Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant 6/11, Including On-Site Leased Workers of the Mulberry Group and Accuforce Staffing Services, Lenoir, NC; Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant 9, Shelby, NC; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand, 72852-72853 [E8-28356]

Download as PDF 72852 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 231 / Monday, December 1, 2008 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–63,420B; TA–W–63,420C] rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant 6/ 11, Including On-Site Leased Workers of the Mulberry Group and Accuforce Staffing Services, Lenoir, NC; Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant 9, Shelby, NC; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand On October 7, 2008, the U.S. Court of International Trade granted the Department of Labor’s motion for voluntary remand for further investigation in Former Employees of Bernhardt Furniture Company v. United States, Court No. 08–00271. A petition for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) was filed by a company official on behalf of workers and former workers of Bernhardt Furniture Company (subject firm), Bernhardt Corporate Office, Lenoir, North Carolina (TA–W–63,420), Bernhardt Central Warehouse, Lenoir, North Carolina (TA–W–63,420A), Plant 6/11, Lenoir, North Carolina (TA–W– 63,420B), Plant 9, Shelby, North Carolina (TA–W–63,420C), and Plant 10, Cherryville, North Carolina (TA–W– 63,420D). Workers covered by TA–W–63,420 are engaged in activities in support of company production and related operations. Workers covered by TA–W– 63,420A are engaged in distribution operations. Plant 6/11 (TA–W–63,420B), Plant 9 (TA–W–63,420C), and Plant 10 (TA–W–63,420D) comprise the Upholstered Furniture Department. Workers at these three facilities produce upholstered furniture and are not separately identifiable by product line. On June 13, 2008, the Department issued a determination certifying workers and former workers at Plant 10, Cherryville, North Carolina (TA–W– 63,420D), based on increased reliance on imports by the subject firm, and denying certification to workers and former workers at the other locations (TA–W–63,420, TA–W–63,420A, TA– W–63,420B, and TA–W–63,420C). The Department’s Notice of Determination was published in the Federal Register on June 27, 2008 (73 FR 36576). On July 17, 2008, a petitioner requested administrative reconsideration on behalf of workers and former workers of Bernhardt Furniture Company, Bernhardt Central Warehouse, Lenoir, North Carolina (TA– W–63,420A). On August 1, 2008, the Department issued a Notice of Negative VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:47 Nov 28, 2008 Jkt 217001 Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration applicable to the worker group covered by TA–W– 63,420A. The Department’s Notice was published in the Federal Register on August 7, 2008 (73 FR 46040). No request for administrative reconsideration was filed on behalf of worker groups covered by TA–W– 63,420B or TA–W–63,420C. By letter dated August 15, 2008, a subject firm official requested that the U.S. Court of International Trade (USCIT) review the negative determinations applicable to TA–W– 63,420B (Plant 6/11) and TA–W– 63,420C (Plant 9). The Department’s negative determination applicable to the worker groups covered by TA–W–63,420B and TA–W–63,420C was based on the Department’s findings that, for each location, the subject firm 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. Significant number or proportion of the workers in a firm, or appropriate subdivision thereof, means at least three workers with a workforce of fewer than 50 workers or five percent of the workers with a workforce over 50 workers. In the complaint, the Plaintiff stated that the three facilities that comprise the Upholstered Furniture Department— Plants 6/11, 9, and 10—‘‘operate as one continuous production operation’’ and provided new information regarding sales and production at the Upholstered Furniture Department. The complaint also included documentation that indicated that the subject firm did separate or threaten to separate a significant number or proportion of workers at Plant 6/11 and Plant 9. To apply for TAA, the group eligibility requirements under Section 222(a) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, must be met. The group eligibility requirements can be satisfied in either one of two ways: I. Section (a)(2)(A)— A. A significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers’ firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated; and B. The sales or production, or both, of such firm or subdivision have decreased absolutely; and C. Increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have contributed importantly to such workers’ separation or threat of separation and to the decline in sales or production of such firm or subdivision; or PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 II. Section (a)(2)(B)— A. A significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers’ firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated; and B. There has been a shift in production by such workers’ firm or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or directly competitive with articles which are produced by such firm or subdivision; and C. One of the following must be satisfied: 1. The country to which the workers’ firm has shifted production of the articles is a party to a free trade agreement with the United States; or 2. The country to which the workers’ firm has shifted production of the articles is a beneficiary country under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act; or 3. There has been or is likely to be an increase in imports of articles that are like or directly competitive with articles which are or were produced by such firm or subdivision. During the remand investigation, the Department carefully reviewed previously-submitted material and new information provided by the subject firm regarding employment levels at Plant 6/11 and Plant 9, the number of workers threatened with separation at each location, sales and production levels of the Upholstered Furniture Department, and import of articles like or directly competitive with upholstered furniture produced by the subject worker groups during the relevant period. Upon further review of these facts, the Department has determined that, during the relevant period, the subject firm did separate or threaten to separate a significant number or proportion of workers at Plant 6/11 and Plant 9; that sales and production of upholstered furniture at Plant 6/11 and Plant 9 declined; and that the subject firm increased its reliance on imports of articles like or directly competitive with those produced at Plant 6/11 and Plant 9. Therefore, the Department determines that the worker groups covered by TA– W–63, 420B and TA–W–63, 420C have met the criteria set forth in Section 222(a)(2)(A). In accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department herein presents the results of its investigation regarding certification of the subject worker groups’ eligibility to apply for ATAA. The Department has determined in this case that the group eligibility requirements of Section 246 have been met. E:\FR\FM\01DEN1.SGM 01DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 231 / Monday, December 1, 2008 / Notices A significant number of workers at the firm are age 50 or over and possess skills that are not easily transferable. Competitive conditions within the industry are adverse. Conclusion After careful review of the facts developed in the remand investigation, I determine that there was a separation or threat of separation of a significant number or proportion of workers at Plant 6/11, Lenoir, North Carolina, and Plant 9, Shelby, North Carolina, that there were sales and production declines of upholstered furniture at Plant 6/11, Lenoir, North Carolina, and Plant 9, Shelby, North Carolina, and that increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with upholstered furniture produced by the subject worker groups contributed importantly to the decline in sales and production of upholstered furniture and worker separations at Plant 6/11, Lenoir, North Carolina, and Plant 9, Shelby, North Carolina. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following certification: ‘‘All workers of Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant 6/11, Lenoir, North Carolina, including on-site leased workers of the Mulberry Group and Accuforce Staffing Services, (TA–W–63, 420B), and Plant 9, Shelby, North Carolina (TA–W–63, 420C), who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after May 20, 2007, 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, and are eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.’’ Signed at Washington, DC this 20th day of November 2008. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E8–28356 Filed 11–28–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P document in the Federal Register on November 17, 2008, announcing the availability of funds and solicitation for grant applications (SGA) for Local Young Offender Planning Grants, State/ Local Juvenile Offender Implementation Grants and an Intermediary Juvenile Reentry Grant. This notice is an amendment to the SGA and it amends under ‘‘Part I—Overall Funding Opportunity Description’’ and ‘‘Part IV—Application and Submission Information, Section C, ‘‘Submission Date, Times, and Addresses’’. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chari Magruder, Grant Officer, Division of Federal Assistance, at (202) 693– 3313. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION CORRECTION: In the Federal Register of November 17, 2008 in FR Doc. E8– 27151. On page 67885, under the heading, ‘‘Part I—Overall Funding Opportunity Description,’’ specifically under paragraph 7 is corrected to read: ‘‘The goal of the intermediary reentry grant is to allow an organization to design and implement a model program for serving returning juvenile offenders in four cities across the country as well as four cities in the same state.’’ On page 67888, under the heading, ‘‘Part IV— Application and Submission Information, Section C, Submission Date, Times, and Addresses,’’ specifically under paragraph 1 is corrected to read: ‘‘Applications submitted electronically through Grants.gov must be successfully submitted at http://www.grants.gov no later than 5 p.m. (Eastern Time) on December 18, 2008, and subsequently validated by Grants.gov.’’ DATES: Effective Date: This notice is effective December 1, 2008. Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th of November 2008. Chari Magruder, Grant Officer. [FR Doc. E8–28349 Filed 11–28–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FT–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Employment and Training Administration [SGA/DFA–PY–08–09] Solicitation for Grant Applications (SGA) Employment and Training Administration (ETA), Labor. ACTION: Notice: Amendment to SGA/ DFA–PY–08–09. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Employment and Training Administration published a VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:47 Nov 28, 2008 Jkt 217001 Planning Guidance and Instructions for Submission of the Strategic State Plan and Plan Modifications for Title I of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) and the Wagner-Peyser Act Employment and Training Administration. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 72853 SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to provide interested parties with the planning guidance for use by states in submitting their Strategic State Plans for Title I of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 and the Wagner-Peyser Act as well as Plan modifications. The Planning Guidance provides a framework for the collaboration of governors, local elected officials, businesses and other partners to continue the development of workforce investment systems that address customer needs, deliver integrated userfriendly services, and are accountable to the customers and the public. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Gay Gilbert, Administrator, Office of Workforce Investment, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Ave., NW., Room S–4231, Washington, DC 20210. Telephone: (202) 693–3980 (voice) (this is not a toll free number) or (202) 693– 7755 (TTY). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: State Planning Guidance and Instructions for Title I of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA) and the Wagner-Peyser Act OMB Control Number: 1205–0398. Expiration Date: Nov. 30, 2011. Table of Contents Statement of Purpose Background Part I. National Strategic Direction A. Demand-Driven Workforce Investment System within a Regional Economic Development Context B. System Reform and Increased Focus on Workforce Education and Training C. Enhanced Integration through the OneStop Delivery System with Improved Service Delivery and Increased Efficiencies D. Vision for Serving Youth Most in Need E. Increased Economic and Workforce Information Data Integration and Analysis F. Effective Utilization of Faith-based and Community Organizations G. Increased Use of Flexibility Provisions in WIA H. An Integrated and Enhanced Performance Accountability System that Provides Improved System Results Part II. State Planning Instructions A. Plan Development Process B. Plan Submission Requirements C. Department of Labor Review and Approval D. Negotiated Performance Indicators E. Modifications to State Plan F. Inquiries State Plan Contents I. State Vision II. State Workforce Investment Priorities III. State Governance Structure A. Organization of State Agencies B. State Workforce Investment Board (WIB) C. State Agencies and State Board Collaboration and Communication E:\FR\FM\01DEN1.SGM 01DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 231 (Monday, December 1, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72852-72853]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-28356]



[[Page 72852]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-63,420B; TA-W-63,420C]


Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant 6/11, Including On-Site Leased 
Workers of the Mulberry Group and Accuforce Staffing Services, Lenoir, 
NC; Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant 9, Shelby, NC; Notice of Revised 
Determination on Remand

    On October 7, 2008, the U.S. Court of International Trade granted 
the Department of Labor's motion for voluntary remand for further 
investigation in Former Employees of Bernhardt Furniture Company v. 
United States, Court No. 08-00271.
    A petition for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Alternative 
Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) was filed by a company official on 
behalf of workers and former workers of Bernhardt Furniture Company 
(subject firm), Bernhardt Corporate Office, Lenoir, North Carolina (TA-
W-63,420), Bernhardt Central Warehouse, Lenoir, North Carolina (TA-W-
63,420A), Plant 6/11, Lenoir, North Carolina (TA-W-63,420B), Plant 9, 
Shelby, North Carolina (TA-W-63,420C), and Plant 10, Cherryville, North 
Carolina (TA-W-63,420D).
    Workers covered by TA-W-63,420 are engaged in activities in support 
of company production and related operations. Workers covered by TA-W-
63,420A are engaged in distribution operations. Plant 6/11 (TA-W-
63,420B), Plant 9 (TA-W-63,420C), and Plant 10 (TA-W-63,420D) comprise 
the Upholstered Furniture Department. Workers at these three facilities 
produce upholstered furniture and are not separately identifiable by 
product line.
    On June 13, 2008, the Department issued a determination certifying 
workers and former workers at Plant 10, Cherryville, North Carolina 
(TA-W-63,420D), based on increased reliance on imports by the subject 
firm, and denying certification to workers and former workers at the 
other locations (TA-W-63,420, TA-W-63,420A, TA-W-63,420B, and TA-W-
63,420C). The Department's Notice of Determination was published in the 
Federal Register on June 27, 2008 (73 FR 36576).
    On July 17, 2008, a petitioner requested administrative 
reconsideration on behalf of workers and former workers of Bernhardt 
Furniture Company, Bernhardt Central Warehouse, Lenoir, North Carolina 
(TA-W-63,420A). On August 1, 2008, the Department issued a Notice of 
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration 
applicable to the worker group covered by TA-W-63,420A. The 
Department's Notice was published in the Federal Register on August 7, 
2008 (73 FR 46040).
    No request for administrative reconsideration was filed on behalf 
of worker groups covered by TA-W-63,420B or TA-W-63,420C.
    By letter dated August 15, 2008, a subject firm official requested 
that the U.S. Court of International Trade (USCIT) review the negative 
determinations applicable to TA-W-63,420B (Plant 6/11) and TA-W-63,420C 
(Plant 9).
    The Department's negative determination applicable to the worker 
groups covered by TA-W-63,420B and TA-W-63,420C was based on the 
Department's findings that, for each location, the subject firm 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. 
Significant number or proportion of the workers in a firm, or 
appropriate subdivision thereof, means at least three workers with a 
workforce of fewer than 50 workers or five percent of the workers with 
a workforce over 50 workers.
    In the complaint, the Plaintiff stated that the three facilities 
that comprise the Upholstered Furniture Department--Plants 6/11, 9, and 
10--``operate as one continuous production operation'' and provided new 
information regarding sales and production at the Upholstered Furniture 
Department. The complaint also included documentation that indicated 
that the subject firm did separate or threaten to separate a 
significant number or proportion of workers at Plant 6/11 and Plant 9.
    To apply for TAA, the group eligibility requirements under Section 
222(a) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, must be met. The group 
eligibility requirements can be satisfied in either one of two ways:

I. Section (a)(2)(A)--

    A. A significant number or proportion of the workers in such 
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have 
become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become 
totally or partially separated; and 
    B. The sales or production, or both, of such firm or subdivision 
have decreased absolutely; and 
    C. Increased imports of articles like or directly competitive 
with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have contributed 
importantly to such workers' separation or threat of separation and 
to the decline in sales or production of such firm or subdivision; 
or

II. Section (a)(2)(B)--

    A. A significant number or proportion of the workers in such 
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have 
become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become 
totally or partially separated; and
    B. There has been a shift in production by such workers' firm or 
subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or directly 
competitive with articles which are produced by such firm or 
subdivision; and
    C. One of the following must be satisfied:
    1. The country to which the workers' firm has shifted production 
of the articles is a party to a free trade agreement with the United 
States; or
    2. The country to which the workers' firm has shifted production 
of the articles is a beneficiary country under the Andean Trade 
Preference Act, African Growth and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean 
Basin Economic Recovery Act; or
    3. There has been or is likely to be an increase in imports of 
articles that are like or directly competitive with articles which 
are or were produced by such firm or subdivision.

    During the remand investigation, the Department carefully reviewed 
previously-submitted material and new information provided by the 
subject firm regarding employment levels at Plant 6/11 and Plant 9, the 
number of workers threatened with separation at each location, sales 
and production levels of the Upholstered Furniture Department, and 
import of articles like or directly competitive with upholstered 
furniture produced by the subject worker groups during the relevant 
period.
    Upon further review of these facts, the Department has determined 
that, during the relevant period, the subject firm did separate or 
threaten to separate a significant number or proportion of workers at 
Plant 6/11 and Plant 9; that sales and production of upholstered 
furniture at Plant 6/11 and Plant 9 declined; and that the subject firm 
increased its reliance on imports of articles like or directly 
competitive with those produced at Plant 6/11 and Plant 9. Therefore, 
the Department determines that the worker groups covered by TA-W-63, 
420B and TA-W-63, 420C have met the criteria set forth in Section 
222(a)(2)(A).
    In accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 
2813), as amended, the Department herein presents the results of its 
investigation regarding certification of the subject worker groups' 
eligibility to apply for ATAA.
    The Department has determined in this case that the group 
eligibility requirements of Section 246 have been met.

[[Page 72853]]

    A significant number of workers at the firm are age 50 or over and 
possess skills that are not easily transferable. Competitive conditions 
within the industry are adverse.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the facts developed in the remand 
investigation, I determine that there was a separation or threat of 
separation of a significant number or proportion of workers at Plant 6/
11, Lenoir, North Carolina, and Plant 9, Shelby, North Carolina, that 
there were sales and production declines of upholstered furniture at 
Plant 6/11, Lenoir, North Carolina, and Plant 9, Shelby, North 
Carolina, and that increased imports of articles like or directly 
competitive with upholstered furniture produced by the subject worker 
groups contributed importantly to the decline in sales and production 
of upholstered furniture and worker separations at Plant 6/11, Lenoir, 
North Carolina, and Plant 9, Shelby, North Carolina.
    In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following 
certification:

    ``All workers of Bernhardt Furniture Company, Plant 6/11, 
Lenoir, North Carolina, including on-site leased workers of the 
Mulberry Group and Accuforce Staffing Services, (TA-W-63, 420B), and 
Plant 9, Shelby, North Carolina (TA-W-63, 420C), who became totally 
or partially separated from employment on or after May 20, 2007, 
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, and are eligible to apply for 
alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the 
Trade Act of 1974.''

    Signed at Washington, DC this 20th day of November 2008.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
 [FR Doc. E8-28356 Filed 11-28-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P