Invista, S.A.R.L., Nylon Apparel Filament Fibers Group, a Subsidiary of Koch Industries, Inc., Chattanooga, TN; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand, 51195-51196 [E9-23902]

Download as PDF cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 191 / Monday, October 5, 2009 / Notices maintained by New Chrysler from June 10, 2009. (g) The term ‘‘Independent Fiduciary’’ means a fiduciary that is (i) independent of and unrelated to Chrysler LLC, New Chrysler, the UAW, the Committee, and their affiliates, and (ii) appointed to act on behalf of the New Chrysler VEBA Plan with respect to the holding, management and disposition of the Shares and the Note. In this regard, the fiduciary will not be deemed to be independent of and unrelated to Chrysler LLC, New Chrysler, the UAW, the Committee, and their affiliates if (1) such fiduciary directly or indirectly controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with Chrysler LLC, New Chrysler, the UAW, the Committee or their affiliates, (2) such fiduciary directly or indirectly receives any compensation or other consideration from Chrysler LLC, New Chrysler, the UAW or any Committee member in his or her individual capacity in connection with any transaction contemplated in this exemption (except that an independent fiduciary may receive compensation from the Committee or the New Chrysler VEBA Plan for services provided to the New Chrysler VEBA Plan in connection with the transactions discussed herein if the amount or payment of such compensation is not contingent upon or in any way affected by the independent fiduciary’s ultimate decision), and (3) the annual gross revenue received by the fiduciary, in any fiscal year, from Chrysler LLC, New Chrysler, the UAW or a member of the Committee in his or her individual capacity, exceeds 3% of the fiduciary’s annual gross revenue from all sources (for federal income tax purposes) for its prior tax year. (h) The term ‘‘Implementation Date’’ shall mean the later of January 1, 2010 or (ii) the ‘‘Final Effective Date,’’ as defined in the Modified Settlement Agreement. (i) The term ‘‘New Chrysler’’ shall mean a Delaware Limited Liability Company formed by Fiat North America LLC, a subsidiary of Fiat S.p.A., a manufacturer of automobiles and automotive parts in Turin, Italy. New Chrysler is the company that acquired certain assets and liabilities from Chrysler LLC pursuant to the Section 363 Sale. (j) The term ‘‘Note’’ shall mean a note issued by New Chrysler with a principal amount of $4,587 billion and an implicit interest rate of nine (9%) payable in fixed annual installments pursuant to the Indenture Agreement. Payments, consisting of accrued and unpaid interest and amortized principal shall be due on July 15 of each year, VerDate Nov<24>2008 14:59 Oct 02, 2009 Jkt 220001 commencing July 15, 2010 and ending on July 15, 2023. (k) The term ‘‘Shares’’ means the membership interests issued by New Chrysler. (l) The term ‘‘New Chrysler VEBA Plan’’ refers to the newly created retiree medical employee welfare benefit plan. The plan is an employee welfare benefit plan established and maintained by the Committee, and shall provide retiree medical benefits to the Class and the Covered Group established pursuant to the Modified Settlement Agreement. (m) The term ‘‘Registration Rights Agreement’’ means the Equity Registration Rights Agreement by and among New Chrysler, the U.S. Treasury, Canada, the VEBA Trust and Chrysler LLC, entered into on June 10, 2009. (n) The term ‘‘Section 363 Sale’’ means a sale under section 363 of Title 11 of the U.S. Code, by which on June 10, 2009, New Chrysler succeeded to certain assets and liabilities of Chrysler LLC. (o) The term ‘‘Modified Settlement Agreement’’ means the UAW Retiree Settlement Agreement between New Chrysler and the UAW dated June 10, 2009. (p) The term ‘‘Treasury Department’’ shall mean the United States Department of the Treasury. (q) The term ‘‘VEBA’’ means the UAW Chrysler Retiree Medical Benefits Plan (the New Chrysler VEBA Plan) and its associated UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust (the VEBA Trust). (r) The term ‘‘UAW’’ means the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America. (s) The term ‘‘Verification Time Period’’ means: (i) With respect to all Shares, the period beginning on the date of publication of the final exemption in the Federal Register and ending 60 calendar days thereafter; (ii) with respect to each payment pursuant to the Note, the period beginning on the date of the payment and ending 90 calendar days thereafter; and (iii) with respect to the UAW-Related Account of the Existing Internal VEBA, the period beginning on the date of publication of the final exemption in the Federal Register (or, if later, the date of the transfer of the UAW-Related Account to the New Chrysler VEBA Plan) and ending 180 calendar days thereafter. Signed at Washington, DC, this 29th day of September 2009. Ivan Strasfeld, Director of Exemption Determinations, Employee Benefits Security Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. [FR Doc. E9–23849 Filed 10–2–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–29–P PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 51195 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA–W–60,808] Invista, S.A.R.L., Nylon Apparel Filament Fibers Group, a Subsidiary of Koch Industries, Inc., Chattanooga, TN; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand On June 18, 2009, the U.S. Court of International Trade (USCIT) remanded to the Department of Labor’s motion for further investigation into the matter of Former Employees of Invista, S.A.R.L. v. U.S Secretary of Labor, Court No. 07– 00160. On December 15, 2006, an official of Invista, S.A.R.L, Nylon Apparel Filament Fibers Group, A Subsidiary of Koch Industries, Inc., Chattanooga, Tennessee (Invista) filed a petition for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) on behalf of workers and former workers at Invista engaged in activity related to the production of nylon fiber. AR 1. The petition stated that the separations were due to a shift in production to Mexico that was the basis for a certification that expired on August 20, 2006 (TA–W–55,055). AR 2. The company official stated that, as of February 1, 2007, all workers of Invista would be terminated from employment. AR 7. On February 7, 2007, the Department of Labor (Department) issued a negative determination regarding workers’ eligibility to apply for TAA/ATAA. AR 30–32. On February 21, 2007, the Department’s Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register (72 FR 7909). AR 43. In support of a request for administrative reconsideration (dated February 18, 2007), a worker stated that the workers’ separations are ‘‘a direct result of the textile industry going to developing countries.’’ AR 38. In a letter dated March 15, 2007, the Department stated that the request for reconsideration was being dismissed because insufficient evidence was furnished to warrant reconsideration pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) and that the shift in production that was the basis for the certification of TA–W–55,055 occurred outside the relevant period. AR 45. The Dismissal of Application for Reconsideration was issued on March 21, 2007. AR 47. The Department’s Notice of dismissal was published in the Federal Register on March 30, 2007 (72 FR 15169). AR 48. On May 11, 2007, Plaintiffs sought review by the USCIT. The Plaintiffs E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM 05OCN1 51196 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 191 / Monday, October 5, 2009 / Notices assert that the worker separations are due to Invista’s shift in production to Mexico. On March 27, 2008, the USCIT granted the Department’s motion for voluntary remand and directed the Department to conduct further investigation to determine whether workers of Invista are eligible to apply for TAA and ATAA. On June 2, 2008, the Department issued a Notice of Negative Determination on Remand based on the finding that there was no causal nexus between the worker separations and an earlier shift in production to Mexico of articles like or directly competitive with nylon fiber produced at Invista. SAR 35. The Department’s Notice of determination was published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2008 (73 FR 32739). SAR 42. On June 18, 2009, the USCIT ordered the Department to conduct further investigation to determine whether workers of Invista are eligible to apply for TAA and ATAA. The group eligibility requirements for directly-impacted (primary) workers under Section 222(a) of 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 cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES 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, 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 VerDate Nov<24>2008 14:59 Oct 02, 2009 Jkt 220001 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. During the second remand investigation, the Department obtained additional information regarding Invista’s shift in production of nylon fiber to Mexico, Invista’s business decisions related to the post-shift reorganization, and the subsequent worker separations at Invista. SAR 67– 71. Following a careful review of the information obtained during its investigations, the Department determined that a significant portion or number of workers at Invista was separated and that there was a shift in production to Mexico of articles like or directly competitive with nylon fiber produced at Invista. Therefore, the Department determines that the group eligibility requirements under Section 222(a)(2)(B) the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, have been met. 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 ATAA. The Department has determined in this case that the group eligibility 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 facts generated through the first and second remand investigations, I determine that a shift in production by Invista to Mexico of articles like or directly competitive to nylon fiber produced at Invista contributed to the total or partial separation of a significant number or proportion of workers at Invista. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following certification: All workers of Invista, S.A.R.L, Nylon Apparel Filament Fibers Group, A Subsidiary of Koch Industries, Inc., Chattanooga, Tennessee, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after August 21, 2006, 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, and are eligible to apply for PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC, this 8th day of September 2009. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E9–23902 Filed 10–2–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Notice of permit applications received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95–541) National Science Foundation. Notice of permit applications received under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, Public Law 95–541. AGENCY: ACTION: SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish notice of permit applications received to conduct activities regulated under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. NSF has published regulations under the Antarctic Conservation Act at Title 45 Part 670 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This is the required notice of permit applications received. DATES: Interested parties are invited to submit written data, comments, or views with respect to this permit application by November 4, 2009. This application may be inspected by interested parties at the Permit Office, address below. ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nadene G. Kennedy at the above address or (703) 292–7405. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Science Foundation, as directed by the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95–541), as amended by the Antarctic Science, Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996, has developed regulations for the establishment of a permit system for various activities in Antarctica and designation of certain animals and certain geographic areas as requiring special protection. The regulations establish such a permit system to designate Antarctic Specially Protected Areas. The applications received are as follows: 1. Applicant: Permit Application No. 2010–017, Juan M. Lopez-Bautista, Department of Biological Sciences, The E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM 05OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 191 (Monday, October 5, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51195-51196]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-23902]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-60,808]


Invista, S.A.R.L., Nylon Apparel Filament Fibers Group, a 
Subsidiary of Koch Industries, Inc., Chattanooga, TN; Notice of Revised 
Determination on Remand

    On June 18, 2009, the U.S. Court of International Trade (USCIT) 
remanded to the Department of Labor's motion for further investigation 
into the matter of Former Employees of Invista, S.A.R.L. v. U.S 
Secretary of Labor, Court No. 07-00160.
    On December 15, 2006, an official of Invista, S.A.R.L, Nylon 
Apparel Filament Fibers Group, A Subsidiary of Koch Industries, Inc., 
Chattanooga, Tennessee (Invista) filed a petition for Trade Adjustment 
Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) on 
behalf of workers and former workers at Invista engaged in activity 
related to the production of nylon fiber. AR 1. The petition stated 
that the separations were due to a shift in production to Mexico that 
was the basis for a certification that expired on August 20, 2006 (TA-
W-55,055). AR 2. The company official stated that, as of February 1, 
2007, all workers of Invista would be terminated from employment. AR 7.
    On February 7, 2007, the Department of Labor (Department) issued a 
negative determination regarding workers' eligibility to apply for TAA/
ATAA. AR 30-32. On February 21, 2007, the Department's Notice of 
determination was published in the Federal Register (72 FR 7909). AR 
43.
    In support of a request for administrative reconsideration (dated 
February 18, 2007), a worker stated that the workers' separations are 
``a direct result of the textile industry going to developing 
countries.'' AR 38.
    In a letter dated March 15, 2007, the Department stated that the 
request for reconsideration was being dismissed because insufficient 
evidence was furnished to warrant reconsideration pursuant to 29 CFR 
90.18(c) and that the shift in production that was the basis for the 
certification of TA-W-55,055 occurred outside the relevant period. AR 
45. The Dismissal of Application for Reconsideration was issued on 
March 21, 2007. AR 47. The Department's Notice of dismissal was 
published in the Federal Register on March 30, 2007 (72 FR 15169). AR 
48.
    On May 11, 2007, Plaintiffs sought review by the USCIT. The 
Plaintiffs

[[Page 51196]]

assert that the worker separations are due to Invista's shift in 
production to Mexico.
    On March 27, 2008, the USCIT granted the Department's motion for 
voluntary remand and directed the Department to conduct further 
investigation to determine whether workers of Invista are eligible to 
apply for TAA and ATAA.
    On June 2, 2008, the Department issued a Notice of Negative 
Determination on Remand based on the finding that there was no causal 
nexus between the worker separations and an earlier shift in production 
to Mexico of articles like or directly competitive with nylon fiber 
produced at Invista. SAR 35. The Department's Notice of determination 
was published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2008 (73 FR 32739). 
SAR 42.
    On June 18, 2009, the USCIT ordered the Department to conduct 
further investigation to determine whether workers of Invista are 
eligible to apply for TAA and ATAA.
    The group eligibility requirements for directly-impacted (primary) 
workers under Section 222(a) of 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, 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.

    During the second remand investigation, the Department obtained 
additional information regarding Invista's shift in production of nylon 
fiber to Mexico, Invista's business decisions related to the post-shift 
reorganization, and the subsequent worker separations at Invista. SAR 
67-71.
    Following a careful review of the information obtained during its 
investigations, the Department determined that a significant portion or 
number of workers at Invista was separated and that there was a shift 
in production to Mexico of articles like or directly competitive with 
nylon fiber produced at Invista. Therefore, the Department determines 
that the group eligibility requirements under Section 222(a)(2)(B) the 
Trade Act of 1974, as amended, have been met.
    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 ATAA.
    The Department has determined in this case that the group 
eligibility 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 facts generated through the first and 
second remand investigations, I determine that a shift in production by 
Invista to Mexico of articles like or directly competitive to nylon 
fiber produced at Invista contributed to the total or partial 
separation of a significant number or proportion of workers at Invista.
    In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following 
certification:

    All workers of Invista, S.A.R.L, Nylon Apparel Filament Fibers 
Group, A Subsidiary of Koch Industries, Inc., Chattanooga, 
Tennessee, who became totally or partially separated from employment 
on or after August 21, 2006, 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, 
and are eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment 
assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 8th day of September 2009.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-23902 Filed 10-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P