DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-51,834

AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DIVISION (IT)
COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application of July 17, 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 applicable to workers of
Agilent Technologies, Inc., Information Technology Division (IT),
Colorado Springs, Colorado was signed on June 16, 2003, and
published in the Federal Register on July 3, 2003 (68 FR 39976).
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 was filed on behalf of workers at Agilent
Technologies, Inc., Information Technology Division (IT),
Colorado Springs, Colorado engaged in computer consulting
services combined with providing information technology. The
petition was denied because the petitioning workers did not
produce an article within the meaning of Section 222 of the Act.
The petitioner appears to imply that the petitioning worker
group should be considered eligible for TAA on the basis that
they served as secondary upstream supplier to a trade certified
firm.
In fact, in order to be eligible for TAA, workers must
produce an article. Further, in order to meet TAA eligibility
requirements as secondary upstream suppliers, the worker group
must produce a component part of the product that was the basis
of the TAA certification for the customer firm.
Only in very limited instances are service workers certified
for TAA, namely the worker separations must be caused by a
reduced demand for their services from a parent or controlling
firm or subdivision whose workers produce an article and who are
currently under certification for TAA.


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 13th day of August 2003.
/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
___________________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance