DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-72,510

JELD-WEN MILLWORK DISTRIBUTION
WILKESBORO, NORTH CAROLINA

Notice of Negative Determination
on Reconsideration

On October 7, 2010, the Department of Labor issued an
Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration for workers and former workers of Jeld-Wen
Millwork Distribution, Wilkesboro, North Carolina (subject
firm). The Department’s Notice was published in the Federal
Register on October 25, 2010 (75 FR 65513).
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, filed by a company official, stated that the
workers distribute “wood exterior door frames” and that “door
frames are being imported from China and South America at a price
we can’t compete with at this location.”
The initial negative determination was based on the findings
that there was no increase in imports of like or directly
competitive articles by either the subject firm or its customers,
and no shift to/acquisition from a foreign country by the
workers’ firm in production of like or directly competitive
articles. The investigation also revealed that the subject firm did
not produce a component part that was used by a firm that employed
workers eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and
used the component parts in the production of the article that was
the basis for the TAA certification.
The workers, in the request for reconsideration, state that
the subject firm’s competitors and customer have increased imports
of like or directly competitive articles from China. The workers
also allege that the articles produced at the subject firm include
door component parts (“door jambs, door T-AST, door mull posts”)
and window component parts (“replacement window grills”).
Information obtained during the reconsideration investigation
confirmed that the only articles produced by the subject firm
during the relevant period are wood exterior door frames; that,
during the relevant period, the subject firm did not increase
reliance on imports of wood exterior door frames; and that the
subject firm supplies articles exclusively to internal customers.
Moreover, information obtained during the reconsideration
investigation confirmed that that the subject firm did not perform
a service (such as distribution) that was used by a firm that both
employed a worker group eligible to apply for TAA and directly used
the services supplied in the production of an article or supply of
a service that was the basis for the TAA certification.
Aggregate data reviewed during the reconsideration
investigation revealed that U.S. imports of articles like or
directly competitive with wood exterior door frames did not
increase during the relevant period.
Conclusion
After reconsideration, I affirm the original notice of
negative determination of eligibility to apply for worker
adjustment assistance for workers and former workers of Jeld-Wen
Millwork Distribution, Wilkesboro, North Carolina.
Signed in Washington, D.C., on this 4th day of March, 2011
/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-72,510

JELD-WEN MILLWORK DISTRIBUTION
WILKESBORO, NORTH CAROLINA

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), (c) or
(f) of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), (c), (f). 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 three
criteria must be met:
I. 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.

II. 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.

(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
(i)(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.

III. The third criterion requires that the increase in imports or
shift/acquisition must have contributed importantly to the
workers’ separation or threat of separation. See Sections
222(a)(2)(A)(iii) and 222(a)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act, 19 U.S.C.
§§ 2272(a)(2)(A)(iii), 2272(a)(2)(B)(ii).

Section 222(d) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(d), defines the
terms “Supplier” and “Downstream Producer.” For the Department to
issue a secondary worker certification under Section 222(c) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), 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.

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(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f).
The group eligibility requirements for workers of a firm under
Section 222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f), 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 October 6, 2009 by a company official on behalf of
workers of Jeld-Wen Millwork Distribution, Wilkesboro, North
Carolina. The workers produce wooden exterior door frames.
The petitioner alleges that the company is importing goods
like those produced at the Wilkesboro facility. The
investigation included analyzing data provided by company
officials and obtaining relevant trade statistics.
With respect to Section 222(a) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that Criterion II has not been met because there was no
increase in imports by the workers’ firm or customers or a
shift/acquisition by the workers’ firm. Criterion III has not
been met because the workers’ separations are not attributable to
increased imports or a shift/aqcisition.
With respect to Section 222(c) of the Act, the investigation
revealed that Criterion (2) has not been met because the workers
did not produce an article that was used by a firm with TAA-
certified workers in the production of an article or a supply of
a service that was the basis for TAA-certification.
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(f) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(f), have not been satisfied
because the workers’ firm has not been identified in an affirmative
finding of injury by the ITC.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the
investigation, I determine that workers of Jeld-Wen Millwork
Distribution, Wilkesboro, North Carolina are denied eligibility to
apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Act, 19
U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 11th day of January, 2010

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





- 8 -