9430 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 4, 2009 / Notices 

By order of the Commission. 

William R. Bishop, 

Hearings and Meetings Coordinator. 

[FR Doc. E9–4525 Filed 3–3–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree 

Under the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

Notice is hereby given that on 

February 26, 2009, an electronic version 

of a proposed consent decree was 

lodged in the United States District 

Court for the Western District of North 

Carolina in State of North Carolina et al. 

v. El Paso Natural Gas Company, et al., 

No. 5:04 CV 38 (Consolidated Cases). 

The consent decree settles claims by the 

United States against Beaunit 

Corporation under Sections 106 and 107 

of the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act of 1980 (‘‘CERCLA’’), as amended, 

42 U.S.C. 9606 & 9607, in connection 

with the FCX Site, a facility 

approximately 1.5 miles west of 

downtown Statesville, Iredell County, 

North Carolina (the ‘‘Site’’). Under the 

terms of the proposed consent decree, 

Beaunit will pay the United States 

$846.54. 

The Department of Justice will receive 

for a period of thirty (30) days from the 

date of this publication comments 

relating to the consent decree. 

Comments should be addressed to the 

Assistant Attorney General, 

Environment and Natural Resources 

Division, and either e-mailed to 

pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov or 

mailed to United States Department of 

Justice, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 

20044–7611. Comments should refer to 

State of North Carolina et al. v. El Paso 

Natural Gas Company, et al., No. 5:04 

CV 38 (Consolidated Cases) and DOJ # 

90–11–3–08264. 

During the public comment period, 

the proposed consent decree may also 

be examined on the following U.S. 

Department of Justice Web site, http:// 

www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ 

Consent_Decrees.html. The consent 

decree may be examined at the Office of 

the United States Attorney for the 

Western District of North Carolina, The 

Carillon Bldg., 227 West Trade St., Suite 

1700, Charlotte, North Carolina. 

A copy of the proposed Consent 

Decree may also be obtained by mail 

from the Consent Decree Library, U.S. 

Department of Justice, P.O. Box 7611, 

Washington, DC 20044–7611 or by 

faxing or e-mailing a request to Tonia 

Fleetwood (tonia.fleetwood@usdoj.gov), 

fax no. (202) 514–0097, phone 

confirmation no. (202) 514–1547. In 

requesting a copy from the Consent 

Decree Library, please refer to the 

referenced case and DOJ Reference 

Number, and please enclose a check in 

the amount of $6.00 (25 cents per page 

reproduction cost) payable to the U.S. 

Treasury, or, if by e-mail or fax, forward 

a check in that amount to the Consent 

Decree Library at the stated address. 

Henry Friedman, 

Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement 

Section, Environment and Natural Resources 

Division. 

[FR Doc. E9–4509 Filed 3–3–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–64,389] 

A. Schulmanm, Inc., Polybatch Color 

Center, Sharon Center, OH; Notice of 

Affirmative Determination Regarding 

Application for Reconsideration 

By application received on February 

4, 2009, the petitioner requested 

administrative reconsideration of the 

negative determination regarding 

workers’ eligibility to apply for Trade 

Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and 

Alternative Trade Adjustment 

Assistance (ATAA) applicable to 

workers and former workers of the 

subject firm. The determination was 

issued on December 22, 2008. The 

Notice of Determination was published 

in the Federal Register on January 14, 

2009 (74 FR 2139). 

The initial investigation resulted in a 

negative determination based on the 

finding that imports of color 

concentrates did not contribute 

importantly to worker separations at the 

subject firm and no shift in production 

to a foreign source occurred. 

In the request for reconsideration, the 

petitioner provided additional 

information regarding a shift in 

production of color concentrates to 

Mexico. 

The Department has carefully 

reviewed the request for reconsideration 

and the existing record and has 

determined that the Department will 

conduct further investigation to 

determine if the workers meet the 

eligibility requirements of the Trade Act 

of 1974. 

Conclusion 

After careful review of the 

application, I conclude that the claim is 

of sufficient weight to justify 

reconsideration of the U.S. Department 

of Labor’s prior decision. The 

application is, therefore, granted. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of 

February 2009. 

Elliott S. Kushner, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E9–4547 Filed 3–3–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–64,190] 

Hafner USA, Inc., New York, NY; Notice 

of Negative Determination on 

Reconsideration 

On January 13, 2009, the Department 

issued an Affirmative Determination 

Regarding Application for 

Reconsideration of the negative 

determination regarding workers’ 

eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment 

Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade 

Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) 

applicable to workers and former 

workers of Hafner USA, Inc., New York, 

New York (subject firm). The 

Department’s Notice was published in 

the Federal Register on January 26, 

2009 (74 FR 4460). 

The initial determination was based 

on the Department’s findings that the 

subject worker group does not support 

a firm or appropriate subdivision that 

produces an article domestically. 

In order to apply for TAA based on 

increased imports, the subject worker 

group must meet the group eligibility 

requirements under Section 222(a) of 

the Trade Act of 1974, as amended. 

Under Section 222(a)(2)(A), the 

following criteria must be met: 

A. A significant number or proportion of 

the workers in such workers’ firm, or an 

appropriate subdivision of the firm, have 

become totally or partially separated, or are 

threatened to become totally or partially 

separated; and 

B. the sales or production, or both, of such 

firm or subdivision have decreased 

absolutely; and 

C. increased imports of articles like or 

directly competitive with articles produced 

by such firm or subdivision have contributed 

importantly to such workers’ separation or 

threat of separation and to the decline in 

sales or production of such firm or 

subdivision.