Pool Disinfectant Isn't 'Unique' Enough to Warrant Surrogate Selection Procedure Change, US Says
Chlorinated isocyanurates (isos) isn’t an “unusual or unique” product that would require a change to the Commerce Department’s surrogate selection procedure, the government said in its Sept. 15 response to domestic producer Bio-Lab’s motion for judgment (Bio-Lab 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 manufactures chlorinated isos, used as a swimming pool disinfectant. It brought one case challenging the results of the 2021-22 antidumping duty review on Chinese-origin chlorinated isos in 2024 (see 2407170053), and another challenging the 2022-23 review in 2025 (see 2503050069).
Both cases challenge the department’s finding that sodium and hypochlorites are comparable to chlorinated isos for the purpose of surrogate selection. Court of International Trade Judge Timothy Reif remanded the 2021-22 review’s results for failing to properly consider new evidence offered by the petitioners for the first time that hypochlorites weren’t a good comparison (see 2504150055). In its remand results, Commerce stuck by its selection of comparable merchandise (see 2508060036).
The petitioner also opposed the use of Romania as both reviews’ primary surrogate country, as well as Commerce’s decision to exclude Mexico from its pre-decisional list of options.
In a new argument this time around, it also said that chlorinated isos is an “unusual or unique” product that triggers a change to Commerce’s usual surrogate selection procedure, whereby Commerce first compiles a list of countries that produce comparable goods, then selects one it determines is economically comparable, rather than the other way around (see 2507180067). The petitioner argued its products are “unusual or unique” because they contain cyanuric acid.
The 2022-23 review’s surrogate selection was lawful and supported by substantial evidence, the U.S. said in its Sept. 15 reply to Bio-Lab’s motion.
Specifically, it said Commerce’s holding that sodium and calcium hypochlorites were comparable to chlorinated isos had been based on the fact that the products “are all just variations of chlorine” and ultimately used for similar purposes.
It said that, despite Bio-Lab’s claim to the contrary, Commerce did consider whether the chlorinated isos was “such a unique or unusual product,” although it did so in the context of “considering whether it was a ‘specialized or dedicated’ major input that would affect product comparison.”
“Although Commerce may not have explicitly used the terms 'unusual or unique' in discussing chlorinated isos, evident from Commerce’s decision not to deviate from its sequential practice is that Commerce did not consider CYA so unique or unusual as to warrant deviating from the sequential analysis, as contemplated by the Policy Bulletin,” it said.
It acknowledged that the previous review’s results had been remanded by CIT, but it said that every review is unique. And it added that the results were only remanded because Commerce based its comparability decisions in them on past reviews, failing to consider evidence raised by the petitioner for the first time.