COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 06.01.1999 
COM(1998) 805 final 
Proposal for a 
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) 
imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of hardboard originating in 
Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Russia and definitively 
collecting the provisional duties imposed 
(presented by the Commission) 

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 
The Commission initiated an anti-dumping proceeding concerning the imports of 
hardboard from Brazil, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Russia on 
7 November 1997 through a publication in the Official Journal of the European 
Communities No C 336, page 2. 
Provisional anti-dumping measures were imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1742/98 on 
6 August 1998 after injurious dumping had been established. 
At that stage, except for the Russian producers, all exporting producers concerned 
offered price undertakings. These exporting producers undertook to sell certain 
product-types for export to the Community, up to a pre-determined annual quantity 
exempted from anti-dumping valorem duty, at prices removing the injurious effect of 
the dumping. For export sales volumes of these product-types beyond the pre­
determined annual quantity-ceilings, the provisional anti-dumping ad valorem duty 
rates would apply. The Commission, being of the opinion that this system is workable 
and can be effectively monitored, accepted these undertakings. 
Following the imposition of provisional anti-dumping measures, all interested parties 
were given the opportunity to request a hearing and to submit additional comments. 
For the definitive findings, the Commission made some adjustments to its analysis in 
accordance with some of the interested parties' submissions. In particular, the 
Commission decumulated Brazil from the analysis. 
The definitive findings confirmed the existence of dumping and resultant injury to the 
Community industry with the exception of Brazil. As regards imports from this 
country, these were not found to have been a cause of the injury suffered by the 
Community industry. The Commission therefore proposes the termination of the 
proceeding against Brazil without measures. As to the imports from the other 
countries concerned, however, these were confirmed as having been a cause of the 
material injury suffered by the Community industry. 
The investigation, taking into account all interests involved, with particular regard to 
the interests of the user industry, also led to the conclusion that it is in the Community 
interest to take definitive anti-dumping measures. 
Since all the exporting producers concerned, except for the Russian ones, offered 
undertakings at the provisional stage, it is proposed that these undertakings continue, 
taking into account any adjustments resulting from the definitive analysis. A separate 
Commission Decision detailing the changes to the undertakings is to be published on 
the same date as the Council Regulation imposing definitive anti-dumping measures. 
With the termination of the proceeding as regards imports from Brazil, the 
undertakings offered by the Brazilian exporting producers will lapse. 
In the light of the above, and in accordance with Article 9 of Council Regulation (EC) 
No 384/96, the Commission therefore proposes that the Council approve the 
imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports from Bulgaria, Estonia, 
Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Russia, and terminate the proceeding against Brazil 
without measures. The proposed duty rates are as indicated in the table below. 
Country 
Bulgaria 
Estonia 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Poland 
Russia Company 
Fazerles AD 
All other companies 
All companies 
All companies 
All companies 
Alpex-Karlino S.A. 
Ekopryta S.A. 
Zaklady Pryt Pilsniowych 
S.A., Przemysl 
Koniecpolskie Zaklady Pryt 
Pilsniowych S.A 
Zaklady Pryt Pilsniowych 
S.A w Krosnie Odrzanskim 
All other companies 
All companies Rate of duty 
(%) 
7.1 
7.2 
6.0 
4.7 
11.4 
22.4 
7.0 
9.1 
11.4 
11.0 
34.8 
30.6 Taric additional 
code 
8461 
8900 
-
-
-
8479 
8480 
8481 
8494 
8495 
8900 
-
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No ... 
of 
imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of hardboard originating in 
Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Russia and definitively 
collecting the provisional duties imposed 
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, 
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on 
protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European 
Community1, and in particular Article 9(4) thereof, 
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after consulting the 
Advisory Committee, 
Whereas: 
1 OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 905/98 (OJ L 128, 
30.4.1998, p. 18). 
h 
A. GENERAL INFORMATION 
1. Provisional measures 
(1) Provisional anti-dumping measures were imposed in the present proceeding on 
6 August 1998 by Regulation (EC) No 1742/982 (hereinafter referred to as the 
"provisional Regulation"). Undertakings were offered and accepted from the co­
operating exporting producers in all the countries concerned except Russia. 
2. Subsequent procedure 
(2) Following the imposition of the provisional measures, certain exporting 
producers, importers and Community users of the product concerned submitted 
comments in writing. Those parties who so requested were granted an 
opportunity to be heard. 
(3) Since the publication of the provisional Regulation, investigations were carried 
out at the premises of the following companies which are users of the product 
concerned in the manufacture of doors: 
Svedex BV, Netherlands 
Swedoor, a division of Nobia Nordisk Bygginteriôr AB, Sweden (two 
- production plants) 
Righini SA, France 
Huet SA, France 
Theuma Deurenindustrie NV, Belgium. 
A non-complainant producer of eucalyptus hardboard was also visited: 
Industria de Fibras de Madeira, Portugal, 
as was an unrelated importer of hardboard: 
Firma Christian Kroger GmbH & Co. KG, Germany. 
2 OJL218, 6.8.1998, p. 16. 
J f 
B. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION AND LIKE PRODUCT 
1. Product under consideration 
(4) The product under consideration in this anti-dumping proceeding is hardboard. 
Hardboard is defined as fibreboard of wood or other ligneous materials, whether 
or not bonded with resins or other organic substances and with a density 
exceeding 0.8 g/cm3, currently classifiable under CN codes ex 4411 11 00 and 
ex 441119 00. 
Hardboard is exclusively obtained from a 'wet production process' (as opposed 
to dry-process fibreboards as described below) and normally has a density of 
800 to 1050 kg/m3 and is made in thicknesses between 1.8 to 6.0 mm. 
Hardboard is typically used in the manufacture of furniture, in the construction 
and automotive industries, for door skins and for packaging, especially fruit and 
vegetable packaging. 
2. 'Thin' dry-process fibreboards 
(5) After the imposition of the provisional anti-dumping measures, a number of 
importers and users continued to argue for an extension to the product scope of 
the proceeding. In particular, they argued that the so-called 'thin' forms (less 
than 6 mm thickness) of dry-process fibreboards such as medium and high 
density fibreboard (thin MDF and HDF) and hardboard have essentially the 
same end uses, and therefore together form a single product. It was therefore 
alleged that the scope of the analysis of dumping, injury and Community 
interest should also include all these products. 
G 
(6) On the basis of the information submitted up to the provisional stage a 
preliminary assessment of the extent to which the end-uses of hardboard and 
thin dry-process fibreboards overlap was made. Based on the information 
submitted since the provisional Regulation a definitive assessment has been 
made and it has become clear that, theoretically, such overlap is substantial and 
that only for some market segments are the two products not at all 
interchangeable. 
(7) However, similarity of end uses does not alone determine the question of like 
product. The conclusions of the provisional investigation that hardboard and 
thin dry-process fibreboards were not a single product were based on 
differences of physical and chemical characteristics of the two products. Further 
investigation of the issues involved has allowed the following refinements of the 
analysis: 
- it is confirmed that the thin HDF variant of dry-process fibreboards can be 
produced in densities comparable to or higher than the density of hardboard. 
With its density defined as being above 800 kg/m , it is thin HDF which can 
be considered the closest to hardboard: 
? 
however, the average prices for thin HDF were higher than those for thin 
MDF (10-15% on average) and for most hardboard of equivalent board 
thicknesses under 6mm, so that over the period investigated it was mainly 
thin MDF (density lower than 800 kg/m3) which competed on the market 
with hardboard over a large part of its final uses, particularly in the furniture 
sector, in part of the packaging sector, in the picture frames sector and in a 
part of the doors sector; 
it was also pointed out that new, zero-emission thin dry-process fibreboards 
are in production, i.e. thin dry-process fibreboards containing no 
formaldehyde. This development allows thin. dry-process fibreboards to 
compete in the market of food packaging from which it has hitherto been 
excluded because of its formaldehyde content. However, these zero-emission 
products are a very recent innovation, and, although it is conceivable that 
thin dry-process fibreboards could in the future be used in the area of food 
packaging, their higher price would probably preclude this at the present 
time. As these developments relate to periods subsequent to the investigation 
period, they could not be investigated; 
the fact that thin dry-process fibreboards and hardboard share a number of 
end uses does not imply that the market considers them as a single product. 
Indeed, most operators in the sectors involved have confirmed that, in 
practice, they do not use the different board-types indiscriminately because 
of the different physical characteristics and technical performances of the 
two products; rather, they choose between them according to which best suits 
their technical requirements. As an example, thin MDF has an advantage 
when it has to be laminated, due to its more porous and matte surface. 
Moreover, its internal structure is smooth and not layered like hardboard, and 
it does not have the tendency to split when submitted to tension. As a 
consequence, thin MDF is generally preferred to hardboard for the 
manufacture of laminated doors and furniture elements. On the other hand, 
hardboard generally has a distinct advantage in those uses where density 
and/or suppleness of the panel are required, such as in lacquered and pre-
painted doors or automobile parts, or where it is thought that the resins 
contained in thin dry-process fibreboards would have, as explained above, a 
possible impact on health, such as in fruit and vegetable packaging. 
(8) In conclusion, the definitive analysis confirms the provisional findings that 
hardboard and thin dry-process fibreboards, although they are theoretically 
interchangeable for many end uses, are not, in practice, a single product because 
of the differences in their physical and chemical characteristics. 
(9) Nevertheless, although thin dry-process fibreboards do not form a single 
product with hardboard, it was claimed that the extent of the overlap in their 
end-uses has important implications for the analysis of the causes of any injury 
suffered by the Community industry. This issue is addressed below under 
causation. 
3. Plywood and chipboard 
(10) Submissions were received clarifying the arguments presented at the provisional 
stage of the investigation that plywood and chipboard panels were also 
interchangeable with hardboard in many of their applications. However, for the 
same reasons as were outlined for thin dry-process fibreboards above, 
theoretical similarity of end uses does not alone determine the question of single 
product. Since the physical and chemical characteristics of hardboard are 
different to chipboard and plywood panels, it cannot be considered to be a 
single product with them. 
The provisional findings are therefore confirmed. 
A o 
4. Like product 
(11) The further investigation confirmed that there were no differences in the basic 
characteristics and uses of the hardboard imported into the Community from the 
countries concerned and the hardboard produced by the Community industry 
and sold on the Community market. The same is true with regard to hardboard 
produced and sold on the domestic markets of Brazil, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, 
Lithuania and Poland (the latter served also as an analogue country for imports 
from Russia). It was therefore concluded that both the hardboard produced and 
sold by the Community industry on the Community market and the hardboard 
produced and sold on the domestic markets of Brazil, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, 
Lithuania and Poland were, within the meaning of Article 1(4) of Regulation 
(EC) No 384/96 (hereinafter referred to as the "basic Regulation"), alike to the 
hardboard imported into the Community from the seven countries subject to 
investigation. 
(12) However, the Brazilian exporting producers, as well as a number of users of 
hardboard, in particular manufacturers of doorskins, repeated their claims made 
at the provisional stage that Brazilian eucalyptus hardboard is not a like product 
with the product produced by the Community industry and should be excluded 
from the scope of the investigation. 
M 
(13) Among the exporting producers concerned by this investigation, only the 
Brazilian exporting producers supply hardboard made from eucalyptus to the 
Community market. There are also two producers of eucalyptus hardboard in 
the Community, both situated in the Iberian peninsula, which did not participate 
in the complaint which led to the initiation of this proceeding. 
(14) These claims in respect of eucalyptus hardboard have been extensively 
investigated. Following the imposition of provisional measures, a number of 
door manufacturers across the Community were visited. In addition, one non-
complainant Community producer of eucalyptus hardboard in Portugal was 
visited. These visits were aimed at clarifying the issues concerning the inclusion 
of Brazilian hardboard within the scope of this proceeding. 
From these visits, the following became clear: 
(a) The technical properties and uses of eucalyptus hardboard 
(15) Numerous technical submissions were received from the Brazilian exporting 
producers, Community door manufacturers, and the complainant concerning the 
properties of eucalyptus hardboard. The exporting producers and door 
manufacturers argue that eucalyptus hardboard has certain unique properties 
which set it apart from any other hardboard types, whether made from softwood 
or hardwood tree species other than eucalyptus. They claim further that no 
viable alternative product is produced by the Community industry. The door 
manufacturers in particular emphasise that the Community industry produces no 
eucalyptus hardboard for doorskins; indeed they point out that the only 
Community-based producer of eucalyptus hardboard which does make 
doorskin-quality boards, and is based in Portugal, is not one of the 
complainants. 
fL 
(16) It was found that hardboard made from eucalyptus wood has a number of 
technical characteristics which make it particularly well-suited for doorskins for 
high-quality, finished doors. First, its especially short fibres give the finished 
hardboard a very regular appearance, high density and stronger tensile 
properties than non eucalyptus hardboard. Second, the eucalyptus tree has 
hardly any bark, a factor which ensures that blemishes in the pressed board are 
minimal. 
(17) However, it should be borne in mind that the eucalyptus tree is not the only 
species to have short fibres. The complainants have submitted that there are 40 
other species of tree growing in Western Europe which have fibres of about the 
same length as eucalyptus, and in some cases even shorter. 
(18) It should also be noted that the high quality required by the door manufactures 
is not limited to the type of wood of which the hardboard is made. Some of the 
chaïacteristics required, such as a constant and reliable thickness of the board 
they use, a high density, a good resistance to high temperatures (doors are 
assembled at above 100°C) and humidity and the absence of surface defects are 
not necessarily linked to eucalyptus, but can also be obtained with other woods, 
with a strictly-controlled production process. It can also be added that, as far as 
the suitability for lacquering is concerned, it was found that some hardboards 
made with wood other than eucalyptus can be lacquered with acceptable results, 
depending on the technique and the quantity of painting material used. The 
advantage of eucalyptus and in general of hardwood hardboard is mainly in the 
smaller quantities of.paint needed to achieve a smooth result. 
^ 
(19) Furthermore, the analysis of the door manufacturers' activities also confirmed 
that for unfinished doors, which are primed or pre-painted in white but which 
require finishing by the final customer, doorskins made with different types of 
wood are used. It was also found that some door producers used Community-
produced hardboard, not made with eucalyptus wood, to make lacquered doors. 
(20) It was also found that during the investigation period, eucalyptus hardboard was 
also used for certain applications in the furniture, roofing and automobile 
industries and, as far as off-cuts of hardboard sheets are concerned, for fruit and 
vegetable containers. 
(b) Conclusion on eucalyptus hardboard as like product 
(21) The examination of the interested parties' submissions confirms that the 
exceptional properties of eucalyptus hardboard do not technically rule out its 
use in those areas in which other hardboards are also used; indeed, the fact that 
it is not widely used outside the doorskin sector is simply a reflection of the 
relatively higher price at which this product is sold on the market, in 
comparison with other hardwood and softwood hardboards. 
Although, therefore, the eucalyptus hardboard produced and exported by 
Brazilian exporting producers has certain special characteristics, these are not 
sufficient to lead to the conclusion that it is not a product alike to the hardboard 
produced by the Community industry with which it shares the same basic 
physical characteristics and uses within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic 
Regulation. 
A 
C. DUMPING 
1. Specific issues raised with regard to the establishment of dumping for 
each of the countries concerned 
(a) Brazil 
(22) In view of the findings on causation in recitals (53) to (56), it is not considered 
necessary to set out any findings in respect of dumping of imports of the 
product concerned from Brazil. 
(b) Bulgaria 
(23) The Bulgarian exporting producers made no comments following disclosure and 
the publication of the provisional Regulation. 
The dumping margins expressed as a percentage of the CIF import price at the 
Community border established for the Bulgarian exporting producers remain 
unchanged, i.e. 
FazerlesAD: 7,1% 
Lessoplast AD: 7,2% 
Non-cooperating exporting producers: 7,2% 
(c) Estonia 
(24) The Estonian exporting producer made no comments following disclosure and 
the publication of the provisional Regulation. 
A*-
The dumping margins expressed as a percentage of the CIF import price at the 
Community border established for the Estonian exporting producers remain 
unchanged, i.e. 
AS Repo Vabrikud: 6,0% 
Non cooperating exporting producers: 6,0% 
(d) Latvia 
General 
(i) Product classification 
(25) Following the adoption of provisional measures, the Latvian exporting producer 
requested a revision of the classification of some of the company product codes 
into Product Control Numbers. The claim was based on the grounds that some 
company product codes, which were originally incorrectly reported by the 
company as referring to standard products, should be considered as cut-to-size 
products. 
This request has been granted as the company product codes in question did 
indeed not cover standard dimensions. 
//6 
Normal value 
(i) Profit margin in constructed normal values 
The Latvian exporting producer claimed that when constructing normal values, 
the profit earned on sales in the ordinary course of trade should be expressed as 
a percentage of the total domestic turnover of the like product of the company -
including the turnover of non-profitable sales - instead of the turnover of the 
sales in the ordinary course of trade only. The approach adopted by the 
Commission in the provisional Regulation inflates, according to the producer, 
the profit margin. The Latvian producer furthermore asserted that there was a 
discrepancy between the methods used by the Commission to calculate, on the 
one hand, the profit margins by excluding non-profitable transactions as well as 
the dumping amounts by excluding negative dumping and, on the other hand, 
the calculation of the dumping margins expressed as a percentage of the total 
CIF value. 
AT-
This claim had to be rejected. The methods used by the Commission to 
construct normal values and to determine which sales had been made in the 
ordinary course of trade are described in recitals (29) and (31) of the provisional 
Regulation and are in conformity with the rules set out in Articles 2(4) and 2(6) 
of the basic Regulation. In particular, it should be added that: First, Article 2(6) 
of the basic Regulation clearly specifies that "the amounts (...) for profits shall 
be based on actual data pertaining to production and sales in the ordinary course 
of trade, of the like product...". Second, the aim is to establish a profit margin 
that could normally be attained for sales of a given product on the domestic 
market. Third, Article 2(4) of the basic Regulation provides as to when loss-
making sales of a given product may be treated as being in the ordinary course 
of trade i.e. if the quantity sold with a loss is below 20% of the total quantity 
sold of that product. In that case, only the total turnover of a product including 
loss-making transactions is the basis of the profit margin calculation. 
Comparison between normal value and export price. 
M 
(i) Allowance for currency conversion 
The Latvian exporting producer had claimed an allowance for currency 
conversion based on a comparison of the amount in Lats the company would 
have obtained using the exchange rate applicable at the time of the conclusion 
of the respective contracts with their customers and the amount actually 
obtained. This claim is based on the assumption that the date of contract is the 
date of sale. In the provisional Regulation, the Commission had rejected this 
claim on the basis that the contracts submitted did not reflect the material terms 
of sale and that the date of invoice more appropriately established these terms. 
The exporting producer reintroduced this claim, adding that contracts could be 
amended. This confirms that the company could react to exchange rate 
variations by amending export prices. Therefore, it is confirmed that such 
contracts do not more appropriately establish the material terms of sale as 
compared to invoices, in particular with regard to the price. The claim could 
not, therefore, be accepted. 
(ii) Interest rates used for credit purposes 
(26) With regard to the credit cost allowance, the Latvian exporting producer claims 
that the deposit rate instead of the credit rate should be used on the grounds that, 
the company having sufficient liquidity, its credit costs are limited to the interest 
earnings not perceived on its bank deposit account. 
A°i 
Following the practice consistently applied by the Community institutions, it 
was not found appropriate to base the calculation of the credit cost allowance on 
the deposit rate on the grounds that these constitute opportunity costs as 
compared to actual costs. 
In this context it is noted that the interests customers would have to pay in case 
of payment delays, as stated in the contracts submitted to the Commission, 
suggest that the company determined such interests on the basis of credit rates 
rather than deposit rates. 
(iii) Depreciation of the machinery of the related domestic producer 
(27) The Latvian exporting producer claims that the depreciation of the machinery of 
the related domestic producer should have been calculated on the basis of a 10-
year depreciation period instead of a 5-year depreciation period. 
Pursuant to Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation, this claim could not be 
accepted as the amount used is in line with the amount declared in the audited 
financial statements of the year 1997 and the application of the 20% 
depreciation amount per year seems therefore to reasonably reflect the 
depreciation costs associated with the production of the product under 
consideration. 
U> 
Dumping 
(28) On the basis of the above, the following modified dumping margins expressed 
as a percentage of the CIF import price at the Community border have been 
established for Latvian exporting producers: 
AS "Bolderâja": 4,7% 
Non cooperating exporting producers: 4,7% 
(e) Lithuania 
(29) The Lithuanian exporting producer made no comments following disclosure and 
the publication of the provisional Regulation. 
The dumping margins expressed as a percentage of the CIF import price at the 
Community border established for Lithuanian exporting producers remain 
unchanged, i.e. 
JSC Grigiskes: 11,4% 
Non cooperating exporting producers: 11,4% 
(f) Poland 
Normal value 
(i) Profit margin in constructed normal values 
(30) The Polish exporting producers made the same claim as the Latvian exporting 
producer with respect to the calculation of the profit margin when constructing 
normal value (see recital (25) above). 
This request has been rejected for the reasons given in recital (25) above. 
11 
(ii) Allocation of selling, general and administrative costs 
(31) One Polish exporting producer claimed that the turnover based allocation 
method which the Commission has used to allocate selling, general and 
administrative expenses relating to domestic sales should be revised and instead 
the method normally applied by the company and used in its questionnaire 
response should be utilised. This method was based on sales volumes in tonnes 
to which conversion factors (i.e. the factors used to convert tonnes into m2) 
relating to the thickness of a given hardboard type were applied. 
The request was examined and it was concluded that the allocation method used 
in the questionnaire response is in line with the normal cost accounting practice 
of the company. Consequently, the allocation method for selling, general and 
administrative expenses has been changed in line with the request of the 
company. 
(iii) Exclusion of specific transactions 
(32) One Polish exporting producer questioned the methodology employed by the 
Commission to determine normal value by excluding transactions of low quality 
hardboard. According to this company, the exclusion of these transactions 
causes the artificial overstatement of sales profitability and consequently affects 
their dumping margin. 
II 
As stated in recital (27) of the provisional Regulation, it was established that 
only hardboard panels with the same characteristics and the same quality are 
directly comparable. This is so because the quality of the hardboard determines 
to a substantial degree its price and the suitability for certain uses. Therefore, 
and since this low quality hardboard was not exported to the Community, the 
request made by the company could not be accepted 
(iv) Cost of production 
(33) One Polish exporting producer proposed a different way of calculating the costs 
of cutting standard-size hardboard into cut-to-size boards as compared to this 
producer's questionnaire response. This new cost allocation also took into 
account the thickness of the panels cut and not only the number of square 
meters cut. This claim was justified on the grounds that the cutting machines 
can cut simultaneously up to 100mm of panels. Therefore, it was claimed, in 
one cutting operation the company was able to cut a substantially different 
number of square meters depending on the thickness of the panels cut. 
Consequently, the claim was accepted. 
Comparison of Normal Value and Export Price 
9> 
(i) Start-up costs 
(34) One Polish exporting producer referred to in recital (65) of the provisional 
Regulation disagreed with the Commission rejection of the start-up cost 
adjustment to its worked hardboard operations. However, as no new evidence 
was submitted by this producer, the findings set out in recital (65) of the 
provisional Regulation are confirmed. 
Dumping 
(35) One Polish exporting producer has put into question the methodology used by 
the Commission of calculating a single dumping margin for all hardboard 
product types instead of calculating a different dumping margin for raw 
hardboard and for worked hardboard. 
This claim could not be accepted. It is the constant practice of the Community 
institutions, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 1 and 2 of the basic 
Regulation, to establish a dumping margin for the product under consideration 
as a whole and not per category, type or model of the product concerned. The 
reason is that for a product like hardboard, which exists in a wide variety of 
types, the implementation of anti-dumping measures, in particular anti-dumping 
duties, on a per type basis is from a customs point of view impractical. 
(36) On the basis of the above, the following modified dumping margins expressed 
as a percentage of the CIF import price at the Community border duty unpaid 
have been established for Polish exporting producers: 
<L\ 
EkopfytaS.A. 20,6% 
Zaklady Pryt Pilsniowych S.A w Krosnie Odrzanskim. 11,0% 
Czarna Woda Zaklady Plyt Pilsniowych: 34,8% 
Alpex Karlino S.A.: 22,4% 
Zaklady Pryt Pilsniowych S.A., Przemysl: 9,1% 
Koniecpolskie Zaklady Pryt Pilsniowych S.A.: 11,4% 
Non-cooperating exporting producers: 34,8% 
With regard to Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, it was found 
that the overall level of cooperation was high. As mentioned in recital (35) of 
the provisional Regulation, it was therefore considered appropriate to set the 
dumping margin for the non-cooperating companies in the countries with high 
cooperation at the level of the highest or the sole dumping margin established 
for a cooperating company in the country in question. 
(g) Russia 
(37) No Russian exporting producer made any comments following disclosure and 
the publication of the provisional Regulation. 
Normal value for Russia was calculated on the basis of the weighted average of 
the normal values established for co-operating Polish companies. 
The dumping margin for Russia has been recalculated taking into account the 
changes in the normal values established for the Polish companies as described 
in recitals (30) to (33) above. 
%f 
On this basis, a new single dumping margin expressed as a percentage of the 
CIF import price at the Community border, duty unpaid, of 30.6% has been 
established for the Russian exporting producers. 
D. INJURY 
1. Consumption 
(38) The provisional findings are confirmed. 
2. Dumped imports 
(a) Cumulation 
(39) The Brazilian exporting producers reiterated the claim that imports into the 
Community from Brazil should not be cumulated with imports from the other 
countries concerned in the proceeding. They argued that hardboard produced in 
Brazil and exported to the Community does not compete with imports 
originating in the other countries concerned in that: 
- the level of its export prices is higher, on average, than the level found for 
the other countries concerned, as shown by the lower provisional 
undercutting margin found at the provisional stage; 
- the volume and market share of imports showed, during the period under 
examination, a divergent trend from mat of the other countries concerned; 
l<o 
- it is sold to different customers, mainly producers of lacquered doors. 
(40) An examination of these claims resulted in the following findings: 
The quasi totality of the imports from Brazil were destined for particular end 
uses especially the manufacture of lacquered doors, a sector where high prices 
are obtained and to which the other countries concerned do not sell. In fact, the 
users of Brazilian hardboard considered imports from these other sources as 
being wholly unsuitable for their needs, on both technical and economic 
grounds. 
The above findings on end use are supported by Brazilian price levels, which 
are substantially above those of other imports from, the other countries 
concerned. Furthermore, Brazilian import volumes are falling while others are 
rising. 
(41) In the light of the above, it is not unreasonable in this case to conclude that a 
cumulative assessment of the imports from Brazil with the effects of imports 
from other sources under investigation would be inappropriate. 
The effects of imports from Brazil were therefore examined separately. 
%Y 
(b) Volume and price development of the dumped imports 
(42) The provisional findings are confirmed. 
However, in the light of the decision to analyse the effects of imports from 
Brazil separately from the effects of imports from the other countries, the 
analysis of import volumes and price trends is as follows: 
Imports from Brazil: 
1993 1994 1995 1996 IP 
QUANTITY (tonnes) 
Indexed 
VALUE (000 Ecus) 
Indexed 
% Market share 
Indexed 
Price per tone 
Indexed 62,193 
100 
18,117 
100 61,605 
99 
17,724 
98 69,783 
112 
20,767 
115 58,514 
94 
16,772 
93 
6.3 5.4 6.0 5.2 
100 86 95 82 
291 288 298 287 
100 99 102 98 
(43) Import volumes and market share show a significant decrease between 1995 and 
the investigation period, while prices remained relatively stable throughout the 
period examined. 
%i 
Imports from other countries concerned: 
QUANTITY (tonnes) 
Indexed 
VALUE (000 Ecus) 
Indexed 
% Market share 
Indexed 
Price per tone 
Indexed 1993 
171,890 
100 
28,707 
100 
17.4 
100 
167 
100 1994 
192,165 
112 
33,919 
118 
16.9 
97 
177 
106 1995 
253,041 
147 
49,103 
171 
21.7 
125 
194 
116 1996 
209,727 
722 
43,461 
151 
18.5 
107 w&itifi}'-
207 
724 
Import volumes and market shares substantially increased between 1993 and 
1995, fell back in 1996, and increased again in the investigation period. Imports, 
both in absolute value and in terms of market share were higher in me 
investigation period than at the beginning of the period examined. 
Although prices rose significantly over the period considered for the analysis of 
injury, imports from all these countries were still substantially undercutting the 
Community industry's prices in the investigation period. 
tf 
(c) Price comparison 
(44) Following the disclosure of the provisional findings, comments were made by 
the Brazilian exporting producers relating to the methodology used for the 
calculation of price undercutting. 
It was pointed out that the price differential between the Brazilian export prices 
and Community industry's prices were mainly due to a small part of the 
transactions during the investigation period, accounting for less than 1% of the 
Community production. 
One of the Brazilian exporting producers requested that for the purpose of the 
comparison, where applicable, the price paid by the first independent customer 
in the Community to its related importer be used, as such a price was at the 
same level of trade as prices of the Community industry. Furthermore, it was 
requested that the margins found be expressed as a percentage of the total value 
of imports in the investigation period, including those omitted from the 
comparison where no matching models had been sold by the Community 
producers. 
(45) The latter request was not accepted. It is standard practice of the Community 
institutions to use only the OF value of the imports during the investigation 
period for which an actual price-undercutting analysis has been performed and, 
consequently, for which matching Community-made product types existed 
when determining the margins found. 
¥> 
(46) Furthermore, the Product Control Numbers (PCNs) provided by both exporting 
/ producers and Community producers were carefully examined and revised 
where necessary to ensure a fair comparison. The comparison was then made at 
the same level of trade between the ex works prices of the Community 
producers and either CIF export prices, Community frontier duty paid, when the 
sale was made directly by the exporting producers to an independent customer, 
or the ex-warehouse resale prices of the related importer to the first independent 
customer. 
(47) The undercutting margin was calculated by weighting the type-by-type average 
undercutting rates by the quantities of the dumped imports times the average 
prices of the matching Community-produced products. 
The same criteria were applied to the price comparisons for the other countries 
concerned. 
(48) The export transactions used for the comparison represented at least 74% of 
total exports for each country concerned. 
(49) The revised calculations confirmed the existence of price undercutting for all 
countries except Brazil, for which no price undercutting was found. The new 
levels of price undercutting are shown in the table below: 
W 
SUMMARY OF THE UNDERCUTTING MARGINS 
Country Weighted average undercutting on a direct 
product type-to-type comparison 
BRAZIL "~ 
BULGARIA 44% 
ESTONIA 65% 
LATVIA . 48% ___ 
LITHUANIA 45% 
POLAND 53% 
RUSSIA 1 65% 
3. Situation of the Community industry 
(50) The provisional findings are confirmed. 
4. Conclusion on injury 
(51) The Polish and Latvian exporting producers questioned the provisional 
conclusions on injury on the grounds that the developments of some injury 
factors, such as production, market share and sales turnover of the Community 
industry were not sufficiently negative to show the existence of material injury. 
These contentions were examined, but could not be accepted. The overall 
analysis at the Community level of all indicators relating to the situation of the 
Community industry, in particular in the light of the substantial deterioration of 
its sales prices and of its increasing financial losses, confirms the existence of 
injury. 
31 
(52) Therefore the provisional findings on injury are confirmed. 
E. CAUSATION OF INJURY 
1. Effect of the dumped imports from Brazil 
(53) The Brazilian exporting producers claimed that imports originating in Brazil 
could not have caused injury for the following reasons: 
- the quantities imported from Brazil decreased by 20% between 1995 and the 
investigation period; 
- the Brazilian product does not compete with Community production since it 
is sold to specialised users, that is manufacturers of lacquered doors, table 
mats and the automotive industry which need Brazilian eucalyptus hardboard 
for their particular quality requirements, and cannot replace it, in spite of its 
higher prices, with other hardboard types; 
- Brazilian exports do not undercut the Community industry's sales, 
particularly in the above-mentioned specialised sectors. 
(54) As to the first claim, the decrease in the quantities imported does not preclude 
that injury has been caused in the investigation period by those imports; indeed, 
the imports were still substantial and well above the de minimis limit as 
provided in Article 5(7) of the basic Regulation. 
3^> 
(55) As to the other claims, it was found that: 
- around 68% of the imports from Brazil during the investigation period were 
destined for production in the Community of lacquered doors. The 
Community lacquered door industry has stringent quality requirements for 
which Brazilian eucalyptus hardboard is particularly well-suited. However, 
as pointed out at recital (18) above, the high quality required by the door 
manufacturers is not strictly linked to the species of wood used, in this case 
eucalyptus. Brazilian hardboard is well-suited to lacquered door 
manufacture, not only because it is made with eucalyptus wood, but also 
because the Brazilian producers carry out very severe quality controls on 
their exports to the Community; 
- in the investigation period only very small quantities of hardboard produced 
by the Community industry were used for the manufacture of lacquered 
doors; the demand was almost completely satisfied by eucalyptus hardboard 
either imported from Brazil or supplied by the Portuguese non-complainant 
producer. The door manufacturers explained their choice on the grounds of 
the high quality guaranteed by those suppliers; 
iH 
- the above argument on the special end-uses is supported by the fact that there 
is no undercutting by Brazilian exports destined for the manufacture of door-
skins; in fact their prices are significantly above those of the Community 
industry; 
- the evidence, therefore, does not support the Community producers' claim 
that market prices were depressed by Brazilian exports, and that it is price 
depression which prevents them from producing doorskins of a quality equal 
to that of the Brazilian product and suitable for the production of lacquered 
doors; 
- as to the imports from Brazil not sold to the lacquered doors segment, they 
did not undercut, on average, the prices of Community production. 
(56) The foregoing leads to the conclusion that Brazilian exports were not a cause of 
material injury to the Community industry, and that, as a consequence, the 
proceeding with respect to Brazil should be terminated without measures. 
3* 
2. Effect of the dumped imports from the other countries subject to 
investigation 
(57) The volume of imports from the other countries subject to investigation 
increased by 29% between 1993 and the investigation period. Although their 
prices increased, on. average, by 32% over the same period, they still undercut 
substantially the prices of the Community industry in the investigation period. 
As a result of this undercutting, which ranged from 44% to 67%, the 
Community industry experienced a 16% fall in its selling prices and a serious 
deterioration of its financial situation. 
The provisional findings that the dumped imports from Bulgaria, Estonia, 
Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Russia caused material injury to the Community 
industry are therefore confirmed. 
3. Effect of imports from other third countries 
(58) Although certain exporting producers in the countries concerned reiterated 
claims that injury had been caused by the increase of imports from other third 
countries, no new information was made available in this respect which could 
alter the provisional findings. 
The provisional findings are therefore confirmed. 
36 
4. Competition from non-complainant Community producers 
(59) Some of the exporting producers concerned drew attention to the fact that, 
although not undercutting the Community industry's prices in the investigation 
period, non-complainant Community producers had been undercutting, on 
average, the Community industry's prices from 1993 to 1995, and that this may 
have been, in those years, a cause of injury. 
(60) It should be noted that, although lower than those of the Community industry, 
non-complainant producers' prices were substantially higher than the average 
prices of imports from the countries concerned with the exception of Brazil: the 
average price of these imports %was 167 Ecus per tonne in 1993, while the 
average unit price for non-complainant producers was 1.02 Ecu per m2, 
corresponding to more than 300 Ecus per tonne. 
(61) In the light of these price relationships, it is considered unlikely that the pricing 
of non-complainant producers was a source of injury to the Community 
industry; in any event, such pricing effect was considered insufficient to break 
the causal link between the dumped imports from the six countries and the 
injury suffered. 
5. Effect of dry-process fibreboards 
(62) After the imposition of provisional measures, various exporting producers again 
argued that the injury suffered by the Community industry was not caused by 
the dumped imports, but by the competition from the thin dry-process 
fibreboards. 
n 
(63) The investigation has shown that thin dry-process fibreboard could be used in 
most areas where hardboard is employed. Nevertheless, despite the strong 
growth in the dry-process fibreboard market in recent years, as shown by the 
growth in consumption for hardboard, this has not occurred at the expense of 
the hardboard sector. 
(64) Various interested parties have submitted estimates of the size of the thin dry-
process fibreboards sector. On the basis of statistics provided by the European 
MDF industry, the volume of production of thin dry-process fibreboards is 
estimated at between 500,000 and 600,000 m3 in 1997, with an increase of 
around 50% between 1993 and 1997. Separate statistics on imports of thin dry-
process fibreboards are not available, but imports of dry-process fibreboards of 
all thicknesses were reported to be minor until 1997. 
(65) However, at the provisional stage it was shown that, since consumption of 
hardboard increased by 20% between 1993 and the investigation period (it 
should be recalled that consumption was around 1,2 million tonnes in the 
investigation period, despite the rise of the thin dry-process fibreboards sector), 
it was unlikely that the increase in the demand of thin dry-process fibreboards 
was a major cause of injury. The injury to the Community industry did not 
consist of a loss in sales volumes, which might indicate that a substitution had 
occurred. Injury was mainly shown by financial losses, due to a strong 
downward pressure on prices exerted by the dumped imports. 
# 
(66) Indeed the data available show that the average price of thin dry-process 
fibreboards was above that of Community produced hardboard of equivalent 
thickness for all of the period 1993 to 1996. Only during the investigation 
period is there some indication that one type of thin dry-process fibreboard, 
namely thin MDF, may have reached the price level of Community produced 
hardboard in parts of the Community. So even in this scenario, hardboard 
imported from the countries concerned during the investigation period was sold 
at significantly lower prices as outlined in recital (49). 
(67) Given the interchangeability between all types of wood-based products, thin 
dry-process fibreboards have established a presence on all markets for wood-
based panels, including the hardboard market. However, the general increase in 
the demand for wood panels, and of fibreboards in particular, has allowed the 
demand for hardboard to grow in spite of the presence of the competing 
products. 
(68) No new information has been made available which changes the provisional 
finding that, despite the growth in demand for thin dr^-process fibreboards, the 
dumped imports of hardboard from the countries subject to investigation, with 
the exception of Brazil, in isolation caused material injury to the Community 
industry, in terms of price depression and financial losses. 
6. Conclusion on causation 
(69) In the light of the foregoing, the provisional findings on causation are 
confirmed, with the exception of those relating to imports from Brazil. 
tf 
F. COMMUNITY INTEREST 
1. The definitive investigation 
(70) Following the imposition of provisional measures, the analysis of the impact of 
^ anti-dumping measures on the various sectors involved in the investigation 
continued. Users of hardboard were visited, as indicated in recital (3) above, as 
well as a non-complainant Community producer of eucalyptus hardboard. 
2. Impact on the Community industry 
(71) Subsequent to the imposition of provisional measures, several arguments were 
presented on the likely impact of any definitive measures on the Community 
industry. 
These arguments concerned the relationship between hardboard and thin dry-
prpcess fibreboards, as follows. 
(a) Arguments presented by interested parties 
(72) It was claimed by certain interested parties that the Community industry could 
not benefit from any anti-dumping measures as a result of the substitutability 
between thin dry-process fibreboards and hardboard. 
Ho 
In support of this view, it was alleged that the price level of thin dry-process 
fibreboards has reached the level of hardboard of equivalent thickness. 
According to these claims, the imposition of anti-dumping measures, with the 
intention of increasing the price of hardboard in the Community, would have the 
effect of raising its price above that of competing thin dry-process fibreboards. 
Where the two products are interchangeable, the effect of the anti-dumping 
measures would be that customers will choose to use thin dry-process 
fibreboards instead of hardboard. In other words, the anti-dumping measures 
would merely serve to reduce the consumption of hardboard by encouraging a 
switch to the consumption of thin dry-process fibreboards. 
(73) It was also claimed that thin dry-process fibreboards are a product in rising 
demand, with an increasing investment in production capacity and with the 
potential to replace hardboard in most end uses if a change in relative prices 
occurs. 
(b) The size of the thin dry-process fibreboards sector 
(74) As mentioned in recital (64), production of thin dry-process fibreboards was 
between 500,000 and 600,000 m3 in 1997, with a growth of around 50% 
between 1993 and 1997. However, the plants specialised in the production of 
these thin boards (that is, those equipped with the so-called 'calander press') are 
currently operating at near-full capacity, and most of the new investments in the 
sector of dry-process fibreboards relate to plants which are best employed in the 
production of 'middle' thicknesses, that is, between 6 and 30mm, which are 
outside the scope of this investigation. 
H1 
In the short run, therefore, an increase in output of thin dry-process fibreboards 
is unlikely. 
(c) The competition between hardboard and thin dry-process fibreboards 
(75) As explained in recitals (5) to (9), hardboard and dry-process fibreboards are 
theoretically interchangeable in many end uses, but their different physical 
characteristics imply that each has its specific advantages and disadvantages for 
any particular end use. 
(76) The exporting producers claimed that if there is a sufficient change in the 
relative prices of the two competing products, the extra costs incurred by any 
technical problems associated with switching to the use of thin dry-process 
fibreboards can be overcome if the price advantage in comparison with 
hardboard becomes large enough. 
(77) The Community industry claimed, however, that the substitution of hardboard 
with dry-process fibreboards has already taken place in those end uses where 
they have a technical advantage, and that at present the competitive situation on 
the market has found an equilibrium, which is not going to be substantially 
altered by the proposed anti-dumping measures. Since consumption of 
hardboard continued to rise by 20% over the period examined, the data suggests 
that hardboard has been able to compete effectively with thin dry-process 
fibreboards, lending weight to the arguments submitted by the Community 
industry. Continual technical progress in the manufacture of thin dry-process 
fibreboards, however, makes it difficult to assess the degree to which thin dry-
process fibreboards might be used in fields hitherto dominated by hardboard in 
the future. 
\j{ 2-
(78) Thin dry-process fibreboards have been priced above hardboard of equivalent 
thickness for most of the period examined, but as technological progress has 
brought about cost reductions, their prices have declined steadily throughout the 
period, reaching approximately the levels of Community-produced hardboard of 
equivalent thickness by 1997. * 
It is unclear whether this trend decrease in the price of thin dry-process 
fibreboards, as technological progress leads to continued cost-reductions, is set 
to continue into the near future. The complainant states that further substantial 
reductions in the prices of thin dry-process fibreboards in the Community are 
not to be expected. The product is, it is claimed, now beyond the phase of rapid 
growth experienced in the last few years, which led to declining unit costs, and 
the mills are approaching full capacity utilisation, with a cost structure which is 
similar to that of hardboard. Therefore, the price of thin dry-process fibreboards 
is expected to remain, if definitive anti-dumping measures are imposed, on the 
same level as the price of Community produced hardboard. 
(79) On the other hand, the continuous-line and calander-press production processes 
which are used to manufacture thin dry-process fibreboards are said by the dry-
processed fibreboard industry to be more efficient than the multi-daylight 
presses used in the production of hardboard. In particular, the levels of waste 
and offcuts from these MDF production processes are allegedly far lower than 
with multi-daylight presses, whilst the speed of manufacture is greater. Thus, it 
is claimed that the prices of Community-produced thin dry-process fibreboards 
can continue their declining trend. The same prediction is made by some of the 
interested parties concerning the price trend of imports of thin dry-process 
fibreboards from outside of the Community. 
M2> 
These developments have implications for the use of hardboard in those sectors 
where its end-uses overlap with those of dry-process fibreboards, such as in the 
furniture industry. If prices of dry-process fibreboards continue to decline after 
the imposition of definitive anti-dumping measures, it is possible that a switch 
in consumption away from hardboard in favour of thin dry-process fibreboards 
could follow in those market segments where dry-process fibreboards are 
interchangeable with hardboard. 
(d) Conclusion on the impact of measures on the Community industry 
(80) In view of the above analysis, it was found that the measures proposed will most 
likely have a beneficial impact on the situation of the Community industry. In 
case anti-dumping measures are not imposed, the dumped imports will continue 
undercutting substantially the Community industry's prices. Given the financial 
difficulties highlighted by the injury analysis, the continuation of the business 
activity of the Community industry would be seriously threatened and a large 
part of Community production of hardboard, which guarantees at present the 
coverage of a wide range of customers' demands, would be put at risk, forcing 
users to choose among less than optimal alternatives, such as the dumped 
imports and other wood panel products. 
It should also be borne in mind that, although it is possible that some of the 
benefits of anti-dumping measures may accrue to industries other than the 
hardboard industry, it is highly unlikely that the Community industry would 
have sought protection against unfair trade had it not expected benefits from 
measures. 
4^1 
The effectiveness of the measures, however, may be reduced depending on the 
future price relationship between hardboard and the dry-process fibreboards, 
and a review under Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation may be justified should 
developments in this context warrant such a review. 
3. Impact on upstream industries 
(81) As no further representations were received, the provisional findings are 
confirmed. 
4. Impact on importers 
(82) In the absence of further representations, the provisional findings are confirmed. 
5. Impact on users 
(83) All the users co-operating during the investigation were manufacturers of doors 
using only hardboard imported from Brazil. It was found that imports from 
Brazil have not caused injury to the Community industry and that no measures 
should be adopted in respect of that country. 
The impact oil other users is expected to be minor, given the rates of duty 
proposed and the small share of hardboard in the cost of production of most of 
such users. 
r 
Mi 
6. Conclusion on Community interest 
(84) In the light of the foregoing, it is concluded that there is no reason to consider 
that the imposition of definitive anti-dumping measures on imports of hardboard 
originating in the countries for whom definitive measures are to be adopted 
would be against the overall interest of the Community. 
G. MEASURES PROPOSED 
1. Termination of the proceeding in respect of Brazil 
(85) Based on the conclusions of the definitive investigation, the proceeding 
concerning imports originating in Brazil is terminated by Commission Decision 
... ? without the imposition of measures. The amounts secured by way of a 
provisional anti-dumping duty shall therefore be released. The undertakings 
provisionally accepted from the two exporting producers in Brazil will 
automatically lapse in accordance with Article 8(6) of the basic Regulation. 
2. Definitive measures 
(a) Injury elimination level 
(86) The injury elimination level was calculated using the same methodology as 
described in the provisional Regulation at recital (113) with a level of trade 
adjustment to reflect sales made via traders. 
3 See page of this Official Journal. 
1/& 
(87) An injury margin was established for each of the exporting producers concerned 
as a result of these comparisons and this margin was expressed as a percentage 
of the CIF value of their exports to the Community for product types for which 
there were Community-made matches. 
(b) Form and level of the definitive measures 
(88) Based on the above conclusions on dumping, injury, causal link and Community 
interest, it was considered what form and level of anti-dumping measures would 
have to be taken in order to remove the trade-distorting effects of injurious 
dumping and to restore effective competitive conditions on the Community 
market. 
Definitive measures should take the form of ad-valorem duties, which are 
deemed appropriate to remove the injury caused by the dumped imports. 
In accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation, as the injury margin 
was lower than the dumping margin found for one of the co-operating Polish 
exporting producers, the definitive anti-dumping duty for that company is set at 
the level of the former. For all other exporting producers, the injury margins are 
higher than the corresponding dumping margins and measures are therefore 
based on the latter margins. The same applies for the residual duties. 
wr 
(c) Undertakings 
(89) It will be recalled from recital (115) et seq. of the provisional Regulation that 
undertakings had been offered by the co-operating exporting producers in 
Brazil, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, and provisionally 
accepted by the Commission. 
These undertakings, with the exception of those offered by the Brazilian 
companies, reflect the definitive findings of the investigation with respect to the 
minimum prices provided therein and have. been definitively accepted by 
Commission Decision «. 
3. Collection of the provisional duties 
(90) In the light of the seriousness of the injury suffered by the Community industry, 
it is considered necessary that the amounts secured by way of the provisional 
anti-dumping duty under Regulation (EC) No 1742/98 should be definitively 
collected to the extent of the amount of the definitive duties levied, 
4 See page of this Official Journal 
Ul> 
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 
Article 1 
1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of hardboard, 
defined as wet-processed fibreboard of wood or other ligneous materials, whether 
or not bonded with resins or other organic substances and with a density exceeding 
0,8 g/cm3, falling under CN codes ex 4411 11 00 and ex 4411 19 00 (TARIC 
codes: 4411 11 00* 10 and 4411 19 00* 10) originating in Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, 
Lithuania, Poland and Russia. 
2. The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to the net free-at-
Community -frontier price to the products manufactured by the companies listed 
below shall be as follows: 
Country 
Bulgaria 
Estonia 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Poland 
Russia Company 
Fazerles AD 
All other companies 
All companies 
All companies 
All companies 
Alpex-Karlino S.A. 
Ekopryta S.A. 
Zaklady Pryt Pilsniowych 
S.A., Przemysl 
Koniecpolskie Zaklady Pryt 
Pilsniowych S.A 
Zaklady Pryt Pilsniowych 
S.A w Krosnie Odrzanskim 
All other companies 
All companies Rate of duty 
(%) 
7.1 
7.2 
6.0 
4.7 
11.4 
22.4 
7.0 
9.1 
11.4 
11.0 
34.8 
30.6 Taric additional 
code 
8461 
8900 
-
-
-
8479 
8480 
8481 
8494 
8495 
8900 
-
uf 
Article 2 
1. Notwithstanding Article 1, the definitive duty shall not apply to imports of 
hardboard produced and directly exported and invoiced to an importing company 
in the Community by the companies listed in paragraph 3, provided that the 
conditions of paragraph 2 are met. 
2. When the declaration for release for free circulation is presented, exemption from 
the duty shall be conditional upon presentation to the competent Member State's 
customs services of a valid Undertaking Invoice issued by one of the companies 
listed in paragraph 3. The Undertaking Invoice, the essential elements of which are 
listed in the Annex, shall conform to the requirements for such invoices set out in 
the undertaking accepted by Commission Decision 5 
3. Imports accompanied by an Undertaking Invoice shall be declared under the 
following Taric additional codes: 
5 See page of this Official Journal 
io 
Country Company Taric Additional 
Code 
Bulgaria FazerlesAD 8496 
Lessoplast AD 8497 
Estonia AS Repo Vabrikud 8498 
Latvia - AS "Bolderaja" 8499 
Lithuania JSC Grigiskes 8510 
Poland Alpex-Karlino S.A. 8511 
Czarna Woda Zaklady Pryt 8600 
Pilsniowych 
EkoplytaS.A. . 8513 
Zaklady Pryt Pilsniowych 8545 
S.A., Przemysl 
Koniecpolskie Zaklady Pryt 8546 
Pilsniowych S.A 
Zaklady Pryt Pilsniowych S.A 8547 
w Krosnie Odrzanskim 
Article 3 
1. The amount provisionally secured by Regulation (EC) No 1742/98 with respect to 
imports originating in the countries mentioned in Article 1 shall be definitively 
collected to the extent of the amount of the definitive duties levied. 
2. The amounts provisionally secured by Regulation (EC) No 1742/98 with respect to 
imports originating in Brazil shall be released. 
51 
Article 4 
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official 
Journal of the European Communities. 
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member 
States. 
Done at Brussels, 
For the Council 
ANNEX 
Elements to be indicated in an Undertaking Invoice referred to in Article 2(2): 
1. the Product Reporting Code (as established in the undertaking offered by the 
producing exporter in question); 
2. The exact description of the goods, including: 
• The Company Product Code (CPC); whether the hardboard is unworked or 
worked; the thickness and the precise measures of the panel, indicating in brackets 
whether it has standard measures (STA) or cut-to-size ones (CTS); 
• CNCode; 
• the TARIC additional code under which the goods on the invoice may be customs 
cleared at Community borders (as specified in the Regulation); 
• quantity (to be given in m2); 
3. The description of the terms of the sale, including: 
• Price per square meter1 ; 
• the applicable payment terms; 
• the applicable delivery terms; 
• total discounts and rebates; 
4. Name of the importer to which the invoice is issued directly by the Company. 
5. The name of the official of the Company that has issued the Undertaking Invoice 
and the following signed declaration: 
1 For Undertaking invoices issued by the Latvian exporting producer AS "Bolderâja", in case of 
sales via sales agents established in the Community the price per m2 may appear on an additional 
invoice issued by the agent instead of on the Undertaking invoice issued by AS "Bolderâja". If that 
is the case, the Undertaking invoice should also mention the name of the agent. 
ii> 
"I, the undersigned, certify that the sale for direct export to the European 
Community of the goods covered by this invoice is being made within the 
scope and under the terms of the undertaking offered by «Company», and 
accepted by the European Commission through Decision (EC) 2 I declare 
that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct." 
2 See page .... of this Official Journal. 
^ 



ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(98) 805 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 02 11 06 01 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-98-813-EN-C 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg