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
<![CDATA[
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
