Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. Welcome to the First Quarter 2012 Earnings call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will be given at that time. (Operator Instructions) As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to our host, Mr. Enrique De Anda. Please go ahead. Enrique De Anda – Corporate Financial Analyst: Thank you, (Christina). Hello 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 conditions. 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 presentation and press release for a full discussion of these risks and uncertainties. In addition, we have included some non-GAAP financial measures in our discussion. Reconciliations to the most comparable GAAP financial measures can be found in the appendix on today's presentation and on our website at www.centuryaluminum.com. I'd now like to introduce Michael Bless, Century Aluminum's President and Chief Executive Officer. Michael Bless – President and Chief Executive Officer: Thanks very much, Enrique. If we could turn to slide 4 now, I'd like to make some introductory comments before we move on with the detail. I am going to talk on the next slide about the external environment, so I won't be repetitive here. Suffice it to say, as you all know that the aluminum price along with the price of other commodities has been held down here recently and quite frankly…

(Operator Instructions) The first question comes from the line of Brett Levy with Jefferies. Brett Levy – Jefferies: Hey, Mike. Hey, Shelly. Can you talk a little bit about kind of the political environment in Iceland if there is I guess I am trying to figure out you said kind of in the next 60 days what do you think kind of some of the key gaining issues are politically, economically to kind of getting itself to the point that you can actually restart construction here?

Good question, Brett. Thanks. There is nothing I’ll talk – I can talk at length obviously about the political environment, but there is nothing specific in the political environment either today or perspectively over the next couple of months that will post this process either way. It’s just unique to these discussions where we have got some processes with both power companies with whom we have contracted. Remember these contracts go back to their signing in 2007, where we’ll be able to determine where we are just to remind you to very different power companies one HS, that’s the one with whom we did the arbitration, the result of which we got just before the end of the year. And so after that over the last couple of months, we have had some discussions with them on the basis of that arbitration result and those discussions I would say are sort of in the 7th or 8th inning. I am not a Red Socks fan, so I probably shouldn't go there at this point in time. But we are getting close to discerning whether we can make an agreement there in the near term. And then with OR, the other power company, Reykjavik Energy as they are really known. Again, this has been a process ongoing there that should be winding its way to conclusion here over the next couple of months. And so I don’t want anybody to believe that just we sort of successfully conclude these discussions here over the next 60 days and we’re going. I mean that would be the successful conclusion of the two processes would be a pre-cursor to a lot of additional work that would have to be done to memorialize agreements and then get the project ready to be restarted later in the year. But I think the next 60 days, Brett will be telling. Brett Levy – Jefferies: And based on the way their bolt-on has been performing so far you don’t really want to be a Red Socks?

I know where you are residing, so I thought I might at least get a friendly voice there, but maybe not. Brett Levy – Jefferies: It is what it is…

It is what it is…. Brett Levy – Jefferies: I’d say in terms of the short position you have sort of versus U.S. production, can you talk about the current quarter and sort of how you positioned yourself in aluminum for in terms of hedging for the balance of the year?

Yeah, Shelly, you want to go ahead and answer this. When you say short, I think you mean just the puts or what do you… Brett Levy – Jefferies: Yeah, essentially puts.

Yeah, yeah, where we have not sold forward any metal obviously, so okay.

Yeah, so as we mentioned in previous quarters, what we have got in place as Mike says right now is simply put just a downside protection and copper is roughly 25% of our un-priced domestic production through the first half of this year. Brett Levy – Jefferies: Anything for the second half?

No, that’s where we are right now. And as we said, we've been looking at it carefully. We think sort of where the market is now our view of the – it's our view, but our view is the potential downside from here, upside from here, and obviously the cost of protecting that downside, we just don’t think it's a good trade right now for our share on investment right now for our shareowner. So, we are watching it carefully, but that’s where we are right now. Brett Levy – Jefferies: And then lastly and I know I’ll get a diplomatic answer to this. The capital markets are relatively open you guys are posting decent numbers here. Any thoughts with respect to coal prices in refinancing the 8% notes?

Sure.

Yeah, Brett, we would expect them to have those notes have about 24 months left to run. There is another call date approaching in a couple of week here. So, we'll be taking a very hard look at this over the next 12 months. We certainly wouldn’t want to get very close to that when your maturity marks, so that we'll be watching those markets.

As you know Brett, your market there has, as you say, it's generally been pretty good. It’s had some, I don’t have to tell you, some fits and starts here over the last couple of weeks for all the obvious reasons and but as Shelly said we are looking at it hard. Brett Levy – Jefferies: Thanks for the time. I’ll get back in queue.

Thank you.

Thank you. We’ll go to the line of David Gagliano with Barclays. David Gagliano – Barclays: Hi, thanks for taking my questions. I just have a few. First on the cost improvement during the quarter, obviously, very nice improvement relative to Q4, some of which was expected, I am just wondering looking forward I didn’t hear much specific commentary with regards to Q2, any reasons we should expect the cost savings realized in the first quarter to reverse in Q2?

I think our expectation at this point is that we will continue to see those cost , improvements, the main area being carbon, which if you look at what we anticipated back at Q4 we thought we would see those sort of flat with 2011, I am sorry, flat in 2011. We actually saw pretty good improvement in Q1. What we are looking forward to that continuing in Q2 and we expect that if that does continue and hopefully we'll have some power pricing update as well. We'll come back to you in July at earnings date then and give you some new guidance.

Yeah. It wouldn’t be as David – as Shelly said, we are not going to – those improvements are here to stay and hopefully will continue. And as it relates to other positive trends, we see them. We are not quite ready to call it yet, but as it relates to the cost guidance and whatnot we gave you just I guess what Shelly, two months ago now. If these trends are to continue the way we have been seeing them, you could expect just to comeback over this in July and update that positively.

Okay great. That’s very helpful. My next question in your Ravenswood negotiations, I am curious what is your sort of downside aluminum price assumption embedded in that weak LME environment commentary that you made on the call?

Yeah. I mean, there is two answers to that question. And I am speculating now because we haven't submitted this application yet and then it becomes a pretty complex process, where a lot of constituencies are looking at this, but few in a perfect world, David, you would have a power price that is so flexible that it protects the plant almost at any LME, that obviously that world doesn't exist, A) because it just gets too, the support you would need just gets too onerous at some point in time and B) because things got really ugly you would be restarting the plant anyway. It goes without saying and so it's a hard question to answer. If you look back I think one way to approach it is, if you look back at where we put all our economic analyses in place and began the substance of discussions with retiree group and then we have active labor. It was around kind of the end of the year and it really accelerated in January/February and at that point in time as you well know, the LME was kind of 200 bucks or so ahead of where it is today, and if you look at as you well know people who forecast, nominal – forecast for the nominal price over the long-term. They are in that range or a little bit better, sort of 2300, 2400 or so and so that's a longwinded answer to your question. Our base case was probably a little bit higher than we are today 10% or so, but again depending upon what kind of power accommodation we could get if one could confidently reopen the plant at lower levels in that kind of longer term rate. So, was that responsive? David Gagliano – Barclays: Yeah. Actually, yeah it was, it was actually very helpful. And then just have one more quick one…

No problem. David Gagliano – Barclays: And this is long lines of asking the obvious question I guess, but with regards to Hawesville, obviously nice sequential cost improvement, but also commentary that it's not economic. So, the obvious question is one, I just show that down until a reasonable power agreement is reached.

Yeah. So, a good question let me and I am glad you, let me make sure I am impressed, I don't say clearly enough. So, when I said that, I said at the forecast for the future the next couple of years that, that power provider has given to us. The plan is not a viable on from an economic standpoint. So, it's not necessarily today, but its prospect. If everything else of the same, the LME was frozen and as power places were perfect forecast and came to be that wouldn’t be a good equation. And so that’s why are pulling the fire alarm now and saying something has got to give. The second half, I think, the second answer to your question as you saw was just if you are seeing that rate is what it's neither easy nor costless. I guess those are both understatements to shut and reopen these plants. Shutting them is reasonably easy. We are starting them as you are seeing now in Ravenswood take some time. You are starting with essentially nothing without a power contract, without a labor force. And even though working capital tends to largely finance itself you are dealing with a reasonable investment $80 million to get Ravenswood back to producing hot metal. So, I think that's the two part answer to your question.

Okay, thanks very much.

Thanks David.

Thank you. We'll go to the line of Kuni Chen with CRT Capital Group. Kuni Chen – CRT Capital Group: Hey, good afternoon folks.

Hi, Kuni. Kuni Chen – CRT Capital Group: I guess it takes a while to detail here just one more question on Ravenswood. Obviously on the power side of the equation that’s undetermined at this point and could go many ways, well, I guess as you see things right now, and if the plant restarts over the next few months, where do you see Ravenswood on the let's say North American cost curve?

Yeah, that’s a great question. You want to do North America or U.S. In North America, obviously you’ve got all the Canadian on the – if I may answer on the U.S. business, it's an easier it’s a more discrete set. I would say it's still, Shelly, a solid third quartile, high third quartile that your guess. Again, it depends on the power it's such, in answering that question I kind of used an average U.S. power price, but as you said at the beginning of your question, Kuni, it depends so heavily on where that power comes in. Shelly, do you have….

Yeah, I would say it is very dependent on metal price and also depends very much on the negotiations that we are having now. So, a bit hard to pinpoint that, but probably somewhere in the third quartile is the right point. Kuni Chen – CRT Capital Group: Okay. And the idea when and if that restarts that's the metal would be sold at market prices or would you do something to sell that forward and kind of lock in your spread there?

That’s a very good question and we’ve thought a lot about and done some modeling on that. And it really, I am not trying to duck it, but it really depends upon again how flexible that power price is, because again in the perfect world if you had the power price that was perfectly linked to the LME like we do in Iceland, you’ve got a natural hedge there and you buy your alumina largely if not wholly on an LME linked basis. You’ve got a pretty large hedge right there naturally between those two items. And thus you might depending upon your view that the market might be able to, might be willing to or I think it’s the best alternative for your shareowners to take advantage of the market price. So, it really depends, but I can tell you it's something that we'll look very hard at and already have that in place, the analysis that is. Kuni Chen – CRT Capital Group: Okay thanks. That's all I had.

Thank Kuni.

Thank you. We'll go to the line of Sal Tharani with Goldman Sachs.

Hi guys.

Hi Sal.

Quickly on Mt. Holly, you mentioned about a short-term amendment with Santee Cooper, when is that contract renewing or come for renewals and what does short-term amendment needs?

Yeah, so the contract is almost an evergreen one, but in 2015, it's been new rate schedule that basically that gets published. So, practical answer to your question is 2015. The answer to the second part of your question is it's still under discussion, but several years. It's not one or two years, but it's not five years start to be, so cute about that answer.

So, you are looking for an amendment after 2015 it doesn't change or you're looking at…

Yeah, this would, I am sorry to cut you. This amendment as it's being discussed would supersede that 2015 data which I just spoke.

Got you. And the next question is on the premium you mentioned which obviously have gone up. I was just wondering if the premium has to do with also the load out rates at the Alameda houses and with rules changing, I believe this month or next month, do you think that might be some decline in the premiums going forward?

Yeah, I would absolutely say what that is, it's part of it. I think the bigger driver is probably the financing transactions tying up the metal units that we've talked about a bunch of times, but the load out rates are important as well, but I am talking about the changes that actually came into effect this month and the topics and so far let's say the impact is very, very modest. And so we don't expect that to have a major impact on the premiums.

Okay, thank you.

Thanks.

Thank you. We'll go to line of Tim Hayes with Davenport & Company. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: Hi, Mike and Shelly.

Hi Tim. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: Several questions just to clarify on Hawesville that it's not economic under this new power contract is that a current LME price or is that on the forward curve for the LME?

So, let me, three responses there Tim with apologies. So, first its not a new power contract, is a power contract into which we entered in 2009 when we old one with terminated with the EON. It just a current price deck or forecast, forecast the current forecast for future prices coming from the power supplier. And yes, embedded in that comments thanks for the clarification was adding around current LME. So, if the future price that they given us where to be apply to current LMEs, then you've got an economic equation that doesn’t work. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: Okay. And then at today's aluminum price, do you have a sense of how much of the industry is losing money?

Depends on regional premiums but and regional prices obviously noted China, but Shelly you want to share with that?

Right, (indiscernible) maybe even little more than that.

Yeah, I don’t think it has, but it's I think Enrique is pointing in terms of as well. Well, we got to consensus here at 35% to 40%. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: It sounds alright okay. And the SG&A of 8.5 is that something that’s now sustainable or so that it maybe be a little higher going forward?

No, we think it's going always pump around based on whether you are working on some things, goes up and down based on legal fees for a variety of things and other consultant fees and things like that, but that has kind of Shelly an average number should be unfortunate that is non-cash as we talked about before small portion. And I think that’s a pretty good number.

We say about 10 million including the non-cash plus a little bit, for Helguvik Q1 was little bit better methodic in the ballpark.

That’s a very good point that Shelly makes is that when we gave you the guidance items in February or whatever we called them embedded in there was an average number for SG&A spending this thing from of course what we report on the cash flow statement, project expanding at Helguvik. And that has been while the project is relatively dormant phase, we're spending CapEx now as you've seen well under a $1 million of month by design, the related SG&A is going to be relatively small. Until and unless or I hopefully until we reach accommodation of power company at which point will start we're having up engine again the financing discussions and on other things around that obviously getting the documents with the power companies more or less will take some time and effort and dollars. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: Okay. And moving to the LCM benefit how does that split between the U.S. smelters and iPhone?

Yeah.

Non U.S. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: Last question in the press release you mention how customers are worry about sign long-term contract is that a comment for Century or is that industry wide.

That’s a very good question. The comment was meant specifically on our customers and the other people in the marketplace of the U.S. market and we speak. So, I can’t comment more generally than that. But I can tell you with good certainty that’s what our customers are telling us at this point in time. Tim Hayes – Davenport & Company: Okay. Thank you.

Thanks.

Thank you. We'll go to line of John Tumazos with John Tumazos. John Tumazos – John Tumazos: With tongue and cheek, Mike I was going to ask if (indiscernible) South Korean, North Korean nuclear issues. And I'm serious could you give us a little background on how the steel workers issues all the progress was made towards resolving those and the legislative support and the public utilities etcetera and sounds like an interesting novel but may be you could give us…..

Well, I appreciate your comments John my son is hoping that I get the call to replace valentine, but that hasn't come quite yet. Look this was I know it sounds like a lot of words, it was a complex process with the retiree group. And at the end of the day like in all good negotiations both sides like and so that's as we all know that's a signal of a good negotiation when everybody is equally as unhappy. But we came to an accommodation, I can only speak on our side that we thought made sense and the reason it make sense for us is that A is conditioned on the plant restarting successfully and B it takes into account to support that we are going to be getting on the power side. So, it in essence uses that in order to fund a Vivat trust for the retire regroup. We said from the outset and obviously people didn't like hearing this. But we were quite serious about it, we said that we are not – we can't get back on behalf of our shareowners into a situation, which we are rebuilding a long-term fixed liability. We can't do it. It's got to be something that we can pay, but payout of the plans cash flow as long as the plant is operating and so, that's how we came together, I mean, again it sounds like words, but we had just tremendous help here, not only from Governor Tomblin, from the mayor of Ravenswood, Lucy Harbert who did a great job and directly and personally from Senators Rockefeller and Manchin who spent their own time, I got to say and energy on this and so, it kind of took all of that the rest of this over the go line and we are very helpful that will come to pass when we get this plant reopened. John Tumazos – John Tumazos: If you saw this (indiscernible), the issues in Kentucky or in South Carolina, the Alcoa is managing all those things looks less challenging.

Well, I don't know, John, I mean, every as I've learned in space here over the last six months, every stated different that's obviously a throw away comment, but they look at these situation differently based on economics and the importance of the industry and a lot of other factors. And so, we have our own set of facts and circumstances in Kentucky that is going to take a lot of work. But we think the result of the (indiscernible) goes without saying as worth and we think there is a solution that makes sense for everybody. It take a while and a lot of effort to get there and less for genuine and the same will be sure we're sure in Kentucky with a great support in Kentucky as well and as just working through the issues with people and being transparent again sounds like a lot of words. But this is just what it simply comes down to making sure everybody understands what the situation is and what we need. John Tumazos – John Tumazos: We look forward to the opportunity to live and play in another day.

Thanks, John.

Thank you. We'll go to a line of Richard Garchitorena with Credit Suisse. Richard Garchitorena – Credit Suisse: Great, thanks, good afternoon.

Hi Rich. Richard Garchitorena – Credit Suisse: Yeah, so, it's a couple of quick questions, one you are talking about carbon cost coming down and the equity going to remain at those levels, I guess my question is there any way that you can lock that in other for Q2 or the rest of the year given the possibility that we get some improvement in the global economy in the second half of the year and I guess what's your comfort that things don't start to move higher again.

That's a good question so, the answer regrettably is no. Our carbon contract as they are worked a little bit differently. Obviously as you know when we see carbon, so, we are talking principally about (indiscernible) and then pitch as well. We buy our own stuff if you will in the U.S. and then for (indiscernible) by finished anodes, which obviously are just the same materials. But generally speaking they are trade or the prices are fixed is a fixed component of all the prices. But they go up and down basically based on the cost of calcined coke, which is not as you know tradable or hedgeable commodity and it's got lots of factor that go into, it's not just simply the price of oil although the coincidence factor between oil and calcined coke is generally pretty high. But it's getting coke to its own market and in addition to that with the coke market, we need depending upon where we are manufacturing for example for Iceland, we need high quality or low sulfur cost so, that's its own little specialized market as well. So, that's a very long winded answer to your question regrettably that there isn't a way to kind of fix those hedges out. I just one could always try to do a coke deal with a supplier, go to the supplier and say hey do you want to move away from the index and fix a price out. But my guess is there going to be very reluctant to do it as well because their profitability is similar they're purchasing raw material that they're using to make their finished product that they sell to us. Richard Garchitorena – Credit Suisse: Okay great that's very helpful. Another question just on Helguvik I guess obviously you're looking into secure some low cost power going forward. I guess my question regards to Ravenswood you’d mention that you like to see not just the power but also commodity price environment that aren't to restart is there any scenario where Helguvik may not be push forward give us…

That's a great question. Richard Garchitorena – Credit Suisse: Yeah.

I mean the strict answer is yes of course. Richard Garchitorena – Credit Suisse: Yeah.

Excellent question and there again because of the framework of the power agreements that we have in place for framework of these that we're looking final Helguvik you've got very flexible power there its not necessarily low cost to higher LMEs but it's always flexible. And as we talked about before and so you might be willing to sort of reasonably some of our environment restart the project but eventually you got to be able to finance it and you got to be able to look for some confidence but way the world is heading pardon me so along with answer to your question but answer is yes. There is a level of which we would say it doesn't make sense to move forward at a point in time. Richard Garchitorena – Credit Suisse: Okay great thank you.

Sure.

Thank you. We'll go to line of Timna Tanners with Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

Hi good evening.

Hi Tim.

Just two hopefully quick one. I wanted to just know the thickness get back given at the or so many moving parts and so many things that we'll have to wait for your updates on or I guess the local media maybe what would you look at if you asked to try to get a sense of going to power arrangements and unit negotiations go ahead. What would you be looking for is there anything externally we can watch?

Yeah that's a good question. I think you've got two places that you've talked about. So, in Iceland really it just those unique counterparty to counterparty discussions with between ourselves and each of those two power companies. So, there is really no, there is no macro trend there is no political things that as with that before it really is just I mean good old fashioned negotiation with each of those guys. On the rate that would you mention union there again I can't I assume that when we reach agreement with the workers trying to think about the real time we would say something at that time. So, you could certainly look for that. But again as I said that process on the labor negotiations with power, the Public Service Commission process over the next couple of months. So, we're gradually not a lot we pointed to say look for this one that we're getting close.

Okay that's fair. And then if you could comment a little bit about the share buybacks and how that gets into kind of the way you're looking your business and your uses of cash just in general.

Yeah it's a nice thinking and the decision that was made for our third quarter last year looking at our balance sheet thing fairly large amount of cash if we wanted to put some work and no there would some delay and how the big projects that good opportunity given the share price in the market. So we're thinking you to what towards that as I mentioned were $50 million into the $60 million program so that would done with it so we feel ways to go.

And we're look as you would expect and hope I would expect we'll look at it again so the extent that we finish this authorization it's something that we'll always look at some or which on a capital deployment capital standpoint.

Okay thanks.

Sure.

Thank you. We do have a question from the line of Paul Massoud with Stifel Nicolaus.

Hi thanks for taking my questions.

Hi.

First is on the price pickup operating rate, is there any reason we should expect those rate to come down or other rates something like you could expect to extent to rest of the year?

First the reason the consistent you can always in a quarter the up or down or present or so. Number one you have just statistically some cores or more days than others and as you know these plants run 24 hours a day and so that will drive the actual results from a per day standpoint you can always be up or going little bit or generally answer your question is now you should no reason to expect that was an back economy of those.

All right. On the direction on the Grundartangi in the first it looked at least I think last year first quarter was also, first quarter is a big quarter for direction. I mean is there seasonality to a direction men's are you starting to see the some of towing arrangements pushing back on when they take delivery?

No real seasonality as we continue to accrete production capacity you're going see more and more direction and as we enter to pay on a last earnings call. But nothing these I can think.

And then finally I think you made comment about the client base arrangements what is being one of the reasons why do want open back up. I mean can you talk a little bit about the customer base. Is there special product coming at raisings would you just talk a little bit maybe you just elaborate on that?

Yeah sure. I mean the straight answer is you got a customer on sight over next door. So, the rolling no which this companies on until 1999 to 2001 it was so, it's now owned by a combination of a private equity firm and major industry player. So it would make sense we believe for us and for them and as you would expect at discussions with them to reinstitute that relationship from an economic standpoint productions, standpoint delivery and will just. That will make a lot of sense that plan produces many products but its sort core product base aerospace business and sort of that broader institute question is that really we believe going forward is answer now with Hawesville which does produce specialty products, high priority metal and high conductivity metal. The customers in the U.S. are going to want local supplied. It sounds bit doesn’t centric but as you talk to the customers they really believe they don’t want to be bring especially high priority product into more receive also the only domestic producer and so as we see more and more capacity in the U.S. either, we think that there we’re seeing in the premiums and you see just in our product premiums about the Midwest and we get on jump high priority product. And we believe there is now it's probably not – doesn’t give digital position are you making plant economic or not put plant as running it makes that much more process.

Thanks a lot.

Sure.

Thank you. And last question comes from the line of Paretosh Misra with Morgan Stanley. Paretosh Misra – Morgan Stanley: Hi guys, thanks taking my question. Just I guess two questions. One on this proposed power contract at Hawesville is that still expected to be linked LME price?

The current one at Hawesville not linked LME price linked two I will say function of I should say not linked to the power providers cost of production it’s a collaborative be power provider collaborative so they basically to their customers including ourselves in the other smelter and to their retail customers. The basically past along the cost and we would expect any change of amendment accommodation in that to be not unlikely to be based on LME linked to but one never no that certain one of things that will be looking at. Paretosh Misra – Morgan Stanley: Got it. At least across your portfolio any opportunities from keep natural for you?

Yes. Its an excellent question and I can’t go into much more detail now but as you just the answer is yes and as you would suspect that something that we are looking at very hard and were excited about that trend both in terms of the supply and the price because that thing and its were not really to say something that’s going change the equation of U.S. smelting but we think its something that could be very exciting for us you're going forward. So, please watch the excellent question. Paretosh Misra – Morgan Stanley: Got it. And actually maybe just last one and this amendment in South Carolina at Mt. Holly similar question, is that going be LME linked or not really?

No, I can’t comment. Yeah, I would say again the current arrangement is on fixed price basis and so I wouldn't expect those too early to tell. We wouldn't expect sort of wholesale change in the structure of that arrangement. Paretosh Misra – Morgan Stanley: Very good guys. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have time for an additional question?

Sure.

Okay going to the line of Tony Rizzuto with Dahlman Rose.

Hey Mike and Shelly congrats on a little progress. I've just got one question just to follow-up on the premiums over the Midwest from a high period metal you sell out of Hawesville where is it now obviously we track it on some other products but could you tell us how should change over the past one to two years?

It's, you're talking about the security premium?

Yes.

Yeah. So over Midwest it's been a high of in some very sort of thin markets in time couple of dimes, Tony and as low as sort of the mid single-digits and if you ask me for I would say keep price our sales head here with me but if you ask me for sort of the general level I'd say dime give or take Steve.

Is that about where it is right now would you say it's little bit tighter and given the…

I'd say it’s around that level now.

Okay, alright fair enough. Thanks very much.

Thank you.

Thank you. Seeing no additional questions at this time. Michael Bless – President and Chief Executive Officer: Thanks very much everybody we look forward to talking with you in a couple of months not before.