[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 168 (Wednesday, August 29, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45696-45697]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-21848]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-38,358 and NAFTA-4241]


Tower Automotive, Kalamazoo, Michigan; Notice of Negative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated March 30, 2001, the International Union, 
United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of 
America (UAW), 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 on January 31, 2001, and published in the Federal Register 
on March 2, 2001 (66 FR 52539).
    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 UAW asserts that for the NAFTA-TAA petition denial, the finding 
that the customers of Tower Automotive did not import stampings is 
incorrect. The UAW states that Ford Motor Company was one of the major 
customers and acknowledges moving work, including 72 different dies for 
metal stamped components, from the Kalamazoo facility to Hermosillo, 
Mexico. The UAW states that Ford reports that the parts made in Mexico 
are being used in the production of a non-U.S. market automobile. 
Further, the UAW believes that some portion of the Mexican parts 
production is being imported for use in the U.S. market, and that a 
survey should be conducted for each of those 72 components.
    The Department issued the NAFTA-TAA denial to workers producing 
metal stampings at Tower Automotive, based on the finding that the 
subject firm did not shift production of those articles from Kalamazoo, 
Michigan, to Mexico or Canada, nor did the company or customers import 
articles like or directly competitive with those produced by the 
workers. If Ford did move the stamping production to Mexico, that is 
not a basis for certifying the Tower Automotive workers. Only if those 
stampings were being returned to the U.S. from Mexico could the worker 
group be certified for NAFTA-TAA. The survey of the major customers of 
the subject firm showed that none imported metal stampings from Canada 
or Mexico in 1999 or 2000. The survey conducted included articles like 
or directly competitive with those made by the workers at the subject 
firm and would include the articles made with the 72 dies cited by the 
UAW.
    The UAW asserts that for the TAA petition denial, the Department 
was incorrect in basing the failure to meet criterion (3) of the group 
eligibility requirements of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, 
solely on the finding that the company did not import metal stampings. 
The Department concurs with the UAW on this issue. The decision 
document for [TA-W-38,385] failed to include the results of the 
customer survey used for the petition investigation for [NAFTA-4241]. 
The Department's NAFTA customer survey asked the respondents to provide 
information not limited to import purchases of metal stampings from

[[Page 45697]]

Mexico or Canada, but additionally, all other import purchases. The 
inclusion of this information would not have reversed the findings for 
criterion (3).
    The UAW also submitted import data for automobiles that they 
believe are like or directly competitive with the Ford Escort, the 
automobile for which the Tower Automotive supplied parts. Under the 
Trade Act of 1974, as amended, the Department is required to examine 
the imports of articles like or directly competitive with those 
produced at the workers' firm. Consequently, for both the TAA and 
NAFTA-TAA petitions, the Department does not consider automobiles to be 
like or directly competitive with the stampings produced by the workers 
at Tower Automotive, Kalamazoo, Michigan.

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 August 2001.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 01-21848 Filed 8-28-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M