DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-72,194

PENDLETON WOOLEN MILLS, INC.
WASHOUGAL, WASHINGTON

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated May 4, 2010, a petitioner requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department's certification
regarding eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance
(TAA), applicable to workers and former workers of the subject
firm. The certification was signed on April 1, 2010, and
published in the Federal Register on May 5, 2010 (75 FR 24751).
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.
In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner asserted
that she and other workers of the subject firm who were laid off
more than a year before the date of the petition (August 24,
2009), and were thus not reached by the impact date of the
certification (August 24, 2008), should be included in the
certification because of their long-term service to the
employer, of their long years of working together with other
employees who will be covered by the decision, and they should
not be penalized for the alleged delay by the petitioner (a
union official) who filed the petition in this case.
The applicable regulation, 29 CFR 90.16(e), states that:
“A certification of eligibility to apply for adjustment
assistance shall not apply to any worker:
(1) whose last total or partial separation from the
firm or appropriate subdivision occurred more than one (1)
year before the date of the petition; . . .”
In this case, the petition that began this investigation
was dated August 24, 2009. Therefore, according to the
regulation above, no worker who was separated earlier than
August 24, 2008 (i.e., one year prior to the August 24, 2009
petition date) can be included in any certification resulting
from the investigation resulting from the petition at issue.
The petitioner in this case was laid off on August 5, 2008,
nineteen days before the earliest possible date for workers to
receive benefits under certification TA-W-72,194. Consequently,
according to 29 CFR 90.16(e), she cannot be covered by that
certification.
The petitioner did not supply facts not previously
considered or provide additional documentation indicating that
there was either 1) a mistake in the determination of facts not
previously considered or 2) a misinterpretation of facts or of
the law justifying reconsideration of the initial determination.
After careful review of the request for reconsideration,
the Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not been met.
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 in Washington, D.C., this 14th day of July, 2010

/s/ Del Min Amy Chen
______________________________
DEL MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
4510-FN-P



DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-72,194

PENDLETON WOOLEN MILLS, INC.
WASHOUGAL, WASHINGTON

Certification 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.
The group eligibility requirements for workers of a firm
under Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), can be
satisfied if the following criteria are met:
I. 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;

II. 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

III. 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(d) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(d), 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.”
The investigation was initiated in response to a petition
filed on September 2, 2009 on behalf of workers of Pendleton
Woolen Mills, Inc., Washougal, Washington. The workers produce
fabric.
The investigation revealed that workers of Pendleton Woolen
Mills who are engaged in employment related to the production
of fabric meet the criteria as Suppliers for secondary worker
certification.
Criterion I has been met because a significant proportion
of workers have become separated or threatened with separation
during the relevant period.
Criterion II has been satisfied because workers of
Pendleton Woolen Mills produced and sold fabric to Pendleton
Woolen Mills, Inc., Portland, Oregon to be incorporated into
apparel. Workers of the Portland, Oregon facility are covered
by certification number TA-W-71,700 issued on January 4, 2010
based on increased aggregate imports.
Criterion III has been met because the fabric provided to
Pendleton Woolen Mills, Inc., Portland, Oregon accounted for
at least 20 percent of the sales of the Washougal, Washington
facility.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the
investigation, I determine that workers of Pendleton Woolen
Mills, Inc., Washougal, Washington, who are engaged in
employment related to fabric, meet the worker group
certification criteria under Section 222(c) of the Act, 19
U.S.C. § 2272(c). In accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19
U.S.C. § 2273, I make the following certification:


“All workers of Pendleton Woolen Mills, Inc., Washougal,
Washington, who became totally or partially separated from
employment on or after August 24, 2008, through two years
from the date of certification, and all workers in the
group threatened with total or partial separation from
employment on the 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 1st day of April, 2010


/s/Michael W. Jaffe
______________________________
MICHAEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance




- 7 -