[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 16 (Wednesday, January 26, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 3732]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-271]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-55,578]


Celestica, Repair Subdivision, Little Rock, AR; Notice of 
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application of October 29, 2004, the International Brotherhood 
of Electrical Workers, Local 2022, 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) and Alternative Trade Adjustment 
Assistance (ATAA). The negative determination applicable to workers of 
Celestica, Repair Subdivision, Little Rock, Arkansas was signed on 
October 15, 2004. The notice of determination was published in the 
Federal Register on November 12, 2004 (69 FR 65462).
    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 was filed on behalf of workers at Celestica, Repair 
Subdivision, Little Rock, Arkansas engaged in activities related to the 
repair of defective wireless phones, wired office phone handlers, phone 
switches, and other related equipment. The petition was denied because 
the workers did not produce an article within the meaning of section 
222 of the Act.
    In the request for reconsideration, the Union alleged that repair 
work should be considered remanufacturing work.
    A company official was contacted to clarify the work performed at 
the Repair Subdivision and ascertain whether the repaired items were 
sold as remanufactured items. The official stated that the work done 
was repair and not remanufacturing, that defective items were sent to 
the repair facility by the end user pursuant to a warranty, that 
repaired items were returned directly to the end user, and that 
repaired items were not sold as remanufactured items.
    Repair of products already purchased does not constitute production 
within the context of eligibility requirements for trade adjustment 
assistance.

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 12th day of January, 2005.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
 [FR Doc. E5-271 Filed 1-25-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P