[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 129 (Monday, July 7, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40298-40299]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-16889]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-50,489]


Corning, Inc., Photonic Technologies Division, Painted Post, New 
York; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application of March 13, 2003, a petitioner 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 February 25, 2003, and 
published in the Federal Register on March 10, 2003 (68 FR 11408).
    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 petition for the workers of Corning, Inc., Photonic 
Technologies Division, Painted Post, New York 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 customers of the workers' firm. The survey revealed that none 
of the respondents increased their purchases of imported amplifiers, 
dispersion compensation modules, and fiber-based components. The 
investigation revealed that the subject firm did not import products 
like or directly competitive with amplifiers, dispersion compensation 
modules, and fiber-based components during the relevant period of 2001 
to 2002, nor did it transfer production abroad.
    The petitioner states layoffs are attributable to imports by the 
company and its customers of VOAs (variable optical attenuators), a 
type of fiber-based component, and couplers, both of which are 
components of optical amplifiers. In regard to the company 
specifically, the petitioner alleges that specific VOA and coupler 
imports came from Canada.
    A company official was contacted regarding company import 
allegations. The official stated that in fact the company did import 
VOAs from Canada, but while the subject firm produced VOAs using 
mechanical technology, the imported VOAs incorporated MEMS technology, 
or Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems, which is the integration of 
mechanical elements, sensors, actuators and electronics on a common 
substrate. As a result of this distinction, the MEMS VOAs are smaller 
and much more efficient; further, the imported VOAs are not 
interchangeable with the VOAs produced at Painted Post in that they 
cannot be inserted in the same optical amplifiers. In regard to imports 
of couplers, the company official confirmed that competitive imports 
did occur in the relevant period; however, couplers comprised of a very 
small portion of subject plant production.
    The petitioner also alleges that customers of the subject firm 
imported competitive products in the relevant period.
    A review of the initial investigation revealed that customers of 
the subject firm all reported competitive imports in the relevant 
period, however their trends of import purchases declined more sharply 
than their purchases from the Painted Post facility, thus they did not 
increase reliance on imports.
    The petitioners also attached a copy of a ``Certification Regarding 
Eligibility To Apply for NAFTA-Transitional Adjustment Assistance'' for 
the workers at Corning, Inc., Photonics Technologies/Monroe Photonic, 
West Henrietta, New York (NAFTA-6130).

[[Page 40299]]

    A review of that decision shows the workers produced different 
products than the subject plant products and thus that decision is not 
relevant to the work performed at the subject plant.

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 13th day of June, 2003.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 03-16889 Filed 7-3-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P