8952 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 38 / Friday, February 26, 2010 / Notices 

1Complaint, In the Matter of Boulder Valley 

Individual Practice Assoc., FTC File No. 051-0252 

(Dec. 24, 2008), available at (http://www.ftc.gov/os/ 

caselist/0510252/081224bouldercmpt.pdf). 2See, e.g., John Aguilar, Doctors Settle with FTC; 

Boulder County Physicians’ Group: Feds Wrong 

with price-fixing claims, DAILY CAMERA, Dec. 30, 

2008, at A1; Greg Blesch, FTC’s Not Done Yet; 

Calif., Colo. Doc partnerships latest to be 

scrutinized, 39 MODERN HEALTHCARE 10 (Jan. 5, 

2009). 3Comment submitted by Wellpoint, Inc., In re 

Boulder Valley Independent Practice Assoc., FTC 

File No. 051-0252 (Jan. 22, 2009), available at 

(http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/ 

bouldervalley%20ipa/539810-00002.pdf). 

consistent with Commission practice: 

when an individual is just an employee 

of the organizational respondent (as 

opposed to an owner of the organization 

or someone who is shown to control the 

organization’s decisions), the 

Commission has rarely named the 

individual as a separate respondent; it 

has instead simply provided that the 

order will apply to the directors of the 

organizational respondent, its officers, 

and employees. Despite my doubts 

about whether liability based on the two 

species of conduct discussed above 

could be found, I found that there was 

‘‘reason to believe’’ that Boulder Valley 

could be fenced-in in this fashion, and 

I voted for the decree.1 One of the 

factors I considered, however, was that 

Ms. Higgins was not joined as a 

respondent. 

Thereafter, it is undisputed that the 

following events occurred. First, Ms. 

Higgins denounced the consent decree 

in the press, asserting, among other 

things, that Boulder Valley had agreed 

to the consent decree only to avoid the 

substantial expense that litigation 

would entail.2 Second, in response to 

the notice for public comment on 

Boulder Valley’s proposed consent, 

Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield 

complained that ‘‘the terms of the 

Consent Order may be interpreted to 

allow individuals associated with 

. . . BVIPA’’ to continue to attempt to 

facilitate collusive pricing.3 Third, 

following those complaints and 

conversations with Anthem, staff 

notified Ms. Higgins that it was 

evaluating whether to add her to the 

Boulder Valley complaint or name her 

separately. Fourth, Ms. Higgins then 

separately met with the Commissioners 

(with the exception of the undersigned) 

in an effort to persuade them not to 

pursue her individually. Fifth, following 

those meetings, staff offered Ms. Higgins 

a consent decree that restricts Ms. 

Higgins’s ability to participate in a pure 

‘‘messenger system’’ in obtaining rates 

for those physicians that Boulder Valley 

represents. Sixth, Ms. Higgins rejected 

that consent decree, but rather than 

litigate, the Commission has since 

agreed to a consent decree that (unlike 

the Commission’s consent decree with 

Boulder Valley) (1) restricts Ms. Higgins 

to a limited messenger model for one 

year and (2) prevents Ms. Higgins from 

negotiating with any payor on behalf of 

any physician that participates in the 

BVIPA for two years. 

Under these circumstances, I cannot 

vote in support of the consent decree 

against Ms. Higgins. First, I do not 

believe that the Commission has 

adduced evidence that warrants 

switching its stance from not naming 

Ms. Higgins at all to requiring her to 

enter into a consent decree that restricts 

her ability to participate in a pure 

‘‘messenger system.’’ There is a factual 

dispute as to whether when Ms. Higgins 

made her post-consent statements to 

Anthem, Ms. Higgins understood that 

she (or Boulder Valley) was subject to 

the binding consent decree in Boulder 

Valley, which had not yet been made 

final. I do not believe that such disputed 

facts supply a sufficient basis for the 

Commission to now proceed against Ms. 

Higgins separately and require that she 

engage in more restrictive conduct as a 

condition of settlement. 

Second, in my view, the 

Commission’s decision today is 

unnecessarily punitive: Ms. Higgins 

cannot possibly do her job to the fullest 

extent for Boulder Valley if she is 

limited in her conduct as described. 

Moreover, I am gravely concerned that 

the Commission’s abrupt decision to 

change its tune can be viewed as 

retaliation for Ms. Higgins’s decision to 

exercise her First Amendment rights 

when she publicly criticized the 

Commission’s initial decision against 

Boulder Valley and for her ensuing 

decision to meet individual 

Commissioners in an effort to persuade 

them not to pursue her separately. 

Third, I believe that by separately 

naming Ms. Higgins, the Commission 

has reneged on its deal. Such actions 

will inevitably undermine the 

Commission’s ability to effectively 

negotiate consent decrees in the future. 

I greatly regret this chain of events, 

and I hope that it does not happen 

again. 

[FR Doc. 2010–4045 Filed 2–25–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–S 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

[Document Identifier: OS–0937–0025] 

Agency Information Collection 

Request; 60-Day Public Comment 

Request 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. 

Agency Information Collection Request; 

60-Day Public Comment Request 

In compliance with the requirement 

of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 

Office of the Secretary (OS), Department 

of Health and Human Services, is 

publishing the following summary of a 

proposed information collection request 

for public comment. Interested persons 

are invited to send comments regarding 

this burden estimate or any other aspect 

of this collection of information, 

including any of the following subjects: 

(1) The necessity and utility of the 

proposed information collection for the 

proper performance of the agency’s 

functions; (2) the accuracy of the 

estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (4) the 

use of automated collection techniques 

or other forms of information 

technology to minimize the information 

collection burden. 

To obtain copies of the supporting 

statement and any related forms for the 

proposed paperwork collections 

referenced above, e-mail your request, 

including your address, phone number, 

OMB number, and OS document 

identifier, to 

Sherette.funncoleman@hhs.gov, or call 

the Reports Clearance Office on (202) 

690–6162. Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collections must be directed 

to the OS Paperwork Clearance Officer 

at the above e-mail address within 60 

days. 

Proposed Project: Application for 

Appointment as a Commissioned 

Officer in the United States Public 

Health Service Commissioned Corps, 

OMB No. 0937–0025 Revision, Office of 

Commissioned Corps Force 

Management, Office of Public Health 

and Science. 

Abstract: Pursuant to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of 

Commissioned Corps Force 

Management (OCCFM), Office of Public 

Health and Science (OPHS), requests 

that the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) approve form PHS–50, 

‘‘Application for Appointment as a 

Commissioned Officer in the United 

States Public Health Service 

Commissioned Corps,’’ (OMB No. 0937– 

0025) and form PHS–1813, ‘‘Reference 

Request for Applicants to the United 

States Public Health Service 

Commissioned Corps’’ (OMB No. 0937– 

0025). 

The principal purpose for collecting 

the information is to permit HHS to 

determine eligibility for appointment of 

applicants into the Commissioned Corps 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 38 / Friday, February 26, 2010 / Notices 8953 

of the U.S. Public Health Service 

(Corps). The application packet pertains 

only to individual health professionals 

who wish to apply for appointment in 

the Corps. This is a request for a 3-year 

approval. 

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN TABLE

Forms 

(if necessary) Type of respondent Number of respondents 

Number of 

responses per 

respondent 

Average 

burden hours 

per response 

Total burden 

hours 

PHS–50 ............................................. Applicant to Corps ............................ 2,500 1 1 2500 

PHS–1813 ......................................... Reference for Applicant ................... 10,000 1 15/60 2500 

Total ........................................... ........................................................... 12,500 1 ........................ 5000 

Seleda Perryman, 

Office of the Secretary, Paperwork Reduction 

Act Reports Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2010–3981 Filed 2–25–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4150–28–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

[Document Identifier: OS–0990–; 30-day 

notice] 

Agency Information Collection 

Request; 30-Day Public Comment 

Request 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. 

Agency Information Collection Request; 

30-Day Public Comment Request 

In compliance with the requirement 

of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 

Office of the Secretary (OS), Department 

of Health and Human Services, is 

publishing the following summary of a 

proposed collection for public 

comment. Interested persons are invited 

to send comments regarding this burden 

estimate or any other aspect of this 

collection of information, including any 

of the following subjects: (1) The 

necessity and utility of the proposed 

information collection for the proper 

performance of the agency’s functions; 

(2) the accuracy of the estimated 

burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and (4) the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology to 

minimize the information collection 

burden. 

To obtain copies of the supporting 

statement and any related forms for the 

proposed paperwork collections 

referenced above, e-mail your request, 

including your address, phone number, 

OMB number, and OS document 

identifier, to 

Sherette.funncoleman@hhs.gov, or call 

the Reports Clearance Office on (202) 

690–5683. Send written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collections within 30 days 

of this notice directly to the OS OMB 

Desk Officer; faxed to OMB at 202–395– 

5806. 

Proposed Project: Evaluation of the 

Parents Speak Up National Campaign 

(PSUNC): Focus Groups with 

Adolescents. OMB No. 0990—NEW— 

Office of the Secretary/Office of Public 

Health and Science/Office Adolescent 

Pregnancy Programs. 

Abstract: The data collection will take 

place once, over a three-day period, in 

early 2010. An estimated 2000 adults 

will be screened to identify parents who 

are willing for their child to participate 

in the study and whose child is eligible. 

Screening will take an estimated 3 

minutes, on average. Study participants 

will total 160 adolescents ages 13–15. 

Participation in the study will take an 

estimated 2 hours on average; including 

time spent responding to a miniquestionnaire and participating in a 

bulletin board focus group. Participants 

will self-administer the miniquestionnaire at home on personal 

computers and will also participate in 

the focus group online. The specific aim 

of this study is to assess qualitatively 

what kinds of information about sex 

adolescents want to hear from their 

parents and their perspectives on the 

factors that either hinder or facilitate 

effective communication. 

ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED BURDEN TABLE

Forms 

(if necessary) Type of respondent Number of respondents 

Number of responses per 

respondent 

Average 

burden hours 

per response 

Total burden 

hours 

Screener ............................................ Adults ............................................... 2,000 1 3/60 100 

Focus group discussion guide and 

mini-questionnaire.

Adolescents ages 13–15 .................. 160 1 2 320 

Total ........................................... ........................................................... 2,160 ........................ ........................ 420 

Seleda M. Perryman, 

Office of the Secretary, Paperwork Reduction 

Act Reports Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2010–3982 Filed 2–25–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4150–30–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Office of the National Coordinator for 

Health Information Technology HIT 

Policy Committee Advisory Meeting; 

Notice of Meeting 

AGENCY: Office of the National 

Coordinator for Health Information 

Technology, HHS. 

ACTION: Notice of meeting. 

This notice announces a forthcoming 

meeting of a public advisory committee 

of the Office of the National Coordinator 

for Health Information Technology 

(ONC). The meeting will be open to the 

public. 

Name of Committee: HIT Policy 

Committee. 

General Function of the Committee: 

To provide recommendations to the 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES