with respect, to all entries of carbon steel flat products from Canada. Treating the reference to the Reseller Policy in the Final Results as a § 1516a determination would create procedural incentives inconsistent with the purpose of the Customs Courts Act and the APA. Plaintiffs’ claims arise from the APA, and challenge the statutory basis for, and procedural flaws in the adoption of, the Reseller Policy. Because a claim under the APA accrues at the time of “final agency action,” 5 U.S.C. § 704, facial challenges to regulations and claims arising from a failure to comply with APA procedures accrue at the time the rule was published, not when the rule is applied to a plaintiff. See Dunn-McCampbell Royalty Interest, Inc. v. Nat’l Park Serv., 112 F.3d 1283, 1287 (5th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>); Wind River Mining Corp. v. United States, 946
holding that the challenge to a university regulation was moot because the regulation had been substantially amended holding that a facial challenge to regulation accrues when the agency publishes its rule in the federal register recognizing that courts should exercise judicial restraint in a facial challenge holding that the alc may not rule upon a facial challenge to the constitutionality of a regulation or statute but may rule upon an asapplied challenge holding that if a person wishes to challenge a mere procedural violation in the adoption of a regulation or other agency action the challenge must be brought within six years of the decision and that similarly if the person wishes to bring a policybased facial challenge to the governments decision that too must be brought within six years of the decision