Dell USA LP, Americas Business Operations Organization; Round Rock, TX; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 53768 [E9-25152]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
53768
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 20, 2009 / Notices
of polyester tire cord and high denier
industrial yarn.
The company reports that UTi
Integrated Logistics, an on-site leasing
firm at the subject firm, was formerly
known as Standard Corporation.
Information also shows that workers
separated from employment from UTi
Integrated Logistics had their wages
reported under a separate
unemployment insurance (UI) tax
account for Standard Corporation.
Accordingly, the Department is
amending this certification to properly
reflect this matter.
The intent of the Department’s
certification is to include all workers of
the subject firm who were adversely
affected as an upstream supplier to a
trade certified primary firm.
The amended notice applicable to
TA–W–70,812 is hereby issued as
follows:
All workers of Performance Fibers
Operations, Inc., Salisbury Plant, including
on-site leased workers from Mundy
Maintenance Services and Operations and
UTi Integrated Logistics, formerly known as
Standard Corporation, Salisbury, North
Carolina, who became totally or partially
separated from employment on or after May
29, 2008 through July 7, 2011, and all
workers in the group threatened with total or
partial separation from employment on date
of certification through two years from the
date of certification, are eligible to apply for
adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of
Title II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 7th day of
October 2009
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9–25148 Filed 10–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–70,477]
cprice-sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Dell USA LP, Americas Business
Operations Organization; Round Rock,
TX; Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for
Reconsideration
By application sent via facsimile on
September 17, 2009, a petitioner
requested administrative
reconsideration of the Department’s
negative determination regarding
eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers
and former workers of the subject firm.
The denial notice was signed on August
7, 2009 and published in the Federal
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:46 Oct 19, 2009
Jkt 220001
Register on September 22, 2009 (74 FR
48304).
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 negative TAA determination
issued by the Department for workers of
Dell USA LP, Americas Business
Operations Organization, Round Rock,
Texas was based on the finding that 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.
The petitioner stated that prior to May
2008 the workers of the subject firm
were part of Global Financial Services
Group at Dell USA. The petitioner
further stated that in May 2008 the
petitioning worker group was
transferred to a different division at Dell
USA and became a part of Americas
Business Operations Group. After the
transition, the workers continued
performing similar functions and were
engaged in activities related to financial
and accounting services.
When assessing eligibility for TAA,
the Department determines whether
each required criterion is met prior to
issuing the determination. In order for
the criteria (a)(2)(A)(i) and 222(c)(1) to
be met, the Department exclusively
considers the relevant employment data
(for one year prior to the date of the
petition and any imminent layoffs) for
the facility where the petitioning worker
group was employed.
In case at hand, the investigation
revealed that employment levels at Dell
USA LP, Americas Business Operations
Organization, Round Rock, Texas did
not decline during the relevant period
and there was no threat of separations.
A significant number or proportion of
the workers in a firm or appropriate
subdivision means at least three workers
in a workforce of fewer than 50 workers,
five percent of the workers in a
workforce of over 50 workers, or at least
50 workers. Therefore, criterion I of
Section 222(a) and criterion (1) of
Section 222(c) of the Act were not met.
The petitioner also alleged that there
was a shift in services provided by the
workers of the subject firm to India and
not to Beijing, China as indicated in the
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
negative determination document
issued by the Department of Labor.
The allegation of the shift in services
to India would have been relevant if it
was determined that all other criteria
have been met. However, it was
revealed that there was no employment
decline at the subject facility during the
relevant period.
Should conditions change in the
future, the petitioner is encouraged to
file a new petition on behalf of the
worker group which will encompass an
investigative period that will include
these changing conditions.
The petitioner did not supply facts
not previously considered; nor provide
additional documentation indicating
that there was either (1) A mistake in
the determination of facts not
previously considered or (2) a
misinterpretation of facts or of the law
justifying reconsideration of the initial
determination.
After careful review of the request for
reconsideration, the Department
determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has 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 in Washington, DC, this 6th day of
October, 2009.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9–25152 Filed 10–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2009–0192; Docket No. 50–244;
Renewed License No. DPR–18]
In the Matter of EDF Development, Inc.,
Constellation Energy Nuclear Group,
LLC; R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant,
LLC (R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant);
Order Approving Application
Regarding Proposed Corporate
Restructuring
I
R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC
(Ginna, LLC or the licensee) is the
holder of Renewed Facility Operating
License No. DPR–18 which authorizes
the possession, use, and operation of the
R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant (Ginna).
The facility is located at the licensee’s
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 201 (Tuesday, October 20, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 53768]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25152]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-70,477]
Dell USA LP, Americas Business Operations Organization; Round
Rock, TX; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration
By application sent via facsimile on September 17, 2009, a
petitioner requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's
negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former workers
of the subject firm. The denial notice was signed on August 7, 2009 and
published in the Federal Register on September 22, 2009 (74 FR 48304).
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 negative TAA determination issued by the Department for workers
of Dell USA LP, Americas Business Operations Organization, Round Rock,
Texas was based on the finding that 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.
The petitioner stated that prior to May 2008 the workers of the
subject firm were part of Global Financial Services Group at Dell USA.
The petitioner further stated that in May 2008 the petitioning worker
group was transferred to a different division at Dell USA and became a
part of Americas Business Operations Group. After the transition, the
workers continued performing similar functions and were engaged in
activities related to financial and accounting services.
When assessing eligibility for TAA, the Department determines
whether each required criterion is met prior to issuing the
determination. In order for the criteria (a)(2)(A)(i) and 222(c)(1) to
be met, the Department exclusively considers the relevant employment
data (for one year prior to the date of the petition and any imminent
layoffs) for the facility where the petitioning worker group was
employed.
In case at hand, the investigation revealed that employment levels
at Dell USA LP, Americas Business Operations Organization, Round Rock,
Texas did not decline during the relevant period and there was no
threat of separations. A significant number or proportion of the
workers in a firm or appropriate subdivision means at least three
workers in a workforce of fewer than 50 workers, five percent of the
workers in a workforce of over 50 workers, or at least 50 workers.
Therefore, criterion I of Section 222(a) and criterion (1) of Section
222(c) of the Act were not met.
The petitioner also alleged that there was a shift in services
provided by the workers of the subject firm to India and not to
Beijing, China as indicated in the negative determination document
issued by the Department of Labor.
The allegation of the shift in services to India would have been
relevant if it was determined that all other criteria have been met.
However, it was revealed that there was no employment decline at the
subject facility during the relevant period.
Should conditions change in the future, the petitioner is
encouraged to file a new petition on behalf of the worker group which
will encompass an investigative period that will include these changing
conditions.
The petitioner did not supply facts not previously considered; nor
provide additional documentation indicating that there was either (1) A
mistake in the determination of facts not previously considered or (2)
a misinterpretation of facts or of the law justifying reconsideration
of the initial determination.
After careful review of the request for reconsideration, the
Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has 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 in Washington, DC, this 6th day of October, 2009.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-25152 Filed 10-19-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
