. /.RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SG/Q2/USA/6
14 October 1999
(99-4393)
Committee on Safeguards Original:  English
NOTIFICATION UNDER ARTICLE 12.1(A) OF THE AGREEMENT ON
SAFEGUARDS ON INITIATION OF AN INVESTIGATION
AND THE REASONS FOR IT
Replies to Questions Posed by the EUROPEAN COMMUNITY
Regarding the Notification of the UNITED STATES1
The following communication, dated 13 October 1999, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of the United States.
_______________
Q1. Supplement the notification with factual data on the basis of which this investigation has
been opened, concerning notably:
(a) the rate and amount of increased imports (volume and quantity of imports of
this product per exporting country, since 1994);
(b) the serious injury claim, including information on the share of the domestic
market taken by increased imports as well as changes in the level of sales,
production, productivity, capacity utilization, profits and losses and
employment.
(c) the alleged causal link and the existence of other factors which may have
contributed to the alleged serious injury .
Reply
The United States International Trade Commissi on (ITC) instituted the investigation on the
basis of a petition filed on 12 January 1999.  As required by the ITC’s rules, the petition contained
information in support of its claim that wire rod is being imported into the United States in such
increased quantities as to be a substantial cause of serious injury, or threat thereof, to the domestic
wire rod industry.  The ITC found the petition to satisfy its rules.  As stated in the US notification
pursuant to Article 12.1(a) of the Agreement on Sa feguards (G/SG/N/6/USA/6), a copy of the public
version of the petition was provided to the WTO Secretariat for inspection by Members’
representatives.  The petition contains the factual information that the European Commission is
requesting.
Q2. Explain the product coverage of the invest igation.  Since the petitioners have excluded
certain special-quality steel wire rod from their remedy request, can the US confirm that the
                                                     
1 G/SG/N/6/USA/6 & Corr.1G/SG/Q2/USA/6
Page 2
increased imports, serious injury and causality determinations in this procedure will not include
the excluded products?
Reply
On the basis of the petition, and after finding that it complied with applicable US statutory
and regulatory provisions, the ITC instituted the investigation to determine whether certain steel wire
rod, including certain special-quality steel wire rod, is being imported into the United States in such
increased quantities as to be a substantial cause of serious injury, or the threat of serious injury, to the
domestic steel wire rod industry.  The wire rod products covered by the ITC investigation are
described in the ITC’s notice of institution, which was published in the Federal Register  on
27 January 1999 (64 F.R. 4123), and which was notified to the Committee on Safeguards in
G/SG/N/6/USA /6/Corr.1.  The same product description is also included in footnote 1 of the ITC’s
12 July 1999 report.  This report, excluding confidential business information, was provided to the
WTO Secretariat for inspection by Members’ representatives ( See G/SG/N/8/USA/4/Suppl.1).
Q3. Given that the factors for the establishment of the existence of injury are basically the
same ones as for in a safeguards procedure but the threshold of serious injury is significantly
higher, please explain how the United States ha s taken into consideration, as evidence for the
initiation of this investigation, the recent determination, in several anti-dumping and
anti-subsidy procedures concerning steel wire rod, that the US steel wire rod industry was not
materially injured.
Reply
There is no requirement in the Agreement on Safeguards for the competent authorities to
consider earlier determinations in anti-dumping and countervailing duty investigations in initiating a
safeguard investigation.  The ITC examined the petition filed, found it to be in compliance withapplicable US statutory and regulatory requirements, and instituted the requested investigation on that
basis.  Further, the referenced ITC determinations under the anti-dumping and countervailing duty
laws involving wire rod were made in November 1997 and March 1998, respectively, and were based
on the applicable law and evidentiary record at the time of those determinations.  The statutory
standards that the ITC applies in safeguard investigations are different from those applied in anti-
dumping and countervailing duty investigations.  The factual information presented in the safeguard
petition on wire rod relates to imports from all sources and to a later period in time, and thus isdifferent from that considered by the Commi ssion in the anti-dumping and countervailing duty
investigations that the European Commission references.
__________