SD

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C.  20549

FORM SD

SPECIALIZED DISCLOSURE REPORT

_______________________________________________________________________________

AMERICAN AXLE & MANUFACTURING HOLDINGS, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Delaware	1-14303	38-3161171
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)	(Commission File Number)	(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
One Dauch Drive, Detroit, Michigan		48211-1198
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)

David E. Barnes (313) 758-2000

(Name and telephone number, including area code, of the person to contact in connection with this report.)

_______________________________________________________________________________

Check the appropriate box to indicate the rule pursuant to which this form is being filed and provide the period to which the information in this form applies:

þ Rule 13p-1 under the Securities Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13p-1) for the reporting period from January 1 to December 31, 2016.

Section 1 - Conflict Minerals Disclosure

Item 1.01 - Conflict Minerals Disclosure and Report

Pursuant to Rule 13p-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, American Axle & Manufacturing Holdings, Inc. (the "Company" or "AAM") has determined that it is required to file a Conflict Minerals Report, which is filed as Exhibit 1.01 to this Specialized Report on Form SD. AAM's Conflict Minerals Report is also available on our website at https://www.aam.com/docs/default-source/suppliers-portal-documents/conflict-minerals/aam-conflict-minerals-policy.pdf?sfvrsn=2 .

Item 1.02 - Exhibit

A copy of the Company's Conflict Minerals Report for the period of January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016 is filed as Exhibit 1.01 hereto and is also available on our website at the address referenced in Item 1.01 above.

Section 2 - Exhibits

Item 2.01 - Exhibits

The following exhibit is filed as part of this report:

Exhibit 1.01 - Conflict Minerals Report for the period from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016 as required by Items 1.01 and 1.02 of this Form SD.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the duly authorized undersigned.

American Axle & Manufacturing Holdings, Inc.

(Registrant)

/s/ David E. Barnes	Date: May 24, 2017
Vice President & General Counsel

EX-1.01

Exhibit 1.01

AMERICAN AXLE & MANUFACTURING HOLDINGS, INC.

CONFLICT MINERALS REPORT

Year End December 31, 2016

Introduction

This report covers the period of January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016 and has been prepared pursuant to Rule 13p-1 (17CFR 240.13p-1) (the Rule) under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. The Rule imposes certain reporting requirements on SEC registrants whose manufactured products contain conflict minerals which are necessary to the functionality or production of their products. Conflict minerals are defined as cassiterite, columbite-tantalite, gold, wolframite, and their derivatives, which are limited to tin, tantalum, tungsten, and gold (3TG) that originated in the Democratic Republic of the Congo or an adjoining country.

American Axle & Manufacturing Holdings, Inc. and its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company” or “AAM”) is a Tier 1 supplier to the automotive industry. We manufacture, engineer, design and validate driveline and drivetrain systems and related components and chassis modules for light trucks, sport utility vehicles, passenger cars, crossover vehicles and commercial vehicles. Driveline and drivetrain systems include components that transfer power from the transmission and deliver it to the drive wheels. Our driveline, drivetrain and related products include axles, driveheads, chassis modules, driveshafts, power transfer units, transfer cases, chassis and steering components, transmission parts, electric drive systems, and metal-formed products. The AAM products that principally use 3TG generally include printed circuit boards and the components that go on those boards. Our business and products are more fully described in our public web site (AAM.com).

This report relates to the process undertaken by AAM with respect to its products that were manufactured or contracted to be manufactured during calendar year 2016 that may contain conflict minerals. The automotive industry supply chain is a high volume, complex and interdependent undertaking. As a result, we rely on our direct suppliers to provide us with information about the source of 3TG contained in their products and their downstream supplier products. The successful launch and continued manufacturing of a vehicle takes massive coordination and several years of planning. Most of the products sold by AAM are highly engineered mechanical devices subject to extreme tolerances and operating conditions. Changes to the direct material supply base are only conducted by a Tier 1 supplier after extensive research and qualification of the sub-supplier and detailed compliance with the vehicle manufacturer’s production part approval process.

On April 6, 2017 AAM closed the acquisition of Metaldyne Performance Group Inc. (“MPG”). As a supplier to AAM in 2016, MPG submitted a CMRT to AAM and has been included in the supplier data collected by AAM for 2016.

Reasonable Country of Origin Inquiry

Step 1: Management System.

A. Conflict Mineral Policy

• AAM’s Conflict Minerals Policy (Policy) can be found on AAM’s public website at AAM.com.

◦ The Policy states AAM will comply with the disclosure and reporting requirements of Section 1502 of the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, as well as the rules of the SEC promulgated under such Act.

◦ The Policy also requires AAM’s suppliers to engage in due diligence of their supply chain to understand and report the content of their parts supplied to AAM.

◦ The Policy is guided in part by AAM’s cultural values, in particular, integrity and “The Power of Doing What is Right.” Our industry is in a period of transition as our suppliers gather the necessary data. As this data becomes more complete, AAM intends to make sourcing decisions consistent with our cultural values.

B. Internal Management Structure

• Cross Functional Team

◦ A cross functional team including representatives from Global Procurement, Engineering, Finance, Legal, and Sales has supported supply chain due diligence.

◦ The purpose of the cross functional team is to ensure availability of resources necessary to support AAM’s supply chain due diligence process and meet the regulatory requirements applicable to AAM. The team monitors execution and effectiveness of AAM’s process and collaborates to promote compliance.

• Senior Leadership or Executive Level Awareness

◦ AAM’s Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary and CCO leads and oversees the team and provides periodic program updates to other senior management and to the Audit Committee and Board of Directors. These briefings include a summary of the information collected during the previous calendar year and actual and potential risks identified in the supply chain risk assessment.

C. Controls and Transparency Over The Mineral Supply Chain

• The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”) developed Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High Risk Areas, Third Edition 2016 (the “OECD Guidelines”). The OECD Guidelines encourage participation in industry-driven programs to establish a system of controls and transparency over the mineral supply chain which includes either a chain of custody or a traceability system.

◦ AAM is engaged and actively participates in the Original Equipment Suppliers Association (OESA). The OESA has established a focus group on conflict minerals and AAM is a participant.

◦ AAM also uses the iPoint Conflict Minerals Platform (iPCMP) which is promoted by the Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG) an organization comprised of membership from original equipment manufacturers and suppliers. This industry-driven group contributes financially to the Conflict Free Smelter Initiative (CFSI) which supports the certification of smelters and refiners to be validated as conflict free. AAM became a full member of the AIAG in 2014. Certification through the CFSI validates chain of custody and/or traceability of the minerals from the mine to the smelter. This is the primary methodology for a downstream supplier like AAM to engage with and have potential influence on the upstream supply base (smelters/refiners).

◦ AAM retained iPoint Data Management Services to collect, manage, aggregate and report conflict mineral data from suppliers for 2016. These services have enhanced consistency in data reporting across our suppliers and the application of standards consistent with other Tier 1 automotive parts suppliers.

◦ AAM adopted the Conflict Minerals Reporting Template (CMRT) Rev. 4.10 and higher for 2016 supplier reporting.

◦ AAM added conflict minerals specific questions to its Supplier Entry Form in January 2015 in an attempt to gather relevant information at the time a prospective supplier becomes a direct material supplier to AAM.

◦ AAM requested suppliers submit their AAM Supplier Number along with their CMRT for sorting the reliability of the supplier information provided.

◦ A contractual condition of doing business with AAM requires each supplier to represent to AAM that neither it nor any of its subcontractors, vendors, agents or other associated third parties will utilize child, slave, prisoner or any other form of forced or involuntary labor, or engage in abusive employment or corrupt business practices. At AAM’s request, the supplier must certify in writing its compliance with these standards. This contractual requirement is broad enough to allow AAM to resource for violations of AAM’s Conflict Minerals Policy.

D. Company Engagement With Supplier

• AAM established a supplier portal to strengthen AAM’s engagement with suppliers.

◦ The supplier portal is available at https://www.aam.com/suppliers

◦ The supplier portal provides compliance guidance and other conflict mineral specific documents (i.e. Policy, supplier response documentation, AAM expectation of supplier compliance, and general communication).

◦ AAM conducted its annual Supplier Day in the US in June 2016 during which the importance of timely and thorough compliance with due diligence requests was emphasized once again to suppliers.

◦ The retention of iPoint Data Management Services has brought additional resources to the data collection task and improved the amount and quality of the communication between AAM and its suppliers during the data collection process.

E. Grievance Mechanism

• The conflictminerals@aam.com mailbox is a mechanism available for any interested stakeholder to communicate their concerns/grievances regarding AAM’s conflict minerals process. Each supplier contacted is advised of the existence of this mailbox as a point of contact for questions or concerns. Other stakeholders are made aware of this mailbox as a result of previous CMR filings.

Step 2 Identify and Assess Risks

A. Identification of Suppliers and Point of Contact

• AAM has identified each of its direct material suppliers to whom payments were made in 2016. There were 703 direct material suppliers identified with 482 being in-scope.

• Suppliers whose 2016 annual spend was less than $10,000 totaled 90 and were considered “out of scope”. AAM determined that suppliers with such a low annual spend figure are a lower priority and available resources were placed instead on trying to achieve improved compliance from our more substantial direct material suppliers.

• AAM intercompany direct material suppliers were removed from the population as any material supplied to AAM would be purchased from the in-scope direct material suppliers already in the data base.

• Indirect, prototype, consignment, paper, plastic, and certain outside processing suppliers such as heat treating or machining were flagged as “out-of-scope” and removed from the population. AAM is confident that these out-of-scope suppliers did not use 3TG in products or material provided to AAM.

• Suppliers were requested to identify individual(s) responsible for providing conflict mineral information from their company.

• In-scope direct material suppliers were also sent a letter indicating that AAM would be utilizing iPoint throughout the entire process of collecting, reviewing, and processing all of AAM’s conflict minerals suppliers’ CMRTs.

• In-scope direct material suppliers were sent an initial supplier request letter and AAM’s 2016 Supplier Conflict Minerals Reporting Requirements from conflictminerals@aam.com. The reporting requirements were posted to www.aam.comin 2016. In-scope suppliers were also sent a separate, system-generated request to create a free iPoint account and respond to AAM’s request directly through the system.

• Non-responsive suppliers received follow up written requests from AAM in the form of reminders and past due notices both by way of email and through iPoint.

▪ The reminders were sent out every 2 weeks prior to January 2017.

▪ Beginning in January 2017, the past due notices were sent out on a weekly basis.

• In an attempt to determine where conflict minerals originated, AAM’s Reasonable Country of Origin Inquiry was made using an industry standard conflict minerals reporting template commonly referred to as the CMRT (an initiative of the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition® (EICC®) and The Global e-Sustainability Initiative (GeSi)). The CMRT was developed to provide a consistent means of reporting and to facilitate disclosure and communication of information regarding smelters that provide material to a company’s supply chain. The CMRT includes questions regarding a company’s conflict free policy, engagement with its direct suppliers, and a listing of the smelters the company and its suppliers use. In addition, the CMRT contains questions about the origin of conflict minerals included in their products, as well as supplier due diligence.

B.Assessment of Risk

• AAM utilized the services of iPoint in reviewing all the suppliers’ submissions.

• All emailed CMRTs were manually loaded by iPoint into their system to enable the automated review.

• iPoint automated review was conducted with the knowledge of the AIAG Guide for Responding to the Conflict Minerals Reporting Template (Fourth Edition - 2016) (the Guide). The iPoint system review AAM used was based on the following criteria:

▪ AAM did not accept any CMRT prior to revision 4.10.

▪ AAM required suppliers to provide a comment on how they determined that they use, or do not use, 3TG.

▪ The iPoint system incorporated a series of red flags. Red flags are a series of criteria conditions that if the supplier did not meet any or all of the conditions, then their CMRT was rejected and additional information was requested from the supplier. Suppliers were advised of a response due date of October 31, 2016. The cut-off date for all data collection for 2016 was February 28, 2017 to assure the inclusion of data provided by late responders.

▪ If questions arose regarding supplier submission or their CMRT was rejected through iPoint, AAM had further communication with the supplier for

clarification and understanding of their submission. Communication was by way of email or through the iPoint system.

• Of all the suppliers that have provided completed CMRTs to AAM, 45% of accepted responses indicate they have a conflict mineral policy in place.

C. Results

▪ Every direct material supplier as described in Step 2A was contacted. AAM received responses from 69% of the 482 in-scope suppliers that represent 93% of all direct material purchases during 2016. Based on the review standards, AAM accepted 61% of in-scope supplier responses representing 89% of the AAM annual spend for 2016. To date, AAM has determined that 58 of the 318 responses received from a supply base of 482 in-scope direct material suppliers are from suppliers that have purchased materials containing 3TG originating in the covered countries. Another 76 suppliers indicated that the origin of purchased materials containing 3TG was unknown.

Due Diligence

AAM began its due diligence when the first review of the submission by each individual in-scope direct material supplier was completed. The due diligence process conducted by AAM aligns with the OECD Guidelines.

Step 3: Responding to Identified Risks

• AAM responded to risks identified in the supplier responses as provided in the CMRT such as:

◦ Requested further information from suppliers that did not provide a completed CMRT or provided a CMRT with contradictory 3TG information.

◦ Required CMRT version 4.10 or higher.

◦ Confirmed the accuracy of identified smelters from suppliers that acknowledge supply 3TG.

◦ Utilized iPCMP to locate the supplier on the CFS or EICC-GeSI list and determine if certified as “conflict free.”

Step 4: Independent Third Party Audit of Due Diligence

• AAM does not have a direct relationship with 3TG smelters and refiners and does not perform or direct audits of these entities within our supply chain.

• AAM utilizes information from the Conflict Free Smelter Program (CFSP). The CFSP assesses and audits the activities, processes and systems used by the smelter to conclude whether the smelter is in conformance with the OECD Guidance and therefore certified conflict free. Through our participation in the AIAG, AAM supports the CFSI.

Smelter / Refiner Disclosures

Step 5: Report on Supply Chain Due Diligence

• Results

562 unique smelter names were identified by AAM’s suppliers. Of these, 244 (43%) are listed as conflict free. Fourteen (2%) have been identified and listed on the EICC-GeSI list, but have not yet been certified conflict free.

The final 304 (54%) identified smelters were unknown. Suppliers that submitted unknown smelters were notified that one or more of their smelters were not matched to the CFS or EICC-GeSI lists and that this should be corrected on future responses.

A large number of additional smelter names were provided by suppliers that could not be verified. These CMRT’s were rejected and a request was made that the suppliers review and consolidate their smelter listings before sending a revised CMRT.

It should also be noted that responses from our suppliers have been provided on a company-wide basis and not specific to a particular product, and therefore, we are unable to determine with specificity the smelters within our supply chain. Subject to this limitation, the list of smelters reported to AAM is attached to the AAM CMRT.

Risk Mitigation / Future Due Diligence

The due diligence process conducted by AAM aligns with the OECD Guidelines. Efforts will be made to determine the mine or location of origin with the greatest specificity possible given the limitations inherent in the supplier reporting system. There will be continued use of the review criteria applicable to all CMRTs submitted. We will continue our membership in the AIAG and utilize updated CMRT forms as they become available. AAM will continue its use of iPoint Data Management Systems to collect, manage, aggregate and report conflict minerals data from suppliers. These services enhance the consistency in data reporting across suppliers and apply standards consistent with other Tier 1 automotive parts suppliers.