Hyosung USA, Inc, Utica Plant, a Subsidiary of Hyosung Holdings USA, Inc., Utica, New York; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 25889-25890 [2014-10256]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 87 / Tuesday, May 6, 2014 / Notices 16 U.S.C. 460o–2(b) states that the Secretary of the Interior may make adjustments in the boundary of Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area by publication of the amended description thereof in the Federal Register: provided, that the area encompassed by such revised boundary shall not exceed the acreage included within the detailed boundary first described in the Federal Register on June 7, 1977 (Vol. 42, No. 109, pp 29071–29103). This boundary adjustment does not exceed the acreage of the detailed boundary so described. The Conservation Fund owns or holds an option for these properties and will convey their fee interests to the United States without cost to help mitigate the effects of the upgrade and expansion of the existing Susquehanna-Roseland electric transmission line across approximately 4.3 miles of the National Recreation Area. Dated: March 28, 2014. Michael Caldwell, Acting Regional Director, Northeast Region. [FR Doc. 2014–10370 Filed 5–5–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–WV–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [NPS–PWR–PWRO–15430; PX.P0131800B.00.1] Notice of Availability of Record of Decision for Merced River Comprehensive Management Plan, Yosemite National Park, California National Park Service, Interior. Notice of Availability of Record of Decision. AGENCY: ACTION: Pursuant to § 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91–190, as amended) and the regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1505.2), the Department of the Interior, National Park Service (NPS), has prepared and approved a Record of Decision for the Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) for the Merced River Comprehensive Management Plan. Approval of the Merced River Comprehensive Management Plan culminates an extensive conservation planning and environmental impact analysis effort which began over 15 years ago. The requisite no-action ‘‘wait period’’ was initiated on February 18, 2014, with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Federal Register notice of the filing of the Final EIS. sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:34 May 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 Decision: The NPS has selected Alternative 5 (identified as both ‘‘agency preferred’’ and ‘‘environmentally preferred’’ in the Final EIS) for implementation as the approved Merced River Comprehensive Management Plan. Under the selected alternative, peak visitation could reach levels experienced in recent years— approximately 20,100 people per day in East Yosemite Valley. West Yosemite Valley will retain its overall natural character, with limited facilities and visitor services provided. Improvements to river access in the Valley, coupled with meadow enhancements and extensive riverbank restoration (189 acres of meadow and riparian habitat will be restored), will result in substantially improved visitor experiences. Visitors to Wawona will continue to enjoy the historic hotel and facilities; recreational options in this area will include tennis and golf, hiking, picnicking, horseback riding, and boating on the South Fork of the Merced River. The El Portal Administrative Site will continue to serve as a hub for park operations, and remote parking to reduce summer traffic congestion will be provided. Selected key components of the approved plan are as follows: (1) Provide for 72 campsites at Upper and Lower River Campgrounds and 482 lodging units at Curry Village; (2) increase parking at El Portal Remote Parking Area to 300 spaces and reduce parking at Yosemite Village Day-use Parking Area to 750 spaces; (3) provide for raft and bicycle rentals at locations outside the river corridor; (4) retain Sugar Pine Bridge and remove Residence One (the Superintendent’s House) through relocation or demolition; (5) adverse effects to cultural resources will be ameliorated according to a Programmatic Agreement executed with the State Historic Preservation Officer; and (6) undertake a rigorous adaptive management program of ecological restoration and monitoring actions in order to improve hydrologic flows, water infiltration, and reduce erosion. Five other alternatives were evaluated, the full range of foreseeable environmental consequences was assessed, and appropriate mitigation measures were identified. Interested parties desiring to review the Record of Decision may obtain a copy by contacting the Superintendent, Attn: Division of Project Management, Yosemite National Park, P.O. Box 700– W, 5083 Foresta Road, El Portal, CA 95318 or via telephone request at (209) 379–1202. PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 25889 Dated: March 31, 2014. Christine S. Lehnertz, Regional Director, Pacific West Region. [FR Doc. 2014–10367 Filed 5–5–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–FF–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–85,057] Hyosung USA, Inc, Utica Plant, a Subsidiary of Hyosung Holdings USA, Inc., Utica, New York; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application dated March 26, 2014, a State of New York workforce official 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 Hyosung USA, Inc., Utica Plant, a subsidiary of Hyosung Holdings USA, Inc., Utica, New York (subject firm). The negative determination was signed on February 26, 2014. The petition stated: ‘‘Richard Guzda . . . will be laid off on 3/31/2014. He has been the maintenance man and watchman for the vacant building. Hyosung has an Agreement . . . to keep someone on site until the end of the lease on 3/31/14.’’ The determination was based on the Department’s finding that there was not a worker group as defined by 29 CFR 90 at the subject firm during the one-year period prior to the date of the petition (February 6, 2014). 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. In the request for reconsideration, the state workforce official stated that ‘‘Mr. Guzda has been fully connected with 81 other workers certified under petition 80085. I believe that TAA petition 80085 should be re-opened and the expiration date should be changed from May 5th, 2013 to at least April 1st, 2014 E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM 06MYN1 25890 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 87 / Tuesday, May 6, 2014 / Notices to ensure that Mr. Guzda is eligible for TAA benefits.’’ 19 U.S.C. 2291 establishes that the certification period ends at ‘‘the 2-year period beginning on the date on which the determination under section 223 was made.’’ 29 CFR 90.11(b) states ‘‘Every petition filed with the Department shall clearly state the group of workers on whose behalf the petition is filed.’’ 29 CFR 90.2 states ‘‘Group means three or more workers in a firm or appropriate subdivision therof.’’ 29 CFR 90.16(e) states ‘‘A certification of eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance shall not apply to any worker: (1) whose last total or partial separation from the firm or appropriate subdivision occurred more than one (1) year before the date of the petition.’’ Because there was one worker at the subject firm on/after February 6, 2013, the worker group criteria have not been met. Because the petitioner did not supply facts not previously considered and did not provide additional documentation indicating that there was either a mistake in the determination of facts not previously considered or a misinterpretation of facts, or of the law justifying reconsideration of the initial determination, 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 24th day of April, 2014. Del Min Amy Chen, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. 2014–10256 Filed 5–5–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Investigations Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance Petitions have been filed with the Secretary of Labor under Section 221(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (‘‘the Act’’) and are identified in the Appendix to this notice. Upon receipt of these petitions, the Director of the Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, has instituted investigations pursuant to Section 221(a) of the Act. The purpose of each of the investigations is to determine whether the workers are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Title II, Chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations will further relate, as appropriate, to the determination of the date on which total or partial separations began or threatened to begin and the subdivision of the firm involved. The petitioners or any other persons showing a substantial interest in the subject matter of the investigations may request a public hearing, provided such request is filed in writing with the Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than May 16, 2014. Interested persons are invited to submit written comments regarding the subject matter of the investigations to the Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than May 16, 2014. The petitions filed in this case are available for inspection at the Office of the Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N–5428, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210. Signed at Washington, DC this 24th day of April 2014. Hope D. Kinglock, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance. APPENDIX 24 TAA PETITIONS INSTITUTED BETWEEN 4/14/14 AND 4/18/14 sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES TA–W 85223 85224 85225 85226 85227 85228 85229 85230 85231 85232 85233 85234 85235 85236 85237 85238 85239 85240 85241 85242 85243 85244 85245 85246 ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... ............... VerDate Mar<15>2010 Date of institution Subject firm (petitioners) Location International Paper Company-Courtland (Company) .............. Catholic Health Initiatives (State/One-Stop) ............................ Cycling Sports Group, Inc. (Company) .................................... Plycem USA—Elementia (Workers) ........................................ Fenton Art Glass Company (Workers) .................................... Nilfisk—Advance Incorporated (State/One-Stop) .................... Trane Ingersoll Rand (Union) .................................................. ITT Corporation (State/One-Stop) ............................................ Convergys Corporation (Workers) ........................................... Supermedia (State/One-Stop) .................................................. Littelfuse, Inc. (Company) ........................................................ Nordyne (Company) ................................................................. Victaulic (Company) ................................................................. Stanley Furniture Young America (Company) ......................... Hyundia Regional Customer Service Center (Workers) .......... Manitowoc Ice Inc. (Workers) .................................................. Robert Bosch Tool (State/One-Stop) ....................................... 3D Systems Corporation (Workers) ......................................... Institute Career Development (Union) ..................................... MFI CORP. (Company) ............................................................ Riverside Manufacturing Company (Company) ....................... Cardolite Corporation (State/One-Stop) ................................... Detroit Tool & Engineering (Workers) ...................................... Kennametal Inc. (State/One-Stop) ........................................... Courtland, AL .......................... Englewood, CO ....................... Bedford, PA ............................ Terre Haute, IN ....................... Williamstown, WV ................... Plymouth, MN ......................... La Crosse, WI ......................... Santa Ana, CA ........................ Denver, CO ............................. Erie, PA ................................... Chicago, IL .............................. Poplar Bluff, MO ..................... Leland, NC .............................. Robbinsville, NC ..................... Charlotte, NC .......................... Manitowoc, WI ........................ Mt. Prospect, IL ...................... Lawrenceburg, TN .................. Merrillville, IN .......................... Everett, MA ............................. Moultrie, GA ............................ Newark, NJ ............................. Lebanon, MO .......................... Lyndonville, VT ....................... 17:34 May 05, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06MYN1.SGM 06MYN1 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/16/14 04/16/14 04/16/14 04/17/14 04/17/14 04/17/14 04/18/14 04/18/14 04/18/14 Date of petition 03/31/14 04/04/14 04/11/14 04/10/14 04/11/14 04/11/14 04/11/14 04/14/14 04/14/14 04/15/14 04/11/14 04/14/14 04/15/14 04/11/14 03/31/14 04/11/14 04/15/14 04/15/14 04/16/14 04/10/14 04/16/14 04/17/14 04/16/14 04/17/14

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 87 (Tuesday, May 6, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25889-25890]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10256]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

 Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-85,057]


Hyosung USA, Inc, Utica Plant, a Subsidiary of Hyosung Holdings 
USA, Inc., Utica, New York; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding 
Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated March 26, 2014, a State of New York workforce 
official 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 Hyosung USA, Inc., Utica Plant, a subsidiary of Hyosung Holdings 
USA, Inc., Utica, New York (subject firm). The negative determination 
was signed on February 26, 2014.
    The petition stated: ``Richard Guzda . . . will be laid off on 3/
31/2014. He has been the maintenance man and watchman for the vacant 
building. Hyosung has an Agreement . . . to keep someone on site until 
the end of the lease on 3/31/14.''
    The determination was based on the Department's finding that there 
was not a worker group as defined by 29 CFR 90 at the subject firm 
during the one-year period prior to the date of the petition (February 
6, 2014).
    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.
    In the request for reconsideration, the state workforce official 
stated that ``Mr. Guzda has been fully connected with 81 other workers 
certified under petition 80085. I believe that TAA petition 80085 
should be re-opened and the expiration date should be changed from May 
5th, 2013 to at least April 1st, 2014

[[Page 25890]]

to ensure that Mr. Guzda is eligible for TAA benefits.''
    19 U.S.C. 2291 establishes that the certification period ends at 
``the 2-year period beginning on the date on which the determination 
under section 223 was made.''
    29 CFR 90.11(b) states ``Every petition filed with the Department 
shall clearly state the group of workers on whose behalf the petition 
is filed.''
    29 CFR 90.2 states ``Group means three or more workers in a firm or 
appropriate subdivision therof.''
    29 CFR 90.16(e) states ``A certification of eligibility to apply 
for adjustment assistance shall not apply to any worker: (1) whose last 
total or partial separation from the firm or appropriate subdivision 
occurred more than one (1) year before the date of the petition.''
    Because there was one worker at the subject firm on/after February 
6, 2013, the worker group criteria have not been met.
    Because the petitioner did not supply facts not previously 
considered and did not provide additional documentation indicating that 
there was either a mistake in the determination of facts not previously 
considered or a misinterpretation of facts, or of the law justifying 
reconsideration of the initial determination, 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 24th day of April, 2014.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2014-10256 Filed 5-5-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.