[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 128 (Thursday, July 3, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Page 39983]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-16904]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-51,340]


Sprint United Management Co., Rosemont Center, Rosemont, IL; 
Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application of May 20, 2003, a petitioner 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 applicable to workers of Sprint United Management 
Company, Rosemont Center, Rosemont, Illinois was signed on April 9, 
2003, and published in the Federal Register on April 24, 2003 (68 FR 
20177).
    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 was filed on behalf of workers at Sprint United 
Management Company, Rosemont Center, Rosemont, Illinois engaged in 
selling long distance services. The petition was denied because the 
petitioning workers did not produce an article within the meaning of 
section 222(3) of the Act.
    In the request for reconsideration, the petitioners state that the 
Department erred in describing worker activities as ``selling long 
distance services''. As clarification, they stated that they worked for 
``Sprint Long Distance Collections Dept.''
    In order to meet eligibility requirements, the petitioning worker 
group must be engaged in production; collection services do not 
constitute production within the meaning of Section 222(3) of the Trade 
Act.
    Only in very limited instances are service workers certified for 
TAA, namely the worker separations must be caused by a reduced demand 
for their services from a parent or controlling firm or subdivision 
whose workers produce an article and who are currently under 
certification for TAA.

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 16th day of June, 2003.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 03-16904 Filed 7-2-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P