Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 20, 2009 / Notices 53761 

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. 

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. 

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 


cprice-sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
53762 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 201 / Tuesday, October 20, 2009 / 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. 

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 

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 

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 


cprice-sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES