[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 152 (Thursday, August 7, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47095-47096]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-20109]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-51,758]


Teleflex Automotive, Inc., a Division of Teleflex, Inc., Van 
Wert, OH; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application of June 13, 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 was signed on June 6, 2003, and published in the Federal 
Register on June 19, 2003 (68 FR 36846).
    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, filed on behalf of workers at Teleflex 
Automotive, Inc., a division of Teleflex, Inc., Van Wert, Ohio, engaged 
in the production of patterns, 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 Department conducted a survey of the 
subject firm's major customers regarding their purchases of competitive 
products in 2000 through April 2003. The respondents reported no 
increased imports. The subject firm did not increase its reliance on 
imports of

[[Page 47096]]

accelerator cable during the relevant period, nor did it shift 
production to a foreign source.
    The petitioner alleges that the layoffs are attributable to a shift 
in production to Mexico.
    A review of the initial investigation revealed that the company 
will shift production to Mexico in the third or fourth quarter of 2003; 
however, the scheduled shift is beyond the relevant period of this 
investigation.

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 18th day of July, 2003.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 03-20109 Filed 8-6-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P