DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-41,987

ALCOA WENATCHEE WORKS
A DIVISION OF ALCOA, INC.
MALAGA, WASHINGTON

Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration

By application dated November 18, 2002, the Wenatchee
Aluminum Trade Council requested administrative reconsideration
of the Department's negative determination regarding eligibility
to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), applicable to
workers and former workers of the subject firm. The Notice of
Termination of Investigation was signed on October 18, 2002 and
published in the Federal Register on November 5, 2002 (67 FR
67423).
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 mis-
interpretation of facts or of the law justified
reconsideration of the decision.


The petition for the workers of Alcoa Wenatchee Works, a
division of Alcoa, Inc., Malaga, Washington engaged in the
production of aluminum was terminated based on the plant ceasing
production of aluminum in July 2001, more than one year prior to
the August 1, 2002, date of the petition.
The petitioner on reconsideration questions the exact
findings that the facility ceased production in July 2001.
The Department of Labor's Notice of Negative Determination
Regarding Application for Reconsideration pertains to the
impacted worker group producing aluminum cited in the petition.
It was determined that the company ceased production of aluminum
on July 1, 2001, more than one year prior to the date of the
petition, August 1, 2002. Contact with the company confirmed
that production of aluminum ceased on July 1, 2001. As such,
layoffs occurring after August 1, 2001 can not be attributable to
the cessation of aluminum production as it had already occurred
at least one month earlier.
The petitioners also infer that we erred in our use of
Section 223(b)(1) referencing it to the ceased production date.
We do not agree that there was an error made in our use of
Section 223(b)(1). The termination notice states "Section
223(b)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 provides that a TAA
certification may not apply to a worker whose separation from
employment occurred more than one year prior to the date the
petition was filed on behalf of affected workers." As noted
above, since production ceased more than a year prior to the
petition date, workers separated subsequent to July 2001 would
not have been engaged in the production of aluminum when
separated.
The petitioner on reconsideration further indicates that
they are asking for reconsideration of laid-off workers after
August 1, 2001.
The initial investigation addressed the group of workers as
stated in the petition and thus the investigation was conducted
for the workers engaged in the production of aluminum. In
conducting the initial investigation the Department was aware
that the plant remained open due to a contract agreement that
required that Alcoa maintain at least 400 employees. The
Department was also aware that a portion of the workforce began
producing carbon anode blocks for another Alcoa Aluminum plant,
while that plant rebuilds their anode baking facility. The
carbon blocks act as a sacrificial anode in the aluminum
production process, so most of the aluminum smelters, including
Wenatchee Works, have such a production facility. The major
contributing factor leading to the layoffs at the subject firm
was the curtailment of aluminum production. Neither of the
activities as described above led to the aluminum worker layoffs
for which the investigation was conducted. In any event, if
employment declines or threat of layoffs occurred relating to the
worker groups engaged in the production of carbon blocks and/or
electricity, a petition for Trade Adjustment Assistance may be
filed on their behalf.
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 11th day of February 2003.

/s/ Edward A. Tomchick

EDWARD A. TOMCHICK
Director, Division of
Trade Adjustment Assistance