Wyatt Virgin Islands (V.I.), Inc., a Division of Wyatt Field Service Company, Working On-Site at Hovensa, LLC Oil Refinery, Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands; Notice of Negative Determination on Reconsideration, 32462-32463 [2013-12738]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
32462
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 104 / Thursday, May 30, 2013 / Notices
customer service and support services
for Verizon Services Corporation
customers/clients.
The initial investigation resulted in a
negative determination based on the
Departments’ findings of no shift in the
supply of customer service and support
services, or like or directly competitive
services, to a foreign country; no
increased imports of customer service
and support services (or like or directly
competitive services) during the
relevant period; that the subject firm is
neither a Supplier or a Downstream
Producer; and that the subject firm was
not named by the International Trade
Commission as required by Section
222(e) of the Trade Act, as amended.
In the request for reconsideration, the
petitioning worker alleged that work
performed by the subject worker group
was outsourced to not only Mexico but
also the Philippines and India; that the
worker group at Clarksburg, West
Virginia are similarly situated as
workers who are eligible to apply for
Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA)
under TA–W–81,968; that the workers
‘‘performed all aspects of customer
service in telecommunications’’ such as
order management; that ‘‘inter-company
numbers were changed to Spanish’’; and
that ‘‘When calling within the company
for internet issues, we spoke with
Verizon workers in India.’’
During the reconsideration
investigation, the Department carefully
reviewed the petition and its
attachments, previously-submitted
information from the subject firm, the
certification of TA–W–81,968 and new
information obtained from the subject
firm regarding the allegations set forth
in the request for reconsideration.
During the reconsideration
investigation, the Department confirmed
that the subject firm did not shift to a
foreign country the supply of services
like or directly competitive with the
customer service or support services
supplied by the subject workers and
that, during the relevant period, the
subject firm did not import services like
or directly competitive with the
customer service or support services
supplied by the subject workers. The
subject firm also affirmed that the
petitioning workers voluntarily left
employment from the subject firm, as
permitted by the collective bargaining
agreement applicable to the worker
group at the Clarksburg, West Virginia
facility.
Further, the workers and former
workers eligible to apply for TAA under
TA–W–81,968 (Verizon Business
Networks Services, Inc., Senior
Analysts-Sales Implementation,
Birmingham, Alabama) are not
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 May 29, 2013
Jkt 229001
similarly-situated as workers covered by
TA–W–82,095 because the services
supplied by the two worker groups
differ and the petitioning workers
belong to a different business unit.
Further, Verizon Business Networks
Services, Inc. is not the same company
as Verizon Services Corporation.
Therefore, after careful review of the
petition and its attachments, previouslysubmitted information, the request for
reconsideration, the certification of TA–
W–81,968 and information obtained
during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department
determines that 29 CFR 90.18(c) has not
been met.
Conclusion
After careful review, 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 Verizon Services
Corporation, Customer Service Clerk,
General Clerk, Clarksburg, West
Virginia, to apply for adjustment
assistance, in accordance with Section
223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2273.
Signed in Washington, DC on this 16th day
of May, 2013.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2013–12739 Filed 5–29–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–81,313]
Wyatt Virgin Islands (V.I.), Inc., a
Division of Wyatt Field Service
Company, Working On-Site at
Hovensa, LLC Oil Refinery,
Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin
Islands; Notice of Negative
Determination on Reconsideration
The initial investigation, instituted on
February 8, 2012, on behalf of workers
and former workers of Wyatt Virgin
Islands (V.I.), Inc., a division of Wyatt
Field Service Company, working on-site
at HOVENSA, LLC Oil Refinery,
Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin
Islands (subject facility) resulted in a
negative determination, issued on April
6, 2012. The Department’s Notice of
negative determination was published
in the Federal Register on April 19,
2012 (77 FR 23511).
Workers of Wyatt V.I., Inc. (subject
firm) provided turnaround (intermittent
and ‘‘as needed’’) maintenance services
on-site at the subject facility. The
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
workers of the subject firm working onsite at HOVENSA, LLC Oil Refinery,
Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin
Islands (subject worker group) worked
only at the subject facility.
The petition states, ‘‘HOVENSA =
Hess Oil is a joint venture with
Venezuela. Impact of the closure of this
plant & refinery will affect thousands of
people displacing workers workforce.
Losses at the HOVENSA refinery have
totaled $1.3 billion in the past three
years, and are projected to continue.’’
The petitioning worker group
eligibility requirements for workers (and
former workers) of a Firm under Section
222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. 2272(a), can
be satisfied if the following criteria are
met:
(1) a significant number or proportion of
the workers in such workers’ firm have
become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially
separated; and
(2)(A)(i) the sales or production, or both, of
such firm have decreased absolutely;
(ii)(I) imports of articles or services like or
directly competitive with articles produced
or services supplied by such firm have
increased;
(II) imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles—
(aa) into which one or more component
parts produced by such firm are directly
incorporated, or
(bb) which are produced directly using
services supplied by such firm, have
increased; or
(III) imports of articles directly
incorporating one or more component parts
produced outside the United States that are
like or directly competitive with imports of
articles incorporating one or more
component parts produced by such firm 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; or
(B)(i)(I) there has been a shift by such
workers’ firm to a foreign country in the
production of articles or the supply of
services like or directly competitive with
articles which are produced or services
which are supplied by such firm; or
(II) such workers’ firm has acquired from
a foreign country articles or services that are
like or directly competitive with articles
which are produced or services which are
supplied by such 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.
Initial Investigation
The initial investigation began when
three workers filed a petition for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA), dated
February 6, 2012, on behalf of workers
and former workers of Wyatt V.I., Inc.
(subject firm). Although workers of the
E:\FR\FM\30MYN1.SGM
30MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 104 / Thursday, May 30, 2013 / Notices
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
subject firm supplied maintenance
services on-site at HOVENSA, LLC Oil
Refinery, Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S.
Virgin Islands (subject facility), Wyatt
VI, Inc. is a domestic firm and the
subject worker group was based out of
Texas. The subject firm was under
contract with HOVENSA, LLC
(HOVENSA) during the relevant time
period for the supply of maintenance
services at the oil refinery and the
worker group subject to this
investigation was recruited from Texas
on a seasonal and ‘‘as needed’’ staffing
basis.
The initial determination was based
on the findings that, although a
significant proportion of the subject
worker group had become separated,
imports of services like or directly
competitive with the maintenance
services supplied by the subject firm
had not increased; the subject firm had
not shifted the supply of services like or
directly competitive with maintenance
services to a foreign country or acquired
like or directly competitive services
from a foreign country; the subject firm
was not a supplier or downstream
producer to a firm that employed a
group of workers who received a
certification to apply for adjustment
assistance; and the subject firm was not
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.
Reconsideration Investigation
By application dated May 18, 2012, a
State workforce office agent requested,
on behalf of a worker, administrative
reconsideration of the Department’s
negative determination regarding the
eligibility of the subject worker group to
apply for adjustment assistance. In the
application, the worker stated that the
initial negative determination was
inaccurate because ‘‘International
Global Trade & its initial impact
contributed to the losses & closure of
HOVENSA oil refinery, which displaced
& dislocated thousands of workers, not
to mention that those jobs will not
return.’’
On June 26, 2012, the Department
issued a Notice of Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application
for Reconsideration in order to conduct
further investigation to determine
worker eligibility. The Department’s
Notice was published in the Federal
Register on July 10, 2012 (77 FR 40637).
In the course of the reconsideration
investigation, the Department reviewed
the Trade Act, as amended, applicable
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 May 29, 2013
Jkt 229001
regulations, previously-submitted
information, information provided by
the worker on whose behalf the request
for reconsideration was filed, and new
information provided by the subject
firm.
During the reconsideration
investigation, the Department clarified
the identity of the subject worker group.
The Department confirmed that
HOVENSA was the only customer of
Wyatt V.I., Inc. during the relevant time
period, that Wyatt V.I., Inc. was created
exclusively for the contract with
HOVENSA, and that the subject worker
group was established to exclusively
work at the HOVENSA refinery plant in
the U.S. Virgin Islands. Specifically, the
subject workers were temporary workers
who were hired by Wyatt V.I., Inc. to
perform maintenance services. As such,
the Department determines that the
subject worker group is limited to
workers of Wyatt V.I., Inc., a division of
Wyatt Field Service Company, working
on-site at HOVENSA, LLC Oil Refinery,
Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin
Islands.
Section 222(a)(1) and Section
222(a)(2)(A)(i) have been met because a
significant number or proportion of
workers of Wyatt V.I., Inc., working onsite at HOVENSA, LLC Oil Refinery,
Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin
Islands, have become totally separated
and because the supply of maintenance
services supplied by the subject worker
group have decreased absolutely.
Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) has not been
met because neither increased imports
of services like or directly competitive
with the maintenance services supplied
by the subject worker groups nor
increased imports of refined petroleum
products (the article which was
produced directly using the
maintenance services supplied by the
subject worker group) could not have
contributed importantly to worker
separations at the subject firm.
Section 247(7) of the Trade Act, as
amended (19 U.S.C. § 2319) defines
‘‘state’’ to mean the fifty States
compromising the United States of
America (U.S.), the District of Columbia,
and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
Further, the regulation addressing
benefits available under the Trade
Program defines ‘‘State’’ to mean the
fifty States compromising the U.S., the
District of Columbia, and the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 20
C.F.R. 617.3(hh)
29 CFR 90.2 states that ‘‘Increased
imports means that imports have
increased either absolutely or relative to
domestic production compared to a
representative base period.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
32463
Because the subject worker group
provided services on-site at a facility
within the U.S. Virgin Islands,
shipments of refined petroleum
products, or like or directly competitive
articles, into the U.S. Virgin Islands
could not be considered imports into
the United States, for purposes of the
Trade Act, as amended. Consequently,
there were no imports during the
relevant period, for purposes of the
Trade Act, as amended.
Section 222(a)(2)(B)(i) has not been
met because the subject firm did not
shift to a foreign country, or acquire
from a foreign country, the supply of
services like or directly competitive
with the maintenance services supplied
by the subject worker group. Rather, the
supply of maintenance services at
HOVENSA ceased when the contract
between the subject firm and HOVENSA
(its only client) was terminated. Further,
any shift in the supply of services from
the U.S. Virgin Islands would not
constitute a shift from the United States
to a foreign country as the U.S. Virgin
Islands is not considered a state, for
purposes of the Trade Act, as amended.
Conclusion
After careful review of the Trade Act
of 1974, as amended, applicable
regulation, and information obtained
during the initial and reconsideration
investigations, I determine that workers
and former workers of Wyatt Virgin
Islands (V.I.), Inc., a division of Wyatt
Field Service Company, working on-site
at HOVENSA, LLC Oil Refinery,
Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin
Islands, are ineligible to apply for
adjustment assistance.
Signed in Washington, DC, on this 17th
day of May, 2013.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment
Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2013–12738 Filed 5–29–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
[TA–W–82,313]
ICG Knott County Coal, LLC, a
Subsidiary of ICG, Inc., Kite, Kentucky;
Notice of Affirmative Determination
Regarding Application for
Reconsideration
By application dated May 6, 2013, a
petitioner requested administrative
reconsideration of the negative
determination regarding workers’
E:\FR\FM\30MYN1.SGM
30MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 104 (Thursday, May 30, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32462-32463]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12738]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-81,313]
Wyatt Virgin Islands (V.I.), Inc., a Division of Wyatt Field
Service Company, Working On-Site at Hovensa, LLC Oil Refinery,
Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands; Notice of Negative
Determination on Reconsideration
The initial investigation, instituted on February 8, 2012, on
behalf of workers and former workers of Wyatt Virgin Islands (V.I.),
Inc., a division of Wyatt Field Service Company, working on-site at
HOVENSA, LLC Oil Refinery, Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin
Islands (subject facility) resulted in a negative determination, issued
on April 6, 2012. The Department's Notice of negative determination was
published in the Federal Register on April 19, 2012 (77 FR 23511).
Workers of Wyatt V.I., Inc. (subject firm) provided turnaround
(intermittent and ``as needed'') maintenance services on-site at the
subject facility. The workers of the subject firm working on-site at
HOVENSA, LLC Oil Refinery, Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin
Islands (subject worker group) worked only at the subject facility.
The petition states, ``HOVENSA = Hess Oil is a joint venture with
Venezuela. Impact of the closure of this plant & refinery will affect
thousands of people displacing workers workforce. Losses at the HOVENSA
refinery have totaled $1.3 billion in the past three years, and are
projected to continue.''
The petitioning worker group eligibility requirements for workers
(and former workers) of a Firm under Section 222(a) of the Act, 19
U.S.C. 2272(a), can be satisfied if the following criteria are met:
(1) a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers' firm have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated; and
(2)(A)(i) the sales or production, or both, of such firm have
decreased absolutely;
(ii)(I) imports of articles or services like or directly
competitive with articles produced or services supplied by such firm
have increased;
(II) imports of articles like or directly competitive with
articles--
(aa) into which one or more component parts produced by such
firm are directly incorporated, or
(bb) which are produced directly using services supplied by such
firm, have increased; or
(III) imports of articles directly incorporating one or more
component parts produced outside the United States that are like or
directly competitive with imports of articles incorporating one or
more component parts produced by such firm 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; or
(B)(i)(I) there has been a shift by such workers' firm to a
foreign country in the production of articles or the supply of
services like or directly competitive with articles which are
produced or services which are supplied by such firm; or
(II) such workers' firm has acquired from a foreign country
articles or services that are like or directly competitive with
articles which are produced or services which are supplied by such
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.
Initial Investigation
The initial investigation began when three workers filed a petition
for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), dated February 6, 2012, on
behalf of workers and former workers of Wyatt V.I., Inc. (subject
firm). Although workers of the
[[Page 32463]]
subject firm supplied maintenance services on-site at HOVENSA, LLC Oil
Refinery, Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands (subject
facility), Wyatt VI, Inc. is a domestic firm and the subject worker
group was based out of Texas. The subject firm was under contract with
HOVENSA, LLC (HOVENSA) during the relevant time period for the supply
of maintenance services at the oil refinery and the worker group
subject to this investigation was recruited from Texas on a seasonal
and ``as needed'' staffing basis.
The initial determination was based on the findings that, although
a significant proportion of the subject worker group had become
separated, imports of services like or directly competitive with the
maintenance services supplied by the subject firm had not increased;
the subject firm had not shifted the supply of services like or
directly competitive with maintenance services to a foreign country or
acquired like or directly competitive services from a foreign country;
the subject firm was not a supplier or downstream producer to a firm
that employed a group of workers who received a certification to apply
for adjustment assistance; and the subject firm was not 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.
Reconsideration Investigation
By application dated May 18, 2012, a State workforce office agent
requested, on behalf of a worker, administrative reconsideration of the
Department's negative determination regarding the eligibility of the
subject worker group to apply for adjustment assistance. In the
application, the worker stated that the initial negative determination
was inaccurate because ``International Global Trade & its initial
impact contributed to the losses & closure of HOVENSA oil refinery,
which displaced & dislocated thousands of workers, not to mention that
those jobs will not return.''
On June 26, 2012, the Department issued a Notice of Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration in order to
conduct further investigation to determine worker eligibility. The
Department's Notice was published in the Federal Register on July 10,
2012 (77 FR 40637).
In the course of the reconsideration investigation, the Department
reviewed the Trade Act, as amended, applicable regulations, previously-
submitted information, information provided by the worker on whose
behalf the request for reconsideration was filed, and new information
provided by the subject firm.
During the reconsideration investigation, the Department clarified
the identity of the subject worker group. The Department confirmed that
HOVENSA was the only customer of Wyatt V.I., Inc. during the relevant
time period, that Wyatt V.I., Inc. was created exclusively for the
contract with HOVENSA, and that the subject worker group was
established to exclusively work at the HOVENSA refinery plant in the
U.S. Virgin Islands. Specifically, the subject workers were temporary
workers who were hired by Wyatt V.I., Inc. to perform maintenance
services. As such, the Department determines that the subject worker
group is limited to workers of Wyatt V.I., Inc., a division of Wyatt
Field Service Company, working on-site at HOVENSA, LLC Oil Refinery,
Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands.
Section 222(a)(1) and Section 222(a)(2)(A)(i) have been met because
a significant number or proportion of workers of Wyatt V.I., Inc.,
working on-site at HOVENSA, LLC Oil Refinery, Christiansted, St. Croix,
U.S. Virgin Islands, have become totally separated and because the
supply of maintenance services supplied by the subject worker group
have decreased absolutely.
Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) has not been met because neither increased
imports of services like or directly competitive with the maintenance
services supplied by the subject worker groups nor increased imports of
refined petroleum products (the article which was produced directly
using the maintenance services supplied by the subject worker group)
could not have contributed importantly to worker separations at the
subject firm.
Section 247(7) of the Trade Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. Sec. 2319)
defines ``state'' to mean the fifty States compromising the United
States of America (U.S.), the District of Columbia, and the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Further, the regulation addressing
benefits available under the Trade Program defines ``State'' to mean
the fifty States compromising the U.S., the District of Columbia, and
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 20 C.F.R. 617.3(hh)
29 CFR 90.2 states that ``Increased imports means that imports have
increased either absolutely or relative to domestic production compared
to a representative base period.''
Because the subject worker group provided services on-site at a
facility within the U.S. Virgin Islands, shipments of refined petroleum
products, or like or directly competitive articles, into the U.S.
Virgin Islands could not be considered imports into the United States,
for purposes of the Trade Act, as amended. Consequently, there were no
imports during the relevant period, for purposes of the Trade Act, as
amended.
Section 222(a)(2)(B)(i) has not been met because the subject firm
did not shift to a foreign country, or acquire from a foreign country,
the supply of services like or directly competitive with the
maintenance services supplied by the subject worker group. Rather, the
supply of maintenance services at HOVENSA ceased when the contract
between the subject firm and HOVENSA (its only client) was terminated.
Further, any shift in the supply of services from the U.S. Virgin
Islands would not constitute a shift from the United States to a
foreign country as the U.S. Virgin Islands is not considered a state,
for purposes of the Trade Act, as amended.
Conclusion
After careful review of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended,
applicable regulation, and information obtained during the initial and
reconsideration investigations, I determine that workers and former
workers of Wyatt Virgin Islands (V.I.), Inc., a division of Wyatt Field
Service Company, working on-site at HOVENSA, LLC Oil Refinery,
Christiansted, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, are ineligible to apply
for adjustment assistance.
Signed in Washington, DC, on this 17th day of May, 2013.
Del Min Amy Chen,
Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 2013-12738 Filed 5-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
