ETA Federal Register Notice

Cognis Corporation, Lock Haven; PA; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration [05/17/2002]

Volume 67, Number 96, Page 35156-35157

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[NAFTA-05183]

 
Cognis Corporation, Lock Haven; PA; Notice of Negative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application received on February 11, 2002, the workers requested 
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative 
determination regarding eligibility to apply for North American Free 
Trade Agreement-Transitional Adjustment Assistance (NAFTA-TAA), 
applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The 
denial notice was signed on November 16, 2001, and was published in the 
Federal Register on December 5, 2002 (66 FR 63262).
    Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) reconsideration may be granted under 
the following circumstances:
    (1) If its 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 NAFTA-TAA petition, filed on behalf of workers at Cognis 
Corporation, Lock Haven, Pennsylvania engaged in activities related to 
the production of photomers was denied because criteria (3) and (4) 
were not met. Imports from Canada or Mexico did not contribute 
importantly to workers' separations. There was no shift in production 
from

[[Page 35157]]

the subject firm to Canada or Mexico during the relevant period. The 
investigation revealed that the Lock Haven plant transferred production 
to another domestic location.
    The petitioner alleges that the company not only produced photomers 
as the decision indicated, but also produced dye intermediates.
    Based on the information provided by the petitioner and the company 
it is evident that the dye intermediates were produced and discontinued 
prior to the relevant period. The investigation concentrated on the 
product (photomers) produced at the subject firm during the relevant 
period.
    Although not noted in the denial notice, the Department surveyed 
the customers of the subject firm regarding their purchases of 
photomers during the relevant period. The survey revealed that none of 
the respondents increased their purchases of imported photomers, while 
decreasing their purchases from the subject firm during the relevant 
period.

Conclusion

    After review of the application for reconsideration 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 16th day of April 2002.
Edward A. Tomchick,
Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 02-12404 Filed 5-16-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M