Archer Daniels Midland Co. v. United States
35 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 2688
Ct. Intl. Trade2014Background
- This case follows a partial remand of Commerce’s first CVD review on citric acid and citrate salts from PRC; remand results sustain Commerce’s determinations.
- Commerce found steam coal LTAR neither de jure nor de facto specific and determined sulfuric acid LTAR via tier 2 benchmarks using world market prices.
- Court previously instructed Commerce to explain de facto specificity and comparability of sulfuric acid benchmarks.
- ADM challenged de facto specificity for steam coal and RZBC challenged sulfuric acid benchmarks for comparability.
- Remand results concluded steam coal lacks de facto specificity and sulfuric acid benchmarks are comparable, sustaining Commerce’s remand results.
- The court reviews Commerce under the substantial evidence/FTCA standards and affirms the remand determinations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Steam coal LTAR de facto specificity | ADM argues power generators are predominant users and receive a disproportionate share. | Commerce lacked sufficient data to show predominant use or disproportionate share. | Remand results sustained; no substantial record evidence of predominant or disproportionate use. |
| Sulfuric acid LTAR comparability | RZBC contends benchmarks are not comparable to its inputs and grades. | Benchmarks at HTS 2807 levels are sufficiently comparable for LTAR analysis. | Remand results sustained; benchmarks are reasonable and comparable. |
| Nature of standard of review | Commerce's factual determinations uphold under substantial evidence standard. |
Key Cases Cited
- Essar Steel Ltd. v. United States, 678 F.3d 1273 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (benchmarks and LTAR analyses governed by substantial evidence review)
- Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States, 458 F.3d 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (standard for reviewing agency determinations under 19 U.S.C. § 1516a)
- Consolo v. Fed. Mar. Comm'n, 383 U.S. 607 (U.S. 1966) (finality and deference principles in agency determinations)
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 197 (U.S. 1938) (substantial evidence and reasonableness standards)
- Allied Tube & Conduit Corp. v. United States, 24 CIT 1357 (2000) (demonstrates deferential standard for agency factual findings)