Pool Chlorine Petitioner Brings Commerce Back to Court for Review of Surrogate Selection
In a March 4 complaint before the Court of International Trade, petitioner Bio-Lab again took issue with the Commerce Department’s surrogate selection in its antidumping duty review of chlorinated isocyanurates, or pool chlorine, from China (see 2407190046) (Bio-Lab, Inc. v. United States, CIT # 25-00054).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Bio-Lab again argued that Commerce should have selected Mexico, the “only potential surrogate country that produced identical merchandise,” not Romania, which only produced sodium hypochlorite, as its primary surrogate. It said the department wrongfully refused to even consider Mexico because Romania and another country, Malaysia, were on the “same” level of economic development as China, whereas Mexico’s economic development was only “similar” to China’s.
The petitioner said that Commerce made this claim despite the fact that, several months earlier, it had placed Mexico and China on the same level of economic development in its most recent Gross National Income List.
“Commerce conducted no analysis of the relative quality of data from Mexico (a producer of identical merchandise) and Romania (a producer of comparable merchandise) or the relative significance of their differences in economic development,” it said.
Sodium hypochlorite has “significantly different physical characteristics, end uses, and production processes” compared with the products in the review, it noted. And its manufacturing process is much less complicated and involves fewer costs, it said.