[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 36 (Monday, February 24, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8621-8622]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-4280]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-41,497 and NAFTA-06126]


Furnimex Products USA Inc., Charm House Manufacturing, Sumter, 
South Carolina; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application 
for Reconsideration

    By application of September 11, 2002, the petitioners 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-41,497 and North American Free Trade Agreement-
Transitional Adjustment Assistance (NAFTA-TAA) under petition NAFTA-
06126. The TAA denial notice applicable to workers of Furnimex Products 
USA Inc., Charm House Manufacturing, Sumter, South Carolina was signed 
on August 6, 2002 and published in the Federal Register on August 20, 
2002 (67 FR 53971). The NAFTA-TAA denial notice was signed on June 21, 
2002 and will soon be published in the Federal Register.
    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 Furnimex Products 
USA Inc., Charm House Manufacturing, Sumter, South Carolina, 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 major customer of the 
subject firm went out of business and the loss of that customer was the 
major contributing factor leading to the closure of the plant. The 
workers produced bed linens and blankets.
    The NAFTA-TAA petition for the same worker group was denied because 
criteria (3) and (4) of the group eligibility requirements in paragraph 
(a)(1) of section 250 of the Trade Act, as amended, were not met. There 
was no shift in production from the workers' firm to Mexico or Canada 
during the relevant period. Imports from Canada or Mexico did not 
contribute importantly to worker separations. The investigation also 
revealed that a major customer of the subject firm went out of business 
and the loss of this customer was the major contributing factor to the 
closure of the Sumter plant.
    The petitioner appears to be indicating that plant production was 
shifted to Mexico after the plant closed down.
    An examination of the initial decision and further contact with the 
company show that the closure of the subject plant is due to a major 
customer going out of business. That customer accounted for a major 
portion of the subject plant's sales and thus impacted the subject 
plant.
    Further contact with the company also shows that the company was a 
Limited Liability Partnership (LLC) between the owner of Charm House 
Manufacturing and Furnimex Products USA Incorporated. The company 
indicated that no plant production was shifted to Mexico. Furnimex 
Products USA Incorporated indicated that an extremely small portion of 
subject plant production was outsourced to an unaffiliated plant 
located in Mexico, after the subject plant closed down, only as a 
customer courtesy. The amount outsourced and imported back from Mexico 
was not significant.

[[Page 8622]]

Conclusion

    After review of the application and investigative findings, I 
conclude that there has been no 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 3rd day of February, 2003.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 03-4280 Filed 2-21-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P