[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 57 (Wednesday, March 24, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 13908]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-6545]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-53,537]


Pacific Rim Log Scaling Bureau, Lacey, WA; Notice of Negative 
Determination on Reconsideration

    On February 13, 2004, the Department issued an Affirmative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the workers 
and former workers of the subject firm. The Department published the 
notice in the Federal Register on February 25, 2004 (69 FR 8701).
    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 TAA petition was filed on behalf of workers at Pacific Rim Log 
Scaling Bureau, Lacey, Washington. The petition was denied because the 
petitioning workers did not produce an article within the meaning of 
section 222 of the Act and are not service workers whose separations 
were caused importantly by a reduced demand for their services from a 
parent firm, a firm otherwise related to their firm by ownership or a 
firm related by control.
    In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner does not refute 
the service designation but alleges that the subject firm is a 
``collective'' consisting of timber companies, the workers ``actually 
work for timber companies that own the [b]ureau'' and the worker 
separations were caused by a reduced demand for services by 
``collective'' members. The petitioner infers that the timber companies 
function as the subject firm's parent company and the subject firm 
should be certified because several of those companies are TAA 
certified.
    The Department conducted an investigation to determine whether the 
worker separations were caused importantly by a reduced demand for 
their services from a parent firm, a firm otherwise related by 
ownership or a firm related by control.
    The investigation revealed that the subject firm is a corporation 
without a parent company or any affiliates. A board of directors, 
consisting of 33 members, is elected by shareholders to manage the 
corporation. Although most of the subject firm's customers are 
shareholders, no individual timber company can have more than one 
person on the board of directors at any time. Furthermore, the main 
purpose of creating the subject firm was to promote fair competition 
among the timber companies. Thus, there is no firm controlling the 
subject firm.

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 in Washington, DC, this 8th day of March, 2004.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 04-6545 Filed 3-23-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P