DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-64,665

ALCOA HOWMET CASTNGS
A SUBSIDIARY OF ALCOA, INCORPORATED
THERMATECH COATINGS AND TITANIUM INGOT DIVISION
PLANT #4
WHITEHALL, MICHIGAN

TA-W-64,665A
ALCOA HOWMET CASTINGS
A SUBSIDIARY OF ALCOA, INCORPORATED
PLANT #5
WHITEHALL, MICHIGAN

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated May 11, 2009, the United Automobile,
Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local
1243 (UAW) requested administrative reconsideration of the
Department's negative determination regarding eligibility for
workers and former workers of Alcoa Howmet Castings, a subsidiary
of Alcoa, Inc., Thermatech Coatings and Titanium Ingot Division,
Plant #4, Whitehall, Michigan, and Alcoa Howmet Castings, a
subsidiary of Alcoa, Inc., Plant #5, Whitehall, Michigan, to
apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade
Adjustment Assistance (ATAA). Workers at Plant #4 produce
environmental coatings and titanium ingots, and are separately
identifiable by product; workers at Plant #5 produce titanium
castings, pattern wax, casting crucibles, and HIP (hot isostatic
pressing), and are not separately identifiable by product.
The Department’s determination was issued on April 24, 2009.
The Department’s Notice of negative determination was published
in the Federal Register on May 7, 2009 (74 FR 21407).
The determination stated that, with regards to Plant #4,
criterion (a)(2)(A)(I.B.) was not met because sales and
production of environmental coatings increased during the
relevant period; criterion (a)(2)(B) was not met because the
subject firm’s production of environmental coatings did not shift
to a foreign country during the relevant period; criterion
(a)(2)(A)(I.C.) was not met because increased imports of titanium
ingot did not contribute importantly to the workers’ separations
and subject firm sales and/or production declines of titanium
ingot; and criterion (a)(2)(B) was not met because the subject
firm’s production of titanium ingot did not shift to a foreign
country during the relevant period.
The determination stated that, with regards to Plant #5,
criterion (a)(2)(A)(I.C.) was not met because increased imports
of titanium castings, pattern wax, casting crucibles, or HIP
processing did not contribute importantly to the workers’
separations and subject firm sales and/or production declines of
titanium castings, pattern wax, casting crucibles, or HIP
processing and criterion (a)(2)(B) was not met because the
subject firms’ production of titanium castings, pattern wax,
casting crucibles, or HIP processing did not shift to a foreign
country during the relevant period.
In the request for reconsideration, the UAW representative
stated that “sales will continue to decline . . . which supports
(a)(2)(A)(I.B.) . . . .”
The UAW representative’s allegation that (a)(2)(A)(I.B.) was
met (sales and/or production declined during the relevant period)
is relevant to Plant #4 but is not relevant to Plant #5 because
the Department determined that there were sales and/or production
declines at Plant #5 during the relevant period. Therefore, the
Department’s review of the request for reconsideration is limited
to sales and production of environmental coatings at Plant #4.
Pursuant to 29 CFR 90.18(c), administrative 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 mis-
interpretation of facts or of the law justified
reconsideration of the decision.

After careful review of the request for reconsideration and
previously submitted materials, the Department determines that
there is no new information that supports a finding that Section
222 of the Trade Act of 1974 was satisfied and that no mistake or
misinterpretation of the facts or of the law with regards to the
number or proportion of workers separated from the subject firm
during the relevant period.
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 12th day of June 2009



/s/ Elliott S. Kushner
___________________________________
ELLIOTT S. KUSHNER
Certifying Officer, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance

4510-FN-P


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-64,665

ALCOA HOWMET CASTNGS
A SUBSIDIARY OF ALCOA, INCORPORATED
THERMATECH COATINGS AND TITANIUM INGOT DIVISION
PLANT #4
WHITEHALL, MICHIGAN

TA-W-64,665A
ALCOA HOWMET CASTINGS
A SUBSIDIARY OF ALCOA, INCORPORATED
PLANT #5
WHITEHALL, MICHIGAN

Negative Determinations 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 December 12, 2008 in
response to a petition filed by the International Union, United
Automobile, Aerospace, and Agricultural Implement Workers of
America, Local 1243, on behalf of workers of Alcoa Howmet Castings,
a subsidiary of Alcoa, Inc., Thermatech Coatings and Titanium Ingot
Division, Plant #4, Whitehall, Michigan (TA-W-64,665) and Alcoa
Howmet Castings, a subsidiary of Alcoa, Inc., Plant #5, Whitehall,
Michigan (TA-W-64,665A). Workers at Plant #4 produce environmental
coatings and titanium ingots and are separately identifiable by
product. Workers at Plant #5 produce titanium castings, pattern
wax, casting crucibles, and HIP (hot isostatic pressing)
processing; and are not separately identifiable by product.
The investigation determined that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.B.) and
(a)(2)(B)(II.C.) have not been met for workers producing
environmental coatings at Alcoa Howmet Castings, a subsidiary of
Alcoa, Inc., Thermatech Coatings and Titanium Ingot Division, Plant
#4, Whitehall, Michigan.
The subject firm sales and production of environmental
coatings increased in 2007 compared to 2006 and in January through
November 2008 when compared to the same period of 2007.
The subject firm did not shift production of environmental
coatings to a foreign country during the relevant period.
The investigation determined that that criteria
(a)(2)(A)(I.C.) and (a)(2)(B)(II.B.) have not been met for workers
producing titanium ingot at Alcoa Howmet Castings, a subsidiary of
Alcoa, Inc., Thermatech Coatings and Titanium Ingot Division, Plant
#4, Whitehall, Michigan.
The subject firm did not import titanium ingot or shift the
production of titanium ingot to a foreign country in 2006, 2007, or
January through November 2008.
The Department of Labor conducted a survey of the subject
firm’s major declining customers regarding their purchases of
titanium ingot in 2006, 2007, and January through November of 2007
and 2008. The surveys revealed no increased import purchases of
titanium ingot during the relevant period.
The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C.) and
(a)(2)(B)(II.B.) have not been met for workers producing titanium
castings, pattern wax, casting crucibles, and HIP (hot isostatic
pressing) processing at Alcoa Howmet Castings, a subsidiary of
Alcoa, Inc., Plant #5, Whitehall, Michigan (TA-W-64,665A).
The subject firm did not import titanium castings, pattern
wax, casting crucibles, and HIP (hot isostatic pressing) processing
or shift production to a foreign country in 2006, 2007, or January
through November 2008.
The Department of Labor conducted a survey of the subject
firm’s major declining customers regarding their purchases of
titanium castings, pattern wax, casting crucibles, and HIP (hot
isostatic pressing) processing in 2006, 2007, and January through
November of 2007 and 2008. The surveys revealed no import
purchases of titanium castings, pattern wax, casting crucibles, and
HIP (hot isostatic pressing) processing during the relevant period.
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 the
investigation, I determine that workers engaged in employment
related to the production environmental coatings and titanium
ingots at Alcoa Howmet Castings, a subsidiary of Alcoa, Inc.,
Thermatech Coatings and Titanium Ingot Division, Plant #4,
Whitehall, Michigan (TA-W-64,665), and all workers Alcoa Howmet
Castings, a subsidiary of Alcoa, Inc., Plant #5, Whitehall,
Michigan (TA-W-64,665A), 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 24th day of April 2009


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





- 2 -