Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Notices 18521 

1Petitioners are the Aluminum Extrusion Fair 

Trade Committee: Aerolite Extrusion Company; 

Alexandria Extrusions Company; Beneda 

Aluminum of Florida, Inc.; William L. Bonnell 

Company, Inc.; Frontier Aluminum Corporation; 

Futura Industries Corporation; Hydro Aluminum 

North American Inc.; Kaiser Aluminum 

Corporation; Profile Extrusion Company; Sapa 

Extrusions, Inc.; Western Extrusions Corporation; 

and the United Steel, Paper, and Forestry, Rubber, 

Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and 

Service Workers International Union. 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–570–968] 

Aluminum Extrusions From the 

People’s Republic of China: Final 

Affirmative Countervailing Duty 

Determination 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) determines that 

countervailable subsidies are being 

provided to producers and exporters of 

aluminum extrusions from the People’s 

Republic of China (the PRC). For 

information on the estimated subsidy 

rates, see the ‘‘Suspension of 

Liquidation’’ section of this notice. 

DATES: Effective Date: April 4, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Conniff, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, 

Import Administration, U.S. Department 

of Commerce, Room 4014, 14th Street 

and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–1009. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

This investigation covers 58 

programs. The mandatory respondents 

in this investigation are: Liaoyang 

Zhongwang Aluminum Profile Co. Ltd./ 

Liaoning Zhongwang Group 

(collectively, the Zhongwang Group), 

Miland Luck Limited, Dragonluxe 

Limited, and the Government of the 

PRC. The voluntary respondents in this 

investigation are: Guang Ya Aluminum 

Industries Co., Ltd., Foshan Guangcheng 

Aluminum Co., Ltd., Guang Ya 

Aluminum Industries Hong Kong, Kong 

Ah International Company Limited, and 

Yongji Guanghai Aluminum Industry 

Co., Ltd. (collectively the Guang Ya 

Companies), and Zhaoqing New 

Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd., Zhongya 

Shaped Aluminum HK Holding Ltd., 

and Karlton Aluminum Company Ltd. 

(collectively the Zhongya Companies). 

Period of Investigation 

The period of investigation for which 

we are measuring subsidies is January 1, 

2009, through December 31, 2009, 

which corresponds to the PRC’s most 

recently completed fiscal year at the 

time we initiated this investigation. See 

19 CFR 351.204(b)(2). 

Case History 

The following events have occurred 

since the Department published the 

Preliminary Determination on 

September 7, 2010. See Aluminum 

Extrusions From the People’s Republic 

of China: Preliminary Affirmative 

Countervailing Duty Determination, 75 

FR 54302 (September 7, 2010) 

(Preliminary Determination). From 

September 17, 2010, through November 

2, 2010, the Department issued 

supplemental questionnaires to the 

Guang Ya Companies, the Zhongya 

Companies, and the GOC, which, in 

turn, submitted questionnaire responses 

from October 13, 2010, through 

November 12, 2010. On October 29, 

2010, we issued a post-preliminary 

decision memorandum addressing new 

subsidy allegations submitted by 

petitioners on July 13 and July 28, 

2010.1 See Memorandum to Ronald K. 

Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant Secretary 

for Import Administration, ‘‘PostPreliminary Decision Memorandum’’ 

(October 29, 2010), a public document 

on file in room 7046 of HCHB, the 

Central Records Unit (CRU). We 

conducted verification of the 

questionnaire responses submitted by 

the Guang Ya Companies, the Zhongya 

Companies, and the GOC from 

December 3 through December 17, 2010. 

We issued verification reports from 

January 20 through January 28, 2011. 

Interested parties submitted case briefs 

on February 9, 2011 and rebuttal briefs 

on February 15, 2011. We conducted a 

public hearing on March 3, 2011. 

Scope Comments 

Based on analysis of information and 

arguments, the Department has 

modified the scope of the antidumping 

and countervailing duty investigations. 

For a full discussion, see Comment 3, 

‘‘Scope of the Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Investigations,’’ of 

the Issues and Decision Memorandum 

that accompanies the final 

determination in the less-than-fair-value 

investigation of aluminum extrusions 

from the People’s Republic of China. 

Scope of Investigation 

The merchandise covered by this 

investigation 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). 

Specifically, the subject merchandise 

made from aluminum alloy with an 

Aluminum Association series 

designation commencing with the 

number 1 contains not less than 99 

percent aluminum by weight. The 

subject merchandise made from 

aluminum alloy with an Aluminum 

Association series designation 

commencing with the number 3 

contains manganese as the major 

alloying element, with manganese 

accounting for not more than 3.0 

percent of total materials by weight. The 

subject merchandise is made from an 

aluminum alloy with an Aluminum 

Association series designation 

commencing with the number 6 

contains magnesium and silicon as the 

major alloying elements, with 

magnesium accounting for at least 0.1 

percent but not more than 2.0 percent of 

total materials by weight, and silicon 

accounting for at least 0.1 percent but 

not more than 3.0 percent of total 

materials by weight. The subject 

aluminum extrusions are properly 

identified by a four-digit alloy series 

without either a decimal point or 

leading letter. Illustrative examples from 

among the approximately 160 registered 

alloys that may characterize the subject 

merchandise are as follows: 1350, 3003, 

and 6060. 

Aluminum extrusions are produced 

and imported in a wide variety of 

shapes and forms, including, but not 

limited to, hollow profiles, other solid 

profiles, pipes, tubes, bars, and rods. 

Aluminum extrusions that are drawn 

subsequent to extrusion (‘‘drawn 

aluminum’’) are also included in the 

scope. 

Aluminum extrusions are produced 

and imported with a variety of finishes 

(both coatings and surface treatments), 

and types of fabrication. The types of 

coatings and treatments applied to 

subject aluminum extrusions include, 

but are not limited to, extrusions that 

are mill finished (i.e., without any 

coating or further finishing), brushed, 

buffed, polished, anodized (including 

bright-dip anodized), liquid painted, or 

powder coated. Aluminum extrusions 

may also be fabricated, i.e., prepared for 

assembly. Such operations would 

include, but are not limited to, 

extrusions that are cut-to-length, 

machined, drilled, punched, notched, 

bent, stretched, knurled, swedged, 

mitered, chamfered, threaded, and spun. 

The subject merchandise includes 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
18522 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Notices 

aluminum extrusions that are finished 

(coated, painted, etc.), fabricated, or any 

combination thereof. 

Subject aluminum extrusions may be 

described at the time of importation as 

parts for final finished products that are 

assembled after importation, including, 

but not limited to, window frames, door 

frames, solar panels, curtain walls, or 

furniture. Such parts that otherwise 

meet the definition of aluminum 

extrusions are included in the scope. 

The scope includes the aluminum 

extrusion components that are attached 

(e.g., by welding or fasteners) to form 

subassemblies, i.e., partially assembled 

merchandise unless imported as part of 

the finished goods ‘kit’ defined further 

below. The scope does not include the 

non-aluminum extrusion components of 

subassemblies or subject kits. 

Subject extrusions may be identified 

with reference to their end use, such as 

fence posts, electrical conduits, heat 

sinks, door thresholds, or carpet trim. 

Such goods are subject merchandise if 

they otherwise meet the scope 

definition, regardless of whether they 

are ready for use at the time of 

importation. 

The following aluminum extrusion 

products are excluded: Aluminum 

extrusions made from aluminum alloy 

with an Aluminum Association series 

designation commencing with the 

number 2 and containing in excess of 

1.5 percent copper by weight; aluminum 

extrusions made from aluminum alloy 

with an Aluminum Association series 

designation commencing with the 

number 5 and containing in excess of 

1.0 percent magnesium by weight; and 

aluminum extrusions made from 

aluminum alloy with an Aluminum 

Association series designation 

commencing with the number 7 and 

containing in excess of 2.0 percent zinc 

by weight. 

The scope also excludes finished 

merchandise containing aluminum 

extrusions as parts that are fully and 

permanently assembled and completed 

at the time of entry, such as finished 

windows with glass, doors with glass or 

vinyl, picture frames with glass pane 

and backing material, and solar panels. 

The scope also excludes finished goods 

containing aluminum extrusions that 

are entered unassembled in a ‘‘finished 

goods kit.’’ A finished goods kit is 

understood to mean a packaged 

combination of parts that contains, at 

the time of importation, all of the 

necessary parts to fully assemble a final 

finished good and requires no further 

finishing or fabrication, such as cutting 

or punching, and is assembled ‘as is’ 

into a finished product. An imported 

product will not be considered a 

‘finished goods kit’ and therefore 

excluded from the scope of the 

investigation merely by including 

fasteners such as screws, bolts, etc. in 

the packaging with an aluminum 

extrusion product. 

The scope also excludes aluminum 

alloy sheet or plates produced by other 

than the extrusion process, such as 

aluminum products produced by a 

method of casting. Cast aluminum 

products are properly identified by four 

digits with a decimal point between the 

third and fourth digit. A letter may also 

precede the four digits. The following 

Aluminum Association designations are 

representative of aluminum alloys for 

casting: 208.0, 295.0, 308.0, 355.0, 

C355.0, 356.0, A356.0, A357.0, 360.0, 

366.0, 380.0, A380.0, 413.0, 443.0, 

514.0, 518.1, and 712.0. The scope also 

excludes pure, unwrought aluminum in 

any form. 

The scope also excludes collapsible 

tubular containers composed of metallic 

elements corresponding to alloy code 

1080A as designated by the Aluminum 

Association where the tubular container 

(excluding the nozzle) meets each of the 

following dimensional characteristics: 

(1) Length of 37 mm or 62 mm, (2) outer 

diameter of 11.0 mm or 12.7 mm, and 

(3) wall thickness not exceeding 0.13 

mm. 

Imports of the subject merchandise 

are provided for under the following 

categories of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTS’’): 

7604.21.0000, 7604.29.1000, 

7604.29.3010, 7604.29.3050, 

7604.29.5030, 7604.29.5060, 

7608.20.0030, and 7608.20.0090. The 

subject merchandise entered as parts of 

other aluminum products may be 

classifiable under the following 

additional Chapter 76 subheadings: 

7610.10, 7610.90, 7615.19, 7615.20, and 

7616.99 as well as under other HTS 

chapters. In addition, fin evaporator 

coils may be classifiable under HTS 

numbers: 8418.99.80.50 and 

8418.99.80.60. While HTS subheadings 

are provided for convenience and 

customs purposes, the written 

description of the scope in this 

proceeding is dispositive. 

Injury Test 

Because the PRC is a ‘‘Subsidies 

Agreement Country’’ within the meaning 

of section 701(b) of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (the Act), the 

International Trade Commission (the 

ITC) is required to determine whether 

imports of the subject merchandise from 

the PRC materially injure, or threaten 

material injury to, a U.S. industry. On 

June 17, 2010, the ITC published its 

preliminary determination finding that 

there is a reasonable indication that an 

industry in the United States is 

threatened with material injury by 

reason of imports of aluminum 

extrusions from the PRC that are alleged 

to be sold in the United States at less 

than fair value and subsidized by the 

GOC. See Certain Aluminum Extrusions 

from China, 75 FR 34482 (June 17, 

2010). 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties to this 

investigation are addressed in the 

Memorandum from Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, entitled ‘‘Issues and 

Decision Memorandum for the Final 

Determination in the Countervailing 

Duty Investigation of Aluminum 

Extrusions from the People’s Republic 

of China,’’ (March 28, 2011) (Decision 

Memorandum), which is hereby 

adopted by this notice. Attached to this 

notice as an Appendix is a list of the 

issues that parties raised and to which 

we have responded in the Decision 

Memorandum. Parties can find a 

complete discussion of all issues raised 

in this investigation and the 

corresponding recommendations in this 

public memorandum, which is on file in 

the Department’s CRU. In addition, a 

complete version of the Decision 

Memorandum can be accessed directly 

on the Internet at http://trade.gov/ia. 

The paper copy and electronic version 

of the Decision Memorandum are 

identical in content. 

Suspension of Liquidation 

In accordance with section 

705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we determine 

the total estimated net countervailable 

subsidy rates to be: 

Company Ad Valorem net subsidy rate 

Guang Ya Aluminum Industries Co., Ltd., Foshan Guangcheng Aluminum Co., Ltd., Guang Ya Aluminum Industries Hong Kong, Kong Ah International Company Limited, and Yongji Guanghai Aluminum Industry Co., Ltd. 

(collectively the Guang Ya Companies).

9.94 percent ad valorem 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Notices 18523 

Company Ad Valorem net subsidy rate 

Zhaoqing New Zhongya Aluminum Co., Ltd., Zhongya Shaped Aluminum HK Holding Ltd., and Karlton Aluminum 

Company Ltd. (collectively the Zhongya Companies).

8.02 percent ad valorem 

Dragonluxe Limited ........................................................................................................................................................ 374.15 percent ad valorem 

Miland Luck Limited ....................................................................................................................................................... 374.15 percent ad valorem 

Liaoyang Zhongwang Aluminum Profile Co. Ltd./Liaoning Zhongwang Group (collectively, the Zhongwang Group) 374.15 percent ad valorem 

All Others Rate .............................................................................................................................................................. 374.15 percent ad valorem 

We note that section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of 

the Act states that for companies not 

investigated, we will determine an allothers rate equal to be the weighted 

average countervailable subsidy rates 

established for exporters and producers 

individually investigated, excluding any 

zero and de minimis countervailable 

subsidy rates, and any rates determined 

entirely under section 776 of the Act. 

However, as discussed in Comment 9 of 

the Decision Memorandum, the 

companies that participated in the 

investigation are voluntary respondents. 

The Department’s regulations state that 

in calculating the all-others rate under 

section 705(c)(5) of the Act, the 

Department will exclude net subsidy 

rates calculated for voluntary 

respondents. See 19 CFR 351.204(d)(3). 

See also Antidumping Duties; 

Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 

27310 (May 19, 1997). 

Therefore, we have resorted to ‘‘any 

reasonable method’’ to derive the allothers rate, as described under section 

705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act. We determine 

that equating the all-others rate with the 

total adverse facts available (AFA) rate 

applied to the non-cooperating, 

mandatory respondents constitutes a 

‘‘reasonable method’’ under 

705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act. See, e.g., 

Certain Potassium Phosphate Salts 

From the People’s Republic of China: 

Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty 

Determination and Termination of 

Critical Circumstances Inquiry, 75 FR 

30375 (June 1, 2010) (in an investigation 

where all of the mandatory respondents 

received a rate based on AFA, the 

Department used the AFA rate assigned 

to the mandatory respondents as the allothers rate). 

As a result of our Preliminary 

Determination and pursuant to section 

703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to 

suspend liquidation of all entries of 

subject merchandise from the PRC 

which were entered or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption on or after 

September 7, 2010, the date of the 

publication of the Preliminary 

Determination in the Federal Register. 

In accordance with section 703(d) of the 

Act, we later issued instructions to CBP 

to discontinue the suspension of 

liquidation for countervailing duty 

(CVD) purposes for subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

on or after January 6, 2011, but to 

continue the suspension of liquidation 

of all entries from September 7, 2010, 

through January 5, 2011. 

We will issue a CVD order and 

reinstate the suspension of liquidation 

under section 706(a) of the Act if the 

ITC issues a final affirmative injury 

determination, and will require a cash 

deposit of estimated CVDs for such 

entries of merchandise in the amounts 

indicated above. If the ITC determines 

that material injury, or threat of material 

injury, does not exist, this proceeding 

will be terminated and all estimated 

duties deposited or securities posted as 

a result of the suspension of liquidation 

will be refunded or canceled. 

ITC Notification 

In accordance with section 705(d) of 

the Act, we will notify the ITC of our 

determination. In addition, we are 

making available to the ITC all nonprivileged and non-proprietary 

information related to this investigation. 

We will allow the ITC access to all 

privileged and business proprietary 

information in our files, provided the 

ITC confirms that it will not disclose 

such information, either publicly or 

under an administrative protective order 

(APO), without the written consent of 

the Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Return or Destruction of Proprietary 

Information 

In the event that the ITC issues a final 

negative injury determination, this 

notice will serve as the only reminder 

to parties subject to an APO of their 

responsibility concerning the 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

written notification of the return/ 

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective order is 

hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and terms of an 

APO is a violation which is subject to 

sanction. 

This determination is published 

pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of 

the Act. 

Dated: March 28, 2011. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix 

List of Comments and Issues in the Decision 

Memorandum 

Comment 1: Application of CVD Law to the 

PRC 

Comment 2: Whether Application of the CVD 

Law to Imports from the PRC Violates the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) 

Comment 3: Double Counting 

Comment 4: Cut-off Date for Identifying 

Subsidies 

Comment 5: Whether the Guang Ya 

Companies Inaccurately Reported Their 

Affiliates Thereby Warranting the 

Application of Adverse Facts Available 

(AFA) 

Comment 6: Whether the Zhongya 

Companies Failed to Report Their 

Affiliates Thereby Warranting the 

Application of AFA 

Comment 7: Whether the AFA Calculation is 

Accurate and Reasonable 

Comment 8: Whether to Include Newly 

Alleged and Self-Reported Programs in the 

AFA Calculation 

Comment 9: Whether the All Others Rate 

Should Equal the Total AFA Rate 

Comment 10: Whether the Department 

Should Have Collected Information from 

Firms Subject to the All Others Rate 

Comment 11: Whether the Department 

Should Have Selected Additional 

Mandatory Respondents 

Comment 12: Whether the Department 

Should Retroactively Revise the All Others 

Rate from the Preliminary Determination 

Comment 13: Whether the Sale of Aluminum 

Extrusions for More Than Adequate 

Remuneration (MTAR) Program Was Used 

by the Voluntary Respondents 

Comment 14: Whether the Sale of Aluminum 

Extrusions for MTAR Program Is Specific 

Comment 15: Whether the Sale of Aluminum 

Extrusions for MTAR Program Confers a 

Benefit 

Comment 16: Whether the Department 

Improperly Rejected Data From The 

Zhongya Companies Pertaining to the Sale 

of Aluminum Extrusions For MTAR 

Program 

Comment 17: Whether the Ownership 

Information of Respondents’ Customers 

Was Complete and Fully Verified 

Comment 18: Whether a Financial 

Contribution Exists Under the Provision of 

Primary Aluminum for Less Than 

Adequate Remuneration (LTAR) Program 

Comment 19: Whether the Provision of 

Primary Aluminum for LTAR Program is 

Specific 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
18524 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2011 / Notices 

1See Aluminum Extrusions from the People’s 

Republic of China: Notice of Preliminary 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 

and Preliminary Determination of Targeted 

Dumping, 75 FR 69403 (November 12, 2010) 

(‘‘Preliminary Determination’’). 

2See Memorandum entitled ‘‘Ministerial Error 

Memorandum, Aluminum Extrusions from the 

People’s Republic of China, Preliminary 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value,’’ 

dated December 21, 2010, on file in the 

Department’s Central Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’), Room 

7046 of the main Department building. 

3See Aluminum Extrusions From the People’s 

Republic of China: Notice of Amended Preliminary 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 76 

FR 323 (January 4, 2011) (‘‘Amended Preliminary 

Determination’’). 

4See the Department’s verification reports on the 

record of this investigation, all on file in the CRU. 

5The Aluminum Extrusions fair Trade Committee 

is comprised of Aerolite Extrusion Company, 

Alexandria Extrusion Company, Benada Aluminum 

of Florida, Inc., William L. Bonnell Company, Inc., 

Frontier Aluminum Corporation, Futura Industries 

Corporation, Hydro Aluminum North America, Inc., 

Kaiser Aluminum Corporation, Profile Extrusions 

Company, Sapa Extrusions, Inc., and Western 

Extrusions Corporation. 

6See the Department’s verification reports on the 

record of this investigation in the CRU, with respect 

to these entities. 

Comment 20: Whether the Benchmark Used 

for the Provision of Primary Aluminum for 

LTAR Program Should Include Import 

Duties 

Comment 21: Whether the Department 

Should Use In-Country Benchmarks Under 

the Provision of Primary Aluminum for 

LTAR Program 

Comment 22: Whether the Guang Ya 

Companies Properly Reported Their 

Purchases of Primary Aluminum and 

Whether the Application of AFA is 

Warranted 

Comment 23: Whether the Land for LTAR 

Program Constitutes a Financial 

Contribution, Provides a Benefit, and is 

Specific 

Comment 24: Whether the Department 

Should Revise the Benchmark Used Under 

the Land for LTAR Program 

Comment 25: Whether the Department Erred 

in Rejecting Factual Information 

Concerning the Benchmark Used Under the 

Land for LTAR Program 

Comment 26: Whether the Guang Ya 

Companies Received an Additional 

Subsidy in Connection With the GOC’s 

Purchase of Land-Use Rights and Buildings 

Comment 27: Whether PRC Commercial 

Banks Are GOC Authorities That Provide a 

Financial Contribution 

Comment 28: Whether there is a Link 

Between the Alleged Policy Lending 

Program and Actual Loans Received by 

Respondents 

Comment 29: Whether the Derivation of the 

Short-Term Benchmark Interest Rate is 

Arbitrary 

Comment 30: Whether the Derivation of the 

Long-Term Benchmark Interest Rate is 

Arbitrary 

Comment 31: Whether the Department 

Committed Ministerial Errors Concerning 

the Famous Brands Program 

Comment 32: Whether the Department 

Should Provide an Entered Value 

Adjustment to the Zhongya Companies to 

Account for Price Mark-Ups Made by Their 

Hong-Kong Affiliate 

Comment 33: Whether the Department 

Improperly Declined to Initiate an 

Investigation of the GOC’s Alleged 

Currency Undervaluation 

[FR Doc. 2011–7926 Filed 4–1–11; 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 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: April 4, 2011. 

SUMMARY: On November 12, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce 

(‘‘Department’’) published its 

preliminary determination of sales at 

less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’) in the 

antidumping investigation of aluminum 

extrusions from the People’s Republic of 

China (‘‘PRC’’).1 We invited interested 

parties to comment on our preliminary 

determination. Based on our analysis of 

the comments we received, we have 

made changes to our margin 

calculations for the mandatory 

respondents. The final dumping 

margins for this investigation are listed 

in the ‘‘Final Determination Margins’’ 

section below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

Stolz or Lori Apodaca, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 8, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–4474 or (202) 482– 

4551, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Case History 

The Department published its 

Preliminary Determination on 

November 12, 2010. The Department 

subsequently issued a ministerial error 

memorandum, in which it agreed to 

correct several ministerial errors.2 On 

January 4, 2011, pursuant to the 

correction of ministerial errors, the 

Department published an Amended 

Preliminary Determination.3

Between December 6, 2010, and 

December 21, 2010, the Department 

conducted verifications of Guang Ya 

Aluminium Industries Co., Ltd. (‘‘Guang 

Ya’’), Foshan Guangcheng Aluminium 

Co., Ltd. (‘‘Guangcheng’’), Kong Ah 

International Co., Ltd.(‘‘Kong Ah’’), and 

Guang Ya Aluminium Industries (Hong 

Kong) Ltd. (‘‘Guang Ya HK’’) 

(collectively the ‘‘Guang Ya Group’’); 

Zhaoqing New Zhongya Aluminum Co., 

Ltd. (‘‘ZNZ’’), Zhongya Shaped 

Aluminium (HK) Holding Limited 

(‘‘Shaped Aluminum’’) and Karlton 

Aluminum Company Ltd. (‘‘Karlton’’) 

(collectively ‘‘New Zhongya’’); and 

Xinya Aluminum & Stainless Steel 

Product Co., Ltd. (‘‘Xinya’’) (all parties, 

collectively ‘‘the Guang Ya Group/New 

Zhongya/Xinya’’). The Department 

released verification reports for each of 

these companies on January 28, 

2011.4See the ‘‘Verification’’ section 

below for additional information. On 

December 12, 2010, Aavid Thermalloy, 

Inc. (‘‘Aavid’’) submitted a request for a 

scope hearing. On December 13, 2010, 

The Aluminum Extrusions Fair Trade 

Committee,5 and the United Steel, Paper 

and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, 

Energy, Allied Industrial and Service 

Workers International Union 

(collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’) and New 

Zhongya submitted requests for a public 

hearing. On February 9, 2011, 

Petitioners submitted a request for a 

closed session of the hearing. On March 

2, 2011, the Department held a public 

scope hearing for the antidumping duty 

and countervailing duty investigations, 

and both an open and a closed session 

of the antidumping duty hearing. 

New Zhongya and Petitioners 

submitted surrogate value comments on 

December 22, 2010. On February 9, 

2011, case briefs were filed by the 

Guang Ya Group, the Government of 

China (‘‘GOC’’), Petitioners, and New 

Zhongya. On February 14, 2011, the 

Guang Ya Group, New Zhongya, and 

Petitioners filed their rebuttal briefs. 

Period of Investigation 

The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is 

July 1, 2009, through December 31, 

2009. This period corresponds to the 

two most recent fiscal quarters prior to 

the month of the filing of the petition, 

which was March 2009. See 19 CFR 

351.204(b)(1). 

Verification 

As provided in section 782(i) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘Act’’), 

we conducted verification of the 

information submitted by the Guang Ya 

Group/New Zhongya/Xinya for use in 

our final determination.6 We used 

standard verification procedures, 

including the examination of relevant 

accounting and production records, as 

appropriate, as well as original source 

documents provided by respondents. 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES