DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,403

BAE SYSTEMS AEROSPACE & DEFENSE GROUP, INC.
PROTECTION SYSTEMS DIVISION
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM THE JOB SHOP
MCKEE, KENTUCKY

TA-W-85,403A

BAE SYSTEMS AEROSPACE & DEFENSE GROUP, INC.
PROTECTION SYSTEMS DIVISON
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM THE JOB SHOP
ANNVILLE, KENTUCKY

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 27, 2014, resulted
in a negative determination, issued on July 25, 2014, that was
based on no shift in production and/or increased imports. The
determination was applicable to workers and former workers of BAE
Systems Aerospace & Defense Group, Inc., Protection Systems
Division, McKee, Kentucky (TA-W-85,403), and BAE Systems
Aerospace & Defense Group, Inc., Protection Systems Division,
Annville, Kentucky (TA-W-85,403A). Herein the subject firm will
be referred to as “BAE Systems Aerospace & Defense Group, Inc.”
The workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to the
production of Modular Lightweight Load Bearing Equipment (MOLLE)
for military personnel. The subject worker group includes on-site
leased workers from The Job Shop.
Based on information reviewed during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department of Labor determines that increased
imports, shifts in production to a foreign country, acquisition of
articles from a foreign country, an International Trade Commission
(ITC) import injury decision, or secondary impact from a firm whose
workers were certified eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA) did not result in worker separations.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports of articles like or directly
competitive with the articles produced by BAE Systems Aerospace and
Defense Group, Inc. have not increased. Rather, the investigation
confirmed that BAE Systems Aerospace and Defense Group, Inc. lost a
bid for a contract to a firm located in Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is
a territory of the United States with Commonwealth Status, not a
foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the production
of Modular Lightweight Load Bearing Equipment (MOLLE) for
military personnel or a like or directly competitive article to a
foreign country or acquire Modular Lightweight Load Bearing
Equipment (MOLLE) for military personnel 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 BAE Systems Aerospace and Defense
Group, Inc. is not a Supplier or 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 BAE Systems
Aerospace & Defense Group, Inc., Protection Systems Division,
including on-site leased workers from The Job Shop, McKee,
Kentucky (TA-W-85,403), and BAE Systems Aerospace & Defense
Group, Inc., Protection Systems Division, including on-site
leased workers from The Job Shop, Annville, Kentucky (TA-W-
85,403A), who were engaged in employment related to the production
of Modular Lightweight Load Bearing Equipment (MOLLE) for
military personnel to apply for adjustment assistance, in
accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 4th day of December, 2015


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







DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,403

BAE SYSTEMS AEROSPACE & DEFENSE GROUP, INC.
PROTECTION SYSTEMS DIVISION
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM
THE JOB SHOP
MCKEE, KENTUCKY

TA-W-85,403A

BAE SYSTEMS AEROSPACE & DEFENSE GROUP, INC.
PROTECTION SYSTEMS DIVISON
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM
THE JOB SHOP
ANNVILLE, KENTUCKY

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 30, 2014 by a state workforce office on behalf of
workers of BAE Systems Aerospace & Defense Group, Inc.,
Protection Systems Division, McKee, Kentucky (TA-W-85,403),
and BAE Systems Aerospace & Defense Group, Inc., Protection
Systems Division, Annville, Kentucky (TA-W-85,403A) (BAE
Systems Aerospace & Defense Group, Inc.). The workers' firm is
engaged in activities related to the production of Modular
Lightweight Load Bearing Equipment (MOLLE) for military
personnel.
The petitioner alleges that, "Local Unemployment Office
was told the jobs were being moved to Puerto Rico."
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers' firm and from a former customer of
the firm.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that BAE Systems Aerospace and Defense
Group, Inc. has not shifted production of Modular Lightweight
Load bearing Equipment (MOLLE), to a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(iii), the
investigation revealed that imports of articles like or directly
competitive with the articles produced by BAE Systems Aerospace
and Defense Group, Inc. have not increased. Rather, the
investigation confirmed that BAE Systems Aerospace and Defense
Group, Inc. lost a bid for a contract to a firm located in
Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico is a Territory of the United States
with Commonwealth Status and is not a foreign country under
the Trade Act.
The investigation revealed that BAE Systems Aerospace and
Defense Group, Inc. is not a Supplier or 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).
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 BAE Systems
Aerospace & Defense Group, Inc., Protection Systems Division,
including on-site leased workers from The Job Shop, McKee,
Kentucky (TA-W-85,403), and BAE Systems Aerospace & Defense
Group, Inc., Protection Systems Division, including on-site
leased workers from The Job Shop, Annville, Kentucky (TA-W-
85,403A) 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 25th day of July 2014.

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