DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-82,663

BELDEN, INC.
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM ADECCO
HORSEHEADS, NEW YORK

Notice of Revised Determination
on Reconsideration


The initial investigation, instituted on April 18, 2013,
resulted in a negative determination, issued on June 14, 2013, that
was based on the Department’s finding of no shift in production by
Belden, Inc., Horseheads, New York (subject firm) to a foreign
country and neither subject firm nor customer imports. The
Department’s Notice of negative determination was published in the
Federal Register on July 2, 2013 (78 FR 39776).
Workers of the subject firm are engaged in activity related to
the production and assembly of coaxial cable connectors and parts,
and are not separately identifiable by article produced. The
worker group includes on-site leased workers from Adecco.
During the reconsideration investigation, the Department
confirmed previously-submitted information and received new
information which revealed that the subject firm shifted to a
foreign country a portion of the production of articles like or
directly competitive with the coaxial cable connectors and parts
produced at the subject firm.

Conclusion
After careful review of the additional facts obtained during
the reconsideration investigation, I determine that workers of
Belden, Inc., Horseheads, New York, who are/were engaged in
employment related to the production of coaxial cable connectors
and parts, 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 Belden, Inc., including on-site leased
workers from Adecco, Horseheads, New York, who became totally or
partially separated from employment on or after April 16,
2012, through two years from the date of this 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 December, 2013


/s/ Michael W. Jaffe
______________________________
MICHAEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistanc




U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-82,663

BELDEN, INC.
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM ADECCO
HORSEHEADS, NEW YORK

Notice of Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated July 8, 2013, workers requested
administrative reconsideration of the negative determination
regarding workers’ eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA) applicable to workers and former workers of
the subject firm. The determination was issued on June 14,
2013 and the Notice of Determination was published in the
Federal Register on July 2, 2013 (78 FR 39776). The subject
firm produces coaxial cable connectors and related parts.

The initial investigation resulted in a negative determination
based on the findings that there was no increase in imports by
the workers’ firm or its customers, nor was there a foreign
shift or acquisition by the workers’ firm or its customers.

The request for reconsideration alleges, among other things,
that Belden has been outsourcing to China and Mexico for
twenty years, that the subject firm’s “splice connectors are
now almost solely produced in Asia, including . . . TBCF81”
and “In 2012, Belden bought PPC . . . PPC sources almost all
of its 350 million Drop-line connector components in China.”

The Department has carefully reviewed the request for
reconsideration and the existing record, and has determined
that the Department will conduct further investigation to
clarify key facts and to determine if the 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 8th day of August, 2013
/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-82,663

BELDEN, INC.
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM ADECCO
HORSEHEADS, NEW YORK

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 April 18, 2013 by a group of workers on behalf of workers
of Belden, Inc., Horseheads, New York (hereafter referred to as
“Belden” or the subject firm). The workers’ firm is engaged in
activities related to the production of coaxial cable connectors
and parts. The workers are not separately identifiable by product
line.
The subject worker group includes on-site leased workers from
Adecco.
The petitioners alleged that the subject firm acquired a
competitor that imports articles like or directly competitive
with the articles produced by the workers, and that such imports
contributed to worker separations.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the petitioner, the workers’ firm and a major
customer of the subject firm.
“Increased imports means that imports have increased either
absolutely or relative to domestic production compared to a
representative base period. The representative base period shall
be one year consisting of the four quarters immediately preceding
the date which is twelve months prior to the date of the
petition.” 29 CFR 90.2
Because the petition is dated April 16, 2013, the period of
investigation is April 2012 through March 2013 and the
representative base period is April 2011 through March 2012.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles like or directly competitive with those
produced by the workers have not increased during the relevant
period. Belden did not import coaxial cable connectors and/or
parts or articles like or directly competitive during the
relevant period.
The Department surveyed a major customer of the subject
firm. The survey revealed that the customer did not increase
import purchases of coaxial cable connectors and/or parts or
articles like or directly competitive during a time period in
which the subject firm experienced a decline in sales.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the subject firm did not shift the
production of coaxial cable connectors and/or parts, or like or
directly competitive articles, to a foreign country or acquire
coaxial cable connectors and/or parts, or like or directly
competitive articles, from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Belden is not 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).
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 publicly
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 Belden, Inc., including on-


site leased workers from Adecco, Horseheads, New York, to apply
for adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. on this 14th day of June, 2013

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








- 9 -