[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 153 (Thursday, August 7, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46039-46040]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18171]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-63,533]


Thomasville Furniture Industries, Inc., Upholstery Plant 9, 
Hickory, NC; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application dated July 17, 2008, a company official 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 July 2, 2008 and published in the Federal Register on July 
21, 2008 (73 FR 42371).
    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

[[Page 46040]]

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 TAA petition, which was filed on behalf of workers at 
Thomasville Furniture Industries, Inc., Upholstery Plant 9, Hickory, 
North Carolina engaged in the production of upholstered furniture, was 
denied based on the findings that sales and production of upholstered 
furniture at the subject firm did not decrease from 2006 to 2007, and 
during the period of January through May 2008 when compared to the same 
period in 2007. Furthermore, there was no shift in production from the 
subject firm to a foreign country during the relevant period.
    In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner stated that in 
order to reveal the negative trend in sales and production, the 
Department should investigate the time period prior to 2006 and compare 
current data with 2005. To support his allegation, the petitioner 
attached financial information for sister plants from 2004, 2005 and 
2006. The information was submitted to the Department in previous 
investigations, which led to certifications of those facilities. The 
petitioner seems to allege that because those facilities were 
previously certified eligible for TAA, the workers of the subject firm 
should be also eligible for TAA.
    When assessing eligibility for TAA, the Department exclusively 
considers employment, production and sales during the relevant time 
period (one year prior to the date of the petition). Therefore, events 
occurring in 2005 are outside of the relevant time period and are not 
relevant in this investigation.
    Should conditions change in the future, the company is encouraged 
to file a new petition on behalf of the worker group which will 
encompass an investigative period that will include any changing 
conditions.
    After careful review of the request for reconsideration, the 
Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not been met.

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 31st day of July, 2008.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E8-18171 Filed 8-6-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P