[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 237 (Wednesday, December 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65101-65102]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32303]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-33,338]
The Standard Products Company, Lexington, Kentucky; Notice of
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application of July 25, 1997, the International Union, United
Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implements of America--UAW
requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding worker eligibility to apply for trade
adjustment assistance, applicable to workers of the subject firm. The
denial notice was signed on June 5, 1997 and was published in the
Federal Register (62 FR 34711) on June 27, 1997.
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 request for reconsideration claims that some of the equipment
in the Lexington, Kentucky was being sent to Georgetown, Canada to
produce parts that were produced at the subject firm and that some
machinery was being sent to Goldsboro, North Carolina and would later
be sent to the company's plant in Mexico.
In order for the Department to issue a worker group certification,
all of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222 of the Trade
Act must be met. Review of the investigation findings show that
criterion (3) was not met. Layoffs at the subject firm were the result
of the consolidation of extruded and molded rubber sealing system
component production from the subject firm into two other company-owned
plants located domestically in Gaylord,
[[Page 65102]]
Michigan and Goldsboro, North Carolina. The shift in production is
attributed to domestic excess capacity and the company's need to cut
costs to stay competitive in the market place. No production performed
at the subject firm was shifted to any foreign location to serve the
company's domestic market. The equipment at the plant was shipped to
whichever plants of the company had a need for additional machinery
that could be used in the company's extrusion process. Except for the
shipment of certain machinery to Gaylord and Goldsboro for the express
purpose of serving the enhanced production at those facilities, no
machinery was shipped to any location to support the production of
parts that had previously been made in Lexington. Some equipment was
shipped to Georgetown, Canada, to support existing production at that
plant, but no production moved from Lexington to Georgetown, Canada or
is being imported back to the United States.
The company recently opened a plant in Mexico. At present the plant
has received two contracts, one from a Japanese manufacturer, and one
from an American manufacturer. Production under these contracts will
not begin before 1999. The Company's Mexican production will supply
those automakers in Mexican plants only.
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, D.C. this 28th day of November 1997.
Grant D. Beale,
Acting Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 97-32303 Filed 12-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
