DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,051

VEC TECHNOLOGY, LLC
A SUBSIDIARY OF J&D HOLDINGS, LLC
GREENVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA

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 February 5, 2014,
resulted in a negative determination, issued on March 21, 2014,
that was based on worker separations were not attributable to
increased imports, shifts to a foreign country, or any secondary
impacts. An Application for Reconsideration was dated on April 10,
2014 and denied on April 28, 2014. The determination was
applicable to workers and former workers of VEC Technology, LLC, a
subsidiary of J&D Holdings, LLC, Greenville, Pennsylvania. The
workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to the production of
engine hoods, engine cover tooling and parts for forklifts and
drainage trenches.
Based on information reviewed during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department of Labor determines that the criteria
were not met.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not increase imports of
articles like or directly competitive with the engine hoods, engine
cover tooling and parts for forklifts and drainage trenches,
produced by the workers of the subject firm. The firm reported no
imports in 2012, 2013, or during the month of January 2014.
Additionally, a customer survey revealed no increased imports of
engine hoods, engine cover tooling or parts during the
aforementioned periods or imports of finished articles
incorporating engine hoods, engine cover tooling or parts.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the production
of engine hoods, engine cover tooling and parts for forklifts and
drainage trenches, or a like or directly competitive article to a
foreign country or acquire engine hoods, engine cover tooling and
parts for forklifts and drainage trenches, 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 VEC Technology, LLC, a subsidiary of
J&D Holdings, LLC, Greenville, Pennsylvania is not a Supplier or
acts as a 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, 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 VEC
Technology, LLC, a subsidiary of J&D Holdings, LLC, Greenville,
Pennsylvania, who are engaged in employment related to the
production of engine hoods, engine cover tooling and parts for
forklifts and drainage trenches, to apply for adjustment
assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. §
2273.

Signed in Washington, D.C. this 8th day of March, 2016.

/s/Hope D. Kinglock
______________________________
HOPE D. KINGLOCK
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance




DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,051

VEC TECHNOLOGY, LLC
A SUBSIDIARY OF J&D HOLDINGS, LLC
GREENVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated April 10, 2014, a company official requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department of Labor's negative
determination regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance,
applicable to workers and former workers of VEC Technology, LLC, a subsidiary
of J&D Holdings, LLC, Greenville, Pennsylvania (subject firm). The
determination was issued on March 21, 2014. The Department’s notice of
determination was published in the Federal Register on April 8, 2014
(79 FR 19385).
The workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to the
production of engine hoods, engine cover tooling, and parts for
forklifts and drainage trenches.
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c) reconsideration may be granted under the
following circumstances:
(1) If it appears on the basis of facts not previously
considered that the determination complained of
was erroneous;
(2) If it appears that the determination complained of
was based on a mistake in the determination of facts
not previously considered; or
(3) If in the opinion of the Certifying Officer, a mis-
interpretation of facts or of the law justified
reconsideration of the decision.
The negative determination of the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)
petition filed on behalf of workers at the subject firm was based on
the Department’s findings that the subject firm did not shift
production of engine hoods and associated articles to a foreign country
and that neither the subject firm nor its customers imported engine hoods
and associated articles, or articles like or directly competitive, during
the relevant time period.
In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner asserts that the
workers of the subject firm should be eligible to apply for TAA because
loss of business that occurred prior to the relevant time period continues
to impact the operations of the subject firm.
29 CFR 90.16(b)(3) establishes that the Department find “increases
(absolute or relative) of imports of articles like or directly competitive
with articles produced by such workers’ firm or an appropriate subdivision
thereof . . . .”
29 CFR 90.2 states “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.”
In the case at hand, the petition date is February 4, 2014. Therefore, “the
twelve months prior” date is February 4, 2013, and the “representative base
period” is January 2012 through December 2012. Consequently, imports during
January 2013 through December 2013 must have increased from January 2012
through December 2012 levels for the Department to determine that the
regulatory definition of “increased imports” is met.
The Department’s investigation, which included an inquiry of both subject
firm and customer imports, did not reveal increased imports of articles like
or directly competitive with those produced at the subject firm during the
relevant period.
The petitioner did not supply facts not previously considered; nor provide
additional documentation indicating that there was either 1) a mistake in the
determination of facts not previously considered or 2) a misinterpretation of

facts or of the law justifying reconsideration of the initial determination.
Based on these findings, the Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has
not been met.
Conclusion
After careful review of the application and investigative findings, I conclude
that there has been no error or misinterpretation of the law or of the facts
which would justify reconsideration of the Department of Labor's prior decision.
Accordingly, the application is denied.

Signed in Washington, D.C., this 28th day of April, 2014

/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-85,051

VEC TECHNOLOGY, LLC
A SUBSIDIARY OF J&D HOLDINGS, LLC
GREENVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA

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 February 5, 2014 by a company official on behalf of
workers of VEC Technology, LLC, a subsidiary of J&D Holdings,
LLC, Greenville, Pennsylvania. The workers' firm is engaged in
activities related to the production of engine hoods, engine
cover tooling and parts for forklifts and drainage trenches.
The petitioner alleged that the subject firm had
experienced a decrease in volume of business with Volvo and
that Volvo has set up manufacturing in Brazil and China.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers' firm and the firm's greatest
declining customers.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the workers' firm did not shift the
production of engine hoods, engine cover tooling and parts for
forklifts and drainage trenches to a foreign country or acquire
engine hoods, engine cover tooling and parts for forklifts and
drainage trenches from a foreign country during the relevant
period of 2012, 2013, and in January 2014.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports of engine hoods, engine
cover tooling and parts for forklifts and drainage trenches
have not increased from 2012 to 2013 or during January 2014 in
contrast to January 2013. The U.S. Department of Labor
surveyed the subject firm's greatest declining customers
regarding their imports of engine hoods, engine cover tooling
and parts for forklifts and drainage trenches during the period
under investigation. The surveys did not reveal any increased
customer imports of engine hoods, engine cover tooling and parts
for forklifts and drainage trenches. Moreover, the investigation
revealed that Volvo did not shift its production of engine
covers to Brazil or China. Instead, Volvo is purchasing engine
covers from other domestic companies and the engine covers are
wholly manufactured in the U.S. Furthermore, although Volvo
operates manufacturing facilities in foreign countries, Volvo's
North American market is distinct from the South American market
and Volvo's foreign operations did not contribute importantly to
the worker separations at the subject firm.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that VEC Technology, LLC 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).
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 all workers of VEC Technology,
LLC, a subsidiary of J&D Holdings, LLC, Greenville,
Pennsylvania engaged in activities related to production of
engine hoods, engine cover tooling and parts for forklifts and
drainage trenches 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 21st day of March, 2014.


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