Level 3 Communications, L.L.C., Austin, TX; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 63995-63996 [E8-25463]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 28, 2008 / Notices
Dated: October 21, 2008.
Joseph T. Rannazzisi,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–25649 Filed 10–27–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Office of the Secretary
Submission for OMB Review:
Comment Request
ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
October 22, 2008.
The Department of Labor (DOL)
hereby announces the submission of 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; including
among other things a description of the
likely respondents, proposed frequency
of response, and estimated total burden
may be obtained from the RegInfo.gov
Web site at https://www.reginfo.gov/
public/do/PRAMain or by contacting
Amy Hobby on 202–693–4553 (this is
not a toll-free number)/e-mail:
DOL_PRA_PUBLIC@dol.gov.
Interested parties are encouraged to
send comments to the 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, Telephone: 202–395–7316/Fax:
202–395–6974 (these are not toll-free
numbers), e-mail:
OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov within
30 days from the date of this publication
in the Federal Register. In order to
ensure the appropriate consideration,
comments should reference the OMB
Control Number (see below).
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Oct 27, 2008
Jkt 217001
• 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 without
change of an existing OMB Control
Number.
Title of Collection: Notice of
Controversion of Right to
Compensation.
OMB Control Number: 1215–0023.
Agency Form Number(s): LS–207.
Affected Public: Businesses or other
for-profits.
Total Estimated Number of
Respondents: 700.
Total Estimated Annual Burden
Hours: 4,375.
Total Estimated Annual Costs Burden:
$8,662.
Description: The LS–207 is used by
insurance carriers and self-insured
employers to controvert claims under
the Longshore and Harbor Workers’
Compensation Act. For additional
information, see related notice
published at 73 FR 37987 on July 2,
2008.
Darrin A. King,
Departmental Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. E8–25652 Filed 10–27–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–CF–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–63,761]
Level 3 Communications, L.L.C.,
Austin, TX; Notice of Negative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration
By application dated September 29,
2008, a worker requested administrative
reconsideration of the Department’s
negative determination regarding
eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade
Adjustment Assistance (ATAA)
applicable to workers and former
workers of Level 3 Communications,
L.L.C., Austin, Texas (subject firm). The
determination was issued on September
11, 2008. The Department’s Notice of
determination was published in the
Federal Register on September 24, 2008
(73 FR 55137). The subject workers are
engaged in telecommunication activities
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63995
related to network design and
provisioning in support of customer
requests, infrastructure, and network
grooming activities.
The petition for TAA was denied
because the workers do not produce an
article within the meaning of Section
222(a)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974. In
order to be certified eligible to apply for
ATAA, the worker group must be
eligible to apply for TAA. Since the
worker group is denied eligibility to
apply for TAA, they cannot be certified
eligible to apply for ATAA.
In the request for reconsideration, the
worker stated that ‘‘the position I held
did create an article that was required
by the customers * * * a document
referred to as an LOA (Letter of
Authorization).’’ The worker also states
that the LOA ‘‘provided vital
information, which included the actual
circuit and channel assignment, to the
customer. Without this information they
would not be able to physically connect
to the correct equipment in the field
* * * The LOA also gave them a legal
document that stated they were allowed
to connect to our equipment and or we
were allowed to connect to their
equipment in the field. The circuit
design and or provisioning could not be
done or move forward without this
LOA.’’
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c),
administrative 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.
In order to be considered eligible to
apply for adjustment assistance, the
worker group seeking certification must
work for a firm or appropriate
subdivision that produces an article and
there must be a relationship between the
workers’ work and the article produced
by the workers’ firm or appropriate
subdivision.
The workers’ firm provides
telecommunication network services.
The firm’s Web site states that it is a
‘‘provider of fiber-based communication
services * * * Our network offerings
include Internet Protocol (IP) services
* * * content and video delivery, data
and voice services.’’ Further,
previously-submitted documents,
including the petition and the
E:\FR\FM\28OCN1.SGM
28OCN1
63996
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 209 / Tuesday, October 28, 2008 / Notices
questionnaire completed by the subject
firm, confirm that the subject firm
provides a service.
Unlike a manufacturing firm, Level 3
Communications, L.L.C. (Level 3) is not
in the business of producing an article
and then selling it, and the subject firm
does not receive revenue from the sales
of the LOA. Level 3’s revenue flows
from providing its customers with
network communication services. The
LOA merely memorializes the service
agreement between the subject firm and
its customer. As such, it is not an article
produced by the subject firm. Rather,
the issuance of a LOA is merely
incidental to the service provided by the
subject firm.
It is the Department’s policy that
something which is created incidental
to the provision of a service is not an
‘‘article’’ for purposes of the Trade Act.
The Department’s policy that those
workers who provide services are not
engaged in the production of an article
for the purposes of the Act, even if
something (tangible or intangible) is
generated in the provision of those
services, has been upheld by the U.S.
Court of International Trade (USCIT) in
Former Employees of Mortgage
Guaranty Insurance Corporation v.
United States Secretary of Labor, Court
No. 07–00182. In its August 13, 2008,
opinion, the USCIT stated ‘‘the Trade
Act does not provide for the eligibility
of workers engaged in the provision of
services.’’
After careful review of the request for
reconsideration, the Department
determines that there is no new
information that supports a finding that
Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974
was satisfied and that no mistake or
misinterpretation of the facts or of the
law with regards to the number or
proportion of workers separated from
the subject firm during the relevant
period.
Conclusion
ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
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 10th day of
October 2008.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8–25463 Filed 10–27–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:28 Oct 27, 2008
Jkt 217001
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
[Docket No. OSHA–2008–0047]
Federal Advisory Council on
Occupational Safety and Health
(FACOSH)
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Announcement of meeting.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Federal Advisory Council
on Occupational Safety and Health
(FACOSH) will meet November 13,
2008, in Washington, DC.
DATES: FACOSH meeting: FACOSH will
meet from 1 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Thursday, November 13, 2008.
Submission of comments and requests
to speak: Comments and requests to
speak at the FACOSH meeting must be
received by November 6, 2008.
ADDRESSES: FACOSH meeting: FACOSH
will meet in Room N–3437, Conference
Rooms A/B/C, U.S. Department of
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210.
Submission of comments and requests
to speak: Comments and requests to
speak at the FACOSH meeting,
identified by Docket No. OSHA–2008–
0047, may be submitted by any of the
following methods:
Electronically: You may submit
materials, including attachments,
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov, the Federal
eRulemaking Portal. Follow the online
instructions for making submissions.
Facsimile: If your submission,
including attachments, does not exceed
10 pages, you may fax it to the OSHA
Docket Office at (202) 693–1648.
Mail, express delivery, hand delivery,
messenger or courier service: You must
submit three copies of your submissions
to the OSHA Docket Office, Room N–
2625, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20210; telephone (202) 693–2350
(TTY (877) 889–5627). Deliveries (hand,
express mail, messenger and courier
service) are accepted during the
Department of Labor’s and OSHA
Docket Office’s normal business hours,
8:15 a.m.–4:45 p.m., e.t.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the Agency name and docket
number for this Federal Register notice
(Docket No. OSHA–2008–0047).
Submissions in response to this Federal
Register notice, including personal
information provided, will be posted
without change at https://
www.regulations.gov. Therefore, OSHA
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
cautions interested parties about
submitting certain personal information
such as social security numbers and
birth dates. Because of security-related
procedures, submissions by regular mail
may result in a significant delay in their
receipt. Please contact the OSHA Docket
Office, at the address above, for
information about security procedures
for making submissions by hand
delivery, express delivery, and
messenger or courier service. For
additional information on submitting
comments and requests to speak, see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
below.
Docket: To read or download
submissions in response to this Federal
Register notice, go to Docket No.
OSHA–2008–0047 at https://
www.regulations.gov or the OSHA
Docket Office at the address above. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the https://www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
documents (e.g., copyrighted material)
are not publicly available to read or
download through https://
www.regulations.gov. All submissions,
including copyrighted material, are
available for inspection and copying at
the OSHA Docket Office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For press inquiries: Jennifer Ashley,
OSHA, Office of Communications, U.S.
Department of Labor, Room N–3647,
200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202)
693–1999.
For general information: Francis
Yebesi, OSHA, Office of Federal Agency
Programs, U.S. Department of Labor,
Room N–3622, 200 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210;
telephone (202) 693–2122; fax (202)
693–1685; e-mail ofap@dol.gov.
For special accommodations for the
FACOSH meeting: Veneta Chatmon,
OSHA, Office of Communications,
Room N–3647, U.S. Department of
Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202)
693–1999.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FACOSH
will meet Thursday, November 13,
2008, in Washington, DC. All FACOSH
meetings are open to the public.
FACOSH is authorized by section 19
of the Occupational Safety and Health
Act of 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 668),
5 U.S.C. 7902, and Executive Order
12196 to advise the Secretary of Labor
on all matters relating to the
occupational safety and health of
Federal employees. This includes
providing advice on how to reduce and
keep to a minimum the number of
injuries and illnesses in the Federal
E:\FR\FM\28OCN1.SGM
28OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 209 (Tuesday, October 28, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63995-63996]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-25463]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-63,761]
Level 3 Communications, L.L.C., Austin, TX; Notice of Negative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application dated September 29, 2008, a worker requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA)
applicable to workers and former workers of Level 3 Communications,
L.L.C., Austin, Texas (subject firm). The determination was issued on
September 11, 2008. The Department's Notice of determination was
published in the Federal Register on September 24, 2008 (73 FR 55137).
The subject workers are engaged in telecommunication activities related
to network design and provisioning in support of customer requests,
infrastructure, and network grooming activities.
The petition for TAA was denied because the workers do not produce
an article within the meaning of Section 222(a)(2) of the Trade Act of
1974. In order to be certified eligible to apply for ATAA, the worker
group must be eligible to apply for TAA. Since the worker group is
denied eligibility to apply for TAA, they cannot be certified eligible
to apply for ATAA.
In the request for reconsideration, the worker stated that ``the
position I held did create an article that was required by the
customers * * * a document referred to as an LOA (Letter of
Authorization).'' The worker also states that the LOA ``provided vital
information, which included the actual circuit and channel assignment,
to the customer. Without this information they would not be able to
physically connect to the correct equipment in the field * * * The LOA
also gave them a legal document that stated they were allowed to
connect to our equipment and or we were allowed to connect to their
equipment in the field. The circuit design and or provisioning could
not be done or move forward without this LOA.''
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c), administrative 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.
In order to be considered eligible to apply for adjustment
assistance, the worker group seeking certification must work for a firm
or appropriate subdivision that produces an article and there must be a
relationship between the workers' work and the article produced by the
workers' firm or appropriate subdivision.
The workers' firm provides telecommunication network services. The
firm's Web site states that it is a ``provider of fiber-based
communication services * * * Our network offerings include Internet
Protocol (IP) services * * * content and video delivery, data and voice
services.'' Further, previously-submitted documents, including the
petition and the
[[Page 63996]]
questionnaire completed by the subject firm, confirm that the subject
firm provides a service.
Unlike a manufacturing firm, Level 3 Communications, L.L.C. (Level
3) is not in the business of producing an article and then selling it,
and the subject firm does not receive revenue from the sales of the
LOA. Level 3's revenue flows from providing its customers with network
communication services. The LOA merely memorializes the service
agreement between the subject firm and its customer. As such, it is not
an article produced by the subject firm. Rather, the issuance of a LOA
is merely incidental to the service provided by the subject firm.
It is the Department's policy that something which is created
incidental to the provision of a service is not an ``article'' for
purposes of the Trade Act. The Department's policy that those workers
who provide services are not engaged in the production of an article
for the purposes of the Act, even if something (tangible or intangible)
is generated in the provision of those services, has been upheld by the
U.S. Court of International Trade (USCIT) in Former Employees of
Mortgage Guaranty Insurance Corporation v. United States Secretary of
Labor, Court No. 07-00182. In its August 13, 2008, opinion, the USCIT
stated ``the Trade Act does not provide for the eligibility of workers
engaged in the provision of services.''
After careful review of the request for reconsideration, the
Department determines that there is no new information that supports a
finding that Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974 was satisfied and
that no mistake or misinterpretation of the facts or of the law with
regards to the number or proportion of workers separated from the
subject firm during the relevant period.
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 10th day of October 2008.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8-25463 Filed 10-27-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P