DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-75,162

PISGAH YARN AND DYEING COMPANY
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM MANPOWER, INC.
OLD FORT, NORTH CAROLINA

Notice of Revised Determination
on Reconsideration

On May 16, 2011, the Department issued a Notice of Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the
workers and former workers of Pisgah Yarn & Dyeing Company, Old
Fort, North Carolina (subject firm) to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance. The Department’s Notice was published in the Federal
Register on May 25, 2011 (76 FR 30392). Workers are engaged in
employment related to the production of cotton yarn. The worker
group includes on-site leased workers from Manpower, Inc.
During the reconsideration investigation, the Department
received new information that revealed that there has been an
acquisition from a foreign country by the workers’ firm of
production of like or directly competitive articles.
Criterion I has been met because a significant number or
proportion of workers at the subject firm have become totally or
partially separated or are threatened with such separation.
Criterion II has been met because there has been an
acquisition from a foreign country by the workers’ firm of
production of articles that are like or directly competitive with
those produced by the subject firm.
Criterion III has been met because the acquisition of cotton
yarn contributed importantly to the workers’ separation or threat
of separation at the subject firm.
Conclusion
After careful review of the additional facts obtained on
reconsideration, I determine that workers and former workers of the
subject firm, who are engaged in employment related to the
production of cotton yarn, 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 Pisgah Yarn & Dyeing Company, including on-
site leased workers from Manpower, Inc., Old Fort, North
Carolina, who became totally or partially separated from
employment on or after January 28, 2010, through two years
from the date of this revised 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 28th day of June, 2011

/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-75,162

PISGAH YARN AND DYEING COMPANY
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM MANPOWER, INC.
OLD FORT, NORTH CAROLINA

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 2, 2011 by a company official on behalf of
workers of Pisgah Yarn & Dyeing Company, Old Fort, North Carolina
(Pisgah Yarn & Dyeing Company). The workers are engaged in
employment related to the production of cotton yarn used for raft
trade. The worker group includes on-site leased workers from
Manpower, Inc.
The petition states “Pisgah . . . is being sold to Canadian
based company. Production is being shifted to a foreign country.”
The investigation included communications with the petitioner
and appropriate company official(s) regarding information
pertaining to the worker group.
With respect to Section 222(a) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that workers of Pisgah Yarn & Dyeing Company do not meet
the criteria for certification.
With respect to Section 222(a) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that Criterion II has not been met because there was no
shift to/acquisition from a foreign country by Pisgah Yarn &
Dyeing Company. A shift of production by the purchasing firm
cannot be the basis for certification because the Trade Act of
1974, as amended, requires that the “workers’ firm” (Pisgah Yarn
and Dyeing Company) shifted production to another country.
Further, while the dollar value of sales and production at Pisgah
Yarn & Dyeing Company decreased insignificantly in 2010 from 2009
levels, the quantity of sales and production at Pisgah Yarn &
Dyeing Company increased in 2010 from 2009 levels.
With respect to Section 222(c) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that Criterion II has not been met because the subject
firm is neither a Supplier nor a Downstream Producer to a firm
that employed a worker group eligible to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance. Further, sales to Pisgah Yarn & Dyeing
Company’s major customers increased in 2010 from 2009 levels.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f), have not been met because
Pisgah Yarn & Dyeing Company has not been identified by name in an
affirmative finding of injury by the U.S. International Trade
Commission.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the
investigation, I determine that workers of Pisgah Yarn & Dyeing
Company, Old Fort, North Carolina, who were engaged in employment
related to the production of cotton yarn, 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, 2011


/s/Del Min Amy Chen_______
DEL MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance




- 7 -