[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 104 (Wednesday, June 1, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-13295]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: June 1, 1994]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[TA-W-29,379]

 

Carter Automotive Company, Inc., a Federal-Mogul Co.; LaFayette, 
TN; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By an application received April 28, 1994, Local #1988 of the 
United Auto Workers (UAW) requested administrative reconsideration of 
the subject petition for trade adjustment assistance (TAA). The denial 
notice was published in the Federal Register on March 30, 1994 (58 FR 
14876).
    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 investigation files show that the workers produced automotive 
fuel systems.
    The union submitted additional information showing that components 
for fuel pumps and filter pump assemblies were imported to Lafayette 
for further production.
    The Department's denial was based on the fact that the 
``contributed importantly'' test of the Group Eligibility Requirements 
of the Trade Act was not met. All production was transferred to another 
corporate domestic plant in Indiana. A transfer of production to 
another domestic location would not provide a basis for a worker group 
certification.
    The investigation files shows that the component parts (adapters, 
bodies, motors, etc.) used in the assembly of fuel systems which were 
purchased offshore were not produced at Lafayette 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 23rd day of May 1994.
Robert O. Deslongchamps,
Director, Office of Legislation and Actuarial Service, Unemployment 
Insurance Service.
[FR Doc. 94-13295 Filed 5-31-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M