Healthcare Management Partners, LLC, Santa Ana, CA; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 74341-74342 [E7-25365]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 249 / Monday, December 31, 2007 / Notices
and, if so, whether the facility(s) had
imported articles like or directly
competitive with the printed circuit
board assemblies produced by the
subject firm.
During the remand investigation, the
Department contacted the former subject
firm official who completed the
Business Confidential Data Request
form, SAR 1–5, and the former subject
firm employee who handled the foreign
customer’s contract for information
about where the articles were shipped.
SAR 7. The Department confirmed that
the subject firm sent the articles
purchased by the foreign customer to a
facility located outside of the United
States and obtained the foreign address
to where the articles were shipped. SAR
3, 5, 7.
Because the subject firm did not send
printed circuit boards to a domestic
facility of the foreign customer, the
Department determines that the foreign
customer did not import articles like or
directly competitive with the printed
circuit boards produced by the subject
firm, and affirms the negative
determination.
In order for the Department to issue
a certification of eligibility to apply for
ATAA, the subject worker group must
be certified eligible to apply for TAA.
Since the subject workers are not
eligible to apply for TAA, the workers
cannot be certified eligible for ATAA.
Conclusion
After careful reconsideration, I affirm
the original notice of negative
determination of eligibility to apply for
worker adjustment assistance for
workers and former workers of
Advanced Electronics, Inc., Boston,
Massachusetts.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 19th day of
December, 2007.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–25362 Filed 12–28–07; 8:45 am]
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:08 Dec 28, 2007
Jkt 214001
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–62,364; TA–W–62,364A]
Cellular Express, Inc., d/b/a Boston
Communications Group, Inc., Bedford,
Massachusetts; Including an Employee
of Cellular Express, Inc., d/b/a Boston
Communications Group, Inc., Bedford,
Massachusetts, Located in
Cumberland Furnace, Tennessee;
Amended Certification Regarding
Eligibility To Apply for Worker
Adjustment Assistance and Negative
Determination Regarding Eligibility to
Apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance
In accordance with Section 223 of the
Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and
Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26
U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the
Department of Labor issued a
Certification Regarding Eligibility to
Apply for Worker Adjustment
Assistance and a Negative
Determination Regarding Eligibility to
Apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance on November 14, 2007,
applicable to workers of Cellular
Express, Inc., d/b/a Boston
Communications Group, Inc., Bedford,
Massachusetts. The notice was
published in the Federal Register on
December 10, 2007 (72 FR 69710).
At the request of a company official,
the Department reviewed the
certification for workers of the subject
firm.
New information shows that worker
separation has occurred involving an
employee of the Bedford, Massachusetts
facility of Cellular Express, Inc., d/b/a
Boston Communications Group, Inc.,
working out of Cumberland Furnace,
Tennessee. Mr. Edward C. Butcher
performed support duties for the firm’s
Bedford, Massachusetts, software
development, testing, and monitoring.
Based on these findings, the
Department is amending this
certification to include an employee of
the Bedford, Massachusetts facility of
Cellular Express, Inc., d/b/a Boston
Communications Group, Inc. working
out of Cumberland Furnace, Tennessee.
The intent of the Department’s
certification is to include all workers of
Cellular Express, Inc., d/b/a Boston
Communications Group, Inc., Bedford,
Massachusetts, who were adversely
affected by increased imports following
a shift in production to India.
The amended notice applicable to
TA–W–62,364 is hereby issued as
follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
74341
‘‘All workers of Cellular Express, Inc.,
d/b/a Boston Communications Group, Inc.
Bedford, Massachusetts (TA–W–62,364),
including an employee of Cellular Express,
Inc., d/b/a Boston Communications Group,
Inc., Bedford, Massachusetts located in
Cumberland Furnace, Tennessee (TA–W–
62,364A), who became totally or partially
separated from employment on or after
October 25, 2006, through November 14,
2009, are eligible to apply for adjustment
assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act
of 1974.’’
I further determine that workers of
Cellular Express, Inc., d/b/a Boston
Communications Group, Inc., Bedford,
Massachusetts (TA–W–62,364),
including an employee of Cellular
Express, Inc., d/b/a Boston
Communications Group, Inc., Bedford,
Massachusetts, located in Cumberland
Furnace, Tennessee (TA–W–62,364A),
are denied eligibility to apply for
alternative trade adjustment assistance
under Section 246 of the Trade Act of
1974.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 20th day of
December 2007.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–25358 Filed 12–28–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–62,310]
Healthcare Management Partners, LLC,
Santa Ana, CA; Notice of Negative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration
By application postmarked November
20, 2007, the petitioner requested
administrative reconsideration of the
Department’s negative determination
regarding eligibility to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA),
applicable to workers and former
workers of the subject firm. The denial
notice was signed on October 23, 2007
and published in the Federal Register
on November 6, 2007 (72 FR 62682).
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c)
reconsideration may be granted under
the following circumstances:
(1) If it appears on the basis of facts
not previously considered that the
determination complained of was
erroneous;
(2) if it appears that the determination
complained of was based on a mistake
in the determination of facts not
previously considered; or
(3) if in the opinion of the Certifying
Officer, a mis-interpretation of facts or
E:\FR\FM\31DEN1.SGM
31DEN1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
74342
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 249 / Monday, December 31, 2007 / Notices
of the law justified reconsideration of
the decision.
The negative TAA determination
issued by the Department for workers of
Healthcare Management Partners, LLC,
Santa Ana, California, was based on the
finding that the worker group does not
produce an article within the meaning
of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974.
The investigation revealed that workers
of the subject firm are engaged in
medical billing and medical practice
management. The investigation further
revealed that no production of article(s)
occurred within the firm or appropriate
subdivision within the Healthcare
Management Partners, LLC during the
relevant time period.
The petitioner contends that the
Department erred in its interpretation of
the work performed by the workers of
the subject firm. The petitioner states
that the workers of the subject firm
‘‘produced medical coding, appeals on
claims, resubmitted claims, bills,
medical records and other documents
for patients, insurance companies, or
other third parties.’’ The petitioner
alleges that because the work was done
in a ‘‘production environment in which
workers submitted weekly reports’’ and
because the written documents and
codes should be considered ‘‘intangible
products’’, workers of the subject firm
should be considered as engaged in
production of articles.
The investigation revealed that
Healthcare Management Partners, LLC,
Santa Ana, California, provide medical
billing and practice management
services to physicians and medical
professional practices and the workers
were engaged in data processing,
payment posting, following up on
accounts receivable for the company’s
medical billing clients. These functions,
as described above, are not considered
production of an article within the
meaning of Section 222 of the Trade
Act. Claims, medical records, bills and
other correspondence are documents
used by the subject firm as incidental to
services provided by the subject firm.
No production took place at the subject
facility nor did the workers support
production of an article for at any
domestic affiliated location during the
relevant period.
The petitioner also alleges that job
functions have been shifted from the
subject firm to overseas contractors.
The allegation of a shift to another
country might be relevant if it was
determined that workers of the subject
firm produced an article. However, the
investigation determined that workers of
Healthcare Management Partners, LLC,
Santa Ana, California, do not produce
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:08 Dec 28, 2007
Jkt 214001
an article within the meaning of Section
222 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Conclusion
After review of the application and
investigative findings, I conclude that
there has been no error or
misinterpretation of the law or of the
facts which would justify
reconsideration of the Department of
Labor’s prior decision. Accordingly, the
application is denied.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 18th day of
December, 2007.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–25365 Filed 12–28–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Notice of Determinations Regarding
Eligibility To Apply for Worker
Adjustment Assistance and Alternative
Trade 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
period of December 10 through
December 14, 2007.
In order for an affirmative
determination to be made for workers of
a primary firm and a certification issued
regarding eligibility to apply for worker
adjustment assistance, 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,
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:
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 country 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 for
secondarily affected workers of a firm
and a certification issued regarding
eligibility to apply for worker
adjustment assistance, 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
(3) Either—
(A) The workers’ firm is a supplier
and the component parts it supplied for
the firm (or subdivision) described in
paragraph (2) accounted for at least 20
percent of the production or sales of the
workers’ firm; or
(B) A loss or business by the workers’
firm with the firm (or subdivision)
described in paragraph (2) contributed
importantly to the workers’ separation
or threat of separation.
In order for the Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance to issue a
certification of eligibility to apply for
Alternative Trade Adjustment
E:\FR\FM\31DEN1.SGM
31DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 249 (Monday, December 31, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74341-74342]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-25365]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-62,310]
Healthcare Management Partners, LLC, Santa Ana, CA; Notice of
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application postmarked November 20, 2007, the petitioner
requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former workers of the
subject firm. The denial notice was signed on October 23, 2007 and
published in the Federal Register on November 6, 2007 (72 FR 62682).
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) reconsideration may be granted under
the following circumstances:
(1) If it appears on the basis of facts not previously considered
that the determination complained of was erroneous;
(2) if it appears that the determination complained of was based on
a mistake in the determination of facts not previously considered; or
(3) if in the opinion of the Certifying Officer, a mis-
interpretation of facts or
[[Page 74342]]
of the law justified reconsideration of the decision.
The negative TAA determination issued by the Department for workers
of Healthcare Management Partners, LLC, Santa Ana, California, was
based on the finding that the worker group does not produce an article
within the meaning of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974. The
investigation revealed that workers of the subject firm are engaged in
medical billing and medical practice management. The investigation
further revealed that no production of article(s) occurred within the
firm or appropriate subdivision within the Healthcare Management
Partners, LLC during the relevant time period.
The petitioner contends that the Department erred in its
interpretation of the work performed by the workers of the subject
firm. The petitioner states that the workers of the subject firm
``produced medical coding, appeals on claims, resubmitted claims,
bills, medical records and other documents for patients, insurance
companies, or other third parties.'' The petitioner alleges that
because the work was done in a ``production environment in which
workers submitted weekly reports'' and because the written documents
and codes should be considered ``intangible products'', workers of the
subject firm should be considered as engaged in production of articles.
The investigation revealed that Healthcare Management Partners,
LLC, Santa Ana, California, provide medical billing and practice
management services to physicians and medical professional practices
and the workers were engaged in data processing, payment posting,
following up on accounts receivable for the company's medical billing
clients. These functions, as described above, are not considered
production of an article within the meaning of Section 222 of the Trade
Act. Claims, medical records, bills and other correspondence are
documents used by the subject firm as incidental to services provided
by the subject firm. No production took place at the subject facility
nor did the workers support production of an article for at any
domestic affiliated location during the relevant period.
The petitioner also alleges that job functions have been shifted
from the subject firm to overseas contractors.
The allegation of a shift to another country might be relevant if
it was determined that workers of the subject firm produced an article.
However, the investigation determined that workers of Healthcare
Management Partners, LLC, Santa Ana, California, do not produce an
article within the meaning of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Conclusion
After review of the application and investigative findings, I
conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of the law
or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of the Department
of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the application is denied.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 18th day of December, 2007.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7-25365 Filed 12-28-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
