15198 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 1997 / Notices

DATES: Written comments must be

submitted to the office listed in the

addressee section below on or before

May 30, 1997.

The Department of Labor is

particularly interested in comments

which:

• 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 or other forms

of information technology, e.g.,

permitting electronic submissions of

responses.

ADDRESSEE: Mark Wolkow, Department

of Labor, Room S–4502 Frances Perkins

Building, 200 Constitution Ave. NW.,

Washington, DC 20210; (202) 219–8184

x123 (phone); (202) 219–4975 (fax);

mwolkow@dol.gov (email).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Debt Collection Act of 1982 and

the Federal Claims Collection

Standards, as implemented in the

Department by 29 CFR part 20, require

Federal agencies to afford debtors the

opportunity to exercise certain rights

before the agency reports a debt to a

credit bureau or makes an

administrative offset. In the exercise of

these rights, the debtor may be asked to

provide a written explanation of the

basis for disputing the amount or

existence of a debt alleged owed the

agency. A debtor may also be required

to provide asset, income, liability, or

other information necessary for the

agency to determine the debtor’s ability

to repay the debt, including any interest,

penalties and administrative costs

assessed.

Information provided by the debtor

will be evaluated by the agency official

responsible for collection of the debt in

order to reconsider his/her initial

decision with regard to the existence or

amount of the debt. Information

concerning the debtor’s assets, income,

liabilities, etc., will be used by the

agency official responsible for collection

of the debt to determine whether the

agency’s action with regard to

administrative offset or the assessment

of interest, administrative costs or

penalties would create undue financial

hardship for the debtor, or to determine

whether the agency should accept the

debtor’s proposed repayment schedule.

If a debtor disputes or asks for

reconsideration of the agency’s

determination concerning the debt, the

debtor will be required to provide the

information or documentation necessary

to state his/her case. Presumably, the

agency’s initial determination would

not change without the submission of

new information.

Information concerning the debtor’s

assets, income, liabilities, etc., would

typically not be available to the agency

unless submitted by the debtor.

II. Current Actions

Failure of the agency to request the

information described would either

violate the debtor’s rights under the

Debt Collection Act of 1982 or limit the

agency’s ability to collect outstanding

debts.

If a debtor wishes to appeal an agency

action based on undue financial

hardship, he/she may be asked to

submit information on his/her assets,

income, liabilities, or other information

considered necessary by the agency

officials for evaluating the appeal. Use

of the information will be explained to

the debtor when it is requested; consent

to use the information for the specific

purpose will be implied from the

debtor’s submission of the information.

III. Type of Review: Extension without

change.

IV. Agency: Office of the Chief

Financial Officer.

V. Title: Disclosure of Information to

Credit Reporting Agencies;

Administrative Offset; Interest penalties

and Administrative Costs.

VI. OMB Number: 1225–0030.

VII. Agency Number: N/A.

VIII. Affected Public: Individuals or

households; businesses or other forprofit; not-for-profit institutions; small

business or organizations; farms;

Federal employees.

IX. Cite/Reference/Form/etc: It is

estimated that 10% of the individuals

and organizations indebted to the

Department will contest the proposed

collection action and will request an

administrative review and/or appeal an

action based on undue financial

hardship. In some case the debtor will

make one request, but not the other.

However, in most cases, it is expected

that the debtor will request both

actions—first, administrative review of

the determination of indebtedness, and

second, relief because of undue

financial hardship.

Annual burden was estimated based

on a review of debtor responses to

similar requests for information. Debtors

typically respond in 1–2 page letters,

supplemented by copies of documents.

Letters are most often typewritten.

Annual burden is based on a 13⁄4 hour

time allotment to prepare and type a

letter. Debtors will not be asked to

respond on a form.

X. Estimated Total Burden Hours:

12,250.

XI. Estimated Total Burden Cost:

Estimated annual cost to the Federal

Government: $734,650.

Estimated annual cost to the

respondents: $239,890.

Comment submitted in response to

this comment request will be

summarized and/or included in the

request for Office of management and

Budget approval of the information

collection request; they will also

become a matter of public record.

Dated: March 25, 1997.

Michael N. Griffin,

Acting Deputy Chief Financial Officer.

[FR Doc. 97–8025 Filed 3–28–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–23–M

Office of the Secretary

Bureau of International Labor Affairs;

U.S. National Administrative Office;

North American Agreement on Labor

Corporation; Address and Change of

Date of Hearing on Submission #9602

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Labor.

ACITON: Notice.

SUMMARY: On March 13, 1997, the

Department provided notice in the

Federal Register of a hearing, open to

the public, on Submission #9602. The

notice stated that the hearing would be

held in Tucson, Arizona, on April 17,

1997, at a location to be announced.

The purpose of this notice is to

provide the address for the hearing on

Submission #9602 and to announce a

change of date.

DATES: The hearing on Submission

#9602 will be held on April 18, 1997,

commencing at 9 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The hearing will be held at

the Mayor and City Council Chambers

located at City Hall, 255 West Alameda,

Tucson Arizona 85701. Tel: 520–791–

4213.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Irasema T. Garza, Secretary, U.S.

National Administrative Office,

Department of Labor, 200 Constitution
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 61 / Monday, March 31, 1997 / Notices 15199

Avenue, NW., Room C–4327,

Washington, DC 20210. Telephone:

(202) 501–6653 (this is not a toll-free

number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Please

refer to the notice published in the

Federal Register on March 13, 1997 (62

FR 11924) for supplementary

information.

Signed at Washington, DC., on March 26,

1997.

Irasema T. Garza,

Secretary, National Administrative Office.

[FR Doc. 97–8067 Filed 3–28–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–28–M

Employment and Training

Administration

Notice of Determinations Regarding

Eligibility to Apply for Worker

Adjustment Assistance and NAFTA

Transitional Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with section 223 of the

Trade Act of 1974, as amended, the

Department of Labor herein presents

summaries of determinations regarding

eligibility to apply for trade adjustment

assistance for workers (TA–W) issued

during the period of March, 1997.

In order for an affirmative

determination to be made and a

certification of eligibility to apply for

worker adjustment assistance to be

issued, each of the group eligibility

requirements of section 222 of the Act

must be met.

(1) That a significant number or

proportion of the workers in the

workers’ firm, or an appropriate

subdivision thereof, have become totally

or partially separated,

(2) That sales or production, or both,

of the firm or subdivision have

decreased absolutely, and

(3) That increases of imports of

articles like or directly competitive with

articles produced by the firm or

appropriate subdivision have

contributed importantly to the

separations, or threat thereof, and to the

absolute decline in sales or production.

Negative Determinations for Worker

Adjustment Assistance

In each of the following cases the

investigation revealed that criterion (3)

has not been met. A survey of customers

indicated that increased imports did not

contribute importantly to worker

separations at the firm.

TA–W–33,006; East Point Seafood Co.,

South Bend, WA

In the following cases, the

investigation revealed that the criteria

for eligibility have not been met for the

reasons specified.

TA–W–33,224; Personal Products Co/

Johnson & Johnson, Milltown, NJ

TA–W–33,130; Zenith Electronics Corp.

of Texas, McAllen, TX

TA–W–33,287; D.D. Jones Transfer &

Warehouse Co., Inc., Harrisburg, PA

TA–W–33,065; Richland Development

(Penzoil Co), Houston, TX

The workers firm does not produce an

article as required for certification under

section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974.

TA–W–33,000 & A, B, C; Pratt &

Whitney, North Haven, CT,

Middletown, CT, & Rocky Hill, CT

The investigation revealed that

criteria (2) has not been met. Sales or

production did not decline during the

relevant period as required for

certification.

TA–W–33,107; Systems and Electronics,

Inc., West Plains, MO

Worker layoffs at the subject firm

were attributable to a cessation of

production that was caused by technical

problems. Other employment declines

were the result of a work stoppage.

TA–W–33,150; Cinch Connector, Div. of

Labinal Components & Systems,

Inc., Lombard, IL

TA–W–33,125; New River Castings Co.,

Radford, VA

The investigation revealed that

criteria (2) and criteria (3) have not been

met. Sales or production did not decline

during the relevant period as required

for certification. Increases of imports of

articles like or directly competitive with

articles produced by the firm or

appropriate subdivision have not

contributed importantly to the

separations or threat thereof, and the

absolute decline in sales or production.

TA–W–33,186; Mail-Well I Corp., dba

Quality Park Products, St. Paul, MN

TA–W–33,222; Coltec Industries, Inc.,

Div. of FMD Electronics Operations,

Roscoe, IL

Layoffs at the subject firm were

caused by the consolidation operations

transfering the production of the subject

plant to another domestic facility.

TA–W–33,053; Mid-America Dairymen,

Inc., Sabetha, KS

Subject plant closure was due to the

reduction of relevant products available

in the area the company relocated; work

previously performed at the subject

plant and consolidated operations.

TA–W–33,063; Ball Corp., Columbus, IN

TA–W–33,029; Willamette Industries,

Inc., Plywood Div., Dallas, OR

Increased imports did not contribute

importantly to worker separations at the

firm.

TA–W–33,068; Smith and Wesson,

Springfield, MA

U.S. imports of handguns declined

significantly in the Jan-Sept period of

1996 compared with the same period of

1995.

Affirmative Determinations for Worker

Adjustment Assistance

The following certifications have been

issued; the date following the company

name & location for each determination

references the impact date for all

workers for such determination.

TA–W–33,219; Tectronics, Inc, Berlin,

CT: February 5, 1996.

TA–W–33,181; ADA Garment Finishers,

Inc., El Paso, TX: January 23, 1996.

TA–W–33,111; Davol, Inc., Cranston, RI:

January 3, 1996.

TA–W–33,074; R & W Apparel,

Scottsboro, AL: December 18, 1995.

TA–W–33,131; Carolina Knits, Inc.,

Statesville, NC: January 8, 1996.

TA–W–33,176; Binks Sames Corp.,

Franklin Park, IL: January 26, 1996

TA–W–33,020; Weldotron Corp.,

Piscataway, NJ: December 10, 1996.

TA–W–33,246; Schindler Elevator Corp.,

Randolph, NJ: February 10, 1996.

TA–W–33,011; Joe Manufacturing, San

Francisco CA: November 18, 1995.

TA–W–33,179; Joyce Sportswear Co.,

Gary, IN: January 30, 1996.

TA–W–33,047; Lance Garment Corp.,

Red Bay, AL: December 12, 1995.

TA–W–33,083, A & B; Sparkle

Sportswear, Inc., Rahway, NJ, New

York, NY, and Pulaski, VA:

December 4, 1995.

TA–W–33,194; Hasbro Corporate

Offices, Pawtucket, RI, A; Hasbro,

Inc., Pawtucket, RI, B; Rhole Island

Manufacturing (RIM), Central Falls,

RI, C; Hasbro Manufacturing

Services, Easley, SC, D; Hasbro

Manufacturing Services, Northvale,

NJ, E; Hasbro Toy Group,

Cincinnati, OH, F; Hasbro Games

Group—Milton Bradley Co, East

Longmeadow, MA, G; Hasbro

Games Group—Parker Brothers,

Beverly, MA, H; Hasbro Games

Group—MB Wood Products,

Fairfax, VT, I; Hasbro

Manufacturing Services, Arcade,

NY: February 1, 1997.

Also, pursuant to Title V of the North

American Free Trade Agreement

Implementation Act (Pub. L. 103–182)

concerning transitional adjustment

assistance hereinafter called (NAFTA–

TAA) and in accordance with section

250(a) Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II,

of the Trade Act as amended, the

Department of Labor presents

summaries of determinations regarding

eligibility to apply for NAFTA–TAA

issued during the month of March,

1997.