DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-56,570

PENN MOULD INDUSTRIES, INC.
WASHINGTON, PENNSYLVANIA

Notice of Revised Determination
on Reconsideration

By letter dated April 18, 2005 United Steelworkers of
America, District 10 requested administrative reconsideration
regarding the Department’s Negative Determination Regarding
Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance, applicable
to the workers of the subject firm.
The initial investigation resulted in a negative
determination signed on March 16, 2005 was based on the finding
that imports of molding equipment for glass containers did not
contribute importantly to worker separations at the subject plant
and no shift of production to a foreign source occurred. The
denial notice will be soon published in the Federal Register.
The petitioner provided additional information on subject
firm’s customers. The petitioner also brought to the
Department’s attention the fact that the subject firm has a
sister company, Ross Mould, Inc., Washington, Pennsylvania, which
manufactures the same products and shares the same customer base
with the subject firm. Workers of Ross Mould, inc., Washington,
Pennsylvania were certified eligible for TAA on November 19, 2004
(TA-W-55,828).
Upon the review of the information obtained during the
investigations of the both sister companies, it was revealed that
subject firm’s major declining customer increased its import
purchases of molding equipment for glass containers while
decreasing its purchases from the subject firm during the
relevant period. It was also revealed that sales and employment
have declined at the subject firm during the relevant time
period.
In accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of 1974 (26 USC
2813), as amended, the Department of Labor herein presents the
results of its investigation regarding certification of eligibility
to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance (ATAA) for
older workers.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of
eligibility to apply for ATAA, the group eligibility requirements
of Section 246 of the Trade Act must be met. The Department has
determined in this case that the requirements of Section 246 have
been met.
A significant number of workers at the firm are age 50 or over
and possess skills that are not easily transferable. Competitive
conditions within the industry are adverse.
Conclusion
After careful review of the initial investigation, I
conclude that increased imports of articles like or directly
competitive with those produced at Penn Mould Industries, Inc.,
Washington, Pennsylvania, contributed importantly to the declines
in sales or production and to the total or partial separation of
workers at the subject firm. In accordance with the provisions
of the Act, I make the following certification:
"All workers of Penn Mould Industries, Inc., Washington,
Pennsylvania, who became totally or partially separated from
employment on or after February 10, 2004 through two years
from the date of this certification, are eligible to apply
for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act
of 1974, and are eligible to apply for alternative trade
adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of
1974."

Signed in Washington, D.C. this 28th day of April, 2005

/s/ Elliott S. Kushner

________________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-56,570

PENN MOULD INDUSTRIES, INC.
WASHINGTON, PENNSYLVANIA

Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended (19 USC 2273), the Department of Labor herein presents the
results of an investigation regarding certification of eligibility
to apply for worker adjustment assistance. The group eligibility
requirements for directly-impacted (primary) workers under Section
222(a) the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, can be satisfied in
either of two ways:
I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following must be satisfied:
A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm,
have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. the sales or production, or both, of such firm or
subdivision have decreased absolutely; and
C. increased imports of articles like or directly competitive
with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have
contributed importantly to such workers’ separation or
threat of separation and to the decline in sales or
production of such firm or subdivision; or

II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the following must be satisfied:
A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm
firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. there has been a shift in production by such workers’ firm
or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or
directly competitive with articles which are produced by
such firm or subdivision; and

C. One of the following must be satisfied:
1. the country to which the workers’ firm has shifted
production of the articles is a party to a free trade
agreement with the United States;
2. the country to which the workers’ firm has shifted
production of the articles is a beneficiary country
under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth
and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic
Recovery Act; or
3. there has been or is likely to be an increase in
imports of articles that are like or directly
competitive with articles which are or were produced
by such firm or subdivision.

The investigation was initiated on February 14, 2005 in
response to a petition filed by a union official from the United
Steelworkers of America, Local 142 on behalf of workers of Penn
Mould Industries, Inc., Washington, Pennsylvania. The workers at
the subject firm produce molding equipment for glass containers.
The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C) and
(a)(2)(B)(II.B) were not met.
The investigation revealed that the subject firm did not
import molding equipment for glass containers in 2003 and 2004, nor
did it shift production abroad during the relevant period.
The Department of Labor surveyed the subject firm’s major
domestic customer regarding its purchases of molding equipment for
glass containers during 2003 and 2004. Results of the survey
indicated very minimal imports. Although imports of the customer
increased, the increase was less than the increase in purchases
from other domestic firms and negligible compared to its purchases
from the subject firm.
In addition, in accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of
1974 (26 USC 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor herein
presents the results of its investigation regarding certification
of eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance
(ATAA) for older workers.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of
eligibility to apply for ATAA, the worker group must be certified
eligible to apply for trade adjustment assistance (TAA). Since the
workers are denied eligibility to apply for TAA, the workers cannot
be certified eligible for ATAA.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that all workers of Penn
Mould Industries, Inc., Washington, Pennsylvania are denied
eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of
the Trade Act of 1974, and are also denied eligibility to apply for
alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the
trade Act of 1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 16th day of March, 2005.

/s/ Richard Church
______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance