Aluminum Extrusions From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 78784-78788 [2014-30662]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
78784
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices
Affected Public: Applicants for
temporary jobs in office and field
positions.
Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory
to apply for temporary positions.
Legal Authority: Title 13, United
States Code, Section 23 a and c.
This information collection request
may be viewed at www.reginfo.gov
.Follow the instructions to view
Department of Commerce collections
currently under review by OMB.
Written comments and
recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent
within 30 days of publication of this
notice to OIRA_Submission@
omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395–5806.
Dated: December 24, 2014.
Glenna Mickelson,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief
Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2014–30627 Filed 12–30–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–07–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Foreign-Trade Zones Board
[S–132–2014]
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Approval of Subzone Status, 5.11, Inc.,
Modesto and Lathrop, California
On November 6, 2014, the Executive
Secretary of the Foreign-Trade Zones
(FTZ) Board docketed an application
submitted by the Port of Stockton,
California, grantee of FTZ 231,
requesting subzone status subject to the
existing activation limit of FTZ 231, on
behalf of 5.11, Inc., in Modesto and
Lathrop, California.
The application was processed in
accordance with the FTZ Act and
Regulations, including notice in the
Federal Register inviting public
comment (79 FR 67413, 11/13/2014).
The FTZ staff examiner reviewed the
application and determined that it
meets the criteria for approval. Pursuant
to the authority delegated to the FTZ
Board Executive Secretary (15 CFR Sec.
400.36(f)), the application to establish
Subzone 231B is approved, subject to
the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations,
including Section 400.13, and further
subject to FTZ 231’s 2,000-acre
activation limit.
Dated: December 23, 2014.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014–30719 Filed 12–30–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:02 Dec 30, 2014
Jkt 235001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–967]
Aluminum Extrusions From the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2012–2013
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) is conducting an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on aluminum
extrusions from the People’s Republic of
China (‘‘PRC’’). The period of review
(‘‘POR’’) is May 1, 2012, through April
30, 2013. These final results cover 52
companies for which an administrative
review was initiated, and for which this
administrative review was not rescinded
in the Preliminary Results.1 For these
final results, the Department examined
two mandatory respondents and one
voluntary respondent for which this
review was initiated. The first
mandatory respondent is Guangzhou
Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering
Co., Ltd. and Jangho Curtain Wall Hong
Kong Ltd. (collectively ‘‘Jangho’’); the
second mandatory respondent is a
single entity that the Department
continues to find is comprised of Guang
Ya Aluminum Industrial Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Guang Ya’’), Foshan Guangcheng
Aluminum Co., Ltd. (‘‘Guangcheng’’),
Kong Ah International Co., Ltd. (‘‘Kong
Ah’’), and Guang Ya Aluminum
Industries (Hong Kong) Ltd. (‘‘Guang Ya
HK’’) (collectively ‘‘Guang Ya Group’’),
Guangdong Zhongya Aluminum Co.,
Ltd. (‘‘Zhongya’’), Zhongya Shaped
Aluminum (HK) Holding Ltd. (‘‘Shaped
Aluminum’’), and Karlton Aluminum
Co., Ltd. (‘‘Karlton’’) (collectively
‘‘Zhongya’’), and Foshan Nanhai Xinya
Aluminum & Stainless Steel Product
Co., Ltd. (‘‘Xinya’’) (collectively ‘‘Guang
Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya’’).
The Department finds for these final
results that Jangho and the Guang Ya
Group/Zhongya/Xinya entity failed to
demonstrate that they were eligible for
separate rates and thus are part of the
PRC-wide entity. For Kromet
International, Inc. (‘‘Kromet’’), a
voluntary respondent in this review, the
AGENCY:
1 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and
Request for Revocation in Part, 78 FR 38924 (June
28, 2013) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’); see also Aluminum
Extrusions From the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Rescission, in Part;
2012/2013, 79 FR 36003 (June 25, 2014)
(‘‘Preliminary Results’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Department finds that Kromet did not
make sales of subject merchandise at
less than normal value during the POR.
Furthermore, the Department finds
that 19 of the companies under review
(including Kromet) have established
their eligibility for a separate rate.
Additionally, we determine that four
companies, Hong Kong Gree Electric
Appliances Sales Limited (‘‘Gree’’),
Jiuyuan Co., Ltd. (‘‘Jiuyuan’’), Shenzhen
Hudson Technology Development Co.,
Ltd. (‘‘Shenzhen Hudson’’), and Skyline
Exhibit Systems (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Skyline’’) had no shipments. The
Department finds that the remaining
companies under review either failed to
establish their eligibility for a separate
rate or were not responsive, and,
therefore, these companies are part of
the PRC-wide entity.
DATES: Effective Date: December 31,
2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James Terpstra or Paul Stolz, AD/CVD
Operations, Office III, Enforcement and
Compliance, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3965 or (202) 482–
4474, respectively.
Background
On June 25, 2014, the Department
published the Preliminary Results of
this administrative review. At that time,
we invited interested parties to
comment on the Preliminary Results.2
We granted parties an extension of time
to submit case and rebuttal briefs.3
On August 8, 2014 we received case
briefs from the Aluminum Extrusions
Fair Trade Committee (‘‘Petitioner’’); 4
Zhongya; Skyline; Jangho; tenKsolar
(Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (‘‘tenKsolar’’);
Permasteelisa South China Factory and
Permasteelisa Hong Kong Ltd.
(collectively, ‘‘Permasteelisa’’); Taishan
City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusion Co.
Ltd., and Kam Kiu Aluminium Products
Sdn. Bhd. (collectively ‘‘Kam Kiu’’). On
2 See
Preliminary Results, 79 FR at 36006.
‘‘Second Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Aluminum Extrusions
from the People’s Republic of China: Granting an
Extension of Time for Parties to Provide Case Briefs
and Rebuttal Case Briefs,’’ dated July 7, 2014 and
‘‘Second Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Aluminum Extrusions
from the People’s Republic of China: Granting an
Extension of Time for Parties to Provide Rebuttal
Briefs,’’ dated August 12, 2014.
4 The individual members of the Committee are
Aerolite Extrusion Company; Alexandria Extrusion
Company; Benada Aluminum of Florida, Inc.;
William L. Bonnell Company, Inc.; Frontier
Aluminum Corporation; Futural Industries
Corporation; Hydro Aluminum North America, Inc.;
Kaiser Aluminum Corporation; Profile Extrusion
Company; Sapa Extrusions, Inc.; and Western
Extrusions Corporation.
3 See
E:\FR\FM\31DEN1.SGM
31DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices
August 20, 2014, we received rebuttal
briefs from the Petitioner, Kromet, and
Jangho.
On September 5, 2014, the
Department extended the deadline for
the final results until December 22,
2014.5
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the
Order 6 is aluminum extrusions which
are shapes and forms, produced by an
extrusion process, made from aluminum
alloys having metallic elements
corresponding to the alloy series
designations published by The
Aluminum Association commencing
with the numbers 1, 3, and 6 (or
proprietary equivalents or other
certifying body equivalents).7
Imports of the subject merchandise
are provided for under the following
categories of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTS’’):
7610.10.00, 7610.90.00, 7615.10.30,
7615.10.71, 7615.10.91, 7615.19.10,
7615.19.30, 7615.19.50, 7615.19.70,
7615.19.90, 7615.20.00, 7616.99.10,
7616.99.50, 8479.89.98, 8479.90.94,
8513.90.20, 9403.10.00, 9403.20.00,
7604.21.00.00, 7604.29.10.00,
7604.29.30.10, 7604.29.30.50,
7604.29.50.30, 7604.29.50.60,
7608.20.00.30, 7608.20.00.90,
7609.00.00.00, 8302.10.30.00,
8302.10.60.30, 8302.10.60.60,
8302.10.60.90, 8302.20.00.00,
8302.30.30.10, 8302.30.30.60,
8302.41.30.00, 8302.41.60.15,
8302.41.60.45, 8302.41.60.50,
8302.41.60.80, 8302.42.30.10,
8302.42.30.15, 8302.42.30.65,
8302.49.60.35, 8302.49.60.45,
8302.49.60.55, 8302.49.60.85,
8302.50.00.00, 8302.60.90.00,
8305.10.00.50, 8306.30.00.00,
8414.59.60.90, 8415.90.80.45,
8418.99.80.05, 8418.99.80.50,
8418.99.80.60, 8419.90.10.00,
8422.90.06.40, 8473.30.20.00,
8473.30.51.00, 8479.90.85.00,
8486.90.00.00, 8487.90.00.80,
8503.00.95.20, 8508.70.00.00,
5 See ‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s
Republic of China: Extension of Deadline for Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review,’’ dated September 5, 2014.
6 See Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s
Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR
30650 (May 26, 2011) (‘‘Order’’).
7 See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant
Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, from
Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations,
titled ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s
Republic of China,’’ which is dated concurrently
with and hereby adopted by this notice (‘‘Issues and
Decision Memorandum’’) for a complete description
of the scope of the Order.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:02 Dec 30, 2014
Jkt 235001
8516.90.50.00, 8516.90.80.50,
8517.70.00.00, 8529.90.73.00,
8529.90.97.60, 8538.10.00.00,
8543.90.88.80, 8708.29.50.60,
8708.80.65.90, 8803.30.00.60,
9013.90.50.00, 9013.90.90.00,
9401.90.50.81, 9403.90.10.40,
9403.90.10.50, 9403.90.10.85,
9403.90.25.40, 9403.90.25.80,
9403.90.40.05, 9403.90.40.10,
9403.90.40.60, 9403.90.50.05,
9403.90.50.10, 9403.90.50.80,
9403.90.60.05, 9403.90.60.10,
9403.90.60.80, 9403.90.70.05,
9403.90.70.10, 9403.90.70.80,
9403.90.80.10, 9403.90.80.15,
9403.90.80.20, 9403.90.80.41,
9403.90.80.51, 9403.90.80.61,
9506.11.40.80, 9506.51.40.00,
9506.51.60.00, 9506.59.40.40,
9506.70.20.90, 9506.91.00.10,
9506.91.00.20, 9506.91.00.30,
9506.99.05.10, 9506.99.05.20,
9506.99.05.30, 9506.99.15.00,
9506.99.20.00, 9506.99.25.80,
9506.99.28.00, 9506.99.55.00,
9506.99.60.80, 9507.30.20.00,
9507.30.40.00, 9507.30.60.00,
9507.90.60.00, and 9603.90.80.50.
The subject merchandise entered as
parts of other aluminum products may
be classifiable under the following
additional Chapter 76 subheadings:
7610.10, 7610.90, 7615.19, 7615.20, and
7616.99 as well as under other HTS
chapters. In addition, fin evaporator
coils may be classifiable under HTS
numbers: 8418.99.80.50 and
8418.99.80.60. While HTS subheadings
are provided for convenience and
customs purposes, the written
description of the scope of this Order is
dispositive.
78785
registered users at https://
access.trade.gov, and it is available to
all parties in the Central Records Unit,
room 7046 of the main Department of
Commerce building. In addition, a
complete version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the internet at https://
www.trade.gov/enforcement/frn/
index.html. The signed Issues and
Decision Memorandum and the
electronic version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on an analysis of the comments
received from interested parties and a
review of the record, the Department
made the following changes for these
final results of review:
• We corrected a calculation error for
the final adjusted margin to be applied
to the separate rate companies.9
• We adjusted the PRC-wide entity
margin for both export subsidies and
domestic subsidy pass-through.10
• We determined that Skyline did not
have shipments of subject merchandise
during the POR.11
• We made a correction to the
spelling of Kam Kiu’s name.12
• For Kromet’s preliminary margin
calculation, we neglected to convert the
variables ‘‘Magnesium Ingots’’ and
‘‘Aluminum Titanium Boron Wire’’
using Thai exchange rates. We corrected
this error, and it did not change
Kromet’s margin.13
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs filed by parties in this
review are addressed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum, which is
incorporated herein by reference. A list
of the issues which parties raised, and
to which we respond in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum, follows as an
appendix to this notice. The Issues and
Decision Memorandum is a public
document and is on file electronically
via Enforcement and Compliance’s
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System
(‘‘ACCESS’’).8 ACCESS is available to
Companies Eligible for a Separate Rate
In our Preliminary Results, we
determined that 18 companies, plus
Kromet, are eligible for a separate rate.14
We received no information since the
issuance of the Preliminary Results that
provides a basis for reconsideration of
this determination. Therefore, the
Department continues to find that these
19 companies are eligible for a separate
rate.
Rate for Non-Examined Companies
Which Are Eligible for a Separate Rate
The Department assigned to nonexamined, separate rate companies the
8 On November 24, 2014, Enforcement and
Compliance changed the name of Enforcement and
Compliance’s AD and CVD Centralized Electronic
Service System (‘‘IA ACCESS’’) to AD and CVD
Centralized Electronic Service System (‘‘ACCESS’’).
The Web site location was changed from https://
iaaccess.trade.gov to https://access.trade.gov. The
Final Rule changing the reference to the Regulations
can be found at 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014).
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
9 See Attachment to the accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum.
10 Id.; see also Comment 3 of the accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
11 See Comment 7 of the accompanying Issues
and Decision Memorandum.
12 See Comment 8 of the accompanying Issues
and Decision Memorandum.
13 See Memorandum to the File titled ‘‘Second
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty
Order on Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s
Republic of China: Analysis of the Final Results
Margin Calculation for Kromet International,’’ dated
concurrently with this notice.
14 See Preliminary Results, 79 FR at 36006.
E:\FR\FM\31DEN1.SGM
31DEN1
78786
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices
weighted-average dumping margin
assigned to non-examined, separate rate
companies in the final determination of
the antidumping investigation and for
the final results of the first
administrative review of the Order.
Neither the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (‘‘the Act’’) nor the
Department’s regulations address the
establishment of the rate applied to
individual companies not selected for
examination where the Department
limited its examination in an
administrative review pursuant to
section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. The
Department’s practice in cases involving
limited selection based on exporters
accounting for the largest volumes of
trade has been to look to section
735(c)(5) of the Act for guidance, which
provides instructions for calculating the
all-others rate in an investigation.
Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act instructs
the Department to avoid calculating an
all-others rate using any rates that are
zero, de minimis, or based entirely on
facts available in investigations. Section
735(c)(5)(B) of the Act provides that,
where all rates are zero, de minimis, or
based entirely on facts available, the
Department may use ‘‘any reasonable
method’’ for assigning an all-others rate.
We determine that the application of
the rate from the investigation to the
non-examined separate rate respondents
is consistent with precedent and an
appropriate method to determine the
separate rate in the instant review.
Pursuant to this method, we are
assigning the rate of 32.79 percent, the
most recent rate (from the less than fair
value investigation) calculated for the
non-examined separate rate
respondents, to the non-examined
separate rate respondents in the instant
review.15
Adjustment Under Section 777A(f) of
the Act
Pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act,
the Department has made an adjustment
for countervailable domestic subsidies
which have been found to have
impacted the U.S. prices. We made no
changes (since the Preliminary Results)
to the adjustments made for these final
results to Kromet’s adjustment or the
separate rate companies’ adjustment
(though we corrected a calculation error
for the final adjusted margin to include
only the passed-through portion of the
domestic subsidy for the separate rate
companies).16 Pursuant to section
777A(f) of the Act, for these final
results, we also made an adjustment to
the PRC-wide entity’s rate to account for
countervailable domestic subsidies.
PRC-Wide Entity
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department determined that the
mandatory respondents Jangho and
Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya were
not eligible for a separate rate, and,
accordingly, were found to be part of the
PRC-wide entity. The Department
received no information since the
issuance of the Preliminary Results that
provides a basis for reconsideration of
this determination. Therefore, the
Department continues to find that
Jangho and Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/
Xinya 17 are not eligible for a separate
rate and are part of the PRC-wide entity.
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department also found 21 companies to
be part of the PRC-wide entity. For one
of those companies, Skyline, the
Department received information since
the Preliminary Results sufficient to
change its determination. For the
remaining 20 companies, the
Department received no information
since the issuance of the Preliminary
Results that provides a basis for
reconsideration of its determination.
Therefore, the Department continues to
find that these 20 companies are not
eligible for a separate rate and are part
of the PRC-wide entity.18
Adverse Facts Available Rate for the
PRC-Wide Entity
For the PRC-wide entity, the
Department in the Preliminary Results
preliminarily determined that the PRCwide entity had not acted to the best of
its ability in providing necessary
information to the Department, and
assigned the rate of 33.28 percent, the
only rate ever determined for the PRCwide entity in this proceeding, as
adverse facts available pursuant to
sections 776(a) and 776(b) of the Act.
The rate of 33.28 percent has probative
value because it was in the range of the
individual dumping margins which we
calculated for Kromet. Accordingly, we
find that the rate of 33.28 percent is
corroborated within the meaning of
section 776(c) of the Act, and that it is
appropriate to continue to apply this
rate of 33.28 percent to the PRC-wide
entity.19
Final Results of Review
As a result of this review, we
determine that the following weightedaverage dumping margins exist for the
period May 1, 2012, through April 30,
2013:
Margin adjusted
for liquidation
and cash deposit
purposes
(%)
Kromet International, Inc .............................................................................................................................
Allied Maker Limited ....................................................................................................................................
Changzhou Changzheng Evaporator Co., Ltd ............................................................................................
Classic & Contemporary Inc ........................................................................................................................
Dynabright Int’l Group (HK) Limited ............................................................................................................
Hanyung Metal (Suzhou) Co., Ltd ...............................................................................................................
Global Point Technology (Far East) Limited 21 ...........................................................................................
Jiangsu Changfa Refrigeration Co., Ltd ......................................................................................................
Jiaxing Jackson Travel Products Co., Ltd ...................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Exporter
Weightedaverage dumping
margin 20
..............................
32.79
32.79
32.79
32.79
32.79
32.79
32.79
32.79
0.00
22.28
32.69
22.28
22.28
22.28
22.28
27.22
27.22
15 See Comment 4 of the accompanying Issues
and Decision Memorandum for further discussion.
16 See Preliminary Results, 79 FR at 36005–36006
and the Attachment to the accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum.
17 See Comments 2, 5, and 6 of the accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum for further
discussion. See also Preliminary Results, 79 FR at
36003–36005 and accompanying Preliminary
Decision Memorandum at 14–15.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:02 Dec 30, 2014
Jkt 235001
18 These companies are: (1) Alnan Aluminium
Co., Ltd.; (2) Chiping One Stop Industrial & Trade
Co., Ltd.; (3) Cixi Handsome Pool Appliance Co.,
Ltd.; (4) DongChuan Swimming Pool Equipments
Co., Ltd.; (5) Dongguan Golden Tiger Hardware
Industrial Co., Ltd.; (6) Foshan Shunde Aoneng
Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd.; (7) Guang Dong Xin
Wei Aluminum Products Co., Ltd.; (8) Guangdong
Whirlpool Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd.; (9)
Guangzhou Mingcan Die-Casting Hardware
Products, Co. Ltd.; (10) Hanyung Alcobis Co., Ltd.;
(11) Henan New Kelong Electrical Appliances Cp.,
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Ltd.; (12) Idex Dinglee Technology (Tianjin Co.,
Ltd.); (13) Nidec Sankyo (Zhejiang) Corporation;
(14) Ningbo Splash Pool Appliance Co., Ltd.; (15)
Samuel, Son & Co., Ltd.; (16) Shenyang Yuanda
Aluminum Industry Engineering Co., Ltd.; (17)
Taizhou Lifeng Manufacturing Corporation; (18)
Tiazhou Lifeng Manufacturing Corporation; (19)
Wenzhou Shengbo Decoration & Hardware; and (20)
Whirlpool (Guangdong).
19 See Comment 3 of the accompanying Issues
and Decision Memorandum for further discussion.
E:\FR\FM\31DEN1.SGM
31DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices
78787
Weightedaverage dumping
margin 20
Margin adjusted
for liquidation
and cash deposit
purposes
(%)
32.79
32.79
32.79
32.79
32.79
32.79
32.79
32.79
32.79
32.79
33.28
27.22
22.28
27.22
27.22
22.28
27.22
27.22
22.28
27.22
27.22
33.18
Exporter
Justhere Co., Ltd .........................................................................................................................................
Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn. Bhd 22 ..................................................................................................
Metaltek Group Co., Ltd ..............................................................................................................................
Midea International Trading Co., Ltd ...........................................................................................................
Permasteelisa Hong Kong Limited 23 ..........................................................................................................
Shanghai Tongtai Precise Aluminum Alloy .................................................................................................
Sincere Profit Limited ..................................................................................................................................
tenKsolar (Shanghai) Co., Ltd .....................................................................................................................
Tianjin Jinmao Import & Export Corp., Ltd ..................................................................................................
Union Industry (Asia) Co., Ltd .....................................................................................................................
PRC-wide Entity ...........................................................................................................................................
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations
performed within five days of the date
of publication of this notice to parties in
this proceeding in accordance with 19
CFR 351.224(b).
Assessment Rates
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
The Department shall determine, and
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(‘‘CBP’’) shall assess, antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries covered
by this review pursuant to section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.212(b).24 The Department intends to
issue assessment instructions to CBP 15
days after the date of publication of
these final results of review.
For Kromet, we will instruct CBP to
liquidate all appropriate entries without
regard to antidumping duties because
Kromet’s weighted-average dumping
margin is zero percent. For the 18 nonexamined, separate rate companies, we
will instruct CBP to liquidate all
appropriate entries at a rate based on
32.79 percent and adjusted for both
export and domestic subsidies as
described above. For the PRC-wide
entity, we will instruct CBP to liquidate
all appropriate entries at a rate equal to
33.18 percent, which is adjusted for
20 As explained in the Preliminary Results, for the
Separate Rate Companies (i.e., all companies other
than Kromet), the Department intends to adjust the
weighted-average dumping margin, for both cash
deposit and liquidation purposes. See Attachment
to the accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum for calculations showing the export
subsidy, domestic subsidy, pass-through rate, and
net adjustments.
21 Hoff Associates Mfg Reps Inc. (dba Global Point
Technology, Inc.) is the U.S. importer.
22 Taishan City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusions
Co., Ltd. is the producer.
23 Permasteelisa South China Factory
(Permasteelisa China) is the producer.
24 See Antidumping Proceeding: Calculation of
the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and
Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty
Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8103
(February 14, 2012) (‘‘NME Antidumping
Proceedings’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:02 Dec 30, 2014
Jkt 235001
export and domestic subsidies, as
appropriate.25
The Department recently announced a
refinement to its assessment practice in
non-market economy (‘‘NME’’) cases.
Pursuant to this refinement in practice,
for entries that were not reported in the
U.S. sales databases submitted by
companies individually examined
during this review, the Department will
instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at
the NME-wide rate. In addition, if the
Department determines that an exporter
under review had no shipments of
subject merchandise, any suspended
entries that entered under that
exporter’s case number (i.e., at that
exporter’s rate) will be liquidated at the
NME-wide rate. For a full discussion of
this practice, see NME Antidumping
Proceedings, supra.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective for all
shipments of the subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
publication date of the final results of
this administrative review, as provided
by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1)
For the exporters listed above, the cash
deposit rate will be equal to the
weighted-average dumping margin
identified in ‘‘Final Results of the
Review,’’ and adjusted for applicable
export and domestic subsidies; (2) for
previously investigated or reviewed PRC
and non-PRC exporters that are not
under review in this segment of the
proceeding but that received a separate
rate in a previous segment, the cash
deposit rate will continue to be the
exporter-specific rate published for the
25 For
the PRC-wide entity, which received an
AFA rate, as an extension of the adverse inference
found necessary pursuant to section 776(b) of the
Act, the Department has adjusted the PRC-wide
entity’s AD assessment rate by the lowest export
subsidy rate and the lowest estimated domestic
subsidy pass-through determined for any party in
the companion CVD proceeding.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
most recently completed segment of this
proceeding; (3) for all PRC exporters of
subject merchandise which have not
been found to be entitled to a separate
rate, the cash deposit rate will be the
PRC-wide rate of 33.18 percent, which
is adjusted for export and domestic
subsidies, as appropriate; 26 and (4) for
all non-PRC exporters of subject
merchandise which have not received
their own rate, the cash deposit rate will
be the rate applicable to the PRC
exporter(s) that supplied that non-PRC
exporter. The cash deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of
antidumping and/or countervailing
duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this review
period. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the
Secretary’s presumption that
reimbursement of the antidumping
and/or countervailing duties occurred
and the subsequent assessment of
double antidumping duties.
Notification to Interested Parties
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.305(a)(3), this notice serves as a
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’)
of their responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under the APO. Timely
written notification of the return or
26 For the PRC-wide entity, which received an
AFA rate, as an extension of the adverse inference
found necessary pursuant to section 776(b) of the
Act, the Department has adjusted the PRC-wide
entity’s AD cash deposit rate by the lowest export
subsidy rate and the lowest estimated domestic
subsidy pass-through determined for any party in
the companion CVD proceeding. See Attachment to
accompanying Issues and Decision memorandum.
E:\FR\FM\31DEN1.SGM
31DEN1
78788
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 250 / Wednesday, December 31, 2014 / Notices
destruction of APO materials, or
conversion to judicial protective order,
is hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a sanctionable violation.
These final results of review and
notice are published in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the
Act.
Dated: December 22, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix—Issues and Decision
Memorandum
Summary
Background
Scope of the Order
Discussion of the Issues
Comment 1A: Selection of the Primary
Surrogate Country
Comment 1B: Selection of Financial
Statements To Derive Financial Ratios
Comment 1C: Selection of Surrogate Value
for Primary Aluminum Input
Comment 1D: Selection of Surrogate Value
for Labor
Comment 2: Whether To Continue To
Collapse Zhongya, Guang Ya, and Xinya
Comment 3: Whether To Recalculate the
PRC-Wide Rate
Comment 4: Whether To Recalculate the
Separate-Rate for Non-Examined
Exporters
Comment 5: Whether the Department Has
the Authority To Assess Antidumping
Duties on Imports of Merchandise Prior
to the Initiation of a Scope Inquiry
Comment 6: Whether the Department
Should Make a Scope Ruling on Jangho’s
Curtain Wall Units and Window Wall
Units in This Review
Comment 7: Status of Skyline’s Separate
Rate
Comment 8: Whether To Correct the
Spelling of Company Names in the Final
Results and CBP Instructions
Recommendation
Attachment
[FR Doc. 2014–30662 Filed 12–30–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
[C–570–968]
Aluminum Extrusions From the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review; 2012
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) completed its
administrative review of the
countervailing duty (CVD) order on
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:02 Dec 30, 2014
Jkt 235001
aluminum extrusions from the People’s
Republic of China (PRC) for the January
1, 2012, through December 31, 2012,
period of review (POR). We determine
that the Alnan Companies 1 and Jiangsu
Changfa Refrigeration Co., Ltd. (Jiangsu
Changfa) received countervailable
subsidies during the POR. The final net
subsidy rates are listed below in ‘‘Final
Results of the Review.’’
DATES: Effective Date: December 31,
2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kristen Johnson and Joy Zhang, AD/
CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement
and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone (202) 482–4793 and (202)
482–1168, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On June 25, 2014, the Department
published the Preliminary Results of
this administrative review.2 On August
26, 2014, the Department extended the
final results of this administrative
review until December 22, 2014.3
The Department invited interested
parties to comment on the Preliminary
Results, received case and rebuttal briefs
from several parties, and held a public
hearing on October 17, 2014.4
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the
Order 5 is aluminum extrusions which
are shapes and forms, produced by an
extrusion process, made from aluminum
alloys having metallic elements
corresponding to the alloy series
1 The Alnan Companies are Alnan Aluminum
Co., Ltd. (Alnan Aluminum), Alnan Aluminum Foil
Co., Ltd. (Alnan Foil), Alnan (Shanglin) Industry
Co., Ltd. (Shanglin Industry), and Shanglin Alnan
Aluminum Comprehensive Utilization Power Co.,
Ltd. (Shanglin Power). Kromet International Inc.,
one of the selected mandatory respondents in this
administrative review, reported that it is a Canadabased company that sold subject merchandise
produced by the Alnan Companies to the United
States during the review period.
2 See Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2012,
79 FR 36009 (June 25, 2014) (Preliminary Results).
3 See Department Memorandum regarding
‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic
of China: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review’’
(August 26, 2014).
4 For additional case history for this
administrative review, see accompanying Decision
Memorandum for the Final Results of the
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review:
Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic
of China, dated concurrently with this notice
(Issues and Decision Memorandum).
5 See Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s
Republic of China: Countervailing Duty Order, 76
FR 30653 (May 26, 2011) (Order).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
designations published by The
Aluminum Association commencing
with the numbers 1, 3, and 6 (or
proprietary equivalents or other
certifying body equivalents).6
Imports of the subject merchandise
are provided for under the following
categories of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS):
7610.10.00, 7610.90.00, 7615.10.30,
7615.10.71, 7615.10.91, 7615.19.10,
7615.19.30, 7615.19.50, 7615.19.70,
7615.19.90, 7615.20.00, 7616.99.10,
7616.99.50, 8479.89.98, 8479.90.94,
8513.90.20, 9403.10.00, 9403.20.00,
7604.21.00.00, 7604.29.10.00,
7604.29.30.10, 7604.29.30.50,
7604.29.50.30, 7604.29.50.60,
7608.20.00.30, 7608.20.00.90,
8302.10.30.00, 8302.10.60.30,
8302.10.60.60, 8302.10.60.90,
8302.20.00.00, 8302.30.30.10,
8302.30.30.60, 8302.41.30.00,
8302.41.60.15, 8302.41.60.45,
8302.41.60.50, 8302.41.60.80,
8302.42.30.10, 8302.42.30.15,
8302.42.30.65, 8302.49.60.35,
8302.49.60.45, 8302.49.60.55,
8302.49.60.85, 8302.50.00.00,
8302.60.90.00, 8305.10.00.50,
8306.30.00.00, 8414.59.60.90,
8415.90.80.45, 8418.99.80.05,
8418.99.80.50, 8418.99.80.60,
8419.90.10.00, 8422.90.06.40,
8473.30.20.00, 8473.30.51.00,
8479.90.85.00, 8486.90.00.00,
8487.90.00.80, 8503.00.95.20,
8508.70.00.00, 8516.90.50.00,
8516.90.80.50, 8517.70.00.00,
8529.90.73.00, 8529.90.97.60,
8538.10.00.00, 8543.90.88.80,
8708.29.50.60, 8708.80.65.90,
8803.30.00.60, 9013.90.50.00,
9013.90.90.00, 9401.90.50.81,
9403.90.10.40, 9403.90.10.50,
9403.90.10.85, 9403.90.25.40,
9403.90.25.80, 9403.90.40.05,
9403.90.40.10, 9403.90.40.60,
9403.90.50.05, 9403.90.50.10,
9403.90.50.80, 9403.90.60.05,
9403.90.60.10, 9403.90.60.80,
9403.90.70.05, 9403.90.70.10,
9403.90.70.80, 9403.90.80.10,
9403.90.80.15, 9403.90.80.20,
9403.90.80.41, 9403.90.80.51,
9403.90.80.61, 9506.11.40.80,
9506.51.40.00, 9506.51.60.00,
9506.59.40.40, 9506.70.20.90,
9506.91.00.10, 9506.91.00.20,
9506.91.00.30, 9506.99.05.10,
9506.99.05.20, 9506.99.05.30,
9506.99.15.00, 9506.99.20.00,
9506.99.25.80, 9506.99.28.00,
9506.99.55.00, 9506.99.60.80,
9507.30.20.00, 9507.30.40.00,
6 For a complete description of the scope of the
Order, see Issues and Decision Memorandum.
E:\FR\FM\31DEN1.SGM
31DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 250 (Wednesday, December 31, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 78784-78788]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-30662]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-967]
Aluminum Extrusions From the People's Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``Department'') is conducting an
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on aluminum
extrusions from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''). The period of
review (``POR'') is May 1, 2012, through April 30, 2013. These final
results cover 52 companies for which an administrative review was
initiated, and for which this administrative review was not rescinded
in the Preliminary Results.\1\ For these final results, the Department
examined two mandatory respondents and one voluntary respondent for
which this review was initiated. The first mandatory respondent is
Guangzhou Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering Co., Ltd. and Jangho
Curtain Wall Hong Kong Ltd. (collectively ``Jangho''); the second
mandatory respondent is a single entity that the Department continues
to find is comprised of Guang Ya Aluminum Industrial Co., Ltd. (``Guang
Ya''), Foshan Guangcheng Aluminum Co., Ltd. (``Guangcheng''), Kong Ah
International Co., Ltd. (``Kong Ah''), and Guang Ya Aluminum Industries
(Hong Kong) Ltd. (``Guang Ya HK'') (collectively ``Guang Ya Group''),
Guangdong Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd. (``Zhongya''), Zhongya Shaped
Aluminum (HK) Holding Ltd. (``Shaped Aluminum''), and Karlton Aluminum
Co., Ltd. (``Karlton'') (collectively ``Zhongya''), and Foshan Nanhai
Xinya Aluminum & Stainless Steel Product Co., Ltd. (``Xinya'')
(collectively ``Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 78 FR
38924 (June 28, 2013) (``Initiation Notice''); see also Aluminum
Extrusions From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Rescission, in Part;
2012/2013, 79 FR 36003 (June 25, 2014) (``Preliminary Results'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department finds for these final results that Jangho and the
Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya entity failed to demonstrate that they
were eligible for separate rates and thus are part of the PRC-wide
entity. For Kromet International, Inc. (``Kromet''), a voluntary
respondent in this review, the Department finds that Kromet did not
make sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value during the
POR.
Furthermore, the Department finds that 19 of the companies under
review (including Kromet) have established their eligibility for a
separate rate. Additionally, we determine that four companies, Hong
Kong Gree Electric Appliances Sales Limited (``Gree''), Jiuyuan Co.,
Ltd. (``Jiuyuan''), Shenzhen Hudson Technology Development Co., Ltd.
(``Shenzhen Hudson''), and Skyline Exhibit Systems (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.
(``Skyline'') had no shipments. The Department finds that the remaining
companies under review either failed to establish their eligibility for
a separate rate or were not responsive, and, therefore, these companies
are part of the PRC-wide entity.
DATES: Effective Date: December 31, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Terpstra or Paul Stolz, AD/CVD
Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20230; telephone: (202) 482-3965 or (202) 482-4474, respectively.
Background
On June 25, 2014, the Department published the Preliminary Results
of this administrative review. At that time, we invited interested
parties to comment on the Preliminary Results.\2\ We granted parties an
extension of time to submit case and rebuttal briefs.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Preliminary Results, 79 FR at 36006.
\3\ See ``Second Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty
Order on Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China:
Granting an Extension of Time for Parties to Provide Case Briefs and
Rebuttal Case Briefs,'' dated July 7, 2014 and ``Second
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Aluminum
Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: Granting an
Extension of Time for Parties to Provide Rebuttal Briefs,'' dated
August 12, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 8, 2014 we received case briefs from the Aluminum
Extrusions Fair Trade Committee (``Petitioner''); \4\ Zhongya; Skyline;
Jangho; tenKsolar (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (``tenKsolar''); Permasteelisa
South China Factory and Permasteelisa Hong Kong Ltd. (collectively,
``Permasteelisa''); Taishan City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusion Co. Ltd.,
and Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn. Bhd. (collectively ``Kam Kiu''). On
[[Page 78785]]
August 20, 2014, we received rebuttal briefs from the Petitioner,
Kromet, and Jangho.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The individual members of the Committee are Aerolite
Extrusion Company; Alexandria Extrusion Company; Benada Aluminum of
Florida, Inc.; William L. Bonnell Company, Inc.; Frontier Aluminum
Corporation; Futural Industries Corporation; Hydro Aluminum North
America, Inc.; Kaiser Aluminum Corporation; Profile Extrusion
Company; Sapa Extrusions, Inc.; and Western Extrusions Corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 5, 2014, the Department extended the deadline for the
final results until December 22, 2014.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See ``Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of
China: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review,'' dated September 5, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the Order \6\ is aluminum extrusions
which are shapes and forms, produced by an extrusion process, made from
aluminum alloys having metallic elements corresponding to the alloy
series designations published by The Aluminum Association commencing
with the numbers 1, 3, and 6 (or proprietary equivalents or other
certifying body equivalents).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China:
Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 30650 (May 26, 2011) (``Order'').
\7\ See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance, from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, titled
``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Aluminum Extrusions from the
People's Republic of China,'' which is dated concurrently with and
hereby adopted by this notice (``Issues and Decision Memorandum'')
for a complete description of the scope of the Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Imports of the subject merchandise are provided for under the
following categories of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (``HTS''): 7610.10.00, 7610.90.00, 7615.10.30, 7615.10.71,
7615.10.91, 7615.19.10, 7615.19.30, 7615.19.50, 7615.19.70, 7615.19.90,
7615.20.00, 7616.99.10, 7616.99.50, 8479.89.98, 8479.90.94, 8513.90.20,
9403.10.00, 9403.20.00, 7604.21.00.00, 7604.29.10.00, 7604.29.30.10,
7604.29.30.50, 7604.29.50.30, 7604.29.50.60, 7608.20.00.30,
7608.20.00.90, 7609.00.00.00, 8302.10.30.00, 8302.10.60.30,
8302.10.60.60, 8302.10.60.90, 8302.20.00.00, 8302.30.30.10,
8302.30.30.60, 8302.41.30.00, 8302.41.60.15, 8302.41.60.45,
8302.41.60.50, 8302.41.60.80, 8302.42.30.10, 8302.42.30.15,
8302.42.30.65, 8302.49.60.35, 8302.49.60.45, 8302.49.60.55,
8302.49.60.85, 8302.50.00.00, 8302.60.90.00, 8305.10.00.50,
8306.30.00.00, 8414.59.60.90, 8415.90.80.45, 8418.99.80.05,
8418.99.80.50, 8418.99.80.60, 8419.90.10.00, 8422.90.06.40,
8473.30.20.00, 8473.30.51.00, 8479.90.85.00, 8486.90.00.00,
8487.90.00.80, 8503.00.95.20, 8508.70.00.00, 8516.90.50.00,
8516.90.80.50, 8517.70.00.00, 8529.90.73.00, 8529.90.97.60,
8538.10.00.00, 8543.90.88.80, 8708.29.50.60, 8708.80.65.90,
8803.30.00.60, 9013.90.50.00, 9013.90.90.00, 9401.90.50.81,
9403.90.10.40, 9403.90.10.50, 9403.90.10.85, 9403.90.25.40,
9403.90.25.80, 9403.90.40.05, 9403.90.40.10, 9403.90.40.60,
9403.90.50.05, 9403.90.50.10, 9403.90.50.80, 9403.90.60.05,
9403.90.60.10, 9403.90.60.80, 9403.90.70.05, 9403.90.70.10,
9403.90.70.80, 9403.90.80.10, 9403.90.80.15, 9403.90.80.20,
9403.90.80.41, 9403.90.80.51, 9403.90.80.61, 9506.11.40.80,
9506.51.40.00, 9506.51.60.00, 9506.59.40.40, 9506.70.20.90,
9506.91.00.10, 9506.91.00.20, 9506.91.00.30, 9506.99.05.10,
9506.99.05.20, 9506.99.05.30, 9506.99.15.00, 9506.99.20.00,
9506.99.25.80, 9506.99.28.00, 9506.99.55.00, 9506.99.60.80,
9507.30.20.00, 9507.30.40.00, 9507.30.60.00, 9507.90.60.00, and
9603.90.80.50.
The subject merchandise entered as parts of other aluminum products
may be classifiable under the following additional Chapter 76
subheadings: 7610.10, 7610.90, 7615.19, 7615.20, and 7616.99 as well as
under other HTS chapters. In addition, fin evaporator coils may be
classifiable under HTS numbers: 8418.99.80.50 and 8418.99.80.60. While
HTS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the scope of this Order is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by parties
in this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum,
which is incorporated herein by reference. A list of the issues which
parties raised, and to which we respond in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum, follows as an appendix to this notice. The Issues and
Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically
via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (``ACCESS'').\8\ ACCESS is
available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and it is
available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the
main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version
of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the
internet at https://www.trade.gov/enforcement/frn/. The signed
Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues
and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ On November 24, 2014, Enforcement and Compliance changed the
name of Enforcement and Compliance's AD and CVD Centralized
Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS'') to AD and CVD Centralized
Electronic Service System (``ACCESS''). The Web site location was
changed from https://iaaccess.trade.gov to https://access.trade.gov.
The Final Rule changing the reference to the Regulations can be
found at 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on an analysis of the comments received from interested
parties and a review of the record, the Department made the following
changes for these final results of review:
We corrected a calculation error for the final adjusted
margin to be applied to the separate rate companies.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Attachment to the accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We adjusted the PRC-wide entity margin for both export
subsidies and domestic subsidy pass-through.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Id.; see also Comment 3 of the accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We determined that Skyline did not have shipments of
subject merchandise during the POR.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Comment 7 of the accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We made a correction to the spelling of Kam Kiu's
name.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Comment 8 of the accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Kromet's preliminary margin calculation, we neglected
to convert the variables ``Magnesium Ingots'' and ``Aluminum Titanium
Boron Wire'' using Thai exchange rates. We corrected this error, and it
did not change Kromet's margin.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Memorandum to the File titled ``Second Administrative
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Aluminum Extrusions from the
People's Republic of China: Analysis of the Final Results Margin
Calculation for Kromet International,'' dated concurrently with this
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Companies Eligible for a Separate Rate
In our Preliminary Results, we determined that 18 companies, plus
Kromet, are eligible for a separate rate.\14\ We received no
information since the issuance of the Preliminary Results that provides
a basis for reconsideration of this determination. Therefore, the
Department continues to find that these 19 companies are eligible for a
separate rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Preliminary Results, 79 FR at 36006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rate for Non-Examined Companies Which Are Eligible for a Separate Rate
The Department assigned to non-examined, separate rate companies
the
[[Page 78786]]
weighted-average dumping margin assigned to non-examined, separate rate
companies in the final determination of the antidumping investigation
and for the final results of the first administrative review of the
Order. Neither the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'') nor the
Department's regulations address the establishment of the rate applied
to individual companies not selected for examination where the
Department limited its examination in an administrative review pursuant
to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. The Department's practice in cases
involving limited selection based on exporters accounting for the
largest volumes of trade has been to look to section 735(c)(5) of the
Act for guidance, which provides instructions for calculating the all-
others rate in an investigation. Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act
instructs the Department to avoid calculating an all-others rate using
any rates that are zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts
available in investigations. Section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act provides
that, where all rates are zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts
available, the Department may use ``any reasonable method'' for
assigning an all-others rate.
We determine that the application of the rate from the
investigation to the non-examined separate rate respondents is
consistent with precedent and an appropriate method to determine the
separate rate in the instant review. Pursuant to this method, we are
assigning the rate of 32.79 percent, the most recent rate (from the
less than fair value investigation) calculated for the non-examined
separate rate respondents, to the non-examined separate rate
respondents in the instant review.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Comment 4 of the accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum for further discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustment Under Section 777A(f) of the Act
Pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act, the Department has made an
adjustment for countervailable domestic subsidies which have been found
to have impacted the U.S. prices. We made no changes (since the
Preliminary Results) to the adjustments made for these final results to
Kromet's adjustment or the separate rate companies' adjustment (though
we corrected a calculation error for the final adjusted margin to
include only the passed-through portion of the domestic subsidy for the
separate rate companies).\16\ Pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act,
for these final results, we also made an adjustment to the PRC-wide
entity's rate to account for countervailable domestic subsidies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Preliminary Results, 79 FR at 36005-36006 and the
Attachment to the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-Wide Entity
In the Preliminary Results, the Department determined that the
mandatory respondents Jangho and Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya were not
eligible for a separate rate, and, accordingly, were found to be part
of the PRC-wide entity. The Department received no information since
the issuance of the Preliminary Results that provides a basis for
reconsideration of this determination. Therefore, the Department
continues to find that Jangho and Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya \17\ are
not eligible for a separate rate and are part of the PRC-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Comments 2, 5, and 6 of the accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum for further discussion. See also Preliminary
Results, 79 FR at 36003-36005 and accompanying Preliminary Decision
Memorandum at 14-15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Preliminary Results, the Department also found 21 companies
to be part of the PRC-wide entity. For one of those companies, Skyline,
the Department received information since the Preliminary Results
sufficient to change its determination. For the remaining 20 companies,
the Department received no information since the issuance of the
Preliminary Results that provides a basis for reconsideration of its
determination. Therefore, the Department continues to find that these
20 companies are not eligible for a separate rate and are part of the
PRC-wide entity.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ These companies are: (1) Alnan Aluminium Co., Ltd.; (2)
Chiping One Stop Industrial & Trade Co., Ltd.; (3) Cixi Handsome
Pool Appliance Co., Ltd.; (4) DongChuan Swimming Pool Equipments
Co., Ltd.; (5) Dongguan Golden Tiger Hardware Industrial Co., Ltd.;
(6) Foshan Shunde Aoneng Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd.; (7) Guang
Dong Xin Wei Aluminum Products Co., Ltd.; (8) Guangdong Whirlpool
Electrical Appliances Co., Ltd.; (9) Guangzhou Mingcan Die-Casting
Hardware Products, Co. Ltd.; (10) Hanyung Alcobis Co., Ltd.; (11)
Henan New Kelong Electrical Appliances Cp., Ltd.; (12) Idex Dinglee
Technology (Tianjin Co., Ltd.); (13) Nidec Sankyo (Zhejiang)
Corporation; (14) Ningbo Splash Pool Appliance Co., Ltd.; (15)
Samuel, Son & Co., Ltd.; (16) Shenyang Yuanda Aluminum Industry
Engineering Co., Ltd.; (17) Taizhou Lifeng Manufacturing
Corporation; (18) Tiazhou Lifeng Manufacturing Corporation; (19)
Wenzhou Shengbo Decoration & Hardware; and (20) Whirlpool
(Guangdong).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adverse Facts Available Rate for the PRC-Wide Entity
For the PRC-wide entity, the Department in the Preliminary Results
preliminarily determined that the PRC-wide entity had not acted to the
best of its ability in providing necessary information to the
Department, and assigned the rate of 33.28 percent, the only rate ever
determined for the PRC-wide entity in this proceeding, as adverse facts
available pursuant to sections 776(a) and 776(b) of the Act. The rate
of 33.28 percent has probative value because it was in the range of the
individual dumping margins which we calculated for Kromet. Accordingly,
we find that the rate of 33.28 percent is corroborated within the
meaning of section 776(c) of the Act, and that it is appropriate to
continue to apply this rate of 33.28 percent to the PRC-wide
entity.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Comment 3 of the accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum for further discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of Review
As a result of this review, we determine that the following
weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period May 1, 2012,
through April 30, 2013:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin adjusted
Weighted- average for liquidation
Exporter dumping margin and cash deposit
\20\ purposes (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kromet International, Inc......... ................. 0.00
Allied Maker Limited.............. 32.79 22.28
Changzhou Changzheng Evaporator 32.79 32.69
Co., Ltd.........................
Classic & Contemporary Inc........ 32.79 22.28
Dynabright Int'l Group (HK) 32.79 22.28
Limited..........................
Hanyung Metal (Suzhou) Co., Ltd... 32.79 22.28
Global Point Technology (Far East) 32.79 22.28
Limited \21\.....................
Jiangsu Changfa Refrigeration Co., 32.79 27.22
Ltd..............................
Jiaxing Jackson Travel Products 32.79 27.22
Co., Ltd.........................
[[Page 78787]]
Justhere Co., Ltd................. 32.79 27.22
Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn. 32.79 22.28
Bhd \22\.........................
Metaltek Group Co., Ltd........... 32.79 27.22
Midea International Trading Co., 32.79 27.22
Ltd..............................
Permasteelisa Hong Kong Limited 32.79 22.28
\23\.............................
Shanghai Tongtai Precise Aluminum 32.79 27.22
Alloy............................
Sincere Profit Limited............ 32.79 27.22
tenKsolar (Shanghai) Co., Ltd..... 32.79 22.28
Tianjin Jinmao Import & Export 32.79 27.22
Corp., Ltd.......................
Union Industry (Asia) Co., Ltd.... 32.79 27.22
PRC-wide Entity................... 33.28 33.18
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the
date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ As explained in the Preliminary Results, for the Separate
Rate Companies (i.e., all companies other than Kromet), the
Department intends to adjust the weighted-average dumping margin,
for both cash deposit and liquidation purposes. See Attachment to
the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum for calculations
showing the export subsidy, domestic subsidy, pass-through rate, and
net adjustments.
\21\ Hoff Associates Mfg Reps Inc. (dba Global Point Technology,
Inc.) is the U.S. importer.
\22\ Taishan City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusions Co., Ltd. is the
producer.
\23\ Permasteelisa South China Factory (Permasteelisa China) is
the producer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (``CBP'') shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries covered by this review pursuant to section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b).\24\ The Department
intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date
of publication of these final results of review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Antidumping Proceeding: Calculation of the Weighted-
Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping
Duty Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8103 (February 14, 2012)
(``NME Antidumping Proceedings'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Kromet, we will instruct CBP to liquidate all appropriate
entries without regard to antidumping duties because Kromet's weighted-
average dumping margin is zero percent. For the 18 non-examined,
separate rate companies, we will instruct CBP to liquidate all
appropriate entries at a rate based on 32.79 percent and adjusted for
both export and domestic subsidies as described above. For the PRC-wide
entity, we will instruct CBP to liquidate all appropriate entries at a
rate equal to 33.18 percent, which is adjusted for export and domestic
subsidies, as appropriate.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ For the PRC-wide entity, which received an AFA rate, as an
extension of the adverse inference found necessary pursuant to
section 776(b) of the Act, the Department has adjusted the PRC-wide
entity's AD assessment rate by the lowest export subsidy rate and
the lowest estimated domestic subsidy pass-through determined for
any party in the companion CVD proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department recently announced a refinement to its assessment
practice in non-market economy (``NME'') cases. Pursuant to this
refinement in practice, for entries that were not reported in the U.S.
sales databases submitted by companies individually examined during
this review, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries
at the NME-wide rate. In addition, if the Department determines that an
exporter under review had no shipments of subject merchandise, any
suspended entries that entered under that exporter's case number (i.e.,
at that exporter's rate) will be liquidated at the NME-wide rate. For a
full discussion of this practice, see NME Antidumping Proceedings,
supra.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the
final results of this administrative review, as provided by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the exporters listed above, the cash
deposit rate will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin
identified in ``Final Results of the Review,'' and adjusted for
applicable export and domestic subsidies; (2) for previously
investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters that are not under
review in this segment of the proceeding but that received a separate
rate in a previous segment, the cash deposit rate will continue to be
the exporter-specific rate published for the most recently completed
segment of this proceeding; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject
merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a separate
rate, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate of 33.18 percent,
which is adjusted for export and domestic subsidies, as appropriate;
\26\ and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which
have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the
rate applicable to the PRC exporter(s) that supplied that non-PRC
exporter. The cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in
effect until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ For the PRC-wide entity, which received an AFA rate, as an
extension of the adverse inference found necessary pursuant to
section 776(b) of the Act, the Department has adjusted the PRC-wide
entity's AD cash deposit rate by the lowest export subsidy rate and
the lowest estimated domestic subsidy pass-through determined for
any party in the companion CVD proceeding. See Attachment to
accompanying Issues and Decision memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties
prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period.
Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's
presumption that reimbursement of the antidumping and/or countervailing
duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping
duties.
Notification to Interested Parties
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), this notice serves as a
reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order
(``APO'') of their responsibility concerning the disposition of
proprietary information disclosed under the APO. Timely written
notification of the return or
[[Page 78788]]
destruction of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective
order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and
terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
These final results of review and notice are published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 22, 2014.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix--Issues and Decision Memorandum
Summary
Background
Scope of the Order
Discussion of the Issues
Comment 1A: Selection of the Primary Surrogate Country
Comment 1B: Selection of Financial Statements To Derive
Financial Ratios
Comment 1C: Selection of Surrogate Value for Primary Aluminum
Input
Comment 1D: Selection of Surrogate Value for Labor
Comment 2: Whether To Continue To Collapse Zhongya, Guang Ya,
and Xinya
Comment 3: Whether To Recalculate the PRC-Wide Rate
Comment 4: Whether To Recalculate the Separate-Rate for Non-
Examined Exporters
Comment 5: Whether the Department Has the Authority To Assess
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Merchandise Prior to the Initiation
of a Scope Inquiry
Comment 6: Whether the Department Should Make a Scope Ruling on
Jangho's Curtain Wall Units and Window Wall Units in This Review
Comment 7: Status of Skyline's Separate Rate
Comment 8: Whether To Correct the Spelling of Company Names in
the Final Results and CBP Instructions
Recommendation
Attachment
[FR Doc. 2014-30662 Filed 12-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
