[Federal Register: March 8, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 45)]
[Notices]
[Page 10761]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08mr04-114]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-53,577]
TDK Texas Corporation, A Subsidiary of TDK USA Corporation, El
Paso, Texas; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration
By application of January 5, 2004, 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 was signed on November 24, 2003 and published in the
Federal Register on December 29, 2003 (68 FR 74978).
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, filed on behalf of workers at TDK Texas
Corporation, a subsidiary of TDK USA Corporation, El Paso, Texas,
engaged in distribution of electronic components was denied because the
workers did not produce an article within the meaning of Section 222 of
the Trade Act of 1974.
The workers appear to be alleging that layoffs at TDK Texas
Corporation, a subsidiary of TDK USA Corporation, El Paso, Texas, was
attributed to free trade and attempt to depict this in their request
for reconsideration.
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 20th day of February, 2004.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E4-467 Filed 3-5-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-13-P