Essar Steel Ltd. v. United States
34 I.T.R.D. (BNA) 2145
Ct. Intl. Trade2012Background
- Civil action challenging Commerce’s countervailing duty determination on hot-rolled carbon steel from India affecting Essar.
- Federal Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part, prompting remand on AFA corroboration and punitive considerations.
- Court previously remanded to Commerce for explanation of AFA rate calculation without addressing corroboration.
- Essar argued Commerce failed to corroborate the AFA rate derived from CIP program participation and relied on stale proxies.
- Court clarifies standard: corroboration under 19 U.S.C. § 1677e(c) or practicability thereof, with De Cecco framework as benchmark.
- Court remands to Commerce to address corroboration on remand and schedule for filing of remand results.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Commerce properly corroborated the AFA rate for CIP. | Essar claims lack of corroboration for proxy rate. | Commerce contends corroboration or practicability exception applied. | Remand needed to address corroboration. |
| Whether the AFA rate is punitive. | Essar asserts rate is punitive due to lack of corroboration or comparators. | Defendant disputes punitive character; relies on other rates to justify AFA. | Court does not resolve punitive issue on this remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- F.lli De Cecco Di Filippo Fara S. Martino S.p.A. v. United States, 216 F.3d 1027 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (defines corroboration standard for AFA with 'reasonably accurate' proxy plus deterrent markup)
- Consolo v. Fed. Mar. Comm'n, 383 U.S. 607 (U.S. 1966) (establishes substantial evidence review standard)
- Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States, 458 F.3d 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (reaffirms substantial evidence standard for agency findings)
- Essar Steel Ltd. v. United States, 678 F.3d 1268 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (Federal Circuit decision guiding AFA and remand scope in CIP context)