Notice of Decision To Revise Method for Estimation of Monthly Labor Force Statistics for Certain Subnational Areas, 3564-3565 [05-1336]
Download as PDF
3564
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 25, 2005 / Notices
pending applications for renewal or
modification of the aforementioned
registration be, and hereby are, denied.
This order is effective February 24,
2005.
Dated: December 30, 2004.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05–1326 Filed 1–24–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–M
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
James E. Thomas, M.D., Revocation of
Registration
On April 29, 2004, the Deputy
Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA), issued an Order
to Show Cause to James E. Thomas,
M.D. (Dr. Thomas) of Troy, Alabama,
notifying him of an opportunity to show
cause as to why DEA should not revoke
his DEA Certificate of Registration
AT7586829, as a practitioner, under 21
U.S.C. 824(a)(3) and deny any pending
applications for renewal or modification
of that registration pursuant to 21 U.S.C.
823(f). As a basis for revocation, the
Order to Show Cause alleged that Dr.
Thomas is not currently authorized to
practice medicine or handle controlled
substances in Alabama, his State of
registration and practice. The Order to
Show Cause also notified Dr. Thomas
that should no request for a hearing be
filed within 30 days, his hearing right
would be deemed waived.
The Order to Show Cause was sent by
certified mail to Dr. Thomas at his
address of record at P.O. Drawer 947,
Suite 2, Highway 231, Troy, Alabama.
That correspondence was returned
marked ‘‘Not Deliverable as
Addressed—Unable to Forward.’’ It was
then determined the local DEA office
had sent three registered letters to Dr.
Thomas’ home and office addresses and
all had been returned marked
‘‘unforwardable.’’ Further, the State of
Alabama, Medical Licensure
Commission (Alabama Commission)
had tried to contact Dr. Thomas without
success. The Deputy Administrator
finds reasonable efforts to contact and
serve Dr. Thomas with the Order to
Show Cause have been made and DEA
has not received a request for hearing or
any other reply from Dr. Thomas or
anyone purporting to represent him in
this matter.
Therefore, the Deputy Administrator,
finding (1) 30 days have passed since
DEA’s attempt to serve the Order to
Show Cause at the registered location
VerDate jul<14>2003
13:14 Jan 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
and that good faith efforts to locate Dr.
Thomas have failed and (2) no request
for a hearing having been received,
concludes that Dr. Thomas is deemed to
have waived his hearing right, See
Steven A. Barnes, M.D., 69 FR 51,474
(2004); David W. Linder, 67 FR 12,579
(2002). After considering material from
the investigative file, the Deputy
Administrator now enters her final
order without a hearing pursuant to 21
CFR 1301.43(d) and (e) and 1301.46.
The Deputy Administrator finds Dr.
Thomas currently possesses DEA
Certificate of Registration AT7586829,
which expires on November 30, 2005.
The Deputy Administrator further finds
that on June 16, 2003, the Alabama
Commission issued an Order revoking
Dr. Thomas’ license to practice
medicine in Alabama. The suspension
was based upon findings of fact, inter
alia, that Dr. Thomas committed
professional misconduct and ‘‘is unable
to practice medicine with reasonable
skill and safety to patients by reason of
illness, inebriation, excessive use of
drugs, narcotics, alcohol, chemicals or
other substances * * * ’’
The investigative file contains no
evidence the Alabama Commission’s
Order has been stayed, modified or
terminated or that Dr. Thomas’ medical
license has been reinstated. Therefore,
the Deputy Administrator finds Dr.
Thomas is not currently authorized to
practice medicine in the State of
Alabama. As a result, it is reasonable to
infer he is also without authorization to
handle controlled substances in that
State.
DEA does not have statutory authority
under the Controlled Substances Act to
issue or maintain a registration if the
applicant or registrant is without State
authority to handle controlled
substances in the State in which he
conducts business. See 21 U.S.C.
802(21), 823(f) and 824(a)(3). This
prerequisite has been consistently
upheld. See Stephen J. Graham, M.D.,
69 FR 11,661 (2004); Dominick A. Ricci,
M.D., 58 FR 51,104 (1993); Bobby Watts,
M.D., 53 FR 11,919 (1988).
Here, it is clear Dr. Thomas’ medical
license has been revoked and he is not
currently licensed to handle controlled
substances in Alabama, where he is
registered with DEA. Therefore, he is
not entitled to a DEA registration in that
State.
Accordingly, the Deputy
Administrator of the Drug Enforcement
Administration, pursuant to the
authority vested in her by 21 U.S.C. 823
and 824 and 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104,
hereby orders that DEA Certificate of
Registration AT7586829, issued to
James E. Thomas, M.D., be, and it
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
hereby is, revoked. The Deputy
Administrator further orders that any
pending applications for renewal of
such registration be, and they hereby
are, denied. This order is effective
February 24, 2005.
Dated: December 30, 2004.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05–1325 Filed 1–24–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–M
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Notice of Decision To Revise Method
for Estimation of Monthly Labor Force
Statistics for Certain Subnational
Areas
AGENCY:
Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Labor.
ACTION:
Statement of policy.
SUMMARY: The Department of Labor,
through the Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS), is responsible for the
development and publication of local
area labor force statistics. In the Local
Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS)
program, monthly estimates of the labor
force, employment, unemployment, and
the unemployment rate for more than
7,000 areas in the Nation are developed
and issued monthly. With data for
January 2005, to be published in March
2005, the monthly labor force estimates
prepared in the LAUS program will be
based on methodological improvements
that resulted from the completion of a
number of projects to improve the
statistical basis of the estimates. In
addition, the LAUS estimates will
reflect updated geography and other
techniques that are based on 2000
Census data.
EFFECTIVE DATE: These changes will be
effective with January 2005 LAUS
estimates issued in March 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sharon P. Brown, Chief, Division of
Local Area Unemployment Statistics,
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Telephone
202–691–6390.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Summary of Comments
The BLS received one comment in
response to the request for comments on
the Proposal to Revise the Method for
Estimation of Monthly Labor Force
Statistics for Certain Subnational Areas.
That commenter was opposed to the use
of model based estimation for the Miami
metropolitan division. In BLS’s
judgment the statistical modeling
E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM
25JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 25, 2005 / Notices
methodology is superior to the existing
method for Miami because it directly
utilizes Current Population Survey
(CPS) estimates of employment and
unemployment, allows for the
development of seasonally adjusted
estimates, and provides measures of
error on the data. The commenter also
opposed the implementation of a
method for adjusting place-of-work
employment to place-of-residence using
decennial census-based ratios for areas
outside the area of estimation with
known commutation. Based on research
and simulations, the BLS feels that this
dynamic approach will result in better
estimation of resident employed in the
intercensal period.
II. Additional Information
Since the BLS was given
responsibility for the LAUS program in
1972, a hierarchy of estimation methods
has been used to produce the State and
area labor force estimates, based in large
part on the availability and quality of
data from the CPS, the official measure
of the labor force for the nation. The
BLS has continuously advanced the
statistical basis of the LAUS estimates
by researching and implementing
improved statistically sound
methodology, updating the methodology
with decennial census data, and
reflecting the latest decennial
identification of geographic areas.
Estimates for States, the District of
Columbia, New York City, Los AnglesLong Beach-Glendale Metropolitan
Division. From 1996 on, the estimates
for States, the District of Columbia, New
York City, Los Angeles metropolitan
area, and the balances of New York
State and California were developed
using signal-plus-noise models. These
models relied heavily on monthly CPS
data, as well as current wage and salary
employment estimates and
unemployment insurance statistics. The
State CPS annual averages of
employment and unemployment were
used as benchmarks to the model-based
estimates at the end of the year. In
general, this method of model
estimation and annual benchmarking
resulted in an overestimate of
employment and an underestimate of
unemployment and the unemployment
rate in States as compared to the
national CPS estimates. The annual
benchmarking approach reintroduced
sampling error into the series and
resulted in significant end-of-year
revisions in a large number of States,
caused economic anomalies that were
an artifact of the benchmarking
approach, distorted seasonality in the
previous year so that analysis is
VerDate jul<14>2003
13:14 Jan 24, 2005
Jkt 205001
impaired, and often missed shocks to
the economy.
The improved model-based approach
to estimation with real-time
benchmarking addresses these issues.
The models are signal-plus-noise
models, where the signal is a bivariate
model of the employment or
unemployment level. Seasonal
adjustment occurs within the model
structure. Real-time benchmarking
ensures that State estimates add to the
national estimates of employment and
unemployment each month. (The
benchmark changes from annual Statelevel estimates of employment and
unemployment to monthly national
estimates of these measures.) In this
way, economic shocks will be reflected
in the State estimates on a real-time
basis, and end-of-year revisions will be
significantly smaller. The models with
real-time benchmarking produce
reliability measures for the seasonally
adjusted and not seasonally adjusted
series, and on over-the-month and overthe-year change.
Model-based Estimation in Six
Additional Areas. Model-based
estimation is extended to the following
areas and the respective balance-of-State
areas: Chicago metropolitan division,
Cleveland metropolitan area, Detroit
metropolitan area, Miami metropolitan
division, New Orleans metropolitan
area, and Seattle-Everett metropolitan
division. This improves the statistical
basis of the estimation for these areas,
and provides important tools for
analysis such as measures of error and
seasonally adjusted series.
These area models are univariate and
are benchmarked to the State
employment and unemployment
estimates on a real-time basis. As with
the State models, seasonally adjusted
series are produced, along with
measures of error for the seasonally
adjusted and not seasonally adjusted
series, and on over-the-month and overthe-year change.
New and Reentrant Unemployment.
Long-standing concerns were expressed
in the regard to the estimation of
unemployment at the substate level (for
areas other than New York City, Los
Angeles, and the balances of New York
State and California). Difficulty in the
measurement of unemployed new and
reentrants to the labor market led to the
use of large proportionate adjustment of
area estimates to the State total
unemployed as a way of controlling for
the underestimate at the area level. The
improved method addresses the issue of
underestimation and eliminates the
need for significant proportionate
adjustment of area estimates to the
monthly State levels of unemployment.
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3565
The new methodology incorporates
the CPS new and reentrants State data
and utilizes improved econometric
modeling techniques. In this model, the
values of the coefficients change from
month to month as the models are
updated with information from current
observations. The model estimates are
distributed to each labor market area in
the State based on the area’s share of the
State population. New entrants are
distributed based on the area’s share of
the State 16–19 year old population, and
reentrants are distributed based on the
area’s share of the State 20 years and
older population.
Residency Adjustment. The
underlying concepts and definitions of
all labor force data developed by the
LAUS program are consistent with those
of the CPS, including the requirement
that measures relate to the place of
residence of the labor force participant.
Current, geographically comprehensive
employment data at the area level are
establishment-based and reflect jobs by
place of work. Thus, these data must be
adjusted to account for multiple-job
holding and residency prior to use in
the LAUS program. The prior Censusbased residency adjustment procedure
used a single ratio for the labor market
area. Thus, it was the limited in the
geographic scope for influencing the
area’s estimate of resident employed
and static in nature. Also, labor market
areas often are not defined to the point
where commutation is zero, and, in the
intercensal period, job growth can and
does occur in the areas surrounding the
estimating area.
In the new method, resident
employment in an area is a function not
only of the relationship between
employed residents and jobs in that
area, but in other areas within
commuting distance. The procedure is
more dynamic than the prior method
insofar as job count changes in
commuting areas can affect resident
employment. As in the current
procedure, however, the commuting
ratios themselves are fixed for the
intercensal period.
Detailed descriptions of the current
and redesign approaches are available at
the above address and at the BLS LAUS
Web site https://www.bls.gov/lau/
home.htm.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 14th day of
January, 2005.
John M. Galvin,
Associate Commissioner, Office of
Employment and Unemployment Statistics,
Bureau of Labor Statistics.
[FR Doc. 05–1336 Filed 1–24–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–24–P
E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM
25JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 15 (Tuesday, January 25, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3564-3565]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1336]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Notice of Decision To Revise Method for Estimation of Monthly
Labor Force Statistics for Certain Subnational Areas
AGENCY: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Labor.
ACTION: Statement of policy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, through the Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS), is responsible for the development and publication of
local area labor force statistics. In the Local Area Unemployment
Statistics (LAUS) program, monthly estimates of the labor force,
employment, unemployment, and the unemployment rate for more than 7,000
areas in the Nation are developed and issued monthly. With data for
January 2005, to be published in March 2005, the monthly labor force
estimates prepared in the LAUS program will be based on methodological
improvements that resulted from the completion of a number of projects
to improve the statistical basis of the estimates. In addition, the
LAUS estimates will reflect updated geography and other techniques that
are based on 2000 Census data.
EFFECTIVE DATE: These changes will be effective with January 2005 LAUS
estimates issued in March 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharon P. Brown, Chief, Division of
Local Area Unemployment Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Telephone 202-691-6390.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Summary of Comments
The BLS received one comment in response to the request for
comments on the Proposal to Revise the Method for Estimation of Monthly
Labor Force Statistics for Certain Subnational Areas. That commenter
was opposed to the use of model based estimation for the Miami
metropolitan division. In BLS's judgment the statistical modeling
[[Page 3565]]
methodology is superior to the existing method for Miami because it
directly utilizes Current Population Survey (CPS) estimates of
employment and unemployment, allows for the development of seasonally
adjusted estimates, and provides measures of error on the data. The
commenter also opposed the implementation of a method for adjusting
place-of-work employment to place-of-residence using decennial census-
based ratios for areas outside the area of estimation with known
commutation. Based on research and simulations, the BLS feels that this
dynamic approach will result in better estimation of resident employed
in the intercensal period.
II. Additional Information
Since the BLS was given responsibility for the LAUS program in
1972, a hierarchy of estimation methods has been used to produce the
State and area labor force estimates, based in large part on the
availability and quality of data from the CPS, the official measure of
the labor force for the nation. The BLS has continuously advanced the
statistical basis of the LAUS estimates by researching and implementing
improved statistically sound methodology, updating the methodology with
decennial census data, and reflecting the latest decennial
identification of geographic areas.
Estimates for States, the District of Columbia, New York City, Los
Angles-Long Beach-Glendale Metropolitan Division. From 1996 on, the
estimates for States, the District of Columbia, New York City, Los
Angeles metropolitan area, and the balances of New York State and
California were developed using signal-plus-noise models. These models
relied heavily on monthly CPS data, as well as current wage and salary
employment estimates and unemployment insurance statistics. The State
CPS annual averages of employment and unemployment were used as
benchmarks to the model-based estimates at the end of the year. In
general, this method of model estimation and annual benchmarking
resulted in an overestimate of employment and an underestimate of
unemployment and the unemployment rate in States as compared to the
national CPS estimates. The annual benchmarking approach reintroduced
sampling error into the series and resulted in significant end-of-year
revisions in a large number of States, caused economic anomalies that
were an artifact of the benchmarking approach, distorted seasonality in
the previous year so that analysis is impaired, and often missed shocks
to the economy.
The improved model-based approach to estimation with real-time
benchmarking addresses these issues. The models are signal-plus-noise
models, where the signal is a bivariate model of the employment or
unemployment level. Seasonal adjustment occurs within the model
structure. Real-time benchmarking ensures that State estimates add to
the national estimates of employment and unemployment each month. (The
benchmark changes from annual State-level estimates of employment and
unemployment to monthly national estimates of these measures.) In this
way, economic shocks will be reflected in the State estimates on a
real-time basis, and end-of-year revisions will be significantly
smaller. The models with real-time benchmarking produce reliability
measures for the seasonally adjusted and not seasonally adjusted
series, and on over-the-month and over-the-year change.
Model-based Estimation in Six Additional Areas. Model-based
estimation is extended to the following areas and the respective
balance-of-State areas: Chicago metropolitan division, Cleveland
metropolitan area, Detroit metropolitan area, Miami metropolitan
division, New Orleans metropolitan area, and Seattle-Everett
metropolitan division. This improves the statistical basis of the
estimation for these areas, and provides important tools for analysis
such as measures of error and seasonally adjusted series.
These area models are univariate and are benchmarked to the State
employment and unemployment estimates on a real-time basis. As with the
State models, seasonally adjusted series are produced, along with
measures of error for the seasonally adjusted and not seasonally
adjusted series, and on over-the-month and over-the-year change.
New and Reentrant Unemployment. Long-standing concerns were
expressed in the regard to the estimation of unemployment at the
substate level (for areas other than New York City, Los Angeles, and
the balances of New York State and California). Difficulty in the
measurement of unemployed new and reentrants to the labor market led to
the use of large proportionate adjustment of area estimates to the
State total unemployed as a way of controlling for the underestimate at
the area level. The improved method addresses the issue of
underestimation and eliminates the need for significant proportionate
adjustment of area estimates to the monthly State levels of
unemployment.
The new methodology incorporates the CPS new and reentrants State
data and utilizes improved econometric modeling techniques. In this
model, the values of the coefficients change from month to month as the
models are updated with information from current observations. The
model estimates are distributed to each labor market area in the State
based on the area's share of the State population. New entrants are
distributed based on the area's share of the State 16-19 year old
population, and reentrants are distributed based on the area's share of
the State 20 years and older population.
Residency Adjustment. The underlying concepts and definitions of
all labor force data developed by the LAUS program are consistent with
those of the CPS, including the requirement that measures relate to the
place of residence of the labor force participant. Current,
geographically comprehensive employment data at the area level are
establishment-based and reflect jobs by place of work. Thus, these data
must be adjusted to account for multiple-job holding and residency
prior to use in the LAUS program. The prior Census-based residency
adjustment procedure used a single ratio for the labor market area.
Thus, it was the limited in the geographic scope for influencing the
area's estimate of resident employed and static in nature. Also, labor
market areas often are not defined to the point where commutation is
zero, and, in the intercensal period, job growth can and does occur in
the areas surrounding the estimating area.
In the new method, resident employment in an area is a function not
only of the relationship between employed residents and jobs in that
area, but in other areas within commuting distance. The procedure is
more dynamic than the prior method insofar as job count changes in
commuting areas can affect resident employment. As in the current
procedure, however, the commuting ratios themselves are fixed for the
intercensal period.
Detailed descriptions of the current and redesign approaches are
available at the above address and at the BLS LAUS Web site https://
www.bls.gov/lau/home.htm.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 14th day of January, 2005.
John M. Galvin,
Associate Commissioner, Office of Employment and Unemployment
Statistics, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
[FR Doc. 05-1336 Filed 1-24-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-24-P