[Federal Register: September 10, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 175)]
[Notices]
[Page 53394]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10se03-89]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-51,834]
Agilent Technologies, Inc., Information Technology Division (IT),
Colorado Springs, CO; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding
Application for Reconsideration
By application of July 17, 2003, a petitioner 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 Agilent Technologies, Inc.,
Information Technology Division (IT), Colorado Springs, Colorado was
signed on June 16, 2003, and published in the Federal Register on July
3, 2003 (68 FR 39976).
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
misinterpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of
the decision.
The TAA petition was filed on behalf of workers at Agilent
Technologies, Inc., Information Technology Division (IT), Colorado
Springs, Colorado, engaged in computer consulting services combined
with providing information technology. The petition was denied because
the petitioning workers did not produce an article within the meaning
of Section 222 of the Act.
The petitioner appears to imply that the petitioning worker group
should be considered eligible for TAA on the basis that they served as
secondary upstream supplier to a trade certified firm.
In fact, in order to be eligible for TAA, workers must produce an
article. Further, in order to meet TAA eligibility requirements as
secondary upstream suppliers, the worker group must produce a component
part of the product that was the basis of the TAA certification for the
customer firm.
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 13th day of August 2003.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 03-22996 Filed 9-9-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P