[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 8, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6735-6736]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-485]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-51,173 and NAFTA-6472]


Ericsson, Inc., Brea, CA; Notice of Revised Determination on 
Remand

    The United States Court of International Trade (USCIT) granted the 
Secretary of Labor's motion for a second voluntary remand for further 
investigation in Former Employees of Ericsson, Inc. v. U.S. Secretary 
of Labor (Court No. 02-00809).
    The Department's denial of the initial Trade Adjustment Assistance 
(TAA) petition was issued on April 15, 2003. The Notice of 
determination was published in the Federal Register on August 18, 2003 
(68 FR 49522). The negative determination was based on the finding that 
the worker group did not produce an article within the meaning of 
section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended. The workers performed 
software development.
    The Department's denial of the initial NAFTA-TAA petition was 
issued on September 24, 2002. The notice of determination was published 
in the Federal Register on October 10, 2002 (67 FR 63160). The negative 
determination was based on the finding that the worker group did not 
produce an article within the meaning of section 250(a) of the Trade 
Act of 1974, as amended. Workers at the subject facility developed 
software for other Ericsson units.
    The Plaintiffs requested judicial review of the TAA case by letter 
to the USCIT, filed on December 18, 2002. In the letter, the Plaintiffs 
contended that the Department failed to fully investigate the TAA 
petition, that the subject worker group was misclassified, and that the 
Department did not correctly apply the statutory criteria. On August 
20, 2003, the USCIT granted the Plaintiff's motion to consolidate the 
TAA case into the NAFTA case. On September 11, 2003, the USCIT issued a 
Voluntary Remand Order, directing the Department to determine whether 
the workers are eligible for benefits.
    During the remand investigation, the Department investigated 
whether the workers produced an article and, if so, whether the workers 
were eligible to apply for NAFTA-TAA. The investigation found that the 
subject worker group did not produce an article within the meaning of 
the Trade Act. The Department issued a Notice of Negative Determination 
on Reconsideration on Remand on January 14, 2004. The notice of 
determination was published in the Federal Register on January 23, 2004 
(69 FR 3394).
    On October 13, 2004, the USCIT again remanded the matter to the 
Department, finding that the Department failed to adequately 
investigate the Plaintiff's claims and that the Department's findings 
were unsupported by substantial evidence on the record. The USCIT 
directed the Department to investigate whether the workers were 
eligible for benefits.
    During the second remand investigation, the Department raised 
additional questions and obtained detailed supplemental responses from 
the company. In particular, the new information indicates that, in 
addition to software development, the subject worker group supported 
production at an affiliated software production facility. As such, the 
subject worker group did engage in activity related to the production 
of an article. The second remand investigation also revealed that all 
production at the affiliated facility shifted to Canada during the 
relevant period and the subject firm simultaneously began importing the 
product from Canada.
    The investigation revealed that the subject facility experienced 
employment declines during the relevant time and that the workers were 
in support of an affiliated production facility that is TAA and NAFTA-
TAA certifiable. As such, the Department determines that the subject 
worker group meets the statutory criteria for TAA and NAFTA-TAA 
certification.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the additional facts obtained on remand, I 
determine that a shift of production to Canada of articles like or 
directly competitive with those produced by the subject firm and the 
simultaneous imports of those articles from Canada, contributed 
importantly to the worker separations and sales or production declines 
at the subject firm.
    In accordance with the provisions of the Trade Act, I make the 
following certification:

    ``All workers of Ericsson, Inc., Brea, California (TA-W-51,173), 
who became totally or partially separated from employment on or 
after January 6, 2002, through two years from the issuance of this 
revised determination, are eligible to apply for worker adjustment 
assistance under section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974,'' and``All 
workers of Ericsson, Inc., Brea, California (NAFTA 6472), who became 
totally or partially separated from employment on or after August 1, 
2001, through two years from the issuance of this revised 
determination, are eligible to apply

[[Page 6736]]

for NAFTA-TAA under section 250 of the Trade Act of 1974.''

    Signed in Washington, DC this 31st day of January 2005.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
 [FR Doc. E5-485 Filed 2-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P