[Federal Register: April 2, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 63)]
[Notices]
[Page 16092-16093]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02ap03-140]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-41,831 and NAFTA-06338]
Metaldyne, Inc., Formerly Accura Tool & Mold Co., Inc., Crystal
Lake, IL; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration
By application of December 18, 2002 (postmark date), a petitioner
requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding eligibility for workers and former workers of
the subject firm to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) under
petition TA-W-41,831 and North American Free Trade Agreement-
Transitional Adjustment Assistance (NAFTA-TAA) under petition NAFTA-
6338. The TAA and NAFTA-TAA denial notices applicable to workers of
Metaldyne, Inc., formerly Accura Tool & Mold Co., Inc., Crystal Lake,
Illinois were signed on November 22, 2002, and November 25, 2002, and
published in the Federal Register on December 23, 2002 (67 FR 78257 and
78258, respectively).
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 mis-
interpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of the
decision.
The TAA petition, filed on behalf of workers at Metaldyne, Inc.,
formerly Accura Tool & Mold Co., Inc., Crystal Lake, Illinois, was
denied because the ``contributed importantly'' group eligibility
requirement of section 222(3) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, was
not met. Most of the molds and dies manufactured at Crystal Lake were
sent internally within the subject corporation. Only a relatively minor
amount of the plastics operation was supplied to outside customers.
Accura Tool & Mold Co., Inc/Metaldyne Inc. did not increase imports of
automotive transmission and powertrain molds and dies from 2000 through
July 2002 when the plant shut down. Production of metal moldings was
transferred to another affiliated domestic facility. The plastics
operation was abandoned due to the closure of the plant.
The NAFTA-TAA petition for the same worker group was denied because
criteria (3) and (4) of the group eligibility requirements in paragraph
(a)(1) of section 250 of the Trade Act, as amended, were not met. There
was no shift in production from the workers' firm to Mexico or Canada
during the relevant period. Imports from Canada or Mexico did not
contribute importantly to worker separations. The factors as addressed
in the TAA denial were also discussed in the NAFTA decision.
The petitioner appears to indicate that the Department of Labor
made errors in the description of the type of work that was done at the
Accura Tool & Mold Co., Inc./Metaldyne plant. When contacted, the
petitioner clarified that he suspected that the petitioning worker
group produced more than just molds and dies for components other than
powertrains and transmissions, as the workers were not always informed
about the end use of their production.
A review of the data supplied in the initial investigation and
recent follow up contact with the company indicates that the subject
plant primarily produced powertrain and transmission molds and dies.
The subject firm also produced plastic molds, but this constituted a
relatively small portion of overall plant production.
The petitioner also alleged that there were ``errors in the
correlation of definitions of what Metaldyne's description and
functions of Accura Tool and Die were.'' The petitioner also attached
various documents in an attempt to depict the allegation. When
contacted for clarification on this allegation, the petitioner stated
that workers skilled in mold and die production can produce molds and
dies for a wide variety of metal parts. He also asserted that any mold
and die facility had workers that could easily produce products
competitive with those produced at the subject firm, and that there
were many cheaper facilities in Mexico and Canada capable of this
production. It appears that he believes that, if the high
transferability of the petitioning worker group's skills were
[[Page 16093]]
properly understood, then the worker group would be considered eligible
for trade adjustment assistance.
In its investigation to assess the eligibility of petitioning
worker groups for trade adjustment assistance, the Department considers
the actual products produced by subject firm workers, and whether or
not like or directly competitive products were imported in the relevant
period. Thus, the ``functions'' as represented by the petitioner, are
irrelevant. The overwhelming amount of mold and die production was
transferred to another affiliated domestic location. As indicated in
the initial investigation, the subject firm also produced plastic
molds, but this constituted a relatively small portion of overall plant
production. The plastics mold operation was abandoned at the time of
plant closure, as it was a residual business of facility's previous
owners, and not in line with the business experience and interests of
Metaldyne. Recent contact with a company official confirmed that the
company did not import products competitive with those produced at the
subject firm during the relevant period.
The petitioner also indicates that additional plants located in
foreign locations perform the same kind of work and production.
An examination of the attachments provided by the petitioner show
various products (i.e., precision die casting as rough castings,
machined casting, assemblies and modules) made on a company wide basis
from various locations, including foreign locations. The import of
these products to the United States is not relevant to the TAA or NAFTA
investigations that were filed on behalf of workers producing molds and
dies. The product imported must be ``like or directly'' competitive
with what the subject firm produced and the imports (including Canada
and/or Mexico as it relates to NAFTA) must ``contribute importantly''
to the layoffs at the subject plant to meet the eligibility
requirements for adjustment assistance under section 222 of the Trade
Act of 1974 or NAFTA-TAA under section 250 of the Trade Act of 1974.
The petitioner further appears to state that there has been little
consideration for present economical factors that point to the current
trend of thousands of manufacturing plant closures and massive layoffs
due to overseas trade agreements resulting in the Accura Tool and Dye
plant closing.
Economic conditions are not criteria in determining eligibility for
worker adjustment assistance pursuant to the Trade Act of 1974.
Increased imports (imports from Canada or Mexico as it relates to
NAFTA) of products like or directly competitive with what the subject
plant produced must contribute importantly to the layoffs at the
subject plant to meet the eligibility requirements of TAA or NAFTA.
Also, a shift in production to Canada or Mexico could have qualified
the workers for NAFTA. In any event, none of these events occurred thus
the criteria were not met for the workers of Metaldyne, Inc., formerly
Accura Tool & Mold Co., Inc., Crystal Lake, Illinois.
Conclusion
After review of the application and investigative findings, I
conclude that there has been no 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 in Washington, DC, this 13th day of March, 2003.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 03-7918 Filed 4-1-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P