DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-72,908

CAROLINA TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY LLC
A WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF EMBARQ CORPORATION
A SUBSIDIARY OF CENTURYLINK, INC.
NEW BERN CALL CENTER
NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated July 14, 2010, petitioners requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former
workers of the subject firm. The determination was issued on
June 16, 2010. The Department’s Notice of determination was
published in the Federal Register on July 1, 2010 (75 FR 38142).
The petition alleges that a merger of the subject firm with
another firm led to duplication of services (call center support
services for landline telephone, Internet, and related data
communications) and, thus, the closure of the subject facility.
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) 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 negative determination was based on the findings that
the subject firm did not shift to/acquire from a foreign country
services like or directly competitive with the call center
support activities provided by the subject workers, nor did the
workers supply a service that was used in the production of an
article or the supply of a service by a firm whose workers are
currently eligible to apply for TAA on the basis of that article
or service.
In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner
paraphrased the findings as presented in the negative
determination and agreed that “[T]here was no shift in work to a
foreign country nor was Embarq [parent company of the subject
firm] acquired by a foreign country.”
The petitioner 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 in Washington, D.C., this 4th day of August, 2010

/s/ Del Min Amy Chen
______________________________
DEL MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
4510-FN-P


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-72,908

CAROLINA TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY LLC
A WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF EMBARQ CORPORATION
A SUBSIDIARY OF CENTURYLINK, INC.
NEW BERN CALL CENTER
NEW BERN, NORTH CAROLINA

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 20, 2009 on behalf of workers of Carolina
Telephone and Telegraph Company LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary
of Embarq Corporation, a subsidiary of CenturyLink, Inc., New
Bern Call Center, New Bern, North Carolina. The workers supply
call center support services for landline telephone, internet
and related data communications (call center support services).
The petitioner alleges that a merger of the subject firm
with another firm led to duplication of services and the
consequent closure of the subject facility.
With respect to Section 222(a) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Criterion II has not been met
because the subject firm did not shift to, or acquire from, a
foreign country services like or directly competitive with the
call center support services provided by subject workers.
With respect to Section 222(c) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Criterion (2) has not been met
because the workers did not produce an article or supply a
service that was used in the production of an article or the
supply of a service by a firm whose workers are currently
eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance on the basis
of that article or service.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f), have not been met
because the workers' firm 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 Carolina Telephone
and Telegraph Company LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Embarq
Corporation, a subsidiary of CenturyLink, Inc., New Bern Call
Center, New Bern, North Carolina, 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 16th day of June, 2010

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





- 2 -