DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-91,495

MOLYCORP METALS AND ALLOYS, INC.
MOUNTAIN PASS, CALIFORNIA

Notice of Revised Determination
on Reconsideration

On August 18, 2016, the Department of Labor issued an
Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration
for the workers and former workers of Molycorp Metals and Alloys,
Inc., Mountain Pass, California (Molycorp Metals and Alloys,
Inc.). The notice was published in the Federal Register on October
22, 2018 (83 FR 53302).
In the application for reconsideration, the petitioner
requested that the Department reevaluate the significance of the
subject firm’s sales of sodium hydroxide, bleach, and hydrochloric
acid to domestic customers. The request includes supporting
documentation which was reviewed during the initial investigation.
During the course of the reconsideration investigation, the
Department reviewed and considered newly obtained data.
The reconsideration investigation revealed that section
222(a)(1) has been met because a significant number or proportion
of the workers in such workers’ firm have become totally or
partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or
partially separated.
The reconsideration investigation revealed that section
222(a)(2)(A)(i) has been met because the sales and/or production
of rare earth alloys have decreased absolutely.
The reconsideration investigation revealed that section
222(a)(2)(A)(ii) has been met because aggregate U.S. imports of
articles like or directly competitive with the articles produced
by Molycorp Metals and Alloys, Inc. have increased.
Finally, the reconsideration investigation revealed that
section 222(a)(2)(A)(iii) has been met because increased
aggregate U.S. imports articles like or directly competitive with
the articles produced by Molycorp Metals and Alloys, Inc.
contributed importantly to the worker group separations and
sales/production decline at Molycorp Metals and Alloys, Inc.
Conclusion
After careful review of the additional facts obtained on
reconsideration, I determine that workers of Molycorp Metals and
Alloys, Inc., Mountain Pass, California, who were engaged in
activities related to the production of rare earth alloys, meet the
worker group certification criteria under Section 222(a) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a). In accordance with Section 223 of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273, I make the following certification:
"All workers of Molycorp Metals and Alloys, Inc., Mountain
Pass, California, who became totally or partially separated
from employment on or after February 19, 2015, through two
years from the date of this certification, and all workers in
the group threatened with total or partial separation from
employment on date of certification through two years from the
date of certification, are eligible to apply for adjustment
assistance under Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade Act of
1974, as amended.”
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 9th day of January, 2019


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


U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-91,495

MOLYCORP METALS AND ALLOYS, INC.
MOUNTAIN PASS, CALIFORNIA

Notice of Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated May 24, 2016, the petitioner requested
administrative reconsideration of the negative determination
regarding workers’ eligibility to apply for worker adjustment
assistance applicable to workers and former workers of Molycorp
Metals and Alloys, Inc., Mountain Pass, California (subject
firm). The determination was issued on April 22, 2016. The
Department’s Notice of determination was published in the Federal
Register on May 24, 2016 (81 FR 32782).
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
misinterpretation of facts or of the law justified
reconsideration of the decision.
The initial investigation resulted in a negative determination
based on the findings that increased imports did not contribute
importantly to worker separations and that the subject firm is an
exporting firm with all customers in foreign countries.
The application requested that the Department reconsider
the significance of the subject firm’s sales of sodium
hydroxide, bleach, and hydrochloric acid to domestic customers.
The Department has carefully reviewed the request for
reconsideration and the existing record, and has determined that
the Department will conduct further investigation to determine if
the workers meet the eligibility requirements of the Trade Act of
1974, as amended.
Conclusion
After careful review of the application, I conclude that the
claim is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the
U.S. Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is,
therefore, granted.

Signed at Washington, D.C., this 18th day of August, 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-91,495

MOLYCORP METALS AND ALLOYS, INC.
MOUNTAIN PASS, CALIFORNIA

Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker 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), (b)
or (e) of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), (b) and
(e). 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 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 the workers' firm
must have become totally or partially separated or be
threatened with total or partial separation.

(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) (I) imports of articles or services like or directly
competitive with articles or services produced or
supplied by the workers' firm have increased, OR
(II)(aa) imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles into which the
component part produced by the workers' firm was
directly incorporated have increased; OR
(II)(bb) imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles which are produced
directly using the services supplied by the
workers' firm have increased; OR
(III) imports of articles directly incorporating
component parts not produced in the U.S. that are
like or directly competitive with the article
into which the component part produced by the
workers' firm was directly incorporated have
increased; AND
(iii) the increase in imports 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.

(B) Shift in Production or Supply Path:
(i)(I) there has been a shift by the workers' firm to a
foreign country in the production of articles or
supply of services like or directly competitive with
those produced/supplied by the workers' firm; OR
(II) there has been an acquisition from a foreign
country by the workers' firm of articles/services that
are like or directly competitive with those
produced/supplied by the workers' firm; and
(ii) the shift described in clause (i)(I) or the
acquisition of articles or services described in
clause (i)(II) contributed importantly to such
workers' separation or threat of separation.

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 or
service 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."
Workers of a firm may also be considered eligible if they
are publicly identified by name by the International Trade
Commission as a member of a domestic industry in an
investigation resulting in a category of determination that is
listed in Section 222(e) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(e).
The group eligibility requirements for workers of a firm
under Section 222(e) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(e), can be
satisfied if the following criteria are met:
(1) the workers' firm is publicly identified by name by
the International Trade Commission as a member of a
domestic industry in an investigation resulting in--
(A) an affirmative determination of serious injury or
threat thereof under section 202(b)(1);
(B) an affirmative determination of market disruption
or threat thereof under section 421(b)(1); or
(C) an affirmative final determination of material
injury or threat thereof under section
705(b)(1)(A) or 735(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of
1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b)(1)(A) and
1673d(b)(1)(A));

(2) the petition is filed during the 1-year period
beginning on the date on which--
(A) a summary of the report submitted to the
President by the International Trade Commission
under section 202(f)(1) with respect to the
affirmative determination described in paragraph
(1)(A) is published in the Federal Register under
section 202(f)(3); or
(B) notice of an affirmative determination described
in subparagraph (1) is published in the Federal
Register; and

(3) the workers have become totally or partially
separated from the workers' firm within--
(A) the 1-year period described in paragraph (2); or
(B) notwithstanding section 223(b), the 1-year
period preceding the 1-year period described in
paragraph (2).

The investigation was initiated in response to a petition
filed on February 22, 2016 by three workers on behalf of
workers of Molycorp Metals and Alloys, Inc. (MMA), Mountain
Pass, California (herein known as "Molycorp Metals and Alloys,
Inc." or "workers' firm"). The workers' firm is engaged in
activities related to the production of rare earth alloys.
The petitioners allege, "The company filed bankruptcy."
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the petitioner, the workers' firm, and the U.S.
Geological Survey.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports of articles like or
directly competitive with articles produced by Molycorp Metals
and Alloys, Inc. did not contribute importantly to worker
separations. The workers' firm is an exporter of rare earth
alloys, with all their customers based in a foreign country for
use within their respective markets. Increases in aggregate
U.S. imports would not have contributed importantly to worker
separations.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the
production of rare earth alloys or a like or directly
competitive article to a foreign country or acquire rare earth
alloys 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 Molycorp Metals and Alloys, Inc.
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 Molycorp Metals and Alloys, Inc.
does not act 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 of the facts obtained in the
investigation, 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 Molycorp Metals and
Alloys, Inc., Mountain Pass, California engaged in activities
related to the production of rare earth alloys to apply for
adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.

Signed in Washington, D.C. this 22nd day of April 2016.

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