DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-80,199

STIMSON LUMBER COMPANY
FOREST GROVE MILL
GASTON, OREGON

Notice of Negative Determination
on Reconsideration

The initial investigation, initiated on May 25, 2011, resulted
in a negative determination based on the findings that worker
separations were not attributable to a shift in production or
increased imports of stud lumber. The determination, issued on
October 5, 2011, was applicable to workers and former workers of
Stimson Lumber Company, Forest Grove Mill, Gaston, Oregon
(Stimson Lumber). The notice of determination was published in the
Federal Register on October 26, 2011 (76 FR 66330).
As required by the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Extension
Act of 2011 (the TAAEA), the investigation into this petition was
reopened for a reconsideration investigation to apply the
requirements for worker group eligibility under chapter 2 of title
II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended by the TAAEA to the facts
of this petition.
Based on the information collected during the initial and
reconsideration investigations, the Department of Labor
(Department) determines that worker separations at the subject firm
were not attributable to a shift in production to a foreign country
or increased imports.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the subject firm does not import
articles like or directly competitive with the stud lumber
products manufactured by workers at the subject firm. During the
initial investigation, the Department surveyed the major customer
that purchases stud lumber from the Gaston facility. This
customer reported no import purchases during the relevant time
period. The reconsideration investigation confirmed that all of
the production at the Gaston location is intended for this
customer. As such, the Department determines that worker
separations at the subject firm were not caused by increased
company or customer imports.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the production
of stud lumber or like or directly competitive articles to a
foreign country or acquire the production of stud lumber or like
or directly competitive articles from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Stimson Lumber 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).
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Stimson Lumber does not act as a
Downstream Producer to a firm (or subdivision, whichever is
applicable) 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).
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied 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 on reconsideration,
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 Stimson Lumber Company, Forest Grove
Mill, Gaston, Oregon to apply for adjustment assistance, in
accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 15th day of December, 2011
/s/ Del Min Amy Chen
_____________________________
DEL MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-80,199

STIMSON LUMBER COMPANY
FOREST GROVE MILL
GASTON, OREGON

Negative Determinations 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 (“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) and (b)
of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a) and (b). 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:
(1) The first criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(1) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a)(1)) requires that 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
(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) imports of articles like or directly competitive with
articles produced by such firm or subdivision have
increased; and
(iii) the increase 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 or subdivision.

(B) Shift in Production Path:
(i) 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
(ii)(I) 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;
(II)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
(III)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.

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 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.”
The investigation was initiated in response to a petition
filed on May 25, 2011 by three workers on behalf of workers of
Stimson Lumber Company, Forest Grove Mill, Gaston, Oregon. The
workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to the production of
stud lumber used for building purposes.
The petitioner alleges that foreign competition contributed
importantly to sales/production declines and worker separations
at the subject firm.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers’ firm and one of its largest
customers.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the subject firm did not shift the
production of stud lumber to a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(iii), the investigation
revealed that neither the subject firm nor the major customer
that was surveyed imported stud lumber over the relevant period.
Further, the investigation revealed that increased aggregate U.S.
imports of articles like or directly competitive with the
articles produced by Stimson Lumber Company did not contribute
importantly to such workers’ separation or threat of separation
or to the decline in sales or production of the firm.
Specifically, the increase in aggregate U.S. imports of sawmill
products was negligible compared to the increase in exports and
U.S. consumption.
With respect to Section 222(b), the investigation revealed
that Stimson Lumber Company is not 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); thus Sections 222(b)(2) and 222(b)(3) have not
been met.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of
eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance
(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 the
investigation, I determine that all workers of Stimson Lumber
Company, Forest Grove Mill, Gaston, Oregon are denied eligibility
to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended, and are also denied eligibility to apply
for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of
the Trade Act of 1974, amended.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 5th day of October 2011


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







- 8 -