Petitioner Type: Workers
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 08/02/2007
Most Recent Update: 08/14/2007
Determination Date: 08/14/2007
Expiration Date:
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-61,927
C-TECH INDUSTRIES
A SUBSIDIARY OF ALFRED KARCHER GMBH AND CO. KG
CALUMET, MICHIGAN
Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application dated September 5, 2007, a worker requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding eligibility for workers and former
workers of C-Tech Industries, A Subsidiary of Alfred Karcher GMBH
& Co. KG, Calumet, Michigan (subject firm) to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance (ATAA). The negative determination applicable to
workers of the subject firm was issued on August 14, 2007. The
Department’s Notice of determination was published in the Federal
Register on August 30, 2007 (72 FR 50126). Workers at the
subject firm produce automatic parts cleaners (parts washers).
The petition, dated August 1, 2007, stated that the subject
firm shifted production to a foreign country and that the subject
firm will close in November 2007. The petition attachments
stated that production of pressure washers at the C-Tech
Industries, Camas, Washington plant shifted to an affiliated
facility in Monterrey, Mexico, and that “C-Tech industries in
Camas, Washington takes over all production of parts washers.”
The investigation revealed that neither sales nor production
of parts cleaners/washers at the subject firm decreased during
the relevant period. Rather, sales and production levels at the
subject firm increased in 2006 from 2005 levels, and increased
during January through July 2007 from January through July 2006
levels. The investigation also revealed that the subject firm
did not shift production of parts cleaners/washers abroad.
Rather, the shift of production was to an affiliated, domestic
facility. Therefore, the Department determined that neither
Section 222(a)(2)(A) nor Section 222(a)(2)(B) was satisfied.
The petitioner contends that “no automatic parts washers
were manufactured in Mexico, but pressure washers are being
manufactured in Mexico” and that it does not matter that “the
manufacture of our specific product did not go to Mexico, because
our company produces a family of products. Transfer of one
product in the family, affects the other products in the family.”
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.
In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner did not
provide any new facts or allege any mistake of facts. Rather,
the petitioner alleges that the Department has misinterpreted the
law – that the shift of production of pressure washers from C-
Tech Industries, Camas, Washington, to Mexico is a basis for a
certification of eligibility for workers and former workers of C-
Tech Industries, A Subsidiary of Alfred Karcher GMBH & Co. KG,
Calumet, Michigan to apply for TAA and ATAA.
The statute requires that the shift of production abroad
must be of an article that is like or directly competitive with
those produced at the subject firm. Because pressure washers and
automatic parts washers are not similar to each other and are not
directly competitive with each other, the Department determines
that the shift of pressure washers to Mexico cannot be the basis
for certification of a worker group that produces parts washers.
Conclusion
After review of the application and investigative findings,
I conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of
the law or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of
the Department of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the
application is denied.
Signed at Washington, D.C., this 24st day of September 2007.
/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
___________________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
4510-FN-P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-61,927
C-TECH INDUSTRIES
A SUBSIDIARY OF ALFRED KARCHER GMBH & CO. KG
CALUMET, MICHIGAN
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, 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 August 2, 2007 in response
to a petition filed on behalf of workers of C-Tech Industries, A
subsidiary of Alfred Karcher GMBh & Co. KG, Calumet, Michigan. The
workers produce automatic parts cleaners.
The investigation revealed that criterion (a)(2)(A)(I.B.) and
(a)(2)(B)(II.B.) have not been met.
The investigation revealed that sales and production for
automatic parts cleaners increased in 2005, 2006 and year to date
2007.
The investigation revealed that the subject firm did not
import or shift production of automatic parts cleaners to a foreign
country during the relevant period.
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 C-Tech Industries, A
subsidiary of Alfred Karcher GMBh & Co. KG, Calumet, Michigan, 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 14th day of August 2007.
/s/Linda G. Poole
______________________________
LINDA G. POOLE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
- 5 -
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-61,927
C-TECH INDUSTRIES
A SUBSIDIARY OF ALFRED KARCHER GMBH AND CO. KG
CALUMET, MICHIGAN
Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application dated September 5, 2007, a worker requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding eligibility for workers and former
workers of C-Tech Industries, A Subsidiary of Alfred Karcher GMBH
& Co. KG, Calumet, Michigan (subject firm) to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance (ATAA). The negative determination applicable to
workers of the subject firm was issued on August 14, 2007. The
Department’s Notice of determination was published in the Federal
Register on August 30, 2007 (72 FR 50126). Workers at the
subject firm produce automatic parts cleaners (parts washers).
The petition, dated August 1, 2007, stated that the subject
firm shifted production to a foreign country and that the subject
firm will close in November 2007. The petition attachments
stated that production of pressure washers at the C-Tech
Industries, Camas, Washington plant shifted to an affiliated
facility in Monterrey, Mexico, and that “C-Tech industries in
Camas, Washington takes over all production of parts washers.”
The investigation revealed that neither sales nor production
of parts cleaners/washers at the subject firm decreased during
the relevant period. Rather, sales and production levels at the
subject firm increased in 2006 from 2005 levels, and increased
during January through July 2007 from January through July 2006
levels. The investigation also revealed that the subject firm
did not shift production of parts cleaners/washers abroad.
Rather, the shift of production was to an affiliated, domestic
facility. Therefore, the Department determined that neither
Section 222(a)(2)(A) nor Section 222(a)(2)(B) was satisfied.
The petitioner contends that “no automatic parts washers
were manufactured in Mexico, but pressure washers are being
manufactured in Mexico” and that it does not matter that “the
manufacture of our specific product did not go to Mexico, because
our company produces a family of products. Transfer of one
product in the family, affects the other products in the family.”
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.
In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner did not
provide any new facts or allege any mistake of facts. Rather,
the petitioner alleges that the Department has misinterpreted the
law – that the shift of production of pressure washers from C-
Tech Industries, Camas, Washington, to Mexico is a basis for a
certification of eligibility for workers and former workers of C-
Tech Industries, A Subsidiary of Alfred Karcher GMBH & Co. KG,
Calumet, Michigan to apply for TAA and ATAA.
The statute requires that the shift of production abroad
must be of an article that is like or directly competitive with
those produced at the subject firm. Because pressure washers and
automatic parts washers are not similar to each other and are not
directly competitive with each other, the Department determines
that the shift of pressure washers to Mexico cannot be the basis
for certification of a worker group that produces parts washers.
Conclusion
After review of the application and investigative findings,
I conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of
the law or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of
the Department of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the
application is denied.
Signed at Washington, D.C., this 24st day of September 2007.
/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
___________________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
4510-FN-P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-61,927
C-TECH INDUSTRIES
A SUBSIDIARY OF ALFRED KARCHER GMBH & CO. KG
CALUMET, MICHIGAN
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, 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 August 2, 2007 in response
to a petition filed on behalf of workers of C-Tech Industries, A
subsidiary of Alfred Karcher GMBh & Co. KG, Calumet, Michigan. The
workers produce automatic parts cleaners.
The investigation revealed that criterion (a)(2)(A)(I.B.) and
(a)(2)(B)(II.B.) have not been met.
The investigation revealed that sales and production for
automatic parts cleaners increased in 2005, 2006 and year to date
2007.
The investigation revealed that the subject firm did not
import or shift production of automatic parts cleaners to a foreign
country during the relevant period.
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 C-Tech Industries, A
subsidiary of Alfred Karcher GMBh & Co. KG, Calumet, Michigan, 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 14th day of August 2007.
/s/Linda G. Poole
______________________________
LINDA G. POOLE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
- 5 -