[Federal Register: March 4, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 41)]
[Notices]
[Page 9433-9434]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04mr09-80]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-63,422]
Springs Global U.S., Inc., Springs Direct Division, Springmaid
Wamsutta Factory Store, Lancaster, SC; Notice of Revised Determination
on Remand
On February 6, 2009, the U.S. Court of International Trade (USCIT)
remanded to the U.S. Department of Labor (Department) for further
review Former Employees of Springs Global, Inc., Springs Global Direct
Division, Springmaid-Wamsutta Factory Store, Lancaster, South Carolina
(FEO Springs Global) v. United States, Court No. 08-00255.
On May 19, 2008, an official of Springs Global U.S. Inc. (subject
firm) filed a petition for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) on behalf of workers of
Springs Global U.S. Inc., Springs Global Direct Division, Springmaid-
Wamsutta Factory Store, Lancaster, South Carolina (subject facility).
The subject facility closed during February 2008. Prior to the
closure, workers at the subject facility managed Springs Global, U.S.,
Inc. (subject firm) retail operations, sold linen products manufactured
by the subject firm to the public and other subject firm employees, and
handled special orders for linen products placed by other subject firm
employees.
The negative determination, issued on May 30, 2008, stated that in
order to be considered eligible to apply for adjustment assistance
under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, the subject worker group
must work for a ``firm'' or appropriate subdivision that produces an
article domestically and there must be a relationship between the
workers' work and the article produced by the workers' firm or
appropriate subdivision. The determination also stated that although
the subject firm produced an article, the subject workers did not
support that production. The Department determined that the subject
worker group cannot be considered import impacted or affected by a
shift in production of an article. The Department's Notice of
determination was published in the Federal Register on June 16, 2008
(73 FR 34044).
The Department did not receive a request for administrative
reconsideration.
In the complaint, Plaintiffs allege that workers at the subject
facility, who ``provided the means by which Springs Global dispensed of
manufactured goods that were not able to be sold otherwise * * *
thereby enabling the company's production operations * * * to reduce
their per-unit overhead and operate more efficiently,'' should be
treated like the workers covered by TA-W-62,768 (Springs Global U.S.,
Inc., Springs Direct Division, Corporate Support Group, Lancaster,
South Carolina; certified February 14, 2008). Workers covered by TA-W-
63,422 are located in the same building as workers covered by TA-W-
62,786.
Workers covered by TA-W-62,786 are engaged in production
estimation, production scheduling, distribution, logistics, and
operational services. The determination for TA-W-62,786 stated that the
workers supported production at a TAA-certified facility (Springs
Global U.S., Inc., Grace Complex, Bedding Division, Lancaster, South
Carolina; TA-W-61,258) and that the worker separations are ``related to
a shift of production and increased imports of textile products.''
The group eligibility requirements for directly-impacted workers
under Section 222(a) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, based on a
shift of production are satisfied if the criteria set forth under
Section 222(a)(2)(B) have been met:
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; and
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 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 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.
On remand, the Department carefully reviewed the language of the
statute, the Department's policy, Plaintiffs' submissions, and the
administrative record.
The intent of the Department is for a certification to cover all
workers of the subject firm or appropriate subdivision who were
adversely affected by increased imports of the article produced by the
firm or a shift in production of the article, based on the
investigation of the TAA/ATAA petition.
After careful review on remand, the Department determines that a
significant number or proportion of the workers in the appropriate
subdivision of the subject firm was separated. Further, the Department
determines that these workers performed activities related to the
firm's production of an article, that the firm shifted production of
that article to a foreign country (and there were increased imports of
like or directly competitive articles produced by the firm), and this
shift in production was a factor in Plaintiffs' separations.
Based on the above, the Department determines that the group
eligibility requirements under Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Trade Act of
1974, as amended, have been met.
In accordance with Section 246 of 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.
[[Page 9434]]
Competitive conditions within the industry are adverse.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts during the remand investigation,
I determine that there was a shift of production from the workers' firm
or subdivision to Brazil of articles that are like or directly
competitive with those produced by the subject firm or subdivision, and
there has been or is likely to be an increase in imports of like or
directly competitive articles. In accordance with the provisions of the
Act, I make the following certification:
All workers of Springs Global U.S. Inc., Springs Global Direct
Division, Springmaid-Wamsutta Factory Store, Lancaster, South
Carolina, who became totally or partially separated from employment
on or after May 19, 2007, 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 23rd day of February 2009.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-4544 Filed 3-3-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P