Desoto Mills LLC, Fort Payne, AL; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 39051-39052 [2010-16420]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 7, 2010 / Notices [FR Doc. 2010–16414 Filed 7–6–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–73,536] cprice-sewell on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES Allstate Insurance Company, Altoona Express Market Claim Office, Including On-Site Leased Workers From Kelly Services, Altoona, PA; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application dated June 7, 2010, 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 Allstate Insurance Company, Altoona Express Market Claim Office, including on-site leased workers from Kelly Services, Altoona, Pennsylvania. The negative determination was issued on May 7, 2010, and the Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register on May 28, 2010 (75 FR 30073). 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 misinterpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of the decision. The negative determination applicable to the subject workers was based on the findings that the subject firm did not import services like or directly competitive with insurance claim services during the relevant period of the investigation or shift service abroad during the same period; and that the workers did not supply a service that was used by a firm that employed a worker group currently eligible to apply for TAA. In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner stated that she had ‘‘verbal confirmation from the Altoona management team that the services being provided by the call center(s) operating in India are directly competitive to the services that were provided by’’ the subject facility. After this office received the request for reconsideration, the investigator VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:28 Jul 06, 2010 Jkt 220001 obtained from the petitioner the name of the subject firm manager who was alleged to be able to confirm the shift to India. However, the official confirmed that insurance claim services provided by the subject facility were distributed to other domestic offices of the subject firm and were not shifted abroad. 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 22nd day of June 2010. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2010–16421 Filed 7–6–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–73,416] Desoto Mills LLC, Fort Payne, AL; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application dated June 1, 2010, a company official 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 determination was signed on April 28, 2010, and the Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register on May 28, 2010 (75 FR 30072). 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 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 39051 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. The negative determination applicable to workers and former workers at Desoto Mills, LLC, a Subsidiary of Fruit of the Loom, Fort Payne, Alabama, was based on the findings that there was neither an increase in imports nor a shift/ acquisition by the workers’ firm that contributed importantly to the worker group separations; the subject workers are not secondarily-affected workers; and the workers’ firm was not identified in an affirmative finding of injury by the International Trade Commission. In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner stated that the steady decline in sales and production at the subject firm ‘‘has caused the entire distribution and administrative support operation to be consolidated into existing Fruit of the Loom * * * locations outside the Desoto Mills Plant.’’ The petitioner compares the situation at this location with similar shifts of production and subsequent downsizing of administrative and distribution staff that have resulted in TAA certifications (TA–W–63,167, TA–W–71,012, TA–W– 72,253, and TA–W–73,414). The initial investigation revealed that there was a shift of production of socks from the subject location in 2006 and 2007, and that, following the shift, distribution work at the Fort Payne, Alabama facility continued with the workers processing foreign-produced socks. Additional information provided by the applicant revealed that, since March 2007, the subject facility has not supported a domestic, affiliated production facility and no significant degree of the supply of distribution services has been shifted to a foreign country. 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. E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM 07JYN1 39052 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 129 / Wednesday, July 7, 2010 / Notices 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 23rd day of June, 2010. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2010–16420 Filed 7–6–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET 2010 Standards for Delineating Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas Correction In notice document 2010–15605 beginning on page 37246 in the issue of Monday, June 28, 2010, make the following corrections: 1. On page 37250, in the second column, under Section 7. Divisions of Metropolitan Statistical Areas and New England City and Town Areas, in the last line of paragraph (a), ‘‘75’’ should read ‘‘.75’’. 2. On page 37251, in the first column, under Section 10. Updating Schedule, in the third line of paragraph (b), ‘‘Metropolitan’’ should read ‘‘Micropolitan’’. 3. On the same page, in the second column, in paragraph (f), in the first and second lines, ‘‘Metropolitan and Metropolitan Statistical Area’’ should read ‘‘Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area’’. [FR Doc. C1 2010–15605 Filed 7–2–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1505–01–D NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES Alice Whelihan, National Endowment for the Arts, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 726, Washington, DC 20506–0001, telephone (202) 682–5574 (this is not a toll-free number), fax (202) 682–5603. cprice-sewell on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES Notice. SUMMARY: The National Endowment for the Arts, 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:28 Jul 06, 2010 Jkt 220001 DATES: Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the ADDRESSES section below on or before June 3, 2008. The National Endowment for the Arts 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 —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting the electronic submissions of responses. ADDRESSES: National Endowment for the Arts; Proposed Collection: Comment Request ACTION: of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95) [44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(A)]. This program helps 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. Currently, the National Endowment for the Arts, on behalf of the Federal Council on the Arts and the Humanities, is soliciting comments concerning the Application for Indemnification for Domestic Exhibitions. A copy of this collection request can be obtained by contacting the office listed below in the ADDRESSES section of this notice. Kathleen Edwards, Director, Administrative Services. [FR Doc. 2010–16397 Filed 7–6–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7537–01–P PO 00000 NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES Federal Council On the Arts and the Humanities Arts and Artifacts Indemnity Panel Advisory Committee AGENCY: The National Endowment for the Humanities. ACTION: Notice of meeting. Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463 as amended) notice is hereby given that a meeting of the Arts and Artifacts Indemnity Panel of the Federal Council on the Arts and the Humanities will be held at 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20506, in Room 730, from 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., on Tuesday, July 27, 2010. The purpose of the meeting is to review applications for Certificates of Indemnity submitted to the Federal Council on the Arts and the Humanities for exhibitions beginning after September 1, 2010. Because the proposed meeting will consider financial and commercial data and because it is important to keep values of objects, methods of transportation and security measures confidential, pursuant to the authority granted me by the Chairman’s Delegation of Authority to Close Advisory Committee Meetings, dated July 19, 1993, I have determined that the meeting would fall within exemption (4) of 5 U.S.C. 552(b) and that it is essential to close the meeting to protect the free exchange of views and to avoid interference with the operations of the Committee. It is suggested that those desiring more specific information contact Advisory Committee Management Officer, Michael P. McDonald, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20506, or call 202–606– 8322. Michael P. McDonald, Advisory Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. 2010–16369 Filed 7–6–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7536–01–P NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES Meeting of National Council on the Humanities AGENCY: The National Endowment for the Humanities, ARTS. ACTION: Notice of meeting. Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463, as amended) notice is hereby Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM 07JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 7, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39051-39052]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-16420]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-73,416]


Desoto Mills LLC, Fort Payne, AL; Notice of Negative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated June 1, 2010, a company official 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 determination was signed on April 28, 2010, and the 
Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register on May 
28, 2010 (75 FR 30072).
    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 
misinterpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of 
the decision.
    The negative determination applicable to workers and former workers 
at Desoto Mills, LLC, a Subsidiary of Fruit of the Loom, Fort Payne, 
Alabama, was based on the findings that there was neither an increase 
in imports nor a shift/acquisition by the workers' firm that 
contributed importantly to the worker group separations; the subject 
workers are not secondarily-affected workers; and the workers' firm was 
not identified in an affirmative finding of injury by the International 
Trade Commission.
    In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner stated that the 
steady decline in sales and production at the subject firm ``has caused 
the entire distribution and administrative support operation to be 
consolidated into existing Fruit of the Loom * * * locations outside 
the Desoto Mills Plant.'' The petitioner compares the situation at this 
location with similar shifts of production and subsequent downsizing of 
administrative and distribution staff that have resulted in TAA 
certifications (TA-W-63,167, TA-W-71,012, TA-W-72,253, and TA-W-
73,414).
    The initial investigation revealed that there was a shift of 
production of socks from the subject location in 2006 and 2007, and 
that, following the shift, distribution work at the Fort Payne, Alabama 
facility continued with the workers processing foreign-produced socks.
    Additional information provided by the applicant revealed that, 
since March 2007, the subject facility has not supported a domestic, 
affiliated production facility and no significant degree of the supply 
of distribution services has been shifted to a foreign country.
    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.

[[Page 39052]]

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 23rd day of June, 2010.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2010-16420 Filed 7-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P