understand why people refer to this novel counting i had a really hard time understanding the briefs on this issue which i think are not that clearest briefs i haven't read i spent quite a bit of contrary to understand it as i anissa labor rate and they excluded as unit costs from the ratios so we had no issue with that that's what the methodology seemed to say that when you notice and comment that was the decision of the department determined was the best way to handle what they were concerned about at the time which was that they were undervalued in labor so instead they decided to use a labor rate them so much more encompassing but they realised that to follow their normal policy of excluding anything in the financial ratios that's already in the labor rate but they would then have to exclude more i think the part that we kept showing was the department said in their labor methodology that the department would if little cost of labor is overstated they would adjust the ratios and they elaborate on what that meant and said specifically when the surrogate financial statement includes disaggregated overhead selling general administrative expenses that are already included in the labor rate and we're going to remove them so if we were asking the department follows the methodology it sad it decided it wanted it went through notice and comment decided i want to use on a new labor a new labor rate and we weren't attacking that we wanted them to use follow the methodology that they said they appendix sixty three but per hour is what the department relied on and the one forty and one twenty that were higher were the ones the department that the court did not understand that those were invalidated removed from the web page so that when the rain that the sixty three yes block figure which is what they ultimately gets but i thought under the the six eight data which they didn't use this proceeding that the labor rate was one forty one my wrong about that been we know what five b was and we also know as we started and are briefed that there is a large variety of labor rates amongst from the people packing and doing day labor up to the man general staff there's a large range of costs with them back and so all of that's been included in this cost and so it's artificially high because of that in the department in a properly adjusted according to their own methodology we were asking that they follow what they said they would do which comes subsidized and there were also additional allegations by the us you know that customs values are being manipulated going into this country so all of these issues together were undermining the fact that the thai still value was the best available information as where we included a chart detailing exactly what was contained within these import systems six there were four h g s eleven digit h g s and these include the monthly totals by country going into this and the vast majority of these quantities are less than the container which is another form of what would be considered commercial so you would say that when you have imports a few thousand or a few hundred per country only totaling three hundred seventy four thousand in total in contrast to these great commercial producers and how much they are using and purchasing this can't because there is a commercial quantity and this chart also undermines the government argument that the specificity of these tie in for values is is what is making them so important as you'll note and we've highlighted and read seventy eight percent of the quantity of these circuit values came under one of these h s so there i see them already moving into my rebuttal time with all of the questions i just want to point out with that the department consider the fact that these charts specific  average unit value with all of the other countries also showing this is the highest you know value on the record and then and light of all of that this was also an import based into a market overwhelmed by dump imports and a highly subsidized domestic market ninety three percent of the imports were dumped so this value is seven percent of the imports is necessarily going to be tainted and impacted by that market it's going into and all of the other domestic on all the price when it's coming in and it just whether it's impacting it up or down it's the fact that it's impacting at the department when they make this analysis in countervailing cases doesn't determine is this making the benchmark price higher or lower they only look at whether this is impacting the price it's not making it a market economy price it's making it a subsidized price or government controlled price so it's i'm alive and we're asking them to consider this as well and in a unique case where ninety three value with respect to the stainless steel coil commerce reasonably selected the most products specific information available from any of the countries over a basket category and obviously when you're trying to value something you want to get as close to that product possible this is what co essentially dying young is attempting to second guess converses reasonable judgment call but i don't understand why commerce in the first place is proposed to make the adjustment that it makes no sense to me laboring so why wouldn't you just adjust the labor rate instead of taking its d n a hours out of the financial ratio yes well your honor i believe you've defined correctly  the first time around i thought that there was double counting because the rate included both production or manufacturing not manufacturing labor the problem is the hours themselves and i believe you he may have pointed that factor of production the other side but we disagree and commerce the first time around i thought that was only double counting your stance you pointed out some fliers and commerce reasonably i took another look at it on remand per part of the problem it's that congress is itself responsible for this ever approach because that what you what it found is that we have more specific information and we're not tied to having to use six a we can use conversely if we can use this better information because it's under a duty to use the best information available on the record and  challenging it's being inaccurate as a way of dealing with an accuracy in some other piece of data i don't understand that approach but there it is well just to conclude  haven't asked that their been just a just not that's not the relief that they state in their reply brief so we ask on both issues that the court sustained affirm the decision of no as this court and discussing the labor methodology has discussed but there may be issues with the logic behind what the department has suggested they do they decided to change their labor methodology to change the labor source and the department sa that they would follow what they've been doing with five b which was to remove anything covered by five b from the financial ratios i said that they would be doing the same thing using this different labor rate and whether that makes sense or not to accommodate according to the department that was not the issue here it was the labor methodology and again i just want to conclude that especially looking at the stainless steel coil which was the main part of our margin that's what drove this margin that you're looking at a small on the record and with the highest value on the record into a market that was the domestic producer was fully subsidized while the domestic market was subsidized and the imports were ninety three percent dumped