U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-71,108

AIR WAY AUTOMATION, INC.
GRAYLING, MICHIGAN

Notice of Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated August 20, 2009, a company official
requested administrative reconsideration of the negative
determination regarding workers’ eligibility to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA) applicable to workers and former
workers of the subject firm. The determination was issued on
August 3, 2009. The Notice of Determination was published in the
Federal Register on September 22, 2009 (74 FR 48304).
The initial investigation resulted in a negative
determination based on the finding that imports of parts feeding
and assembly equipment did not contribute importantly to worker
separations at the subject firm and no shift of production to a
foreign source occurred.
In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner provided
additional information regarding customers of the subject firm
and increasing foreign competition in the bidding process.
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.
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 21st day of October 2009.


/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
_________________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance

4510-FN-P


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-71,108

AIR WAY AUTOMATION, INC.
GRAYLING, MICHIGAN

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), (c) or
(f) of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), (c), (f). 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:
I. The first criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(1) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2282(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.

II. 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.
(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
(i)(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.

III. The third criterion requires that the increase in imports or
shift/acquisition must have contributed importantly to the
workers’ separation or threat of separation. See Sections
222(a)(2)(A)(iii) and 222(a)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act, 19 U.S.C.
§§ 2272(a)(2)(A)(iii), 2272(a)(2)(B)(ii).

Section 222(d) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(d), defines the
terms “Supplier” and “Downstream Producer.” For the Department to
issue a secondary worker certification under Section 222(c) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), 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.

The investigation was initiated in response to a petition
filed on June 9, 2009 by a company official on behalf of workers
of Air Way Automation, Inc., Grayling, Michigan. The workers
produce parts feeding and assembly equipment. This equipment is
used by customers on assembly lines in the assembly of
automobiles and not as components of automobiles themselves.
The petitioner alleges that increased foreign competition for
bids of available work resulted in decreased sales and worker
separations.
The investigation included collection of data from the subject
firms and a survey of the subject firm’s largest declining
customer.
With respect to Section 222(a) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that the workers of Air Way Automation, Inc., Grayling,
Michigan did not meet the criterion for certification.
Criterion II has not been met because there was no increase in
imports or shift/acquisition by the subject firm of articles like
or directly competitive with the parts feeding and assembly
equipment produced in Grayling, Michigan.
In addition, a survey of the major declining customer of the
subject firm revealed that this customer did not import articles
like or directly competitive with parts feeding and assembly
equipment during the relevant period.
With respect to Section 222(c) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that the workers of Airway Automation, Inc., Grayling,
Michigan did not meet the criteria for certification as secondarily
affected workers.
Criterion (2) has not been met because the workers did not
produce an article or supply a service that was used by a firm with
TAA-certified workers in the production of an article.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f), have not been satisfied
because the workers’ firm has not been identified in an affirmative
finding of injury by the ITC.


Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the
investigation, I determine that workers of Air Way Automation,
Inc., Grayling, Michigan who produce parts feeding and assembly
equipment are denied eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance
under Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 3rd day of August 2009


/s/Richard Church
______________________________
RICHARD CHURCH
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance






- 3 -