International Trade Administration January 2, 2014 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

The Department of Commerce (the Department) has completed its administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on citric acid and certain citrate salts (citric acid) from the People's Republic of China for the period January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2011. On June 10, 2013, we published the preliminary results of this review and the post- preliminary results were completed on November 7, 2013.\1\

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 November 12, 2010, through April 30, 2012. These final results cover 62 companies for which an administrative review was initiated,\1\ and for which this administrative review was not rescinded in the Preliminary Results.\2\ For these final results, the Department examined two mandatory respondents which include three companies for which this review was initiated. The first mandatory respondent is Kromet International, Inc. (``Kromet'') for which the Department finds for these final results did not make sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value. The second mandatory respondent the Department has continued to find is a single entity, collectively Zhongya/Guang Ya Group/Xinya, comprised of Zhaoqing New Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd. a.k.a. Guangdong Zhongya Aluminum Company Limited (``Zhongya''); Guangya Aluminum Industrial Co., Ltd. (``Guang Ya''), Foshan Guangcheng Aluminum Co., Ltd. (``Guangcheng'') \3\ (collectively ``Guang Ya Group''); and Foshan Nanhai Xinya Aluminum & Stainless Steel Products Co., Ltd. (``Xinya'').\4\ The Department finds for these final results that the Zhongya/Guang Ya Group/Xinya entity failed to demonstrate that it was eligible for a separate rate and thus it is part of the PRC-wide entity. Furthermore, the Department finds that ten (including Kromet) of the other companies under review have established their eligibility for a separate rate. The Department finds that the remaining companies under review either failed to establish their eligibility for a separate rate or were not responsive, and, therefore, these companies are part of the PRC-wide entity.