DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-59,183

GEHL COMPANY
WEST BEND, WISCONSIN

Notice of Revised Determination
on Reconsideration

On August 2, 2006, the Department issued an Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the
workers and former workers of the subject firm. The notice was
published in the Federal Register on August 11, 2006 (71 FR
46243-46244).
The previous investigation initiated on April 11, 2006,
resulted in a negative determination issued on June 7, 2006,
based on the finding that imports of agricultural implements did
not contribute importantly to worker separations at the subject
firm and no shift of production to a foreign source occurred.
The denial notice was published in the Federal Register on July
14, 2006 (71 FR 40160).
To support the request for reconsideration, the company
official supplied additional information. Upon further review of
the initial investigation and contact with subject firm’s company
official, the Department conducted additional survey of subject
firm’s declining customers. The survey revealed that subject
firm customers increased their reliance on import purchases of
agricultural implements during the relevant period. The
investigation also revealed that sales and production at the
subject firm declined 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 additional facts obtained on
reconsideration, I conclude that increased imports of articles
like or directly competitive with those produced at Gehl Company,
West Bend, Wisconsin, 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 Gehl Company, West Bend, Wisconsin, who
became totally or partially separated from employment on or
after April 10, 2005 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 29th day of September 2006.

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

4510-30-P


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-59,183

GEHL COMPANY
WEST BEND, WISCONSIN

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 April 11, 2006 in response
to a petition filed by the United Steelworkers of America, District
2, on behalf of workers of Gehl Company, West Bend, Wisconsin. The
workers at the subject firm manufactured agricultural implements.
The workers were not separately identifiable by product line.
The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C) and
(a)(2)(B)(II.B) have not been met.
The investigation revealed that the subject firm did not
import agricultural implements or shift production abroad in 2004,
2005, or during the period of January through March 2006.
The Department of Labor surveyed the subject firm’s major
declining customers regarding their purchases agricultural
implements. This survey revealed minimal imports of agricultural
implements during the relevant period and increased reliance on
purchases from other domestic sources.
The subject firm made a corporate decision to discontinue the
production of agricultural implements at this location and
concentrate on core business at other domestic locations.
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 during this
investigation, I determine that workers of Gehl Company, West Bend,
Wisconsin 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 7th day of June 2006

/s/ Linda G. Poole
_______________________________
LINDA G. POOLE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance





- 2 -