Lands'End, A Subsidiary of Sears Roebuck and Company, Business Outfitters CAD Operations, Dodgeville, Wisconsin; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand, 18357-18358 [E6-5277]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 2006 / Notices employment occurred at the subject facility during the relevant period. Conclusion After careful review of the facts generated through the remand investigation, I determine that a shift in production of financial applications software like or directly competitive to that produced at the subject facility to Mexico contributed importantly to the total or partial separation of a significant number of workers at the subject facility. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following certification: ‘‘All workers of Electronic Data Systems Corporation, I Solutions Center, Fairborn, Ohio, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after December 27, 2001, 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.’’ Signed at Washington, DC this 24th day of March 2006. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E6–5279 Filed 4–10–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–30–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–56,688] wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES Lands’End, A Subsidiary of Sears Roebuck and Company, Business Outfitters CAD Operations, Dodgeville, Wisconsin; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand In an Order issued on December 7, 2005, the United States Court of International Trade (USCIT) granted the motion filed by the Department of Labor (Department) for voluntary remand in Former Employees of Lands’ End Business Outfitters v. United States Secretary of Labor, Court No. 05–00517. The Department denied Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) to workers of Lands’ End, a Subsidiary of Sears Roebuck and Company, Business Outfitters CAD Operations, Dodgeville, Wisconsin, (Lands’ End) because the workers’ separations were due to the subject company’s decision to move computer assisted design operations abroad. The subject worker group is engaged in computerizing embroidery and logo designs which are utilized by the production division of Lands’ End, also VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:37 Apr 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 located in Dodgeville, Wisconsin. The Notice of determination was issued on March 25, 2005, and published in the Federal Register on May 2, 2005 (70 FR 22710). On June 6, 2005, the Department issued an Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers and former workers of the subject firm. The Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register on June 20, 2005 (70 FR 35456). In the request for reconsideration, the petitioners alleged that workers produce digitized embroidery designs, that production shifted overseas, and that imports had increased following the shift of production abroad. A negative determination on reconsideration was issued on July 28, 2005. The Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register on August 9, 2005 (70 FR 46190). During the reconsideration investigation, the Department was informed that the workers create digitized embroidery designs from customers’ logos. The designs are owned by the customers. The digitized designs are readable by the embroidery machines at Dodgeville, Wisconsin, and are embroidered onto clothing and luggage produced by Lands’ End. Alternatively, the customer may give the design to another apparel manufacturer for the production of the logo design on clothing and luggage. The Department found that the production of digitized embroidery designs shifted overseas, and that the designs are electronically returned to Dodgeville, Wisconsin. Because the Department’s policy required that articles be tangible for purposes of the Trade Act, it was determined that the workers did not produce an article and were not covered by the Trade Act. Since the issuance of the voluntary remand order, the Department has revised its policy to acknowledge that, at least in the context of this case, there are tangible and intangible articles and to clarify that the production of intangible articles can be distinguished from the provision of services. Software and similar intangible goods that would have been considered articles for the purposes of the Trade Act if embodied in a physical medium will now be considered to be articles regardless of their method of transfer. The Department stresses that it will continue to implement the longstanding precedent that firms must produce an article to be certified under the Act. This determination is not altered by the fact the provision of a service may result in the incidental creation of an article. For example, accountants provide PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 18357 services for the purposes of the Act even though, in the course of providing those services, they may generate audit reports or similar financial documents that might be articles on the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. Because the new policy may have ramifications beyond this case of which the Department is not fully cognizant, the new policy will be further developed in rulemaking. Moreover, because it is the Department’s practice to apply current policy instead of the policy which existed during the investigative period if doing so is favorable to the workers, the Department conducted the remand investigation under the new policy. After careful review of the facts, the Department has determined that: the petitioners are former employees of Land’s End Business Outfitters CAD operations of Dodgeville, Wisconsin; that the workers’ firm produced an intangible article (digitized embroidery designs) that would have been considered an article if embodied in a physical medium; that employment at the subject facility declined during the relevant period; that the workers’ firm shifted digitized embroidery design production abroad; and that the workers’ firm increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with the digitized embroidery designs produced at the subject facility. In accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, the Department of Labor herein presents the results of its investigation regarding certification of eligibility to apply ATAA. In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for ATAA, the group eligibility requirements of Section 246 of the Trade Act must be met. The Department has determined in this case that the requirements of Section 246 have been met. Additional investigation has determined that the workers possess skills that are not easily transferable. A significant number or proportion of the worker group are age fifty years or over. Competitive conditions within the industry are adverse. Conclusion After careful review of the facts generated through the remand investigation, I determine that increased imports of digitized embroidery designs like or directly competitive with those produced by the subject firm contributed importantly to the total or partial separation of a significant number of workers at the subject facility. In accordance with the E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM 11APN1 18358 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 69 / Tuesday, April 11, 2006 / Notices provisions of the Act, I make the following certification: DEPARTMENT OF LABOR ‘‘All workers of Lands’ End, a Subsidiary of Sears Roebuck and Company, Business Outfitters CAD Operations, Dodgeville, Wisconsin, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after March 3, 2004, 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 24th day of March 2006. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E6–5277 Filed 4–10–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–30–P Employment and Training Administration Investigations Regarding Certifications of Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance Petitions have been filed with the Secretary of Labor under Section 221(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (‘‘the Act’’) and are identified in the Appendix to this notice. Upon receipt of these petitions, the Director of the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, has instituted investigations pursuant to Section 221 (a) of the Act. The purpose of each of the investigations is to determine whether the workers are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Title II, Chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations will further relate, as appropriate, to the determination of the date on which total or partial separations began or threatened to begin and the subdivision of the firm involved. The petitioners or any other persons showing a substantial interest in the subject matter of the investigations may request a public hearing, provided such request is filed in writing with the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than April 21, 2006. Interested persons are invited to submit written comments regarding the subject matter of the investigations to the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than April 21, 2006. The petitions filed in this case are available for inspection at the Office of the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room C–5311, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Signed at Washington, DC this 29th day of March 2006. Erica R. Cantor Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. APPENDIX— [TAA Petitions Instituted Between 3/6/06 and 3/10/06] wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES TA-W Subject firm (Petitioners) Location 58965 ....... 58966 ....... 58967 ....... 58968 ....... 58969 ....... 58970 ....... 58971 ....... 58972 ....... 58973 ....... 58974 ....... 58974A .... 58975 ....... 58976 ....... 58977 ....... 58978 ....... 58979 ....... 58980 ....... 58981 ....... 58982 ....... 58983 ....... 58984 ....... 58985 ....... 58986 ....... 58987 ....... 58988 ....... 58989 ....... 58990 ....... 58991 ....... 58992 ....... 58993 ....... 58994 ....... 58995 ....... Monmouth Ceramics, Inc. (Comp) .............................................. Quintiles, Inc. (Wkrs) .................................................................. Spectrum Brands (Wkrs) ............................................................ Maryland Plastics, Inc. (State) .................................................... Panel Products (Wkrs) ................................................................ ADC (State) ................................................................................. Sotco, Inc. (Comp) ...................................................................... Elite Furniture Mfg. (Comp) ........................................................ Arcona Leather Technologies, LLC (Wkrs) ................................ Affinia Group (Comp) .................................................................. Affinia Group (Comp) .................................................................. Nazar Rubber Company (Union) ................................................ Berkshire Weaving Corp. (Comp) ............................................... Oce’ Imagistics, Inc. (State) ........................................................ Confluent Photonics Corp. (Comp) ............................................. Tension Envelopes Corp. (State) ............................................... Stora Enso (Comp) ..................................................................... Cardinal Brands, Inc. (Comp) ..................................................... Guildcraft of California (State) .................................................... Hersey Meters (Comp) ............................................................... Independent Steel Casting Co., Inc. (UAW) ............................... York International (Wkrs) ............................................................ Galerie DBA Ross Acquisitions (Wkrs) ...................................... Lady Ester Lingerie Corporation (Comp) .................................... Orlandi Valuta (Wkrs) ................................................................. Thermalcast, LLC (Wkrs) ............................................................ H.W. Close Plant Springs Global (Wkrs) .................................... Lear Corporation (Wkrs) ............................................................. Georgia Pacific Corp. (Union) ..................................................... Ark-Les Custom Products Corporation (Comp) .......................... Commercial Furniture Group, Inc. (Comp) ................................. Moore Wallace, Inc. (Comp) ....................................................... Monmouth, IL ........................... Morrisville, NC .......................... Fennimore, WI .......................... Federalsburg, MD .................... White City, OR ......................... Shakopee, MN ......................... West Paducah, KY ................... High Point, NC ......................... Hudson, NC .............................. North East, PA ......................... Erie, PA .................................... Toledo, OH ............................... Lancaster, SC .......................... Melbourne, FL .......................... Salem, NH ................................ Minnetonka, MN ....................... Stevens Point, WI .................... Topeka, KS .............................. Rancho Dominguez, CA .......... Cleveland, NC .......................... New Buffalo, MI ........................ Bristol, VA ................................ Wellston, OH ............................ Berwick, PA .............................. Cerritos, CA .............................. Worcester, MA ......................... Fort Lawn, SC .......................... Lebanon, VA ............................ Gaylord, MI ............................... New Berlin, WI ......................... Morristown, TN ......................... Nacogdoches, TX ..................... VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:37 Apr 10, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM Date of institution 11APN1 03/06/06 03/06/06 03/06/06 03/07/06 03/07/06 03/07/06 03/07/06 03/07/06 03/07/06 03/07/06 03/07/06 03/07/06 03/07/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 03/10/06 Date of petition 03/06/06 03/01/06 03/03/06 03/03/06 03/06/06 03/06/06 02/17/06 03/06/06 02/24/06 03/07/06 03/07/06 03/07/06 03/01/06 03/07/06 03/09/06 03/07/06 03/07/07 03/08/06 03/08/06 03/08/06 03/02/06 03/02/06 03/06/06 03/08/06 03/09/06 02/09/06 03/01/06 03/06/06 03/09/06 03/03/06 03/09/06 03/08/06

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18357-18358]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-5277]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-56,688]


Lands'End, A Subsidiary of Sears Roebuck and Company, Business 
Outfitters CAD Operations, Dodgeville, Wisconsin; Notice of Revised 
Determination on Remand

    In an Order issued on December 7, 2005, the United States Court of 
International Trade (USCIT) granted the motion filed by the Department 
of Labor (Department) for voluntary remand in Former Employees of 
Lands' End Business Outfitters v. United States Secretary of Labor, 
Court No. 05-00517.
    The Department denied Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and 
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) to workers of Lands' 
End, a Subsidiary of Sears Roebuck and Company, Business Outfitters CAD 
Operations, Dodgeville, Wisconsin, (Lands' End) because the workers' 
separations were due to the subject company's decision to move computer 
assisted design operations abroad. The subject worker group is engaged 
in computerizing embroidery and logo designs which are utilized by the 
production division of Lands' End, also located in Dodgeville, 
Wisconsin. The Notice of determination was issued on March 25, 2005, 
and published in the Federal Register on May 2, 2005 (70 FR 22710).
    On June 6, 2005, the Department issued an Affirmative Determination 
Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers and former 
workers of the subject firm. The Notice of determination was published 
in the Federal Register on June 20, 2005 (70 FR 35456). In the request 
for reconsideration, the petitioners alleged that workers produce 
digitized embroidery designs, that production shifted overseas, and 
that imports had increased following the shift of production abroad.
    A negative determination on reconsideration was issued on July 28, 
2005. The Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register 
on August 9, 2005 (70 FR 46190). During the reconsideration 
investigation, the Department was informed that the workers create 
digitized embroidery designs from customers' logos. The designs are 
owned by the customers. The digitized designs are readable by the 
embroidery machines at Dodgeville, Wisconsin, and are embroidered onto 
clothing and luggage produced by Lands' End. Alternatively, the 
customer may give the design to another apparel manufacturer for the 
production of the logo design on clothing and luggage. The Department 
found that the production of digitized embroidery designs shifted 
overseas, and that the designs are electronically returned to 
Dodgeville, Wisconsin. Because the Department's policy required that 
articles be tangible for purposes of the Trade Act, it was determined 
that the workers did not produce an article and were not covered by the 
Trade Act.
    Since the issuance of the voluntary remand order, the Department 
has revised its policy to acknowledge that, at least in the context of 
this case, there are tangible and intangible articles and to clarify 
that the production of intangible articles can be distinguished from 
the provision of services. Software and similar intangible goods that 
would have been considered articles for the purposes of the Trade Act 
if embodied in a physical medium will now be considered to be articles 
regardless of their method of transfer.
    The Department stresses that it will continue to implement the 
longstanding precedent that firms must produce an article to be 
certified under the Act. This determination is not altered by the fact 
the provision of a service may result in the incidental creation of an 
article. For example, accountants provide services for the purposes of 
the Act even though, in the course of providing those services, they 
may generate audit reports or similar financial documents that might be 
articles on the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. 
Because the new policy may have ramifications beyond this case of which 
the Department is not fully cognizant, the new policy will be further 
developed in rulemaking.
    Moreover, because it is the Department's practice to apply current 
policy instead of the policy which existed during the investigative 
period if doing so is favorable to the workers, the Department 
conducted the remand investigation under the new policy.
    After careful review of the facts, the Department has determined 
that: the petitioners are former employees of Land's End Business 
Outfitters CAD operations of Dodgeville, Wisconsin; that the workers' 
firm produced an intangible article (digitized embroidery designs) that 
would have been considered an article if embodied in a physical medium; 
that employment at the subject facility declined during the relevant 
period; that the workers' firm shifted digitized embroidery design 
production abroad; and that the workers' firm increased imports of 
articles like or directly competitive with the digitized embroidery 
designs produced at the subject facility.
    In accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, 
the Department of Labor herein presents the results of its 
investigation regarding certification of eligibility to apply ATAA.
    In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility 
to apply for ATAA, the group eligibility requirements of Section 246 of 
the Trade Act must be met. The Department has determined in this case 
that the requirements of Section 246 have been met.
    Additional investigation has determined that the workers possess 
skills that are not easily transferable. A significant number or 
proportion of the worker group are age fifty years or over. Competitive 
conditions within the industry are adverse.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the facts generated through the remand 
investigation, I determine that increased imports of digitized 
embroidery designs like or directly competitive with those produced by 
the subject firm contributed importantly to the total or partial 
separation of a significant number of workers at the subject facility. 
In accordance with the

[[Page 18358]]

provisions of the Act, I make the following certification:

    ``All workers of Lands' End, a Subsidiary of Sears Roebuck and 
Company, Business Outfitters CAD Operations, Dodgeville, Wisconsin, 
who became totally or partially separated from employment on or 
after March 3, 2004, 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 24th day of March 2006.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
 [FR Doc. E6-5277 Filed 4-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P