80 FR 15823 - Covidien LP, North American Shared Services Group, Mansfield, Massachusetts; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 57 (March 25, 2015)

Page Range		15823-15824
FR Document		2015-06833

Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 57 (Wednesday, March 25, 2015)

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 57 (Wednesday, March 25, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15823-15824]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06833]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-85,640]


Covidien LP, North American Shared Services Group, Mansfield, 
Massachusetts; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application 
for Reconsideration

    By application dated December 11, 2014, a separated worker 
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 
Covidien LP, North American Shared Services Group, Mansfield, 
Massachusetts (Subject Firm). The denial notice was signed on November 
25, 2014, and the Notice of Determination was published in the Federal 
Register on December 10, 2014 (79 FR 73338).
    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 revealed that the subject firm does not 
produce an article within the meaning of Section 222(a) or Section 
222(b) of the Act. Rather, the investigation revealed that the workers' 
firm supplied services related to administrative support and customer 
services. In order to be considered eligible to apply for adjustment 
assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, the worker group 
seeking certification (or on whose behalf certification is being 
sought) must work for a ``firm'' or appropriate subdivision that 
produces an article. The definition of a firm includes an individual 
proprietorship, partnership, joint venture, association, corporation 
(including a development corporation), business trust, cooperative, 
trustee in bankruptcy, and receiver under decree of any court.
    In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner stated that the 
workers of the subject firm should be eligible for TAA because the 
subject firm shifted to a foreign country the supply of like or

[[Page 15824]]

directly competitive services with those provided by the workers of the 
subject firm.
    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 12th day of March, 2015.
Michael W. Jaffe,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2015-06833 Filed 3-24-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 57 / Wednesday, March 25, 2015 / Notices 15823

(WHD) has created Forms WH–514, Transportation of Migrant and Seasonal DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
WH–514a, and WH–515, which allow Agricultural Workers and the Doctor’s
FLC applicants to verify to the WHD Certification (minimum physical Employment and Training
that the vehicles used to transport requirements to drive a vehicle). Administration
migrant/seasonal agricultural workers Additionally, DOL seeks the approval of [TA–W–85,640]
meet the MSPA vehicle safety standards the revisions of the subject information
and that anyone who drives such collection requirements in the Farm Covidien LP, North American Shared
workers meets the Act’s minimum Labor Contractor/Farm Labor Contractor Services Group, Mansfield,
physical requirements. The WHD uses Employee Application (WH–530), Massachusetts; Notice of Negative
the information in deciding whether to revisions to the Vehicle Mechanical Determination Regarding Application
authorize the FLC/FLCE applicant to for Reconsideration
Inspection Reports for Transportation
transport/drive any migrant/seasonal
agricultural worker(s) or to cause such Subject to Department of Labor Safety By application dated December 11,
transportation. Form WH–514 is used to Requirements (WH–514a form), 2014, a separated worker requested
verify that any vehicle used or caused revisions to the Vehicle Mechanical administrative reconsideration of the
to be used to transport any migrant/ Inspection Report for Transportation Department of Labor’s negative
seasonal agricultural worker(s) meets Subject to Department of Transportation determination regarding eligibility to
the Department of Transportation (DOT) Requirements (WH–514 form), and apply for worker adjustment assistance,
safety standards. When the adopted revisions to the Doctor’s Certificate, applicable to workers and former
DOT rules do not apply, FLC applicants (WH–515 form). workers of Covidien LP, North
seeking authorization to transport any Type of Review: Revision and American Shared Services Group,
migrant/seasonal agricultural workers Extension. Mansfield, Massachusetts (Subject
use Form WH–514a to verify that the Firm). The denial notice was signed on
vehicles meet the DOL safety standards Agency: Wage and Hour Division. November 25, 2014, and the Notice of
and, upon the vehicle meeting the Titles: Application for a Farm Labor Determination was published in the
required safety standards, the form is Contractor or a Farm Labor Contractor Federal Register on December 10, 2014
completed. Form WH–515 is a doctor’s Employee Certificate of Registration; (79 FR 73338).
certificate used to document that a Vehicle Mechanical Inspection Report Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c)
motor vehicle driver or operator meets for Transportation Subject to reconsideration may be granted under
the minimum DOT physical Department of Transportation the following circumstances:
requirements that the DOL has adopted. (1) If it appears on the basis of facts
Requirements; Vehicle Mechanical
This information collection is currently not previously considered that the
Inspection Report for Transportation
approved for use through August 31, determination complained of was
Subject to Department of Labor Safety
2015. As part of this renewal, the erroneous;
Standards; MSPA Doctor’s Certificate. (2) If it appears that the determination
Department proposes to make revisions
to the Forms WH–514, WH–514a, WH– OMB Control Number: 1235–0016. complained of was based on a mistake
515, and WH–530. Agency Numbers: Forms WH–514, in the determination of facts not
II. Review Focus: The DOL is WH–514a, WH–515, WH–530. previously considered; or
particularly interested in comments (3) If in the opinion of the Certifying
Affected Public: Businesses or other Officer, a mis-interpretation of facts or
that:
* Evaluate whether the proposed for-profits, Farms. of the law justified reconsideration of
collection of information is necessary Respondents: 23,196. the decision.
for the proper performance of the The initial investigation revealed that
Total Annual responses: 23,196.
functions of the agency, including the subject firm does not produce an
whether the information will have Estimated Total Burden Hours: 9,334. article within the meaning of Section
practical utility; Estimated Time per Response: 5 222(a) or Section 222(b) of the Act.
* Evaluate the accuracy of the minutes for the vehicle mechanical Rather, the investigation revealed that
agency’s estimate of the burden of the inspection reports (WH–514 or WH– the workers’ firm supplied services
proposed collection of information, 514a) and 20 minutes for the MSPA related to administrative support and
including the validity of the Doctor’s Certification (WH–515) and 30 customer services. In order to be
methodology and assumptions used; minutes for the Farm Labor Contractor considered eligible to apply for
* Enhance the quality, utility, and Application (WH–530). adjustment assistance under Section 223
clarity of the information to be of the Trade Act of 1974, the worker
collected; and Frequency: On Occasion, but no more group seeking certification (or on whose
* Minimize the burden of the often than annual. behalf certification is being sought)
collection of information on those who Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): must work for a ‘‘firm’’ or appropriate
are to respond, including through the $0. subdivision that produces an article.
use of appropriate automated, Total Burden Cost (operating/ The definition of a firm includes an
electronic, mechanical, or other individual proprietorship, partnership,
maintenance): $447,354.
technological collection techniques or joint venture, association, corporation
other forms of information technology, Dated: March 18, 2015. (including a development corporation),
e.g., permitting electronic submissions Mary Ziegler, business trust, cooperative, trustee in
rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

of responses. Director, Division of Regulations, Legislation bankruptcy, and receiver under decree
III. Current Actions: The DOL seeks to and Interpretation. of any court.
extend the information collection [FR Doc. 2015–06758 Filed 3–24–15; 8:45 am] In the request for reconsideration, the
requests for the Application for a Farm petitioner stated that the workers of the
BILLING CODE 4510–27–P
Labor Contractor or Farm Labor subject firm should be eligible for TAA
Contractor Employee Certificate of because the subject firm shifted to a
Registration; Motor Vehicle Safety for foreign country the supply of like or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:26 Mar 24, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM 25MRN1

15824 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 57 / Wednesday, March 25, 2015 / Notices

directly competitive services with those firm. The workers were engaged in workers and former workers of
provided by the workers of the subject activities related to the production of Honeywell, Aerospace Division,
firm. office furniture. including on-site leased workers from
The petitioner did not supply facts The company reports that workers OptiScan, Tempe, Arizona (Honeywell).
not previously considered; nor provide leased from Bradley Personnel Inc., The determination was issued on
additional documentation indicating Graham Personnel Services, Aerotek, December 9, 2014 and the Department
that there was either (1) a mistake in the Workforce Unlimited, Experis, and of Labor’s Notice of Determination was
determination of facts not previously imPact Business Group were employed published in the Federal Register on
considered or (2) a misinterpretation of on-site at the High Point, North Carolina December 30, 2014 (79 FR 78496).
facts or of the law justifying location of Brayton International. The Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c)
reconsideration of the initial Department has determined that these reconsideration may be granted under
determination. Based on these findings, workers were sufficiently under the the following circumstances:
the Department determines that 29 CFR control of the subject firm to be (1) If it appears on the basis of facts
90.18(c) has not been met. considered leased workers. not previously considered that the
Based on these findings, the determination complained of was
Conclusion
Department is amending this erroneous;
After careful review of the application certification to include leased workers (2) If it appears that the determination
and investigative findings, I conclude from Bradley Personnel Inc., Graham complained of was based on a mistake
that there has been no error or Personnel Services, Aerotek, Workforce in the determination of facts not
misinterpretation of the law or of the Unlimited, Experis, and imPact previously considered; or
facts which would justify Business Group working on-site at the (3) If in the opinion of the Certifying
reconsideration of the Department of High Point, North Carolina location of Officer, a misinterpretation of facts or of
Labor’s prior decision. Accordingly, the Brayton International. the law justified reconsideration of the
application is denied. The amended notice applicable to decision.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 12th day of TA–W–82,478 is hereby issued as The initial investigation resulted in a
March, 2015. follows: negative determination based on the
Michael W. Jaffe, findings that with respect to Section
All workers of Brayton International, a
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment subsidiary of Steelcase, Inc., including on- 222(a) and Section 222(b) of the Act,
Assistance. site leased workers from Manpower Group, Criterion (1) had not been met because
[FR Doc. 2015–06833 Filed 3–24–15; 8:45 am] Experis, Bradley Personnel Inc., Graham a significant number or proportion of
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
Personnel Services, Aerotek, Workforce the workers in such workers’ firm had
Unlimited, Experis, and imPact Business not become totally or partially
Group, High Point, North Carolina, who separated, nor were they threatened to
became totally or partially separated from become totally or partially separated.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR employment on or after February 15, 2012 The request for reconsideration
through March 11, 2015, and all workers in
Employment and Training asserts that the subject worker group
the group threatened with total or partial
Administration separation from employment on the date of was defined too broadly and therefore
certification through March 11, 2015, are failed to capture the worker separations
[TA–W–82,478]
eligible to apply for adjustment assistance and trade impact experienced by the
Brayton International, a Subsidiary of under Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade Act specific workers of OptiScan who were
Steelcase, Inc., Including On-Site of 1974, as amended. employed on-site at Honeywell,
Leased Workers From Manpower Signed in Washington, DC, this 10th day of Aerospace Division, Tempe, Arizona;
Group, Experis, Bradley Personnel March, 2015. that numerous firms which supplied the
Inc., Graham Personnel Services, Michael W. Jaffe, subject firm with on-site leased workers
Aerotek, Workforce Unlimited, Experis, Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment were erroneously combined together for
and Impact Business Group High Assistance. the purpose of reaching a determination
Point, North Carolina; Amended [FR Doc. 2015–06838 Filed 3–24–15; 8:45 am] as a single firm, yet they were not all in
Certification Regarding Eligibility To BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
support of the manufacturing process at
Apply for Worker Adjustment the subject firm; that the employment
Assistance decline criterion was met for the
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR OptiScan workers employed on-site at
In accordance with Section 223 of the Honeywell, Aerospace Division, Tempe,
Trade Act of 1974, as amended (‘‘Act’’), Employment and Training Arizona; and that the data management
19 U.S.C. 2273, the Department of Labor Administration services they supplied in support of the
issued a Certification of Eligibility to engineering group were shifted to a
Apply for Worker Adjustment [TA–W–85,556]
foreign country.
Assistance on March 11, 2013, Honeywell, Aerospace Division; The Department has carefully
applicable to workers of Brayton Including On-Site Leased Workers reviewed the request for reconsideration
International, a subsidiary of Steelcase, From OptiScan, Tempe, Arizona; and the existing record, and has
Inc., including on-site leased workers Notice of Affirmative Determination determined that the Department will
from The Manpower Group/Experis, Regarding Application for conduct further investigation to
High Point, North Carolina. The determine if the workers meet the
rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Reconsideration
Department’s Notice of Determination eligibility requirements of the Trade Act
was published in the Federal Register By application dated January 28, of 1974, as amended.
on March 8, 2013 (Volume 78 FR 2015, a worker requested administrative
15051). reconsideration of the negative Conclusion
At the request of a company official, determination regarding workers’ After careful review of the
the Department reviewed the eligibility to apply for worker application, I conclude that the claim is
certification for workers of the subject adjustment assistance applicable to of sufficient weight to justify

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:26 Mar 24, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM 25MRN1

Document Created: 2018-02-21 09:49:26
Document Modified: 2018-02-21 09:49:26

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
FR Citation		80 FR 15823

80 FR 15823 - Covidien LP, North American Shared Services Group, Mansfield, Massachusetts; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

DEPARTMENT OF LABOREmployment and Training Administration

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 57 (March 25, 2015)

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration