[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 82 (Thursday, April 29, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Page 23115]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-10719]
[[Page 23115]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-35,414]
Baker Oil Tools, Baker Hughes Inc. Headquartered in Houston, TX;
Notice of Negative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration
Including workers in the following states:
TA-W-35,414A Arkansas
TA-W-35,414B California
TA-W-35,414C Illinois
TA-W-35,414D Kansas
TA-W-35,414E Louisiana
TA-W-35,414F Mississippi
TA-W-35,414G Missouri
TA-W-35,414H New Mexico
TA-W-35,414I North Dakota
TA-W-35,414J Oklahoma
TA-W-35,414K Pennsylvania
TA-W-35,414L Tennessee
TA-W-35,414M Wyoming
By application dated April 9, 1999, Labor Counsel (hereafter
referenced as the petitioner) for the subject firm requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination regarding worker eligibility to apply for Trade
Adjustment Assistance (TAA). The denial notice applicable to workers of
the subject firm headquartered in Houston, Texas, including workers in
multiple States, signed on March 8, 1999, will soon be published in the
Federal Register.
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.
Findings of the initial investigation showed that workers of the
subject firm were primarily engaged in the production of oilfield tools
and equipment. Workers were denied eligibility to apply for TAA based
on the finding that criteria (2) and (3) of the group eligibility
requirements of Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, were
not met.
The petitioner asserts that sales and employment at Baker Oil Tools
decreased in the relevant time periods. Data submitted to the
Department by Baker Oil Tools show increases in sales and employment
from 1997 to 1998. Even if criterion (2) was met, further investigation
would serve no purpose because criterion (3) has not been met.
Aggregate U.S. imports of oil and gas field machinery are negligible.
The petitioner also asserts that specific consideration was not
given to field marketing employees, particularly technical specialists
and fishing tool supervisors providing services at the rig site. The
petition was filed by a company official on behalf of workers of the
subject firm manufacturing oilfield tools and service equipment at
various U.S. locations. The investigation concluded that the
predominant portion of the workforce at Baker Oil Tools were engaged in
employment related to the production of oilfield tools and equipment.
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 at Washington, D.C. this 13th day of April 1999.
Grant D. Beale,
Acting Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 99-10719 Filed 4-28-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
