[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 28 (Monday, February 12, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 6603]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-2285]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-60,140]


Tap Holdings, LLC; Los Angeles, CA; Notice of Negative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application postmarked December 18, 2006, petitioners 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 November 16, 2006 and 
published in the Federal Register on November 28, 2006 (71 FR 68841).
    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 petition for the workers of TAP Holdings, LLC, Los Angeles, 
California engaged in production of re-manufactured carburetors and 
throttle body injection units was denied because the ``contributed 
importantly'' group eligibility requirement of Section 222 of the Trade 
Act of 1974, as amended, was not met, nor was there a shift in 
production from that firm to a foreign country in 2004, 2005 or January 
through August, 2006. The ``contributed importantly'' test is generally 
demonstrated through a survey of the workers' firm's customers. The 
survey revealed no imports of re-manufactured carburetors and throttle 
body injection units during the relevant period. The subject firm did 
not import re-manufactured carburetors and throttle body injection 
units nor did it shift production to a foreign country during the 
relevant period.
    The petitioner states that the subject firm lost its business 
producing carburetors as a direct result of the increasing presence of 
electronic fuel injectors in the automobile industry. The petitioner 
also states that imports of electronic fuel injectors have increased 
and thus workers of the subject firm who manufacture re-manufactured 
carburetors and throttle body injection units should be eligible for 
TAA.
    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 customers regarding their purchases of re-
manufactured carburetors and throttle body injection units. The survey 
revealed that the declining customers did not increase their imports of 
re-manufactured carburetors and throttle body injection units during 
the relevant period.
    The petitioner also requested that workers of TAP Holdings, LLC, 
Los Angeles, California be considered eligible for TAA as a secondary 
affected company. The petitioner provided a list of TAA certified 
companies to which the subject firm allegedly supplied components 
during the relevant time period.
    For certification on the basis of the workers' firm being a 
secondary upstream supplier, the subject firm must produce a component 
part of the article that was the basis for the customers' 
certification.
    A company official was contacted to verify whether the subject firm 
supplied re-manufactured carburetors and throttle body injection units 
to the companies provided by the petitioner. The company official 
stated that TAP Holdings, LLC, Los Angeles, California did not directly 
sell to these companies and that these companies were not customers of 
the subject firm during the relevant time period. The Department 
conducted a further investigation and determined that none of the 
customers of the subject firm were certified eligible for TAA during 
the relevant time 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 of the Department 
of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the application is denied.

    Signed at Washington, DC this 5th day of February, 2007.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E7-2285 Filed 2-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P