[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 92 (Thursday, May 12, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27667-27668]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-11640]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-73,479A]


Enesco, LLC, Itasco, IL; Notice of Negative Determination on 
Reconsideration

    On October 18, 2010, the Department of Labor issued an Affirmative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers 
and former workers of Enesco, LLC, Gund Division, Distribution Center, 
Edison, New Jersey (Enesco-Edison). The Department's Notice was 
published in the Federal Register on October 29, 2010 (75 FR 66795). 
The workers supplied packaging and distribution services related to 
giftware.
    The initial investigation was initiated in response to a petition 
filed on February 17, 2010 by a State of Illinois Workforce Office on 
behalf of workers of Enesco, LLC, Itasca, Illinois. The petition 
alleges that ``Enesco LLC production of giftware products is currently 
in China; the company has transferred Quality/Regulatory Compliance 
Department overseas as well in order to keep production and quality 
assurance testing in one location.''
    Because the petitioner did not provide additional information 
regarding the worker group, the Department relied on publicly-available 
materials and the company official identified on the petition for 
information.
    Although the company's headquarters are in Itasca, Illinois, the 
company official provided information that revealed that the separated 
workers worked in the distribution center that was part of the Gund 
Division in Edison, New Jersey (TA-W-73,479). Based on this 
information, the Department determined that the subject worker group 
was not Enesco LLC, Itasca, Illinois but Enesco-Edison.
    In the request for reconsideration, the State Workforce Office 
stated that a worker who was in the ``Regulatory Compliance/Quality 
Assurance Department of Enseco, LLC, located in Itasca, Illinois'' had 
``spent over 6 hours on the conference call with China, training 
someone to perform her duties.'' The State Workforce Office further 
alleges that ``all of the Regulatory Compliance/Quality Assurance 
Department of Enseco LLC was transferred to Hong Kong.'' In support of 
the allegations, the State Workforce Office provided a document titled 
``Letter to supplier regarding QA & QC'' that states ``We have expanded 
our team both in China as well as in our Hong Kong office'' (dated 
March 6, 2009).
    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 
misinterpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of 
the decision.
    The initial negative determination was based on the findings that 
Enesco-Edison did not shift to/acquire from a foreign country the 
supply of services like or directly competitive with the services 
supplied by the workers; that the workers' separation, or threat of 
separation, was not related to an increase in imports of like or 
directly competitive services; and that the workers are not adversely 
affected secondary workers.
    During the reconsideration investigation, the Department contacted 
Enesco, LLC and obtained information regarding Enesco, LLC, Itasca, 
Illinois (Enesco-Itasca) and the worker on whose behalf the petition 
and request for reconsideration were filed.
    New information provided by the subject firm revealed that there is 
no Regulatory Compliance/Quality Assurance Department; that workers at 
Enesco-Itasca are separately identifiable by division and separately 
identifiable within each division by service supplied; and that the 
worker on whose behalf the petition and the request for reconsideration 
were filed worked in the logistics division of Enesco-Itasca and 
supplied quality control services related to the production of toys. 
Further, Enesco-Itasca does not produce toys; rather, Enesco-Itasca 
supplies services related to the sales, marketing and development of 
toys.
    Additional information obtained during the reconsideration 
investigation revealed that the group eligibility

[[Page 27668]]

requirements under Section 222(a) and (c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a) 
and (c), have not been met. 29 CFR 90.2 states that a significant 
number or proportion of the workers means at least three workers in a 
firm (or appropriate subdivision thereof) with a workforce of fewer 
than 50 workers, or five percent of the workers or 50 workers, 
whichever is less, in a workforce of 50 or more workers.
    Although the Department was able to confirm separations at the 
Itasca, Illinois facility, the number or proportion of workers totally 
or partially separated, or threatened with such separation, at Enesco, 
LLC, Itasca, Illinois, does not meet the regulatory definition.

Conclusion

    After reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of negative 
determination of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance 
for workers and former workers of Enesco, LLC, Itasca, Illinois (TA-W-
73,479A).

    Signed in Washington, DC, on this 2nd day of May, 2011.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2011-11640 Filed 5-11-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P