UNITED STATES – MEASURES RELATED TO PRICE COMPARISON METHODOLOGIES REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY CHINA
Document: Addendum
Date: 8 November 2017
Document codes: WT/DS515/1/Add.1; G/L/1169/Add.1; G/ADP/D115/1/Add.1
Complainant: China
Respondent: U.S.
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 2, 2.1, 2.2, 5.2, 5.3, 7.1, 9.2, 9.3, 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 18.1, 18.4  Anti-dumpingArt. I:1, VI:1, VI:2  GATT 1994Art. XVI:4  Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization

UNITED STATES – MEASURES RELATED TO PRICE COMPARISON METHODOLOGIES
REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY CHINA
Addendum
The following communication, dated 3 November 2017, from the delegation of China to the
delegation of the United States and to the Chairperson o f the Dispute Settlement Body, is
circulated in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.

My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Govern ment of the
United States of America ("United States") pursuant to Article 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) and Article 17 of the Agreement on Implementation of
Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (AD Agreement). This addendum
supplements and does not replace China's request for consultations with the United States dated
12 December 2016.1
On 12 December 2016, the People's Republic of China ("China") requested consultation s
with the United States. China and the United States held an initial round of consultations in this
matter on 7-8 February 2017 with a view to reaching a mutually satisfactory solution. While these
consultations assisted in clarifying some of the issues before the parties, they failed to resolve the
dispute.
Subsequent to the consultations between China and the United States, the United States
Department of Commerce (USDOC) announced on 29 March 2017 that it would review China's
status as a so-called "non-market economy" under the provisions of US law discussed below. This
review provided an opportunity for the United States to comply with its obligations under the
covered agreements using a domestic legal procedure. Regrettably, the USDOC issued a
determination on 30 October 2017 that China remains a "non -market economy" under US law,
with the result that the United States will continue to violate its obligations under the covered
agreements. China is therefore compelled to seek further consultations wi th the United States in
the interests of securing a positive resolution to this dispute.
Background
At the time of China's accession to the WTO, the Members agreed that for a period of 15
years, investigating authorities would be allowed to determine norma l value in anti -dumping
proceedings involving Chinese products using methodologies "not based on a strict comparison
with domestic prices or costs in China". The limited authority to use these methodologies was set
forth in Section 15(a)(ii) of the Protoc ol on the Accession of the People's Republic of China
("Protocol"), and subject to the conditions set forth therein. Pursuant to Section 15(d) of the
Protocol, "[i]n any event, the provisions of subparagraph (a)(ii) shall expire 15 years after the date
of accession". Accordingly, Members were required to terminate the use of these methodologies
under Section 15(a)(ii) of the Protocol no later than 11 December 2016, and the continued use of

1 The request for consultations was circulated on 15 December 2016 in document WT/DS515/1,
G/L/1169, G/ADP/D115/1.
WT/DS515/1/Add.1 • G/L/1169/Add.1 • G/ADP/D115/1/Add.1

these methodologies thereafter is in violation of a Member's oblig ations under the covered
agreements.
After 11 December 2016, the provisions of the AD Agreement and the GATT 1994 that
ordinarily apply to the determination of normal value apply to imports from China without
derogation. China is concerned that the provis ions of US law pertaining to the determination of
normal value in anti -dumping proceedings involving products from China are inconsistent with
those provisions.
Pursuant to Section 773(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (Tariff Act), the USDOC ordinarily
determines normal value based on: (1) the price at which the like product is sold or offered for
sale for consumption in the exporting country; (2) the price at which the like product is sold or
offered for sale for consumption in a third -country export market; o r (3) the cost of production in
the country of origin, including an amount for administrative, selling, and general costs, and for
profits.2
Under Section 773(c)(1) of the Tariff Act, however, if an investigation involves imports from
a country that the Un ited States designates as a "non -market economy", and the USDOC "finds
that available information" does not permit the determination of normal value in accordance with
the methodologies set forth in Section 773(a) of the Tariff Act, then the USDOC "shall d etermine"
normal value on the basis of the values of the factors of production (plus amounts for general
expenses and profit) as identified in a third country (referred to hereinafter as "surrogate
values").3 The USDOC's regulations implementing Section 773(c) of the Tariff Act are set forth at
19 C.F.R. § 351.408.
Section 771(18)(c) of the Tariff Act provides that a determination by the USDOC that a
country is a non -market economy "shall remain in effect until revoked by the administering
authority", i.e. by the USDOC. The USDOC last determined that China is a "non -market economy"
in a memorandum dated 26 October 2017. 4 As of the present date, the USDOC has not revoked
that determination. Accordingly, pursuant to Section 771(18)(c) of the Tariff Act, the provisions of
Section 773(c) of the Tariff Act remain applicable in anti -dumping proceedings relating to products
from China.5
The foregoing provisions of US law provide for, and result in, the determination of normal
value and margins of dumping other t han in accordance with the requirements of Article 2 of the
AD Agreement and Article VI of the GATT 1994. These derogations from the covered agreements
were exceptionally permitted pursuant to Section 15 of the Protocol, subject to the conditions set
forth therein, but are no longer permitted as a result of the expiration of Section 15(a)(ii).
Separate and apart from the provisions of Section 773(c) of the Tariff Act, Section 773(e) of
the Tariff Act provides that, in some circumstances, the USDOC may dete rmine a constructed
normal value on the basis of "another calculation methodology under this subtitle or any other
calculation methodology". Section 773(e) could, in principle, permit the USDOC as a matter of US
law to determine normal value and margins o f dumping in investigations and reviews of imports
from China using surrogate values.

2 The methodologies for determining the cost of production in the country of origin are further specified
in Sections 773(e) and 773(f) of the Tariff Act.
3 Section 773(c)(2) provides that if the USDOC finds that the available information concerning the
values of the factors of production in a "market economy country" is "inadequate", the USDOC shall determine
normal value by reference to the price at which the product at issue is sold from a "market economy" country
into the United States or other countries. The term "surrogate values" as used herein encompasses the use of
third-country prices as provided for under Section 773(c)(2).
4 See China's Status as a Non -Market Economy, memorandum dated 26 October 2017 issued in the
anti-dumping investigation of Certain Aluminum Foil From the People's Republic of China (USDOC docket A -
570-053).
5 The provisions of Section 773(c) of the Tariff Act apply in any circumstance in which the USDOC
determines normal value for the purposes of the anti -dumping provisions of the Tariff Act. These
circumstances include: (i) original anti -dumping investigations initiated pursuant to section 732 of the Tariff
Act; (ii) administrative (periodic) reviews of anti -dumping orders pursuant to sections 751(a)(1) and
751(a)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act; (iii) "new shipper" reviews pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act;
(iv) "changed circumstance" reviews pursuant to section 751(b) of the Tariff Act; and (v) sunse t (expiry)
reviews pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act (items (ii) through (v) referred to hereinafter, collectively,
as "reviews").
WT/DS515/1/Add.1 • G/L/1169/Add.1 • G/ADP/D115/1/Add.1

Measures at Issue
As described above, the measures at issue establish the US non-market economy methodology
and result in the use of surrogate values to determine normal value and margins of dumping in
anti-dumping investigations and reviews of Chinese products. These measures consist of:
1. Section 771(18) of the Tariff Act;
2. Section 773 of the Tariff Act;
3. Part 351.408 of the USDOC's regulations, 19 C.F.R. § 351.408;
4. The USDOC's determination of 26 October 2017 that China is a "non -market economy"
for the purposes of the Tariff Act; and
5. The failure of the United States, by way of omission, to revoke the USDOC's
determination that China is a "non -market economy" or otherwise m odify its laws and
regulations to render the surrogate value provisions of Section 773(c) of the Tariff Act
(or Section 773(e), to the extent that it permits the use of surrogate values) inapplicable
to anti-dumping investigations and reviews of Chinese products.
In addition to the above measures, which establish the US non -market economy methodology,
the measures at issue consist of:
6. The policy or practice 6 of using surrogate values to determine normal value in both
original and administrative review deter minations in anti-dumping proceedings involving
Chinese products, whether that conduct is pursuant to Section 773(c) of the Tariff Act,
Section 773(e) of the Tariff Act, or any other provision of US law;

7. All measures listed in Appendix A, Part I, where the USDOC made a final determination
of normal value in an anti -dumping investigation or administrative review of imports
from China, subsequent to 11 December 2016, that was based on the use of surrogate
values (referenced collectively as "Measure 7");

8. The policy or practice of initiating anti -dumping investigations involving Chinese
products where the evidence of dumping in the application by or on behalf of the
domestic industry is calculated based on the use of surrogate values;

9. The USDOC's Preliminary Affirmative Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value in
Certain Hardwood Plywood Products From the People's Republic of China (A-570-051)
(23 June 2017); Certain Aluminum Foil From the People's Republic of China (A-570-053)
(26 October 2017); and Carton-Closing Staples from the People's Republic of China (A-
570-055) (27 October 2017) (referenced collectively as "Measure 9");7

10. All measures listed in Appendix A, Part II, where the USDOC made a final determination
in a sunset review regarding the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and
injury in which it relied on margins of dumping calculated on the basis of surrogate
values (referenced collectively as "Measure 10");

11. The policy or practice of making final determinations in sunset r eviews of anti-dumping
orders applicable to Chinese products relying on margins of dumping calculated on the
basis of surrogate values, whether pursuant to Section 773(c) of the Tariff Act, Section
773(e) of the Tariff Act, or any other provision of US law;

6 Where China refers to a "policy or practice" in this request for consultations, China refers to a policy or
practice that constitutes a rule or norm of general and prospective application (whether or not that rule or
norm results from the operation of US law) and/or conduct that is presently occurring and likely to be
continued in the future.
7 If the USDOC issues f inal determinations in these proceedings and makes final determinations of
normal value based on the use of surrogate values , China advances the same claims in relation to these final
determinations that it advances in relation to Measures 1-7.
WT/DS515/1/Add.1 • G/L/1169/Add.1 • G/ADP/D115/1/Add.1

12. The failure of the USDOC, by way of omission, to conduct "reviews based on changed
circumstances" pursuant to Section 751(b) of the Tariff Act in the anti -dumping
investigations of Chinese products, by virtue of the expiration of Section 15(a)(ii).

Legal Basis of the Complaint
It appears to China that the measures at issue are inconsistent with the covered agreements
in the following respects.8
I. MEASURES 1-5, IN THEIR COMBINED OPERATION, AS WELL AS MEASURES 6-7,
ARE INCONSISTENT WITH:
a. Article 2.2 of th e AD Agreement and Article VI:1 of the GATT 1994, because the
measures at issue provide for, and result in, the calculation of normal value and margins
of dumping in investigations and reviews of products from China other than on the basis
of the cost of p roduction "in the country of origin" (or on the basis of "a comparable
price of the like product when exported to an appropriate third country");
b. Article 2.1 of the AD Agreement and Article VI:1 of the GATT 1994, because the
measures at issue provide for, and result in, the calculation of normal value and margins
of dumping in investigations and reviews of products from China other than by reference
to the price at which the product at issue is sold "when destined for consumption in the
exporting country", i.e. China;
c. Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994, because the measures at issue provide for, and result in,
the levying of anti -dumping duties greater than the margin of dumping determined in
accordance with the provisions of Article VI:1 of the GATT 1994;
d. Article 18.1 of the AD Agreement, because the measures at issue constitute a specific
action against dumping taken other than in accordance with the pro visions of the
GATT 1994 as interpreted by the AD Agreement;
e. Article I:1 of the GATT 1994, because the measure s at issue fail to extend immediately
and unconditionally to China an "advantage, favour, privilege or immunity" granted by
the United States "[w]ith respect to customs duties and charges of any kind imposed on
or in connection with" the importation of pro ducts originating in the territory of other
Members, as well as with respect to "the method of levying such duties and charges"
and the "rules and formalities in connection with importation";
f. Article 9.2 of the AD Agreement, because the measures at issue p rovide for, and result
in, the collection of anti-dumping duties other than on a "non-discriminatory basis";
g. Article 9.3 of the AD Agreement, with respect to administrative reviews, because the
measures at issue provide for, and result in, the levying of a nti-dumping duties greater
than the margin of dumping determined in accordance with the provisions of Article 2 of
the AD Agreement.
II. MEASURE 8 IS INCONSISTENT WITH:
a. Article 5.2 of the AD Agreement, because the USDOC initiates investigations where the
application provided by or on behalf of the domestic industry does not include evidence
of dumping calculated in a manner consistent with Article 2 of the AD Agreement;
b. Article 5.3 of the AD Agreement, because the USDOC initiates investigations in the
absence of sufficient evidence to justify those initiations;
c. Article I:1 of the GATT 1994, for the reasons articulated in Section I above.

8 China's claims with respect to Measures 1 -11 relate to anti -dumping investigations and reviews of
Chinese products initiated and/or resulting in preliminary or final determinations after 11 December 2016.
WT/DS515/1/Add.1 • G/L/1169/Add.1 • G/ADP/D115/1/Add.1

III. MEASURE 9 IS INCONSISTENT WITH:
a. Article 7.1(ii) of the AD Agreement, because the USDOC applied provisional measures
without ma king a preliminary affirmative determination of dumping in a manner
consistent with Article 2 of the AD Agreement;
b. Articles 2.2, 2.1, and 18.1 of the AD Agreement, and Article I:1 of the GATT 1994, for
the reasons articulated in Section I above.
IV. MEASURES 10 AND 11 ARE INCONSISTENT WITH:
a. Articles 11.1 and 11.3 of the AD Agreement, because the USDOC unlawfully relies on
margins of dumping calculated on the basis of surrogate values when making a
determination of the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury;
b. Article 18.1 of the AD Agreement, Article I:1 of the GATT 1994, and Article 9.2 of the AD
Agreement, for the reasons articulated in Section I above.
V. MEASURE 12 IS INCONSISTENT WITH:
a. Articles 11.1 and 11.2 of the AD Agreement, because the USDOC has not, after
11 December 2016, reviewed the need for the continued imposition of the duty where
such a review is "warranted" within the meaning of Article 11.2 by virtue of the
expiration of Section 15(a)(ii);
b. Article 18.1 of the AD Agreement, Article I:1 of the GATT 1994, and Article 9.2 of the AD
Agreement, for the reasons articulated in Section I above.
Measures 1-12 also appear to be inconsistent with Article 18.4 of the AD Agreement and
Article XVI:4 of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, as a
consequence of the foregoing, because the United States has failed to ensure "the conformity of its
laws, regulations and administrative procedures" with the identified provisions of the AD
Agreement and the GATT 1994.
The inconsistencies with the covered agreements specified above ceased to be justifiable
when Section 15(a)(ii) of the Protocol expired on 11 December 2016 pursuant to Section 15(d) of
the Protocol. After that date, Section 15(a)(ii) of the Protocol does no t provide a legal basis for
Members to determine normal value using methodologies that are "not based on a strict
comparison with domestic prices or costs in China". In addition, the measures at issue are not
justifiable under the second Supplementary Pro vision to Article VI:1 of the GATT 1994, as
referenced in Article 2.7 of the AD Agreement.

China reserves the right to raise additional claims and legal matters regarding the above -
mentioned measures during the course of the consultations. This request for consultations also
concerns any modification, replacement or amendment to the measures identified above, and any
closely connected, subsequent measures (including final determinations in respect of any
preliminary determination identified herein).
China looks forward to receiving the reply of the Government of the United States to this
request and to setting a mutually convenient date for consultations.
WT/DS515/1/Add.1 • G/L/1169/Add.1 • G/ADP/D115/1/Add.1

Appendix A
I. FINAL DETERMINATIONS IN ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE
REVIEWS
Original Investigations
 Large Residential Washers From the People 's Republic of China: Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final Negative Determination of Critical
Circumstances, 81 Fed. Reg. 90776 (December 15, 2016). (Amended: Large Residential
Washers From the People 's Republic of China: Amended Final Affirmative Antidumping
Duty Determination and Antidumping Duty Order, 82 Fed. Reg. 9371 (February 6,
2017)).
 Certain Biaxial Integral Geogrid Products From the People's Republic of China: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 82 Fed. Reg. 3284 (January 11, 2017).
 Ammonium Sulfate From the People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 82 Fed. Reg. 8403 (January 25, 2017).
 Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Amorphous Silica Fabric From the People's
Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less -Than-Fair-Value, and
Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 82 Fed. Reg. 8399 (January
25, 2017).
 Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-To-Length Plate From the People's Republic of China:
Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 82 Fed. Reg. 8510
(January 26, 2017).
 Truck and Bus Tires From the People 's Republic of China: Fina l Affirmative
Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Critical Circumstances, 82 Fed. Reg.
8599 (January 27, 2017).
 Antidumping Duty Investigation of Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip From the People 's
Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final
Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 82 Fed. Reg. 9716 (February 8,
2017).
 1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane (R -134a) From the People 's Republic of China: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Determination of Critical
Circumstances, in Part, 82 Fed. Reg. 12192 (March 1, 2017).
 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid From the People 's Republic of China: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value , 82 Fed. Reg. 14876 ( March 23, 2017).
(Amended: 1-Hydroxyethylidene-1, 1-Diphosphonic Acid From the People 's Republic of
China: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Antidumping
Duty Order, 82 Fed. Reg. 22807 (May 18, 2017)).
Administrative Reviews
 Lightweight Thermal Paper From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014 -2015, 81 Fed. Reg. 91115 (December
16, 2016).
 Certain Cut -to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From the People's Republic of China: Final
Results of the 2014 -2015 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 81 Fed Reg. 91904
(December 19, 2016).
 Magnesia Carbon Bricks From the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Partial
Rescission of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014 -2015, 82 Fed. Reg.
1695 (January 6, 2017).
WT/DS515/1/Add.1 • G/L/1169/Add.1 • G/ADP/D115/1/Add.1

 Chlorinated Isocyanurates From the People 's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014 –2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 4852 (January 17,
2017).
 Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Fini shed and Unfinished, From the People's
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, and
Rescission of New Shipper Review; 2014-2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 4844 (January 17, 2017).
 Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People's Republic of China: Final Results
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments in
Part; 82 Fed. Reg. 10743 (February 15, 2017).
 Small Diameter Graphite Electrodes From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments;
2015-2016, 82 Fed. Reg. 10876 (February 16, 2017).
 Xanthan Gum From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 82 Fed. Reg. 11428 (February 23, 2017).
 Xanthan Gum From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, Final Determination of No Shipments, Final Partial Rescission;
2014-2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 11434 (February 23, 2017).
 Magnesium Metal From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016, 82 Fed. Reg. 12928 (March 8, 2017).
 Uncovered Innerspring Units From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review ; 2015-2016, 82 Fed. Reg. 13975 (March 16,
2017).
 Certain Steel Nails From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, Final Determination of No Shipment and Final Partial
Rescission; 2014-2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 14344 (March 20, 2017). (Amended: Certain Steel
Nails From the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 19217 (April 26, 2017)).
 Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republ ic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Review; 2014 -2015, 82 Fed.
Reg. 17634 (April 12, 2017).
 Steel Wire Garment Hangers From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Re view, 2014 -2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 18115 (April 17,
2017).
 Certain New Pneumatic Off -the-Road Tires From the People's Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014 -2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 18733
(April 21, 2017). (Amended: Certain P neumatic Off -the-Road Tires From the People's
Republic of China: Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review;
2014-2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 27224 (June 14, 2017)).
 Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From the People's Republic of China: Final Res ults of the
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015 -2016, 82 Fed. Reg. 23187 (May 22,
2017).
 Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review; 2010-2011, 82 Fed. Reg. 23195 (May 22, 2017).
 Certain Cased Pencils From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 24675 (May 30, 2017).
WT/DS515/1/Add.1 • G/L/1169/Add.1 • G/ADP/D115/1/Add.1

 Pure Magnesium From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2015-2016, 82 Fed. Reg. 25771 (June 5, 2017).
 Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Final Determination of No Shipments, and
Final Partial Rescission of A ntidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014 -2015, 82 Fed.
Reg. 25766 (June 5, 2017). (Corrected: Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's
Republic of China: Correction to the Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 2014-2015; 82 Fed. Reg. 43219 (September 14, 2017)).
 Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014 -2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 26912
(June 12, 2017).
 Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of Chi na: Final Results and Partial Rescission of
the 21st Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 27230 (June
14, 2017).
 Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Adminis trative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments;
2015-2016, 82 Fed. Reg. 27226 (June 14, 2017).
 Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube From the People's Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014 -2015, 82 Fed. Re g. 27688
(June 16, 2017).
 Potassium Permanganate From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 28044 (June 20, 2017).
 Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments;
2015-2016, 82 Fed. Reg. 28639 (June 23, 2017).
 Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the
People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and
Final Determination of No Shipments; 2014 -2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 29033 (June 27, 2017).
(Amended: Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into
Modules, from the People's Republi c of China: Amended Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 82 Fed. Reg. 40560 (August 25, 2017).
 Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments;
2015-2016, 82 Fed. Reg. 30841 (July 3, 2017).
 Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products From the People 's Republic of China:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Determination of No
Shipments; 2014-2016, 82 Fed. Reg. 32170 (July 12, 2017).
 Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Rescission of New Shipper Review; 2015 -
2016, 82 Fed. Reg. 47469 (October 12, 2017).
 Glycine From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Rescission of Administrative Review, in Part; 2015 -2016, 82
Fed. Reg. 47474 (October 12, 2017).
II. FINAL DETERMINATIONS IN SUNSET REVIEWS
 Sulfanilic Acid From India and the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited
Fourth Sunset Reviews of Antidumping Duty Orders, 82 Fed. Reg. 1321 (January 5,
2017).
WT/DS515/1/Add.1 • G/L/1169/Add.1 • G/ADP/D115/1/Add.1

 Certain Artist Canvas From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of the Expedited
Second Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 82 Fed. Reg. 8723 (January 30,
2017).

 Pure Magnesium From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited Fourth
Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 82 Fed. Reg. 9198 (February 3, 2017).

 Certain Helical Spring Lock Washers From the People 's Republic of China and Taiwan:
Final Results of the Expedited Fourth Five -Year Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty
Orders, 82 Fed. Reg. 12805 (March 7, 2017).
 Multilayered Wood Flooring F rom the People 's Republic of China: Final Results of
Expedited First Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order, 82 Fed. Reg. 13092 (March
9, 2017).
 Furfuryl Alcohol From the People 's Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited Fourth
Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order, 82 Fed. Reg. 20318 (May 1, 2017).
 Silicon Metal From the People 's Republic of China: Final Results of the Expedited Fourth
Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 82 Fed. Reg. 30841 (July 3, 2017).
 Fresh Garlic From the People 's Republic of China: Final Results of Fourth Expedited
Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 82 Fed. Reg. 36752 (August 7, 2017).
 Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents From the People 's Republic of China and
Taiwan: Final Results of the Expedi ted Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders,
82 Fed. Reg. 36732 (August 7, 2017).
 High Pressure Steel Cylinders From the People 's Republic of China: Final Results of the
Expedited First Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order, 82 Fed. Reg. 41607
(September 1, 2017).
 Foundry Coke Products From the People 's Republic of China: Final Results of the
Expedited Third Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order, 82 Fed. Reg. 41598
(September 1, 2017).