FTC Staff Comment to the Hon. Frank Annunzio Concerning H.R. 458, the Credit Repair Organizations Act

0
~'\ .	"'-.- ..	• 	y
o,r,ca 0'
l'IoIC C;""'I"~"'H
,:-:::c c:r;,.,.:.. ;~ AC::: C CMMISSICN
NASI·,.NCi'CN. C. C. ZO~!C
May 	11, 	19S1
~he Honorable 	Frank 	~~~u~:ic
0.5. 	House 	of 	Representatives
Washington, 	D.C. 	20515
Oear 	Mr. 	Annun~iot
Thank 	you 	for 	your 	recent 	letter 	forwarding 	a 	copy 	of
~.R. 	458, 	t~e Credit 	Reoair 	Craanizations 	Act, 	t: 	t~~ 	Federal
Trade 	Commission. 	~e 	appreciate 	the 	opportunity 	to 	comment 	on
~h. 	?:opos~d legislation.
The 	credit 	repai: 	=usiness 	appears 	to 	ce 	a 	relatively 	recent
?he~ome~on. 	!~ 	involves 	the 	marKeting 	of 	credit 	repair 	~ervices
to 	consumers 	whose 	credit 	bureau 	reports 	contain 	neg~tive infor-
mation 	chac 	interferes 	with 	their 	ability 	to 	obtain 	credit. 	The
principal 	method 	such 	businesses 	rely 	upon 	to 	improve 	consumers'
credit: 	bureau 	reports 	is 	':he 	dispute 	procedure 	available 	to 	"'-:..
consumers 	~nder Section 	611 	of 	the 	Fair 	Credit 	Reporting 	Act
(FCRA). 	Section 	611 	is 	designed 	~o 	provide 	consumers 	wi~~'a
self-help 	mechanism 	to 	correct 	credit 	repor~s that 	contain
inaccurate 	or 	incomOle~e information. 	'Cor%ec~ing and 	updating
such 	information 	benefits 	creditors 	as 	well 	as 	consumers 	by
helping 	to 	ensure 	that 	credit-srantin9 	decisions 	are 	made 	on 	the
basis 	~f 	complete 	and 	accurate 	information 	reflecting 	the
probable 	creditworthiness 	of 	the 	consumer.
It 	does 	not 	appear, 	however, 	that 	most 	consumers 	who 	employ
the 	service$ 	of 	a 	credit 	repair 	organization 	seek 	to 	correct
inaccurate 	information. 	Based 	on 	the 	monitoring 	e;<per-ience 	of
Commission 	staff, 	ic 	_??_a:s 	i~staad 	tha~ 	ma~y of 	those 	who 	turn
to 	credit 	repair 	organizations 	have 	ex?erienced 	significart
credit 	prob~ems 	in 	the 	pase, 	which 	they 	hope 	to 	minimize.
~::hou9h minor 	inaccuracies 	may 	appear 	in 	their 	credit 	re~orts,
~y 	a~~ 	la~~e 	t~e 	a~"s~-~ 	~_._._~.;-" ~~~. 	~« 	.~-_._~~ S~M''J~ 	th~~	IIrIo.- 	....... 	... '":' 	•• 	r-. .." ..... lW 	.... _..., .....--.. • ........ 	'- ... -. .. 	.. _ 	•• :"'..... All _ ... ~ 	_ _ _ 	_ 	_ ~
fairly 	reflects 	what 	actually 	occurred. 	Otili%a~ion of 	FCRA
dis?ute 	procedures 	is, 	therQEore, 	unli~ely to 	ale 	these
cons~=ers. ~~c~ethele~g, ~hrough adver-iseme~~s a~d oral 	:e?=e-
sen~a~ions, c:edit 	repair 	orsani:acions 	of~en 	l~ad 	;;ns~me=3 ~o
1 	~he 	Cc~~~ission 	b:~u~ht 	an 	e~fc:came~~ ac~io~ a~a~~s~ si~
credi ~ 	--p'ir 	~rac·4·~~-e-~ t~ 	'ass 	(S-4 	-_~~~~-... ~_' 	~-.~__~._ ~_·~~~1a~;~~.	... 	..... 	- 	l:' 	......_ •• 	-~ 	....... - 	""'- 	-\,;...... 	- 	............... "
docket 	numbers 	C-3l85 	through 	C-3190j 	and 	presently 	i3 	monitoring
the 	ac~ivities of 	several 	others. 	~.	... ",

The 	nonorab14 	Fran~ ~nnun~io
believe 	that 	adverse 	Lnf~rmation in 	their 	credit 	reports 	can 	=~
deleted 	or 	~QQifi~d ragardless 	of 	i~; 	accu~acy. 	!n 	~a~,
hQweve:, 	1~ 	adv~rse 	i~fo:mation reported 	by 	the 	credit 	bureau 	is
accura~., under 	ch~ 	~C~A 	i~ ~ay 	be 	repo:ted 	for 	at 	least 	seven
Y~4:S. 	Ean~ru~ccy =.a1 	:e 	~e~c:~~c !c: 	~~n 	~ears. 	Although 	the
rCRA 	~oes 	no~ 	,equi:~ 	credit 	~ureaus to 	r~port adverse 	Lnfotma-
t1cn 	fo: 	this 	period 	of 	time, 	it 	~x~lici~11 authorizes 	them 	to 	do
~o. 	Credit 	bu:e4us, 	~hic~ are 	in 	the 	bus~ess o~ 	5allin~ c:a=~~
history 	informacion 	to 	c:.Qitc:~, ordin~rily re~or~ suc~-infQ=-
~ation 	eor 	~s 	lons 	~s 	is 	legally 	petmissiblQ. 	. .
.
It 	acce~:e that 	credit 	repair 	o:~a~i:a~iQ~$ ccc3sicnall v	.. 	. 	- 	...
improve 	consumers' 	cradit 	bu:a~u reports, 	but 	~ail 	to 	do 	so 	in
~oa~ 	ins;anc~3 -- 	~:ir.cipally because 	mose 	of 	the 	information
~hey dispute 	is 	accurace 	and 	within 	the 	per~issibla :a?Or::~;
?eriod. 	t~~i, 	servic~s ~re 	f=equene~y sold 	en 	a 	~oney-oack
s~a:~n~e~ 	basis, 	bue 	consu~ers have 	:e?or~Qd difficulti~s in
obtaining 	refunds. 	T~e company 	may 	be 	out 	of 	bU3iness, 	lac~ 	the
funds 	to 	pay 	by 	the 	ti~e consu~ers $~e~ 	ra!unds, 	or 	simply 	refuse
to 	honor 	the 	guarantee. 	Credi~ 	repair .organi%ations 	have 	ca~~ed
economic 	injury 	to 	c:.di~ our9a~s ~~ 	~ell as 	to 	consu~ers oy 	~.
generating 	large 	nu~~ers of 	3roundless 	dis~utes that 	cred~t bureaus
~ust ~rocess. 	To 	th~·ex~ent 	th~t 	a 	~redi~ 	repair. ~r9ani%ation .
do~s 	succ~9d 	in 	dal~eing accur~te ~dv~rse 	inf~rmation from 	a 	.
con~umer's 	credie 	~ist~ry, cr~di;~rs are 	de?rived 	of 	informatio~
t~at ~ight 	o~herwise have 	~een a 	~eci3ive 	eactor 	in 	the 	c:edit-
~rantin9 decision. 	Creditors 	~ave 	~x?ressed concern 	to 	the
Commission 	that 	dQletio~ of 	accurate 	information 	may 	result 	in
incr~a~e~ landing 	ri~k. 	. 	.
'!'he 	COInmiss ion I s 	:sta f f 	belie '/~s 	tha t 	:3. 	subs tan t i~l 	segmen ~
~f 	the 	cr4dit 	repair 	industry 	~:esently angage~ 	in 	practices 	that
injure 	~oth 	ehe 	gener3l 	public 	and 	individual 	eonsu~~rs. 	Wheeh~r
2. 	C:~dit: 	o'J'C'eaua 	a:e' 	req\1ireQ 	by 	Sec-:.ion 	6ll 	of 	the 	E"crv-. 	co
reinves~i:a~e ~iseuted i~for~aticn withi~ a 	~eaaonable 	oarioa 	of	~ 	. 	.~i~e 	and 	~Q 	dele~e 	info:mation 	tha: 	~heY 	ca~~o~ v~rifY. 	A cr~di:	.. 	..
:u:e.~ 	may 	~eleca 	ac~urace 	info:m~tic~ 	E:e~ 	a 	c~ns~mer'~ 	c:ed~t
bureau 	re~ort oecause, 	for 	exa:.?le, 	i: 	is 	cverwhelmed 	cy 	dts?u~es
gene:a~3d by 	credit 	re~ait orsanizations 	or 	because 	c:e~i:=~s
fail 	to 	respond 	prom9~ly ~o 	veri:ic3~icn :eq~est~.

•"The- HQnoracl~ 	~rank 	~nnuniio 	'-- 	~a;~ 	~
the 	potential 	scope 	of 	this 	~roblem justifies 	enactment 	~e
fede:al 	le91s1~t1on i~ 	an 	ig~~e 	fo: 	C=r~=as3 ~~ decide. 	~s 	the
~rimarv law 	enforcement 	aqency, 	however, 	the 	Commission 	believes
thAt 	it 	has 	a 	~nique 	gersp~c~ive 	to 	contribu~a if 	Congress
c~c~~es ~= 	enac~ 	s~~h 	le9Lslatlc~. 	In 	our 	view, 	the 	p:oposed
legislation 	would 	be 	strengthened 	by 	changing 	its 	focus
sQmewhat:..
H.R. 	4Sa 	would 	i~~cs$ a 	bending 	req~i:~rnen~ on 	c:~~1t ~Qpai:
otganizatiens. 	It 	also 	woul: 	~rov~~e c:ns~me=s '~ith 	the 	:ight 	t?
sue 	and 	to 	obtain 	payment 	from 	a 	su:e~y 	when 	a 	c:ed1t 	:epai:
oraani~atiQn violaces 	the 	te:~s c: 	:hs 	st~t~t~. 	T~e C=~~issicr.
~pposes 	~his 	approach 	~ecause ~e 	have 	serious 	r~servatlons about
hew 	well 	it 	would 	work 	in 	ptac~ics. 	The 	way 	that 	the 	bond 	1s
intenaed 	to 	function 	is 	far 	:=c~ cl~ar. 	!~ 	add!ticn~ administra-
tion 	o~ 	a 	bondin~ 	requi:9ment 	involves 	ov.rsight 	and 	enforcement
r~s90nsibilities tna~ are 	cat:a: 	~~~a=:akan by 	the 	states 	t~an
the 	~ederal government, 	in 	our 	view.
From 	~he 	~ers?ectiv~ of 	public 	law 	enforcement, 	~he Commis-
sion 	believes 	that 	requiring 	disclosures 	about 	the 	~CRA's 	limL~ed
basis 	for 	changing 	ctedit 	reports 	\oIoul.j 	protect 	cons·~=:lers :nor e·"
si~?ly 	and 	effec~ively. 	Their 	~i~ht to 	sue. a 	c:edit 	re~air
organization 	that 	enga~es in 	decepti~n should 	also 	b~ 	dizclosed.
Moreov~r, 	al~housh we 	believe 	that 	the 	pro~osed privat~ ~ight of
action 	for 	consumers 	may 	aid 	in 	~nfotcin9 the 	law, 	we 	think "that
enforcement 	of 	~he Credit 	~ep~ir ~rganizations ~ct 	~ould be
enhanced 	considerably 	if 	Congress 	we:~ 	to 	~rant 	the 	Commission
authority 	to 	seek 	civil 	penalties 	for 	violations 	of 	its 	provi-
s iQns. 	The 	ensuing 	comment~ discuss 	t11ese 	issues 	in 	more
detail. 	They 	31so 	sugge~t natrowing 	the 	definition 	of 	a 	~r~dit
repair 	organization 	an~ 	eli~iriating one 	of 	$~ction 404's
ptchibited 	?ractices.
~isclo~ur~ ~eauir~ments: Section 	405
The 	Commission 	suppor tsti1e 	incll.:s ion 	of 	ef =ect:: i \7~ 	d isclosu: ~
:e~~i:emer.ts in 	this 	legislation. 	Oespite 	educatiqnal 	efforts,
3 ~lt~o~sh 	we 	a:~ 	a~a:e 	~~ 	a 	fe~ 	large 	cre~i~ :epa!r 	organiza-
~ions, 	a 	gr~at 	many 	o~~ers 	a~?ea= 	t~ 	oe 	!~all 	an~ 	:el~:ively
"n~-a~'a 	··a 	ha"e 	~~ 	-as~~ 	c __ 	.~.·~a-:~~ .~a 	-"-~e~ ~.	-. 	w~_ • 	.,,~ 	• 	.., 	.., 	.. ~ 	• ..". 	--_4....•..':' 	6.1 __ 	....,_
C~S~Q~e~s t~ey e~::e~::l ~:~=act C~ 	oredic~i~~ whe~he: thai:
cli:n~ele may·di~in!~b in 	tbe 	nea~ 	~~~~e 	as 	i 	:esult 	of 	consumQr
education 	and 	unfavc:able 	publicity.

•The 	nonor.ble 	Fean~ 	~nnun~io
many 	consum.~. continue 	to 	be 	unaware 	of 	the 	fCRAts 	rulea 	90vern-
inC] 	the 	reporting 	o~ 	in:o:::nat:ion 	by 	c::adit: 	cct~aus. 	~s 	a. 	res1.:l~,
these 	consumers 	ate 	easily misled 	by 	credit 	repair 	organizations
that 	o~fer 	to 	re~~i= 	:: 	improve 	their 	c:edithistorles. 	Requir-
l~S 	~=3di: ==pa!: 	c:;~~i:~~ion~ ~o disclos9 	information 	aboue 	t~o
FCRA 	prior 	to 	execution 	of 	a 	sales 	contract 	should 	reQuce 	their
ability 	to 	misrepres~nt what 	the 	creal: 	repair 	process 	is 	11k~ly
to 	achiave. 	The 	Co=mi~~icn believe~ t~at 	~he 	fccus 	of 	~~a c~s
~lQsur.s required 	unciar 	Section 	40S(b) 	0: 	the 	~:cposed legisla-
t:i~n should 	!:a 	shi!e~d, 	however. 	Sec~ion 405(c} (1) 	requires 	a-
credit 	repair 	organization, 	prior 	to 	ehe 	~xe~u~ion of 	a 	cont,ac~,
to 	disclose 	to 	consumers 	their 	righ~ to 	raview 	their 	vwn 	c:adi:
files 	.and 	to 	dispute 	the 	completeness 	or 	accur3cy 	of 	intQtma~ion
~ontained the~ein. 	~he 	~f:ect of 	this 	section 	is 	to 	bar 	a 	credit
repair 	or~anization that 	only 	sells 	information 	acc~: cons~~e:~1
~iahts to 	correct 	Lnfcr~a~ion conce~ninc thei: 	c::d1~ rgcord,
cr;dit 	history, 	or 	credit 	rating 	from 	ch~r9ing a 	fe~ 	for 	~a~i~s
this 	information 	available 	to 	cQn~umers.~ 	There 	is 	no 	a??a:an~
reason 	for 	a 	prQh1bi~io~ 0: 	this 	sort. 	Other 	businesse~ and 	pro-
:assions 	routin~ly ch~r3e for 	the 	disclosure 	of 	information 	a~out
rights 	and 	opportunities 	provided 	by 	law; 	inde~d, 	this 	is 	a 	ka~
com~on~nt 	in 	the 	provi3ion 	o~ 	~any profe$sional 	ser~ices. 	.
•- 	-, 	..
r-1oreover, 	the 	disclosures 	required 	by 	S~c~ion 405 (0) (1) 	Qr}
not 	~ddrQss ~hat appears 	to 	be 	the 	principal 	cause 	of 	injury 	to
~onsumers in 	their 	dealings 	~ith crgdit 	~epair organizations.
Injury 	does 	not 	arise 	bec~use credit 	repair 	organizations, 	for 	a
fee, 	Gx~ccise :ights 	t~at consume:s 	could 	Qxeccise 	~hemselv~s at
little 	or 	no cost. 	·tnstead, 	consumers 	are 	injured 	when 	they 	?ay
money 	to 	an 	oeganization 	to 	do 	something 	that 	neither 	that
or9anization 	nor 	they 	themselves 	can 	accompli~h. 	We 	t~ink 	that
disclosures 	explaining 	instead 	the 	limited 	circumstances 	under
~hlch credit 	history 	information 	must 	be 	alt~red by 	c~edit
b~rea~s wc~ld 	~~c~i:e cc~s~me:S ~ith an 	infor~ed basis 	fer 	~valu-	..atin9 	a 	c:edit 	repair 	~rsanizationls ~laims and 	that 	this 	is
their 	best 	protec~ion. 	It 	may 	also 	:e 	worthwhile 	to 	requite
dis~losures that 	consu=ers 	may 	sue 	a 	~:edit 	rep~ir 	crganization
~~ 	it 	engages 	in 	decep~:cn and 	that 	they 	may 	rescind 	any 	contract
within 	three 	days 	of 	signing 	it. 	Finally, 	w~ 	thin~ 	it 	WQulQ 	be
hel?f~l to 	identify 	the 	~eca:al ~:ad~ CQ~~i5Sion as 	the 	relevanc
'a'_1 	-n.co"c 	m 	: 	'--" 	,..- 	- 	;.. 	("'" 	~";o 	'" 	;~.	... 	..,., 	_... 	... 	e u"".... 	a 	n o.r .. '" l' I 	5 ~ 	,..... 	• _ •• S "'Me • S 	w__ •• 	• ... e ~ ... 	n.. 	w ~ _ J.
~nQW 	whom 	to 	CO~~acc.
Jl
.. 	o~ 	cO" .. s 	t ..... $ 	c ....... -e ..... 	:s 	'ass 	S:_ ... tlt:l ca 	"0 	c-ec·;" 	...._c."~~	... 	.. 	, 	.,. 	...,~ ..... 	•• ~... 	.":"._. 	,. 	__ 	I. 	lW __
c:;a~i:ations t~at 	also 	~~~ 	se:~icas for 	the 	ouroose 	of 	improv-
in9 	a 	consume.r1s 	crsdit 	recore, 	c:~ci: his:ory: 	or 	credit 	rating.

•~he 	Ecnc=~ble 	Fran~ 	~nnun:io
~h~re 	a:. 	~'-O ~ddi~ic~al sets 	of 	olscloaures 	thae 	S~c~ion
405 	presently 	rqquiroes. 	S~ceion 405(0) (2) 	requireg 	a 	complete
and 	detailed 	disclosure 	of 	the 	~ervices to 	be 	Fer!or~ed an~ 	t~e
total 	amount 	to 	be 	~aid 	fe: 	the~e 	services, 	disclosures 	which~re
duplicated 	in 	Section 	406 	governing 	the 	content 	oE 	ccn~:ac:s. 	w~
question 	thQ 	utility 	of 	requi:ing 	a 	detailed 	dQscr1?tion 	of
~.cvicas ~~ 	~e 	~e:~orm~d. 	~ven 	a 	minu~ely 	de~ailed'desc:iption
could 	~asily avoid 	conveyi~g claar 	and 	definitive 	information
a!:out 	what: 	\lIi~1 	:e 	c:ne 	!.~ the 	C3se 	of 	an 	individual 	coneume~. 	. ..
SQctitjn 	405(=) (J) 	rsq!.::':as 	disclos\.:re 	c~ 	the 	consumer's 	right; 	to
~:ec&ed .a~ain.st. a 	bend a~d 	iden-:i!ies'tha 	surety. 	Ineo:'~ation
about 	the 	right 	~o 	p~oceed against 	a 	bond 	clearly 	wo~:d ~e
significant: 	to 	consumerS 	if 	Congress .should 	decide 	to 	retain 	th~
~cnd 	:a~ui:~ment. 	~owever, 	for 	reasons 	discussed 	in 	:~e 	en~~ing
~eceion, we 	do 	not 	endor2e 	a 	bon~ 	requirement.
We 	sU9~es: 	thac, 	t~ 	oe 	~ost 	effectiv~, 	any 	=eq~i:~d
d1sclosur~s be 	conveyed 	on 	~ 	separate 	sheet 	of 	pap~r, 	in 	simple,
non-technical 	language, 	~efore the 	consu~er 31gn8 	a 	cont:~ct 	or
the 	credit 	repair 	or~ani%ation receives~ny payment. 	So 	as 	to
~void 	possible 	obf~scat:i~n, \oIe 	:ecommend 	that:. 	c:editi 	repai: 	~"
or9anizations 	be 	required 	tp 	follow 	language 	~h~t 	13 	identical 	or
subseant:.ially 	simil~r to 	model 	language 	proposed 	by 	Congrass.
~or 	example, 	the 	r~qui:ed diaclosure 	might 	begin 	with 	~
warning 	not 	to 	sign 	a 	cont:act 	~r 	pay 	~oney 	for 	crp.dit 	r~pair
~ervlces before 	readin~ t~e 	notic~. 	It 	might 	then 	state:
1. 	~ou 	have 	no 	le1a1 	right 	to 	have 	accurate
information 	removed 	from 	your 	c:edit 	bureau
r~~ort. 	Under 	t~e 	Fair 	:redit 	~e~ortin9 Ac~,
th~ 	credit 	bureau 	must 	remove 	accur3te 	negaeiv~
information 	fr~m your 	re~ort only 	if 	it 	is 	OVer
7 	1ears 	old. 	aankruptcy 	can 	be 	re~or~ed 	for 	10
years. 	~ven when 	a 	debe 	has 	been 	completely
~epaid, 	your 	re~ort can 	show 	that 	it 	was 	paid
late 	if 	~hat 	is 	accurate. 	.
~. 	YQ~ 	have 	th~ 	,ig~~ 	:~ 	~~a 	a 	c=e~it 	repair 	Ot
c:adi~ 	i~e=ove=en~ com=anv 	~~~t 	violates 	the
C:en1t 	Recair 	Oroanizaeio~s Ac~. 	~his 	law	. 	..
p::hi~its 	decypt1v~ 	~raccices 	~y 	credit 	repai=
cc~?anie5.
3. 	~~a C:edi: 	~eeai: O:=ani:a~io~s Act 	zlso 	9ives
1c~ 	t~Q 	righc·t~ can~el your 	cont:act 	for 	any
reason 	within 	3 worki:1g 	cays 	f:oln 	the 	cace 	~oiJ.
sign 	it. 	~.
'.. \r

..
. "rhe 	iiono~able 	Frank 	.\~nun·~io 	••
4. 	The 	Federal 	Trade 	Commission 	enforces 	these
federal 	laws. 	=ormore 	infor~a~ion, call 	or
'toIr1~e:
oivision 	of 	Cred!~ ?ractice~
Federal 	Trade 	Commission
Washington, 	D.C. 	20SSa
(:02) 	J:5-~~1S
~or 	enforcement 	purposes, 	each 	disclosu:~ ~tat~ment should
be 	~i;~ec by 	the 	CC~Swllier as 	an 	ackncwled;emen~ of 	having 	read 	i~
before 	eneerinq 	into 	the 	contract. 	~he 	consumer's 	name, 	address,
and 	eelephone 	number 	should 	be 	included, 	as 	should 	the 	sales
agen~'s si;na:~:a and 	t~e 	com~anyfs name, 	address, 	and 	telephone
number. 	The 	stateme~t sh~uld be 	signed 	in 	duplic~te, ~o 	:ha~ 	t~e
~:ns~~er may 	retain 	one 	copy 	and 	the 	credic 	re9air 	~rqanization
~a1 	:etain 	the 	other 	for 	the 	~wo-year period 	th~t, 	we 	assu~e,
Section 	40S{c) 	would 	re~uire.
-..
. We 	believe 	that 	thesQ 	disclosures 	would 	effect~ve11 warn
consumers 	against 	contracting 	~it~ cr~dit 	cep~ir organizations ..
whose 	business~s are 	based 	90' 	explicit 	or 	Lnplicie 	misrepresenta-
tions 	of 	what 	ehe 	law 	per~it3. 	no~ev~~, 	these 	disclosures 	should
~ot 	~dversell affece 	tae 	ac~iviti~s of 	cr~dit 	tmprove~enc coun-
selors 	who 	do 	not 	rely 	on 	consu~ers' 	ignorance 	of 	the 	credit
reporting 	laws 	or 	otherwise 	att~~pc to 	mislead 	them.
aonding 	rteauirements: 	Sec~ion 404(a)
~he 	proposed 	le9islation 	requires 	a 	creoie 	repair 	organiza-
tion 	to 	Obtain 	a 	$50,000 	surety 	bond 	if 	it 	wishes 	to 	obtain
?~ymen~ for 	~ervices in 	advance 	of 	perfor~ance. 	~ 	surety 	is 	a
thir~-?arty 	guaraneor 	who 	promises 	to 	pay 	i~ 	t~e 	principal 	does
not 	and 	requi:e~ a 	percentage 	oE 	the 	bond 	amount 	for 	providing
this 	assurance. 	The 	percentaqe 	is 	often 	small 	because 	t~e
:s It 	would 	facilitate
~vicence that~a c:ecii:
~eM~~a--2-2 c-~~1~a~-4	.............,,, •.- .... -.. '-'- 	""';i""r-" 	•• ~-
l1:aa::ar 	d~t:ail.
eoth 	complianc~ and 	enEor:emen: 	i~ 	the
:e~~i: organiza:icn 	shculd 	ret~in 	to
unce: 	Section 	405(c) 	we:e 	set 	forth 	in
6 	~e 	~sst:me 	that. 	inde~~~i~i=.!.:icn of 	this 	so:~ 	is 	wna: 	the
~e~~31a~ion i; 	in:e~:e~ ~= 	==~duce. 	:: 	is 	e~: 	uncers~anding
that 	~~ee? 	a~r~~~en~ take·~any dif~~~e~~ ~o~~s, 	hcweve~, 	a~d
are 	designed 	to 	aChieva 	many 	diff~rent 	pu~poses. 	.~
'''Il-

..	. 	.
•	The 	Honorable 	Frank 	Annun:io
I..
..
surety 	tetains 	the 	right 	to 	recever 	ene 	amoun~ paid 	f::~ 	~~e
p:inci~al. 	!n 	erder 	to 	obtain 	a 	bond 	a 	company 	must 	persuade 	~he
surety 	~hat 	ltis 	a 	sood 	risk. 	:~ 	~he 	ease 	of 	a 	credit 	repair
organi:ation, 	we 	Qss~~e 	~~a; 	a 	~u:~tl 	~c~ld 	~an~ 	somo 	assurance
~ha~ 	the 	e:gani~ation's practices 	will 	conform 	to 	th~ 	law 	and
that, 	as 	a 	result, 	the 	organization 	is 	not 	likely 	to 	be 	held
liable 	for 	violaein9 	the 	law. 	?:ior 	business 	expeiiencas, 	b~s~
n.ss 	and 	personal 	credit 	history, 	income, 	aSSetS, 	ana 	ctn~r
t~::Hcia of 	raliability 	may 	be 	factors 	in 	deter:':\ining 	whethe: 	an"
or~anization 	is 	able 	to 	Obtain 	a 	bond. 	A business 	that 	do~~ 	not
appear 	to 	be 	sUfficienely 	tis~-f:ee otdinarily 	wc~l~ ca 	:~q~i:ed
by ~he 	suraty 	to 	9ut 	up 	collaceral 	corresponding 	to 	the 	amount 	of
the 	bond. 	Under 	che 	~roposed legislation, 	a 	com9any 	that 	~annot
or 	does 	noe 	wish 	to 	~btain a 	~uret¥ 	cend 	is 	no; 	ca::ad 	~:=m 	t~;
c:~di: 	re~ai: business. 	Althcugh 	it 	woulc 	be 	p:ohibited 	from
:.~a~~i~; ~3~S p:ior 	to 	~erfor~ing the 	services 	ie 	sold, 	i~ 	cou~=
obligate 	consumers 	in 	advance 	to 	pay 	Eor 	ae~vices upon 	co~?le:icn
of 	performance.
The 	purpose 	of 	the 	pro~osed bond 	requirement, 	~~ 	assume, 	is
to 	~ake 	funds 	available 	for 	~he 	paymene 	of 	consumers,' 	claima_
.The 	Commis.sion 	is 	concerned 	that 	it:. 	may 	not:. 	serve 	1:his 	purpose 	~n
~ractice, 	howQver. 	Susinesses 	that 	arQ 	engaged 	in.delibecat~
consur.ter 	fraud 	may 	well' ignore 	the 	bonding 	,~qui~ !ment. 	"'lor 13-
over, 	the 	requirement 	:nay 	:e 	too 	a;norphous 	to 	achieve 	its
int~nded purpose. 	Tbe 	lp.gislation 	does 	not 	outline 	in 	any 	detail
how 	th~ 	bond 	is 	to 	func~ion or 	wha 	is 	to 	administer 	payments 	from
it. 	It 	do~s not 	9xplain 	whae 	?rocedure~ are 	to 	be 	foll~weQ 	in
t~e 	~vent of 	competing 	clai;ns 	t~at exceed 	the 	bond 	amount 	or
~hether 	the 	bond 	amount 	~f 	$50,000 	must 	be 	continuously 	main-
tained. 	It 	is 	noe 	clear 	fro:nthe 	statutory 	language 	whether 	an
organi:ation 	that 	Joes 	=usiness 	in 	more 	than 	one 	state 	~us~
pro~ide 	for 	a 	$SO,CCC 	=cnci 	in 	~a=h s~a~~ or 	wheth~r, al~erna
tiv~ly, 	a 	single 	~50,OOO bond 	iSSUQd 	by 	a 	suret~ 	licensed 	to 	co
business 	in 	each 	of 	those 	~tate~ would 	~uffice. 	It 	also 	is
uncl~ar whee~er residents 	of 	one 	st~ee ~ay make 	claims 	against 	~
bond 	iss~ed 	in 	anct~e: 5t~te 	~h~~ 	~he 	bond 	funds 	in 	th~ir 	state
o~ 	residen~e have 	been 	~aid oue. 	~or 	is 	it 	clear 	~hethQ' con-
$~mQrs are 	intenced 	;0 	~a~e 	the 	su:e~y as 	a 	defendant 	in 	an
..,.
i Credie 	repair 	or9anizations 	va:y 	consice:a:ly 	in 	o:a:a~ional
.!:':uc:'~:a 	<==anch!.sas 	~re 	:ec;~:'~e r:-.o'e 	c~~on) I 	si%fJ, 	3.~~
business 	volume. 	If 	Cons:es~ :h~~ld decide 	to 	include 	a 	bond
requirem~nt in 	this 	legislation, 	we 	suggest 	that 	i~ 	examine 	ways
to 	lini< 	the 	valUE! 	and 	numcer 	of 	bonds· 	required 	to-variables. such
as 	t~ese. 	;.. \jo

. 	- .
Tn. 	iignQ,~~.e 	i":.n~ 	;'~~a;,::!.o·
4~tlon 	0: 	~o 	seek 	payment 	~rom 	the 	sur~ty only 	if 	conv~ntional
efforts 	eo 	satisfy 	s 	~~~=e~: 	~:~m 	th~ 	ctedit 	re9air 	~rgani%ation
have 	been 	exhaust9d.
:!.n~ur~rs wh-o 	lsaua 	:iu:a:y 	bends, 	such 	as 	9o'lernmen~ per:orm-
ance 	bonds 	0: ·inQQmnity 	guarantees, 	may 	well 	be 	reluceanc 	to
i~=ue any 	bond 	pursuan: 	to 	this 	le9 i s1ation, 	re9ardless 	~f 	t~e
cha:ac~.: of 	the 	e:~d~: ~~~air organization 	at 	issue. 	Sureties
orcina:ily 	want 	to 	knc~ ~~~t 	their 	~c1igations and 	li~bilities
.:e 	fixed 	and 	olear 	~e~c:a agre~i~7 t~ 	act 	in 	this 	ca9acity.
Under 	th. 	law 	as 	?resen:ll 	~:attad, 	t~w 	i~ 	any 	ir.su~e:~ m~y e$
wi.lling 	to 	ac: 	aa. sl.::~~ies for 	c:e~i~ rapai: 	o:~~r.iz.!.tions. 	Ellen
if 	the 	bonding 	requiremen~ a~J 	consumers' 	access 	~o 	i: 	~ere
spelled 	out 	in 	more 	decail, 	however, 	we 	are 	not 	persuaded 	that 	it
~houlQ ~. 	in~l~dad 	i~ 	~ac.:a~ le~isl~~i~~. 	Th~ 	eauitab1e 	dis-
t:ibution 	of 	bond 	funds 	may 	be 	difficult 	or 	impossible 	without
the 	in~ecv~ncion of 	a 	d~si~:~:es~a~ 	:~i:: 	pa'~YI 	suc~ 	as 	a 	s~a~e
administrative 	agQncy. 	c~ 	oalan~e, 	th~ 	Cc~~issic~ belia~Qs t~a~
the 	bonding 	of 	credit 	r~pair organizations 	should 	be 	l~ft 	to 	t~e
state~ 	to 	legi3late 	and 	administer. --.
Enforcement: 	$ections 	~09 	and 	411
. 	. 	.
Se~tion 	409 	of 	the 	~ct 	~covides consumecs 	wi~h 	the 	right 	to·
sue 	fa: 	a 	viola:ion 	of 	any 	~f 	its 	provisions. 	It 	provides 	Eor
actual 	damages, 	additional 	damages, 	costs 	of 	bringing 	the 	action,
and 	attorney'3 	~ees. 	ay 	@covi.dilV,. consumers 	with 	a 	mechanism 	for
racovering, 	at 	a 	minimum, 	the 	fees 	paid 	to 	a 	'lio1ativ'3 	organiza-
tion, 	thi3 	right 	of 	~rivate action 	should 	help 	to 	~ake 	the
statute 	~elf-enforcin9.
None~heless, the 	Commission 	believes 	that 	enforcement 	of
any 	credit 	repair 	organization 	legislation 	Congress 	mig~t enact
would 	be 	strQngthened 	considerably 	if 	Congress 	~ere 	to 	grant 	the
commissionacillil 	penalty 	~nlorcement authori~y for 	violacions 	of
its 	te:ms. 	~t 	~resent, Section 	411 	of 	the 	proposed 	legisla~ion
'.~
8 Congress 	ty?ically 	ac~o:cs 	the 	Commission 	civi: 	~enalty
authority 	by 	autho:i.in~ en:;:ce~e~t of 	statutory 	'liolations 	as
i~ 	t~ey w.~e 	viola:icns 	0: 	a 	Commission 	t:aCQ 	reg~~a~ion rule,
L"!., 	t:::o:.:gh 	Sec";~cn 5{:n} (l) (A) 	c! 	~he 	Fecet'al 	T=ade 	Commission
AC~, 	which 	empowers 	tne 	Cc~~i~sion :0 	~e~~ 	c~vil eenalties. 	See
Sec";ion 	704(c) 	of 	the 	tqua1 	Creal: 	Oppor~uni:y Ac~, 	15 	o.~.c.--
5 	l6~lc~ 	Sec:ion 	814(a) 	of 	the 	rai: 	Oebt 	Collection 	Prac~ices
Act, 	lS 	u.s.c. 	5 	16921.. 	~
"'c-

· .	HQ~o=:a=.!.e 	~age 	9
acco:~ 	o~1 	a~~is~:ative 	enforcement 	authority 	to 	tnG 	Commis-
sion. 	I~ 	provides 	tnae 	a 	violation 	of 	its 	terms 	con~titute~ an
unfair 	c: 	d8c~ptive act 	or 	?ractic~ in 	violation 	oe 	Section 	5(a)
ot 	ths 	Feda:al 	Trade 	Commission 	~c~ 	and 	is 	enfocce~ble throuah
the 	Commission's 	administrative 	adjudication 	procedures 	under
Section 	S(b). 	The 	Commission 	currently 	possesses 	Secti~n 5
enforcement 	&utho:ltv 	over 	c:edlt 	repair 	organizations. 	Thus,
as 	?roposed, 	the 	~rant of 	aut~ority to 	enforce 	thecreQit 	repaic
stat~ta wc~ld not 	exeand 	the 	Commission's 	cowers, 	althouQh 	the
a~~irm4t1v~ require~;n:3 of 	the 	law 	would 	;i~pllfy en~Q:~em~n: to
some 	e ... tent.
ay 	including 	civil 	penalty 	authority 	in 	~he 	Act, 	Congre~s
~culd ac~~:d ~he Co~mis9ion greater 	flexibility 	in 	selecting 	.
enforcement 	alternatives 	and 	would 	also, 	~e 	believ., 	promote 	~ote
~igorous enfoccement. 	ra~~icularly in 	casas 	~~vo~~ing celi=e=a:~
-raud 	t· i"I~ ~"".w~r 	to 	-.",c.. : -~ 	--,.!'"./ 	-'" 	~'--.... , .... 	~ 	~ ... f"\#~ ....	.l. 	, 	•• - 	/:_"'"'_ 	" 	'--·-rg,·~_ 	"" 	0-:7...., 	':t~ 	.;;a 	~ • ..", ••• -
through 	imposition 	of 	a 	civil 	fin!O~ay be 	the 	on~y way 	to 	adcress
adequately 	the 	viola~ive conduct. 	Bec~use civil 	penalty
actions 	are 	brought 	and 	cesolved 	1n 	federal 	court, 	the·final·
order 	-- 	whether 	it 	involves 	injunctive 	:~lief, 	a 	clvil 	fin~.. oc
more 	-- 	is 	directly 	entocceable 	by 	the 	court. 	~he' contempt
powers 	available 	to 	the 	court 	are 	a 	~ote·nt 	tool 	if 	compliance
E':obll!ms 	arise.
Preced __ nt 	exists 	in 	the 	federal 	consumer 	c~Qdi~ proe~cti~n
field 	eor 	establishinq 	a 	range 	of 	enfo:c~men~ ~echanisms.
Congress 	has 	accorded 	the 	Commission 	the 	authori~y to 	seek 	civil
~enalties Eor 	violations 	of 	the 	~qual Credit 	Opportunity 	Act 	~nd
the 	Fair 	Oebt 	Callection 	Practices 	~ct 	under 'sections 	providing
for 	administrative 	enforcement. 	Other 	~e~tions of 	these 	statutes
~rovide 	for 	the 	imposition 	of 	civil 	liability 	by 	authori%ing
consumers 	to 	bring 	private 	damage 	suies. 	The 	Commission's
enforcement 	~xperienc& ~ith 	chese 	laws 	indica~es ~h4t different
enforcement 	a~proacneg can 	serve 	JiEf~rent but 	often 	comrleme~
t~ry enforcement 	goals. 	As 	a 	cesult, 	we 	believe 	that 	allowing
the 	CommiSSion 	to 	seek 	civil 	penal:ies 	fot 	violations 	of 	this 	~c:
would 	assist 	en:o~c~~~nt ~ffocts .
footnote 	1 	above 	yas9 T~e 	enE::cernent 	ac~ivi:y referred 	to 	i~
based 	on 	t~at Section 	5 	autho:itv •	..
lO ~he 	credit 	repair 	business 	is 	often 	a 	transient 	one. 	nhen 	a
company 	moves 	from 	seate 	to 	staee, 	ehe 	likelihood 	~hat 	individual
consu~ers ~r 	local 	la~ 	enforcement 	authori;ies 	will 	succeed 	in
bringing 	an 	ac~ion 	a9~inst 	it 	is 	sUbstantiallv 	r~ced.	.. 	'It'
• 1
I

'.
..
:':3:,\1< 	.\~l'\u!'\zio 	Paq8 	10
C2 ..... ~l!-.. 	~"'"	
-~-rl '- - 	-- 	S~ction 403(dl
The 	d8~initicn o~ 	a 	c:edit 	repair 	organi:aticn 	in 	Sec~ion
403(0), 	like 	~Qst ~f 	the 	provisions 	of 	the 	propo~Qd legislation,
tocuses 	on 	businesses 	selling 	credie 	re~air or 	~:eci: 	~~~:~~e~8~~
services, 	i.~., 	services 	to 	remove 	ad~e:se 	information 	from 	con-
2umers' 	~:edit bureau 	~~?Or~s. 	The 	definition 	of 	a 	credit 	repair
c=9&ni%a~ion appears 	~o 	be 	~aedless11 broad, 	heweva:. 	:~
includes 	.n~i~ie9 that, 	for 	a 	fee, 	provide 	~Qrvices for 	the
~urpos. of 	·obtaining 	an 	ex~~ns~cn 0: 	c~nsume' 	c=edi~ 	~or 	a
consumer ••••~ 	~~~s 	:e~in1~ion would 	include, 	for 	examole,
·au~omatQd mortgage 	loan 	~hc~~i~~ services 	and 	ot~e: 	busi~9sses
that 	sell 	information 	about 	currently 	a~ailable ter~a and 	condi-
ticns 	o~ 	c~~di~. 	~uch businesses 	can 	?rovide 	an 	i~F~:tQ~t con-
sumer 	service 	in 	a 	e:eci~-otiented 	economy 	and 	should 	not 	be
~ubj~c~ed 	to 	eegul~tion i~ 	the 	absence 	0: 	evidenca 	~~at 	~~ey
,..3.'.2 .... CO"'SU1"er 	~"'':''''''I 	""a"' .. ".......... "'c---e,.....a 	~Iot~~ 	.. h 	..:I-fin 1 -	___ .. 'to; 	£4 	..aJ\,.6..... 	_' 	Q 	.. q 	.,.. 	a.. 	...
tion 	of 	a 	credit 	reoair 	~rgani~ation be 	revised 	to 	gliminate
reference 	to 	tbos~ ~ho 	assist 	in 	obtaining 	credit 	extensions 	for
consu~ers. 	tndi?idual 	bu~inesses that '~ake 	false 	clai~s about
their 	ability 	to 	obtain 	credit 	for 	consu~e,~ are, 	we 	~el1ev~~
~ettar 	dealt 	~ith on 	a 	case-by-case 	basi~ 	~nder 	Sec~~Qn S of 	the
Federal 	~rade Commission 	~ct 	or 	similar 	~~~te consumer 	protection
laws.
We 	note 	that 	the 	proposed 	l~gislaticn pre~ently exempts 	a
number 	~f 	ingtitutions 	and 	proEessions 	from 	the 	definition 	of 	a
credit 	re~air ~rgani%ation. 	Deposi~~,y institutions, 	rgal 	~stat~
brokers, 	and 	bro~er-dealers appear 	to 	ba 	exem@ted 	becaus~, 	in 	the
ordinary course 	of 	business, 	they 	~ay 	assis~ cons~m.rs in 	obtain-
ing 	c=edit. 	If 	Congress 	acopts 	~he 	fore~oing reco~~enJation to
r~define 3 	c=edi~ 	repair 	~rganiz3tion, these 	exem~tions may 	be
unnecessary. 	The 	Commission 	is 	no~ 	aware 	that 	sucn 	en~i~i~s
ordin3rily 	sell 	services 	to 	consu~ers 	Eor 	the 	pur?Os~ of 	im~rov
ing 	their 	c~edie bureau 	repor:s. 	We 	suggest 	that 	the 	exem~tio~s
for 	consumer 	,epor~in9 agencies 	and 	debt 	collec~ors be 	eli~inatgd
a3 	well. 	Neither 	of 	these 	entities 	advises 	of, assists 	consumers
i~ 	i~~:ovi~9 c=edi~ ~ureau ce~o,es for 	_ 	fae.·-
11 	When 	c=edit 	b~reaus 	remove 	neca:ive 	inEorma~ion that 	is
inacc~rate or 	obsolete 	they 	~ay 	i~~rove ~onsumersl credie
repo:ts. 	=eca~se 	:his 	is 	root 	a 	$er~ic~ 	th~~ 	c:9dit 	bureaus 	may
charge 	for 	but 	a 	right 	graneed 	to 	consumers 	by 	the 	=C~~, 	c:eci~
burea'JS 	would 	not 	fall 	within 	the 	definition 	of 	a 	c:edit 	t:"~pai~
organization. 	Services 	that 	c:edit 	oureaus 	ar~ 	permitted 	to
charge 	for 	a:e 	desc~ibed in 	Sec~ion 612 	of 	the 	FCRA_... co

?age 	11
Unde~ 	~his 	apptoach 	only 	two 	exem~tions remain 	-- 	non~rofi~
c:g~ni:aeiQna and 	a:~=;~eys. 	~on?rof1t organiza~ions, 3uch 	as
the 	consume~ c~edle counsaling'~Qcqices operated 	by 	the 	National
?c~~dation fo~ 	Con~umer Credit, 	someti~as charge 	a 	s~all 	f~e 	E~=
acvi=ing 	consumer~ about 	c:edit 	history 	problems. 	~ttorneys may
also 	advise 	or 	assist 	their 	clients 	concerning 	their 	ctedit
histories 	and 	~heir 	rights 	under 	the 	Fair 	C:edi~ Rercrting 	Act.
In 	the 	Ccmmission's 	~i.w 	it 	is 	preferable 	~o 	avoid 	e~emp-~
tiQns 	when 	?ossibl=. 	!xem?~:o~s ca~ 	c:eat~ ~nforcement 9aps.l~ 	_,
They 	givo 	a 	competitive 	advantage 	to 	one 	g:CU? 	or 	9rcfession 	ove~
anoth_:. 	Regulations 	necessarily 	impose 	so~e 	bu~dens on 	business
and, 	if 	regulaeion 	is 	nece3sary, 	the 	underlying 	rationale 	ordi-
narily 	should 	be 	equally 	app1ic~b1e to 	all 	industry 	members. 	We
sugges~ 	~~era~Qre 	t~a~ 	C=~g:~~s 	congider 	~hether 	~he 	definiti~n
of 	a 	c:~dit 	tapai: 	organization 	should 	prOVide 	for 	any 	~xempti~ns.
Par·.;cul 	ly 	i C M""e 	'-_ .. ~~-- 	.. cs,....,~ .........en· 	l .. 	~1 i ... ~ .. · .. ~~ 	a" 	"~e	•• 	.. 	'-~~ 	..,...."" ...... ., 	__ ~_4 __ :l~ 	... 	I.~ 	__ 	.u ..... Q, __ ~, 	004 	.....
Commiasion 	has 	pt'o?=~ed, complyinlJ 	..,i~h the 	a.~:~=;::ati·:E! !:'S!quirS!-
ma~ts of 	the 	Act 	should 	not 	bQ 	undUly 	oner~us.
~rohibited ?ractic2s: 	Se~tion 	40~(b)
-. ,
Sec~ion 	404(b) 	of 	the 	pro?osed 	le~i~lation prohibits
charging 	fees 	301ely 	foc 	r~f~tring a 	consu~er 	to 	a 	retail 	seller
who 	will 	or 	~ay make 	cr,9dit 	availabl~ to 	the 	consumQ~ ~n 	substan-
tially 	the 	sa~e 	terms 	as 	those 	3vailable 	to 	the 	general 	~ublic. '
If 	Congress 	r~vises the 	definiti~n of 	~ 	c:edit 	r~pair orsaniza-
~ion 	to 	exclude 	those 	who 	refer 	~onsumer3 to 	creditors 	for
?ossible 	~:edit extension, 	it 	may 	~ish 	to 	delete 	this 	~rovision
as 	well, 	~s 	it 	appears 	to 	be 	dir~ct~d ~t 	practices 	associat~d
with 	c=edit:., referral 	rather 	'than 	with 	c~edit 	re\;lair.
In 	any 	event, 	the 	Commiss~on questions 	~hether 	the 	~rI3~ice
~hat 	this 	sec~ion addresses 	necessarily 	injures 	consumers. 	I~,
through 	the 	assi~tance of 	a 	credit 	re~air ~tganization, a 	consu~~~
who 	cannot 	otherwise 	obtain 	c:edi~ 	is ,able 	to 	do 	so, 	the 	consumer
....
-- 	.	Fe: 	exam=le, 	the 	at:o~~ev-a:-law exem?~~~n ~c 	~he 	Fa~= 	Cebt
Collec;ic~ P:act~oes Act 	was·~~c~nel~ reoeale~ because 	it 	had
become 	a 	haven 	foe 	attorneys 	who 	pra~~ic~d 	deb~ 	collec~icn 	,at~e=
~han 	law.
13 ~o:eove" 	if 	;:lis 	?tactio; 	we:e 	inj~~io~3, t~e Commission 	is
no~ 	certain 	why 	the 	injury 	would 	atise 	only 	in 	connection 	wi:~
c=e~i; extended 	by 	retail 	sellers 	as 	opposed 	co 	other 	ca:agc~ies
of 	c:edi':.ors.

'.
.' .
•	The 	Honorable 	Frank 	Annun%io
may 	w.ll 	d••m this 	a 	sGtvice 	~~rth 	paying 	f~r. 	The 	critical
1sa~e, 	in 	ou~ 	vi~w, 	is 	root 	~hethee 	th~ 	c:ed!t 	to 	be 	?rovided 	is
~va1labl8 to 	others 	on 	the 	same 	terms 	or 	~ven on 	more 	~avo~able
~arms, 	but 	whe~her the 	CQnsu~er understancs 	"ha~ he 	or 	she 	is
paying 	fQ~. 	Wh.t~sr 	~he 	c:~~it 	is 	c~~e:ed on 	terms 	that 	are
cesi:3:le 	~: 	the 	consumer 	~ill depend 	on 	the 	!lnancial 	circum-
stan~~s ar.d 	options 	available 	~o 	~hat consumer.
~hank 	you 	agai~ 	for 	~clicit~n1 the 	Co~~isgion's views 	On 	the
C:e~i~ Repai= 	O=sani:ations 	Ac~. 	~e 	ho~e that 	these 	comments 	will
be 	usefuL 	in 	your 	deli~~r~tic~e.
31 	~i:e~~icn of 	th~ Commission,
~"~"IvOanil'!l Ol iv'er
Chairman
-...: .
....