IBM Corporation Global Services Division, Piscataway, NJ; Middletown, NJ; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand, 29183 [E6-7609]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 97 / Friday, May 19, 2006 / Notices
imports of ammonia nitrate during the
relevant period.
To support the request for
reconsideration, the company official
supplied additional information
regarding increased imports of ammonia
nitrate by other major declining
customers of the subject firm.
During the reconsideration
investigation, the Department
conducted a survey of the additional
customers provided by the company
official. The survey revealed increased
reliance on imported ammonia nitrate
during the period of sales and
production declines at the subject firm.
In accordance with section 246 the
Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as
amended, the Department herein
presents the results of its investigation
regarding certification of eligibility to
apply for alternative trade adjustment
assistance (ATAA) for older workers.
In order for the Department to issue
a certification of eligibility to apply for
ATAA, the group eligibility
requirements of section 246 of the Trade
Act, as amended, must be met. The
Department has determined in this case
that the requirements of section 246
have been met.
A significant number of workers at the
firm are age 50 or over and possess
skills that are not easily transferable.
Competitive conditions within the
industry are adverse.
Conclusion
After careful review of the additional
facts obtained on reconsideration, I
conclude that increased imports of
articles like or directly competitive with
those produced at the subject firm
contributed importantly to the sales and
production declines and to the
separation of workers at the subject
firm.
In accordance with the provisions of
the Act, I make the following
certification:
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
All workers of Air Products and Chemicals,
Inc., Including On-Site Leased Workers of
Shaw Maintenance, Inc., Pace, Florida, who
became totally or partially separated from
employment on or after January 5, 2005
through two years from the date of this
certification, are eligible to apply for
adjustment assistance under section 223 of
the Trade Act of 1974, and are eligible to
apply for alternative trade adjustment
assistance under section 246 of the Trade Act
of 1974, as amended.
Signed in Washington, DC this 12th day of
May 2006.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6–7613 Filed 5–18–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:37 May 18, 2006
Jkt 208001
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–50,129; TA–W–50,129A]
IBM Corporation Global Services
Division, Piscataway, NJ; Middletown,
NJ; Notice of Revised Determination
on Remand
On April 10, 2006, the United States
Court of International Trade (USCIT)
granted a consent motion for partial
voluntary remand in Former Employees
of IBM Corporation, Global Services
Division v. U.S. Secretary of Labor,
Court No. 03–00656.
On November 13, 2002, a petition for
Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)
was filed with the U.S. Department of
Labor (Department) on behalf of workers
at IBM Corporation, Global Services
Division, Piscataway, New Jersey, and
Middletown, New Jersey (the subject
firm). The petitioning workers alleged
that the subject firm was shifting
computer software production to
Canada and importing those products
from Canada. Workers are software
developers who write and test computer
software.
The Department determined that the
workers did not produce an article
within the meaning of section 222 of the
Trade Act. The Department’s
determination was issued on March 26,
2003. The Notice of determination was
published in the Federal Register on
April 7, 2003 (68 FR 16834).
On April 29, 2003, a petitioner
requested administrative
reconsideration of the Department’s
negative determination regarding
eligibility for the subject workers to
apply for TAA. The Department’s Notice
of Negative Determination Regarding
Application for Reconsideration was
issued on June 26, 2003, and published
in the Federal Register on July 15, 2003
(68 FR 41845).
On September 11, 2003, the Plaintiffs
requested review by the USCIT. On
December 9, 2005, the Department
issued its Notice of Negative
Determination on Remand, finding that
the subject workers are not engaged in
the production of an article or support
of an article. The Notice was published
in the Federal Register on December 21,
2005 (70 FR 75837).
Since the publication of the last
remand determination, the Department
has revised its policy to acknowledge
that, at least in the context of this case,
there are tangible and intangible articles
and to clarify that the production of
intangible articles can be distinguished
from the provision of services. Software
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29183
and similar intangible goods that would
have been considered articles, for the
purposes of the Trade Act, if embodied
in a physical medium will now be
considered to be articles regardless of
their method of transfer.
The Department stresses that it will
continue to implement the longstanding
precedent that firms must produce an
article to be certified under the Trade
Act. This determination is not altered by
the fact the provision of a service may
result in the incidental creation of an
article. Because the revised policy may
have implications beyond this case of
which the Department is not fully
cognizant, it will be further developed
in rulemaking.
Therefore, due to the Department’s
policy change, the Department
requested the second remand to conduct
an investigation to determine whether
the subject workers are eligible to apply
for trade adjustment assistance.
Reviewing previously-submitted
information through the lens of the
revised policy, the Department has
determined that, for purposes of the
Trade Act, the subject workers produce
an article (computer software). During
the relevant period, a significant portion
of workers was separated from the
Piscataway, New Jersey facility and
production shifted to an affiliated
facility located in Canada; a significant
portion of workers was separated from
the Middletown, New Jersey facility and
production shifted to an affiliated
facility located in Canada.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts
generated through the second remand
investigation, I determine that a shift in
production of software like or directly
competitive to that produced at the
subject facilities to Canada contributed
to the total or partial separation of a
significant number or proportion of
workers at the subject facilities. In
accordance with the provisions of the
Act, I make the following certification:
All workers of IBM Corporation, Global
Services Division, Piscataway, New Jersey
(TA–W–50,129), and Middletown, New
Jersey (TA–W–50,129A), who became totally
or partially separated from employment on or
after November 13, 2001, through two years
from the issuance of this revised
determination, are eligible to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance under section 223 of
the Trade Act of 1974.
Signed at Washington, DC this 10th day of
May 2006.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6–7609 Filed 5–18–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
E:\FR\FM\19MYN1.SGM
19MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 97 (Friday, May 19, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 29183]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-7609]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-50,129; TA-W-50,129A]
IBM Corporation Global Services Division, Piscataway, NJ;
Middletown, NJ; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand
On April 10, 2006, the United States Court of International Trade
(USCIT) granted a consent motion for partial voluntary remand in Former
Employees of IBM Corporation, Global Services Division v. U.S.
Secretary of Labor, Court No. 03-00656.
On November 13, 2002, a petition for Trade Adjustment Assistance
(TAA) was filed with the U.S. Department of Labor (Department) on
behalf of workers at IBM Corporation, Global Services Division,
Piscataway, New Jersey, and Middletown, New Jersey (the subject firm).
The petitioning workers alleged that the subject firm was shifting
computer software production to Canada and importing those products
from Canada. Workers are software developers who write and test
computer software.
The Department determined that the workers did not produce an
article within the meaning of section 222 of the Trade Act. The
Department's determination was issued on March 26, 2003. The Notice of
determination was published in the Federal Register on April 7, 2003
(68 FR 16834).
On April 29, 2003, a petitioner requested administrative
reconsideration of the Department's negative determination regarding
eligibility for the subject workers to apply for TAA. The Department's
Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration was issued on June 26, 2003, and published in the
Federal Register on July 15, 2003 (68 FR 41845).
On September 11, 2003, the Plaintiffs requested review by the
USCIT. On December 9, 2005, the Department issued its Notice of
Negative Determination on Remand, finding that the subject workers are
not engaged in the production of an article or support of an article.
The Notice was published in the Federal Register on December 21, 2005
(70 FR 75837).
Since the publication of the last remand determination, the
Department has revised its policy to acknowledge that, at least in the
context of this case, there are tangible and intangible articles and to
clarify that the production of intangible articles can be distinguished
from the provision of services. Software and similar intangible goods
that would have been considered articles, for the purposes of the Trade
Act, if embodied in a physical medium will now be considered to be
articles regardless of their method of transfer.
The Department stresses that it will continue to implement the
longstanding precedent that firms must produce an article to be
certified under the Trade Act. This determination is not altered by the
fact the provision of a service may result in the incidental creation
of an article. Because the revised policy may have implications beyond
this case of which the Department is not fully cognizant, it will be
further developed in rulemaking.
Therefore, due to the Department's policy change, the Department
requested the second remand to conduct an investigation to determine
whether the subject workers are eligible to apply for trade adjustment
assistance.
Reviewing previously-submitted information through the lens of the
revised policy, the Department has determined that, for purposes of the
Trade Act, the subject workers produce an article (computer software).
During the relevant period, a significant portion of workers was
separated from the Piscataway, New Jersey facility and production
shifted to an affiliated facility located in Canada; a significant
portion of workers was separated from the Middletown, New Jersey
facility and production shifted to an affiliated facility located in
Canada.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts generated through the second
remand investigation, I determine that a shift in production of
software like or directly competitive to that produced at the subject
facilities to Canada contributed to the total or partial separation of
a significant number or proportion of workers at the subject
facilities. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the
following certification:
All workers of IBM Corporation, Global Services Division,
Piscataway, New Jersey (TA-W-50,129), and Middletown, New Jersey
(TA-W-50,129A), who became totally or partially separated from
employment on or after November 13, 2001, through two years from the
issuance of this revised determination, are eligible to apply for
Trade Adjustment Assistance under section 223 of the Trade Act of
1974.
Signed at Washington, DC this 10th day of May 2006.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E6-7609 Filed 5-18-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P
