[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17798-17802]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08467]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-082]


Certain Steel Wheels From the People's Republic of China: 
Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation

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

DATES: Applicable April 16, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Bailey or Aleksandras Nakutis 
at (202) 482-0193 or (202) 482-3147, respectively; AD/CVD Operations, 
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 
20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petition

    On March 27, 2018, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) 
received an antidumping duty (AD) Petition concerning imports of 
certain steel wheels (steel wheels) from the People's Republic of China 
(China), filed in proper form on behalf of Accuride Corporation 
(Accuride) and Maxion Wheels Akron LLC (Maxion) (collectively, the 
petitioners).\1\ The AD Petition was accompanied by a countervailing 
duty (CVD) Petition concerning imports of steel wheels from China. The 
petitioners are domestic producers of steel wheels.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the petitioners' letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition 
of Antidumping Duties and Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Certain Steel Wheels from the People's Republic of China,'' dated 
March 27, 2018 (the Petition).
    \2\ See Volume I of the Petition, at I-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 30, 2018, Commerce requested supplemental information 
pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions. The petitioners filed 
additional information on April 3, 2018.\3\ On April 9 and 13, 2018, 
Commerce requested the petitioners to clarity the scope of the 
Petition.\4\ The petitioners filed responses to Commerce's scope 
request on April 13, 2018.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See the petitioners' letters, ``Certain Steel Wheels from 
the People's Republic of China (C-570-083): Petitioners' Response to 
the Department's March 30, 2018 Supplemental Questionnaire Regarding 
the Countervailing Duty Petition, dated March 30, 2018); and 
``Petitioners' Response to the Department of Commerce's March 30, 
2018 General Issues Questionnaire Regarding the Petitions for the 
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Certain Steel Wheels from the People's Republic of China,'' dated 
April 3, 2018 (General Issues Supplement).
    \4\ See Commerce's Memorandum to the File, ``Phone Call with 
Counsel to Petitioners,'' dated April 9, 2018 and Commerce's 
Memorandum to the File, ``Phone Call with Counsel to Petitioners,'' 
dated April 13, 2018.
    \5\ See the petitioners' Letter, ``Petitioners' Scope 
Clarification Regarding the Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Steel 
Wheels from the People's Republic of China,'' dated April 13, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of steel wheels 
from China are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at 
less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and 
that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material 
injury to, the domestic industry producing steel wheels in the United 
States. Consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petition is 
accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners 
supporting their allegation.
    Commerce finds that the petitioners filed the Petition on behalf of 
the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested parties as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the 
petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to 
the initiation of the AD investigation that the petitioners are 
requesting.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
Petition'' section, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    Because China is a non-market economy (NME) country, pursuant to 19 
CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) for the China 
investigation is July 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017.

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by this investigation is certain steel wheels 
from China. For a full description of the scope of this investigation, 
see the Appendix to this notice.

Scope Comments

    During our review of the Petition, Commerce issued questions to, 
and received responses from, the petitioners pertaining to the proposed 
scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petition is an accurate 
reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking 
relief.\7\ As a result of these exchanges, the scope of the Petition 
was modified to clarify the description of merchandise covered by the 
Petition. The description of the merchandise covered by this 
initiation, as described in the Appendix to this notice, reflects these 
clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See General Issues Supplement, at SGQ2-SGQ8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are 
setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding 
product coverage (scope).\8\ Commerce will consider all comments 
received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with 
interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary 
determination. If scope comments include factual information,\9\ all 
such factual information should be limited to public information. To 
facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that 
all interested parties submit such comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time 
(ET) on May 7, 2018, which is the next business day after 20 calendar 
days from the signature date of this notice.\10\ Any rebuttal comments, 
which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on 
May 17, 2018, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comments 
deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
    \10\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce requests that any factual information parties consider 
relevant to the scope of the investigation be submitted during this 
period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual 
information pertaining to the scope of the investigation may be 
relevant, the party may contact Commerce and request permission to 
submit the additional information. All such submissions must be filed 
on the records of each of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using 
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\11\

[[Page 17799]]

An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its 
entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents exempted from the 
electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in 
paper form) with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 
18022, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, 
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by 
the applicable deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order 
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and 
Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046 
(November 20, 2014) for details of Commerce's electronic filing 
requirements, effective August 5, 2011. Information on help using 
ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and a 
handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaire

    Commerce is provide interested parties an opportunity to comment on 
the appropriate physical characteristics of steel wheels to be reported 
in response to Commerce's AD questionnaire. This information will be 
used to identify the key physical characteristics of the merchandise 
under consideration in order to report the relevant factors of 
production accurately, as well as to develop appropriate product-
comparison criteria.
    Interested parties may provide any information or comments that 
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of 
physical characteristics. In order to consider the suggestions of 
interested parties in developing and issuing the AD questionnaire, all 
product characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on May 
7, 2018, which is the next business day after 20 calendar days from the 
signature date of this notice.\12\ Any rebuttal comments must be filed 
by 5:00 p.m. ET on May 17, 2018. All comments and submissions to 
Commerce must be filed electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, 
on the record of the China less-than-fair-value investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i) 
Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if 
there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or 
(ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling 
method to poll the ``industry.''
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which 
is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has 
been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like 
product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the 
ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product,\13\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a 
separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce's determination 
is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may 
result in different definitions of the like product, such differences 
do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Section 771(10) of the Act.
    \14\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in a 
petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope 
of the Petition. Based on our analysis of the information submitted on 
the record, we have determined that steel wheels, as defined in the 
scope, constitute a single domestic like product, and we have analyzed 
industry support in terms of that domestic like product.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Certain Steel Wheels from the People's Republic of China (Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Steel 
Wheels from the People's Republic of China (Attachment II). This 
checklist is dated concurrently with this notice and on file 
electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is 
also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main 
Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section 
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petition and the General Issues Supplement with 
reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ``Scope of the 
Investigation,'' in the Appendix to this notice. The petitioners 
provided their 2017 production of the domestic like product.\16\ The 
petitioners state that they are the only known producers of steel 
wheels in the United States; therefore, the Petition is supported by 
100 percent of the U.S. industry.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Volume I of the Petition, at I-36.
    \17\ Id. at I-7 and Exhibit I-1; see also General Issues 
Supplement, at SGQ-11--SGQ-12 and Exhibit SGQ-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petition, General Issues 
Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce 
indicates that the petitioners have established industry support for 
the Petition.\18\ First, the Petition established support from domestic 
producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product and, as such, Commerce is not 
required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support 
(e.g., polling).\19\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have 
met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 
732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) 
who support the Petition account for at least 25 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product.\20\ Finally, the domestic 
producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry 
support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic 
producers (or workers) who support the Petition account for more than 
50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by 
that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to,

[[Page 17800]]

the Petition.\21\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petition 
was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of 
section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \19\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \20\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce finds that the petitioners filed the Petition on behalf of 
the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined in 
section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and they have demonstrated sufficient 
industry support with respect to the AD investigation that they are 
requesting that Commerce initiate.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioners allege that the U.S. industry producing the 
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened 
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject 
merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the 
petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility 
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Volume I of the Petition, at I-20--I-22 and Exhibit I-
15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports, 
reduced market share and increasing market share of subject imports, 
underselling and price depression or suppression, lost sales and 
revenues, and adverse effects on the petitioners' operating indicators 
and financial results.\24\ We have assessed the allegations and 
supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material 
injury, and causation, and we have determined that these allegations 
are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the statutory 
requirements for initiation.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Volume I of the Petition, at I-22 through I-37, 
Exhibits I-10 through I-16, and Exhibit I-25.
    \25\ See Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, Analysis of 
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Steel 
Wheels from the People's Republic of China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

    The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less 
than fair value upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate an 
AD investigation of imports of steel wheels from China. The sources of 
data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and NV 
are discussed in greater detail in the Initiation Checklist.

Export Price

    The petitioners based EP on an importer price list, price quotes, 
and internet prices.\26\ Where applicable, the petitioners made 
deductions from U.S. price for movement and other expenses, consistent 
with the terms of sale.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Initiation Checklist and AD Supplement.
    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

    Commerce considers China to be an NME country.\28\ In accordance 
with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, any determination that a foreign 
country is an NME country shall remain in effect until revoked by 
Commerce. Therefore, we continue to treat China as an NME country for 
purposes of the initiation of this investigation. Accordingly, NV in 
China is appropriately based on factors of production (FOPs) valued in 
a surrogate market economy country, in accordance with section 773(c) 
of the Act.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Aluminum Foil 
from the People's Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary 
Determination of Sales at Less-Than-Fair Value and Postponement of 
Final Determination, 82 FR 50858, 50861 (November 2, 2017), and 
accompanying decision memorandum, China's Status as a Non-Market 
Economy.
    \29\ See AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners claim that Thailand is an appropriate surrogate 
country for China because it is a market economy country that is at a 
level of economic development comparable to that of China and it is a 
significant producer of comparable merchandise.\30\ The petitioners 
provided publicly available information from Thailand to value all 
FOPs.\31\ Therefore, based on the information provided by the 
petitioners, we determine that it is appropriate to use Thailand as the 
primary surrogate country for initiation purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Volume II of the Petition, at I-4 and II-5.
    \31\ Id. at II-6 and Exhibit II-7(A)(1-2) and (B)(1-4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties will have the opportunity to submit comments 
regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly 
available information to value FOPs within 30 days before the scheduled 
date of the preliminary determination.

Factors of Production

    Because information regarding the FOPs and volume of inputs 
consumed by Chinese producers/exporters was not reasonably available, 
the petitioners used the product-specific consumption rates of a U.S. 
steel wheels producer to estimate the Chinese manufacturers' FOPs.\32\ 
The petitioners valued the estimated FOPs using surrogate values from 
Thailand, as noted above.\33\ The petitioners used the average POI 
exchange rate to convert the data to U.S. dollars.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Id. at II-10.
    \33\ Id. at II-6 and Exhibit II-7(A)(1-2) and (B)(1-4).
    \34\ Id. at Exhibit II-7(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to 
believe that imports of steel wheels from China are being, or are 
likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value. Based 
on comparisons of EP to NV in accordance with sections 772 and 773 of 
the Act, the estimated dumping margins for steel wheels from China are 
12.1-231.7 percent.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation

    Based upon the examination of the AD Petition, we find that the 
Petition meets the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, 
we are initiating an AD investigation to determine whether imports of 
steel wheels from China are being, or are likely to be, sold in the 
United States at less than fair value. In accordance with section 
733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we 
will make our preliminary determination no later than 140 days after 
the date of this initiation.

Respondent Selection

    The petitioners named 32 producers/exporters as accounting for the 
majority of exports of steel wheels to the United States from 
China.\36\ In accordance with our standard practice for respondent 
selection in AD cases involving NME countries, we intend to issue 
quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires to producers/exporters of 
merchandise subject to this investigation. In the event Commerce 
determines that it cannot individually examine each company, where 
appropriate, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents based on 
the responses received. For this investigation, Commerce will request 
Q&V information from known exporters and producers identified with 
complete contact information in the Petition. In addition, Commerce 
will post the Q&V questionnaires along with filing instructions on 
Enforcement and Compliance's website at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See Volume I of the Petition at Exhibit I-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Producers/exporters of steel wheels from China that do not receive 
Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit

[[Page 17801]]

a response to the Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy of the Q&V 
questionnaire from Enforcement & Compliance's website. The Q&V response 
must be submitted by the relevant Chinese exporters/producers no later 
than 5:00 p.m. ET on April 30, 2018, which is two weeks from the 
signature date of this notice. All Q&V responses must be filed 
electronically via ACCESS.

Separate Rates

    In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation, 
exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate application.\37\ 
The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application in 
this investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself, 
which is available on Commerce's website at http://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/nme-sep-rate.html. The separate-rate 
application will be due 30 days after publication of this initiation 
notice.\38\ Exporters and producers who submit a separate-rate 
application and have been selected as mandatory respondents will be 
eligible for consideration for separate-rate status only if they 
respond to all parts of Commerce's AD questionnaire as mandatory 
respondents. Commerce requires that companies from China submit a 
response to both the Q&V questionnaire and the separate-rate 
application by the respective deadlines in order to receive 
consideration for separate-rate status. Companies not filing a timely 
Q&V response will not receive separate-rate consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and 
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation 
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf (Policy Bulletin 
05.1).
    \38\ Although in past investigations this deadline was 60 days, 
consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(a), which states that ``the Secretary 
may request any person to submit factual information at any time 
during a proceeding,'' this deadline is now 30 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Use of Combination Rates

    Commerce will calculate combination rates for certain respondents 
that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME investigation. The 
Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin states:

    {w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate 
rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will 
now assign in its NME Investigation will be specific to those 
producers that supplied the exporter during the period of 
investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the 
exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise 
to it during the period of investigation. This practice applies both 
to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated 
separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms 
receiving the weighted-average of the individually calculated rates. 
This practice is referred to as the application of ``combination 
rates'' because such rates apply to specific combinations of 
exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned 
to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the 
firm in question and produced by a firm that supplied the exporter 
during the period of investigation.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petition have been 
provided to the government of China via ACCESS. To the extent 
practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of 
the Petition to each exporter named in the Petition, as provided under 
19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

    We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 
732(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petition was filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of steel wheels from China are materially 
injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. industry. A negative 
ITC determination will result in the investigation being 
terminated.\40\ Otherwise, the investigation will proceed according to 
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of Factual Information

    Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) 
Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence 
submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available 
information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the 
adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence 
placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual 
information described in (i)-(iv). 19 CFR 351.301(b) requires any 
party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which 
subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted 
\41\ and, if the information is submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct 
factual information already on the record, to provide an explanation 
identifying the information already on the record that the factual 
information seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct.\42\ Time limits for 
the submission of factual information are addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, 
which provides specific time limits based on the type of factual 
information being submitted. Interested parties should review the 
regulations prior to submitting factual information in this 
investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \42\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extensions of Time Limits

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the 
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as 
otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request 
will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the 
time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are 
due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be 
considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. 
Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time 
limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for 
submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such 
a case, we will inform parties in the letter or memorandum setting 
forth the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension 
requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request 
must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited 
circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension 
of time limits. Parties should review Extension of Time Limits; Final 
Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to 
submitting factual information in this investigation.

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\43\ 
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\44\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \44\ See also Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to 
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule are available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.

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

[[Page 17802]]

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, Commerce 
published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents 
Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). 
Parties wishing to participate in this investigation should ensure that 
they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of 
letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) 
and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).

    Dated: April 16, 2018.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise subject to the investigation is certain on-the-
road steel wheels, discs, and rims for tubeless tires, with a 
nominal rim diameter of 22.5 inches and 24.5 inches, regardless of 
width. Certain on-the-road steel wheels with a nominal wheel 
diameter of 22.5 inches and 24.5 inches are generally for Class 6, 
7, and 8 commercial vehicles (as classified by the Federal Highway 
Administration Gross Vehicle Weight Rating system), including 
tractors, semi-trailers, dump trucks, garbage trucks, concrete 
mixers, and buses, and are the current standard wheel diameters for 
such applications. The standard widths of certain on-the-road steel 
wheels are 7.5 inches, 8.25 inches, and 9.0 inches, but all certain 
on-the-road steel wheels, regardless of width, are covered by the 
scope. While 22.5 inches and 24.5 inches are standard wheel sizes 
used by Class 6, 7, and 8 commercial vehicles, the scope covers 
sizes that may be adopted in the future for Class 6, 7, and 8 
commercial vehicles.
    The scope includes certain on-the-road steel wheels with either 
a ``hub-piloted'' or ``stud- piloted'' mounting configuration, and 
includes rims and discs for such wheels, whether imported as an 
assembly or separately. The scope includes certain on-the-road steel 
wheels, discs, and rims, of carbon and/or alloy steel composition, 
whether cladded or not cladded, whether finished or not finished, 
and whether coated or uncoated. All on-the-road wheels sold in the 
United States are subject to the requirements of the National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration and bear markings, such as the 
``DOT'' symbol, indicating compliance with applicable motor vehicle 
standards. See 49 CFR 571.120. The scope includes certain on- the-
road steel wheels imported with or without the required markings. 
Certain on-the-road steel wheels imported as an assembly with a tire 
mounted on the wheel and/or with a valve stem attached are included. 
However, if the certain on-the-road steel wheel is imported as an 
assembly with a tire mounted on the wheel and/or with a valve stem 
attached, the certain on- the-road steel wheel is covered by the 
scope, but the tire and/or valve stem is not covered by the scope.
    Excluded from the scope are:
    (1) steel wheels for tube-type tires that require a removable 
side ring;
    (2) aluminum wheels;
    (3) wheels where steel represents less than fifty percent of the 
product by weight; and
    (4) steel wheels that do not meet National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration requirements, other than the rim marking 
requirements found in 49 CFR 571.120S5.2.
    Imports of the subject merchandise are currently classified 
under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) subheadings: 8708.70.4530, 8708.70.4560, 8708.70.6030, 
8708.70.6060, 8716.90.5045, and 8716.90.5059. Merchandise meeting 
the scope description may also enter under the following HTSUS 
subheadings: 4011.20.1015, 4011.20.5020, and 8708.99.4850. While 
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, 
the written description of the subject merchandise is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2018-08467 Filed 4-23-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P