WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
9 February 2005 
 
 (05-0537) 
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices 
Working Group on Implementation  
 
 
  
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT 
  
 
 
 During the meeting of the Working Group on Implementation ("Group") on 27 October 2004, 
the Secretariat was requested to compile a list of a ll the topics referred to the Group by the Committee 
on Anti-Dumping Practices ("Committee") since the establishment of the Group on 29 April 1996, for 
discussion and recommendations to the Committee
1, as well as a list of topics which had been proposed 
by Members for discussion by the Group, but whic h had not been referred to it by the Committee. 
 A. F
IRST LIST OF TOPICS  
 At its regular meeting held on 29 April 1996, the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices 
decided to establish the Group to prepare r ecommendations on issues where agreement seemed 
possible, and report to the Committee, and consider  other issues regarding implementation on which 
Members believed discussion would be helpful2.  Members were requested to submit to the Secretariat 
proposals for items that the Group could discuss.  The following proposals, circulated as document 
G/ADP/W/399, were received:  1. Proposed topics for discussion by the Gr oup - circulated as document G/ADP/W/399 
1.1. (European Communities )  Treatment of confidential information.  
  1.2. (Japan)  The period of data collection for a dumping investigation    Each Member has its own criteria to de termine the period of data collection for a 
dumping investigation because there is no provision in the Anti-Dumping Agreement 
regarding the data collection period.  Could this issue be discussed? 
  1.3. (Korea)  Clarification of the rela tionship between footno te 14 and Article 5.4 
 
  It should be clarified whether employees of domestic producers, or the representatives 
of those employees, have the right to vote  under Article 5.4.  If so, the relationship 
between their rights and those of the domest ic producers should al so be clarified. 
 
                                                     
 
1 Implementation-related issues referred to the Committee on Anti-Dumping Pr actices and the Working 
Group on Implementation by the Doha Ministerial Conference – paragraphs 7.2 and 7.3 of document WT/MIN/(01)/17, are not included in this compilation. 
2 Document G/ADP/M/7. G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
Page 2  
 
  1.4. (Korea)  Sampling method under Article 6.10   
   Article 6.10 indicates that under certain ci rcumstances a determinat ion of an individual 
margin of dumping may be impractical if the number of exporters, producers, 
importers, or types of products involved is  too large.  The criteria constituting "too 
large" should be elaborated upon.   The term "statist ically valid" should also be defined. 
  1.5. (New Zealand)  What might constitute "special circumstances" in Article 5.6 of the 
Agreement?  
 
 1.6. (United States)  Notification of the gov ernment of the exporting member pursuant to 
Article 5.5. 
  1.7. (United States)  Protection of business pr oprietary data set forth in Article 6.5.   
 
 1.8. (United States)  The provisi on for hearings in Article 6.2.   
  1.9. (United States)  Provision of essential facts under consid eration before making a final 
determination under Article 6.9.   
  1.10. (Chile)  Advantages and drawbacks of taking normal value to mean the export price to 
an appropriate third country as opposed to th e constructed value (when it is not possible 
to use the sale price in the domestic market).   
  1.11. (Chile)  More precise definition of  an "appropriate th ird country".     
 
 1.12. (Chile)  Precise methods for determin ing "a reasonable amount for administrative, 
selling and general costs and for profits".     
  1.13. (Chile)  Methods for constructing the export price in cases where the exporter and 
importer are related.   
 
 1.14. (Chile)  Precise method s for establishing the discounts  needed for a fair comparison 
between the export price and the normal value.     
  1.15. (Korea)  Establish a priority for applyi ng "comparable export price to third country" 
and "constructed value"  under Article 2.2 
 
  When it is impossible to compute the dumpin g margin with the ordinary domestic price 
in the exporting country, Article 2.2 permit s authorities to use the "comparable export 
price to a third country", or the "construct ed value".  However, it is unclear which 
method should take precedence in lieu of the ordinary price. 
 
 1.16. (Korea)  Establish a priority in substituting the ordinary  domestic price under 
Article 2.2.2 
   Again, a standard set of priorities should be established for whic h substitutes to use in 
place of actual data, taking into account the actual amount of the same general category 
of product, the weighted average of the act ual amounts incurred by other exporters or 
producers, and any other reasonable methods. 
  G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
 Page 3 
 
 
  1.17. (Korea)  The application of both weig hted average price under Article 2.4.2 and the de 
minimis  margin under Article 5.8 
   The weighted average pr ice under Article 2.4.2 is of ten applied asymmetrically 
between export prices  and the normal value, or calcul ated on different time bases for 
investigation and review.  The de minimis  criteria and negligibility under Article 5.8 is, 
in some cases, interpreted as being applie d only to the investigation.  The scope of 
application of these articles needs clarifying. 
  1.18. (Chile)  Precise guidelines for th e definition of a "like product".     
 
 1.19. (Chile)  With regard to "injury" and "c ausal link", discussion of accounting, statistical 
and economic methods for: 
 
(a) Determining the distorting effect on the prices and volumes of the imports 
complained of and those from other origins (cumulative assessment); 
 
(b) Determining the distorting effect on the domestic industry caused by the 
prices and volumes of imports; 
(c) Measuring the "likelihood" of a substan tial increase in imports in the event of 
a threat of injury; 
(d) Determining the "margin of injury"; 
(e) Assessing the public interest and the effects of anti-dumping measures on 
users and consumers.   
 1.20. (Korea)  Criteria of "s ignificance" under Article 3.2. 
 
 1.21. (Korea)  Methodology in evaluating the economic indices under Article 3.4. 
  1.22. (Korea)  Criteria in determining "material" in both "material" injury and "material" 
retardation under footnote 9 
   Authorities shall consider, under Article 3. 2, the 'significance' of the increase in 
dumped imports, the price undercutting by the dumped imports, and the degree of the 
depressive effect by the dum ped imports, respectively.  De finite criteria should be 
established for the sake of clarity of the authorities determination. 
    Article 3.4 exemplifies four groups of re levant economic factor s and indices to be 
evaluated by authorities in examining the impact on the domestic industry of the 
dumped imports.  An objective methodology should be established for the same reason 
as agenda item 3.  For instance, it can be considered whether each indices of the same 
group have varied collectively, or whethe r the weighted average of the group can 
function as a general index. 
 
  In the same context, definite criteria sh ould be offered in dete rmining both 'material' 
injury and 'material' retardation under footnote 9. 
  1.23. (European Communities)  Disclosure of findings.  G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
Page 4  
 
  1.24. (Hong Kong, China)  P ublic notices (Article 12) 
   Article 12 sets out requirements of public notices and explanatio n of determinations, 
which are not provided for in the Tokyo R ound Code.  Members ad minister different 
anti-dumping systems and may adopt different practices in this resp ect.  It would be 
useful to consider if some guidelines woul d be helpful to Members in implementation 
and, if so, what such guidelines should be. 
  1.25. (United States)  Publ ic notice of determinations under Article 12.2, including 
explanations for final determina tions under Article 12.2.2.   
 
 1.26. (European Communities)  Minimum standards in provisional measures.  
  1.27. (Hong Kong, China)  Format of  semi-annual report (Article 16.4) 
 
  Article 16.4 provides that semi-annual reports  shall be submitted on an agreed standard 
form.  At its meeting on 30 October 1995, the Committee adopted a format which is 
essentially identical to that used by th e Tokyo Round Code Committee.  It appears 
appropriate to review the format to see if an y modifications are necessary to bring it in 
line with the requirements of the WTO Agreement. 
 
 1.28. (Japan)  Date of starting export by expor ters or producers eligible for a new shipper 
review.   
   The following issues could be discussed:  
(a) Who would be eligible for the inves tigation of a new shipper review:  
exporters/producers who started exports after the end of the period of the 
original investigation, or those who started exports after the date when the decision to impose duties was made? 
 
(b) Can we make consensus on the understandi ng that those who exported before 
the beginning of the period of the data collection of the original investigation, 
but did not export during the period of the data collection, and resumed exports after the end of the period of the data collection should be regarded as 
eligible for a new shipper review? 
 
(c) In addition, how do we describe the investigation of a new shipper review in 
the notification format of the semi-annual report? 
  1.29. (Korea)  Standard of the panel review under Article 17.6 
   By means of the contextual interpretation of Article 17.6, the standard of the panel 
review on anti-dumping matters seems to be relatively restricted compared with the 
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Gove rning the Settlement of Disputes.  The 
standard of the panel review should ther efore be clarified, and or brought into 
conformity with the DSU. 
 
 1.30. (United States)  Judicial reviews outlined in Article 13.   
  1.31. (United States)  Duty assessments under Article 9.   
  G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
 Page 5 
 
 
  1.32. (United States)  Terminat ion of investigations in which the volume of dumped imports 
is negligible in Article 5.8. 
 
2. Agreed list of new topics referred to Gro up for discussion - circulated as document 
G/ADP/W/401 
 The proposals circulated as document G/ADP/W/399, were discussed by the Committee during 
its regular meeting held on 21 October 1996.  The Committee decided to refer the following topics, 
circulated as document G/ADP/W/ 401, to the Group for discussion and consideration of possible 
recommendations to the Committee:  
 2.1. Treatment of confidential  information.  Protection of bus iness proprietary data set forth 
in Article 6.5.   
  2.2. The period of data collection for a dump ing investigation.  E ach Member has its own 
criteria to determine the pe riod of data collection for a dumping investigation because 
there is no provision in the Anti-Dumping Agreement regarding the data collection 
period.  Could this issue be discussed? 
  2.3. Sampling method under Article 6.10.  Article 6.10 indicates that under certain 
circumstances a determination of an indivi dual margin of dumpi ng may be impractical 
if the number of exporters, producers, importers, or types of products involved is too 
large.  The criteria constituting 'too larg e' should be elaborated upon.  The term 
"statistically valid" should also be defined. 
  2.4. What might constitute "special circumst ances" in Article 5.6 of the Agreement?  
 
 2.5. Notification of the government of the ex porting member pursuant to Article 5.5.   
  2.6. The provision for hearings in Article 6.2.     2.7. Provision of esse ntial facts under consideration befo re making a final determination 
under Article 6.9.  Disclosure of findings. 
 
 2.8. Public notices (A rticle 12).  Article 12 sets out requirements of public notices and 
explanation of determinations , which are not provided for in the Tokyo Round Code.  
Members administer di fferent anti-dumping systems and may adopt differ ent practices 
in this respect.  It would be useful to co nsider if some guidelines would be helpful to 
Members in implementation and, if so, what such guidelines should be.  Public notice 
of determinations under Article 12.2, includi ng explanations for final determinations 
under Article 12.2.2.   
  2.9. Contents of preliminary affirmative determinations.  
 2.10. Duty assessments under Article 9.  
 G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
Page 6  
 
 B. S
ETTING ASIDE OF TOPICS ON THE FIRST LIST FROM ACTIVE DISCUSSION  
 At its regular meeting on 29 April 1999, the Committee noted that th e Group considered that 
certain of the topics that had been referred to it by the Committee could be set aside from active 
consideration  The following topi cs were set aside from active co nsideration by the Group, with the 
understanding that while these topics would not be th e subject of active discussion in the Group, they 
had not been eliminated from the Group's consideration.  If any Member wished to initiate further 
discussion of any of these topics, they might do so by  submitting, by the applicable deadline, a paper on 
the topic for consideration at the next meeting of the Group:  
1. Topics from First List set aside – circulated as document G/ADP/W/410 
 1.1. Topic 1 – Treatment of confidential information. 
  1.2. Topic 3 – Sampling method under Article 6.10.   1.3. Topics 4 – "Special ci rcumstances" in Article 5.6. 
 
 1.4. Topics 5 – Notification of exporting Member.   1.5. Topic 6 – Hearings.   1.6. Topic 7 – Disclosu re of essential facts. 
 
 1.7. Topic 8 – Public notices.  Facts.   1.8. Topic 10 – Duty assessment under Article 9.   
C. S
ECOND LIST OF TOPICS  
 After several rounds of discussions on the to pics, circulated as G/ ADP/W/401, the Committee, 
at its regular meeting held on 29 October 1998, decided to request Members to su bmit to the Secretariat 
by 1 December 1998 a list of new topics  Members wished th e Group to discuss3.  At the regular meeting 
of the Committee held on 29 April 1999, the followi ng proposals submitted by Me mbers, and circulated 
as document G/ADP/W/407/Rev.2, regarding new topi cs for discussion by the Group, were discussed4: 
 
1. Proposed new topics for discussion by the Group - circulated as document 
G/ADP/W/407/Rev.2 
 1.1. (Israel)  Article 2 
  
  A discussion as to the application of the Agreement regarding the situation of bids and 
tenders.  
 
                                                      
3 G/ADP/M/13. 
4 Document G/ADP/W/407/Rev.2.  G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
 Page 7 
 
 
  1.2. (Turkey)  Non-market economy country in connection with the term "ordinary course 
of trade" – Article 2.1 
   In determining "ordinary course of trade"  a s  u s e d  i n  A r t i c l e  2.1 of the Agreement, 
whether the exporting country is a market or non-market economy country becomes 
important.  Given the fact that there are no rules in the Agreement defining non-market 
economy countries, Turkey would like to know what the other members' practice on 
this specific issue is. 
  1.3. (Turkey)  Meaning of the term "Reasonable Amount" as used in Article 2.2. 
 
  1.4. (Turkey)  Constructed export price – Article 2.3         Article 2.3 of the Agreement states that when the actual export price is unreliable 
because of a compensatory arrangement between the exporter and the importer or a 
third party the export price may be construc ted on the basis of the price at which the 
imported products are first reso ld to an independent buyer. 
    Does this mean that the authorities shou ld use constructed export price even in cases 
where they possess some reliable export pri ce data, or, can they calculate the export 
price by using the reliable export price da ta that they have and disregard the 
unreliable data? 
   1.5. (Israel)  Article 2.4 – Fair Comparison     A discussion as to the various types of di fferences that may affect price comparability 
and which are in fact recognized when calculating dumping  margins.  
   1.6. (New Zealand)  Exchange Rates – Article 2.4.1       The footnote to this Article states that " normally, the date of sale would be the date of 
contract, purchase order, order confirmati on, or invoice, whichever establishes the 
material terms of sale".  This may bear no relation to the price actually paid for the 
goods, particularly in a situation where ther e is a sustained movement in exchange 
rates which does not come within the last sentence of Article 4.2.1, i.e. when the 
normal value currency declines against the export price currency 
 
  1.7. (Japan)  Establishment of appropriate exchange rate 
    Article 2.4.1. stipulates the principl es of how to determine exchange rates in 
calculating dumping margin.  Moreover, it also prescribes that "fluctuations in exchange rates" shall be ignored and that  exporters shall be given time to adjust 
export prices to reflect "sustained movements in exchange rates".  What situations 
should be recognized as giving rise to fluctua tions that can be ignored or to sustained 
movements for adjusting export prices, a nd in such situations how should the 
appropriate exchange rate be established specifically?  
   1.8. (Australia)  Article 2.4.2 
 
   Practical issues raised in the applicati on of this provision such as:  the different 
circumstances for using transaction-to-tran saction and weighted average-to-weighted 
average comparisons; the incidence of using the alternative methods; and the G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
Page 8  
 
 determination of whether the margin of dumping is de minimis  under the transaction-
to-transaction approach. 
   1.9. (Turkey)  Sampling in injury under Article 3.  
  1.10. (United States)  Negligible imports 
      Discuss the implementation of Article 3 c oncerning the termination of investigations 
caused by determinations based on de minimis  volumes of dumped imports. 
 
  1.11. (New Zealand)  Cumulation – Article 3.3 
      What is the practice of other administrations in applying this Article?    1.12. (Turkey)  Cumulative assessment – Article 3.3 
 
   In accordance with the provisions of Ar ticle 3.3 of the Agreement, what are the 
experiences of the other members in de termining the conditions of competition 
between the imported products and between  the imported products and the like 
product? 
 
  1.13. (European Communities)  Article 4/5.4 
      Definition of domestic industry (exclusion of producers related to 
importers/exporters, survey fo r standing determination). 
 
  1.14. (New Zealand)  Domestic industry – Article 4.1(i)   
      What is the practice of other Members in  applying this article ? The article provides 
for discretion, "… may
 be interpreted …".  How do authorities decide when to apply 
this article and exclude related producers? 
 
  1.15. (Turkey)  Interpretation of Artic le 4.1 – (footnote 11) and 3.5 simultaneously 
      Under Article 4.1, related producers may be excluded from the definition of the 
domestic industry.  On the other hand, Article  3.5 requires that other factors injuring 
the domestic industry be examined and in juries caused by these factors not be 
attributed to the dumped imports. 
    In some instances some of the exporters under investigation may have set up their 
manufacturing plants in the territory of the importing member.  In such cases, the 
investigating authorities of the importing member must not attribute the effect of these branches on the sector subject to the investigation to dumped imports 
originating in another country if the aut horities have information about the related 
producers. 
      Taking into consideration this hypothe tical case Turkey would like to know how 
other Members interpret these two articles simultaneously. 
 
  1.16. (Turkey)  Evidence – Article 5      Article 5 of the Agreement states th at the application for the initiation of an 
investigation shall include evidence of dumping, injury and the causal link between  G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
 Page 9 
 
 
 the two.  However, there is no clarifica tion as to what form of information may 
constitute evidence. 
   1.17. (United States)  Questionnaires/requests for information    
   Discuss the implementation of Article 6. 1 and Article 6.1.1, including the form and 
nature of questionnaires issued;  the different sections or types of questionnaires and their purpose(s);  who are the appropriate  recipients of questionnaires in both 
dumping and injury investigations;  time to respond;  and opportunities to submit 
additional information in response to s upplemental questionnaires or otherwise. 
 
  1.18. (European Communities)  Article 6.1       Questionnaires and other information provided by exporters/foreign producers 
(whether time limits are adequate for retu rns to be made, whether there is genuine 
flexibility on timing, including whether due  allowance is made for SMEs, companies 
without computerized records, etc.). 
   1.19.  (Japan)  Extension of deadline for reply to questionnaire         Regarding the extension of the deadline for a reply to questionnaires prescribed in 
Article 6.1.1, what "cause" should be provid ed for the extension to be granted and in 
what situation should such extension be deemed as "practicable"?   
   1.20. (United States)  Availability of evidence  
   Discuss the implementation of the Article 6.1.2 requirement that, subject to the 
requirement to protect confidential informa tion, evidence presented in writing by one 
interested party shall be made availabl e promptly to other interested parties 
participating in the investigation. 
   1.21. (United States)  Access to information 
 
   Discuss the implementation of Article 6.4,  which requires that, whenever practicable, 
authorities should provide timely opportunities for all interested parties to see all 
information that is relevant to the present ation of their cases that is not confidential 
under Article 6.5, and is used by authoriti es in an investigation, including, e.g. 
memoranda and other documents prepared and used by the authorities in reaching 
their determinations. 
   1.22. (United States)  Conduct of verifications       Discuss the implementation of Article 6. 7, which provides that authorities may carry 
out investigations in other countries as required, provided they obtain the agreement 
of the firms concerned, and they notify the representatives of the government of the 
countries in question (unless the latter object to the investigation).  Address issues 
such as whether governments provide verifica tion outlines, lists of participants, or 
other preparatory information prior to the verification;  and whether the verification 
findings are memorialized in written reports or otherwise. 
    G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
Page 10  
 
   1.23. (European Communities)  Article 6.8 
    Use of information available (how do users of the instrument use information 
available, or intend to use it, adverse c onsequences of using information available). 
 
  1.24. (Israel)  Article 6.12  
      A discussion pertaining to the practices of the various authorities as to how and at 
what stages in the investigation, they provide opportunities for industrial users and consumer organizations to provide informati on which is relevant to the proceedings.  
 
  1.25. (Canada)  Article 6.12       Article 6.12 requires that anti-dumping authorities provide an opportunity for 
industrial users of the product under inves tigation and consumer  organizations to 
provide information which is relevant to  the investigation.  How do authorities 
accommodate this requirement? 
   1.26. (Malaysia)  Article 9.5 – "Expedited/new shipper review".    1.27. (European Communities)  Article 9.5 
   
   Handling of newcomer reviews (date of  starting exports, newcomers in cases where 
sampling has been applied (individual treat ment), treatment of one-off shipments). 
   1.28. (Japan)  Conditions for the Retroactive levying of AD duties.   
   
   What should be the criteria to determin e the following conditions for the retroactive 
levying of AD duties prescribed in Article 10.6?  
      (1) the importer was, or should have  been, aware that the exporter practices 
dumping and that such dumping would cause injury (10.6(i)); 
   (2) the injury is caused by massive dumped imports of a product in a relatively 
short time which in light of the timing and the volume of the dumped imports is likely 
to seriously undermine the remedial effect  of the definitive anti-dumping duty to be 
applied (10.6(ii)). 
 
  1.29. (Turkey)  Recurrence of Injury – Articles 11.2 and 11.3.   
      How do the investigating authorities of the other members examine, during a review 
investigation initiated under Articles 11.2 or 11. 3, whether the injury will continue or 
recur if the definitive anti-dumping duty is terminated?  What specifically does recurrence mean as used in these paragraphs? 
 
  1.30. (Japan)  Review investigations  prescribed in Article 11.2 or 11.3   
      When determining whether anti-dumping du ty is "no longer warranted" (Article 11.2) 
or when determining whether "the expiry of  the duty would be likely to lead to the 
continuation or recurrence of dumping and in jury" (Article 11.3), what factors should 
the authorities take into account, and in wh at situation can the authorities determine 
to terminate or to continue the duty?   
     G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
 Page 11 
 
 
   1.31. (United States)  Judicial, arbitral or administrative review 
      Discuss the implementation of Article 13, and whether there is an opportunity for 
prompt review of administrative actions re lating to final determ inations and reviews 
of determinations.  Discuss, e.g. the types of review provided (judicial, arbitral, 
administrative), whether determinations can be appealed, and to what court or other 
institution. 
   1.32. (European Communities)  Article 13    
   Judicial Review (what steps taken to implement this provision, types of review 
available). 
   1.33. (New Zealand) Third Country Dumping – Article 14.4    
   New Zealand has investigated two cases of dumping on behalf of a third country.  In 
both cases, differing opinions were held by various members as to what constituted 
“action” under Article 14.4, and what the procedures are for gaining approval from 
the Council for Trade in Goods for such action. 
 
2. Agreed list of new topics referred to Gro up for discussion - circulated as document 
G/ADP/W/410 
 After discussing the proposals for new topics circulated as document G/ADP/W/407/Rev.2, 
the Committee decided, during its regular meeting he ld on 29 April 1999 to refer the following new 
topics to the Group for discussion and the possible development of an agreed understanding or recommendation on implementation for considera tion by the Committee, circulated as document 
G/ADP/410. 
  2.1. Practical issues and experience in applying Article 2.4.2       Practical issues raised in the applicati on of this provision such as:  the different 
circumstances for using transaction-to-tran saction and weighted average-to-weighted 
average comparisons; the incidence of using the alternative methods; and the 
determination of whether the margin of dumping is de minimis  under the transaction-
to-transaction approach. 
  2.2. Termination of investigat ions under Article 5.8 in cases of de minimis  import volume  
 
   Negligible imports.    Discuss the implementation of Article 3 c oncerning the termination of investigations 
caused by determinations based on de minimis  volumes of dumped imports. 
  2.3 Practical issues and experience in cases involving cumulation under Article 3.3. 
 
   Cumulation – Article 3.3    What is the practice of other administrations in applying this Article? 
Cumulative assessment – Article 3.3.  In accordance with the provisions of Article 
3.3 of the Agreement, what are the experi ences of the other members in determining 
the conditions of competition between the imported products and between the 
imported products and the like product? 
 G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
Page 12  
 
  2.4. Practical issues and experience with respect to questionnaires and requests for 
information under Articles 6.1 and 6.1.1. 
 
Questionnaires/requests for informati on.  Discuss the implementation of 
Article 6.1 and Article 6.1.1, including the form and nature of questionnaires 
issued;  the different sections or types of questionnaires and their purpose(s);  
who are the appropriate recipients of questionnaires in both dumping and 
injury investigations;  time to respond;  and opportunities to submit additional 
information in response to supplemental questionnaires or otherwise. 
Article 6.1:  Questionnaires and other in formation provided by exporters/foreign 
producers (whether time limits are adequate for returns to be made, whether there is 
genuine flexibility on timing, including wh ether due allowance is made for SMEs, 
companies without computerized records, etc.). 
 
Extension of deadline for reply to questi onnaire:  Regarding the extension of the 
deadline for a reply to questionnaires prescribed  in Article 6.1.1, what "cause" should 
be provided for the extension to be gran ted and in what situation should such 
extension be deemed as "practicable"?   
  2.5. Practical issues and experience in providing opportunities for industrial users and 
consumer organizations to provide  information under Article 6.12. 
 
  Article 6.12:  A discussion pertaining to the practices of the various authorities as to 
how and at what stages in the investigation,  they provide opportunities for industrial 
users and consumer organizations to provide  information which is relevant to the 
proceedings 
  
 Article 6.12:  Article 6.12 requires that anti-dumping authorities provide an 
opportunity for industrial users of the product under investigation and consumer 
organizations to provide information which is  relevant to the investigation.  How do 
authorities accommodate this requirement? 
 
 2.6. Practical issues and experience in  conducting "new shipper" reviews under 
Article 9.5. - See Document G/ADP/W/407/Rev.2, Items 26 & 27. 
   Article 9.5 – "Expedited/new shipper review" 
 
   Article 9.5 
   Handling of newcomer reviews (date of  starting exports, newcomers in cases where 
sampling has been applied (individual treat ment), treatment of one-off shipments). 
 D. S
ECOND SETTING ASIDE OF TOPICS FROM ACTIVE DISCUSSION  
 At the regular meeting of the Group on 29 April 2003, Members considered that certain of the 
topics that had been referred to the Group by the Committee, as set out in document G/ADP/W/410, 
could be set aside from active consideration at th is time, with the understanding that while these 
topics would not be the subject of active discussion in the Group, they had not been eliminated from 
the Group's consideration.  If any Member wished to  initiate further discussion of any of these topics, 
they might do so by submitting, by the applicable deadline, a paper on the topic for consideration at 
the next meeting of the Group.  Members thus ag reed to set aside the following topics from active 
consideration by the Group:  G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
 Page 13 
 
 
 1. Topics from Second List set aside – circulated as document G/ADP/W/433 
1.1. Practical issues and experience in applying Article 2.4.2. 
1.2. Practical issues and experience in case s involving cumulation under Article 3.3. 
1.3. Practical issues and experience with respect to questionnaires and requests for 
information under Articles 6.1 and 6.1.1. 
1.4. Practical issues and experience in prov iding opportunities for industrial users and 
consumer organizations to provide  information under Article 6.12. 
1.5. Practical issues and experience in  conducting "new shipper" reviews under 
Article 9.5. 
E. THIRD LIST OF TOPICS  
 After several rounds of discussions on the topics circulated as document G/ADP/W/410, the 
Group agreed during its regular meeting held on 21 October 2002, to start the process of identifying 
new topics for discussion.  Members were request ed to submit proposals for new topics to the 
Secretariat no later than 31 March 20035.  In response to this request, the following proposals for new 
topics were submitted, circulated as document G/ADP/431. 
 
1. Proposed new topics for discussion by the Group - circulated as document 
G/ADP/W/431 
1.1. (European Communities)  Article 2.2:  How do Members decide when to use export 
prices to third countries and when to use constructed normal value under Article 2.2? 
1.2. (European Communities)  Article 2.4.1:  Foreign exchange fluctuations (how do users 
of the instrument deal with currency fl uctuations in the context of dumping 
calculations?). 
1.3. (European Communities)  Article 2.6:  Li ke product (what criteria do users of the anti-
dumping instrument consider in defining the like product?). 
1.4. (European Communities)  Article 4/5.4:  Members' practice as concerns the exclusion 
of producers related to importers/ exporters from the domestic industry. 
1.5. (European Communities)  Article 8:  Members' practice concerning price 
undertakings, in particular, standard provi sions, situations where they would be 
considered appropriate, use of quan titative elements and monitoring. 
1.6. (European Communities)  Article 9.3:  Members' practice as concerns the refund 
procedure:  including timetables for requests and submission of evidence;  which 
authority carries out this procedure (is it the same as in the origin al investigation?);  
what type of evidence is needed to initiate the procedure, and what type of evidence is 
needed to actually receive a refund;  do es the domestic industry complainant have 
standing? 
                                                      
5 G/ADP/M/22. G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
Page 14  
 
 1.7. (United States)   Article 6.1.2 Availab ility of Evidence: Discuss the implementation of 
the Article 6.1.2 requirement that, subject to the requirement to protect confidential 
information, evidence presented in writing by one party shall be made available 
promptly to other interested parties participating in the investigation. 
 1.8. (United States)  Article 6.4 Access to Information:  Discuss the implementation of 
Article 6.4, which requires that, whenever  practicable, authorities should provide 
timely opportunities for all interested parties to  see all information that is relevant to 
the presentation of their cases, that is not confidential under Article 6.5 and that is used by authorities in an investigation, including all non-confidential information and 
written argument presented to or obtained by  the authorities during the course of the 
investigation which relates to that investigation.  
  1.9. (United States)  Article 6.7 Conduct of  Verification:  Discuss the implementation of 
Article 6.7, which provides that authorities may carry out investigations in other countries as required, provided they obtain the agreement of the firms concerned, and 
they notify the representatives of the government of the countries in question (unless 
the latter object to the investigation).  Address issues such as whether authorities 
provide verification outlines, lists of partic ipants, or other preparatory information 
prior to the verification; and whether the verification findings are memorialized in 
written reports or otherwise. 
 
 1.10. (United States)  Article 13 Judicial, arbitral or administrative review:  Discuss the 
implementation of Article 13, and whether th ere is an opportunity for prompt review 
of administrative actions relating to final determinations and reviews of 
determinations.  Discuss, e.g. the types of review provided (judicial, arbitral, 
administrative), whether determinations can be appealed, and to what court or other 
institution. 
 
2. Agreed list of new topics referred to Gro up for discussion - circulated as document 
G/ADP/W/433 
 At its regular meeting on 29 April 2003, the Committee discussed proposed new topics 
submitted by Members for discussion by the Group, circulated as document G/ADP/W/431, and 
decided to refer the following group of four topics to the Group for discussion and consideration of 
possible recommendations to the Committee.  The list of topics was subsequently circulated as document G/ADP/W/433.  A short title had been given to each topic in the listing below, for ease of reference.  However, the scope of the topics rema ined as originally proposed and described in the 
Group.  References to the original proposals are included. 
2.1. Article 2.2 – Export prices to thir d countries or constructed normal value 
 How do Members decide when to use export prices to third countries and when to use 
constructed normal valu e under Article 2.2? 
2.2. Article 2.4.1 - Foreign exchange fluctuations 
 How do users of the instrument deal with  currency fluctuations in the context of 
dumping calculations?  G/ADP/AHG/W/168 
 Page 15 
 
 
 2.3. Article 6.7 - Conduct of verification 
 Discuss the implementation of Article 6.7,  which provides that authorities may carry 
out investigations in other countries as required, provided they obtain the agreement of the firms concerned, and they notify the representatives of the government of the 
countries in question (unless the latter object to the investigations).  Address issues 
such as whether authorities provide verification outlines, lists of participants, or other 
preparatory information prior to the verifi cation, and whether the verification findings 
are memorialized in written reports or otherwise. 
2.4. Article 13 - Judicial, arbitral or administrative review 
 Discuss the implementation of Article 13, and whether there is an opportunity for 
prompt review of administrative actions re lating to final determ inations and reviews 
of determinations.  Discuss, e.g., the types of review provided (judicial, arbitral, administrative), whether determinations can be appealed, and to what court or other 
institution. 
F. T
OPICS ON WHICH RECOMMENDATIONS HAD BEEN AGREED UPON BY THE GROUP  
 1. Period of data collection for a dumping investigation : Recommendation Concerning 
the Periods of Data Collection for Anti- Dumping Investigations adopted by the 
Committee on 5 May 2000 – document G/ADP/6 . 
  2. Article 5.5: Noti fication to the government  of the exporting Member : 
Recommendation Concerning the Timing of th e Notification under Article 5.5 adopted 
by the Committee on 29 October 1998 – document G/ADP/5. 
  3. Contents of preliminary affirmative determinations :  Draft recommendation 
concerning matters to be included in pr eliminary affirmative determinations – 
document G/ADP/AHG/W/64/ Rev.3, was submitted to the Committee on 
25 October 2001 for consideration. 
  4. Article 5.8: Termination of investigat ions under Article 5.8 in case of de minimis  
import volume : Recommendation concerning the time -period to be considered in 
making a determination of negligible import volumes for purposes of Article 5.8 of the 
Agreement was adopted by the Commit tee on 27 November 2002 – document 
G/ADP/10. 
  5. Article 6.1 and Article 6.1.1: Practical issues and experience with respect to 
questionnaires and requests for inform ation under Articles 6.1 and 6.1.1 :  
Recommendation concerning indicative list of elements relevant to a decision on a 
request for extension of time to provide information was adopted by the Committee 
on 26 April 2001 – document G/ADP/7. 
 
__________