[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 140 (Monday, July 22, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Page 47866]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-18425]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[NAFTA-5866]


Exide Technologies Transportation Business Group Florence, MS; 
Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application dated May 13, 2002, the company requested 
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative 
determination regarding eligibility to apply for North American Free 
Trade Agreement-Transitional Adjustment Assistance (NAFTA-TAA), 
applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The 
denial notice was signed on April 11, 2002, and was published in the 
Federal Register on April 24, 2002 (67 FR 20167).
    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 denial of NAFTA-TAA for workers engaged in activities related 
to the production of SLI batteries at Exide Technologies, 
Transportation Business Group, Florence was based on the finding that 
criteria (3) and (4) of the group eligibility requirements of paragraph 
(a)(1) of section 250 of the Trade Act, as amended, were not met. There 
were no company imports of SLI batteries from Mexico or Canada, nor did 
the subject firm shift production from Florence, Mississippi to Mexico 
or Canada. The survey conducted by the Department of Labor revealed no 
increase in customer purchases of SLI batteries from Canada or Mexico 
during the period.
    The petitioner alleges that a major competitor is expanding their 
production facility in Mexico.
    The expansion of a major competitor's Mexican facility producing 
SLI batteries is not relevant to meeting the eligibility requirements 
for adjustment assistance under section 250(a) of the Trade Act of 
1974, as amended.
    The petitioner is further concerned that the customers are not 
buying the batteries directly from the Mexican facility, but purchasing 
the imported Mexican batteries from domestic sources and thus the 
Mexican imports may not show up in the Department of Labor's 
investigation.
    The Department of Labor (DOL) survey tests for imported products 
that are purchased from domestic sources that are like or directly 
competitive with what the subject plant produces during the relevant 
period. The DOL survey revealed that none of customers increased their 
purchases of imported batteries from Canada or Mexico or other domestic 
sources that may be importing from Canada or Mexico during the relevant 
period.
    On June 5, 2002 the company contacted the Labor Department stating 
that other Exide Technologies facilities were certified eligible for 
NAFTA-TAA and that the customer bases of those facilities were similar 
to subject plant's customer base. Therefore, the company believes that 
the subject plant should also be certified eligible for NAFTA-TAA based 
on those certifications.
    Examination of previous company wide NAFTA-TAA certifications show 
that those facilities were certified eligible for NAFTA-TAA based on a 
major customer increasing their imports of batteries from Mexico during 
the relevant time period. The subject plant did not sell batteries to 
that major customer during the relevant time period.

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 14th day of June 2002.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 02-18425 Filed 7-19-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P