52990 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 167 / Monday, August 30, 2010 / Notices 

(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 negative determination of the 

TAA petition filed on behalf of workers 

at Specialty Chemicals, Inc., Franklin, 

Virginia, was based on the finding that 

there was no shift/acquisition of 

production of precipitated calcium 

carbonate from the subject firm to a 

foreign country; nor was there any 

increase in imports of articles like or 

directly competitive with precipitated 

calcium carbonate produced at the 

subject facility; nor was the component 

part produced by the subject firm 

(precipitated calcium carbonate) 

directly incorporated into a firm’s 

production of an article that was the 

basis of a primary TAA certification. 

The company official’s request for 

reconsideration stated that the workers 

of the subject firm should be eligible for 

TAA because ‘‘our customer, 

International Paper (IP) Franklin, 

Virginia is certified as a Primary 

Producer (see TA–W–70,243). The date 

of the certification is still within the 

relevant period for the separations for 

which benefits are sought.’’ The 

company official asserts that workers of 

the subject firm are eligible to apply for 

TAA as adversely affected secondary 

workers. 

The initial investigation revealed that 

there are two International Paper 

Company facilities in Franklin, Virginia, 

that employed workers who are eligible 

to apply for TAA. Workers at 

International Paper Company (Lumber 

Plant) Franklin, Virginia were certified 

as adversely affected primary workers 

(TA–W–70,243) and workers at 

International Paper Company, Franklin 

Pulp and Paper Mill, Franklin, Virginia 

were certified as adversely affected 

secondary workers (TA–W–72,764). 

The Department believes that the 

company official misidentified the 

petition number of International Paper 

Company, Franklin Pulp and Paper 

Mill, Franklin, Virginia because, during 

the initial investigation, the company 

official confirmed that precipitated 

calcium carbonate was incorporated 

into the paper produced by 

International Paper Company, Franklin 

Pulp and Paper Mill, Franklin, Virginia 

and International Paper Company 

confirmed that the subject firm supplied 

precipitated calcium carbonate to 

International Paper Company, Franklin 

Pulp and Paper Mill, Franklin, Virginia. 

The worker’s request for 

reconsideration stated that the subject 

firm is a ‘‘supplier/downstream 

producer’’ to ‘‘International Paper’’ and 

‘‘closed down as a direct result of what 

happened at the Franklin paper mill.’’ 

The Department determines that 

International Paper Company, Franklin 

Pulp and Paper Mill, Franklin, Virginia 

is the ‘‘Franklin paper mill.’’ 

Section 222(c) of the Trade Act of 

1974, as amended, states that adversely 

affected secondary workers must be 

employed by a firm that is a supplier to 

a firm that employed a worker group 

who are adversely affected primary 

workers. Therefore, the supply of 

precipitated calcium carbonate to 

International Paper Company, Franklin 

Pulp and Paper Mill, Franklin, Virginia 

cannot be a basis for certification for 

workers of the subject firm. 

The petitioners did not supply facts 

not previously considered nor provide 

additional documentation indicating 

that there was either (1) a mistake in the 

determination of facts not previously 

considered or (2) a misinterpretation of 

facts or of the law justifying 

reconsideration of the initial 

determination. 

After careful review of the request for 

reconsideration, the Department 

determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not 

been met. 

Conclusion 

After review of the application and 

investigative findings, I conclude that 

there has been no error or 

misinterpretation of the law or of the 

facts which would justify 

reconsideration of the Department of 

Labor’s prior decision. Accordingly, the 

application is denied. 

Signed in Washington, DC, this 19th day of 

August, 2010. 

Del Min Amy Chen, 

Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment 

Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21392 Filed 8–27–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE 

CORPORATION 

[MCC FR 10–08] 

Notice of the September 15, 2010, 

Millennium Challenge Corporation 

Board of Directors Meeting; Sunshine 

Act Meeting 

AGENCY: Millennium Challenge 

Corporation. 

TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m. to 12 p.m., 

Wednesday, September 15, 2010. 

PLACE: Department of State, 2201 C 

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20520. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Information on the meeting may be 

obtained from Melvin F. Williams, Jr., 

VP/General Counsel and Corporate 

Secretary via e-mail at 

corporatesecretary@mcc.gov or by 

telephone at (202) 521–3600. 

STATUS: Meeting will be closed to the 

public. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Board 

of Directors (the ‘‘Board’’) of the 

Millennium Challenge Corporation 

(‘‘MCC’’) will hold a meeting to discuss 

approval of the Jordan Compact; 

approval of the Selection Criteria & 

Methodology Report; Compact 

Development and Portfolio Update; 

Threshold Program Review Update; and 

certain administrative matters. The 

agenda items are expected to involve the 

consideration of classified information 

and the meeting will be closed to the 

public. 

Dated: August 26, 2010. 

Melvin F. Williams, Jr., 

VP/General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, 

Millennium Challenge Corporation. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21748 Filed 8–26–10; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 9211–03–P 

MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE 

CORPORATION 

[MCC FR 10–07] 

Report on Countries That Are 

Candidates for Millennium Challenge 

Account Eligibility in Fiscal Year 2011 

and Countries That Would Be 

Candidates But For Legal Prohibitions 

AGENCY: Millennium Challenge 

Corporation. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Section 608(d) of the 

Millennium Challenge Act of 2003 

requires the Millennium Challenge 

Corporation to publish a report that 

identifies countries that are ‘‘candidate 

countries’’ for Millennium Challenge 

Account assistance during FY 2011. The 

report is set forth in full below. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 167 / Monday, August 30, 2010 / Notices 52991 

Dated: August 25, 2010. 

Melvin F. Williams, Jr., 

Vice President/General Counsel and 

Corporate Secretary, Millennium Challenge 

Corporation. 

Report on Countries That Are 

Candidates for Millennium Challenge 

Account Eligibility for Fiscal Year 2011 

and Countries That Would Be 

Candidates but for Legal Prohibitions 

Summary 

This report to Congress is provided in 

accordance with section 608(a) of the 

Millennium Challenge Act of 2003, as 

amended, 22 U.S.C. 7701, 7707(a) (the 

‘‘Act’’). 

The Act authorizes the provision of 

Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) 

assistance for countries that enter into a 

Millennium Challenge Compact with 

the United States to support policies 

and programs that advance the progress 

of such countries to achieve lasting 

economic growth and poverty 

reduction. The Act requires the 

Millennium Challenge Corporation 

(MCC) to take a number of steps in 

selecting countries with which MCC 

will seek to enter into a compact, 

including (a) determining the countries 

that will be eligible for MCA assistance 

for fiscal year 2011 (FY11) based on a 

country’s demonstrated commitment to 

(i) just and democratic governance, (ii) 

economic freedom, and (iii) investments 

in its people; and (b) considering the 

opportunity to reduce poverty and 

generate economic growth in the 

country. These steps include the 

submission of reports to the 

congressional committees specified in 

the Act and the publication of notices in 

the Federal Register that identify: 

(1) The countries that are ‘‘candidate 

countries’’ for MCA assistance for FY11 

based on per capita income levels and 

eligibility to receive assistance under 

U.S. law, and countries that would be 

candidate countries but for specified 

legal prohibitions on assistance (section 

608(a) of the Act); 

(2) The criteria and methodology that 

the MCC Board of Directors (Board) will 

use to measure and evaluate the policy 

performance of the ‘‘candidate 

countries’’ consistent with the 

requirements of subsections (a) and (b) 

of section 607 of the Act in order to 

determine ‘‘MCA eligible countries’’ 

from among the ‘‘candidate countries’’ 

(section 608(b) of the Act); and 

(3) The list of countries determined by 

the Board to be ‘‘MCA eligible countries’’ 

for FY11, identification of such 

countries with which the Board will 

seek to enter into compacts, and a 

justification for such eligibility 

determination and selection for compact 

negotiation (section 608(d) of the Act). 

This report is the first of three 

required reports listed above. 

Candidate Countries for FY11 

The Act requires the identification of 

all countries that are candidates for 

MCA assistance for FY11 and the 

identification of all countries that would 

be candidate countries but for specified 

legal prohibitions on assistance. 

Sections 606(a) and (b) of the Act 

provide that for FY11 a country shall be 

a candidate for MCA assistance if it: 

• Meets one of the following two 

income tests: 

Æ Has a per capita income equal to or 

less than the historical ceiling of the 

International Development Association 

eligibility for the fiscal year involved (or 

$1,905 gross national income (GNI) per 

capita for FY11) (the ‘‘low income 

category’’); or 

Æ Is classified as a lower middle 

income country in the then most recent 

edition of the World Development 

Report for Reconstruction and 

Development published by the 

International Bank for Reconstruction 

and Development and has an income 

greater than the historical ceiling for 

International Development Association 

eligibility for the fiscal year involved (or 

$1,906 to $3,945 GNI per capita for 

FY11) (the ‘‘lower middle income 

category’’); and 

• Is not ineligible to receive U.S. 

economic assistance under part I of the 

Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as 

amended, (the ‘‘Foreign Assistance 

Act’’), by reason of the application of the 

Foreign Assistance Act or any other 

provision of law. 

Pursuant to section 606(c) of the Act, 

the Board has identified the following 

countries as candidate countries under 

the Act for FY11. In so doing, the Board 

has anticipated that prohibitions against 

assistance as applied to countries in the 

Department of State, Foreign 

Operations, and Related Programs 

Appropriations Act, 2010 (Div. F, Pub. 

L. 111–117) (the ‘‘FY10 SFOAA’’), will 

again apply for FY11, even though the 

Department of State, Foreign 

Operations, and Related Programs 

Appropriations Act for FY11 has not yet 

been enacted and certain findings under 

other statutes have not yet been made. 

As noted below, MCC will provide any 

required updates on subsequent changes 

in applicable legislation or other 

circumstances that affect the status of 

any country as a candidate country for 

FY11. 

Candidate Countries: Low Income 

Category 

1. Afghanistan 

2. Bangladesh 

3. Benin 

4. Bolivia 

5. Burkina Faso 

6. Burundi 

7. Cambodia 

8. Cameroon 

9. Central African Republic 

10. Chad 

11. Comoros 

12. Congo, Republic of the 

13. Dem. Republic of the Congo 

14. Djibouti 

15. Ethiopia 

16. Gambia, The 

17. Ghana 

18. Guinea 

19. Guinea Bissau 

20. Guyana 

21. Haiti 

22. Honduras 

23. India 

24. Kenya 

25. Kiribati 

26. Kyrgyz Republic 

27. Lao PDR 

28. Lesotho 

29. Liberia 

30. Malawi 

31. Mali 

32. Mauritania 

33. Moldova 

34. Mongolia 

35. Mozambique 

36. Nepal 

37. Nicaragua 

38. Niger 

39. Nigeria 

40. Pakistan 

41. Papua New Guinea 

42. Philippines 

43. Rwanda 

44. Sao Tome and Principe 

45. Senegal 

46. Sierra Leone 

47. Solomon Islands 

48. Somalia 

49. Tajikistan 

50. Tanzania 

51. Togo 

52. Uganda 

53. Vietnam 

54. Yemen 

55. Zambia 

Candidate Countries: Lower Middle 

Income Category 

1. Angola 

2. Armenia 

3. Belize 

4. Bhutan 

5. Cape Verde 

6. Ecuador 

7. Egypt, Arab Republic 

8. El Salvador 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
52992 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 167 / Monday, August 30, 2010 / Notices 

9. Georgia 

10. Guatemala 

11. Indonesia 

12. Jordan 

13. Kosovo 

14. Maldives 

15. Marshall Islands 

16. Micronesia, Fed. Sts. 

17. Morocco 

18. Paraguay 

19. Samoa 

20. Sri Lanka 

21. Swaziland 

22. Thailand 

23. Timor-Leste 

24. Tonga 

25. Tunisia 

26. Turkmenistan 

27. Tuvalu 

28. Ukraine 

29. Vanuatu 

Countries That Would Be Candidate 

Countries but for Legal Prohibitions 

That Prohibit Assistance 

Countries that would be considered 

candidate countries for FY11, but are 

ineligible to receive United States 

economic assistance under part I of the 

Foreign Assistance Act by reason of the 

application of any provision of the 

Foreign Assistance Act or any other 

provision of law, are listed below. As 

noted above, this list is based on legal 

prohibitions against economic 

assistance that apply for fiscal year 2010 

and that are anticipated to apply again 

for FY11. 

Prohibited Countries: Low Income 

Category 

1. Burma is subject to numerous 

restrictions, including section 570 of the 

fiscal year 1997 Foreign Operations, 

Export Financing, and Related Programs 

Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 104–208), 

which prohibits assistance to the 

government of Burma until it makes 

progress on improving human rights 

and implementing democratic 

government, and due to its status as a 

major drug-transit or major illicit drug 

producing country for 2009 

(Presidential Determination No. 2009– 

30 (9/15/2009)). 

2. Cote d’Ivoire is subject to section 

7008 of the FY10 SFOAA and similar 

provisions of prior-year appropriations 

acts, which prohibit assistance to the 

government of a country whose duly 

elected head of government is deposed 

by military coup or decree. Cote d’Ivoire 

is also subject to section 7086(c) of the 

FY10 SFOAA, which restricts economic 

and security assistance under the 

SFOAA for the central government of a 

country that fails to make its annual 

national budget publicly available. 

3. Eritrea is subject to restrictions due 

to its status as a Tier III country under 

the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, 

as amended, 22 U.S.C. sections 7101 et 

seq. 

4. Madagascar is subject to section 

7008 of the FY10 SFOAA, which 

prohibits assistance to the government 

of a country whose duly elected head of 

government is deposed by military coup 

or decree and also section 7086(c) of the 

FY10 SFOAA regarding budget 

transparency. 

5. North Korea is subject to numerous 

restrictions, including section 7007 of 

the FY10 SFOAA, which prohibits any 

direct assistance to the government. 

6. Sudan is subject to numerous 

restrictions, including section 620A of 

the Foreign Assistance Act, which 

prohibits assistance to governments 

supporting international terrorism; 

section 7012 of the FY10 SFOAA and 

section 620(q) of the Foreign Assistance 

Act, both of which prohibit assistance to 

countries in default on payment to the 

U.S. in certain circumstances; section 

7008 of the FY10 SFOAA, which 

prohibits assistance to the government 

of a country whose duly elected head of 

government is deposed by military coup 

or decree; and section 7070(f) of the 

FY10 SFOAA. 

7. Uzbekistan’s central government is 

subject to section 7076(a) of the fiscal 

year 2009 SFOAA, which is largely 

incorporated by reference and carried 

forward by section 7075 of the FY10 

SFOAA. This restriction states that 

funds (other than expanded 

international military education and 

training funds) may be made available 

for assistance to the central government 

of Uzbekistan only if the Secretary of 

State determines and reports to the 

Congress that the government is making 

substantial and continuing progress in 

meeting its commitments under a 

framework agreement with the United 

States. 

8. Zimbabwe is subject to several 

restrictions, including section 7070(i)(2) 

of the FY10 SFOAA, which prohibits 

assistance (except for macroeconomic 

growth assistance) to the central 

government of Zimbabwe unless the 

Secretary of State determines and 

reports to Congress that the rule of law 

has been restored in Zimbabwe. 

Prohibited Countries: Lower Middle 

Income Category 

1. China is not eligible to receive 

economic assistance from the United 

States, absent special authority, because 

of concerns relating to China’s record on 

human rights. 

2. Iraq is subject to section 620(t) of 

the Foreign Assistance Act, which 

prohibits assistance to any country 

which has severed diplomatic relations 

with the United States until such 

diplomatic relations are restored and an 

agreement to furnish such assistance has 

been negotiated and entered into after 

the resumption of diplomatic relations. 

3. Syria is subject to numerous 

restrictions, including 620A of the 

Foreign Assistance Act, which prohibits 

assistance to governments supporting 

international terrorism; section 7007 of 

the FY10 SFOAA, which prohibits 

direct assistance; and section 7012 of 

the FY10 SFOAA and section 620(q) of 

the Foreign Assistance Act, both of 

which prohibit assistance to countries 

in default in payment to the U.S. in 

certain circumstances. 

The countries identified above as 

candidate countries, as well as countries 

that would be considered candidate 

countries but for the applicability of 

legal provisions that prohibit U.S. 

economic assistance, may be the subject 

of future statutory restrictions, 

determinations, or changed country 

circumstances that affect their legal 

eligibility for assistance under part I of 

the Foreign Assistance Act by reason of 

application of the Foreign Assistance 

Act or any other provision of law for 

FY11. MCC will include any required 

updates on such statutory eligibility that 

affect countries’ identification as 

candidate countries for FY11, at such 

time as it publishes the notices required 

by sections 608(b) and 608(d) of the Act, 

or at other appropriate times. Any such 

updates with regard to the eligibility or 

ineligibility of particular countries 

identified in this report will not affect 

the date on which the Board is 

authorized to determine eligible 

countries from among candidate 

countries which, in accordance with 

section 608(a) of the Act, shall be no 

sooner than 90 days from the date of 

publication of this report. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21518 Filed 8–25–10; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 9211–03–P 

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS 

ADMINISTRATION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comment Request 

AGENCY: National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: NARA is giving public notice 

that the agency proposes to reinstate use 

of a voluntary survey of visitors to the 

Public Vaults, which is part of the 

National Archives Experience in 

Washington, DC. The information will 

be used to determine how the various 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES