DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-75,183

REYNOLDS FOOD PACKAGING LLC
A SUBSIDIARY OF REYNOLDS GROUP HOLDING LIMITED
GROVE CITY, PENNSYLVANIA

Notice of Revised Determination
on Reconsideration

On June 6, 2011, the Department of Labor (Department) issued a
Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)
applicable to workers and former workers of Reynolds Food
Packaging LLC, a subsidiary of Reynolds Group Holding Limited,
Grove City, Pennsylvania (subject firm). Workers at the subject
firm are engaged in employment related to the production of
disposable food service containers and bulk sheet.
During the reconsideration investigation, the Department
received new information that revealed that there has been a shift
in a portion of production of disposable food service containers
and bulk sheet by the subject firm to a foreign country.
Criterion I has been met because a significant number or
proportion of the workers in the workers’ firm have become
totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become
totally or partially separated.
Criterion II has been met because there has been a shift in
production of disposable food service containers and bulk sheet by
the subject firm to a foreign country.
Criterion III has been met because the shift in production to
a foreign country contributed importantly to worker group
separations at the subject firm.
Conclusion
After careful review of the additional facts obtained on
reconsideration, I determine that workers and former workers of the
subject firm, who are engaged in employment related to the
production of disposable food service containers or bulk sheet,
meet the worker group certification criteria under Section 222(a)
of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a). In accordance with Section 223 of
the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273, I make the following certification:
"All workers of Reynolds Food Packaging LLC, a subsidiary of
Reynolds Group Holding Limited, Grove City, Pennsylvania,
who became totally or partially separated from employment on
or after January 26, 2010, through two years from the date of
this revised certification, 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 in Washington, D.C., this 26th day of August, 2011

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


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-75,183

REYNOLDS FOOD PACKAGING LLC
A SUBSIDIARY OF REYNOLDS GROUP HOLDING LIMITED
GROVE CITY, PENNSYLVANIA

Notice of Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated May 27, 2011, the United Steel, Paper,
and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied-Industrial and
Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, requested
administrative reconsideration of the negative determination
regarding workers’ eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA) applicable to workers and former workers of
Reynolds Food Packaging, LLC, a subsidiary of Reynolds Group
Holding Limited, Grove City, Pennsylvania (subject firm).
The negative determination was issued on April 21, 2011. The
Department’s Notice of Determination was published in the Federal
Register on May 3, 2011 (76 FR 24917). The workers are engaged in
activities related to the production of plastic containers, paper
products and foil.
The negative determination was based on the findings that
imports of like or directly competitive articles have not
increased and there has not been a shift in production to a
foreign country by the workers’ firm, and that the worker
separations are not attributable to increased imports or a shift
in production to a foreign country.
Rather, the investigation confirmed that the separations are
attributable to a shift in production from the Grove City,
Pennsylvania facility to other locations within the United
States.
With respect to Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. §
2272(c), the investigation revealed that criterion II has not been
met because the firm is not a Supplier or Downstream Producer to a
firm with a TAA-certified worker group.
Finally, the worker 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 International Trade Commission.
In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner stated that
“there has been a significant increase in imports of the articles
produced by the subject firm and of articles that directly
incorporate component parts produced by Reynolds Grove City. See
attachment (“Imports of Plastics Film and Sheet”) . . . Reynolds
Food Packaging has ceased extruding plastic sheet at Grove City
and replaced Grove City production of this product with imported
extruded plastics from Octal Petrochemical PET and APET Sheet
Plant, located in Oman.”
The petitioner also cited data from the U.S. Census Bureau
International Trade Statistics, stating that “imports of non-
reinforced plastics including plastic sheet have increased a
total of 558.4% from 2007 to 2010. Reynolds Food Packaging’s
importation of plastic sheet from Octal Petrochemical in Oman
has, therefore, resulted in the direct loss of production jobs at
Reynolds Grove City.”
The petitioner also stated that “Reynolds Food Packaging has
shifted production of articles formerly produced by Reynolds
Grove City to a foreign country. In November of 2010, Reynolds
Food Packaging acquired Pactiv Corporation and began to source
products previously manufactured at the Reynolds Grove City from
Pactiv’s foreign suppliers.”
The Department 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 petitioning workers meet the eligibility requirements of the
Trade Act of 1974, as amended.
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 6th day of June, 2011
/s/ Del Min Amy Chen
_______________________________
DEL MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
4510-FN-P


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-75,183

REYNOLDS FOOD PACKAGING, LLC
A SUBSIDIARY OF REYNOLDS GROUP HOLDING LIMITED
GROVE CITY, PENNSYLVANIA

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 February 8, 2011 on behalf of workers of Reynolds Food
Packaging, LLC, a subsidiary of Reynolds Group Holding Limited,
Grove City, Pennsylvania. The workers produce plastic
containers, paper products and foil.
The petitioners alleged that machinery was shifted to
Mexico. The investigation included analysis of data provided by
the workers’ firm.
With respect to Section 222(a) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that criterion II has not been met because imports of
articles like or directly competitive with the articles produced
by the firm have not increased and there has not been a shift in
production to a foreign country by the workers’ firm. Criterion
III has not been met because the worker separations are not
attributable to increased imports or a shift in production to a
foreign country. Rather, the investigation confirmed that the
separations are attributable to a shift in production from the
Grove City, Pennsylvania facility to other locations within the
United States.
With respect to Section 222(c) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that criterion II has not been met because the firm is not
a Supplier or Downstream Producer to a firm with a TAA-certified
worker group.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f), have not been satisfied
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 Reynolds Food
Packaging, LLC, a subsidiary of Reynolds Group Holding Limited,
Grove City, Pennsylvania, who produce plastic containers, paper
products and foil, 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 21st day of April, 2011


/s/Michael W. Jaffe____________
MICHAEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance





- 2 -