DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-50,074

SUMMIT MANUFACTURING, LLC
WEST HAZELTON, PENNSYLVNIA

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application of February 25, 2003, a petitioner 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 was signed on February 3,
2003 and published in the Federal Register on February 24, 2003
(68 FR 8619).
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 TAA petition, filed on behalf of workers at Summit
Manufacturing, LLC, West Hazelton, Pennsylvania engaged in the
production of steel telecommunications poles, steel pole
modifications, cellular poles, sign and lighting poles, and flag
poles was denied because the "contributed importantly" group
eligibility requirement of Section 222(3) of the Trade Act of
1974, as amended, was not met. The "contributed importantly"
test is generally demonstrated through a survey of the workers'
firm's customers. The Department conducted a survey of the
subject firm’s major customers regarding their purchases of steel
telecommunications poles, steel pole modifications, cellular
poles, sign and lighting poles, and flag poles in 2000, 2001 and
2002. None of the respondents reported increasing imports while
decreasing purchases from the subject firm during the relevant
period. Imports did not contribute importantly to layoffs at the
subject firm.
The petitioner alleges that the imports of steel, especially
from Canada increased from 2001 to 2002.
Imports of steel are not “like or directly competitive” with
the products produced (steel telecommunications poles, steel pole
modifications, cellular poles, sign and lighting poles, and flag
poles) by the subject plant, thus this allegation is not relevant
to the investigation.
The petitioner’s request for reconsideration further states
that the investigation took longer than the 40 days required to
complete the investigation and, because of this, the workers of
the subject plant should be certified.
The Department makes every effort to conduct a TAA
investigation within the prescribed 40 day period. A review of
the initial investigation shows that the responses by the company
and customers took longer than normal. The Department bases its
findings on facts after it receives all requested data necessary
in order to make an accurate decision, irregardless of
timeframes.
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 18th day of March, 2003.
/s/ Edward A. Tomchick
_______________________
EDWARD A. TOMCHICK
Director, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance