Outokumpu Copper Strip, B v. v. United States

15 F. Supp. 2d 806, 22 Ct. Int'l Trade 604, 22 C.I.T. 604, 20 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 1698, 1998 Ct. Intl. Trade LEXIS 77

• Court: United States Court of International Trade
• Decided: June 23, 1998
• Docket: Slip Op. 98-85. Court No. 97-07-01155
• Status: Published

Opinion

OPINION AND ORDER

DiCARLO, Senior Judge.

This action is a result of the third administrative review of an antidumping order published in Brass Sheet and Strip from the Netherlands, 53 Fed.Reg. 30,455 (Dep’t Comm.1988) (antidumping duty order). The period of review was August 1, 1990 to July 31, 1991. The final results contained ministerial errors that affected the final dumping margin for the period of review. See Brass Sheet and Strip from the Netherlands, 61 Fed.Reg. 1,324 (Dep’t Comm.1996) (final admin. review) [hereinafter Final Results ]. In a related case filed by the current defendant-intervenors, the court authorized Commerce to correct those errors. Aug. 1, 1996 Order, Hussey Copper, Ltd. v. United States, Ct. No. 96-02-00578 (Ct. Int’l Trade dismissed Aug. 7, 1997). Commerce then issued amended final results. Brass Sheet and Strip from the Netherlands, 62 Fed.Reg. 33,-395 (Dep’t Comm.1997) (amendment of final admin, review) [hereinafter Amended Final Results ].

Plaintiff charges that in addition to correcting the ministerial errors identified in the court’s order, Commerce’s Amended Final Results adopted an unauthorized change in methodology. The U.S. sales database used to calculate the dumping margin in the original Final Results included all entries made during the period of review, regardless of sale date. The Amended Final Results excluded entries sold before the period of review. The Amended Final Results also excluded one exporter’s sales price transaction. These changes reduced the number of transactions included in the database from 391 to 150, increasing the margin of dumping from 2.03% to 5.85%.

Defendant states that the changes were inadvertent, and agrees that the U.S. sales database should include the omitted sales. It asks that the ease be remanded to Commerce to reinstate the excluded transactions. The court also agrees that a remand is necessary, since the change to the scope of the U.S. sales database was neither requested by the parties nor authorized by the court. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that the ease is remanded to Commerce with instructions to reinstate in the U.S. sales database: 1) all entries of merchandise sold prior to the period of review and entered during the period of review, and 2) the exporter’s sales price transaction omitted from the Amended Final Results. It is further

ORDERED that Commerce shall recalculate the dumping margins and issue new amended final results consistent with this order. Remand results are due within thirty days of the date this opinion is entered. It is further

ORDERED that any party contesting the amended results shall file comments or responses within thirty days, after which Commerce will have fifteen days in which to file a reply.

SO ORDERED.