[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 173 (Wednesday, September 8, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 54318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E4-2096]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment And Training Administration

[TA-W-55,045]


Merrow Machine Company, Newington, Connecticut; Notice of 
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application of July 24, 2004, International Union of Electronic, 
Electrical, Salaried, Machine and Furniture Workers -Communications 
Workers of America, Local No. 249 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 13, 2004, and published in the Federal Register on 
August 3, 2004 (69 FR 46574).
    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 petition for the workers of Merrow Machine Company, Newington, 
Connecticut engaged in production of industrial sewing machines was 
denied because the ``contributed importantly'' group eligibility 
requirement of section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, was 
not met. The ``contributed importantly'' test is generally demonstrated 
through a survey of the workers' firm's customers. The survey revealed 
no increase of imports of industrial sewing machines during the 
relevant period. The subject firm did not import industrial sewing 
machines in the relevant period nor did it shift production to a 
foreign country.
    The petitioner alleges that the subject company shipped products to 
several foreign countries, including China, Russia and Japan, thus 
workers of the subject firm should be eligible for TAA.
    As trade adjustment assistance is concerned exclusively with 
whether imports or a shift in production to a trade impacted country 
causes layoffs of petitioning worker groups, the above-mentioned 
allegation regarding subject firm's exports of products is irrelevant.
    A company official was requested to provide the additional list of 
all the remaining customers which were not surveyed during the original 
investigation. All customers provided by a company official during the 
reconsideration represent foreign firms.
    The petitioner further alleges that the subject firm lost its 
business due to an impact of the foreign competition on textile 
industry.
    In order to establish import impact, the Department must consider 
imports that are like or directly competitive with those produced at 
the subject firm. The Department conducted a survey of the subject 
firm's major declining domestic customers regarding their purchases of 
industrial sewing machines. The survey revealed that the declining 
customers did not import industrial sewing machines during the relevant 
period.

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 ofthe Department of 
Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the application is denied.

    Signed in Washington, DC this 26th day of August, 2004.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E4-2096 Filed 9-7-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P