Alleged Errors in Commerce Margin Methodology Didn't Affect Margin, Nucor Argues at CIT

Commerce's adjustment to the total manufacturing cost and scrap offsets in an antidumping duty administrative review on steel pipes and tubes from Korea cannot be argued at the Court of International Trade, defendant-intervenor Nucor Tubular Products said in an April 24 motion to dismiss two claims in HiSteel's complaint. Nucor argued that even if HiSteel is correct, the alleged calculation errors could not have affected the dumping margin, and so HiSteel has failed to allege any actual injury and the claims are not subject to the court's jurisdiction (HiSteel Co. v. U.S., CIT # 22-00142).

HiSteel is protesting the Commerce department's use of the Cohen's d test in its decision to use an "average-to-transaction" comparison of sales along with the department's cost of manufacturing and scrap offset (see 2206080062). HiSteel received a 10.24% weighted-average dumping margin in the final review.

In Commerce's final calculation of HiSteel's margin, it applied an adjustment to account for undervalued slitting charges from an affiliate. To implement this adjustment, Commerce created a "transactions-disregarded adjustment" field and effectively increased HiSteel's cost of manufacturing. Commerce also made an adjustment to account for scrap sold to an affiliate at an above-market rate and created a similar "scrap adjustment" field. In simulations, the inclusion of eitherthe "transactions-disregarded adjustment" or the scrap adjustment made no difference in the calculated margin, DOJ said. Though HiSteel alleged that Commerce's calculations were done incorrectly, its disagreement with that methodology "did not result in any actual, concrete harm" on which to base a claim, DOJ said.