[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 57 (Friday, March 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17021-17026]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7047]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-973]


Certain Steel Wheels From the People's Republic of China: Notice 
of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Partial 
Affirmative Final Determination of Critical Circumstances

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

DATES: Effective Date: March 23, 2012.

SUMMARY: On November 2, 2011, the Department of Commerce 
(``Department'') published its preliminary determination of sales at 
less than fair value (``LTFV'') in the antidumping investigation of 
certain steel wheels (``steel wheels'') from the People's Republic of 
China (``PRC'').\1\ We invited interested parties to comment on our 
preliminary determination of sales at LTFV. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Steel Wheels From the People's Republic of 
China: Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value, Partial Affirmative Preliminary Determination of 
Critical Circumstances, and Postponement of Final Determination, 76 
FR 67703 (November 2, 2011) (``Preliminary Determination''). Less 
Than Fair Value, Partial Affirmative Preliminary Determination of 
Critical Circumstances, and Postponement of Final Determination, 76 
FR 67703 (November 2, 2011) (``Preliminary Determination'').

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brendan Quinn or Raquel Silva, 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-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5848 or (202) 482-6475, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Case History

    The Department published its Preliminary Determination of sales at 
LTFV on November 2, 2011. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii), we 
invited parties to comment on the Preliminary Determination.
    On November 3, 2011, the Department issued a post-preliminary 
supplemental questionnaire to Zhejiang Jingu Company Limited 
(``Zhejiang Jingu'') and its affiliated exporter Shanghai Yata Industry 
Co., Ltd (``Yata'') (collectively ``Jingu''). On November 14, 2011, 
Jingu submitted its response to the Department's post-preliminary 
supplemental questionnaire. Also on November 14, 2011, Jingu and Jining 
Centurion Wheel Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (``Jining Centurion'') and its 
affiliated U.S. reseller, Centurion Wheel Manufacturing Company 
(``Centurion USA'') (collectively ``Centurion'') provided additional 
factual information pertaining to respondents' production experience.
    Between November 21, 2011, and December 9, 2011, the Department 
conducted verifications of Jining Centurion and its affiliated U.S. 
reseller, Centurion USA. Between December 1, 2011, and December 9, 
2011, the Department conducted verifications of Zhejiang Jingu and its 
affiliated exporter Yata. The Department released verification reports 
for each verification of Centurion and Jingu on January 10, 2012, and 
January 11, 2012, respectively. The Department also released an 
addendum to its verification report regarding Centurion on January 23, 
2012. Accuride Corporation and Hayes Lemmerz International 
(``Petitioners'') submitted their comments regarding the Department's 
January 23, 2012, addendum on January 25, 2012.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See the ``Verification'' section below for additional 
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 19, 2011, Centurion and Jingu submitted publicly 
available surrogate value submissions. On December 29, 2011, 
Petitioners submitted rebuttal comments to Jingu's surrogate value 
submission. Case briefs were submitted on January 20, 2012, by the 
following parties: (1) Petitioners; (2) the Government of China; (3) 
Blackstone/OTR LLC and OTR Wheel Engineering, Inc. (collectively 
``Blackstone''); (4) Jingu; and (5) Centurion. On January 25, 2012, 
Centurion and Petitioners submitted rebuttal briefs. On February 29, 
2012, the Department met with counsel for Blackstone/OTR and Super Grip 
Corporation, an interested party in this proceeding. The Department met 
with counsel for Petitioners on March 2, 2012.

Scope Comments

    Following the Preliminary Determination, on December 6, 2011, the 
Department issued a post-preliminary supplemental questionnaire to all 
interested parties requesting further information regarding various 
scope issues in this and the concurrent countervailing duty 
investigation on certain steel wheels from the PRC

[[Page 17022]]

related to: (1) The U.S. Department of Transportation's regulatory 
requirements for steel wheels; (2) steel wheel product specifications; 
and (3) additional off-highway uses for Petitioners' steel wheels.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See the Department's letter to all interested parties 
entitled, ``LTFV antidumping duty investigation of Certain Steel 
Wheels from the People's Republic of China: Post-Preliminary Request 
for Information,'' dated December 6, 2011 (``scope supplemental 
questionnaire'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 13, 2011, the following parties submitted responses to 
the Department's scope supplemental questionnaire: (1) Petitioners; (2) 
Xiamen Sunrise Wheel Group Co., Ltd. (``Xiamen Sunrise'') and its 
affiliate, Xiamen Topu Import & Export Co., Ltd. (``Xiamen Topu''); (3) 
Jingu; (4) Blackstone; and (5) Jiaxing Stone Wheel Co., Ltd (``Jiaxing 
Stone''). On December 22, 2011, Blackstone submitted rebuttal comments 
to the Petitioners' scope supplemental questionnaire response. On 
December 23, 2011, Petitioners and Jingu also provided their rebuttal 
comments to parties' scope supplemental questionnaire responses.
    Based on the Department's analysis of these comments and the 
factual records of these investigations, the Department continues to 
find that the scope of the investigation should not exclude off-the-
road steel wheels.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For a complete discussion of the parties' comments and the 
Department's position, see Memorandum to Paul Piquado entitled 
``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination in the 
Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Steel Wheels from the People's 
Republic of China,'' dated March 16, 2012, and incorporated herein 
by reference (``Issues and Decision Memorandum'') at Comment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (``POI'') is July 1, 2010, through 
December 31, 2010. This period corresponds to the two most recent 
fiscal quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition, which 
was March 2011.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
(``Act''), we verified the information submitted by Centurion and Jingu 
for use in our final determination. The Department used standard 
verification procedures, including the examination of relevant 
accounting and production records, as well as original source documents 
provided by respondents.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Memorandum from the Department entitled, ``Verification 
of the Sales Responses of Centurion Wheel Manufacturing Company 
(``Centurion USA'') in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain 
Steel Wheels From the People's Republic of China,'' dated January 
10, 2012 (``Centurion USA's Verification Report''); Memorandum from 
the Department entitled, ``Verification of the Sales Responses of 
Jining Centurion Wheel Manufacturing Company, Ltd. in the 
Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Steel Wheels From the 
People's Republic of China,'' dated January 10, 2012 (Jining 
Centurion's Verification Report''); Memorandum from the Department 
entitled, ``Verification of the Sales Information of Yata Industry 
Company, Ltd.'' dated January 11, 2012 (Yata's Verification 
Report''); and Memorandum from the Department entitled, 
``Verification of the Sales and Factor Production Information of 
Zhejiang Jingu Company Limited'' dated January 11, 2012 (``Jingu's 
Verification Report'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 
A list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have 
responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached to this 
notice as Appendix I. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public 
document and is on file electronically via Import Administration's 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service 
System (``IA ACCESS''). Access to IA ACCESS is available in the Central 
Records Unit (``CRU''), room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce 
building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://www.trade.gov/ia/. The paper copy and electronic version of the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    <bullet> The Department is using Thai import data to value 
respondents' pallet inputs, rather than the Indonesian data used for 
the Preliminary Determination.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Comment 4 of the Issues and Decision Memorandum; see 
also Memorandum to the File entitled ``Antidumping Duty 
Investigation of Certain Steel Wheels from the People's Republic of 
China (``PRC''): Final Determination Surrogate Value Memorandum,'' 
dated March 16, 2012 (``Surrogate Value Memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    <bullet> To value inland truck freight, the Department is using an 
average of updated prices from the same source used in the Preliminary 
Determination.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Comment 5 of the Issues and Decision Memorandum; see 
also Surrogate Value Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    <bullet> The Department has revised Centurion and Jingu's margin 
calculations to incorporate minor corrections submitted at their 
respective verifications, as well as other minor discrepancies noted in 
their verification reports.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Comment 9 of the Issues and Decision Memorandum; see 
also Centurion USA's Verification Report, Jining Centurion's 
Verification Report, Yata's Verification Report, and Jingu's 
Verification Report; see also Memorandum from the Department 
entitled, ``Investigation of Certain Steel Wheels from the People's 
Republic of China: Analysis of the Final Determination Margin 
Calculation for Zhejiang Jingu Company Limited (``Jingu'') and 
Shanghai Yata Industry Company Limited (``Yata''),'' dated March 16, 
2012 (``Jingu's Final Analysis Memorandum''); and Memorandum from 
the Department entitled, ``Investigation of Certain Steel Wheels 
from the People's Republic of China: Analysis of the Final 
Determination Margin Calculation for Jining Centurion Wheels 
Manufacturing Co., Ltd. and Centurion Wheel Manufacturing Company,'' 
dated March 16, 2012 (Centurion's Final Analysis Memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    <bullet> The Department finds that critical circumstances exist for 
the PRC-entity.

Scope of Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are steel wheels with a 
wheel diameter of 18 to 24.5 inches. Rims and discs for such wheels are 
included, whether imported as an assembly or separately. These products 
are used with both tubed and tubeless tires. Steel wheels, whether or 
not attached to tires or axles, are included. However, if the steel 
wheels are imported as an assembly attached to tires or axles, the tire 
or axle is not covered by the scope. The scope includes steel wheels, 
discs, and rims of carbon and/or alloy composition and clad wheels, 
discs, and rims when carbon or alloy steel represents more than fifty 
percent of the product by weight. The scope includes wheels, rims, and 
discs, whether coated or uncoated, regardless of the type of coating.
    Imports of the subject merchandise are provided for under the 
following categories of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States (``HTSUS''): 8708.70.05.00, 8708.70.25.00, 8708.70.45.30, and 
8708.70.60.30. Imports of the subject merchandise may also enter under 
the following categories of the HTSUS: 8406.90.4580, 8406.90.7500, 
8420.99.9000, 8422.90.1100, 8422.90.2100, 8422.90.9120, 8422.90.9130, 
8422.90.9160, 8422.90.9195, 8431.10.0010, 8431.10.0090, 8431.20.0000, 
8431.31.0020, 8431.31.0040, 8431.31.0060, 8431.39.0010, 8431.39.0050, 
8431.39.0070, 8431.39.0080, 8431.43.8060, 8431.49.1010, 8431.49.1060, 
8431.49.1090, 8431.49.9030, 8431.49.9040, 8431.49.9085, 8432.90.0005, 
8432.90.0015, 8432.90.0030, 8432.90.0080, 8433.90.1000, 8433.90.5020, 
8433.90.5040, 8436.99.0020, 8436.99.0090, 8479.90.9440, 8479.90.9450, 
8479.90.9496, 8487.90.0080, 8607.19.1200,

[[Page 17023]]

8607.19.1500, 8708.70.1500, 8708.70.3500, 8708.70.4560, 8708.70.6060, 
8709.90.0000, 8710.00.0090, 8714.19.0030, 8714.19.0060, 8716.90.1000, 
8716.90.5030, 8716.90.5060, 8803.20.0015, 8803.20.0030, and 
8803.20.0060. These HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes only; the written description of the scope is 
dispositive.

Surrogate Country

    In the Preliminary Determination, the Department selected Indonesia 
as the appropriate surrogate country to use in this investigation.\10\ 
For the final determination, since we received no comments on our 
decision, we continue to use Indonesia as the primary surrogate 
country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 67708.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Affiliation

    In the Preliminary Determination, based on the evidence on the 
record, the Department preliminarily found that Zhejiang Jingu and Yata 
are affiliated, pursuant to section 771(33)(E) of the Act. In addition, 
based on the evidence presented in their respective questionnaire 
responses, we preliminarily found that Zhejiang Jingu and Yata should 
be treated as a single entity for the purposes of this 
investigation.\11\ Since the Preliminary Determination, the Department 
has found no information to reverse this finding, nor have parties 
provided comment to rebut this finding. Therefore, the Department 
continues to find Yata and Zhejiang Jingu to be affiliated with each 
other pursuant to sections 771(33)(E) of the Act, for this final 
determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Memorandum from the Department entitled, ``Antidumping 
Duty Investigation of Certain Steel Wheels from the People's 
Republic of China: Affiliation and Collapsing of Zhejiang Jingu 
Company Limited and Shanghai Yata Industry Company Limited,'' dated 
October 26, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Separate Rates

    In proceedings involving NME countries, the Department begins with 
a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are 
subject to government control and, thus, should be assigned a single 
antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the Department's policy to assign 
all exporters of merchandise subject to an investigation in an NME 
country this single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is 
sufficiently independent so as to be entitled to a separate rate.\12\ 
In the Preliminary Determination, we found that the two mandatory 
respondents (i.e., Centurion and Jingu), and the separate-rate 
respondents (i.e., (1) Shandong Land Star Import & Export Co., Ltd. 
(``Shandong Land Star''), (2) Shandong Jining Wheel Factory (``Shandong 
Jining''), (3) Wuxi Superior Wheel Co., Ltd. (``Wuxi Superior''), (4) 
Shandong Xingmin Wheel Co. Ltd. (``Xingmin Wheel''), (5) Xiamen 
Sunrise, (6) Jiaxing Stone, (7) Xiamen Topu and (8) China Dongfeng 
Motor Industry Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd. (``Dongfeng Motor'')) demonstrated 
their eligibility for separate-rate status. For the final 
determination, we continue to find that the evidence placed on the 
record of this investigation by these companies demonstrates both a de 
jure and de facto absence of government control, with respect to their 
respective exports of the merchandise under investigation, and, thus 
are eligible for separate-rate status.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Sparklers from the People's Republic of China, 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 
1991), as amplified by Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the People's Republic of 
China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994) and 19 CFR 351.107(d).
    \13\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 67709-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Margin for Non-Examined Separate Rate Companies

    Consistent with the Department's practice, as the rate for non-
examined entities which qualify for separate rate status, we have 
established a margin based on the rate calculated for the mandatory 
respondents, Centurion and Jingu.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See e.g., Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of Critical 
Circumstances: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's 
Republic of China, 71 FR 77373, 77377 (December 26, 2006) (unchanged 
in Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Partial 
Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain 
Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's Republic of China, 72 FR 
19690 (April 19, 2007)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Use of Facts Available and Adverse Facts Available

    Section 776(a) of the Act provides that the Department shall apply 
facts available (``FA'') if (1) necessary information is not on the 
record, or (2) an interested party or any other person (A) withholds 
information that has been requested, (B) fails to provide information 
within the deadlines established, or in the form and manner requested 
by the Department, subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782 
of the Act, (C) significantly impedes a proceeding, or (D) provides 
information that cannot be verified as provided by section 782(i) of 
the Act.
    Section 776(b) of the Act further provides that the Department may 
use an adverse inference in applying FA (i.e., adverse facts available 
(``AFA'')) when a party has failed to cooperate by not acting to the 
best of its ability to comply with a request for information. Such an 
adverse inference may include reliance on information derived from the 
petition, the final determination, a previous administrative review, or 
other information placed on the record.
    For this final determination, in accordance with section 776(b) of 
the Act, we have determined that the use of AFA is warranted for the 
PRC-wide entity as discussed below.

The PRC-Wide Rate

    Because the Department begins with the presumption that all 
companies within an NME country are subject to government control, and 
because only the companies listed under the ``Final Determination 
Margins'' section, below, have overcome that presumption, we are 
applying a single antidumping rate (i.e., the PRC-wide rate) to all 
other exporters of subject merchandise from the PRC. These other 
companies did not demonstrate entitlement to a separate rate.\15\ The 
PRC-wide rate applies to all entries of subject merchandise except for 
entries from the companies eligible for separate rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See e.g., Synthetic Indigo From the People's Republic of 
China; Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value, 65 FR 25706, 25707 (May 3, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Preliminary Determination, the Department preliminarily 
determined that there were exporters/producers of the subject 
merchandise during the POI from the PRC that did not respond to the 
Department's request for information. Further, we treated these PRC 
producers/exporters as part of the PRC-wide entity because they did not 
apply for a separate rate. As a result, we found that the use of FA was 
appropriate to determine the PRC-wide rate pursuant to section 
776(a)(2)(A) of the Act.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 67710-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the PRC-wide entity did not respond to our requests for 
information, withheld information requested by the Department, and did 
not allow their information to be verified, pursuant to sections 
776(a)(2)(A), (C), and (D) of the Act, we determine, as in the 
Preliminary Determination, that the use of facts otherwise available is 
appropriate to determine the PRC-wide rate.
    Thus, in the Preliminary Determination, the Department determined 
that, in selecting from among the FA, an adverse inference is 
appropriate because the PRC-wide

[[Page 17024]]

entity failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to 
comply with requests for information.\17\ As AFA, we preliminarily 
assigned to the PRC-wide entity a rate of 193.54 percent, the highest 
rate from the petition.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Id.
    \18\ See Id; see also Statement of Administrative Action 
accompanying the URAA, H.R. Rep. No. 103-316, vol. 1, at 870 (1994) 
(``SAA'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Selection of the Adverse Facts Available Rate

    In deciding which facts to use as AFA pursuant to section 776(b) of 
the Act and 19 CFR 351.308(c)(1), the Department may rely on 
information derived from (1) the petition, (2) a final determination in 
the investigation, (3) any previous review or determination, or (4) any 
information placed on the record. In selecting a rate for AFA, the 
Department selects a rate that is sufficiently adverse ``as to 
effectuate the purpose of the facts available rule to induce 
respondents to provide the Department with complete and accurate 
information in a timely manner.'' \19\ It is also the Department's 
practice to select a rate that ensures ``that the party does not obtain 
a more favorable result by failing to cooperate than if it had 
cooperated fully.'' \20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less than 
Fair Value: Static Random Access Memory Semiconductors From Taiwan, 
63 FR 8909, 8932 (February 23, 1998).
    \20\ See Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Final 
Results and Partial Rescission of the Seventh Administrative Review; 
Final Results of the Eleventh New Shipper Review, 70 FR 69937, 69939 
(November 18, 2005); see also SAA at 870.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Generally, the Department finds selecting the highest rate on the 
record of the proceeding as AFA to be appropriate.\21\ It is the 
Department's practice to select, as AFA, the higher of the (a) highest 
margin alleged in the petition, or (b) the highest calculated rate of 
any respondent in the investigation.\22\ In the instant investigation, 
as AFA, we have assigned to the PRC-wide entity the highest petition 
rate on the record of this proceeding that can be corroborated.\23\ The 
Department determines that this information is the most appropriate 
from the available sources to effectuate the purposes of AFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See e.g., Certain Cased Pencils from the People's Republic 
of China; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review and Intent to Rescind in Part, 70 FR 76755, 76761 (December 
28, 2005)(unchanged in Certain Cased Pencils from the People's 
Republic of China; Final Results and Partial Rescission of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 38366 (July 6, 2006) 
and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 10).
    \22\ See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Quality Steel Products from the People's 
Republic of China, 65 FR 34660 (May 21, 2000) and accompanying 
Issues and Decision Memorandum at ``Facts Available.''
    \23\ See Certain Steel Wheels From the People's Republic of 
China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 76 FR 23294 
(April 26, 2011)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Corroboration

    Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies 
on secondary information rather than on information obtained in the 
course of an investigation as FA, it must, to the extent practicable, 
corroborate that information from independent sources reasonably at its 
disposal. Secondary information is described as ``information derived 
from the petition that gave rise to the investigation or review, the 
final determination concerning merchandise subject to this 
investigation, or any previous review under section 751 concerning the 
merchandise subject to this investigation.'' \24\ To ``corroborate'' 
means that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary 
information to be used has probative value. Independent sources used to 
corroborate may include, for example, published price lists, official 
import statistics and customs data, and information obtained from 
interested parties during the particular investigation. To corroborate 
secondary information, the Department will, to the extent practicable, 
examine the reliability and relevance of the information used.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See SAA at 870.
    \25\ See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and 
Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or 
Less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, From Japan; 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and 
Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 57391, 57392 
(November 6, 1996) (unchanged in Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts 
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller 
Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and Components 
Thereof, From Japan; Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Reviews and Termination in Part, 62 FR 11825 (March 
13, 1997)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is the Department's practice to use the highest rate from the 
petition in an investigation when a respondent fails to act to the best 
of its ability to provide the necessary information.\26\ Consistent 
with our practice, for the final determination we find that the highest 
rate in the petition of 193.54 percent is appropriate for the PRC-wide 
entity.\27\ For the final determination, in accordance with section 
776(c) of the Act, we corroborated our AFA margin using information 
submitted by Jingu. Specifically, we compared the normal values and net 
U.S. prices we calculated for Jingu in the final determination to the 
normal value and net U.S. price underlying the calculation of the 
193.54 percent rate in the petition. We found that certain normal 
values we calculated for Jingu in this investigation were higher than 
or within the range of the normal value in the petition; we found that 
certain net U.S. prices we calculated for Jingu in this investigation 
were lower than or within the range of the U.S. price in the 
petition.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: 
Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Finland, 69 FR 77216 (December 
27, 2004) (unchanged in Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Purified Carboxymethylcellulose From Finland, 
70 FR 28279 (May 17, 2005)).
    \27\ See, Certain Steel Wheels From the People's Republic of 
China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 76 FR 23294 
(April 26, 2011) (``Initiation Notice'').
    \28\ See Jingu's Final Analysis Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, we find this rate is reliable and relevant, 
considering the record information, and thus, has probative value. 
Additionally, by using information that was corroborated in the pre-
initiation stage of this investigation and determining it to be 
relevant for the uncooperative respondent in this investigation, we 
have corroborated the AFA rate ``to the extent practicable'' as 
provided in section 776(c) of the Act.\29\ Therefore, with respect to 
the PRC-wide entity, for the final determination we have used, as AFA, 
the margin in the petition of 193.54 percent, as set forth in the 
notice of initiation. Given that numerous PRC-wide entities did not 
respond to the Department's requests for information, the Department 
concludes that the updated petition rate of 193.54 percent, as total 
AFA for the PRC-wide entity, is sufficiently adverse to prevent these 
respondents from benefitting from their lack of cooperation.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See also 19 CFR 351.308(d). See, e.g., Notice of 
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Postponement of Final Determination: Stainless Steel Bar From the 
United Kingdom, 66 FR 40192 (August 2, 2001) (unchanged in Notice of 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Stainless 
Steel Bar from the United Kingdom, 67 FR 3146 (January 23, 2002).
    \30\ See SAA at 870.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The PRC-wide rate applies to all entries of the merchandise under 
investigation except for entries from Centurion, Jingu, Shandong Land 
Star, Shandong Jining, Wuxi Superior, Xingmin Wheel, Xiamen Sunrise, 
Jiaxing Stone, Xiamen Topu and Dongfeng Motor, as they have 
demonstrated eligibility for a separate rate. These companies and their 
corresponding antidumping duty cash deposit rates are listed below in 
the ``Final Determination'' section of this notice.

Critical Circumstances

    In the Preliminary Determination, we determined that critical 
circumstances

[[Page 17025]]

do not exist for Jingu, separate rate respondents, or the PRC entity, 
but do exist with respect to imports from Centurion.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 67706-08.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Centurion, Jingu and the Separate Rate Respondents

    On November 8, 2011, the Department issued a request to Centurion 
and Jingu for further information regarding monthly shipments of 
subject merchandise for the purposes of a final determination of 
critical circumstances. On November 14, 2011, both Centurion and Jingu 
submitted the requested monthly shipment data. Based on the updated 
shipment data received from respondents, the Department continues to 
find that critical circumstances do not exist for Jingu or the separate 
rate respondents, but do exist with respect to imports from 
Centurion.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See Comment 6 of the Issues and Decision Memorandum; see 
also Memorandum from the Department entitled, ``Critical 
Circumstances Data and Calculations for the Final Determination,'' 
dated March 16, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRC-Wide Entity

    With respect to the Department's preliminary determination that 
critical circumstances do not exist with respect to imports from the 
PRC entity,\33\ we find that the Preliminary Determination was 
inconsistent with Department practice regarding this issue. Therefore, 
we have re-evaluated this issue for the final determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Preliminary Determination, 76 FR at 67708.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the PRC-wide entity did not cooperate with the Department 
by not responding to the Department's antidumping questionnaire, we 
were unable to obtain shipment data from the PRC-wide entity for 
purposes of our critical circumstances analysis, and thus there is no 
verifiable information on the record with respect to its export 
volumes. Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides that, if an interested 
party or any other person (A) withholds information that has been 
requested by the administering authority or the Commission under this 
title, (B) fails to provide such information by the deadlines for 
submission of the information or in the form and manner requested, 
subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782 of the Act, (C) 
significantly impedes a proceeding under the Act, or (D) provides such 
information but the information cannot be verified as provided in 
section 782(i) of the Act, the Department shall, subject to section 
782(d) of the Act, use the FA in reaching the applicable determination 
under this title.
    Furthermore, as noted in the Use of Facts Available and Adverse 
Facts Available section above, section 776(b) of the Act provides that, 
if a party has failed to act to the best of its ability, the Department 
may apply an adverse inference. The PRC-wide entity did not respond to 
the Department's request for information. Thus, we are using FA, in 
accordance with section 776(a) of the Act, and, pursuant to section 
776(b) of the Act, we also find that AFA is warranted because the PRC-
wide entity has not acted to the best of its ability in not responding 
to the request for information. Accordingly, as AFA we find that there 
were massive imports of merchandise from the PRC-wide entity.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods From the People's 
Republic of China: Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value, Affirmative Preliminary Determination of 
Critical Circumstances and Postponement of Final Determination, 74 
FR 59117, 59121 (November 17, 2009)(unchanged in Certain Oil Country 
Tubular Goods from the People's Republic of China: Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Affirmative Final 
Determination of Critical Circumstances and Final Determination of 
Targeted Dumping, 75 FR 20335 (April 19, 2010)); see also e.g., 
Drill Pipe From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative 
Determination of Critical Circumstances, and Postponement of Final 
Determination, 75 FR 51004, 51013 (August 18, 2010)(unchanged in 
Drill Pipe From the People's Republic of China: Final Determination 
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Critical Circumstances, 76 FR 
1966 (January 11, 2011); Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks From the 
People's Republic of China: Notice of Preliminary Affirmative 
Determination of Critical Circumstances, 75 FR 28237, 28239 (May 20, 
2010)(unchanged in Certain Magnesia Carbon Bricks From the People's 
Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value and Critical Circumstances, 75 FR 45468 (August 2, 2010)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Combination Rates

    In the Preliminary Determination, the Department stated that it 
would calculate combination rates for respondents that are eligible for 
a separate rate in this investigation.\35\ This practice is described 
in the Separate Rate Policy Bulletin.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See Preliminary Determination, 75 FR at 24905.
    \36\ See Memorandum entitled ``Separate-Rates Practice and 
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations 
involving Non-Market Economy Countries'' dated April 5, 2005, 
available at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Determination

    The simple-average dumping margin percentages are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
             Exporter                        Producer            margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zhejiang Jingu Company Limited....  Zhejiang Jingu Company         82.92
                                     Limited.
Shanghai Yata Industry Company      Zhejiang Jingu Company         82.92
 Limited.                            Limited.
Jining Centurion Wheels             Jining Centurion Wheels        44.96
 Manufacturing Co., Ltd.             Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
Shandong Land Star Import & Export  Shandong Shengtai Wheel        63.94
 Co., Ltd.                           Co., Ltd.
Shandong Jining Wheel Factory.....  Shandong Jining Wheel          63.94
                                     Factory.
Wuxi Superior Wheel Co., Ltd......  Wuxi Superior Wheel Co.,       63.94
                                     Ltd.
Shandong Xingmin Wheel Co. Ltd....  Shandong Xingmin Wheel         63.94
                                     Co. Ltd.
Xiamen Sunrise Wheel Group Co.,     Jining Centurion Wheels        63.94
 Ltd.                                Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
Jiaxing Stone Wheel Co., Ltd......  Jiaxing Stone Wheel Co.,       63.94
                                     Ltd.
Xiamen Topu Import & Export Co.,    Xiamen Sunrise Wheel           63.94
 Ltd.                                Group Co., Ltd.
Xiamen Topu Import & Export Co.,    Jining Centurion Wheels        63.94
 Ltd.                                Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
China Dongfeng Motor Industry Imp.  Dongfeng Automotive Wheel      63.94
 & Exp. Co., Ltd.                    Co., Ltd.
PRC-Wide Entity...................  .........................     193.54
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the 
date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we are 
directing U.S. Customs and Border Protection

[[Page 17026]]

(``CBP'') to continue to suspend liquidation of all imports of subject 
merchandise exported by Jingu or the separate rate respondents and 
entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the 
date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal 
Register. Further, in accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, 
we are directing CBP to continue to suspend liquidation of all imports 
of subject merchandise exported by Centurion on or after 90 days prior 
to the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the 
Federal Register. Additionally, because we have found critical 
circumstances exist with respect to the PRC-Entity, we are directing 
CBP to suspend liquidation of all imports of subject merchandise 
exported by the PRC-entity on or after 90 days prior to the date of 
publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register. 
We will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond 
equal to the weighted-average amount by which the normal value exceeds 
U.S. price, as follows: (1) The rates for the exporter/producer 
combinations listed in the chart above will be the rates we have 
determined in this final determination as listed in the chart; (2) for 
all PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their 
own rate, the cash-deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate; and (3) for 
all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received 
their own rate, the cash-deposit rate will be the rate applicable to 
the PRC exporter/producer combination that supplied that non-PRC 
exporter. These suspension-of-liquidation instructions will remain in 
effect until further notice.
    Additionally, as the Department has determined in its concurrent 
countervailing duty (``CVD'') steel wheels investigation that the 
merchandise under investigation exported by Zhejiang Jingu and Shanghai 
Yata benefitted from export subsidies,\37\ we will instruct CBP to 
require an antidumping cash deposit or posting of a bond equal to the 
amount by which the normal value exceeds the U.S. price for each of 
these companies, as indicated above, reduced by the respective amount 
determined to constitute export subsidies for each of these 
companies.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See Certain Steel Wheels From the People's Republic of 
China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, Final 
Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination and accompanying 
Issues and Decision Memorandum, dated concurrently with this notice 
(``CVD Final Determination'').
    \38\ See Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods From the People's 
Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value, Affirmative Final Determination of Critical Circumstances and 
Final Determination of Targeted Dumping, 75 FR 20335, 20341 (April 
19, 2010); see also e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value: Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 From India, 69 FR 
67306, 67307 (November 17, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to Shandong Xingmin Wheel Co. Ltd., a separate rate 
recipient in this case, but a mandatory respondent in the companion CVD 
investigation that was found to have benefitted from export subsidies, 
we will instruct CBP to require an antidumping cash deposit or posting 
of a bond equal to the amount by which the NV exceeds the U.S. price, 
as indicated above, reduced by the lesser of its own CVD export subsidy 
rate or the average of the CVD export subsidy rates applicable to the 
mandatory respondents, on which Shandong Xingmin Wheel Co. Ltd.'s 
dumping margin is based. For the other separate rate recipients \39\ in 
this case, excluding Shandong Xingmin Wheel Co. Ltd., who are receiving 
the All-Others rate in the CVD investigation, we will instruct CBP to 
require an antidumping cash deposit or posting of a bond equal to the 
amount by which the NV exceeds the U.S. price, as indicated above, 
reduced by the lesser of the average of the export subsidy rates 
determined in the CVD investigation or the average of the CVD export 
subsidy rates applicable to the mandatory respondents, on which the 
separate rate dumping margins are based.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ The Department notes that it is our practice to adjust the 
separate rate companies by the lesser of the export subsidy rate (or 
average thereof) applicable to the mandatory respondents from which 
the separate rate is calculated, or the All-Others export subsidy 
rate from the CVD case (with exception of Shandong Xingmin Wheel Co. 
Ltd., which has its own calculated export subsidy rate). See 
Galvanized Steel Wire From the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Postponement of Final Determination, 76 FR 68407, 68421 (November 4, 
2011).
    \40\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the 
International Trade Commission (``ITC'') of our final determination of 
sales at LTFV. As our final determination is affirmative, in accordance 
with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will, within 45 days, 
determine whether the domestic industry in the United States is 
materially injured or threatened with material injury, by reason of 
imports or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation of the 
subject merchandise. If the ITC determines that material injury or 
threat of material injury does not exist, the proceeding will be 
terminated and all securities posted will be refunded or canceled. If 
the ITC determines that such injury does exist, the Department will 
issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess antidumping 
duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered or withdrawn 
from warehouse for consumption on or after the effective date of the 
suspension of liquidation.

Notification Regarding APO

    This notice also serves as a reminder to the parties subject to 
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of return or 
destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order 
is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the 
terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
    This determination and notice are issued and published in 
accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: March 16, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I--List of Issues

Case Issues

Comment 1: Whether the Scope Should Exclude Off-Road/Non-DOT 
Specification Stamped Wheels.
Comment 2: Whether Double Remedies Arise From the Concurrent CVD 
Investigation.
Comment 3: Use of PT Prima Alloy's Financial Statement for Surrogate 
Financial Ratios.
Comment 4: Surrogate Value for Pallet Inputs.
Comment 5: Surrogate Value for Inland Freight.
Comment 6: Critical Circumstances.
Comment 7: Treatment of Administrative Expenses in Centurion's 
Indirect Selling Expense Calculation.
Comment 8: Hot-Rolled Steel Surrogate Value.
Comment 9: Corrections to Zhejiang Jingu's Databases.

[FR Doc. 2012-7047 Filed 3-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P