Navistar Truck Development and Technology Center, a Subsidiary of Navistar International Corporation Truck Division, Fort Wayne, IN; Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

Del Min Amy Chen
Federal Register
September 23, 2011

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 185 (Friday, September 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 59166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24478]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-75,151]


Navistar Truck Development and Technology Center, a Subsidiary of 
Navistar International Corporation Truck Division, Fort Wayne, IN; 
Notice of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for 
Reconsideration

    By application dated May 31, 2011, a petitioner requested 
administrative reconsideration of the negative determination regarding 
workers' eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) 
applicable to workers and former workers of Navistar Truck Development 
and Technology Center, a Subsidiary of Navistar International 
Corporation, Truck Division, Fort Wayne, Indiana (subject firm). The 
negative determination was issued on April 13, 2011. The Department's 
Notice of Determination was published in the Federal Register on May 2, 
2011 (76 FR 24536). The workers are engaged in activities related to 
the supply of truck body engineering and design services.
    The negative determination was based on the findings that, with 
respect to Section 222(a) of the Act, Criterion II has not been met 
because imports of engineering and design services have not increased 
and there has not been a shift of engineering and design services by 
the workers' firm to a foreign country. Further, Criterion III has not 
been met because the worker separations are not attributable to 
increased imports or a shift of services to a foreign country. Rather, 
the investigation confirmed that the worker separations are 
attributable to a consolidation and shift of engineering and design 
services to another facility located within the United States.
    With respect to Section 222(c) of the Act, the investigation 
revealed that Criterion (2) has not been met because the firm is not a 
Supplier or Downstream Producer to a firm with a TAA-certified worker 
group.
    In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner stated that 
``Navistar has not only increased the amount of work that they 
outsource, they have increased the number of countries that they 
outsource that work to.'' The petitioner referenced multiple 
attachments and stated that the subject firm has joint ventures with 
China, India, Brazil, and Europe. The petitioner also stated that 
``This chart shows Fort Wayne employees doing export work under the 
heading of Mexico, Brazil, and Export Engineering * * *. The work is 
now clearly outsourced to India, Brazil, and China according to the 
organizational chart.''
    The petitioner also referenced an attachment and stated ``two job 
postings for Chief Engineers to work in China to oversee Engineering 
and Design work.'' The petitioner also referenced an attachment and 
stated ``shows new work being sent to a Company in Romania * * * shows 
the name of the on-site coordinator, whose primary responsibility is to 
prepare and send work via the internet for his counterparts in Romania 
to perform * * * shows a listing of work that has been transferred to 
Romania for completion.'' The petitioner also referenced an attachment 
and stated ``shows the increasing amount of work being sent to 
Brazil.''
    The petitioner also referenced an attachment and stated ``shows an 
email with an employee break down of the increase in the amount of work 
being sent to India from a single department. This department sent out 
4 jobs to India in 2010, and has already sent nine jobs to India in the 
first four months of 2011.'' The petitioner also referenced an 
attachment and stated ``details how IT Services group was partially 
replaced by a call center/support staff in India.''
    The petitioner also referenced an attachment and stated ``Navistar 
answered the Community's questions about their intentions for the 
property they were acquiring for the move. * * * This is a headcount 
reduction across the nation, made possible by the Global Outsourcing. * 
* * '' The petitioner also referenced an attachment and stated 
``Earlier Exhibits detailed that these countries are doing their own 
engineering and development work, they not simply `points of sale.'. ''
    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 
petitioning 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, DC, this 15th day of September, 2011.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2011-24478 Filed 9-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P