[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17794-17798]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08469]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-083]


Certain Steel Wheels From the People's Republic: Initiation of 
Countervailing Duty Investigation

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

DATES: Applicable April 16, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eli Lovely at (202) 482-1593 or Maisha 
Cryor at (202) 482-5831, 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 a countervailing duty (CVD) 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 (collectively, the 
petitioners).\1\ The CVD Petition was accompanied by an antidumping 
duty (AD) Petition concerning imports of steel wheels 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\ Id. at 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 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that the Government of China 
(GOC) is providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of 
sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of steel wheels in 
China and imports of such products are materially injuring, or 
threatening material injury to, the domestic steel wheels industry in 
the United States. Consistent with section 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 
CFR 351.202(b), for those alleged programs on which we are initiating a 
CVD investigation, the Petition is accompanied by information 
reasonably available to the petitioners supporting their allegations.
    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

[[Page 17795]]

support necessary for the initiation of the requested CVD 
investigation.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Period of Investigation

    Because the Petition was filed on March 27, 2018, the period of 
investigation is January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017.

Scope of the Investigation

    The product covered by these investigations is steel wheels from 
China. For a full description of the scope of these investigations, 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 Supplemental Questionnaire, at 3-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 6, 2018, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date 
of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual 
information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on May 16, 2018, which is 10 
calendar days from the initial comments deadline.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble).
    \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 investigations 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\ 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, which went into effect on 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce 
notified representatives of the GOC of the receipt of the Petition and 
provided them the opportunity for consultations with respect to the CVD 
Petition.\12\ The GOC did not request consultations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Letter from Robert Bolling, Program Manager, Office IV, 
to the Embassy of China ``Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain 
Steel Wheels from China,'' dated April 2, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(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 702(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

[[Page 17796]]

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 Countervailing 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 
702(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 
702(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 702(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, 
the Petition.\21\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petition 
was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of 
section 702(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \19\ See section 702(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 CVD investigation that they are 
requesting that Commerce initiate.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Injury Test

    Because China is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the 
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act 
applies to this investigation. Accordingly, the ITC must determine 
whether imports of the subject merchandise from China materially 
injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioners allege that imports of the subject merchandise are 
benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are 
causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry 
producing the domestic like product. 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 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\ Id. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of CVD Investigation

    Based on the examination of the Petition, we find that the Petition 
meet the requirements of section 702 of the Act. Therefore, we are 
initiating a CVD investigation to determine whether imports of steel 
wheels from China benefit from countervailable subsidies conferred by 
the GOC. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary 
determinations no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation.
    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on all of the 
subsidy programs alleged in the petition, with certain limitations. For 
a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each 
program, see China CVD Initiation Checklist. A public version of the 
initiation checklist for this investigation is available on ACCESS.

Respondent Selection

    The petitioners named 32 companies in China \26\ as producers/
exporters of steel wheels. Commerce intends to follow its standard 
practice in CVD investigations and calculate company-specific subsidy 
rates in these investigations. In the event Commerce determines that 
the number of companies is large and it cannot individually examine 
each company based upon Commerce's resources, where appropriate, 
Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents based on U.S. Customs 
and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of steel wheels from 
China during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
of the United States numbers listed in the ``Scope of the 
Investigation,'' in the Appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire Response at 
Exhibit SGQ-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such 
applications may be found on the Commerce's website at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
    Comments must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An 
electronically filed document must be received successfully, in its 
entirety, by ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the date noted above. 
We intend to finalize our decisions regarding respondent selection 
within 20 days of publication of this notice.

[[Page 17797]]

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

    In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public versions of the Petition have been 
provided to the GOC 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 Petitions, as provided under 19 CFR 
351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

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

Preliminary Determinations 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.\27\ A 
negative ITC determination will result in the investigation being 
terminated.\28\ Otherwise, this investigation will proceed according to 
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
    \28\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 
\29\ 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.\30\ 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 these 
investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \30\ 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 these investigations.

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\31\ 
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\32\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \32\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (``Final Rule''); see also 
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 702 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

[[Page 17798]]

    (4) steel wheels that do not meet National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration requirements, other than the rim marking 
requirements found in 49 CFR Sec.  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. 2018-08469 Filed 4-23-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P