Ratte (202–326–3514), FTC used the information of consumers who or service, where such sharing is contrary to stated sharing practices in Bureau of Consumer Protection, 600 signed up for Gmail, including first and effect at the time the Google user’s Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., last name and email contacts, to information was collected. This Washington, DC 20580. populate the social network, which, in many instances, resulted in certain provision is limited to users of Google’s SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant previously private information being products and services whom Google has to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade made public. identified at the time it shares their information with third parties, for Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C. The Commission’s complaint alleges example, users who are logged into a 46(f), and § 2.34 of the Commission that Google violated Section 5(a) of the Google product. Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is FTC Act by falsely representing to users hereby given that the above-captioned Part III of the proposed order requires signing up for Gmail that it would use Google to establish and maintain a consent agreement containing a consent their information only for the purpose of comprehensive privacy program that is order to cease and desist, having been providing them with web-based email. reasonably designed to: (1) Address filed with and accepted, subject to final The complaint also alleges that Google privacy risks related to the development approval, by the Commission, has been falsely represented to consumers that it and management of new and existing placed on the public record for a period would seek their consent before using products and services, and (2) protect of thirty (30) days. The following their information for a purpose other the privacy and confidentiality of Analysis to Aid Public Comment than that for which it was collected. The covered information. The privacy describes the terms of the consent complaint further alleges that Google program must be documented in writing agreement, and the allegations in the deceived consumers about their ability and must contain privacy controls and complaint. An electronic copy of the to decline enrollment in certain features procedures appropriate to Google’s size full text of the consent agreement of Buzz. In addition, the complaint and complexity, the nature and scope of package can be obtained from the FTC alleges that Google failed to disclose its activities, and the sensitivity of Home Page (for March 30, 2010), on the adequately that certain information covered information. Specifically, the World Wide Web, at http://www.ftc.gov/ would become public by default order requires Google to: through the Buzz product. Finally, the os/actions.shtm. A paper copy can be • Designate an employee or complaint alleges that Google obtained from the FTC Public Reference employees to coordinate and be misrepresented its compliance with the Room, Room 130–H, 600 Pennsylvania responsible for the privacy program; U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Framework, a • Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580, Identify reasonably-foreseeable, mechanism by which U.S. companies material risks, both internal and either in person or by calling (202) 326– may transfer data from the European 2222. external, that could result in the Union to the United States consistent unauthorized collection, use, or Public comments are invited, and may with European law. disclosure of covered information and be filed with the Commission in either The proposed order contains assess the sufficiency of any safeguards paper or electronic form. All comments provisions designed to prevent Google in place to control these risks; should be filed as prescribed in the from engaging in the future in practices • Design and implement reasonable ADDRESSES section above, and must be similar to those alleged in the complaint privacy controls and procedures to received on or before the date specified with respect to all Google products and control the risks identified through the in the DATES section. services, not only Gmail or Buzz. privacy risk assessment and regularly

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:18 Apr 04, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05APN1.SGM 05APN1 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES 18764 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Notices

test or monitor the effectiveness of the order. Part VII ensures notification to requirement) from engaging in any ‘‘new safeguards’ key controls and procedures; the FTC of changes in corporate status. or additional sharing’’ of previously • Develop and use reasonable steps to Part VIII mandates that Google submit collected personal information ‘‘with select and retain service providers an initial compliance report to the FTC any third party’’ that results from ‘‘any capable of appropriately protecting the and make available to the FTC change, addition, or enhancement’’ to privacy of covered information they subsequent reports. Part IX is a any Google product or service. First, receive from respondent, and require provision ‘‘sunsetting’’ the order after Google did not represent in its general service providers by contract to twenty (20) years, with certain ‘‘Privacy Policy’’ (or otherwise, implement and maintain appropriate exceptions. according to the Complaint) that the privacy protections; and The purpose of the analysis is to aid ‘‘consent’’ it would seek would require • Evaluate and adjust its privacy public comment on the proposed order. consumers to ‘‘opt in’’ as required by program in light of the results of the It is not intended to constitute an Part II. Indeed, the Complaint does not testing and monitoring, any material official interpretation of the proposed allege that Google ever asked consumers changes to its operations or business order or to modify its terms in any way. to signify their ‘‘consent’’ by ‘‘opting in’’ arrangements, or any other By direction of the Commission. (as opposed to ‘‘opting out’’). To be sure, circumstances that it knows or has insofar as Google did not seek ‘‘consent’’ Donald S. Clark, reason to know may have a material at all, its representation in its general impact on the effectiveness of its Secretary. ‘‘Privacy Policy’’ was deceptive in privacy program. Concurring Statement of Commissioner violation of Section 5. But the ‘‘opt in’’ Part IV of the proposed order requires J. Thomas Rosch requirement in Part II is seemingly that Google obtain within 180 days, and brand new. It does not echo what I concur in accepting, subject to final on a biennial basis thereafter for twenty Google promised to do at the outset. In approval, a consent agreement from (20) years, an assessment and report the separate Statement that I issued Google Inc. (‘‘Google) for public from a qualified, objective, independent when the staff issued its preliminary comment. However, it should be third-party professional, certifying, Privacy Report, I expressed concern emphasized that this consent agreement among other things, that: it has in place about whether an ‘‘opt in’’ requirement is being accepted, subject to final a privacy program that provides in these circumstances might sometimes approval. I have substantial reservations protections that meet or exceed the be contrary to the public interest. Then, about Part II of the consent agreement. protections required by Part III of the as now, I was concerned that it might be proposed order; and its privacy controls My concerns are threefold. Before I used as leverage in consent negotiations are operating with sufficient describe them, however, I want to make with other competitors. effectiveness to provide reasonable clear that I do not mean to defend Second, Part II of the proposed assurance that the privacy of covered Google. Google can—and should—speak consent order applies whenever Google information is protected. for itself. However, I believe that, as a engages in any ‘‘new or additional Parts V through IX of the proposed Commission, we must always be sharing’’ of previously collected order are reporting and compliance concerned that a consent agreement, personal information ‘‘with any third provisions. Part V requires that Google like a litigated decree, is consistent with party’’ for the next twenty years, not just retain all ‘‘widely disseminated the public interest. For that reason, I am any ‘‘material’’ new or additional sharing statements that describe the extent to opposed to accepting consent of that information. Because internet which respondent maintains and agreements that may be contrary to the business models (and technology) protects the privacy and confidentiality public interest because a party is willing change so rapidly, Google (and its of any covered information, along with to agree to terms that hurt other competitors) are bound to engage in all materials relied upon in making or competitors as much or more than the ‘‘new or additional’’ sharing of disseminating such statements, for a terms will hurt that party. That may previously collected information with period of three (3) years. Part V further occur, for example, when a consent third parties during that period. That requires Google to retain, for a period of agreement is used as ‘‘leverage in means that Part II is certain to apply six (6) months from the date received, dealing with the practices of other (and with some frequency) during that all consumer complaints directed at competitors.’’ Part II of the proposed period as long as Google does not warn Google, or forwarded to Google by a consent order may be susceptible to this users or consumers in its ‘‘general third party, that allege unauthorized happening. Privacy Policy’’ that it may engage in collection, use, or disclosure of covered More specifically, the crux of the such sharing in the future. information and any responses to such violation alleged in the Complaint is Third, Part II applies not just to complaints. Part V also requires Google that Google represented in its general Google’s social networking services or to retain for a period of five (5) years ‘‘Privacy Policy’’ that ‘‘When you sign up products, but to every single Google from the date received, documents that for a particular service that requires service or product that undergoes some contradict, qualify, or call into question registration, we ask you to provide ‘‘change, addition, or enhancement’’ its compliance with the proposed order. personal information. If we use this (terms that are not defined in Part II) Finally, Part V requires that Google information in a manner different from that results from the sharing of certain retain all materials relied upon to the purpose for which it was collected, information. As a practical matter, this prepare the third-party assessments for then we will ask for your consent prior means that Google is at risk that Part II a period of three (3) years after the date to such use. However, when Google will apply across the board to every that each assessment is prepared. initiated its social networking service existing product or service that Google Part VI requires dissemination of the (‘‘Google Buzz’’) it used personal offers, including any product or service order now and in the future to information previously collected for that involves the tracking and sharing of principals, officers, directors, and other purposes without asking for users’ identified Google users’ browsing managers, and to all current and future consent prior to this use. Part II of the behavior. employees, agents, and representatives proposed consent order prohibits In short, on the face of it, Part II seems having supervisory responsibilities Google, without prior ‘‘express to be contrary to Google’s self-interest. relating to the subject matter of the affirmative consent’’ (an ‘‘opt-in’’ I therefore ask myself if Google willingly

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:18 Apr 04, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05APN1.SGM 05APN1 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Notices 18765

agreed to it, and if so, why it did so. In compliance with the requirement Abstract: The Office of the Assistant Surely it did not do so simply to save of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Secretary for Planning and Evaluation itself litigation expense. But did it do so Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the (ASPE) is requesting Office of because it was being challenged by Office of the Secretary (OS), Department Management and Budget (OMB) other government agencies and it of Health and Human Services, is approval on a new data collection, wanted to ‘‘get the Commission off its publishing the following summary of a consisting of a survey of a national back’’? Or did it do so in hopes that Part proposed information collection request sample of health insurers to learn about II would be used as leverage in future for public comment. Interested persons the effects of various recent insurance government challenges to the practices are invited to send comments regarding market reforms from the Affordable Care of its competitors? In my judgment, this burden estimate or any other aspect Act (ACA) on premiums and coverage neither of the latter explanations is of this collection of information, for certain benefits. ASPE will use the consistent with the public interest. including any of the following subjects: results of this survey in conjunction Nor am I comforted that the purpose (1) The necessity and utility of the with other data sources to build a more and effect of Part II may be to ‘‘fence in’’ proposed information collection for the complete picture of the effects of the Google. I am aware of the teaching of proper performance of the agency’s Jacob Siegel Co. v. FTC, 327 U.S. 608 functions; (2) the accuracy of the insurance market reforms that went into (1946) that a ‘‘fencing in’’ order may estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance effect in September of 2010. The survey cover legal conduct as long as that the quality, utility, and clarity of the instrument will be a one-time, self- conduct is ‘‘reasonably related’’ to the information to be collected; and (4) the administered web survey sent to eight of violation. Even if Part II may be use of automated collection techniques the 12 largest insurers in each state plus considered to cover conduct that is or other forms of information the District of Columbia based on total ‘‘reasonably related’’ to the violation technology to minimize the information 2009 comprehensive major medical here, any consent order, whether collection burden. premiums, yielding a targeted sample of litigated or negotiated, must be To obtain copies of the supporting 408 health insurers. Each health insurer consistent with the public interest. I statement and any related forms for the will be asked to provide self-reported look forward to public comment about proposed paperwork collections data on the percentage of covered lives whether Part II of the proposed consent referenced above, e-mail your request, with coverage for various benefits before order meets that requirement. including your address, phone number, and after the insurance market reforms [FR Doc. 2011–7963 Filed 4–4–11; 8:45 am] OMB number, and OS document went into effect, any effect of these BILLING CODE 6750–01–P identifier, to reforms on premiums, and coverage for [email protected], or call select other benefits under the Reports Clearance Office on (202) consideration for the essential benefits DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 690–6162. Written comments and package. The survey design and content HUMAN SERVICES recommendations for the proposed have been reviewed by both the ASPE information collections must be directed [Document Identifier OS–0990–New; 60-day project officer and other ASPE to the OS Paperwork Clearance Officer Notice] personnel, and by several former and at the above email address within 60 current chief actuaries at health Agency Information Collection days. Proposed Project: Effects of Insurance insurers. Data collection activities will Request; 60-Day Public Comment be completed within 60 days (two Request Market Reforms—OMB No. 0990–NEW– Office of the Assistant Secretary for months) of OMB Clearance. AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. Planning and Evaluation (ASPE).

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN TABLE

Average Number of Number of burden Total burden Forms Type of respondent respondents responses per (in hours) per hours respondent response

Self-administered web survey...... Chief Actuary at health insurance 408 1 45/60 306 companies.

Mary Forbes, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SUMMARY: 42 U.S.C. 299c establishes a Office of the Secretary, Paperwork Reduction HUMAN SERVICES National Advisory Council for Act Reports Clearance Officer. Healthcare Research and Quality (the [FR Doc. 2011–8034 Filed 4–4–11; 8:45 am] Agency for Healthcare Research and Council). The Council is to advise the Quality BILLING CODE 4150–05–P Secretary of HHS (Secretary) and the Director of the Agency for Healthcare National Advisory Council for Research and Quality (AHRQ) on Healthcare Research and Quality: matters related to activities of the Request for Nominations for Public Agency to improve the quality, safety, Members efficiency, and effectiveness of health care for all Americans. AGENCY: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), HHS. Seven current members’ terms will expire in November 2011. To fill these ACTION: Notice of request for positions, we are seeking individuals nominations for public members. who are distinguished: (1) In the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:18 Apr 04, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\05APN1.SGM 05APN1 srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES