DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-51,207

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY
INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMS
MEBANE, NORTH CAROLINA

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application of April 30, 2003, a petitioner requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former workers of the
subject firm. The denial notice was signed on March 26, 2003,
and published in the Federal Register on April 7, 2003 (68 FR
16834).
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 petition for the workers of General Electric Company,
Industrial Systems, Mebane, North Carolina 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 customers of the workers’ firm. The survey
revealed that none of the respondents increased their purchases
of motor control centers, limit amps, switchboards and power
panels. The company did not import motor control centers, limit
amps, switchboards and power panels in the relevant period, nor
did it shift production to a foreign source in the relevant
period.
The petitioner asserts that the company official who filled
out the data request for the initial investigation provided
incorrect answers to the Department of Labor. Specifically, it
was alleged that the company was moving “half a production line”
to another company and that the company is importing products
like or directly competitive with those produced at the subject
facility.
Two company officials were contacted in regard to these
allegations. Further investigation revealed that the company will
be shifting a part of its motor control centers in the summer of
2003; however, no shift occurred in the relevant period. In
addition, it was confirmed that the company does not import any
products that are like or directly competitive with those
produced at the subject firm.
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 6th day of June, 2003

/s/ Elliott S. Kushner

ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance