 
./.  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/RL/GEN/15 
15 September 2004 
 
 (04-3853) 
Negotiating Group on Rules Original:   English 
  
 
CONDUCT OF VERIFICATIONS (ADA ARTICLE 6.7 & 
ANNEX I AND ASCM ARTICLE 12.6 & ANNEX VI) 
 
Communication from the United States
 
 
 
 The following communication, dated 13 September 2004, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of the United States.   The submitting delegation has requested that th is paper, which was submitted to the Rules 
Negotiating Group as an informal document (JOB(04)/ 119), also be circulated as a formal document. 
 
_______________ 
 
  The United States raised in an earlier paper (T N/RL/W/35) the need for clarifications and 
improvements to Article 6.7 and Annex I of the An tidumping Agreement (ADA) and Article 12.6 and 
Annex VI of the Agreement on Subsidies and C ountervailing Measures (ASCM) with respect to 
on-the-spot investigations (also referred to by  some Members as "verifications").  While the 
Agreements contain language providing some guida nce as to when and how Members are to conduct 
on-site verifications, the United States believes the Agreements can be improved to provide greater 
clarity on this important topic.    
  Although on-site verification is not requir ed under the Agreements, ADA Article 6.7 and 
ASCM Article 12.6 provide for on-site verifications by the investigating authority, subject to certain 
notification and consent requirements.  On-site verifi cation is an important investigative tool that is 
beneficial to both the investigating authority and the respondent exporters/producers.  On-site 
verification provides an important means for the inv estigating authority to confirm the accuracy of 
much of the information submitted by an exporter/producer.
1  Verification also provides the 
exporter/producer with an important opportunity to confirm the accuracy of its submissions and clear 
up any questions or confusion that the investigating authority may have.  To effectively achieve these 
goals, however, a verification mu st be conducted properly.  W ithout appropriate verification 
procedures, the process will not aid the investigating authority or the exporter/producer, and may even 
be counterproductive.    ADA Annex I and ASCM Annex VI contain some  general provisions c oncerning verification 
procedures, but they do not provide sufficient guidance.   This is an important area in the Agreements 
that should be clarified.  Specifically, the United States suggests the following clarifications: 
 • Verification Outline :  The Agreements require that an investigating authority provide the 
firms to be verified and the exporting Member with  adequate notice of intent to verify, and to 
advise the firm as to the "general nature" of  the information to be verified and further 
                                                     
 
1 Article 6.6 of the ADA and Article 12.5 of the ASCM state that investigating authorities 
shall satisfy themselves as to the accuracy of th e information provided by interested parties.  TN/RL/GEN/15 
Page 2  
 
 information that needs to be provided.
2  However, to afford the firm adequate opportunity to 
prepare for verification, an investigating author ity should provide more than just a description 
of the "general nature" of the information to be  verified.  Investigating authorities should be 
required to provide the firm, prior to verificati on, a detailed outline that identifies the topics 
that will be covered at verification and describ es the types of supporting documentation that 
will be reviewed.  The investigating authority should also be required to provide additional 
clarification or explanation of the verifica tion outline upon request by the firm.  Because a 
detailed outline of the verification process will ensure adequate opportunity for the firm to 
prepare, it will enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the verification and minimize the adverse consequences that may fl ow from error and confusion.  
 
• Verification Reports .  ADA Article 6.7 and ASCM Article 12.6 require the investigating 
authority to make the results of verification "available," or disclose the results pursuant to 
ADA Article 6.9/ASCM Article 12.8, to the verified firm, and state that the authority may make the results available to the applicants.  In the absence of more detailed requirements 
concerning verification results, Members’ practices vary widely.  Given the importance of the 
verification process, the United States believes th at the Agreements should explicitly require 
the investigating authority to issue a writte n verification report, with any confidential 
information contained in the report treated in  accordance with the provisions contained in 
Articles 6.5 and 12.4 of the ADA and ASCM, resp ectively.  The verification report should 
provide sufficient detail to give interested parties a full understanding of the issues and 
findings addressed during verification, in order to  allow them to defend their interests fully.  
Moreover, knowledge of the results of verifica tion may be essential for an interested party to 
adequately defend its interests.  The United St ates therefore believes that the Agreements 
should require that the verification report (or a non-confidential version, as appropriate) is 
made available to  all interested parties, within a reasonable time sufficient to provide an 
adequate opportunity to defend their interests. 
 Adding more detail to the procedural requirement s in ADA Annex I(7) and ASCM Annex VI(7) will 
promote a more common approach to verification.  In addition, however, the Members should explore the possibility of standardizing verification outlin es and the structure of verification reports, as 
suggested in our earlier paper (TN/RL/W/35).  Th is would help to ensure that Members are 
conducting similar verifications that are designed to obtain the necessary information required to 
conduct properly a thorough investigation.  
__________ 
  
                                                     
 
2 ADA Annex I(7); ASCM Annex VI(7).  