[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 9, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45547-45548]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-17142]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-40,309]


Firestone Tube Co., a Division of Bridgestone/Firestone North 
American Tire, LLC, Subsidiary of Bridgestone Corp., Russellville, AR; 
Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application dated May 14, 2002, the United Steelworkers of 
America, Local 884 requested administrative reconsideration of the 
Department's negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for 
Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former 
workers of the subject firm. The denial notice was signed on April 18, 
2002, and published in the Federal Register on May 2, 2002 (67 FR 
22114).
    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 mis-
interpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of the 
decision.
    The petition for the workers of Firestone Tube Company, a division 
of Bridgestone/Firestone North American Tire, LLC, a subsidiary of 
Bridgestone Corp., Russellville, Arkansas was denied because criterion 
(2) was not met. Sales and production at the subject firm increased 
during the relevant period.
    The petitioner alleges that plant production declined during the 
relevant

[[Page 45548]]

period and attempts to illustrate these declines in production by 
supplying plant statistics of cure sets (molds used in the production 
of tubes) to attempt to show that production of tubes at the subject 
plant declined during the relevant period.
    A review of the initial decision shows that plant sales and 
production increased from January through September 2001 over the 
corresponding 2000 period. During the initial investigation the company 
reported declines in plant sales and production in the year 2000 over 
the 1999 period. However, due to the reported decline in sales and 
production during the year 2000, although not noted in the TAA 
decision, the U.S. Department of Labor conducted a survey of the major 
declining customers of the subject firm regarding their purchases of 
automobile inner tubes for the 1999, 2000 and the January through 
November 2001 period over the corresponding 2000 period. The survey is 
conducted to test if customer imports of like or directly competitive 
products as produced at the subject firm ``contributed importantly'' to 
the worker separations of the workers' firm. None of the customers 
reported importing inner tubes during the relevant period.
    The United Steel Workers of America, Local 884 further alleges that 
the company is importing tubes from Korea and China to the 
Russellville, Arkansas plant and then sells the tubes to customers.
    Further review of company data supplied during the initial 
investigation, shows that the company imported a grouping of small 
tubes, most of which the plant was unable to produce. The reported 
imports of these tubes were relatively stable during the relevant 
period. The amount of company tube imports like or directly competitive 
with what the subject firm produced was also relatively low, therefore 
imports like or directly competitive with what the subject plant 
produced did not contribute importantly to the layoffs 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 decision. Accordingly, the application is denied.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 20th day of June, 2002.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 02-17142 Filed 7-8-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P