57514 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Notices 

One comment stated that determining 

green job occupations based on OES 

assumes that green jobs are distributed 

throughout the workforce in the same 

proportion by occupation as all jobs. 

The commenter stated that results of 

their State survey indicated that green 

jobs seem to be widely disbursed, but 

are more concentrated in construction 

and extraction, production, and farming 

and fishing occupations. BLS responds 

that occupational employment will be 

estimated using OES data for specific 

establishments, according to whether or 

not they produce green goods or 

services. This is different from using 

OES estimates for overall employment. 

Two comments concerned the BLS 

plan to count jobs in all occupations in 

the establishment in the green goods 

and services survey, with one comment 

agreeing and one comment saying there 

is ‘‘no need to count support jobs, such 

as accountants or administrative staff, 

because their job duties are not affected 

directly by the green product or service 

and thus they do not require additional 

training.’’ BLS notes that its green jobs 

definition is not based on skill 

differences, but instead on the 

environmental impact of the good or 

service produced or the production 

process used. However, data users can 

select the occupations they wish to 

consider for training offerings from 

those BLS identifies as occurring in 

establishments producing green goods 

and services. The O*NET green 

occupations taxonomy should be useful 

in this type of analysis. 

Data by public ownership. One 

comment encouraged BLS to generate 

data that identify the level of public 

sector green employment in the NAICSdefined industries and the 

characteristics of the public sector green 

jobs. BLS responds that it intends to 

provide data from the green goods and 

services survey by public versus private 

ownership. 

Process approach to measuring green 

jobs. BLS plans to develop a special 

employer survey to test the feasibility of 

collecting data on jobs associated with 

use of environmentally friendly 

production processes. Environmentally 

friendly production processes and 

practices are those that reduce the 

environmental or natural resources 

impact resulting from production of any 

good or service. These production 

processes include (1) production of 

green goods and services for use within 

the establishment, and (2) use of 

technologies and practices that have a 

positive environmental or natural 

resources conservation impact. 

Sixteen comments addressed the 

process approach. Five comments 

supported using this approach and one 

comment recommended against. Three 

of these comments emphasized that all 

industries should be included in the 

process survey. BLS responds that, as 

stated in the March 16, 2010, notice, the 

scope of the process survey will be all 

industries. 

Six comments indicated the need for 

more clarity in the process approach. 

BLS responds that the approach is 

under development and will be 

described in a future notice. 

Two comments recommended using 

product life-cycle criteria for identifying 

green goods, with one of these 

comments suggesting that ‘‘a ‘green 

good’ and a good produced with ‘green 

processes’ will become increasingly 

indistinguishable in the marketplace 

among the leading experts and 

stakeholders in the sustainable products 

field.’’ BLS responds that applying lifecycle criteria or identifying 

‘‘sustainable’’ products is not feasible in 

its data collection. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 26th day of 

August 2010. 

Kimberley Hill, 

Chief, Division of Management Systems, 

Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23485 Filed 9–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–24–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

Notice of Determinations Regarding 

Eligibility To Apply for Worker 

Adjustment Assistance 

In accordance with Section 223 of the 

Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 

U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor 

herein presents summaries of 

determinations regarding eligibility to 

apply for trade adjustment assistance for 

workers by (TA–W) number issued 

during the period of August 30, 2010 

through September 3, 2010. 

In order for an affirmative 

determination to be made for workers of 

a primary firm and a certification issued 

regarding eligibility to apply for worker 

adjustment assistance, each of the group 

eligibility requirements of Section 

222(a) of the Act must be met. 

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

following must be satisfied: 

(1) A significant number or proportion 

of the workers in such workers’ firm 

have become totally or partially 

separated, or are threatened to become 

totally or partially separated; 

(2) The sales or production, or both, 

of such firm have decreased absolutely; 

and 

(3) One of the following must be 

satisfied: 

(A) Imports of articles or services like 

or directly competitive with articles 

produced or services supplied by such 

firm have increased; 

(B) Imports of articles like or directly 

competitive with articles into which one 

or more component parts produced by 

such firm are directly incorporated, 

have increased; 

(C) Imports of articles directly 

incorporating one or more component 

parts produced outside the United 

States that are like or directly 

competitive with imports of articles 

incorporating one or more component 

parts produced by such firm have 

increased; 

(D) Imports of articles like or directly 

competitive with articles which are 

produced directly using services 

supplied by such firm, have increased; 

and 

(4) The increase in imports 

contributed importantly to such 

workers’ separation or threat of 

separation and to the decline in the 

sales or production of such firm; or 

II. Section 222(a)(2)(B) all of the 

following must be satisfied: 

(1) A significant number or proportion 

of the workers in such workers’ firm 

have become totally or partially 

separated, or are threatened to become 

totally or partially separated; 

(2) One of the following must be 

satisfied: 

(A) there has been a shift by the 

workers’ firm to a foreign country in the 

production of articles or supply of 

services like or directly competitive 

with those produced/supplied by the 

workers’ firm; 

(B) there has been an acquisition from 

a foreign country by the workers’ firm 

of articles/services that are like or 

directly competitive with those 

produced/supplied by the workers’ firm; 

and 

(3) The shift/acquisition contributed 

importantly to the workers’ separation 

or threat of separation. 

In order for an affirmative 

determination to be made for adversely 

affected workers in public agencies and 

a certification issued regarding 

eligibility to apply for worker 

adjustment assistance, each of the group 

eligibility requirements of Section 

222(b) of the Act must be met. 

(1) A significant number or proportion 

of the workers in the public agency have 

become totally or partially separated, or 

are threatened to become totally or 

partially separated; 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Notices 57515 

(2) The public agency has acquired 

from a foreign country services like or 

directly competitive with services 

which are supplied by such agency; and 

(3) The acquisition of services 

contributed importantly to such 

workers’ separation or threat of 

separation. 

In order for an affirmative 

determination to be made for adversely 

affected secondary workers of a firm and 

a certification issued regarding 

eligibility to apply for worker 

adjustment assistance, each of the group 

eligibility requirements of Section 

222(c) of the Act must be met. 

(1) A significant number or proportion 

of the workers in the workers’ firm have 

become totally or partially separated, or 

are threatened to become totally or 

partially separated; 

(2) The workers’ firm is a Supplier or 

Downstream Producer to a firm that 

employed a group of workers who 

received a certification of eligibility 

under Section 222(a) of the Act, and 

such supply or production is related to 

the article or service that was the basis 

for such certification; and 

(3) Either— 

(A) the workers’ firm is a supplier and 

the component parts it supplied to the 

firm described in paragraph (2) 

accounted for at least 20 percent of the 

production or sales of the workers’ firm; 

or 

(B) a loss of business by the workers’ 

firm with the firm described in 

paragraph (2) contributed importantly to 

the workers’ separation or threat of 

separation. 

In order for an affirmative 

determination to be made for adversely 

affected workers in firms identified by 

the International Trade Commission and 

a certification issued regarding 

eligibility to apply for worker 

adjustment assistance, each of the group 

eligibility requirements of Section 222(f) 

of the Act must be met. 

(1) The workers’ firm is publicly 

identified by name by the International 

Trade Commission as a member of a 

domestic industry in an investigation 

resulting in— 

(A) An affirmative determination of 

serious injury or threat thereof under 

section 202(b)(1); 

(B) An affirmative determination of 

market disruption or threat thereof 

under section 421(b)(1); or 

(C) An affirmative final determination 

of material injury or threat thereof under 

section 705(b)(1)(A) or 735(b)(1)(A) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 

1671d(b)(1)(A) and 1673d(b)(1)(A)); 

(2) The petition is filed during the 1- 

year period beginning on the date on 

which— 

(A) a summary of the report submitted 

to the President by the International 

Trade Commission under section 

202(f)(1) with respect to the affirmative 

determination described in paragraph 

(1)(A) is published in the Federal 

Register under section 202(f)(3); or 

(B) notice of an affirmative 

determination described in 

subparagraph (1) is published in the 

Federal Register; and 

(3) The workers have become totally 

or partially separated from the workers’ 

firm within— 

(A) the 1-year period described in 

paragraph (2); or 

(B) notwithstanding section 223(b)(1), 

the 1-year period preceding the 1-year 

period described in paragraph (2). 

Affirmative Determinations for Worker 

Adjustment Assistance 

The following certifications have been 

issued. The date following the company 

name and location of each 

determination references the impact 

date for all workers of such 

determination. 

The following certifications have been 

issued. The requirements of Section 

222(a)(2)(A) (increased imports) of the 

Trade Act have been met. 

TA–W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 

72,531 .................................... Riley Power, Inc., Vogt-Nem, Inc. and Babcock Power, Inc Erie, PA ................................. October 2, 2008. 

73,656 .................................... JK Products and Services, Inc., Leased Workers Aid Temporary Services, Inc., Staffmark, and Appleone, etc.Jonesboro, AR ...................... March 5, 2009. 

73,965 .................................... Angell-Demmel North America Corp, Sellner Corporation .. Dayton, OH ........................... April 9, 2009. 

74,025 .................................... Babcock Lumber Company, Hardwood Division; leased 

Workers Staff Right Services, etc.

St. Marys, PA ........................ April 23, 2009. 

74,134 .................................... Reynoldsville Holding Company ........................................... Reynoldsville, PA .................. May 10, 2009. 

74,267 .................................... Mason County Forest Products ............................................ Shelton, WA .......................... June 14, 2009. 

74,277 .................................... Westcode, Inc ....................................................................... Binghamton, NY .................... June 21, 2009. 

74,307 .................................... Brockway Mould, Inc., Ross Mould, Inc ............................... Brockport, PA ........................ June 25, 2010. 

74,384 .................................... Shipbuilders of Wisconsin, Inc., Burger Boat Company; 

Leased Workers Aerotek and Skilled Trade Services.

Manitowoc, WI ...................... June 8, 2009. 

74,534 .................................... DuPont Teijin Films, Leased Workers from Schenkers Logistics, Inc.Florence, SC ......................... November 7, 2009. 

The following certifications have been 

issued. The requirements of Section 

222(a)(2)(B) (shift in production or 

services) of the Trade Act have been 

met. 

TA–W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 

73,547 ................................... Acxiom Corporation, Leased Workers from CJCN, Kyntex, 

Premier Staffing, Quintex, etc.

Little Rock, AR ...................... February 22, 2009. 

73,547A ................................. Acxiom Corporation, Leased Workers from CJCN, Kyntex, 

Premier Staffing, Quintex, etc.

Conway, AR .......................... February 22, 2009. 

73,608 ................................... PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP (‘PwC’), Internal Firm Services (‘IFS’) Group.Charlotte, NC ........................ February 26, 2009. 

73,829 ................................... Suncor Energy (U.S.A.), Inc., A Subsidiary of Suncor Energy, Inc.Greenwood Village, CO ........ March 11, 2009. 

73,887 ................................... ITT Water & Wastewater Leopold, Inc., ITT Corporation; 

Leased Workers Account Temps, Kelly Services, 

Adecco, etc.

Zelienople, PA ...................... May 22, 2010. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
57516 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Notices 

TA–W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 

74,008 ................................... Cooper, Crouse-Hinds MTL, Inc., Cooper, Crouse-Hinds; 

Cooper Industries; Leased Workers from Accountemps, 

etc.

West Melbourne, FL ............. April 22, 2009. 

74,028 ................................... Imhauser Corporation .......................................................... Romney, WV ........................ April 28, 2009. 

74,065 ................................... ShopKo Stores Operating Co., LLC, Information Services 

Division; SKO Group Holding, LLC; Leased Workers, 

etc.

Green Bay, WI ...................... May 7, 2009. 

74,085 ................................... Avery Dennison, Leased Workers from Adecco, Inc .......... Lenoir, NC ............................ May 13, 2009. 

74,086 ................................... Unisys Corporation, Managed Service Center; Leased 

Workers from Apex Systems and Pinnacle.

Austin, TX ............................. May 13, 2009. 

74,142 ................................... World Color Mt. Morris, IL LLC, Premedia Chicago Division; Leased Workers from The Creative Group, etc.Schaumburg, IL .................... May 21, 2009. 

74,377 ................................... Sony Pictures Entertainment, IT Department, Leased 

Workers from Banctec, CCP Global, Invision, etc.

Culver City, CA ..................... June 28, 2009. 

74,414 ................................... PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Internal Firm Services 

Group.

Cleveland, OH ...................... July 13, 2009. 

74,454 ................................... LSI Corporation, Integrated Circuit Testing Department ..... Fort Collins, CO .................... July 22, 2009. 

74,455 ................................... Uniboard Fostoria, Inc., Uniboard Canada .......................... Fostoria, OH ......................... July 26, 2009. 

74,483 ................................... Wood Group Component Repair Services, Inc., Wood 

Group Gas Turbine Services, Inc.

East Windsor, CT ................. August 3, 2009. 

74,505 ................................... Neff Motivation, Inc., Visant Corporation ............................. Unadilla, GA ......................... August 9, 2009. 

74,518 ................................... Peco II by Lineage Power, Leased Workers from 

Waycraft, Incorporated.

Galion, OH ............................ July 27, 2009. 

74,524 ................................... TD Ameritrade, Inc., TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc.; TD 

Ameritrade Holding Corporation etc.

Fort Worth, TX ...................... August 5, 2009. 

74,530 ................................... Hewlett Packard Company, Human Resources Division .... Auburn and other Cities in 

California, CA.

August 4, 2009. 

74,530A ................................. Hewlett Packard Company, Human Resources Division .... Boise, ID ............................... August 4, 2009. 

74,530B ................................. Hewlett Packard Company, Human Resources Division .... Ellicott City, MD .................... August 4, 2009. 

74,530C ................................ Hewlett Packard Company, Human Resources Division .... Canton, MI ............................ August 4, 2009. 

74,530D ................................ Hewlett Packard Company, Human Resources Division .... Wake Forest, NC .................. August 4, 2009. 

74,530E ................................. Hewlett Packard Company, Human Resources Division .... Corvallis, OR ........................ August 4, 2009. 

74,530F ................................. Hewlett Packard Company, Human Resources Division .... Blue Bell, PA ........................ August 4, 2009 

74,530G ................................ Hewlett Packard Company, Human Resources Division .... Houston and other Cities in 

Texas, TX.

August 4, 2009. 

74,530H ................................ Hewlett Packard Company, Human Resources Division .... Herndon, VA ......................... August 4, 2009. 

74,530I .................................. Hewlett Packard Company, Human Resources Division .... Vancouver, WA ..................... August 4, 2009. 

74,545 ................................... HAVI Logistics, North America, HAVI Group, LP; Leased 

Worker from Express Personnel Services, etc.

Bloomingdale, IL ................... August 11, 2009. 

74,550 ................................... Artisans, Inc ......................................................................... Glen Flora, WI ...................... August 20, 2009. 

74,552 ................................... CKE Restaurants, Inc., Client Services Division; Leased 

Workers from B2B Staffing Services.

Anaheim, CA ........................ August 18, 2009. 

74,561 ................................... Hilton Reservations and Customer Care, Hemet Division 

of Hilton Worldwide.

Hemet, CA ............................ August 11, 2009. 

The following certifications have been 

issued. The requirements of Section 

222(c) (supplier to a firm whose workers 

are certified eligible to apply for TAA) 

of the Trade Act have been met. 

TA–W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 

73,203 ................................... Hitachi Automotive Products (USA), Inc., Hitachi America, 

Ltd.; Leased Workers from Nesco Resource Company.

Harrodsburg, KY ................... December 31, 2009. 

73,486 ................................... Ethan Allen Retail, Inc ......................................................... Lombard, IL .......................... February 10, 2009. 

73,496 ................................... Guardian Automotive Corp., SRG Global Inc ..................... LaGrange, GA ...................... March 27, 2009. 

74,495 ................................... General Electric Company, Transportation Division; 

Leased Workers from Adecco Technical.

Grove City, PA ...................... August 3, 2009. 

Negative Determinations for Worker 

Adjustment Assistance 

In the following cases, the 

investigation revealed that the eligibility 

criteria for worker adjustment assistance 

have not been met for the reasons 

specified. 

The investigation revealed that the 

criteria under paragraphs(a)(2)(A) 

(increased imports) and (a)(2)(B) (shift 

in production or services to a foreign 

country) of section 222 have not been 

met. 

TA–W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 

73,021 ................................... BJ Services, A Baker Hughes Incorporated Company ....... Eldorado, TX .........................

73,721 ................................... RCL Burco, Inc., RCL Services Group, LLC ....................... Culloden, WV ........................


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 21, 2010 / Notices 57517 

TA–W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 

73,722 ................................... Sojitz Corporation of America, Sojitz Corporation; Forest 

Products Department.

Seattle, WA ...........................

74,035 ................................... OSRAM Sylvania, Siemens ................................................. Warren, PA ...........................

74,246 ................................... Bank of America, Card Customer Assistance Division ....... State College, PA .................

74,290 ................................... Supermedia LLC, Idearc Media LLC; SuperMedia Information Services LLC; Client Care, etc..Middleton, MA .......................

Determinations Terminating 

Investigations of Petitions for Worker 

Adjustment Assistance 

After notice of the petitions was 

published in the Federal Register and 

on the Department’s Web site, as 

required by Section 221 of the Act (19 

U.S.C. 2271), the Department initiated 

investigations of these petitions. 

The following determinations 

terminating investigations were issued 

because the petitioner has requested 

that the petition be withdrawn. 

TA–W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 

73,707 ................................... JD Norman Industries, Inc., Brooklyn Facility ..................... Brooklyn, OH ........................

73,759 ................................... Eskco, Inc ............................................................................ Dayton, OH ...........................

74,353 ................................... Riverhawk Aviation .............................................................. Hickory, NC ..........................

The following determinations 

terminating investigations were issued 

because the petitioning groups of 

workers are covered by active 

certifications. Consequently, further 

investigation in these cases would serve 

no purpose since the petitioning group 

of workers cannot be covered by more 

than one certification at a time. 

TA–W No. Subject firm Location Impact date 

73,625 ................................... Compuware Corporation ...................................................... Warren, MI ............................

I hereby certify that the 

aforementioned determinations were 

issued during the period of August 30, 

2010 through September 3, 2010. Copies 

of these determinations may be 

requested under the Freedom of 

Information Act. Requests may be 

submitted by fax, courier services, or 

mail to FOIA Disclosure Officer, Office 

of Trade Adjustment Assistance (ETA), 

U.S. Department of Labor, 200 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20210 or tofoiarequest@dol.gov. 

These determinations also are available 

on the Department’s Web site at 

http://www.doleta.gov/tradeact under 

the searchable listing of determinations. 

Dated: September 10, 2010. 

Elliott S. Kushner 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23496 Filed 9–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–70,344] 

Atlantic Southeast Airlines, a 

Subsidiary of Skywest, Inc., Airport 

Customer Service Division, Including 

On-Site Leased Workers of Delta 

Global Services, Inc., Fort Smith, AR; 

Notice of Negative Determination on 

Remand 

On July 6, 2010, the United States 

Court of International Trade (USCIT) 

granted the Department of Labor’s 

request for voluntary remand to conduct 

further investigation in Former 

Employees of Atlantic Southeast 

Airlines, a Subsidiary of Skywest, Inc., 

Airport Customer Service Division v. 

United States Secretary of Labor (Court 

No. 09–00522). 

Background 

On September 28, 2009, the 

Department of Labor (Department) 

issued a Negative Determination 

regarding eligibility to apply for Trade 

Adjustment Assistance (TAA) under the 

Trade Act of 1974, as amended 

(hereafter referred to as the Act) 

applicable to workers and former 

workers of Atlantic Southeast Airlines, 

a Subsidiary of Skywest, Inc., Airport 

Customer Division, Fort Smith, 

Arkansas (subject firm). AR 35. Workers 

at the subject firm (subject worker 

group) provided airline ground services, 

such as baggage handling, at the Forth 

Smith, Arkansas airport. AR 8, 14, 17, 

25–26, 34. The Department’s Notice of 

negative determination was published 

in the Federal Register on November 17, 

2009 (74 FR 59251). AR 48. 

The negative determination stated 

that the subject firm did not import 

services like or directly competitive 

with the services supplied by the 

subject workers in the period under 

investigation nor shift the supply of 

these services to a foreign country 

during this period. A customer survey 

was not conducted because the subject 

firm’s customers were private 

individuals who traveled through Fort 

Smith, Arkansas airport. AR 35–38. 

By application dated October 19, 

2009, a petitioner requested 

administrative reconsideration on the 

Department’s negative determination. In 

the request for reconsideration, the 

petitioner alleged that workers at the 

subject firm provided services to 

individuals employed at firms that 

employed workers eligible to apply for 

TAA and that workers at the subject 

firm should also be eligible to apply for 

TAA as ‘‘downstream producers’’ to 

these firms. AR 42–43. 

Because the petitioner did not provide 

information that had not been 

previously considered, the Department 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES