DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-81,145

SUNOCO, INC., R&M
REFINING DIVISION
INCLUDING ON-SITE LEASED WORKERS FROM
ACCREDITED ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES, AMQUIP CORPORATION,
ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, BAKER PETROLITE, BAKERCORP,
BELL-FAST FIRE PROTECTION INC., BOLTTECH INC., BRAND INSULATION
SERVICES, BRAND SCAFFOLD BUILDERS INC. (AKA BRAND INSULATION
SERVICES), CATALYST HANDLING SERVICE CO., CHALMERS & KUBECK,
CHEF’E CATERING, CINTAS, CLEAN VENTURES, INC., CM TOWERS, INC.,
COMPU-COM, DELAWARE BAY AND RIVER COOPERATIVE, DEVON PROPERTY
SERVICES LLC, EISCO-NJ, FISHER TANK COMPANY, GE ENERGY SERVICES,
GODWIN PUMPS OF AMERICA INC., HAGEMEYER NORTH AMERICA, HRI
INCORPORATED, INTEGRITY TEST LAB, INTERTEK-CALEB BRETT USA, JJ
WHITE, JR METZGER, JOY SERVICES, MATRIX SVC. INDUSTRIAL
CONTRACTORS, MADISON LTD, MISTRAS SERVICES GROUP, MOBILE
DREDGING AND PUMPING CO., MOTT TANK INSPECTION, O’BRIENT & GERE
ENGINEERS INC., PRESIDIO NETWORKED SOLUTIONS, INC., PSC
INDUSTRIAL OUTSOURCING, LP, PSCI-PROGRESSIVE SOFTWARE COMPUTING,
QUALITY TESTING SERVICES, INC., RAILROAD CONSTRUCTION CO. OF
SOUTH JERSEY, INC., REPUBLIC SERVICES OF PENNSYLVANIA, SAGE
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING, SAYBOLT, INC., SEALTEC-DIVISION OF
SEALCO, INC., SECURITY SERVICES & TECH/AKA ADT ADVANCE
INTEGRATION, SERVICE PAINTING, INC., SGS NORTH AMERICA, INC.,
SHARED SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, INC., SERVICE PAINTING INC., SGS
NORTH AMERICA, INC., SHARED SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, INC., STANTEC
CONSULTING CORPORATION, SUNSTATES SECURITY, LLC, TEAM INDUSTRIAL
SERVICES, INC., TEKSOLV, INC., THYSSENKRUPP SAFWAY, INC. (DBA
SAFWAY SERVICES, INC.), TRICO EQUIPMENT, UNION TANK CAR CO/UTLX,
UNITED STATES ROOFING CORPORATION, WILSON, INC., WIRELESS
COMMUNICATIONS & ELECTRONICS, XEROX GLOBAL SERVICES, AND
ZEROCHAOS
100 GREEN STREET
MARCUS HOOK, PENNSYLVANIA

TA-W-81,145A

SUNOCO, INC., R&M
10 INDUSTRIAL HWY, MS4 BUILDING G
LESTER, PENNSYLVANIA

TA-W-81,145B

SUNOCO, INC., R&M
3144 PASSYUNK AVENUE
PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA

Notice of Revised Determination
on Reconsideration


On September 14, 2012, the Department of Labor issued a Notice
of Affirmative Determination Regarding Application for
Reconsideration applicable to workers and former workers of Sunoco,
Inc., R&M, Refining Division, Marcus Hook, Pennsylvania (TA-W-
81,145), Sunoco, Inc., R&M, Lester, Pennsylvania (TA-W-81,145A),
and Sunoco, Inc., R&M, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (TA-W-81,145B)
(hereafter collectively referred to as “Sunoco” or “subject firm”).
The subject firm is engaged in activities related to the production
of refined petroleum products. Workers are not separately
identifiable by product line.
The worker group at the Marcus Hook facility includes on-site
leased workers from Accredited Environmental Technologies, Amquip
Corporation, Anderson Construction Services, Baker Petrolite,
BakerCorp, Bell-Fast Fire Protection Inc., Bolttech Inc., Brand
Insulation Services, Brand Scaffold Builders Inc. (aka Brand
Insulation Services), Catalyst Handling Service Co., Chalmers &
Kubeck, Chef’e Catering, Cintas, Clean Ventures, Inc., CM Towers,
Inc., Compu-Com, Delaware Bay and River Cooperative, Devon Property
Services LLC, Eisco-NJ, Fisher Tank Company, GE Energy Services,
Godwin Pumps of America Inc., Hagemeyer North America, HRI
Incorporated, Integrity Test Lab, Intertek-Caleb Brett USA, JJ
White, JR Metzger, Joy Services, Matrix Svc. Industrial
Contractors, Madison LTD, Mistras Services Group, Mobile Dredging
and Pumping Co., Mott Tank Inspection, O’Brient & Gere Engineers
Inc., Presidio Networked Solutions, Inc., PSC Industrial
Outsourcing, LP, PSCI-Progressive Software Computing, Quality
Testing Services, Inc., Railroad Construction Co. of South Jersey,
Inc., Republic Services of Pennsylvania, Sage Environmental
Consulting, Saybolt, Inc., Sealtec-Division of Sealco, Inc.,
Security Services & Tech/AKA ADT Advance Integration, Service
Painting, Inc., SGS North America, Inc., Shared Systems Technology,
Inc., Service Painting Inc., SGS North America, Inc., Shared
Systems Technology, Inc., Stantec Consulting Corporation, Sunstates
Security, LLC, Team Industrial Services, Inc., Teksolv, Inc.,
ThyssenKrupp Safway, Inc. (dba Safway Services, Inc.), Trico
Equipment, Union Tank Car Co/UTLX, United States Roofing
Corporation, Wilson, Inc., Wireless Communications & Electronics,
Xerox Global Services, and ZeroChaos.
The worker groups at the Lester and Philadelphia facilities do
not include leased workers.
Based on a careful review and clarification of previously-
submitted information and additional information obtained during the
reconsideration investigation, the Department determines that
increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with the
refined petroleum products produced by Sunoco contributed
importantly to workers’ separations and to the decline in sales or
production at the afore-identified facilities.
Section 222(a)(1) has been met because a significant number or
proportion of the workers at Sunoco have become totally or partially
separated, or are threatened with such separation.
Section 222(a)(2)(A)(i) has been met because Sunoco sales
and/or production of refined petroleum products have decreased.
Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) has been met because aggregate
imports of articles like or directly competitive with the refined
petroleum products produced by Sunoco have increased during the
period of Sunoco’s sales and/or production decline.
Finally, Section 222(a)(2)(A)(iii) has been met because
increased aggregate imports contributed importantly to the worker
group separations and sales/production declines at Sunoco.
Conclusion
After careful review of previously-submitted facts and the
additional facts obtained during the reconsideration investigation, I
determine that workers of Sunoco, Inc., R&M, Refining Division,
including on-site leased workers, Marcus Hook, Pennsylvania (TA-W-
81,145), Sunoco, Inc., R&M, Lester, Pennsylvania (TA-W-81,145A),
and Sunoco, Inc., R&M, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (TA-W-81,145B),
who were engaged in employment related to the production of refined
petroleum products, meet the worker group certification criteria
under Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a). In accordance
with Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273, I make the following
certification:
"All workers of Sunoco, Inc., R&M, Refining Division, including
on-site leased workers from Accredited Environmental
Technologies, Amquip Corporation, Anderson Construction
Services, Baker Petrolite, BakerCorp, Bell-Fast Fire
Protection Inc., Bolttech Inc., Brand Insulation Services,
Brand Scaffold Builders Inc. (aka Brand Insulation Services),
Catalyst Handling Service Co., Chalmers & Kubeck, Chef’e
Catering, Cintas, Clean Ventures, Inc., CM Towers, Inc.,
Compu-Com, Delaware Bay and River Cooperative, Devon Property
Services LLC, Eisco-NJ, Fisher Tank Company, GE Energy
Services, Godwin Pumps of America Inc., Hagemeyer North
America, HRI Incorporated, Integrity Test Lab, Intertek-Caleb
Brett USA, JJ White, JR Metzger, Joy Services, Matrix Svc.
Industrial Contractors, Madison LTD, Mistras Services Group,
Mobile Dredging and Pumping Co., Mott Tank Inspection,
O’Brient & Gere Engineers Inc., Presidio Networked Solutions,
Inc., PSC Industrial Outsourcing, LP, PSCI-Progressive
Software Computing, Quality Testing Services, Inc., Railroad
Construction Co. of South Jersey, Inc., Republic Services of
Pennsylvania, Sage Environmental Consulting, Saybolt, Inc.,
Sealtec-Division of Sealco, Inc., Security Services & Tech/AKA
ADT Advance Integration, Service Painting, Inc., SGS North
America, Inc., Shared Systems Technology, Inc., Service
Painting Inc., SGS North America, Inc., Shared Systems
Technology, Inc., Stantec Consulting Corporation, Sunstates
Security, LLC, Team Industrial Services, Inc., Teksolv, Inc.,
ThyssenKrupp Safway, Inc. (dba Safway Services, Inc.), Trico
Equipment, Union Tank Car Co/UTLX, United States Roofing
Corporation, Wilson, Inc., Wireless Communications &
Electronics, Xerox Global Services, and ZeroChaos, Marcus
Hook, Pennsylvania (TA-W-81,145), Sunoco, Inc., R&M, Lester,
Pennsylvania (TA-W-81,145A), and Sunoco, Inc., R&M,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (TA-W-81,145B), who became totally
or partially separated from employment on or after February 13,
2010, through two years from the date of this certification, and
all workers in the group threatened with total or partial
separation from employment on date of certification through two
years from the date of certification, are eligible to apply for
adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade
Act of 1974, as amended.”
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 28th day of March, 2013

/s/ Del Min Amy Chen
______________________________
DEL MIN AMY CHEN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance
4510-FN-P


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-81,145

SUNOCO, INC. R&M
REFINING DIVISION
MARCUS HOOK, PENNSYLVANIA

TA-W-81,145A

SUNOCO, INC.
10 INDUSTRIAL HWY, MS4 BUILDING G
LESTER, PENNSYLVANIA

Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended (“Act”), 19 U.S.C. § 2273, the Department of Labor herein
presents the results of an investigation regarding certification of
eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance.
Workers of a firm may be eligible for worker adjustment
assistance if they satisfy the criteria of subsection (a), (b) or (e)
of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), (b) and (e). For the
Department of Labor to issue a certification for workers under
Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), the following
criteria must be met:
(1) The first criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(1) of the Act,
19 U.S.C. § 2282(a)(1)) requires that a significant number or
proportion of the workers in the workers’ firm must have become
totally or partially separated or be threatened with total or
partial separation.

(2) The second criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(2) of the Act,
19 U.S.C. § 2272(a)(2)) may be satisfied in one of two ways:
(A) Increased Imports Path:
(i) sales or production, or both, at the workers’ firm must
have decreased absolutely, AND
(ii) (I) imports of articles or services like or directly
competitive with articles or services produced or
supplied by the workers’ firm have increased, OR
(II)(aa) imports of articles like or directly competitive
with articles into which the component part produced
by the workers’ firm was directly incorporated have
increased; OR
(II)(bb) imports of articles like or directly competitive
with articles which are produced directly using the
services supplied by the workers’ firm have increased;
OR
(III) imports of articles directly incorporating component
parts not produced in the U.S. that are like or
directly competitive with the article into which the
component part produced by the workers’ firm was
directly incorporated have increased.
(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.

(B) Shift in Production or Supply Path:
(i)(I) there has been a shift by the workers’ firm to a
foreign country in the production of articles or supply of
services like or directly competitive with those
produced/supplied by the workers’ firm; OR
(II) there has been an acquisition from a foreign country
by the workers’ firm of articles/services that are like or
directly competitive with those produced/supplied by the
workers’ 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.

For the Department to issue a secondary worker certification
under Section 222(b) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(b), to workers of a
Supplier or a Downstream Producer, the following criteria must be
met:
(1) a significant number or proportion of the workers in the
workers’ firm or an appropriate subdivision of the firm
have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;

(2) the workers’ firm is a Supplier or Downstream Producer to a
firm that employed a group of workers who received a
certification of eligibility under Section 222(a) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), and such supply or production is
related to the article or service that was the basis for
such certification; and

(3) either
(A) the workers’ firm is a supplier and the component
parts it supplied to the firm described in paragraph (2)
accounted for at least 20 percent of the production or
sales of the workers’ firm;
or
(B) a loss of business by the workers’ firm with the firm
described in paragraph (2) contributed importantly to the
workers’ separation or threat of separation.

Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), defines the
terms “Supplier” and “Downstream Producer.”
Workers of a firm may also be considered eligible if they are
publicly identified by name by the International Trade Commission as
a member of a domestic industry in an investigation resulting in a
category of determination that is listed in Section 222(e) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(e).
The group eligibility requirements for workers of a firm under
Section 222(e) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(e), can be satisfied if
the following criteria are met:
(1) the workers’ firm is publicly identified by name by the
International Trade Commission as a member of a domestic
industry in an investigation resulting in--
(A) an affirmative determination of serious injury or
threat thereof under section 202(b)(1);
(B) an affirmative determination of market disruption or
threat thereof under section 421(b)(1); or
(C) an affirmative final determination of material injury
or threat thereof under section 705(b)(1)(A) or
735(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1671d(b)(1)(A) and 1673d(b)(1)(A));

(2) the petition is filed during the 1-year period beginning on
the date on which--
(A) a summary of the report submitted to the President by
the International Trade Commission under section
202(f)(1) with respect to the affirmative
determination described in paragraph (1)(A) is
published in the Federal Register under section
202(f)(3); or
(B) notice of an affirmative determination described in
subparagraph (1) is published in the Federal Register;
and

(3) the workers have become totally or partially
separated from the workers’ firm within--
(A) the 1-year period described in paragraph (2); or
(B) notwithstanding section 223(b)(1), the 1-year
period preceding the 1-year period described in
paragraph (2).

The investigation was initiated in response to a petition filed
on December 8, 2011 by a union official from the United Steel
Workers Local 10-34, on behalf of workers of Sunoco, Inc. R&M,
Refining Division, Marcus Hook, Pennsylvania. The workers’ firm is
engaged in activities related to production of refined petroleum
products.
At the request of a company official, the investigation of this
petition was expanded to include workers of Sunoco, Inc., 10
Industrial Hwy, MS4 Building G, Lester, Pennsylvania.
The petitioner alleges that increased U.S. imports of refined
petroleum products contributed importantly to sales, production,
and employment declines at the subject firm.
During the course of the investigation, data was collected
from the workers’ firm and from the U.S. Energy Information
Administration.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports of articles like or directly
competitive with the refined petroleum products produced by Sunoco
have not increased. Specifically, the subject firm has not
increased imports of refined petroleum products, and aggregate U.S.
imports of refined petroleum products have decreased from 2009 to
2010 and from 2010 to 2011.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm has not shifted production of
refined petroleum products to a foreign country or acquired refined
petroleum products from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Sunoco is not a Supplier or Downstream
Producer to a firm that employed a group of workers who received a
certification of eligibility under Section 222(a) of the Act, 19
U.S.C. § 2272(a).
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section 222(e)
of the Act, have not been satisfied because the workers’ firm has not
been 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.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the investigation,
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 Sunoco Inc. R&M, Refining Division, Marcus
Hook, Pennsylvania (TA-W-81,145) and Sunoco Inc., 10 Industrial
Hwy, MS4 Building G, Lester, Pennsylvania (TA-W-81,145A), engaged
in activities related to the production of refined petroleum
products, to apply for adjustment assistance, in accordance with
Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 7th day of February, 2012

/s/ Michael W. Jaffe
______________________________
MICHAEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance







- 12 -