Bourns Microelectronics Modules, Inc., a Subsidiary of Bourns Inc., New Berlin, WI; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand, 50409-50410 [E5-4670]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 165 / Friday, August 26, 2005 / Notices
schedule II controlled substance for a
legitimate medical purpose without
seeing the patient in person, the
physician may mail the prescription to
the patient or pharmacy. In addition, as
the DEA regulations state: ‘‘A
prescription for a schedule II controlled
substance may be transmitted by the
practitioner or the practitioner’s agent to
a pharmacy via facsimile equipment,
provided that the original written,
signed prescription is presented to the
pharmacist for review prior to the actual
dispensing of the controlled substance,
except as noted [elsewhere in this
section of the regulations].’’ 21 CFR
1306.11(a). Thus, as this provision of
the regulations provides, faxing may be
used to facilitate the filling of a
schedule II prescription, but only if the
pharmacy receives the original written,
signed prescription prior to dispensing
the drug to the patient.
4. The CSA and DEA regulations
contain no specific limit on the number
of days worth of a schedule II controlled
substance that a physician may
authorize per prescription. Some states,
however, do impose specific limits on
the amount of a schedule II controlled
substance that may be prescribed. Any
limitations imposed by state law apply
in addition to the corresponding
requirements under Federal law, so long
as the state requirements do not conflict
with or contravene the Federal
requirements. 21 U.S.C. 903. Again, the
essential requirement under Federal law
is that the prescription for a controlled
substance be issued for a legitimate
medical purpose in the usual course of
professional practice. In addition,
physicians and pharmacies have a duty
as DEA registrants to ensure that their
prescribing and dispensing of controlled
substances occur in a manner consistent
with effective controls against diversion
and misuse, taking into account the
nature of the drug being prescribed. 21
U.S.C. 823(f).
Finally, as stated in the Solicitation of
Comments, once DEA has completed its
review of the comments, the agency
plans to issue a new Federal Register
document, which will provide a
recitation of the pertinent legal
principles relating to the dispensing of
controlled substances for the treatment
of pain.
Dated: August 19, 2005.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 05–16954 Filed 8–25–05; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–56,114]
[TA–W–57,428]
Americal Corporation, Henderson, NC;
Notice of Termination of Investigation
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended, an
investigation was initiated on June 22,
2005 in response to a petition filed by
a company official on behalf of workers
at Americal Corporation, Henderson,
North Carolina.
The petitioner has requested that the
petition be withdrawn. Consequently,
the investigation has been terminated.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 29th day of
July, 2005.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E5–4678 Filed 8–25–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–57,639 and TA-W–57,639A]
Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant #
9, Shelby, NC, and Bernhardt Furniture
Company, Plant # 14, Cherryville, NC;
Notice of Termination of Investigation
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade
Act of 1974, an investigation was
initiated on July 28, 2005 in response to
a petition filed by a company official on
behalf of workers at Bernhardt Furniture
Company, Plant #9, Shelby, North
Carolina (TA–W–57,639) and Bernhardt
Furniture Company, Plant #14,
Cherryville, North Carolina (TA–W–
57,639A).
The petitioner has requested that the
petition be withdrawn. Consequently,
the investigation has been terminated.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 10th day of
August, 2005.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E5–4683 Filed 8–25–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:18 Aug 25, 2005
Jkt 205001
50409
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Bourns Microelectronics Modules, Inc.,
a Subsidiary of Bourns Inc., New
Berlin, WI; Notice of Revised
Determination on Remand
On June 29, 2005, the United States
Court of International Trade (USCIT)
granted the Department of Labor’s
motion for voluntary remand in Former
Employees of Bourns Microelectronics
Modules, Inc. v. U.S. Secretary of Labor
(Court No. 045–00350).
A petition, dated November 30, 2004,
for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)
and Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance (ATAA) was filed on behalf
of workers and former workers of MMC
Bidding, Inc., Division of Bourns, New
Berlin, Wisconsin. The investigation
revealed that the workers previously
worked for Microelectronics Modules
Corporation (MMC), New Berlin,
Wisconsin and that the workers’
employment with MMC was terminated
when Bourns acquired the assets of
MMC on October 30, 2003. The
investigation also revealed that the
Department granted a certification for
the former workers of MMC (TA–W–
42,217; expired December 6, 2004).
On December 27, 2004, the
investigation for the case at hand was
terminated because it was believed that
the workers were covered by the
previous certification for MMC (TA–W–
42,217). (The Department had also
terminated another investigation for a
previous petition for the same location
(TA–W–54,790) on June 4, 2004 because
the Department found that the workers
were covered by the certification for
MMC (TA–W–42,217)). The
Department’s Notice of Termination of
Investigation for this case was published
in the Federal Register (70 FR 3732).
By letter dated January 14, 2005, the
petitioner requested administrative
reconsideration, stating that the workers
were hired by and then separated from
Bourns, that the petitioner helped ship
machines and documentation to, and
provided training to persons in Costa
Rica, China and Taiwan, and that parts
were being imported to satisfy
customers’ demands.
By letter dated March 10, 2005, the
petitioner’s request for reconsideration
was dismissed based on the finding that
no new facts of a substantive nature
which would bear importantly on the
Department’s determination was
provided by the petitioner. On March
11, 2005, the Dismissal of Application
E:\FR\FM\26AUN1.SGM
26AUN1
50410
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 165 / Friday, August 26, 2005 / Notices
for Reconsideration was issued. The
Department’s Notice of Dismissal was
published in the Federal Register on
March 22, 2005 (70 FR 14483).
On May 3, 2005, the petitioner filed
an appeal with the USCIT. In the
appeal, the petitioner suggested that the
workers were engaged in production
during their employment with Bourns
and alleged that they were separated
from Bourns in May 2004 when the
facility closed due to the shift of
production to China, Taiwan and Costa
Rica.
In its June 29, 2005 Order, the USCIT
granted the Department’s motion for a
voluntary remand for further
investigation and directed the
Department to determine whether the
subject worker group met the criteria set
forth in the Trade Act of 1974 for TAA
and ATAA certification.
During the remand investigation, the
Department contacted a Bourns official
to ascertain whether the workers were
employees of Bourns Microelectronics
Modules, Inc., (BMMI), whether the
workers were engaged in production of
computer modules during their
employment with BMMI and if so,
whether computer module production
shifted abroad, and whether there were
increased imports of computer modules
during the relevant period.
The remand investigation revealed
that the subject company did not
acquire the subject facility until
December 3, 2003 and that the subject
workers were separated from BMMI, a
subsidiary of Bourns, Inc., when the
subject company shifted a meaningful
portion of computer module production
from the subject facility to Costa Rica.
Under Section 113 of the Trade
Adjustment Assistance Reform Act of
2002 (PL 107–210), workers may be
eligible to apply for TAA services if they
were laid off as a result of increased
imports or if their companies shifted
production out of the United States to
certain foreign countries. Workers laid
off as a result of a shift in production
to a country that is party to a free trade
agreement with the United States, or a
country that is named as a beneficiary
under the Andean Trade Preference Act,
the African Growth and Opportunity
Act or the Caribbean Basin Economic
Recovery Act, may satisfy TAA
certification criteria. Since Costa Rica is
a named beneficiary under the
Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery
Act, the shift of computer module
production from the subject facility to
Costa Rica satisfies the criteria for TAA
certification.
A careful review of the record
revealed that all criteria regarding
ATAA for the subject worker group have
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:18 Aug 25, 2005
Jkt 205001
been met. A significant number or
proportion of the worker group are age
fifty years or over, the workers possess
skills that are not easily transferable and
competitive conditions within the
industry are adverse.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts
obtained in the remand investigation, I
conclude that there was a shift in
production from the workers’ firm or
subdivision to Costa Rica of articles that
are like or directly competitive with
those produced by the subject firm or
subdivision. In accordance with the
provisions of the Act, I make the
following certification:
All workers of Bourns Microelectronics
Modules, Inc., A Subsidiary of Bourns, Inc.,
New Berlin, Wisconsin, who became totally
or partially separated from employment on or
after December 3, 2003, through two years
from the issuance of this revised
determination, are eligible to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance under Section 223 of
the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible
to apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance under Section 246 of the Trade
Act of 1974.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 16th day of
August, 2005.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E5–4670 Filed 8–25–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Notice of Determinations Regarding
Eligibility To Apply for Worker
Adjustment Assistance
In accordance with Section 223 of the
Trade Act of 1974, as amended, (19
U.S.C. 2273), the Department of Labor
herein presents summaries of
determinations regarding eligibility to
apply for trade adjustment assistance for
workers (TA–W) number and alternative
trade adjustment assistance (ATAA) by
(TA–W) number issued during the
periods of July 2005.
In order for an affirmative
determination to be made and a
certification of eligibility to apply for
directly-impacted (primary) worker
adjustment assistance to be issued, each
of the group eligibility requirements of
Section 222(a) of the Act must be met.
I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following
must be satisfied:
A. A significant number or proportion
of the workers in such workers’ firm, or
an appropriate subdivision of the firm,
PO 00000
Frm 00120
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
have become totally or partially
separated, or are threatened to become
totally or partially separated;
B. The sales or production, or both, of
such firm or subdivision have decreased
absolutely; and
C. Increased imports of articles like or
directly competitive with articles
produced by such firm or subdivision
have contributed importantly to such
workers’ separation or threat of
separation and to the decline in sales or
production of such firm or subdivision;
or
II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the
following must be satisfied:
A. A significant number or proportion
of the workers in such workers’ firm, or
an appropriate subdivision of the firm,
have become totally or partially
separated, or are threatened to become
totally or partially separated;
B. There has been a shift in
production by such workers’ firm or
subdivision to a foreign county of
articles like or directly competitive with
articles which are produced by such
firm or subdivision; and
C. One of the following must be
satisfied:
1. The country to which the workers’
firm has shifted production of the
articles is a party to a free trade
agreement with the United States;
2. The country to which the workers’
firm has shifted production of the
articles to a beneficiary country under
the Andean Trade Preference Act,
African Growth and Opportunity Act, or
the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery
Act; or
3. There has been or is likely to be an
increase in imports of articles that are
like or directly competitive with articles
which are or were produced by such
firm or subdivision.
Also, in order for an affirmative
determination to be made and a
certification of eligibility to apply for
worker adjustment assistance as an
adversely affected secondary group to be
issued, each of the group eligibility
requirements of Section 222(b) of the
Act must be met.
(1) Significant number or proportion
of the workers in the workers’ firm or
an appropriate subdivision of the firm
have become totally or partially
separated, or are threatened to become
totally or partially separated;
(2) The workers’ firm (or subdivision)
is a supplier or downstream producer to
a firm (or subdivision) that employed a
group of workers who received a
certification of eligibility to apply for
trade adjustment assistance benefits and
such supply or production is related to
the article that was the basis for such
certification; and
E:\FR\FM\26AUN1.SGM
26AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 165 (Friday, August 26, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50409-50410]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-4670]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-56,114]
Bourns Microelectronics Modules, Inc., a Subsidiary of Bourns
Inc., New Berlin, WI; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand
On June 29, 2005, the United States Court of International Trade
(USCIT) granted the Department of Labor's motion for voluntary remand
in Former Employees of Bourns Microelectronics Modules, Inc. v. U.S.
Secretary of Labor (Court No. 045-00350).
A petition, dated November 30, 2004, for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) was
filed on behalf of workers and former workers of MMC Bidding, Inc.,
Division of Bourns, New Berlin, Wisconsin. The investigation revealed
that the workers previously worked for Microelectronics Modules
Corporation (MMC), New Berlin, Wisconsin and that the workers'
employment with MMC was terminated when Bourns acquired the assets of
MMC on October 30, 2003. The investigation also revealed that the
Department granted a certification for the former workers of MMC (TA-W-
42,217; expired December 6, 2004).
On December 27, 2004, the investigation for the case at hand was
terminated because it was believed that the workers were covered by the
previous certification for MMC (TA-W-42,217). (The Department had also
terminated another investigation for a previous petition for the same
location (TA-W-54,790) on June 4, 2004 because the Department found
that the workers were covered by the certification for MMC (TA-W-
42,217)). The Department's Notice of Termination of Investigation for
this case was published in the Federal Register (70 FR 3732).
By letter dated January 14, 2005, the petitioner requested
administrative reconsideration, stating that the workers were hired by
and then separated from Bourns, that the petitioner helped ship
machines and documentation to, and provided training to persons in
Costa Rica, China and Taiwan, and that parts were being imported to
satisfy customers' demands.
By letter dated March 10, 2005, the petitioner's request for
reconsideration was dismissed based on the finding that no new facts of
a substantive nature which would bear importantly on the Department's
determination was provided by the petitioner. On March 11, 2005, the
Dismissal of Application
[[Page 50410]]
for Reconsideration was issued. The Department's Notice of Dismissal
was published in the Federal Register on March 22, 2005 (70 FR 14483).
On May 3, 2005, the petitioner filed an appeal with the USCIT. In
the appeal, the petitioner suggested that the workers were engaged in
production during their employment with Bourns and alleged that they
were separated from Bourns in May 2004 when the facility closed due to
the shift of production to China, Taiwan and Costa Rica.
In its June 29, 2005 Order, the USCIT granted the Department's
motion for a voluntary remand for further investigation and directed
the Department to determine whether the subject worker group met the
criteria set forth in the Trade Act of 1974 for TAA and ATAA
certification.
During the remand investigation, the Department contacted a Bourns
official to ascertain whether the workers were employees of Bourns
Microelectronics Modules, Inc., (BMMI), whether the workers were
engaged in production of computer modules during their employment with
BMMI and if so, whether computer module production shifted abroad, and
whether there were increased imports of computer modules during the
relevant period.
The remand investigation revealed that the subject company did not
acquire the subject facility until December 3, 2003 and that the
subject workers were separated from BMMI, a subsidiary of Bourns, Inc.,
when the subject company shifted a meaningful portion of computer
module production from the subject facility to Costa Rica.
Under Section 113 of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Reform Act of
2002 (PL 107-210), workers may be eligible to apply for TAA services if
they were laid off as a result of increased imports or if their
companies shifted production out of the United States to certain
foreign countries. Workers laid off as a result of a shift in
production to a country that is party to a free trade agreement with
the United States, or a country that is named as a beneficiary under
the Andean Trade Preference Act, the African Growth and Opportunity Act
or the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, may satisfy TAA
certification criteria. Since Costa Rica is a named beneficiary under
the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, the shift of computer module
production from the subject facility to Costa Rica satisfies the
criteria for TAA certification.
A careful review of the record revealed that all criteria regarding
ATAA for the subject worker group have been met. A significant number
or proportion of the worker group are age fifty years or over, the
workers possess skills that are not easily transferable and competitive
conditions within the industry are adverse.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the remand
investigation, I conclude that there was a shift in production from the
workers' firm or subdivision to Costa Rica of articles that are like or
directly competitive with those produced by the subject firm or
subdivision. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the
following certification:
All workers of Bourns Microelectronics Modules, Inc., A
Subsidiary of Bourns, Inc., New Berlin, Wisconsin, who became
totally or partially separated from employment on or after December
3, 2003, through two years from the issuance of this revised
determination, are eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to
apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance under Section 246
of the Trade Act of 1974.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 16th day of August, 2005.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E5-4670 Filed 8-25-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P
