[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