C&C Smith Lumber Company, Inc., Summerhill, PA; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 5084-5085 [E7-1695]
Download as PDF
5084
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 22 / Friday, February 2, 2007 / Notices
services. The five responses provided a
combined total of 10,243 beds.
Environmental impacts of each facility
have been evaluated in a combined
Environmental Assessment (EA) based
primarily on information provided by
the Offerors. The EA evaluated the full
effects of the potentially available of
10,243 inmate beds.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Background Information
Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c) of the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 and the Council of Environmental
Quality Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–
1508), BOP has prepared EA to contract
with multiple public and private
corporations to house approximately
7,000 federal, low-security, adult male,
non-U.S. citizen, criminal aliens in
existing Contractor-Owned/ContractorOperated facilities located in Arizona,
California, Louisiana, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, or Texas. Five existing
facilities, have been offered in response
to the BOP’s solicitation for services.
The five responses provided a
combined total of 10,243 beds. The EA
was published on December 12, 2006,
for a 30-day comment period and
prepared pursuant to NEPA.
Project Information
The BOP is responsible for carrying
out judgements of the Federal courts
whenever a period of confinement is
ordered. Subsequently, the mission of
the BOP is to protect society by
confining offenders in the controlled
environments of prisons and
community-based facilities that are safe,
humane, cost-efficient, and
appropriately secure, and that provide
work and other self-improvement
opportunities to assist offenders in
becoming law-abiding citizens.
Approximately 162,200 inmates are
currently housed within the 114 federal
correctional institutions that have levels
of security ranging from minimum to
maximum; a number exceeding the
combined rated capacities of all federal
correctional facilities. Measures being
taken to manage the growth of the
federal inmate population include
construction of new institutions,
acquisition and adaptation of facilities
originally intended for other purposes,
expansion and improvement of existing
correctional facilities, and expanded use
of contract beds. Adding capacity
through these various means allows the
BOP to work toward the long-term goal
of reduced system-wide crowding.
Alternatives Considered
The No Action alternative is defined
as a decision not to proceed with the
proposed action to award a contract to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:13 Feb 01, 2007
Jkt 211001
house the described population. Instead,
the BOP would continue the current and
long-standing arrangement whereby
low-security, adult male, criminal alien
inmate populations are housed in
facilities owned and operated by the
BOP as well as with state, local, and
private residential reentry centers and
in alternative confinement. Adoption of
the No Action alternative would avoid
the potential impacts associated with
use of a Contractor-Owned/ContractorOperated correctional facility to house
low-security, federal inmates.
Under the No Action alternative, the
beneficial impacts on local and regional
economies resulting from operational
budget expenditures at potentially
vacant or underutilized correctional
facilities would not occur. The loss of
jobs is likely at some facilities under the
No Action alternative. The No Action
alternative does not meet the purpose
and need of the BOP’s Action
alternative and would not address the
demand for additional capacity to house
the increasing federal inmate
population.
Five locations were evaluated in the
EA. Because any given facility could be
awarded a number of inmates up to its
capacity, potential impacts at each
facility were evaluated based upon its
maximum possible capacity. The
facilities and respective inmate
populations evaluated were:
Big Spring Correctional Center (BSCC),
located in Big Springs, Texas,
evaluated for its maximum capacity
under this action to provide 3,307
beds.
Eden Detention Center (EDC), Eden,
Texas, evaluated for its maximum
capacity to provide 1,556 beds.
Giles W. Dalby Correction Center
(GDCC) of Post, Texas, evaluated for
its maximum capacity to provide
1,670 beds.
Pine Prairie Correctional Facility
(PPCF), Pine Prairie, Louisiana,
evaluated for its maximum capacity to
provide 1,090 beds.
Reeves County Detention Center
(RCDC), located in Pecos, Texas,
evaluated for its maximum capacity to
provide 2,620 beds.
The impacts of the Action alternative
on the environment were considered in
an EA published on December 12, 2006,
and prepared pursuant to NEPA. The
EA evaluated the full effects of the
potentially available of 10,243 inmate
beds. Review of the EA with the
necessary mitigation has led to a
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI), as that phrase is defined
pursuant to NEPA. The Action
alternative would result in negligible
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
impacts to public services of host
communities. There would be no
significant adverse impacts to
surrounding land uses, utility systems,
traffic patterns or other community
considerations. No significant adverse
on-site impacts as defined pursuant to
NEPA are anticipated as a result of the
Action alternative. After review of the
comments received from interested
agencies and local citizens concerning
the EA, the BOP signed a FONSI for the
Action alternative.
Notice of Availability
BOP provided written notices of the
availability of the EA in five newspapers
with local and regional circulations, and
through five local public libraries. The
BOP also distributed approximately 175
copies (each) of the EA to Federal and
State agencies, state and local
governments, elected officials,
interested organizations, and
individuals.
Availability of The Finding of No
Significant Impact
The Finding of No Significant Impact
and other information regarding this
project are available upon request. To
request a copy of the Finding of No
Significant Impact, please contact:
Pamela J. Chandler, Chief, or Issac J.
Gaston, Site Selection Specialist, Site
Selection and Environmental Review
Branch, Federal Bureau of Prisons, 320
First Street, NW., Washington, DC
20534. Tel: 202–514–6470/Fax: 202–
616–6024/E-mail:
pchandler@bop.gov-igaston@bop.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Pamela J. Chandler, or Issac J. Gaston,
Federal Bureau of Prisons.
Dated: January 26, 2007.
Issac J. Gaston,
Site Selection Specialist, Site Selection and
Environmental Review Branch.
[FR Doc. E7–1624 Filed 2–1–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–5–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–60,197]
C&C Smith Lumber Company, Inc.,
Summerhill, PA; Notice of Negative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration
By application dated November 29,
2006, a company official requested
administrative reconsideration of the
Department’s negative determination
regarding eligibility to apply for Trade
E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM
02FEN1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 22 / Friday, February 2, 2007 / Notices
Adjustment Assistance (TAA),
applicable to workers and former
workers of the subject firm. The denial
notice was signed on November 2, 2006,
and published in the Federal Register
on November 22, 2006 (71 FR 67650).
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 petition for the workers of C&C
Smith Lumber Company, Inc.,
Summerhill, Pennsylvania engaged in
production of furniture parts was
denied because the ‘‘contributed
importantly’’ group eligibility
requirement of Section 222 of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended, was not met,
nor was there a shift in production from
that firm to a foreign country. The
‘‘contributed importantly’’ test is
generally demonstrated through a
survey of the workers’ firm’s customers.
The survey revealed no imports of
furniture parts in 2004, 2005 and
January through September 2006. The
subject firm did not import furniture
parts nor did they shift production to a
foreign country during the relevant
period.
The petitioner states that the affected
workers lost their jobs as a direct result
of a loss of customers in the furniture
industry. The petitioner alleges that
major declining customers of the subject
firm which manufacture furniture
decreased purchases of various furniture
parts and components from the C&C
Smith Lumber Company, Inc.,
Summerhill, Pennsylvania because their
business was in its turn negatively
impacted by increased imports of
furniture. Therefore, the petitioner
concludes that because sales and
production of furniture parts at the
subject firm have been negatively
impacted by increasing presence of
foreign imports of furniture on the
market, workers of the subject firm
should be eligible for TAA.
In order to establish import impact,
the Department must consider imports
that are like or directly competitive with
those produced at the subject firm. The
Department conducted a survey of the
subject firm’s major declining customers
regarding their purchases of furniture
parts and components. The survey
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:13 Feb 01, 2007
Jkt 211001
revealed that the declining customers
did not increase their imports of
furniture parts and components during
the relevant period.
Imports of furniture cannot be
considered like or directly competitive
with furniture parts, such as hardwood
furniture squares and stair parts,
produced by C&C Smith Lumber
Company, Inc., Summerhill,
Pennsylvania and imports of furniture
are not relevant in this investigation.
Upon further review of the previous
investigation and further contact with
the company official, the Department
requested an additional list of customers
in order to conduct a fuller investigation
to determine whether there were any
imports of furniture parts and
components during the relevant time
period.
The Department conducted a further
survey of the additional customers
regarding their purchases of furniture
parts. The survey revealed that none of
the respondents reported imports of
furniture parts during the relevant time
period.
Moreover, the subject firm does not
import furniture parts and components
and did not shift production of furniture
parts and components abroad.
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 day 19th of
January, 2007.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of, Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–1695 Filed 2–1–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–60,277]
Creative Engineering Products,
Formerly Known as Carlisle
Engineered Products, Belleville
Division, a Subsidiary of the Reserve
Group, Belleville, MI; Dismissal of
Application for Reconsideration
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(C) an
application for administrative
reconsideration was filed with the
Director of the Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance for workers at
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5085
Creative Engineering Products, formerly
known as Carlisle Engineered Products,
Belleville Division, a subsidiary of the
Reserve Group, Belleville, Michigan.
The application did not contain new
information supporting a conclusion
that the determination was erroneous,
and also did not provide a justification
for reconsideration of the determination
that was based on either mistaken facts
or a misinterpretation of facts or of the
law. Therefore, dismissal of the
application was issued.
TA–W–60,277; Creative Engineering
Products, Formerly Known as Carlisle
Engineered Products, Belleville Division,
a Subsidiary of the Reserve Group.
Belleville, Michigan (January 18, 2007)
Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of
January 2007.
Ralph DiBattista,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–1697 Filed 2–1–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–60,700]
Quality Staffing Services Working at
Filtronic Comtek, Inc., Salisbury, MD;
Notice of Termination of Investigation
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended, an
investigation was initiated on January 4,
2007 in response to a petition filed by
a state agency represenative on behalf of
workers of Quality Staffing Services,
working at Filtronic Comtek, Inc.,
Salisbury, Maryland. The workers at the
subject facility produce filters for cell
tower base stations.
The petitioning group of workers is
covered by an earlier petition (TA–W–
60,699) filed on January 3, 2007 that is
the subject of an ongoing investigation
for which a determination has not yet
been issued. Further investigation in
this case would duplicate efforts and
serve no purpose; therefore the
investigation under this petition has
been terminated.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 18th day of
January 2007.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of, Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–1696 Filed 2–1–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM
02FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 22 (Friday, February 2, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5084-5085]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-1695]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-60,197]
C&C Smith Lumber Company, Inc., Summerhill, PA; Notice of
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application dated November 29, 2006, a company official
requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade
[[Page 5085]]
Adjustment Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former workers
of the subject firm. The denial notice was signed on November 2, 2006,
and published in the Federal Register on November 22, 2006 (71 FR
67650).
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 petition for the workers of C&C Smith Lumber Company, Inc.,
Summerhill, Pennsylvania engaged in production of furniture parts was
denied because the ``contributed importantly'' group eligibility
requirement of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, was
not met, nor was there a shift in production from that firm to a
foreign country. The ``contributed importantly'' test is generally
demonstrated through a survey of the workers' firm's customers. The
survey revealed no imports of furniture parts in 2004, 2005 and January
through September 2006. The subject firm did not import furniture parts
nor did they shift production to a foreign country during the relevant
period.
The petitioner states that the affected workers lost their jobs as
a direct result of a loss of customers in the furniture industry. The
petitioner alleges that major declining customers of the subject firm
which manufacture furniture decreased purchases of various furniture
parts and components from the C&C Smith Lumber Company, Inc.,
Summerhill, Pennsylvania because their business was in its turn
negatively impacted by increased imports of furniture. Therefore, the
petitioner concludes that because sales and production of furniture
parts at the subject firm have been negatively impacted by increasing
presence of foreign imports of furniture on the market, workers of the
subject firm should be eligible for TAA.
In order to establish import impact, the Department must consider
imports that are like or directly competitive with those produced at
the subject firm. The Department conducted a survey of the subject
firm's major declining customers regarding their purchases of furniture
parts and components. The survey revealed that the declining customers
did not increase their imports of furniture parts and components during
the relevant period.
Imports of furniture cannot be considered like or directly
competitive with furniture parts, such as hardwood furniture squares
and stair parts, produced by C&C Smith Lumber Company, Inc.,
Summerhill, Pennsylvania and imports of furniture are not relevant in
this investigation.
Upon further review of the previous investigation and further
contact with the company official, the Department requested an
additional list of customers in order to conduct a fuller investigation
to determine whether there were any imports of furniture parts and
components during the relevant time period.
The Department conducted a further survey of the additional
customers regarding their purchases of furniture parts. The survey
revealed that none of the respondents reported imports of furniture
parts during the relevant time period.
Moreover, the subject firm does not import furniture parts and
components and did not shift production of furniture parts and
components abroad.
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 day 19th of January, 2007.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of, Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7-1695 Filed 2-1-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P