DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-60,197

C & C SMITH LUMBER COMPANY, INC.
SUMMERHILL, PENNSYLVANIA

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated November 29, 2006, 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 denial notice was signed on
November 2, 2006, and published in the Federal Register on
November 22, 2006 (71 FR 67650).
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 petition for the workers of C & C Smith Lumber Company,
Inc., Summerhill, Pennsylvania engaged in production of furniture
parts was denied because the “contributed importantly” group
eligibility requirement of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974,
as amended, was not met, nor was there a shift in production from
that firm to a foreign country. The “contributed importantly”
test is generally demonstrated through a survey of the workers’
firm’s customers. The survey revealed no imports of furniture
parts in 2004, 2005 and January through September 2006. The
subject firm did not import furniture parts nor did they shift
production to a foreign country during the relevant period.
The petitioner states that the affected workers lost their
jobs as a direct result of a loss of customers in the furniture
industry. The petitioner alleges that major declining customers
of the subject firm which manufacture furniture decreased
purchases of various furniture parts and components from the C &
C Smith Lumber Company, Inc., Summerhill, Pennsylvania because
their business was in its turn negatively impacted by increased
imports of furniture. Therefore, the petitioner concludes that
because sales and production of furniture parts at the subject
firm have been negatively impacted by increasing presence of
foreign imports of furniture on the market, workers of the
subject firm should be eligible for TAA.
In order to establish import impact, the Department must
consider imports that are like or directly competitive with those
produced at the subject firm. The Department conducted a survey
of the subject firm’s major declining customers regarding their
purchases of furniture parts and components. The survey revealed
that the declining customers did not increase their imports of
furniture parts and components during the relevant period.
Imports of furniture cannot be considered like or directly
competitive with furniture parts, such as hardwood furniture
squares and stair parts, produced by C & C Smith Lumber Company,
Inc., Summerhill, Pennsylvania and imports of furniture are not
relevant in this investigation.
Upon further review of the previous investigation and
further contact with the company official, the Department
requested an additional list of customers in order to conduct a
fuller investigation to determine whether there were any imports
of furniture parts and components during the relevant time
period.
The Department conducted a further survey of the additional
customers regarding their purchases of furniture parts. The
survey revealed that none of the respondents reported imports of
furniture parts during the relevant time period.
Moreover, the subject firm does not import furniture parts
and components and did not shift production of furniture parts
and components abroad.
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 at Washington, D.C., day 19th of January, 2007.


/s/ Elliott S. Kushner


ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance


4510-30-P


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-60,197

C & C SMITH LUMBER COMPANY, INC.
SUMMERHILL, PENNSYLVANIA

Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended (19 USC 2273), the Department of Labor herein presents the
results of an investigation regarding certification of eligibility
to apply for worker adjustment assistance. The group eligibility
requirements for directly-impacted (primary) workers under Section
222(a) the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, can be satisfied in
either of two ways:
I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following must be satisfied:
A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm,
have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. the sales or production, or both, of such firm or
subdivision have decreased absolutely; and
C. increased imports of articles like or directly competitive
with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have
contributed importantly to such workers’ separation or
threat of separation and to the decline in sales or
production of such firm or subdivision; or



II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the following must be satisfied:

A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm
firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. there has been a shift in production by such workers’ firm
or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or
directly competitive with articles which are produced by
such firm or subdivision; and

C. One of the following must be satisfied:
1. the country to which the workers’ firm has shifted
production of the articles is a party to a free trade
agreement with the United States;
2. the country to which the workers’ firm has shifted
production of the articles is a beneficiary country
under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth
and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic
Recovery Act; or
3. there has been or is likely to be an increase in
imports of articles that are like or directly
competitive with articles which are or were produced
by such firm or subdivision.

The investigation was initiated in response to a petition
received on October 3, 2006, filed by a company official on behalf
of workers of C & C Smith Lumber Company, Inc., Summerhill,
Pennsylvania. Workers at the subject firm produce furniture parts
(e.g. hardwood furniture squares and stair parts); they are not
separately identifiable by articles produced.
The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C) and
(a)(2)(B)(II.B) were not met.
The investigation revealed that the subject firm did not
import furniture parts (e.g. hardwood furniture squares and stair
parts) during 2004, 2005, or January through September 2006 nor did
it shift production to a foreign country.

The Department of Labor surveyed the subject firm’s major
declining customers regarding their purchases of furniture parts
(e.g. hardwood furniture squares and stair parts) during 2004, 2005
and January through September 2006 over the corresponding 2005
period. The survey revealed that the subject firm's major declining
customers did not import furniture parts (e.g. hardwood furniture
squares and stair parts) during the relevant period.
Since the workers manufactured articles that are incorporated
into further production the Department examined if the workers are
eligible for TAA under secondary impact.
In order to make an affirmative determination and issue a
certification of eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance,
the following group eligibility requirements under Section 222(b)
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 (or subdivision) is a supplier or
downstream producer to a firm (or subdivision) that
employed a group of workers who received a certification
of eligibility to apply for trade adjustment assistance
benefits and such supply or production is related to the
article that was the basis for such certification; and

(3) either—

(A) the workers’ firm is a supplier and the component
parts it supplied for the firm (or subdivision) 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
(or subdivision) described in paragraph (2) contributed
importantly to the workers’ separation or threat of
separation.

The investigation revealed that criterion (3) has not been
met.
The investigation revealed that a subject firm customer using
furniture parts as a component in the production of household
furniture was certified eligible for trade adjustment assistance
based on “increased customer imports.” However, the customer
accounted for a negligible amount of the subject firm’s sales
during 2004, 2005 and January through September 2006. None of the
other customers were under existing certification during the
relevant period.
In addition, in accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of
1974 (26 USC 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor herein
presents the results of its investigation regarding certification
of eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance
(ATAA) for older workers.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of
eligibility to apply for ATAA, the worker group must be certified
eligible to apply for trade adjustment assistance (TAA). Since the
workers are denied eligibility to apply for TAA, the workers cannot
be certified eligible for ATAA.


Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in this
investigation, I determine that all workers of C & C Smith Lumber
Company, Inc., Summerhill, Pennsylvania are denied eligibility to
apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act
of 1974 and alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section
246 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 2nd day of November 2006


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





- 4 -