DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-54,002

ASTI, INC.
TRANSACTION PRINTER GROUP, INC.
RIVERTON, WYOMING

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application of March 21, 2004, 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 25,
2004 and published in the Federal Register on April 6, 2004 (69
FR 18109).
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 Asti, Inc.,
Transaction Printer Group, Inc., Riverton, Wyoming engaged in the
production of impact printers, was denied because the
"contributed importantly" group eligibility requirement of
Section 222 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 impact printers in 2002
and 2003. The respondents reported no increased imports. The
subject firm did not increase its reliance on imports of impact
printers during the relevant period, nor did it shift production
to a foreign source.
The petitioner alleges that the layoffs at the subject firm
are attributed to a shift in production from Riverton plant and
from another manufacturing facility in Ithaca, New York to Mexico
in 1999. To support this statement, the petitioner attached a
letter signed by the General Manager of Axiohm dated July 28, 1999
which announces a shift of manufacturing operations from the
Riverton plant to be completed by December 1999.
A company official was contacted to clarify whether a shift in
production occurred within the subject firm during 2003 and 2004.
The official confirmed directly that there was no shift in
production from the subject firm to the Mexican facility in the
relevant time period. A shift to Mexico mentioned by the
petitioner took place in 1999, which is outside of the relevant
time period.
The official further stated that though the subject firm does
own a facility in Mexico, products manufactured there are not like
or directly competitive with those manufactured at the Riverton
plant.
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 21st day of May, 2004.
/s/ Linda G. Poole
_______________________
LINDA G. POOLE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-54,002

ASTI, INC.
TRANSACTION PRINTER GROUP, INC.
RIVERTON, WYOMING

Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended (19 USC 2273), the Department of Labor herein presents the
results of an investigation regarding certification of eligibility
to apply for worker adjustment assistance. The group eligibility
requirements for directly-impacted (primary) workers under Section
222(a) the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, can be satisfied in
either of two ways:
I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following must be satisfied:
A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm,
have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. the sales or production, or both, of such firm or
subdivision have decreased absolutely; and
C. increased imports of articles like or directly competitive
with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have
contributed importantly to such workers’ separation or
threat of separation and to the decline in sales or
production of such firm or subdivision; or



II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the following must be satisfied:

A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm
firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. there has been a shift in production by such workers’ firm
or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or
directly competitive with articles which are produced by
such firm or subdivision; and

C. One of the following must be satisfied:
1. the country to which the workers’ firm has shifted
production of the articles is a party to a free trade
agreement with the United States;
2. the country to which the workers’ firm has shifted
production of the articles is a beneficiary country
under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth
and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic
Recovery Act; or
3. there has been or is likely to be an increase in
imports of articles that are like or directly
competitive with articles which are or were produced
by such firm or subdivision.

The investigation was initiated on January 14, 2004 in
response to a petition filed on behalf of workers at ASTI, Inc.,
Transaction Printer Group, Inc., Riverton, Wyoming. The workers at
the subject firm produce impact printers.
The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C) and
(a)(2)(B)(II.B) were not met.
The investigation revealed that the subject firm did not
import impact printers during 2002 and 2003, nor did it shift
production abroad during the relevant period.
The Department of Labor surveyed the subject firm’s major
declining customers regarding their purchases of impact printers
during 2001, 2002 and 2003. The survey revealed none of the
customers increased their purchases of imported printers, while
decreasing their purchases from the subject firm during the
relevant period.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in this
investigation, I determine that all workers of ASTI, Inc.,
Transaction Printer Group, Inc., Riverton, Wyoming are denied
eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of
the Trade Act of 1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 25th day of February 2004.

/s/ Elliott S. Kushner

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