[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 40 (Wednesday, March 1, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11117-11118]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5015]



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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[TA-W-30,444]


Martin Marietta Utica, NY; Notice of Negative Determination 
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By an application dated January 22, 1995, the French Road Lodge 
1669 of the International Association of Machinists (IAM) requested 
administrative reconsideration of the subject petition for trade 
adjustment assistance, TAA. The denial notice was issued on December 
30, 1994 and published in the Federal Register on January 20, 1995 (60 
FR 4194).
    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; [[Page 11118]] 
    (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.
    Investigation findings show that the workers produce printed 
circuit boards.
    The union claims that production is being transferred to Mexico. 
The union also claims that the production of GD 53s (radar assembles 
for aircraft) was transferred to Taiwan.
    The findings show that the subject firm has been outsourcing a 
specific type of circuit board production to Mexico since 1992. The 
workers affected by this shift of assembly work were certified as 
eligible to apply for TAA on December 4, 1993. The certification (TA-W-
27,877) expired on December 4, 1994. No new production has been 
transferred to Mexico.
    Other circuit board production at Utica has been affected by 
declines and delays in Defense contracts regulating from Defense 
spending cutbacks. The subject firm has not lost bids to foreign firms.
    Also, a Taiwanese contract with the subject firm called for the 
Utica plant to co-produce with Taiwan and train Taiwanese workers on 
the production of the radar assembles for the Taiwanese market. This 
contract actually had a positive employment affect at Utica. After a 
certain number of radar assemblies were produced, the production was 
transferred to Taiwan. There were no imports of the radar assemblies. 
Worker separations resulting from a loss of production or sales to the 
export market would not form a basis for a worker group certification.

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 16th day of February 1995.
Victor J. Trunzo,
Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services; Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 95-5015 Filed 2-28-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M