[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 173 (Wednesday, September 6, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 54074]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-22756]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-37,383]


Philadelphia Gear Corporation, King of Prussia, PA; Notice of 
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated July 27, 2000, attorneys representing the 
International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, Lodge 1 
and Local Lodge 864 (hereinafter referenced as the petitioners), 
request administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative 
determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment 
Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former workers of 
Philadelphia Gear Corporation, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, TA-W-
37,383. The denial notice was signed on June 7, 2000, and was published 
in the Federal Register on June 29, 2000 (65 FR 40135).
    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 workers at the subject firm produced gears and gear boxes for 
power transmissions, speed reducers and marine drives. The petitioners 
submitted charts to substantiate their claim that American companies 
like Philadelphia Gear are suffering a trade deficit. The charts were 
duplicates of those which Philadelphia Gear submitted to the Department 
during the petition investigation. The Department conducts petition 
investigations on a plant by plant basis, not industry-wide. While 
aggregate import trends are important to a determination, in order to 
demonstrate import impact on the workers' firm, the Department will 
normally conduct a survey of the subject firm's major declining 
customers. In this case, however, there were no major declining 
customers.
    The petitioners report that in 1988, the Philadelphia Gear workers 
were certified eligible to apply for TAA, and since that time the 
subject firm has continued to downsize due to market losses caused by 
increased import competition.
    On February 26, 1988, workers of Philadelphia Gear were certified, 
TA-W-20,304, based on the findings that aggregate U.S. imports of 
industrial gears increased and the subject firm lost a contract to a 
foreign producer. Although the worker group was previously certified, 
Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, requires the 
Department to establish that increased imports contributed importantly 
to declines in sales or production and separations at the workers' firm 
or appropriate subdivision. The negative TAA determination for this 
petition investigation applicable to workers of the subject firm was 
based on the finding that this requirement was not met.
    Sale declines at the subject firm were small in the relevant period 
while production costs rose. Philadelphia Gear made the decision to 
exit certain unprofitable lines. Declines were not caused by the firm's 
loss of its customer base due to imports. The subject firm did import 
some products like or directly competitive with those produced by the 
workers at the King of Prussia plant, but imports declined and were 
small relative to total sales and production.
    To support the petitioners request for reconsideration, the subject 
firm submitted information on bookings for 1998, 1999 and projections 
for 2000. Bookings are not a criterion for worker group certification.

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 25th day of August 2000.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 00-22756 Filed 9-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M