[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 4, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47184-47185]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-17724]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-54,455]


Weirton Steel Corporation, Weirton, West Virginia; Notice of 
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application of June 18, 2004, a company representative 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 May 14, 2004, and published in the Federal 
Register on June 2, 2004 (69 FR 31135).
    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, which was filed on behalf of workers at Weirton 
Steel Corporation, Weirton, West Virginia engaged in the production of 
hot-rolled, cold-rolled, tin-plate and hot dipped, and electrolytic 
galvanized steel, was denied because the ``contributed importantly'' 
group eligibility requirement of section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, 
as amended, was not met. The subject firm did not increase its reliance 
on imports of hot-rolled, cold-

[[Page 47185]]

rolled, tin-plate and hot dipped and electrolytic galvanized steel 
during the relevant time period, nor did they shift production to a 
foreign source. The ``contributed importantly'' test is generally 
demonstrated through a survey of the workers' firm's customers to 
determine the correlation between customers' increased reliance on 
imports and the subject firm's decreased sales during the relevant 
period. The investigation revealed that sales of hot-rolled, cold-
rolled, tin-plate and hot dipped, and electrolytic galvanized steel at 
the subject firm increased from 2002 to 2003 and from January through 
February, 2004 compared with the same period in 2003. Even though the 
survey of the subject firm's major customers would have been irrelevant 
in this case, the Department conducted a survey of the subject firm's 
major customers regarding their purchases of competitive products in 
2002, 2003, and January through February of 2004. The survey revealed 
that imports did not contribute importantly to layoffs at the subject 
firm.
    In the request for reconsideration, the company representative 
requests to extend the period for investigation beyond the relevant 
time period in order to include the circumstances bearing evidence of 
sales declines and import impact, registered by the Department during a 
previous investigation which resulted in TAA certification granted to 
workers of the subject firm in April of 2002, TA-W-39,657.
    The Department considers import impact in terms of the relevant 
period of the current investigation; therefore sales declines and 
import impact as established in a previous investigation that is 
outside the relevant period are irrelevant. The Department must conform 
to the Trade Act and associated regulations.
    Should conditions change in the future, the company is encouraged 
to file a new petition on behalf of the worker group which will 
encompass an investigative period that will include these changing 
conditions.

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 23rd day of July, 2004.
Elliott Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 04-17724 Filed 8-3-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P