KYRGYZ REPUBLIC – ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON STEEL PIPES REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY UKRAINE
Document: REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY
Date: 22 October 2018
Document codes: WT/DS570/1; G/L/1265; G/ADP/D128/1
Complainant: Ukraine
Respondent: Kyrgyzstan
Dispute stage: Consultation
Agreements cited: Art. 9.1, 11.1, 11.2, 11.4, 12.2.2  Anti-dumpingArt. VI, VI:2  GATT 1994

KYRGYZ REPUBLIC – ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON STEEL PIPES
REQUEST FOR CONSULTATIONS BY UKRAINE
The following communication, dated 17 October 2018 , from the delegation of Ukraine to the
delegation of the Kyrgyz Republic, is circulated to the Dispute Settlement Body in accordance with
Article 4.4 of the DSU.

My authorities have instructed me to request consultations with the Government of the Kyrgyz
Republic pursuant to Article 4 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), Article XXIII:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994
("GATT 1994") and Articles 17.2 and 17.3 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 ("Anti-Dumping Agreement").
I. Background
This request is with respect to the anti-dumping measures applied to certain types of steel pipes on
the customs territory of the Kyrgyz Republic according to the results of sunset review as applied on
unjustified level whic h exceeds the established margin of dumping because of the failure of the
Eurasian Economic Commission ("EEC") to adopt to date a decision to implement findings of the
investigating authority under interim review initiated in light of changed circumstances.
The current measures, that are applied pursuant to the Decision of the Collegium of the EEC No. 48
of 2 June 2016 as a result of the sunset review of the anti-dumping measures on imports of certain
types of steel pipes originating in Ukraine and importe d on the customs territory of the Eurasian
Economic Union, are higher than necessary, erroneous and based on deficient rulings, procedures
and provisions pertaining to the Anti-Dumping Agreement, because the investigating authority when
conducting examination of likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury failed to:
- rely upon information pertaining to a period as close as practicable to the date of initiation
of the investigation;
- assess positive evidence and provide the objective examination with respect to the volume
of the dumped imports and the effect of the dumped imports on prices in the domestic
market for like products;
- assess relevant economic factors and indices as well as other factors which at the same time
were injuring domestic industry;
- examine accuracy and adequacy of the complaint and initiated the sunset review on the
basis of complaint which was lack of the evidence that the expiry of the duty would be likely
to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury;
- provide to exporters the reasons for non -acceptance of the undertakings submitted by
Ukrainian producers and to give Ukrainian exporters an opportunity to make comments
thereon; and
- take into account the information which was verifiable, appropriately submitted by Ukrainian
exporters so that it could be used in the investigation without undue difficulties and which
was supplied in on time etc.
WT/DS570/1 • G/L/1265 • G/ADP/D128/1

Moreover, on 17 October 2016 an interim review was init iated1 with a view to revise level of
individual anti-dumping duties in light of changed circumstances. As a result of the interim review,
investigating authority issued a Report with subsequent calculations and evidences concluding that
anti-dumping duties should be decreased. However, the EEC has failed to adopt to date a decision
to implement findings of the investigating authority, contained in its Report, within an established
time frame for interim reviews.
II. Measures at issue
The measures at issue are the following:
• the Decision of the Collegium of the EEC No. 48 of 2 June 2016 "On prolongation of anti-dumping
measures on certain types of steel pipes originating in Ukraine and imported into the customs
territory of the Eurasian Economic Union"2;
• the findings of the EEC Department for Internal Market Defence in the Report (Notice
No. 2017/89/AD1R3 of 4 October 2017) "On the results of the interim review of anti-dumping duties
on certain types of steel pipes originating in Ukraine with a view to review level of individual anti -
dumping duties in light of changed circumstances"3.
Ukraine considers that the current anti-dumping measures on certain types of steel pipes originating
in Ukraine together with the EEC's failure to comply with procedural requirements are inconsistent
with Article VI of the GATT 1994 and the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
In addition, this Request for Consultations also covers in whatever form: any amendments,
supplements, or extensions to or of the measures referred to in this Section; any measures
replacing, renewing or implementing the measures referred to in this Section; and, any measures
related to the measures referred to in this Section.
III. Legal basis for the complaint
Ukraine considers that the measures referred to in Section II above are inconsistent with several of
the Kyrgyz Republic's WTO obligations, including, but not limited to:
1. Article 9.1 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement because the anti -dumping duties, which are
currently in place, exceed the adequate level that could remove injury to the domestic
industry;
2. Article 9.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and paragraph 2 of Article VI of the GATT 1994,
because the anti -dumping duties, which are currently in place, exceed the margin of
dumping determined by the EEC Department for Internal Market Defence within the interim
review;
3. Article 11.1 of the Anti -Dumping Agreement because the anti -dumping duties are still in
force in the amount that exceeds the level of duty necessary to coun teract dumping that is
causing injury although findings of the EEC Department for Internal Market Defence under
the interim review, contained in its Report dated 4 October 2017, proved that the anti -
dumping duties should be decreased;
4. Article 11.2 of the A nti-Dumping Agreement because the measure that is no longer
warranted is still in force despite of the findings of the EEC Department for Internal Market
Defence within the interim review that the anti-dumping duties should be decreased;
5. Article 11.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement because the EEC failed to conclude the interim
review expeditiously and has been carrying out such review for almost 24 months;

1 Notice of initiation of the interim review dated 17 October 2016 is available at
http://www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/act/trade/podm/investigations/PublicDocuments/AD1R3_notice_initiati
on.pdf
2 https://docs.eaeunion.org/docs/ru-ru/01410363/clcd_03062016_48
3
http://www.eurasiancommission.org/ru/act/trade/podm/investigations/PublicDocuments/AD1R3_report.pdf
WT/DS570/1 • G/L/1265 • G/ADP/D128/1

6. Article 12.2.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement because the EEC failed to give a public notice
of conclusion or suspension of the interim review as the decision has not been adopted yet;
7. Article VI of the GATT 1994 as a consequence of a breach of the Anti -Dumping Agreement
described above.
These violations appear to nullify or impair benefits accruing to Ukra ine directly or indirectly under
the cited agreements.
Ukraine reserves the right to raise additional claims and legal matters during the course of the
consultations and in any future request for panel proceedings.
Ukraine looks forward to receiving the Kyrgyz Republic's reply to this request and to fixing a mutually
convenient date for consultations.