DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-86,111

SEATTLE SNOHOMISH MILL COMPANY INC.
INCLUDING WORKERS WHOSE WAGES WERE REPORTED
THROUGH RIVERSIDE LUMBER
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM LABOR READY
SNOHOMISH, WASHINGTON

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated March 10, 2016, the State of Washington
requested administrative reconsideration of the Department of
Labor's determination regarding eligibility to apply for worker
adjustment assistance, applicable to workers and former workers of
Seattle Snohomish Mill Company, Inc., Snohomish, Washington
(subject firm). The determination was signed on March 2, 2016.
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 negative determination states that the subject firm “had
not experienced a decline in the sales or production of softwood
dimensional lumber during the period of investigation.”
The request for reconsideration stated that “production
clearly declined in the subsequent months.”
The subject worker group is the subject of a pending
investigation (TA-W-91,922).
The petitioner did not supply facts not previously considered
nor 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. Based on
these findings, the Department determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has
not been met.
Conclusion
After careful 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 18th day of August, 2016

/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-86,111

SEATTLE SNOHOMISH MILL CO. INC.
INCLUDING WORKERS WHOSE WAGES WERE REPORTED THROUGH
RIVERSIDE LUMBER
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM LABOR READY
SNOHOMISH, WASHINGTON

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), (b)
or (e) of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), (b) and
(e). 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 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 the workers' firm
must have become totally or partially separated or be
threatened with total or partial separation.

(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) (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; AND
(iii) the increase in imports 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.

(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
(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; and
(ii) the shift described in clause (i)(I) or the
acquisition of articles or services described in
clause (i)(II) contributed importantly to such
workers' separation or threat of separation.

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 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.

Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), defines the
terms "Supplier" and "Downstream Producer."
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(e) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(e).
The group eligibility requirements for workers of a firm
under Section 222(e) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(e), 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), the 1-year
period preceding the 1-year period described in
paragraph (2).

The investigation was initiated in response to a petition
filed on June 19, 2015 by a state workforce office on behalf of
workers of Seattle-Snohomish Mill Co. Inc., including workers
whose wages were reported through Riverside Lumber, including
on-site leased workers from Labor Ready, Snohomish, Washington
(herein known as "Seattle-Snohomish Mill Co. Inc."). The
workers' firm is engaged in activities related to the production
of softwood dimensional lumber.
The petitioner alleges that increased aggregate imports
of softwood lumber in the U.S. and foreign competition made it
difficult for the subject firm to compete in this industry.
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the petitioner and workers' firm.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that increased imports did not contribute
importantly to worker separations. The subject firm had not
experienced a decline in the sales or production of softwood
dimensional lumber during the period under investigation (2013
to 2014, or during the period of January through May 2014 over
the corresponding 2015 period). Sales and production increased
prior to shut down. Due to this fact, the firm did not report
any declining customers.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Seattle-Snohomish Mill Co. Inc. did
not shift the production of softwood dimensional lumber to a
foreign country or acquire softwood dimensional lumber from a
foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Seattle-Snohomish Mill Co. Inc. 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 Seattle-Snohomish Mill Co. Inc.
does not act as a 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).
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied either because
Criterion (1) has not been met since the workers' firm has not
been publicly 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 in the
investigation, 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 Seattle-Snohomish
Mill Co. Inc., including workers whose wages were reported
through Riverside Lumber, including on-site leased workers
from Labor Ready, Snohomish, Washington engaged in activities
related to the production of softwood dimensional lumber to
apply for adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223
of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.

Signed in Washington, D.C. this 2nd day of March 2016.

/s/Hope D. Kinglock
______________________________
HOPE D. KINGLOCK
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance