[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 104 (Thursday, May 30, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Page 37872]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-13541]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-40,039]


TNS Mills Inc., Rockingham Plant, Rockingham, NC; Notice of 
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated March 19, 2002, the company, 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 was signed on February 15, 2002 and published in the 
Federal Register on February 28, 2002 (67 FR 9324).
    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 at TNS Mills 
Incorporated, Rockingham Plant, Rockingham, North Carolina engaged in 
the production of ring spun carded cotton yarn, 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 Department conducted a 
survey of the subject company's major customers regarding their 
purchases of ring spun carded cotton yarn. The survey revealed that 
none of the customers increased their import purchases of ring spun 
carded cotton yarn during the relevant period.
    The petitioner alleges that various customers of the subject firm 
were certified for TAA. Therefore, they believe that due to the number 
of customers certified for TAA, they should be certified for TAA.
    The certification of the subject firm's customers is irrelevant 
unless the customers are affiliated with the subject firm by corporate 
ownership. If there was corporate affiliation the workers could receive 
consideration for eligibility under TAA. The customers certified under 
TAA were outside the TNS Mills corporate structure, and therefore 
cannot be considered eligible for TAA under those certifications.
    The petitioner also alleges that imports of ring spun cotton yarn 
are lower in price than the domestic market, thus impacting the subject 
firm workers.
    The price of ring spun cotton yarns is not relevant to the TAA 
investigation that were filed on behalf of workers producing ring spun 
cotton yarns.
    The petitioner further claims that imported carded yarns impacted 
the closing of the subject plant. The petitioner supplied a chart with 
import trends of various yarn imports.
    Although, the Department uses industry data in their TAA 
determinations, the Department of Labor normally examines if the 
``contributed importantly'' test is met through a survey of the 
workers' firm's customers. A review of the survey results shows that 
the customers did not increase their imports of ring spun carded cotton 
yarn during the relevant period. Further, the ratio of imports of 
carded yarn to U.S. production is relatively low during the relevant 
period and therefore not a major contributing factor relating to the 
declines in sales and employment at the subject firm.

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 30th day of April, 2002.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 02-13541 Filed 5-29-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P