Ananke, Inc., Providence, RI; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration, 14696-14697 [2011-6194]

Download as PDF 14696 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 52 / Thursday, March 17, 2011 / Notices Signed in Washington, DC, on this 4th day of March 2011. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2011–6185 Filed 3–16–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–72,355] srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES Flanders Tool Company, Inc., Flanders, NJ; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration On January 4, 2010, the Department of Labor issued a Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance for the workers and former workers of Flanders Tool Company, Flanders, New Jersey (the subject firm). The Department’s Notice was published in the Federal Register on February 16, 2010 (75 FR 7039). By application dated February 12, 2010, the petitioner requested administrative reconsideration of the negative determination regarding workers’ eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. At the request of the petitioners, the Department conducted further investigation to determine if the workers meet the eligibility requirements of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended. Workers are engaged in employment related to the production of precision cutting tools and drills. 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 initial negative determination was based on the findings that there was no increase in imports by the workers’ firm or customers of articles like or directly competitive with precision cutting tools and drills, or a shift to/ acquisition from a foreign country by the workers’ firm in the production of articles like or directly competitive with precision cutting tools and drills, and VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:48 Mar 16, 2011 Jkt 223001 that the workers’ firm did not produce and supply directly component parts (or services) to a firm that both employed a worker group eligible to apply for TAA and directly used the component parts (or services) in the production of the article or in the supply of the service that was the basis for the TAA certification. The request for reconsideration stated that the subject firm supplies products to certified customers. Information obtained during the reconsideration investigation confirmed that the subject firm did not produce and supply directly component parts to a firm that both employed a worker group eligible to apply for TAA and directly used the component parts in the production of the article or in the supply of the service that was the basis for the TAA certification. While tools and capital equipment are used in the production of an article, they are not component parts. Information obtained during the reconsideration investigation confirmed that, during the relevant period, the major declining customers of the subject firm did not directly or indirectly import articles like or directly competitive with the precision cutting tools and drills produced by the subject firm. Conclusion After reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of negative determination of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance for workers and former workers of Flanders Tool Company, Flanders, New Jersey. Signed in Washington, DC, on this 4th day of March 2011. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2011–6193 Filed 3–16–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–72,493] Ananke, Inc., Providence, RI; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration On December 1, 2010, the Department of Labor issued an Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers and former workers of Ananke, Inc., Rhode Island (subject firm). The Department’s Notice was published in the Federal Register on December 13, 2010 (75 FR PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 77664). The workers at the subject firm supplied on-site application packaging services to a financial services firm located in Boston, Massachusetts. Therefore, the worker group includes workers who report to the subject firm but are located in Massachusetts; however, the worker group does not include any on-site leased or temporary workers. 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 initial negative determination was based on the findings that neither the subject firm nor a declining customer imported services like or directly competitive with the application packaging services supplied by the subject workers; that the subject firm did not shift to/acquire from a foreign country the supply of services like or directly competitive with the application packaging services supplied by the subject workers; and that workers of the subject firm are not adversely affected secondary workers. The request for reconsideration states that ‘‘Ananke Inc. performed application packaging services for John Hancock * * * In September 2009, John Hancock replaced * * * Ananke Inc. with * * * Cognizant Technology Solutions (an offshoring/outsourcing company)’’ and included support documentation. Information obtained during the reconsideration investigation confirmed that, during the relevant period, neither the subject firm nor a client firm shifted to/acquired from a foreign country the supply of services like or directly competitive with the application packaging services supplied by the workers. Rather, the shift in the supply of services that is alleged by the petitioner is related to services that are neither like nor directly competitive with those supplied by the subject workers. Conclusion After reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of negative determination of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance for workers and former workers of Ananke, Inc., Rhode Island. E:\FR\FM\17MRN1.SGM 17MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 52 / Thursday, March 17, 2011 / Notices Signed in Washington, DC, on this 4th day of March 2011. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2011–6194 Filed 3–16–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–72,041] Aleris Blanking and Rim Products, Inc., a Division of Aleris International, Inc., Terre Haute, IN; Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration On February 18, 2010, the Department issued an Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers and former workers of the subject firm. The Department’s Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2010 (75 FR 9436–9437). The workers produce aluminum blanks and hoops. New information revealed that, during the period of investigation, imports of articles like or directly competitive with aluminum blanks and hoops produced by the subject firm have increased. Specifically, the Department of Labor conducted a second tier survey of the subject firm’s major declining customer regarding their purchases of aluminum blanks and hoops during the relevant period. The survey revealed increased customer reliance on imported aluminum blanks and hoops. Finally, Section 222(a)(2)(A)(iii) has been met because the increased imports of aluminum blanks and hoops by a second tier customer of the subject firm’s major declining customer contributed importantly to the worker group separations and sales/production declines at the subject firm. srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES Conclusion After careful review of the additional facts obtained during the reconsideration investigation, I determine that workers of Aleris Blanking and Rim Products, Inc., a division of Aleris International, Inc., Terre Haute, Indiana, who are engaged in employment related to the production of aluminum blanks and hoops, meet the worker group certification criteria under Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a). In accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2273, I make the following certification: VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:48 Mar 16, 2011 Jkt 223001 All workers of Aleris Blanking and Rim Products, Inc., a division of Aleris International, Inc., Terre Haute, Indiana, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after August 14, 2008, through two years from the date of this revised certification, 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 in Washington, DC, this 4th day of March 2011. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2011–6192 Filed 3–16–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–74,689] Amdocs, Inc., Global Support Services, Advertising and Media AT&T Division, New Haven, CT; Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration 14697 Conclusion After careful review of the additional facts obtained on reconsideration, I determine that workers of the subject firm, who are engaged in employment related to the supply of development, testing, including sanity and regression testing, and production support services related to computer systems, meet the worker group certification criteria under Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a). In accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2273, I make the following certification: All workers of Amdocs, Inc., Global Support Services, Advertising and Media AT&T Division, New Haven, Connecticut, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after September 29, 2009, through two years from the date of this revised certification, 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 in Washington, DC, this 4th day of March 2011. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2011–6187 Filed 3–16–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P By application dated December 22, 2010, the petitioner requested administrative reconsideration of the Department’s negative determination regarding the eligibility of workers and former workers of Amdocs, Inc., Global Support Services, Advertising and Media AT&T Division, New Haven, Connecticut to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA). On January 21, 2011, the Department issued a Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration applicable to workers of the subject firm. The Notice was published in the Federal Register on February 22, 2011 (76 FR 5831). The subject workers are engaged in employment related to the supply of development, testing, including sanity and regression testing, and production support services related to computer systems. During the reconsideration investigation, the Department received information that revealed that the subject firm had shifted to a foreign country a portion of the supply of services like or directly competitive with the services supplied by the subject workers, and that the shift in services contributed importantly to worker group separations at the subject firm. PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–70,305] Shorewood Packaging, a Business Unit of International Paper, Inc., Springfield, OR; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration On January 26, 2010, the Department of Labor issued an Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration applicable to workers and former workers of Shorewood Packaging, a business unit of International Paper, Inc., Springfield, Oregon (the subject firm). The Department’s Notice was published in the Federal Register on February 16, 2010 (75 FR 7030). 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 E:\FR\FM\17MRN1.SGM 17MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 52 (Thursday, March 17, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14696-14697]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6194]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-72,493]


Ananke, Inc., Providence, RI; Notice of Negative Determination on 
Reconsideration

    On December 1, 2010, the Department of Labor issued an Affirmative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers 
and former workers of Ananke, Inc., Rhode Island (subject firm). The 
Department's Notice was published in the Federal Register on December 
13, 2010 (75 FR 77664). The workers at the subject firm supplied on-
site application packaging services to a financial services firm 
located in Boston, Massachusetts. Therefore, the worker group includes 
workers who report to the subject firm but are located in 
Massachusetts; however, the worker group does not include any on-site 
leased or temporary workers.
    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 initial negative determination was based on the findings that 
neither the subject firm nor a declining customer imported services 
like or directly competitive with the application packaging services 
supplied by the subject workers; that the subject firm did not shift 
to/acquire from a foreign country the supply of services like or 
directly competitive with the application packaging services supplied 
by the subject workers; and that workers of the subject firm are not 
adversely affected secondary workers.
    The request for reconsideration states that ``Ananke Inc. performed 
application packaging services for John Hancock * * * In September 
2009, John Hancock replaced * * * Ananke Inc. with * * * Cognizant 
Technology Solutions (an offshoring/outsourcing company)'' and included 
support documentation.
    Information obtained during the reconsideration investigation 
confirmed that, during the relevant period, neither the subject firm 
nor a client firm shifted to/acquired from a foreign country the supply 
of services like or directly competitive with the application packaging 
services supplied by the workers. Rather, the shift in the supply of 
services that is alleged by the petitioner is related to services that 
are neither like nor directly competitive with those supplied by the 
subject workers.

Conclusion

    After reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of negative 
determination of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance 
for workers and former workers of Ananke, Inc., Rhode Island.


[[Page 14697]]


    Signed in Washington, DC, on this 4th day of March 2011.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2011-6194 Filed 3-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P

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