[Federal Register: August 7, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 153)]
[Notices]
[Page 46039-46040]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07au08-94]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-63,533]
Thomasville Furniture Industries, Inc., Upholstery Plant 9,
Hickory, NC; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration
By application dated July 17, 2008, a company official 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 denial notice was
signed on July 2, 2008 and published in the Federal Register on July
21, 2008 (73 FR 42371).
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
[[Page 46040]]
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 mis-
interpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of the
decision.
The TAA petition, which was filed on behalf of workers at
Thomasville Furniture Industries, Inc., Upholstery Plant 9, Hickory,
North Carolina engaged in the production of upholstered furniture, was
denied based on the findings that sales and production of upholstered
furniture at the subject firm did not decrease from 2006 to 2007, and
during the period of January through May 2008 when compared to the same
period in 2007. Furthermore, there was no shift in production from the
subject firm to a foreign country during the relevant period.
In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner stated that in
order to reveal the negative trend in sales and production, the
Department should investigate the time period prior to 2006 and compare
current data with 2005. To support his allegation, the petitioner
attached financial information for sister plants from 2004, 2005 and
2006. The information was submitted to the Department in previous
investigations, which led to certifications of those facilities. The
petitioner seems to allege that because those facilities were
previously certified eligible for TAA, the workers of the subject firm
should be also eligible for TAA.
When assessing eligibility for TAA, the Department exclusively
considers employment, production and sales during the relevant time
period (one year prior to the date of the petition). Therefore, events
occurring in 2005 are outside of the relevant time period and are not
relevant in this investigation.
Should conditions change in the future, the company is encouraged
to file a new petition on behalf of the worker group which will
encompass an investigative period that will include any changing
conditions.
After careful review of the request for reconsideration, the
Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not been met.
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 31st day of July, 2008.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8-18171 Filed 8-6-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P