Aluminum Extrusions From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 75060-75064 [2015-30502]

Download as PDF tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 75060 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 230 / Tuesday, December 1, 2015 / Notices review of that party absent new information as to the party’s location. Moreover, if the interested party who files a request for review is unable to locate the producer or exporter for which it requested the review, the interested party must provide an explanation of the attempts it made to locate the producer or exporter at the same time it files its request for review, in order for the Secretary to determine if the interested party’s attempts were reasonable, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.303(f)(3)(ii). As explained in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003), and NonMarket Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011) the Department clarified its practice with respect to the collection of final antidumping duties on imports of merchandise where intermediate firms are involved. The public should be aware of this clarification in determining whether to request an administrative review of merchandise subject to antidumping findings and orders.2 Further, as explained in Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963 (November 4, 2013), the Department clarified its practice with regard to the conditional review of the non-market economy (NME) entity in administrative reviews of antidumping duty orders. The Department will no longer consider the NME entity as an exporter conditionally subject to administrative reviews. Accordingly, the NME entity will not be under review unless the Department specifically receives a request for, or self-initiates, a review of the NME entity.3 In administrative reviews of antidumping duty orders on merchandise from NME countries where a review of the NME entity has not been initiated, but where an individual exporter for which a review was initiated does not qualify for a separate rate, the Department will issue a final decision indicating that the company in question is part of the NME entity. However, in that situation, because no review of the NME entity 2 See also the Enforcement and Compliance Web site at http://trade.gov/enforcement/. 3 In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b)(1), parties should specify that they are requesting a review of entries from exporters comprising the entity, and to the extent possible, include the names of such exporters in their request. VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:35 Nov 30, 2015 Jkt 238001 was conducted, the NME entity’s entries were not subject to the review and the rate for the NME entity is not subject to change as a result of that review (although the rate for the individual exporter may change as a function of the finding that the exporter is part of the NME entity). Following initiation of an antidumping administrative review when there is no review requested of the NME entity, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate entries for all exporters not named in the initiation notice, including those that were suspended at the NME entity rate. All requests must be filed electronically in Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (‘‘ACCESS’’) on Enforcement and Compliance’s ACCESS Web site at http:// access.trade.gov.4 Further, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f)(l)(i), a copy of each request must be served on the petitioner and each exporter or producer specified in the request. The Department will publish in the Federal Register a notice of ‘‘Initiation of Administrative Review of Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation’’ for requests received by the last day of December 2015. If the Department does not receive, by the last day of December 2015, a request for review of entries covered by an order, finding, or suspended investigation listed in this notice and for the period identified above, the Department will instruct CBP to assess antidumping or countervailing duties on those entries at a rate equal to the cash deposit of (or bond for) estimated antidumping or countervailing duties required on those entries at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption and to continue to collect the cash deposit previously ordered. For the first administrative review of any order, there will be no assessment of antidumping or countervailing duties on entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the relevant provisional-measures ‘‘gap’’ period of the order, if such a gap period is applicable to the period of review. This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community. 4 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011). PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Dated: November 13, 2015. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. [FR Doc. 2015–30499 Filed 11–30–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 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; 2013–2014 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on aluminum extrusions from the People’s Republic of China (PRC).1 The period of review (POR) is May 1, 2013, through April 30, 2014. These final results cover 39 companies for which an administrative review was initiated and not rescinded.2 The Department selected the following companies as mandatory respondents: Guangzhou Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering Co., Ltd. and Jangho Curtain Wall Hong Kong Ltd. (collectively, Jangho), Union Industry (Asia) Co., Ltd. (Union), and Guang Ya Aluminium Industries Co., Ltd., Foshan Guangcheng Aluminium Co., Ltd., Kong Ah International Company Limited, and Guang Ya Aluminium Industries (Hong Kong) Ltd. (collectively, Guang Ya Group); Guangdong Zhongya Aluminium Company Limited, Zhongya Shaped Aluminium (HK) Holding Limited, and Karlton Aluminum Company Ltd. (collectively, Zhongya); and Xinya Aluminum & Stainless Steel Product Co., Ltd. (Xinya) (collectively, Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya).3 AGENCY: 1 The Department initiated this review on June 27, 2014. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 79 FR 36462 (June 27, 2014) (Initiation Notice). 2 This administrative review initially covered 155 companies. See Initiation Notice. However, on January 29, 2015, the Department rescinded this review with respect to 116 companies. See Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s Republic of China: Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 80 FR 4868 (January 29, 2015). 3 In prior segments of this proceeding the Department found that the Guang Ya Group, Zhongya, and Xinya were affiliated and should be treated as a single entity. See, e.g., Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Rescission, in Part, 2010/12, 79 FR 96 (January 2, 2014) and Aluminum Extrusions From E:\FR\FM\01DEN1.SGM 01DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 230 / Tuesday, December 1, 2015 / Notices The Department finds for these final results that Union made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value. In addition, the Department determines that Jangho, Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/ Xinya, and 15 other companies subject to this review did not demonstrate eligibility for a separate rate, and, accordingly, are to be considered part of the PRC-wide entity. We also determine for these final results that one company, Xin Wei Aluminum Company Limited (Xin Wei), had no shipments. DATES: Effective Date: December 1, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Scott, Mark Flessner, or Robert James, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2657, (202) 482–6312 or (202) 482–0649, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES On June 8, 2015, the Department published the Preliminary Results of this administrative review.4 At that time, we invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On June 10, 2015, we received comments from the Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee (Petitioner) on the calculation of the margin for Union.5 On July 8, 2015, we received case briefs from Petitioner 6 and Zhongya.7 On July 15, 2015, we received rebuttal briefs the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012– 2013, 79 FR 78784 (December 31, 2014) (2012–2013 Final Results). 4 See Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013– 2014, 80 FR 32347 (June 8, 2015) (Preliminary Results) and the accompanying memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, entitled, ‘‘Decision Memorandum for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China; 2013–2014,’’ dated June 1, 2015 (Preliminary Decision Memorandum). 5 See letter from Petitioner to the Secretary of Commerce entitled, ‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China: Comments on Union’s Preliminary Margin Calculations,’’ dated June 10, 2015. 6 See letter from Petitioner to the Secretary of Commerce entitled, ‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China: Case Brief of the Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee,’’ dated July 8, 2015. 7 See letter from Zhongya to the Secretary of Commerce entitled, ‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from China: Zhongda {sic} Case Brief,’’ dated July 8, 2015. VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:35 Nov 30, 2015 Jkt 238001 from Jangho 8 and Petitioner.9 On September 25, 2015, the Department extended the deadline for the final results until November 5, 2015.10 Scope of the Order The merchandise covered by the Order 11 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).12 Imports of the subject merchandise are provided for under the following categories of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS): 7609.00.00, 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, 8302.42.30.1 0, 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, 8 See letter from Jangho to the Secretary of Commerce entitled, ‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China: Rebuttal Brief: Guangzhou Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering Co., Ltd. and Jangho Curtain Wall Hong Kong Ltd.,’’ dated July 15, 2015. 9 See letter from Petitioner to the Secretary of Commerce entitled, ‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China: Rebuttal Brief of the Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee,’’ dated July 15, 2015. 10 See memorandum from Mark Flessner to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, entitled, ‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,’’ dated September 25, 2015. 11 See Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 30650 (May 26, 2011) (Order). 12 For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, entitled, ‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013–2014,’’ dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 75061 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, 8515.90.20.00, 8516.90.50.00, 8516.90.80.50, 8517.70.00.00, 8529.90.73.00, 8529.90.97.60, 8536.90.80.85, 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 HTSUS chapters. In addition, fin evaporator coils may be classifiable under HTSUS numbers: 8418.99.80.50 and 8418.99.80.60. While HTSUS 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). ACCESS is available to E:\FR\FM\01DEN1.SGM 01DEN1 75062 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 230 / Tuesday, December 1, 2015 / Notices registered users at http:// access.trade.gov and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 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 http:// 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 corrected calculation errors for the final adjusted margin to be applied to Union. For a full explanation, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2. This recalculation of Union’s rate affected the rate for other companies; see the section below entitled, ‘‘Rate for Non-Examined Companies Which Are Eligible for a Separate Rate.’’ The Department also reconsidered the necessity of having applied adverse facts available in the Preliminary Results with respect to Jangho and Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya in light of the Department’s recent change of practice concerning the conditional review of the PRC-wide entity.13 For additional explanation, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum at ‘‘Application of Facts Available and Use of Adverse Inference’’ and Comments 4 and 5. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Companies Eligible for a Separate Rate In our Preliminary Results, we determined that 11 companies, plus Union, are eligible for a separate rate.14 These companies are: Allied Maker Limited; Changzhou Changzheng Evaporator Co., Ltd.; Dongguan Aoda Aluminum Co., Ltd.; Justhere Co., Ltd.; Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn Bhd; Kromet International Inc. (Kromet); Metaltek Group Co., Ltd.; Permasteelisa South China Factory; Permasteelisa Hong Kong Ltd.; Taishan City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusion Co., Ltd.; and tenKsolar (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. We received no information since the issuance of the Preliminary Results that provides a basis for reconsideration of this determination. Therefore, the 13 See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963, 65970 (November 4, 2013) (Conditional Review of NME Entity Notice). 14 See Preliminary Results, 80 FR at 32348. VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:35 Nov 30, 2015 Jkt 238001 Department continues to find that these 12 companies are eligible for a separate rate. Rate for Non-Examined Companies Which Are Eligible for a Separate Rate Neither the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), nor the Department’s regulations address the establishment of the rate applied to individual separate rate 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 administrative reviews 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 a market-economy antidumping 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. In the Preliminary Results, we assigned 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 However, we have determined in these Final Results that the methodology used in the Preliminary Results was predicated on the erroneous calculation of a rate of zero for Union. As Union’s rate at these Final Results is neither zero nor de minimis, we are applying Union’s calculated rate to the non-examined, separate rate companies in accordance with section 735(c)(5) of the Act. For a full explanation, see the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 3. Determination of No Shipments One company remaining under review, Xin Wei, timely submitted a certification indicating that it had no sales, shipments, or entries of subject merchandise during the POR.16 Consistent with our practice, the Department requested that CBP conduct 15 Id., at 32349. letter from Xin Wei to the Secretary of Commerce entitled, ‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China: Certification of No Sales, Shipments, or Entries,’’ dated August 26, 2014. 16 See PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 a query on potential shipments made by Xin Wei during the POR; CBP provided no evidence that contradicted Xin Wei’s claim of no shipments. Based on Xin Wei’s no-shipment certification and our analysis of the CBP information, in the Preliminary Results we determined that Xin Wei had no shipments during the POR.17 No party commented on that determination. The Department will issue appropriate instructions to CBP.18 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 part of the PRC-wide entity.19 For purposes of these Final Results, the Department continues to find that Jangho and Guang Ya Group/ Zhongya/Xinya are not eligible for a separate rate and are part of the PRCwide entity. For a full explanation, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comments 4 and 5. In addition, 14 companies still subject to these final results are not eligible for separate-rate status because they did not submit separate-rate applications or certifications; those companies are: Aluminicaste Fundicion de Mexico; China Zhongwang Holdings, Ltd.; Classic & Contemporary Inc.; Dongguan Golden Tiger; Dongguan Golden Tiger Hardware Industrial Co., Ltd.; Gold Mountain International Development, Ltd.; Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc.; Metaltek Metal Industry Co., Ltd.; Nidec Sankyo Singapore Pte. Ltd.; Press Metal International Ltd.; tenKsolar, Inc.; Tianjin Jinmao Import & Export Corp., Ltd.; WTI Building Products, Ltd.; and Zahoqing China Square Industry Limited/Zhaoqing China Square Industry Limited.20 Further, one company still under review, Shenyang Yuanda Aluminium Industry Engineering Co., Ltd., submitted a separate-rate application that did not demonstrate eligibility for a separate 17 See Preliminary Results, 80 FR at 32349. Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694, 65695 (October 24, 2011). 19 See Preliminary Results, 80 FR at 32350. 20 One company, Zhaoqing New Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd. (New Zhongya), was determined to have been succeeded by Guangdong Zhongya Aluminum Company Limited (Guangdong Zhongya) in a changed circumstances review. See Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review, 77 FR 54900 (September 6, 2012). Thus, despite the fact that a review was initiated of New Zhongya, it is not being included among these 14 companies because its successor in interest, Guangdong Zhongya, is part of the Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya single entity. 18 See E:\FR\FM\01DEN1.SGM 01DEN1 75063 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 230 / Tuesday, December 1, 2015 / Notices rate. As a result, the Department finds for these final results that these 15 companies are also part of the PRC-wide entity. The Department’s change in policy regarding conditional review of the PRC-wide entity applies to this administrative review.21 Under this policy, the PRC-wide entity will not be under review unless a party specifically requests, or the Department selfinitiates, a review of the entity. Because no party requested a review of the PRCwide entity in this review, the entity is not under review and the entity’s rate from the previous administrative review (i.e., 33.28 percent) is not subject to change.22 Adjustments for Countervailable Subsidies Because no mandatory respondent established eligibility for an adjustment under section 777A(f) of the Act for countervailable domestic subsidies, the Department, for these final results, did not make an adjustment pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act for countervailable domestic subsidies for Union or the separate-rate recipients.23 Pursuant to section 772(c)(1)(C) of the Act, the Department made an adjustment for countervailable export subsidies. For Union, we made adjustments to its reported U.S. price.24 For the companies eligible for a separate rate, because all of these companies participated in the second countervailing duty administrative review,25 an adjustment has been made based on the countervailable export subsidy found for the non-selected companies in the final results of the second countervailing duty administrative review (or its own calculated rate, in the case of Kromet).26 For a full explanation, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 3. For the PRC-wide entity, since the entity is not currently under review, no adjustments were warranted to its rate, as its rate is not subject to change.27 Final Results of Review The Department determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the POR for these final results: Weightedaverage dumping margin (%) Exporter Allied Maker Limited ................................................................................................................................................ Changzhou Changzheng Evaporator Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................ Dongguan Aoda Aluminum Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................................ Justhere Co., Ltd ..................................................................................................................................................... Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn Bhd 29 ............................................................................................................... Kromet International Inc .......................................................................................................................................... Metaltek Group Co., Ltd .......................................................................................................................................... Permasteelisa Hong Kong Ltd 30 ............................................................................................................................. tenKsolar (Shanghai) Co., Ltd ................................................................................................................................. Union Industry (Asia) Co., Ltd ................................................................................................................................. 86.01 86.01 86.01 86.01 86.01 86.01 86.01 86.01 86.01 86.01 Margin adjusted for liquidation and cash deposit purposes 28 (%) 85.73 85.73 85.73 85.73 85.73 85.66 85.73 85.73 85.73 85.73 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Additionally, the Department determines for these final results that the following companies are part of the PRC-wide entity: Jangho (which includes Guangzhou Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering Co., Ltd. and Jangho Curtain Wall Hong Kong Ltd.); Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya (which includes Guang Ya Aluminium Industries Co., Ltd.; Foshan Guangcheng Aluminium Co., Ltd.; Kong Ah International Company Limited; Guang Ya Aluminium Industries (Hong Kong) Ltd.; Guangdong Zhongya Aluminium Company Limited; Zhongya Shaped Aluminium (HK) Holding Limited; Karlton Aluminum Company Ltd.; and Xinya Aluminum & Stainless Steel Product Co., Ltd.); Aluminicaste Fundicion de Mexico; China Zhongwang Holdings, Ltd.; Classic & Contemporary Inc.; Dongguan Golden Tiger; Dongguan Golden Tiger Hardware Industrial Co., Ltd.; Gold Mountain International Development, Ltd.; Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc.; Metaltek Metal Industry Co., Ltd.; Nidec Sankyo Singapore Pte. Ltd.; Press Metal International Ltd.; Shenyang Yuanda Aluminium Industry Engineering Co., Ltd.; tenKsolar, Inc.; Tianjin Jinmao Import & Export Corp., Ltd.; WTI Building Products, Ltd.; and Zahoqing China Square Industry Limited/Zhaoqing China Square 21 See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963, 65970 (November 4, 2013) (Conditional Review of NME Entity Notice). 22 See 2012–2013 Final Results, 79 FR at 78787. 23 See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 34 and Attachment 1. 24 See Memorandum from Mark Flessner to the File entitled, ‘‘2013–2014 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 Union Industry (Asia) Co., Ltd.,’’ dated concurrently with this notice (Union Final Analysis Memorandum). 25 See Aluminum Extrusions From the People]s Republic of China: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2012, 79 FR 78788, 78789–90 (December 31, 2014). 26 See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at Attachment 1. 27 See 2012–2013 Final Results, 79 FR at 78787; see also Conditional Review of NME Entity Notice, 78 FR 65970. As the rate for the PRC-wide entity is not subject to change in the instant review, the margin from the 2012–2013 Final Results that we are applying to the PRC-wide entity in the instant review is net of countervailable domestic and export subsidies. 28 See the memorandum from Mark Flessner to The File entitled, ‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China: Export Subsidy Adjustment Memorandum for the Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013– 2014,’’ dated concurrently with this notice. 29 Although the Department initiated a review for both Taishan City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusion Co., Ltd. and Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn Bhd, it is apparent from the company’s separate-rate application that Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn Bhd is the exporter and Taishan City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusion Co., Ltd. is a producer only; thus, Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn Bhd is the appropriate party to grant the separate rate status. 30 Although the Department initiated a review for Permasteelisa South China Factory and Permasteelisa Hong Kong Ltd., it is apparent from the company’s separate-rate application that Permasteelisa Hong Kong Ltd. is the exporter and Permasteelisa South China Factory is a producer only; thus, Permasteelisa Hong Kong Ltd. is the appropriate party to grant the separate rate status. VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:35 Nov 30, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\01DEN1.SGM 01DEN1 75064 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 230 / Tuesday, December 1, 2015 / Notices Industry Limited. The rate previously established for the PRC-wide entity in the previous administrative review is 33.28 percent.31 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Assessment Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of review in the Federal Register. Consistent with the Department’s assessment practice in NME cases, 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 PRC-wide rate.32 In addition, if the Department determines that an exporter under review had no shipments of subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under the exporter’s case number (i.e., at that exporter’s rate) will be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.33 For each individually-examined respondent whose weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent) in the final results of this review, the Department will calculate importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer’s examined sales to the total entered value of those same sales, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review where an importer- (or customer-) specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above de minimis. Where either the respondent’s weightedaverage dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer- (or customer) specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. For the other companies eligible for a separate rate, the Department will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on the company’s entries of subject merchandise at the rates listed above in the section ‘‘Final Results of Review.’’ 31 See 2012–2013 Final Results, 79 FR at 78787. Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings; Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011) (Assessment Practice Refinement). 33 Id. 32 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 23:35 Nov 30, 2015 Jkt 238001 Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) for Union and the other companies eligible for a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will that listed above in the section ‘‘Final Results of Review’’; (2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters not listed above that have a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding in which the exporter was reviewed; (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 that established for the PRC-wide entity of 33.28 percent;34 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 producer or exporter that supplied that non-PRC exporter with the subject merchandise. The deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Disclosure The Department intends to disclose to the parties the calculations performed for these final results within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Notification to Importers This notice 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 duties and/or countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties and/or countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. Administrative Protective Order Notification to Interested Parties This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information 34 See PO 00000 2012–2013 Final Results, 79 FR at 78787. Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. Notification to Interested Parties This administrative review and notice are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h). Dated: November 20, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix—List of Issues Raised in Case and Rebuttal Briefs Summary Background Application of Facts Available and Use of Adverse Inference Discussion of the Issues Issue 1: Collapsing of Zhongya Issue 2: Improper Calculation of Union’s Dumping Margin Issue 3: Assignment of Union’s Revised Dumping Margin to the Separate Rate Respondents Issue 4: Use of Union’s Recalculated Margin as the AFA Rate Issue 5: Revision of the PRC-Wide Rate to Reflect Union’s Recalculated Dumping Margin Conclusion [FR Doc. 2015–30502 Filed 11–30–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. AGENCY: In accordance with section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) is automatically initiating the five-year review (‘‘Sunset Review’’) of the antidumping and countervailing duty (‘‘AD/CVD’’) orders listed below. The International Trade Commission (‘‘the Commission’’) is publishing concurrently with this notice its notice of Institution of Five-Year Review which covers the same orders. SUMMARY: DATES: E:\FR\FM\01DEN1.SGM Effective Date: December 1, 2015. 01DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 230 (Tuesday, December 1, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75060-75064]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-30502]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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; 2013-2014

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on aluminum 
extrusions from the People's Republic of China (PRC).\1\ The period of 
review (POR) is May 1, 2013, through April 30, 2014. These final 
results cover 39 companies for which an administrative review was 
initiated and not rescinded.\2\ The Department selected the following 
companies as mandatory respondents: Guangzhou Jangho Curtain Wall 
System Engineering Co., Ltd. and Jangho Curtain Wall Hong Kong Ltd. 
(collectively, Jangho), Union Industry (Asia) Co., Ltd. (Union), and 
Guang Ya Aluminium Industries Co., Ltd., Foshan Guangcheng Aluminium 
Co., Ltd., Kong Ah International Company Limited, and Guang Ya 
Aluminium Industries (Hong Kong) Ltd. (collectively, Guang Ya Group); 
Guangdong Zhongya Aluminium Company Limited, Zhongya Shaped Aluminium 
(HK) Holding Limited, and Karlton Aluminum Company Ltd. (collectively, 
Zhongya); and Xinya Aluminum & Stainless Steel Product Co., Ltd. 
(Xinya) (collectively, Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Department initiated this review on June 27, 2014. See 
Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Reviews, 79 FR 36462 (June 27, 2014) (Initiation Notice).
    \2\ This administrative review initially covered 155 companies. 
See Initiation Notice. However, on January 29, 2015, the Department 
rescinded this review with respect to 116 companies. See Aluminum 
Extrusions From the People's Republic of China: Partial Rescission 
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 80 FR 4868 (January 29, 
2015).
    \3\ In prior segments of this proceeding the Department found 
that the Guang Ya Group, Zhongya, and Xinya were affiliated and 
should be treated as a single entity. See, e.g., Aluminum Extrusions 
From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review and Rescission, in Part, 2010/12, 79 FR 
96 (January 2, 2014) and Aluminum Extrusions From the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review; 2012-2013, 79 FR 78784 (December 31, 2014) (2012-2013 Final 
Results).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 75061]]

    The Department finds for these final results that Union made sales 
of subject merchandise at less than normal value. In addition, the 
Department determines that Jangho, Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya, and 15 
other companies subject to this review did not demonstrate eligibility 
for a separate rate, and, accordingly, are to be considered part of the 
PRC-wide entity. We also determine for these final results that one 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
company, Xin Wei Aluminum Company Limited (Xin Wei), had no shipments.

DATES: Effective Date: December 1, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Scott, Mark Flessner, or 
Robert James, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, 
International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 1401 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
2657, (202) 482-6312 or (202) 482-0649, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 8, 2015, the Department published the Preliminary Results 
of this administrative review.\4\ At that time, we invited interested 
parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On June 10, 2015, we 
received comments from the Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee 
(Petitioner) on the calculation of the margin for Union.\5\ On July 8, 
2015, we received case briefs from Petitioner \6\ and Zhongya.\7\ On 
July 15, 2015, we received rebuttal briefs from Jangho \8\ and 
Petitioner.\9\ On September 25, 2015, the Department extended the 
deadline for the final results until November 5, 2015.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Aluminum Extrusions From the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-
2014, 80 FR 32347 (June 8, 2015) (Preliminary Results) and the 
accompanying memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to 
Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 
Compliance, entitled, ``Decision Memorandum for Preliminary Results 
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Aluminum Extrusions from 
the People's Republic of China; 2013-2014,'' dated June 1, 2015 
(Preliminary Decision Memorandum).
    \5\ See letter from Petitioner to the Secretary of Commerce 
entitled, ``Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: 
Comments on Union's Preliminary Margin Calculations,'' dated June 
10, 2015.
    \6\ See letter from Petitioner to the Secretary of Commerce 
entitled, ``Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: 
Case Brief of the Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee,'' dated 
July 8, 2015.
    \7\ See letter from Zhongya to the Secretary of Commerce 
entitled, ``Aluminum Extrusions from China: Zhongda {sic{time}  Case 
Brief,'' dated July 8, 2015.
    \8\ See letter from Jangho to the Secretary of Commerce 
entitled, ``Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: 
Rebuttal Brief: Guangzhou Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering 
Co., Ltd. and Jangho Curtain Wall Hong Kong Ltd.,'' dated July 15, 
2015.
    \9\ See letter from Petitioner to the Secretary of Commerce 
entitled, ``Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: 
Rebuttal Brief of the Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee,'' 
dated July 15, 2015.
    \10\ See memorandum from Mark Flessner to Christian Marsh, 
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations, entitled, ``Aluminum Extrusions from the People's 
Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,'' dated September 25, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by the Order \11\ 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).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of 
China: Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 30650 (May 26, 2011) (Order).
    \12\ For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see 
Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary 
for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, entitled, 
``Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: Issues 
and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; 2013-2014,'' dated concurrently with this 
notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Imports of the subject merchandise are provided for under the 
following categories of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States (HTSUS): 7609.00.00, 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, 8302.42.30.1 0, 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, 8515.90.20.00, 
8516.90.50.00, 8516.90.80.50, 8517.70.00.00, 8529.90.73.00, 
8529.90.97.60, 8536.90.80.85, 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 HTSUS chapters. In addition, fin evaporator coils may be 
classifiable under HTSUS numbers: 8418.99.80.50 and 8418.99.80.60. 
While HTSUS 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). ACCESS is available to

[[Page 75062]]

registered users at http://access.trade.gov and is available to all 
parties in the Central Records Unit, room B8024 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 http://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 corrected 
calculation errors for the final adjusted margin to be applied to 
Union. For a full explanation, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum 
at Comment 2. This recalculation of Union's rate affected the rate for 
other companies; see the section below entitled, ``Rate for Non-
Examined Companies Which Are Eligible for a Separate Rate.'' The 
Department also reconsidered the necessity of having applied adverse 
facts available in the Preliminary Results with respect to Jangho and 
Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya in light of the Department's recent change 
of practice concerning the conditional review of the PRC-wide 
entity.\13\ For additional explanation, see the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum at ``Application of Facts Available and Use of Adverse 
Inference'' and Comments 4 and 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in 
Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty 
Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity 
in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963, 65970 (November 4, 
2013) (Conditional Review of NME Entity Notice).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Companies Eligible for a Separate Rate

    In our Preliminary Results, we determined that 11 companies, plus 
Union, are eligible for a separate rate.\14\ These companies are: 
Allied Maker Limited; Changzhou Changzheng Evaporator Co., Ltd.; 
Dongguan Aoda Aluminum Co., Ltd.; Justhere Co., Ltd.; Kam Kiu Aluminium 
Products Sdn Bhd; Kromet International Inc. (Kromet); Metaltek Group 
Co., Ltd.; Permasteelisa South China Factory; Permasteelisa Hong Kong 
Ltd.; Taishan City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusion Co., Ltd.; and tenKsolar 
(Shanghai) Co., Ltd. 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 12 companies are eligible for a separate rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Preliminary Results, 80 FR at 32348.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rate for Non-Examined Companies Which Are Eligible for a Separate Rate

    Neither the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), nor the 
Department's regulations address the establishment of the rate applied 
to individual separate rate 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 administrative reviews 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 a market-economy 
antidumping 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.
    In the Preliminary Results, we assigned 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\ However, 
we have determined in these Final Results that the methodology used in 
the Preliminary Results was predicated on the erroneous calculation of 
a rate of zero for Union. As Union's rate at these Final Results is 
neither zero nor de minimis, we are applying Union's calculated rate to 
the non-examined, separate rate companies in accordance with section 
735(c)(5) of the Act. For a full explanation, see the accompanying 
Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Id., at 32349.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of No Shipments

    One company remaining under review, Xin Wei, timely submitted a 
certification indicating that it had no sales, shipments, or entries of 
subject merchandise during the POR.\16\ Consistent with our practice, 
the Department requested that CBP conduct a query on potential 
shipments made by Xin Wei during the POR; CBP provided no evidence that 
contradicted Xin Wei's claim of no shipments. Based on Xin Wei's no-
shipment certification and our analysis of the CBP information, in the 
Preliminary Results we determined that Xin Wei had no shipments during 
the POR.\17\ No party commented on that determination. The Department 
will issue appropriate instructions to CBP.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See letter from Xin Wei to the Secretary of Commerce 
entitled, ``Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: 
Certification of No Sales, Shipments, or Entries,'' dated August 26, 
2014.
    \17\ See Preliminary Results, 80 FR at 32349.
    \18\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment 
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694, 65695 (October 24, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 part of the PRC-
wide entity.\19\ For purposes of these Final Results, the Department 
continues to find that Jangho and Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya are not 
eligible for a separate rate and are part of the PRC-wide entity. For a 
full explanation, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comments 4 
and 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Preliminary Results, 80 FR at 32350.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, 14 companies still subject to these final results are 
not eligible for separate-rate status because they did not submit 
separate-rate applications or certifications; those companies are: 
Aluminicaste Fundicion de Mexico; China Zhongwang Holdings, Ltd.; 
Classic & Contemporary Inc.; Dongguan Golden Tiger; Dongguan Golden 
Tiger Hardware Industrial Co., Ltd.; Gold Mountain International 
Development, Ltd.; Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc.; 
Metaltek Metal Industry Co., Ltd.; Nidec Sankyo Singapore Pte. Ltd.; 
Press Metal International Ltd.; tenKsolar, Inc.; Tianjin Jinmao Import 
& Export Corp., Ltd.; WTI Building Products, Ltd.; and Zahoqing China 
Square Industry Limited/Zhaoqing China Square Industry Limited.\20\ 
Further, one company still under review, Shenyang Yuanda Aluminium 
Industry Engineering Co., Ltd., submitted a separate-rate application 
that did not demonstrate eligibility for a separate

[[Page 75063]]

rate. As a result, the Department finds for these final results that 
these 15 companies are also part of the PRC-wide entity. The 
Department's change in policy regarding conditional review of the PRC-
wide entity applies to this administrative review.\21\ Under this 
policy, the PRC-wide entity will not be under review unless a party 
specifically requests, or the Department self-initiates, a review of 
the entity. Because no party requested a review of the PRC-wide entity 
in this review, the entity is not under review and the entity's rate 
from the previous administrative review (i.e., 33.28 percent) is not 
subject to change.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ One company, Zhaoqing New Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd. (New 
Zhongya), was determined to have been succeeded by Guangdong Zhongya 
Aluminum Company Limited (Guangdong Zhongya) in a changed 
circumstances review. See Aluminum Extrusions From the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review, 77 
FR 54900 (September 6, 2012). Thus, despite the fact that a review 
was initiated of New Zhongya, it is not being included among these 
14 companies because its successor in interest, Guangdong Zhongya, 
is part of the Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya single entity.
    \21\ See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement of Change in 
Department Practice for Respondent Selection in Antidumping Duty 
Proceedings and Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy Entity 
in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 65963, 65970 (November 4, 
2013) (Conditional Review of NME Entity Notice).
    \22\ See 2012-2013 Final Results, 79 FR at 78787.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adjustments for Countervailable Subsidies

    Because no mandatory respondent established eligibility for an 
adjustment under section 777A(f) of the Act for countervailable 
domestic subsidies, the Department, for these final results, did not 
make an adjustment pursuant to section 777A(f) of the Act for 
countervailable domestic subsidies for Union or the separate-rate 
recipients.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 34 and Attachment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to section 772(c)(1)(C) of the Act, the Department made an 
adjustment for countervailable export subsidies. For Union, we made 
adjustments to its reported U.S. price.\24\ For the companies eligible 
for a separate rate, because all of these companies participated in the 
second countervailing duty administrative review,\25\ an adjustment has 
been made based on the countervailable export subsidy found for the 
non-selected companies in the final results of the second 
countervailing duty administrative review (or its own calculated rate, 
in the case of Kromet).\26\ For a full explanation, see the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum at Comment 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Memorandum from Mark Flessner to the File entitled, 
``2013-2014 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 Union Industry (Asia) Co., 
Ltd.,'' dated concurrently with this notice (Union Final Analysis 
Memorandum).
    \25\ See Aluminum Extrusions From the People]s Republic of 
China: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 
2012, 79 FR 78788, 78789-90 (December 31, 2014).
    \26\ See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at Attachment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the PRC-wide entity, since the entity is not currently under 
review, no adjustments were warranted to its rate, as its rate is not 
subject to change.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See 2012-2013 Final Results, 79 FR at 78787; see also 
Conditional Review of NME Entity Notice, 78 FR 65970. As the rate 
for the PRC-wide entity is not subject to change in the instant 
review, the margin from the 2012-2013 Final Results that we are 
applying to the PRC-wide entity in the instant review is net of 
countervailable domestic and export subsidies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Results of Review

    The Department determines that the following weighted-average 
dumping margins exist for the POR for these final results:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Margin
                                                           adjusted for
                                             Weighted-      liquidation
                Exporter                      average        and cash
                                              dumping         deposit
                                            margin  (%)    purposes \28\
                                                                (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allied Maker Limited....................           86.01           85.73
Changzhou Changzheng Evaporator Co., Ltd           86.01           85.73
Dongguan Aoda Aluminum Co., Ltd.........           86.01           85.73
Justhere Co., Ltd.......................           86.01           85.73
Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn Bhd \29\.           86.01           85.73
Kromet International Inc................           86.01           85.66
Metaltek Group Co., Ltd.................           86.01           85.73
Permasteelisa Hong Kong Ltd \30\........           86.01           85.73
tenKsolar (Shanghai) Co., Ltd...........           86.01           85.73
Union Industry (Asia) Co., Ltd..........           86.01           85.73
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See the memorandum from Mark Flessner to The File entitled, 
``Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: Export 
Subsidy Adjustment Memorandum for the Final Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014,'' dated concurrently with 
this notice.
    \29\ Although the Department initiated a review for both Taishan 
City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusion Co., Ltd. and Kam Kiu Aluminium 
Products Sdn Bhd, it is apparent from the company's separate-rate 
application that Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn Bhd is the exporter 
and Taishan City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusion Co., Ltd. is a producer 
only; thus, Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn Bhd is the appropriate 
party to grant the separate rate status.
    \30\ Although the Department initiated a review for 
Permasteelisa South China Factory and Permasteelisa Hong Kong Ltd., 
it is apparent from the company's separate-rate application that 
Permasteelisa Hong Kong Ltd. is the exporter and Permasteelisa South 
China Factory is a producer only; thus, Permasteelisa Hong Kong Ltd. 
is the appropriate party to grant the separate rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the Department determines for these final results 
that the following companies are part of the PRC-wide entity: Jangho 
(which includes Guangzhou Jangho Curtain Wall System Engineering Co., 
Ltd. and Jangho Curtain Wall Hong Kong Ltd.); Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/
Xinya (which includes Guang Ya Aluminium Industries Co., Ltd.; Foshan 
Guangcheng Aluminium Co., Ltd.; Kong Ah International Company Limited; 
Guang Ya Aluminium Industries (Hong Kong) Ltd.; Guangdong Zhongya 
Aluminium Company Limited; Zhongya Shaped Aluminium (HK) Holding 
Limited; Karlton Aluminum Company Ltd.; and Xinya Aluminum & Stainless 
Steel Product Co., Ltd.); Aluminicaste Fundicion de Mexico; China 
Zhongwang Holdings, Ltd.; Classic & Contemporary Inc.; Dongguan Golden 
Tiger; Dongguan Golden Tiger Hardware Industrial Co., Ltd.; Gold 
Mountain International Development, Ltd.; Golden Dragon Precise Copper 
Tube Group, Inc.; Metaltek Metal Industry Co., Ltd.; Nidec Sankyo 
Singapore Pte. Ltd.; Press Metal International Ltd.; Shenyang Yuanda 
Aluminium Industry Engineering Co., Ltd.; tenKsolar, Inc.; Tianjin 
Jinmao Import & Export Corp., Ltd.; WTI Building Products, Ltd.; and 
Zahoqing China Square Industry Limited/Zhaoqing China Square

[[Page 75064]]

Industry Limited. The rate previously established for the PRC-wide 
entity in the previous administrative review is 33.28 percent.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See 2012-2013 Final Results, 79 FR at 78787.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), 
the Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The 
Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days 
after the date of publication of the final results of review in the 
Federal Register. Consistent with the Department's assessment practice 
in NME cases, 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 PRC-wide rate.\32\ In addition, if the Department determines that 
an exporter under review had no shipments of subject merchandise, any 
suspended entries that entered under the exporter's case number (i.e., 
at that exporter's rate) will be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings; Assessment 
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011) (Assessment 
Practice Refinement).
    \33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For each individually-examined respondent whose weighted-average 
dumping margin is above de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent) in the final 
results of this review, the Department will calculate importer-specific 
ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount 
of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales to the total 
entered value of those same sales, in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.212(b)(1). We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries covered by this review where an importer- (or 
customer-) specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of 
this review is above de minimis. Where either the respondent's 
weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer- 
(or customer-) specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, the 
Department will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries 
without regard to antidumping duties. For the other companies eligible 
for a separate rate, the Department will instruct CBP to assess 
antidumping duties on the company's entries of subject merchandise at 
the rates listed above in the section ``Final Results of Review.''

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all 
shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as 
provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) for Union and the 
other companies eligible for a separate rate, the cash deposit rate 
will that listed above in the section ``Final Results of Review''; (2) 
for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters not 
listed above that have a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will 
continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most 
recently completed segment of this proceeding in which the exporter was 
reviewed; (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 that established for the PRC-wide entity of 33.28 percent;\34\ 
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 producer or exporter that supplied that non-PRC 
exporter with the subject merchandise. The deposit requirements, when 
imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See 2012-2013 Final Results, 79 FR at 78787.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    The Department intends to disclose to the parties the calculations 
performed for these final results within five days of the date of 
publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Notification to Importers

    This notice 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 duties and/or countervailing 
duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. 
Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the 
Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties and/
or countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of 
doubled antidumping duties.

Administrative Protective Order Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern 
business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. 
Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO 
materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby 
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an 
APO is a sanctionable violation.

Notification to Interested Parties

    This administrative review and notice are issued and published in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.213(h).

    Dated: November 20, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix--List of Issues Raised in Case and Rebuttal Briefs

Summary
Background
Application of Facts Available and Use of Adverse Inference
Discussion of the Issues
    Issue 1: Collapsing of Zhongya
    Issue 2: Improper Calculation of Union's Dumping Margin
    Issue 3: Assignment of Union's Revised Dumping Margin to the 
Separate Rate Respondents
    Issue 4: Use of Union's Recalculated Margin as the AFA Rate
    Issue 5: Revision of the PRC-Wide Rate to Reflect Union's 
Recalculated Dumping Margin
Conclusion

[FR Doc. 2015-30502 Filed 11-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P