Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EC) No 2022/95 imposing a definitive anti- dumping duty on imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia
Date: 1998-03-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Russia, anti-dumping duty, chemical salt, dumping, import

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels,  12.03  1998 
COM(1998)  148 final 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION  (EC) 

amending Regulation  (EC) No 2022/95 imposing a definitive  anti-dumping duty on 
imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia 

(presented by the Commission) 

EXPLANATORY  MEMORANDUM 

The Council, by Regulation (EC) No 2022/95', imposed a definitive  anti-dumping duty 

on imports of ammonium  nitrate originating in Russia. 

The  Commission 
imports  on 
29  May  19972,  pursuant  to  Article  12  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  384/96-\ 

investigation  concerning 

reopened 

such 

the 

subsequent  to  the  lodging  of  a  complaint  by  the  European  Fertilizer  Manufacturers 

Association on  14 April 1997. 

The findings  of the review investigation  show that  the definitive  duty  imposed  did not 

lead  to  sufficient  movement  in resale  prices  in the  Community  within  the  meaning  of 

Article  12 (2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96.  Following the imposition  of the duty, it 

was  found  that  the  margin  of  dumping  had  increased. 

It  is  proposed,  therefore,  to 

change the anti-dumping  measure from  the minimum  import  price currently  applicable 

to  a  specific  duty  per  tonne  of  ECU  26.3,  in  line  with  the  new  findings  on  export 

prices. 

The  Advisory  Committee  was  consulted  on  14  January  1998  and  declared  itself 

unanimously  in favour.  The  Legal  Service,  the  Directorate-General  for  Industry  and 

the  Directorate-General  for  Customs  and  Indirect  Taxation  have  been  consulted  and 

have also given their approval in this respect 

1  OJNoL  198. 23.8.1995, p. 1. 

2  OJ No C  162. 29.5.1997, p. 5. 

1  OJ No L 56, 6.3.19%. p. 1. 

1 

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 

/98 

of 

1998 

amending Regulation (EC) No 2022/95 imposing a definitive  anti-dumping duty on 
imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia 

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  Community0 \  as 
amended  by Council  Regulation  (EC) No 2331/96  of 2 December  1996(2), and  in  particular 
Article  12 thereof, 

Having  regard  to the proposal  submitted  by the Commission  after  consulting  the  Advisory 
Committee, 

Whereas: 

A. PROCEDURE 

1.  Previous measures 

(1) 

In  May  1994,  by  Commission  Decision  94/293/EC  ,  anti-dumping  measures  were 

adopted with regard to imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Lithuania and  Russia, 

following  a  regional  anti-dumping  proceeding  concerning  imports  into  the  United 

Kingdom.  Measures  were  in  the  form  of  the  acceptance  of  undertakings  which  were 

intended to limit exports from  each country to the United Kingdom to  100 000 tonnes per 

annum.  The undertaking  accepted  from  the Russian authorities  was, however,  breached 

within the first year of its operation. 

1  OJ No L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. 

2  OJ No L 317, 6.12.1996, p. 1. 

3  OJ No L 129, 21.5.1994, p. 24. 

y\  £*. 

(2) 

In  June  1994,  a  Community-wide  anti-dumping  investigation  concerning  imports  of 
ammonium  nitrate  originating  in  Lithuania  and  Russia  was  initiated(4)  subsequent  to  a 

complaint lodged by the European Fertilizer Manufacturers  Association  (EFMA). 

In August  1995 the Council, by Regulation (EC) No 2022/95(5), imposed a definitive  anti 

dumping  duty,  in  the  form  of  a  variable  duty,  on  imports  of  ammonium  nitrate 

originating  in Russia.  The amount of duty was set at the difference  between a minimum 

import  price  of  ECU  102.9 per  tonne  net  of  product  and  the  net  cif  price,  Community 

frontier  before  customs  clearance,  where  the  latter  was  lower.  The  Commission 

simultaneously  terminated  the regional anti-dumping proceeding  in respect  of imports of 
ammonium nitrate originating in Russia(6). 

For  imports  originating  in  Lithuania,  the  Community-wide  proceeding  was  terminated 

without measures in view of the findings  of the investigation  concerning the causation of 
injury(7).  However,  the  undertaking  concerning  imports  into  the  United  Kingdom 

originating  in  Lithuania,  accepted  in  the  framework  of  the  regional  anti-dumping 

proceeding, remained in place. 

The  investigation  that  led  to  the  imposition  of  the  Community-wide  measures  is 

hereinafter  referred  to  as  'the  original  investigation'.  The  investigation  period  of  the 

original investigation was from  1  April  1993 to 31 March 1994. 

2.  Request for a reopening of the investigation 

(3)  In April  1997, EFMA lodged a request pursuant to Article  12 of Council Regulation  (EC) 

No  384/96  (hereinafter  referred  to  as  'the  basic  Regulation')  to  reopen  the  investigation 

into imports of ammonium  nitrate originating  in Russia with a view to examine  whether 

the measures had had an effect  on resale prices or subsequent selling prices. 

The  request  was  lodged  on  behalf  of  Community  producers  whose  collective  output  of 

ammonium nitrate constitutes a major  proportion, as defined  by Article 5 (4) of the basic 

4  OJ No C  158, 9.6.1994, p. 3. 

5  OJ No L  198, 23.8.1995, p. 1. 

6  OJ No L 198,23.8.1995, p. 29. 

7  OJ No L  198, 23.8.1995, p. 27. 

Regulation,  of the total  Community  production  of the product  concerned,  that  is,  by the 

Community industry in the proceeding. 

(4)  It was alleged that the imposition of anti-dumping duties on imports of ammonium  nitrate 

originating in Russia had led to no movement, or insufficient  movement,  in resale  prices 

or  subsequent  selling  prices  in  the  Community.  The  information  submitted  by  the 

Community  industry  contained  prima  facie  evidence  to  justify  the  reopening  of  the 

investigation, consisting of a comparison of the resale price per tonne which  should  have 

been  expected  following  the  imposition  of  measures  (calculated  by  adding  to  the 

minimum  import  price  set  by  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2022/95  all  costs  incurred 

between  import  and  resale)  with  actual  resale  prices  per  tonne  in  two  Member  States 

(France  and  the  United  Kingdom),  which  were  alleged  to  account  for  82%  of  the 

consumption of ammonium nitrate in the Community. 

3.  Reopening of the investigation 

(5)  The  evidence  submitted  in  the  request  was  considered  sufficient.  On  29  May  1997, 

therefore, the Commission announced by a notice published in the Official Journal of the 

European Communities'  the reopening of the investigation, pursuant to Article  12 of the 

basic  Regulation,  concerning  the  anti-dumping  measures  applicable  to  imports  of 

ammonium nitrate originating in Russia and commenced the reinvestigation. 

(6)  The 

Commission 

officially 

advised 

the 

producers/exporters 

and 

importers/traders/distributors known to be concerned, the representatives of the exporting 

country  and the Community  producers of the reopening  of the investigation..  Interested 

parties were given the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a 

hearing.  All  parties  who  so  requested  were  granted  hearings.  Written  and  oral 

submissions  were  also  received  from  certain  importers/traders/distributors  and  from 

EFMA  and  certain  of  its  constituent  members.  Questionnaires  were  sent  by  the 

Commission  directly  to all  producers/exporters  and  importers/traders/distributors  known 

to be concerned. 

8  OJNoC  162,29.5.1997, p. 5. 

(a) Producers/exporters in the country of origin and their related companies 

No  replies  to  the  questionnaire  were  received  within  the  time  limit  set.  One 

producer/exporter  replied  after  the expiry  of the time limit, but  in a manner  which  could 

only be considered  insufficient.  This company  was then given the opportunity  to  rectify 

the  deficiencies  in  its  response,  which  it  failed  to  do.  The  company  was  therefore 

informed  that  it would  be considered  as non-cooperating  and  was given  the  opportunity 

to comment  on this decision,  in accordance  with Article  18 (4)  of the  basic  Regulation. 

The  company  replied,  outside  the  deadline,  that  it  had  supplied  non-confidential 

information  which should be used by the Commission.  The non-confidential  information 

already  supplied  was,  however,  clearly 

insufficient 

for 

the  purposes  of 

the 

reinvestigation. 

(b) Importers/traders/distributors in the Community 

Nine unrelated importers/traders/distributors  made themselves known to the  Commission 

and  responded  to  the  questionnaire.  Of  these, two  subsequently  did  not  cooperate  and 

were  therefore  excluded  from  the  reinvestigation  conducted.  Both  companies  were 

informed  of this decision and were given an opportunity to comment, in accordance with 

Article  18 (4) of the basic Regulation. 

The  Commission  carried  out  investigation  visits  at  the  premises  of  the  following 

companies : 

- Unifert  France, SA, France 

- SHB Trading Ltd., United Kingdom 

- ConAgra Resources Europe Ltd., United Kingdom 

- Common Market Fertilizers, SA, Belgium 

The  three  remaining  cooperating  importers/traders/distributors  were  not  visited  by  the 

Commission  but  appropriate  account  was  taken  of  the  information  provided  in  their 

replies. 

(7)  The reinvestigation  covered the period from  1 April  1996 to 31 March  1997  (hereinafter 

referred to as 'the period of reinvestigation'). 

(8)  The  reinvestigation  exceeded  the  normal  time  period  of  six  months  provided  for  in 

Article  12 (4)  of the  basic  Regulation  owing  to  the  Commission  being  hampered  in its 

efforts  to gather information  by the marked lack of cooperation. 

B.  PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION 

(9)  The product reinvestigated  is the same product, originating  in Russia, as that concerned 

by  the  original  investigation:  i.e.  ammonium  nitrate,  which  is  a  fertiliser  produced  in 

prill  or granular  form,  currently  classifiable  within  CN codes  3102  30  90  (ammonium 

nitrate, other than in aqueous solution) and  3102 40 90 (mixtures of ammonium  nitrate 

with  calcium  carbonate  or  other  inorganic  non-fertilising  substances  with  a  nitrogen 

content exceeding 28% by weight). 

C.  THE REINVESTIGATION 

1.  Cooperation 

(10)  No  producer/exporter  of  ammonium  nitrate 

located 

in  Russia  -  or  related 

importer/trader/distributor  located  within  or outside the  Community  - cooperated  with 

the reinvestigation.  In addition, as indicated in recital (11) below, little cooperation  was 

received  from  unrelated  importers/traders/distributors  located  within  or  outside  the 

Community. 

Recourse  was  therefore  made  to  facts  available  in  accordance  with  Article  18 of  the 

basic  Regulation. 

Information  received  from  customs  authorities  in  the  United 

Kingdom, 

from 

published 

trade 

journals, 

from 

cooperating 

importers/traders/distributors  and  from  the  Community  industry  was  used,  where 

appropriate. 

(11)  Only  20% of  imports  into the  Community  of  ammonium  nitrate  originating  in  Russia 

during the period  of reinvestigation  was accounted  for  by the purchases of  cooperating 

companies.  Furthermore,  a  number  of  cooperating  companies  were  related  to  non-

cooperators  also  involved  in  the  trade  of  ammonium  nitrate  originating  in  Russia. 

Despite the fact that this meant the Commission could not be wholly confident  as to the 

completeness  of  the  information  supplied,  it  was  nonetheless  not  disregarded,  where 

relevant,  as  it  was  considered  that  the  deficiencies  were  not  such  as  to  cause  undue 

5 

difficulty  in arriving at a reasonably accurate finding,  in accordance with Article  18 (3) 

of  the  basic  Regulation.  In this  respect,  costs  between  import  and  resale  verified  on-

the-spot  at  cooperating  companies  considered  to  have  provided  the  most  detailed 

information  were used  to  calculate the  resale price  level  which  could  reasonably  have 

been expected for the product concerned after the adoption of measures. 

2. Movement of resale prices in the Community 

(12)  Pursuant to Article  12 (1) and (2) of the basic Regulation, it was determined  whether, 

following  the imposition of definitive  anti-dumping duties in  1995, the expected 

movement in resale prices in the Community had occurred.  In particular, the resale 

price to the first independent buyer which should have been expected during the period 

of reinvestigation (the 'benchmark resale price') was compared with the resale price 

actually found  for the same period (the 'actual resale price'). 

(a) Calculation of the benchmark resale price 

(13)  In order to calculate the benchmark resale price it was considered  appropriate  to add to 

the  minimum  import  price  established  pursuant  to  the  original  investigation  all  costs 

incurred between import and resale plus an amount for  profit. 

However,  in  the  absence  of  any  more  suitable  information,  a  distinction  was  made 

between 

costs 

associated  with 

imports 

accounted 

for 

by 

cooperating 

importers/traders/distributors  - for  which  the costs  incurred  between  import  and  resale 

were  verified  on-the-spot  -  and  those  associated  with  imports  accounted  for  by  non-

cooperators  -  whose  costs  were  established  on  the  basis  of  the  facts  available,  in 

accordance with Article  18 of the basic Regulation. 

(14)  In  order  to  calculate  the  costs  incurred  between  import  and  resale  for  cooperating 

companies, appropriate amounts for customs duty, handling and ancillary  costs, selling, 

general  and  administrative  expenses  (including  credit  costs)  and  profit  were  taken  into 

consideration, as verified  on-the-spot. 

One  importer  argued,  after  disclosure  of  the  findings  of  the  reinvestigation,  that  the 

profitability  used  did  not  reflect  actual  profitability  verified  on-the-spot.  The  rate  of 

profitability  used was reviewed  and, after  consideration,  an appropriate  adjustment  was 

made. 

(15)  For  non-cooperators,  appropriate  amounts  for  customs  duty,  handling  and  ancillary 

costs,  product  losses,  selling,  general  and  administrative  expenses  (including  credit 

costs)  and  profit  were  taken  into  consideration,  taking  the  highest  costs  found,  by 

Member  State,  for  cooperating  companies.  Due  account  was  taken  of  the  fact  that 

imports  made  into  the  United  Kingdom  accounted  for  by  non-cooperating  companies 

were primarily made in bulk, as indicated  by evidence provided  by customs authorities. 

In this  respect,  the  costs  of  bags and  bagging  were  also  included  in  the  calculation  of 

costs incurred between import and resale for  imports accounted  for  by  non-cooperating 

companies  made  into the United  Kingdom.  The amount  for  profit  was  determined  on 

the basis of information  contained in the request for a reinvestigation. 

(16)  Weighted average costs incurred between import and resale and profit  were added to the 

minimum import price established pursuant to the original  investigation  (established  on 

a  cif  Community  frontier  basis  duty  unpaid)  in  order  to  establish  the  Community 

benchmark resale price, denominated in ECU, for the period of reinvestigation. 

(b) Actual resale price after the imposition of the measures 

(17)  The actual resale price to the first independent buyer for all imports into the Community 

of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia during the period of reinvestigation  was then 

established.  A  distinction  was  made  between  the  actual  resale  price  for  imports 

accounted  for  by  cooperating  importers/traders/distributors  and  that  calculated  for 

imports accounted for by non-cooperators. 

(18)  For  imports  accounted  for  by  cooperating  companies,  the  actual  resale  price  was 

calculated on the basis of information  verified  on-the-spot. 

(19)  For imports accounted for by non-cooperators, the actual resale price was calculated, on 

the basis of the facts available, in accordance with Article  18 of the basic  Regulation, on 

a  monthly  basis  for  the  period  of  reinvestigation,  by  reference  to  market  prices 

published  in trade journals, on a Member  State by Member  State basis.  In the  absence 

of any more suitable information,  in order not to reward non-cooperation  and in view of 

the fact that the market prices referred  to were those for all  imported  ammonium  nitrate 

whilst,  according  to  information  received  during  the  course  of  the  reinvestigation, 

Russian  ammonium  nitrate  trades  at  a  lower  price  than  other  imported  ammonium 

nitrate, the lowest market price published therein was taken. 

(20)  Finally,  a  single  weighted  average  actual  resale  price,  denominated  in  ECU,  was 

calculated  for  all imports of the product concerned  (both made  in bulk and  bagged)  for 

the period of reinvestigation. 

(c) Insufficient movement of resale prices 

(21)  The difference  between the actual resale price and the benchmark  resale price  was then 

calculated  in order  to determine whether  or not there  had  been  sufficient  movement  in 

resale prices following the imposition of anti-dumping measures. 

(22)  It  was  found  that  the  imposition  of  anti-dumping  measures  had  led  to  insufficient 

movement  in resale  prices  in the Community.  The actual  resale price  remained  below 

the  benchmark  resale  price  on  a  weighted  average  basis.  This  shortfall  in  price 

movement  is  expressed  below  as  a  percentage  of  the  weighted  average  actual  resale 

price: 

9.0% 

In  view  of  the  significant  shortfall  in  the  movement  of  resale  prices,  it  was  not 

considered necessary to investigate any further  whether the subsequent  selling prices in 

the Community had moved  sufficiently. 

(d) Other factors  affecting the average resale price  of  the product  after  imposition of 

the anti-dumping duty 

(23)  No  other  arguments  were  brought  forward  by  interested  parties,  nor  were  any  other 

factors  found  during  the  reinvestigation,  explaining  why  resale  prices  as  indicated 

above did not move to the extent that could reasonably  be expected after  the  imposition 

of the anti-dumping duty. 

Certain  importers  argued  that  low  resale  prices  reflected  the  poor  condition  of  the 

market  for  ammonium  nitrate.  Such  a  situation  does  not,  however,  address  the  issue 

under consideration which is that, for the period of reinvestigation (i.e. one year), resale 

prices  did  not  sufficiently  reflect  costs  incurred  and  profit  realised,  had  the  minimum 

import price been respected. 

(e)  Conclusion 

(24)  The  Council  concludes  that  for  ammonium  nitrate  originating  in  Russia,  the  anti 

dumping  measures  have  not  led  to  sufficient  movement  in  resale  prices  in  the 

Community within the meaning of Article  12 (2) of the basic Regulation. 

3. Recalculation of the dumping margin 

(25)  In  accordance  with  Article  2  of  the  basic  Regulation,  a  new  dumping  margin  was 

established, as required by Article  12 (2) of that Regulation. 

(a) Normal value 

(26)  As no producer/exporter  claimed  a change  in  normal  value  had  occurred,  as  provided 

for  by  Article  12  (5)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  the  normal  value  as  established  in  the 

original  investigation  for  the analogue  country,  Poland,  was used  for  the  recalculation 

of the dumping margin. 

(b) Reassessed export price 

(27)  One  export  price  was  calculated  for  all  ammonium  nitrate  originating  in  Russia 

imported into the Community during the period of reinvestigation. 

(28)  For  imports  accounted  for  by  cooperating  importers/traders/distributors,  export  prices 

were calculated, using information  verified  on-the-spot, on the basis of the price paid or 

payable by these operators. 

(29)  In  the  absence  of  export  prices  for  imports  accounted  for  by  non-cooperators  it  was 

decided  to  construct  such  prices  in  accordance  with  Article  2  (9)  of  the  basic 

Regulation.  In  this  regard,  Eurostat  import  statistics  were  not  considered  a  reliable 

basis for establishing  such prices in view of the apparent  existence of an association  or 

compensatory  arrangement.  This  consideration  concurs  with  evidence  provided  by 

customs  authorities  in  the  United  Kingdom  indicating  widespread  overstatement  of 

export  prices  by  certain  non-cooperators.  This  is  also  the  conclusion  drawn  from 

information  concerning  resale invoices in the hands of the Commission  which  indicates 

a  price  for  resale  far  below  that  which  would  allow  an  importer  to  carry  on  normal 

business,  were  the  minimum  import  price  being  respected;  in other  words,  if  all  costs 

incurred  between  import  and  resale  were deducted  from  the resale  invoice  price  to  the 

first independent buyer, an import price is reached, Community  frontier  before  customs 

clearance, which is lower than the minimum import price. 

Reliable  export  prices  at  the  Community  frontier  were  therefore  constructed  on  the 

basis  of  the  price  at  which  the  imported  product  was  first  resold  to  an  independent 

buyer,  established  on  the  basis  of  facts  available  in  accordance  with  Article  18 of  the 

basic Regulation, i.e. the information  referred  to in recital  (19) above, with  adjustments 

made for all costs incurred between importation  and resale, including the  anti-dumping 

duty  payable,  plus  a  reasonable  amount  for  profit.  The  amount  for  profit  was 

determined  on the basis of  information  contained  in the request  for  a reopening  of  the 

reinvestigation, which has been corroborated by other sources. 

(30)  A  weighted  average  Community  frontier  export  price  was  then  calculated  for  all 

imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia. 

(c) Comparison 

(31)  A fair  comparison  was  made  between  the  normal  value  as  established  in  the  original 

investigation and the weighted average export price as established  above, in accordance 

with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation. 

(d) Dumping margin 

(32)  The  comparison  of  normal  value  with  reassessed  weighted  average  export  prices 

showed the  existence  of a higher  dumping  margin  as compared  with  that  found  in the 

original  investigation.  The  recalculated  weighted  average  dumping  margin,  expressed 

as a percentage of the cif price free at the Community frontier,  is: 

(e)  Conclusion 

41.9% 

10 

(33)  As  the  reinvestigation  has  shown  that  the  measures  in  force  have  led  lo  msullicicni 

movement  in resale prices in the Community  and that dumping  margins have  increased. 

the measures  in force  shall be amended,  in line with the new findings  on export  prices. 

in accordance with Article  12 (3) of the basic Regulation. 

4. Proposed  change of the measures  applicable 

(34)  The  measures  previously  applicable  did  not  have their  intended  effect  upon  the  resale 

price of ammonium nitrate originating  in Russia, due to absorption  of the  anti-dumping 

measures in force.  Actual  resale prices  for  the period  of reinvestigation  did  not  reflect 

the costs incurred between the levels of import and resale. 

During  the  course  of  the  reinvestigation  it  was  considered  whether  it  would  be 

appropriate  simply  to  increase  the  minimum  import  price  to  reflect  the  increased 

dumping margin. 

The  very  fact,  however,  that  absorption  of  anti-dumping  duties  in  the  form  of  a 

minimum  import price has taken place also means that any  increase  in the  level  of the 

minimum  import  price  might  be  equally  ineffective  in  revising  resale  prices  or 

subsequent selling prices in the Community. 

From  the  foregoing,  it  can  be  seen  that  the  flexibility  permitted  to  the  Russian 

producers/exporters  by the variable anti-dumping  duty  hitherto  applicable  has  failed  to 

revise prices for ammonium nitrate originating in Russia to the extent that the  injurious 

effect  of the dumping has not been removed. 

(35)  It  is  concluded  from  the findings of  the  reinvestigation  -  and  taking  into  account  the 

past  history  of  anti-dumping  measures  concerning  imports  of  ammonium  nitrate 

originating  in  Russia,  which  involved  the  breach  of  an  undertaking  in  the  first  year 

following  its  acceptance  by  the  Commission  (see  recital  (1)  above)  -  that  it  is  also 

prudent to alter the form  of measures in force.  In view of the possibility  of  absorption 

of  an  ad-valorem  duty  for  this  seasonal  and  price-sensitive  product,  the  Council 

considers it appropriate  to amend the definitive  anti-dumping  duty  imposed  on  imports 

of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia from  the minimum  import  price currently  in 

force  to a specific  duty  per tonne.  This form  of anti-dumping  measure  would  be more 

11 

effective  in  revising  resale  prices  and  thus  remedying  the  injurious  effect  of  die 

dumping. 

One  importer  argued  that  the problem  of absorption  of the  anti-dumping  duty  in  force 

was confined  to  imports  made  in bulk  and  that, therefore,  while  the  specific  duty  was 

appropriate for imports made in bulk, the minimum import price should remain  in  force 

for  imports made in bags.  After  consideration  of the merits of this argument  it was not 

accepted  for the reason that the findings  of the reinvestigation  indicated  that  absorption 

of the duties was not confined to those imports made in bulk. 

One producer located in Russia, which had at no time prior to disclosure of the findings 

of the reinvestigation made itself known, proposed an undertaking.  After  consideration, 

this proposal was judged to be unacceptable due to the total  lack of cooperation  from  all 

Russian producers/exporters. 

(36)  The new level of anti-dumping  duty was determined  by adding  to the previous  level  of 

the  duty  (minimum  import  price  less  export  price  at  the  Community  frontier  in  the 

original  investigation  period)  the  difference  between  the  export  prices  in  the  original 

investigation  and those of the current  reinvestigation.  The amended  duty, to  be  levied 

on a per tonne net basis at the Community frontier,  is ECU 26.3 per tonne. 

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 

Article  1  par. 2 of Regulation (EC) No 2022/95 is hereby replaced by the following:  "2. 

The rate of the anti-dumping duty applicable is ECU 26.3 per tonne." 

Article 2 

This Regulation shall  enter into force  on the day following  that 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. 

12 

Done at Brussels, 

For  the  Council 

The President 

13 

ISSN 0254-1475 

COM(98)  148 final 

DOCUMENTS 

EN 

02  11  10 

Catalogue  number  :  CB-CO-98-157-EN-C 

ISBN  92-78-32009-9 

Office  for Official  Publications of the European  Communities 

L-2985  Luxembourg 

A  Li