Innovative Dental, Inc., Reno, Nevada; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 16821-16822 [2014-06679]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 58 / Wednesday, March 26, 2014 / Notices respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the RegInfo.gov Web site at http:// www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201402-1218-007 (this link will only become active on the day following publication of this notice) or by contacting Michel Smyth by telephone at 202–693–4129, TTY 202– 693–8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at DOL_PRA_ PUBLIC@dol.gov. Submit comments about this request by mail or courier to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL–OSHA, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202– 395–6881 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email: OIRA_ submission@omb.eop.gov. Commenters are encouraged, but not required, to send a courtesy copy of any comments by mail or courier to the U.S. Department of Labor-OASAM, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Attn: Departmental Information Compliance Management Program, Room N1301, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; or by email: DOL_PRA_PUBLIC@dol.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michel Smyth by telephone at 202–693– 4129, TTY 202–693–8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or by email at DOL_ PRA_PUBLIC@dol.gov. Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D). This ICR seeks to extend PRA authorization for the information collection requirements specified in the Logging Operations Standard and codified at 29 CFR 1910.266(f), (g), and (i). The Standard requires a covered employer to assure operating and maintenance instructions are available on a machine or in the area where the machine is operated. For vehicles, an employer must assure that operating and maintenance instructions are available for each vehicle. The standard also requires an employer to provide training to workers and to certify that the training has been provided. The Occupational Safety and Health Act authorizes this information collection. See 29 U.S.C. 657. This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:43 Mar 25, 2014 Jkt 232001 law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. The DOL obtains OMB approval for this information collection under Control Number 1218–0198. OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal, and the current approval for this collection is scheduled to expire on March 31, 2014. The DOL seeks to extend PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) more years, without any change to existing requirements. The DOL notes that existing information collection requirements submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on December 5, 2013 (78 FR 73208). Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section within 30 days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. In order to help ensure appropriate consideration, comments should mention OMB Control Number 1218– 0198. The OMB is particularly interested in comments that: • 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 through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Agency: DOL–OSHA. Title of Collection: Logging Operations Standard. OMB Control Number: 1218–0198. Affected Public: Private Sector— businesses or other for-profits. Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 8,286. Total Estimated Number of Responses: 50,904. PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 16821 Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 1,622 hours. Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0. Dated: March 19, 2014. Michel Smyth, Departmental Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. 2014–06589 Filed 3–25–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–26–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–82,998] Innovative Dental, Inc., Reno, Nevada; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application dated September 27, 2013, a separated worker requested administrative reconsideration of the Department of Labor’s negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm (issued September 12, 2013). The Department’s Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register on October 3, 2013 (78 FR 61394). 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 negative determination of the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) petition filed on behalf of workers at Innovative Dental, Inc., Reno, Nevada was based on the Department’s findings that a significant number or proportion of workers at the subject firm has not been totally or partially separated, or threatened with such separation. In a worker group of fewer than fifty workers, a significant number or proportion of workers is three workers. 29 CFR 90.2 The request for reconsideration stated that ‘‘over 60% of the dental laboratory restorations in this country are manufactured overseas . . . or across our Southern border’’ and did not provide any information regarding the E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM 26MRN1 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

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 58 (Wednesday, March 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16821-16822]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06679]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-82,998]


Innovative Dental, Inc., Reno, Nevada; Notice of Negative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated September 27, 2013, a separated worker 
requested administrative reconsideration of the Department of Labor's 
negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade 
Adjustment Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former workers 
of the subject firm (issued September 12, 2013). The Department's 
Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register on 
October 3, 2013 (78 FR 61394).
    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 negative determination of the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) 
petition filed on behalf of workers at Innovative Dental, Inc., Reno, 
Nevada was based on the Department's findings that a significant number 
or proportion of workers at the subject firm has not been totally or 
partially separated, or threatened with such separation. In a worker 
group of fewer than fifty workers, a significant number or proportion 
of workers is three workers. 29 CFR 90.2
    The request for reconsideration stated that ``over 60% of the 
dental laboratory restorations in this country are manufactured 
overseas . . . or across our Southern border'' and did not provide any 
information regarding the

[[Page 16822]]

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