[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 206 (Tuesday, October 26, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Page 57656]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-27917]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-36,160 AND NAFTA-3127]
Polaroid Corporation Film Manufacturing Division (Integral), R1,
R2, and R3 Plants Waltham Massachusetts; Notice of Negative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application dated July 18, 1999, a petitioner requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA) and North American Free Trade Agreement-Transitional
Adjustment Assistance (NAFTA-TAA), applicable to workers and former
workers of the subject firm. The denial notices were signed June 21,
1999, and published in the Federal Register on July 20, 1999; the TAA
at (64 FR 38920) and the NAFTA-TAA at (64 FR 38922).
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 denial of TAA for workers engaged in activities related to the
production of integral film at Polaroid Corporation, Film Manufacturing
Division (Integral), R1, R2 and R3 Plants Waltham, Massachusetts, was
based on the finding that the ``contributed importantly'' criterion of
the group eligibility requirements of section 222 of the Trade Act of
1974 was not met. The subject firm did not import products similar to
that which was produced at the plants during the relevant time period.
The Department's denial of NAFTA-TAA for the same worker group was
based on the finding that criteria (3) and (4) of the group eligibility
requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of Section 250 of the Trade Act of
1974, as amended, were not met. There was no shift in production of
integral film from the subject firm to Mexico or Canada, nor were there
company imports of like or directly competitive products from Mexico or
Canada.
The petitioner asserts that machinery was shifted from the R2 plant
production floor in Waltham to Mexico, and adds that the company has
ordered semi-automatic assembly machines to be shipped to Mexico. The
petitioner acknowledges that the machinery shipped to Mexico will be
used to produce a new form of instant film called ``Deli Strip.'' The
initial investigation revealed that Deli Strip was being developed in
the Waltham plant by temporary workers, not employees of Polaroid
Corporation. The decision to produce Deli Strip in Mexico as opposed to
Waltham was a corporate decision, and therefore, did not adversely
affect workers of the subject firm producing integral film.
The petitioner's second point focuses on their contention that the
Department was incorrect in the statement contained in the decision
document that there is no competition for the integral film format
produced at the subject firm plants. The petitioner asserts that over
the years 35mm film has become competitive with integral film. The
petitioner states that this being true, a great deal of 35mm film sold
in the U.S. is being manufactured overseas by competitors, and that
Polaroid is searching for a new plant in China. There was no evidence
that the subject firm is importing products like or directly
competitive with integral film produced at the Film manufacturing
Division (Integral), R1, R2, and R3 plants in Waltham, Massachusetts.
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 decisions. Accordingly, the application is denied.
Signed at Washington, DC this 8th day of October 1999.
Grant D. Beale,
Program Manager, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 99-27917 Filed 10-25-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
