Ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon. Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Fourth Quarter 2011 Earnings Call. At this time, all lines are in a listen-only mode. Later, there will be an opportunity for your questions and instructions will be given at that time. (Operator Instructions) And as a reminder, this conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to our host, Ms. Shelly Harrison. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Tom. Good afternoon, everyone and welcome to the conference call. Before we begin, I would like to remind you that today’s discussion will contain forward-looking statements related to future events and expectations, including our expected future financial performance, results of operations and financial condition. These forward-looking statements involve important known and unknown risks and uncertainties, which could cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements. Please review the forward-looking statements disclosure in today’s slides and press release for a full discussion of these risks and uncertainties. In addition, we’ve included some non-GAAP financial measures in our discussion. Reconciliations to the most comparable GAAP financial measures can be found in the appendix to today’s presentation and on our website at www.centuryaluminum.com. I’d now like to introduce Mike Bless, Century’s President and Chief Executive Officer.

Thanks very much, Shelly. If we could turn to slide 4 please, we’ll go into a quick review of 2011 and the last couple months. And just a couple of minutes Shelly is going to come back on and take you through our review of the macro environment. So, I won’t be repetitive there. I guess, I could just suffice to say in summary now at this point, we’re prepared for the volatile conditions in the marketplace to continue for some reason over a period of time, and we’re going to continue to manage the company in that context. Okay. Let’s take a quick review of 2011. At Hawesville starting off, as you recall we restarted line 5 in February of this past year. As we’ve discussed that (inaudible) plant got away from us a few months into this process upon assessment, we’ve confirmed as we talked you about the past that the issues where primarily related to the management and leadership in the plant. As we’ve looked through the causes we found no purely technical reasons as to what happened in the plant. Due to the upset conditions in the plant, our safety performance there also fell below our normal standards and again, as we talked to you about in the past, it took us longer than we initially expected to diagnose the problems in the plant and to get the systemic fixes into place, which we’ve now done. When all was said and done just a bottom line for you, the upset conditions in the plant last year cost us $50 million in last profits. This is a combination on the one hand of unabsorbed fixed costs, did in lower volume and number two, due to higher spending both on materials and outside contractors. As I said, we…

Thanks Mike. If you please turn to slide five; the only cash price averaged approximately $2,100 per ton in the fourth quarter. this is a significant decline from previous quarters and resulted in an average price of approximately $2,400 per ton for 2011. Prices have strengthened a bit from the $1,900 level we saw year-end, and have traded in a low 2000 so far in 2012. Price [default] is being driven by global cost pressures and western well producer discipline, but it’s been capped by macroeconomic concerns in Europe, large aluminum inventory stockpiles, and concerns over the lack of action by Chinese producers and taking off-line high cost capacity. In recent months, there have been several announcements that plant come in actions taken by producers in Europe and Australia as well as supply disruption affecting production in Canada and other parts of the world. While aluminum markets have been generally strengthened by these announcements. there is an over hanging disappointment from the limited action taken by China, the world’s largest producer of aluminum. Aluminum inventories continue to reach new record levels, yet local premiums have reversed their pull back from late 2011 and are steadily creeping back towards the record levels we saw earlier last year. No interest rates and a widening contango have reinforced the economics that aluminum financing transactions and lead times to access metal from warehouses continue to grow. Even with the increased load-out rates that are planned to come in to effect over the next few months long lead times for metal are expected to persist and premium should remain strong. Alumina market have been somewhat soft and recent trades have been completed in the low 300s per ton, U.S. market is expected to remain balanced to slightly over supplied in the near term. To move…

Thanks Shelly. Turn to slide seven please; as Shelly said I’d like to just give you a quick review of the company’s operations in the fourth quarter. Let’s start with Hawesville; as I said we returned during the quarter to control the operations and we’re now working to maintain that tradition obviously and into improve the plant. Moving down here you’ll see that safety was a, we had a good performance in safety during the quarter and in the last couple of months. The incidence rate has come down nicely, one of the areas on which we’re focusing here just to give you a little bit of flavor is on housekeeping for those of you, who have been around industrial plants will know that keeping the plant orderly and everything in its place is key to improving safety performance. It’s sounds easy, and a complex environment like in aluminum reduction plant it’s not at all, and we’ve had one of our most experience and talented people, he’s actually from Ravenswood plant, on loan to Hawesville to help them put in place the right processes and [Gordon Harper] has been doing a fantastic job there. Production metrics were improved across the board as Hawesville over the quarter. I’m going to just give you some examples; current efficiency was up 2 percentage points, Q4 over Q3, power usage or efficiency down 3% or our usage down 3%, efficiency up 3%. We had 45 more average parts and service Q4 over Q3, and obviously that improved production, drove labor productivity up 12%. You see the conversion cost coming down, most of that improvement came towards the end of the quarter and now that we’ve got all the third party contractors out of the plant, the unusual and high usage of maintenance and materials…

Sure. So if you’ll turn to slide 12, as we do in the fourth quarter of each year, we’re providing a couple of slides with detailed information on the company’s anticipated financial measures for the coming year. In 2012, we expect all operating facilities to be producing above their rate of capacity levels. As Mike has mentioned, Hawesville is now operating on its rate of capacity and we (inaudible) production around 250,000 tons this year. We anticipate production out or above record levels for both Mt. Holly and Grundartangi as a result of the efficient programs that have implemented at these facilities. Increased production over 2011 levels will be weighted towards the back end of the year. As in previous years the vast majority of the products we sell both in the U.S. and Iceland, we’ve priced at a one month lag. For 2012, we provide a cash cost for our U.S. and Icelandic facility, obviously our cost of production is highly dependent on metal prices due to our LME linked alumina and power contract. The indicated ranges for cash costs are consistent with an LME price of $2,200 to $2,400 per ton. For this purpose we’re presenting cash costs in a format that we believe is directly comparable to the LME reported price. To do this either cost of alumina for our tooling operation in Iceland and deducted regional premiums above the LME price for all facility. In power costs, we are forecasting a 15% year-over-year increase at Hawesville. A portion of this increase is related to the rate case, which was approved in late 2011 and the balance is due to higher producer fuel cost, which do not require PSD approval. As Michael discussed, we are working very hard on the situation in Mt. Holly and hope to…

Thanks Shelly. We can turn to slide 14, as Shelly said, I’d like to talk with you just for a few moments here, but some of the major items on which we will be working in 2012 and going forward. So first safety is always going to be our first priority and we truly believe here at the senior management board level that this is a commitment to our people and to all visitors in our facilities. And I also believe firmly based upon my experience as an industrial plants that it’s a foundation of a well-run manufacturing plant. Let me just give you a couple of examples of what we’re doing at both Hawesville and Grundartangi. At Hawesville as I said, the new management team there has a renewed commitment focus in this area. Each department in the plant has their own plan. Each of those plans is modeled up the principles of the plant wide program. We have 30, 90, and 180 day improvement programs in place and each of those have measurable metrics. We do have some modest capital in the CapEx budget that Shelly described for safety related items. We want to make sure everybody understands that we won’t shy away from spending capital, when it improve the safety in our facilities. Most of the improvement however, is going to come from leadership and from adherence to standard operating procedures in the plant. And after we get to the right level, our next step at Hawesville will be the implementation of behavioral base safety, which is where Grundartangi is now heading. Grundartangi is operating from a very good baseline. And so, we know we can improve now to the next level. They’ve got good SOPs and processes in place. And as I said before, when we…

Yes, Tom (inaudible) please.

(Operator Instructions) Our first question today comes from the line of Kuni Chen with CRT Capital Group. Please go ahead. Kuni Chen – CRT Capital Group: Hi, good evening every body.

Hi, Kuni. Kuni Chen – CRT Capital Group: Congratulations to you Mike.

Thank you. Kuni Chen – CRT Capital Group: And good to see all the progress, looks like you guys are doing a lot of good work here.

Thank you. Kuni Chen – CRT Capital Group: Just first of on Ravenswood, it seems like you appear a little bit more confident on getting this restarted at some point maybe even with some positive, [you still have] near term, can you give us some parameters around capital spending to get the plant back up?

Sure I will give you not only capital, but the total spending to get the plant back up, because the capital quite frankly is a reasonably small part of it, so I’ll give you the bottom line answer first and then dissect it. It will cost around $70 million in cash to get that plant restarted. Of that Kuni about half is working capital as you would expect largely alumina there, of the remaining half $35 million less than a third of that is pure CapEx, most of it is preproduction labor, preproduction power, training programs, material supplies and things like that. Kuni Chen – CRT Capital Group: Okay. That’s helpful. And then just on Glencore and Xstrata, can you talk about how that potentially would impact essentially just share some of your perspectives there and longer term will that have any impact either your alumina or tolling agreements?

I can imagine those are commercial arrangements Kuni and as it related to Glencore is normally, we don’t and wouldn’t comment on anything that they are doing. Kuni Chen – CRT Capital Group: Okay, fair enough, I’ll turn it over.

Okay, thanks Kuni.

Question comes from Brett Levy with Jefferies & Company. Please go ahead. Brett Levy – Jefferies & Company: Hey guys first one is kind of a math one, it looks like your pension in opening half went from 162 to 216 in about a quarter, can you talk about sort of what drove the change in the unfronted number and whether or not that impacts cash costs going forward?

Thanks, Brett. Yeah, Steve Schneider, who is our Chief Accounting Officer sitting here and he has reported here the right hand these are largely valuation assumptions the most meaningful one is given that you’re on the fixed income side and know exactly what I’m talking about the sudden discount rates. So the answer to your the second part of your question is no? Brett Levy – Jefferies & Company: Got it kind of just figured that. You’ve said something to the effect of $50 million in bad management related at Hawesville. Is there any way of drilling that – getting anymore specificity, we can say this is an easy fix, this is an easy fix. Can you give me an example of some chunk of that $50 million or stuff that went wrong?

Absolutely, and it’s – the answer is, yes. The fixes are all made and so let me drill down a little bit for you. So as I said, $9 million and what we’ve called in the past, we’ve talked about these numbers in the past, but just to remember you that direct restart costs. So this is purchase of materials and supplies, training of employees, et cetera, et cetera, the direct cost of bringing that top line back. Of the other $40 million odd about half of it or so is due to a combination of fixed costs under absorption, so very simply put your stats for as Shelly said, full capacity of around 250,000 tons a year and you’re producing much less than that. So that’s bleeding down into gross profit. And then on the other hand, just direct cost of trying to get the conditions on the pot lines back to (inaudible). So as I said, we had over usage of materials and the third party contractors in the plant that try to help us get back online. And then the remainder is just inefficiency, as you’re using your powerless efficiency, you’re current efficiency is down. You labor productivity of course is down, some of these are repetitive, those in the major items there. Brett Levy – Jefferies & Company: Okay. And the last one is a fixed income question. As coal prices continue to step down on your (inaudible). Are you contemplating a rebuy or make changes in your capital structure as we approach the spring here?

No, that’s a great question, Brett. In fact Shelly and I was just talking about that the other day, so just for everybody’s edification the coal price on our senior notes, steps down from 104 to 102 in May Shelly?

May.

Middle of May and therefore potential opportunities to extent out that maturity, the break-evens of all those depending upon one view of the interest rates in the future, get a little bit more interesting. And so, nothing to direct answer to your question, Brett there is nothing on the dock at right now. But we are looking at it as we do all the time, but here with the step down now, we’re going to look at it with some increased emphasis and obviously, we continue to watch conditions out in your markets as we go forward. So we’ll be looking at it. Brett Levy – Jefferies & Company: Got it, thanks very much and congratulations on the promotion.

Thanks Brett.

Next question comes from the line of Sandeep SM with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Sandeep SM – Goldman Sachs: Hey.

Hello. Sandeep SM – Goldman Sachs: You have given the cash cost guidance for 2012 for U.S. and Iceland. I was wondering if you could give the cash – what was the cash cost in 2011?

That’s a – I understand the question, and what we generally haven’t done is broken those two, we can certainly do it and in fact I think you can get a very good view of it rather than goes to the math right now. We’ll be filing our 10-K here mid next week. The due date is Wednesday, we’ll be filing on that day or before. And when we talked about this in the past when you go to – as you know, we don’t breakout the U.S. versus Iceland on a segment basis, on a reporting basis, but when you got the guarantor statements in the back of the K, and the back of the financial statements, under the footnotes. You’ll see an (inaudible) in essence there breakout of the U.S. versus Iceland. It’s not perfect, but it’s pretty down close. And by making some estimates of non-cash costs principally deprecation of course you can put together pretty good estimate for 2011 of what the actual cash cost was in the U.S. has distinct from Iceland. Sandeep SM – Goldman Sachs: Okay. My second question, I was wondering if you could just help me understand matter here, we have seen outside center a lot of major aluminum producers actually shutting down their smelters either because of cost issues or they feel that the market is not supporting, market price is not supporting even us and you are – you’ve actually already started Iceland you are now starting at Ravenswood or bringing a start in Ravenswood. So I what’s changed, I mean is it market or do you think that you have a better cost structure, what...

That’s a very good question as Shelly detailed, we are seeing over the last couple of months and probably prospectively meaningful curtailments and closures of capacity in Western Europe and some in the U.S. I guess as well, the major difference is easy to qualify for you here, it’s a Hawesville of course, it’s a marginal analysis if you will. so we had a plant running at 80% capacity four or five top lines. And so the economics of bringing that fifth top line back on even with the power cost at Hawesville, which as we said right now is very challenged, made sense. And if you are looking at bringing back a completely curtailed plant under those same conditions, it would have been a very, very difficult analysis and most likely, a different conclusion. In Ravenswood, the issue will be somewhat different. as we said before, we need a couple of things in order to, for to make sense to bring Ravenswood back online and again, we hope to get to the finish line of the this one, reasonably soon. as we said, the first and most important, our agreements with our labor constituents both the retiree groups and actively; but then as we’ve said, since we started talking about this over a year ago, but we also need isn’t enabling power contract that would enable us to have the confidence to bring that plant backup and to have a power rate that supports positive cash flow operations and decent return to our shareowners at a range of LME. so you’ll understand what I’m having here, we need support on the power as to bring that plant backup and that’s part of what these series of discussions over the last year, but intensely over the last couple of months (inaudible). Sandeep SM – Goldman Sachs: Okay. And the guidance you have mentioned, something like $14 million of Ravenswood curtailment charges that goes in the other operating expense line. So that assuming that Ravenswood remains shut during the year. is that right?

That’s correct. That assumes the plant is curtailed. Sandeep SM – Goldman Sachs: Okay. Thank you.

Thanks.

And next we will go to the line of Timna Tanners with Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Please go ahead Timna Tanners – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: Yeah. Hi, good afternoon.

Hi, Timna. Timna Tanners – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: So a couple of questions for you just to follow-up on Ravenswood to make sure I understand, is it the case that in your recent conversations with your constituents you’re getting more comfortable with a negotiation in a settlement that would enable you to run the plant even at a lower aluminum price, LME price, because in the past, you had talked about requiring a much higher LME price in order to be profitable. Is that what’s happened?

Yeah. I mean that is the concept Timna with which we’ve been working that that at lower LMEs and obviously, your next question might be lower than a what and that would be a good question, it’s a relative discussion, but yes, that’s the concept that we need to be able to have protection at somewhat lower LMEs. So that’s a long win, did I suppose yes, to your question. Timna Tanners – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: Because the alternatives that you’ve gotten just more bullish on the aluminum price. So I was just wondering is that a case that you are more bullish on aluminum or more confident that you can run rate and put a lower cost structure?

I think it’s more the former than the latter. Timna Tanners – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: Okay, thank you. And then if you could talk us through on Helguvik, what your best case or base case scenario would be for start-up because I just I cannot lose track with some of the moving parts and the different steps that are necessary. Can you talk us through again, like what might be the possible timeframe for starting up that in the best or base scenarios?

No problem, don’t blame me for losing track it’s a complex process that ebbs and flows. So, bottom line the answer is try to short windily answer your question. We think here that if we could get agreements on these two parameters here over the next couple of months, based on the additional work that we need to happen to less importantly document all that more importantly how the power companies go out and put in place. What they would need to put in place for us to enable, to have the confidence to restart, you are at looking at late 2000, late this year going in – falling into early 2013. And then as we have said before for this first phase, you add 24 months before you get the first half metal. So extrapolating that all out first half metal you know reasonably best case late 2014, early 2015 for the first 90,000 ton phase. Timna Tanners – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: Okay, perfect. Thanks so much.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from the line of John Tumazos [Very Independent Research]. Please go ahead. Mr. Tumazos, your line is open.

Thank you. You commented that you expect Chinese demand up 10%?

That’s right.

An first 40 days of this year, the steel outputs down 13%. Did you, we’ve seen the aluminum smelter output cuts, less production, but still more inventory. Do you think that the first quarter is down sharply or that there is just a massive destocking in the wake of the European bank messes.

I would say that the first quarter is probably down a bit from what we would expect for the average for the year, but as you know the first quarter is certainly looking China is always a bit unusual with the Chinese New Year. So, we certainly don’t put too much weight on that we continue to look out for the full year. And continue to expect that on average it will still be a strong year for demand growth in China.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from the line of Tim Hayes from Davenport and Company. (Operator Instructions). Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: Hello, everyone.

Hi, Tim. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: Just two questions there, what’s your view going forward on using the put options to protect the cost there at, profitability at Hawesville.

At this point in time Tim, as you know we’ve got options purchased that run through the first half of this year. And at this point in time we are holding steady and looking at the markets. So I wouldn’t, we are open minded. I would say as we said in the past we are opportunistic, we are not dogmatic in terms of a policy we must be hedged thus and less percent. And anything we do in the future, I think as we’ve talked about as well anything that we would do would be reasonably short-term in nature. So right now the facts are that’s what we’ve got, we haven’t put anything on this last quarter of course we would have reported to you. And we are watching it. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: Great. And then the expansion at Grundartangi I missed a bit of the detail you said that’s an expansion of the Rod mill.

No, no that’s an expansion of the hot metal capacity. So it’s no more reduction sales its no more parts, but it will be quite frankly at the end of the day just cranking up the average to get more production out of deposits that we have now. And in order to achieve that, we need to do a couple of things including upgrading the high voltage equipment and as you referenced upgrading the [writing] room as well. And so, those are our neighbors for being able to with more power as I said, increasing the average to the cost. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: Yes, how much is the expansion of the hard metal?

It will be just shy of the – over the whole program just of 50,000 tons. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: And I guess then timing in CapEx to achieve that?

Yes, $90 million over five years, we’re going to get as I noted we really are working to try to accelerate this because it’s a very good IRR on lower risk project for us, but as laid out right now, its now just shy of five year, just shy of $90 million and the staging of that as I said is only about 10 of that $90 million get spent in 2012. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: Thank you.

Thanks. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: (Inaudible)

I can’t hear you (Inaudible). Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: What the average currently in the plant or what you’re going say (Inaudible)?

It’s in the mid 190s and it will above 200,000. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: Okay, thank you.

Sure.

And our next question comes from the line of Bridget Freas with Morningstar. Please go ahead. Bridget Freas – Morningstar: Hi, good afternoon, thank you for taking my question.

Hi. Bridget Freas – Morningstar: On alumina prices you’re expected to be steady in 2012 as a percentage of the LME. So now with alumina moving more to an index or spot basis how does that affect you? May be in Iceland that won’t matter much, given the totaling basis but what about in the U.S.?

Even in the U.S. there should be a very limited impact certainly for 2012 and actually going out for the most of 2014, because of the existing contracts that we have in place that are already price with the percentage are remain Bridget Freas – Morningstar: Okay. And then my second question on your 2012 shipment guidance being above data capacity. At these efficiency improvements that you’ve made sustainable capacity at these smelters increased permanently

Yes, they have Bridget Freas – Morningstar: Okay, thank you.

Next question comes from the line of Kuni Chen. Please go ahead Kuni Chen – CRT Capital Group: Hi, sorry just a quick follow-up. On Helga Vick you mentioned the – I guess that the key issue there is the power prices mechanism, is that you have not yet had a chance to sit down with HS workload since the arbitration settlement. So you don’t really know how that dynamic will come together or have

It’s the foremost so we’re just I said, its absolutes the former [farmers] he has been working over the last month or two since the arbitration came out to see where we think we are and we are just here literally on the verge over the next couple of weeks of sitting down with them there was some articles in the Atlantic press recently of there CEO was saying the exact same thing. So we don’t know where they are and vice versa, but, I think here over the next month or two as we meet and kind of digest each others positions we’ll be able to determine with them. I mean the dialogue has been very (inaudible) on all that. We know them well, they know us well, it’s a question of how quickly we can get something that works for us mutually. Kuni Chen – CRT Capital Group: Okay, I understood. Thanks.

Thanks, Kuni.

We have a question from the line of Frank Duplak with Prudential. Please go ahead. Frank Duplak – Prudential: Well, it’s just curious if you could give us an update on revolver availability at the end of the year?

Yeah, sure. At the end of the year, we basically have full availability on the revolver, now that’s $100 million facility, but we do have LC’s outstanding against it. LC there $42 million across $58 million of net availability. Frank Duplak – Prudential: Thank you.

: Paul Massoud – Stifel Nicolaus: Hi, Shelly. Hi, Mike. Apologize for any background noise you might here, but I just had a quick question on Helguvik. in the past, you’ve said that you preferred to wait on breaking ground and so have secured for all four phases. Is that still the case or would you consider starting – if may be a power secured from another so to first, two or three of those?

Thanks, Paul. Let me just – let me correct or just modify your question if I can pick the liberty to do that, and then answer your question. So it’s not the start obviously, will be recommence, we got to $130 million of investments in the project already. and so what we said in the past, and this hasn’t changed it all, because that we would certainly not require certainty as it relates to specific delivery and price on the backend, say for the last phase or so, or something like that. but that – given the fact that the capital costs per unit of capacity is much higher in Phase I that it is in the subsequent phases, just one quarter magnitude it’s almost 2X the capital costs for ton of installed capacity in Phase I versus Phases II, III and IV, because of course of the infrastructure that you got to put in place regardless of how much production capacity you have, because of that the returns are – get better over the projects, their better two over one and on and on and on and on. And so for that reason, we need to have some good, very good certainty in the early phases and then our willingness to proceed with relatively less certainty in terms of specific delivery dates and specific pricing, increases as you move out sort of past, certainly pass Phase III and maybe even pass sort of Phase II. Paul Massoud – Stifel Nicolaus: Okay, thanks.

You bet.

And there are no other question queuing up at this time.

We appreciate everybody joining us this afternoon, and we look forward to talking with you again in a couple of months and not before. Thanks very much.