DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-91,957

JOY GLOBAL, INC.
A DIVISION OF JOY GLOBAL UNDERGROUND MINING, LLC
EIGHTY FOUR, PENNSYLVANIA

Notice of Negative Determination
on Reconsideration

On November 15, 2016, the Department of Labor issued an
Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration
applicable to workers and former workers of Joy Global, Inc., a
Division of Joy Global Underground Mining, LLC, Eighty Four,
Pennsylvania (Joy Global-Eighty Four). Joy Global, Inc. is engaged
in activities related to the production of mining machinery and
equipment. Prior to its closure, Joy Global-Eighty Four warehoused
mining machinery and equipment produced by Joy Global, Inc.
The request for reconsideration asserts that the Eighty Four,
Pennsylvania “facility was a Supplier or Downstream Producer of
material and services to the following Joy Global locations that
have been certified for Trade Adjustment Assistance” and identified
four (4) locations: Franklin, Pennsylvania (TA-W-91,145); Reno,
Pennsylvania (TA-W-91,145B); Brook Park, Ohio (TA-W-91,007); and
Virginia, Minnesota (TA-W-91,252). The request further states that
“the loss of the aforementioned business accounted for a minimum of
33 percent of the firm’s former business” and that the loss of
business resulted in the closure of Joy Global-Eighty Four and,
consequently, the workers’ separations.
During the reconsideration investigation, the Department
contacted the worker who requested administrative reconsideration
and carefully reviewed both previously-submitted information and
new information submitted regarding Joy Global-Eighty Four.
During the reconsideration investigation, the Department
confirmed that the subject firm did not shift the supply of
warehousing services, or like or directly competitive services, to
another country or acquire the supply of such services from a
foreign country. The additional information clarified that Joy
Global-Eighty Four warehoused overflow material from a specific
domestic warehouse/distribution center; that the domestic facility
that Joy Global-Eighty Four supported is not located in Franklin,
Pennsylvania, Reno, Pennsylvania, Brook Park, Ohio, or and
Virginia, Minnesota; and that services provided by Joy Global-
Eighty Four was shifted to other existing domestic warehouses.
Petition TA-W-91,007 (Brook Park, Ohio) resulted in a
certification based on the Department’s findings that the facility
was engaged in the production of underground mining equipment, that
production shifted to a foreign country, and that the shift of
production contributed importantly to worker group separations at
that facility.
Petitions TA-W-91,145 (Franklin, Pennsylvania) and TA-W-
91,145B (Reno, Pennsylvania) resulted in certifications based on
the Department’s findings that the facilities are engaged in the
production of underground mining equipment, that production shifted
to a foreign country, and that the shift of production contributed
importantly to worker group separations at those facilities.
Petition TA-W-91,252 (Virginia, Minnesota) resulted in a
certification based in the Department’s findings that the facility
is engaged in the supply of OEM parts and the supply of rebuilding,
repairing, and servicing of mining equipment services, that this
facility is a Supplier, and that workers at this facility meet the
criteria as secondarily-affected, per the Trade Act, as amended.
The Eighty Four, Pennsylvania facility does not meet the
definition of a Supplier because it does not supply directly to
another firm component parts for articles, or services, used in the
production of articles, or in the supply of services, that was the
basis for the certification of the Brook Park, Ohio facility, the
Franklin, Pennsylvania facility, or the Reno, Pennsylvania
facility. The warehousing service is supplied post-production.
The Eighty Four, Pennsylvania facility does not meet the
definition of a Downstream Producer because it does not perform
additional, value-added production processes or services directly
for another firm for articles or services that was the basis for
the certification of the Brook Park, Ohio facility, the Franklin,
Pennsylvania facility, or the Reno, Pennsylvania facility. The
warehousing service is not a value-added process or service.
Value-added production processes or services include final
assembly, finishing, testing, packaging, or maintenance or
transportation services.
The certification of petition TA-W-91,252 cannot be the basis
for certification of another petition because the statute requires
that the firm to which a Supplier or Downstream Producer supplies
services must employ a worker group eligible to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) under Section 222(a) of the Trade Act,
and the worker group covered under TA-W-91,252 is eligible to apply
for TAA under Section 222(b) of the Act, as amended.
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 Joy Global,
Inc., a Division of Joy Global Underground Mining, LLC, Eighty
Four, Pennsylvania, to apply for adjustment assistance, in
accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.

Signed in Washington, D.C. on this 7th day of April, 2017

/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-91,957

JOY GLOBAL INC.
A DIVISION OF JOY GLOBAL UNDERGROUND MINING, LLC
EIGHTY FOUR, PENNSYLVANIA

Notice of Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated October 13, 2016 the Department of Labor
(Department) received a request for administrative reconsideration
of the Department’s Notice of negative determination regarding
workers’ eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)
applicable to workers and former workers of Joy Global Inc., a
Division of Joy Global Underground Mining, LLC, Eighty Four,
Pennsylvania (subject firm). The determination was issued on
September 21, 2016. The subject firm is engage in activities
related to the supply of mining machinery and equipment
distribution services.
The request for reconsideration asserts that the worker’ 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.S 2272 (a), and such supply or
production is related to the article or service that was the basis
for such certification.
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 16th day of November, 2016

/s/Del-Min Amy Chen
_______________________________
DEL-MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
4510-FN-P





DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-91,957

JOY GLOBAL INC.
A DIVISION OF JOY GLOBAL UNDERGROUND MINING, LLC
EIGHTY FOUR, PENNSYLVANIA

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 June 24, 2016 by three workers on behalf of workers of
Joy Global Inc., a division of Joy Global Undermining, LLC,
Eighty Four, Pennsylvania (Joy Global). The subject worker
group is engaged in activities related to the supply of mining
machinery and equipment distribution services.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers' firm.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports of services like or
directly competitive with the services supplied by Joy Global
have not increased.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the supply of
mining machinery and equipment distribution services or like
or directly competitive services to a foreign country or
acquire mining machinery and equipment distribution services
or like or directly competitive services from a foreign
country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Joy Global 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 Joy Global 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 Joy Global Inc., a
division of Joy Global Underground Mining, LLC, Eighty Four,
Pennsylvania, engaged in activities related to the supply of
mining machinery and equipment distribution services to apply
for adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.

Signed in Washington, D.C. this 21st day of September 2016.

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