[Federal Register: September 8, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 173)]
[Notices]
[Page 54319-54320]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08se04-82]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment And Training Administration
[TA-W-54,974]
Tarkett, Inc., Whitehall, Pennsylvania; Notice of Negative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By letter of August 4, 2004, the 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) and
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA). The negative
determination was signed on June 16, 2004. Department's notice of
determination was 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 initial petition was denied because the subject worker group
did not produce an article within the meaning of section 222(3) of the
Act. The Department determined that the workers sold imported sheet
vinyl flooring and provided administrative and information technology
(IT) support for the sales team.
Information supplied in the initial investigation indicate that
production of sheet vinyl flooring at the subject facility ceased
completely in 1999, that sheet vinyl flooring has not been made
domestically since 1999, and that workers at the subject facility are
engaged in the sale of sheet vinyl flooring produced entirely in
Canada.
[[Page 54320]]
The investigation also revealed that sales, marketing, and customer
service functions are being performed at the subject facility, and that
certain sales and IT positions moved to Canada.
The petitioner alleges that their job functions are being performed
by workers at an affiliated Canadian facility. The petitioner infers
that the same circumstances that supported a previous certification for
the subject firm (TA-W-39,469; signed July 31, 2001) should support the
current application.
The petitioner also alleges that the subject worker group supports
an affiliated, TAA-certified facility (Tarkett, Inc., Newburgh, New
York; signed March 24, 2003; TA-W-50,982). The petitioner further
alleges that the closing of the New York site contributed to worker
separations at the subject facility.
The petitioner has not presented any new facts or made any
allegation that facts used in determining TAA eligibility were
erroneous or that there was a misinterpretation of facts. Thus, the
Department reaffirms the determination that the workers at the subject
firm do not produce an article within the meaning of Section 222(3) of
the Trade Act 1974.
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 26th day of August, 2004.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E4-2094 Filed 9-7-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P