Roseburg Forest Products Composite Panels Division Missoula, Montana; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration, 35061 [2012-14194]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 12, 2012 / Notices Chemistry Department, and Analytical Chemistry and Material Management Department, Groton, Connecticut, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after July 8, 2010 through December 2, 2013, and all workers in the group threatened with total or partial separation from employment on the 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 25th day of May, 2012. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2012–14195 Filed 6–11–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–80,459] srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Roseburg Forest Products Composite Panels Division Missoula, Montana; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration On March 14, 2012, the Department of Labor (Department) issued an Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers and former workers of Roseburg Forest Products, Composite Panels Division, Missoula, Montana (subject firm). The Department’s Notice was published in the Federal Register on March 26, 2012 (77 FR 17524). The workers are engaged in employment related to the production of particleboard. 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 investigation resulted in a negative determination based on the findings that worker separations were not attributable to either increased imports by the subject firm or its declining customers of particleboard (or articles like or directly competitive with particleboard), or a shift/acquisition of the production of particleboard (or articles like or directly competitive with VerDate Mar<15>2010 22:42 Jun 11, 2012 Jkt 226001 particleboard) to/from a foreign country by the workers’ firm. In the request for reconsideration, a company official alleged that workers at the subject firm were impacted by increased import competition of particleboard similar to workers at three other subject firm facilities who are eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (Louisville, Missouri; Orangeburg, South Carolina; and Russellville, South Carolina). During the reconsideration investigation, the Department reviewed and confirmed information collected during the initial investigation and collected additional information from the subject firm. The reconsideration investigation findings confirmed that neither the subject firm nor its major declining customers increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with particleboard in the period under investigation. Additionally, the reconsideration investigation findings confirmed that the subject firm did not shift the production of particleboard (or a like or directly competitive article) to a foreign country or acquire the production of such articles from a foreign country. After careful review of the request for reconsideration, previously-submitted information, and information obtained during the reconsideration investigation, the Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not been met. Conclusion After careful review, I determine that the requirements of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272, have not been met and, therefore, deny the petition for group eligibility of to apply for adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2273. Signed in Washington, DC, on this 25th day of May, 2012. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2012–14194 Filed 6–11–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P PO 00000 Frm 00129 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 35061 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Announcement Regarding States Triggering ‘‘Off’’ in the Emergency Unemployment Compensation 2008 Program and the Federal-State Extended Benefits Program Employment and Training Administration, Labor. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Announcement regarding states triggering ‘‘off’’ in the Emergency Unemployment Compensation 2008 (EUC08) Program and the Federal-State Extended Benefits (EB) Program. The U.S. Department of Labor (Department) produces trigger notices indicating which states qualify for both EB and EUC08 benefits, and provides the beginning and ending dates of payable periods for each qualifying state. The trigger notices covering state eligibility for these programs can be found at: http://ows.doleta.gov/ unemploy/claims_arch.asp. The following changes have occurred since the publication of the last notice regarding states’ EB and EUC08 trigger status: • Based on data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on March 30, 2012, the three month average, seasonally adjusted total unemployment rate in Connecticut fell below the 8.0% rate required to remain ‘‘on’’ in a high unemployment period (HUP) within the EB program. Claimants in this state were eligible for up to 20 weeks of benefits through April 21, 2012, but starting April 22, 2012, the maximum potential entitlement in the EB program for this state decreased from 20 weeks to 13 weeks. • Based on data released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics on March 30, 2012, as well as revisions to prior year data released on February 29, 2012, Alabama, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, and Washington no longer meet one of the criteria to remain ‘‘on’’ in EB, i.e., having their current three month average, seasonally adjusted total unemployment rate be at least 110% of one of the rates from a comparable period in one of the three prior years. This triggered these states ‘‘off’’ EB and the end of the payable period for these states in the EB program was the week ending April 21, 2012. • Although some states have triggered ‘‘off’’ of EB, they are currently triggered ‘‘on’’ to Tier 4 of the EUC08 program. Under Public Law 112–96, new Tier 4 claimants in states that are triggered SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM 12JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 12, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 35061]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14194]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-80,459]


Roseburg Forest Products Composite Panels Division Missoula, 
Montana; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration

    On March 14, 2012, the Department of Labor (Department) issued an 
Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for 
the workers and former workers of Roseburg Forest Products, Composite 
Panels Division, Missoula, Montana (subject firm). The Department's 
Notice was published in the Federal Register on March 26, 2012 (77 FR 
17524). The workers are engaged in employment related to the production 
of particleboard.
    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 investigation resulted in a negative determination 
based on the findings that worker separations were not attributable to 
either increased imports by the subject firm or its declining customers 
of particleboard (or articles like or directly competitive with 
particleboard), or a shift/acquisition of the production of 
particleboard (or articles like or directly competitive with 
particleboard) to/from a foreign country by the workers' firm.
    In the request for reconsideration, a company official alleged that 
workers at the subject firm were impacted by increased import 
competition of particleboard similar to workers at three other subject 
firm facilities who are eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment 
Assistance (Louisville, Missouri; Orangeburg, South Carolina; and 
Russellville, South Carolina).
    During the reconsideration investigation, the Department reviewed 
and confirmed information collected during the initial investigation 
and collected additional information from the subject firm.
    The reconsideration investigation findings confirmed that neither 
the subject firm nor its major declining customers increased imports of 
articles like or directly competitive with particleboard in the period 
under investigation. Additionally, the reconsideration investigation 
findings confirmed that the subject firm did not shift the production 
of particleboard (or a like or directly competitive article) to a 
foreign country or acquire the production of such articles from a 
foreign country.
    After careful review of the request for reconsideration, 
previously-submitted information, and information obtained during the 
reconsideration investigation, the Department determines that 29 CFR 
90.18(c) has not been met.

Conclusion

    After careful review, I determine that the requirements of Section 
222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272, have not been met and, therefore, deny 
the petition for group eligibility of to apply for adjustment 
assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2273.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on this 25th day of May, 2012.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2012-14194 Filed 6-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P