Petitioner Type: Workers
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 06/11/2001
Most Recent Update: 11/27/2001
Determination Date: 11/27/2001
Expiration Date:
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-39,417
INNOVEX, INC.
CHANDLER, ARIZONA
Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application of December 19, 2001, petitioners 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). The denial notice applicable to workers of
Innovex, Inc., Chandler, Arizona was issued on November 27, 2001,
and was published in the Federal Register on December 18, 2001
(66 FR 65220).
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 investigation findings revealed that criterion (3) of
the group eligibility requirements of Section 222 of the Trade
Act of 1974 was not met. Increased imports of articles like or
directly competitive with articles produced by the firm did not
contribute importantly to worker separations at the subject firm.
The request for reconsideration claims that the company
imported products like or directly competitive with what the
subject plant produced, due to a partial shift in plant
production to a foreign source. The petitioner provided a list
of the subject plant's customers that they believe are now
receiving these products from foreign sources.
A review of data supplied during the initial investigation
and clarification provided by the company shows that over three-
quarters of plant production of flexible circuits was shifted to
other domestic locations. The remaining production was shifted
to Thailand. The production performed in Thailand is then
distributed to countries all over the world. The amount of
flexible circuits shipped from Thailand to the firm's customers
located in the United States is negligible in relation to the
production that was performed at the subject plant.
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, D.C., this 19th day of March 2002
/s/ Edward A. Tomchick
__________________________
EDWARD A. TOMCHICK
Director, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-39,417
INNOVEX, INC.
CHANDLER, ARIZONA
Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance
In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
USC 2273) as amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act
of 1988 (P. L. 100-418), the Department of Labor herein presents
the results of an investigation regarding certification of eligi-
bility to apply for worker adjustment assistance.
In order to make an affirmative determination and issue a
certification of eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance,
each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222 of the
Act must be met:
(1) that a significant number or proportion of the workers
in the workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision
thereof, have become totally or partially separated, or
are threatened to become totally or partially separat-
ed;
(2) that sales or production, or both, of the firm or
subdivision have decreased absolutely; and
(3) that increases of imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles produced by the firm or
appropriate subdivision have contributed importantly to
the separations, or threat thereof, and to the absolute
decline in sales or production.
The investigation was initiated on June 11, 2001 in response
to a petition filed by workers on behalf of workers Innovex, Inc,
Chandler, Arizona. The workers were engaged in the production of
flexible circuits.
The investigation revealed that criterion (3) has not been
met.
The subject company is an export company and does not have
any import purchases of flexible circuits.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that all workers of
Innovex, Inc., Chandler, Arizona, are denied eligibility to apply
for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of
1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 27th day of November, 2001.
/s/ Linda G. Poole
______________________________
LINDA G. POOLE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-39,417
INNOVEX, INC.
CHANDLER, ARIZONA
Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration
By application of December 19, 2001, petitioners 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). The denial notice applicable to workers of
Innovex, Inc., Chandler, Arizona was issued on November 27, 2001,
and was published in the Federal Register on December 18, 2001
(66 FR 65220).
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 investigation findings revealed that criterion (3) of
the group eligibility requirements of Section 222 of the Trade
Act of 1974 was not met. Increased imports of articles like or
directly competitive with articles produced by the firm did not
contribute importantly to worker separations at the subject firm.
The request for reconsideration claims that the company
imported products like or directly competitive with what the
subject plant produced, due to a partial shift in plant
production to a foreign source. The petitioner provided a list
of the subject plant's customers that they believe are now
receiving these products from foreign sources.
A review of data supplied during the initial investigation
and clarification provided by the company shows that over three-
quarters of plant production of flexible circuits was shifted to
other domestic locations. The remaining production was shifted
to Thailand. The production performed in Thailand is then
distributed to countries all over the world. The amount of
flexible circuits shipped from Thailand to the firm's customers
located in the United States is negligible in relation to the
production that was performed at the subject plant.
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, D.C., this 19th day of March 2002
/s/ Edward A. Tomchick
__________________________
EDWARD A. TOMCHICK
Director, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-39,417
INNOVEX, INC.
CHANDLER, ARIZONA
Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance
In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
USC 2273) as amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act
of 1988 (P. L. 100-418), the Department of Labor herein presents
the results of an investigation regarding certification of eligi-
bility to apply for worker adjustment assistance.
In order to make an affirmative determination and issue a
certification of eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance,
each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222 of the
Act must be met:
(1) that a significant number or proportion of the workers
in the workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision
thereof, have become totally or partially separated, or
are threatened to become totally or partially separat-
ed;
(2) that sales or production, or both, of the firm or
subdivision have decreased absolutely; and
(3) that increases of imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles produced by the firm or
appropriate subdivision have contributed importantly to
the separations, or threat thereof, and to the absolute
decline in sales or production.
The investigation was initiated on June 11, 2001 in response
to a petition filed by workers on behalf of workers Innovex, Inc,
Chandler, Arizona. The workers were engaged in the production of
flexible circuits.
The investigation revealed that criterion (3) has not been
met.
The subject company is an export company and does not have
any import purchases of flexible circuits.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that all workers of
Innovex, Inc., Chandler, Arizona, are denied eligibility to apply
for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of
1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 27th day of November, 2001.
/s/ Linda G. Poole
______________________________
LINDA G. POOLE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment