[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 175 (Friday, September 10, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Page 49240]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-23556]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-35,934 and NAFTA-02989]


The Torrington Company Elberton, Georgia; Notice of Negative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated July 6, 1999, the company requested 
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative 
determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment 
Assistance (TAA) and NAFTA-Transitional Adjustment Assistance (NAFTA-
TAA), applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The 
denial notices applicable to workers of the Torrington Company located 
in Elberton, Georgia, were signed on May 13, 1999, and published in the 
Federal Register on June 3, 1999 (64 FR 29888) and (64 FR 29889), 
respectively.
    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 TAA petition, filed on behalf of workers of The Torrington 
Company, Elberton, Georgia, producing automotive camshafts and shaft 
and yoke assemblies was denied because the ``contributed importantly'' 
group eligiblity requirement of Section 222(3) 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. None of the Torrington Company customers reported increased 
import purchases or articles while decreasing purchases from 
Torrington's Elberton plant.
    The NAFTA-TAA petition for the same worker group was denied because 
criteria (3) and (4) of the group eligibility requirements in paragraph 
(a)(1) of Section 250 of the Trade Act, as amended, were not met. There 
were no company imports of automotive camshafts or shaft and yoke 
assemblies from Mexico or Canada, nor was there a shift in production 
from the workers' firm to Mexico or Canada. A survey of the major 
declining customers of the Torrington Company showed that none of the 
respondents increased import purchases of automotive camshafts or shaft 
and yoke assemblies from Mexico or Canada.
    In support of their application for reconsideration, the company 
asserts that a domestic manufacturer to whom Torrington lost a 
contract, has had to rely on imports of some of the parts and articles 
required in order to meet the specifications of the contract. The 
Torrington Company concludes that absent the new suppliers' imports, it 
would still benefit from the contract, and would not have had to layoff 
employees of the Elberton plant.
    Imports of components cannot be considered as a basis for worker 
group certification. The Department is required to examine imports of 
the articles produced and sold by the workers' firm, which in this case 
are camshafts and shaft and yoke assemblies.

Conclusion

    After a 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 decisions. Accordingly, the application is denied.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 30th day of August 1999.
Edward a. Tomchick,
Program Manager, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 99-23556 Filed 9-9-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M