DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-92,318

VANCOUVER IRON AND STEEL, INC.
VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON


Notice of Negative Determination
on Reconsideration

On April 12, 2017, the Department of Labor issued an
Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration
for the workers and former workers of Vancouver Iron and Steel,
Inc., Vancouver, Washington (Vancouver Iron and Steel). Workers at
Vancouver Iron and Steel are engaged in the production of iron and
steel castings.
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 initial investigation resulted in a negative determination
based on the findings that the subject firm did not shift
production of iron and steel castings or like or directly
competitive articles to a foreign country, or acquire production of
iron and steel castings or like or directly competitive articles
from a foreign country; that subject firm, customer, and aggregate
imports did not increase, as defined in 29 CFR § 90.2; that the
subject firm 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);
and that the subject firm is not named by the International Trade
Commission as a member of a domestic industry in an affirmative
finding of serious injury, market disruption, or material injury,
or threat thereof.
The request for reconsideration states “Our foundry produced
steel and iron castings for industry in the domestic market . . .
Our plant was forced in to an unprofitable market by cheaper
product imported from China, Mexico, and other countries . . . .”
The request for reconsideration did not include additional
information or supporting documents.
After careful review of previously-submitted information,
including imports of iron and steel castings or like or directly
competitive articles during the relevant period, the Department
determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not been met.


Conclusion
After careful reconsideration, I determine that the
requirements of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272, have not
been met and affirm the original notice of negative determination
of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance for
workers and former workers of Vancouver Iron and Steel, Inc.,
Vancouver, Washington, to apply for adjustment assistance, in
accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. on this 1st day of March, 2018.
/s/Del-Min Amy Chen
_______________________________
DEL-MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-92,318

VANCOUVER IRON AND STEEL, INC.
VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON


Notice of Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated February 13, 2017, the petitioner
requested administrative reconsideration of the negative
determination regarding workers’ eligibility to apply for worker
adjustment assistance applicable to workers and former workers of
Vancouver Iron and Steel, Inc., Vancouver, Washington (subject
firm). The determination was issued on January 18, 2017. The
subject firm is engaged in the production of iron and steel
castings.
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
misinterpretation of facts or of the law justified
reconsideration of the decision.
The application requested that the Department reconsider
the significance of the subject firm’s sales of iron castings to
the subject firm’s customers and identified additional
customers, including customers which employed worker groups
eligible to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance.
The Department has carefully reviewed the request for
reconsideration and the existing record, and has determined that
the Department will conduct further investigation to determine if
the workers meet the eligibility requirements of the Trade Act of
1974, as amended.
Conclusion
After careful review of the application, I conclude that the
claim is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the
U.S. Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is,
therefore, granted.

Signed in Washington, D.C., this 12th day of April, 2017

/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-92,318

VANCOUVER IRON AND STEEL, INC.
VANCOUVER, 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 October 12, 2016, by the company official on behalf of
workers of Vancouver Iron and Steel, Inc., Vancouver,
Washington (Vancouver Iron and Steel). The workers' firm is
engaged in activities related to the production of iron and
steel castings. Workers at Vancouver Iron and Steel are
separately identifiable according to the customer's
specifications for the casting but are not separately
identifiable by product (iron castings or steel castings).
The worker group does not include any on-site leased or
temporary workers.
The petition stated "Production has been shifted to
foreign countries, in particular China and Mexico." The
petition includes additional information and supporting
documents.
During the course of the investigation, the Department
collected information from Vancouver Iron and Steel, the
subject firm's declining customer(s), and public sources.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed no increased firm, customer, or
aggregate imports, during the relevant period, of articles
like or directly competitive with the iron and steel casting
produced by Vancouver Iron and Steel, when compared to the
representative base period.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Vancouver Iron and Steel did not
shift the production of iron and steel castings, or a like or
directly competitive article, to a foreign country or acquire
the production of iron and steel castings, or a like or
directly competitive article, from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Vancouver Iron and Steel 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).
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied 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 Vancouver Iron and
Steel, Inc., Vancouver, Washington, to apply for adjustment
assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C.
§ 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 18th day of January 2017.

/s/Del Min Amy Chen
______________________________
DEL MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance