US, Trade Coalition Support Commerce's Model Match Method Switch in SAP Case

The U.S. and domestic producers of superabsorbent polymers Nov. 12 both supported the Commerce Department's redetermination on remand that switched back to its preliminary determination’s method of model matching in a highly technical case (see 2406170034) (The Ad Hoc Coalition of American SAP Producers v. United States, CIT # 23-00010).

Producers in The Ad Hoc Coalition of American SAP Producers brought their suit arguing that the model matching hierarchy the department originally relied on to reach its final antidumping investigation determination, the one proposed by exporter LG Chem, gave the exporter an unfair benefit (see 2307170007). The Court of International Trade took issue, too, remanding the determination in March so Commerce could either change course or justify its decision with sufficient evidence and address the coalition’s claims (see 2403080064).

The parties agreed that SAP products’ primary characteristic is their ability to hold liquid, measured in grams of saline solution retained per gram of SAP (g/g). To select control numbers, or CONNUMs, for the SAP products, LG Chem successfully requested the department consider two other product characteristics, permeability and absorbency under pressure, as well as a narrower 4 g/g increment rather than the then-standing 6 g/g increment.

In its preliminary determination, Commerce relied only on the liquid retention characteristic -- it split LG Chem’s entries into three categories: products that could retain less than 30g/g, 30-36 g/g and more than 36 g/g of liquid. But when it switched to LG Chem’s preferred methodology in its final determination, the exporter’s AD rate dropped from 28.74% to 17.64%

With its redetermination on remand, LG Chem’s AD jumped back up to 26.05%, and Commerce switched back to only looking at the liquid retention characteristic.

LG Chem said in an August brief opposing the remand redetermination that the department had failed to sufficiently explain the change (see 2408290042). It argued that Commerce “simply stated” that CIT itself found that “evidence demonstrates that [these increments] have no commercial significance or utility,” even though it should be Commerce, not the court, making that determination.

But, on remand, the department ruled that there was no commercially significant difference between the CONNUMs resulting from LG Chem’s proposed model match methodology and the coalition’s, The Ad Hoc Coalition said.

And the government, too, claimed in its brief that “Commerce revisited parties’ comments on the record and found that the evidence demonstrated that SAP product differences were driven by customer preference, thus supporting a finding that [liquid retention] is the only commercially meaningful characteristic.”

The exporter also said that “the entirety of the record evidence supporting Commerce’s reversion” was “contained in a single paragraph.” But this wasn’t true, either, the U.S. and coalition said. The domestic producers said that the change was based on “substantial” evidence that included “certified comments and product brochures.”

The department also looked to cost data when categorized using the two different increments and discovered a preference for the 6 g/g increment categories, it said.

LG Chem finally argued that Commerce failed to follow the court’s instruction because it didn’t address the coalition's claim that LG Chem’s method created “a significant risk of manipulation.” But the department didn’t need to, The Ad Hoc Coalition said -- that risk of manipulation had vanished when Commerce chose to use the coalition’s method instead.