95-13524. Pennzoil Products Co., Roosevelt, Utah Refinery, Roosevelt, Utah; Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 106 (Friday, June 2, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 28801]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-13524]



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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[TA-W-30,690]


Pennzoil Products Co., Roosevelt, Utah Refinery, Roosevelt, Utah; 
Negative Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    By an application postmarked April 28, 1995, one of the petitioners 
requested administrative reconsideration of the subject petition for 
trade adjustment assistance. The denial notice was signed on March 30, 
1995 and published in the Federal Register on April 27, 1995 (60 FR 
20763).
    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 investigation findings show that the workers were primarily 
engaged in employment related to the production of petroleum products.
    The Department's denial was based on the fact that the 
``contributed importantly'' test of the increased import criterion of 
the Group Eligibility Requirements of the Trade Act was not met. The 
``contributed importantly'' test is generally demonstrated through a 
survey of the workers' firm's customers.
    The petroleum products produced at Pennzoil's Roosevelt, Utah 
refinery, were sold to wholesale or retail customers. The Department's 
survey of Pennzoil's customers shows that they did not import petroleum 
products during the relevant periods.
    The Petitioner claims that the international price of crude oil 
affects the price of domestic crude oil and was responsible for the 
worker separations at Pennzoil.
    Price is not a criterion for a worker group certification, and 
would not form a basis for a worker group certification.
    The Trade Act was not intended to provide TAA benefits to everyone 
who is in some way affected by foreign competition but only to those 
who experienced a decline in sales or production and employment and an 
increase in imports of like or directly competitive products which 
``contributed importantly'' to declines in sales or production and 
employment.

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, DC, this 23 day of May 1995.
Victor J. Trunzo,
Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 95-13524 Filed 6-1-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M