DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-54,545

CONTROL TECH, INC.
HICKORY, NORTH CAROLINA

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 March 19, 2004 in response
to a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at
Control Tech, Inc., Hickory, North Carolina. The workers produced
air duct systems.
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 air duct systems during 2002 and 2003, nor did it shift
production abroad in the above periods.
The Department of Labor surveyed the subject firm's major
customers regarding their purchases of air duct systems in 2002,
2003 and January through March, 2004. Respondents reported that
they did not import in the relevant periods.
Petitioners allege that job losses were due to their firm
losing business as a supplier to a firm that shifted production
abroad or was affected by increased imports. The investigation
revealed, however, that was not the case.
The subject firm did not supply a component to a primary firm
whose workers have been certified as trade impacted. The air duct
systems manufactured by the subject firm are not a component part
of an article that was the basis of a certification of any primary
firm customer of Control Tech, Inc.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that all workers of Control
Tech, Inc., Hickory, North Carolina are denied eligibility to apply
for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of
1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 6th day of April, 2004.

/s/ Richard Church
______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance