DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-39,375
AND
NAFTA-04939

SUN STUDS, INC.
LONE ROCK TIMBER COMPANY
LONE ROCK LOGGING COMPANY
ROSEBURG, OREGON

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application of September 18, 2001 and September 19, 2001,
the company and petitioners, respectively requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding eligibility for workers and former
workers of the subject firm to apply for Trade Adjustment
Assistance (TAA) under petition TA-W-39,375 and North American
Free Trade Agreement-Transitional Adjustment Assistance (NAFTA-
TAA) under petition NAFTA-4939. The denial notices were signed
on August 8, 2001 and published in the Federal Register on August
23, 2001 (66 FR 4378).
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 TAA petition, filed on behalf of workers at Sun Studs,
Inc., Lone Rock Timber Company, Lone Rock Logging Company,
Roseburg, Oregon engaged in the production of veneer, was denied
because the "contributed importantly" group eligibility
requirement of Section 222(3) of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended, was not met. The "contributed importantly" test is
generally demonstrated through a survey of the workers' firm's
customers. The Department conducted a survey of the subject
company's major customers regarding their purchases of veneer.
The survey revealed that none of the customers increased their
import purchases of veneer, while reducing their purchases from
the subject firm during the relevant period. The subject firm
did not import veneer during the relevant period.
The NAFTA-TAA petition for the same worker group was denied
because criteria (3) and (4) of the group eligibility
requirements in paragraph (a)(1) of Section 250 of the Trade Act,
as amended, were not met. The survey revealed that the major
customers did not increase their purchases of veneer, while
decreasing their purchases from the subject firm during the
relevant period. The subject firm did not import veneer like and
directly competitive with what the subject plant produced from
Mexico or Canada, nor was the veneer production shifted from the
workers' firm to Mexico or Canada.


The petitioners supplied trade data depicting U.S. import
trends during the relevant period.
The Department of Labor does examine and take into
consideration trade statistics, but puts more emphasis on
customer surveys to examine if the "contributed importantly" test
is met, since this test demonstrates the direct impact on the
subject firm. In addition to the initial survey showing no
increased imports of veneer, the survey further indicates that
some of the respondents increased their purchases of domestic
veneer, rather than increasing their purchases of imported veneer
during the relevant period.
The petitioners further allege that imported Canadian veneer
was of a lower price then domestic veneer and thus the lower
prices impacted the subject workers.
The price of veneer is not relevant to the TAA or NAFTA-TAA
investigations that were filed on behalf of workers producing
veneer.
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 decisions. Accordingly, the
application is denied.
Signed at Washington, D.C., this 11th day of February, 2002.
/s/ Edward A. Tomchick
_______________________
EDWARD A. TOMCHICK
Director, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance