DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-73,416

DESOTO MILLS LLC
FORT PAYNE, ALABAMA

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated June 1, 2010, a company official
requested administrative reconsideration of the Department's
negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former
workers of the subject firm. The determination was signed on
April 28, 2010, and the Notice of determination was published in
the Federal Register on May 28, 2010 (75 FR 30072).
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 mis-
interpretation of facts or of the law justified
reconsideration of the decision.
The negative determination applicable to workers and former
workers at Desoto Mills, LLC, a Subsidiary of Fruit of the Loom,
Fort Payne, Alabama, was based on the findings that there was
neither an increase in imports nor a shift/acquisition by the
workers’ firm that contributed importantly to the worker group
separations; the subject workers are not secondarily-affected
workers; and the workers’ firm was not identified in an
affirmative finding of injury by the International Trade
Commission.
In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner stated
that the steady decline in sales and production at the subject
firm “has caused the entire distribution and administrative
support operation to be consolidated into existing Fruit of the
Loom . . . locations outside the Desoto Mills Plant.” The
petitioner compares the situation at this location with similar
shifts of production and subsequent downsizing of administrative
and distribution staff that have resulted in TAA certifications
(TA-W-63,167, TA-W-71,012, TA-W-72,253, and TA-W-73,414).
The initial investigation revealed that there was a shift
of production of socks from the subject location in 2006 and
2007, and that, following the shift, distribution work at the
Fort Payne, Alabama facility continued with the workers
processing foreign-produced socks.
Additional information provided by the applicant revealed
that, since March 2007, the subject facility has not supported a
domestic, affiliated production facility and no significant
degree of the supply of distribution services has been shifted
to a foreign country.
The petitioner did not supply facts not previously
considered; nor provide additional documentation indicating that
there was either 1) a mistake in the determination of facts not
previously considered or 2) a misinterpretation of facts or of
the law justifying reconsideration of the initial determination.
After careful review of the request for reconsideration,
the Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not been met.
Conclusion
After review of the application and investigative findings,
I conclude that there has been no error or misinterpretation of
the law or of the facts which would justify reconsideration of
the Department of Labor's prior decision. Accordingly, the
application is denied.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 23rd day of June, 2010

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

4510-FN-P


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-73,416

DESOTO MILLS, LLC
A SUBSIDIARY OF FRUIT OF THE LOOM
FORT PAYNE, ALABAMA

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.

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(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f).
The group eligibility requirements for workers of a firm
under Section 222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f), 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)(1), 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 3, 2010 by a company official on behalf of
workers of Desoto Mills, LLC, a subsidiary of Fruit of a Loom,
Fort Payne, Alabama (Desoto). The workers are engaged in
activities related to the distribution of socks produced at an
affiliated Honduras production site.
The petitioner/company official alleged that employee
separations are a result of a consolidation of domestic
manufacturing support operations. The investigation included
obtaining information from the subject firm.
With respect to Section 222(a) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Criterion II has not been met
because there was no increase in imports, shift, or acquisition
by the workers’ firm. The investigation revealed that the
subject firm had shifted production of socks to Honduras in
October 2006 through March 2007. That shift did not contribute
importantly to the employee separations relevant to the current
investigation.
With respect to Section 222(c) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that 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 or supply of a service that was the
basis for TAA-Certification. Furthermore, the socks distributed
by the subject firm are produced by a foreign affiliate. The
employment activities of the workers are not related to domestic
production.
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 Desoto Mills, LLC, a
subsidiary of Fruit of a Loom, Fort Payne, Alabama who are
engaged in activities related to the distribution of socks
produced at an affiliated Honduras production site 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 28th day of April, 2010

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



- 9 -