Submission for OMB Review: Comment Request, 19895-19896 [E6-5771]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
19895
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 18, 2006 / Notices
(August 11, 2005). The complaint
alleged violations section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the
importation into the United States, the
sale for importation, and the sale within
the United States after importation of
certain tissue converting machinery,
including rewinders, tail sealers, trim
removers, and components thereof by
reason of infringement of claims 1, 3, 6–
8, and 13–15 of U.S. Patent No.
5,979,818, claims 1–5 of U.S. Patent No.
Re. 35,729, and claim 5 of U.S. Patent
No. 5,475,917. The complaint and
notice of investigation named Chan Li
Machinery, Co., Ltd. of Taipei Hsien,
Taiwan as the respondent.
The Commission determined not to
review ALJ Order No. 10, adding to this
investigation claims 7, 12, 15 and 16 of
U.S. Patent No. 6,948,677, and ALJ
Order No. 11, adding Fabio Perini S.p.A.
(of Italy) as a complainant. See Certain
Tissue Converting Machinery, Including
Rewinders, Tail Sealers, Trim Removers,
and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337–
TA–548, Notice of Commission Decision
Not to Review, 71 FR 10065 (February
28, 2006). On February 22, 2006, the
ALJ issued Order No. 13 staying the
proceedings in view of settlement
negotiations.
On February 27, 2006, Fabio Perini
North America, Inc., Fabio Perini S.p.A.,
and Chan Li Machinery Co. Ltd. filed a
‘‘Joint Motion to Terminate
Investigation Based Upon Settlement
Agreement.’’ On March 6, 2006, the
Commission Investigative Attorney filed
a motion in support of the joint motion
to terminate, noting that it was unaware
of any information indicating that the
basis of the settlement agreement would
be contrary to the public interest.
On March 13, 2006, the ALJ issued
the subject ID (Order No. 14)
terminating the investigation on the
basis of a settlement agreement. The ALJ
found no indication that termination of
the investigation on the basis of the
settlement agreement would adversely
affect the public interest, and that the
procedural requirements for terminating
the investigation had been met. No
petitions for review were filed.
The Commission has determined not
to review the ID.
This action is taken under the
authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337,
and Commission rule 210.42, 19 CFR
210.42.
Issued: April 12, 2006.
By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E6–5786 Filed 4–17–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Office of the Secretary
Submission for OMB Review:
Comment Request
April 12, 2006.
The Department of Labor (DOL) has
submitted the following public
information collection request (ICR) to
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13,
44 U.S.C. chapter 35). A copy of this
ICR, with applicable supporting
documentation, may be obtained by
contacting Darrin King on 202–693–
4129 (this is not a toll-free number) or
email: king.darrin@dol.gov.
Comments should be sent to Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the
Employment Standards Administration
(ESA), Office of Management and
Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC
20503, 202–395–7316 (this is not a tollfree number), within 30 days from the
date of this publication in the Federal
Register.
The OMB is particularly interested in
comments which:
• Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
• Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
• Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
• Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Agency: Employment Standards
Administration.
Type of Review: Extension of
currently approved collection.
Title: Application to Employ
Homeworkers Piece Rate Measurements,
Homeworker Handbooks.
OMB Number: 1215–0013.
Form Numbers: WH–46 and WH–75.
Frequency: On occasion.
Type of Response: Recordkeeping and
Reporting.
Affected Public: Business or other forprofit; Individuals or households; and
Not-for-profit institutions.
Number of Respondents: 377,531.
Annual
responses
Collection of information
Average
response time
(hours)
Annual burden
hours
Form WH–46 ...............................................................................................................................
Form WH–75 ...............................................................................................................................
Recordkeeping
Piece-rate measurements ....................................................................................................
Homeworker Handbooks* .....................................................................................................
25
1,208,020
0.50
0.50
13
604,010
150
1,208,020
1.01
0.01
152
10,067
Total ...............................................................................................................................
1,208,195
........................
614,241
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
* Not counted in total as separate responses.
Total Annualized capital/startup
costs: $0.
Total Annual Costs (operating/
maintaining systems or purchasing
services): $10.50.
Description: Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) section 11(d), 29 U.S.C. 211(d),
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:03 Apr 17, 2006
Jkt 208001
authorizes the Secretary of Labor to
regulate, restrict, or prohibit industrial
homework as necessary to prevent
evasion of the minimum wage
requirements of the Act. The reporting
and recordkeeping requirements for
employers and employees in industries
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
employing homeworkers are necessary
E:\FR\FM\18APN1.SGM
18APN1
19896
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 18, 2006 / Notices
to insure employees are paid in
compliance with FLSA.
Darrin A. King,
Acting Departmental Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. E6–5771 Filed 4–17–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–27–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–59,024]
Agilent Technologies, Inc., Global
Infrastructure Organization, Palo Alto,
CA; Notice of Termination of
Investigation
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended, an
investigation was initiated on March 14,
2006 in response to a worker petition
filed on behalf of workers at Agilent
Technologies, Inc., Global Infrastructure
Organization, headquartered in Palo
Alto, California. The workers were
employed as information technology
specialists, telecommuting from their
homes, but reporting to different
facilities.
The petition regarding the
investigation has been deemed invalid.
Petitioners do not constitute a valid
worker group of three or more
associated workers working at the same
facility. Consequently, the investigation
has been terminated.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of
April 2006.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6–5769 Filed 4–17–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–58,620]
hsrobinson on PROD1PC68 with NOTICES
Bankers Trust Services A/K/A
Deutsche Bank Services Tennessee,
Inc., Nashville, TN; Notice of Negative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration
By application dated February 22,
2006 a petitioner requested
administrative reconsideration of the
Department’s negative determination
regarding eligibility for workers and
former workers of the subject firm to
apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
(TAA). The denial notice applicable to
workers of Bankers Trust Services,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:03 Apr 17, 2006
Jkt 208001
a/k/a Deutsche Bank Services
Tennessee, Inc., Nashville, Tennessee
was signed on January 26, 2006 and
published in the Federal Register on
February 10, 2006 (71 FR 7077).
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 misinterpretation of facts or of
the law justified reconsideration of the
decision.
The TAA petition filed on behalf of
workers at Bankers Trust Services,
a/k/a Deutsche Bank Services
Tennessee, Inc., Nashville, Tennessee
were engaged in providing general
banking and financial services to the
public and were denied because the
petitioning workers did not produce an
article within the meaning of section
222 of the Act.
The petitioner contends that the
Department erred in its interpretation of
work performed at the subject facility as
providing a service and further conveys
that workers of the subject firm
‘‘produced individualized billing
models with separate tangible file
folders’’. The petitioner further states
that ‘‘billing would have been
impossible without the production of
these individualized billing models’’.
A company official was contacted for
clarification in regard to the nature of
the work performed at the subject
facility. The official stated that the
subject firm does not manufacture
products that are sold on the open
market. The official further clarified that
workers of the subject firm entered
account information into an in-house
billing system for the purpose of billing
external clients. The copies of the work
that was entered into the system was
kept in a tangible file folder at the
subject firm for reference purposes.
The sophistication of the work
involved is not an issue in ascertaining
whether the petitioning workers are
eligible for trade adjustment assistance,
but whether they produce an article
within the meaning of section 222 of the
Trade Act of 1974.
Entering accounting information into
the billing system and making copies of
the billing financial data for filing
purposes is not considered production
of an article within the meaning of
section 222 of the Trade Act. Petitioning
workers do not produce an ‘‘article’’
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
within the meaning of the Trade Act of
1974.
The investigation on reconsideration
supported the findings of the primary
investigation that the petitioning group
of workers does not produce an article.
Furthermore, workers of the subject firm
did not support production of an article
at any affiliated facility.
The petitioner further alleges that
because workers lost their jobs due to a
transfer of job functions to India,
petitioning workers should be
considered import impacted.
The company official stated that such
functions as entry of accounting
information into a Deutsche Bank
billing system for the purpose of billing
external clients were shifted to India.
Your petition allegation of jobs
transferred to a foreign country might be
relevant if all other worker group
eligibility requirements for trade
adjustment assistance were met.
However, workers of the subject firm are
engaged in data entry of the account
information into the in-house billing
system and do not meet the requirement
of producing an article as established in
section 222 of the Trade Act. Thus, the
workers in this case do not meet the
worker group eligibility requirements of
TAA.
Service workers can be certified only
if worker separations are caused by a
reduced demand for their services from
a parent or controlling firm or
subdivision whose workers produce an
article domestically who meet the
eligibility requirements, or if the group
of workers are leased workers who
perform their duties at a facility that
meet the eligibility requirements.
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 at Washington, DC, this 11th day of
April, 2006.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6–5764 Filed 4–17–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
E:\FR\FM\18APN1.SGM
18APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 74 (Tuesday, April 18, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19895-19896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-5771]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Office of the Secretary
Submission for OMB Review: Comment Request
April 12, 2006.
The Department of Labor (DOL) has submitted the following public
information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35). A copy of
this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by
contacting Darrin King on 202-693-4129 (this is not a toll-free number)
or email: king.darrin@dol.gov.
Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the Employment Standards
Administration (ESA), Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235,
Washington, DC 20503, 202-395-7316 (this is not a toll-free number),
within 30 days from the date of this publication in the Federal
Register.
The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:
Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
Minimize the burden of the collection of information on
those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate
automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection
techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
Agency: Employment Standards Administration.
Type of Review: Extension of currently approved collection.
Title: Application to Employ Homeworkers Piece Rate Measurements,
Homeworker Handbooks.
OMB Number: 1215-0013.
Form Numbers: WH-46 and WH-75.
Frequency: On occasion.
Type of Response: Recordkeeping and Reporting.
Affected Public: Business or other for-profit; Individuals or
households; and Not-for-profit institutions.
Number of Respondents: 377,531.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average
Collection of information Annual response time Annual burden
responses (hours) hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Form WH-46...................................................... 25 0.50 13
Form WH-75...................................................... 1,208,020 0.50 604,010
Recordkeeping
Piece-rate measurements..................................... 150 1.01 152
Homeworker Handbooks*....................................... 1,208,020 0.01 10,067
-----------------------------------------------
Total................................................... 1,208,195 .............. 614,241
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Not counted in total as separate responses.
Total Annualized capital/startup costs: $0.
Total Annual Costs (operating/maintaining systems or purchasing
services): $10.50.
Description: Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) section 11(d), 29
U.S.C. 211(d), authorizes the Secretary of Labor to regulate, restrict,
or prohibit industrial homework as necessary to prevent evasion of the
minimum wage requirements of the Act. The reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for employers and employees in industries employing
homeworkers are necessary
[[Page 19896]]
to insure employees are paid in compliance with FLSA.
Darrin A. King,
Acting Departmental Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. E6-5771 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-27-P
