DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-81,791

FASCO
A DIVISION OF REGAL BELOIT CORPORATION
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM PENMAC PERSONNEL SERVICES
ELDON, MISSOURI

Notice of Revised Determination
on Reconsideration

On September 14, 2012, the Department of Labor issued a Notice
of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration applicable to workers and former workers of Fasco, a
division of Regal Beloit Corporation, Eldon, Missouri (subject firm).
The subject worker group includes workers engaged in activities
related to warehousing and distribution of electric motors, as well
as engineering, customer service and information technology (IT)
services. Workers are not separately identifiable by service
supplied. The worker group includes on-site leased workers from
Penmac Personnel Services.
Section 222(a)(1) has been met because a significant number or
proportion of the workers in the subject firm have become totally or
partially separated, or are threatened with such separation.
Based on information provided during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department determines that worker separations at
the subject firm are related to a shift in a portion of the supply of
engineering services (or like or directly competitive services) to a
foreign country and that the shift in the supply of these services
contributed importantly to worker separations at the subject firm.
Conclusion
After careful review of the additional facts obtained during the
reconsideration investigation, I determine that workers of Fasco, a
division of Regal Beloit Corporation, Eldon, Missouri, who were
engaged in employment related to the supply of warehousing,
distribution, engineering, customer service and information
technology services, 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 Fasco, a division of Regal Beloit Corporation,
including on-site leased workers from Penmac Personnel Services,
Eldon, Missouri who became totally or partially separated from
employment on or after July 9, 2011, through two years from the
date of certification, and all workers in the group threatened
with total or partial separation from employment on the 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 at Washington, D.C., this 5th day of November, 2012
/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-81,791

FASCO
A DIVISION OF REGAL BELOIT CORPORATION
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM
PENMAC PERSONNEL SERVICES
ELDON, MISSOURI

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), (b) or (e)
of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), (b) and (e). 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. § 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.

(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) (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.
(iii) the increase in imports 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.

(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
(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; and
(ii) the shift described in clause (i)(I) or the acquisition of
articles or services described in clause (i)(II)
contributed importantly to such workers’ separation or
threat of separation.

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 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.

Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), defines the
terms “Supplier” and “Downstream Producer.”
Workers of a firm may also be considered eligible if they are
publicly identified by name by the International Trade Commission as
a member of a domestic industry in an investigation resulting in a
category of determination that is listed in Section 222(e) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(e).
The group eligibility requirements for workers of a firm under
Section 222(e) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(e), 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 July 11, 2012 by a Company Official on behalf of workers of Fasco,
a division of Regal Beloit Corporation, Eldon, Missouri (Fasco). The
worker group is also comprised of on-site leased workers from Penmac
Personnel Services. The workers’ firm is a warehouse and distribution
center for electric motors. The subject worker group includes workers
engaged in activities related to the supply of warehousing and
distribution of electric motors, as well as engineering, customer
service and IT services.
The petitioner alleged that the upcoming closure of the subject
firm and related separations are connected to the shift of production
of electric motors to Mexico that happened in 2009.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers’ firm.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that worker separations were not related to an
increase of imports of services like or directly competitive with the
services supplied by Fasco. The warehousing and distribution,
engineering, customer service and IT services were supplied
specifically and exclusively to the firm’s own customers.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the supply of
warehousing and distribution, engineering, customer service and IT
services or a like or directly competitive service to a foreign
country or acquire warehousing and distribution, engineering,
customer service and IT services or a like or directly competitive
service from a foreign country. The investigation revealed that the
firm had extra capacity upon a domestic acquisition and decided to
consolidate the subject firm’s operations with two other U.S.
locations.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that Fasco 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 Fasco 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 either because Criterion (1) has
not been met 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 of the facts obtained in the investigation,
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 Fasco, a division of Regal Beloit
Corporation, including on-site leased workers from Penmac Personnel
Services, Eldon, Missouri, engaged in activities related to the
supply of warehousing and distribution of electric motor,
engineering, customer service and IT services to apply for adjustment
assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. §
2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 7th day of August, 2012.


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









- 3 -