G/ADP/Q1/CHL/5  
G/SCM/Q1/CHL/5  
G/SG/Q1/CHL/3  
 
21 August 2013  
(13-4485)  Page: 1/2  
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices 
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Committee on Safeguards
 Original: English  
 
  NOTIFICATION OF LAWS AND REGULATIONS UNDER  
ARTICLES 18.5, 32.6 AND 12.6 OF THE AGREEMENTS 
QUESTIONS POSED BY THE UNITED STATES 
REGARDING THE NOTIFICATION OF CHILE1 
The following communication, dated 16 August 2013, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of the United States.  
_______________ 
  
The United States thanks Chile for its notification of the anti-distortion regulations hereinafter  
"Regulations") and poses the following questions:  General
2 
 
1. Article 8 of the Regulations states that the Na tional Commission created under Article 9 of 
Law No. 18.525 (hereinafter "the Commission") may invite persons or institutions to attend 
Commission meetings when at least three Commission members vote to invite them. However, it 
is not clear in what capacity these invitees oper ate (e.g. to provide additional information, to 
clarify information on the record, to present new evidence relevant to the case, to vote on matters 
before the Commission, etc.) Could Chile please clarify the status and role of these invitees to 
Commission meetings? In addition, when such invitees attend Commission meetings, will a summary of the meeting be placed on the official case record? 
 
Safeguards 
 2. Articles 14 and 17 of the Regulations set out time lines for conducting the initial portions of 
safeguard investigations, starting with the filing of an application. The time lines indicate that the 
competent authorities have up to 20 days to consider the application and publish the initiation through a notice, and up to 90 days in which to complete an investigation. Article 24 of the 
Regulations further provides that the competent authorities have up to 30 days from initiation of 
the investigation to make a recommendation for a provisional measure. However, the Regulations do not appear to specify time periods for making determinations of serious injury, or for making decisions on whether to apply a safeguard measure.  
 
a. Please provide a typical schedule of events for an investigation, beginning with the day 
on which the application is filed to the day on which a safeguard would be expected to 
take effect, if imposed.  
b. Please also explain whether the time period for making a recommendation for a 
provisional measure would overlap with the 90 day period for making a serious injury 
determination.  
                                               
1 G/ADP/N/1/CHL/2/Suppl.1–G/SCM/N/1/CHL/2/Suppl.1–G/SG/N/1/CHL/2/Suppl.2 (dated 
13 May 2013). 
2 For the sake of efficiency, the United States suggests that committee review for the "General" question 
be conducted in the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices. G/ADP/Q1/CHL/5 • G/SCM/Q1/CHL/5 • G/SG/Q1/CHL/3 
 
- 2 - 
 
  c. Please clarify whether these are working days or calendar days.  
3. Article 24 of the Regulations states "{w}here the interested party has requested the 
application of a provisional measure at the same time as requesting the initiation of an investigation, the Commission shall rule on that request in the same act as that in which it rules on 
the initiation of the investigation." In this situation, given that interested parties (outside of the 
applicant) are not notified of the existence of an application until initiation, how will the Chilean authorities ensure that interested parties are given ample opportunity to defend their interests on 
the issue of the application of provisional measures? In other words, how will the Chilean 
authorities ensure that its actions are consistent with the requirements in Article 3.1 of the WTO 
Agreement on Safeguards? 
 
4. Article 25 of the Regulations states "At any stage of the investigation, whether ex officio or 
at the request of the interested party, the Commission may recommend to the President of the Republic, through the Ministry of Finance, that the provisional measures be modified or repealed."  
 
a. Please confirm that parties would be able to provide comments prior to any modification 
of duties.  
b. In instances where Chile will modify or repeal provisional measures, will the rationale for 
making such a decision be disclosed to the parties?  
c. Through this Article, could provisional measures also be increased?  
d. If provisional measures are reduced as a resu lt of this modification, could Chile please 
confirm that any duties paid in excess of the revised measure would be refunded? 
5. Article 26 of the Regulations refers to th e issuing of a "reasoned resolution" that the 
requirements for applying a measure have been met and identifies certain types of findings and 
reasoned conclusions to be included therein. Please explain whether this "resolution" equates to 
the "report" referred to at the end of Articl e 3.1 of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards, and 
whether this report or resolution will contain the "findings and reasoned conclusions on all 
pertinent issues of fact and law" as required by  Article 3.1 of the Safeguards Agreement. Please 
also explain whether the same an swer would apply in the case of a "reasoned resolution" under 
Article 31 of the Regulations regarding an extension of a safeguard measure. If the required report 
is separate from the resolution, please explain how the report will be released to parties.  
 
Anti-Dumping  
6. Article 40 of the Regulation states "Investigations for the application of anti-dumping and 
countervailing duties shall be conducted in accordance with the rules and procedures laid down in Law No. 18.525, the Agreement on Implementation  of Article VI of the GATT 1994, the Agreement 
on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, the GA TT 1994, and these Regulations." In case of a 
discrepancy between these Regulations and the aforementioned Agreements, which will hold 
precedence?  
7. Article 55 of the Regulations states in part that "In the case of exporters of the product 
subject to investigation, questionnaires shall be deemed to have been received one week after the 
date on which they were sent to the respondent  or transmitted to the appropriate diplomatic 
representative of the exporting country." Please conf irm that Chile will send questionnaires directly 
to known exporters of subject merchandise. 
 
8. Article 64 seems to indicate that the Presiden t of the Republic either affirmatively confirms 
or vetoes every proposed antidumping and countervailing duty measure, or may have the option to modify the proposed measure. Please confirm this understanding of Article 64 and describe the 
procedures that would be followed if the President were to modify the proposed measure.  
 
 
__________