CIT Reconsiders ITA Zeroing in Korea Carbon Steel Flat Products AD Case

The Court of International Trade reconsidered its previous affirmance of the International Trade Administration’s use of zeroing methodology in the final results of the 2006-07 antidumping administrative review of certain corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products from Korea (A-580-816), and ordered the ITA to submit a second remand redetermination to address the issue of zeroing.

(In February 2011, CIT affirmed the ITA's use of zeroing in its final results of the administrative review at issue, but remanded the ITA's final results for other reasons, including the model-match methodology applied to Union Steel's merchandise. Subsequently, in March 2011, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in Dongbu Steel Co. v. United States, 635 F.3d 1363 (2011), that the final results of AD reviews must be remanded so the ITA can explain its inconsistent interpretations of definition of "dumping margin" given by 19 USC 1677(35) in investigations and administrative reviews (in investigations, the ITA provides offsets for negative dumping margins (i.e., does not use zeroing), but at the time of these final results, the ITA did not provide offsets in administrative reviews). Union Steel requested that CIT reconsider its affirmance of the use of zeroing in the final results in light of Dongbu.)

CIT Reconsiders Affirmance of Zeroing, Remands Zeroing Issue to ITA in Light of CAFC Ruling

CIT ruled that in light of CAFC’s subsequent ruling in Dongbu, CIT found that reconsideration of its previous affirmance was warranted. CIT said that, as it did not have before it a statutory construction by the ITA that is satisfactory under the reasoning of Dongbu, it set aside its previous affirmance and directed ITA to provide the explanation required by the CAFC's Dongbu decision. Therefore, CIT remanded for a second time for the ITA to reconsider its decision to apply the zeroing methodology, and either alter that decision or explain how the definition of "dumping margin" may permissibly be construed in one way with respect to the use of zeroing in administrative reviews (in a way that allows zeroing) and in another with respect to investigations (in a away that does not).

CIT also affirmed the remand redetermination with respect to the ITA’s modification of its model-match methodology used to calculate Union Steel’s AD rate.

(CIT Slip Op. 12-56, dated 04/25/12, Judge Stanceu)