DaimlerChrysler Commercial Buses NC, Greensboro, NC; Notice of Termination of Investigation, 56739 [E5-5294]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 187 / Wednesday, September 28, 2005 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–57,716]
DaimlerChrysler Commercial Buses
NC, Greensboro, NC; Notice of
Termination of Investigation
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade
Act of 1974, an investigation was
initiated on August 11, 2005 in response
to a petition filed by a company official
on behalf of workers at DaimlerChrysler
Commercial Buses NC, Greensboro,
North Carolina.
The petitioner has requested that the
petition be withdrawn. Consequently,
the investigation has been terminated.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 25th day of
August, 2005.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E5–5294 Filed 9–27–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–55,395B]
Dana Undies, Colquitt, GA; Notice of
Revised Determination on Remand
On June 13, 2005, the United States
Court of International Trade (USCIT)
granted the Department of Labor’s
motion for voluntary remand in Former
Employees of Dana Undies v. U.S.
Department of Labor (Court No. 04–
00615).
A petition, dated August 5, 2004, for
Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and
Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance (ATAA) was filed on behalf
of workers and former workers of Dana
Undies facilities in Colquitt, Georgia;
Blakely, Georgia; and Arlington,
Georgia. The investigation revealed that
the workers of the Blakely and
Arlington facilities were adversely
affected by imports of infant’s, toddler’s,
boy’s and girl’s underwear, and
consequently the workers of the Blakely
and Arlington facilities were certified as
eligible to apply for TAA and ATAA on
September 14, 2004 (TA–W–55,395 and
TA–W–55,395A).
In the case of the Colquitt facility, the
investigation revealed that all of the
workers were separated more than one
year prior to the date of the petition.
Section 223(b)(1) of the Act specifies
that no certification may apply to any
worker whose last separation occurred
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:02 Sep 27, 2005
Jkt 205001
more than one year before the date of
the petition. Therefore, the September
14, 2004 notice included a negative
determination regarding eligibility to
apply for TAA and ATAA for the
Colquitt facility (TA–W–55,395B). The
Department’s notice of determinations
regarding eligibility to apply for TAA
and ATAA for the above facilities was
published in the Federal Register on
September 23, 2004 (69 FR 57089).
By letter dated October 7, 2004, the
petitioner requested administrative
reconsideration, stating that: ‘‘In January
2003, February 2003, July 2003, and
September 2003 myself (Alice DeBruyn)
and Ethel Haire told employees of the
Georgia Department of Labor in
Bainbridge, Georgia that the Colquitt
plant had been closed due to work going
out of the country, due to imports’’ and
that ‘‘the last pay date for the Colquitt
Plant was January 3, 2003.’’
By letter dated October 28, 2004, the
petitioner’s request for reconsideration
was dismissed based on the finding that
no new facts of a substantive nature
which would bear importantly on the
Department’s determination had been
provided by the petitioner. On
November 4, 2004, the Department’s
Dismissal of Application for
Reconsideration was issued. The
Department’s Notice of Dismissal was
published in the Federal Register on
November 12, 2004 (69 FR 65457).
On October 8, 2004, the petitioner
filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of
International Trade (‘‘USCIT’’). In the
amended complaint filed March 10,
2005, the petitioner suggested that the
Georgia Department of Labor, acting as
agent of the United States in the
administration of the TAA program,
advised the employees of the Colquitt
plant, during the year following their
termination, that they could not file a
petition for TAA and, thus, prevented
the employees from filing a petition
during the statutorily required period.
In its June 13, 2005 Order, the USCIT
granted the Department’s motion for a
voluntary remand to determine whether
the petitioners are eligible for
certification for worker adjustment
assistance benefits.
During the remand investigation, the
Department received an affidavit of the
petitioner’s allegations and contacted
numerous officials of the Georgia
Department of Labor to determine
whether the petitioners were indeed
prevented or discouraged from filing a
petition during the statutory period.
The remand investigation revealed
that, although no officials of the Georgia
Department of Labor recalled refusing to
allow any worker to submit a petition
for TAA group certification, at least
PO 00000
Frm 00118
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56739
some of them were under the
impression that the jobs of the Colquitt
plant had been transferred domestically
to the Blakely plant. This understanding
was, apparently, based on a
conversation between a Georgia
Department Labor official and a Dana
Undies Company official (whose name
could not be recalled).
Moreover, in the course of the remand
investigation, the petitioner submitted
an affidavit which states that, during the
statutory period, she and other
separated employees were told by
Georgia Department of Labor officials
that the Blakely plant was still in
operation and thus the Colquitt
terminations were not due to imports
but from lack of work and thus no
petition could be filed.
Based on the above, it seems likely
that, at a minimum, through a series of
miscommunications both between the
Dana Undies Company and the Georgia
Department of Labor, and between the
Georgia Department of Labor and the
affected employees of the Colquitt plant,
the Colquitt employees were led to
believe they would not be eligible for
TAA benefits. This generally coincides
with the allegations in the plaintiff’s
affidavit, which states that the plaintiff
sought to apply for TAA benefits during
the statutory period.
Therefore, the Department has
determined that it is appropriate to
investigate the workers’ eligibility to
apply for Trade Act benefits. Moreover,
since the petitioners are seeking
certification for eligibility to apply for
ATAA, the Department will assume that
the plaintiff intended to submit a
petition at the earliest time they could
apply for ATAA. The ATAA program
went into affect on August 6, 2003, so
the Department will consider the
petition submitted on that date.
In order to make an affirmative
determination and issue a certification
of eligibility to apply for TAA, the group
eligibility requirements in either
paragraph (a)(2)(A) or (a)(2)(B) of
Section 222 of the Trade Act must be
met. It is determined in this case that
the requirements of (a)(2)(B) of Section
222 have been met. The subject firm
separated a significant number of
workers, and shifted production of
infant and toddler underwear from the
Colquitt facility to China and Thailand.
Company imports of infant and toddler
underwear were likely to increase at the
time of the Colquitt plant’s closure, and
did increase soon thereafter.
Moreover, the investigation revealed
that all criteria regarding ATAA for the
subject worker group have been met. A
significant number or proportion of the
worker group are age fifty years or over,
E:\FR\FM\28SEN1.SGM
28SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 28, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 56739]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-5294]
[[Page 56739]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-57,716]
DaimlerChrysler Commercial Buses NC, Greensboro, NC; Notice of
Termination of Investigation
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation
was initiated on August 11, 2005 in response to a petition filed by a
company official on behalf of workers at DaimlerChrysler Commercial
Buses NC, Greensboro, North Carolina.
The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn.
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 25th day of August, 2005.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E5-5294 Filed 9-27-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P
