G/SG/Q2/IND/22  
 
17 May 2016  
(16-2693)  Page: 1/2  
Committee on Safeguards  Original: English  
 
NOTIFICATION UNDER ARTICLE 12.1(B) OF THE AGREEMENT ON 
SAFEGUARDS ON FINDING A SERIOUS INJURY OR THREAT 
THEREOF CAUSED BY INCREASED IMPORTS 
NOTIFICATION OF A PROPOSAL TO IMPOSE A MEASURE 
NOTIFICATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 9, FOOTNOTE 2 
OF THE AGREEMENT ON SAFEGUARDS 
QUESTIONS POSED BY THE UN ITED STATES REGARDING 
THE NOTIFICATION OF INDIA1  
(Unwrought Aluminium (Aluminium not 
alloyed and Aluminium alloys)) 
The following communication, dated 10 May 2016, is  being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of the United States. 
_______________ 
The United States thanks India for its corrigendum notification regarding additional 
information provided under paragraph 3 of document G/SG/N/8/IND/29-G/SG/N/10/IND/20- G/SG/N/11/IND/15 (dated 29 April 2016), and poses the following questions: 
 
Question 1 
Article 9.1 of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards ("Agreement") provides for special treatment for 
a developing country if its market share is less than 3 percent and where the developing countries' 
aggregate share is less than 9 percent. Footnote 2 to Article 9.1 provides that "[a] Member shall 
immediately notify an action taken under paragraph 1 of Article 9 to the Committee on Safeguards." Most Members comply with the foot note 2 obligation by providing a list of the 
developing countries excluded from a measure, and developing countries generally see this as a 
vital transparency step, as notifications are often the best method to know whether a measure will be applied to them. 
India's corrigendum attempts to provide this transp arency by directing developing countries to the 
relevant Customs Notification from 5 February 2016, and providing a corresponding Internet address where the notification can be found. However, the provided address merely directs the user to the main webpage of the Central Board of Excise and Customs within the Ministry of 
Finance. That page has a Customs drop-down menu that contains a link to yet another page, 
http://www.cbec.gov.in/Cu stoms-Notifications . The "Safeguards" tab lists only one notification, 
01/2016 Cus.(SG), dt. 29-03-2016, which relates to the hot-rolled safeguards investigation. Could 
India please explain whether and, if so, how, Members, including developing country Members, 
can use the information in India's notification to identify which developing countries are excluded from India's safeguard measures? 
                                               
1 G/SG/N/8/IND/29/Corr.1-G/SG/N/10/IND/20/Corr.1-G/SG/N/11/IND/15/Corr.1 (dated 2 May 2016). G/SG/Q2/IND/22 
 
- 2 - 
 
  Question 2 
Could India please confirm that the following In ternet address is the more appropriate one for 
developing countries (and all WTO Members) to refer to in order to determine which developing countries are excluded from the measure: http://www.cbec.gov.in/htdocs-cbec/customs/cs-
act/notifications/notfns-2016/cs-nt2016/csnt19-2016 ? If correct, the United States notes that the 
notification is identified as "to be published". Could India please also confirm that the notification 
has actually been published? 
Question 3 
Given the apparent limitation regarding the provid ed Internet address of the appropriate customs 
notification, could India please explain why it did not provide the list of countries as stated in the 
notification itself, consistent with how most Members discharge their respective Article 9.1, 
footnote 2 obligation? Or, alternatively, at a minimum, given that the customs notification 
predates the WTO notification by almost three months, could India not also attach the relevant customs notification to its applicable WTO notifications so that developing countries (and all WTO 
Members) have absolute clarity, transparency, an d understanding regarding the applicability of the 
measure? 
 
__________