Petitioner Type: State
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 05/10/2011
Most Recent Update: 08/17/2011
Determination Date: 08/17/2011
Expiration Date:
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-80,172
BURNER SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL
CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE
Notice of Negative Determination
on Reconsideration
The initial investigation, initiated May 10, 2011, resulted in
a negative determination, issued on August 17, 2011, that was based
on the finding that Criterion (1) has not been met because a
significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers’
firm, have not become totally or partially separated, nor are they
threatened to become totally or partially separated. Rather, only
one worker was separated or threatened with separation. The
determination was applicable to workers and former workers of
Burner Systems International, Chattanooga, Tennessee. The notice
of negative determination was published in the Federal Register on
September 2, 2011 (76 FR 54795). The workers’ firm is engaged in
activities related to the supply of on-site field support
services. The separated worker acted as liaison between the firm
and customer, managed the schedule for manufacturing, and
facilitated communication between the firm and customer.
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 provided during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department of Labor determines that the
subject firm did not employ a worker group during the relevant
period.
With respect to Section 222(a) and Section 222(b) of the Act,
the investigation revealed that Criterion (1) has not been met
because only one worker was totally or partially separated, or
threatened with such separation. The regulation defines a
significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers’
firm to mean at least three workers in a worker group fewer than
fifty workers, or five percent in a workforce of fifty or more
workers. The subject firm did not meet this threshold level.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied since 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 Burner
Systems International, Chattanooga, Tennessee, to apply for
adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act,
19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 15th day of December, 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-80,172
BURNER SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL
CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE
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
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 10, 2011, by a state agency representative on behalf
of workers of Burner Systems International, Chattanooga,
Tennessee. The workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to
gas component systems.
The petitioner claimed that the loss of a customer
contributed to worker separations on-site at that customer
located in Springfield, Tennessee.
With respect to Section 222(a) and Section 222(b) of the Act,
the investigation revealed that Criterion (1) has not been met
because a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers’ firm have not become totally or partially separated, nor
are a significant number or proportion of workers threatened to
become totally or partially separated. Rather, the investigation
confirmed that one worker has been separated and no additional
separations are threatened.
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 workers of Burner Systems
International, Chattanooga, Tennessee, who are engaged in
activities related to gas component systems 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 17th day of August, 2011
/s/Michael W. Jaffe
______________________________
MICHAEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
- 7 -
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-80,172
BURNER SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL
CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE
Notice of Negative Determination
on Reconsideration
The initial investigation, initiated May 10, 2011, resulted in
a negative determination, issued on August 17, 2011, that was based
on the finding that Criterion (1) has not been met because a
significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers’
firm, have not become totally or partially separated, nor are they
threatened to become totally or partially separated. Rather, only
one worker was separated or threatened with separation. The
determination was applicable to workers and former workers of
Burner Systems International, Chattanooga, Tennessee. The notice
of negative determination was published in the Federal Register on
September 2, 2011 (76 FR 54795). The workers’ firm is engaged in
activities related to the supply of on-site field support
services. The separated worker acted as liaison between the firm
and customer, managed the schedule for manufacturing, and
facilitated communication between the firm and customer.
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 provided during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department of Labor determines that the
subject firm did not employ a worker group during the relevant
period.
With respect to Section 222(a) and Section 222(b) of the Act,
the investigation revealed that Criterion (1) has not been met
because only one worker was totally or partially separated, or
threatened with such separation. The regulation defines a
significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers’
firm to mean at least three workers in a worker group fewer than
fifty workers, or five percent in a workforce of fifty or more
workers. The subject firm did not meet this threshold level.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied since 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 Burner
Systems International, Chattanooga, Tennessee, to apply for
adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act,
19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 15th day of December, 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-80,172
BURNER SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL
CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE
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
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 10, 2011, by a state agency representative on behalf
of workers of Burner Systems International, Chattanooga,
Tennessee. The workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to
gas component systems.
The petitioner claimed that the loss of a customer
contributed to worker separations on-site at that customer
located in Springfield, Tennessee.
With respect to Section 222(a) and Section 222(b) of the Act,
the investigation revealed that Criterion (1) has not been met
because a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers’ firm have not become totally or partially separated, nor
are a significant number or proportion of workers threatened to
become totally or partially separated. Rather, the investigation
confirmed that one worker has been separated and no additional
separations are threatened.
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 workers of Burner Systems
International, Chattanooga, Tennessee, who are engaged in
activities related to gas component systems 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 17th day of August, 2011
/s/Michael W. Jaffe
______________________________
MICHAEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
- 7 -