Russound Also Known as Folded Metal Products, Inc., Newmarket, NH; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 29783-29784 [E8-11372]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 100 / Thursday, May 22, 2008 / Notices
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. The firm does not have a
significant number of workers 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.
None.
The Department has determined that
criterion (3) of Section 246 has not been
met. Competition conditions within the
workers’ industry are not adverse.
None.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
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–63,113; Custom Metal Spinning,
Inc., Paramount, CA.
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–63,227; Belden, Mohawk
Division, Leominster, MA.
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–62,898; Finisar Corporation,
Advanced Optical Components
Division, Allen, TX.
TA–W–63,096; PolyVision Corporation,
Corona, CA.
TA–W–63,169; Batavia Transmissions,
LLC, A Subsidiary of Ford Motor
Company, Batavia, OH.
TA–W–63,029; Carm Newsome Hosiery,
Inc., Fort Payne, AL.
The workers’ firm does not produce
an article as required for certification
under Section 222 of the Trade Act of
1974.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:03 May 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
TA–W–63,074; Pfizer, Inc., Global
Research and Development
Division, Groton, CT.
TA–W–63,076; Aon Risk Services, Inc.,
Document Production Department,
Saint Louis, MO.
TA–W–63,200; Ranco North America,
Invensys Climate Controls Division,
Brownsville, TX.
TA–W–63,254; Teva Neuroscience, Inc.,
Global Clinical Professional
Resources Group, Horsham, PA.
TA–W–63,294; Hughes Lumber
Company, White City, OR.
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 May 5 through May 9, 2008. 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: May 15, 2008.
Erin Fitzgerald,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8–11367 Filed 5–21–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–63,075]
Russound Also Known as Folded
Metal Products, Inc., Newmarket, NH;
Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for
Reconsideration
By application received May 7, 2008,
a petitioner 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 April
11, 2008 and published in the Federal
Register on April 23, 2008 (73 FR
21992).
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
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29783
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 negative TAA determination
issued by the Department for workers of
Russound, also known as Folded Metal
Products, Inc., Newmarket, New
Hampshire was based on the finding
that the worker group does not produce
an article within the meaning of Section
222 of the Trade Act of 1974.
The petitioner infers that employment
at the subject firm was negatively
impacted by the outsourcing of
production by other companies to
foreign sources. Following this shift of
production abroad, jobs performed by
workers of the subject firm (electronic,
mechanical and industrial designers and
engineers, supply chain managers,
safety/compliance engineers) were also
shifted or outsourced abroad. The
petitioner also states that regardless of
whether the workers of the subject firm
produce a product or provide services,
they should be certified eligible for
Trade Adjustment Assistance.
The investigation revealed that the
workers of Russound, also known as
Folded Metal Products, Inc.,
Newmarket, New Hampshire are
engaged in functions related to the
design and distribution of audio-video
systems and connectivity products.
These functions, as described above, are
not considered production of an article
within the meaning of Section 222 of
the Trade Act of 1974.
The allegation of a shift to another
country might be relevant if it was
determined that workers of the subject
firm produced an article. Since the
investigation determined that workers of
Russound, also known as Folded Metal
Products, Inc., Newmarket, New
Hampshire do not produce an article,
there cannot be imports nor a shift in
production of an ‘‘article’’ abroad within
the meaning of the Trade Act of 1974 in
this instance.
The petitioner did not supply facts
not previously considered; nor provide
additional documentation indicating
that there was either (1) a mistake in the
determination of facts not previously
considered or (2) a misinterpretation of
facts or of the law justifying
reconsideration of the initial
determination.
After careful review of the request for
reconsideration, the Department
determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not
been met.
E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM
22MYN1
29784
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 100 / Thursday, May 22, 2008 / Notices
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 in Washington, DC, this 15th day of
May 2008.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8–11372 Filed 5–21–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Conclusion
[TA–W–62,718]
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Fraser Timber Limited Including OnSite Leased Workers of Tempo
Employment Services; Ashland, ME;
Notice of Revised Determination on
Reconsideration
On April 28, 2008, the Department
issued an Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application on
Reconsideration applicable to workers
and former workers of the subject firm.
The notice was published in the Federal
Register on May 7, 2008 (73 FR 25772).
The previous investigation initiated
on January 23, 2008, resulted in a
negative determination issued on March
14, 2008, that was based on the finding
that imports of lumber and woodchips
did not contribute importantly to
worker separations at the subject firm
and no shift in production to a foreign
source occurred. The denial notice was
published in the Federal Register on
March 26, 2008 (73 FR 16064).
In the request for reconsideration, the
company official provided additional
information regarding the subject firm’s
customers and also requested the
Department of Labor conduct further
analysis of imports of lumber and
woodchips.
The Department reviewed responses
of a sample customer survey conducted
during the initial investigation. On
further analysis, it has been determined
that a significant number of customers
increased their reliance on imports of
lumber and woodchips while decreasing
their purchases from the subject firm
from 2006 to 2007.
In accordance with Section 246 the
Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as
amended, the Department of Labor
herein presents the results of its
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:03 May 21, 2008
investigation regarding certification of
eligibility to apply for alternative trade
adjustment assistance (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 this case 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.
The investigation revealed that Fraser
Timber Limited leased workers from
Tempo Employment Services to work
on-site at the Ashland, Maine, plant.
Jkt 214001
After careful review of the additional
facts obtained on reconsideration, I
conclude that increased imports of
articles like or directly competitive with
those produced at Fraser Timber
Limited, Ashland, Maine, contributed
importantly to the declines in sales or
production and to the total or partial
separation of workers at the subject
firm. In accordance with the provisions
of the Act, I make the following
certification:
All workers of Fraser Timber Limited,
including on-site leased workers of Tempo
Employment Services, Ashland, Maine, who
became totally or partially separated from
employment on or after January 19, 2007,
through two years from the date of this
certification, are eligible to apply for
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.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 13th day of
May 2008.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8–11369 Filed 5–21–08; 8:45 am]
a company official on behalf of workers
at Automated Equipment, Inc., Paris,
Tennessee.
The petitioner has requested that the
petition be withdrawn. Consequently,
the investigation has been terminated.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 15th day of
May, 2008.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8–11377 Filed 5–21–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–62,982]
Employment Giant, LLC, Warren, MI;
Notice of Termination of Investigation
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended, an
investigation was initiated on March 11,
2008, in response to a petition filed by
a State agency representative on behalf
of workers of Employment Giant, LLC,
Warren, Michigan, working at
Thyssenkrupp Budd, Detroit, Michigan.
The petitioning worker group is
covered by petition certification number
TA–W–60,703, amended on May 15,
2008, to reflect that Thyssenkrupp
Budd, Detroit, Michigan, began using
the payroll service of Employment
Giant, LLC to pay the wages of the
workers at the producing firm.
Since the petitioning worker group is
covered by amended TA–W–60,703,
further investigation in this case would
serve no purpose, and the investigation
has been terminated.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 15th day of
May 2008.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8–11371 Filed 5–21–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–63,120]
[TA–W–63,207]
Automated Equipment, Inc., Paris, TN;
Notice of Termination of Investigation
Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended, an
investigation was initiated on April 17,
2008 in response to a petition filed by
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Honeywell International, Inc.,
Honeywell Process Solutions Division,
HPS Technology Subdivision, Phoenix,
AZ; Notice of Termination of
Investigation
In accordance with Section 221 of the
Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an
E:\FR\FM\22MYN1.SGM
22MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 100 (Thursday, May 22, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29783-29784]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-11372]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-63,075]
Russound Also Known as Folded Metal Products, Inc., Newmarket,
NH; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration
By application received May 7, 2008, a petitioner 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 April 11, 2008 and
published in the Federal Register on April 23, 2008 (73 FR 21992).
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 negative TAA determination issued by the Department for workers
of Russound, also known as Folded Metal Products, Inc., Newmarket, New
Hampshire was based on the finding that the worker group does not
produce an article within the meaning of Section 222 of the Trade Act
of 1974.
The petitioner infers that employment at the subject firm was
negatively impacted by the outsourcing of production by other companies
to foreign sources. Following this shift of production abroad, jobs
performed by workers of the subject firm (electronic, mechanical and
industrial designers and engineers, supply chain managers, safety/
compliance engineers) were also shifted or outsourced abroad. The
petitioner also states that regardless of whether the workers of the
subject firm produce a product or provide services, they should be
certified eligible for Trade Adjustment Assistance.
The investigation revealed that the workers of Russound, also known
as Folded Metal Products, Inc., Newmarket, New Hampshire are engaged in
functions related to the design and distribution of audio-video systems
and connectivity products. These functions, as described above, are not
considered production of an article within the meaning of Section 222
of the Trade Act of 1974.
The allegation of a shift to another country might be relevant if
it was determined that workers of the subject firm produced an article.
Since the investigation determined that workers of Russound, also known
as Folded Metal Products, Inc., Newmarket, New Hampshire do not produce
an article, there cannot be imports nor a shift in production of an
``article'' abroad within the meaning of the Trade Act of 1974 in this
instance.
The petitioner did not supply facts not previously considered; nor
provide additional documentation indicating that there was either (1) a
mistake in the determination of facts not previously considered or (2)
a misinterpretation of facts or of the law justifying reconsideration
of the initial determination.
After careful review of the request for reconsideration, the
Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not been met.
[[Page 29784]]
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 in Washington, DC, this 15th day of May 2008.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8-11372 Filed 5-21-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
