Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2007-11-21 · National Park Service, Interior · Notices

Notices. Notice of Intent to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Special Resource Study for Castle Nugent Farms, St

17,859 words·~81 min read·/register/2007/11/21/07-5796

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 4311-AM-M DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Notice of Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS)on the Special Resource Study for Castle Nugent Farms, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS)on the Special Resource Study for Castle Nugent Farms, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and National Park Service
(NPS)policy in Director's Order 2 (Park Planning) and Director's Order 12 (Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision-making), the NPS will prepare an EIS for the Special Resource Study
(SRS)for Castle Nugent Farms. The NPS will conduct local public meetings to receive input from interested parties on issues, concerns and suggestions believed to be relevant to the future of Castle Nugent Farms and its potential inclusion as a unit of the National Park System. Of particular interest to the NPS are suggestions and ideas for managing cultural and natural resources, interpretation, and the visitor experience at Castle Nugent Farms. The Draft EIS will formulate and evaluate environmental impacts associated with various types and levels of visitor use and resources management at the site. DATES: The dates and times of the public scoping meetings will be published in local newspapers and on the internet at *http://parkplanning.nps.gov.* These dates and times may also be obtained by contacting the NPS Southeast Regional Office, Division of Planning and Compliance. Scoping suggestions will be accepted throughout the planning process. The NPS anticipates that the Draft EIS will be available for public review by January 2009. ADDRESSES: The locations of the public scoping meetings will be published in local newspapers and on the internet at *http://parkplanning.nps.gov.* Suggestions and ideas should be submitted in writing to the following address: John Barrett, Planning Team Leader, Castle Nugent Farms Special Resource Study, NPS Southeast Regional Office, Division of Planning and Compliance, 100 Alabama Street, SW., 6th Floor, 1924 Building, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Barrett, Planning Team Leader, Castle Nugent Farms Special Resource Study, 404-562-3124, extension 637. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Castle Nugent Farms consists of approximately 1,400 acres on the southeastern shore of St. Croix. The rolling terrain consists of a mixture of dry forest, native vegetation, and rangeland that slopes down from an elevation of 750 feet to the sea. The property has a long and diverse history of farming dating back to the 1730s when it was first established as a cotton and sugar plantation. In the 19th century, N'Dama cattle breeding was brought to Castle Nugent Farms. This breed was a prominent part of the farm's operations until the 1950s, when attention shifted towards raising an N'Dama cross breed of cattle known as Senepol. Today, Senepol cattle are still bred under an agreement between the property's owners and the University of the Virgin Islands. Issues currently being considered for the SRS/EIS include a determination of Castle Nugent Farm's national significance and an assessment of the site's suitability and feasibility as a potential addition to the National Park System. The Draft EIS will identify cultural and natural resources of Castle Nugent Farms and evaluate a range of potential management options that might adequately protect these resources and provide for public use and enjoyment. Our practice is to make comments, including names, home addresses, home phone numbers, and e-mail addresses of respondents, available for public review. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will always make submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. Authority: The authority for publishing this notice is contained in 40 CFR 1506.6. The responsible official for this EIS is Art Frederick, Acting Regional Director, Southeast Region, National Park Service, 100 Alabama Street, SW., 1924 Building, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. Dated: September 19, 2007. Art Frederick, Acting Regional Director, Southeast Region. [FR Doc. E7-22723 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-53-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service List of Programs Eligible for Inclusion in Fiscal Year 2008 Funding Agreements To Be Negotiated With Self-Governance Tribes AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice lists programs or portions of programs that are eligible for inclusion in Fiscal Year 2008 funding agreements with self-governance tribes and lists programmatic targets pursuant to section 405(c)(4) of the Tribal Self-Governance Act. DATES: This notice expires on September 30, 2008. ADDRESSES: Inquiries or comments regarding this notice may be directed to the American Indian Liaison Office, 1201 Eye Street, NW. (Org. 2560, 9th Floor), Washington, DC 20005. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Title II of the Indian Self-Determination Act Amendments of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-413, the “Tribal Self-Governance Act” or the “Act”) instituted a permanent self-governance program at the Department of the Interior (DOI). Under the self-governance program certain programs, services, functions, and activities, or portions thereof, in DOI bureaus other than the Bureau of Indian Affairs
(BIA)are eligible to be planned, conducted, consolidated, and administered by a self-governance tribal government. Under section 405(c) of the Act, the Secretary of the Interior is required to publish annually:
(1)A list of non-BIA programs, services, functions, and activities, or portions thereof, that are eligible for inclusion in agreements negotiated under the self-governance program; and
(2)programmatic targets for these bureaus. Under the Act, two categories of non-BIA programs are eligible for self-governance funding agreements (AFAs):
(1)Under section 403(b)(2) of the Act, any non-BIA program, service, function or activity that is administered by DOI that is “otherwise available to Indian tribes or Indians,” can be administered by a tribal government through a self-governance funding agreement. The Department interprets this provision to authorize the inclusion of programs eligible for self-determination contracts under Title I of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (Pub. L. 93-638, as amended). Section 403(b)(2) also specifies “nothing in this subsection may be construed to provide any tribe with a preference with respect to the opportunity of the tribe to administer programs, services, functions and activities, or portions thereof, unless such preference is otherwise provided by law.”
(2)Under section 403(c) of the Act, the Secretary may include other programs, services, functions, and activities or portions thereof that are of “special geographic, historical, or cultural significance” to a self-governance tribe. Under section 403(k) of the Act, funding agreements cannot include programs, services, functions, or activities that are inherently Federal or where the statute establishing the existing program does not authorize the type of participation sought by the tribe. However, a tribe (or tribes) need not be identified in the authorizing statutes in order for a program or element to be included in a self-governance funding agreement. While general legal and policy guidance regarding what constitutes an inherently Federal function exists, we will determine whether a specific function is inherently Federal on a case-by-case basis considering the totality of circumstances. II. Eligible non-BIA Programs of the National Park Service Below is a listing of the types of non-BIA programs, or portions thereof, that may be eligible for self-governance funding agreements because they are either “otherwise available to Indians” under Title I and not precluded by any other law, or may have “special geographic, historical, or cultural significance” to a participating tribe. The list represents the most current information on programs potentially available to tribes under a self-governance funding agreement. The National Park Service will also consider for inclusion in funding agreements other programs or activities not included below, but which, upon request of a self-governance tribe, the National Park Service determines to be eligible under either sections 403(b)(2) or 403(c) of the Act. Tribes with an interest in such potential agreements are encouraged to begin such discussions. The National Park Service welcomes comments from self-governance regarding the content and format of this list. The National Park Service administers the National Park System, which is made up of national parks, monuments, historic sites, battlefields, seashores, lake shores, and recreation areas. The National Park Service maintains the park units, protects the natural and cultural resources, and conducts a range of visitor services such as law enforcement, park maintenance, and interpretation of geology, history, and natural and cultural resources. Some elements of the following programs may be eligible for inclusion in a self-governance funding agreement. This listing below was developed considering the proximity of an identified self-governance tribe to a national park, monument, preserve, or recreation area and the types of programs that have components that may be suitable for contracting through a self-governance agreement. This listing is not all-inclusive, but is representative of the types of programs which may be eligible for tribal participation through a funding agreement. a. Archaeological Surveys b. Comprehensive Management Planning c. Cultural Resource Management Projects d. Ethnographic Studies e. Erosion Control f. Fire Protection g. Gathering Baseline Subsistence Data, Alaska h. Hazardous Fuel Reduction i. Housing Construction and Rehabilitation j. Interpretation k. Janitorial Services l. Maintenance m. Natural Resource Management Projects n. Operation of Campgrounds o. Range Assessment, Alaska p. Reindeer Grazing, Alaska q. Road Repair r. Solid Waste Collection and Disposal s. Trail Rehabilitation t. Watershed Restoration and Maintenance u. Beringia Research v. Elwha River Restoration Locations of National Park Service Units With Close Proximity to Self-Governance Tribes 1. Bering Land Bridge National Park, Alaska. 2. Cape Krusenstern National Monument, Alaska. 3. Gates of the Arctic National Park & Preserve, Alaska. 4. Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve, Alaska. 5. Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska. 6. Kenai Fjords National Park, Alaska. 7. Klondike Gold Rush National Historical Park, Alaska. 8. Kobuk Valley National Park, Alaska. 9. Lake Clark National Park and Preserve, Alaska. 10. Noatak National Preserve, Alaska. 11. Sitka National Historical Park, Alaska. 12. Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve, Alaska. 13. Yukon-Charley Rivers National Preserve, Alaska. 14. Casa Grande Ruins National Monument, Arizona. 15. Hohokam Pima National Monument, Arizona. 16. Montezuma Castle National Monument, Arizona. 17. Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument, Arizona. 18. Saguaro National Park, Arizona. 19. onto National Monument, Arizona. 20. Tumacacori National Historical Park, Arizona. 21. Tuzigoot National Monument, Arizona. 22. Arkansas Post National Memorial, Arkansas. 23. Joshua Tree National Park, California. 24. Lassen Volcanic National Park, California. 25. Redwood National Park, California. 26. Whiskeytown National Recreation Area, California. 27. Hagerman Fossil Beds National Monument, Idaho. 28. Effigy Mounds National Monument, Iowa. 29. Fort Scott National Historic Site, Kansas. 30. Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve, Kansas. 31. Boston Harbor Islands, a National Park Area, Massachusetts. 32. Cape Cod National Seashore, Massachusetts. 33. New Bedford Whaling National Historical Park, Massachusetts. 34. Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore, Michigan. 35. Grand Portage National Monument, Minnesota. 36. Voyageurs National Park, Minnesota. 37. Bear Paw Battlefield, Nez Perce National Historical Park, Montana. 38. Glacier National Park, Montana. 39. Great Basin National Park, Nevada. 40. Aztec Ruins National Monument, New Mexico. 41. Bandelier National Monument, New Mexico. 42. Carlsbad Caverns National Park, New Mexico. 43. Chaco Culture National Historical Park, New Mexico. 44. White Sands National Monument, New Mexico. 45. Fort Stanwix National Monument, New York. 46. Cuyahoga Valley National Park, Ohio. 47. Hopewell Culture National Historical Park, Ohio. 48. Chickasaw National Recreation Area, Oklahoma. 49. John Day Fossil Beds National Monument, Oregon. 50. Alibates Flint Quarries National Monument, Texas. 51. Guadalupe Mountains National Park, Texas. 52. Lake Meredith National Recreation Area, Texas. 53. Ebey's Landing National Recreation Area, Texas. 54. Mt. Rainier National Park, Washington. 55. Olympic National Park, Washington. 56. San Juan Islands National Historical Park, Washington. 57. Whitman Mission National Historic Site, Washington. For questions regarding self-governance contact Dr. Patricia Parker, Chief, American Indian Liaison Office, National Park Service, 1201 Eye Street, NW., (Org. 2560, 9th Floor), Washington, DC 20005, telephone 202-354-6965, fax 202-371-6609. III. Programmatic Targets During Fiscal Year 2008, upon request of a self-governance tribe, the National Park Service will negotiate funding agreements for its eligible programs beyond those already negotiated. The National Park Service currently has self-governance annual funding agreements with the Yurok Tribe and Redwood National Park, the Grand Portage Band of Chippewa Indians and Grand Portage National Monument, and the Lower Elwha Tribal Community and Olympic National Park. Dated: October 31, 2007. David Verhey, Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. [FR Doc. E7-22733 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312-52-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 332-491] China: Government Policies Affecting U.S. Trade in Selected Sectors AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice of addition of case studies on the semi-fabricated copper and brass products sector and paper sector in China; request for information and views from interested parties. SUMMARY: In its notice announcing institution of this investigation, the Commission indicated that its report would include case studies on industry sectors in China in which government policies and interventions are prevalent, and the notice identified seven industry sectors that would be the subject of such case studies. After receiving and considering public comment and input from other government agencies regarding possible additional case studies, the Commission has decided to include case studies on two additional industry sectors in China, the semi-fabricated copper and brass products sector, and the paper sector. DATES: February 1, 2008: Deadline for filing written submissions. July 29, 2008: Transmittal of Commission report to the Committee on Ways and Means. ADDRESSES: All Commission offices, including the Commission's hearing rooms, are located in the United States International Trade Commission Building, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC. All written submissions should be addressed to the Secretary, United States International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket
(EDIS)at *http://www.usitc.gov/secretary/edis.htm.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Project leaders Joanne Guth (202-205-3264 or *joanne.guth@usitc.gov* ) or Deborah McNay (202-205-3425 or *deborah.mcnay@usitc.gov* ) for information on the investigation. For information on the legal aspects of the investigation, contact William Gearhart of the Commission's Office of the General Counsel (202-205-3091 or *william.gearhart@usitc.gov* ). The media should contact Margaret O'Laughlin, Office of External Relations (202-205-1819 or *margaret.olaughlin@usitc.gov* ). Hearing-impaired individuals may obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal at 202-205-1810. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. Background The investigation is being conducted at the request of the Committee on Ways and Means of the U.S. House of Representatives. In its letter of May 23, 2007, the Committee requested that the Commission's report include, among other things, case studies on sectors in China where government policies and interventions are prevalent, and identified seven such sectors: The semiconductor, telecom, banking, textiles and apparel, steel, automotive parts, and aircraft sectors. The Committee also directed that the Commission seek public comment and input from other government agencies on other sectors that should be included as case studies. Notice of institution and the scheduling of a public hearing (which was held on October 30, 2007) was published in the **Federal Register** of July 31, 2007 (72 FR 41773). Written Submissions All written submissions should be addressed to the Secretary, and should be received not later than 5:15 p.m., February 1, 2008. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission's *Rules of Practice and Procedure* (19 CFR 201.8). Section 201.8 requires that a signed original (or a copy so designated) and fourteen
(14)copies of each document be filed. In the event that confidential treatment of a document is requested, at least four
(4)additional copies must be filed, in which the confidential information must be deleted (see the following paragraph for further information regarding confidential business information). The Commission's rules authorize filing submissions with the Secretary by facsimile or electronic means only to the extent permitted by section 201.8 of the rules (see Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, *http://www.usitc.gov/secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/documents/handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf* ). Persons with questions regarding electronic filing should contact the Secretary (202-205-2000). Any submissions that contain confidential business information must also conform with the requirements of section 201.6 of the *Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure* (19 CFR 201.6). Section 201.6 of the rules requires that the cover of the document and the individual pages be clearly marked as to whether they are the “confidential” or “non-confidential” version, and that the confidential business information be clearly identified by means of brackets. All written submissions, except for confidential business information, will be made available for inspection by interested parties. In its request letter, the Committee stated that it intends to make the Commission's report available to the public in its entirety, and asked that the Commission not include any confidential business information or national security classified information in the report it sends to the Committee. Any confidential business information received by the Commission in this investigation and used in preparing this report will not be published in a manner that would reveal the operations of the firm supplying the information. Issued: November 15, 2007. By order of the Commission. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E7-22667 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Office on Violence Against Women; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Office on Violence Against Women, United States Department of Justice. ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the schedule and proposed agenda of the forthcoming public meeting of the National Advisory Committee on Violence Against Women (hereinafter “the Committee”). DATES: The meeting will take place on December 3, 2007, from 1 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. and on December 4, 2007, from 9 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place at the United States Department of Justice, Great Hall, 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20530. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Claire Brickman, The United States Department of Justice Office on Violence Against Women, 800 K Street, NW., Ste. 920, Washington, DC 20530; by telephone at:
(202)514-6975; e-mail: *claire.brickman@usdoj.gov;* or fax:
(202)307-3911. You may also view the Committee's Web site at: *http://www.usdoj.gov/ovw/nac/welcome.html.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is required under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The Committee is chartered by the Attorney General, and co-chaired by the Attorney General and the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary), to provide the Attorney General and the Secretary with practical and general policy advice concerning implementation of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, the Violence Against Women Act of 2000, the Violence Against Women Act of 2005 and related laws. The Committee also assists in the efforts of the Department of Justice and the Department of Health and Human Services to combat violence against women, especially domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. Because violence against women is increasingly recognized as a public health problem of staggering human cost, the Committee brings national attention to the problem to increase public awareness of the need for prevention and enhanced victim services. This meeting will primarily focus on the Committee's work and the completion of their two-year term of membership. The meeting will take place on December 3, 2007, from 1:30 p.m. until 5:30 p.m., and on December 4, 2007, from 9:00 am until 12:45 p.m., and will include breaks and a working lunch. However, there will be an opportunity for public comment on the Committee's role in providing general policy guidance on implementation of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, the Violence Against Women Act of 2000, the Violence Against Women Act of 2005 and related laws. Time will be reserved for public comment on December 4, 2007, from 9 a.m. until 9:30 a.m. See the section below for information on reserving time for public comment. *Access:* This meeting will be open to the public but registration on a space-available basis is required. Persons who wish to attend must register at least six
(6)days in advance of the meeting by contacting Claire Brickman by e-mail at: *claire.brickman@usdoj.gov;* or fax:
(202)307-3911. All attendees will be required to sign in at the meeting registration desk. Please bring photo identification and allow extra time prior to the meeting. The meeting site is accessible to individuals with disabilities. Individuals who require special accommodations in order to attend the meeting should notify Claire Brickman by e-mail at: *claire.brickman@usdoj.gov;* or fax at:
(202)307-3911, no later than November 26, 2007. After this date, we will attempt to satisfy accommodation requests, but cannot guarantee the availability of any requests. *Written Comments:* Interested parties are invited to submit written comments by November 26, 2007 to Claire Brickman at The United States Department of Justice Office on Violence Against Women, 800 K Street, NW., Ste. 920, Washington, DC 20530. Comments may also be submitted by e-mail to Claire Brickman at *claire.brickman@usdoj.gov;* or fax at
(202)307-3911. *Public Comment:* Persons interested in participating during the public comment period of the meeting, which will discuss the implementation of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 and the Violence Against Women Act of 2000, the Violence Against Women Act of 2005 and related legislation, are requested to reserve time on the agenda by contacting Claire Brickman by e-mail at *claire.brickman@usdoj.gov;* or fax at
(202)307-3911. Requests must include the participant's name, organization represented, if appropriate, and a brief description of the issue. Each participant will be permitted approximately 3 to 5 minutes to present comments, depending on the number of individuals reserving time on the agenda. Participants are also encouraged to submit two written copies of their comments at the meeting. Given the expected number of individuals interested in presenting comments at the meeting, reservations should be made as soon as possible. Persons unable to obtain reservations to speak during the meetings are encouraged to submit written comments, which will be accepted at the meeting site or may be mailed to the Committee, attention Claire Brickman, at 800 K Street, NW., Ste. 920, Washington, DC 20530. Mary Beth Buchanan, Acting Director, Office on Violence Against Women. [FR Doc. E7-22721 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FX-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comments Requested ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review; Drug Questionnaire—DEA Form 341. The Department of Justice (DOJ), Drug Enforcement Administration
(DEA)will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** Volume 72, Number 164, page 48682 on August 24, 2007, allowing for a 60-day comment period. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days for public comment until December 21, 2007. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice, especially the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, *Attention:* Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503. Additionally, comments may be submitted to OMB via facsimile to
(202)395-5806. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points: —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; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and —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. Overview of This Information Collection:
(1)*Type of Information Collection:* Extension of a currently approved collection.
(2)*Title of the Form/Collection:* Drug Questionnaire (DEA Form 341).
(3)Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: *Form number:* DEA Form 341. *Component:* Human Resources Division, Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. Department of Justice.
(4)Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: *Primary:* Individuals. *Other:* none. *Abstract:* DEA Policy states that a past history of illegal drug use may be a disqualification for employment with DEA. This form asks job applicants specific questions about their personal history, if any, of illegal drug use.
(5)An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 31,800 respondents will respond annually, taking 5 minutes to complete each form.
(6)An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: 2,650 annual burden hours. If additional information is required contact: Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Patrick Henry Building, Suite 1600, 601 D Street, NW., Washington, DC 20530. Dated: November 15, 2007. Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, PRA, Department of Justice. [FR Doc. E7-22719 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P EMPLOYEE BENEFITS SECURITY ADMINISTRATION [Application No. D-11337] Proposed Amendment to the Class Exemption for the Release of Claims and Extensions of Credit in Connection With Litigation AGENCY: Employee Benefits Security Administration, Department of Labor. ACTION: Notice of proposed amendment to a class exemption. SUMMARY: This document contains a notice of a proposed amendment to a class exemption from certain prohibited transaction restrictions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA or the Act) and from certain taxes imposed by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code). The proposed amendment to the class exemption, PTE 2003-39 (68 FR 75632, Dec. 31, 2003), would apply to transactions engaged in by a plan in connection with the settlement of litigation, including bankruptcy litigation. This amendment is being proposed in response to requests from practitioners and independent fiduciaries who sought an expansion of the types of consideration that plans could accept in connection with the settlement of litigation. The proposed exemption, if granted, would affect all employee benefit plans, the participants and beneficiaries of such plans, and parties in interest with respect to those plans engaging in the described transactions. DATES: Written comments and requests for a public hearing shall be submitted to the Department before January 22, 2008. DATES: *Effective Date:* If adopted, the proposed amendments would be effective as of date of publication of the final amendments in the **Federal Register** . ADDRESSES: All written comments and requests for a public hearing (preferably 3 copies) should be sent to: U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration, Room N-5700, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210, Attention: Proposed Amendment to Plan Settlement Class Exemption. Commenters are encouraged to submit responses electronically by e-mail to *e-OED@dol.gov,* or by using the Federal eRulemaking portal at *www.regulations.gov.* All responses will be available for public inspection in the Public Disclosure Room, Employee Benefits Security Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-1513, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210, and online at *www.regulations.gov* and *http://www.dol.gov/ebsa.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Buyniski, Office of Exemption Determinations, Employee Benefits Security Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Washington DC 20210
(202)693-8540 (not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document contains a notice that the Department is proposing an amendment to a class exemption from the restrictions of sections 406(a) and 407(a) of the Act and from the sanctions resulting from the application of section 4975 of the Code, by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(A) through
(D)of the Code. The exemption described herein is being proposed by the Department on its own motion pursuant to section 408(a) of the Act and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, and in accordance with the procedures set forth in 29 CFR part 2570 subpart B (55 FR 32836, August 10, 1990). 1 1 Section 102 of Reorganization Plan No. 4 of 1978, 5 U.S.C. app. at 214
(2000)generally transferred the authority of the Secretary of Treasury to issue exemptions under section 4975(c)(2) of the Code to the Secretary of Labor. In the discussion of the exemption, references to specific provisions of the Act should be read to refer as well to the corresponding provisions of section 4975 of the Code. Executive Order 12866 Statement Under Executive Order 12866, the Department must determine whether a regulatory action is “significant” and therefore subject to the requirements of the Executive Order and subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Under section 3(f), the order defines a “significant regulatory action” as an action that is likely to result in a rule
(1)having an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely and materially affecting a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities (also referred to as “economically significant”);
(2)creating serious inconsistency or otherwise interfering with an action taken or planned by another agency;
(3)materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4)raising novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. Pursuant to the terms of the Executive Order, it was determined that this action is not “significant” under Section 3(f)(4) of the Executive Order. Accordingly, this action has not been reviewed by OMB. Paperwork Reduction Act In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) (PRA 95), the Department submitted the information collection request
(ICR)included in the Class Exemption For Release of Claims and Extensions of Credit in Connection with Litigation (the “Class Exemption”) to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and clearance at the time the class exemption was published in the **Federal Register** (68 FR 75632, December 31, 2003) under OMB control number 1210-0091. The ICR was renewed by OMB on May 11, 2006. As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, the Department of Labor conducts a preclearance consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA 95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This helps to ensure that the public understands the Department's collection instructions, respondents can provide the requested data in the desired format, the reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, and the Department can properly assess the impact of collection requirements on respondents. Currently, the Department is soliciting comments concerning the information collection request
(ICR)included in the Proposed Amendment to the Class Exemption for the Release of Claims and Extensions of Credit in Connection with Litigation. A copy of the ICR may be obtained by contacting the person listed in the PRA Addressee section below. The Department has submitted a copy of amendment to OMB in accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) for review of its information collections. The Department and OMB are particularly interested in comments that: Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and 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., by permitting electronic submission of responses. Comments should be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; Attention: Desk Officer for the Employee Benefits Security Administration. Although comments may be submitted through January 22, 2008, OMB requests that comments be received within 30 days of publication of the Proposed Amendment to the Class Exemption for the Release of Claims and Extensions of Credit in Connection with Litigation to ensure their consideration. *PRA Addressee:* Address requests for copies of the ICR to Gerald B. Lindrew, Office of Policy and Research, U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room N-5718, Washington, DC 20210. Telephone:
(202)693-8410; Fax:
(202)219-5333. These are not toll-free numbers. A copy of the ICR also may be obtained at *http://www.RegInfo.gov.* The Class Exemption contains the following information collections: *Written Settlement Agreement.* The terms of the settlement must be specifically described in a written agreement or consent decree. *Acknowledgement by Fiduciary.* The fiduciary acting on behalf of the plan must acknowledge in writing that s/he is a fiduciary with respect to the settlement of the litigation. The proposed amendment would expand the scope of non-cash consideration that may be accepted by an Authorizing Fiduciary on behalf of the plan in connection with the settlement of litigation (subject to additional conditions) to include the following:
(i)Employer securities, including bonds, and stock rights or warrants to acquire employer stock;
(ii)a written promise by the employer to increase future contributions to the plan (as valued by a qualified appraiser); and/or
(iii)a written agreement to adopt future plan amendments or provide additional employee benefits as approved by the Authorizing Fiduciary without an independent appraisal (“benefit enhancements”). The proposed amendment to the class exemption would modify the written settlement agreement information collection by requiring the agreement to specifically describe
(i)the employer securities and written promises of future employer contributions (and the methodology for determining the fair market value of such consideration) that has been tendered as consideration in settlement of litigation and/or
(ii)benefit enhancements as approved by the Authorizing Fiduciary that are provided to the plan as consideration for settlement. Because it is usual and customary business practice to express the terms of a settlement in writing with some degree of detail, no additional hour burden has been accounted for this provision of the proposed amendment. The 2007 proposed amendment also would modify the information collection associated with the Fiduciary Acknowledgment by requiring the Authorizing Fiduciary to acknowledge its fiduciary responsibility for the approval of an attorney's fee award in connection with the settlement in writing. The Department expects the Authorizing Fiduciary to incorporate this acknowledgement into the investment management or trustee agreement outlining the terms and conditions of the fiduciary's retention as a plan service provider, and that this agreement will already be in existence as part of usual and customary business practice. The additional hour burden attributable to the acknowledgement provided in the proposed amendment is negligible; therefore, the Department has not increased the overall hour burden for this provision of the proposed amendment. I. Background Based upon feedback from practitioners and independent fiduciaries working to settle litigation in accordance with PTE 2003-39, the Department proposes to expand the type of consideration that can be accepted by an employee benefit plan in settlement of litigation. While the Department encourages cash settlements, it recognizes that there are situations in which it may be in the interest of participants and beneficiaries to accept consideration other than cash in exchange for releasing the claims of the plan and/or the plan fiduciary. In addition, because ERISA does not permit plans to hold employer-issued stock rights, warrants, or most bonds, without an individual exemption, 2 the transactions covered by the class exemption have been expanded to include acquisition, holding, and disposition of employer securities received in settlement of litigation, including bankruptcy litigation. Other amendments seek to clarify the scope of the duties of the independent fiduciary charged with responsibility for settling litigation. 2 For example, PTE 2004-03, Lodgian 401(k) Plan and Trust Agreement, 69 FR 7506, 7509 (Feb. 14, 2004) (warrants); PTE 2003-33, Liberty Media 401(k) Savings Plan, 68 FR 64657 (Nov. 14, 2003) (stock rights); PTE 2002-02, The Golden Retirement Savings Program and The Golden Security Program, 67 FR 1242, 1243 (Jan. 9, 2002) (warrants). In this regard, the prohibited transaction provisions of the Act generally prohibit transactions between a plan and a party in interest (including a fiduciary) with respect to such plan. Specifically, section 406(a) of the Act states that:
(1)A fiduciary with respect to a plan shall not cause the plan to engage in a transaction, if he knows or should know that such transaction constitutes a direct or indirect—
(A)Sale or exchange, or leasing, of any property between the plan and a party in interest;
(B)Lending of money or other extension of credit between the plan and a party in interest;
(C)Furnishing of goods, services, or facilities between the plan and a party in interest;
(D)Transfer to, or use by or for the benefit of, a party in interest, of any assets of the plan; or
(E)Acquisition, on behalf of the plan, of any employer security or employer real property in violation of section 407(a).
(2)No fiduciary who has authority or discretion to control or manage the assets of a plan shall permit the plan to hold any employer security or employer real property if he knows or should know that holding such security or real property violates section 407(a). II. Description of Existing Relief The class exemption for the release of claims and extensions of credit in connection with litigation provides limited relief. Since conflicted fiduciaries are not permitted to have a role under the exemption in settling the litigation, no relief is provided from the self-dealing provisions of ERISA. The current exemption permits the release of the plan's or the plan fiduciary's claim against a party in interest in exchange for consideration, and related extensions of credit. No relief is provided for any prohibited transactions that are part of the underlying claims in the litigation, or any new prohibited transactions that may be proposed in settlement of litigation. 3 3 Where the Department of Labor
(DOL)and/or the Internal Revenue Service
(IRS)is a party to the litigation, new prohibited transactions may be permitted to resolve litigation pursuant to PTE 79-15, Class Exemption for Certain Transactions Authorized or Required by Judicial Order or Judicially Approved Settlement Decree, 44 FR 26979 (May 8, 1979). DOL may also enter into a voluntary settlement with parties covered by ERISA, in which case any prospective prohibited transactions may be covered by the Class Exemption to Permit Certain Transactions Authorized Pursuant to Settlement Agreements between the Department of Labor and Plans, PTE 94-71, 59 FR 51216 (Oct. 7, 1994). In those situations where the prohibited transaction at issue is “corrected” in compliance with section 4975(f)(5) of the Code, this exemption will not be necessary because correcting a prohibited transaction under section 4975 of the Code does not give rise to a prohibited transaction under Title I of the Act. 4 Additionally, there is no prohibited transaction if the plan receives consideration, 5 but does not have to relinquish its cause of action, or other assets. Finally, if the dispute involves the provision of services or incidental goods by a service provider, the settlement may fall within the statutory exemption under section 408(b)(2) of the Act. 6 4 It should be noted that the Department of the Treasury has authority to issue regulations, rulings and opinions regarding the term “correction” as defined in section 4975 of the Code. Reorg. Plan No. 4 of 1978, 5 U.S.C. App. at 214 (2000). Treas. Reg. section 53.4941(e)-1(c)(1)
(1986)(excise taxes on private foundations) applies to “correction” of prohibited transactions under section 4975(f) of the Code (dealing with pension excise taxes) by reason of Temp. Treas. Reg. section 141.4975-13 (1986). 5 Parties entering into such arrangement should review the IRS rules with respect to restorative payments. Rev. Rul. 2002-45, 2002-2 C.B. 116. 6 *See* , Advisory Opinion 95-26A (Oct. 17, 1995). The exemption is not available where a party in interest is suing an employee benefit plan, unless the party in interest is suing on behalf of the plan pursuant to section 502(a)(2) or
(3)of ERISA, in their capacity as a participant, beneficiary, or fiduciary. Further, it is the view of the Department that, in general, no exemption is needed to settle benefits disputes, 7 including subrogation cases. 7 *Lockheed* v. *Spink,* 517 U.S. 882, 892-893 (1996)(the payment of benefits is not a prohibited transaction). The operative language of the current class exemption provides as follows: Section I. Covered Transactions Effective January 1, 1975, the restrictions of section 406(a)(1)(A),
(B)and
(D)of the Act, and the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and
(b)of the Code, by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(A),
(B)and
(D)of the Code, shall not apply to the following transactions, if the relevant conditions set forth in sections II through III below are met:
(a)The release by the plan or a plan fiduciary, of a legal or equitable claim against a party in interest in exchange for consideration, given by, or on behalf of, a party in interest to the plan in partial or complete settlement of the plan's or the fiduciary's claim.
(b)An extension of credit by a plan to a party in interest in connection with a settlement whereby the party in interest agrees to repay, over time, an amount owed to the plan in settlement of a legal or equitable claim by the plan or a plan fiduciary against the party in interest. Section II. Conditions Applicable to All Transactions
(a)There is a genuine controversy involving the plan. A genuine controversy will be deemed to exist where the court has certified the case as a class-action.
(b)The fiduciary that authorizes the settlement has no relationship to, or interest in, any of the parties involved in the litigation, other than the plan, that might affect the exercise of such person's best judgment as a fiduciary.
(c)The settlement is reasonable in light of the plan's likelihood of full recovery, the risks and costs of litigation, and the value of claims foregone.
(d)The terms and conditions of the transaction are no less favorable to the plan than comparable arms-length terms and conditions that would have been agreed to by unrelated parties under similar circumstances.
(e)The transaction is not part of an agreement, arrangement, or understanding designed to benefit a party in interest.
(f)Any extension of credit by the plan to a party in interest in connection with the settlement of a legal or equitable claim against the party in interest is on terms that are reasonable, taking into consideration the creditworthiness of the party in interest and the time value of money.
(g)The transaction is not described in Prohibited Transaction Exemption
(PTE)76-1, A.I. (41 FR 12740, March 26, 1976, as corrected, 41 FR 16620, April 20, 1976) (relating to delinquent employer contributions to multiemployer and multiple employer collectively bargained plans). Section III. Prospective Conditions In addition to the conditions described in section II, the following conditions apply to the transactions described in section I(a) and
(b)entered into after January 30, 2004:
(a)Where the litigation has not been certified as a class action by the court, an attorney or attorneys retained to advise the plan on the claim, and having no relationship to any of the parties, other than the plan, determines that there is a genuine controversy involving the plan.
(b)All terms of the settlement are specifically described in a written settlement agreement or consent decree.
(c)Assets other than cash may be received by the plan from a party in interest in connection with a settlement only if:
(1)Necessary to rescind a transaction that is the subject of the litigation; or
(2)Such assets are securities for which there is a generally recognized market, as defined in ERISA section 3(18)(A), and which can be objectively valued. Notwithstanding the foregoing, a settlement will not fail to meet the requirements of this paragraph solely because it includes the contribution of additional qualifying employer securities in settlement of a dispute involving such qualifying employer securities.
(d)To the extent assets, other than cash, are received by the plan in exchange for the release of the plan's or the plan fiduciary's claims, such assets must be specifically described in the written settlement agreement and valued at their fair market value, as determined in accordance with section 5 of the Voluntary Fiduciary Correction
(VFC)Program, 67 FR 15062 (March 28, 2002). The methodology for determining fair market value, including the appropriate date for such determination, must be set forth in the written settlement agreement.
(e)Nothing in section III
(c)shall be construed to preclude the exemption from applying to a settlement that includes a written agreement to:
(1)make future contributions;
(2)adopt amendments to the plan; or
(3)provide additional employee benefits.
(f)The fiduciary acting on behalf of the plan has acknowledged in writing that it is a fiduciary with respect to the settlement of the litigation on behalf the plan.
(g)The plan fiduciary maintains or causes to be maintained for a period of six years the records necessary to enable the persons described below in paragraph
(h)to determine whether the conditions of this exemption have been met, including documents evidencing the steps taken to satisfy sections II (b), such as correspondence with attorneys or experts consulted in order to evaluate the plan's claims, except that:
(1)If the records necessary to enable the persons described in paragraph
(h)to determine whether the conditions of the exemption have been met are lost or destroyed, due to circumstances beyond the control of the plan fiduciary, then no prohibited transaction will be considered to have occurred solely on the basis of the unavailability of those records; and
(2)No party in interest, other than the plan fiduciary responsible for recordkeeping, shall be subject to the civil penalty that may be assessed under section 502(i) of the Act or to the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and
(b)of the Code if the records are not maintained or are not available for examination as required by paragraph
(h)below; (h)(1) Except as provided below in paragraph (h)(2) and notwithstanding any provisions of section 504(a)(2) and
(b)of the Act, the records referred to in paragraph
(g)are unconditionally available at their customary location for examination during normal business hours by—
(A)Any duly authorized employee or representative of the Department or the Internal Revenue Service;
(B)Any fiduciary of the plan or any duly authorized employee or representative of such fiduciary;
(C)Any contributing employer and any employee organization whose members are covered by the plan, or any authorized employee or representative of these entities; or
(D)Any participant or beneficiary of the plan or the duly authorized employee or representative of such participant or beneficiary.
(2)None of the persons described in paragraph (h)(1)(B) through
(D)shall be authorized to examine trade secrets or commercial or financial information which is privileged or confidential. Section III. Definition For purposes of this exemption, the terms “employee benefit plan” and “plan” refer to an employee benefit plan described in section 3(3) of ERISA and/or a plan described in section 4975(e)(1) of the Code. III. Description of Proposed Amendments New Transactions The proposed amendment expands the transactions covered by the exemption. In this regard, warrants and stock rights are often offered to shareholders, including the company's employee benefit plan, in settlement of litigation, including bankruptcy. In such situations, bonds or other property that do not constitute qualifying employer securities under ERISA may also be offered to employee benefit plans. ERISA does not permit plans to hold these assets absent an individual exemption. Effective as of the date of publication of the final exemption in the **Federal Register** , a plan may acquire, hold, and dispose of employer securities in settlement of litigation, including bankruptcy. The transactions covered by the exemption include the subsequent disposition of stock rights and warrants by sale or by exercise of the rights or warrants. Modified Conditions The exemption currently requires that an attorney retained to advise 8 the plan determine that there is a genuine controversy, unless the case has been certified as a class action. As amended, this genuine controversy requirement may be met in non-class action cases if a Federal or State agency is a plaintiff in the litigation. 8 The Department is aware that at least one commentator has interpreted this condition as requiring a formal opinion of counsel. This is not the case. Further, it is not necessary for the litigation to be filed. If suit has not been filed, the independent attorney can review the disputed issues and conclude that there is a genuine controversy. As noted in the original exemption, the purpose of this condition is to avoid covering sham transactions. *See, Dairy Fresh Corp* . v. *Poole* , 108 F.Supp. 2d 1344, 1353 (S.D. Ala. 2000). Section II
(b)has been redrafted to clarify that the settlement is being authorized by a fiduciary (hereinafter referred to as the Authorizing Fiduciary). Currently, the independent fiduciary must assess the reasonableness of the settlement in light of the risks and costs of litigation, and the value of claims foregone. The Department has become concerned that some independent fiduciaries, and those responsible for their retention, are viewing this condition too narrowly. As result, the amendment clarifies that in assessing the reasonableness of any settlement, the Authorizing Fiduciary must consider the entire settlement. This includes the scope of the release of claims and the value of any non-cash assets. In this regard, the Department further emphasizes that the Authorizing Fiduciary, in assessing the reasonableness of the settlement, may not exclude consideration of the attorney's fee award or any other sums to be paid from the recovery ( *e.g.* , consultants) in connection with the settlement of the litigation. Since the class exemption was finalized, attorneys for the Department have reviewed numerous releases in class-action litigation involving employee benefit plans. Some of these releases were unreasonably broad. The Department continues to believe that the role of the Authorizing Fiduciary includes a careful review of the scope of any release that will eliminate the claims of the plan or the plan fiduciaries. In some instances, it may be necessary for the Authorizing Fiduciary to raise objections with the court, for example, requesting that the court narrow the scope of the release. 9 9 The Department does not suggest that other litigants can release ERISA-based claims of the Secretary of Labor, plan fiduciaries, participants or beneficiaries. The Department further notes that the amount of the attorney's fees award to plaintiffs' attorneys may reduce the plan's recovery, directly or indirectly. 10 The Department recognizes that the attorneys bringing these cases are entitled to fair compensation. However, in some instances there have been abuses in connection with class-action attorney's fees. 11 In 2005, Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 12 to address some of these issues. Where the plan's share of the settlement is significant, the Authorizing Fiduciary is generally well-positioned to use its bargaining strength to ensure that these fees are reasonable. It is the view of the Department that the Authorizing Fiduciary's role may require involvement in the attorney's fee decisions, including possibly filing a formal objection with the court regarding these fees. 10 In some instances, the amount of the settlement fund is finalized before the attorney's fee awards are determined. In other instances, the attorney's fees are calculated as a percentage of the settlement fund. Generally, a court will review the reasonableness of the attorney's fee award. 11 This issue was considered by the Federal Trade Commission's Class Action Fairness Project. The FTC's web site contains links to many of the materials produced in connection with the Class-Action Fairness Project. Federal Trade Commission Home Page, *http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/classaction/index.htm* (last visited Apr. 2, 2007). 12 Pub. L. 109-2, 119 Stat. 4 (2005). The Act amends both Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. 1332. It expands federal jurisdiction over certain cases and contains new rules for class action settlements and calculation of attorney's fees. The proposed amendment expands the scope of non-cash consideration that may be accepted by an Authorizing Fiduciary on behalf of the plan, subject to additional conditions. Such consideration is divided into two categories: Non-cash assets and benefits enhancements. Non-cash assets consist of property that can be appraised pursuant to the guidelines set forth in the Department's Voluntary Fiduciary Correction
(VFC)Program. 13 As amended, employer securities, including bonds, and stock rights or warrants on employer securities, are covered. 13 71 FR 20262 (Apr. 19, 2006). The VFC Program, as amended, covers certain prohibited transactions involving illiquid property. The exemption states that such property includes, but is not limited to, restricted and thinly traded stock, limited partnership interests, real estate and collectibles. 71 FR at 20279. Authorizing Fiduciaries may find the guidelines in the VFC Program helpful in considering whether accepting Non-Cash property as part of a settlement is appropriate given the risks and additional costs that may be incurred where a plan holds such property. Illiquid assets may complicate the plan's mandatory distributions at age 70 1/2 pursuant to section 401(a)(9) of the Code. The Service takes the position that compliance with this provision may necessitate distribution of a participant's fractional interest in the illiquid asset, which could result in additional costs to the plan. *See, e.g.* , I.R.S. Priv. Ltr. Rul. 9726032 (June 27, 1997) and I.R.S. Priv. Ltr. Rul. 9226066 (June 26, 1992). The current exemption specifies that a written agreement to make future contributions could be accepted in exchange for a release. This continues to be the case. As amended, a written promise by the employer to increase future contributions falls within the expanded category of non-cash assets. The fair market value of a stream of future contributions can be determined by a qualified appraiser. In contrast, benefits enhancements, *i.e.* , where the employer offers to change the plan design to increase opportunities to diversify, or to offer other employee benefits, are plan amendments, not plan assets. Therefore, the exemption requires only approval by the Authorizing Fiduciary with respect to such benefits enhancements. Because such enhancements do not make the plan whole and may not benefit the same participants who were harmed by the actions that are the subject of litigation, 14 such offers should be subject to additional scrutiny by the Authorizing Fiduciary. 14 See generally, Field Assistance Bulletin No. 2006-01 (Apr. 9, 2006) at *http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/regs/fab_2006-1.html* for a discussion of issues to be considered when the need arises to allocate settlement proceeds among different classes of participants and beneficiaries. As amended, relief is provided for the acquisition, holding, and disposition of employer securities that are not “qualifying,” within the meaning of section 407(d)(5) of the Act. We understand from our conversations with independent fiduciaries that when settling cases involving financially troubled companies, stock rights and warrants may be all that is available. In other instances, employer-issued bonds or other debt instruments may offer the best possibility for recovery. The relief provided by the class exemption for holding such non-cash assets extends only to relief from the prohibited transaction provisions of sections 406(a) and 407(a) of the Act, no relief is provided from the fiduciary provisions of section 404 of the Act. Before authorizing a settlement involving non-cash assets, the Authorizing Fiduciary must determine whether accepting such assets is prudent and in the interest of participants and beneficiaries. In addition, where such non-cash assets are employer securities, particular attention must be paid to ERISA's diversification requirements. Section 404(a)(1)(C) requires that a fiduciary diversify the investments of the plan so as to minimize the risk of large losses, unless under the circumstances it is clearly prudent not to do so. Section 404(a)(2) provides that, in the case of an eligible individual account plan, the diversification requirement of section 404(a)(1)(C) and the prudence requirement (only to the extent that it requires diversification) of section 404(a)(1)(B) are not violated by the acquisition or holding of qualifying employer securities. To the extent that the employer securities do not meet the definition of qualifying employer securities under section 407(d)(5) of the Act, the exception contained in section 404(a)(2) from the diversification requirements of the Act would not apply to a Plan's investment in these assets. Accordingly, it is the responsibility of the Authorizing Fiduciary to determine the appropriate level of investment in employer securities, based on the particular facts and circumstances, consistent with its responsibilities under section 404 of the Act. Where non-cash assets or benefits enhancements are being considered, the Authorizing Fiduciary must first determine that a cash settlement is either not feasible or is less beneficial than the alternative. Any non-cash assets must be valued at their fair market value in accordance with section 5 of the Voluntary Fiduciary Correction Program, 71 FR 20262, 20270 (Apr. 19, 2006). Both non-cash assets and benefits enhancements must be described in the written settlement agreement. Where employer securities are received by the plan from the employer as part of the settlement, the Authorizing Fiduciary or another independent fiduciary must retain sole responsibility for investment decisions regarding the assets unless such responsibility is delegated to individual participants in an individual account plan. The proposed amendment provides that the plan may not pay any commissions in connection with the acquisition of assets pursuant to this exemption. As is the case in the current exemption, the Authorizing Fiduciary must acknowledge in writing that it is a fiduciary for purposes of the settlement. As noted above, since the original exemption was granted at the end of 2003, the Department has learned that practitioners are divided on whether or not the Authorizing Fiduciary's role in the settlement included review of attorney's fees. It is the view of the Department that in any instance where an attorney's fee award or any other sums to be paid from the recovery has the potential to reduce the plan's overall recovery, the Authorizing Fiduciary should take appropriate steps to review the proposed fees. The exact nature of the Authorizing Fiduciary's role in connection with attorney's fees and other expenses paid from the recovery will vary depending on the size and nature of the litigation. General Information The attention of interested persons is directed to the following:
(1)The fact that a transaction is the subject of an exemption under section 408(a) of the Act and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code does not relieve a fiduciary or other party in interest or disqualified person from certain other provisions of the Act and the Code, including any prohibited transaction provisions to which the exemption does not apply and the general fiduciary responsibility provisions of section 404 of the Act which require, among other things, that a fiduciary discharge his or her duties with respect to the plan solely in the interests of the participants and beneficiaries of the plan and in a prudent fashion in accordance with section 404(a)(1)(B) of the Act; nor does it affect the requirement of section 401(a) of the Code that the plan must operate for the exclusive benefit of the employees of the employer maintaining the plan and their beneficiaries;
(2)Before an exemption may be granted under section 408(a) of the Act and section 4975(c)(2) of the Code, the Department must find that the exemption is administratively feasible, in the interests of plans and their participants and beneficiaries and protective of the rights of the participants and beneficiaries of plans;
(3)If granted, the exemption will be applicable to a particular transaction only if the conditions specified in the class exemption are met; and
(4)The exemption, if granted, will be supplemental to, and not in derogation of, any other provisions of the Code and the Act, including statutory or administrative exemptions and transitional rules. Furthermore, the fact that a transaction is subject to an administrative or statutory exemption is not dispositive of whether the transaction is in fact a prohibited transaction. Written Comments and Hearing Requests All interested persons are invited to submit written comments or requests for a public hearing on the proposed exemption to the address and within the time period set forth above. All comments will be made a part of the record. Comments and requests for a hearing should state the reasons for the writer's interest in the proposed exemption. Comments received will be available for public inspection with the referenced application at the above-referenced address. Proposed Exemption Section I. Prospective Exemption—Covered Transactions Effective [DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL EXEMPTION IN THE **Federal Register** ], the restrictions of sections 406(a) and 407(a) of ERISA and the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and
(b)of the Code, by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(A) through
(D)of the Code, shall not apply to the following transactions, if the relevant conditions set forth in sections II through III below are met:
(a)The release by the plan or a plan fiduciary of a legal or equitable claim against a party in interest in exchange for consideration, given by, or on behalf of, a party in interest to the plan in partial or complete settlement of the plan's or the fiduciary's claim.
(b)An extension of credit by a plan to a party in interest in connection with a settlement whereby the party in interest agrees to repay, over time, an amount owed to the plan in settlement of a legal or equitable claim by the plan or a plan fiduciary against the party in interest.
(c)The plan's acquisition, holding, and disposition of employer securities received in settlement of litigation, including bankruptcy. Disposition of employer securities that are stock rights or warrants includes sale of these securities, as well as the exercise of the rights or warrants. Section II Prospective Exemption—Conditions
(a)Where the litigation has not been certified as a class action by the court, and no federal or state agency is a plaintiff in the litigation, an attorney or attorneys retained to advise the plan on the claim, and having no relationship to any of the parties involved in the claims, other than the plan, determines that there is a genuine controversy involving the plan.
(b)The settlement is authorized by a fiduciary (The Authorizing Fiduciary) that has no relationship to, or interest in, any of the parties involved in the claims, other than the plan, that might affect the exercise of such person's best judgment as a fiduciary.
(c)The settlement terms, including the scope of the release of claims; the amount of cash and the value of any non-cash assets received by the plan; and the amount of any attorney's fee award or any other sums to be paid from the recovery, are reasonable in light of the plan's likelihood of full recovery, the risks and costs of litigation, and the value of claims foregone.
(d)The terms and conditions of the transaction are no less favorable to the plan than comparable arms-length terms and conditions that would have been agreed to by unrelated parties under similar circumstances.
(e)The transaction is not part of an agreement, arrangement, or understanding designed to benefit a party in interest.
(f)Any extension of credit by the plan to a party in interest in connection with the settlement of a legal or equitable claim against the party in interest is on terms that are reasonable, taking into consideration the creditworthiness of the party in interest and the time value of money.
(g)The transaction is not described in section A.I. of Prohibited Transaction Exemption
(PTE)76-1 (41 FR 12740, 12742 (Mar. 26, 1976), as corrected, 41 FR 16620 Apr. 20, 1976)(relating to delinquent employer contributions to multiemployer and multiple employer collectively bargained plans).
(h)All terms of the settlement are specifically described in a written settlement agreement or consent decree.
(i)Non-cash assets, which may include employer securities, and written promises of future employer contributions (hereinafter, “non-cash assets”), and/or a written agreement to adopt future plan amendments or provide additional employee benefits (hereinafter “benefits enhancements”) may be provided to the plan by a party in interest in exchange for a release by the plan or a plan fiduciary only if:
(1)the Authorizing Fiduciary determines that an all cash settlement is either not feasible, or is less beneficial to the participants and beneficiaries than accepting all or part of the settlement in non-cash assets and/or benefits enhancements;
(2)the non-cash assets are specifically described in writing as part of the settlement and valued at their fair market value, as determined in accordance with section 5 of the Voluntary Fiduciary Correction
(VFC)Program, 71 FR 20262, 20270 (Apr. 19, 2006). The methodology for determining fair market value, including the appropriate date for such determination, must be set forth in the written agreement;
(3)Benefits enhancements are specifically described in writing as part of the settlement. Benefits enhancements may be included as part of the settlement without an independent appraisal. In deciding whether to approve the release of a claim in exchange for benefits enhancements, the Authorizing Fiduciary shall take into account all aspects of the settlement, including the cash or other assets to be received by the plan, the solvency of the party in interest, and the best interests of the class of participants harmed by the acts that are the subject of the plan's claims;
(4)The Authorizing Fiduciary, or another independent fiduciary, acts on behalf of the plan and its participants and beneficiaries for all purposes related to any property, including employer securities as defined by 407(d)(1) of the Act, received by the plan from the employer as part of the settlement. The Authorizing Fiduciary or another independent fiduciary continues to act on behalf of the plan and its participants and beneficiaries for the period that the plan holds the property, including employer securities, received from the employer as part of the settlement. The Authorizing Fiduciary or another independent fiduciary shall have sole responsibility relating to the acquisition, holding, disposition, ongoing management, and where appropriate, exercise of all ownership rights, including the right to vote securities, except that, in the case of an individual account plan which permits participant direction, the Authorizing Fiduciary or other independent fiduciary may delegate to the individual participants to whose accounts the assets have been allocated, the decision to hold, exercise ownership rights, or dispose of the assets;
(j)The plan does not pay any commissions in connection with the acquisition of the assets;
(k)The Authorizing Fiduciary acting on behalf of the plan has acknowledged in writing that it is a fiduciary with respect to the settlement of the litigation on behalf of the plan;
(l)The plan fiduciary maintains or causes to be maintained for a period of six years the records necessary to enable the persons described below in paragraph
(m)to determine whether the conditions of this exemption have been met, including documents evidencing the steps taken to satisfy section II (c), such as correspondence with attorneys or experts consulted in order to evaluate the plan's claims, except that:
(1)if the records necessary to enable the persons described in paragraph
(m)to determine whether the conditions of the exemption have been met are lost or destroyed, due to circumstances beyond the control of the plan fiduciary, then no prohibited transaction will be considered to have occurred solely on the basis of the unavailability of those records; and
(2)No party in interest, other than the plan fiduciary responsible for record-keeping, shall be subject to the civil penalty that may be assessed under section 502(i) of the Act or to the taxes imposed by section 4975(a) and
(b)of the Code if the records are not maintained or are not available for examination as required by paragraph
(m)below; (m)(1) Except as provided below in paragraph (m)(2) and notwithstanding any provisions of section 504(a)(2) and
(b)of the Act, the records referred to in paragraph
(l)are unconditionally available at their customary location for examination during normal business hours by—
(A)Any duly authorized employee or representative of the Department or the Internal Revenue Service;
(B)Any fiduciary of the plan or any duly authorized employee or representative of such fiduciary;
(C)Any contributing employer and any employee organization whose members are covered by the plan, or any authorized employee or representative of these entities; or
(D)Any participant or beneficiary of the plan or the duly authorized employee or representative of such participant or beneficiary.
(2)Nothing in this exemption supersedes any restriction on the disclosure of trade secrets or other commercial or financial information which is privileged or confidential and this exemption does not authorize any of the persons described in paragraph (m)(1)(B)-(D) to examine trade secrets or such commercial or financial information. Section III. Definition For purposes of this exemption, the terms “employee benefit plan” and “plan” refer to an employee benefit plan described in section 3(3) of ERISA and/or a plan described in section 4975(e)(1) of the Code. For purposes of this exemption, the term “employer security” refers to employer securities described in section 407(d)(1) of ERISA. IV. Effective Dates This amendment to the class exemption is effective for settlements occurring on or after the date of publication of the final exemption in the **Federal Register** . For settlements occurring before the date of publication of the final exemption in the **Federal Register** , see the original grant of the Class Exemption for Release of Claims and Extensions of Credit in Connection with Litigation, 68 FR 75632 (Dec. 31, 2003). Signed at Washington, DC, this 14th day of November, 2007. Ivan L. Strasfeld, Director, Office of Exemption Determinations, Employee Benefits Security Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. [FR Doc. E7-22718 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-29-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-62,411] A.O. Smith Electrical Products Company, Scottsville, KY; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on November 5, 2007 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at A.O. Smith Electrical Products Company, Scottsville, Kentucky. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed in Washington, DC, this 14th day of November 2007. Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-22751 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-62,376] Dixie Consumer Products, LLC, Dixie Products Division, a Subsidiary of Georgia-Pacific, Including Leased Workers of Staffmark, Los Angeles, CA; Notice of Termination of Investigation; Findings of the Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on October 29, 2007 in response to a worker petition filed on behalf of workers of Dixie Consumer Products, LLC, Dixie Products Division, a subsidiary of Georgia Pacific, Los Angeles, California. The petitioning group of workers is covered by an active certification (TA-W-62,268) which expires on October 23, 2009. Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no purpose, and the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC, this 14th day of November 2007. Richard Church, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-22749 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-61,324] Ford Motor Company, Vehicle Operations Division, Wixom Assembly Plant, Including On-Site Leased Workers of G-Tech Professional Staffing, Inc., MSX and Aerotech, Wixom, MI; Amended Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration In accordance with section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration on August 22, 2007. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on August 30, 2007 (72 FR 50128). On our own motion, the Department reviewed the Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration for workers of the subject firm. The workers were engaged in the assembly of Lincoln Towncars. The review of the investigation record shows that the Department inadvertently excluded from the certification on-site leased workers from G-Tech Professional Staffing, Inc., MSX and Aerotech. The Department has determined that these workers were sufficiently under the control of Ford Motor Company, Vehicle Operations Division, Wixom Assembly Plant to be considered leased workers. Accordingly, the Department is amending this certification to include leased workers of G-Tech Professional Staffing, Inc., MSX and Aerotech working on-site at the Wixom, Michigan location of the subject firm. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers employed at Ford Motor Company, Vehicle Operations Division, Wixom Assembly Plant, Wixom, Michigan who were adversely-impacted by a shift in production to Canada. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-61,324 is hereby issued as follows: All workers of Ford Motor Company, Vehicle Operations Division, Wixom Assembly Plant, including on-site leased workers of G-Tech Professional Staffing, Inc., MSX and Aerotech, Wixom, Michigan, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after April 12, 2006, through August 22, 2009, 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 14th day of November 2007. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-22746 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-62,056] Glaxo Smith Kline, Shared Financial Services Department, Philadelphia, PA; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application dated October 15, 2007, the petitioner requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The denial notice was signed on September 17, 2007 and published in the **Federal Register** on October 3, 2007 (72 FR 56385). 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 negative TAA determination issued by the Department for workers of Glaxo Smith Kline, Shared Financial Services Department, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania was based on the finding that the worker group does not produce an article within the meaning of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974. The investigation revealed that workers of the subject firm performed financial services, such as invoice processing, general accounting, helpdesk support and travel and expense services. The investigation further revealed that although production of article(s) occurred within the firm or appropriate subdivision, the workers do not support this production. The petitioner contends that the Department erred in its determination and conveys that workers of the subject firm should be investigated on the basis of the secondary impact, and should be certified eligible for TAA as “downstream producers”. The petitioner alleges that workers of the subject firm are “value-added production workers” because they provide the processing of payments of invoices for the vendors that Glaxo Smith Kline uses to produce their drugs. In order to make an affirmative determination and issue a certification of eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance on the basis of the secondary impact, the workers' firm has to be a downstream producer (final finishing or assembly) for, a primary firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for adjustment assistance. In this case, however, workers of Glaxo Smith Kline, Shared Financial Services Department, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, did not produce a product and did not perform finishing or final assembly of articles produced by a primary firm from August 2006 through August of 2007. Financial services, such as the processing of payments of invoices for the vendors are not considered production of an article within the meaning of Section 222 of the Trade Act. No production took place at the subject facility and the workers did not support production of articles at any affiliated firm in the relevant time period. Thus the subject firm workers are not eligible under secondary impact. The petitioner also alleges that workers of the subject firm lost their jobs “due to off-shoring the services to India.” The allegation of a shift to another country might be relevant if it was determined that workers of the subject firm produce an article. However, the investigation determined that workers of Glaxo Smith Kline, Shared Financial Services Department, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania do not produce an article within the meaning of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974. Conclusion After review of the application and investigative findings, I conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of the law or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of the Department of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the application is denied. Signed in Washington, DC, this 14th day of November, 2007. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-22747 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Investigations Regarding Certifications of Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance Petitions have been filed with the Secretary of Labor under Section 221(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (“the Act”) and are identified in the Appendix to this notice. Upon receipt of these petitions, the Director of the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, has instituted investigations pursuant to Section 221(a) of the Act. The purpose of each of the investigations is to determine whether the workers are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Title II, Chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations will further relate, as appropriate, to the determination of the date on which total or partial separations began or threatened to begin and the subdivision of the firm involved. The petitioners or any other persons showing a substantial interest in the subject matter of the investigations may request a public hearing, provided such request is filed in writing with the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than December 3, 2007. Interested persons are invited to submit written comments regarding the subject matter of the investigations to the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than December 3, 2007. The petitions filed in this case are available for inspection at the Office of the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room C-5311, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Signed at Washington, DC, this 13th day of November 2007. Ralph DiBattista, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. Appendix.—TAA Petitions Instituted Between 11/5/07 and 11/9/07 TA-W Subject firm (petitioners) Location Date of institution Date of petition 62405 Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company (State) Tyler, TX 11/05/07 11/02/07 62406 Ceratizit South Carolina
(Comp)Columbia, SC 11/05/07 11/02/07 62407 Eastprint, Inc.
(Comp)North Andover, MA 11/05/07 11/01/07 62408 PQ Corporation (Union) Anderson, IN 11/05/07 11/05/07 62409 Stanric, Inc. (State) Fajardo, PR 11/05/07 11/01/07 62410 Small-Pak Chemicals, Inc.
(Comp)Pineville, NC 11/05/07 11/02/07 62411 A.O. Smith Electrical Products Company
(Comp)Scottsville, KY 11/05/07 11/02/07 62412 Walter Drake, Inc.
(Comp)Holyoke, MA 11/05/07 10/19/07 62413 Simclar (North America), Inc.
(Comp)Winterville, NC 11/06/07 11/05/07 62414 Consistent Textile Industries, Inc.
(Comp)Dallas, NC 11/06/07 11/05/07 62415 Bernard Chaus/Cynthia Steffe (UNITE) Secaucus, NJ 11/06/07 11/05/07 62416 4 Corners Pine/Div. of Wells Eagle, Inc.
(Wkrs)Trout Creek, MT 11/06/07 10/26/07 62417 Avery Dennison Corporation
(Comp)Greensboro, NC 11/06/07 11/05/07 62418 Computer Sciences Corporation
(Comp)Dallas, TX 11/06/07 11/05/07 62419 Flowserve Corporation
(Comp)Dayton, OH 11/06/07 11/05/07 62420 Johnson Hosiery Mills, Inc.
(Comp)Hickory, NC 11/06/07 11/02/07 62421 RCN Corporation
(Comp)Wilkes-Barre, PA 11/07/07 10/19/07 62422 Curtain and Drapery Fashions
(Comp)Lowell, NC 11/07/07 11/01/07 62423 KLA-Tencor
(Wkrs)Tucson, AZ 11/07/07 11/02/07 62424 Tanner Companies LLC
(Wkrs)Rutherfordton, NC 11/07/07 10/31/07 62425 Stoney Point Products (State) New Ulm, MN 11/07/07 11/06/07 62426 Flextronics Enclosures
(Wkrs)Youngsville, NC 11/07/07 11/06/07 62427 CNI/UTI
(Wkrs)Cadillac, MI 11/07/07 11/06/07 62428 Home Products International
(Comp)Mooresville, NC 11/07/07 11/06/07 62429 Covalence Plastic (State) City of Industry, CA 11/07/07 10/26/07 62430 Pageland Screen Printers
(Comp)Pageland, SC 11/07/07 11/06/07 62431 Bierner Hat Company
(Comp)Dallas, TX 11/08/07 11/07/07 62432 LEM Industries, Inc.
(Comp)Obetz, OH 11/08/07 11/07/07 62433 Lawrence Sewing
(Wkrs)San Francisco, CA 11/08/07 11/07/07 62434 Arrow Industries, Inc./Arrow Home Fashion
(Comp)Anaheim, CA 11/08/07 11/06/07 62435 Huffman Finishing Company, Inc.
(Wkrs)Granite Falls, NC 11/08/07 11/05/07 62436 Councill Company LLC
(Wkrs)Denton, NC 11/08/07 11/07/07 62437 Mirador International, LLC
(Wkrs)High Point, NC 11/09/07 11/07/07 62438 Chrysler LLC
(UAW)Fenton, MO 11/09/07 11/07/07 62439 PI, Inc./Custom Molding Divison
(Comp)Athens, GA 11/09/07 11/08/07 62440 Evergy, Inc./Vitrus Division
(Comp)Pawtucket, RI 11/09/07 11/08/07 62441 Hitachi Gst
(Wkrs)San Jose, CA 11/09/07 11/07/07 62442 Infinite Graphics, Inc. (State) Minneapolis, MN 11/09/07 11/08/07 62443 Booth Electrosystems, Inc.
(Comp)Greeneville, SC 11/09/07 10/18/07 [FR Doc. E7-22744 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Notice of 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 (19 U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor herein presents summaries of determinations regarding eligibility to apply for trade adjustment assistance for workers (TA-W) number and alternative trade adjustment assistance
(ATAA)by (TA-W) number issued during the period of *November 5 through November 9, 2007* . 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. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following must be satisfied: A. 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; B. the sales or production, or both, of such firm or subdivision have decreased absolutely; and C. increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have contributed importantly to such workers' separation or threat of separation and to the decline in sales or production of such firm or subdivision; or II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the following must be satisfied: A. 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; B. 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 C. One of the following must be satisfied: 1. 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; 2. The country to which the workers' firm has shifted production of the articles to a beneficiary country under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act; or 3. 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. Also, in order for an affirmative determination to be made for secondarily affected 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(b) of the Act 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 (or subdivision) is a supplier or downstream producer to a firm (or subdivision) that employed a group of workers who received a certification of eligibility to apply for trade adjustment assistance benefits 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 for the firm (or subdivision) described in paragraph
(2)accounted for at least 20 percent of the production or sales of the workers' firm; or
(B)A loss or business by the workers' firm with the firm (or subdivision) described in paragraph
(2)contributed importantly to the workers' separation or threat of separation. In order for the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance
(ATAA)for older workers, the group eligibility requirements of Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act must be met. 1. Whether a significant number of workers in the workers' firm are 50 years of age or older. 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. 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-62,080; Lake Erie Products, A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of TriMas Corporation, Wood Dale, IL: August 17, 2006.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of section 222(a)(2)(B) (shift in production) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-62,367A; Rockwell Automation, Operations & Engineering, Mayfield Heights, OH: October 25, 2006.* *TA-W-62,197; Texas Instruments Incorporated, KFAB Manufacturing Division, Dallas, TX: September 24, 2006.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of section 222(b) (supplier to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of section 222(b) (downstream producer for a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA based on increased imports from or a shift in production to Mexico or Canada) of the Trade Act have been met. 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. *TA-W-62,222; ALRS Inc., dba Guildcraft of California, Rancho Dominguez, CA: September 27, 2006.* *TA-W-62,231; Wilson Sporting Goods Company, Golf Division, Humboldt, TN: September 8, 2007.* *TA-W-62,266; Classic Die, Inc., Grand Rapids, MI: October 8, 2006.* *TA-W-62,377; First Choice Distribution, Working On-Site at Maytag Corp., Newton, IA: October 26, 2006.* *TA-W-62,046; Wallowa Forest Products, A Subsidiary of D.R. Johnson Lumber Co., Wallowa, OR: August 24, 2006.* *TA-W-62,113; Ken-Bar Manufacturing Company, Baldwin, GA: September 6, 2006.* *TA-W-62,289; Metal Powder Products Company, Washington Street Division, St. Mary's, PA: October 4, 2006.* *TA-W-62,214; Ford Motor Company, Louisville Assembly Plant, Vehicle Operation Div, Louisville, KY: September 24, 2006.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of section 222(a)(2)(B) (shift in production) and section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-62,265; KLA-Tencor Corporation, San Jose, CA: October 5, 2006.* *TA-W-62,308; Robertshaw Controls Company, Division of Invensys Controls, Long Beach, CA: October 2, 2006.* *TA-W-62,367; Rockwell Automation, Operations & Engineering, Manpower Temporary Service, Dublin, GA: October 25, 2006.* *TA-W-62,407; Eastprint, Inc., North Andover, MA: November 1, 2006.* *TA-W-62,312; Ridgeway Furniture, Ridgeway, VA: October 15, 2006.* *TA-W-62,394; TI Automotive Systems, Plating Department, Warren, MI: October 30, 2006.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of section 222(b) (supplier to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA) and section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-62,210; Dexter Chemical LLC, Textile Chemicals Division, Bronx, NY: September 25, 2006.* *TA-W-62,210A; Dexter Chemical LLC, Textile Chemicals Division, Charlotte, NY: September 25, 2006.* *TA-W-62,230; Collins Products, LLC, Klamath Falls, OR: October 1, 2006.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of section 222(b) (downstream producer for a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA based on increased imports from or a shift in production to Mexico or Canada) and section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *None* . 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. The Department has determined that criterion
(1)of section 246 has not been met. The firm does not have a significant number of workers 50 years of age or older. *TA-W-62,367A; Rockwell Automation, Operations & Engineering, Mayfield Heights, OH.* The Department has determined that criterion
(2)of Section 246 has not been met. Workers at the firm possess skills that are easily transferable. *TA-W-62,080; Lake Erie Products, A Wholly Owned Subsidiary of TriMas Corporation, Wood Dale, IL.* *TA-W-62,197; Texas Instruments Incorporated, KFAB Manufacturing Division, Dallas, TX.* The Department has determined that criterion
(3)of section 246 has not been met. Competition conditions within the workers' industry are not adverse. *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.A.) and (a)(2)(B)(II.A.) (employment decline) have not been met. *TA-W-61,819; Bemis Manufacturing, Sheboygan Falls, WI.* The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.B.) (Sales or production, or both, did not decline) and (a)(2)(B)(II.B.) (shift in production to a foreign country) have not been met. *TA-W-62,303; Agilent Technologies, Inc., Liberty Lake, WA.* *TA-W-62,355; Hawley Products Incorporated, Paducah, KY.* 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. *TA-W-62,034; Wavesplitter Technologies, Inc., Headquarter Office, Santa Clara, CA.* *TA-W-62,232; Philips Lighting Co, Lamps Division, Danville, KY.* The workers' firm does not produce an article as required for certification under section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974. *TA-W-62,188; Nortel Networks Corp., Global Software Delivery Div., Site Readiness, Research Triangle Park, NC.* *TA-W-62,278; GE Money, Business Client Services, Atlanta, GA.* The investigation revealed that criteria of section 222(b)(2) has not been met. The workers' firm (or subdivision) is not a supplier to or a downstream producer for a firm whose workers were certified eligible to apply for TAA. *None* . I hereby certify that the aforementioned determinations were issued during the period of *November 5 through November 9, 2007* . Copies of these determinations are available for inspection in Room C-5311, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210 during normal business hours or will be mailed to persons who write to the above address. Dated: Novemeber 14, 2007. Ralph DiBattista, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-22745 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-62,064] Pfizer, Inc., Pilot Plant, Kalamazoo, MI; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on August 29, 2007 in response to a worker petition filed by a state workforce representative on behalf of workers of Pfizer, Inc, Pilot Plant, Kalamazoo, Michigan. The petitioning group of workers is covered by an active certification (TA-W-59,828) which expires on October 8, 2008. Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no purpose, and the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of November, 2007. Richard Church, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-22748 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-61,991] Superior Studs, LLC, a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Swanson Group Manufacturing, LLC, Glide, OR; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on August 16, 2007 in response to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Superior Studs, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Swanson Group Manufacturing, LLC, Glide, Oregon. The workers at the subject facility produced stud lumber. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed in Washington, DC, this 8th day of November 2007. Richard Church, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-22743 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Occupational Safety and Health Administration [Docket No. OSHA-2007-0079] Standard on Fire Brigades; Extension of the Office of Management and Budget's
(OMB)Approval of Information Collection (Paperwork) Requirements AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor. ACTION: Request for public comment. SUMMARY: OSHA solicits public comment concerning its proposal to extend OMB approval of the information collection requirements specified in its Standard on Fire Brigades (29 CFR 1910.156). DATES: Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent, or received) by January 22, 2008. ADDRESSES: *Electronically:* You may submit comments and attachments electronically at *http://www.regulations.gov,* which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the instructions online for submitting comments. *Facsimile:* If your comments, including attachments, are not longer than 10 pages, you may fax them to the OSHA Docket Office at
(202)693-1648. *Mail, hand delivery, express mail, messenger, or courier service:* When using this method, you must submit three copies of your comments and attachments to the OSHA Docket Office, OSHA Docket No. OSHA-2007-0079, U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Room N-2625, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Deliveries (hand, express mail, messenger, and courier service) are accepted during the Department of Labor's and Docket Office's normal business hours, 8:15 a.m. to 4:45 p.m., e.t. *Instructions:* All submissions must include the Agency name and OSHA docket number for the ICR (OSHA-2007-0079). All comments, including any personal information you provide, are placed in the public docket without change, and may be made available online at *http://www.regulations.gov.* For further information on submitting comments see the “Public Participation” heading in the section of this notice titled “Supplementary Information.” *Docket:* To read or download comments or other material in the docket, go to *http://www.regulations.gov* or the OSHA Docket Office at the address above. All documents in the docket (including this **Federal Register** notice) are listed in the *http://www.regulations.gov* index; however, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download through the website. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. You may also contact Theda Kenney at the address below to obtain a copy of the ICR. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theda Kenney or Todd Owen, Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room N-3609, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210; telephone
(202)693-2222. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent (i.e., employer) burden, conducts a preclearance consultation program to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program ensures that information is in the desired format, reporting burden (time and costs) is minimal, collection instruments are clearly understood, and OSHA's estimate of the information collection burden is accurate. The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 *et seq.* ) authorizes information collection by employers as necessary or appropriate for enforcement of the Act or for developing information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational injuries, illnesses, and accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act also requires that OSHA obtain such information with minimum burden upon employers, especially those operating small businesses, and to reduce to the maximum extent feasible unnecessary duplication of efforts in obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657). Paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(4) contain the paperwork requirements of the Standard. Under paragraph (b)(1) of the Standard, employers must develop and maintain an organizational statement that establishes the: Existence of a fire brigade; the basic organizational structure of the brigade; type, amount, and frequency of training provided to brigade members; expected number of members in the brigade; and functions that the brigade is to perform. This paragraph also specifies that the organizational statement must be available for review by employees, their designated representatives, and OSHA compliance officers. The organizational statement delineates the functions performed by the brigade members and, therefore, determines the level of training and type of personal protective equipment
(PPE)necessary for these members to perform their assigned functions safely. Making the statement available to employees, their designated representatives, and OSHA compliance officers ensures that the elements of the statement are consistent with the functions performed by the brigade members and the occupational hazards they experience, and that employers are providing training and PPE appropriate to these functions and hazards. To permit an employee with known heart disease, epilepsy, or emphysema to participate in fire-brigade emergency activities, paragraph (b)(2) of the Standard requires employers to obtain a physician's certificate of the employee's fitness to do so. This provision provides employers with a direct and efficient means of ascertaining whether or not they can safely expose employees with these medical conditions to the hazards of fire-fighting operations. Paragraph (c)(1) of the Standard requires employers to provide training and education for fire-brigade members commensurate with the duties and functions they perform, with brigade leaders and training instructors receiving more comprehensive training and education than employers provide to the general membership. Under paragraph (c)(2) of the Standard, employers must conduct training and education frequently enough, but at least annually, to assure that brigade members are able to perform their assigned duties and functions satisfactorily and safely; employers must provide brigade members who perform interior structural fire fighting with educational and training sessions at least quarterly. In addition, paragraph (c)(4) specifies that employers must: Inform brigade members about special hazards such as storage and use of flammable liquids and gases, toxic chemicals, radioactive sources, and water-reactive substances that may be present during fires and other emergencies; advise brigade members of changes in the special hazards; and develop written procedures that describe the actions brigade members must take when special hazards are present, and make these procedures available in the education and training program and for review by the brigade members. Providing appropriate training to brigade members at the specified frequencies, informing them about special hazards, developing written procedures on how to respond to special hazards, and making these procedures available for training purposes and review by the members enables them to use operational procedures and equipment in a safe manner to avoid or control dangerous exposures to fire related hazards. Therefore, the training and information requirements specified by paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(4) of the Standard prevent serious injuries and death among members of fire brigades. II. Special Issues for Comment OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues: • Whether the proposed information collection requirements are necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions, including whether the information is useful; • The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and costs) of the information collection requirements, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • The quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and • Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply; for example, by using automated or other technological information collection and transmission techniques. III. Proposed Actions OSHA is requesting that OMB extend its approval of the information collection requirements contained in the Standard on Fire Brigades (29 CFR 1910.156). The Agency is requesting an adjustment decrease from 6,042 hours to 5,048 hours for a total decrease of 994 hours. The decrease is a result of updated data estimating that the total number of establishments requiring new or revised organizational statements has declined from 2,797 to 2,337; and that the number of fire brigade members has declined from 559,390 to 467,330. The Agency will summarize the comments submitted in response to this notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Title:* Standard on Fire Brigades (29 CFR 1910.156). *OMB Number:* 1218-0075. *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit. *Number of Respondents:* 7,010. *Frequency:* On occasion. *Average Time Per Response:* Varies from 5 minutes (.05 hour) to obtain a physician's certificate to 2 hours to develop or revise an organizational plan. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 5,048. *Estimated Cost (Operation and Maintenance):* $0. IV. Public Participation—Submission of Comments on This Notice and Internet Access to Comments and Submissions You may submit comments in response to this document as follows:
(1)Electronically at *http://www.regulations.gov,* which is the Federal eRulemaking Portal;
(2)by facsimile (FAX); or
(3)by hard copy. All comments, attachments, and other material must identify the Agency name and the OSHA docket number for the ICR (Docket No. OSHA-2007-0079). You may supplement electronic submissions by uploading document files electronically. If you wish to mail additional materials in reference to an electronic or facsimile submission, you must submit them to the OSHA Docket Office (see the section of this notice titled Addresses ). The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments by your name, date, and the docket number so the Agency can attach them to your comments. Because of security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a significant delay in the receipt of comments. For information about security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by hand, express delivery, messenger, or courier service, please contact the OSHA Docket Office at
(202)693-2350 (TTY
(877)889-5627). Comments and submissions are posted without change at *http://www.regulations.gov.* Therefore, OSHA cautions commenters about submitting personal information such as social security numbers and date of birth. Although all submissions are listed in the *http://www.regulations.gov* index, some information (e.g., copyrighted material) is not publicly available to read or download through this Web site. All submissions, including copyrighted material, are available for inspection and copying at the OSHA Docket Office. Information on using the *http://www.regulations.gov* Web site to submit comments and access the docket is available at the Web site's “User Tips” link. Contact the OSHA Docket Office for information about materials not available through the Web site, and for assistance in using the Internet to locate docket submissions. V. Authority and Signature Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506 *et seq.* ) and Secretary of Labor's Order No. 5-2007 (72 FR 31159). Signed at Washington, DC, on November 15, 2007. Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health. [FR Doc. E7-22706 Filed 11-20-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-26-P LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION Sunshine Act Meeting of the Board of Directors TIME AND DATE: The Board of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation will meet on November 27, 2007 via conference call. The meeting will begin at 2 p.m., and continue until conclusion of the Board's agenda. LOCATION: 3333 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20007, 3rd Floor Conference Center. STATUS OF MEETING: Open, *except* that a portion of the meeting of the Board of Directors may be closed to the public pursuant to a vote of the Board of Directors to hold an executive session to consider and act on its response to the U.S. Government Accountability Office's Draft Report on LSC's oversight and management of its grants to legal services programs. A *verbatim* written transcript of the session will be made. The transcript of any portions of the closed session falling within the relevant provisions of the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B), and the corresponding provision of the Legal Services Corporation's implementing regulation, 45 CFR 1622.5(g), will not be available for public inspection. The transcript of any portions not falling within the cited provisions will be available for public inspection. A copy of the General Counsel's Certifications that the closings are authorized by law will be available upon request. Directors will participate by telephone conference in such a manner as to enable interested members of the public to hear and identify all persons participating in the meeting. Members of the public may observe/hear the public session meeting by joining participating staff at the location indicated above or calling 1-800-857-5485. MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Agenda Open Session 1. Approval of agenda. 2. Consider and act on Board of Directors' response to the Inspector General's Semiannual Report to Congress for the period of April 1, 2007 through September 30, 2007. 3. Consider and act on other business. 4. Public comment. 5. Consider and act on whether to authorize an executive session of the Board to consider and act on a response to the U.S. Government Accountability Office's draft report on LSC's oversight and management of LSC grants to legal services programs. Closed Session 6. Consider and act on response to the U.S. Government Accountability Office's draft report on LSC's oversight and management of LSC grants to legal services programs. 7. Consider and act on motion to adjourn meeting. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Batie, Manager of Board Operations, at
(202)295-1500 or *pbatie@lsc.gov.* *Special Needs:* Upon request, meeting notices will be made available in alternate formats to accommodate visual and hearing impairments. Individuals who have a disability and need an accommodation to attend the meeting may notify Patricia Batie at
(202)295-1500 or *pbatie@lsc.gov.* Dated: November 16, 2007. Victor M. Fortuno, Vice President, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary. [FR Doc. 07-5796 Filed 11-19-07; 11:39 am]
Connectionstraces to 11
14 references not yet in our index
  • 40 CFR 1506.6
  • Pub. L. 103-413
  • Pub. L. 93-638
  • 5 CFR 1320.10
  • 29 CFR 2570
  • 44 USC 3501-3520
  • Rev. Rul. 2002-45
  • 517 U.S. 882
  • 108 F. Supp. 2d 1344
  • Pub. L. 109-2
  • 119 Stat. 4
  • 26 USC 2813
  • 29 CFR 90.18(c)
  • 45 CFR 1622.5(g)
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of Intent to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Special Resource Study for Castle Nugent Farms, St
C.F.R.§ 201.8
C.F.R.§ 201.6
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 3506
U.S.C.§ 3507
U.S.C.§ 1332
U.S.C.§ 2273
C.F.R.§ 1910.156
U.S.C.§ 651
SCOTUS517 U.S. 882
F. Supp.108 F. Supp. 2d 1344
Cite40 CFR 1506.6
Cites 25 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.