Newark Recycled Paperboard Solutions; Newark Paperboard Products; Greenville, Pennsylvania; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 19376 [2014-07743]

Agencies

• Employment and Training Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 67 (Tuesday, April 8, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 19376]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07743]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-83,096]


Newark Recycled Paperboard Solutions; Newark Paperboard Products; 
Greenville, Pennsylvania; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding 
Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated January 4, 2014 a worker requested 
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative 
determination regarding eligibility for workers and former workers of 
Newark Recycled Paperboard Solutions, Newark Paperboard Products, 
Greenville, Pennsylvania (subject firm) to apply for Trade Adjustment 
Assistance (TAA). The negative determination was issued on November 13, 
2013, and the Department's Notice of negative determination was 
published in the Federal Register on December 9, 2013 (78 FR 73888). 
The subject workers produce recycled paperboard tubes and cores. 
Workers are not separately identifiable by product line.
    The negative determination was issued because the subject firm did 
not shift to a foreign country production of articles like or directly 
competitive with the recycled paperboard tubes and cores produced by 
the workers at the subject firm; the subject firm did not, during the 
relevant period, increase imports of articles like or directly 
competitive with the recycled paperboard tubes and cores produced by 
the workers at the subject firm; declining customers of the subject 
firm did not, during the relevant period, increase imports of articles 
like or directly competitive with the recycled paperboard tubes and 
cores produced by the workers of the subject firm; the subject firm was 
not a Supplier or Downstream Producer to a firm that employed a worker 
group eligible to apply for TAA, per Section 222(b) of the Trade Act of 
1974, as amended (the Act); and the subject firm was not identified by 
name by the International Trade Commission, per Section 222(e) of the 
Act.
    Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c), administrative 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 
misinterpretation of facts or of the law justified reconsideration of 
the decision.
    The request for reconsideration asserts that, due to the closure of 
two facilities that employed worker groups who are eligible to apply 
for TAA (TA-W-80,495 and TA-W-81,155), the costs of shipping of raw 
material to the Newark, Pennsylvania facility has increased, that 
``several of our customers have already been transferred to Canada'' 
and that another customer (Aurubis) was scheduled to transfer to 
Canada. The request concludes that the increased costs of raw material 
and the customers' decision to shift operations to Canada have 
``directly affected'' employment at the subject firm.
    After careful review of the request for reconsideration, the 
support documentation, and previously submitted materials, the 
Department determines that there is no new information that supports a 
finding that Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974 was satisfied and 
that no mistake or misinterpretation of the facts or of the law with 
regards to the number or proportion of workers separated from the 
subject firm during the relevant period.
    During the initial investigation, the Department took into 
consideration the aforementioned certifications, inquired into imports 
of recycled paperboard tubes and cores (and like or directly 
competitive articles) by both the subject firm and the firm's major 
declining customers, inquired whether the subject firm shifted to a 
foreign country the production of recycled paperboard tubes and cores 
(and like or directly competitive articles) or acquired such production 
from a foreign country, considered whether or not the workers of the 
subject firm are secondarily-affected workers, and reviewed the 
International Trade Commission's findings, and did not find that such 
activity occurred during the relevant period.
    The Department notes that, for purposes of the Act, the shift of 
customers' operations to a foreign country is not a basis for 
certification.

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, DC, this 14th day of March 2014.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2014-07743 Filed 4-7-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P