WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/DS344/18 
24 August 2009 
 
 (09-4000) 
 Original:   Spanish 
  
 
UNITED STATES – FINAL ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES 
ON STAINLESS STEEL FROM MEXICO 
 
Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Mexico
 
 
Request for Consultations 
 
  The following communication, dated 19 August 2009, from the delegation of Mexico to the 
delegation of the United States and to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated in 
accordance with Article 21.5 of the DSU. 
 
_______________ 
 
  The Government of Mexico hereby requests consultations with the Government of the 
United States pursuant to Articles 21.5 and 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures 
Governing the Settlement of Disputes  ("DSU"), Article XXII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and 
Trade 1994 ("GATT 1994"), Article 17 of the Agreem ent on Implementation of Article VI of the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (" Anti-Dumping Agreement ") and paragraph 1 of the 
Agreement between Mexico and the United States Re garding Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of 
the Dispute Settlement Understanding (" Sequencing Agreement ")
1, with respect to the issues 
identified below.  
I. BACKGROUND TO THE REQUEST 
1. On 20 May 2008, the Dispute Settlement Body ("DSB") adopted the Appellate Body Report 
and the Panel Report, as modified by the Appellate Body Report, in United States – Final 
Anti-Dumping Measures On Stainless Steel From Mexico  (WT/DS344) ( US – Zeroing (Mexico) ).
2  
The DSB found that: 
 (i) Model zeroing in original investigations is , "as such", inconsistent with Article 2.4.2 
of the Anti-Dumping Agreement3; 
 
 (ii) the United States Department of Comme rce ("USDOC") acted inconsistently with 
Article 2.4.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement in the investigation on Stainless Steel 
Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico  by using model zeroing4; 
  (iii) simple zeroing in periodic reviews is, "as such", inconsistent with Article VI:2 of the 
GATT 1994 and Article 9.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement
5;  and 
                                                      
1 WT/DS344/17. 
2 Minutes of DSB Meeting, WT/DSB/M/250, para. 74 (20 May 2008). 
3 Panel Report, US – Zeroing (Mexico) , para. 8.1(a). 
4 Ibid., para. 8.1(b). WT/DS344/18 
Page 2  
 
   
 (iv) the United States acted inconsistently  with Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994 and 
Article 9.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement  by applying simple zeroing in the 
five periodic reviews at issue in this di spute (and identified as cases 1 to 5 in the 
Annex to this request).
6 
 
2. On 2 June 2008, the United States informed the DSB that it intended to comply with its 
WTO obligations in this dispute but that it woul d require a reasonable period of time to do so.7  The 
United States requested 15 months, ending on 20 August 2009, to take legislative action and/or 
administrative action pursuant to Section 123 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act  to implement the 
recommendations and rulings of the DSB with resp ect to simple zeroing used in periodic reviews.8  
Mexico and the United States, however, were unabl e to agree on a reasonable period of time for 
implementation.9 
3. On 11 August 2008, Mexico requested that th e reasonable period of time be determined 
through binding arbitration pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU.10  On 20 October 2008, the 
Arbitrator determined that the reasonable period of  time ("RPT") for the United States to implement 
the recommendations and rulings of the DSB was 11 months plus 10 days from the date of adoption 
of the Panel and Appellate Body Re ports.  The RPT ended on 30 April 2009.11 
4. On 18 May 2009, Mexico and the United States concluded the Sequencing Agreement  with a 
view to facilitating the procedures for a resolution of this dispute under Articles 21 and 22 of the 
DSU. 
II. IMPLEMENTATION ACTION AND INACTION DECLARED BY THE 
UNITED STATES 
5. On 27 December 2006, the USDOC published a notice stating its intention to abandon the use 
of zeroing in average-to-average comparisons in an ti-dumping original investigations, pursuant to the 
recommendations and rulings of the DSB.12  The final modification became effective on 
22 February 2007.13 
6. At the DSB meeting on 20 May 2009, the United States informed the DSB that it had issued a 
new final determination on 31 Marc h 2009, recalculating the margin of dumping in the original 
investigation of Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico  without model zeroing.14  The 
USDOC published a notice confirming implementa tion of this determination, effective 
                                                                                                                                                                     
5 Appellate Body Report, US – Zeroing (Mexico) , para. 165(a). 
6 Ibid., para. 165(b). 
7 Minutes of DSB Meeting, WT/DSB/M/251, para. 9 (2 June 2008). 
8 US – Zeroing (Mexico) , Award of the Arbitrator , Arbitration under Article 21.3 (c) of the DSU, 
WT/DS344/15, paras. 6-21 (31 Oct 2008). 
9 Ibid., para. 2. 
10 Ibid. 
11 Ibid., para. 65. 
12 Anti-Dumping Proceedings:  Calc ulations of the Weighted-Aver age Dumping Margin during an 
Anti-Dumping Investigation , 71 Fed. Reg. 77722 (Department of Commerce) (27 Dec. 2006) (final 
modification). 
13 Anti-Dumping Proceedings:  Calculations of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin in 
Anti-Dumping Investigations , 72 Fed. Reg. 3783 (Department of Commerce) (26 January 2007) (change in 
effective date of final modification). 
14 Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of Proceeding Under Section 129 of the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act:  Anti-Dump ing Measures on Stainl ess Steel from Mexico , A-201-822 
(31 March 2009).  WT/DS344/18 
 Page 3 
 
 
  23 April 2009.15  The determination revised the "all ot hers" anti-dumping duty  cash deposit rate, 
prospectively for subject imports from 23 April 2009 forward, but did not affect the anti-dumping duty cash deposit rate for the sole res pondent, ThyssenKrupp Mexinox S.A. de C.V.
16 
7. With respect to the administrative review s that were challenged "as applied", the 
United States informed the DSB that "any prospectiv e effect of those reviews has been eliminated and 
all entries of merchandise under the five review s have been liquidated for customs purposes."17  With 
respect to other rulings and recommendations in the dispute, the United States informed the DSB that 
it "has also been conferring with Mexico about the steps that the United States has taken to comply 
with the recommendations and rulings of the DSB."18 
III. MEASURES AT ISSUE AND CLAIMS MADE IN THESE PROCEEDINGS 
8. Mexico considers that the United States has failed to implement the recommendations and 
rulings of the DSB in this dispute and is therefore in breach of its WTO obligations.  The claims on which Mexico is seeking consultations w ith the United States are the following: 
 (i) As described in paragraph 1(iii) of th is Request, the DSB made recommendations and 
rulings to the effect that the use of simp le zeroing in periodic reviews is "as such" 
inconsistent with Artic le VI:2 of the GATT 1994  and Article 9.3 of the  Anti-Dumping 
Agreement .  The United States has not taken any steps to eliminate simple zeroing in 
periodic reviews and has therefore failed to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings by the end of the RPT or thereaf ter.  By continuing to maintain and use 
simple zeroing in periodic reviews and failing to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings, the Unite d States has acted and continues to act 
inconsistently with Articles 17.14, 21.1 and 21.3 of the DSU and, as indicated in the 
DSB's recommendations and rulings, Article  VI:2 of the GATT 1994 and Article 9.3 
of the Anti-Dumping Agreement . 
  (ii) As described in paragraph 1(iv) of this Request, the DSB made recommendations and 
rulings to the effect that the United States acted inconsistently with Article VI:2 of 
the GATT 1994 and Article 9.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement  by applying simple 
zeroing in the five periodic reviews orig inally challenged in this dispute (and 
identified in the Annex to this Request as cases 1 to 5).  The United States has not taken any steps to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings regarding the use of simple zeroing in cases 1 to 5.  By co ntinuing to maintain and use the simple 
zeroing measure in these five periodic  reviews and failing to implement the 
DSB's recommendations and rulings, the Un ited States acts inconsistently with 
Articles 17.14, 21.1 and 21.3 of the DSU and, as indicated in the DSB's recommendations and rulings, Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994 and Article 9.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement . 
 
 (iii) This Request also concerns five closel y related subsequent periodic reviews of the 
same anti-dumping duty order on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from Mexico (identified in the Annex as cases 6 to 10)  as well as any other subsequent closely 
                                                     
 
15 Implementation of the Findings of the WTO Dispute Settlement Panel and Appellate Body in 
United States – Final Anti-Dumping Meas ures on Stainless Steel from Mexico , 74 Fed. Reg. 19527 (Department 
of Commerce) (29 April 2009) (notice of determination under Section 129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements 
Act). 
16 See US Customs and Border Protection Message No. 9126204 (6 May 2009). 
17 Statement of the United States, Meeting of th e Dispute Settlement Body of 20 May 2009. 
18 Ibid. WT/DS344/18 
Page 4  
 
  related measures taken by the United Stat es in connection with the anti-dumping 
order on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from Mexico.  The foregoing includes, 
but is not limited to, any anti-dumping duty de terminations and measures that derive 
mechanically therefrom, that have a clos e nexus to the above-mentioned five periodic 
reviews originally challenged in this dispute.  Since the end of the RPT, the 
United States has improperly continued to impose, assess and/or collect anti-dumping 
duties in excess of the proper margin of dumping, and evidences its intention to continue to do so, through the five subsequent periodic reviews at issue, any amendments thereto, any measures closely related thereto, any future subsequent 
periodic reviews, and the United States Government instructions and notices.  The 
United States thereby improperly imposes duties on the importation of Mexican 
goods in excess of the duties permitted under the United States' Schedule of 
Concessions.  The United States' failure to take measures to eliminate simple zeroing and, thereby, to bring itself into conformity  with its WTO obligations, is inconsistent 
with Articles 17.14, 21.1 and 21.3 of the DSU.  As a result of this omission, the 
United States continues to act inconsistently with Article 9.3 of the Anti-Dumping 
Agreement  and Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994, as indicated in the 
DSB's recommendations and rulings. 
  (iv) Further, the United States' measures taken to comply as described herein, in so far as 
they exist, are inconsistent with Article 9.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement  and 
Articles II:1(a), II:1(b), VI:1 and VI:2 of the GATT 1994 for the reasons given in the 
previous paragraph. 
 9. Mexico reserves all of its WTO rights in r espect of the purported compliance by the 
United States with its obligations in this dispute.  It also reserves the right to raise further factual and 
legal claims in the course of the consultations. 
10. Mexico looks forward to receiving the US Govern ment's response to this Request in order to 
set a mutually convenient date for consultations. 
  WT/DS344/18 
 Page 5 
 
 
   
ANNEX 
 
STAINLESS STEEL SHEET AND STRIP IN COILS FROM MEXICO 
(USDOC CASE NO. A-201-822) 
 
CASE PERIOD OF REVIEW PUBLICATION 
1 4 January 1999 - 30 June 2000 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico , 
67 FR 6490 (USDOC) (12 February 2002), subsequently amended as Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from 
Mexico , 67 FR 15542 (USDOC) (2 April 2002). 
2 1 July 2000 - 30 June 2001 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico , 
68 FR 6889 (USDOC) (11 February 2003), subsequently amended as Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from 
Mexico , 68 FR 13686 (USDOC) (20 March 2003). 
3 1 July 2001- 30 June 2002 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico , 
69 FR 6259 (USDOC) (10 February 2004). 
4 1 July 2002 – 30 June 2003 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico , 
70 FR 3677 (USDOC) (26 January 2005). 
5 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico , 
70 FR 73444 (USDOC) (12 December 2005). 
6 1 July 2004 - 30 June 2005 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico , 
71 FR 76978 (USDOC) (22 December 2006). 
7 1 July 2005 - 30 June 2006 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico , 
73 FR 7710 (USDOC) (11 February 2008), as 
subsequently amended 73 FR 14215 (17 March 2008). 
8 1 July 2006 - 30 June 2007 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico , 
74 FR 6365 (USDOC) (9 February 2009). 
9 1 July 2007- 30 June 2008 Preliminary Determination - Stainless Steel Sheet and 
Strip in Coils from Mexico , 74 FR 39622 (USDOC) 
(7 August 2009). 
10 1 July 2008 - 30 June 2009 Initiation - Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from 
Mexico , 74 FR ____ (USDOC) (__ August 2009). 
 
__________