Specialty Bar Products Company; A Subsidiary of Doncasters, Inc., Blairsville, PA; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration, 40644 [2012-16735]
Download as PDF
40644
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 10, 2012 / Notices
[FR Doc. 2012–16745 Filed 7–9–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–80,511]
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Specialty Bar Products Company; A
Subsidiary of Doncasters, Inc.,
Blairsville, PA; Notice of Negative
Determination on Reconsideration
On January 25, 2012, the Department
of Labor issued an Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration for the workers and
former workers of Specialty Bar
Products Company, a subsidiary of
Doncasters, Inc., Blairsville,
Pennsylvania (subject firm). The
Department’s Notice was published in
the Federal Register on February 8,
2012 (77 FR 6584). Workers at the
subject firm are engaged in activities
related to the production of pins,
bushings, and gun blanks.
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 the subject firm did not
shift the production of pins, bushings,
or gun blanks (or like or directly
competitive articles) to a foreign country
or acquire the production of such
articles from a foreign country. The
investigation also revealed that neither
the subject firm nor its customers
imported articles like or directly
competitive with those produced by the
subject firm.
The initial investigation also revealed
that with respect to Section 222(b)(2) of
the Act, the subject firm is neither a
Supplier nor Downstream Producer to a
firm that employed a group of workers
who received a certification of eligibility
under Section 222(a) of the Act, 19
U.S.C. 2272(a).
The request for reconsideration stated
that the subject firm is owned by a
company located in the United
Kingdom, the subject firm ‘‘provided
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:28 Jul 09, 2012
Jkt 226001
products to international companies
such as William Cook Defense, Sheffield
England’’ and due to ‘‘the international
corporate company in the United
Kingdom, a significant decrease in
production orders resulted in reduction
of work force within Specialty Bar
Products.’’
Information obtained during the
reconsideration investigation confirmed
that the subject workers are engaged in
activities related to the production of
pins, bushings, and shotgun blanks, and
clarified that the subject firm does not
produce firearms, vehicles, or
equipment that utilizes these articles.
Information obtained during the
reconsideration investigation also
confirmed that the subject firm is owned
by Doncasters Group Ltd in Centrum,
United Kingdom.
The reconsideration investigation also
confirmed that the subject firm did not
shift the production of pins, bushings,
or shotgun blanks (or like or directly
competitive articles) to a foreign country
or acquire the production of such
articles from a foreign country.
During the reconsideration
investigation, the Department obtained
information which reflects that while
William Cook Defense is a customer, it
was not a major declining customer. The
customer surveyed during the initial
investigation constituted a significant
majority of the subject firm’s sales
declines.
During the reconsideration, the
Department confirmed that neither the
subject firm nor its major declining
customer imported articles like or
directly competitive with those
produced by the subject firm.
Specifically, the Department surveyed
the subject firm’s major declining
customer in regard to imports of pins,
bushings, and shotgun blanks (or like or
directly competitive articles). The
investigation revealed no such imports.
The investigation also revealed that
with respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the
Act, the subject firm is neither a
Supplier nor Downstream Producer to a
firm that employed a group of workers
who received a certification of eligibility
under Section 222(a) of the Act, 19
U.S.C. 2272(a).
Based on a careful review of
information obtained during the initial
and reconsideration investigations, 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 Specialty Bar Products
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Company, a subsidiary of Doncasters,
Inc., Blairsville, Pennsylvania, to apply
for adjustment assistance, in accordance
with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C.
2273.
Signed in Washington, DC, on this 26th
day of June, 2012.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2012–16735 Filed 7–9–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–81,047, TA–W–81,047A]
ERA Systems, LLC, Formerly ERA
Systems Corporation, a Subsidiary of
Systems Research and Applications
Corporation, 6647 Old Thompson
Road, Syracuse, NY; ERA Systems,
LLC, Formerly ERA Systems
Corporation, a Subsidiary of Systems
Research and Applications
Corporation, 6712 Brooklawn Parkway,
Suite 106, Syracuse, NY; Notice of
Revised Determination on
Reconsideration
The initial investigation, initiated on
November 2, 2011, resulted in a
negative determination, issued on
January 13, 2012. The determination
was applicable to workers and former
workers of Era Systems, LLC, formerly
Era Systems Corporation, a subsidiary of
Systems Research and Applications
Corporation, Syracuse, New York. The
notice of the Affirmative Determination
Regarding the Application for
Reconsideration was published in the
Federal Register on February 28, 2012
(77 FR 12080).
During the reconsideration
investigation, the Department clarified
the worker group. Specifically, the
Department determined that the subject
worker group consists of workers and
former workers of Era Systems, LLC,
formerly Era Systems Corporation, a
subsidiary of Systems Research and
Applications Corporation, 6647 Old
Thompson Road, Syracuse, New York
(TA–W–81,047) and Era Systems, LLC,
formerly Era Systems Corporation, a
subsidiary of Systems Research and
Applications Corporation, 6712
Brooklawn Parkway, Suite 106,
Syracuse, New York (TA–W–81,047A).
Both locations are engaged in activities
related to the supply of research and
development services for air traffic
components and software used for
tracking and transmitting flight-related
data.
E:\FR\FM\10JYN1.SGM
10JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 132 (Tuesday, July 10, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 40644]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16735]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-80,511]
Specialty Bar Products Company; A Subsidiary of Doncasters, Inc.,
Blairsville, PA; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration
On January 25, 2012, the Department of Labor issued an Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers
and former workers of Specialty Bar Products Company, a subsidiary of
Doncasters, Inc., Blairsville, Pennsylvania (subject firm). The
Department's Notice was published in the Federal Register on February
8, 2012 (77 FR 6584). Workers at the subject firm are engaged in
activities related to the production of pins, bushings, and gun blanks.
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 the subject firm did not shift the
production of pins, bushings, or gun blanks (or like or directly
competitive articles) to a foreign country or acquire the production of
such articles from a foreign country. The investigation also revealed
that neither the subject firm nor its customers imported articles like
or directly competitive with those produced by the subject firm.
The initial investigation also revealed that with respect to
Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the subject firm is neither a Supplier
nor Downstream Producer to a firm that employed a group of workers who
received a certification of eligibility under Section 222(a) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a).
The request for reconsideration stated that the subject firm is
owned by a company located in the United Kingdom, the subject firm
``provided products to international companies such as William Cook
Defense, Sheffield England'' and due to ``the international corporate
company in the United Kingdom, a significant decrease in production
orders resulted in reduction of work force within Specialty Bar
Products.''
Information obtained during the reconsideration investigation
confirmed that the subject workers are engaged in activities related to
the production of pins, bushings, and shotgun blanks, and clarified
that the subject firm does not produce firearms, vehicles, or equipment
that utilizes these articles.
Information obtained during the reconsideration investigation also
confirmed that the subject firm is owned by Doncasters Group Ltd in
Centrum, United Kingdom.
The reconsideration investigation also confirmed that the subject
firm did not shift the production of pins, bushings, or shotgun blanks
(or like or directly competitive articles) to a foreign country or
acquire the production of such articles from a foreign country.
During the reconsideration investigation, the Department obtained
information which reflects that while William Cook Defense is a
customer, it was not a major declining customer. The customer surveyed
during the initial investigation constituted a significant majority of
the subject firm's sales declines.
During the reconsideration, the Department confirmed that neither
the subject firm nor its major declining customer imported articles
like or directly competitive with those produced by the subject firm.
Specifically, the Department surveyed the subject firm's major
declining customer in regard to imports of pins, bushings, and shotgun
blanks (or like or directly competitive articles). The investigation
revealed no such imports.
The investigation also revealed that with respect to Section
222(b)(2) of the Act, the subject firm is neither a Supplier nor
Downstream Producer to a firm that employed a group of workers who
received a certification of eligibility under Section 222(a) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a).
Based on a careful review of information obtained during the
initial and reconsideration investigations, 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 Specialty Bar Products Company, a
subsidiary of Doncasters, Inc., Blairsville, Pennsylvania, to apply for
adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19
U.S.C. 2273.
Signed in Washington, DC, on this 26th day of June, 2012.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2012-16735 Filed 7-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P