Council Regulation (EC) No 132/2001 of 22 January 2001 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Poland and Ukraine, and terminating the anti-dumping proceeding in respect of imports originating in Lithuania
Date: 2001-01-22
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine, anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping legislation, chemical salt

25.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 23/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 132/2001

of 22 January 2001

imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed
on imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Poland and Ukraine, and terminating the anti-
dumping proceeding in respect of imports originating in Lithuania

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 Community (1), and in
particular Article 9 thereof,

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

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

(3)

A. PROVISIONAL MEASURES

The Commission, by Regulation (EC) No 1629/2000 (2)
(the ‘provisional Regulation’) imposed a provisional anti-
dumping duty on imports of ammonium nitrate falling
within CN codes 3102 30 90 and 3102 40 90 and
originating in Poland and Ukraine.

In the same Regulation, it was provisionally concluded
that no anti-dumping duty should be imposed on
imports of the product concerned originating in Lithu-
ania, also subject to the same investigation, since these
imports were found not to have been dumped.

B. SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURE

Subsequent to the disclosure of the essential facts and
considerations on the basis of which it was decided to
impose provisional measures on imports of ammonium
nitrate originating in Poland and Ukraine, several inter-
ested parties submitted comments in writing. The parties
who so requested were also granted an opportunity to
be heard orally.

(4)

The Commission continued to seek and verify all infor-
mation it deemed necessary for its definitive findings.

(1) OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation

(EC) No 2238/2000 (OJ L 257, 11.10.2000, p. 2).

(2) OJ L 187, 26.7.2000, p. 12.

(5)

(6)

(7)

the essential

All parties were informed of
facts and
considerations on the basis of which it was intended to
recommend the imposition of definitive anti-dumping
duties and the definitive collection of amounts secured
by way of provisional duties. They were also granted a
period within which they could make representations
subsequent to this disclosure.

The oral and written comments submitted by the parties
were considered, and, where appropriate, the provisional
findings have been modified accordingly.

C. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT

regarding

Since no new arguments
the product
concerned and the like product were put forward by any
of the interested parties, the facts and findings as set out
in recitals 7 and 8 of the provisional Regulation are
hereby confirmed.

D. DUMPING

1. Lithuania

(a) N o r m a l v a l u e

(8)

The complainant, the European Fertiliser Manufacturers
Association (EFMA), made a number of comments on
the provisional findings under this heading:

— the percentage of profitable domestic sales achieved
by the cooperating exporting producer should have
been near to zero because dumped Russian imports
over much of
the investigation period (IP) had
depressed prices in Lithuania;

— the lowest possible constructed normal value, based
on the complainant's information, was above export
prices and therefore there must have been dumping;

— the Lithuanian producer's record of low profitability
cast doubt on its future over the medium term. Its
sales should not, therefore, have been considered as
being in the ordinary course of trade.

L 23/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.1.2001

(9)

All these comments were closely examined. With regard
to the cost of production, it should be noted that it had
been verified and found not to be unreliable or underes-
timated. As far as the level of profitable sales was
concerned, this had been determined on the basis of
those sales prices found to be above the unit cost of
production, in accordance with Article 2(4) of Regula-
tion (EC) No 384/96 (the ‘basic Regulation’). The precise
level of profitable sales cannot be disclosed for reasons
of confidentiality but it was still substantial and could, in
accordance with the aforementioned provision, be used
as a basis for determining normal value. As far as the
impact of Russian imports on prices was concerned, this
had indeed been reflected in lower sales prices which, if
unprofitable, had been excluded from the calculation of
normal value.

(b) E x p o r t p r i c e , c o m p a r i s o n

only one of the transactions on the export side equalled
or exceeded 5 000 tonnes (none on the domestic side),
whereas the total volume sold was several hundred thou-
sand tonnes. Sampling, therefore, was not considered an
appropriate method.

(15)

The dumping margin (0 %) established in recital 13 of
the provisional Regulation is therefore confirmed.

2. Poland

(a) N o r m a l v a l u e , e x p o r t p r i c e

(16)

In the absence of any comments under these headings,
the provisional findings, as set out in recitals 15 to 18 of
the provisional Regulation, are confirmed.

(10)

In the absence of any comments under these headings,
the provisional findings, as set out in recitals 11 and 12
of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.

(b) C o m p a r i s o n

(11)

(12)

(13)

(14)

(c) D u m p i n g m a r g i n

The complainant argued that the transaction-to-transac-
tion methodology should have been used to establish
the dumping margin, because the weighted average to
weighted average method masked the Lithuanian produ-
cer's pricing strategy (which was allegedly designed to
avoid anti-dumping measures) and did not reflect the full
degree of dumping.

in accordance with Article 2(11) of

The normal method used to establish whether there is
dumping is to compare the weighted average normal
value with the weighted average of all export transac-
tions,
the basic
Regulation. The transaction-to-transaction method had
not been used because of the very large number of
transactions (several thousand) and the insurmountable
practical difficulties involved in matching individual
normal values with individual export prices. This claim
was therefore rejected. However, it is noted that even a
comparison of the weighted average normal value with
individual export prices, which was based on a regional
pattern found in the export prices, showed a dumping
margin below the de minimis level.

The complainant argued further that as the number of
transactions was very large, sampling should have been
shipments and
applied taking 5 000 tonne export
comparing
to domestic
customers.

them with similar

sales

(17) At

stage,

the level of

the provisional

trade claim
concerning the price difference between sales to traders
and dealers had been rejected. Since then, the exporting
producer in question has been able to clarify the situa-
tion. Export sales were made to traders while domestic
sales were (with one unrepresentative exception) made
to dealers. On this basis, a downward adjustment to the
price to dealers was granted. In order to quantify this
adjustment, a lump-sum corresponding to 10 % of the
gross margin (selling, general and administrative costs
plus profit on dealers' sales) was deducted from the
normal value. This lump-sum constitutes a surrogate for
the dealers' mark-up. It was also found that the same
adjustment should be granted to the other exporting
producer.

(18) At the provisional stage, the in-season/off-season adjust-
ment had been rejected. The producer then claimed that
this was not justified because there was a pronounced
seasonal effect on the prices of the product concerned in
the Community market, but no such effect on the prices
of ammonium nitrate in the Polish domestic market.
Therefore, this difference affected the fair comparison
between export price and normal value, and merited an
adjustment in accordance with Article 2(10)(k) of the
basic Regulation This claim was also re-examined but
had to be rejected because it was found that there was a
seasonal effect on ammonium nitrate prices in the Polish
market as well, since customers had not, as alleged, paid
the same prices irrespective of the season. This had not
therefore
comparability, within the
meaning of Article 2(10)(k) of the basic Regulation.

affected price

For the purpose of establishing the dumping margin,
sampling of transactions may be considered appropriate
in cases where the product concerned covers a large
number of types/models or where the number of trans-
actions is large, providing the sample is statistically valid
or represents the largest possible volume of sales,
in
accordance with Article 17(1) of the basic Regulation. In
this case, there was only one single type of product, and

(c) D u m p i n g m a r g i n

(19) One users' association objected that the Commission
had not taken into account the depreciation of around
15 % in the zloty against the euro during the IP. It is
pointed out that average monthly exchange rates were
used for the calculations and therefore any material
impact of the exchange rate evolution was eliminated.

25.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 23/3

(20)

In the absence of any other comments concerning the
methodology used for the calculation of the dumping
margin, the methodology described in recital 20 of the
provisional Regulation is confirmed. On this basis,
taking into account the adjustment for level of trade
granted, the definitive dumping margins for the cooper-
ating exporting producers, as well as
the residual
dumping margin, expressed as a percentage of the cif
Community frontier price, are set out below:

Anwil SA

Zaklady Azotowe Pulawy SA

Residual dumping margin

31,2 %

22,3 %

41,6 %

3. Ukraine

(a) A n a l o g u e
p r i c e

c o u n t r y , n o r m a l v a l u e ,

e x p o r t

(21)

In the absence of any comments concerning the choice
of Poland as market economy third country, the provi-
sional conclusion as set out in recitals 22 to 24 of the
provisional Regulation is confirmed.

(b) C o m p a r i s o n

(22) At the definitive stage, the basis of the comparison was
changed from fob to ex-works, because of the significant
distances between the factories and the frontier. More-
over, since these costs account for a very high propor-
tion of the selling price of bulk products such as the
product concerned, the fob comparison could give an
undue advantage to Ukrainian companies. The appro-
priate adjustments were therefore made to the export
price in respect of the costs for transport from ex-works
to port and for port services. In parallel, the normal
value was also established on an ex-works basis. The
cooperating exporting producers did not make any
comment on this change.

(c) D u m p i n g m a r g i n

(23) One users' association objected that the Commission
had not taken into account the substantial depreciation
of the Ukrainian currency during the IP and that this had
affected the dumping margin. It is noted that for the
determination of the export price Eurostat figures were
used. Information on export prices contained in Eurostat
is expressed in euro and is compiled on the basis of
monthly exchange rates. Any alleged impact of
the
depreciation on the method used by the Commission for
the calculation of the dumping margin is therefore elimi-
nated.

(24)

In view of the change in the basis of comparison from
fob to ex-works level, the countrywide dumping margin,
expressed as a percentage of the cif Community frontier
price,

is 67,6 %.

E. INJURY

1. Definition of the Community industry

(25)

In the absence of new information the provisional find-
ings concerning the definition of
the Community
industry, as described in recital 28 of the provisional
Regulation are confirmed.

2. Imports from Poland and Ukraine

(a) C u m u l a t i v e a s s e s s m e n t

(26) One Polish exporting producer argued that imports of
ammonium nitrate originating in Poland should not be
cumulated with those originating in Ukraine in view of
differences existing in the conditions of competition.
The claim was based on the grounds
that while
Ukrainian imports were on average undercutting the
prices of the Community industry by 12,5 %, the Polish
imports were on average undercutting those prices by
only 2,1 %.

(27)

(28)

In this respect it should be noted that undercutting was
found for both Poland and Ukraine. Moreover, Article
3(4) of the basic Regulation does not require that the
levels of undercutting are in the same range. Indeed, it
is
has been confirmed that a cumulative assessment
appropriate since the margin of dumping is more than
de minimis. Both countries' import volumes and market
shares are of the same order of magnitude, substantial
and increased compared to 1995, and having regard to
the conditions of competition between the imports from
Poland and Ukraine, it is to be noted that the downward
trend in prices is similar. Both countries' export prices
were well below the prices of the Community industry
and both were using the same or similar channels of
trade. Given the above, and in the absence of any other
new arguments, the findings of recital 30 of the provi-
sional Regulation concerning the conditions for a cumu-
lative assessment of
the imports from the countries
concerned are confirmed.

(b) V o l u m e o f

i m p o r t s

Two Ukrainian producers, who had stated at the provi-
sional stage that they had not exported directly to the
Community during the IP, claimed that the Eurostat
figures used for establishing the export price were
different from the data of the Ukrainian Ministry of
Statistics, which reported a significantly lower volume
for the same period. However,
this claim was not
substantiated by any evidence. Moreover, as these statis-
tics are export statistics which means that not every sale
shown therein will ultimately be shipped to the specified
destination, it was concluded that the Eurostat import
statistics provided a more accurate picture. In addition
the latest Eurostat figures were reviewed and no discrep-
ancy from the figures used at the provisional stage was
found.

L 23/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.1.2001

(c) U n d e r c u t t i n g

average price difference charged by the Community
industry during the IP.

(29) As regards the price undercutting margins, one Polish
the average profit
exporting producer argued that
margin of the importers used for the calculation of the
ex quay customs duty paid (DEQ) export prices of the
exporting producers
should be
higher than as the one applied in the provisional calcula-
tion.

in the Community,

In this respect, the Commission's provisional findings
were based on the verified information provided by the
cooperating importers in the Community. Since no new
or substantiated evidence was provided by the exporting
producer in this respect, the importers' profit margin
used for the provisional determination of price under-
cutting is confirmed.

(36)

(30)

(31)

(32)

same

exporting producer

the
The
unloading costs applied for the calculation of the DEQ
export prices should amount to at least EUR 8,5 per
tonne, and not to EUR 5,9, as used in the provisional
calculation.

submitted that

in support of

In this respect, the evidence submitted by the exporting
producer
its claim contained some
elements which did not constitute unloading costs. In
fact, a corrected version of
the evidence submitted
supported the provisional findings of the Commission,
which are therefore confirmed.

(33) As regards the price difference between granular and
prilled ammonium nitrate, the complainant submitted
that after the IP, and in particular by the 2000/2001
season, the apparent price difference between prilled and
granular ammonium nitrate had been eradicated in
certain markets and therefore no allowance should be
granted. One Polish exporting producer, however,
claimed that
the allowance for the price difference
between granular and prilled ammonium nitrate should
be EUR 10 per tonne, as in previous anti-dumping cases
involving ammonium nitrate, and not EUR 5,8 per
tonne, as used in the provisional calculation.

(34)

It should be noted that in accordance with Article 6(1)
of the basic Regulation, information relating to a period
after the IP should not normally be taken into account.
In considering whether
the alleged development of
prices after the IP should be examined, it was concluded
that, as no evidence had been provided that the latest
price developments would be of a lasting nature which
makes the imposition of measures at the level proposed
manifestly unsuitable, this information should not be
taken into account. As regards the allowance in respect
of
the price difference between granular and prilled
ammonium nitrate, the Commission based its provi-
sional findings on the facts available, and applied the

(35)

In the absence of new evidence, the findings of recital 33
of the provisional Regulation concerning the undercut-
ting margin calculations are confirmed.

(d) S i t u a t i o n o f

t h e C o m m u n i t y i n d u s t r y

In addition to the economic factors already analysed at
the provisional stage, information relating to the impact
of the magnitude of the margin of dumping, return on
investments, cash flow, wages and the ability to raise
capital has been examined for the period between 1995
and the IP. As regards return on investments and cash
flow, the development was very much in line with that
for profitability as established in recital 39 of the provi-
sional Regulation. With respect to wages, they broadly
followed the decline in the number of persons employed
as established in recital 40 of the provisional Regulation.
As concerns the ability to raise capital, fertiliser produc-
tion companies form part of larger groups and no diffi-
culties have been reported. As concerns the impact on
the Community industry of the magnitude of the actual
margin of dumping, given the volume and the prices of
the imports from the countries concerned, this impact
cannot be considered to be negligible.

(37) On the basis of the above, the provisional findings as
regards the material injury suffered by the Community
industry during the IP are confirmed.

3. Causation

figures,

(38) One Ukrainian producer argued that, on the basis of
Eurostat
the product concerned
imports of
originating in Ukraine accounted for only 4 % of total
consumption in the Community, it was alleged that this
represented an insignificant quantity which could not
cause injury to the Community industry.

(39)

In this respect, the effects of the imports originating in
Ukraine have been assessed cumulatively with those
originating in Poland, pursuant to Article 3(4) of the
basic Regulation. In establishing whether the conditions
for cumulation were met in this case (recital 30 of the
provisional Regulation)
the
Ukrainian imports in the total Community consumption
was found not to be negligible. The request was there-
fore rejected.

the market

share of

(40) One Polish producer submitted that one cause of the
material injury suffered by the Community industry was
the fact that prices for cereals had been declining since
1996 and that this had resulted in price pressure exerted
from farmers on the ammonium nitrate producers'
selling prices.

25.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 23/5

(41) Whilst there was a decline in cereal prices as from 1996,
it is to be noted that ammonium nitrate is a commodity
product with a high degree of price competition and,
when compared with the role of factors such as the
price depressive
injurious dumping
observed, any downward price pressure exercised by
farmers could therefore not have had a decisive influ-
ence on market prices and could not in themselves have
been the cause of the injury suffered. This argument
therefore leads to the conclusion that there was no break
in the causal link between the dumping and the injury
found.

effects of

the

(42) One users' association argued that the Commission had
underestimated certain factors which had allegedly
caused the decrease in ammonium nitrate prices and the
subsequent injury suffered by the Community industry,
such as a declining consumption and the allegedly insuf-
ficient efforts of
rationalisation undertaken by the
Community industry — evidenced, inter alia, by a low
rate of capacity utilisation.

(43)

In addition, an importers' association submitted that the
cause of the injury suffered by the Community industry
was the global overcapacity in the industry.

(44) With respect to the question of declining consumption,
it was analysed in the provisional Regulation and in the
absence of any new information, the findings of the
provisional Regulation are confirmed.

(45) As concerns the rationalisation efforts undertaken by the
Community industry, it is to be noted that considerable
investments were made, unrelated to the expansion of
the production capacity of the product concerned, and a
number of plants have recently been closed, which
resulted in a reduction in the production capacity and
the number of employees. It has been found that this
demonstrates that sufficient rationalisation efforts have
been made.

(46) As concerns the capacity utilisation rate and the ques-
tion of global overcapacity in the industry, it is recalled
that at
the provisional stage this indicator was not
considered to be a meaningful indicator of the situation
of the Community industry (see recital 35 of the provi-
sional Regulation). Moreover, while there might be,
nevertheless, still some overcapacity in the industry
concerned, this element has not been found to have an
impact such as to break the causal
link established
between the dumping and the injury suffered by the
Community industry.

(47)

In the light of the above and in the absence of any new
findings as described in
information,
the provisional Regulation are
recitals 46 to 49 of
confirmed.

the provisional

4. Community interest

(48) One users' association argued that anti-dumping meas-
ures would decrease the income of British farmers, thus
putting them in a much more difficult economic
situation.

(49)

In this respect, on the basis of information provided by
the users' association, it was found that, during the IP,
fertilisers
the total
represented on average 6 % of
production costs for farmers.

(50) Given that imports from the countries concerned only
represented 9 % of ammonium nitrate consumption in
the Community market (11 % in the UK market), the
level of the anti-dumping duty, and the fact that only
part of any resulting price increase is likely to be passed
on to the users, any increase in farmers' production
costs
likely to be minor. Moreover, were the
Community industry to increase not only the volume of
its sales but also its prices, any such price increase would
be limited given the existence of other sources of supply,
namely imports from third countries not subject
to
measures.

is

(51) On the basis of the above, the limited impact on farmers
was considered not to constitute a compelling reason
against the imposition of anti-dumping measures.

(52) On the basis of the above, the provisional findings in
recital 53 of the provisional Regulation are confirmed.

F. ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

1. Termination of

the proceeding in respect of

Lithuania

(53)

In view of the findings on imports originating in Lithu-
ania, the proceeding in respect of this country should be
terminated.

(54)

(55)

(56)

2. Injury elimination level

In accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation,
the anti-dumping duty should correspond to the
dumping margin unless the injury margin is lower. For
the purposes of establishing the level of measures to be
definitively imposed, an injury elimination level has been
established.

It is to be noted that the arguments and the corre-
sponding findings regarding the adjustments made for
the price difference between granular and prilled
ammonium nitrate in the context of the price undercut-
ting calculation, equally refer to the injury margins
calculation.

In addition, as regards specifically the injury margins
calculation, the complainant reiterated its statement that
the profit margin that the Community industry might
achieve in the absence of injurious dumping should be
at least 10 %. However, no new evidence was submitted
in this respect. At the same time, a Polish exporting
producer submitted that a profit margin of 5 % should
be used as had been done in previous anti-dumping
cases involving fertilisers. As set out in recital 56 of the
provisional Regulation, given the high profits reached by
the Community industry in the years 1995 and 1996
for the product under consideration in this proceeding,
it was considered that a profit margin of 8 % could
reasonably be reached in the absence of
injurious
dumping.

L 23/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.1.2001

(57)

Subsequently, the methodology used for establishing the injury elimination level as described in
recital 56 of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.

3. Form and level of definitive measures

(58)

(59)

The complainant submitted that
the emergence of new forms of
there were indications of
ammonium nitrate, i.e. mixtures of ammonium nitrate with other products, whose only purpose is
to circumvent possible anti-dumping measures concerning ammonium nitrate. The attention of the
customs authorities is drawn to this issue.

In the light of the foregoing, it is considered that, in accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic
Regulation, a definitive anti-dumping duty should be imposed at the level of the injury margins
found, except for one Polish exporting producer for which a definitive anti-dumping duty should be
imposed at the level of the dumping margin found.

(60)

In order to ensure the efficiency of the measures and to discourage the price manipulation which has
been observed in some previous proceedings involving fertilisers, it is confirmed that the duties
should be imposed in the form of a specific amount per tonne. These duties amount to:

Country

Basis for
anti-dumping duty
in %

Amount of duty
(EUR per tonne)

Poland

Anwil SA

Zaklady Azotowe Pulaway SA

All other companies

Ukraine

All companies

25,2

22,3

30,5

43,4

23,13

20,65

26,91

33,25

(61)

The individual company anti-dumping duty rates specified in this Regulation were established on the
basis of the findings of the present investigation. Therefore, they reflect the situation found during
that investigation with respect to these companies. These duty rates (as opposed to the country-wide
duty applicable to ‘all other companies’) are thus exclusively applicable to imports of products
originating in the country concerned and produced by the companies and thus by the specific legal
entities mentioned. Imported products produced by any other company not specifically mentioned
in the operative part of this Regulation with its name and address, including entities related to those
specifically mentioned, cannot benefit from these rates and shall be subject to the duty rate
applicable to ‘all other companies’.

(62) Any claim requesting the application of these individual company anti-dumping duty rates (e.g.
following a change in the name of the entity or following the setting up of new production or sales
entities) should be addressed to the Commission (1) forthwith with all relevant information,
in
particular any modification in the company's activities linked to production, domestic and export
sales associated with e.g. that name change or that change in the production and sales entities. The
Commission, if appropriate, will, after consultation of the Advisory Committee, amend the Regula-
tion accordingly by updating the list of companies benefiting from individual duty rates.

(1) European Commission

Directorate-General for Trade
Directorate B
TERV 0/10
Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 200
B-1049 Brussels

25.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 23/7

4. Collection of provisional duties

(63)

In view of the magnitude of the dumping margins found and in the light of the level of the injury
caused to the Community industry, it is considered necessary that the amounts secured by way of
the provisional anti-dumping duty, imposed by the provisional Regulation, i.e. Regulation (EC) No
1629/2000, should be definitively collected at the rate of the duty definitively imposed,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of ammonium nitrate other than in
1.
aqueous solution and mixtures of ammonium nitrate with calcium carbonate or other inorganic non-ferti-
lising substances, with a nitrogen content exceeding 28 % by weight, falling within CN codes 3102 30 90
and 3102 40 90 and originating in Poland and Ukraine.

The amount of duty in EUR per tonne shall be as shown below for the products manufactured by the

2.
following companies:

Poland

Country

Company

Anwil SA
ul. Tourunska 222,
87-805 Wloclawek
Poland

Zaklady Azotowe Pulawy SA
Al. Tysiaclecia P.P. 13,
24-110 Pulawy
Poland

All other companies

Ukraine

All companies

Amount of duty
(EUR per tonne)

TARIC additional code

23,13

A174

20,65

A175

26,91

33,25

A999

3.
In cases where goods have been damaged before entry into free circulation and, therefore, the price
actually paid or payable is apportioned for the determination of the customs value pursuant to Article 145
of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 (1), the amount of anti-dumping duty, calculated on the basis
of the amounts set above, shall be reduced by a percentage which corresponds to the apportioning of the
price actually paid or payable.

4.

Unless otherwise specified, the provisions in force concerning customs duties shall apply.

The proceeding concerning imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Lithuania shall be termi-

5.
nated.

Article 2

The amounts secured by way of provisional anti-dumping duties pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1629/
2000 on imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Poland and Ukraine shall be collected at the rate of
the duty definitively imposed. Amounts secured in excess of the definitive anti-dumping duty shall be
released.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the
European Communities.

(1) OJ L 253, 11.10.1993, p. 40.

L 23/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.1.2001

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 22 January 2001.

For the Council

The President

A. LINDH