Solicitation for Grant Applications (SGA); Community-Based Job Training Grants Correction, 44321-44322 [E6-12763]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 150 / Friday, August 4, 2006 / Notices
TA–W–59,627; Liebert Corporation,
Irvine, CA.
The workers’ firm does not produce
an article as required for certification
under Section 222 of the Trade Act of
1974.
TA–W–59,494; Sun Microsystems, Inc.,
Information Technology Group,
Santa Clara, CA.
TA–W–59,521; Dora L. International,
Customer Service Division, Los
Angeles, CA.
TA–W–59,632; Lightmaster Systems,
Inc., Cupertino, CA.
TA–W–59,637; Americas Finance
Organization, A Subdivision of
Lenovo USA, Research Triangle
Park, NC.
TA–W–59,640; Armstrong World
Industries Inc., Customer Service
Call Center, Lancaster, PA.
TA–W–59,662; Geneva Steel LLC, A
Subsidiary of Geneva Steel
Holdings, Vineyard, UT.
TA–W–59,683; Morse Automotive Corp.,
Arkadelphia, AR.
The investigation revealed that
criteria of Section 222(b)(2) has not been
met. The workers’ firm (or subdivision)
is not a supplier to or a downstream
producer for a firm whose workers were
certified eligible to apply for TAA.
TA–W–59,534; Pictorial Engraving Co.,
Charlotte, NC.
I hereby certify that the
aforementioned determinations were
issued during the month of July 2006.
Copies of these determinations are
available for inspection in Room C–
5311, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20210 during normal business hours
or will be mailed to persons who write
to the above address.
Dated: July 28, 2006.
Erica R. Cantor,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6–12623 Filed 8–3–06;
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
Notice was published in the Federal
Register on May 19, 2006 (71 FR 29184).
The petition for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA), dated February 28,
2006, filed on behalf of workers of WSW
Company of Sharon, Inc., a Subsidiary
of Wormser Company, Sharon,
Tennessee (subject facility) was denied
because, during the relevant period, the
workers did not produce an article
within the meaning of the Trade Act
and did not support a domestic
production facility that was importimpacted. While the subject facility was
previously certified for TAA (TA–W–
51,848), the certification expired prior
to the petition date (expired on June 30,
2005).
In the request for reconsideration, the
petitioners assert that, during the
relevant period, they were engaged in
activity related to the production of an
article (children’s sleepwear)
manufactured by Wormser Company
(subject firm).
During the reconsideration
investigation, the Department confirmed
that domestic production had ceased in
2004 and, therefore, determined that
production did not take place at the
subject facility during the relevant
period.
In subsequent submissions, the
petitioners asserted that they produced
‘‘pick tickets’’ (internal-use distribution
documents) and labels used for
shipping. Although the workers’
activities resulted in printed material,
this material is incidental to the
provision of distribution services. The
Department has consistently determined
that items produced as a result of the
provision of services are not marketable
and not an article for purposes of the
Trade Act.
Further, information provided by the
petitioners reveal that the activities in
which they were engaged supported a
domestic warehousing and shipping
facility, not a production facility.
Conclusion
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
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.
Employment and Training
Administration
gechino on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
[TA–W–58,935]
WSW Company of Sharon, Inc., a
Subsidiary of Wormser Company,
Sharon, TN; Notice of Negative
Determination on Reconsideration
On May 10, 2006, the Department
issued an Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for
Reconsideration for the workers and
former workers of the subject firm. The
VerDate Aug<31>2005
22:39 Aug 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
Signed at Washington, DC, this 27th day of
July 2006.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6–12621 Filed 8–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
44321
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Solicitation for Grant Applications
(SGA); Community-Based Job Training
Grants Correction
Employment and Training
Administration (ETA), Labor.
ACTION: Notice; correction and
supplemental information.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Employment and
Training Administration published a
document in the Federal Register on
July 3, 2006, concerning the availability
of grant funds to support workforce
training for high-growth/high-demand
industries through the national system
of community and technical colleges.
This correction is to explain how OneStop Career Center applicants must
apply and to provide additional
clarification regarding direct training
costs, tuition payments, and the
leveraging of Workforce Investment Act
resources.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kevin Brumback, Grants Management
Specialist, Division of Federal
Assistance, (202) 693–3381.
Corrections
In the Federal Register of July 3,
2006, in FR Volume 71, Number 127:
On Page 37953, in the third column,
Section III(A)(4) is corrected to read:
4. One-Stop Career Centers, as
established under Section 121 of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (Pub.
L. 105–220). The eligible applicant for
One-Stop Career Centers is the One-Stop
Operator, as defined under Section 121
of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998
(Pub. L. 105–220), on behalf of the OneStop Career Center. The applicant must:
(1) Have a letter of concurrence from all
signatories to the One-Stop Career
Center Memorandum of Understanding,
including the Local Workforce
Investment Board (WIB) and all
mandatory partners, as specified in
Section 121 of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998; (2) demonstrate
that the proposed activities are
consistent with the state strategic
Workforce Investment Act plan; and (3)
demonstrate that the Local Workforce
Investment Board, or its designated
fiscal agent, will serve as the fiscal agent
for the grant. The Workforce Investment
Board’s support and involvement in the
project should be detailed in the letter
of concurrence, which should also
address the above requirements (2) and
(3). The WIB may also address above
requirements 2 and 3 in a separate letter
E:\FR\FM\04AUN1.SGM
04AUN1
44322
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 150 / Friday, August 4, 2006 / Notices
of concurrence. Applications from OneStop Career Centers without a letter of
concurrence from the One-Stop Career
Center partners will be considered nonresponsive. One-Stop Career Center
applications must specify one or more
community college(s) where all capacity
building and training activities will
occur under the grant.
On page 37955, Section III(C), in the
first column, is corrected to add:
7. Re-designation of One-Stop
Operators. If at any time, the applicant
One-Stop Operator changes, then the
One-Stop partners may amend their
application, on behalf of the One-Stop
Career Center, for the purpose of
designating a new One-Stop Operator.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
gechino on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
(1) Clarification of the Intent of Behind
the Requirement That a Component of
All Applications Be Direct Training
Costs That Allow Participants, Without
Tuition Payments, To Be Enrolled in the
Training Program (71 FR 37948 (July 3,
2006) pages 37954.)
ETA’s intent with this condition is
that grantees do not ‘‘double dip’’ by
charging tuition AND direct training
costs from the grant for the same
enrollee. It is ETA’s expectation that the
grant will cover the direct training costs
for a substantive number of targeted
students and that those students would
not be charged tuition. Grantees must
identify and track the number of
individuals trained using grant dollars
as well as the number of individuals
trained using leveraged resources.
The SGA requires that each project
include a component of direct training.
Traditionally, institutions of higher
education charge a per-credit hour
tuition to cover these costs. ETA intends
that students participating in the direct
training component of the project not be
required to pay costs already covered by
the grant. Applicants may recoup the
costs of the direct training component in
two ways: (1) charging the grant the
normal tuition rate for the course or (2)
charging the actual direct and indirect
costs of the course. If the applicants
choose to recoup the costs through
tuition charged to the grant, they may
also charge the grant for the non-tuition
costs of attending the course such as lab
fees or books.
For the targeted number of students to
be trained with leveraged resources,
direct training may be leveraged with
Department of Education PELL grants,
WIA training funds, and other cash
sources. Also, these leveraged resources
may also cover the non-tuition costs of
attending the course such as lab fees or
books.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
22:39 Aug 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
In addition, the capacity building
component of the grant may enable
students beyond those targeted for
training under the grant to access
training at the college. The college may
charge those students tuition. In these
instances, applicants should estimate
the impact of this capacity building
activity by projecting the numbers of
students that will be trained in addition
to those targeted for training under the
grant and/or leveraged resources.
For reference, direct training costs are
the costs associated with the actual
provision of a training course as
opposed to the capacity building costs
associated with the development of
training capabilities or curriculums.
Direct training costs may include
(please note that this is not an
exhaustive list):
• Faculty costs, including salaries
and fringe benefits
• In-house training staff
• Support staff costs such as lab or
teaching assistants
• Classroom space, including
laboratories, mock-ups or other facilities
used for training purposes
• Books, materials, and supplies used
in the training course, including
specialized equipment used in the
training course
Direct training costs do not include
costs that support the college in general,
but not the training program, such as
fees to support student activities, the
library, gym or recreation center, etc,
which may be covered through some
other mechanism, such as student fees.
Indirect training costs may include the
applicable share of the Institution’s
indirect costs (overhead) and library or
other student activity fees associated
with the operation of the Institution.
Both direct and indirect training costs
must be allowable costs under the
applicable OMB circular. All direct and
indirect training costs should be linked
to a specific course or curriculum as
specified in the proposal or the
statement of work.
(2) Clarification of Intent Behind the 5
Bonus Points for Leveraging Workforce
Investment Act Resources (71 FR 37948
(July 3, 2006), pages 37951 and 37958.)
The application currently states:
‘‘Applications that demonstrate the use
of Workforce Investment Act (WIA)
funds for Individual Training Accounts,
the pilot of Career Advancement
Accounts, or for customized training to
cover the tuition costs for the CBJTG
training program for eligible new or
incumbent workers, will receive 5
bonus points,’’ 71 FR 37948 (July 3,
2006). ETA’s intent behind this criterion
is to award bonus points to applications
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
that demonstrate integration of WIA
training funds into grant activities.
Examples of WIA training funds include
Individual Training Accounts,
customized training, and Career
Advancement Accounts. Applications
that demonstrate the use of WIA
training funds, whether through ITAs,
customized training, or CAAs, will
receive 5 bonus points. This does not
change what is allowed for applications
to receive bonus points, but is a
clarification of the intent of bonus
points being for use of WIA training
funds generally, not just ITA’s, CAA’s,
or customized training, to cover the
tuition costs for eligible new or
incumbent workers.
Career Advancement Accounts
(CAAs) have been proposed in the
President’s Fiscal Year 2007 budget;
however ETA recognizes that some
states may be piloting CAAs in advance
of the FY 2007 budget, which is why
they are included in the list of programs
utilizing WIA training funds.
Dated: August 2, 2006.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 2nd day of
August, 2006.
Laura P. Watson,
Division Chief, Division of Federal Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6–12763 Filed 8–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS
ADMINISTRATION
Records Schedules; Availability and
Request for Comments
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA).
ACTION: Notice of availability of
proposed records schedules; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA)
publishes notice at least once monthly
of certain Federal agency requests for
records disposition authority (records
schedules). Once approved by NARA,
records schedules provide mandatory
instructions on what happens to records
when no longer needed for current
Government business. They authorize
the preservation of records of
continuing value in the National
Archives of the United States and the
destruction, after a specified period, of
records lacking administrative, legal,
research, or other value. Notice is
published for records schedules in
which agencies propose to destroy
records not previously authorized for
disposal or reduce the retention period
of records already authorized for
E:\FR\FM\04AUN1.SGM
04AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 150 (Friday, August 4, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44321-44322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-12763]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
Solicitation for Grant Applications (SGA); Community-Based Job
Training Grants Correction
AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration (ETA), Labor.
ACTION: Notice; correction and supplemental information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Employment and Training Administration published a
document in the Federal Register on July 3, 2006, concerning the
availability of grant funds to support workforce training for high-
growth/high-demand industries through the national system of community
and technical colleges. This correction is to explain how One-Stop
Career Center applicants must apply and to provide additional
clarification regarding direct training costs, tuition payments, and
the leveraging of Workforce Investment Act resources.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Brumback, Grants Management
Specialist, Division of Federal Assistance, (202) 693-3381.
Corrections
In the Federal Register of July 3, 2006, in FR Volume 71, Number
127: On Page 37953, in the third column, Section III(A)(4) is corrected
to read:
4. One-Stop Career Centers, as established under Section 121 of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (Pub. L. 105-220). The eligible
applicant for One-Stop Career Centers is the One-Stop Operator, as
defined under Section 121 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (Pub.
L. 105-220), on behalf of the One-Stop Career Center. The applicant
must: (1) Have a letter of concurrence from all signatories to the One-
Stop Career Center Memorandum of Understanding, including the Local
Workforce Investment Board (WIB) and all mandatory partners, as
specified in Section 121 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998; (2)
demonstrate that the proposed activities are consistent with the state
strategic Workforce Investment Act plan; and (3) demonstrate that the
Local Workforce Investment Board, or its designated fiscal agent, will
serve as the fiscal agent for the grant. The Workforce Investment
Board's support and involvement in the project should be detailed in
the letter of concurrence, which should also address the above
requirements (2) and (3). The WIB may also address above requirements 2
and 3 in a separate letter
[[Page 44322]]
of concurrence. Applications from One-Stop Career Centers without a
letter of concurrence from the One-Stop Career Center partners will be
considered non-responsive. One-Stop Career Center applications must
specify one or more community college(s) where all capacity building
and training activities will occur under the grant.
On page 37955, Section III(C), in the first column, is corrected to
add:
7. Re-designation of One-Stop Operators. If at any time, the
applicant One-Stop Operator changes, then the One-Stop partners may
amend their application, on behalf of the One-Stop Career Center, for
the purpose of designating a new One-Stop Operator.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
(1) Clarification of the Intent of Behind the Requirement That a
Component of All Applications Be Direct Training Costs That Allow
Participants, Without Tuition Payments, To Be Enrolled in the Training
Program (71 FR 37948 (July 3, 2006) pages 37954.)
ETA's intent with this condition is that grantees do not ``double
dip'' by charging tuition AND direct training costs from the grant for
the same enrollee. It is ETA's expectation that the grant will cover
the direct training costs for a substantive number of targeted students
and that those students would not be charged tuition. Grantees must
identify and track the number of individuals trained using grant
dollars as well as the number of individuals trained using leveraged
resources.
The SGA requires that each project include a component of direct
training. Traditionally, institutions of higher education charge a per-
credit hour tuition to cover these costs. ETA intends that students
participating in the direct training component of the project not be
required to pay costs already covered by the grant. Applicants may
recoup the costs of the direct training component in two ways: (1)
charging the grant the normal tuition rate for the course or (2)
charging the actual direct and indirect costs of the course. If the
applicants choose to recoup the costs through tuition charged to the
grant, they may also charge the grant for the non-tuition costs of
attending the course such as lab fees or books.
For the targeted number of students to be trained with leveraged
resources, direct training may be leveraged with Department of
Education PELL grants, WIA training funds, and other cash sources.
Also, these leveraged resources may also cover the non-tuition costs of
attending the course such as lab fees or books.
In addition, the capacity building component of the grant may
enable students beyond those targeted for training under the grant to
access training at the college. The college may charge those students
tuition. In these instances, applicants should estimate the impact of
this capacity building activity by projecting the numbers of students
that will be trained in addition to those targeted for training under
the grant and/or leveraged resources.
For reference, direct training costs are the costs associated with
the actual provision of a training course as opposed to the capacity
building costs associated with the development of training capabilities
or curriculums. Direct training costs may include (please note that
this is not an exhaustive list):
Faculty costs, including salaries and fringe benefits
In-house training staff
Support staff costs such as lab or teaching assistants
Classroom space, including laboratories, mock-ups or other
facilities used for training purposes
Books, materials, and supplies used in the training
course, including specialized equipment used in the training course
Direct training costs do not include costs that support the college
in general, but not the training program, such as fees to support
student activities, the library, gym or recreation center, etc, which
may be covered through some other mechanism, such as student fees.
Indirect training costs may include the applicable share of the
Institution's indirect costs (overhead) and library or other student
activity fees associated with the operation of the Institution. Both
direct and indirect training costs must be allowable costs under the
applicable OMB circular. All direct and indirect training costs should
be linked to a specific course or curriculum as specified in the
proposal or the statement of work.
(2) Clarification of Intent Behind the 5 Bonus Points for Leveraging
Workforce Investment Act Resources (71 FR 37948 (July 3, 2006), pages
37951 and 37958.)
The application currently states: ``Applications that demonstrate
the use of Workforce Investment Act (WIA) funds for Individual Training
Accounts, the pilot of Career Advancement Accounts, or for customized
training to cover the tuition costs for the CBJTG training program for
eligible new or incumbent workers, will receive 5 bonus points,'' 71 FR
37948 (July 3, 2006). ETA's intent behind this criterion is to award
bonus points to applications that demonstrate integration of WIA
training funds into grant activities. Examples of WIA training funds
include Individual Training Accounts, customized training, and Career
Advancement Accounts. Applications that demonstrate the use of WIA
training funds, whether through ITAs, customized training, or CAAs,
will receive 5 bonus points. This does not change what is allowed for
applications to receive bonus points, but is a clarification of the
intent of bonus points being for use of WIA training funds generally,
not just ITA's, CAA's, or customized training, to cover the tuition
costs for eligible new or incumbent workers.
Career Advancement Accounts (CAAs) have been proposed in the
President's Fiscal Year 2007 budget; however ETA recognizes that some
states may be piloting CAAs in advance of the FY 2007 budget, which is
why they are included in the list of programs utilizing WIA training
funds.
Dated: August 2, 2006.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 2nd day of August, 2006.
Laura P. Watson,
Division Chief, Division of Federal Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6-12763 Filed 8-3-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P
