Fed. Reg. Notices — Notice of an open ACA meeting

BILLING CODE 4410-09-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-56,168] AG Communication Systems, a Division of Lucent Technologies, Genoa, IL; Including Employees of AG Communication Systems, a Division of Lucent Technologies, Genoa, IL Working in the States of: TA-W-56,168A Florida, TA-W-56,168B Wisconson, TA-W-56,168C California, TA-W-56,168D Texas; 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) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on January 4, 2005, applicable to workers of AG Communication Systems, a division of Lucent Technologies, Genoa, Illinois.

The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on February 7, 2005 (70 FR 6460). At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. New information shows that worker separations have occurred involving employees of AG Communication Systems, a division of Lucent Technologies, Genoa, Illinois working in Florida, Wisconsin, California and Texas. These employees provide support function services for the production of telecommunications equipment produced at the Genoa, Illinois location of the subject firm.

Based on these findings, the Department is amending this certification to include employees of AG Communication Systems, a division of Lucent Technologies, Genoa, Illinois working in Florida, Wisconsin, California and Texas. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of AG Communication Systems, a division of Lucent Technologies who were adversely affected by a shift in production to Malaysia. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-56,168 is hereby issued as follows:

All workers of AG Communication Systems, a division of Lucent Technologies, Genoa, Illinois (TA-W-56,168), including employees of AG Communication Systems, a division of Lucent Technologies, Genoa, Illinois, working in Florida (TA-W-56,168A), Wisconsin (TA-W-56,168B), California (TA-W-56,168C) and Texas (TA-W-56,168D), who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after December 3, 2003, through January 4, 2007, 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 1st day of April 2005. Richard Church, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1937 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-56,838] Alden Manufacturing, Co. Chicago, IL; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on October 14, 2003 in response to a petition filed on by a company official on behalf of workers of Alden Manufacturing, Co., Chicago, Illinois.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 30th day of March 2005. Richard Church, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1936 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ADMINISTRATION [TA-W 56,756 and TA-W 56,756A] Ansonia Copper and Brass, Anosonia, CT, Ansonia Copper and Brass, Waterbury, CT; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on March 14, 2005 in response to a petition filed by a state agency representative on behalf of workers at Ansonia Copper and Brass, Ansonia, Connecticut, and Ansonia Copper and Brass, Waterbury, Connecticut.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 6th day of April 2005. Richard Church, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1934 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-56,083] Apex Pattern Company, Los Angeles, CA; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application of February 14, 2005 a petitioner requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative determination regarding eligibility for workers and former workers of the subject firm to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance

(TAA)and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA). The denial notice was signed on February 1, 2005 and published in the **Federal Register** on March 9, 2005 (70 FR 11703). Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) reconsideration may be granted under the following circumstances:

(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 mis-interpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of the decision. The TAA petition, filed on behalf of workers at Apex Pattern Company, Los Angeles, California engaged in production of wheel molds was denied because the “contributed importantly” group eligibility requirement of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974 was not met. The “contributed importantly” test is generally demonstrated through a survey of the workers' firm's customers. The survey revealed no increase in imports of wheel molds during the relevant period. The subject firm did not import wheel molds in the relevant period nor did it shift production to a foreign country. The petitioner alleges that the subject firm lost its business due to its major customers importing products and shifting their production abroad. In order to establish import impact, the Department must consider imports that are like or directly competitive with those produced at the subject firm. The Department conducted a survey of the subject firm's major declining customer regarding their purchases of wheel molds. The survey revealed that the declining customers did not increase their imports of wheel molds during the relevant period. The petitioner further alleges that the major customer of the subject firm has shifted its production of wheels to Mexico and that workers of this firm were certified eligible for TAA. The fact that subject firm's customer shifted its production abroad and were certified eligible for TAA is relevant to this investigation if determining whether workers of the subject firm are eligible for trade adjustment assistance

(TAA)based on the secondary upstream supplier impact. For certification on the basis of the workers' firm being a secondary upstream supplier, the subject firm must produce a component part of the article that was the basis for the customers' certification. In this case, however, the subject firm does not act as an upstream supplier, because wheel molds do not form a component part of the aluminum automotive wheels. Thus the subject firm workers are not eligible under secondary impact. 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 at Washington, DC this 31st day of March, 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1938 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-56,536, TA-W-56,536A, and TA-W-56,536B] Butler Manufacturing Company, Subsidiary of Bluescope Steel, LTD, Buildings Division, Wall and Roof Panels Production, Galesburg, IL; Buildings Division, Trim and Components Production, Galesburg, IL; Buildings Division, Secondaries Production, Galesburg, IL; Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application of April 1, 2005, members of the subject worker group requested administrative reconsideration of the Department of Labor's Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance, applicable to workers of the subject firm. The negative determination was signed on March 2, 2005 and the Notice of determination was published in the **Federal Register** on April 1, 2005 (70 FR 16847). The workers produced parts for pre-engineered metal buildings systems. Workers are separately identifiable by product line. The petition was denied because the subject firm did not shift production abroad and there were no increased imports by the subject company or its customers during the relevant period. The request for reconsideration alleges that the workers are not separately identifiable by product line, that the subject firm will shift of production to India and China in May/June 2005 and import pre-engineered metal buildings from those facilities, that the shift to Mexico will continue, and that the subject firm has increased imports from Mexico, Australia, China and India. The Department has carefully reviewed the petitioner's request for reconsideration and shall further investigate the matter based on new information provided by the petitioners. Conclusion After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted. Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of April 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1928 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-55,607] Creo Americas, Inc., U.S. Headquarters, a Subsidiary of Creo, Inc., Billerica, MA; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand On February 22, 2005, the United States Court of International Trade (USCIT) granted the Department's motion for voluntary remand for further investigation in *Former Employees of Creo Americas, Inc.* v. *U.S. Secretary of Labor* (Court No. 05-0021). The Department's denial of the initial petition for Trade Adjustment Assistance

(TAA)was issued on October 20, 2004. The Notice of determination was published in the **Federal Register** on November 12, 2004 (69 FR 65462). The negative determination was based on the finding that the predominant cause of separations at the subject facility was the consolidation of administrative and support functions to the subject firm's corporate headquarters in Canada. Administrative reconsideration was not requested. By letter dated January 8, 2005, the petitioner filed an appeal with the USCIT, alleging that worker separations were due to the subject firm's shift of production to Canada. In order to carry out the intent of the statute and to safeguard the interests of the petitioners, the Department requested, and was granted, a voluntary remand to further investigate the matter. During the remand investigation, the Department raised additional questions and obtained detailed supplemental responses from the company. In particular, the new information provided by the company officials revealed that the subject firm is an integrated organization which coordinates all activities at the subject facility and that the subject worker group supported domestic subject firm production, including the subject firm's production facility in Lynwood, Washington (TA-W-55,165; certified on July 12, 2004) during 2003 and January through September 2004. The Department also investigated whether Creo Americas, Inc., Creo Seattle Division, A Subsidiary of Creo, Inc., Lynwood, Washington was TAA-certifiable during the relevant period. The investigation revealed that the Lynwood, Washington facility experienced a shift of production to Canada during the relevant period and that the shift of production contributed importantly to the employment declines at the subject facility. Conclusion After careful review of the newly-obtained facts generated during the remand investigation, I determine that a shift of production contributed importantly to the total or partial separation of workers at the subject facility. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following certification: All workers of Creo Americas, Inc., U.S. Headquarters, A Subsidiary of Creo, Inc., Billerica, Massachusetts, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after September 7, 2003, through two years from the issuance of this determination, are eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC this 5th day of April 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1932 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-55,826] Dendrite International Stroudsburg, PA; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration On January 31, 2005, the Department of Labor issued its Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for workers and former workers of the subject firm. The Department's Notice was published in the **Federal Register** on February 22, 2005 (70 FR 8638). The Department's initial determination was issued on the basis that the workers did not produce an article within the meaning of section 222(a)(2) of the Trade Act. In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner alleged that the workers produced an article, licensed pharmaceutical sales software sold in a physical medium, such as CD-ROM. During the reconsideration investigation, the Department contacted several members of the subject worker group and several company officials to determine whether the workers were engaged in activity related to the production of an article. The reconsideration investigation revealed that the workers used to work for another company that produced sales force automation software and began working for the subject company when it was purchased by the subject company in 1999. After the purchase, the subject company continued to sell the sales force automation software to vendors within the pharmaceutical industry and provided related software support and maintenance services to its clients, such as implementing changes in the software configuration to adapt to a client's needs. Sales of the software ceased in 2002 and the subject facility did not replicate any software available to the retail public after 2002. From that time in 2002 until the subject facility closed in 2004, the workers provided software support and maintenance services. The services rendered pursuant to a service contract included providing a “bug-fix” solution burned on a CD to a client in response to a specific problem, sending another copy of the obsolete software per a client's request, and updating software via electronic mail or network messages. The reconsideration also revealed that those activities which were moved to Bangalore, India did not subsequently enter the United States in a physical medium and that the remaining support services were consolidated into the subject company's Bethlehem, Pennsylvania and Bedminster, New Jersey facilities. Furthermore, because the “bug-fix” solution was not mass-produced but custom designed to meet specific, one-time needs of an individual client, it was inherently unique. As such, each “bug-fix” release was a separate creation of a trouble-solving solution. Therefore, even if the Department were to consider the “bug-fix” CD to be a product for purposes of TAA, neither Section 222(a)(2)(B)—increased imports—nor Section 222 (a)(2)(A)—shift of production—of the Trade Act would have been met because each solution could not have been considered “like or directly” competitive with other custom designed solutions. Conclusion After reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of negative determination of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance for workers and former workers of Dendrite International, Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania. Signed at Washington, DC, this 1st day of April 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1940 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-56,566B] Devilbiss Air Power Company, Subsidiary of Black and Decker Compressors/Generators Division, Jackson, TN; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on February 14, 2005 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at DeVilbiss Air Power Company, subsidiary of Black and Decker, Compressors/Generators Division, Jackson, Tennessee. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 30th day of March, 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1929 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-53,722] Fisher Controls, North Stonington, CT, Now Located In Pawcatuck, CT; 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) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on January 8, 2004, applicable to workers of Fisher Controls, North Stonington, Connecticut. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on February 6, 2004 (69 FR 5867). At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged in the production of rotary valves. New information shows that in October 2004, the subject firm located in North Stonington, Connecticut, relocated to Pawcatuck, Connecticut. Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to include workers at the new location of the subject firm in Pawcatuck, Connecticut. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers employed at Fisher Controls, who were adversely affected by increased imports. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-53,722 is hereby issued as follows: All workers of Fisher Controls, North Stonington, Connecticut, now located in Pawcatuck, Connecticut, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after December 2, 2002, through January 8, 2006, 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 5th day of April 2005. Richard Church, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1944 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-56,272] Geotrac, Inc., Norwalk, OH; Dismissal of Application for Reconsideration Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(C) an application for administrative reconsideration was filed with the Director of the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance for workers at Geotrac, Inc., Norwalk, Ohio. The application contained no new substantial information which would bear importantly on the Department's determination. Therefore, dismissal of the application was issued. TA-W-56,272; Geotrac, Inc. Norwalk, Ohio (April 1, 2005) Signed at Washington, DC this 14th day of April 2005. Timothy Sullivan, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1935 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-55,907] GlaxoSmithKline Bristol, TN; Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration On February 23, 2005, the Department issued an Affirmative Determination Regarding Application on Reconsideration applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on March 15, 2005 (70 FR 12737). The previous investigation initiated on November 7, 2004, resulted in a negative determination issued on December 9, 2004, based on the finding that imports of Augmentin and Amoxil did not contribute importantly to worker separations at the subject firm and no shift of production to a foreign source occurred. The denial notice was published in the **Federal Register** on January 24, 2005 (70 FR 3390). In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner provided additional information regarding subject firm's products. In particular, it was revealed that Augmentin and Amoxil, addressed by the company official during the original investigation as products manufactured at GlaxoSmithKline in Bristol, Tennessee, are brand names of penicillin-based antibiotics. It was further revealed that other companies manufacture antibiotics equivalent to Augmentin and Amoxil, but use different generic names for these products. Therefore, surveys of customers conducted during the original investigation did not reveal purchases from any sources other than the subject firm. The Department conducted new customer surveys requesting information on purchases of penicillin-based antibiotics like or directly competitive with Augmentin and Amoxil. The result of this survey showed that the largest declining customer of the subject firm significantly increased its reliance on purchases of penicillin-based antibiotics like or directly competitive with Augmentin and Amoxil from other domestic firms during the relevant time period. However, the customer had no knowledge of the country of origin of these products. Upon further investigation, it was revealed that GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol, Tennessee is the only domestic manufacturer of Augmentin and Amoxil and their generic equivalents in the United States. All other generic brands sold on the domestic market are imports. Consequently, customers increasing their reliance on purchases from other domestic firms, increased their reliance on imports. In accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor herein presents the results of its investigation regarding certification of eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance

(ATAA)for older workers. In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for ATAA, the group eligibility requirements of Section 246 of the Trade Act must be met. The Department has determined in this case that the requirements of Section 246 have been met. A significant number of workers at the firm are age 50 or over and possess skills that are not easily transferable. Competitive conditions within the industry are adverse. Conclusion After careful review of the additional facts obtained on reconsideration, I conclude that increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with those produced at GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol, Tennessee, contributed importantly to the declines in sales or production and to the total or partial separation of workers at the subject firm. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following certification: All workers of GlaxoSmithKline, Bristol, Tennessee, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after October 11, 2003 through two years from the date of this certification, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed in Washington, DC this 8th day of April 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1939 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-56,361; TA-W-56,361A; TA-W-56,361B; and TA-W-56,361C] Hedstrom Corporation, Arlington Heights, IL, Including Employees of Hedstrom Corporation Arlington Heights, IL Working In The States of: Nevada, Texas, Florida; 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) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on February 8, 2005, applicable to workers of Hedstrom Corporation, Arlington Heights, Illinois. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on March 9, 2005 (70 FR 11704). At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. New information shows that worker separations have occurred involving employees of Hedstrom Corporation, Arlington Heights, Illinois working in Nevada, Texas and Florida. These employees provide support function services for the production of children's leisure products such as swing sets, trampolines and sleeping bags produced at the Arlington Heights, Illinois location of the subject firm. Based on these findings, the Department is amending this certification to include employees of Hedstrom Corporation, Arlington Heights, Illinois working in Nevada, Texas and Florida. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of Hedstrom Corporation who were adversely affected by increased company imports. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-56,361 is hereby issued as follows: All workers of Hedstrom Corporation, Arlington Heights, Illinois (TA-W-56,361), including employees of Hedstrom Corporation, Arlington Heights, Illinois, working in Nevada (TA-W-56,361A), Texas (TA-W-56,361B), and Florida (TA-W-56,361C), who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after January 12, 2004, through February 8, 2007, 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 in Washington, DC this 1st day of April 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1927 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-56,751] Hitachi Global Storage Technologies, Inc., San Jose, CA; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on March 11, 2005 in response to a worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Hitachi Global Storage Technologies, Inc., San Jose, California. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 30th day of March 2005. Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1933 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-56,586] Lawson-Hemphill Sales, Inc., Spartanburg, SC; Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application of April 2, 2005, a petitioner requested administrative reconsideration of the Department of Labor's Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance, applicable to workers of the subject firm. The determination was signed on March 3, 2005 and the Department's Notice of determination was published in the **Federal Register** on April 1, 2005 (70 FR 16847). Workers were engaged in the distribution of textile testing instruments. A company official filed the petition on January 24, 2005 as a secondarily-affected company. The petition was denied on the basis that the subject firm neither separated nor threatened to separate a significant number or proportion of workers at the subject facility during the relevant period. In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner alleged, and provided documentation that supports the allegation, that the subject facility is affiliated with Lawson-Hemphill, Inc., Central Falls, Rhode Island, and infers that worker separations at the subject facility are related to sales and/or production declines at Lawson-Hemphill, Inc., Central Falls, Rhode Island. During the initial investigation, the Department determined that the subject facility was unaffiliated with Lawson-Hemphill, Inc., Central Falls, Rhode Island, and thus did not inquire into whether sales and/or production declined at that facility. The Department carefully reviewed the petitioner's request for reconsideration and has determined that the Department will conduct further investigation based on new information provided by the petitioner. Conclusion After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted. Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of April 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1930 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-55,748] Liz Claiborne, Inc., North Bergen, NJ; Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration On March 1, 2005, the Department issued an Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The Notice of determination was published in the **Federal Register** on March 15, 2005 (70 FR 12737). A corrected copy of the determination (dated March 11, 2005) was published in the **Federal Register** on March 22, 2005 (70 FR 14484). The Department initially denied Trade Adjustment Assistance

(TAA)to workers of Liz Claiborne, Inc., North Bergen, New Jersey because the subject company did not import garment prototypes or samples and did not shift production of these articles abroad. In the request for reconsideration, the petitioners alleged that the subject firm shifted sample production abroad. In order to make an affirmative determination and issue a certification of eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance, the group eligibility requirements in either paragraph (a)(2)(A) or (a)(2)(B) of Section 222 of the Trade Act must be met. It is determined in this case that the requirements of (a)(2)(B) of Section 222 have been met. During the reconsideration investigation, the Department requested additional information and clarification from the subject company and the petitioners. The reconsideration investigation revealed that the company official misunderstood what constituted a shift of production. Based on newly obtained information, the Department determined that during the relevant period, subject company domestic garment sample production levels and employment levels declined and that the subject company shifted garment sample production abroad and increased its reliance on imports of garment samples. In accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department herein presents the results of its investigation regarding certification of eligibility to apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

(ATAA)for older workers. In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for ATAA, the group eligibility requirements of Section 246 of the Trade Act must be met. The Department has determined in this case that the requirements of Section 246 have been met. According to the company official, a significant number of workers at the firm are age fifty or over and workers of the subject facility possess skills that are not easily transferable. Competitive conditions within the garment industry are adverse. Conclusion After careful review of the newly obtained facts obtained in the reconsideration investigation, I determine that there was a shift of garment sample production abroad followed by actual or likely increased imports of articles that are like or directly competitive with those produced by the subject firm or subdivision. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following certification: All workers of Liz Claiborne, Inc., North Bergen, New Jersey, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after October 5, 2003 through two years from the date of certification 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 in Washington, DC this 25th day of March 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1941 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-56,625] Longwear Hosiery Mill, Inc., Hildebran, NC; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on February 23, 2005 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Longwear Hosiery Mill, Inc., Hildebran, North Carolina. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC, this 30th day of March, 2005. Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1931 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-54,408] Morganite, Inc., Commutator Division, Now Known as Energy Conversion Systems Holdings LLC, Commutator Division, Dunn, NC; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor issued Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on April 23, 2004, applicable to workers of Morganite, Inc., Commutator Division, Dunn, North Carolina. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on June 2, 2004 (69 FR 31136). At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged in the production of commutators for fractional horsepower motors in consumer applications. New information shows that Morganite, Inc, Commutator Division became known as Energy Conversion Systems Holdings, LLC, Commutator Division, after the subject firms' assets and operations were sold to Energy Conversion Systems Holdings, LLC in June 2004. Workers separated from employment as the subject firm had their wages reported under a separated unemployment insurance

(UI)tax account for Energy Conversion Systems Holdings, LLC, Commutator Division. Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to properly reflect this matter. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of Morganite, Inc., Commutator Division, now known as Energy Conversion Systems Holdings LLC, Commutator Division, who were adversely affected by increased imports. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-54,408 is hereby issued as follows: All workers of Morganite, Inc., Commutator Division, now known as Energy Conversion Systems Holdings LLC, Commutator Division, Dunn, North Carolina, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after February 16, 2003, through April 23, 2006, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC this 8th day of April 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1943 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-56,322] Roseburg Forest Products Particleboard Plant, a Subsidiary of RLC Industries, Roseburg, OR; Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By letter dated March 29, 2005, the Western Council of Industrial Workers, Local 2949, requested administrative reconsideration of the Department of Labor's Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance, applicable to workers of the subject firm. The determination was signed on February 4, 2005 and the Department's Notice of determination was published in the **Federal Register** on March 9, 2005 (70 FR 11703). The workers of the subject company produce particleboard. The negative determination was based on the findings that subject company sales and production increased during the investigatory period, that the subject company did not have any imports of like or directly competitive products, and that the subject company did not shift particleboard production abroad. In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner alleges that particleboard production decreased during the relevant period. The Department has carefully reviewed the request for reconsideration and has determined that the Department will conduct further investigation based on new information provided by the petitioner. Conclusion After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted. Signed at Washington, DC, this 6th day of April 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1926 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-56,274] Shane-Hunter, Inc., San Francisco, CA; Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration On March 15, 2005, the Department issued an Affirmative Determination Regarding Application on Reconsideration applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The Notice of determination will soon be published in the **Federal Register** . The Department initially denied Trade Adjustment Assistance

(TAA)to workers of Shane-Hunter, Inc., San Francisco, California because the subject company's sales and production increased during the relevant period and the subject company did not shift production abroad. Workers were engaged in employment related to the production of women's and children's garments and were not separately identifiable by product line. In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner alleged that the subject company shifted garment production abroad and is increasing reliance upon imports. In order to make an affirmative determination and issue a certification of eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance, the group eligibility requirements in either paragraph (a)(2)(A) or (a)(2)(B) of Section 222 of the Trade Act must be met. It is determined in this case that the requirements of (a)(2)(A) of Section 222 have been met. During the reconsideration investigation, the Department requested additional information and clarification from the subject company. The investigation revealed that during the relevant period, the subject company's domestic production levels and employment levels declined and that the subject company increased its reliance on imports of articles like or directly competitive with those produced at the subject company. In accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department herein presents the results of its investigation regarding certification of eligibility to apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

(ATAA)for older workers. In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for ATAA, the group eligibility requirements of Section 246 of the Trade Act must be met. The Department has determined in this case that the requirements of Section 246 have been met. A significant number of workers at the firm are age 50 or over and possess skills that are not easily transferable. Competitive conditions within the garment industry are adverse. Conclusion After careful review of the facts obtained in the reconsideration investigation, I determine that increases of imports of articles like or directly competitive with those produced at the subject firm contributed importantly to the decline in sales or production and to the total or partial separation of workers of that firm. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following certification: All workers of Shane-Hunter, Inc., San Francisco, California, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after December 15, 2003 through two years from the date of certification 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 in Washington, DC this 25th day of March 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1925 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-54,048A and TA-W-54,048D] Westpoint Stevens, Lanier Facility, Bed Products Division, Valley, AL, and Westpoint Stevens, Sheeting Division Office, Opelika, AL; 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) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on February 19, 2004, applicable to workers of WestPoint Stevens, Lanier Facility, Bed Products Division, Valley, Alabama. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on March 12, 2004 (69 FR 11889). At the request of the company official, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers of the firm's Bed Products Division produced sheeting materials. New information submitted by the company demonstrates that workers in the WestPoint Stevens, Sheeting Division Office, Opelika, Alabama, provided administrative support for the firm's production of sheeting at the Lanier Plant in Valley, Alabama which has ceased production. When filing the petition, the company official inadvertently failed to include workers in the Sheeting Division Office, Opelika, Alabama, in support of the Lanier Plant production. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of the firm who were adversely affected by increased imports. Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to include workers of the Sheeting Division Office of the subject firm in Opelika, Alabama. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-54,048A is hereby issued as follows: All workers of WestPoint Stevens, Lanier Facility, Bed Products Division, Valley, Alabama (TA-W-54,048A), and WestPoint Stevens, Sheeting Division Office, Opelika, Alabama, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after January 15, 2003, through February 19, 2006, 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 6th day of April 2005. Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5-1942 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Public Meeting of the Advisory Committee on Apprenticeship

(ACA)AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration, Labor. ACTION: Notice of an open ACA meeting. SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 10 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463; 5 U.S.C. APP. 1), notice is hereby given of an open meeting of the Advisory Committee on Apprenticeship (ACA). *Time and Date:* The meeting will begin at approximately 8:30 a.m. on Monday, May 16th, and continue until approximately 5 p.m. The meeting will reconvene at approximately 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday, May 17th, and continue until approximately 4 p.m. The final meeting day will begin at approximately 8:30 a.m. on Wednesday, May 18th, and adjourn at 12 noon. *Place:* Hilton Crystal City, 2399 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202,

(703)418-6800. The agenda is subject to change due to time constraints and priority items which may come before the Committee between the time of this publication and the scheduled date of the ACA meeting. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Anthony Swoope, Administrator, Office of Apprenticeship Training, Employer and Labor Services, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-5311, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone

(202)693-2796 (this is not a toll-free number). *Matters To Be Considered:* The agenda will focus on the following topics: • Committee Orientation; • Advisory Committee Procedures and Ethics; • Demand Driven Workforce Solutions; and • 21st Century Apprenticeship *Status:* Members of the public are invited to attend the proceedings. Individuals with disabilities should contact Marion Winters at

(202)693-3786 no later than May 10, 2005, if special accommodations are needed. Any member of the public who wishes to file written data or comments pertaining to the agenda may do so by sending them to Mr. Anthony Swoope, Administrator, Office of Apprenticeship Training, Employer and Labor Services, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-5311, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Such submissions should be sent by May 10, 2005, to be included in the record for the meeting. Any member of the public who wishes to speak at the meeting should indicate the nature of the intended presentation and the amount of time needed by furnishing a written statement to the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Anthony Swoope, by May 9, 2005. The Chairperson will announce at the beginning of the meeting the extent to which time will permit the granting of such requests. Signed at Washington, DC, this 18th day of April, 2005. Emily Stover DeRocco, Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training. [FR Doc. E5-1950 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Assistant Secretary for Veterans Employment and Training Service President's National Hire Veterans Committee; Notice of Open Meeting The President's National Hire Veterans Committee was established under 38 U.S.C. 4100 note Public Law 107-288, Jobs for Veterans Act, to furnish information to employers with respect to the training and skills of veterans and disabled veterans, and the advantages afforded employers by hiring veterans with such training and skills and to facilitate employment of veterans and disabled veterans through participation in Career One Stop national labor exchange, and other means. The President's National Hire Veterans Committee will meet on Thursday, May 5, 2005, beginning at 8:30 a.m. at the Omni Hotel Conference Center, Austin, Texas. The committee will discuss raising employers awareness of the advantages of hiring veterans. Signed at Washington, DC, this 18th of April, 2005. Frederico Juarbe, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Veterans' Employment and Training. [FR Doc. 05-8195 Filed 4-22-05; 8:45 am]

Notices. Notice of an open ACA meeting