Thomson, Inc., Circlesville Glass Operations, Circleville, OH; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance, 5750-5751 [E7-1954]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
5750
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Notices
morning’’ (implying that designs were
being imported).
In order for the Plaintiffs to be
certified for TAA based on a shift of
production, it must be shown that there
was:
(1) A significant portion or number of
workers at the subject company
separated or threatened with separation
during the relevant period; and
(2) either—(a) A shift in production of
articles like or directly competitive with
those produced by the subject worker
group to a country that is party to a free
trade agreement with the United States,
or a country that is named as a
beneficiary under the Andean Trade
Preference Act, the African Growth and
Opportunity Act or the Caribbean Basin
Economic Recovery Act, or (b) a shift of
production abroad followed by actual or
increased imports of articles like or
directly competitive with those
produced by the subject worker group.
Because it was shown that at least five
percent of workers at Tesco
Technologies were separated during the
relevant period, the worker separation
criterion was met.
Because India is not a country that is
party to a free trade agreement with the
United States, or a country that is
named as a beneficiary under the
Andean Trade Preference Act, the
African Growth and Opportunity Act or
the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery
Act, the only issue in the first remand
investigation was whether, during the
relevant period, there was a shift of
production abroad of articles like or
directly competitive with those
produced by Tesco Technologies
followed by actual or threatened
increased imports of articles like or
directly competitive with those created
at Tesco Technologies.
Under the Department’s interpretation
of ‘‘like or directly competitive,’’ (29
CFR 90.2) ‘‘like’’ articles are those
articles which are substantially identical
in inherent or intrinsic characteristics
and ‘‘directly competitive’’ articles are
those articles which are substantially
equivalent for commercial purposes
(essentially interchangeable and
adapted to the same uses), even though
the articles may not be substantially
identical in their inherent or intrinsic
characteristics.
During the first remand investigation,
the Department determined that because
each design created by the workers is
‘‘unique,’’ there could not be any
articles which are like or directly
competitive with any design produced
by Tesco Technologies and,
consequently, the shift of production
criterion could not be met.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:36 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
The Notice of Negative Determination
on Remand applicable to the subject
workers was issued on July 25, 2005 and
the Notice of determination was
published in the Federal Register on
August 5, 2005 (70 FR 45438).
In its November 9, 2006 opinion, the
USCIT remanded the case at hand to the
Department for further investigation.
Since the Notice of Negative
Determination on Remand applicable to
the subject firm was issued, the
Department has clarified its policy to
acknowledge that, under certain
circumstances, there may be articles
which are like or directly competitive to
a ‘‘unique’’ article.
Reviewing the relevant facts with the
foregoing in mind, the Department has
determined that, during the relevant
period, a significant portion of workers
was separated from the subject facility,
design production shifted abroad, and
the subject firm increased its imports of
designs following the shift.
In accordance with Section 246 the
Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as
amended, the Department herein
presents the results of its investigation
regarding certification of eligibility to
apply for ATAA for older workers. In
order for the Department to issue a
certification of eligibility to apply for
ATAA, the group eligibility
requirements of Section 246 of the
Trade Act must be met. The Department
has determined in the case at hand that
the requirements of Section 246 have
been met.
A significant number of workers at the
firm are age 50 or over and possess
skills that are not easily transferable.
Competitive conditions within the
industry are adverse.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts
generated through the second remand
investigation, I determine that a shift in
production abroad of articles like or
directly competitive to that produced at
the subject facilities followed by
increased imports of such articles
contributed to the total or partial
separation of a significant number or
proportion of workers at the subject
facility. In accordance with the
provisions of the Act, I make the
following certification:
All workers of Tesco Technologies, LLC,
Headquarters Office, Auburn Hills, Michigan,
who became totally or partially separated
from employment on or after August 19,
2003, through two years from the issuance of
this revised determination, are eligible to
apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance under
Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are
eligible to apply for Alternative Trade
Adjustment Assistance under Section 246 of
the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Signed at Washington, DC this 26th day of
January 2007.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–1955 Filed 2–6–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–52,274]
Thomson, Inc., Circlesville Glass
Operations, Circleville, OH; Amended
Certification Regarding Eligibility To
Apply for Worker Adjustment
Assistance and Alternative Trade
Adjustment Assistance
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
certification of eligibility to apply for
Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) on
August 7, 2003, applicable to workers
and former workers of Thomson, Inc.,
Circleville Glass Operations, Circleville,
Ohio. The Department’s Notice was
published in the Federal Register on
September 2, 2003 (68 FR 52228). The
workers were engaged in the production
of glass components of picture tubes
prior to the subject firm’s closure in
June 2004.
On March 8, 2005, the Department
issued a certification of eligibility for
Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance (ATAA) covering workers of
the subject firm separated from
employment on or after June 27, 2002
through August 7, 2005. The
Department’s Notice was published in
the Federal Register on April 1, 2005
(70 FR 16851).
Even though production activity
ceased in June 2004, the State of Ohio
required the subject firm to submit
within ninety days a cessation of
operations plan and to undertake an 18month process for the identification and
remediation of any hazards left over
from the manufacturing process. At the
time of the shutdown, the subject firm
retained fifteen employees (‘‘shutdown
workers’’) solely for purposes of the
shutdown process.
The shutdown workers subsequently
petitioned for TAA/ATAA benefits (TA–
W–59,118), referring to TA–W–52,274
for support. The Department determined
in TA–W–59,118 that the shutdown
workers were ineligible for benefits
because there was no production at the
subject facility during the relevant
E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM
07FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 7, 2007 / Notices
period. The petitioners appealed the
Department’s negative determination to
the U.S. Court of International Trade
(Court No. 06–00266). The Department
subsequently obtained a voluntary
remand for the purpose of further
review and a redetermination of the
workers’ eligibility to apply for worker
adjustment assistance.
During the ensuing remand process
for TA–W–59,118, the Department
determined that there was a causal
nexus between the subject firm’s
shutdown of operations and the
shutdown workers’ separations and that,
therefore, the separations of the workers
through December 31, 2006 are
attributable to the conditions specified
in section 222 of the Trade Act. The
Department has further determined that,
given the particular facts presented, it is
appropriate to amend the certification of
the immediate petition to include those
workers involved in cessation of
operations activities who were
separated after August 7, 2005.
The Department’s decision in this
case is limited to the precise
circumstances of this specific case and
should not be considered as any
indication of how the Department
would proceed in other cases or in any
subsequent rulemaking on this subject.
The amended notice applicable to
TA–W–52,274 is hereby issued as
follows:
‘‘All workers of Thomson, Inc., Circleville
Glass Operations, Circleville, Ohio (TA–W–
52,274), who became totally or partially
separated from employment on or after June
27, 2002 through December 31, 2006, 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.’’
Signed at Washington, DC, this 25th day of
January 2007.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–1954 Filed 2–6–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
[TA–W–59,118]
Thomson, Inc., Circleville, OH; Notice
of Termination of Investigation
On October 27, 2006, the U.S. Court
of International Trade (USCIT) granted
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:36 Feb 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
the Department of Labor’s consent
motion for voluntary remand in Former
Employees of Thomson, Inc. v. United
States, Court No. 06–0266.
On March 24, 2006, three workers
filed a petition for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade
Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) on
behalf of workers and former workers of
Thomson, Inc., Circleville, Ohio. The
petition stated that the subject workers’
task was ‘‘decommission facility,’’ that
the facility closed on June 25, 2004, that
the subject facility was previously
certified (TA–W–52,274; expired), and
that the ‘‘remaining employees should
be considered for benefits.’’
On May 10, 2006, the Department of
Labor (Department) issued a negative
determination regarding the subject
worker group’s eligibility to apply for
TAA and ATAA, stating that the
workers do not produce an article
within the meaning of the Trade Act of
1974. The Department’s Notice of
determination was published in the
Federal Register on May 24, 2006 (71
FR 29984).
In a letter dated May 24, 2006, three
workers requested administrative
reconsideration by the Department. The
workers implied that because the
petitioning worker group is part of the
group certified under TA–W–52,274 and
remained working at the subject facility
after production ceased and beyond the
certification period for TA–W–52,274
(August 7, 2005), they should be
considered eligible to apply for TAA
and ATAA.
By letter dated June 19, 2006, the
Department dismissed the workers’
request for reconsideration. The
Department’s Notice of dismissal was
issued in June 20, 2006 and published
in the Federal Register on July 6, 2006
(71 FR 38425).
In a letter dated August 1, 2006, the
workers requested judicial review. In
the complaint, the workers stated that
the subject firm ceased operations in
April 2004, that they were employed
past April 2004 to ‘‘perform mandated
requirements under the Cessation of
Regulations Operations,’’ and ‘‘our jobs
were lost to foreign competition the
same as the other employees of
Thomson, Inc. in Circleville, Ohio.’’ In
response to the complaint, the
Department filed an administrative
record.
The Department subsequently moved
for a voluntary remand, so that the
Department could conduct a further
review and make a redetermination of
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5751
eligibility. On October 27, 2006, the
Department’s motion was granted.
During the initial investigation for
this petition, the Department was
informed by a company official that the
subject workers were employed in order
for the company to satisfy a Statemandated plant closure process. This
process required the company to submit
a ‘‘Cessation of Regulated Operations’’
(CRO) plan that addressed the removal
of all hazardous materials. The Stateapproved CRO plan required an 18month implementation schedule. The
subject facility ceased production in
April 2004 and entered the CRO phase
in June 2004.
After careful review during the
remand investigation, the Department
determines that the workers who
continued their employment with the
subject firm to execute the CRO plan
and complete shutdown functions are
part of the worker group covered by
TA–W–52,274. The Department’s
determination is based on the causal
nexus between the subject facility’s
closure and the workers’ separations.
On March 8, 2005, the Department
issued a certification of eligibility to
apply for ATAA under petition TA–W–
52,274. The Department’s Notice was
published in the Federal Register on
April 1, 2005 (70 FR 16851).
On January 25, 2007, the Department
amended the TAA/ATAA certification
of TA–W–52,274 to cover workers of the
subject firm separated from employment
on or after June 27, 2002 through
December 31, 2006.
Since the subject workers are covered
by TA–W–52–274, further investigation
in this case would serve no purpose and
the investigation has been terminated.
Conclusion
After careful review of the findings of
the remand investigation, I am
terminating the investigation of the
petition for worker adjustment
assistance filed on behalf of workers and
former workers of Thomson, Inc.,
Circleville, Ohio.
Signed at Washington, DC this 25th day of
January 2007.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7–1957 Filed 2–6–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM
07FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 25 (Wednesday, February 7, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5750-5751]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-1954]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-52,274]
Thomson, Inc., Circlesville Glass Operations, Circleville, OH;
Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker
Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance
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 certification of eligibility
to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) on August 7, 2003,
applicable to workers and former workers of Thomson, Inc., Circleville
Glass Operations, Circleville, Ohio. The Department's Notice was
published in the Federal Register on September 2, 2003 (68 FR 52228).
The workers were engaged in the production of glass components of
picture tubes prior to the subject firm's closure in June 2004.
On March 8, 2005, the Department issued a certification of
eligibility for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) covering
workers of the subject firm separated from employment on or after June
27, 2002 through August 7, 2005. The Department's Notice was published
in the Federal Register on April 1, 2005 (70 FR 16851).
Even though production activity ceased in June 2004, the State of
Ohio required the subject firm to submit within ninety days a cessation
of operations plan and to undertake an 18-month process for the
identification and remediation of any hazards left over from the
manufacturing process. At the time of the shutdown, the subject firm
retained fifteen employees (``shutdown workers'') solely for purposes
of the shutdown process.
The shutdown workers subsequently petitioned for TAA/ATAA benefits
(TA-W-59,118), referring to TA-W-52,274 for support. The Department
determined in TA-W-59,118 that the shutdown workers were ineligible for
benefits because there was no production at the subject facility during
the relevant
[[Page 5751]]
period. The petitioners appealed the Department's negative
determination to the U.S. Court of International Trade (Court No. 06-
00266). The Department subsequently obtained a voluntary remand for the
purpose of further review and a redetermination of the workers'
eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance.
During the ensuing remand process for TA-W-59,118, the Department
determined that there was a causal nexus between the subject firm's
shutdown of operations and the shutdown workers' separations and that,
therefore, the separations of the workers through December 31, 2006 are
attributable to the conditions specified in section 222 of the Trade
Act. The Department has further determined that, given the particular
facts presented, it is appropriate to amend the certification of the
immediate petition to include those workers involved in cessation of
operations activities who were separated after August 7, 2005.
The Department's decision in this case is limited to the precise
circumstances of this specific case and should not be considered as any
indication of how the Department would proceed in other cases or in any
subsequent rulemaking on this subject.
The amended notice applicable to TA-W-52,274 is hereby issued as
follows:
``All workers of Thomson, Inc., Circleville Glass Operations,
Circleville, Ohio (TA-W-52,274), who became totally or partially
separated from employment on or after June 27, 2002 through December
31, 2006, 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.''
Signed at Washington, DC, this 25th day of January 2007.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7-1954 Filed 2-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
