Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From India and the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 7073-7081 [2016-02701]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 27 (Wednesday, February 10, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7073-7081]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02701]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-533-869, A-570-034]


Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From India and the 
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value 
Investigations

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

DATES: Effective date: February 3, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Bailey at (202) 482-0193 
(India) and Alex Rosen at (202) 482-7814 (PRC), AD/CVD Operations, 
Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street 
and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions

    On January 8, 2016, the Department of Commerce (Department) 
received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of certain 
new pneumatic off-the-road tires (off road tires) from the People's 
Republic of China (PRC) and India, filed in proper form on behalf of 
Titan Tire Corporation (Titan) and the United Steel, Paper and 
Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service 
Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC (USW) (collectively, 
Petitioners).\1\ The AD petitions were accompanied by three 
countervailing duty (CVD) petitions for the PRC, India and Sri 
Lanka.\2\ Petitioners are a domestic producer of off road tires and a 
recognized union, which represents the domestic industry engaged in the 
manufacture of off road tires in the United States.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on 
Imports of Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from India and 
the People's Republic of China and Countervailing Duties on Imports 
of Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from India, the People's 
Republic of China, and Sri Lanka, dated January 8, 2016 
(collectively, Petitions).
    \2\ Id.
    \3\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at I-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 12, 2016, the Department requested additional 
information and clarification of certain areas of the AD Petitions.\4\ 
Petitioners filed responses to

[[Page 7074]]

these requests on January 14, 2016,\5\ provided further information 
regarding India on January 19, 2016,\6\ and provided further 
clarification regarding scope on January 20, 2016.\7\ On January 21, 
2016, ATC Tires Private Ltd. and Alliance Tire Americas, Inc. 
(collectively, Alliance) provided comments on domestic industry support 
and requested that the Department poll the domestic industry with 
respect to the Petitions.\8\ On January 22, 2016, Petitioners provided 
a response to Alliance's comments on industry support and request for 
polling.\9\ Alliance provided additional comments on January 28, 
2016.\10\ On January 27, 2016, the Department determined to toll all 
deadlines four business days as a result of the Federal Government 
closure during snowstorm ``Jonas'', applicable to this initiation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See the following January 12, 2016, letters from the 
Department to Petitioners: ``Petition for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain New 
Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires from India and The People's Republic of 
China and Countervailing Duties on Imports from Sri Lanka: 
Supplemental Questions'' (General Issues Supplemental 
Questionnaire), ``Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties 
on Imports of Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from The 
People's Republic of China: Supplemental Questions,'' and ``Petition 
for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain New 
Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from India: Supplemental Questions.''
    \5\ See the following January 14, 2016, responses from 
Petitioners: ``Petitioners' Response to the Department's January 12, 
2016, Supplemental Questionnaire Regarding General Issues,'' 
(General Issues Supplement); ``Petitioners' Response to the 
Department's January 12, 2016 Supplemental Questions Regarding the 
Antidumping Petition on China (A-570-034),'' (PRC Supplemental 
Response); ``Petitioners' Response to the Department's January 12, 
2016 Supplemental Questions Regarding the Antidumping Duty Petition 
on India'' (First India Supplemental Response); and ``Scope 
Supplement to the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties 
on Imports of Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from India 
and the People's Republic of China and Countervailing Duties on 
Imports of Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from India, the 
People's Republic of China, and Sri Lanka'' (First Scope 
Supplement).
    \6\ See Petitioners' submission, ``Petitioners' Second 
Supplement to the Antidumping Duty Petition on India,'' dated 
January 19, 2016 (Second India Supplemental Response). We note that 
Petitioners' submission of the Second India Supplemental Response 
was unsolicited by the Department. For further information, see the 
Department's memorandum to the File, ``Petition for Initiation of 
Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road 
Tires from India: Conference Call with Counsel to Petitioners,'' 
dated January 22, 2016.
    \7\ See Petitioners' submission, ``Second Scope Supplement to 
the Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 
Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from India and the People's 
Republic of China and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain 
New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from India, the People's Republic 
of China, and Sri Lanka,'' dated January 20, 2016 (Second Scope 
Supplement).
    \8\ See letter from Alliance, ``Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-
Road Tires from India, the People's Republic of China and Sri Lanka: 
Comments on Industry Support,'' dated January 21, 2016 (Alliance 
Letter).
    \9\ See letter from Petitioners, ``Petitioners' Response to 
Alliance's Polling Request Regarding the Petitions for the 
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain New Pneumatic 
Off-the-Road Tires from India and the People's Republic of China and 
Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-
Road Tires from India, the People's Republic of China, and Sri 
Lanka,'' dated January 22, 2016 (``Petitioners' Response to Alliance 
Letter'').
    \10\ See letter from Alliance, ``Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-
Road Tires from India, the People's Republic of China and Sri Lanka: 
Reply Comments on Industry Support,'' dated January 21, 2016 
(``Alliance Letter II'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in the memorandum from the Acting Assistant Secretary 
for Enforcement and Compliance, the Department has exercised its 
discretion to toll all administrative deadlines due to the recent 
closure of the Federal Government. All deadlines in this segment of the 
proceeding have been extended by four business days. The revised 
deadline for the initiation of these AD investigations is now February 
3, 2016.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Memorandum to the Record from Ron Lorentzen, Acting A/S 
for Enforcement & Compliance, regarding ``Tolling of Administrative 
Deadlines As a Result of the Government Closure During Snowstorm 
Jonas,'' dated January 27, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), Petitioners alleged that imports of off road tires 
from India and the PRC 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, an industry in the United States. Also, 
consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are 
accompanied by information reasonably available to Petitioners 
supporting their allegations.
    The Department finds that Petitioners filed these Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because Petitioners are interested 
parties as defined in sections 771(9)(C) and (D) of the Act. The 
Department also finds that Petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry 
support with respect to the initiation of the AD investigations that 
Petitioners are requesting.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See the ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
Petitions'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Periods of Investigation

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), because the Petitions were filed 
on January 8, 2016, the period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 
2015, through December 31, 2015, for India and July 1, 2015, through 
December 31, 2015, for the PRC.

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is off road tires from 
India and the PRC. For a full description of the scope of these 
investigations, see the ``Scope of the Investigations'' in Appendix I 
of this notice. As explained in more detail in Appendix I, the scope of 
the PRC investigation is narrower than the scope of the investigation 
from India because the PRC investigation excludes any products covered 
by the existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders on Certain 
New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the PRC.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From the 
People's Republic of China: Notice of Amended Final Affirmative 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty 
Order, 73 FR 51624 (September 4, 2008) (A-570-912) and Certain New 
Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From the People's Republic of China: 
Countervailing Duty Order, 73 FR 51626 (September 4, 2008) (C-570-
913).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Scope of the Investigations

    During our review of the Petitions, the Department issued questions 
to, and received responses from, Petitioners pertaining to the proposed 
scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions would be an 
accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is 
seeking relief.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire and First and 
Second Scope Supplements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations,\15\ 
we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage (scope). The Department will consider all 
comments received from parties and, if necessary, will consult with 
parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations. If 
scope comments include factual information (see 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21)), 
all such factual information should be limited to public information. 
In order to facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, the 
Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments by 
5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Tuesday, February 23, 2016, 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 Friday, March 4, 2016, which is 10 calendar days after the 
initial comments deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 
27323 (May 19, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department requests that any factual information the parties 
consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted 
during this time 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 the

[[Page 7075]]

Department and request permission to submit the additional information. 
All such comments must be filed on the records of each of the 
concurrent AD and CVD investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\16\ An electronically 
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the 
time and date when it is due. Documents excepted 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, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by 
the applicable deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 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 the Department'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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires

    The Department requests comments from interested parties regarding 
the appropriate physical characteristics of off road tires to be 
reported in response to the Department's AD questionnaires. This 
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics 
of the subject merchandise in order to report the relevant factors and 
costs 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. Specifically, they may provide comments as to 
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product 
characteristics and (2) product-comparison criteria. We note that it is 
not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product-
comparison criteria. We base product-comparison criteria on meaningful 
commercial differences among products. In other words, although there 
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers 
to describe off road tires, it may be that only a select few product 
characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical 
characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the 
order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching 
products. Generally, the Department attempts to list the most important 
physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics 
last.
    In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in 
developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all comments must be 
filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on Tuesday, February 23, 2016, which is twenty 
calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal 
comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on Monday, February 29, 
2016.\17\ All comments and submissions to the Department must be filed 
electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the records of both 
the India and the PRC less-than-fair-value investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Where the deadline falls on a weekend/holiday, the 
appropriate date is the next business day. Because five days from 
February 23, 2016, is Sunday, February 28, 2016, the actual 
submission date is Monday, February 29, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    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, the Department 
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 the Department 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 the Department and 
the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product,\18\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a 
separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department'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.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \19\ 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 the 
Petitions).
    With regard to the domestic like product, Petitioners do not offer 
a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of 
the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted 
on the record, we have determined that off road tires constitute a 
single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in 
terms of that domestic like product.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from India (India AD 
Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain New 
Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from India, the People's Republic of 
China, and Sri Lanka (Attachment II); and Antidumping Duty 
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-
Road Tires from the People's Republic of China (PRC AD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are 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 Petitioners have standing under section 
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in

[[Page 7076]]

Appendix I of this notice. To establish industry support, Petitioners 
provided Titan's production of the domestic like product in 2015 and 
estimated the 2015 production for each remaining U.S. producer of off 
road tires, by plant. Petitioners based their estimates of 2015 off 
road tire production by plant on daily plant-specific production 
capacity data published in Modern Tire Dealer. Petitioners multiplied 
the daily production capacity data by 360 (to estimate annual capacity) 
and then multiplied the annual production capacity for each plant by 
Titan's capacity utilization rate, which Petitioners believe is 
representative of the U.S. off road tires industry (to estimate 
domestic production by each plant). To calculate industry support, 
Petitioners added Titan's 2015 production of the domestic like product 
to the estimated 2015 production of the domestic like product for those 
plants represented by the USW, and divided the result by the estimated 
production of the domestic like product in 2015 for the entire U.S. off 
road tires industry.\21\ We relied on data Petitioners provided for 
purposes of measuring industry support.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at I-5--I-9 and Exhibits I-
3--I-9 and I-33; see also General Issues Supplement, at 4-9 and 
Exhibits I-SQ-1, I-SQ-5--I-SQ-8.
    \22\ Id. For further discussion, see India AD Initiation 
Checklist and PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 21, 2016, we received comments on industry support from 
Alliance, an Indian producer of the subject merchandise and its U.S. 
importer.\23\ Petitioners responded to these comments on January 22, 
2016.\24\ Alliance submitted additional industry support comments on 
January 28, 2016.\25\ For further discussion of these comments, see the 
India AD Initiation Checklist and PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Alliance Letter.
    \24\ See Petitioners' Response to the Alliance Letter.
    \25\ See Alliance Letter II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, General Issues 
Supplement, letters from Alliance and Petitioners, and other 
information readily available to the Department indicates that 
Petitioners have established industry support.\26\ First, the Petitions 
established support from domestic producers and workers accounting for 
more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like 
product and, as such, the Department is not required to take further 
action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).\27\ 
Second, the domestic producers and workers have met the statutory 
criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act 
because the domestic producers and workers who support the Petitions 
account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic 
like product.\28\ Finally, the domestic producers and workers have met 
the statutory criteria for industry support under section 
732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers and workers 
who support the Petitions 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 Petitions.\29\ 
Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petitions were filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) 
of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See India AD Initiation Checklist and PRC AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \27\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also India AD 
Initiation Checklist and PRC AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment 
II.
    \28\ See India AD Initiation Checklist and PRC AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \29\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that Petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf 
of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as defined 
in sections 771(9)(C) and (D) of the Act and they have demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the AD investigations that 
they are requesting the Department initiate.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    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, with regard to India, 
Petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility 
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at I-27, I-28 and Exhibit I-
17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With regard to the PRC, Petitioners argue that the covered tires 
are entered under at least fifteen basket categories that do not permit 
the imports to be reliably quantified based on publicly available data. 
Accordingly, the data do not show whether imports from the PRC meet the 
statutory requirements for negligibility. However, Petitioners allege 
and provide supporting evidence that (1) there is a reasonable 
indication that data obtained in the ITC's investigation will establish 
that imports exceed the negligibility threshold,\32\ and (2) there is 
the potential that imports from the PRC will imminently exceed the 
negligibility threshold. Petitioners' arguments regarding the 
limitations of publicly available import data and the collection of 
scope-specific import data in the ITC's investigation are consistent 
with the SAA. Furthermore, Petitioners' arguments regarding the 
potential for imports from the PRC to imminently exceed the 
negligibility threshold are consistent with the statutory criteria for 
``negligibility in threat analysis'' under section 771(24)(A)(iv) of 
the Act, which provides that imports shall not be treated as negligible 
if there is a potential that subject imports from a country will 
imminently exceed the statutory requirements for negligibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See Statement of Administrative Action (SAA), H.R. Doc. No. 
103-316, Vol. 1, (1994), at 857; see also Volume I of the Petitions, 
at I-29--I-34 and Exhibits I-17--I-21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; decline in shipments, production, 
and capacity utilization; underselling and price suppression or 
depression; reduced employment variables; lost sales and revenues; and 
decline in financial performance.\33\ 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.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at I-18--I-22, I-24--I-61 
and Exhibits I-14, I-15, I-17--I-37; see also General Issues 
Supplement, at 1-3 and Exhibits I-SQ-1 and I-SQ-4.
    \34\ See India AD Initiation Checklist and PRC AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence 
of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain New Pneumatic Off-
the-Road Tires from India, the People's Republic of China, and Sri 
Lanka.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 the Department based its decision to 
initiate investigations of imports of off road tires from India and the 
PRC. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to 
U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the country-
specific initiation checklists.

Export Price

India

    For India, Petitioners based U.S. prices on price quotes to 
customers in the United States for off road tires

[[Page 7077]]

produced in, and exported from, India by both Alliance Tire Group and 
Balkrishna Industries Limited (BKT).\35\ Petitioners made deductions 
from U.S. price for movement expenses.\36\ Petitioners also deducted 
from U.S. price brokerage and handling expenses.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See India AD Initiation Checklist; see also Volume IV of 
the Petitions, at IV-2; and First India Supplemental Response at IV-
SQ-1 and Exhibit IV-SQ-1.
    \36\ See India AD Initiation Checklist; see also Volume IV of 
the Petitions, at IV-2 and IV-3 and Exhibit IV-3; and First India 
Supplemental Response at Exhibit IV-SQ-2.
    \37\ See India AD Initiation Checklist; see also Volume IV of 
the Petitions, at IV-3 and Exhibit IV-4; and First India 
Supplemental Response at IV-SQ-1 and Exhibit IV-SQ-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRC

    Petitioners based U.S. price on an export price (EP) derived from 
import data for wheel and tire assemblies (i.e., tires mounted on 
wheels) of farm wagons and carts classified under Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule sub-heading 8716.9010.20 as obtained from the ITC's Trade 
DataWeb.\38\ Because these data were for wheel and tire assemblies, in 
order to derive a comparison U.S. price for tires only, Petitioners 
selected four Titan (i.e., one of the petitioning entities) models of 
tires sold in assembilies that are most similar to those PRC tires that 
were imported as part of assemblies under HTS 8716.9010.20. Using 
Titan's actual sales of these assemblies during the POI, Petitioners 
calculated ratios for both the portion of weight attributable to the 
tires and the portion of the per-kilogram price attributable to tires 
in these four assemblies.\39\ After deducting unrebated export tax and 
foreign brokerage and handling from the HTS 8716.9010.20 import data to 
determine the EP for assembilies,\40\ Petitioners applied the 
calculated ratios to the adjusted U.S. price for assemblies in order to 
derive a comparison U.S. price for tires only.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See Volume II of the Petitions, at II-2 through II-4, 
Exhibits II-2, II-2(A), II-2(C); PRC Supplemental Response at 3, 
Exhibits II-SQ-9, and II-SQ-10.
    \39\ See PRC Supplemental Response at 2, Exhibits II-SQ-3 and 
II-SQ-4.
    \40\ Petitioners stated they conservatively did not include an 
adjustment for inland freight from the factory to the port because 
information regarding the location of the companies exporting the 
farm wagon and cart wheel and tire assemblies was not reasonably 
available.
    \41\ See Volume II of the Petitions Exhibit II-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, Petitioners obtained 13 free-on-board (FOB) PRC prices 
from publicly-available internet sources of certain subject wheel and 
tire assemblies.\42\ Similarly, Petitioners matched each product in the 
internet price quotes with Titan assembly sales that included a tire 
that was closest in size to the model in the internet price quote and 
calculated ratios for price and weight attributable to tires based on 
Titan's assembly sales.\43\ After deducting unrebated export tax, 
foreign brokerage and handling, and inland freight from the factory to 
the port of export,\44\ Petitioners applied the calculated ratios to 
the adjusted price quotes of assemblies in order to derive comparison 
U.S. prices for tires only.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ Id., at II-4, Exhibits II-1, II-2, II-2(G).
    \43\ Id., at II-4, Exhibits II-1, II-2, II-2(B), II-2(G); PRC 
Supplemental Response at 2, Exhibits II-SQ-3, II-SQ-4, II-SQ-11.
    \44\ See Volume II of the Petitions at Exhibit II-2, II-2(H), 
II-9(J), B), II-2(F), II-9(G), II-9(H); PRC Supplemental Response at 
4, Exhibits II-SQ-7, II-SQ-8.
    \45\ See Volume II of the Petitions at Exhibits II-2, II-2(B), 
II-2(D), PRC Supplemental Response at 2, Exhibits II-SQ-3, II-SQ-4, 
II-SQ-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners valued foreign brokerage and handling and foreign 
inland truck freight based on data reported in the Doing Business 2016: 
Thailand.[hairsp]\46\ The Department corrected for a conversion error 
in the calculation of per kilogram per kilometer truck freight as 
submitted by Petitioners.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See Volume II of the Petitions at Exhibit II-9, II-9(G), 
II-9(H), PRC Supplemental Response at 4, Exhibits II-SQ-7 and II-SQ-
8.
    \47\ See PRC AD Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

India

    For India, Petitioners asserted that they were unable to obtain 
pricing data for off road tires sold in the home or third country 
markets.\48\ Consequently, pursuant to section 773(a)(4) of the Act, 
Petitioners relied on constructed value (CV) as the basis for NV.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See Volume IV of the Petitions, at IV-4 and First India 
Supplement Responseat IV-SQ-2 and IV-SQ-3.
    \49\ In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade Preferences 
Extension Act of 2015, amending section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for 
the India investigation, the Department will request information 
necessary to calculate the CV and cost of production (COP) to 
determine whether there are reasonable grounds to believe or suspect 
that sales of the foreign like product have been made at prices that 
represent less than the COP of the product. The Department no longer 
requires a COP allegation to conduct this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value Based on Constructed Value
    Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the cost of 
manufacturing (COM); selling, general, and administrative (SG&A) 
expenses; financial expenses; packing expenses, and profit. Petitioners 
calculated COM based on a U.S. producer's experience adjusted for known 
differences between the industry in the United States and the industry 
in India during the proposed POI.\50\ Using publicly available data to 
account for price differences, Petitioners multiplied the U.S. 
producer's usage quantities by the submitted value of the inputs used 
to manufacture off road tires in India.\51\ The U.S. producer's labor 
cost was adjusted to reflect the experience of BKT, an Indian producer 
of off road tires, based on BKT's March 31, 2015 audited financial 
statements. To determine fixed overhead (including energy and packing 
material costs), SG&A, financial expenses, and profit, Petitioners 
again relied on BKT's March 31, 2015, financial statements.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See India AD Initiation Checklist.
    \51\ Id.
    \52\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRC

    With respect to the PRC, Petitioners stated that the Department has 
found the PRC to be a non-market economy (NME) country in every 
administrative proceeding in which the PRC has been involved.\53\ In 
accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the presumption of 
NME status remains in effect until revoked by the Department. The 
presumption of NME status for the PRC has not been revoked by the 
Department and, therefore, remains in effect for purposes of the 
initiation of this investigation. Accordingly, the NV of the product is 
appropriately based on factors of production (FOPs) valued in a 
surrogate market economy country, in accordance with section 773(c) of 
the Act. In the course of this investigation, all parties, and the 
public, will have the opportunity to provide relevant information 
related to the issues of the PRC's NME status and the granting of 
separate rates to individual exporters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ See Volume II of the Petitions, at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Petitioners claim that Thailand is an appropriate surrogate country 
because it is a market economy that is at a level of economic 
development comparable to that of the PRC and it is a significant 
producer of the merchandise under consideration.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ Id., at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the information provided by Petitioners, we believe it is 
appropriate to use Thailand as a surrogate country for initiation 
purposes. 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.

[[Page 7078]]

Factors of Production
    Petitioners based the FOPs for materials and labor on Titan's 
consumption rates for producing off road tires.\55\ Petitioners note 
that Titan's production process is comparable to that of producers of 
mounted off road tires in the PRC.\56\ Petitioners valued the estimated 
factors of production using surrogate values from Thailand.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ See Volume II of the Petitions, at II-9, Exhibits II-2(C) 
and II-2(D), PRC Supplemental Response at 2, Exhibits II-SQ-12 
through II-SQ-14.
    \56\ See PRC Supplemental Response at 1 and Exhibit II-SQ-1.
    \57\ See Volume II of the Petitions at II-5 through II-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valuation of Raw Materials
    For direct materials, Petitioners valued certain rubber components 
based on the daily prices of natural rubber published by the Rubber 
Research Institute of Thailand from July 1, 2015, to December 31, 2015 
and other inputs based on publicly-available data for Thai imports 
obtained from the Global Trade Atlas (GTA) for the period covering June 
2015 through November 2015, the most POI-contemporaneous data available 
at the time the Petition was filed.\58\ Petitioners excluded all import 
values from countries previously determined by the Department to 
maintain broadly available, non-industry-specific export subsidies and 
from countries previously determined by the Department to be NME 
countries. In addition, in accordance with the Department's practice, 
the average import value excludes imports that were labeled as 
originating from an unidentified country. The Department determines 
that the surrogate values used by Petitioners are reasonably available 
and, thus, are acceptable for purposes of initiation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ Per the Department's instruction, Petitioners used the 
surrogate values using the GTA trade data for the most recent six-
month period (i.e., June-November 2015) because the trade data for 
December 2015 is not available; see PRC Supplemental Response at 3, 
Exhibits II-SQ-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valuation of Labor
    Petitioners valued labor using quarterly Thai labor data published 
by Thailand's National Statistics Office (NSO).\59\ Specifically, 
Petitioners relied on data pertaining to wages and benefits earned by 
Thai workers engaged in the manufacturing sector of the Thai economy. 
Petitioners converted the wage rates to hourly and converted to U.S. 
Dollars using the average exchange rate during the POI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ See Volume II of the Petitions at Exhibit II-9(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valuation of Energy, Factory Overhead, Selling, General and 
Administrative Expenses (SG&A), and Profit
    Petitioners calculated surrogate financial ratios (i.e., factory 
overhead (including energy), SG&A expenses, and profit) using the 
audited financial statements of S. R. Tyres Co., Ltd., Hihero Co., 
Ltd., and Hwa Fong Rubber, as used in the 2013-2014 administrative 
review of the existing antidumping order on new pneumatic off-the-road 
tires from the PRC.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ Id., at Exhibits II-9(L).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by Petitioners, there is reason to 
believe that imports of off road tires from India and the PRC are 
being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less-than-
fair-value. Based on comparisons of EP to CV in accordance with 
sections 772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for off 
road tires from India range from 10.77 to 76.45 percent.\61\ Based on 
comparisons of EP to NV, in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act, 
the estimated dumping margins for off road tires from the PRC range 
from 11.20 to 77.69 percent.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ See India AD Initiation Checklist.
    \62\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the AD Petitions on off road tires 
from India and the PRC, we find that the Petitions meet the 
requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD 
investigations to determine whether imports of off road tires from 
India and the PRC 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 determinations no later than 140 days after the date of 
this initiation.
    On June 29, 2015, the President of the United States signed into 
law the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, which made numerous 
amendments to the AD and CVD law.\63\ The 2015 law does not specify 
dates of application for those amendments. On August 6, 2015, the 
Department published an interpretative rule, in which it announced the 
applicability dates for each amendment to the Act, except for 
amendments contained in section 771(7) of the Act, which relate to 
determinations of material injury by the ITC.\64\ The amendments to 
sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are applicable to all 
determinations made on or after August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply 
to these AD investigations.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Pub. L. 114-
27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
    \64\ See Dates of Application of Amendments to the Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Laws Made by the Trade Preferences Extension 
Act of 2015, 80 FR 46793 (August 6, 2015) (Applicability Notice).
    \65\ Id., at 46794-95. The 2015 amendments may be found at 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Respondent Selection

    Petitioners named six companies from India as producers/exporters 
of subject off road tires.\66\ Following standard practice in AD 
investigations involving market economy countries, for the India AD 
case, the Department intends to select respondents based on U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports under the 
appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') 
numbers listed in the ``Scope of the Investigation'' section above. We 
intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order 
(APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO within 
five business days of publication of this Federal Register notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties wishing to comment regarding the CBP data and/or 
respondent selection for India must do so within seven calendar days 
after the placement of the CBP data on the record of this 
investigation. Parties wishing to submit rebuttal comments should 
submit those comments five calendar days after the deadline for the 
initial comments. An electronically-filed document must be received 
successfully in its entirety by the Department's electronic records 
system, ACCESS, by 5:00 p.m. ET by the date noted above. We intend to 
make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20 days of 
publication of this notice.
    With respect to the PRC, Petitioners named 124 companies as 
producers/exporters of off road tires.\67\ In accordance with our 
standard practice for respondent selection in cases involving NME 
countries, we intend to issue quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires 
to producers/exporters of merchandise subject to this investigation 
\68\ and base respondent selection on the responses received,

[[Page 7079]]

ensuring that potential overlap with products covered by the existing 
AD and CVD orders is eliminated. In addition, the Department will post 
the Q&V questionnaire along with filing instructions on the Enforcement 
and Compliance Web site at https://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ See Volume I of the Petition at I-15 and Exhibit I-12; see 
also PRC Supplemental Response at 2 and Exhibit II-SQ-2.
    \68\ See Appendix I, ``Scope of the Investigations'', which for 
the PRC, excludes products covered by the existing antidumping and 
countervailing duty orders on Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road 
Tires from the People's Republic of China.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Exporters/producers of off road tires from the PRC that do not 
receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response to the 
Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy from the Enforcement and 
Compliance Web site. The Department will establish an exact deadline by 
which Q&V responses must be submitted in the questionnaire itself, as 
subsequently released to potential respondents and posted to the 
Enforcement and Compliance Web site. 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.\69\ 
The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application in 
the PRC investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself, 
which is available on the Department's Web site at https://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/nme-sep-rate.html. The separate-rate 
application will be due 30 days after publication of this initiation 
notice.\70\ 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 the Department's AD questionnaire as mandatory 
respondents. The Department requires that respondents from the PRC 
submit a response to both the Q&V questionnaire and the separate-rate 
application by their respective deadlines in order to receive 
consideration for separate-rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ 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 
https://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf (Policy Bulletin 
05.1).
    \70\ 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

    The Department 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.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been 
provided to the governments of India and the PRC via ACCESS. To the 
extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public 
version of the Petitions 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 
732(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determinations by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of off road tires from India and the PRC are 
materially injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. 
industry.\72\ A negative ITC determination for any country will result 
in the investigation being terminated with respect to that country; 
\73\ otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to 
statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \72\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \73\ 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 the Department; and (v) evidence other than 
factual information described in (i)-(iv). Any party, when submitting 
factual information, must specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 
351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted \74\ 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.\75\ 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. Please review the regulations prior to 
submitting factual information in these investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \74\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \75\ 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, 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 expires. 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. Review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 
57790 (September 20, 2013), available at https:// 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.\76\ 
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are 
in effect for company/government officials, as

[[Page 7080]]

well as their representatives. Investigations initiated on the basis of 
petitions filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any 
AD or CVD proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use 
the formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the 
Final Rule.\77\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if 
the submitting party does not comply with applicable revised 
certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \76\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \77\ 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 
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

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

    Dated: February 3, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigations

    The scope of these investigations is certain new pneumatic off-
the-road tires (certain off road tires). Certain off road tires are 
tires with an off road tire size designation. The tires included in 
the scope may be either tube-type \78\ or tubeless, radial, or non-
radial, regardless of whether for original equipment manufacturers 
or the replacement market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \78\ While tube-type tires are subject to the scope of these 
proceedings, tubes and flaps are not subject merchandise and 
therefore are not covered by the scope of these proceedings, 
regardless of the manner in which they are sold (e.g., sold with or 
separately from subject merchandise).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subject tires may have the following prefix or suffix 
designation, which appears on the sidewall of the tire:
    Prefix designations:
    DH--Identifies a tire intended for agricultural and logging 
service which must be mounted on a DH drop center rim.
    VA--Identifies a tire intended for agricultural and logging 
service which must be mounted on a VA multipiece rim.
    IF--Identifies an agricultural tire to operate at 20 percent 
higher rated load than standard metric tires at the same inflation 
pressure.
    VF--Identifies an agricultural tire to operate at 40 percent 
higher rated load than standard metric tires at the same inflation 
pressure.
    Suffix designations:
    ML--Mining and logging tires used in intermittent highway 
service.
    DT--Tires primarily designed for sand and paver service.
    NHS--Not for Highway Service.
    TG--Tractor Grader, off-the-road tire for use on rims having 
bead seats with nominal +0.188'' diameter (not for highway service).
    K--Compactor tire for use on 5[deg] drop center or semi-drop 
center rims having bead seats with nominal minus 0.032 diameter.
    IND--Drive wheel tractor tire used in industrial service.
    SL--Service limited to agricultural usage.
    FI--Implement tire for agricultural towed highway service.
    CFO--Cyclic Field Operation.
    SS--Differentiates tires for off-highway vehicles such as mini 
and skid-steer loaders from other tires which use similar size 
designations such as 7.00-15TR and 7.00-15NHS, but may use different 
rim bead seat configurations.
    All tires marked with any of the prefixes or suffixes listed 
above in their sidewall markings are covered by the scope regardless 
of their intended use.
    In addition, all tires that lack any of the prefixes or suffixes 
listed above in their sidewall markings are included in the scope, 
regardless of their intended use, as long as the tire is of a size 
that is among the numerical size designations listed in the 
following sections of the Tire and Rim Association Year Book, as 
updated annually, unless the tire falls within one of the specific 
exclusions set forth below. The sections of the Tire and Rim 
Association Year Book listing numerical size designations of covered 
certain off road tires include:
    The table of mining and logging tires included in the section on 
Truck-Bus tires;
    The entire section on Off-the-Road tires;
    The entire section on Agricultural tires; and
    The following tables in the section on Industrial/ATV/Special 
Trailer tires:
     Industrial, Mining, Counterbalanced Lift Truck (Smooth 
Floors Only);
     Industrial and Mining (Other than Smooth Floors);
     Construction Equipment;
     Off-the-Road and Counterbalanced Lift Truck (Smooth 
Floors Only);
     Aerial Lift and Mobile Crane; and
     Utility Vehicle and Lawn and Garden Tractor.
    Certain off road tires, whether or not mounted on wheels or 
rims, are included in the scope. However, if a subject tire is 
imported mounted on a wheel or rim, only the tire is covered by the 
scope. Subject merchandise includes certain off road tires produced 
in the subject countries whether mounted on wheels or rims in a 
subject country or in a third country. Certain off road tires are 
covered whether or not they are accompanied by other parts, e.g., a 
wheel, rim, axle parts, bolts, nuts, etc. Certain off road tires 
that enter attached to a vehicle are not covered by the scope.
    Excluded from the scope of these investigations are any products 
covered by the existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders 
on Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the People's 
Republic of China. See Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires From 
the People's Republic of China: Notice of Amended Final Affirmative 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty 
Order, 73 FR 51624 (September 4, 2008); Certain New Pneumatic Off-
the-Road Tires From the People's Republic of China: Countervailing 
Duty Order, 73 FR 51627 (September 4, 2008).\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \79\ In these prior investigations, the Department found that 
imports of off road tires mounted on wheels were not within the 
scope of subject merchandise. See Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road 
Tires from the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Partial 
Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 40485 
(July 15, 2008) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at 
Comment 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, specifically excluded from the scope are passenger 
vehicle and light truck tires, racing tires, mobile home tires, 
motorcycle tires, all-terrain vehicle tires, bicycle tires, on-road 
or on-highway trailer tires, and truck and bus tires. Such tires 
generally have in common that the symbol ``DOT'' must appear on the 
sidewall, certifying that the tire conforms to applicable motor 
vehicle safety standards. Such excluded tires may also have the 
following prefixes and suffixes included as part of the size 
designation on their sidewalls:
    Prefix letter designations:
    AT--Identifies a tire intended for service on All-Terrain 
Vehicles;
    P--Identifies a tire intended primarily for service on passenger 
cars;
    LT--Identifies a tire intended primarily for service on light 
trucks;
    T--Identifies a tire intended for one-position ``temporary use'' 
as a spare only; and
    ST--Identifies a special tire for trailers in highway service.
    Suffix letter designations:
    TR--Identifies a tire for service on trucks, buses, and other 
vehicles with rims having specified rim diameter of nominal plus 
0.156'' or plus 0.250'' ;
    MH--Identifies tires for Mobile Homes;
    HC--Identifies a heavy duty tire designated for use on ``HC'' 
15'' tapered rims used on trucks, buses, and other vehicles. This 
suffix is intended to differentiate among tires for light trucks, 
and other vehicles or other services, which use a similar 
designation.
    Example: 8R17.5 LT, 8R17.5 HC.
    LT--Identifies light truck tires for service on trucks, buses, 
trailers, and multipurpose passenger vehicles used in nominal 
highway service;
    ST--Special tires for trailers in highway service; and
    M/C--Identifies tires and rims for motorcycles.
    The following types of tires are also excluded from the scope: 
Pneumatic tires that are not new, including recycled or retreaded 
tires and used tires; non-pneumatic tires, including solid rubber 
tires; aircraft

[[Page 7081]]

tires; and turf, lawn and garden, and golf tires. Also excluded from 
the scope are mining and construction tires that have a rim diameter 
equal to or exceeding 39 inches. Such tires may be distinguished 
from other tires of similar size by the number of plies that the 
construction and mining tires contain (minimum of 16) and the weight 
of such tires (minimum 1500 pounds).
    The subject merchandise is currently classifiable under 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 
4011.20.1025, 4011.20.1035, 4011.20.5030, 4011.20.5050, 
4011.61.0000, 4011.62.0000, 4011.63.0000, 4011.69.0050, 
4011.92.0000, 4011.93.4000, 4011.93.8000, 4011.94.4000, 
4011.94.8000, 8431.49.9038, 8431.49.9090, 8709.90.0020, and 
8716.90.1020. Tires meeting the scope description may also enter 
under the following HTSUS subheadings: 4011.99.4550, 4011.99.8550, 
8424.90.9080, 8431.20.0000, 8431.39.0010, 8431.49.1090, 
8431.49.9030, 8432.90.0005, 8432.90.0015, 8432.90.0030, 
8432.90.0080, 8433.90.5010, 8503.00.9560, 8708.70.0500, 
8708.70.2500, 8708.70.4530, 8716.90.5035 and 8716.90.5055. While 
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, 
the written description of the subject merchandise is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2016-02701 Filed 2-9-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P