60338 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 198 / Friday, October 10, 2008 / Notices 

policies of a person other than an 

individual. 

(h) The term, ‘‘Client Plan(s),’’ means 

an employee benefit plan or employee 

benefit plans that are subject to the Act 

and/or the Code, and for which plan(s) 

an Asset Manager exercises 

discretionary authority or discretionary 

control respecting management or 

disposition of some or all of the assets 

of such plan(s), but excludes In-House 

Plans, as defined, below, in Section 

IV(o). 

(i) The term, ‘‘Pooled Fund(s),’’ means 

a common or collective trust fund(s) or 

a pooled investment fund(s): 

(1) In which employee benefit plan(s) 

subject to the Act and/or Code invest, 

(2) Which is maintained by an Asset 

Manager, and 

(3) For which such Asset Manager 

exercises discretionary authority or 

discretionary control respecting the 

management or disposition of the assets 

of such fund(s). 

(j)(1) The term, ‘‘Independent 

Fiduciary,’’ means a fiduciary of a plan 

who is unrelated to, and independent of 

any PNC/BlackRock Related Entity. For 

purposes of this proposed exemption, a 

fiduciary of a plan will be deemed to be 

unrelated to, and independent of any 

PNC/BlackRock Related Entity, if such 

fiduciary represents that neither such 

fiduciary, nor any individual 

responsible for the decision to authorize 

or terminate authorization for the 

transactions described, above, in 

Section I of this proposed exemption, is 

an officer, director, or highly 

compensated employee (within the 

meaning of section 4975(e)(2)(H) of the 

Code) of any PNC/BlackRock Related 

Entity, and represents that such 

fiduciary shall advise the Asset Manager 

within a reasonable period of time after 

any change in such facts occurs. 

(2) Notwithstanding anything to the 

contrary in this Section IV(j), a fiduciary 

of a plan is not independent: 

(i) If such fiduciary, directly or 

indirectly, through one or more 

intermediaries, controls, is controlled 

by, or is under common control with 

any PNC/BlackRock Related Entity; 

(ii) If such fiduciary directly or 

indirectly receives any compensation or 

other consideration from any PNC/ 

BlackRock Related Entity for his or her 

own personal account in connection 

with any transaction described in this 

proposed exemption; 

(iii) If any officer, director, or highly 

compensated employee (within the 

meaning of section 4975(e)(2)(H) of the 

Code) of the Asset Manager responsible 

for the transactions described, above, in 

Section I of this proposed exemption, is 

an officer, director, or highly 

compensated employee (within the 

meaning of section 4975(e)(2)(H) of the 

Code) of the sponsor of a plan or of the 

fiduciary responsible for the decision to 

authorize or terminate authorization for 

the transactions described, above, in 

Section I. However, if such individual is 

a director of the sponsor of a plan or of 

the responsible fiduciary, and if he or 

she abstains from participation in: (A) 

The choice of such plan’s investment 

manager/adviser; and (B) the decision to 

authorize or terminate authorization for 

transactions described, above, in 

Section I, then Section IV(j)(2)(iii) shall 

not apply. 

(3) The term, ‘‘officer,’’ means a 

president, any vice president in charge 

of a principal business unit, division, or 

function (such as sales, administration, 

or finance), or any other officer who 

performs a policy-making function for a 

PNC/BlackRock Related Entity. 

(k) The term, ‘‘Securities,’’ shall have 

the same meaning as defined in section 

2(36) of the Investment Company Act of 

1940 (the 1940 Act), as amended (15 

U.S.C. 80a 2(36) (1996)). For purposes of 

this proposed exemption, mortgagebacked or other asset backed securities 

rated by one of the Rating 

Organizations, as defined, below, in 

Section IV(n), will be treated as debt 

securities. 

(l) The term, ‘‘Eligible Rule 144A 

Offering,’’ shall have the same meaning 

as defined in SEC Rule 10f–3(a)(4) (17 

CFR 270.10f–3(a)(4)) under the 1940 

Act. 

(m) The term, ‘‘qualified institutional 

buyer,’’ or the term, ‘‘QIB,’’ shall have 

the same meaning as defined in SEC 

Rule 144A (17 CFR 230.144A(a)(1)) 

under the 1933 Act. 

(n) The term, ‘‘Rating Organizations,’’ 

means Standard & Poor’s Rating 

Services, Moody’s Investors Service, 

Inc., Fitch Ratings Inc., DBRS Limited, 

or DBRS, Inc., or any successors thereto. 

(o) The term, ‘‘In-House Plan(s),’’ 

means an employee benefit plan(s) that 

is subject to the Act and/or the Code, 

and that is sponsored by: 

(1) A PNC Related Entity, as defined, 

above, in Section IV(e), or 

(2) A BlackRock Related Entity, as 

defined, above, in Section IV(d), for 

their respective employees. 

(p) The term ‘‘Affiliated Servicer’’ 

means a PNC/BlackRock Related Entity 

that serves as a servicer of one or more 

of the commercial mortgage loans in a 

Pooled Fund that issues commercial 

mortgage-backed securities. 

The availability of this proposed 

exemption is subject to the express 

condition that the material facts and 

representations contained in the 

application for exemption are true and 

complete and accurately describe all 

material terms of the transactions. In the 

case of continuing transactions, if any of 

the material facts or representations 

described in the applications change, 

the exemption will cease to apply as of 

the date of such change. In the event of 

any such change, an application for a 

new exemption must be made to the 

Department. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of 

October 2008. 

Ivan L. Strasfeld, 

Director of Exemption Determinations, 

Employee Benefits Security Administration, 

U.S. Department of Labor. 

[FR Doc. E8–24100 Filed 10–9–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–29–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–63,758] 

Lear Corporation, Quality Control and 

Inspection Department, 950 Loma 

Verde Drive, El Paso, Texas; Notice of 

Affirmative Determination Regarding 

Application for Reconsideration 

In an application post-marked 

September 4, 2008 a worker 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 Lear 

Corporation, Quality Control and 

Inspection Department, located at 950 

Loma Verde Drive, El Paso, Texas 

(subject firm). 

The negative determination was 

issued on August 21, 2008. The 

Department’s Notice of determination 

was published in the Federal Register 

on September 3, 2008 (73 FR 51530). 

Workers performed testing and 

inspection of component parts 

(terminals, connectors, wires, and 

grommets) for wire harnesses. The 

determination stated that the subject 

firm does not produce an article within 

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

Act. The determination further stated 

that because the subject workers are 

denied eligibility to apply for TAA, the 

workers cannot be certified eligible for 

ATAA. 

The request for reconsideration stated 

that subject firm ‘‘held two very 

different departments * * * the Quality 

Control and Inspection Dept. * * * and 

the other one was the PPAP Dept. 

(Production Part Approval Process). The 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 198 / Friday, October 10, 2008 / Notices 60339 

request further states that the appeal is 

limited to the ‘‘PPAP Dept.’’ 

The request for reconsideration 

alleges that the PPAP ‘‘is an essential 

part of the production process, it is 

directly involved in the manufacturing 

of the final product in the production 

line’’ and that ‘‘Lear Corporation took 

our jobs to Mexico.’’ 

The Department has carefully 

reviewed the worker’s request for 

reconsideration and has determined that 

the Department will conduct further 

investigation. 

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 3rd day of 

October 2008. 

Elliott S. Kushner, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E8–24122 Filed 10–9–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–62,849] 

Newpage Corporation, Formerly 

Known as Stora Enso North America; 

Stamford, Connecticut; Including 

Employees of Newpage Corporation, 

Formerly Known as Stora Enso North 

America, Stamford, Connecticut; 

Amended Certification Regarding 

Eligibility To Apply for Worker 

Adjustment Assistance and Alternative 

Trade Adjustment Assistance; Working 

at Various Locations in the Following 

States 

TA–W–62,849A; NORTH CAROLINA 

TA–W–62,849B; CALIFORNIA 

TA–W–62,849C; GEORGIA 

TA–W–62,849D; ILLINOIS 

TA–W–62,849E; MICHIGAN 

TA–W–62,849F; MINNESOTA 

TA–W–62,849G; NEW YORK 

TA–W–62,849H; OHIO 

TA–W–62,849I; PENNSYLVANIA 

TA–W–62,849J; TEXAS 

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 Regarding Eligibility to 

Apply for Worker Adjustment 

Assistance and Alternative Trade 

Adjustment Assistance on July 21, 2008, 

applicable to workers of NewPage 

Corporation, formerly known as Stora 

Enso North America, Stamford, 

Connecticut. The notice was published 

in the Federal Register on August 12, 

2008 (73 FR 46923). 

At the request of a company official, 

the Department reviewed the 

certification for workers of the subject 

firm. 

New information provided shows that 

worker separations have occurred 

involving employees of the Stamford, 

Connecticut facility of NewPage 

Corporation, formerly known as Stora 

Enso North America working out of 

various locations in the following states: 

North Carolina, California, Georgia, 

Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, New 

York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Texas. 

These employees provided sales, 

accounting and managerial function 

support services for the production of 

coated and uncoated paper by the 

subject firm. 

Based on these findings, the 

Department is amending this 

certification to include employees of the 

Stamford, Connecticut facility of 

NewPage Corporation, formerly known 

as Stora Enso North America working 

out of various locations in the above 

mentioned states. 

The intent of the Department’s 

certification is to include all workers of 

NewPage Corporation, formerly known 

as Stora Enso North America, Stamford, 

Connecticut, who were adversely 

affected by increased imports of coated 

and uncoated paper. 

The amended notice applicable to 

TA–W–62,849 is hereby issued as 

follows: 

All workers of NewPage Corporation, 

formerly known as Stora Enso North 

America, Stamford, Connecticut (TA–W– 

62,849), including employees of NewPage 

Corporation, formerly known as Stora Enso 

North America, Stamford, Connecticut 

located at various locations in the following 

states: North Carolina (TA–W–62,849A), 

California (TA–W–62,849B), Georgia (TA–W– 

62,849C), Illinois (TA–W–62,849D), 

Michigan (TA–W–62,849E), Minnesota (TA– 

W–62,849F), New York (TA–W–62,849G), 

Ohio (TA–W–62,849H), Pennsylvania (TA– 

W–62,849I, and Texas (TA–W–62,849J), who 

became totally or partially separated from 

employment on or after February 13, 2007, 

through July 21, 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 2nd day of 

October 2008. 

Linda G. Poole, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E8–24124 Filed 10–9–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–63,662] 

Steelcase, Inc.; Andersons Desk, Inc.; 

City of Industry Plant, City of Industry, 

California; 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 Regarding Eligibility to 

Apply for Worker Adjustment 

Assistance and Alternative Trade 

Adjustment Assistance on July 31, 2008, 

applicable to workers of Steelcase, Inc., 

City of Industry Plant, City of Industry, 

California. The notice was published in 

the Federal Register on August 12, 2008 

(73 FR 46923). 

At the request of the State agency, the 

Department reviewed the certification 

for workers of the subject firm. The 

workers were engaged in the production 

of office furniture. 

New information shows that some 

workers separated from employment at 

the subject firm have had their wages 

reported under a separate 

unemployment insurance (UI) tax 

account for Andersons Desk, Inc. 

Accordingly, the Department is 

amending the certification to properly 

reflect this matter. 

The amended notice applicable to 

TA–W–63,662 is hereby issued as 

follows: 

All workers of Steelcase, Inc., Andersons 

Desk, Inc., City of Industry Plant, City of 

Industry, California, who became totally or 

partially separated from employment on or 

after July 9, 2007, through July 31, 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. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES