DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-62,651

EASTALCO ALUMINUM COMPANY
A SUBSIDIARY OF ALCOA, INC.
FREDERICK, MARYLAND

Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply For Worker Adjustment Assistance and
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended (19 USC 2273), the Department of Labor herein presents the
results of an investigation regarding certification of eligibility
to apply for worker adjustment assistance.
The investigation was initiated on January 9, 2008, in
response to a petition filed by a State agency representative on
behalf of workers of Eastalco Aluminum Company, a subsidiary of
Alcoa, Inc., Frederick, Maryland.
The petitioner indicated on the petition form that the workers
produce ingots, slabs, and billets, and the plant closed on
December 15, 2005 affecting 605 workers. The State agency
indicated that the basis for seeking certification was a shift in
production by the workers' firm to a foreign country and petition
TA-W-58,288 was about to expire.
The workers of the subject firm producing ingots, slabs, and
billets were certified eligible to apply for adjustment assistance
under petition number TA-W-58,288, issued on February 2, 2006. The
basis for the certification was a shift in production to Canada.
All workers of Eastalco Aluminum Company, a subsidiary of Alcoa,
Inc., Frederick, Maryland, separated from employment on or after
February 2, 2006 through February 2, 2008 are covered by that
certification.
This investigation revealed that employment at the subject
firm declined in 2007 when compared to 2006. The workers separated
during this period were covered under petition number TA-W-58,288,
which expired February 2, 2008. The remaining workers at the site
perform plant maintenance functions.
The investigation determined that the smelting operation
ceased in December 2005 and the cast house operation ceased
December of 2006.
The remaining employees perform administrative and maintenance
functions at the subject firm location.
In order to be certified as eligible to apply for adjustment
assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, the worker
group must work for a firm or appropriate subdivision that produces
an article domestically, and there must be a relationship between
the workers' work and the article produced by the workers' firm or
appropriate subdivision. A new certification may be made on one of
three bases: There was an increase in imports (Section
223(a)(2)(A)); there was a shift in production (Section
223(a)(2)(B)); or the workers were adversely affected secondary
workers (Section 223(b)).
The first basis for certification requires, under Section
223(a)(2)(A)(ii), that "imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have
increased." "Increased imports," defined at 29 CFR 97.2, means
"that imports have increased either absolutely or relative to
domestic production compared to a representative base period. The
representative base period shall be one year consisting of the four
quarters immediately preceding the date which is twelve months
prior to the date of the petition." Accordingly, the
"representative base period" here was the four quarters running
from January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006.
Thus, for there to be increased imports as required by Section
221(a)(2)(A)(ii), imports would have had to increase "compared to"
the period January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006. Further,
Section 221(A)(2)(A)(iii) requires that the increased imports
"contributed importantly . . . to the decline in the sales or
production of" the firm or subdivision. However, since all
production at the workers' firm ceased on December 31, 2006, during
the representative base period, any subsequent increase in imports
"compared to" that base period could not have "contributed
importantly . . . to the decline in the sales or production of" the
firm or subdivision. In other words, since production stopped
before the end of the representative base period, any subsequent
increase in imports "compared to" this period could not have had
any effect whatsoever on the subject firm's already stopped
production. Accordingly, the petition cannot be certified under
Section 222(a)(2)(A).
Further, the absence of a shift in production by Eastalco
Aluminum Company, a subsidiary of Alcoa, Inc., Frederick, Maryland,
precludes certification on the second basis.
Lastly, the workers cannot be certified as adversely affected
secondary workers, the third basis for certification. A
certification as secondary workers must, under Section 223(b)(2),
be based on the certification of a primary firm.
In addition, in accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of
1974 (26 USC 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor herein
presents the results of its investigation regarding certification
of eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance
(ATAA) for older workers.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of
eligibility to apply for ATAA, the worker group must be certified
eligible to apply for trade adjustment assistance (TAA). Since the
workers are denied eligibility to apply for TAA, the workers cannot
be certified eligible for ATAA.



Conclusion
All workers of Eastalco Aluminum Company, a subsidiary of
Alcoa, Inc., Frederick, Maryland, are denied eligibility to apply
for adjustment assistance under section 223 of the Trade Act of
1974, and are also denied eligibility to apply for alternative
trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of
1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 1st day of May 2008


/s/Linda G. Poole
_____________________________
LINDA G. POOLE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-62,651A

EASTALCO ALUMINUM COMPANY
A SUBSIDIARY OF ALCOA, INC.
PIER FACILITY
BALTIMORE, MARYLAND

Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and
Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended (19 USC 2273), the Department of Labor herein presents the
results of an investigation regarding certification of eligibility
to apply for worker adjustment assistance. The group eligibility
requirements for directly-impacted (primary) workers under Section
222(a) the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, can be satisfied in
either of two ways:
I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following must be satisfied:
A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in
such workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the
firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. the sales or production, or both, of such firm or
subdivision have decreased absolutely; and
C. increased imports of articles like or directly
competitive with articles produced by such firm or
subdivision have contributed importantly to such workers'
separation or threat of separation and to the decline in
sales or production of such firm or subdivision; or

II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the following must be satisfied:

A. a significant number or proportion of the workers in such
workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm,
have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;
B. there has been a shift in production by such workers' firm
or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or
directly competitive with articles which are produced by
such firm or subdivision; and

C. One of the following must be satisfied:
1. the country to which the workers' firm has shifted
production of the articles is a party to a free trade
agreement with the United States;
2. the country to which the workers' firm has shifted
production of the articles is a beneficiary country under
the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth and
Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery
Act; or
3. there has been or is likely to be an increase in imports
of articles that are like or directly competitive
with articles which are or were produced by such firm or
subdivision.

The investigation was initiated on January 9, 2008, in
response to a petition filed on by a State agency representative on
behalf of workers of Eastalco Aluminum Company, a subsidiary of
Alcoa, Inc., Frederick, Maryland. The investigation was expanded
at the request of a company official to include workers of Eastalco
Aluminum Company, a subsidiary of Alcoa, Inc., Pier Facility in
Baltimore, Maryland, where the workers are engaged in trans-loading
aluminum ore from barges to railcars and perform site maintenance
activities.
The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.A) and
(a)(2)(B)(II.A) have not been met.
The investigation revealed that the subject firm did not
separate or threaten to separate a significant number or proportion
of workers as required by Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Significant number or proportion of the workers in a firm or
appropriate subdivision means at least three workers in a workforce
of fewer than 50 workers, five percent of the workers in a
workforce of over 50 workers, or at least 50 workers.
In addition, in accordance with Section 246 the Trade Act of
1974 (26 USC 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor herein
presents the results of its investigation regarding certification
of eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance
(ATAA) for older workers.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of
eligibility to apply for ATAA, the worker group must be certified
eligible to apply for trade adjustment assistance (TAA). Since the
workers are denied eligibility to apply for TAA, the workers cannot
be certified eligible for ATAA.
Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in this
investigation, I determine that all workers of Eastalco Aluminum
Company, a subsidiary of Alcoa, Inc., Pier Facility, Baltimore,
Maryland, are denied eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance
under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and alternative trade
adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 1st day of May 2008


/s/Linda G. Poole
______________________________
LINDA G. POOLE
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance