Invista, S.A.R.L., Nylon Apparel Filament Fibers Group, a Subsidiary of Koch Industries, Inc.; Chattanooga, TN; Notice of Revised Determination on Remand, 53761-53762 [E9-25146]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 20, 2009 / Notices
cprice-sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
issued a Certification of Eligibility to
Apply for Worker Adjustment
Assistance on July 14, 2009, applicable
to workers of Delphi Steering, including
on-site leased workers from Bartech and
Securitas, Saginaw, Michigan. The
notice was published in the Federal
Register on September 2, 2009 (74 FR
45477).
At the request of the State Agency, the
Department reviewed the certification
for workers of the subject firm. The
workers are engaged in the production
of steering systems and components
such as steering columns, gears, pumps
and electronic power steering systems.
The company reports that on-site
leased workers from Acro Service Corp.,
Aerotek, Inc., Continental, Inc.,
Dynamic Corp., G–Tech Professional
Staffing, Inc., GlobalEdge Technologies,
Inc. (formerly CAE Tech), Gonzalez
Contract Services, Integrated Partners
Group LLC, Kelly Services, Manpower,
Inc., Rapid Global Business Solutions,
Inc., TAC Worldwide, Trialon Corp.,
Trison Business Solutions and Wright
K. Technologies were employed on-site
at the Saginaw, Michigan location of
Delphi Steering. The Department has
determined that these workers were
sufficiently under the control of the
subject firm to be considered leased
workers.
Based on these findings, the
Department is amending this
certification to include workers leased
from the above mentioned firms
working on-site at the Saginaw,
Michigan location of Delphi Steering.
The amended notice applicable to
TA–W–70,460 is hereby issued as
follows:
All workers of Delphi Steering, including
on-site leased workers from Bartech,
Securitas, Acro Service Corp., Aerotek, Inc.,
Continental, Inc., Dynamic Corp., G–Tech
Professional Staffing, Inc., GlobalEdge
Technologies, Inc., (formerly CAE Tech),
Gonzalez Contract Services, Integrated
Partners Group LLC, Kelly Services,
Manpower, Inc., Rapid Global Business
Solutions, Inc., TAC Worldwide, Trialon
Corp., Trison Business Solutions, and Wright
K. Technologies, Saginaw, Michigan, who
became totally or partially separated from
employment on or after May 20, 2008,
through July 14, 2011, and all workers in the
group threatened with total or partial
separation from employment on date of
certification through two years from the date
of certification, are eligible to apply for
adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of
Title II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:46 Oct 19, 2009
Jkt 220001
Signed at Washington, DC, this 7th day of
October 2009.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9–25149 Filed 10–19–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
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 the matter 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
53761
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
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
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
53762
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 20, 2009 / Notices
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.
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.
cprice-sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
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.
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
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,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:46 Oct 19, 2009
Jkt 220001
Signed at Washington, DC, this 8th day of
September 2009.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9–25146 Filed 10–19–09; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
TA–W–64,643, Chrysler LLC,
Headquarters, Including On-Site
Leased Workers From Aerotek, Ajilon,
et al., Auburn Hills, MI; TA–W–64,643A,
Chrysler LLC, Technology Center,
Including On-Site Leased Workers
From Aerotek, Ajilon, et al., Auburn
Hills, MI; TA–W–64,643B, Chrysler LLC,
Featherstone, Including On-Site
Leased Workers From Aerotek,
Bartech Group, et al., Auburn Hills, MI;
TA–W–64,643C, Chrysler LLC, Chrysler
Office Building, Including On-Site
Leased Workers From Aerotek, Ajilon,
et al., Auburn Hills, MI; Amended
Certification Regarding Eligibility To
Apply for Worker Adjustment
Assistance and Alternative Trade
Adjustment Assistance
In accordance with Section 223 of the
Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and
Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26
U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the
Department of Labor issued a
Certification of Eligibility to Apply for
Worker Adjustment Assistance and
Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance on December 19, 2008,
applicable to workers of Chrysler LLC,
Headquarters, Auburn Hills, Michigan,
Chrysler LLC, Technology Center,
Auburn Hills, Michigan and Chrysler
LLC, Featherstone, Auburn Hills,
Michigan. The notice was published in
the Federal Register on January 14,
2009 (74 FR 2136). The notice was
amended on April 24, 2009 to include
on-site leased workers. The Notice was
published in the Federal Register on
May 18, 2009 (74 FR 23216). The notice
was amended again on August 27, 2009
to include workers at the Chrysler Office
Building, an annex of the Headquarters
at the Auburn Hills Complex. The
notice was published in the Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Register on September 22, 2009 (74 FR
48297)
At the request of the State agency, the
Department reviewed the certification
for workers of the subject firm. The
workers are engaged in activities related
to the production automotive vehicles
and automotive vehicle parts.
New information shows that workers
leased from the INCAT, Ta Ta
Technologies, TechOps and Tech Team
Global were employed on-site at the
Auburn Hills, Michigan locations of the
above mentioned plants of Chrysler
LLC.
The Department has determined that
these workers were sufficiently under
the control of Chrysler LLC,
Headquarters, Technology Center,
Featherstone and Chrysler Office
Building to be considered leased
workers.
Based on these findings, the
Department is amending this
certification to include workers leased
from INCAT, Ta Ta Technologies,
TechOps and Tech Team Global
working on-site at the Auburn Hills,
Michigan locations of the subject firm.
The amended notice applicable to
TA–W–64,494 is hereby issued as
follows:
All workers of Chrysler LLC, Headquarters,
including on-site leased workers from
Aerotek, Ajilon, Argos, ASG Renaissance,
Bartech, Group, CDI Information Services,
Computer Consultants of America, Computer
Engrg Services, Epitec Group, Gtech
Professional Staffing, JDM Systems
Consultants, Kelly Services, Preferred
Solutions, Resource Technologies, Spherion,
Synova, and TAC Transportation, INCAT, Ta
Ta Technologies, TechOps and Tech Team
Global, Auburn Hills, Michigan (TA–W–
64,643), Chrysler LLC, Technology Center,
including on-site leased workers from
Aerotek, Ajilon, Altair Engineering, Applied
Technologies, Argos, ASG Renaissance,
Automated Analysis Corp/Belcan, Bartech
Group, CAE Tech, CDI Information Services,
CER–CAD Engineering Resources, Computer
Consultants of America, Computer Engrg
Services, Compuware, Controller
Technologies, Data Communications Corp.,
Emerging Technologies Corp., Engineering
Technology Assoc., Gonzalez Design
Engineering, Gtech Professional Staffing,
Incat, Jefferson Wells International, Kelly
Services, Magnasteyr, Meda Technical
Services, Modern Professional Services, MSX
International, Optical Q Quest Corp.,
Quantum Consultants, Rapid Global
Business, Resource Technologies, Ricardo,
RSB Systems, Spherion, Synova, Syntel Int’l,
Systems Technology, TAC Transportation,
TEC, Technical Training, UGS PLM
Solutions, Unique Systems Design, Valley
Forge, Wel-Tek International, INCAT, Ta Ta
Technologies TechOps and Tech Team
Global, Auburn Hills, Michigan (TA–W–
64,643A), Chrysler LLC, Featherstone,
including on-site leased workers from
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 201 (Tuesday, October 20, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53761-53762]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25146]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
the matter 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 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
[[Page 53762]]
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. E9-25146 Filed 10-19-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
