Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27853 

[FR Doc. E7–9475 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–61,083] 

Intel Corporation, Optical Platform 

Division, Newark, CA; Notice of 

Negative Determination Regarding 

Application for Reconsideration 

By application dated April 20, 2007, 

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) and 

Alternative Trade Adjustment 

Assistance (ATAA). The denial notice 

was signed on April 6, 2007 and 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 24, 2007 (72 FR 20371). 

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 at Intel Corporation, Optical 

Platform Division, Newark, California 

engaged in production of optical 

modules for networking and 

communication equipment was denied 

because the ‘‘contributed importantly’’

group eligibility requirement of Section 

222 of the Trade Act of 1974 was not 

met. The investigation revealed that 

production of optical modules for 

networking and communication 

equipment was shifted to Thailand, 

however, there were no imports of 

optical modules into the United States 

in 2005 and 2006. 

In the request for reconsideration, the 

petitioner stated that the subject firm 

also manufactured transponders and 

that this production was shifted to 

Malaysia in 2003. The petitioner further 

stated that the subject firm has been 

importing transponders back into the 

United States. 

A contact with the company official 

confirmed what was revealed during the 

initial investigation. It was determined 

that the subject firm ceased production 

of transponders at the end of 2005, 

when all production of transponders 

was shifted to Malaysia. 

In its investigation, the Department 

must conform to the Trade Act and 

associated regulations. Therefore, the 

Department considers production and 

imports that occurred within a year 

prior to the date of the petition. Thus 

the events occurring in 2005 are outside 

of the relevant period as established by 

the current petition date of February 28, 

2007. Shift in production of 

transponders and imports of 

transponders are irrelevant for this 

investigation as Intel Corporation, 

Optical Platform Division, Newark, 

California did not manufacture 

transponders for sale in 2006 and 

January through February of 2007. 

The request for reconsideration also 

states that production of optical 

modules for networking and 

communication equipment was shifted 

to Thailand and that the subject firm has 

been progressively increasing imports of 

optical modules from Thailand into the 

United States. 

The review of the initial investigation 

and further contact with the company 

official did reveal that the subject firm 

shifted production of optical modules to 

Thailand. However, Thailand is not a 

country that is a party to a free trade 

agreement with the United States or is 

a beneficiary country under the Andean 

Trade Preference Act, African Growth 

and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean 

Basin Economic Recovery Act. The 

company official stated that modules, 

which are manufactured in Thailand are 

not sold directly to customers, with the 

exception of one customer in Japan. All 

modules are shipped from Thailand to 

Intel’s facility in Malaysia to be further 

integrated into finished product, 

transponders. Transponders are further 

sold to customers, who might import 

them into the United States. 

In order to establish import impact, 

the Department must consider imports 

that are like or directly competitive with 

those produced at the subject firm. The 

company official verified that Intel 

Corporation, Optical Platform Division, 

Newark, California did not import 

optical modules for networking and 

communication equipment in 2006 and 

January through February of 2007. Any 

imports of transponders are not like or 

directly competitive with optical 

modules as required by the Trade Act. 

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 9th day of 

May, 2007. 

Richard Church, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E7–9477 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

Notice of Determinations Regarding 

Eligibility To Apply for Worker 

Adjustment Assistance and Alternative 

Trade Adjustment Assistance 

In accordance with Section 223 of the 

Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 

U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor 

herein presents summaries of 

determinations regarding eligibility to 

apply for trade adjustment assistance for 

workers (TA–W) number and alternative 

trade adjustment assistance (ATAA) by 

(TA–W) number issued during the 

period of April 30 through May 4, 2007. 

In order for an affirmative 

determination to be made for workers of 

a primary firm and a certification issued 

regarding eligibility to apply for worker 

adjustment assistance, each of the group 

eligibility requirements of Section 

222(a) of the Act must be met. 

I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following 

must be satisfied: 

A. A significant number or proportion 

of the workers in such workers’ firm, or 

an appropriate subdivision of the firm, 

have become totally or partially 

separated, or are threatened to become 

totally or partially separated; 

B. The sales or production, or both, of 

such firm or subdivision have decreased 

absolutely; and 

C. Increased imports of articles like or 

directly competitive with articles 

produced by such firm or subdivision 

have contributed importantly to such 

workers’ separation or threat of 

separation and to the decline in sales or 

production of such firm or subdivision; 

or 

II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the 

following must be satisfied: 

A. A significant number or proportion 

of the workers in such workers’ firm, or 

an appropriate subdivision of the firm, 

have become totally or partially 

separated, or are threatened to become 

totally or partially separated; 

B. There has been a shift in 

production by such workers’ firm or 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES