[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 226 (Monday, November 24, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Page 65955]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-29261]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-52,067]


Pall Corporation, Life Sciences Groups, Capsule Department, Ann 
Arbor, MI; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application of August 6, 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 July 22, 2003, and 
published in the Federal Register on August 14, 2003 (68 FR 48645).
    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 petition for the workers of Pall Corporation, Life Sciences 
Groups, Capsule Department, Ann Arbor, Michigan was denied because 
criterion (1) was not met. Employment at the subject plant increased 
from 2001 to 2002, and January 2003 as compared to January 2002.
    The petitioner suggests that the data indicating an increase in 
employment at the subject facility is mitigated by the fact that the 
company has reduced positions in ``skilled worker jobs'', and that the 
total number of employees is buffered by ``low wage level work'.
    In following the directives of TAA legislation, the Department 
assesses whether worker groups are separately identifiable by product 
line. If workers at the subject facility are all engaged in the 
production of the same products, it is directed to consider the totals 
of all production workers. Thus the type of distinctions sought by the 
petitioner are not relevant to an investigation regarding group 
eligibility requirements for TAA.
    In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner seems to imply 
that a shift of production to Puerto Rico on the part of the company 
constitutes a shift of production to a country included in Caribbean 
Basin Economic Recovery Act. The petitioner seems to conclude that it 
is this shift that is responsible for separations at the subject 
facility.
    Puerto Rico is a U.S. Territory and therefore any movement of 
production to this region would not constitute a shift of production to 
a foreign source.

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 17th day of October, 2003.
Elliott S. Kushner
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 03-29261 Filed 11-21-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P