WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SG/N/9/VEN/1
6 June 2000
(00-2239)
Committee on Safeguards Original:  Spanish
INFORMATION TO BE NOTIFIED TO THE COMMITTEE WHERE
A SAFEGUARD INVESTIGATION IS TERMINATED
WITH NO SAFEGUARD MEASURE IMPOSED
BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF VENEZUELA
The following communication, dated 24 May 2000, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
_______________
I have the pleasure to inform you that the competent Venezuelan authority on safeguards, the
Anti-Dumping and Subsidies Commission (C ASS), through Decision ST-S-T004/00 dated
12 May 2000, terminated the safeguard investigation re lating to cold-rolled steel products, not clad,
plated or coated.  These products are identifi ed under the Venezuelan NANDINA tariff code 72.09.
The termination is due to the domestic producer's formal withdrawal and its consequent request to the
investigating authority for its application for an investigation to be concluded and placed on file.
BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF VENEZUELA –
MINISTRY OF PRODUCTION AND TRADE. –
TECHNICAL SECRETARIAT OF THE ANTI-DUMPING
AND SUBSIDIES COMMISSION.-
DECISION NO. ST–S–T 004/00.- CARACAS, 12 MAY 2000.
"190th Year of Independence and 141st Year of the Republic
Pursuant to Article 14 of Decree No. 250, dated 10 August 1999, published in the Official
Gazette of the Republic of Venezuela, Special Edition No. 5,372, on 11 August 1999, enacting the
Decree with the Status and Force of Law Concerning Safeguard Measures (hereinafter, Decree-Law
on Safeguard Measures) and, in exercise of the powers conferred upon it by the Ministry ofProduction and Trade, by Resolution No. 626, dated 11 November 1999, published in the Official
Gazette of the Republic of Venezuela No. 36,829, on 15 November 1999, the Technical Secretariat of
the Anti-Dumping and Subsidies Commission (hereinafter, the Technical Secretariat) hereby delivers
its decision regarding the withdrawal request it received on 5 May 2000 from representatives of the
company Siderúrgica del Orinoco (SIDOR) C.A ., announcing the formal withdrawal of their
application for definitive safeguard measures, and of the investigation into imports of "flat-rolled
products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of  600 mm. or more, cold-rolled (cold-reduced), not
clad, plated or coated", identified under NANDINA tariff code 72.09 of the Venezuelan Customs
Tariff, initiated by Decision No. ST-S-AP002/ 00, dated 28 January 2000, published in the Official
Gazette of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Special Edition No. 5,443, of 24 February 2000, on
the basis of the following facts and considerations:G/SG/N/9/VEN/1
Page 2
I
Regarding the Application
In a written document submitted to the Technical Secretariat, dated 5 May 2000,
Messrs Daniel Novegil and Oscar Montero, satisfactorily identified in the corresponding
administrative record and in their capacity as repr esentatives of the company Siderúrgica del Orinoco
(SIDOR) C.A., assisted by their lawyer Luis Domínguez, identity-card-holder  No. 6,970,726 and
listed in INPREABOGADO under No. 28,210, formally withdrew their applic ation for definitive
safeguard measures in the following terms:  "( … )  we formally withdraw our application for
definitive safeguard measures to be applied to imports of cold-rolled steel products, submitted by ourrepresentative on 7 January 2000, the investigation for which was initiated by Decision No.
ST-S-AP002/00 on 28 January 2000.  We request that th e application be officially withdrawn, that the
investigation be terminated and that the case file be placed in the archives".
II
The Technical Secretariat's Considerations
In relation to the withdrawal submitted by SIDOR's representatives, Article 63 of the Organic
Law on Administrative Procedures stipulates that:  "the procedure shall be terminated by an applicant
withdrawing his application, claim or request. The wit hdrawal shall be notified in writing.  (…)  The
competent official shall record the withdrawal in wr iting and order the case file to be placed in the
archives."
As has been mentioned previously, the Article cited above makes it quite clear that the
applicant responsible for the initiation of an investigation has the right to withdraw his application at
any stage, thus conveying his intention to forego the legal claim he initially made.  The conditions are,
firstly, that the withdrawal must be notified by th e person with the competence and authority to do so,
or rather that only the applicant responsible for the initiation of the process can subsequently call for
its termination;  and secondly, that the competent offi cial is responsible for officially approving such a
withdrawal, and the procedure shall only be consider ed concluded or terminated after the official has
approved the withdrawal and given formal notice thereof.
In this context, and taking into account the applicant's express desire to drop its initial claim
for the imposition of definitive safeguard measures with regard to the imports in question, as well asthe powers of the Technical Secretariat in relation to suspending and concluding safeguard
investigations, this should necessarily lead not only to the "suspension" of the investigation to
determine the existence of an increase in imports under such conditions and in such quantities as to
cause or threaten to cause serious injury to the domestic industry, but also to the "conclusion" of that
investigation without the preparation of the corresponding final report and the recommendations thatthe Technical Secretariat may have seen fit to draw  up.  Taking into account that the investigation in
question was initiated at the request of the company now notifying its withdrawal, we must bear in
mind that not only do the definitive measures depend on the determination of a significant increase in
the imports in question, of the threat of serious injury or serious injury to the domestic industry
producing like or directly competitive products and of  the causal link between the two, but that there
must also remain on the part of the applicant a desire to pursue the initial claim.  As a result, since the
applicant no longer wants to impose such measures  to be imposed, it would now be superfluous to
carry out the necessary analysis to determine the appropriateness of such measures, which would
indicate that the corresponding investigation should be suspended.G/SG/N/9/VEN/1
Page 3
In a situation in which the applicant expresses its desire to drop not just one incident, but the
whole investigation to determine the appropriateness of definitive safeguard measures, and taking into
account that withdrawal is one of the ways in which such a process can be terminated, a procedure
known as "untimely termination", the untimely or exceptional nature being attributable to an expressdecision which, while not resolving the basic issue at stake, implies the end of the administrative
procedure, it must be concluded that, once the respective withdrawal has been approved, by way of
suspension of the investigation, there can be no doubt that the direct consequence of such a
suspension shall be the termination or conclusion of the corresponding investigation.  Thus, the
Technical Secretariat, in exercise of its powers to suspend and conclude investigations, conferred
upon it by the aforementioned Resolution on the Delegation of Functions, must suspend the
investigation once the request for withdrawal has been officially recorded, and consequently declarethe administrative procedure relating to the safeguard investigation closed.
In the present case it is noted that the withdrawal request was submitted by the party holding
the right to drop the initial claim, since the very same representatives of the company SIDOR were
responsible for the initiation of the administrative procedure.  It is also noted that, with theinvestigation in progress, the applicant notified in writing the formal withdrawal of its application for
definitive safeguard measures to be applied to imports of cold-rolled steel products, requesting that
the withdrawal be officially recorded, the investigation be terminated and the case file be placed in the
archives;  from which it is absolutely clear that it wish es not only to drop the initial claim, but also to
see the investigation concluded without obtaining an express decision on the merits or substance ofthe case.
III
Decision
In view of the withdrawal request submitted by  the representatives of SIDOR and taking into
account the above considerations, the Technical Secretariat of the Anti-Dumping and Subsidies
Commission, in exercise of the powers conferre d upon it by Article 14 of the Decree-Law on
Safeguard Measures, delegated by the Ministry of Production and Trade through Resolution No. 626,
dated 11 November 1999, published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Venezuela No. 36,829,on 15 November 1999 DECIDES:
First, TO ACCEPT the withdrawal request submitted by the representatives of the company
Siderúrgica del Orinoco (SIDOR) to the Technical Secretariat on 5 May 2000 in relation to the
safeguard investigation into imports of "flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of600 mm. or more, cold-rolled (cold-reduced), not clad, plated or coated", identified in the Venezuelan
customs tariff under NANDINA tariff code 72.09.
Second, TO SUSPEND the investigation to determine the existence of a significant increase
in imports;  of the threat of serious injury or serious injury to the domestic industry producing like ordirectly competitive products and the causal li nk between the two, with regard to imports of
"flat-rolled products of iron or non-alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm. or more, cold-rolled
(cold-reduced), not clad, plated or coated", identified in the Venezuelan customs tariff under
NANDINA tariff code 72.09.
Consequently, the safeguard investigation into imports of "flat-rolled products of iron or non-
alloy steel, of a width of 600 mm. or more, cold-r olled (cold-reduced), not clad, plated or coated",
identified in the Venezuelan customs tariff under NANDINA tariff code 72.09 is CONCLUDED,
without preparation of the corresponding final re port or the recommendations that the TechnicalG/SG/N/9/VEN/1
Page 4
Secretariat may have seen fit to draw up, in relati on to the alleged increase of respective imports and
the presumed injury to the domestic industry producing like or directly competitive products.
Furthermore, the corresponding case file is  ordered to be PLACED IN THE ARCHIVES.
The applicant shall be officially notified of the present decision.
For communication and publication,
(Signed) Enie Neri de Ross
Director
Republic of Venezuela
Technical Secretariat of the Anti-Dumping
and Subsidies Commission
__________