DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,001

BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM CHEMICLAS, INC. (BICI)
A SUBSIDIARY OF BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM CORPORATION
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM
D&D MECHANICAL, INDUSTRIAL TURNAROUND,
SHS INTERNATIONAL AND VAVO STAFFING
PETERSBURG, VIRGINIA

Notice of Negative Determination
After Statutory Reconsideration

As required by the Trade Adjustment Assistance Reauthorization
Act of 2015 (TAARA 2015), which was enacted as Title IV of the
Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law No. 114-27,
section 405(a)(1)(A), 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 TAARA 2015, to the
facts of this petition (statutory reconsideration).
The initial investigation, initiated January 4, 2014, resulted
in a negative determination, issued on February 19, 2014, that was
based on no increase in imports and no shift in production. Based
on information reviewed during the reconsideration investigation,
the Department of Labor determines that the requirements for
certification have not been met. The determination was applicable
to workers and former workers of Boehringer Ingelheim Chemicals,
Inc., a subsidiary of Boehringer Ingelheim Corporation, including
on-site leased workers from D&D Mechanical, Industrial
Turnaround, SHS International, and VAVO Staffing, Petersburg,
Virginia (hereafter referred to “BICI”). The workers’ firm is
engaged in activities related to the production of active
pharmaceutical ingredients (API).
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not import articles like
or directly competitive with API.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the production
of API or a like or directly competitive article to a foreign
country or acquire API or a like or directly competitive article
from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that BICI 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 BICI 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 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, 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 Boehringer
Ingelheim Chemicals, Inc., a subsidiary of Boehringer Ingelheim
Corporation, including on-site leased workers from D&D
Mechanical, Industrial Turnaround, SHS International, and VAVO
Staffing, Petersburg, Virginia, who were engaged in employment
related to the production of API to apply for adjustment
assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. §
2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 29th day of January, 2016.

/s/Jessica R. Webster
______________________________
JESSICA R. WEBSTER
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,001

BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM CHEMICLAS, INC. (BICI)
A SUBSIDIARY OF BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM CORPORATION
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM
D&D MECHANICAL, INDUSTRIAL TURNAROUND,
SHS INTERNATIONAL, AND VAVO STAFFING
PETERSBURG, VIRGINIA

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 January 6, 2014 on behalf of workers of Boehringer
Ingelheim Chemicals, Inc. (BICI), a subsidiary of Boehringer
Ingelheim Corporation, including on-site leased workers from D&D
Mechanical, Industrial Turnaround, SHS International, and VAVO
Staffing, Petersburg, Virginia ("Boehringer"). The workers' firm
is engaged in activities related to the production of active
pharmaceutical ingredients for the pharmaceutical industry.
The petition stated that the workers' separations are due to
"business closing" and did not provide additional information or
supporting documents.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers' firm.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the subject firm did not shift the
production of active pharmaceutical ingredients, or a like or
directly competitive product, to a foreign country which is a
party to free trade agreement with the United States or a
beneficiary country under the African Growth and Opportunity
Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii), the investigation
revealed no increased imports by Boehringer of active
pharmaceutical ingredients (or like or directly competitive
articles) during the relevant period. Because Boehringer
reported no declining external customers during the relevant
period, the Department did not conduct a customer survey.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Boehringer is not a Supplier to, or
act as a Downstream Producer for, 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 (TAA). 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 Boehringer
Ingelheim Chemicals, Inc. (BICI), a subsidiary of Boehringer
Ingelheim Corporation, including on-site leased workers from D&D
Mechanical, Industrial Turnaround, SHS International, and VAVO
Staffing, Petersburg, Virginia 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 19th day of February, 2014

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