DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,571

VLOC, INC.
A SUBSIDIARY OF II-VI, INC.
TRINITY, FLORIDA

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).
VLOC, Inc., a subsidiary of II-VI, Inc., Trinity, Florida
(the subject firm) is engaged in activities related to the
production of optical components for the defense, aerospace and
securities industries.
The initial investigation, initiated on October 2, 2014,
resulted in a negative determination, issued on November 20, 2014,
that was based on the findings that the subject firm did not import
from a foreign country articles like or directive competitive with
optical components for the defense, aerospace and securities
industries produced by the workers of the subject firm nor did the
firm shift production of articles like or directly competitive with
optical components for the defense, aerospace and securities
industries to a foreign country.
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 the subject firm did not increase
imports of articles like or directly competitive with the optical
components for the defense, aerospace and securities industries
produced by the workers of the subject firm. Customer surveys were
not conducted because the articles produced by the workers at the
subject firm for their customers were required to be produced in
the United States under the International Traffic in Arms
Regulations (ITAR).
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the subject firm did not shift
production of optical components for the defense, aerospace and
securities industries, or a like or directly competitive article,
to a foreign country or acquire optical components for the
defense, aerospace and securities industries or a like or directly
competitive article, from a foreign country. The articles
produced by the workers at the subject firm for their customers
were required to be produced in the United States under ITAR.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that VLOC, Inc., a subsidiary of II-VI,
Inc., Trinity, Florida, 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), and 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 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 VLOC, Inc., a
subsidiary of II-VI, Inc., Trinity, Florida, to apply for
adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act,
19 U.S.C. § 2273.

Signed in Washington, D.C. this 17th day of February, 2016.

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




DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,571

VLOC, INC.
A SUBSIDIARY OF II-VI, INC.
TRINITY, FLORIDA


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 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 October 2, 2014 on behalf of workers of VLOC, Inc., a
subsidiary of II-VI, Inc., Trinity, Florida (subject firm).
The workers' firm is engaged in activities related to the
production of optical components for the defense aerospace and
securities industries.
The petitioners allege that the shift of the commercial
article production to another facility in the U.S. and
subsequent decline in purchased by the U.S. Defense Department
led to the worker separations.
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
production of optical components to a foreign country because
they are covered under the International Traffic in Arms
Regulations (ITAR).
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports of articles like or
directly competitive with those produced by the subject firm
have not increased during the relevant period. The articles
produced by the workers at the subject firm are required to be
produced in the United States under ITAR.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the subject firm 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 the subject firm that 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), 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. 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 VLOC, Inc., a
subsidiary of II-VI, Inc., Trinity, Florida, 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 20th day of November, 2014


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