UNITED STATES – FINAL ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON STAINLESS STEEL FROM MEXICO
Document: Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Mexico Request for Consultations
Date: 24 August 2009
Document codes: WT/DS344/18
Complainant: Mexico
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Brazil, Chile, China, EU, Japan, South Korea, Thailand
Dispute stage: Mutually Agreed Solution
Agreements cited: Art. 1, 2.1, 2.4, 2.4.2, 9, 18.4  Anti-dumpingArt. VI:1, VI:2  GATT 1994Art. XVI:4  Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization

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 (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).

 (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 Reports. 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).

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 respondent, 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 prospective 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 with 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 Article 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
, 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 the Dispute Settlement Body of 20 May 2009.
18 Ibid.

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.

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).