Weather Shield Manufacturing, Inc., Corporate Office, Medford, WI; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 38048-38049 [E9-18182]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
38048
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 145 / Thursday, July 30, 2009 / Notices
None.
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.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD 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.
None.
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.
None.
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–65,630; National Envelope,
Scottdale, PA
TA–W–65,704; Chipblaster, Inc.,
Meadville, PA
TA–W–65,753; Weyerhaeuser
Company, Warrenton, OR
TA–W–65,914; Alliance Machine
Systems International, Spokane
Valley, WA
The workers’ firm does not produce
an article as required for certification
under Section 222 of the Trade Act of
1974.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:34 Jul 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
None.
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.
TA–W–65,324; General Aluminum
Manufacturing Co., Richmond
Plant, Richmond, IN
I hereby certify that the aforementioned
determinations were issued during the period
of June 29 through July 17, 2009. Copies of
these determinations are available for
inspection in Room n-5428, 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: July 21, 2009.
Linda G. Poole,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9–18176 Filed 7–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–64,725]
Weather Shield Manufacturing, Inc.,
Corporate Office, Medford, WI; Notice
of Negative Determination Regarding
Application for Reconsideration
By application dated May 26, 2009,
the petitioners requested administrative
reconsideration of the Department’s
negative determination regarding
eligibility for workers and former
workers of Weather Shield
Manufacturing, Inc., Corporate Office,
Medford, Wisconsin (subject firm) to
apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
(TAA) and Alternative Trade
Adjustment Assistance (ATAA). The
Department’s Notice of Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration was signed on June
2, 2009, and published in the Federal
Register on June 18, 2009 (74 FR 28956).
The initial investigation revealed that
workers of the subject firm are engaged
in support functions such as
administrative, human resources,
accounting, sales, and marketing
operations. It was also revealed that the
workers of the subject firm support
production of windows at various
Weather Shield Manufacturing facilities.
The investigation resulted in a negative
determination that was based on the
finding that imports of windows did not
contribute importantly to worker
separations at the subject facility and
there was no shift of production to a
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
foreign country. The ‘‘contributed
importantly’’ test is generally
demonstrated through a survey of the
workers’ firm’s declining domestic
customers. The survey of the major
declining customers revealed negligible
imports of windows in 2008 compared
with 2007. The subject firm did not
import windows during the relevant
period.
A careful review of previouslysubmitted material shows that one of
the facilities supported by workers of
the Weather Shield Manufacturing, Inc.,
Corporate Office in Milford, Wisconsin
produced doors. During the
reconsideration investigation, the
Department conducted additional
customer survey regarding purchases of
doors (including like or directly
competitive articles) during 2007 and
2008. Based on the information obtain
through the survey, the Department
determined no imports of doors during
the relevant period.
The petitioner also alleges that the
competitor of the subject firm has been
certified for TAA during August 2008
and therefore workers of the subject firm
should be also certified for TAA.
The impact of competitors on the
subject firm is revealed in an
investigation through customer survey
analysis. In the case at hand, the
Department solicited information from
the customers of the subject firm to
determine if customers purchased
imported windows and doors during
2007 and 2008. The survey is intended
to determine if competitor imports
contributed importantly to layoffs at the
subject firm. The survey revealed that
imports of windows and doors were
negligible during the relevant period.
The investigation also revealed the
subject firm did not import windows
and doors nor was there a shift in
production of windows and doors from
subject firm abroad during the relevant
period. Furthermore, U.S. aggregate
imports of windows and doors declined
from 2007 to 2008.
Based on the information above, the
Department determines that the group
eligibility requirements under section
222(a) of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended, were not met.
In order for the Department to issue
a certification of eligibility to apply for
ATAA, the subject worker group must
be certified eligible to apply for TAA.
Since the subject workers are denied
eligibility to apply for TAA, the workers
cannot be certified eligible for ATAA.
Conclusion
After reconsideration, I affirm the
original notice of negative
determination of eligibility to apply for
E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM
30JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 145 / Thursday, July 30, 2009 / Notices
worker adjustment assistance for
workers and former workers of Weather
Shield Manufacturing, Inc., Corporate
Office, Medford, Wisconsin.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 14th day of
July 2009.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9–18182 Filed 7–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–65,770; TA–W–65,770A; TA–W–
65,770B; TA–W–65,770C]
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Westport Shipyard, Inc., Westport, WA;
Westport Shipyard, Inc., Hoquiam, WA;
Westport Shipyard, Inc., Port Angeles,
WA; Westport Shipyard, Inc., La
Conner, WA; Notice of Negative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration
By application dated June 12, 2009,
the petitioners requested administrative
reconsideration of the Department’s
negative determination regarding
eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade
Adjustment Assistance (ATAA),
applicable to workers and former
workers of the subject firm. The denial
notice was signed on May 15, 2009 and
published in the Federal Register on
June 18, 2009 (74 FR 28961).
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 initial investigation resulted in a
negative determination, which was
based on the finding that imports of
large motor yachts did not contribute
importantly to worker separations at the
subject facility and there was no shift of
production to a foreign country. The
subject firm did not import large motor
yachts nor shift production of large
motor yachts to a foreign country during
the 2007, 2008 and January through
March 2009 period. Furthermore, the
investigation revealed that sales and
production of large motor yachts at the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:34 Jul 29, 2009
Jkt 217001
subject firm increased from January
through March, 2009 when compared
with the same period in 2008.
The petitioners alleged that the
customers of the subject firm, who are
individual buyers and not business
entities, can purchase ‘‘similar
products’’ in foreign countries. The
individuals can subsequently ship or
sail the yachts back to the United States
as a personal property, thus these
products are not considered imports. To
support their allegations, the petitioners
attached information about aggregate
imports, which reflects ports of
unlading of ‘‘yachts, row boats, canoes
and sailboats, with or without auxiliary
motor’’ for the state of Washington in
2006, 2007, 2008 and January 2009. This
data shows that aggregate imports into
the state of Washington of the above
mentioned products declined from 2006
to 2007, further declined from 2007 to
2008, and increased in January 2009
when compared with January 2008. The
petitioners seem to allege that these
increasing imports in January 2009
amounted to a significant amount
contributing importantly to the worker
separations at all Westport Shipyard
locations.
In order to establish import impact,
the Department solicits relevant
information from the subject firm,
customers of the subject firm and
analyzes available United States
aggregate data regarding imports of
products, including those like or
directly competitive with the products
manufactured by the subject firm for the
relevant period (one year prior to the
date of the petition). In the case at hand,
the customers were not surveyed, as
they are individuals and one-time
buyers. According to the data available
from the U.S. Department of Commerce
and the U.S. International Trade
Commission, United States imports of
motorized vessels and yachts have
declined from 2007 to 2008 and
decreased from January through April
2009, when compared with the
corresponding 2008 period.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38049
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 9th day of
July 2009.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9–18183 Filed 7–29–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–62,613]
Longview Fibre Paper and Packaging,
Inc., Longview Mill, Formerly Longview
Fibre Company, Including On-Site
Leased Workers From Oregon Electric
and J.H. Kelly, Longview, WA;
Amended Notice of Revised
Determination on Reconsideration
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 Notice of
Revised Determination on
Reconsideration on April 16, 2008. The
notice was published in the Federal
Register on April 23, 2008 (73 FR
21992–21993).
At the request of the State agency, the
Department reviewed the Notice of
Revised Determination on
Reconsideration for workers of the
subject firm. The workers are engaged in
the production of kraft paper.
New information shows that workers
leased workers from Oregon Electric and
J.H. Kelly were employed on-site at the
Longview, Washington location of
Longview Fibre Paper and Packaging,
Inc., Longview Mill, Formerly Longview
Fibre Company. The Department has
determined that these workers were
sufficiently under the control of
Longview Fibre Paper and Packaging,
Inc., Longview Mill, Formerly Longview
Fibre Company to be considered leased
workers.
Based on these findings, the
Department is amending this revised
determination to include workers leased
from Oregon Electric and J.H. Kelly
working on-site at the Longview,
Washington location of the subject firm.
E:\FR\FM\30JYN1.SGM
30JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 145 (Thursday, July 30, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38048-38049]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18182]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-64,725]
Weather Shield Manufacturing, Inc., Corporate Office, Medford,
WI; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration
By application dated May 26, 2009, the petitioners requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding eligibility for workers and former workers of
Weather Shield Manufacturing, Inc., Corporate Office, Medford,
Wisconsin (subject firm) to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)
and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA). The Department's
Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration was signed on June 2, 2009, and published in the
Federal Register on June 18, 2009 (74 FR 28956).
The initial investigation revealed that workers of the subject firm
are engaged in support functions such as administrative, human
resources, accounting, sales, and marketing operations. It was also
revealed that the workers of the subject firm support production of
windows at various Weather Shield Manufacturing facilities. The
investigation resulted in a negative determination that was based on
the finding that imports of windows did not contribute importantly to
worker separations at the subject facility and there was no shift of
production to a foreign country. The ``contributed importantly'' test
is generally demonstrated through a survey of the workers' firm's
declining domestic customers. The survey of the major declining
customers revealed negligible imports of windows in 2008 compared with
2007. The subject firm did not import windows during the relevant
period.
A careful review of previously-submitted material shows that one of
the facilities supported by workers of the Weather Shield
Manufacturing, Inc., Corporate Office in Milford, Wisconsin produced
doors. During the reconsideration investigation, the Department
conducted additional customer survey regarding purchases of doors
(including like or directly competitive articles) during 2007 and 2008.
Based on the information obtain through the survey, the Department
determined no imports of doors during the relevant period.
The petitioner also alleges that the competitor of the subject firm
has been certified for TAA during August 2008 and therefore workers of
the subject firm should be also certified for TAA.
The impact of competitors on the subject firm is revealed in an
investigation through customer survey analysis. In the case at hand,
the Department solicited information from the customers of the subject
firm to determine if customers purchased imported windows and doors
during 2007 and 2008. The survey is intended to determine if competitor
imports contributed importantly to layoffs at the subject firm. The
survey revealed that imports of windows and doors were negligible
during the relevant period.
The investigation also revealed the subject firm did not import
windows and doors nor was there a shift in production of windows and
doors from subject firm abroad during the relevant period. Furthermore,
U.S. aggregate imports of windows and doors declined from 2007 to 2008.
Based on the information above, the Department determines that the
group eligibility requirements under section 222(a) of the Trade Act of
1974, as amended, were not met.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility
to apply for ATAA, the subject worker group must be certified eligible
to apply for TAA. Since the subject workers are denied eligibility to
apply for TAA, the workers cannot be certified eligible for ATAA.
Conclusion
After reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of negative
determination of eligibility to apply for
[[Page 38049]]
worker adjustment assistance for workers and former workers of Weather
Shield Manufacturing, Inc., Corporate Office, Medford, Wisconsin.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 14th day of July 2009.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-18182 Filed 7-29-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
