Petitioner Type: Company
Impact Date:
Filed Date: 11/27/2007
Most Recent Update: 12/20/2007
Determination Date: 12/20/2007
Expiration Date:
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-62,498
DOUBLE D LOGGING
JOHN DAY, OREGON
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 (19 USC
2273), as amended, the Department of Labor herein presents the
results of an investigation regarding certification of eligibility
to apply for worker adjustment assistance as an adversely affected
secondary group.
An investigation was conducted in order to determine whether
the petitioning group of workers qualify as adversely affected
secondary workers as suppliers of component parts to a firm or
subdivision primarily affected by increased imports or a shift of
production abroad.
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 was initiated on November 27, 2007 in
response to a petition filed by a One-Stop Operator on behalf of
workers of Double D Logging, John Day, Oregon. The workers at the
subject firm are engaged in logging.
The investigation revealed that the criterion (2) was not met.
In order to meet the eligibility requirements of Section
222(b), workers of Double D Logging must supply components for
articles that were the basis for certifying the primary firm's
worker group. The investigation determined that the workers of the
firm to which Double D Logging supplied logs were certified
eligible to apply for adjustment assistance based on secondary
affects, not as workers of a primary firm. Therefore, there is no
basis for workers of Double D Logging to be certified as
secondarily affected.
Further investigation was conducted to determine if the group
eligibility requirements for directly-impacted (primary) workers
under Section 222(a) the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, could be
met. The requirements 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, 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 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 logs during 2005, 2006, or 2007, nor was there a shift
production to a foreign country.
The investigation further revealed that the subject firm's
major declining customer(s) did not import products like or
directly competitive with logs in 2005, 2006, or in January through
October 2007.
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 Double D Logging,
John Day, Oregon, are denied eligibility to apply for adjustment
assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also
denied eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment
assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 20th day of December, 2007
/s/Linda G. Poole
______________________________
LINGA G. POOLE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
Employment and Training Administration
TA-W-62,498
DOUBLE D LOGGING
JOHN DAY, OREGON
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 (19 USC
2273), as amended, the Department of Labor herein presents the
results of an investigation regarding certification of eligibility
to apply for worker adjustment assistance as an adversely affected
secondary group.
An investigation was conducted in order to determine whether
the petitioning group of workers qualify as adversely affected
secondary workers as suppliers of component parts to a firm or
subdivision primarily affected by increased imports or a shift of
production abroad.
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 was initiated on November 27, 2007 in
response to a petition filed by a One-Stop Operator on behalf of
workers of Double D Logging, John Day, Oregon. The workers at the
subject firm are engaged in logging.
The investigation revealed that the criterion (2) was not met.
In order to meet the eligibility requirements of Section
222(b), workers of Double D Logging must supply components for
articles that were the basis for certifying the primary firm's
worker group. The investigation determined that the workers of the
firm to which Double D Logging supplied logs were certified
eligible to apply for adjustment assistance based on secondary
affects, not as workers of a primary firm. Therefore, there is no
basis for workers of Double D Logging to be certified as
secondarily affected.
Further investigation was conducted to determine if the group
eligibility requirements for directly-impacted (primary) workers
under Section 222(a) the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, could be
met. The requirements 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, 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 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 logs during 2005, 2006, or 2007, nor was there a shift
production to a foreign country.
The investigation further revealed that the subject firm's
major declining customer(s) did not import products like or
directly competitive with logs in 2005, 2006, or in January through
October 2007.
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 Double D Logging,
John Day, Oregon, are denied eligibility to apply for adjustment
assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also
denied eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment
assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 20th day of December, 2007
/s/Linda G. Poole
______________________________
LINGA G. POOLE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance