Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 156 / Wednesday, August 13, 1997 / Notices 43353

APPENDIX—Continued

[Petitions instituted on 7/28/97]

TA–W Subject firm (petitioners) Location Date of

petition Product(s)

33,683 ..... Lucas Varity Kelsey-Hayes (Co.) ................... Brighton, MI ................. 07/15/97 Anti Brake System Sensors.

33,684 ..... Memorex Telex (Wrks) .................................. Raleigh, NC ................. 07/14/97 Computer Products.

33,685 ..... Connie Casuals Limited (Co.) ........................ Bangor, PA .................. 07/03/97 Ladies’ Blouses and Smocks.

33,686 ..... Basler Electric (Co.) ....................................... Pharr, TX ..................... 07/14/97 High Frequency Transformers.

33,687 ..... Bend Manufacturing Co (Co.) ........................ Bend, OR .................... 07/15/97 Fingerjoint Blocks.

33,688 ..... Maxus Energy (Co.) ....................................... Dallas, TX ................... 07/15/97 Crude Oil and Natural Gas.

33,689 ..... Copper Range (USWA) ................................. White Pine, MI ............ 07/16/97 Anode and Cathode Copper.

33,690 ..... Bemis Company (Wrks) ................................. Pepperell, MA ............. 07/11/97 Bags and Paper Industrial Bags.

[FR Doc. 97–21391 Filed 8–12–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training

Administration

[TA–W–33,216]

Gruen Marketing Corporation, Exeter,

Pennsylvania; Notice of Negative

Determination Regarding Application

for Reconsideration

By application dated March 18, 1997,

one of the petitioners requested

administrative reconsideration of the

Department’s negative determination

regarding worker eligibility to apply for

trade adjustment assistance. The denial

notice applicable to workers of the

subject firm located in Exeter,

Pennsylvania, was signed on February

26, 1997 and published in the Federal

Register on March 21, 1997 (62 CFR

13709).

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.

Findings of the initial investigation

showed that workers of Gruen

Marketing Corporation, Exeter,

Pennsylvania were engaged in

employment related to the

merchandising of imported watches.

The workers at the Exeter facility

provided warehousing, packaging and

distribution services. The Department’s

denial of TAA for workers of the subject

firm was based on the fact that the

workers provided a service and did not

produce an article within the meaning

of the group eligibility requirements of

Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as

amended.

The petitioner claims that since the

workers installed batteries, performed

watch repair, packaged and bar coded

the product, the work performed should

be considered producing a product.

The company official reports that the

Exeter facility was a packaging and

shipping facility. Battery installation

constituted only a minuscule part of the

Exeter plant’s work. With respect to

watch repair, there was a department at

the subject plant that did warranty

work, including battery replacement. It

also handled stock repairs, which

involved refurbishing watches.

Packaging and refurbishing of foreign

production does not constitute a basis

for a worker group certification under

the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.

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 l justify

reconsideration of the Department of

Labor’s prior decision. Accordingly, the

application is denied.

Signed at Washington, D.C. this 30th day

of July 1997.

Grant D. Beale,

Acting Director, Office of Trade Adjustment

Assistance.

[FR Doc. 97–21394 Filed 8–12–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training

Administration

[TA–W–33,050; TA–W–33,050F; TA–W–

33,050G]

Ithaca Industries, Incorporated,

Thomasville, Georgia, Meigs, Georgia,

and Women’s Division Management

Center, Cairo, Georgia; Amended

Certification Regarding Eligibility To

Apply for Worker Adjustment

Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the

Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273) the

Department of Labor issued a

Certification of Eligibility to Apply for

Worker Adjustment Assistance on

February 14, 1997, applicable to all

workers of Ithaca Industries, Inc.,

Thomasville, Georgia. The notice was

published in the Federal Register on

April 29, 1997 (62 23273).

At the request of a company official,

the Department reviewed the

certification for workers of the subject

firm. New information shows that

worker separations will occur at the

subject firms’ Meigs and Cairo, Georgia

locations when they close in August and

October 1997, respectively. Workers at

the Meigs, Georgia location are engaged

in the production of women’s and men’s

undergarments. Workers at the Women’s

Division Management Center, Cairo,

Georgia provide administrative and

support function services to the

production facilities of Ithaca

Industries, Incorporated. Based on these

new findings, the Department is

amending the certification to cover

workers at the Meigs and Cairo, Georgia

locations.

The intent of the Department’s

certification is to include all workers of

Ithaca Industries, Inc. adversely affected

by increased imports.

The amended notice applicable to

TA–W–33,050 is hereby issued as

follows: