DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,387

JOHN DEERE HARVESTER WORKS
A SUBSIDIARY OF DEERE & COMPANY
EAST MOLINE, ILLINOIS

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 June 23, 2014, resulted
in a negative determination, issued on September 22, 2014, that was
based on no increased imports of articles, no shifts in production
to foreign country, and not qualifying as a secondary worker. The
determination was applicable to workers and former workers of John
Deere Harvester Works, a subsidiary of Deere & Company, East
Moline, Illinois. The workers’ firm is engaged in activities
related to the production of combine harvesters and harvesting
equipment.
Based on information reviewed during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department of Labor determines that the
requirements for certification have not been met.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports did not increase of articles
like or directly competitive with the combine harvesters and
harvesting equipment. The articles produced, were not components
parts, and therefore imports of finished articles with like or
directly competitive component parts were not considered.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the production
of the combine harvesters or harvesting equipment or a like or
directly competitive article to a foreign country or acquire the
combine harvesters or harvesting equipment 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 John Deere Harvester Works, a
subsidiary of Deere & Company 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 John Deere
Harvester Works, a subsidiary of Deere & Company, East Moline,
Illinois, who were engaged in employment related to the production
of combine harvesters and harvesting equipment 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-85,387

JOHNE DEERE HARVESTER WORKS
A SUBSIDIARY OF DEERE & COMPANY
EAST MOLINE, ILLINOIS

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 June 20, 2014 by the International Union, United
Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of
America, Local 865 on behalf of workers of John Deere Harvester
Works, a subsidiary of Deere & Company, East Moline, Illinois.
The workers' firm is engaged in activities related to the
production of combine harvesters and harvesting equipment.
The petitioner alleged that 1) Combines are being built at
an increasing rate in Russia, Brazil and China rather than the
US; 2) the continuation and result of a decentralization of
component part manufacturing including Mexico, Spain and China;
3) A decrease in US grain price futures and US grown grain
exportation tot the global market as foreign crop production has
continued to expand and gain market share, resulting in low
grain price; 4)downward pressure on corn futures as federal
subsidies for ethanol production ended in 2011; 5) the
expiration of "bonus depreciation" at the end of 2013; 6)
increased machine cost due to environmental regulations.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers' firm and the U.S. International
Trade Commission.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports of articles like or
directly competitive with combine harvesters and harvesting
equipment have not increased from 2012 to 2013 or from 2013 to
2014.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the workers' firm did not shift the
production of articles like or directly competitive with combine
harvesters and harvesting equipment to a country with a free-
trade agreement or to a beneficiary country. In addition, the
investigation confirmed that although the workers' firm has
shifted production to other foreign countries, there is not a
likelihood of increased imports.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that John Deere Harvester Works, a
subsidiary of Deere & Company, East Moline, Illinois 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 John Deere
Harvester Works, a subsidiary of Deere & Company, East Moline,
Illinois engaged in activities related to the production of
combine harvesters and harvesting equipment 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 22nd day of September, 2014

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