DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-62,271

RAVENSWOOD SPECIALTY SERVICES, INC.
RAVENSWOOD, WEST VIRGINIA

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated November 29, 2007, the United Steel,
Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied
Industrial and Service workers International Union (the Union)
requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's
negative determination regarding eligibility for workers and
former workers of Ravenswood Specialty Services, Inc.,
Ravenswood, West Virginia (subject firm) to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade Adjustment
Assistance (ATAA). The negative determination was issued on
October 18, 2007. The Department’s Notice of determination was
published in the Federal Register on October 31, 2007 (72 FR
61686). Workers produce nylon polymer and Minlon, and are not
separately identifiable by related article.
The petition was denied because the subject firm did not
shift production to a foreign country, the subject firm did not
import nylon polymer or Minlon, and the subject firm’s major
declining customer did not import nylon polymer or Minlon during
the relevant period.
In the request for reconsideration, the Union stated that
“the workers’ separations is due to foreign imports and a shift
of production to a foreign country. We are in the process of
gathering further information to help support this position and
will forward it to your office a soon as possible.”
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c), administrative reconsideration
may be granted under the following circumstances:
(1) If it appears on the basis of facts not previously
considered that the determination complained of
was erroneous;
(2) if it appears that the determination complained of
was based on a mistake in the determination of facts
not previously considered; or
(3) if in the opinion of the Certifying Officer, a mis-
interpretation of facts or of the law justified
reconsideration of the decision.
The Union did not supply facts not previously considered;
nor provide additional documentation indicating that there was
either 1) a mistake in the determination of facts not previously
considered or 2) a misinterpretation of facts or of the law
justifying reconsideration of the initial determination.
After careful review of the request for reconsideration, the
Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not been met.


Conclusion
After review of the application and investigative findings,
I conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of
the law or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of
the Department of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the
application is denied.

Signed at Washington, D.C. this 16th day of January 2008


/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
___________________________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance

4510-FN-P


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-62,271

RAVENSWOOD SPECIALTY SERVICES, INC.
RAVENSWOOD, WEST VIRGINIA

Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended (19 USC 2273), the Department of Labor herein presents the
results of an investigation regarding certification of eligibility
to apply for worker adjustment assistance. The group eligibility
requirements for directly-impacted (primary) workers under Section
222(a) 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.

The investigation was initiated in response to a petition
received on October 9, 2007, filed by a United Steel, Paper and
Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and
Service Workers Union (USW), Local 8-997 Representative on behalf
of workers of Ravenswood Specialty Services, Inc., Ravenswood, West
Virginia. Workers at the subject firm produced nylon polymer and
Minlon. Workers are not separately identifiable by related
article.
The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C) and
(a)(2)(B)(II.B) were not met.
The investigation revealed that the subject firm did not
import nylon polymer or Minlon nor did it shift production to a
foreign country during the relevant period.
The Department of Labor surveyed the subject firm’s major
declining customer regarding its purchases of nylon polymer and
minlon during 2005, 2006, and the January through September of
2007. The survey revealed that the subject firm's major declining
customer did not import nylon polymer or Minlon during the relevant
period.
The USW, Local 8-997 Representative cited imports by the
subject firm’s major customer from Canada during the relevant
period. The investigation revealed the subject firm’s major
customer did not import nylon polymer or Minlon during the relevant
period. The Canadian firm referenced by the USW, Local 8-997
Representative does not sell nylon polymer or Minlon to any
domestic locations of the subject firm’s major customer.
In addition, in accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of
1974 (26 USC 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor herein
presents the results of its investigation regarding certification
of eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance
(ATAA) for older workers.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of
eligibility to apply for ATAA, the worker group must be certified
eligible to apply for trade adjustment assistance (TAA). Since the
workers are denied eligibility to apply for TAA, the workers cannot
be certified eligible for ATAA.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in this
investigation, I determine that all workers of Ravenswood Specialty
Services, Inc., Ravenswood, West Virginia are denied eligibility to
apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act
of 1974 and alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section
246 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 18th day of October 2007


/s/Richard Church
______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance






- 3 -