[Federal Register: September 6, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 172)]
[Notices]
[Page 52582]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06se06-105]
[[Page 52582]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-59,552]
Admiral Foundry, Formerly The Admiral Machine Company, Wadsworth,
OH; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration
On August 9, 2006, the Department issued an Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers
and former workers of the subject firm. The Department's Notice of
determination was published in the Federal Register on August 16, 2006
(71 FR 47249).
The initial investigation revealed that, during the relevant
period, the subject firm neither shifted production abroad nor imported
cast aluminum tire molds from a foreign country. The investigation also
revealed that the ``contributed importantly'' group eligibility
requirement of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, was
not met. The ``contributed importantly'' test is generally demonstrated
through a survey of customers of the subject workers' firm. The survey
revealed that none of the respondents increased their imports of cast
aluminum tire molds during the relevant period.
In the request for reconsideration, the International Union, United
Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America,
Region 2-B (the Union) stated that the subject firm produced both molds
and casts used on the tire industry and inferred that the scope of the
initial investigation was too limited because it only addressed cast
aluminum tire molds.
During the reconsideration investigation, the Department sought
clarification from the subject firm regarding the article(s) produced
at the Wadsworth, Ohio facility during the relevant period. The company
official stated that the Wadsworth, Ohio facility produced aluminum
tread castings (a component part for tire molds) and did not produce
complete tire molds.
On reconsideration, the Department also investigated whether the
subject workers are eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
(TAA) as workers of a secondarily-affected firm (supplied component
parts for articles produced by a firm with a currently TAA-certified
worker group).
For certification on the basis of the workers' firm being a
secondary upstream supplier, the subject firm must have customers with
a worker group that is currently TAA-certified, and the subject firm
must produce a component part of the product that was the basis for the
customers' certification. In addition, either the TAA-certified
customer must represent at least twenty percent of the subject firm's
business or a loss of business with the TAA-certified customer
contributed importantly to the subject workers' separation at the
subject firm.
During the reconsideration investigation, the Department determined
that none of the subject firm's declining customers are currently
certified for TAA based on increased imports of tire molds. Thus the
subject firm workers are not eligible under secondary impact.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of eligibility
to apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA), the
subject worker group must be certified eligible to apply for TAA. Since
the workers are denied eligibility to apply for TAA, the workers cannot
be certified eligible for ATAA.
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, this 28th day of August 2006.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6-14730 Filed 9-5-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P