AT&T Corporation; a Subsidiary of AT&T Inc.; Business Billing Customer Care; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration, 29211-29212 [2014-11637]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Notices
petitioning worker group at Redflex
Traffic Systems, Inc., North American
Division, Phoenix, Arizona (subject
firm) did not meet the eligibility criteria
of the Trade Act, as amended. The
Department’s Notice of determination
was published in the Federal Register
on February 13, 2014 (79 FR 8736).
The request for reconsideration
asserts that the petition for Trade
Adjustment Assistance was filed on
behalf of the Engineering Department
and that the scope of the initial
investigation was too broad and,
therefore, detrimental to the petitioning
workers.
Based on information collected from
the subject firm during the
reconsideration investigation, the
Department determines that the subject
firm shifted to a foreign country the
supply of services like or directly
competitive with those provided by the
workers of Redflex Traffic Systems, Inc.,
North American Division, Engineering
Department, Phoenix, Arizona.
Conclusion
After careful review of the additional
facts obtained on reconsideration, I
determine that workers of Redflex
Traffic Systems, Inc., North American
Division, Engineering Department,
Phoenix, Arizona, meet the worker
group certification criteria under
Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C.
2272(a). In accordance with Section 223
of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2273, I make the
following certification:
All workers of Redflex Traffic Systems,
Inc., North American Division, Engineering
Department, Phoenix, Arizona, who became
totally or partially separated from
employment on or after October 29, 2012,
through two years from the date of this
certification, and all workers in the group
threatened with total or partial separation
from employment on 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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Signed in Washington, DC, this 29th day of
April, 2014.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2014–11640 Filed 5–20–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:42 May 20, 2014
Jkt 232001
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–82,697]
AT&T Corporation; a Subsidiary of
AT&T Inc.; Business Billing Customer
Care; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Notice
of Negative Determination on
Reconsideration
On October 23, 2013, the Department
of Labor (Department) issued an
Affirmative Determination Regarding
Application for Reconsideration for the
workers and former workers of AT&T
Corporation, a subsidiary of AT&T Inc.,
Business Billing Customer Care,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (hereafter
referred to as ‘‘the subject firm’’).
Workers at the subject firm were
engaged in activities related to the
supply of billing inquiry and billing
dispute resolution services.
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 was based
on the Department’s findings that there
no increased imports, during the
relevant period, of services like or
directly competitive with the billing
inquiry and billing dispute resolution
services supplied by the subject
workers; the subject firm has not shifted
the supply of services like or directly
competitive with the billing inquiry and
billing dispute resolution services
supplied by the subject workers to a
foreign country or acquired the supply
of billing inquiry and billing dispute
resolution services from a foreign
country; the worker separations are
attributable to a shift of billing inquiry
and billing dispute resolution services
to other locations within the United
States; the subject firm is not a Supplier
to, or act as a 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); and the workers’ firm
has not been publicly identified by
name by the International Trade
Commission as a member of a domestic
industry in an investigation resulting in
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29211
an affirmative finding of serious injury,
market disruption, or material injury, or
threat thereof.
The request for reconsideration
alleges that the subject firm has shifted
billing services, ordering services, and/
or customer support services to
Slovakia, Mexico, India, and/or the
Philippines. The worker requesting
reconsideration also supplied additional
information in regard to employment
figures at the aforementioned locations
and subsequently submitted multiple
documents and attachments related to
the afore-mentioned allegations.
During the course of the
reconsideration investigation, the
subject firm addressed the aforementioned allegations and confirmed
the meaning of multiple documents and
attachments provided by the worker
requesting reconsideration.
During the reconsideration
investigation, the Department received
information which confirmed that the
subject firm has not imported, during
the relevant period, any services like or
directly competitive with billing inquiry
and billing dispute resolution services
supplied by workers of the subject firm;
the subject firm did not shift the supply
of services like or directly competitive
with the billing inquiry and billing
dispute resolution services supplied by
workers of the subject firm, and; the
subject firm did not acquire from a
foreign country the supply of services
like or directly competitive with the
billing inquiry and billing dispute
resolution services supplied by workers
of the subject firm.
Additional information obtained from
the subject firm during the
reconsideration investigation revealed
that the subject firm does not import
any finished products that incorporate
services like or directly competitive
with the services supplied by the
subject firm.
Therefore, after careful review of the
request for reconsideration, 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 AT&T Corporation, a
subsidiary of AT&T Inc., Business
Billing Customer Care, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, to apply for adjustment
assistance, in accordance with Section
223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2273.
E:\FR\FM\21MYN1.SGM
21MYN1
29212
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Notices
Signed in Washington, DC, on this 7th day
of May, 2014.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2014–11637 Filed 5–20–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–85,051]
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
VEC Technology, LLC; a Subsidiary of
J&D Holdings, LLC; Greenville,
Pennsylvania; Notice of Negative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration
By application dated April 10, 2014,
a company official requested
administrative reconsideration of the
Department of Labor’s negative
determination regarding eligibility to
apply for worker adjustment assistance,
applicable to workers and former
workers of VEC Technology, LLC, a
subsidiary of J&D Holdings, LLC,
Greenville, Pennsylvania (subject firm).
The determination was issued on March
21, 2014. The Department’s notice of
determination was published in the
Federal Register on April 8, 2014 (79 FR
19385).
The workers’ firm is engaged in
activities related to the production of
engine hoods, engine cover tooling, and
parts for forklifts and drainage trenches.
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 the
subject firm was based on the
Department’s findings that the subject
firm did not shift production of engine
hoods and associated articles to a
foreign country and that neither the
subject firm nor its customers imported
engine hoods and associated articles, or
articles like or directly competitive,
during the relevant time period.
In the request for reconsideration, the
petitioner asserts that the workers of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:42 May 20, 2014
Jkt 232001
subject firm should be eligible to apply
for TAA because loss of business that
occurred prior to the relevant time
period continues to impact the
operations of the subject firm.
29 CFR 90.16(b)(3) establishes that the
Department find ‘‘increases (absolute or
relative) of imports of articles like or
directly competitive with articles
produced by such workers’ firm or an
appropriate subdivision thereof . . . .’’
29 CFR 90.2 states ‘‘Increased imports
means that imports have increased
either absolutely or relative to domestic
production compared to a representative
base period. The representative base
period shall be one year consisting of
the four quarters immediately preceding
the date which is twelve months prior
to the date of the petition.’’
In the case at hand, the petition date
is February 4, 2014. Therefore, ‘‘the
twelve months prior’’ date is February 4,
2013, and the ‘‘representative base
period’’ is January 2012 through
December 2012. Consequently, imports
during January 2013 through December
2013 must have increased from January
2012 through December 2012 levels for
the Department to determine that the
regulatory definition of ‘‘increased
imports’’ is met.
The Department’s investigation,
which included an inquiry of both
subject firm and customer imports, did
not reveal increased imports of articles
like or directly competitive with those
produced at the subject firm during the
relevant period.
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 28th day of
April, 2014.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Notice of Availability of Funds and
Solicitation for Grant Applications for
Workforce Innovation Fund Grants
Employment and Training
Administration, Labor.
AGENCY:
Notice of Solicitation for Grant
Applications (SGA).
ACTION:
Funding Opportunity Number: SGA/
DFA PY 13–06.
SUMMARY: The Employment and
Training Administration (ETA), U.S.
Department of Labor, announces the
availability of up to $53 million in grant
funds to be awarded under the
Workforce Innovation Fund (WIF) grant
program and anticipates awarding
between 8–15 grants. These funds
support innovative approaches that
generate long-term improvements in the
performance of the public workforce
system, outcomes for job seekers and
employers, and cost-effectiveness. All
projects funded under the WIF will be
rigorously evaluated in order to build a
body of knowledge about what works in
workforce development.
The complete SGA and any
subsequent SGA amendments in
connection with this solicitation are
described in further detail on ETA’s
Web site at https://www.doleta.gov/
grants/ or on https://www.grants.gov. The
Web sites provide application
information, eligibility requirements,
review and selection procedures, and
other program requirements governing
this solicitation.
The closing date for receipt of
applications under this announcement
is June 18, 2014. Applications must be
received no later than 4:00:00 p.m.
Eastern Time.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeannette Flowers, 200 Constitution
Avenue NW., Room N–4716,
Washington, DC 20210; Email:
Flowers.Jeannette@dol.gov.
Signed May 14, 2014 in Washington, DC.
Donna Kelly,
Grant Officer, Employment and Training
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014–11778 Filed 5–20–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
[FR Doc. 2014–11642 Filed 5–20–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\21MYN1.SGM
21MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 98 (Wednesday, May 21, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29211-29212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11637]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-82,697]
AT&T Corporation; a Subsidiary of AT&T Inc.; Business Billing
Customer Care; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Notice of Negative
Determination on Reconsideration
On October 23, 2013, the Department of Labor (Department) issued an
Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for
the workers and former workers of AT&T Corporation, a subsidiary of
AT&T Inc., Business Billing Customer Care, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
(hereafter referred to as ``the subject firm''). Workers at the subject
firm were engaged in activities related to the supply of billing
inquiry and billing dispute resolution services.
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 was based on the Department's findings
that there no increased imports, during the relevant period, of
services like or directly competitive with the billing inquiry and
billing dispute resolution services supplied by the subject workers;
the subject firm has not shifted the supply of services like or
directly competitive with the billing inquiry and billing dispute
resolution services supplied by the subject workers to a foreign
country or acquired the supply of billing inquiry and billing dispute
resolution services from a foreign country; the worker separations are
attributable to a shift of billing inquiry and billing dispute
resolution services to other locations within the United States; the
subject firm is not a Supplier to, or act as a 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); and the
workers' firm has not been publicly identified by name by the
International Trade Commission as a member of a domestic industry in an
investigation resulting in an affirmative finding of serious injury,
market disruption, or material injury, or threat thereof.
The request for reconsideration alleges that the subject firm has
shifted billing services, ordering services, and/or customer support
services to Slovakia, Mexico, India, and/or the Philippines. The worker
requesting reconsideration also supplied additional information in
regard to employment figures at the aforementioned locations and
subsequently submitted multiple documents and attachments related to
the afore-mentioned allegations.
During the course of the reconsideration investigation, the subject
firm addressed the afore-mentioned allegations and confirmed the
meaning of multiple documents and attachments provided by the worker
requesting reconsideration.
During the reconsideration investigation, the Department received
information which confirmed that the subject firm has not imported,
during the relevant period, any services like or directly competitive
with billing inquiry and billing dispute resolution services supplied
by workers of the subject firm; the subject firm did not shift the
supply of services like or directly competitive with the billing
inquiry and billing dispute resolution services supplied by workers of
the subject firm, and; the subject firm did not acquire from a foreign
country the supply of services like or directly competitive with the
billing inquiry and billing dispute resolution services supplied by
workers of the subject firm.
Additional information obtained from the subject firm during the
reconsideration investigation revealed that the subject firm does not
import any finished products that incorporate services like or directly
competitive with the services supplied by the subject firm.
Therefore, after careful review of the request for reconsideration,
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 AT&T Corporation, a subsidiary of
AT&T Inc., Business Billing Customer Care, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, to
apply for adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. 2273.
[[Page 29212]]
Signed in Washington, DC, on this 7th day of May, 2014.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2014-11637 Filed 5-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
