Proposed Rule2024-30718
Trade Regulation Rule on Impersonation of Government and Businesses
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
December 26, 2024
Issuing agencies
Federal Trade Commission
Abstract
The Federal Trade Commission ("FTC" or "Commission") published a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking ("SNPRM") in the Federal Register on March 1, 2024, titled "Trade Regulation Rule on Impersonation of Government and Businesses" ("Rule"), which requested additional public comment on whether the Commission should revise the title of the Rule, add a prohibition on the impersonation of individuals, and extend liability for violations of the Rule to parties who provide goods and services with knowledge or reason to know that those goods or services will be used in impersonation schemes that violate the Rule. The SNPRM announced the opportunity for interested parties to present their positions orally at an informal hearing. Six commenters requested to participate at the informal hearing. The Commission has decided not to proceed with the SNPRM's proposed means and instrumentalities provision at this time. The purpose of the informal hearing will be to address issues relating to the proposed prohibition on impersonating individuals.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 247 (Thursday, December 26, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 247 (Thursday, December 26, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 104905-104908]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30718]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 461
RIN 3084-AB71
Trade Regulation Rule on Impersonation of Government and
Businesses
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
ACTION: Initial notice of informal hearing; final notice of informal
hearing; list of Hearing Participants; requests for submissions from
Hearing Participants.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission (``FTC'' or ``Commission'')
published a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (``SNPRM'') in
the Federal Register on March 1, 2024, titled ``Trade Regulation Rule
on Impersonation of Government and Businesses'' (``Rule''), which
requested additional public comment on whether the Commission should
revise the title of the Rule, add a prohibition on the impersonation of
individuals, and extend liability for violations of the Rule to parties
who provide goods and services with knowledge or reason to know that
those goods or services will be used in impersonation schemes that
violate the Rule. The SNPRM announced the opportunity for interested
parties to present their positions orally at an informal hearing. Six
commenters requested to participate at the informal hearing. The
Commission has decided not to proceed with the SNPRM's proposed means
and instrumentalities provision at this time. The purpose of the
informal hearing will be to address issues relating to the proposed
prohibition on impersonating individuals.
DATES:
Hearing date: The informal hearing will be conducted virtually on
January 17, 2025, at 1 p.m. Eastern.
Participation deadline: If you are a Hearing Participant and would
like to submit your oral presentation in writing or file a
supplementary documentary submission, you must do so on or before
January 9, 2025.
ADDRESSES: Hearing Participants may submit their oral presentations in
writing or file supplementary documentary submissions, online or on
paper, by following the instructions in part IV of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section. Write ``Impersonation SNPRM, R207000'' on your
submission and send it electronically to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d7b2bbb2b4a3a5b8b9beb4b1bebbbeb9b0a497b1a3b4f9b0b8a1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ceaba2abadbabca1a0a7ada8a7a2a7a0a9bd8ea8baade0a9a1b8">[email protected]</span></a>,
with a copy to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1c535d50565c7a687f327b736a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="347b75787e745240571a535b42">[email protected]</span></a>. If you prefer to file your submission on
paper, mail it via overnight service to: Federal Trade Commission,
Office of the Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Stop H-144
(Annex I), Washington, DC 20580.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Harris, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bcc8d4ddceced5cf8dfcdac8df92dbd3ca"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9ce8f4fdeeeef5efaddcfae8ffb2fbf3ea">[email protected]</span></a>, (202-
326-3620), Claire Wack, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d5b6a2b4b6be95b3a1b6fbb2baa3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f5968294969eb5938196db929a83">[email protected]</span></a>, (202-326-2836), and Ryan
McAuliffe, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f0829d9391859c99969695b0968493de979f86"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e59788868490898c838380a5839186cb828a93">[email protected]</span></a>, (202-326-3044).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Following public comment on an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking (``ANPRM''), 86 FR 72901 (Dec. 23, 2021), the FTC published
a notice of proposed rulemaking (``NPRM''), 87 FR 62741 (Oct. 17,
2022), entitled ``Trade Regulation Rule on Impersonation of Government
and Business'' (``Rule''), in the Federal Register, proposing to add
part 461 to title 16 of the Code of Federal Regulations, chapter I, to
prohibit the impersonation of government, businesses, or their
officers. On March 30, 2023, the Commission published an initial notice
of informal hearing, 88 FR 19024, and on May 4, 2023, Chief
Administrative
[[Page 104906]]
Law Judge Michael Chappell presided over the informal hearing, which
was viewable live to the public from the Commission's website, <a href="https://www.ftc.gov">https://www.ftc.gov</a>. Based upon the comments submitted regarding the proposed
provision imposing means and instrumentalities liability,\1\ the
Commission decided that this provision warranted further analysis and
consideration, and stated that it would continue to consider the issue,
including soliciting additional comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See SNPRM, 89 FR 15072 (Mar. 1, 2024), <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/03/01/2024-03793/trade-regulation-rule-on-impersonation-of-government-and-businesses">https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/03/01/2024-03793/trade-regulation-rule-on-impersonation-of-government-and-businesses</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 1, 2024, the Commission published its final Rule in the
Federal Register, 89 FR 15017. In that same issue of the Federal
Register, the Commission also published the SNPRM, 89 FR 15072,
requesting additional public comment on whether the Commission should
revise the title of the Rule, add a prohibition on the impersonation of
individuals, and extend liability for violations of the Rule to parties
who provide goods and services with knowledge or reason to know that
those goods or services will be used in impersonation schemes that
violate the Rule.
In accordance with section 18(b)(1) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C.
57a(b)(1), which requires the Commission to provide the opportunity for
an informal hearing in section 18 rulemaking proceedings, the SNPRM
also announced the opportunity for interested persons to present their
positions orally at an informal hearing. Six of the commenters
requested the opportunity to present their position orally or
participate at an informal hearing. Three additional commenters
requested the opportunity to participate in a hearing if one were held
but did not request a hearing themselves.
After further consideration, the Commission has decided not to
proceed with the SNPRM's proposed means and instrumentalities provision
(proposed Sec. 461.5) at this time. Therefore, the purpose of the
informal hearing will be to address issues relating to the proposed
prohibition on impersonating individuals (proposed Sec. 461.4).
II. The Requests for an Informal Hearing; Presentation of Oral
Submissions
Section 18 of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 57a, as implemented by the
Commission's Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 1.11(e), provides interested
persons with the opportunity to present their positions orally at an
informal hearing upon request.\2\ To make such a request, a commenter
must submit, no later than the close of the comment period for the
SNPRM, (1) a request to make an oral submission, if desired; (2) a
statement identifying the interested person's interests in the
proceeding; and (3) any proposal to add disputed issues of material
fact to be addressed at the hearing.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 16 CFR 1.11(e).
\3\ 16 CFR 1.11(e)(1) through (3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following six commenters requested an informal hearing
generally in accordance with the requirements of 16 CFR 1.11(e):
1. The Abundance Institute; \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Abundance Institute describes itself as ``a mission-
driven non-profit dedicated to creating the policy and cultural
environment where emerging technologies can develop and thrive in
order to perpetually expand widespread human prosperity.'' Abundance
Institute Cmt. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Andreesen Horowitz (a16z); \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Andreesen Horowitz of a16z states that a16z is the ``world's
largest venture capital firm'' and a ``leading investor'' in
generative artificial intelligence (``AI'') ``with a wide-ranging
portfolio of companies'' and the belief that AI ``should be able to
do a better job than unaided human intelligence in solving the
complex challenges facing humanity, thereby creating a better
world.'' a16z Cmt. at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. The Consumer Technology Association (CTA); \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ CTA states that it is the largest technology trade
association in North America, whose members range from startups to
established brands. CTA Cmt. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA); \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ SIIA states that it is a trade organization made up of
companies engaged in the information economy, ``including digital
content providers and users in academic publishing, education
technology companies, software developers, cloud service providers,
financial information firms, and companies that host platforms used
by billions of people worldwide.'' SIIA Cmt. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. TechFreedom; \8\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ TechFreedom states that it is a ``nonprofit, nonpartisan
think tank . . . dedicated to promoting technological progress that
improves the human condition.'' TechFreedom Cmt. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. TechNet.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ TechNet describes itself as ``the national, bipartisan
network of technology CEOs and senior executives that promotes the
growth of the innovation economy by advocating a targeted policy
agenda at the federal and 50-state level.'' TechNet Cmt. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, while the following commenters stated that an informal
hearing was not necessary, they requested the opportunity to make an
oral presentation if the Commission holds an informal hearing at
others' request:
1. Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), et al.; \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ This comment was ``submitted by the following consumer and
privacy advocacy organizations: Electronic Privacy Information
Center (EPIC), National Consumer Law Center on behalf of its low-
income clients, Consumer Federation of America, National Consumers
League, Consumer Action, and National Association of Consumer
Advocates.'' EPIC, et al. Cmt. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The Internet & Television Association (NCTA); \11\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ NCTA states that it is ``the principal trade association
for the U.S. cable industry, representing cable operators serving
nearly 90% of the nation's cable television households and cable
program networks.'' NCTA Cmt. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Truth in Advertising (TINA).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ TINA describes itself as ``a nonpartisan, nonprofit
consumer advocacy organization whose mission is to combat deceptive
advertising and consumer fraud; promote understanding of the serious
harms commercial dishonesty inflicts; and work with consumers,
businesses, independent experts, synergy organizations, self-
regulatory bodies and government agencies to advance countermeasures
that effectively prevent and stop deception in our economy.'' TINA
Cmt. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission finds that the requests submitted were generally
adequate and therefore will hold an informal hearing. The nine
commenters listed will have the opportunity to make oral presentations
during the informal hearing. The Commission does not find it necessary
to identify any group of interested persons with the same or similar
interest in the proceeding.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 16 CFR 1.12(a)(5) requires the initial notice of informal
hearing to include a ``list of the groups of interested persons
determined by the Commission to have the same or similar interests
in the proceeding.'' 16 CFR 1.12(d) explains that the Commission
``will, if appropriate, identify groups of interested persons with
the same or similar interests in the proceeding.'' Doing so
facilitates the Commission's ability to ``require any group of
interested persons with the same or similar interests in the
proceeding to select a single representative to conduct cross-
examination on behalf of the group.'' Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Disputed Issues of Material Fact; Final Notice
In the SNPRM, the Commission did not identify any disputed issues
of material fact that needed to be resolved at an informal hearing.
However, the Commission may still do so in this initial and final
notice of informal hearing, either on its own initiative or in response
to a persuasive showing from a commenter.\14\ To be appropriate for
cross-examination or rebuttal, a disputed issue of material fact must
raise ``specific facts'' that are ``necessary to be resolved.'' \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See 16 CFR 1.12(a)(3); 15 U.S.C. 57a(c)(2)(B); see also 89
FR 15072 (Mar. 1, 2024).
\15\ 16 CFR 1.13(b)(1)(i) (issues that ``must'' be considered
for cross-examination or rebuttal are only those disputed issues of
fact the Commission determines to be ``material'' and ``necessary to
resolve'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the SNPRM, six commenters proposed disputed issues
of material fact related to proposed Sec. 461.5 (Means and
Instrumentalities: Provision of Goods or Services for Unlawful
Impersonation Prohibited) regarding extending liability to parties who
provide goods or services with
[[Page 104907]]
knowledge or reason to know that they will be used in impersonation
schemes.
The Abundance Institute claimed in its comment: ``The record
contains reports of business practices described as `means and
instrumentalities' violations. But none of the reports identify even a
single incident (let alone a `prevalent' practice) of a party
`pass[ing] on a false or misleading representation' as is necessary to
meet the first prong of the two-prong test for M&I violations of
Section 5.'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The Abundance Institute Cmt. at 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTA proposed three disputed issues of material fact: \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ CTA Cmt. at 11-12. CTA additionally requested to cross
examine witnesses pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 57a(c)(2)(B) as to these
proposed disputed issues of material fact.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. ``Whether the Means and Instrumentalities Proposal imposes an
affirmative obligation on companies to address the misuse of their
products and services, and whether there are any costs associated with
implementing compliance plans to satisfy this requirement.''
2. ``Whether the Means and Instrumentalities Proposal will chill
the development of new products and services that could be misused by
fraudsters.''
3. ``Whether the Means and Instrumentalities Proposal's liability
framework is responsive to the known trends and evidence of online
fraud.''
TechNet proposed two disputed issues of material fact:
1. ``Whether the means and instrumentalities provision imposes an
affirmative obligation to address the misuse of tools, products, and
services and the costs associated with such compliance programs.''
2. ``Whether the means and instrumentalities provision will chill
the development and deployment of legitimate tools that can be
misappropriated for impersonation.''
SIIA proposed three disputed issues of material fact:
1. ``Whether the Commission has accurately estimated the costs
associated with the proposed rule.'' \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See SIIA Cmt. at 7. Although it mentions generally the
estimate of potential costs of the ``proposed rule,'' the Commission
understands the substance of this proposed disputed issue of
material fact to concern the estimated costs specifically associated
with proposed Sec. 461.5 because SIIA stated in its comment that it
recommends adoption of the other proposed amendments regarding
individual impersonation. Id. at 1 (``SIIA supports the Commission's
proposed extension of the impersonation rule to individuals.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. ``Whether the means and instrumentalities provision would impose
an affirmative obligation on companies to address misuses of goods and
services and, if so, costs associated with implementing additional
compliance programs or efforts to address potential misuse.''
3. ``Whether the means and instrumentalities provision will impede
the development of technologies that have positive societal benefits
but could be misused to enable impersonation.''
a16z quoted the following portion of a paragraph from the SNPRM,
noting that it disputed ``those material facts[:]'' ``Because the
deceptive impersonation of individuals is already prohibited by section
5 of the FTC Act, and section 5 similarly makes unlawful providing the
means and instrumentalities for a violation of section 5 of the Act,
the SNPRM would not change the state of law in terms of what is legal
and what is illegal. Furthermore, the proposed amendments to the Rule
would impose no recordkeeping requirement and would not create or
impose any compliance costs.'' \19\ Relatedly, it proposed as a
disputed issue of material fact ``the existence and magnitude'' of
``direct and indirect harms'' that the ``proposed constructive
knowledge standard'' in Sec. 461.5 would, in a16z's view, ``inflict.''
\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ a16z Cmt. at 20 (quoting SNPRM, 89 FR 15078). The
Commission does not understand a16z's proposed disputed issue of
material fact regarding the quoted portion of this paragraph to
concern proposed Sec. 461.4. Like SIIA, ``a16z supports expanding
the Impersonation Rule's scope to impersonations of individuals.''
Id. at 2.
\20\ Id. at 20-21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TechFreedom proposed as disputed issues of material fact whether
``the rule would apply to AI tools covered by Section 230'' and ``the
applicability of a constructive knowledge standard'' in proposed Sec.
461.5.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ TechFreedom Cmt. at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each of these proposed disputed issues of material fact relates to
the Sec. 461.5 proposal to extend liability to parties who provide
goods or services with knowledge or reason to know that they will be
used in impersonation schemes. After further consideration, the
Commission has decided not to proceed with proposed Sec. 461.5 at this
time. It is therefore not necessary to address the proposed disputed
issues concerning Sec. 461.5, and the purpose of the informal hearing
will be to address issues relating to proposed Sec. 461.4's
prohibition on impersonating individuals.
Thus, the Commission finds that there are no ``disputed issues of
material fact'' to resolve at the informal hearing \22\ and no need for
cross-examination or rebuttal submissions.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ If any interested person seeks to have additional disputed
issues of material fact designated, the person may make such request
to the presiding officer pursuant to 16 CFR 1.13(b)(1)(ii).
\23\ 16 CFR 1.12(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This initial notice of informal hearing also serves as the ``final
notice of informal hearing.'' \24\ A final notice of informal hearing
is limited in its substance to matters that arise only when the
Commission designates disputed issues of material fact: who will
conduct cross-examination; whether any interested persons with similar
interests will be grouped together for such purposes; and who will make
rebuttal submissions.\25\ Because cross-examination and submissions of
rebuttal evidence are not anticipated to occur in this informal
hearing, no separate final notice of informal hearing is necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ 16 CFR 1.12(c).
\25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. List of Hearing Participants; Making an Oral Statement; Requests
for Documentary Submissions
Pursuant to Commission Rule Sec. 1.12(a)(4), 16 CFR 1.12(a)(4),
the following is the list of interested persons (``Hearing
Participants'') who will have the opportunity to make oral
presentations at the informal hearing:
1. The Abundance Institute;
2. Andreesen Horowitz (a16z);
3. The Consumer Technology Association (CTA);
4. Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA);
5. TechFreedom;
6. TechNet;
7. Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) (et al.);
8. The Internet & Television Association (NCTA); and
9. Truth in Advertising (TINA).
Because the Commission has decided not to proceed with proposed
Sec. 461.5, the purpose of the hearing will be to address issues
relating to the remaining proposal to prohibit impersonation of
individuals in Sec. 461.4. Oral statements will be limited to 15
minutes, although they may be supplemented by documentary submissions,
and the presiding officer may grant an extension of time for good cause
shown. Transcripts of the oral statements will be placed in the
rulemaking record. Hearing Participants will be provided with
instructions as to how to participate in the virtual hearing.
If you are a Hearing Participant and would like to submit your oral
representation in writing or file a supplementary documentary
submission, please write ``Impersonation SNPRM, R207000'' on your
submission and send it
[[Page 104908]]
electronically to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c9aca5acaabdbba6a7a0aaafa0a5a0a7aeba89afbdaae7aea6bf"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="22474e474156504d4c4b41444b4e4b4c4551624456410c454d54">[email protected]</span></a>, with a copy to
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2a656b66606a4c5e49044d455c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5e111f12141e382a3d70393128">[email protected]</span></a>. If you prefer to file your submission on paper, mail it
by overnight service to: Federal Trade Commission, Office of the
Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Stop H-144 (Annex I),
Washington, DC 20580.
If you file a documentary submission under this section, your
submission--including your name and your State--will be placed on the
public record of this proceeding, including on the website <a href="https://www.ftc.gov">https://www.ftc.gov</a>. Because your documentary submission will be placed on the
public record, you are responsible for making sure that it does not
include any sensitive or confidential information. In particular, your
submission should not contain sensitive personal information, such as
your or anyone else's Social Security number; date of birth; driver's
license number or other State identification number or foreign country
equivalent: passport number; financial account number; or credit or
debit card number. You are also solely responsible for making sure your
documentary submission doesn't include any sensitive health
information, such as medical records or other individually identifiable
health information. In addition, your documentary submission should not
include any ``[t]rade secret or any commercial or financial information
which . . . is privileged or confidential''--as provided in section
6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and Commission Rule Sec.
4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)--including, in particular, competitively
sensitive information such as costs, sales statistics, inventories,
formulas, patterns, devices, manufacturing processes, or customer
names.
Documentary submissions containing material for which confidential
treatment is requested must be filed in paper form, must be clearly
labeled ``Confidential,'' and must comply with Commission Rule Sec.
4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). In particular, the written request for
confidential treatment that accompanies the submission must include the
factual and legal basis for the confidentiality request and must
identify the specific portions to be withheld from the public record.
See Commission Rule Sec. 4.9(c). Your documentary submission will be
kept confidential only if the General Counsel grants your request in
accordance with the law and the public interest. Once your documentary
submission has been posted publicly at <a href="https://www.ftc.gov">https://www.ftc.gov</a>--as legally
required by Commission Rule Sec. 4.9(b), 16 CFR 4.9(b)--we cannot
redact or remove it, unless you submit a confidentiality request that
meets the requirements for such treatment under Commission Rule Sec.
4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c), and the General Counsel grants that request.
Visit the FTC website to read this document and the news release
describing it. The FTC Act and other laws that the Commission
administers permit the collection of submissions to consider and use in
this proceeding as appropriate. The Commission will consider all timely
and responsive documentary submissions it receives from the Hearing
Participants on or before January 9, 2025. For information on the
Commission's privacy policy, including routine uses permitted by the
Privacy Act, see <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy">https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/privacy-policy</a>.
Hearing Participants who need assistance should indicate as much in
their submissions, and the Commission will endeavor to provide
accommodations. Hearing Participants without the computer technology
necessary to participate in video conferencing will be able to
participate in the informal hearing by telephone; they should indicate
as much in their submissions.
V. Conduct of the Informal Hearing; Role of Presiding Officer
The Commission's Chief Presiding Officer, the Chair, has appointed
and designates Administrative Law Judge for the Federal Trade
Commission, the Honorable Jay L. Himes, to serve as the presiding
officer of the informal hearing. Judge Himes will conduct the informal
hearing virtually using video conferencing starting at 1 p.m. Eastern
on January 17, 2025. The informal hearing will be available for the
public to watch live from the Commission's website, <a href="https://www.ftc.gov">https://www.ftc.gov</a>, and a recording or transcript of the informal hearing will
be placed in the rulemaking record.
Because there are no ``disputed issues of material fact'' to
resolve at the informal hearing, the presiding officer is not
anticipated to make a recommended decision.\26\ The role of the
presiding officer shall include presiding over and ensuring the orderly
conduct of the informal hearing, including selecting the sequence in
which oral statements will be heard, and placing the transcript and any
additional written submissions received into the rulemaking record. The
presiding officer may prescribe additional procedures or issue rulings
in accordance with Commission Rule Sec. 1.13, 16 CFR 1.13. In
execution of the presiding officer's obligations and responsibilities
under the Commission Rules, the presiding officer may issue additional
public notices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See 16 CFR 1.13(d) (``The presiding officer's recommended
decision will be limited to explaining the presiding officer's
proposed resolution of disputed issues of material fact.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Communications by Outside Parties to the Commissioners or Their
Advisors
Pursuant to Commission Rule Sec. 1.18(c)(1), 16 CFR 1.18(c)(1),
the Commission has determined that communications with respect to the
merits of this proceeding from any outside party to any Commissioner or
Commissioner advisor shall be subject to the following treatment.
Written communications and summaries or transcripts of oral
communications shall be placed on the rulemaking record if the
communication is received before the participation deadline. They shall
be placed on the public record if the communication is received later.
Unless the outside party making an oral communication is a Member of
Congress, such communications are permitted only if advance notice is
published in the Weekly Calendar and Notice of ``Sunshine''
Meetings.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See 15 U.S.C. 57a(i)(2)(A); 16 CFR 1.18(c).
By direction of the Commission.
April J. Tabor,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-30718 Filed 12-23-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on December 26, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.