Midas International Corporation, Muffler Corporation of America Division, Hartford Manufacturing Facility, Hartford, WI; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 76890-76891 [E5-7957]

Download as PDF 76890 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 28, 2005 / Notices Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than January 9, 2006. 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 January 9, 2006. 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 20th day of December 2005. Erica R. Cantor, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. APPENDIX.—TAA PETITIONS INSTITUTED BETWEEN 12/5/05 AND 12/9/05 TA–W Subject firm (Petitioners) Location 58453 .......... 58454 .......... 58455 .......... 58456 .......... 58457 .......... 58458 .......... 58459 .......... 58460 .......... 58461 .......... 58462 .......... 58463 .......... 58464 .......... 58465 .......... 58466 .......... 58467 .......... 58468 .......... 58469 .......... 58470 .......... 58471 .......... 58472 .......... 58473 .......... 58474 .......... 58475 .......... 58475A ........ 58475C ........ 58475D ........ 58475B ........ 58476 .......... 58477 .......... 58478 .......... 58479 .......... 58480 .......... 58481 .......... 58482 .......... 58483 .......... 58484 .......... 58485 .......... 58486 .......... 58487 .......... 58488 .......... 58489 .......... 58490 .......... Leggett and Platt (Wkrs) ................................................................... Metso Automation (State) ................................................................. Sturgis Foundry Corp. (Wkrs) ........................................................... WestPoint Home (Comp) .................................................................. Sonoco Products Company (Comp) ................................................. Hitchcock Chair Company (Comp) ................................................... SJP Corp. (Comp) ............................................................................. Glenoit Fabrics (Comp) ..................................................................... Jaderloon Co., Inc. (Comp) ............................................................... Key Plastics (Wkrs) ........................................................................... Nexus Custom Electronics Corp. (Comp) ......................................... South-Eastern Fabrics Corp. (Comp) ............................................... JB Woven Labels (USA), Inc. (Comp) .............................................. Royal Indemnity Co. (Wkrs) .............................................................. Scottsburg Plastics, Inc. (Comp) ...................................................... Candor Hosiery Mills, Inc. (Comp) .................................................... Rockford Corporation (Wkrs) ............................................................ Great Lakes Industry, Inc. (Comp) ................................................... Columbia Gas of Ohio (Comp) ......................................................... Visteon Systems, LLC (Comp) ......................................................... National Textiles (Wkrs) .................................................................... IBM Global Services (Wkrs) .............................................................. Pendleton Woolen Mills, Inc. (Comp) ............................................... Pendleton Woolen Mills, Inc. (Comp) ............................................... Pendleton Woolen Mills, Inc. (Comp) ............................................... Pendleton Woolen Mills, Inc. (Comp) ............................................... Pendleton Woolen Mills, Inc. (Comp) ............................................... Orban CRL (State) ............................................................................ Dolce, Inc. (State) ............................................................................. Rich Products Manufacturing Corp. (BCU) ....................................... FYC Apparel Donna Ricco (Wkrs) .................................................... LeSportsac, Inc. (Comp) ................................................................... Collins and Aikman (Comp) .............................................................. Dan River Inc. (Comp) ...................................................................... Reed and Barton Silversmiths (RWDSU) ......................................... Big River Zinc Corporation (USW) .................................................... Rawlings Sporting Goods (Wkrs) ...................................................... Hewlett Packard () ............................................................................ US Airways (CWA) ............................................................................ River City Metal Products (Comp) .................................................... Tricon Industries, Inc. (Wkrs) ............................................................ Greeneville Casting, Inc. (Comp) ...................................................... Cedar City, UT ................... Shrewsbury, MA ................. Sturgis, MI .......................... Valley, AL ........................... Charlotte, NC ..................... New Hartford, CT ............... Rutherford, NJ .................... Tarboro, NC ....................... Burleson, TX ...................... Hartford City, IN ................. Woburn, MA ....................... Conover, NC ...................... San Francisco, CA ............. Charlotte, NC ..................... Scottsburg, IN .................... Robbins, NC ....................... Walker, MI .......................... Jackson, MI ........................ Lorain, OH .......................... Bedford, IN ......................... China Grove, NC ................ Oakbrook, IL ....................... Portland, OR ...................... Milwaukie, OR .................... Washougal, WA ................. Pendleton, OR .................... Bellevue, NE ...................... San Leandro, CA ............... Los Angeles, CA ................ Winchester, VA .................. East Haven, CT .................. Stearns, KY ........................ El Paso, TX ........................ Morven, NC ........................ Taunton, MA ....................... Sauget, IL ........................... Licking, MO ........................ Omaha, NE ........................ Pittsburgh, PA .................... Keokuk, IA .......................... Downers Grove, IL ............. Greeneville, TN .................. [FR Doc. E5–7956 Filed 12–27–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–30–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES [TA–W–58,360] Magna International, Red Oak, IA; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to section 221 of the November 17, 2005 in response to a VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:37 Dec 27, 2005 Jkt 208001 worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Magna International, Red Oak, Iowa. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC, this 8th day of December 2005. Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5–7959 Filed 12–27–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–30–P PO 00000 Frm 00156 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Date of institution 12/05/05 12/05/05 12/05/05 12/05/05 12/05/05 12/05/05 12/05/05 12/05/05 12/06/05 12/06/05 12/06/05 12/06/05 12/06/05 12/06/05 12/06/05 12/06/05 12/06/05 12/06/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/08/05 12/08/05 12/08/05 12/08/05 12/08/05 12/09/05 12/09/05 12/09/05 12/09/05 Date of petition 11/30/05 12/02/05 11/22/05 12/02/05 12/02/05 12/02/05 11/17/05 12/05/05 11/28/05 12/02/05 11/30/05 11/30/05 12/04/05 11/21/05 12/06/05 12/05/05 11/29/05 11/28/05 12/05/05 11/30/05 11/28/05 11/28/05 11/16/05 11/16/05 11/16/05 11/16/05 11/16/05 11/18/05 11/29/05 12/01/05 12/01/05 11/30/05 12/07/05 12/08/05 12/07/05 12/07/05 12/05/05 12/06/05 12/05/05 12/05/05 09/13/05 12/08/05 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–57,657] Midas International Corporation, Muffler Corporation of America Division, Hartford Manufacturing Facility, Hartford, WI; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration By application of November 4, 2005, United Steelworkers of America, Local E:\FR\FM\28DEN1.SGM 28DEN1 wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 28, 2005 / Notices 2–152 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 12, 2005, and published in the Federal Register on October 6, 2005 (70 FR 58476). 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 petition for the workers of Midas International Corporation, Muffler Corporation of America Division, Hartford Manufacturing Facility, Hartford, Wisconsin engaged in production of automotive muffler and exhaust products for the aftermarket was denied because the ‘‘contributed importantly’’ group eligibility requirement of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, was not met, nor was there a shift in production from that firm to a foreign country. The ‘‘contributed importantly’’ test is generally demonstrated through a survey of the workers’ firm’s customers. The survey revealed no imports of automotive muffler and exhaust products during the relevant period. The subject firm did not import automotive muffler and exhaust products nor did it shift production to a foreign country during the relevant period. The petitioner states that the affected workers lost their jobs as a result of the subject firm ‘‘exiting the manufacturing portion of the business’’ and its consequent decision to purchase automotive muffler and exhaust products from a different vendor. The petitioner alleges that because this vendor has ‘‘120 manufacturing facilities in 25 countries’’, there naturally should be imported automotive muffler and exhaust products sold to the subject firm. The petitioner states that because the new vendor is a global producer of automotive muffler and exhaust products, the workers of the subject firm should be eligible for TAA. To support the above allegations, the petitioner attached news articles from companies’ VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:37 Dec 27, 2005 Jkt 208001 websites which contain information on Midas International’s new supplier of automotive muffler and exhaust products. A company official was contacted regarding the above allegations. The company official confirmed what was revealed during the initial investigation. In particular, the official stated that Midas International Corporation’s actions in ceasing its production of automotive muffler and exhaust products was a reflection of company’s strategic desire to be a retailer, combined with the reduction in the size of the overall market for exhaust systems. The official provided the name of the vendor which supplies automotive muffler and exhaust products to Midas International. This is the same vendor indicated by the petitioner in the request for reconsideration. The Department conducted a survey of the vendor regarding its manufacturing of automotive muffler and exhaust products. The survey revealed that the majority of automotive mufflers and exhaust products sold to Midas International is manufactured in the United States and only a small fraction of automotive mufflers and exhaust products is imported. Moreover, the survey revealed an insignificant amount of vendor’s overall imports of automotive muffler and exhaust products during the relevant time period. The petitioner also attached abstracts from the publication by the United States International Trade Commission (USITC) which contain information on imports of mufflers and exhaust pipes from 1999 to 2003 and a printout from the USITC website which shows an eight percent increase in U.S. aggregate imports of motor vehicle parts from January through August of 2005 when compared with the same period in 2004. In order to establish import impact, the Department must consider imports that are like or directly competitive with those produced at the subject firm within a year prior to the date of the petition. Thus the period ending in 2003 is outside of the relevant period as established by the current petition date of July 30, 2005. Information on imports of motor vehicle parts does not provide import information on specific types of motor parts, such as automotive mufflers and exhaust products and thus is also irrelevant in this investigation. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00157 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 76891 facts which would justify reconsideration of the Department of Labor’s prior decision. Accordingly, the application is denied. Signed at Washington, DC, day 13th of December, 2005. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5–7957 Filed 12–27–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–30–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W–58,475, TA-W–58,475A, and TA-W– 58,475B] Pendleton Woolen Mills, Inc., Corporate Headquarters, Portland, OR; Menswear Distribution Center, Milwaukie, OR; Bellevue Plant, Bellevue, NE; Washougal Mill, Washougal, WA; and Pendelton Mill, Pendelton, OR; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on December 7, 2005 in response to a worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Pendleton Woolen Mills, Inc., Corporate headquarters, Portland Oregon; Menswear Distribution Center, Milwaukie, Oregon; Bellevue Plant, Bellevue, Nebraska; Washougal Mill, Washougal, Washington and Pendleton Mill, Pendleton, Oregon. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 14th day of December 2005. Richard Church, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E5–7961 Filed 12–27–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–30–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–58,356] The Rug Barn, Abbeville, SC; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on November 15, 2005 in response to a worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at The Rug Barn, Abbeville, South Carolina. E:\FR\FM\28DEN1.SGM 28DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 248 (Wednesday, December 28, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76890-76891]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-7957]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-57,657]


Midas International Corporation, Muffler Corporation of America 
Division, Hartford Manufacturing Facility, Hartford, WI; Notice of 
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application of November 4, 2005, United Steelworkers of America, 
Local

[[Page 76891]]

2-152 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 12, 
2005, and published in the Federal Register on October 6, 2005 (70 FR 
58476).
    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 petition for the workers of Midas International Corporation, 
Muffler Corporation of America Division, Hartford Manufacturing 
Facility, Hartford, Wisconsin engaged in production of automotive 
muffler and exhaust products for the aftermarket was denied because the 
``contributed importantly'' group eligibility requirement of Section 
222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, was not met, nor was there a 
shift in production from that firm to a foreign country. The 
``contributed importantly'' test is generally demonstrated through a 
survey of the workers' firm's customers. The survey revealed no imports 
of automotive muffler and exhaust products during the relevant period. 
The subject firm did not import automotive muffler and exhaust products 
nor did it shift production to a foreign country during the relevant 
period.
    The petitioner states that the affected workers lost their jobs as 
a result of the subject firm ``exiting the manufacturing portion of the 
business'' and its consequent decision to purchase automotive muffler 
and exhaust products from a different vendor. The petitioner alleges 
that because this vendor has ``120 manufacturing facilities in 25 
countries'', there naturally should be imported automotive muffler and 
exhaust products sold to the subject firm. The petitioner states that 
because the new vendor is a global producer of automotive muffler and 
exhaust products, the workers of the subject firm should be eligible 
for TAA. To support the above allegations, the petitioner attached news 
articles from companies' websites which contain information on Midas 
International's new supplier of automotive muffler and exhaust 
products.
    A company official was contacted regarding the above allegations. 
The company official confirmed what was revealed during the initial 
investigation. In particular, the official stated that Midas 
International Corporation's actions in ceasing its production of 
automotive muffler and exhaust products was a reflection of company's 
strategic desire to be a retailer, combined with the reduction in the 
size of the overall market for exhaust systems. The official provided 
the name of the vendor which supplies automotive muffler and exhaust 
products to Midas International. This is the same vendor indicated by 
the petitioner in the request for reconsideration.
    The Department conducted a survey of the vendor regarding its 
manufacturing of automotive muffler and exhaust products. The survey 
revealed that the majority of automotive mufflers and exhaust products 
sold to Midas International is manufactured in the United States and 
only a small fraction of automotive mufflers and exhaust products is 
imported. Moreover, the survey revealed an insignificant amount of 
vendor's overall imports of automotive muffler and exhaust products 
during the relevant time period.
    The petitioner also attached abstracts from the publication by the 
United States International Trade Commission (USITC) which contain 
information on imports of mufflers and exhaust pipes from 1999 to 2003 
and a printout from the USITC website which shows an eight percent 
increase in U.S. aggregate imports of motor vehicle parts from January 
through August of 2005 when compared with the same period in 2004.
    In order to establish import impact, the Department must consider 
imports that are like or directly competitive with those produced at 
the subject firm within a year prior to the date of the petition. Thus 
the period ending in 2003 is outside of the relevant period as 
established by the current petition date of July 30, 2005. Information 
on imports of motor vehicle parts does not provide import information 
on specific types of motor parts, such as automotive mufflers and 
exhaust products and thus is also irrelevant in this investigation.

Conclusion

    After review of the application and investigative findings, I 
conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of the law 
or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of the Department 
of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the application is denied.

    Signed at Washington, DC, day 13th of December, 2005.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E5-7957 Filed 12-27-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P