[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 93 (Thursday, May 13, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26621-26622]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-10863]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-53,702]


Snap-On Tools Manufacturing Company, Kenosha, WI; Notice of 
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application of March 5, 2004, International Association of 
Machinists, District Lodge 34 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 published in the 
Federal Register on March 12, 2004 (69 FR 11888).
    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 Snap-On Tools 
Manufacturing Company, Kenosha, Wisconsin engaged in the production of 
hand tools, was denied because criteria I.C and II.B and the 
``contributed importantly'' group eligibility requirement of Section 
222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, were not met. The 
``contributed importantly'' test is generally demonstrated through a 
survey of the workers' firm's customers. The survey revealed an 
insignificant level of imports during the relevant period. The subject 
firm imported a negligible amount of hand tools during the relevant 
period.
    The petitioner alleges that the company is currently in the process 
of purchasing a facility in China for the purpose of shifting some of 
the production from the subject facility.
    A company official was contacted in regard to these allegations. 
The official stated that there never was a shift of hand tools 
production from Snap-On Tools Manufacturing Company, Kenosha, Wisconsin 
abroad and no plans exist to move any production from the subject 
facility to China.
    The petitioner further alleges that Snap-on, Inc. is considering to

[[Page 26622]]

discontinue the E-Line Plier line and replacing it with foreign made 
products, manufactured in Sweden or Germany and mentions Blue Point 
product, which was affected by the foreign trade.
    The official stated that E-Line Pliers were never manufactured at 
the subject facility and that this line existed at another Snap-on 
Tools, Inc. facility in Mt. Carmel, Illinois. The official further 
stated that the company does import power tools which are branded as 
Blue Point, however, they are not like or directly competitive with 
products manufactured at Snap-On Tools Manufacturing Company, Kenosha, 
Wisconsin. The company has been outsourcing manufacturing of the 
adjustable wrenches and pliers from overseas vendors for many years, 
however, this sourcing, including Blue Point tools represents less than 
2 percent of the overall production of Snap-on, Inc. and did not 
increase during the relevant time period.
    Finally, the petitioner alleges that the subject firm lost a 
considerable amount of business to its competitor, a company which is 
``more price-competitive due to the use of overseas trade.''
    A review of competitors is not relevant to an investigation 
concerning import impact on workers applying for trade adjustment 
assistance. As noted above, ``contributed importantly'' test is 
generally demonstrated through a survey of customers of the workers' 
firm to examine the direct import impact on a specific firm. No imports 
or very insignificant amount of imports of hand tools were evidenced 
during the survey of subject firm's customers during the original 
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 decisions. Accordingly, the application is denied.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 30th day of April 2004.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 04-10863 Filed 5-12-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P