Aluminum Extrusions From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 85516-85520 [2016-28502]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
85516
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 228 / Monday, November 28, 2016 / Notices
suspension of liquidation of the subject
merchandise pending a final and
conclusive court decision.
Amended Final Results of Review
Because there is now a final court
decision, the Department is amending
the Final Results by accepting Baoding
Mantong’s untimely withdrawal request,
and rescinding the review with respect
to Baoding Mantong.
In the event the Court’s ruling is not
appealed or, if appealed, upheld by a
final and conclusive court decision, the
Department will instruct the U.S.
Customs and Border Protection to assess
antidumping duties on unliquidated
entries of subject merchandise based on
the rescission of the review with respect
to Baoding Mantong.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Since the Final Results, the
Department established a new cash
deposit rate for Baoding Mantong.
Therefore, the cash deposit rate for
Baoding Mantong will remain the
company-specific rate established for
the subsequent and most recent period
for a completed administrative review
during which Baoding Mantong was
reviewed.6
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1),
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: November 22, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016–28504 Filed 11–25–16; 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; 2014–2015
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). The period of review
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
6 See Glycine From the People’s Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Partial Rescission of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013–
2014, 80 FR 62026, 62028 (Oct. 15, 2015).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:15 Nov 25, 2016
Jkt 241001
(POR) is May 1, 2014 through April 30,
2015. These final results cover 46
companies for which an administrative
review was initiated and not rescinded.
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) 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). The
Department finds that Jangho, Guang Ya
Group/Zhongya/Xinya, and 23 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 two companies, Xin Wei Aluminum
Company Limited and Permasteelisa
Hong Kong Limited, had no shipments
during the POR. Finally, we find that
eight companies, including JMA (HK)
Company Limited (JMA), continue to be
eligible for a separate rate.
DATES: Effective November 28, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Deborah Scott or Mark Flessner, 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 or (202) 482–6312,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department initiated this review
on July 1, 2015.1 On June 14, 2016, the
Department published the Preliminary
Results of this administrative review.2
At that time, we invited interested
parties to comment on the Preliminary
Results. On July 6, 2016, JMA submitted
a letter stating that it was officially
withdrawing from participation in this
1 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 80 FR
37588 (July 1, 2015) (Initiation Notice).
2 See Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and
Rescission of Review in Part; 2014–2015, 81 FR
38664 (June 14, 2016) (Preliminary Results), and
accompanying preliminary decision memorandum
(Preliminary Decision Memorandum).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
review and requesting that the
Department remove all of JMA’s
submissions from the record.3 On July
14, 2016, we received a case brief from
the Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade
Committee (Petitioner).4 On July 19,
2016, we received a rebuttal brief from
Jangho.5 On October 3, 2016, the
Department extended the deadline for
the final results of this administrative
review until November 21, 2016.6
These final results cover 46
companies for which an administrative
review was initiated and not rescinded.7
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the
Order 8 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).9
Imports of the subject merchandise
are provided for under the following
categories of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS):
8481.90.9060, 8481.90.9085,
9031.90.9195, 8424.90.9080,
9405.99.4020, 9031.90.90.95,
7616.10.90.90, 7609.00.00, 7610.10.00,
7610.90.00, 7615.10.30, 7615.10.71,
7615.10.91, 7615.19.10, 7615.19.30,
3 See Letter from JMA to the Department,
‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from China; Withdrawal
from Participation,’’ dated July 6, 2016.
4 See Letter from Petitioner to the Department,
‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic
of China: Case Brief,’’ dated July 14, 2016
(Petitioner’s Case Brief).
5 See Letter from Jangho to the Department,
‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic
of China: Rebuttal Brief,’’ dated July 19, 2016
(Jangho’s Rebuttal Brief).
6 See Memorandum from Chelsey Simonovich to
Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations,
‘‘Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic
of China: Extension of Time Limit for Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,’’
dated October 3, 2016.
7 This administrative review initially covered 175
companies. See Initiation Notice. However, the
Department rescinded this review with respect to
129 companies for which all administrative review
requests were timely withdrawn. See Preliminary
Results, 81 FR at 38665.
8 See Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s
Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR
30650 (May 26, 2011) (Order).
9 For a complete description of the scope of the
Order, see Memorandum from Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for
the Final Results of the 2014–2015 Administrative
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on
Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s Republic
of China,’’ dated concurrently with this notice
(Issues and Decision Memorandum).
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 228 / Monday, November 28, 2016 / Notices
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,
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:15 Nov 25, 2016
Jkt 241001
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 in the
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
registered users at https://
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 https://
enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.
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
The Department reconsidered the
necessity of applying adverse facts
available (AFA), pursuant to sections
776(a) and (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930
(the Act), in the Preliminary Results
with respect to Jangho and Guang Ya
Group/Zhongya/Xinya 10 in light of the
Department’s policy concerning the
conditional review of the PRC-wide
entity.11 For additional explanation, see
the Issues and Decision Memorandum at
10 In prior segments of this proceeding, the
Department found that Guang Ya Group, Zhongya,
and Xinya were affiliated with each other 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) (2010–2012
Final Results); 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); and Aluminum Extrusions From the
People’s Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013–
2014, 80 FR 75060 (December 1, 2015) (2013–2014
Final Results). See also Zhaoqing New Zhongya
Aluminium Co., Ltd. v. United States, 70 F. Supp.
3d 1298 (CIT May 27, 2015) and Zhaoqing New
Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd. et al. v. United States,
887 F. Supp. 2d 1301, 1310 (CIT 2012).
11 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).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
85517
‘‘Application of Facts Available and Use
of Adverse Inference.’’ In addition, one
company, JMA, withdrew from
participation in this administrative
review after the Preliminary Results.
Companies Eligible for a Separate Rate
In our Preliminary Results, we
determined that nine companies were
eligible for a separate rate.12 These
companies are: Allied Maker Limited;
Birchwoods (Lin’an) Leisure Products
Co., Ltd.; Changzhou Changzheng
Evaporator Co., Ltd.; Dongguan Aoda
Aluminum Co., Ltd.; JMA (HK)
Company Limited (JMA); Kam Kiu
Aluminium Products Sdn. Bhd.;
Metaltek Group Co., Ltd.; Taishan City
Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusion Co.,
Ltd.; and Tianjin Jinmao Import &
Export Corp., 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
nine companies are eligible for a
separate rate. For further discussion
with respect to the application of a
separate rate to JMA, see the Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Comment 2.
Rate for Non-Examined Companies
Which Are Eligible for a Separate Rate
The separate rate for non-selected
companies is normally the amount
equal to the weighted average of the
calculated weighted-average dumping
margins established for mandatory
respondents, excluding any margins that
are zero, de minimis, or based entirely
on adverse facts available.13 In the
Preliminary Results,14 consistent with
the Department’s practice when
addressing such a factual scenario,15 we
12 See
Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 38666.
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 exports 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 antidumping investigation.
14 See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 38666.
15 See Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven
Selvedge From Taiwan; Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013–
2014, 81 FR 22578 (April 18, 2016) and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 1; see also Ball Bearings and Parts
Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and
the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Reviews and Rescission of
Reviews in Part, 73 FR 52823, 52824 (September 11,
2008) and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 16. This is also
13 Neither
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
Continued
28NON1
85518
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 228 / Monday, November 28, 2016 / Notices
assigned the non-examined, separaterate companies a rate that was not zero,
de minimis, or based entirely on facts
available. Specifically, we assigned the
non-examined, separate-rate companies
a margin of 86.01 percent, the sole
margin calculated in the most recently
completed segment of this proceeding
for the mandatory respondent and
applied to the non-examined separaterate respondents in that segment of the
proceeding.16 No parties commented on
the methodology for calculating this
separate rate.17 For the final results, we
continue to apply this approach in
accordance with section 735(c)(5) of the
Act.18
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Determination of No Shipments
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department determined that Xin Wei
Aluminum Company Limited and
Permasteelisa Hong Kong Limited had
no shipments during the POR.19 No
consistent with the Department’s determination in
prior segments of this proceeding. See 2010–2012
Final Results, 79 FR at 99; 2012–2013 Final Results,
79 FR at 78786; and 2013–2014 Final Results, 80 FR
at 75062. See also Yangzhou Bestpak Gifts & Crafts
Co., Ltd. v. United States, 716 F.3d 1370, 1374 (Fed.
Cir. 2013) (recognizing and affirmatively discussing
the Department’s normal methodology for
calculating a separate rate).
16 See 2013–2014 Final Results, 80 FR at 75062–
75063.
17 We note that, while Petitioner commented on
the rate to assign to one company found to be
eligible for a separate rate, JMA, Petitioner’s
comments were specific to circumstances involving
JMA, not the Department’s overall methodology for
determining the rate to assign to non-examined
separate-rate companies. For further discussion
with respect to the application of a separate rate to
JMA, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 2.
18 As explained in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum in the section ‘‘Application of Facts
Available and Use of Adverse Inference,’’ the
Department finds for these final results that the
application of AFA to the two mandatory
respondents in this review, Jangho and Guang Ya
Group/Zhongya/Xinya, is not necessary in light of
the Department’s recent change in practice
concerning the conditional review of the PRC-wide
entity. 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. See Conditional Review of NME Entity
Notice, 78 FR at 65970. 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 most-recently completed administrative review
(i.e., 33.28 percent) is not subject to change. See
2013–2014 Final Results, 80 FR at 75063. While we
no longer find it necessary to apply AFA to Jangho
and Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya, we note that
the 33.28 percent rate applicable to the PRC-wide
entity (which includes to Jangho, Guang Ya Group/
Zhongya/Xinya, and 23 other companies subject to
this review) was determined on the basis of AFA.
See Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s
Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value, 76 FR 18524, 18529 (April
4, 2011).
19 See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 38666. We
note that we did not make a preliminary
determination of no shipments with regard to
Permasteelisa South China Factory because
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:15 Nov 25, 2016
Jkt 241001
party commented on that determination
and we have received no information to
contradict this determination.
Therefore, the Department continues to
determine that Xin Wei Aluminum
Company Limited and Permasteelisa
Hong Kong Limited had no shipments of
subject merchandise during the POR,
and will issue appropriate liquidation
instructions to U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) that are consistent with
our ‘‘automatic assessment’’
clarification, for these final results.20
PRC-Wide Entity
For purposes of these final results, the
Department finds 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 5–6.
In addition, the Department found in
the Preliminary Results that 21
companies subject to this review were
not eligible for separate-rate status
because they did not submit separaterate applications or certifications; those
companies are: Belton (Asia)
Development Ltd.; Classic &
Contemporary Inc.; Danfoss Micro
Channel Heat Exchanger (Jia Xing) Co.,
Ltd.; Dongguan Golden Tiger Hardware
Industrial Co., Ltd.; Ever Extend Ent.
Ltd.; Fenghua Metal Product Factory;
FookShing Metal & Plastic Co. Ltd.;
Foshan Golden Source Aluminum
Products Co., Ltd.; Global Point
Technology (Far East) Limited; Gold
Mountain International Development
Limited; Golden Dragon Precise Copper
Tube Group, Inc.; Hebei Xusen Wire
Mesh Products Co., Ltd.; Jackson Travel
Products Co., Ltd.; New Zhongya
Aluminum Factory; Shanghai
Automobile Air-Conditioner
Accessories Co., Ltd.; Southwest
Aluminum (Group) Co., Ltd.; Suzhou
NewHongJi Precision Part Co., Ltd.;
Union Aluminum (SIP) Co.; Whirlpool
Canada L.P.; Whirlpool Microwave
Products Development Ltd.; and Xin
Wei Aluminum Co.21 The Department
Permasteelisa South China Factory was not granted
separate rate status in a prior segment of this
proceeding. See, e.g., 2013–2014 Final Results, 80
FR at 75063, footnote 30. Our determination
concerning Permasteelisa South China Factory
remains unchanged for these final results.
20 See Non-Market Economy Antidumping
Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76
FR 65694, 65695 (October 24, 2011) (Assessment
Practice Refinement).
21 Id., 81 FR at 38665. We note that 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
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
also found in the Preliminary Results
that two companies subject to this
review, Atlas Integrated Manufacturing
Ltd. and Genimex Shanghai, Ltd.,
submitted separate-rate applications
that did not demonstrate eligibility for
a separate rate.22 As a result, the
Department found in the Preliminary
Results that these 23 companies are also
part of the PRC-wide entity.23 For
purposes of these final results, the
Department continues to find that these
23 companies are not eligible for a
separate rate and are part of the PRCwide entity.
Under the Department’s policy
regarding conditional review of the
PRC-wide entity, the PRC-wide entity
will not be under review unless a party
specifically requests, or the Department
self-initiates, a review of the entity.24
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.25
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
the separate-rate recipients.26
Pursuant to section 772(c)(1)(C) of the
Act, the Department made an
adjustment for countervailable export
subsidies for the separate-rate
recipients. Specifically, we adjusted the
assigned separate rate by deducting the
simple average of the countervailable
export subsidies determined for the
individually examined respondents in
the 2013 countervailing duty
administrative review.27
(September 6, 2012). Thus, despite the fact that a
review was initiated of New Zhongya, it is not being
included among these 21 companies because its
successor in interest, Guangdong Zhongya, is part
of the Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya single
entity.
22 See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 38665.
23 Id., 81 FR at 38667.
24 See Conditional Review of NME Entity Notice,
78 FR at 65970.
25 See 2013–2014 Final Results, 80 FR at 75063.
26 See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 20.
27 See Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s
Republic of China: Final Results, and Partial
Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative
Review; 2013, 80 FR 77325 (December 14, 2015) and
Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s Republic
of China: Amended Final Results of Countervailing
Duty Administrative Review; 2013, 81 FR 15238
(March 22, 2016), as corrected in Aluminum
Extrusions from the People’s Republic of China:
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
85519
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 228 / Monday, November 28, 2016 / Notices
For the PRC-wide entity, since the
entity is not currently under review, no
adjustments were warranted to its rate,
as it is not subject to change.28
Final Results of Review
The Department determines that the
following weighted-average dumping
margins exist for the 2014–2015 POR:
WeightedAverage
dumping
margin
(percent)
Exporter
Allied Maker Limited ................................................................................................................................................
Birchwoods (Lin’an) Leisure Products Co., Ltd .......................................................................................................
Changzhou Changzheng Evaporator Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................
Dongguan Aoda Aluminum Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................................
JMA (HK) Company Limited ....................................................................................................................................
Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn Bhd 29 ...............................................................................................................
Metaltek Group Co., Ltd ..........................................................................................................................................
Tianjin Jinmao Import & Export Corp., Ltd ..............................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Additionally,29 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.); Atlas Integrated
Manufacturing Ltd.; Belton (Asia)
Development Ltd.; Classic &
Contemporary Inc.; Danfoss Micro
Channel Heat Exchanger (Jia Xing) Co.,
Ltd.; Dongguan Golden Tiger Hardware
Industrial Co., Ltd.; Ever Extend Ent.
Ltd.; Fenghua Metal Product Factory;
FookShing Metal & Plastic Co. Ltd.;
Foshan Golden Source Aluminum
Products Co., Ltd.; Genimex Shanghai,
Ltd.; Global Point Technology (Far East)
Limited; Gold Mountain International
Development Limited; Golden Dragon
Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc.; Hebei
Xusen Wire Mesh Products Co., Ltd.;
Jackson Travel Products Co., Ltd.; New
Zhongya Aluminum Factory; Shanghai
Automobile Air-Conditioner
Notice of Correction to Amended Final Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2013,
81 FR 31227 (May 18, 2016). See also Preliminary
Decision Memorandum at Attachment 1 for the
calculation of the countervailable export subsidies
deducted from the assigned separate rate.
28 See Conditional Review of NME Entity Notice,
78 FR at 65970. As the rate for the PRC-wide entity
is not subject to change in the instant review, the
adjusted margin we are applying to the PRC-wide
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:15 Nov 25, 2016
Jkt 241001
Accessories Co., Ltd.; Southwest
Aluminum (Group) Co., Ltd.; Suzhou
NewHongJi Precision Part Co., Ltd.;
Union Aluminum (SIP) Co.; Whirlpool
Canada L.P.; Whirlpool Microwave
Products Development Ltd.; and Xin
Wei Aluminum Co. The rate established
for the PRC-wide entity in the previous
administrative review is 33.28
percent.30
86.01
86.01
86.01
86.01
86.01
86.01
86.01
86.01
Margin
adjusted for
liquidation
and cash
deposit
purposes
(percent)
85.94
85.94
85.94
85.94
85.94
85.94
85.94
85.94
above in the section ‘‘Final Results of
Review.’’
Cash Deposit Requirements
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the
Department will determine, and CBP
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries of subject
merchandise in accordance with the
final results of this review. 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, 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.31 For the 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
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
the 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 nonPRC exporters not listed above that
received a separate rate in a prior
segment of this proceeding, 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,
which is 33.28 percent; 32 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 that supplied that non-PRC
exporter with the subject merchandise.
entity in the instant review, 33.18 percent, is net of
the countervailable domestic and export subsidies
determined in the 2012–2013 Final Results. See
2012–2013 Final Results, 79 FR at 78787; see also
2013–2014 Final Results, 80 FR at 75063, footnote
27.
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
certification 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 which to grant the separate rate
status.
30 See 2013–2014 Final Results, 80 FR at 75063–
75064.
31 See Assessment Practice Refinement, 76 FR at
65694.
32 See 2013–2014 Final Results, 80 FR at 75063.
Assessment
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
85520
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 228 / Monday, November 28, 2016 / Notices
These deposit requirements, when
imposed, shall remain in effect until
further notice.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Notification to Importers
[C–122–854]
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.
Supercalendered Paper From Canada:
Preliminary Results of Countervailing
Duty Expedited Review
International Trade Administration
Notification to Interested Parties
Regarding Administrative Protective
Order
This notice also 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.
We are issuing and publishing this
notice in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.213(h).
Dated: November 21, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum
Summary
Background
Scope of the Order
Application of Facts Available and Use of
Adverse Inference
Discussion of the Issues
Comment 1: Rate to Assign to Jangho
Comment 2: Rate to Assign to JMA
Conclusion
[FR Doc. 2016–28502 Filed 11–25–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:15 Nov 25, 2016
Jkt 241001
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) is conducting an
expedited review of the countervailing
duty (CVD) order on supercalendered
paper (SC paper) from Canada. The
period of expedited review (POR) is
January 1, 2014, through December 31,
2014. We preliminarily determine that
Irving Paper Limited received
countervailable subsidies during the
POR. We also preliminarily determine
that Catalyst Paper received de minimis
countervailable subsidies. Interested
parties are invited to comment on these
preliminary results.
DATES: Effective November 28, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nicholas Czajkowski or Toby Vandall,
AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482–1395 and (202) 482–1664,
respectively.
AGENCY:
Scope of the Order
The product covered by this order is
SC paper. A full description of the scope
of the order is contained in the
Preliminary Decision Memorandum,
which is hereby adopted by this notice.1
Methodology
On December 10, 2015, the
Department issued a countervailing
duty order on SC paper from Canada.2
The Department is conducting this CVD
expedited review in accordance with 19
CFR 351.214(k). For a full description of
the methodology underlying our
preliminary conclusions, see the
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
The list of topics discussed in the
Preliminary Decision Memorandum is
included as an Appendix to this notice.
1 See Memorandum from James Maeder, Senior
Director, Office I, for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, to Gary Taverman,
Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Preliminary Results
of Expedited Review of the Countervailing Duty
Order on Supercalendered Paper from Canada,’’
dated concurrently with this notice (Preliminary
Decision Memorandum).
2 See Supercalendered Paper From Canada:
Countervailing Duty Order, 80 FR 76668 (December
10, 2015).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The Preliminary 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 registered users
at https://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
Preliminary Decision Memorandum can
be accessed directly on the Internet at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/
index.html. The signed Preliminary
Decision Memorandum and the
electronic versions of the Preliminary
Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
We calculated a CVD rate for each
producer/exporter of the subject
merchandise that requested an
expedited review.
Preliminary Results of Review
As a result of this review, we
preliminarily determine the
countervailable subsidy rates to be:
Company
Subsidy rate
Catalyst Paper Corporation
(Catalyst).
Irving Paper Limited (Irving).
0.79 percent (de
minimis)
7.99 percent
Disclosure and Public Comment
The Department will disclose to
parties to this proceeding the
calculations performed in connection
with these preliminary results within
five days publication of this notice.3
Interested parties may submit case briefs
within 30 days of publication of these
preliminary results and rebuttal briefs
no later than five days after the deadline
for filing case briefs.4 Rebuttal briefs
must be limited to issues raised in the
case briefs.5 Parties who submit case or
rebuttal briefs are requested to submit
with the argument: (1) A statement of
the issue; (2) a brief summary of the
argument; and, (3) a table of
authorities.6 Pursuant to 19 CFR
351.310(c), interested parties who wish
to request a hearing must do so within
30 days of publication of these
preliminary results by submitting a
written request to the Assistant
Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance, U.S. Department of
Commerce, filed electronically using
ACCESS. Requests should contain the
3 See
19 CFR 351.224(b).
19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii) and (d)(1).
5 See 19 CFR 351.309(d)(2).
6 See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2).
4 See
E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM
28NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 228 (Monday, November 28, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 85516-85520]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28502]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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; 2014-2015
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). The period of
review (POR) is May 1, 2014 through April 30, 2015. These final results
cover 46 companies for which an administrative review was initiated and
not rescinded. 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)
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). The
Department finds that Jangho, Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya, and 23
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 two
companies, Xin Wei Aluminum Company Limited and Permasteelisa Hong Kong
Limited, had no shipments during the POR. Finally, we find that eight
companies, including JMA (HK) Company Limited (JMA), continue to be
eligible for a separate rate.
DATES: Effective November 28, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Scott or Mark Flessner, 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 or (202) 482-6312,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department initiated this review on July 1, 2015.\1\ On June
14, 2016, the Department published the Preliminary Results of this
administrative review.\2\ At that time, we invited interested parties
to comment on the Preliminary Results. On July 6, 2016, JMA submitted a
letter stating that it was officially withdrawing from participation in
this review and requesting that the Department remove all of JMA's
submissions from the record.\3\ On July 14, 2016, we received a case
brief from the Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade Committee
(Petitioner).\4\ On July 19, 2016, we received a rebuttal brief from
Jangho.\5\ On October 3, 2016, the Department extended the deadline for
the final results of this administrative review until November 21,
2016.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews, 80 FR 37588 (July 1, 2015) (Initiation
Notice).
\2\ See Aluminum Extrusions From the People's Republic of China:
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and
Rescission of Review in Part; 2014-2015, 81 FR 38664 (June 14, 2016)
(Preliminary Results), and accompanying preliminary decision
memorandum (Preliminary Decision Memorandum).
\3\ See Letter from JMA to the Department, ``Aluminum Extrusions
from China; Withdrawal from Participation,'' dated July 6, 2016.
\4\ See Letter from Petitioner to the Department, ``Aluminum
Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: Case Brief,'' dated
July 14, 2016 (Petitioner's Case Brief).
\5\ See Letter from Jangho to the Department, ``Aluminum
Extrusions from the People's Republic of China: Rebuttal Brief,''
dated July 19, 2016 (Jangho's Rebuttal Brief).
\6\ See Memorandum from Chelsey Simonovich to Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, ``Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of
China: Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review,'' dated October 3, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These final results cover 46 companies for which an administrative
review was initiated and not rescinded.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ This administrative review initially covered 175 companies.
See Initiation Notice. However, the Department rescinded this review
with respect to 129 companies for which all administrative review
requests were timely withdrawn. See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at
38665.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The merchandise covered by the Order \8\ 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).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Aluminum Extrusions from the People's Republic of China:
Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 30650 (May 26, 2011) (Order).
\9\ For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see
Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ``Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2014-2015
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Aluminum
Extrusions from the People's Republic of China,'' 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): 8481.90.9060, 8481.90.9085, 9031.90.9195, 8424.90.9080,
9405.99.4020, 9031.90.90.95, 7616.10.90.90, 7609.00.00, 7610.10.00,
7610.90.00, 7615.10.30, 7615.10.71, 7615.10.91, 7615.19.10, 7615.19.30,
[[Page 85517]]
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, 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 in the 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
registered users at https://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 https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. 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
The Department reconsidered the necessity of applying adverse facts
available (AFA), pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Tariff Act
of 1930 (the Act), in the Preliminary Results with respect to Jangho
and Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya \10\ in light of the Department's
policy concerning the conditional review of the PRC-wide entity.\11\
For additional explanation, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum at
``Application of Facts Available and Use of Adverse Inference.'' In
addition, one company, JMA, withdrew from participation in this
administrative review after the Preliminary Results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ In prior segments of this proceeding, the Department found
that Guang Ya Group, Zhongya, and Xinya were affiliated with each
other 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) (2010-2012 Final Results);
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); and Aluminum
Extrusions From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 80 FR 75060
(December 1, 2015) (2013-2014 Final Results). See also Zhaoqing New
Zhongya Aluminium Co., Ltd. v. United States, 70 F. Supp. 3d 1298
(CIT May 27, 2015) and Zhaoqing New Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd. et
al. v. United States, 887 F. Supp. 2d 1301, 1310 (CIT 2012).
\11\ 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 nine companies were
eligible for a separate rate.\12\ These companies are: Allied Maker
Limited; Birchwoods (Lin'an) Leisure Products Co., Ltd.; Changzhou
Changzheng Evaporator Co., Ltd.; Dongguan Aoda Aluminum Co., Ltd.; JMA
(HK) Company Limited (JMA); Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn. Bhd.;
Metaltek Group Co., Ltd.; Taishan City Kam Kiu Aluminium Extrusion Co.,
Ltd.; and Tianjin Jinmao Import & Export Corp., 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 nine companies are eligible for
a separate rate. For further discussion with respect to the application
of a separate rate to JMA, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 38666.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rate for Non-Examined Companies Which Are Eligible for a Separate Rate
The separate rate for non-selected companies is normally the amount
equal to the weighted average of the calculated weighted-average
dumping margins established for mandatory respondents, excluding any
margins that are zero, de minimis, or based entirely on adverse facts
available.\13\ In the Preliminary Results,\14\ consistent with the
Department's practice when addressing such a factual scenario,\15\ we
[[Page 85518]]
assigned the non-examined, separate-rate companies a rate that was not
zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts available. Specifically,
we assigned the non-examined, separate-rate companies a margin of 86.01
percent, the sole margin calculated in the most recently completed
segment of this proceeding for the mandatory respondent and applied to
the non-examined separate-rate respondents in that segment of the
proceeding.\16\ No parties commented on the methodology for calculating
this separate rate.\17\ For the final results, we continue to apply
this approach in accordance with section 735(c)(5) of the Act.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 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
exports 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 antidumping investigation.
\14\ See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 38666.
\15\ See Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From Taiwan;
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014,
81 FR 22578 (April 18, 2016) and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 1; see also Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof
From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Rescission of
Reviews in Part, 73 FR 52823, 52824 (September 11, 2008) and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 16. This is
also consistent with the Department's determination in prior
segments of this proceeding. See 2010-2012 Final Results, 79 FR at
99; 2012-2013 Final Results, 79 FR at 78786; and 2013-2014 Final
Results, 80 FR at 75062. See also Yangzhou Bestpak Gifts & Crafts
Co., Ltd. v. United States, 716 F.3d 1370, 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2013)
(recognizing and affirmatively discussing the Department's normal
methodology for calculating a separate rate).
\16\ See 2013-2014 Final Results, 80 FR at 75062-75063.
\17\ We note that, while Petitioner commented on the rate to
assign to one company found to be eligible for a separate rate, JMA,
Petitioner's comments were specific to circumstances involving JMA,
not the Department's overall methodology for determining the rate to
assign to non-examined separate-rate companies. For further
discussion with respect to the application of a separate rate to
JMA, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2.
\18\ As explained in the Issues and Decision Memorandum in the
section ``Application of Facts Available and Use of Adverse
Inference,'' the Department finds for these final results that the
application of AFA to the two mandatory respondents in this review,
Jangho and Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya, is not necessary in light
of the Department's recent change in practice concerning the
conditional review of the PRC-wide entity. 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.
See Conditional Review of NME Entity Notice, 78 FR at 65970. 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 most-
recently completed administrative review (i.e., 33.28 percent) is
not subject to change. See 2013-2014 Final Results, 80 FR at 75063.
While we no longer find it necessary to apply AFA to Jangho and
Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya, we note that the 33.28 percent rate
applicable to the PRC-wide entity (which includes to Jangho, Guang
Ya Group/Zhongya/Xinya, and 23 other companies subject to this
review) was determined on the basis of AFA. See Aluminum Extrusions
From the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value, 76 FR 18524, 18529 (April 4, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Determination of No Shipments
In the Preliminary Results, the Department determined that Xin Wei
Aluminum Company Limited and Permasteelisa Hong Kong Limited had no
shipments during the POR.\19\ No party commented on that determination
and we have received no information to contradict this determination.
Therefore, the Department continues to determine that Xin Wei Aluminum
Company Limited and Permasteelisa Hong Kong Limited had no shipments of
subject merchandise during the POR, and will issue appropriate
liquidation instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
that are consistent with our ``automatic assessment'' clarification,
for these final results.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 38666. We note that we
did not make a preliminary determination of no shipments with regard
to Permasteelisa South China Factory because Permasteelisa South
China Factory was not granted separate rate status in a prior
segment of this proceeding. See, e.g., 2013-2014 Final Results, 80
FR at 75063, footnote 30. Our determination concerning Permasteelisa
South China Factory remains unchanged for these final results.
\20\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694, 65695 (October 24, 2011)
(Assessment Practice Refinement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-Wide Entity
For purposes of these final results, the Department finds 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 5-6.
In addition, the Department found in the Preliminary Results that
21 companies subject to this review were not eligible for separate-rate
status because they did not submit separate-rate applications or
certifications; those companies are: Belton (Asia) Development Ltd.;
Classic & Contemporary Inc.; Danfoss Micro Channel Heat Exchanger (Jia
Xing) Co., Ltd.; Dongguan Golden Tiger Hardware Industrial Co., Ltd.;
Ever Extend Ent. Ltd.; Fenghua Metal Product Factory; FookShing Metal &
Plastic Co. Ltd.; Foshan Golden Source Aluminum Products Co., Ltd.;
Global Point Technology (Far East) Limited; Gold Mountain International
Development Limited; Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc.;
Hebei Xusen Wire Mesh Products Co., Ltd.; Jackson Travel Products Co.,
Ltd.; New Zhongya Aluminum Factory; Shanghai Automobile Air-Conditioner
Accessories Co., Ltd.; Southwest Aluminum (Group) Co., Ltd.; Suzhou
NewHongJi Precision Part Co., Ltd.; Union Aluminum (SIP) Co.; Whirlpool
Canada L.P.; Whirlpool Microwave Products Development Ltd.; and Xin Wei
Aluminum Co.\21\ The Department also found in the Preliminary Results
that two companies subject to this review, Atlas Integrated
Manufacturing Ltd. and Genimex Shanghai, Ltd., submitted separate-rate
applications that did not demonstrate eligibility for a separate
rate.\22\ As a result, the Department found in the Preliminary Results
that these 23 companies are also part of the PRC-wide entity.\23\ For
purposes of these final results, the Department continues to find that
these 23 companies are not eligible for a separate rate and are part of
the PRC-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Id., 81 FR at 38665. We note that 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 21 companies because its successor in
interest, Guangdong Zhongya, is part of the Guang Ya Group/Zhongya/
Xinya single entity.
\22\ See Preliminary Results, 81 FR at 38665.
\23\ Id., 81 FR at 38667.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the Department's policy regarding conditional review of the
PRC-wide entity, the PRC-wide entity will not be under review unless a
party specifically requests, or the Department self-initiates, a review
of the entity.\24\ 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.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See Conditional Review of NME Entity Notice, 78 FR at
65970.
\25\ See 2013-2014 Final Results, 80 FR at 75063.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the separate-rate
recipients.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to section 772(c)(1)(C) of the Act, the Department made an
adjustment for countervailable export subsidies for the separate-rate
recipients. Specifically, we adjusted the assigned separate rate by
deducting the simple average of the countervailable export subsidies
determined for the individually examined respondents in the 2013
countervailing duty administrative review.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Aluminum Extrusions From the People's Republic of
China: Final Results, and Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review; 2013, 80 FR 77325 (December 14, 2015) and
Aluminum Extrusions From the People's Republic of China: Amended
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2013, 81
FR 15238 (March 22, 2016), as corrected in Aluminum Extrusions from
the People's Republic of China: Notice of Correction to Amended
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2013, 81
FR 31227 (May 18, 2016). See also Preliminary Decision Memorandum at
Attachment 1 for the calculation of the countervailable export
subsidies deducted from the assigned separate rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 85519]]
For the PRC-wide entity, since the entity is not currently under
review, no adjustments were warranted to its rate, as it is not subject
to change.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See Conditional Review of NME Entity Notice, 78 FR at
65970. As the rate for the PRC-wide entity is not subject to change
in the instant review, the adjusted margin we are applying to the
PRC-wide entity in the instant review, 33.18 percent, is net of the
countervailable domestic and export subsidies determined in the
2012-2013 Final Results. See 2012-2013 Final Results, 79 FR at
78787; see also 2013-2014 Final Results, 80 FR at 75063, footnote
27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of Review
The Department determines that the following weighted-average
dumping margins exist for the 2014-2015 POR:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Weighted- adjusted for
Average liquidation
Exporter dumping and cash
margin deposit
(percent) purposes
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allied Maker Limited.................... 86.01 85.94
Birchwoods (Lin'an) Leisure Products 86.01 85.94
Co., Ltd...............................
Changzhou Changzheng Evaporator Co., Ltd 86.01 85.94
Dongguan Aoda Aluminum Co., Ltd......... 86.01 85.94
JMA (HK) Company Limited................ 86.01 85.94
Kam Kiu Aluminium Products Sdn Bhd \29\. 86.01 85.94
Metaltek Group Co., Ltd................. 86.01 85.94
Tianjin Jinmao Import & Export Corp., 86.01 85.94
Ltd....................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally,\29\ 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.); Atlas Integrated Manufacturing Ltd.; Belton
(Asia) Development Ltd.; Classic & Contemporary Inc.; Danfoss Micro
Channel Heat Exchanger (Jia Xing) Co., Ltd.; Dongguan Golden Tiger
Hardware Industrial Co., Ltd.; Ever Extend Ent. Ltd.; Fenghua Metal
Product Factory; FookShing Metal & Plastic Co. Ltd.; Foshan Golden
Source Aluminum Products Co., Ltd.; Genimex Shanghai, Ltd.; Global
Point Technology (Far East) Limited; Gold Mountain International
Development Limited; Golden Dragon Precise Copper Tube Group, Inc.;
Hebei Xusen Wire Mesh Products Co., Ltd.; Jackson Travel Products Co.,
Ltd.; New Zhongya Aluminum Factory; Shanghai Automobile Air-Conditioner
Accessories Co., Ltd.; Southwest Aluminum (Group) Co., Ltd.; Suzhou
NewHongJi Precision Part Co., Ltd.; Union Aluminum (SIP) Co.; Whirlpool
Canada L.P.; Whirlpool Microwave Products Development Ltd.; and Xin Wei
Aluminum Co. The rate established for the PRC-wide entity in the
previous administrative review is 33.28 percent.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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
certification 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 which to grant the separate rate status.
\30\ See 2013-2014 Final Results, 80 FR at 75063-75064.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b),
the Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties
on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with
the final results of this review. 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, 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.\31\ For the 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 Assessment Practice Refinement, 76 FR at 65694.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the 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 received a separate rate in a prior segment of this proceeding,
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, which is 33.28 percent; \32\ 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 that
supplied that non-PRC exporter with the subject merchandise.
[[Page 85520]]
These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until
further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See 2013-2014 Final Results, 80 FR at 75063.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Notification to Interested Parties Regarding Administrative Protective
Order
This notice also 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.
We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h).
Dated: November 21, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum
Summary
Background
Scope of the Order
Application of Facts Available and Use of Adverse Inference
Discussion of the Issues
Comment 1: Rate to Assign to Jangho
Comment 2: Rate to Assign to JMA
Conclusion
[FR Doc. 2016-28502 Filed 11-25-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
