Humana Insurance Company, a Division Of Carenetwork, Inc., Green Bay, WI; Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 57502-57503 [2010-23495]

Download as PDF srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES 57502 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Notices briefs must conform with the provisions of section 207.65 of the Commission’s rules; the deadline for filing is January 20, 2011. Parties may also file written testimony in connection with their presentation at the hearing, as provided in section 207.24 of the Commission’s rules, and posthearing briefs, which must conform with the provisions of section 207.67 of the Commission’s rules. The deadline for filing posthearing briefs is February 10, 2011; witness testimony must be filed no later than three days before the hearing. In addition, any person who has not entered an appearance as a party to the reviews may submit a written statement of information pertinent to the subject of the reviews on or before February 10, 2011. On March 7, 2011, the Commission will make available to parties all information on which they have not had an opportunity to comment. Parties may submit final comments on this information on or before March 9, 2011, but such final comments must not contain new factual information and must otherwise comply with section 207.68 of the Commission’s rules. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission’s rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission’s rules. The Commission’s rules do not authorize filing of submissions with the Secretary by facsimile or electronic means, except to the extent permitted by section 201.8 of the Commission’s rules, as amended, 67 FR 68036 (November 8, 2002). Even where electronic filing of a document is permitted, certain documents must also be filed in paper form, as specified in II(c) of the Commission’s Handbook on Electronic Filing Procedures, 67 FR 68168, 68173 (November 8, 2002). Additional written submissions to the Commission, including requests pursuant to section 201.12 of the Commission’s rules, shall not be accepted unless good cause is shown for accepting such submissions, or unless the submission is pursuant to a specific request by a Commissioner or Commission staff. In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission’s rules, each document filed by a party to the reviews must be served on all other parties to the reviews (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service. Authority: These reviews are being conducted under authority of title VII of VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:52 Sep 20, 2010 Jkt 220001 the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.62 of the Commission’s rules. Issued: September 14, 2010. By order of the Commission. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–74,281] [FR Doc. 2010–23474 Filed 9–20–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Robotics Technology Consortium, Inc. Correction In notice document 2010–22215 beginning on page 54914 in the issue of Thursday, July 9, 2010, make the following corrections: 1. On page 54914, in the first column, in the sixteenth line below the document subject, ‘‘AEB, Inc.’’ should read ‘‘ABB, Inc.’’. 2. On the same page, in the same column, in the 23rd line below the document subject, ‘‘BEN Technologies Corp’’ should read ‘‘BBN Technologies Corp’’. 3. On the same page, in the same column, in the eighth line from the bottom of the page, ‘‘Amstin, TX’’ should read ‘‘Austin, TX’’. 4. On the same page, in the same column, in the last line of the column, ‘‘101–Integrated Consultants, Inc.’’ should read ‘‘ICI–Integrated Consultants, Inc.’’ 5. On the same page, in the third column, in the first full paragraph, in the second and third lines, ‘‘activity of this group research additional written membership’’ should read ‘‘ activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and RTC intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.’’ 6. On the same page, in the same column, in the second full paragraph, in the first through sixth lines, ‘‘On October 15, pursuant to Section the group research project. Membership in the project remains open, and RTC intends to file notifications disclosing all changes. In 2009, RTC filed its original notification 6(a) of the Act.’’ should read, ‘‘On October 15, 2009, RTC filed its original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act.’’ [FR Doc. C1–2010–22215 Filed 9–20–10; 8:45 am] Humana Insurance Company, a Division Of Carenetwork, Inc., Green Bay, WI; Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application dated August 23, 2010, petitioners requested administrative reconsideration of the negative determination regarding workers’ eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The determination was issued on August 13, 2010. The Notice of Determination was published in the Federal Register on August 30, 2010 (75 FR 52986). Workers are engaged in employment related to the supply of health insurance benefits. The negative determination applicable to workers and former workers at Humana Insurance Company, a Division of CareNetwork, Inc., Green Bay, Wisconsin was based on the findings that the subject firm did not, during the period under investigation, shift to a foreign country services like or directly competitive with the supply of health insurance benefits provided by the workers or acquire these services from a foreign country; that the workers’ separation, or threat of separation, was not related to any increase in imports of like or directly competitive services; and that the workers did not supply a service that was directly used in the production of an article or the supply of service by a firm that employed a worker group that is eligible to apply for TAA based on the aforementioned article or service. In the request for reconsideration, the petitioners provided additional information pertaining to a shift in services abroad. The Department has carefully reviewed the request for reconsideration and the existing record and has determined that the Department will conduct further investigation to determine if the workers meet the eligibility requirements of the Trade Act of 1974. Conclusion After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the U.S. Department of Labor’s prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted. BILLING CODE 1505–01–D PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21SEN1.SGM 21SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Notices Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of September 2010. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2010–23495 Filed 9–20–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Occupational Safety and Health Administration [Docket No. OSHA–2010–0029] Application for Training Grant; Extension of the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork) Requirements Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor. ACTION: Request for public comment. AGENCY: OSHA solicits public comments concerning its proposal to extend the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) approval of the information collection requirements contained in the Training Grant Application. SUMMARY: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by November 22, 2010. ADDRESSES: Electronically: You may submit comments and attachments electronically at https:// www.regulations.gov, which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting comments. Facsimile: If your comments, including attachments, are not longer than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693–1648. Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service: When using this method, you must submit three copies of your comments and attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, Docket Number OSHA–2010–0029, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N–2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service) are accepted during the Department of Labor’s and Docket Office’s normal business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t. Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and OSHA docket number for this Information Collection Request (ICR) (OSHA–2010– 0029). All comments, including any personal information you provide, are placed in the public docket without srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES DATES: VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:02 Sep 20, 2010 Jkt 220001 change, and may be made available online at https://www.regulations.gov. For further information on submitting comments see the ‘‘Public Participation’’ heading in the section of this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Docket: To read or download comments or other material in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov or the OSHA Docket Office at the address above. All documents in the docket (including this Federal Register notice) are listed in the https:// www.regulations.gov index; however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download through the Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. To obtain a copy of the ICR, you may contact Theda Kenney or Todd Owen at the Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N–3609, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693–2222. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Technical: Kimberly A. Newell, OSHA Directorate of Training and Education, 2020 S. Arlington Heights Road, Arlington Heights, IL 60005–4102; telephone: (847) 759–7700; e-mail: HarwoodGrants@dol.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs) is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA’s estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for enforcement of the OSH Act or for developing information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). Section 21 of the OSH Act (29 U.S.C. 670) authorizes the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (‘‘OSHA’’ or the ‘‘Agency’’) to conduct directly, or through grants and contracts, education and training courses. These courses PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 57503 must ensure an adequate number of qualified personnel to fulfill the purposes of the Act, provide them with short-term training, inform them of the importance and proper use of safety and health equipment, and train employers and workers to recognize, avoid, and prevent unsafe and unhealthful working conditions. Under Section 21, the Agency awards grants to non-profit organizations to provide part of the required training. To obtain such a grant, an organization must complete the training grant application. OSHA uses the information in this application to evaluate: The organization’s competence to provide the proposed training (including the qualifications of the personnel who manage and implement the training); the goals and objectives of the proposed training program; a workplan that describes in detail the tasks that the organization will implement to meet these goals and objectives; the appropriateness of the proposed costs; and compliance with Federal regulations governing nonprocurement debarment and suspension, maintaining a drug-free workplace, and lobbying activities. Also required is a program summary that Agency officials use to review and evaluate the highlights of the overall proposal. After awarding a training grant, OSHA uses the work plan and budget information provided in the application to monitor the organization’s progress in meeting training goals and objectives, as well as planned expenditures. The initial grant award is for one year. II. Special Issues for Comment OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues: • Whether the proposed information collection requirements are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency’s functions, including whether the information is useful; • The accuracy of the Agency’s estimate of the burden (time and costs) of the information collection requirements, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • The quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and • Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply; for example, by using automated or other technological information collection and transmission techniques. III. Proposed Actions OSHA is requesting that OMB extend its approval of the information collection requirements contained in the Training Grant Application. The Agency is requesting to increase its current E:\FR\FM\21SEN1.SGM 21SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 21, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57502-57503]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-23495]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-74,281]


Humana Insurance Company, a Division Of Carenetwork, Inc., Green 
Bay, WI; Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application dated August 23, 2010, petitioners requested 
administrative reconsideration of the negative determination regarding 
workers' eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) 
applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The 
determination was issued on August 13, 2010. The Notice of 
Determination was published in the Federal Register on August 30, 2010 
(75 FR 52986). Workers are engaged in employment related to the supply 
of health insurance benefits.
    The negative determination applicable to workers and former workers 
at Humana Insurance Company, a Division of CareNetwork, Inc., Green 
Bay, Wisconsin was based on the findings that the subject firm did not, 
during the period under investigation, shift to a foreign country 
services like or directly competitive with the supply of health 
insurance benefits provided by the workers or acquire these services 
from a foreign country; that the workers' separation, or threat of 
separation, was not related to any increase in imports of like or 
directly competitive services; and that the workers did not supply a 
service that was directly used in the production of an article or the 
supply of service by a firm that employed a worker group that is 
eligible to apply for TAA based on the aforementioned article or 
service.
    In the request for reconsideration, the petitioners provided 
additional information pertaining to a shift in services abroad.
    The Department has carefully reviewed the request for 
reconsideration and the existing record and has determined that the 
Department will conduct further investigation to determine if the 
workers meet the eligibility requirements of the Trade Act of 1974.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim 
is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the U.S. 
Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, 
granted.



[[Page 57503]]

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of September 2010.
 Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2010-23495 Filed 9-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.