[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 45 (Monday, March 8, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 10761]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E4-467]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-53,577]


TDK Texas Corporation, A Subsidiary of TDK USA Corporation, El 
Paso, Texas; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application of January 5, 2004, 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 November 24, 2003 and published in the 
Federal Register on December 29, 2003 (68 FR 74978).
    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 TDK Texas 
Corporation, a subsidiary of TDK USA Corporation, El Paso, Texas, 
engaged in distribution of electronic components was denied because the 
workers did not produce an article within the meaning of Section 222 of 
the Trade Act of 1974.
    The workers appear to be alleging that layoffs at TDK Texas 
Corporation, a subsidiary of TDK USA Corporation, El Paso, Texas, was 
attributed to free trade and attempt to depict this in their request 
for reconsideration.
    The worker allegations of trade impact would only be relevant if 
all other eligibility requirements for trade adjustment assistance were 
met in this case. However, distribution services do not meet the 
definition of production of an article as established in Section 222 of 
the Trade Act, thus the workers in this case do not meet the 
eligibility requirements of TAA.
    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 20th day of February, 2004.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
 [FR Doc. E4-467 Filed 3-5-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-13-P