U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-81,475

HUNTINGTON FOAM LLC
FORT SMITH, ARKANSAS

Notice of Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated May 21, 2012, the State Workforce Office
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 negative determination was issued
on May 16, 2012. Workers at the subject firm were engaged in
activities related to the production of expandable polystyrene.
The initial investigation resulted in a negative determination
based on the findings that the subject firm did not shift
production of polystyrene to a foreign country, nor did the subject
firm or its customers report and increased reliance of imports of
articles like or directly competitive with polystyrene.
The State has asserted that the subject firm supplied a
component part to a firm that employed a worker group eligible to
apply for TAA.
The Department has carefully reviewed the request for
reconsideration and the existing record and will conduct further
investigation to determine if the 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, D.C., this 8th day of August, 2012
/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-81,475

HUNTINGTON FOAM LLC
FORT SMITH, ARKANSAS

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 petition
filed on April 4, 2012 by a state workforce office on behalf of
workers of Huntington Foam LLC, Fort Smith, Arkansas (Huntington
Foam). The workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to the
production of expandable polystyrene.
The petitioner alleges the worker group under investigation is
a supplier to a firm whose workers are eligible to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA).
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers’ firm and the firm’s customer.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm and customers did not import
expandable polystyrene or articles like or directly competitive
with the articles produced by Huntington Foam.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the production
of expandable polystyrene or a like or directly competitive article
to a foreign country or acquire expandable polystyrene or a like or
directly competitive article from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Huntington Foam is not a Supplier 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). Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), defines
the term “Supplier” as “a firm that produces and supplies directly
to another firm component parts for articles, or services used in
the production of articles or in the supply of services, as the
case may be, that were the basis for a certification of eligibility
under subsection (a) [of Section 222 of the Act] of a group of
workers employed by such other firm.”
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Huntington Foam does not act as a
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). Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. §
2272(c), defines the term “Downstream Producer” as “a firm that
performs additional, value-added production processes or services
directly for another firm for articles or services with respect to
which a group of workers in such other firm has been certified
under subsection (a) [of Section 222 of the Act]” and defines the
term “value-added production processes or services” to “include
final assembly, finishing, testing, packaging, or maintenance or
transportation services.” Huntington Foam sends the expandable
polystyrene to the customer to package at their facility.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied either because Criterion
(1) has not been met since the workers’ firm has not been
publically 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 Huntington Foam LLC, Fort
Smith, Arkansas engaged in activities related to the production of
expandable polystyrene to apply for adjustment assistance, in
accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 16th day of May, 2012

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






- 3 -