Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 185 / Friday, September 22, 2000 / Notices 57385

the decision document, the Department

inadvertently included an irrelevant

citation, 19 U.S.C. 2231(a)(1)(A)(iii) and

(B). Accordingly, the notice of negative

determination on remand is amended to

delete the reference to 19 U.S.C.

2231(a)(1)(A)(iii) and (B).

Signed at Washington, D.C. this 15th day

of September 2000.

Edward A. Tomchick,

Director, Division of Trade Adjustment

Assistance.

[FR Doc. 00–24419 Filed 9–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training

Administration

[TA–W–34,013]

Alcatel Telecommunications Cable

Roanoke, Virginia; Notice of Negative

Determination on Remand

On July 27, 2000, the United States

Court of International Trade remanded

this matter to the Secretary of Labor for

further investigation in Former

Employees of Alcatel

Telecommunications Cable v. Secretary

of Labor, No. 98–03–00540 (Ct. Int’l

Trade 2000).

The Department’s initial negative

determination of eligibility to apply for

trade adjustment assistance (TAA) for

the workers and former workers of

Alcatel Telecommunications Cable

located in Roanoke, Virginia was issued

on December 9, 1997 and published in

the Federal Register on January 6, 1998,

see 63 Fed. Reg. 577 (1998). The denial

was based on the finding that criteria (3)

of the group eligibility requirements of

Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as

amended, 19 U.S.C. 2231(a)(1)(A)(iii)

and (B), were not met: i.e., imports did

not contribute importantly to the worker

separations, and the company

transferred production to another

domestic location.

On remand, the court ordered the

Department to undertake a full and

complete investigation into the

eligibility of former workers at Alcatel

Telecommunications cable, Roanoke,

Virginia to apply for trade adjustment

assistance (TAA).

A complete investigation was

undertaken, and the results of that

investigation revealed that increased

imports of singlemode optical fiber did

not contribute importantly to the worker

separations. Information provided by

the company revealed that the company

imports of singlemode optical fiber in

1998 were less than 2% of the 1997

production levels at the Roanoke

facility. Further, a survey of Alcatel’s

customers who were purchasing

singlemode optical fiber for the U.S.

market revealed that those customers

did not increase their reliance on

purchases of imported singlemode

optical fiber.

Conclusion

After careful consideration of the

results of the remand investigation, I

affirm the original notice of negative

determination of eligibility to apply for

trade adjustment assistance for workers

and former workers of Alcatel

Telecommunications Cable, Roanoke,

Virginia.

Signed at Washington, DC this 11th day of

September 2000.

Edward A. Tomchick,

Program Manager, Division of Trade

Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. 00–24422 Filed 9–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training

Administration

[TA–W–37,715; TA–W–37,715A]

Murray, Incorporated, Lawrenceburg,

TN, and Mantachie, MS; 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 June

20, 2000, applicable to workers of

Murray, Incorporated, Lawrenceburg,

Tennessee. The notice was published in

the Federal Register on July 24, 2000

(65 FR 45620).

At the request of the company, the

Department reviewed the certification

for workers of the subject firm. New

findings show that worker separations

will occur at Murray, Incorporated’s

Mantachie, Mississippi facility when it

closes in October, 2000. The workers are

engaged in the production of bicycles.

Accordingly, the Department is

amending the certification to cover

workers at Murray, Incorporated,

Mantachie, Mississippi. The intent of

the Department’s certification is to

include all workers of Murray,

Incorporated adversely affected by

increased imports.

The amended notice applicable to

TA–W–37,715 is hereby issued as

follows:

All workers of Murray, Incorporated,

Lawrenceburg, Tennessee (TA–W–37,715)

and Mantachie, Mississippi (TA–W–37,715A)

engaged in employment related to the

production of bicycles who became totally or

partially separated from employment on or

after May 11, 1999 through June 20, 2002 are

eligible to apply for adjustment assistance

under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.

Signed at Washington, DC this 13th day of

September, 2000.

Edward A. Tomchick,

Director, Division of Trade Adjustment

Assistance.

[FR Doc. 00–24420 Filed 9–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training

Administration

Notice of Determinations Regarding

Eligibility To Apply for Worker

Adjustment Assistance and NAFTA

Transitional Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with section 223 of the

Trade Act of 1974, as amended, the

Department of Labor herein presents

summaries of determinations regarding

eligibility to apply for trade adjustment

assistance for workers (TA–W) issued

during the period of September, 2000.

In order for an affirmative

determination to be made and a

certification of eligibility to apply for

worker adjustment assistance to be

issued, each of the group eligibility

requirements of section 222 of the Act

must be met.

(1) That a significant number or

proportion of the workers in the

workers’ firm, or an appropriate

subdivision thereof, have become totally

or partially separated,

(2) That sales or production, or both,

of the firm or subdivision have

decreased absolutely, and

(3) That increases of imports of

articles like or directly competitive with

articles produced by the firm or

appropriate subdivision have

contributed importantly to the

separations, or threat thereof, and to the

absolute decline in sales or production.

Negative Determinations for Worker

Adjustment Assistance

In each of the following cases the

investigation revealed that criterion (3)

has not been met. A survey of customers

indicated that increased imports did not

contribute importantly to worker

separations at the firm.

TA–W–37,940; Cloverland

Manufacturing, Inc., Escanaba, MI

TA–W–37,670; Berstone Knitting Mills,

Brooklyn, NY

TA–W–37,753; Spray Cotton Mills, Nova

Yarns Div., Eden, NC