[Federal Register: June 19, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 118)]
[Notices]               
[Page 36852-36853]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19jn03-106]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-51,048]

 
Kayser-Roth Corporation, Creedmoor Facility, Creedmoor, NC; 
Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application of April 16, 2003, employees requested 
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative 
determination regarding eligibility for workers and former workers of 
the subject firm to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA). The 
denial notice applicable to workers of Kayser-Roth Corporation, 
Creedmoor Facility, Creedmoor, North Carolina was signed on March 19, 
2003, and published in the Federal Register on April 7, 2003 (68 FR 
16834).
    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.

[[Page 36853]]

    The TAA petition was filed on behalf of workers at Kayser-Roth 
Corporation, Creedmoor Facility, Creedmoor, North Carolina engaged in 
activities related to the distribution services of ``No Nonsense'' leg-
wear. The petition was denied because the petitioning workers did not 
produce an article within the meaning of Section 222(3) of the Act.
    The workers allege that layoffs at Kayser-Roth Corporation, 
Creedmoor Facility, Creedmoor, North Carolina, were directly ``due to 
free trade'' and supply supplemental information to confirm this.
    The worker allegations of trade impact would only be relevant if 
all other eligibility requirements for trade adjustment assistance were 
met in this case. However, distribution services do not meet the 
definition of production of an article as established in Section 222 of 
the Trade Act, thus the workers in this case do not meet the 
eligibility requirements of TAA.
    Only in very limited instances are service workers certified for 
TAA, namely the worker separations must be caused by a reduced demand 
for their services from a parent or controlling firm or subdivision 
whose workers produce an article and who are currently under 
certification for TAA.

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, DC, this 3rd day of June, 2003.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance
[FR Doc. 03-15476 Filed 6-18-03; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-30-P