Notice of Determinations Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance, 5747-5749 [E7-1953]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–60,832]
Notice of Determinations Regarding
Eligibility To Apply for Worker
Adjustment Assistance and Alternative
Trade Adjustment Assistance
Lear Corporation, Madisonville, KY;
Notice of Termination of Investigation
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended, an
investigation was initiated on January
25, 2007 in response to a worker
petition filed on behalf of workers of
Lear Corporation, Madisonville,
Kentucky.
This petition is a photocopy of the
petition filed on January 16, 2007, that
is the subject of an ongoing
investigation for which a determination
has not yet been issued (TA–W–60,764).
Since this petition was initiated in
error, the investigation has been
terminated.
Signed at Washington, DC this 29th day of
January 2007.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–1960 Filed 2–6–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–60,739]
Mega Brands, Rose Art Industries,
LLC, Wood-Ridge, NJ; Notice of
Termination of Investigation
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended, an
investigation was initiated on January
11, 2006, in response to a petition filed
on behalf of workers of Mega Brands,
Rose Art Industries, Wood-Ridge, New
Jersey.
This worker group is covered by an
existing certification. Workers of Rose
Art Industries, LLC, which is a
subsidiary of Mega Brands, Wood-Ridge,
New Jersey, were certified eligible to
apply for adjustment assistance on
January 29, 2007, under petition number
TA–W–60,319. Consequently, further
investigation would serve no purpose
and the investigation is terminated.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 30th day of
January 2007.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance
[FR Doc. E7–1959 Filed 2–6–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:36 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
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 January 15 through January 19,
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
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5747
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) 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 of 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
E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM
07FEN1
5748
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Notices
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.
None.
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–60,305; Steven Labels, Inc., Main
Plant, Santa Fe Springs, CA:
October 16, 2005.
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.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
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–60,449; Cambridge Lee
Industries, LLC, Plant #2 and Plant
#3 and Workers of Gage Personnal,
Reading, PA: November 9, 2005.
TA-W–60,449A; Cambridge Lee
Industries, LLC, Corporate Office,
Reading, PA: November 9, 2005.
TA-W–60,644; ISM Fastening Systems,
Butler, PA: May 6, 2006.
TA-W–60,658; Victor Mill, Inc.,
Greenville, SC: December 14, 2005.
TA-W–60,748; Eljer, Inc., Ford City, PA:
October 5, 2006.
TA-W–60,407; J.L. French Automotive
Castings, Inc., Benton Harbor, MI:
November 7, 2005.
TA-W–60,568; Fiberweb, Inc., Bethune,
SC: December 8, 2005.
TA-W–60,633; Alexvale Furniture Co.,
Plant Offices, Taylorsville, NC:
December 15, 2005.
TA-W–60,648; Potlatch Forest Products
Corp., Prescott, AR: December 19,
2005.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:36 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
TA-W–60,652; Celestica, Fulfillment
Services Division, Charlotte, NC:
December 19, 2005.
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–60,598; Checkpoint Caribbean
Limited, Ponce, PR: December 13,
2005.
TA-W–60,603; Wetherill Associates,
Inc., Royersford, PA: December 7,
2005.
TA-W–60,619; Alcan Packaging, Inc.,
Lincoln Park, NJ: December 1, 2005.
TA-W–60,628; Quadra Fab Corporation,
Plattsburgh, NY: December 15,
2005.
TA-W–60,646; Hollister, Inc., Kirksville
Manufacturing Facility, Kirksville,
MO: February 12, 2006.
TA-W–60,686: Simonds Industries, Inc.,
File Division, Newcomerstown, OH:
December 28, 2005.
TA-W–60,688; Lego Systems, Inc., OnSite Workers From Staff
Management, Enfield, CT: January
2, 2006.
TA-W–60,735; Waterloo Industries, Inc.,
Pocahontas, AR: January 9, 2006.
TA-W–60,583; Pulaski Furniture
Corporation, Plant 1, Pulaski, VA:
December 12, 2005.
TA-W–60,583A; Pulaski Furniture
Corporation, Administration Office,
Pulaski, VA: December 12, 2005.
TA-W–60,671; Dura Automotive
Systems, Inc., Atwood Mobile
Products, West Union, IA:
December 21, 2005.
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–60,582; Harodite Industries, Inc.,
Southern Division, Travelers Rest,
SC: December 11, 2005.
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.
TA-W–60,476; Ultraflex, Division of
Hickory Springs Mfg., High Point,
NC: November 22, 2005.
Negative Determinations for Alternative
Trade Adjustment Assistance
In the following cases, it has been
determined that the requirements of
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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. Workers at the firm are 50 years of
age or older.
None.
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–60,305: Steven Labels, Inc., Main
Plant, Santa Fe Springs, CA.
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–60,618; Lockheed Martin MS2,
Surface Systems Division,
Moorestown, NJ.
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–60,624; R and A Tool and
Engineering, Westland, MI.
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–60,305A; Steven Labels, Inc.,
Membrane Plant, Santa Fe Springs,
CA.
TA–W–60,305B; Steven Labels, Inc., Roll
Label Plant, Santa Fe Springs, CA.
TA–W–60,499; Eaton Corporation,
Engine Air Management
Operations, Belmond, IA.
TA–W–60,683; Chesmore Seed
Company, St. Joseph, MO.
The investigation revealed that the
predominate cause of worker
separations is unrelated to criteria
(a)(2)(A)(I.C.) (increased imports) and
(a)(2)(B)(II.C) (shift in production to a
foreign country under a free trade
agreement or a beneficiary country
E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM
07FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Notices
under a preferential trade agreement, or
there has been or is likely to be an
increase in imports).
None.
The workers’ firm does not produce
an article as required for certification
under Section 222 of the Trade Act of
1974.
TA–W–60,488; Tellabs, Inc., Customer
Distribution Center, Petaluma, CA.
TA–W–60,698; Commonwealth Sprague
Capacitor, Inc., North Adams, MA.
TA–W–60,447; Honeywell International,
Inc., Aerospace Information
Technology Function, Phoenix, AZ.
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 January 15
through January 19, 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: January 26, 2007.
Ralph Dibattista,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–1953 Filed 2–6–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–55,495]
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Tesco Technologies, LLC,
Headquarters Office, Auburn Hills, MI;
Notice of Revised Determination on
Second Remand
On November 9, 2006, the United
States Court of International Trade
(USCIT) remanded Former Employees of
Tesco Technologies, LLC v. United
States (Court No. 05–00264) to the
Department of Labor (Department) for
further investigation.
In the August 19, 2004, Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and
Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance (ATAA) petition, three
workers identified Tesco Engineering as
the subject company and the article
produced as ‘‘designs for tooling and
production lines for General Motors
automotive assembly plants.’’ The
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:36 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
petitioners alleged that Tesco
Engineering was shifting production to
a foreign country.
During the investigation, it was
revealed that Tesco Engineering
manufactured equipment, while
workers at Tesco Technologies, LLC
(‘‘Tesco Technologies’’), a subsidiary of
Tesco Engineering, created mechanical
designs used to build equipment for
automotive part production. Since the
petitioners created designs and did not
produce equipment, the Department
identified Tesco Technologies as the
proper subject company.
Because the Department considered
design creation not to be production, the
Department concluded that the
designers of Tesco Technologies could
be certified only if they supported an
affiliated, TAA-certifiable, domestic,
production facility. Although Tesco
Technologies’ designs accounted for an
insignificant portion of the equipment
produced at Tesco Engineering, the
Department nonetheless fully
investigated whether, during the
relevant period, there were increased
imports of production/assembly
equipment or a shift of production from
Tesco Engineering to an overseas
facility.
The expanded investigation revealed
that Tesco Engineering neither shifted
production to a foreign country nor
imported any equipment during the
relevant period. Further, a survey of
Tesco Engineering’s major declining
customers revealed that, during the
relevant period, no customer increased
its import purchases while decreasing
its purchases from the subject firm.
On September 27, 2004, the
Department issued a denial regarding
workers’ eligibility to apply for TAA
and ATAA for workers of Tesco
Technologies, LLC, Headquarters Office,
Auburn Hills, Michigan. The
determination was based on the findings
that there was neither an increase in
imports of equipment by Tesco
Engineering or its major declining
customers, nor a shift of production
overseas by Tesco Engineering. The
Department published the Notice of
determination in the Federal Register
on October 26, 2004 (69 FR 62460).
By application dated October 22,
2004, the petitioner requested
administrative reconsideration of the
Department’s determination. On
December 7, 2004, the Department
issued a Notice of Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration due to factual
discrepancies identified during the
review of the request and of previouslysubmitted documents. The Department’s
Notice was published in the Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5749
Register on December 20, 2004 (69 FR
76017).
In the request for reconsideration, the
petitioner identified the subject
company as ‘‘Tesco Technologies, LLC,
Auburn Hills, Michigan’’ and asserted
that ‘‘we the petitioners are connected
to General Motors tooling only,’’
reiterated that designs are a product,
and inferred that designers are de facto
production workers producing
automobile parts for General Motors.
The petitioner also implied that the
subject company’s major customer,
General Motors, had outsourced work to
India.
During the reconsideration
investigation, the Department contacted
a Tesco Technologies official, the
General Motors officials identified by
the petitioner, and the General Motors
official who supervised the design
contract at issue.
During the reconsideration
investigation, the Department confirmed
that the petitioners used application
software to develop tooling designs
which were used to build equipment for
the production of automobile parts for
General Motors; the designs are
developed at Tesco Technologies,
Auburn Hills, Michigan and sent to the
customer via electronic means (such as
the Internet) and tangible means (such
as CD–ROM); and General Motors did
not outsource work overseas but
awarded the work to another domestic
company and moved some design work
in-house.
On January 11, 2005, the Department
issued a Notice of Negative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration which stated there
was neither a shift of production abroad
by Tesco Technologies nor any
outsourcing of design work overseas by
General Motors. The Department’s
Notice was published in the Federal
Register on January 21, 2005 (70 FR
3228).
By letter dated February 8, 2005, the
petitioners appealed to the USCIT for
judicial review. On May 25, 2005, the
USCIT granted the Department’s motion
for voluntary remand to clarify the
Department’s basis for the negative
determination on reconsideration and to
request additional information in the
Department’s efforts to clarify the
reasons for the previous determinations.
In the request for judicial review, the
petitioners alleged that engineers were
brought in from India to train at Tesco
Technologies; later, the engineers were
sent back to India to a General Motors
facility; and ‘‘work is sent over to India
via satellite in the evening and sent back
for check and inspection in the
E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM
07FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 25 (Wednesday, February 7, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5747-5749]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-1953]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 January
15 through January 19, 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) 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 of 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
[[Page 5748]]
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.
None.
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-60,305; Steven Labels, Inc., Main Plant, Santa Fe Springs, CA:
October 16, 2005.
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-60,449; Cambridge Lee Industries, LLC, Plant #2 and Plant #3 and
Workers of Gage Personnal, Reading, PA: November 9, 2005.
TA-W-60,449A; Cambridge Lee Industries, LLC, Corporate Office, Reading,
PA: November 9, 2005.
TA-W-60,644; ISM Fastening Systems, Butler, PA: May 6, 2006.
TA-W-60,658; Victor Mill, Inc., Greenville, SC: December 14, 2005.
TA-W-60,748; Eljer, Inc., Ford City, PA: October 5, 2006.
TA-W-60,407; J.L. French Automotive Castings, Inc., Benton Harbor, MI:
November 7, 2005.
TA-W-60,568; Fiberweb, Inc., Bethune, SC: December 8, 2005.
TA-W-60,633; Alexvale Furniture Co., Plant Offices, Taylorsville, NC:
December 15, 2005.
TA-W-60,648; Potlatch Forest Products Corp., Prescott, AR: December 19,
2005.
TA-W-60,652; Celestica, Fulfillment Services Division, Charlotte, NC:
December 19, 2005.
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-60,598; Checkpoint Caribbean Limited, Ponce, PR: December 13,
2005.
TA-W-60,603; Wetherill Associates, Inc., Royersford, PA: December 7,
2005.
TA-W-60,619; Alcan Packaging, Inc., Lincoln Park, NJ: December 1, 2005.
TA-W-60,628; Quadra Fab Corporation, Plattsburgh, NY: December 15,
2005.
TA-W-60,646; Hollister, Inc., Kirksville Manufacturing Facility,
Kirksville, MO: February 12, 2006.
TA-W-60,686: Simonds Industries, Inc., File Division, Newcomerstown,
OH: December 28, 2005.
TA-W-60,688; Lego Systems, Inc., On-Site Workers From Staff Management,
Enfield, CT: January 2, 2006.
TA-W-60,735; Waterloo Industries, Inc., Pocahontas, AR: January 9,
2006.
TA-W-60,583; Pulaski Furniture Corporation, Plant 1, Pulaski, VA:
December 12, 2005.
TA-W-60,583A; Pulaski Furniture Corporation, Administration Office,
Pulaski, VA: December 12, 2005.
TA-W-60,671; Dura Automotive Systems, Inc., Atwood Mobile Products,
West Union, IA: December 21, 2005.
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-60,582; Harodite Industries, Inc., Southern Division, Travelers
Rest, SC: December 11, 2005.
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.
TA-W-60,476; Ultraflex, Division of Hickory Springs Mfg., High Point,
NC: November 22, 2005.
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. Workers at the firm are 50 years of age or older.
None.
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-60,305: Steven Labels, Inc., Main Plant, Santa Fe Springs, CA.
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-60,618; Lockheed Martin MS2, Surface Systems Division, Moorestown,
NJ.
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-60,624; R and A Tool and Engineering, Westland, MI.
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-60,305A; Steven Labels, Inc., Membrane Plant, Santa Fe Springs,
CA.
TA-W-60,305B; Steven Labels, Inc., Roll Label Plant, Santa Fe Springs,
CA.
TA-W-60,499; Eaton Corporation, Engine Air Management Operations,
Belmond, IA.
TA-W-60,683; Chesmore Seed Company, St. Joseph, MO.
The investigation revealed that the predominate cause of worker
separations is unrelated to criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C.) (increased
imports) and (a)(2)(B)(II.C) (shift in production to a foreign country
under a free trade agreement or a beneficiary country
[[Page 5749]]
under a preferential trade agreement, or there has been or is likely to
be an increase in imports).
None.
The workers' firm does not produce an article as required for
certification under Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974.
TA-W-60,488; Tellabs, Inc., Customer Distribution Center, Petaluma, CA.
TA-W-60,698; Commonwealth Sprague Capacitor, Inc., North Adams, MA.
TA-W-60,447; Honeywell International, Inc., Aerospace Information
Technology Function, Phoenix, AZ.
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 January 15 through January 19, 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: January 26, 2007.
Ralph Dibattista,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7-1953 Filed 2-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
