DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-58,629

CONSOLIDATED CONTAINER COMPANY
BEVERAGE AND INDUSTRIAL CONTAINER DIVISION
LEETSDALE, PENNSYLVANIA

Notice of Revised Determination
on Reconsideration

By application of March 13, 2006, the United Electrical,
Radio & Machine Workers of America, Local 690 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 issued on February 15, 2006, was based on the
finding that imports of polycarbonate bottles did not contribute
importantly to worker separations at the subject plant and that
there was no shift to a foreign country. The denial notice was
published in the Federal Register on March 10, 2006 (71 FR
12396).
To support the request for reconsideration, the petitioner
supplied additional information to supplement that which was
gathered during the initial investigation. Upon further review
of the information and a contact with the company official, it
was revealed that the subject firm shifted two production lines
of the polycarbonate bottles to Canada during the relevant period
and that this shift contributed to the layoffs at the subject
firm.
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 facts obtained in the
investigation, I determine that there was a shift in production
from the workers’ firm or subdivision to Canada of articles that
are like or directly competitive with those produced by the subject
firm or subdivision. In accordance with the provisions of the Act,
I make the following certification:


"All workers of Consolidated Container Company, Beverage &
Industrial Container Division, Leetsdale, Pennsylvania who
became totally or partially separated from employment on or
after January 11, 2005 through two years from the date of
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 12th day of May 2006.

/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
________________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-58,629

CONSOLIDATED CONTAINER COMPANY
BEVERAGE AND INDUSTRIAL CONTAINER DIVISION
LEETSDALE, PENNSYLVANIA

Negative Determinations 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, 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 January 12, 2006 in
response to a petition filed by the United Electrical, Radio &
Machine Workers of America, District 6, on behalf of workers of
Consolidated Container Company, Beverage & Industrial Container
division, Leetsdale, Pennsylvania. The workers produce
polycarbonate bottles.
The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C) and
(a)(2)(B)(II.B) have not been met.
The subject facility did not shift production to a foreign
country in 2004 or 2005, nor did it import polycarbonate bottles
during the aforementioned periods.
The Department of Labor surveyed the subject facility’s
primary customers regarding purchases of polycarbonate bottles in
2004 and 2005. The survey revealed no increase in imports of
customers purchasing from the subject firm in the period under
investigation.
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 of the facts obtained in the
investigation, I determine that all workers of Consolidated
Container Company, Beverage & Industrial Container division,
Leetsdale, Pennsylvania are denied eligibility to apply for adjust-
ment 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 15th day of February 2006.

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