65512 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2010 / Notices 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the 

Department of Labor—Employee 

Benefits Security Administration 

(EBSA), Office of Management and 

Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 

20503, Telephone: 202–395–6881/Fax 

202–395–5806 (these are not toll-free 

numbers), E-mail: 

OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov within 

30 days from the date of this publication 

in the Federal Register. In order to 

ensure the appropriate consideration, 

comments should reference the 

applicable OMB Control Number (see 

below). 

The OMB is particularly interested in 

comments which: 

(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 

agency’s 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. 

Agency: Employee Benefits Security 

Administration. 

Type of Review: Extension without 

change of a currently approved 

collection. 

Title of Collection: Default Investment 

Alternatives under Individual Account 

Plans. 

OMB Control Number: 1210–0132. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit; Not-for-profit institutions. 

Cost to Federal Government: $0. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

648,000. 

Total Number of Responses: 

83,358,375. 

Total Estimated Annual Burden 

Hours: 782,000. 

Total Estimated Annual Cost Burden 

(operating/maintaining): $32,116,000. 

Description: Section 404(c) of the 

Employee Retirement Income Security 

Act of 1974 (ERISA) states that 

participants or beneficiaries who can 

hold individual accounts under their 

pension plans, and who can exercise 

control over the assets in their accounts 

‘‘as determined in regulations of the 

Secretary [of Labor]’’ will not be treated 

as fiduciaries of the plan. Moreover, no 

other plan fiduciary will be liable for 

any loss, or by reason of any breach, 

resulting from the participants’ or 

beneficiaries exercise of control over 

their individual account assets. 

The Pension Protection Act (PPA), 

Public Law 109–280, amended ERISA 

section 404(c) by adding subparagraph 

(c)(5)(A). The new subparagraph says 

that a participant in an individual 

account plan who fails to make 

investment elections regarding his or 

her account assets will nevertheless be 

treated as having exercised control over 

those assets so long as the plan provides 

appropriate notice (as specified) and 

invests the assets ‘‘in accordance with 

regulations prescribed by the Secretary 

[of Labor].’’ Section 404(c)(5)(A) further 

requires the Department of Labor 

(Department) to issue corresponding 

final regulations within six months after 

enactment of the PPA. The PPA was 

signed into law on August 17, 2006. 

The Department of Labor issued a 

final regulation under ERISA section 

404(c)(5)(A) offering guidance on the 

types of investment vehicles that plans 

may choose as their ‘‘qualified default 

investment alternative’’(QDIA). The 

regulation also outlines two information 

collections. First, it implements the 

statutory requirement that plans provide 

annual notices to participants and 

beneficiaries whose account assets 

could be invested in a QDIA. Second, 

the regulation requires plans to pass 

certain pertinent materials they receive 

relating to a QDIA to those participants 

and beneficiaries with assets invested in 

the QDIA as well to provide certain 

information on request. The ICRs are 

approved under OMB Control Number 

1210–0132, which is scheduled to 

expire on October 31, 2010. 

For additional information, see 

related notice published in the Federal 

Register on August 23, 2010 (75 FR 

51843). 

Agency: Employee Benefits Security 

Administration. 

Type of Review: Extension without 

change of a currently approved 

collection. 

Title of Collection: Regulation 

Relating to Loans to Plan Participants 

and Beneficiaries who are Parties in 

Interest with Respect to the Plan. 

OMB Control Number: 1210–0076. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit. 

Cost to Federal Government: $0. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

1,900. 

Total Number of Responses: 1,900. 

Total Estimated Annual Burden 

Hours: 0. 

Total Estimated Annual Cost Burden 

(operating/maintaining): $673,000. 

Description: The Employee 

Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 

(ERISA) prohibits a plan fiduciary from 

causing the plan to engage in a 

transaction if he knows or should know 

that such transaction constitutes direct 

or indirect loan or extension of credit 

between the plan and a party in interest. 

ERISA section 408(b)(1) exempts from 

this prohibition loans from a plan to 

parties in interest who are participants 

and beneficiaries of the plan, provided 

that certain requirements are satisfied. 

In final regulations published in the 

Federal Register on July 20, 1989, (54 

FR 30520), the Department provided 

additional guidance on section 

408(b)(1)(C), which requires that loans 

be made in accordance with specific 

provisions in the plan. This ICR 

therefore relates to the provisions plan 

documents must include in order for a 

plan may make loans to participants. 

The ICR is scheduled to expire on 

October 31, 2010. 

For additional information, see 

related notice published in the Federal 

Register on August 23, 2010 (75 FR 

51844). 

Dated: October 18, 2010. 

Linda Watts Thomas, 

Acting Departmental Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26868 Filed 10–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–29–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–72,587] 

Raleigh Film and Television Studios, 

LLC, Los Angeles, CA; Notice of 

Affirmative Determination Regarding 

Application for Reconsideration 

By application dated January 24, 

2010, the petitioner requested 

administrative reconsideration of the 

negative determination regarding 

workers’ eligibility to apply for Trade 

Adjustment Assistance (TAA) 

applicable to workers and former 

workers of Raleigh Film and Television 

Studios, LLC, Los Angeles, California 

(the subject firm). The Notice of 

determination was issued on January 14, 

2010 and published in the Federal 

Register on February 16, 2010 (75 FR 

7039). The workers provide sound 

stages, production, office space, 

catering, security, and other services to 

the entertainment production industry. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 205 / Monday, October 25, 2010 / Notices 65513 

The initial investigation resulted in a 

negative determination based on the 

findings that there was, during the 

relevant period, no increase in imports 

of services like or directly competitive 

with those supplied by the workers by 

either the subject firm or its customers, 

nor a shift to/acquisition from a foreign 

country by the subject firm of like or 

directly competitive services. The 

investigation also revealed that the 

workers did not produce a component 

part or supply a service that was 

directly used by a firm that employed a 

worker group eligible to apply for TAA. 

The request for reconsideration 

alleges that the subject firm ‘‘is actively 

building large film studios in both 

Budapest, Hungary and Khazastan.’’ 

The Department has carefully 

reviewed the request for reconsideration 

and the existing record, and has 

determined that the Department will 

conduct further investigation to 

determine if the workers meet the 

eligibility requirements of the Trade Act 

of 1974, as amended. 

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 7th day of 

October 2010. 

Del Min Amy Chen, 

Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment 

Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26900 Filed 10–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–72,554] 

General Motors Company, Pontiac 

Company, Pontiac, MI; Notice of 

Affirmative Determination Regarding 

Application for Reconsideration 

By application dated June 11, 2010, a 

representative of the International 

Union of United Automobile, 

Aerospace, and Agricultural Implement 

Workers of America (UAW) requested 

administrative reconsideration of the 

negative determination regarding 

workers’ eligibility to apply for Trade 

Adjustment Assistance (TAA) 

applicable to workers and former 

workers of the subject firm. The 

determination was issued on April 12, 

2010 and the Notice of Determination 

was published in the Federal Register 

on May 20, 2010 (75 FR 28301). The 

workers produce the GMC Sierra and 

Chevrolet Silverado. 

The negative determination was based 

on the findings that there was no 

increase in imports by the firm or 

customers or a shift to/acquisition from 

a foreign country by the workers’ firm 

of articles like or directly competitive 

with the automobiles produced by the 

workers. The investigation also revealed 

that the workers did not produce a 

component part that was used by a firm 

that employed workers eligible to apply 

for TAA and that directly incorporated 

the component parts into the article that 

was the basis for the TAA certification. 

The UAW’s request for 

reconsideration states that production of 

standard cab and extended cab GMC 

Sierra and Chevrolet Silverado vehicles 

shifted to an affiliated facility in 

Mexico. The request for reconsideration 

also includes new information in 

support of the allegation. 

The Department has carefully 

reviewed the request for reconsideration 

and the existing record, and has 

determined that the Department will 

conduct further investigation to 

determine if the workers meet the 

eligibility requirements of the Trade Act 

of 1974, as amended. 

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 7th day of 

October 2010. 

Del Min Amy Chen, 

Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment 

Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26899 Filed 10–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–72,510] 

JELD–WEN Millwork Distribution, 

Wilkesboro, NC; Notice of Affirmative 

Determination Regarding Application 

for Reconsideration 

By application dated February 3, 

2010, the petitioner requested 

administrative reconsideration of the 

negative determination regarding 

workers’ eligibility to apply for Trade 

Adjustment Assistance (TAA) 

applicable to workers and former 

workers of the subject firm. The Notice 

of negative determination was issued on 

January 11, 2010 and published in the 

Federal Register on February 16, 2010 

(75 FR 7039). The workers produce 

wooden exterior door frames. 

The initial investigation resulted in a 

negative determination based on the 

findings that there was no increase in 

imports of like or directly competitive 

articles by either the subject firm or its 

customers, and no shift to/acquisition 

from a foreign country by the workers’ 

firm of production of like or directly 

competitive articles. The investigation 

also revealed that the subject firm did 

not produce a component part that was 

used by a firm that employed workers 

eligible to apply for TAA and used the 

component parts in the production of 

the article that was the basis for the 

certification. 

The workers, in the request for 

reconsideration, state that subject firm’s 

competitors and customer have 

increased imports of like or directly 

competitive articles from China. The 

workers also allege that the articles 

produced at the subject firm include 

door component parts (‘‘door jambs, 

door T–AST, door mull posts’’) and 

window component parts (‘‘replacement 

window grills’’), and that those articles 

are being imported from China. 

The Department has carefully 

reviewed the request for reconsideration 

and the existing record, and has 

determined that the Department will 

conduct further investigation to 

determine if the workers meet the 

eligibility requirements of the Trade Act 

of 1974, as amended. 

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 7th day of 

October 2010. 

Del Min Amy Chen, 

Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment 

Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26898 Filed 10–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES