U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-72,729

INTERNATIONAL PAPER, PINEVILLE MILL
INDUSTRIAL PACKAGING GROUP
PINEVILLE, LOUISIANA

Notice of Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated November 2, 2009, the company official
from the subject firm requested administrative reconsideration of
the negative determination regarding workers’ eligibility to apply
for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) applicable to workers and
former workers of the subject firm. The determination was issued
on August 20, 2010 and the Notice of Determination was published in
the Federal Register on September 3, 2010 (75 FR 54187).
The initial investigation resulted in a negative
determinantion based on the findings that neither the subject firm
nor any of its customers imported articles like or directly
competitive with uncoated freesheet containerboard produced by the
subject firm nor did the subject firm shift production to a foreign
country or acquire from another country articles like or directly
competitive with the uncoated freesheet containerboard produced
at the subject firm. The initial investigation also revealed that
the subject firm did not produce a component part that was used
by a firm that employed a worker group that is currently eligible
to apply for TAA and that directly incorporated the containerboard
in the production of the article that was the basis for the TAA
certification.
In request for reconsideration, the subject firm provided
new information in regard to the product produced by the subject
firm.
The Department of Labor has carefully reviewed the request
for reconsideration and the existing record, and has determined
that the Department will conduct further investigation to
determine if the workers meet the eligibility requirements of the
Trade Act of 1974.
Conclusion
After careful review of the application, I conclude that the
claim is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the
U.S. Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is,
therefore, granted.
Signed at Washington, D.C., this 15th day of October 2010

/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
_______________________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance


4510-FN-P



DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-72,729

INTERNATIONAL PAPER, PINEVILLE MILL
INDUSTRIAL PACKAGING GROUP
PINEVILLE, LOUISIANA

Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended (“Act”), 19 U.S.C. § 2273, the Department of Labor herein
presents the results of an investigation regarding certification of
eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance.
Workers of a firm may be eligible for worker adjustment
assistance if they satisfy the criteria of subsection (a), (c) or
(f) of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), (c), (f). For
the Department of Labor to issue a certification for workers under
Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), the following three
criteria must be met:
I. The first criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(1) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2282(a)(1)) requires that a significant
number or proportion of the workers in the workers’ firm must
have become totally or partially separated or be threatened
with total or partial separation.

II. The second criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(2) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a)(2)) may be satisfied in one of two
ways:
(A) Increased Imports Path:
(i) sales or production, or both, at the workers’ firm must
have decreased absolutely, AND
(ii) (I) imports of articles or services like or directly
competitive with articles or services produced or
supplied by the workers’ firm have increased, OR
(II)(aa) imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles into which the component
part produced by the workers’ firm was directly
incorporated have increased; OR
(II)(bb) imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles which are produced
directly using the services supplied by the
workers’ firm have increased; OR
(III) imports of articles directly incorporating
component parts not produced in the U.S. that are
like or directly competitive with the article into
which the component part produced by the workers’
firm was directly incorporated have increased.

(B) Shift in Production or Supply Path:
(i)(I) there has been a shift by the workers’ firm to a
foreign country in the production of articles or supply
of services like or directly competitive with those
produced/supplied by the workers’ firm; OR
(i)(II) there has been an acquisition from a foreign country
by the workers’ firm of articles/services that are like
or directly competitive with those produced/supplied by
the workers’ firm.

III. The third criterion requires that the increase in imports or
shift/acquisition must have contributed importantly to the
workers’ separation or threat of separation. See Sections
222(a)(2)(A)(iii) and 222(a)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act, 19 U.S.C.
§§ 2272(a)(2)(A)(iii), 2272(a)(2)(B)(ii).

Section 222(d) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(d), defines the
terms “Supplier” and “Downstream Producer.” For the Department to
issue a secondary worker certification under Section 222(c) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), to workers of a Supplier or a Downstream
Producer, the following criteria must be met:
(1) a significant number or proportion of the workers in the
workers’ firm or an appropriate subdivision of the firm
have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;

(2) the workers’ firm is a Supplier or Downstream Producer to
a firm that employed a group of workers who received a
certification of eligibility under Section 222(a) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), and such supply or production
is related to the article or service that was the basis
for such certification; and

(3) either
(A) the workers’ firm is a supplier and the component parts
it supplied to the firm described in paragraph (2)
accounted for at least 20 percent of the production or
sales of the workers’ firm; or
(B) a loss of business by the workers’ firm with the firm
described in paragraph (2) contributed importantly to the
workers’ separation or threat of separation.

Workers of a firm may also be considered eligible if they
are publicly identified by name by the International Trade
Commission (ITC) as a member of a domestic industry in an
investigation resulting in a category of determination that is
listed in Section 222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f).
The group eligibility requirements for workers of a firm under
Section 222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f), can be satisfied if
the following criteria are met:
(1) the workers’ firm is publicly identified by name by the
International Trade Commission as a member of a domestic
industry in an investigation resulting in--
(A) an affirmative determination of serious injury or
threat thereof under section 202(b)(1);
(B) an affirmative determination of market disruption
or threat thereof under section 421(b)(1); or
(C) an affirmative final determination of material
injury or threat thereof under section 705(b)(1)(A)
or 735(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1671d(b)(1)(A) and 1673d(b)(1)(A));
(2) the petition is filed during the 1-year period beginning
on the date on which--
(A) a summary of the report submitted to the President
by the International Trade Commission under section
202(f)(1) with respect to the affirmative
determination described in paragraph (1)(A) is
published in the Federal Register under section
202(f)(3); or
(B) notice of an affirmative determination described in
subparagraph (1) is published in the Federal
Register; and
(3) the workers have become totally or partially
separated from the workers’ firm within--
(A) the 1-year period described in paragraph (2); or
(B) notwithstanding section 223(b)(1), the 1-year
period preceding the 1-year period described in
paragraph (2).

The investigation was initiated in response to a petition
filed on November 2, 2009 by the State of Louisiana Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Coordinator on behalf of workers of
International Paper Pineville Mill, Industrial Packaging Group,
Pineville, Louisiana (International Paper Pineville Mill). The
workers are engaged in activities related to the production of
uncoated freesheet containerboard (which is later converted into
corrugated containers).
The petitioner states that “since the onset of the global
recession, the decline in demand for . . . uncoated freesheet .
. . has accelerated, and . . . the company has decided to
further reduce its uncoated freesheet capacity.”
The investigation included the collection of data using the
Department’s confidential data request form, telephone interviews
and electronic correspondence with the petitioner and
International Paper Pineville Mill company officials.
With respect to Section 222(a) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that Criterion II has not been met because, during the
relevant period, neither International Paper Pineville Mill nor
any of its customers imported articles like or directly competitive
to uncoated freesheet containerboard produced by International
Paper Pineville Mill. Further, International Paper Pineville
Mill did not shift to another country or acquire from another
country articles like or directly competitive with the uncoated
freesheet containerboard produced at the Pineville, Louisiana
facility during the relevant period.
With respect to Section 222(c) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that Criterion (2) has not been met because International
Paper Pineville Mill did not produce a component part that was
used by a firm that employed a worker group that is currently
eligible to apply for TAA and that directly incorporated the
containerboard in the production of the article that was the basis
for the TAA certification.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f), have not been met because
International Paper Pineville Mill has not been identified in an
affirmative finding of injury by the ITC.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the
investigation, I determine that workers of International Paper
Pineville Mill, Industrial Packaging Group, Pineville, Louisiana,
who are engaged in activities related to the production of


uncoated freesheet containerboard (which is later converted into
corrugated containers), are denied eligibility to apply for
adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. §
2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 20th day of August, 2010

/s/Del Min Amy Chen
______________________________
DEL MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance



- 8 -