Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc., North American Division, A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Redflex Holdings, Ltd., Including On-Site Leased Workers From Iconma, BPS Staffing, AZ Tech Finder, and Volt Workforce Solutions, Phoenix, Arizona; Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 16822-16823 [2014-06674]

Download as PDF 16822 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 58 / Wednesday, March 26, 2014 / Notices number or proportion of workers separated at the subject firm. The request for reconsideration did not include any supporting documents. The Department contacted the worker for information regarding the number or proportion of workers separated from the subject firm, but did not receive any additional information. 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. Based on these findings, the Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not been met. Conclusion After careful 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 13th day of March, 2014. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2014–06679 Filed 3–25–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–82,371] sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES T-Mobile USA, Inc., Core Fault Isolation Team, Engineering Division, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration On May 8, 2013, the Department of Labor issued an Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers and former workers of T-Mobile USA, Inc., Core Fault Isolation Team, Engineering Division, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania (subject firm). The Department’s Notice was published in the Federal Register on May 24, 2013 (78 FR 31592). The subject workers are engaged in activities related to the supply of technical trouble-shooting services for T-Mobile USA, Inc. customers. T-Mobile USA, Inc. is an international mobile communications company. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:43 Mar 25, 2014 Jkt 232001 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 no shift in services and no company or customer imports of like or directly competitive services. In the request for reconsideration, the petitioners asserted that the subject firm had acquired from a foreign country services like or directly competitive with those provided by the workers at the subject firm and that the subject workers provided value-added services to a firm that employed a worker group eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (T-Mobile, Allentown, Pennsylvania; TA–W–81,520). Specifically, the request states ‘‘our separations were in fact attributable to the shift of services to a foreign country by T-Mobile USA.’’ In support of the assertion that the workers are secondarily-affected, the request states ‘‘our team was created to provide this location [Allentown, Pennsylvania call center] with a value added service by providing the bridge for the communication gap between TMobile USA’s Allentown technical support group and T-Mobile USA’s engineering teams.’’ During the reconsideration investigation, the Department carefully reviewed previously-submitted information, reviewed the certification of TA–W–81,520, and directed the subject firm to address the assertions in the request for reconsideration. Information obtained during the reconsideration investigation revealed that the Core Fault Isolation Team received work orders from various call centers (not only the Allentown or Bethlehem, Pennsylvania centers), operation centers, and from other internal and external customers. Based on information obtained during the reconsideration investigation, the Department affirms that the subject firm did not import from another country the supply of technical trouble-shooting services; that the subject firm did not shift to a foreign country or acquire from a foreign country the supply of services like or directly competitive with those PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 provided by the workers at the subject firm; that the subject workers do not qualify as Downstream Producers because they did not supply valueadded services, as defined by the Trade Act, as amended. 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, affirm the negative determination applicable to workers and former workers of T-Mobile USA, Inc., Core Fault Isolation Team, Engineering Division, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2273. Signed in Washington, DC on this 12th day of March, 2014. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2014–06678 Filed 3–25–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–83,184] Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc., North American Division, A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Redflex Holdings, Ltd., Including On-Site Leased Workers From Iconma, BPS Staffing, AZ Tech Finder, and Volt Workforce Solutions, Phoenix, Arizona; Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application dated February 18, 2014, a former worker 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. The determination was issued on November 25, 2013 and the Department’s Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register on February 13, 2014 (79 FR 8736). Workers at the subject firm are engaged in employment related to the installation, maintenance, and operation services of traffic enforcement systems. The initial investigation resulted in a negative determination based on the findings that the subject firm did not shift to, or acquire from, a foreign country the services provided by the workers of the subject firm; further, neither the subject firm nor its customers imported services like or E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM 26MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 58 / Wednesday, March 26, 2014 / Notices directly competitive with the services supplied by the 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 misinterpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of the decision. The request for reconsideration asserts that because the petition was filed only for workers of the Engineering Department, the scope of the investigation was overly broad and, consequently, detrimental to the petitioning workers. The petitioner further asserts that the Department’s determination was based on inaccurate information and is, therefore, erroneous. The petitioner supplied facts not previously considered and information indicating a mistake in the determination of facts not previously considered. Based on these findings, the Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has been met. The Department has carefully reviewed the request for reconsideration and the existing record, and has determined that the Department will conduct further investigation to determine if the workers meet the eligibility requirements of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended. Conclusion After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the U.S. Department of Labor’s prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted. Signed at Washington, DC, this 13th day of March, 2014. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES [FR Doc. 2014–06674 Filed 3–25–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:00 Mar 25, 2014 Jkt 232001 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Notice of Determinations Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor herein presents summaries of determinations regarding eligibility to apply for trade adjustment assistance for workers (TA–W) number and alternative trade adjustment assistance (ATAA) by (TA–W) number issued during the period of March 3, 2014 through March 7, 2014. In order for an affirmative determination to be made for workers of a primary firm and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance, each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(a) of the Act must be met. I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following must be satisfied: A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers’ firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated; B. the sales or production, or both, of such firm or subdivision have decreased absolutely; and C. increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have contributed importantly to such workers’ separation or threat of separation and to the decline in sales or production of such firm or subdivision; or II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the following must be satisfied: A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers’ firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated; B. there has been a shift in production by such workers’ firm or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or directly competitive with articles which are produced by such firm or subdivision; and C. One of the following must be satisfied: 1. the country to which the workers’ firm has shifted production of the articles is a party to a free trade agreement with the United States; 2. the country to which the workers’ firm has shifted production of the PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 16823 articles to a beneficiary country under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act; or 3. there has been or is likely to be an increase in imports of articles that are like or directly competitive with articles which are or were produced by such firm or subdivision. Also, in order for an affirmative determination to be made for secondarily affected workers of a firm and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance, each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(b) of the Act must be met. (1) Significant number or proportion of the workers in the workers’ firm or an appropriate subdivision of the firm have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated; (2) the workers’ firm (or subdivision) is a supplier or downstream producer to a firm (or subdivision) that employed a group of workers who received a certification of eligibility to apply for trade adjustment assistance benefits and such supply or production is related to the article that was the basis for such certification; and (3) either— (A) the workers’ firm is a supplier and the component parts it supplied for the firm (or subdivision) described in paragraph (2) accounted for at least 20 percent of the production or sales of the workers’ firm; or (B) a loss or business by the workers’ firm with the firm (or subdivision) described in paragraph (2) contributed importantly to the workers’ separation or threat of separation. In order for the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) for older workers, the group eligibility requirements of Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act must be met. 1. Whether a significant number of workers in the workers’ firm are 50 years of age or older. 2. Whether the workers in the workers’ firm possess skills that are not easily transferable. 3. The competitive conditions within the workers’ industry (i.e., conditions within the industry are adverse). Affirmative Determinations For Worker Adjustment Assistance The following certifications have been issued. The date following the company name and location of each determination references the impact E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM 26MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 58 (Wednesday, March 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16822-16823]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06674]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-83,184]


Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc., North American Division, A Wholly 
Owned Subsidiary of Redflex Holdings, Ltd., Including On-Site Leased 
Workers From Iconma, BPS Staffing, AZ Tech Finder, and Volt Workforce 
Solutions, Phoenix, Arizona; Notice of Affirmative Determination 
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated February 18, 2014, a former worker 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. The 
determination was issued on November 25, 2013 and the Department's 
Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register on 
February 13, 2014 (79 FR 8736). Workers at the subject firm are engaged 
in employment related to the installation, maintenance, and operation 
services of traffic enforcement systems.
    The initial investigation resulted in a negative determination 
based on the findings that the subject firm did not shift to, or 
acquire from, a foreign country the services provided by the workers of 
the subject firm; further, neither the subject firm nor its customers 
imported services like or

[[Page 16823]]

directly competitive with the services supplied by the 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 
misinterpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of 
the decision.
    The request for reconsideration asserts that because the petition 
was filed only for workers of the Engineering Department, the scope of 
the investigation was overly broad and, consequently, detrimental to 
the petitioning workers. The petitioner further asserts that the 
Department's determination was based on inaccurate information and is, 
therefore, erroneous. The petitioner supplied facts not previously 
considered and information indicating a mistake in the determination of 
facts not previously considered. Based on these findings, the 
Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has been met.
    The Department has carefully reviewed the request for 
reconsideration and the existing record, and has determined that the 
Department will conduct further investigation to determine if the 
workers meet the eligibility requirements of the Trade Act of 1974, as 
amended.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim 
is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the U.S. 
Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, 
granted.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 13th day of March, 2014.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2014-06674 Filed 3-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P