[Federal Register: August 11, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 154)]
[Notices]               
[Page 48895]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11au04-114]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-54,635]

 
Westside Stitching, Inc., West Wyoming, PA; Notice of Negative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application of July 12, 2004, a company official requested 
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative 
determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment 
Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former workers of the 
subject firm. The denial notice was signed on June 16, 2004, and 
published in the Federal Register on July 7, 2004 (69 FR 40983).
    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 petition for the workers of Westside Stitching, Inc., West 
Wyoming, Pennsylvania engaged in production of motion furniture was 
denied because the ``contributed importantly'' group eligibility 
requirement of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, was 
not met. The ``contributed importantly'' test is generally demonstrated 
through a survey of the workers' firm's customers. The survey revealed 
no increase of imports of motion furniture during the relevant period. 
The subject firm did not import motion furniture in the relevant period 
nor did it shift production to a foreign country.
    The petitioner alleges that the subject firm lost its business due 
to its major customer importing products from China.
    This customer was surveyed by the Department during the original 
investigation. A review of the survey confirmed no import purchases of 
motion furniture during the relevant period.
    The petitioner further states that the subject firm manufactures 
only motion furniture, excluding any lift mechanisms, and that the 
subject firm's customers started importing a lift mechanism, a 
component to the motion furniture. The petitioner concludes that, 
because the production of lift mechanisms occurs abroad, the subject 
firm workers producing motion furniture are import impacted.
    In order to establish import impact, the Department must consider 
imports that are like or directly competitive with those produced at 
the subject firm. The Department conducted a survey of the subject 
firm's major declining customer regarding their purchases of motion 
furniture. The survey revealed that the declining customers did not 
import motion furniture during the relevant period.

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 August, 2004.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 04-18342 Filed 8-10-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-30-P