Barcode : 4326250-02 A-533-889 REV - Admin Review 12 / 13 / 19 - 5 / 31 / 21
�
�
�
�
�
�
� �
�
�
�
Commerce ’ s preliminary decision that it cannot rely on the information on the record is unsupported by record evidence . To the contrary , the record contains sufficient sales and cost information that is complete and verifiable . As such , Commerce is able to calculate an accurate dumping margin without resorting to AFA . Should Commerce require time to further collect and analyze information pertaining to Antique Group ’ s reported sales and cost data , the agency is able to extend the final results by an additional 60 days . Commerce should either permit Antique Group to re-file its supplemental questionnaire or seek clarification of existing information on the record by issuing another supplemental questionnaire ; either way , the agency should comply with the intent of antidumping laws by ensuring the rate for Antique Group is as accurate and current as possible . Given the unique circumstances in this review , not only would the issuance of a supplemental questionnaire to Antique Group be logical but , in fact , required . Issuing this would ensure that Commerce complies with precedent requiring that it calculate the most accurate possible dumping margins . 102 Just as Commerce did in Celik Halat I , the agency relied on section 776 of the Act to apply its regulations in a way that exceeds its statutory authority , resulting in unwarranted results for Antique Group for a minor filing error that had no discernible effect on this review . 103 Application of AFA to Antique Group is inappropriate , given Antique Group ’ s participation and attempts to comply with Commerce ’ s requests for information throughout the review , including its efforts to explain the reasons for and the actions taken to avoid the submission error in the future . Commerce has not provided Antique Group an opportunity to remedy deficiencies on the record . The CAFC has ruled that AFA should be used sparingly and that it cannot be drawn merely from a failure to respond but only where it is reasonable for Commerce to conclude that less than full cooperation has been shown . 104 Antique Group has been fully cooperative with Commerce ’ s requests throughout the review , and the calendaring mistake that resulted in the five-hour late submission in no way impeded this proceeding or placed a burden on Commerce ’ s ability to carry out the review . In the past , Commerce has distinguished between inadvertent errors such as that committed by Antique Group and more serious behavior , such as fraud or withholding information . 105 Antique Group has provided all information requested by Commerce , and it is unclear how the calendaring mistake should be treated equally to fraudulent activity by a respondent . In addition , Antique Group fully intended to submit the supplemental
102
Id . at 15 ( citing Rhone Poulenc , Inc . v . United States , 899 F . 2d 1185 , 1191 ( Fed . Cir . 1990 ) ( Rhone Poulenc ); Grobest , 815 F . Supp . 2d 1342 , 1365 , and 1367 ).
103
Id . ( citing Celik Halat I ).
104
Id . at 20-21 ( citing Celik Halat ve Tel Sanayi A . S ., 557 F . Supp . 3d 1363 , 1380-81 ( Celik Halat II ); and Nippon Steel , 337 F . 3d at 1382 ).
105
Id . at 21-22 ( citing Lightweight Thermal Paper from Germany : Final Results of First Antidumping Duty Administrative Review , 76 FR 22078 ( April 20 , 2011 ), and accompanying IDM at 9 ).
22 Filed By : David Lindgren , Filed Date : 1 / 3 / 23 1:27 PM , Submission Status : Approved