18756 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 83 / Monday, April 29, 1996 / Notices

Toxicology Testing of HFA–134a

(‘‘IMPACT–I’’) has filed written

notifications simultaneously with the

Attorney General and the Federal Trade

Commission disclosing the addition of a

new member. The notifications were

filed for the purpose of extending the

Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of

antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages

under specified circumstances.

Specifically, Astra AB, Sodertalje,

Sweden, became a new member of

IPACT–I on February 2, 1996.

No other changes have been made in

either the membership or planned

activity of IPACT–I. Membership in this

ground research project remains open,

and IPACT–I intends to file additional

written notification disclosing all

changes in membership.

On August 7, 1990, IPACT–I filed its

original notification pursuant to Section

6(a) of the Act. The Department of

Justice published a notice in the Federal

Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the

Act on September 6, 1990 (55 FR

36710).

The last notification was filed with

the Department on May 25, 1995. A

notice has not yet been published in the

Federal Register.

Constance K. Robinson,

Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 96–10481 Filed 4–26–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

Notice Pursuant to the National

Cooperative Research and Production

Act of 1993—Joint Venture for

Development and Manufacture of

Glass Panels and Funnels for Use in

Cathode Ray Tubes

Notice is hereby given that, on July

12, 1995, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the

National Cooperative Research and

Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301

et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Sony Electronics Inc.

(‘‘Sony’’), for itself and on behalf of the

parties identified below, filed

notifications simultaneously with the

Attorney General and the Federal Trade

Commission disclosing (1) the identities

of the parties and (2) the nature and

objectives of a cooperative research and

production venture. The notifications

were filed for the purpose of invoking

the Act’s provisions limiting the

recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual

damages under specified circumstances.

Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the

identities of the parties are: Sony

Electronics Inc., Park Ridge, NJ, owned

by Sony Corporation, Tokyo, JAPAN;

Corning Inc., Corning, NY; Asahi Glass

America, Inc., New York, NY, owned by

Asahi Glass Company, Ltd., Tokyo,

JAPAN; Corning Asahi Corporation,

Corning, NY, owned by Corning Inc.

and Asahi Glass America, Inc.;

American Video Glass Company, Mount

Pleasant, PA, owned by Sony

Electronics Inc. and Corning Asahi

Corporation; and Corning Asahi Video

Products Company, Corning, NY, owned

by Corning Inc. and Asahi Glass

America, Inc.

The area of planned activity is

cooperation in the exchange of

information concerning, and the

development and manufacture of, glass

panels and funnels for use in cathode

ray tubes.

Constance K. Robinson,

Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 96–10480 Filed 4–26–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

Notice Pursuant to the National

Cooperative Research and Production

Act of 1993—Petroleum Environmental

Research Forum

Notice is hereby given that, on April

9, 1996, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the

National Cooperative Research and

Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301

et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), the participants in

the Petroleum Environmental Research

Forum (‘‘PERF’’) Project No. 95–02,

titled ‘‘Basic Principles and Control of

Crude Oil Emulsion Formation-Part 3,’’

have filed written notifications

simultaneously with the Attorney

General and with the Federal Trade

Commission disclosing a change in

project membership. The notifications

were filed for the purpose of extending

the Act’s provisions limiting the

recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual

damages under specified circumstances.

Specifically, the following parties have

become members in the PERF Project:

Marathon Oil Company, Littleton, CO;

Mobil Technology Company, Paulsboro,

NJ; and Texaco, Inc., Houston, TX.

No other changes have been made in

either the membership or the planned

activities of the Project. Membership

remains open, and the participants

intend to file additional notifications(s)

disclosing all changes in membership in

this Project.

On November 30, 1995, PERF Project

No. 95–02 filed its original notification

pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The

Department of Justice published a notice

in the Federal Register pursuant to

Section 6(b) of the Act on January 31,

1996 (61 FR 3464).

Information regarding participation in

PERF Project No. 95–02 may be

obtained from Ms. Catherine Peddie,

Shell Oil Products Company, Houston,

TX.

Constance K. Robinson,

Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 96–10482 Filed 4–26–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request

ACTION: Notice of Information Collection

Under Review; Juveniles Taken Into

Custody Reporting Program.

The proposed information collection

is published to obtain comments from

the public and affected agencies.

Comments are encouraged and will be

accepted for 60 days from the date listed

at the top of this page in the Federal

Register.

Request written comments and

suggestions from the public and affected

agencies concerning the proposed

collection of information. Your

comments should address one or more

of the following four points:

(1) 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;

(2) 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;

(3) enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

(4) 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.

Comments and/or suggestions

regarding the item(s) contained in this

notice, especially regarding the

estimated public burden and associated

response time should be directed to

Joseph Moone (phone number and

address listed below). If you have

additional comments, suggestions, or

need a copy of the proposed information

collection instrument with instructions,

or additional information, please

contact Joseph Moone, 202–397–5929,

Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention, Office of
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 83 / Monday, April 29, 1996 / Notices 18757

Justice Programs, U.S. Department of

Justice, Room 782, 633 Indiana Avenue,

NW, Washington, DC 20531.

Overview of this information

collection:

(1) Type of Information Collection:

Reinstatement, without change, of a

previously approved collection for

which approval has expired.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection:

Juveniles Taken Into Custody Reporting

Program

(3) Agency form numbers, if any, and

the applicable component of the

Department of Justice sponsoring the

collection: Forms JTIC–1A, jtic–1b,

JTIC–1C. Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention, Office of

Justice Programs, United States

Department of Justice.

(4) Affected public who will be asked

to required to respond, as well as a brief

abstract: Primary: State and Local

governments. Other: None. To

enumerate and describe annual

movements of juvenile offenders

through state correctional systems. It

will be used by the Department of

Justice for planning and policy affecting

states. Providers of data are personnel in

state departments of corrections and

juvenile services.

(5) An estimate of the total number of

respondents and the amount of time

estimated for an average respondent to

respond: 51 respondents with an

average 12 hours per respondent.

(6) An estimate of the total public

burden (in hours) associated with the

collection: 628 annual burden hours.

If additional information is required

contact: Mr. Robert B. Briggs, Clearance

Officer, United States Department of

Justice, Information Management and

Security Staff, Justice Management

Division, Suite 850, Washington Center,

1001 G Street, NW, Washington, DC

20530.

Dated: April 24, 1996.

Robert B. Briggs,

Department Clearance Officer, United States

Department of Justice.

[FR Doc. 96–10472 Filed 4–26–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–18–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

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 April, 1996.

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–31,879; Rayloc, Atlanta, GA

TA–W–32,025; Winona Knitting Mills,

Berwick Knitwear (Formerly Komar

& Sons Berwick Knitwear), Berwick,

PA

TA–W–31,975; Modine Manufacturing

Co., Clinton, TX

TA–W–31,899; Marion Plywood Corp.,

Coreline Div., Shawano. WI

In the following cases, the

investigation revealed that the criteria

for eligibility have not been met for the

reasons specified.

TA–W–31,993; Aeroil Products Co., Inc.,

South Hackensack, NJ

TA–W–32,118; James River Corp.

Packaging Business, Wausau, WI

TA–W–31,995; ABC Rail Products Corp.,

Anderson, IN

Increased imports did not contribute

importantly to worker separations at the

firm.

TA–W–32,065 & A, B, C, D; Ames

Department Stores, Inc.,

Skowhagen, Caribou, Houlton,

Madawaska & Presque Island, ME

TA–W–31,889; Kids Today, Ltd, New

York, NY

TA–W–32,067; Segerman International,

Inc., New York, NY

The workers’ firm does not produce

an article as required for certification

under Section 222 of the Trade Act of

1974.

TA–W–31843; Pauline Handbags, New

York, NY

The investigation revealed that

criterion (1) and criterion (2) have not

been met. A significant number or

proportion of the workers did not

become totally or partially separated as

required for certification. Sales or

production did not decine during the

relevant period as required for

certification.

TA–W–31,928; Hobet Mining, Inc.,

Madison, WV

U.S. imports of coal are negligible

through the relevant period.

TA–W–31,942; Carter-Wallace, Inc,

Trenton, NJ

The investigation revealed that

criterion (2) and criterion (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–31,919; Toymax, Inc., Westbury,

NY

The investigation revealed that

criterion (1) and criterion (3) have not

been met. A significant number or

proportion of the workers did not

become totally or partially separated 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.

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–31,933; Victory Corrugated

Container Corp. of New Jersey,

Roselle, NJ: February 9, 1995.

TA–W–32,237; Intercontinental Branded

Apparel, Hialeah, FL: April 8, 1995.

TA–W–33,039; Turbine Engine

Components Textron, Danville, PA:

March 8, 1995.

TA–W–32,085; Alcoa Electronic

Packaging, San Diego, CA: March 7,

1995.

TA–W–32,019; Simpson Paper Co., West

Linn, OR: February 20, 1995.

TA–W–32,088; Mobil Corp., Mobil

Research & Development Corp.,

Princeton, NJ: March 4, 1996.