Terex USA, LLC, Cedar Rapids, IA; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 20396-20397 [2010-8875]

Agencies

• Employment and Training Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 74 (Monday, April 19, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20396-20397]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-8875]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-72,103]


Terex USA, LLC, Cedar Rapids, IA; Notice of Negative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated March 8, 2010, the State of Iowa Trade 
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Coordinator requested administrative 
reconsideration of the Department's negative determination regarding 
eligibility to apply for TAA applicable to workers and former workers 
of the subject firm. The Notice of negative determination was signed on 
February 3, 2010. The Department's Notice was published in the Federal 
Register on March 12, 2010 (74 FR 11925).
    The petitioner states in the request for reconsideration that the 
initial customer survey was limited to only the largest customer of the 
subject firm and that perhaps many of the subject firm's customers are 
purchasing imports of products like those produced by the subject firm, 
and that such purchasing of imports by many small customers could have 
brought about the worker separations at the subject firm.
    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 initial investigation resulted in a negative determination, 
which was based on the finding that shifts of production of crushing, 
screening, and paving equipment (types of construction equipment) did 
not contribute importantly to worker separations at the subject firm 
and that a major portion of the sales decline of the subject firm can

[[Page 20397]]

be attributed to a loss of exports and thus is not affected by imports.
    During the initial investigation, the subject firm provided sales 
and contact information for its major declining customers: one domestic 
customer and three foreign customers. The sole domestic customer 
constituted 16 percent of the sales decline experienced by the subject 
firm and the three foreign customers constituted 72 percent of the 
subject firm's sales decline.
    The Department confirmed during the initial investigation that the 
three foreign customers were purchasing finished articles and not 
component parts of construction equipment from the subject firm, and 
determined that the subject firm's declining sales with the three 
foreign customers was loss of export business by the subject firm. 
Further, during the initial investigation, the Department had collected 
aggregate data that shows that imports into the United States of 
agricultural and construction machinery decreased by almost 40 percent 
during the relevant period.
    Because the export losses and the losses to the sole domestic 
customer account for 88 percent of the decline in sales for the subject 
firm and there were decreasing aggregate imports of construction 
equipment, the Department determined that the customer survey conducted 
during the initial investigation was appropriate.
    The petitioner did not supply facts not previously considered; nor 
provide additional documentation indicating that there was either (1) a 
mistake in the determination of facts not previously considered or (2) 
a misinterpretation of facts or of the law justifying reconsideration 
of the initial determination.
    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 in Washington, DC this 1st day of April 2010.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2010-8875 Filed 4-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P