Block Corporation, American Trouser Division, Tupelo, MS; Notice of Termination of Investigation, 51841-51842 [E7-17882]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 11, 2007 / Notices Practices’’ Guidelines, and amending the Ad Unit Guidelines (formerly known as the Half-Page Ad Standard Guidelines) which were listed in the IAB’s original notification. On September 17, 2004, IAB filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on October 21, 2004 (69 FR 61868). The last notification was filed with the Department on October 6, 2006. a notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on October 30, 2006 (71 FR 63358). Patricia A. Brink, Deputy Director of Operations, Antirust Division. [FR Doc. 07–4436 Filed 9–10–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–11–M DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—LiMo Foundation Notice is hereby given that, on June 15, 2007, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq, (‘‘the Act’’), LiMo Foundation (‘‘LiMo’’) filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, McAfee, Inc., Santa Clara, CA; Celunite, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA; Aplix Corporation, San Francisco, CA; and LG Electronics, Inc., Seoul, Korea, have been added as parties to this venture. No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of this group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and LiMo intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership. On March 1, 2007, LiMo filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on April 9, 2007 (72 FR 17583). Patricia A. Brink, Deputy of Operations, Antitrust Division. [FR Doc. 07–4430 Filed 9–10–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–11–M VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:06 Sep 10, 2007 Jkt 211001 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—National Biodiesel Accreditation Commission Notice is hereby given that, on June 19, 2007, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), National Biodiesel Accreditation Commission (‘‘NBAC’’) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing additions or changes to its standards development activities. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, NBAC has amended its standard and its program including accompanying documents by making the standard applicable to eligible companies on a worldwide basis except where contraindicated by international law. On August 27, 2004, NBAC filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on October 4, 2004, (69 FR 59269). The last notification was filed with the Department on January 3, 2007. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on January 25, 2007 (72 FR 3416). Patricia A. Brink, Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. [FR Doc. 07–4433 Filed 9–10–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–11–M 51841 activities performed by their employees that are not inherently governmental— i.e., inventories of commercial activities. The FAIR Act further requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to review the inventories in consultation with the agencies and publish a notice of public availability in the Federal Register after the consultation process is completed. Interested parties who disagree with an agency’s initial judgment may challenge the inclusion or the omission of an activity on the list of activities within 30 working days and, if not satisfied with this review, may appeal to a higher level within the agency. A notice of the first release of the Department of Labor’s (DOL’s) FY 2006 inventories was published by the OMB in the Federal Register on May 2, 2007. See 72 FR 24340–24341. As indicated in OMB’s May 2007 notice, the FY 2006 inventory prepared by the DOL was released in connection with the first notice of public availability. However, following the initial release of its inventory, DOL made revisions to its inventory as a result of a challenge by the Nation Council of Field Labor Locals (NCFLL), available pursuant to this notice. The DOL Office of Competitive Sourcing has made available a summary of the revisions, as well as the complete original and revised FY 2006 inventories, through its Internet site at https://www.dol.gov/oasam/programs/ boc/comp-sourcing/index.htm. Additionally, the Office of Federal Procurement Policy within the OMB has made available a FAIR Act User’s Guide through its Internet site: https:// www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ procurement/fair-index.html. This User’s Guide may help interested parties review DOL’s FY 2006 inventories. Edward C. Hugler, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management. [FR Doc. E7–17789 Filed 9–10–07; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Public Availability of Revised Fiscal Year 2006 Department of Labor Inventories Under the Federal Activities Inventory Reform Act BILLING CODE 4510–23–P Department of Labor. Notice of revised public availability of Department of Labor inventory of activities that are not inherently governmental and of activities that are inherently governmental Employment and Training Administration SUMMARY: The Federal Activities Inventory Reform (FAIR) Act, Public Law 105–270, requires agencies to develop inventories each year of Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation was initiated on August 30, 2007 in response to a worker petition filed by a company AGENCY: ACTION: PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR [TA–W–62,070] Block Corporation, American Trouser Division, Tupelo, MS; Notice of Termination of Investigation E:\FR\FM\11SEN1.SGM 11SEN1 51842 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 175 / Tuesday, September 11, 2007 / Notices official on behalf of workers at Block Corporation, American Trouser Division, Tupelo, Mississippi. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 5th day of September, 2007. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7–17882 Filed 9–10–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–61,833] sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES Chapin Watermatics Incorporated, a Subsidiary of Jain Americas Incorporated, Watertown, NY; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application of August 20, 2007, 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 was signed on July 30, 2007 and published in the Federal Register on August 14, 2007 (72 FR 45451). 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 mis-interpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of the decision. The TAA petition, which was filed on behalf of workers at Chapin Watermatics Inc. a subsidiary of Jain Americas Inc., Watertown, New York engaged in the production of irrigation systems, such as drip irrigation tape, was denied based on the findings that during the relevant time period, the subject company did not separate or threaten to separate a significant number or proportion of workers, as required by Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:06 Sep 10, 2007 Jkt 211001 In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner states that there were five workers laid off from the subject firm during the relevant time period. For companies with a workforce of over fifty workers, a significant proportion of worker separations or threatened separation is five percent. Significant number or proportion of the workers in a firm or appropriate subdivision with a workforce of fewer than 50 workers is at least three workers. In determining whether there were a significant proportion of workers separated or threatened with separations at the subject company during the relevant time period, the Department requested employment figures for the subject firm for 2005, 2006, and January through August, 2007. A careful review of the information provided in the initial investigation revealed that five workers were laid off from the administrative office at the subject firm during the relevant time period. However, overall employment at the subject firm has increased from 2005 to 2006 and from January through August, 2007 when compared with the same period in 2006. Furthermore, a review of the initial investigation also revealed that the subject company sales and production of drip irrigation tape increased from 2005 to 2006, and also increased during January through June of 2007 when compared with the same period in 2006, and that the subject company did not shift production abroad. As employment levels, sales and production at the subject facility did not decline in the relevant period, and the subject firm did not shift production to a foreign country, criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.A), (a)(2)(B)(II.A), (a)(2)(A)(I.B), and (a)(2)(B)(II.B) have not been met. 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 5th day of September, 2007 Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7–17886 Filed 9–10–07; 8:45 am] DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Investigations Regarding Certifications of Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade 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 September 21, 2007. 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 September 21, 2007. 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 4th day of September 2007. Ralph DiBattista, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11SEN1.SGM 11SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 11, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51841-51842]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-17882]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-62,070]


Block Corporation, American Trouser Division, Tupelo, MS; Notice 
of Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation 
was initiated on August 30, 2007 in response to a worker petition filed 
by a company

[[Page 51842]]

official on behalf of workers at Block Corporation, American Trouser 
Division, Tupelo, Mississippi.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed at Washington, DC this 5th day of September, 2007.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
 [FR Doc. E7-17882 Filed 9-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.