Background
Archer Daniels Midland Company moved to complete the administrative record by adding rebuttal comments it had prepared in response to new factual information submitted by The Mosaic Company. ADM’s counsel had electronically filed the comments under the first administrative-review proceeding rather than the second remand proceeding because the filing was coded for the wrong segment.
Commerce therefore was unaware of the comments and did not consider them when preparing the completed remand redetermination before the court. The government and Mosaic deferred to the court’s discretion, while plaintiff-intervenor Joint Stock Company Apatit consented to ADM’s motion.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of International Trade denied ADM’s motion. Under 19 U.S.C. § 1516a(b)(2)(A), the relevant administrative record consists of information presented to or obtained by Commerce during the administrative proceeding at issue. Because ADM’s comments were misfiled in a different segment, they were neither presented to nor obtained by Commerce in the second remand proceeding.
The court explained that the governing statute—not party consent or judicial discretion—determines what belongs in the record. Commerce had not asked to reopen the record, and apparently very similar material was already included. The court therefore held that ADM’s rebuttal comments were not part of the statutory record for this segment of the proceeding.
Key Takeaways
- A document filed under the wrong segment of a Commerce proceeding does not become part of the administrative record for the segment under judicial review.
- The parties’ consent and the court’s discretion cannot add extra-record material where the governing statute does not include it.
- The decision whether to reopen Commerce’s record ordinarily rests with the agency, and Commerce did not request reopening here.
Why It Matters
The order underscores the consequences of segment-specific filing errors in trade proceedings. Even when a party timely prepares relevant comments, those comments may be excluded from judicial review if Commerce did not receive or consider them in the administrative segment that produced the challenged determination.
Trade practitioners should verify that electronic submissions are coded to the correct review or remand segment because a later motion to complete the record cannot cure material that was never before the agency in that proceeding.