19 C.F.R. § 351.224

Disclosure of calculations and procedures for the correction of ministerial errors

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Introduction. In the interests of transparency, the Department has long had a practice of providing parties with the details of its antidumping and countervailing duty calculations. This practice has come to be referred to as a “disclosure.” This section contains rules relating to requests for disclosure and procedures for correcting ministerial errors.

(b) Disclosure. The Secretary will disclose to a party to the proceeding calculations performed, if any, in connection with a preliminary determination under section 703(b) or section 733(b) of the Act, a final determination under section 705(a) or section 735(a) of the Act, and a final results of a review under section 736(c), section 751, or section 753 of the Act, normally within five days after the date of any public announcement or, if there is no public announcement of, within five days after the date of publication of, the preliminary determination, final determination, or final results of review (whichever is applicable). The Secretary will disclose to a party to the proceeding calculations performed, if any, in connection with a preliminary results of review under section 751 or section 753 of the Act, normally not later than ten days after the date of the public announcement of, or, if there is no public announcement, within five days after the date of publication of, the preliminary results of review.

(c) Comments regarding ministerial errors—(1) In general. A party to the proceeding to whom the Secretary has disclosed calculations performed in connection with a preliminary determination may submit comments concerning a significant ministerial error in such calculations. A party to the proceeding to whom the Secretary has disclosed calculations performed in connection with a final determination or the final results of a review may submit comments concerning any ministerial error in such calculations. Comments concerning ministerial errors made in the preliminary results of a review should be included in a party's case brief.

(2) Time limits for submitting comments. A party to the proceeding must file comments concerning ministerial errors within five days after the earlier of:

(i) The date on which the Secretary released disclosure documents to that party; or

(ii) The date on which the Secretary held a disclosure meeting with that party.

(3) Replies to comments. Replies to comments submitted under paragraph (c)(1) of this section must be filed within five days after the date on which the comments were filed with the Secretary. The Secretary will not consider replies to comments submitted in connection with a preliminary determination.

(4) Extensions. A party to the proceeding may request an extension of the time limit for filing comments concerning a ministerial error in a final determination or final results of review under § 351.302(c) within three days after the date of any public announcement, or, if there is no public announcement, within five days after the date of publication of the final determination or final results of review, as applicable. The Secretary will not extend the time limit for filing comments concerning a significant ministerial error in a preliminary determination.

(d) Contents of comments and replies. Comments filed under paragraph (c)(1) of this section must explain the alleged ministerial error by reference to applicable evidence in the official record, and must present what, in the party's view, is the appropriate correction. In addition, comments concerning a preliminary determination must demonstrate how the alleged ministerial error is significant (see paragraph (g) of this section) by illustrating the effect on individual weighted-average dumping margin or countervailable subsidy rate, the all-others rate, or the country-wide subsidy rate (whichever is applicable). Replies to any comments must be limited to issues raised in such comments.

(e) Corrections. The Secretary will analyze any comments received and, if appropriate, correct any significant ministerial error by amending the preliminary determination, or correct any ministerial error by amending the final determination or the final results of review (whichever is applicable). Where practicable, the Secretary will announce publicly the issuance of a correction notice, and normally will do so within 30 days after the date of public announcement, or, if there is no public announcement, within 30 days after the date of publication, of the preliminary determination, final determination, or final results of review (whichever is applicable). In addition, the Secretary will publish notice of such corrections in the Federal Register. A correction notice will not alter the anniversary month of an order or suspended investigation for purposes of requesting an administrative review (see § 351.213) or a new shipper review (see § 351.214) or initiating a sunset review (see § 351.218).

(f) Definition of “ministerial error.” Under this section, ministerial error means an error in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical error resulting from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other similar type of unintentional error which the Secretary considers ministerial.

(g) Definition of “significant ministerial error.” Under this section, significant ministerial error means a ministerial error (see paragraph (f) of this section), the correction of which, either singly or in combination with other errors:

(1) Would result in a change of at least five absolute percentage points in, but not less than 25 percent of, the weighted-average dumping margin or the countervailable subsidy rate (whichever is applicable) calculated in the original (erroneous) preliminary determination; or

(2) Would result in a difference between a weighted-average dumping margin or countervailable subsidy rate (whichever is applicable) of zero (or de minimis) and a weighted-average dumping margin or countervailable subsidy rate of greater than de minimis, or vice versa.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 84 cases (17 in the last 5 years), 1999–2026 · leading case: Qvd Food Co., Ltd. v. United States, 658 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Qvd Food Co., Ltd. v. United States, 658 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2011). · cites it 4× “§ 1675 (h); see 19 C.F.R. § 351.224 (f). Commerce concluded that "QVD's arguments with respect to [the general expense ratio] are methodological in nature because QVD essentially disagrees with the Department's assignment of certain expenses to the calculation of the .”

Goodluck India Ltd. v. United States, 2023 CIT 164 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2023). · cites it 5× “See 19 C.F.R. § 351.224 (a)–(c). A ministerial error is “an error in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical error resulting from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other similar type of unintentional error.”

Alloy Piping Prods., Inc. v. United States, 201 F. Supp. 2d 1267 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2002). · cites it 4× “§ 1675 (h); 19 C.F.R. § 351.224 (c).) Correcting the errors would not pose a burden on Commerce since it would merely require an adjustment to the computer program to correct the deficiency.”

Hor Liang Indus. Corp. v. United States, 2018 CIT 124 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2018). · cites it 7× “Rejection of Submission (Feb. 27, 2018) ("Commerce Feb.”

The Stanley Works (Langfang) Fastening Sys. Co. v. United States, 2013 CIT 118 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2013). · cites it 9× “See generally 19 C.F.R. § 351.224 (“Disclosure of calculations and procedures for the correction of ministerial errors.”

Shandong Huarong Gen. Corp. v. United States, 159 F. Supp. 2d 714 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001). · cites it 2× “The procedures established by Commerce to enforce this statute are found in 19 C.F.R. § 351.224 , and provide: (c) A party to the proceeding to whom the Secretary has disclosed calculations performed in connection with a preliminary determination may submit comments concerning a…”

Kaiyuan Grp. Corp. v. United States, 343 F. Supp. 2d 1289 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2004). · cites it 3× “27 World Finer Foods, 24 *1311 CIT at 549-50; 19 C.F.R. § 351.224 (f) (1999). It is these types of ministerial errors that Commerce must correct, especially if the error is so obvious and egregious that the failure to correct it would be “an abuse of discretion” and “undermine…”

Gov't of Quebec v. United States, 105 F.4th 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2024). · cites it 2× “8453; see 19 C.F.R. § 351.224 (f). 4 Generally, after Commerce discloses its calcula- tions in its preliminary determinations, a party to the pro- ceeding may submit comments concerning “ministerial errors” contained in Commerce’s calculations.”

Neenah Foundry Co. v. United States, 142 F. Supp. 2d 1008 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001). · cites it 3× “19 C.F.R. § 351.224 (c), (d) (1998). While replies are “limited to issues raised in such comments”, there is no express requirement that they be submitted by or on behalf of a party to the proceeding.”

Husteel Co. v. United States, 2015 CIT 66 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015). · cites it 7× “To implement § 1675(h), Commerce has promulgated regulations under which it *1292 makes “disclosures” of “the details of its antidumping and countervailing duty calculations,” 19 C.F.R. § 351.224 (a), including its calculations for preliminary and final results of an…”

Sichuan Changhong Elec. Co. v. United States, 460 F. Supp. 2d 1338 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2006). · cites it 2× “” 19 C.F.R. § 351.224 (f) (2004); see also 19 U.”

Sgl Carbon LLC v. United States, 819 F. Supp. 2d 1352 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2012). · cites it 9× “§ 1675 (h) (2006); 19 C.F.R. § 351.224 (2008). 3 The legislative history underscores the raison d’etre for the ministerial errors statute and regulation, emphasizing Congress’ desire to have Commerce correct such errors in order to preempt needless litigation and thereby promote…”

Show all 84 citing cases →

— 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(c)(1) — 1 case

Catfish Farmers of Am. v. United States, 2025 CIT 152 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2025).

— 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(c)(2) — 2 cases

Corus Staal BV v. United States, 387 F. Supp. 2d 1291 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2005).

Dorbest Ltd. v. United States, 547 F. Supp. 2d 1321 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2008).

— 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(e) — 1 case

ABB Inc. v. United States, 190 F. Supp. 3d 1159 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2016).

— 19 C.F.R. § 351.224(f) — 6 cases

Vinh Hoan Corp. v. United States, 49 F. Supp. 3d 1285 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015).

Chengde Malleable Iron Gen. Factory v. United States, 505 F. Supp. 2d 1367 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2007).

Husteel Co. v. United States, 2015 CIT 66 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2015). “To implement § 1675(h), Commerce has promulgated regulations under which it *1292 makes “disclosures” of “the details of its antidumping and countervailing duty calculations,” 19 C.F.R. § 351.224 (a), including its calculations for preliminary and final results of an…”

Shanghai Tainai Bearing Co. v. United States, 2023 CIT 132 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2023).

Apiário Diamante Comercial Exportadora Ltda. v. United States, 2024 CIT 64 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2024).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.