[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 25 (Friday, February 6, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6208-6209]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-2916]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-33,969 and NAFTA-01994]


Champion Aviation Products, Weatherly, Pennsylvania; Negative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated January 6, 1998, the company requested 
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative 
determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment 
Assistance (TAA) and NAFTA-Transitional Adjustment Assistance (NAFTA-
TAA), applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The 
denial notices applicable to workers of the subject firm located in 
Weatherly, Pennsylvania, were signed on December 11, 1997. The TAA and 
NAFTA-TAA decisions were published in the Federal Register on January 
6, 1998 (63 FR 577) and (63 FR 578), respectively.
    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 of Champion Aviation 
Products Division of Cooper Industries, Weatherly, Pennsylvania, 
producing aircraft displays and aircraft power supplies was denied 
because the ``contributed importantly'' group eligibility requirement 
of section 222(3) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, was not met. 
The ``contributed importantly'' test is generally demonstrated through 
a survey of the worker firm's customers. None of the Champion Aviation 
Products' customers reported increased import purchases while 
decreasing purchases from Champion's Weatherly plant. A survey of firms 
to whom the subject firm submitted competitive bids revealed that those 
bids were awarded domestically.
    The NAFTA-TAA petition for the same worker group was denied because 
criteria (3) and (4) of the group eligibility requirements in paragraph 
(a)(1) of section 250 of the Trade Act, as amended, were not met. There 
were no company imports of aircraft displays and aircraft power 
supplies from Mexico or Canada, nor was there a shift in production 
from the workers' firm to Mexico or Canada. A survey of the major 
declining customers of Champion showed that none of the respondents 
purchased imports of aircraft displays or power supplies from Mexico or 
Canada. A survey of firms to whom the subject firm submitted 
competitive bids revealed that those bids were awarded domestically.
    In support of their application for reconsideration, the company 
asserts that one of their lost contract bids was awarded to a foreign 
supplier. Review of this information shows that firm soliciting bids 
was a foreign company not a domestic operation. The Department does not 
survey foreign firms, including those located in Mexico or Canada. The 
Department must examine sales to U.S customers, and in this case, 
competitive bids offered by U.S. companies. Sales to customers outside 
of the United States would be considered to be for the export market. A 
loss of export market business cannot

[[Page 6209]]

be considered a basis for worker group certification.
    The company also contends that some work performed at the Weatherly 
plant was shifted to the parent company's Sparta, Tennessee facility, 
which in turn has shifted some of their production to Mexico. The 
Department's records show that a NAFTA-TAA petition was never filed on 
behalf of the Cooper Industries workers in Sparta, Tennessee. 
Consequently, the shift in production from Weatherly, Pennsylvania to 
Sparta, Tennessee does not merit a NAFTA-TAA 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 decisions. Accordingly, the application is denied.

    Signed at Washington, DC this 27th day of January 1998.
Grant D. Beale,
Acting Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 98-2916 Filed 2-5-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M