Petitioner Type: Company
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 10/26/2011
Most Recent Update: 01/06/2012
Determination Date: 01/06/2012
Expiration Date:
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-81,017
INTEGRITY BUILDING SYSTEMS, INC.
MILTON, 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. § 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.
(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.
(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)(1), the 1-year
period preceding the 1-year period described in
paragraph (2).
The investigation was initiated in response to a worker petition filed on October 26, 2011 on behalf of workers of Integrity Building Systems, Inc., Milton, Pennsylvania. The workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to the production of modular homes.
The petitioners allege that the cost of raw material is increasing. The former workers claim that foreign banking interests, and foreign oil interests affect the price of various building products. During the course of the investigation, information was collected from the workers’ firm, the petitioner, and official government sources.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the investigation revealed that Integrity Building Systems, Inc., Milton, Pennsylvania, did not increase imports of articles like or directly competitive with modular homes in 2009, 2010, or 2011. Similarly, U.S. aggregate imports of articles like or directly competitive with modular homes produced by Integrity Building Systems, Inc., have not increased during the period under investigation.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the investigation revealed that Integrity Building Systems, Inc., Milton, Pennsylvania, has not shifted production of articles like or directly competitive with modular homes to a foreign country and has not acquired articles like or directly competitive with modular homes from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the investigation revealed that Integrity Building Systems, Inc., Milton, Pennsylvania, is not 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).
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section 222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied because Integrity Building Systems, Inc., Milton, Pennsylvania, 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 Integrity Building Systems, Inc., Milton, Pennsylvania, engaged in activities related to the production of modular homes to apply for adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 6th day of January, 2012
/s/ Michael W. Jaffe
______________________________
MICHAEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-81,017
INTEGRITY BUILDING SYSTEMS, INC.
MILTON, 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. § 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.
(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.
(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)(1), the 1-year
period preceding the 1-year period described in
paragraph (2).
The investigation was initiated in response to a worker petition filed on October 26, 2011 on behalf of workers of Integrity Building Systems, Inc., Milton, Pennsylvania. The workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to the production of modular homes.
The petitioners allege that the cost of raw material is increasing. The former workers claim that foreign banking interests, and foreign oil interests affect the price of various building products. During the course of the investigation, information was collected from the workers’ firm, the petitioner, and official government sources.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the investigation revealed that Integrity Building Systems, Inc., Milton, Pennsylvania, did not increase imports of articles like or directly competitive with modular homes in 2009, 2010, or 2011. Similarly, U.S. aggregate imports of articles like or directly competitive with modular homes produced by Integrity Building Systems, Inc., have not increased during the period under investigation.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the investigation revealed that Integrity Building Systems, Inc., Milton, Pennsylvania, has not shifted production of articles like or directly competitive with modular homes to a foreign country and has not acquired articles like or directly competitive with modular homes from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the investigation revealed that Integrity Building Systems, Inc., Milton, Pennsylvania, is not 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).
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section 222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied because Integrity Building Systems, Inc., Milton, Pennsylvania, 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 Integrity Building Systems, Inc., Milton, Pennsylvania, engaged in activities related to the production of modular homes to apply for adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 6th day of January, 2012
/s/ Michael W. Jaffe
______________________________
MICHAEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance