12150 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 54 / Monday, March 23, 2009 / Notices 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 10th day of 

March 2009. 

Richard Church, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E9–6235 Filed 3–20–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–64,335] 

Indiana Handle Co., Inc., Currently 

Known as Crestwood Manufacturing, 

Inc., Paoli, IN; Amended Certification 

Regarding Eligibility To Apply for 

Worker Adjustment Assistance and 

Alternative Trade Adjustment 

Assistance 

In accordance with Section 223 of the 

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

Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 

U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the 

Department of Labor issued a 

Certification Regarding Eligibility to 

Apply for Worker Adjustment 

Assistance and Alternative Trade 

Adjustment Assistance on December 12, 

2008, applicable to workers of Indiana 

Handle Co., Paoli, Indiana. The notice 

was published in the Federal Register 

on December 30, 2008 (73 FR 79914). 

At the request of the State agency, the 

Department reviewed the certification 

for workers of the subject firm. The 

workers are engaged in the production 

of wooden furniture components and 

wood turnings. 

New information shows that due to a 

change in ownership, Indiana Handle 

Co., Inc., is currently known as 

Crestwood Manufacturing, Inc. 

Workers wages at the subject firm are 

being reported under the 

Unemployment Insurance (UI) tax 

account for Crestwood Manufacturing, 

Inc. 

Accordingly, the Department is 

amending this certification to include 

workers of the subject firm whose UI 

wages are reported under the successor 

firm, Crestwood Manufacturing, Inc., 

Paoli, Indiana. 

The amended notice applicable to 

TA–W–64,335 is hereby issued as 

follows: 

’’All workers of Indiana Handle Co., Inc., 

currently known as Crestwood 

Manufacturing, Inc., Paoli, Indiana, who 

became totally or partially separated from 

employment on or after October 29, 2008, 

through December 12, 2010, are eligible to 

apply for adjustment assistance under 

Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are 

also eligible to apply for alternative trade 

adjustment assistance under Section 246 of 

the Trade Act of 1974.’’ 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of 

March, 2009. 

Richard Church, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E9–6238 Filed 3–20–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

TA–W–64,733 

Modine Manufacturing, Truck Division, 

Including On-Site Leased Workers 

From Staffmark, Lawrenceburg, TN; 

Amended Certification Regarding 

Eligibility To Apply for Worker 

Adjustment Assistance and Alternative 

Trade Adjustment Assistance 

In accordance with Section 223 of the 

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

Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 

U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the 

Department of Labor issued a 

Certification of Eligibility to Apply for 

Worker Adjustment Assistance and 

Alternative Trade Adjustment 

Assistance on January 23, 2009, 

applicable to workers of Modine 

Manufacturing, Truck Division, 

Lawrenceburg, Tennessee. The notice 

was published in the Federal Register 

on February 10, 2009 (74 FR 6652). 

At the request of the State agency, the 

Department reviewed the certification 

for workers of the subject firm. The 

workers are engaged in the production 

of charged air coolers, air filters, and oil 

coolers used in trucks. 

New information provided by the 

company shows that workers leased 

from Staffmark were employed on-site 

at Modine Manufacturing, Truck 

Division, Lawrenceburg, Tennessee. 

The intent of the Department’s 

certification is to include all workers at 

the subject firm who were adversely 

affected by the shift in production of 

charged air coolers, air filters, and oil 

coolers to Mexico. 

The Department has determined that 

these workers were sufficiently under 

the control of Modine Manufacturing to 

be considered leased workers. 

Based on these findings, the 

Department is amending this 

certification to include workers leased 

from working on-site at the 

Lawrencebury, Tennessee location of 

the subject firm. 

The amended notice applicable to 

TA–W–64,733 is hereby issued as 

follows: 

‘‘All workers of Modine Manufacturing, 

Truck Division, Lawrenceburg, Tennessee, 

including on-site leased workers from 

Staffmark, who became totally or partially 

separated from employment on or after 

December 17, 2007 through January 29, 2011, 

are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance 

under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, 

and are also eligible to apply for alternative 

trade adjustment assistance under Section 

246 of the Trade Act of 1974.’’ 

Signed in Washington, DC, this 6th day of 

March 2009. 

Linda G. Poole, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E9–6241 Filed 3–20–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–64,135] 

Panasonic Electronic Devices 

Corporation of America, General and 

Administrative, Production 

Engineering, Switch Engineering, 

Including On-Site Leased Workers 

From Express Employment 

Professionals and Johnson Service 

Group, Knoxville, TN; Amended 

Certification Regarding Eligibility To 

Apply for Worker Adjustment 

Assistance and Alternative Trade 

Adjustment Assistance 

In accordance with Section 223 of the 

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

Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 

U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the 

Department of Labor issued a 

Certification of Eligibility to Apply for 

Worker Adjustment Assistance and 

Alternative Trade Adjustment 

Assistance on October 14, 2008, 

applicable to workers of Panasonic 

Electronic Devices Corporation of 

America, General and Administrative, 

Production Engineering, Switch 

Engineering, including on-site leased 

workers from Express Employment 

Professionals, Knoxville, Tennessee. 

The notice was published in the Federal 

Register on October 21, 2008 (73 FR 

62324). 

At the request of the State agency, the 

Department reviewed the certification 

for workers of the subject firm. The 

workers provide general and 

administrative services, production 

engineering, and switch engineering for 

the Panasonic speaker manufacturing 

facility in Knoxville, Tennessee. 

New information provided by the 

company shows that workers leased 

from Johnson Service Group were 

employed on-site at Panasonic 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 54 / Monday, March 23, 2009 / Notices 12151 

Electronic Devices Corporation of 

America, General and Administrative, 

Production Engineering, Switch 

Engineering, Knoxville, Tennessee. 

The intent of the Department’s 

certification is to include all workers at 

the subject firm who were adversely 

affected by the shift in production of 

speakers to Mexico. 

The Department has determined that 

these workers were sufficiently under 

the control of Panasonic Electronic 

Devices Corporation of America to be 

considered leased workers. 

Based on these findings, the 

Department is amending this 

certification to include workers leased 

from Johnson Service Group working 

on-site at Panasonic Electronic Devices 

Corporation of America, General and 

Administrative, Production Engineering, 

Switch Engineering, Knoxville, 

Tennessee. 

The amended notice applicable to 

TA–W–64,135 is hereby issued as 

follows: 

‘‘All workers of Panasonic Electronic 

Devices Corporation of America, General and 

Administrative, Production Engineering, 

Switch Engineering, Knoxville, Tennessee, 

including on-site leased workers from 

Express Employment Professionals and 

Johnson Service Group, who became totally 

or partially separated from employment on or 

after September 29, 2007 through October 14, 

2010, are eligible to apply for adjustment 

assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act 

of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for 

alternative trade adjustment assistance under 

Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.’’ 

Signed in Washington, DC, this 11th day of 

March 2009. 

Elliott S. Kushner, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E9–6236 Filed 3–20–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–64,452] 

Kensington Windows, Inc., a 

Subsidiary of Jancor Companies, Inc., 

Vandergrift, PA; Notice of Affirmative 

Determination Regarding Application 

for Reconsideration 

By application postmarked February 

27, 2009, the International Union of 

Electronic, Electrical, Salaried, Machine 

and Furniture Workers (IUE), Local 

188643 requested administrative 

reconsideration of the negative 

determination regarding workers’ 

eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment 

Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade 

Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) 

applicable to workers and former 

workers of the subject firm. The 

determination was issued on January 9, 

2009. The Notice of Determination was 

published in the Federal Register on 

February 2, 2009 (74 FR 5871). 

The initial investigation resulted in a 

negative determination based on the 

finding that imports of vinyl 

replacement windows and doors did not 

contribute importantly to worker 

separations at the subject firm and no 

shift of production to a foreign source 

occurred. 

In the request for reconsideration, the 

petitioner provided additional 

information regarding imports of vinyl 

replacement windows and doors and 

alleged that the customers might have 

increased imports of vinyl replacement 

windows and doors in the relevant 

period. 

The Department has carefully 

reviewed the request for reconsideration 

and the existing record and has 

determined that the Department will 

conduct further investigation to 

determine if the workers meet the 

eligibility requirements of the Trade Act 

of 1974. 

Conclusion 

After careful review of the 

application, I conclude that the claim is 

of sufficient weight to justify 

reconsideration of the U.S. Department 

of Labor’s prior decision. The 

application is, therefore, granted. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 12th day of 

March 2009. 

Elliott S. Kushner, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E9–6239 Filed 3–20–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–64,681] 

United State Steel—Granite City 

Works, Granite City, IL; Notice of 

Negative Determination Regarding 

Application for Reconsideration 

By application dated January 28, 

2009, the United Steelworkers, District 

7 requested administrative 

reconsideration of the Department’s 

negative determination regarding 

eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment 

Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade 

Adjustment Assistance (ATAA), 

applicable to workers and former 

workers of the subject firm. The denial 

notice was signed on December 23, 2008 

and published in the Federal Register 

on January 14, 2009 (74 FR 2139). 

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 initial investigation resulted in a 

negative determination, which was 

based on the finding that imports of flat 

rolled steel did not contribute 

importantly to worker separations at the 

subject facility and there was no shift of 

production to a foreign country. The 

subject firm did not import flat rolled 

steel in 2006, 2007 and January through 

November 2008. Furthermore, the 

investigation revealed that sales and 

production of flat rolled steel at the 

subject firm increased from January 

through November, 2008 when 

compared with the same period in 2007. 

The petitioner alleged that aggregate 

imports of flat rolled steel, although 

diminished from one year earlier, still 

amounted to a significant amount 

contributing importantly to the worker 

separations and to the decline in sales 

and production at the Granite City 

plant. 

In order to establish import impact, 

the Department considers sales, 

production and import numbers for the 

relevant period (one year prior to the 

date of the petition). Imports of flat 

rolled steel did not increase during the 

relevant period, while sales and 

production of flat rolled steel increased 

at the subject firm. There was no shift 

in production from subject firm abroad 

during the relevant period. 

The petitioner did not supply facts 

not previously considered; nor provide 

additional documentation indicating 

that there was either (1) a mistake in the 

determination of facts not previously 

considered or (2) a misinterpretation of 

facts or of the law justifying 

reconsideration of the initial 

determination. 

After careful review of the request for 

reconsideration, the Department 

determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not 

been met. 

Conclusion 

After review of the application and 

investigative findings, I conclude that 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES