[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 90 (Friday, May 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 25664]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-12228]
[[Page 25664]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-30,617]
Shaw Pipe, Incorporated Highspire, Pennsylvania Notice of
Negative Determination of Reconsideration on Remand
The United States Court of International Trade (USCIT) remanded for
further investigation the Secretary of Labor's negative determination
in Former Employees of Shaw Pipe, Inc. v. Secretary of Labor, No. 95-
04-00482.
The Department's initial denial of the petition for employees of
Shaw Pipe, Incorporated, Highspire, Pennsylvania, was issued on
February 24, 1995 and published in the Federal Register on March 10,
1995 (60 Fed. Reg. 13,177). The denial was based on the fact that the
workers provided a service and did not produce an article.
On remand, during the Department's investigation, it was determined
that the work performed by employees of Shaw Pipe, Incorporated,
consisted of applying concrete and polyethylene coatings to small and
large diameter pipe which is ultimately used for pipeline transmission.
The purpose of coating steel pipe is to prevent rust and corrosion, and
thus, extend the life of the pipe. Findings on remand show that in the
coating process performed by employees at the subject firm, the pipe
moves along a conveyor line and the coating is applied to the pipe.
Other findings on remand show that coating the pipe does not change
the end use of the pipe. Subject firm officials report the pipe used
for pipeline transmission could be used without the protective coating,
but it is not likely. Therefore, it can be concluded that the coating
of pipe does not constitute the production of a tangible or new
product.
Remand findings also show that the subject firms closed the
Highspire, Pennsylvania plant because the contract with the primary
customer was not renewed. The customer awarded the contract to another
domestic company.
Even if the work performed at Highspire was considered the
production of a new product, the workers would not be eligible to apply
for Trade Adjustment Assistance because they did not meet all of the
group eligibility requirements of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974,
as amended. Although criteria (1) and (2) were met, criterion (3) was
not met because the primary customer of the subject firm awarded the
pipe coating contract to another domestic company. Thus, increased
imports did not contribute to the separation of the workers or to Shaw
Pipe's decline in sales and production.
Conclusion
After reconsideration on remand, I affirm the original notice of
negative determination of eligibility to apply for adjustment
assistance for workers and former workers of Shaw Pipe, Incorporated,
Highspire, Pennsylvania.
Signed at Washington, D.C. this 2nd day of May 1997.
Russell T. Kile,
Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 97-12228 Filed 5-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
