Stimson Lumber Company, Clatskanie, OR; Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration, 41529 [2010-17390]

Agencies

• Employment and Training Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 136 (Friday, July 16, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 41529]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17390]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-70,261]


Stimson Lumber Company, Clatskanie, OR; Notice of Negative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By application dated March 11, 2010, the President of Woodworkers, 
Local Lodge W536, of the International Association of Machinists and 
Woodworkers requested administrative reconsideration of the 
Department's negative determination regarding eligibility to apply for 
Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), applicable to workers and former 
workers of the subject firm. The determination was issued on February 
19, 2010, and the Department's Notice of determination was published in 
the Federal Register on March 12, 2010 (75 FR 11925).
    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 was based on the finding that there had 
been no increase in imports by the company or by the company's 
customers of the articles produced by the subject firm; that there was 
no shift of production or acquisition abroad of the articles produced 
by the subject firm; that aggregate imports of articles like and 
directly competitive with those produced by the subject firm had 
declined absolutely and also relative to domestic consumption of those 
products; and that the separations at the subject facility were not the 
result of loss of business by the subject firm as either a supplier of 
components to, or a downstream finisher of articles produced by, a 
customer that employed a worker group that is currently eligible to 
apply for TAA.
    In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner stated that the 
workers of the subject firm should be eligible for TAA because the 
subject firm is ``in direct competition to major timber firms in Canada 
[and] a portion of that timber finds its way across the border and into 
the U.S. market.'' The petitioner also alleged that ``During the 
pertinent time period Stimson lumber has also marketed Hampton lumber 
under the Stimson label'' and that Hampton Lumber (certification issued 
on September 17, 2009; TA-W-72,129) therefore ``is an upstream supplier 
of Stimson Lumber.''
    During the initial investigation, the Department received an 
attestation from a company official that the subject firm did not shift 
to a foreign country or acquire from a foreign country softwood 
dimensional lumber (or like or directly competitive articles) and did 
not increase its imports of softwood dimensional lumber (or like or 
directly competitive articles).
    During the initial investigation, the Department conducted a 
customer survey (which accounted for over 65% of the subject firm's 
declining sales and/or production) that showed that the surveyed 
customers did not increase their imports of softwood dimensional lumber 
(or like or directly competitive articles).
    During the initial investigation, the Department obtained data from 
the U.S. Census Bureau, the U.S. Department of Commerce, and the U.S. 
International Trade Commission that showed that aggregate imports of 
softwood dimensional lumber declined both absolutely and relative to 
domestic consumption.
    To be eligible for a secondary certification, the subject firm must 
provide a component part for, or be downstream finisher for, an article 
produced by the firm that employed a worker group that is currently 
eligible to apply for TAA.
    The petitioner's assertion that the subject firm markets some of 
the products of Hampton Lumber cannot be a basis for secondary 
certification because the lumber at issue is not a component part of 
lumber that was the basis of the certification of TA-W-72,129 and 
because the marketing of the Hampton Lumber does not constitute 
downstream production.
    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.
    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, DC, this 8th day of July, 2010.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2010-17390 Filed 7-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P