Denied
« back to search results

TAW-82519  /  Allegheny Ludlum, LLC (Walterboro, SC)

Petitioner Type: Workers
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 03/04/2013
Most Recent Update: 06/14/2013
Determination Date: 06/14/2013
Expiration Date:

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-82,519

ALLEGHENY LUDLUM, LLC
A SUBSIDIARY OF ALLEGHENY TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM STAFFMARK
WALTERBORO, SOUTH 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), (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 March 4, 2013 by workers of Allegheny Ludlum, LLC, a
subsidiary of Allegheny Technologies Incorporated, Walterboro,
South Carolina (Allegheny). Workers of Allegheny Ludlum, LLC,
Walterboro, South Carolina (the subject worker group) were
engaged in employment related to the production of coiled
stainless steel strips. The subject worker group includes on-
site leased workers from Staffmark.
The petition alleges a shift of production to Germany.
During the course of the investigation, petitioners were
contacted and information was collected from the workers' firm.
The investigation revealed that prior to the closure of the
Walterboro, South Carolina facility in April 2013, sales and
production at that facility increased.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that that Criterion (2)(A)(ii) has not been
met because imports of articles like or directly competitive with
coiled stainless steel strips produced by Allegheny Ludlum, LLC
have not increased during the relevant period.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Allegheny Ludlum, LLC did not shift
the production of coiled stainless steel strips, or like or
directly competitive articles, to a foreign country or acquire
the production of coiled stainless steel strips, or like or
directly competitive articles, from a foreign country. Rather,
production shifted to an upgraded domestic facility.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Allegheny Ludlum, LLC is not a
Supplier or 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).
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 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 Allegheny Ludlum, LLC, a
subsidiary of Allegheny Technologies Incorporated, Walterboro,
South Carolina, to apply for adjustment assistance, in accordance
with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 14th day of June, 2013


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