66778 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 215 / Wednesday, November 6, 2013 / Notices 

(4) The proposed exemptions, if 

granted, will be subject to the express 

condition that the material facts and 

representations contained in each 

application are true and complete, and 

that each application accurately 

describes all material terms of the 

transaction which is the subject of the 

exemption. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 31st day of 

October 2013. 

Lyssa E. Hall, 

Director Office of Exemption Determinations, 

Employee Benefits Security Administration, 

U.S. Department of Labor. 

[FR Doc. 2013–26506 Filed 11–5–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–29–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employee Benefits Security 

Administration 

[Exemption Application No. D–11672] 

Withdrawal of Notice of Proposed 

Exemption Involving the Studley, Inc. 

Section 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan (the 

Plan) Located in New York, NY 

In the Federal Register dated 

November 16, 2012 (77 FR 68842), the 

Department of Labor (the Department) 

published a notice of proposed 

exemption (the Notice) from the 

prohibited transaction restrictions of the 

Employee Retirement Income Security 

Act of 1974, as amended, and from 

certain taxes imposed by the Internal 

Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. The 

Notice concerned the proposed cash 

sale by the Plan of an 8.828121% 

partnership interest (the Interest) in the 

Julien J. Studley N Street Partnership, a 

general partnership (the JJS Partnership) 

to Studley, Inc. (the Employer), a party 

in interest with respect to the Plan. 

Subsequent to the publication of the 

Notice in the Federal Register, the 

Department was informed that Melvin 

Lenkin, Edward J. Lenkin and the EJL 

Trust, who are unrelated parties with 

respect to the Plan, purchased the 

Interest from the Plan. Accordingly, the 

Department hereby withdraws the 

Notice from the Federal Register. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 31st day of 

October 2013. 

Lyssa E. Hall, 

Director, Office of Exemption Determinations, 

Employee Benefits Security Administration, 

U.S. Department of Labor. 

[FR Doc. 2013–26505 Filed 11–5–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–29–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–81,387] 

Eastman Kodak Company, IPS— 

Dayton Location, Including On-Site 

Leased Workers From Adecco, Dayton, 

Ohio; Notice of Negative Determination 

on Reconsideration 

On March 2, 2012, the Department of 

Labor (Department) initiated an 

investigation in response to a Trade 

Adjustment Assistance (TAA) petition 

filed on behalf of workers and former 

workers of Eastman Kodak Company, 

IPS-Dayton Location, including on-site 

leased workers from Adecco, Dayton, 

Ohio (hereafter referred to as ‘‘Eastman 

Kodak-IPS-Dayton’’). On May 18, 2012, 

the Department denied the petition for 

group eligibility to apply for TAA. The 

Department’s Notice of negative 

determination was published in the 

Federal Register on June 6, 2012 (77 FR 

33494). 

On August 1, 2012, the Department 

issued a Notice of Affirmative 

Determination Regarding Application 

for Reconsideration, applicable to 

Eastman Kodak-IPS-Dayton. The 

Department’s Notice of affirmative 

determination was published in the 

Federal Register on August 14, 2012 (77 

FR 48549). 

On March 19, 2013, the Department 

issued a Notice of Termination of 

Reconsideration Investigation to 

workers and former workers of Eastman 

Kodak-IPS-Dayton (TA–W–81,387) 

which stated that the worker group on 

whose behalf the request for 

reconsideration was filed is eligible to 

apply for TAA under the amended 

certification for TA–W–74,813A. The 

Department’s Notice of termination of 

reconsideration investigation was 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 9, 2013 (78 FR 21155). 

On June 21, 2013, the Department 

issued a Notice of Termination of 

Certification applicable to workers and 

former workers eligible to apply for 

TAA under TA–W–74,813A. The 

Department’s Notice of Termination of 

Certification was published in the 

Federal Register on July 5, 2013 (78 FR 

40507). In the Notice of Termination of 

Certification, the Department stated that 

the reconsideration investigation of TA– 

W–81,387 would be re-opened and a 

determination on reconsideration would 

be issued accordingly. 

During the re-opened reconsideration 

investigation, the Department contacted 

the workers who filed the initial 

petition for information and received 

additional information from one of the 

petitioners. 

The petition alleges that production of 

printers shifted from the Dayton, Ohio 

facility to a foreign country. In an 

attachment to the petition, the 

petitioners state that ‘‘a few years back 

our facility . . . shipped the 

manufacture of . . . fluid systems and 

controllers to . . . China’’; that ‘‘in 2010 

a large portion of the print head 

refurbishment for the 4′′ (four inch) 

product line was shipped to . . . 

China’’; that ‘‘all of the printed circuit 

board production and testing was 

moved to China’’; that a ‘‘portion of the 

new product under development 

(Stream) was moved to Mexico for 

manufacture’’ in 2011; that people from 

Malaysia spent months in the fall of 

2011 ‘‘to learn the processes of 

manufacture so equipment can be sent 

to their facility in Malaysia’’; and that 

‘‘production of the new Stream product 

is to be done in Malaysia.’’ 

During the re-opened reconsideration 

investigation, a former worker stated 

that separations at the Dayton, Ohio 

facility were due to the shift in 

production to China and/or Mexico; that 

production of ‘‘legacy’’ products were 

shifted to a facility in China that builds 

cameras and desktop printers; that the 

shift of production to China also 

resulted in reduced need for ‘‘testing 

and repair of new build circuit boards 

and electronic assembly’’; that 

production of ink jet print systems and 

the ‘‘Four Inch’’ product line were 

shifted to China; and that, in April 2012, 

three of the remaining workers were 

separated ‘‘because the remaining repair 

work was shifted to a third party 

company in the Dayton area.’’ 

During the re-opened reconsideration 

investigation, the Department obtained 

updated information from Eastman 

Kodak Company regarding operations at 

the Dayton, Ohio facility and responses 

to the afore-mentioned allegations. 

Based on information obtained during 

the re-opened reconsideration 

investigation, the Department 

determines that while there was some 

production shift abroad in 2006 to 2008, 

no such shift occurred in 2012 and 

2013, and that the shift which occurred 

during 2006 to 2008 did not contribute 

to worker separations at the Dayton, 

Ohio facility in 2012 and 2013. 

Rather, information obtained during 

the reconsideration investigation 

confirmed that worker separations at the 

Dayton, Ohio facility in 2012 and 2013 

have been part of bankruptcy-related 

activities, including restructuring and 

domestic outsourcing of some services, 

and have not resulted in a shift of 

production abroad. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES