No Request Is Required for Commerce to Engage in Standard Practice, Steel Exporter Argues at Trade Court

The Commerce Department failed to correctly apply quarterly cost methodology in an antidumping duty review of certain carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length (CTL) plate from Italy, exporter Officine Tecnosider said in a March 17 motion for judgment at the Court of International Trade (Officine Tecnosider v. U.S., CIT # 23-00001).

Commerce unlawfully deviated from its "clear and predictable" established practice of applying quarterly cost methodology without providing a reasonable explanation, Officine told the court. Commerce has established a practice of using quarterly cost methodology when a respondent's cost of manufacturing has changed by over 25% during the review period and the cost of manufacturing and net price are reasonably correlated, as was the case here, Officine said.

"This case is a classic example of an administrative agency deviating from its established practice without providing a reasonable explanation," which made its decision arbitrary, Officine said. Officine said it provided evidence to Commerce, including its entire slab purchase data; that its change in cost of manufacturing was significant; and that its prices were reasonably linked to those costs.

In the preliminary determination, Commerce found that the quarterly cost methodology was not warranted. When Officine challenged the decision in its case brief, Commerce faulted the company for making an "untimely request." Officine said that Commerce has an established practice that it cannot refuse and does not even require a request by a respondent. Commerce has explicitly stated that "there is no need for the respondent to request that the Department undertake such analysis," Officine said.

When Officine filed its complaint in January, it specifically argued that Commerce arbitrarily found that the company had failed to challenge the agency's decision to reject the quarterly methodology (see 2301250044).