Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 209 / Wednesday, October 29, 2014 / Notices 64415 

2. Whether the workers in the 

workers’ firm possess skills that are not 

easily transferable. 

3. The competitive conditions within 

the workers’ industry (i.e., conditions 

within the industry are adverse). 

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. 

None. 

Affirmative Determinations for Worker 

Adjustment Assistance and Alternative 

Trade 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) and 

Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act 

have been met. 

85,469, Litho-Krome Company, LLC, 

Midland, Georgia. August 6, 2013. 

85,518, Scherer & Trier USA, Saline, 

Michigan, September 5, 2013. 

85,521, CIVCO, Kalona, Iowa. 

September 9, 2013. 

85,522, Marlow Industries, Inc., Dallas, 

Texas. September 8, 2013. 

85,524, Sunspring America, Inc., 

Henderson, Kentucky. August 19, 

2013. 

85,533, Modine Manufacturing 

Company, Ringwood, Illinois, 

September 11, 2013. 

85,535, UTI Integrated Logistics, LLC, EL 

Paso, Texas, September 4, 2013. 

85,418, Three Dimensional Graphics, 

Danvers, Massachusetts. July 7, 

2013. 

Negative Determinations for Alternative 

Trade Adjustment Assistance 

In the following cases, it has been 

determined that the requirements of 

246(a)(3)(A)(ii) have not been met for 

the reasons specified. 

None. 

Negative Determinations for Worker 

Adjustment Assistance and Alternative 

Trade 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. 

Because the workers of the firm are 

not eligible to apply for TAA, the 

workers cannot be certified eligible for 

ATAA. 

The investigation revealed that 

criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C.) (increased 

imports) and (a)(2)(B)(II.B.) (shift in 

production to a foreign country) have 

not been met. 

85,488, Sig Sauer, Inc., Newington, New 

Hampshire. 

85,496, Remington Arms, Inc., Ilion, 

New York. 

85,513, Heartland Footwear, Inc., 

Pocahontas, Arkansas. 

The workers’ firm does not produce 

an article as required for certification 

under Section 222 of the Trade Act of 

1974. 

85,373, General Electric International, 

Inc., Plainville, Connecticut. 

85,466, GrafTech International 

Holdings, Inc., Emporium, 

Pennsylvania. 

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. 

None. 

I hereby certify that the aforementioned 

determinations were issued during the period 

of September 29, 2014 through October 3, 

2014. These determinations are available on 

the Department’s Web site www.tradeact/taa/ 

taa_search_form.cfm under the searchable 

listing of determinations or by calling the 

Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance toll 

free at 888–365–6822. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of 

October 2014. 

Michael W. Jaffe, 

Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment 

Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 2014–25654 Filed 10–28–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–85,013] 

TRW Integrated Chassis Systems, 

LLC; North American Braking Division; 

A Subsidiary of TRW Automotive 

Including On-Site Leased Workers 

From Adecco and DM Burr; Saginaw, 

Michigan; Negative Determinations 

Regarding Eligibility To Apply for 

Worker Adjustment Assistance And 

Alternative Trade Adjustment 

Assistance 

In accordance with Section 223 of the 

Trade Act of 1974, as amended (‘‘Act’’), 

19 U.S.C. 2273, the Department of Labor 

herein presents the results of an 

investigation regarding certification of 

eligibility to apply for worker 

adjustment assistance. 

Workers of a firm may be eligible for 

worker adjustment assistance if they 

satisfy the criteria of subsection (a) and 

(b) of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 

2272(a) and (b). For the Department of 

Labor to issue a certification for workers 

under Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 

U.S.C. 2272(a), the following three 

criteria must be met: 

(1) The first criterion (set forth in Section 

222(a)(1) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a)(1)) 

requires that a significant number or 

proportion of the workers in such workers’ 

firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the 

firm, have become totally or partially 

separated, or are threatened to become totally 

or partially separated 

(2) The second criterion (set forth in 

Section 222(a)(2) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 

2272(a)(2)) may be satisfied in one of two 

ways: 

(A) Increased Imports Path: 

(i) Sales or production, or both, at the 

workers’ firm must have decreased 

absolutely, AND 

(ii) imports of articles like or directly 

competitive with articles produced by such 

firm or subdivision have increased; and 

(iii) the increase described in clause (ii) 

contributed importantly to such workers’ 

separation or threat of separation and to the 

decline in the sales or production of such 

firm or subdivision. 

(B) Shift in Production Path: 

(i) There has been a shift in production by 

such workers’ firm or subdivision to a foreign 

country of articles like or directly 

competitive with articles which are produced 

by such firm or subdivision; and 

(ii)(I) the country to which the workers’ 

firm has shifted production of the articles is 

a party to a free trade agreement with the 

United States; 

(II) the country to which the workers’ firm 

has shifted production of the articles is a 

beneficiary country under the Andean Trade 

Preference Act, African Growth and 

Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin 

Economic Recovery Act; or 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

64416 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 209 / Wednesday, October 29, 2014 / Notices 

(III) there has been or is likely to be an 

increase in imports of articles that are like or 

directly competitive with articles which are 

or were produced by such firm or 

subdivision. 

For the Department to issue a 

secondary worker certification under 

Section 222(b) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 

§ 2272(b), to workers of a Supplier or a 

Downstream Producer, the following 

criteria must be met: 

(1) A significant number or proportion of 

the workers in the workers’ firm or an 

appropriate subdivision of the 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, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a), and such 

supply or production is related to the article 

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. 

Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 

2272(c), defines the terms ‘‘Supplier’’ 

and ‘‘Downstream Producer.’’ 

The investigation was initiated in 

response to a petition filed on January 

13, 2014 by a company official on behalf 

of workers of TRW Integrated Chassis 

Systems, LLC, North American Braking 

Division, a subsidiary of TRW 

Automotive, Saginaw, Michigan (TRW 

Integrated Chassis Systems). The 

workers’ firm is engaged in activities 

related to the production of rotor and 

knuckle components and brake corners. 

The workers are not separately 

identifiable by article produced. The 

subject worker group includes on-site 

leased workers from Adecco and DM 

Burr. 

Workers of the subject firm are 

eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment 

Assistance (TAA) under petition TA– 

W–71,662, which expired on September 

30, 2011. 

The petition states ‘‘At this time our 

customer . . . has decided to source our 

product to other suppliers’’. 

During the course of the investigation, 

information was collected from the 

workers’ firm and its customers. 

With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of 

the Act, the investigation revealed that 

the subject firm did not shift production 

of rotor and knuckle components and 

brake corners to a foreign country. 

With respect to Section 

222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the 

investigation revealed subject firm, 

customer, and aggregate U.S. imports of 

articles like or directly competitive with 

the rotor and knuckle components and 

brake corners produced by TRW 

Integrated Chassis Systems have not 

increased during the relevant period. 

With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of 

the Act, the investigation revealed that 

TRW Integrated Chassis Systems is not 

a Supplier to a firm that employed a 

group of workers who received a 

certification of eligibility under Section 

222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a). 

With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of 

the Act, the investigation revealed that 

TRW Integrated Chassis Systems that 

does not act as a Downstream Producer 

to a firm that employed a group of 

workers who received a certification of 

eligibility under Section 222(a) of the 

Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a), based on an 

increase in imports from, or a shift in 

production to, Canada or Mexico. 

In order for the Department to issue 

a certification of eligibility to apply for 

alternative trade adjustment assistance 

(ATAA), the worker group must be 

certified eligible to apply for trade 

adjustment assistance. Since the 

workers are denied eligibility to apply 

for TAA, the workers cannot be certified 

eligible for ATAA. 

Conclusion 

After careful review of the facts 

obtained in the investigation, I 

determine that all workers of TRW 

Integrated Chassis Systems, LLC, North 

American Braking Division, a subsidiary 

of TRW Automotive, including on-site 

leased workers from Adecco and DM 

Burr, Saginaw, Michigan, are denied 

eligibility to apply for adjustment 

assistance under Section 223 of the 

Trade Act of 1974, as amended, and are 

also denied eligibility to apply for 

alternative trade adjustment assistance 

under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 

1974, amended. 

Signed in Washington, DC this 26th day of 

February, 2014. 

Del Min Amy Chen, 

Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment 

Assistance. 

Editorial Note: This document was 

received for publication by the Office of 

Federal Register on October 23, 2014. 

[FR Doc. 2014–25656 Filed 10–28–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration 

[Docket No. OSHA–H022k–2006–0062] 

Preparations for the 28th Session of 

the UN Sub-Committee of Experts on 

the Globally Harmonized System of 

Classification and Labelling of 

Chemicals (UNSCEGHS) 

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA), Department of 

Labor 

ACTION: Notice of public meeting. 

SUMMARY: This notice is to advise 

interested persons that on Wednesday, 

November 12, 2014, OSHA, as a 

representative of the U.S Interagency 

GHS (Globally Harmonized System of 

Classification and Labelling of 

Chemicals) Coordinating Group, will 

conduct a public meeting to discuss 

proposals in preparation for the 28th 

session of the United Nations SubCommittee of Experts on the Globally 

Harmonized System of Classification 

and Labelling of Chemicals 

(UNSCEGHS) to be held December 10 to 

12, 2014 in Geneva, Switzerland. OSHA, 

along with the U.S. Interagency GHS 

Coordinating Group, plans to consider 

the comments and information gathered 

at this public meeting when developing 

the U.S. Government positions for the 

UNSCEGHS meeting. 

Also, on Wednesday, November 12, 

2014, the Department of Transportation 

(DOT), Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA) will conduct a public meeting 

(See Docket No. PHMSA–2014–0117, 

Notice No. 14–12) to discuss proposals 

in preparation for the 46th session of the 

United Nations Sub-Committee of 

Experts on the Transport of Dangerous 

Goods (UNSCOE TDG) to be held 

December 1 to December 9, 2014, in 

Geneva, Switzerland. 

DATES: Wednesday, November 12, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Both meetings will be held 

at the DOT Headquarters Conference 

Center, West Building, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. 

Times and Locations 

PHMSA public meeting: 9:00 a.m. to 

12:00 p.m. EDT, Conference Room 4. 

OSHA public meeting: 1:00 p.m. to 

4:00 p.m. EDT, Conference Room 4. 

Registration: It is requested that 

attendees pre-register for these meetings 

by completing the form at: https://

www.surveymonkey.com/s/9WWZWR2. 

Attendees may use the form to preregister for the OSHA meeting, the 

PHMSA meeting, or both meetings. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES