DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,488

SIG SAUER, INC.
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM
KEY PARTNERS, INC. JVT ADVISORS, KBW FINANCIAL STAFFING &
RECRUITING, MCINTOSH STAFFING RESOURCES, PETROCELLI WORKFORCE
SOLUTIONS, SUMMIT TECHNICAL SERVICES, AND TECHNICAL NEEDS
NEWINGTON, NEW HAMPSHIRE

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 on August 18, 2014,
resulted in a negative determination, issued on October 3, 2014, that
was based on the Department’s finding of no increased imports of
small firearms during the relevant period; that the subject firm did
not shift production of small firearms to a foreign country; and that
the subject firm is neither a Supplier nor a Downstream Producer. The
determination was applicable to workers and former workers of Sig
Sauer, Inc., including on-site leased workers from Key Partners,
Inc., JVT Advisors, KBW Financial Staffing & Recruiting, McIntosh
Staffing Resources, Petrocelli Workforce Solutions, Summit
Technical Services, and Technical Needs, Newington, New Hampshire
(Sig Sauer). The workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to
the production of small firearms.
Based on information reviewed during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department determines that the requirements for
certification have not been met.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii), the investigation
revealed no increased imports, during the relevant period, of small
firearms, or like or directly competitive articles, by the subject
firm or its major declining customers.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Sig Sauer did not shift production of
small firearms, or like or directly competitive articles, to a
foreign country or acquire such production from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Sig Sauer is neither a Supplier to, nor
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).
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section 222(e)
of the Act, have not been satisfied because 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 Sig Sauer,
Inc., including on-site leased workers from Key Partners, Inc., JVT
Advisors, KBW Financial Staffing & Recruiting, McIntosh Staffing
Resources, Petrocelli Workforce Solutions, Summit Technical
Services, and Technical Needs, Newington, New Hampshire, to apply
for adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act,
19 U.S.C. § 2273.

Signed in Washington, D.C. this 31st day of March, 2016

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






DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,488

SIG SAUER, INC.
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM
KEY PARTNERS, JVT ADVISORS, KBW FINANCIAL STAFFING & RECRUITING,
MCINTOSH STAFFING RESOURCES, PETROCELLI WORKFORCE SOLUTIONS,
SUMMIT TECHNICAL SERVICES, AND TECHNICAL NEEDS
NEWINGTON, NEW HAMPSHIRE


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 August 18, 2014 on behalf of workers of Sig Sauer,
Inc., including on-site leased workers from Key Partners,
Inc., JVT Advisors, KBW Financial Staffing & Recruiting,
McIntosh Staffing Resources, Petrocelli Workforce Solutions,
Summit Technical Services, and Technical Needs, Newington, New
Hampshire ("Sig Sauer" or "subject firm"). The workers' firm is
engaged in activities related to the production of small
firearms.
The petition states, "Former World Headquarters and factory
in Eckernforde Germany will be closed by end of 2015. Loss of
international sales" and identified three on-line articles. The
petition did not include supporting documents or attachments.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers' firm, the subject firm's major
declining customers, and publically available sources.
During the investigation, the Department determined that
the subject firm is located in Newington, New Hampshire (and
not Portsmouth, New Hampshire as identified in the petition).
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Sig Sauer did not shift production
of small firearms, or like or directly competitive articles,
to a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii), the
investigation revealed no increased imports of small firearms,
or like or directly competitive articles, by the subject firm
or its major declining customers during the relevant period.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
Department did not receive information that Sig Sauer is 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).
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 Sig Sauer, Inc.,
including on-site leased workers from Key Partners, Inc., JVT
Advisors, KBW Financial Staffing & Recruiting, McIntosh
Staffing Resources, Petrocelli Workforce Solutions, Summit
Technical Services, and Technical Needs, Newington, New
Hampshire, 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 3rd day of October, 2014

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