International Business Machines Corporation, Tulsa, OK; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand, 26426-26427 [E7-8825]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
26426
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 9, 2007 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
also eligible to apply for alternative trade
adjustment assistance under Section 246 of
the Trade Act of 1974.’’
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–60,858]
[TA–W–61,177]
Bartech Group, Inc., Including Workers
of Continental Design and Engineering
and Manpower, Anderson, IN; Notice of
Termination of Investigation
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended, an
investigation was initiated on March 26,
2007 in response to a petition filed on
behalf of workers of Bartech Group, Inc.,
including workers of Continental Design
and Engineering and Manpower,
Anderson, Indiana.
The petitioning group of workers is
covered by an active certification (TA–
W–60,858 as amended) which expires
on February 2, 2009. Consequently,
further investigation in this case would
serve no purpose, and the investigation
has been terminated.
Signed at Washington, DC this 2nd day of
May 2007.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–8824 Filed 5–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA-W–61,104]
Bay State Circuits, Inc.; Millbury, MA;
Notice of Termination of Investigation
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended, an
investigation was initiated on March 13,
2007, in response to a worker petition
filed by a company official on behalf of
workers of Bay State Circuits, Inc.,
Millbury, Massachusetts.
The petitioner has requested that the
petition be withdrawn. Consequently,
the investigation has been terminated.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 1st day of
May 2007.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–8828 Filed 5–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:12 May 08, 2007
Jkt 211001
Delphi Corporation, Automotive
Holdings Group Including Leased
Workers of Bartech Group, Inc.,
Manpower and Continental Design and
Engineering Working On-Site at
Delphi; Anderson, IN; Amended
Certification Regarding Eligibility To
Apply for Worker Adjustment
Assistance and Alternative Trade
Adjustment Assistance
In accordance with Section 223 of the
Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and
Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26
U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the
Department of Labor issued a
Certification of Eligibility to Apply for
Worker Adjustment Assistance and
Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance on February 2, 2007,
applicable to workers of Delphi
Corporation, Automotive Holdings
Group, Anderson, Indiana. The notice
was published in the Federal Register
on February 14, 2007 (72 FR 7087).
At the request of the petitioners, the
Department reviewed the certification
for workers of the subject firm. The
workers are engaged in the production
of automotive ignition products.
New information shows that leased
workers of Bartech Group, Inc.,
Manpower and Continental Design and
Engineering were employed on-site at
the Anderson, Indiana location of
Delphi Corporation, Automotive
Holdings Group.
Based on these findings, the
Department is amending this
certification to include leased workers
of Bartech Group, Inc., Manpower and
Continental Design and Engineering
working on-site at the Anderson,
Indiana location of the subject firm.
The intent of the Department’s
certification is to include all workers
employed on-site at Delphi Corporation,
Automotive Holdings Group, Anderson,
Indiana who were adversely affected by
a shift in production to Mexico.
The amended notice applicable to
TA–W–60,858 is hereby issued as
follows:
‘‘All workers of Delphi Corporation,
Automotive Holdings Group, including
leased workers of Bartech Group, Inc.,
Manpower and Continental Design and
Engineering, Anderson, Indiana, who became
totally or partially separated from
employment on or after January 23, 2006,
through February 2, 2009, are eligible to
apply for adjustment assistance under
Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Signed at Washington, DC, this 1st day of
May 2007.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–8826 Filed 5–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–53,648]
International Business Machines
Corporation, Tulsa, OK; Notice of
Revised Determination on Remand
On March 30, 2007, the United States
Court of International Trade (USCIT)
remanded to the Department of Labor
(Department) for further investigation
Former Employees of International
Business Machines Corporation v. U.S.
Secretary of Labor, Court No. 04–00079.
In accordance with Section 223 of the
Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19
U.S.C. 2273), the Department herein
presents the results of the remand
investigation regarding workers’
eligibility to apply for worker
adjustment assistance.
The initial investigation to determine
the eligibility of workers of International
Business Machines Corporation (IBM),
Tulsa, Oklahoma (subject firm) to apply
for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)
was initiated on November 26, 2003 in
response to a worker-filed petition. The
Department’s initial negative
determination, issued on December 2,
2003 and published in the Federal
Register on January 16, 2004 (69 FR
2622), was based on finding that the
workers did not produce an article
within the meaning of Section 222 of
the Trade Act of 1974.
The petitioners requested
administrative reconsideration of the
negative determination on February 6,
2004. By letter dated February 11, 2004,
the petitioners also sought judicial
review of the negative determination.
On March 30, 2004, the USCIT granted
the Department’s request for voluntary
remand in order to issue a finding
pursuant to the request for
reconsideration.
The Department issued a negative
determination on the request for
reconsideration on March 31, 2004. The
Department’s Notice of determination
was published in the Federal Register
on April 16, 2004 (69 FR 20644). The
determination was based on findings
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 9, 2007 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
that the workers’ firm did not produce
an article within the meaning of Section
222 of the Trade Act and that the
workers did not provide services in
direct support of an affiliated TAA
certified firm.
On May 14, 2004, the Department
filed its second consent motion for
voluntary remand. The Department
issued a negative determination on
remand on August 2, 2004. The
Department’s Notice of determination
was published in the Federal Register
on August 10, 2004 (69 FR 48527). The
determination was based on findings
that the workers at the subject facility
did not produce or support the
production of an article by IBM and
were not under the control of BP. On
December 2, 2005, the USCIT remanded
the matter to the Department.
On February 6, 2006, the Department
issued a second negative determination
on remand. The Department’s Notice of
determination was published in the
Federal Register on March 2, 2006 (71
FR 10709). The Department’s
determination was based on findings
that the criteria developed by the
Department to determine the extent to
which a worker group engaged in
activities related to the production of an
article by a producing firm was under
the control of the producing firm had
not been met. On March 30, 2007, the
USCIT remanded the matter to the
Department.
The Department has determined after
further review that during the relevant
period, a significant number or
proportion of the subject worker group
was separated and that the subject
worker group was working in support
of, and under sufficient control of
import impacted BP production
facilities, whose workers were certified
as eligible for TAA.
Conclusion
Based on review of the record
evidence, I determine that BP controlled
the subject worker group and that
increased imports of articles like or
directly competitive with crude oil
produced by an affiliated facility which
the subject worker group supported,
contributed to the total or partial
separation of a significant number or
proportion of workers at the subject
facility.
In accordance with the provisions of
the Act, I make the following
certification:
‘‘All workers of International Business
Machines Corporation, Tulsa, Oklahoma,
who became totally or partially separated
from employment on or after November 26,
2002, through two years from the issuance of
this revised determination, are eligible to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:12 May 08, 2007
Jkt 211001
apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance under
Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.’’
Signed at Washington, DC this 2nd day of
May 2007.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–8825 Filed 5–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
Proposed Information Collection
RequestSubmitted for Public Comment
and Recommendations; Safety
Defects, Examination, Correction, and
Records
ACTION:
Notice.
SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as
part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent burden,
conducts a preclearance consultation
program to provide the general public
and Federal agencies with an
opportunity to comment on proposed
and/or continuing collections of
information in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA95) [44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)]. This
program helps to ensure that requested
data can be provided in the desired
format, reporting burden (time and
financial resources) is minimized,
collection instruments are clearly
understood, and the impact of collection
requirements on respondents can be
properly assessed.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
July 9, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to U.S.
Department of Labor, Mine Safety and
Health Administration, Debbie Ferraro,
Management Services Division, 1100
Wilson Boulevard, Room 2171,
Arlington, VA 22209–3939. Commenters
are encouraged to send their comments
on a computer disk, or via E-mail to
Ferraro.Debbie@dol.gov, along with an
original printed copy. Ms. Ferraro can
be reached at (202) 693–9821 (voice), or
(202) 693–9801 (facsimile).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Contact the employee listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this notice.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Title 30 CFR 56.13015 and 57.13015
require that compressed-air receivers
and other unfired pressure vessels be
inspected by inspectors holding a valid
National Board Commission and in
accordance with the applicable chapters
of the National Board Inspection Code,
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26427
a manual for Boiler and Pressure Vessels
Inspectors, 1979.
Title 30 CFR 56.13030 and 57.13030
require that fired pressure vessels
(boilers) be equipped with safety
devices approved by the American
Society of Mechanical Engineers
(ASME) to protect against hazards from
overpressure, flameouts, fuel
interruptions and low water level.
Sections 56/57.13030 requires that
records of inspections and repairs be
retained by the mine operator in
accordance with the requirements of the
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
and the National Board Inspection Code
(progressive records—no limit on
retention time) and made available to
the Secretary or his/her authorized
representative.
Title 30 CFR 56.14100 and 57.14100
require equipment operators to inspect
equipment, machinery, and tools that
are to be used during a shift for safety
defects before the equipment is placed
in operation. Defects affecting safety are
required to be corrected in a timely
manner. In instances where the defect
makes continued operation of the
equipment unsafe, the standards require
removal from service, tagging to identify
that it is out of use, and repair before
use is resumed.
Title 30 CFR 56.18002 and 57.180002
require that a competent person
designated by the operator shall
examine each working place at least
once each shift for conditions which
may adversely affect safety or health. A
record that such examinations were
conducted shall be kept by the operator
for a period of one year, and shall be
made available for review by the
Secretary or his/her authorized
representative.
II. Desired Focus of Comments
Currently, the Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA) is soliciting
comments concerning the proposed
extension of the information collection
related to the Safety Defects,
Examination, Correction, and Records.
MSHA 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
E:\FR\FM\09MYN1.SGM
09MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 9, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26426-26427]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8825]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-53,648]
International Business Machines Corporation, Tulsa, OK; Notice of
Revised Determination on Remand
On March 30, 2007, the United States Court of International Trade
(USCIT) remanded to the Department of Labor (Department) for further
investigation Former Employees of International Business Machines
Corporation v. U.S. Secretary of Labor, Court No. 04-00079. In
accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19
U.S.C. 2273), the Department herein presents the results of the remand
investigation regarding workers' eligibility to apply for worker
adjustment assistance.
The initial investigation to determine the eligibility of workers
of International Business Machines Corporation (IBM), Tulsa, Oklahoma
(subject firm) to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) was
initiated on November 26, 2003 in response to a worker-filed petition.
The Department's initial negative determination, issued on December 2,
2003 and published in the Federal Register on January 16, 2004 (69 FR
2622), was based on finding that the workers did not produce an article
within the meaning of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974.
The petitioners requested administrative reconsideration of the
negative determination on February 6, 2004. By letter dated February
11, 2004, the petitioners also sought judicial review of the negative
determination. On March 30, 2004, the USCIT granted the Department's
request for voluntary remand in order to issue a finding pursuant to
the request for reconsideration.
The Department issued a negative determination on the request for
reconsideration on March 31, 2004. The Department's Notice of
determination was published in the Federal Register on April 16, 2004
(69 FR 20644). The determination was based on findings
[[Page 26427]]
that the workers' firm did not produce an article within the meaning of
Section 222 of the Trade Act and that the workers did not provide
services in direct support of an affiliated TAA certified firm.
On May 14, 2004, the Department filed its second consent motion for
voluntary remand. The Department issued a negative determination on
remand on August 2, 2004. The Department's Notice of determination was
published in the Federal Register on August 10, 2004 (69 FR 48527). The
determination was based on findings that the workers at the subject
facility did not produce or support the production of an article by IBM
and were not under the control of BP. On December 2, 2005, the USCIT
remanded the matter to the Department.
On February 6, 2006, the Department issued a second negative
determination on remand. The Department's Notice of determination was
published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2006 (71 FR 10709). The
Department's determination was based on findings that the criteria
developed by the Department to determine the extent to which a worker
group engaged in activities related to the production of an article by
a producing firm was under the control of the producing firm had not
been met. On March 30, 2007, the USCIT remanded the matter to the
Department.
The Department has determined after further review that during the
relevant period, a significant number or proportion of the subject
worker group was separated and that the subject worker group was
working in support of, and under sufficient control of import impacted
BP production facilities, whose workers were certified as eligible for
TAA.
Conclusion
Based on review of the record evidence, I determine that BP
controlled the subject worker group and that increased imports of
articles like or directly competitive with crude oil produced by an
affiliated facility which the subject worker group supported,
contributed to the total or partial separation of a significant number
or proportion of workers at the subject facility.
In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following
certification:
``All workers of International Business Machines Corporation,
Tulsa, Oklahoma, who became totally or partially separated from
employment on or after November 26, 2002, 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 2nd day of May 2007.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7-8825 Filed 5-8-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
