402Thus, even though the presentation of that argument is inconsistent with certain assertions made during the administrative procedure and with Transcatab’s failure to contest certain aspects of the Commission’s analysis, that does not detract from the finding that the argument in the first part of the third plea was already raised during the administrative procedure. Consequently, when the Commission granted Transcatab the reduction, it was already aware of that argument and the argument cannot therefore constitute a substantial contestation of the facts calling in question the reduction granted under the Leniency Notice in the contested decision.