Importer Says Roller Bearing Raw Material Not Subject to AD Order on Roller Bearings
Importer Precision Components filed a reply brief on Aug. 30 at the Court of International Trade in an antidumping scope case, telling the court that the Commerce Department characterized a "raw material as a component and thus impermissibly brought" the materials within the scope of the AD order on tapered roller bearings from China. The record clearly says "the materials at issue are not bearing components or parts of bearings and could not be used in the production of bearings absent significant physical processes performed on the raw materials" (Precision Components v. United States, CIT # 23-00218).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
The scope ruling found that Precision's low-carbon steel blanks fall within the scope of the AD order. In its brief, the U.S. said Precision conceded that its blanks are plainly covered by a 2020 ruling similarly finding the goods to fall under the scope of the order (see 2407120058). The government claimed that Precision can't challenge the 2020 ruling, which found the blanks to be unfinished tapered roller bearing parts.
In response, Precision said the order's plain language controls and that the government's claim that the nature of the material is irrelevant should be rejected. Precision said that while the 2020 ruling didn't differentiate between bearing and non-bearing steel, "this is not remarkable." Bearings "must be made of bearing steel," since bearings made from non-bearing steel don't "properly function as standard bearings and cannot meet the certification requirements for bearings."
In addition, Precision said the 2020 ruling was based in part on the Chevron principle of deferring to agencies' interpretations of ambiguous statutes. Since the Supreme Court struck down this principle in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the applicability of the 2020 review is now limited and "supports an examination anew without reference to the prior scope ruling."
The U.S. argued the blanks are within the scope of the order since they are parts used to make bearings and the order doesn't reference raw materials. Precision said the government ignores "that bearings must be made from bearing steel or from material subject to significant processing to make it the equivalent of bearing steel. A bearing not made from bearing steel would not be able to function as a standard bearing."