[Federal Register: May 11, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 91)]
[Notices]
[Page 26181]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11my04-127]
[[Page 26181]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-53,597]
Fashion Technologies, Gaffney, SC; Notice of Negative
Determination on Reconsideration
On March 23, 2004, 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 April 5, 2004 (69 FR 17711).
The petition for the workers of Fashion Technologies, Gaffney,
South Carolina 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 customers of the workers' firm. The
survey revealed that none of the respondents increased their imports of
engraved rotary screens.
In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner states that
Fashion Technology, Gaffney, South Carolina worked very closely with
companies (converters) that print fabric using engraved rotary screens
produced by the subject firm. The petitioner believes that even though
engraved rotary screens are not being imported by customers, they are
used in the production of print fabric, and customers were shifting
their fabric printing production abroad. The petitioner concludes that,
because these print plants are being transferred abroad, the subject
firm workers producing the engraved rotary screens are import impacted.
The petitioner supplied a list of customers, alleging that these
companies are now printing fabric abroad and an investigation of these
additional customers would prove that the subject firm was eligible
under secondary impact.
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 additional
customers regarding their purchases of engraved rotary screens. The
survey revealed no imports of engraved rotary screens during the
relevant period.
The fact that subject firm's customers are shifting their
production abroad may be relevant to this investigation if determining
whether workers of the subject firm are eligible for trade adjustment
assistance (TAA) based on the secondary upstream supplier impact. For
certification on the basis of the workers' firm being a secondary
upstream supplier, the subject firm must have customers that are TAA
certified, and these TAA certified customers must represent a
significant portion of subject firm's business. In addition, the
subject firm would have to produce a component part of the product that
was the basis for the customers' certification.
In this case, however, the subject firm does not act as an upstream
supplier, because engraved rotary screens do not form a component part
of the fabric. Furthermore, none of the customers provided by the
petitioner are certified for TAA. Thus the subject firm workers are not
eligible under secondary impact.
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 in Washington, DC this 13th day of April, 2004.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance Assistance.
[FR Doc. E4-1067 Filed 5-10-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-13-P