[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 15 (Thursday, January 23, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3528-3529]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-1666]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-32, 709; NAFTA-01224]
Penn Mould Industries, Incorporated, Washington, Pennsylvania;
Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration
On November 27, 1996, the Department issued an Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers
and former workers of the subject firm. The petitioner, American Flint
Glass Workers Union, AFL-CIO, presented evidence that the Department's
survey of the subject firm customers was incomplete. This notice was
published in the Federal Register on December 13, 1996 (61 FR 65599).
The Department's initial denial of TAA for workers of Penn Mould
Industries was because the ``contributed importantly'' group
eligibility requirement of Section 222(3) of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended, was not met. The investigation revealed that layoffs were
attributable to a change in the manufacturing process of glass molds at
the Washington, Pennsylvania plant.
The Department's initial denial of NAFTA-TAA for workers of Penn
Mould Industries was because criteria (3) and (4) of the group
eligibility requirements in paragraph (a)(1) of Section 250 of the
Trade Act were not met. The subject firm did not import glass forming
molds, or shift production to Mexico or Canada. The investigation
revealed that layoffs were attributable to a process change in the
manufacturing of glass forming molds.
The petitioner provided data on U.S. imports of glass containers to
support their claim that workers producing glass forming molds are
adversely affected by increased imports. The Department concurs that
there is an aggregate increase in imports of glass containers from
Mexico and Canada and other foreign sources. However, in order to
determine worker eligibility for TAA or NAFTA-TAA, the Department must
examine imports of products like or directly competitive with those
articles produced at the Washington production facility. In this case,
the products produced at Washington were glass forming molds. Glass
containers cannot be considered like or directly competitive with the
end products produced and sold at the Washington plant.
The petitioner claims that Penn Mould was a captive producer of
glass forming molds for its parent company, Ball-Foster Glass
Container, Inc. On July 1, 1996, Penn Mould was sold to Ross Mould,
Inc. and the Washington, Pennsylvania facility became a commercial
producer of glass forming molds. Consequently, the customer base
expanded.
The Department conducted a survey of the major customer of Penn
Mould Industries, Inc., formerly Penn Mould. Findings of the survey
revealed that from 1994 through September 1996, the customer,
accounting for the predominate proportion of sales, did not import
glass forming molds from Canada, Mexico or other foreign sources.
The petitioner further alleges that workers of another domestic
company producing glass forming molds was certified eligible to apply
for NAFTA-TAA. Review of that case showed that the workers were
certified based on increased company imports of the product.
[[Page 3529]]
Conclusion
After reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of negative
determination of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance
and NAFTA-TAA for workers and former workers of Penn Mould Industries,
Inc., Washington, Pennsylvania.
Signed at Washington, D.C., this 27th day of December 1996.
Curtis K. Kooser,
Acting Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 97-1666 Filed 1-22-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
