10616 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Notices 

needs of professionals working in the 

juvenile justice field. The needs 

assessment will capture information 

regarding the topics of interest to the 

field, the level of need for information 

about the topic, the types of training and 

technical assistance of interest around a 

topic, and the specific challenges that 

the field is facing in their work. The 

needs assessment utilizes an on-line 

format and incorporated skip patterns to 

ensure that each completion is tailored 

to the needs of the respondent and 

reduces the burden of time to complete 

the instrument. The information will be 

used to improve services and plan for 

future training and technical assistance 

efforts in a fiscally responsible manner 

that can provide the greatest benefit and 

impact. 

(5) An Estimate of the Total Number 

of Respondents and the Amount of Time 

Estimated for an Average Respondent to 

Respond/Reply: It is expected that 

invitations for completion will be sent 

to approximately 6,000 respondents 

with a 60% response rate. This would 

indicate approximately 3,600 

respondents who will require an average 

of 20 minutes to complete the needs 

assessment. 

(5) An Estimate of the Total Public 

Burden (In Hours) Associated with the 

Collection: 

The total annual public burden hours 

for this information collection is 

estimated to be 1200 hours. 

If Additional Information is Required 

Contact: Lynn Bryant, Deputy Clearance 

Officer, United States Department of 

Justice, Planning and Policy Staff, 

Justice Management Division, 601 D 

Street, NW., Suite 1600, Washington, 

DC 20530. 

Lynn Bryant, 

Department Clearance Officer, PRA, United 

States Department of Justice. 

[FR Doc. E9–5239 Filed 3–10–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–18–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Office of Justice Programs 

[OMB Number 1121–NEW] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comments Requested 

ACTION: 60-Day Notice of Information 

Collection Under Review: Assessing the 

Performance of Juvenile DNA System. 

The Urban Institute, Justice Policy 

Center, will be submitting the following 

information collection request to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review and approval in 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed 

information collection is published to 

obtain comments from the public and 

affected agencies. Comments are 

encouraged and will be accepted for 

‘‘sixty days’’ until May 11, 2009. This 

process is conducted in accordance with 

5 CFR 1320.10. 

If you have comments especially on 

the estimated public burden or 

associated response time, suggestions, 

or need a copy of the proposed 

information collection instrument with 

instructions or additional information, 

please contact Simon Tidd, The Urban 

Institute Justice Policy Center, 2100 M 

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20037. 

Written comments and suggestions 

from the public and affected agencies 

concerning the proposed collection of 

information are encouraged. Your 

comments should address one or more 

of the following four points: 

—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 agencies 

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 techniques or other forms 

of information technology, e.g., 

permitting electronic submission of 

responses. 

Overview of This Information 

Collection 

(1) Type of Information Collection: 

Telephone interviews with state lab 

directors and SDIS administrators. 

Collection of summary statistics on 

juvenile DNA records within CODIS. 

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: 

Assessing the Performance of Juvenile 

DNA System 

(3) Agency form number, if any, and 

the applicable component of the 

Department of Justice sponsoring the 

collection: Form Number: National 

Institute of Justice, Office of Justice 

Programs, No form number. 

(4) Affected public who will be asked 

or required to respond, as well as a brief 

abstract: Primary: State Crime Lab 

Directors. Other: State CODIS personnel. 

The Urban Institute has been funded by 

the NIJ to examine the collection and 

use of juvenile DNA. We will establish 

the state-specific policies and practices 

through interviews with state lab 

personnel and non-identifiable 

summary data on the number of 

juveniles included in SDIS and the DNA 

crime matches attributed to that 

population. This data can then be used 

to assess the value of juvenile DNA 

records from the practitioner 

perspective and inform DNA policy 

decisions at the local, state, and Federal 

level. 

(5) An estimate of the total number of 

respondents and the amount of time 

estimated for an average respondent to 

respond: Interviews will occur with one 

state crime lab director and CODIS 

administrator in each state, for a total of 

70 estimated respondents. Telephone 

interviews are expected to take 1 hour 

each (35 respondents). Summary 

statistic collection is expected to take 3 

hours (35 respondents); 1 hour for 

discussion with us, 1.5 hours for the 

actually data pull, and .5 hours to 

format and transmit the summary 

statistics. 

(6) An estimate of the total public 

burden (in hours) associated with the 

collection: The total estimated burden 

hours to complete both interviews and 

data collection is 140 hours. 

If additional information is required 

contact: Lynn Bryant, Department 

Clearance Officer, United States 

Department of Justice, Planning and 

Policy Staff, Justice Management 

Division, 601 D Street, NW., Suite 1600, 

Washington, DC 20530. 

Dated: March 6, 2009. 

Lynn Bryant, 

Department Clearance Officer, PRA, United 

States Department of Justice. 

[FR Doc. E9–5240 Filed 3–10–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–18–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–64,591] 

Gensym Corporation, A Subsidiary of 

Versata Enterprises, Inc., Burlington, 

MA; Notice of Affirmative 

Determination Regarding Application 

for Reconsideration 

By application dated February 20, 

2009, the Division of Career Services, 

Trade Program Manager, Massachusetts, 

requested administrative 

reconsideration of the negative 

determination regarding workers’ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 11, 2009 / Notices 10617 

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 February 

4, 2009 and will soon be published in 

the Federal Register. 

The initial investigation resulted in a 

negative determination based on the 

finding that the worker group engaged 

in IT sales, consulting and support 

services, does not produce an article 

within the meaning of Section 222(a)(2) 

of the Act. 

In the request for reconsideration, the 

petitioner provided additional 

information regarding activities of the 

workers at the subject facility. The 

petitioners stated that workers of the 

subject firm produced software which 

was sold to customers. 

The Department has carefully 

reviewed the request for reconsideration 

and determined that the Department 

will conduct further investigation to 

determine whether the workers of the 

subject firm were engaged in production 

of articles and whether they 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 2nd day of 

March 2009. 

Elliott S. Kushner, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E9–5181 Filed 3–10–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–63,344] 

General Motors Corporation, Moraine 

Assembly Plant, Vehicle Manufacturing 

Division, Including On-Site Leased 

Workers From Allied Systems, Ltd and 

Securitas, Moraine, OH; Amended 

Certification Regarding Eligibility To 

Apply for Worker Adjustment 

Assistance and Alternative Trade 

Adjustment Assistance 

In accordance with Section 223 of the 

Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and 

Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 

U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the 

Department of Labor issued a 

Certification of Eligibility to Apply for 

Worker Adjustment Assistance and 

Alternative Trade Adjustment 

Assistance on June 5, 2008, applicable 

to workers of General Motors 

Corporation, Moraine Assembly Plant, 

Vehicle Manufacturing Division, 

Moraine, Ohio. The notice was 

published in the Federal Register on 

June 20, 2008 (73 FR 35164). The 

certification was amended on December 

4, 2008 to include on-site leased 

workers from Allied Systems, Ltd. The 

notice was published in the Federal 

Register on December 15, 2008 (73 FR 

76057–76058). 

At the request of a petitioner, the 

Department reviewed the certification 

for workers of the subject firm. The 

workers assemble Buick Rainiers, 

Chevrolet TrailBlazers, GMC Envoys, 

Isuzu Ascenders and Saab 9–7Xs. 

New information shows that workers 

leased from Securitas were employed 

on-site at the Moraine, Ohio location of 

General Motors Corporation, Moraine 

Assembly Plant, Vehicle Manufacturing 

Division. The Department has 

determined that these workers were 

sufficiently under the control of the 

subject firm to be considered leased 

workers. 

Based on these findings, the 

Department is amending this 

certification to include leased workers 

from Securitas working on-site at the 

Moraine Assembly Plant, Vehicle 

Manufacturing Division, Moraine, Ohio 

location of the subject firm. 

The amended notice applicable to 

TA–W–63,344 is hereby issued as 

follows: 

All workers of General Motors Corporation, 

Moraine Assembly Plant, Vehicle 

Manufacturing Division, including on-site 

leased workers from Allied Systems, LTD, 

and Securitas, Moraine, Ohio, who became 

totally or partially separated from 

employment on or after June 17, 2008, 

through June 5, 2010, are eligible to apply for 

adjustment assistance under Section 223 of 

the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible 

to apply for alternative trade adjustment 

assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act 

of 1974. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 27th day of 

February 2008. 

Richard Church, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E9–5173 Filed 3–10–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–64,393] 

Nikko America, Plano, TX; Notice of 

Negative Determination Regarding 

Application for Reconsideration 

By application dated January 22, 

2009, a petitioner requested 

administrative reconsideration of the 

Department’s negative determination 

regarding eligibility for workers and 

former workers of the subject firm to 

apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance 

(TAA) and Alternative Trade 

Adjustment Assistance (ATAA). The 

denial notice was signed on January 6, 

2009 and published in the Federal 

Register on February 2, 2009 (74 FR 

5871). 

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 misinterpretation of facts or of 

the law justified reconsideration of the 

decision. 

The TAA petition filed on behalf of 

workers at Nikko America, Plano, Texas 

was based on the finding that the 

worker group does not produce an 

article within the meaning of Section 

222 of the Trade Act of 1974. 

The petitioner in the request for 

reconsideration contends that the 

Department erred in its interpretation of 

the work performed by the workers of 

the subject firm. The petitioner stated 

that workers of the subject firm ‘‘were 

responsible for final assembly of some 

products’’, including ‘‘putting batteries 

in the boxes where the toys were 

already located and placing decal 

stickers on the toys, taping them back 

up and distributing these products’’. 

The petitioner further stated that Nikko 

decreased production of toys in 2008 

and decided to import products directly 

to consumers bypassing the distribution 

center. 

The investigation revealed that 

workers of Nikko America, Plano, Texas 

were engaged in warehousing, sales, 

distribution and service of radio 

controlled toys during the relevant 

period. No articles were produced by 

Nikko America in the United States. The 

subject firm imported all the products 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES