[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 90 (Tuesday, May 11, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Page 25367]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-11859]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-35,450]


Braeburn Alloy Steel, Incorporated Lower Burrell, Pennsylvania; 
Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application dated April 14, 1999, the 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). The 
denial notice applicable to workers of Braeburn Alloy Steel, 
Incorporated located in Lower Burrell, Pennsylvania, was signed on 
March 15, 1999, and published in the Federal Register on April 6, 1999 
(64 FR 16752).
    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 petition, filed on behalf of workers of the subject firm in 
Lower Burrell, Pennsylvania, engaged in the conversion of steel 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 workers' firm's customers. The investigation 
revealed that none of the subject firm customers reported increased 
import purchases of articles like or directly competitive with those 
produced at the Braeburn Alloy Steel, Incorporated plant in Lower 
Burrell, Pennsylvania.
    The company official asserts that the Department wrongfully 
interpreted the information submitted for the petition investigation. 
The investigation concluded that none of Braeburn's customers imported 
steel slab in 1997 and 1998. The company official explains that 
Braeburn Steel converts customer's steel such as ingots, slabs and bar 
into specified products as requested by the customers. The company 
states that Braeburn's customers in turn sell the steel product to 
their customers, who in turn will buy the imported steel that impacts 
Braeburn's business.
    The Trade Act was not intended to provide TAA benefits to everyone 
who is in some way affected by foreign competition but only to those 
who experienced a decline in sales or production and employment and an 
increase in imports of like or directly competitive products which 
``contributed importantly'' to declines in sales or production and 
employment. The Department limits its investigation to the impact of 
imports like or directly competitive with the products produced and 
sold by the workers' firm in this case converted steel products.
    The Department stands corrected that the survey conducted for the 
customer's of the subject firm requested information regarding customer 
import purchases of converted steel, not steel slabs as inadvertently 
indicated in the March 15 decision document.
    The company official also included news articles about some of 
Braeburn's customers describing the impact of imported steel rod, bar 
and plate, and also cites that workers for one of the subject firm 
customers were certified eligible for TAA. The steel shapes, regardless 
of source of the raw material (steel bars, slabs or ingots) sent by 
customers to Braeburn for conversion cannot be considered like or 
directly competitive with the products produced at the petitioning 
workers firm. The Department has reviewed TAA petitions processed and 
found that there were no TAA workers group certifications issued for 
the specific customer location cited by the company official.

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, D.C. this 28th day of April 1999.
Grant D. Beale,
Acting Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 99-11859 Filed 5-10-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M