[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 23, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54858-54859]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22123]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-62,895]


Siny Corp, d/b/a Monterey Mills, Janesville, WI; Notice of 
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated September 3, 2008, a petitioner requested 
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative 
determination

[[Page 54859]]

regarding eligibility for workers and former workers of the subject 
firm to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Alternative 
Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA). The denial notice was signed on 
July 28, 2008 and published in the Federal Register on August 12, 2008 
(73 FR 46924).
    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 TAA petition, which was filed on behalf of workers at Siny 
Corporation, d/b/a Monterey Mills, Janesville, Wisconsin engaged in the 
production of acrylic knit pile fabric, was denied based on the 
findings that imports of acrylic knit pile fabric did not contribute 
importantly to worker separations at the subject firm and no shift in 
production to a foreign source occurred.
    In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner stated that 
workers of the subject firm were previously certified eligible for 
Trade Adjustment Assistance. The petitioner further stated that in 
order to reveal the import impact, the Department should consider the 
time period prior to 2006. The petitioner seems to allege that because 
the subject firm was previously certified eligible for TAA, the workers 
of the subject firm should be granted another TAA certification.
    When assessing eligibility for TAA, the Department exclusively 
considers import impact during the relevant time period (from one year 
prior to the date of the petition). Therefore, events occurring before 
2006 are outside of the relevant period and are not relevant in this 
investigation.
    After careful review of the request for reconsideration, the 
Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not been met.

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 15th day of September, 2008.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8-22123 Filed 9-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P