[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 7, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51300-51301]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-19953]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-40,919]


Sovereign Adhesives Incorporated, Formerly Croda Adhesives, 
Ewing, NJ; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application postmarked of June 7, 2002, a worker 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) under 
petition TA-W-40,919. The TAA denial notice applicable to workers of 
Sovereign Adhesives Incorporated, formerly Croda Adhesives, Ewing, New 
Jersey, was signed on April 30, 2002 and published in the Federal 
Register on May 17, 2002 (67 FR 35143).
    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 TAA petition, filed on behalf of workers at Sovereign Adhesives 
Incorporated, formerly Croda Adhesives, Ewing, New Jersey engaged in 
employment related to the production of adhesives, was denied

[[Page 51301]]

because the ``contributed importantly'' group eligibility requirement 
of Section 222(3) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, was not met. 
The preponderance in the declines in employment at the subject plant 
was related to Sovereign Specialty Chemicals, Inc. acquiring Croda 
International Plc Specialty adhesive and coatings business in October 
2000. Following this acquisition production was transferred from the 
Croda plant in Ewing, New Jersey to other Sovereign plants located in 
the United States.
    The petitioner alleges, based on the company's SEC filings, that 
they have manufacturing plants in Brazil, Belgium and the United 
Kingdom. The SEC filing states that the Brazilian plant would be a 
conditional sale. The petitioner indicates the subject plant supplied 
Latiseal type sealants to Brazil and they would start production on 
their own and send them to the United States. The petitioner further 
indicates that the Ewing plant also produced acrylic blends 29-044 and 
29-045, which were shipped to American and Canadian customers and 
subsequently replaced by European imports. The petitioner feels these 
events were overlooked.
    A review of the initial investigation and further contact with the 
company revealed that the company did not import the sealants or blends 
as addressed by the petitioner above during the relevant period. The 
company indicated that any imported products like or directly 
competitive with what the subject plant produced would be ``less than 
negligible''.
    Further review of the initial investigation shows the preponderance 
in the declines in employment at the subject plant was related to a 
domestic shift in plant production to Buffalo, New York and Akron, 
Ohio. Also, in the initial investigation the company reported no 
declines in their customer base during the relevant period. Therefore, 
any potential imports of products ``like or directly competitive'' with 
what the subject plant produced would not meet the ``contributed 
importantly'' group eligibility requirement of Section 222(3) of the 
Trade Act of 1974, as amended.

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 25th day of July, 2002.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 02-19953 Filed 8-6-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P