8416 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 1995 / Notices

summaries of determinations regarding

eligibility to apply for NAFTA–TAA

issued during the months of January and

February, 1995.

In order for an affirmative

determination to be made and a

certification of eligibility to apply for

NAFTA–TAA the following group

eligibility requirements of Section 250

of the Trade Act must be met:

(1) That a significant number or

proportion of the workers in the

workers’ firm, or an appropriate

subdivision thereof (including workers

in any agricultural firm or appropriate

subdivision thereof), have become

totally or partially separated from

employment and either—

(A) That sales or production, or both,

of such firm or subdivision have

decreased absolutely,

(B) That imports from Mexico or

Canada of articles like or directly

competitive with articles produced by

such firm or subdivision have increased.

(c) That the increase in imports

contributed importantly to such

workers’ separations or threat of

separation and to the decline in sales or

production of such firm or subdivision;

or

(2) That there has been a shift in

production by such workers’ firm or

subdivision to Mexico or Canada of

articles like or directly competitive with

articles which are produced by the firm

or subdivision.

Negative Determinations NAFTA–TAA

NAFTA–TAA–00320; Fenestra Corp.,

Erie, PA

The investigation revealed that

criteria (3) and criteria (4) were not met.

There was no shift in production from

the subject facility to Mexico or Canada

during the period under investigation,

nor did the company import steel door

and frames from Mexico or Canada.

NAFTA–TAA–00317; Nelson Yacht

Corp., Snohomish, WA

The investigation revealed that

criteria (1) was not met in conjection

with the requirements of Section

506(b)(2) of the Act. The firm closed in

March 1993 and all worker separations

from the subject firm occurred prior to

December 8, 1993, the earliest possible

reachback date.

NAFTA–TAA–00310; Tennessee Valley

Steel Corp., Harriman/Rockwood,

TN

The investigation revealed that

criteria (3) and criteria (4) were not met.

There was no shift in production from

the subject facility to Mexico or Canada

during the period under investigation,

nor did the company import steel from

Mexico or Canada. Customers did not

increase imports of steel products from

Canada or Mexico during the periods

under investigation.

NAFTA–TAA–00311; Indiana

Sportswear, Clinton, IN

NAFTA–TAA–00311A; Columbus

Sportswear, Columbus, IN

The investigation revealed that

criteria (3) and criteria (4) were not met.

Survey results revealed that customers

did not import ladies jackets from

Mexico or Canada during the periods

under investigation. There was no shift

in production from the subject facility to

Mexico or Canada during the period

under investigation, nor did the

company import ladies jackets from

Mexico or Canada.

Affirmative Determinations NAFTA–

TAA

NAFTA–TAA–00318; Dover/

Parkersburg, Falls River, MA

A certification was issued covering all

workers at Dover/Parkersburg located in

Falls River, MA separated on or after

December 8, 1993.

NAFTA–TAA–00319; Woodward

Governor Co., Aircraft Controls

Group, Stevens Point, WI

A certification was issued covering all

workers of Woodward Governor Co.,

Aircraft Group, Aircraft Parts Mfg,

Stevens Point, WI separated on or after

December 8, 1993.

NAFTA–TAA–00321; General Imaging

Technology (USA), Inc., Denver

Plant, Arvada, CO

A certification was issued covering all

workers of the Slitting Division of

General Imaging Technology (USA),

Inc., Denver, CO separated on or after

December 8, 1993.

NAFTA–TAA–00315; Mobil Chemical

Co., Films Div., Macedon, NY

A certification was issued covering all

workers of Mobil Chemical Co’s Films

Division plant, located in Macedon, NY

separated on or after December 8, 1993.

NAFTA–TAA–00316; Ansell Pacific,

Inc., Pacific Dunlop, Inc., Salem,

OR

A certification was issued covering all

workers of Ansell Pacific, Inc., Salem,

OR separated on or after December 20,

1993.

I hereby certify that the

aforementioned determinations were

issued during the months of January and

February, 1995. Copies of these

determinations are available for

inspection in Room C–4318, U.S.

Department of Labor, 200 Constitution

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210

during normal business hours or will be

mailed to persons who write to the

above address.

Dated: February 7, 1995.

Victor J. Trunzo,

Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment

Services, Office of Trade Adjustment

Assistance.

[FR Doc. 95–3645 Filed 2–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

[TA–W–30,216]

AEG Transportation Systems;

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Revised

Determination on Reconsideration

On January 24, 1995, the Department

issued an Affirmative Determination

Regarding Application for

Reconsideration for workers and former

workers of the subject firm. The notice

will soon be published in the Federal

Register.

New findings on reconsideration

show that the subject firm lost a major

bid for the construction of a rapid

transit project to a Japanese firm. The

loss of this contract contributed

importantly to the layoff of personnel in

1993 and 1994 and to decreased sales

and production in 1994.

Other findings show decreased

production in 1993 compared to 1992

and decreased sales in the first six

months of 1994 compared to the same

period in 1993. Average employment

declined in 1993 compared to 1992 and

in the first six months of 1994 compared

to the same period in 1993.

Conclusion

After careful consideration of the new

facts obtained on reconsideration, it is

concluded that workers and former

workers of AEG Transportation Systems,

Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania were

adversely affected by increased imports

of articles that are like or directly

competitive with transit vehicle systems

and related equipment.

In accordance with the provisions of

the Act, I make the following revised

determination for workers of AEG

Transportation Systems, Inc., in

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

All workers of AEG Transportation

Systems, Inc., in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

who became totally or partially separated

from employment on or after August 4, 1993

are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance

under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 2nd day

of February 1995.

Victor J. Trunzo,

Program Director, Policy and Reemployment

Services, Office of Trade Adjustment

Assistance.

[FR Doc. 95–3642 Filed 2–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–M