DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-80,145

TRUELOVE DENTAL LABORATORY, INC.
NORMAN, OKLAHOMA

Notice of Negative Determination
on Reconsideration

The initial investigation, initiated May 3, 2011, resulted in
a negative determination, issued on August 11, 2011, that was based
on the finding that the subject firm did not shift production to a
foreign country nor did the subject firm or its major declining
customers increase imports. The determination was applicable to
workers and former workers of Truelove Dental Laboratory, Inc.,
Norman, Oklahoma (subject firm). The notice of determination was
published in the Federal Register on September 2, 2011 (76 FR
54797). The workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to the
production of dental appliances (crowns and bridges).
As required by the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Extension
Act of 2011 (the TAAEA), the investigation into this petition was
reopened for a reconsideration investigation to apply the
requirements for worker group eligibility under chapter 2 of title
II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended by the TAAEA, to the facts
of this petition.
Based on information reviewed during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department of Labor determines that worker group
at the subject firm does not meet the criteria for certification.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed no increased imports by the subject firm
or its customers of articles like or directly competitive with
the dental appliances produced by Truelove Dental Laboratory,
Inc., Norman, Oklahoma.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the subject firm did not shift the
production of dental appliances (or like or directly competitive
articles) to a foreign country or acquire the production of such
articles from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Truelove Dental Laboratory, Inc. is
not a Supplier 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).
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Truelove Dental Laboratory, Inc. does
not act as a Downstream Producer to a firm (or subdivision,
whichever is applicable) 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).
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied because the workers’
firm has not been publically identified by name by the
International Trade Commission as a member of a domestic industry
in an investigation resulting in an affirmative finding of serious
injury, market disruption, or material injury, or threat thereof.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that the requirements of
Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272, have not been met and,
therefore, deny the petition for group eligibility of Truelove
Dental Laboratory, Inc., Norman, Oklahoma, to apply for adjustment
assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. §
2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 25th day of November, 2011


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




DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-80,145

TRUELOVE DENTAL LABORATORY, INC.
NORMAN, OKLAHOMA

Negative Determinations 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 (“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) and (b)
of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a) and (b). 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:
(1) The first criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(1) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a)(1)) requires that 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
(2) 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) imports of articles like or directly competitive with
articles produced by such firm or subdivision have
increased; and
(iii) the increase described in clause (ii) contributed
importantly to such workers’ separation or threat of
separation and to the decline in the sales or
production of such firm or subdivision.

(B) Shift in Production Path:
(i) 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
(ii)(I) 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;
(II)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
(III)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.

For the Department to issue a secondary worker certification
under Section 222(b) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(b), 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 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.

Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), defines the
terms “Supplier” and “Downstream Producer.”
The investigation was initiated in response to a petition
filed on May 3, 2011 on behalf of workers of Truelove Dental
Laboratory, Inc., Norman, Oklahoma (Truelove Dental Lab). The
workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to the production of
dental crowns and bridges.
The petitioners alleged that, “Dentists (their customers) are
ordering from overseas because they can get the product for cheaper
prices than we are able to complete with.”
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers’ firm, a sample of the firm’s major
declining customers, and from the United States International
Trade Commission and Department of Commerce.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Truelove Dental Lab did not shift the
production of dental crowns and bridges to a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Truelove Dental Lab did not increase
imports of dental crowns and bridges in 2009, 2010, and January
through April 2011. In response to the workers’ allegations that
dentists are ordering from overseas, the Department of Labor
surveyed a sample of Truelove Dental Lab’s major declining
customers. The surveys revealed that Truelove Dental Lab’s major
declining customers are not importing articles like or directly
competitive with dental crowns and bridges during the relevant
period.
Data from the United States International Trade Commission
and United States Department of Commerce revealed decreasing
imports of articles like or directly competitive with dental
crowns and bridges during the relevant period. Furthermore,
United States exports of articles like or directly competitive
with dental crowns and bridges were increasing during the
relevant period.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Truelove Dental Lab is not a Supplier
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).
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Truelove Dental Lab that does not act
as a Downstream Producer to a firm (or subdivision, whichever is
applicable) 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), based on an increase in imports from, or a shift
in production to, Canada or Mexico.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of
eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance
(ATAA), the worker group must be certified eligible to apply for
trade adjustment assistance. 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 the
investigation, I determine that all workers of Truelove Dental
Laboratory, Inc., Norman, Oklahoma engaged in activities related
to the production of dental crowns and bridges are denied
eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of
the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, and are also denied eligibility
to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section
246 of the Trade Act of 1974, amended.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 11th day of August, 2011


/s/Hope D. Kinglock
______________________________
HOPE D. KINGLOCK
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance



- 3 -