G/ADP/Q1/BRA/40  
G/SCM/Q1/BRA/40  
G/SG/Q1/BRA/9  
 
29 March 2019  
(19-1981) Page: 1/2 
Comm ittee 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 BRAZ IL1 
The following c ommunication, dated 28 March 2019 , is being circulated at the requ est of the 
delegation of the United States.  
 
_______________  
 
 
The United States thanks Brazil for its notification regarding the electronic administrative procedure 
relating to trade remedy  investigations ( i.e., Ordinance 30 of 8  June 2018), and poses the following 
questions:2 
 
Question 1  
 
Please provide the following additional details on Brazil 's electronic administrative procedure:  
 
(a) How long has the Department of Trade Remedies (DECOM) been using the Decom Digital 
System (DDS) for its trade remedy proceedings?  
(b) Does DECOM still maintain hard copy records for cases that were concluded prior to the 
implementation of DDS? If so, can interested parties still access those records? If so, how?  
(c) Does DECOM still maintain a reading room where interested parties can access case files?  
(d) Does DECOM maintain hard copy records for any of its current/on -going trade remedy 
proceedings?  
 
Question 2  
 
In Article 2, paragraph 2, Brazil states that interested parties to trade remedy proceedings "shall 
participate in the course of investigations through a duly authorized representative recognized by 
DECOM ". Paragraph 3, however, notes that "intervention " in trade remedy proceedings of 
representatives that are not authorized shall be accepted for specified actions, including the 
submission of questionnaire response and comments on product models, et al . Please clarify this 
apparent inconsistency or further explain whether "participation in the course of investigations " and 
"interventions " include different and/or distinct activities . May interested parties to Brazilian trade 
remedy proceedings submit questionnaire responses and/or otherwise partic ipate without a duly 
authorized representative? If so, please explain any limitations on the rights of parties to participate 
or specific activities that require an authorized representative.  
 
                                                
1 G/ADP/N/1/BRA/3/Suppl.10 -G/SCM/N/1/BRA/2/Suppl.13 -G/SG/N/1/BRA/3/Suppl.4  (dated 
30 January  2019).  
2 For the sake of  efficiency, the United States suggests that committee review for all questions be 
conducted in the Committee on Anti -Dumping Practices.  G/ADP/Q1/BRA/40 • G/SCM/Q1/BRA/40 • G/SG/Q1/BRA/9  
 
- 2 - 
 
  Question 3  
 
Article 4 states that "All procedural acts " in Bra zilian trade remedy proceedings "shall be digitally 
signed by means of digital certificates issued under ICP -Brasil ". Paragraph 1 of Article 4 further 
states that "the representative of the interested party should follow the guidelines established by 
the N ational Institute of Information Technology at http://www.ita.gov.br  to acquire an ICP -Brasil 
standard digital certificate ".  
 
(a) Are interested parties to Brazilian trade remedy proceedings which are located outside of Brazil 
(e.g., foreign respondents and/or their representatives, government officials of respondent 
countries, or exporters) able to obtain a digital certificate and u se the DDS? If so, is the 
process for doing so the same as under the guidelines?   
(b) Are foreign respondents required to have local counsel or a "duly authorized representative " 
that is physically located in Brazil to obtain access to the DDS?   
(c) Can members of the general public register for and use the DDS?  
 
Question 4  
 
Article 7, paragraph 2 states that "The disclosure of confidential information by mistake of 
classification of the document is {sic} sole responsibility of the party that submitted it ".   
 
(a) Are there any penalties under Brazilian law associated with the wrongful disclosure of 
confidential data? For example, what would happen if a party disclosed confidential data in a 
document that was incorrectly classified?  
(b) What would happen if DECOM inadvertently disclosed confidential data in a document 
generated by DECOM (e.g., a preliminary or final determination or essential facts document)? 
How would DECOM be held accountable?   
(c) Would any violation concerning the wrongful disclosure o f proprietary information be treated 
the same regardless of whether the document was filed electronically or in a hard copy paper 
format?   
 
Question 5  
 
Articles 10 and 11 discuss regular maintenance of DDS, and what happens in instances when the 
system is unavailable .  
 
(a) Has DECOM experienced any prolonged outages of the DDS system since it was implemented? 
If so, how did DECOM handle these outages?  
(b) Were case deadlines extended?  
(c) Are parties able to utilize alternative filing methods when the DDS is down? For example, if 
the DDS is unavailable, do parties have the option to make hard copy submissions to DECOM?  
 
 
__________