Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1100/2000 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of silicon carbide originating in the People's Republic of China, the Russian Federation and the Ukraine and prolonging the undertaking accepted by Commission decision 94/202/EC
Date: 2004-04-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: China, Russia, Ukraine, anti-dumping duty, chemical product, import, originating product

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 19.04.2004 
COM(2004)278 final 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EC) No 1100/2000 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on 
imports of silicon carbide originating in the People’s Republic of China, the Russian 
Federation and the Ukraine and prolonging the undertaking accepted by Commission 
decision 94/202/EC  

 (presented by the Commission) 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

On 20 March 2004, the Commission initiated a review investigation with regard to imports of 
silicon  carbide  originating  in  the  Russian  Federation  and  the  Ukraine.  The  purpose  of  this 
review  was  to  examine  whether  these  measures  should  be  amended  to  take  account  of  the 
enlargement of the Community. 

The  examination  showed  that  it  was  in  the  interests  of  the  Community  to  provide  for  the 
temporary  adaptation  of  the  measures  in  force  to  avoid  an  excessive  negative  impact  on 
importers and users in EU10. 

The  examination  of  the  undertaking  accepted  from  the  Russian  exporter  showed  that  it  is 
necessary to adapt the quantitative element of the undertaking to take account of the fact that 
this  quantity  which  had  been  calculated  on  the  basis  of  a  Community  of  15  Member  States 
should be recalculated on the basis of a Community of 25 Member States.  

It  is  therefore  proposed  to  revise  the  existing  undertaking  for  the  Russian  exporter  and  to 
accept  a  temporary  undertaking  from  the  Ukrainian  exporter  concerned  for  a  quantitative 
ceilings corresponding to its traditional export volumes to EU10.  

Member States were consulted and did not oppose the proposal. 

It is proposed that the Council adopt the attached proposal for a Regulation which should be 
published in the Official Journal no later than 20 May 2004. 

2 

 
 
  
 
 
Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EC) No 1100/2000 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on 
imports of silicon carbide originating in the People’s Republic of China, the Russian 
Federation and the Ukraine and prolonging the undertaking accepted by Commission 
decision 94/202/EC 

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,  as  last 
amended  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  461/20042  (“the  basic  Regulation”),  and  in  particular 
Articles 8, 11(3), 21 and 22 (c) thereof, 

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

Whereas: 

A. PROCEDURE 

1. Measures in force 

(1) 

By  Regulation  (EC)  No  821/94,  following  an  expiry  review,  the  Council  imposed 
definitive  anti-dumping  duties  on  imports  of  silicon  carbide,  originating  in  the 
People’s  Republic  of  China,  the  Russian  Federation  and  the  Ukraine.  At  the  same 
time, the Commission accepted by Commission Decision 94/202/EC of 9 March 19943 
an  undertaking  offered  by  the  Government  of  Russia,  in  conjuction  with  V/O 
Stankoimport,  Moscow,  Russia.  By  Regulation  (EC)  No  1100/20004,  following  the 
expiry review, the Council imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports into the 
Community  of  silicon  carbide  (“the  product  concerned”)  originating  in  People’s 
Republic of China (PRC), the Russian Federation (Russia) and the Ukraine (Ukraine) 
and  the  Commission  prolonged  the  undertaking  accepted  by  Commission  Decision 
94/202/EC for a Russian company ‘V/O Stankoimport’.  

(2) 

The  rate  of  the  duty  applicable  to  the  net,  free-at-Community-frontier  price,  before 
duty, is set at 23,3% for imports of the product concerned originating in Russia. 

1 
2 
3 
4 

OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p.1. 
OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12. 
OJ L 94, 13.4.1994, p. 32. 
OJ L 125, 26.5.2000, p.3. 

3 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
(3) 

The  rate  of  the  duty  applicable  to  the  net,  free-at-Community-frontier  price,  before 
duty, is set at 24% for imports of the product concerned originating in Ukraine 

2. Investigation 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

On 20 March 2004 the Commission announced through the publication of a notice in 
the Official Journal of the European Union5 the initiation of a partial interim review of 
measures  in  force  (“measures”)  pursuant  to  Article  11(3)  and  22(c)  of  the  basic 
Regulation.  

The  review  was  launched  at  the  initiative  of  the  Commission  in  order  to  examine 
whether, as a consequence of the enlargement of the European Union on 1 May 2004 
(“Enlargement”) and bearing in mind the aspect of Community interest, there is a need 
to adapt the measures in order to avoid a sudden and excessively negative effect on all 
interested parties including users, distributors and consumers.  

3. Parties concerned by the investigation 

All  interested  parties  known  to  Commission,  including  the  Community  industry, 
associations  of  producers  or  users  in  the  Community,  exporting  producers  in  the 
country concerned, importers and their associations and the relevant authorities of the 
countries concerned as well as interested parties in the ten new Member States which 
acceded  to  the  European  Union  on  1  May  2004  (“the  EU10”)  were  advised  of  the 
initiation  of  the  investigation  and  were  given  the  opportunity  to  make  their  views 
known in writing, to submit information and to provide supporting evidence within the 
time limit set out in the notice of initiation. All interested parties who so requested and 
showed that there were reasons why they should be heard were granted a hearing.  

(7) 

In this regard, the following interested parties made their views known: 

(a) Community producers Association:  

– 

European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC)  

(b) Exporting producer:  

– 

Zaporozhsky Abrasivny Combinat, Zaporozhye, Ukraine 

(c) Exporter: 

– 

V/O Stankoimport, Russia 

(d) Producer: 

– 

JSC Volzhsky Abrasive Works, Russia 

B. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION 

(8) 

The  product  under  consideration  is  the  same  as  in  the  original  investigation,  falling 
within CN code 2849 20 00. 

5 

OJ C 70, 20.3.2004, p.15. 

4 

 
 
  
 
                                                 
(9) 

The production process of silicon carbide is such that output automatically comprises a 
variety  qualities  of  silicon  carbide  which  can  be  segregated  into  two  main  grades: 
crystalline  and  metallurgical.  The  crystalline  grade,  which  is  further  classified  under 
the  types  black  and  green,  is  normally  used  in  the  manufacturing  of  abrasive  tools, 
grinding  wheels,  high-quality  refractory  products,  ceramics,  plastic  materials  etc., 
while the metallurgical grade is normally used in foundry and blast furnace operations 
as  a  silicon  carrier.  As  in  the  previous  investigations,  both  grades  have  to  be 
considered as forming one product for the purpose of this investigation.  

C. RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION  

I. REGARDING SILICON CARBIDE ORIGINATING IN RUSSIA 

1. Claims made by interested parties 

(10)  The Russian exporter subject to the undertaking submitted that the volume of imports 
to which the undertaking applies was established on the basis of its sales to the market 
of the EU15 and that, therefore, the undertaking should be revised in order to take due 
account of the market of the EU25. It claimed that such revision was essential in order 
to avoid discrimination in favour of the other exporters of the product concerned to the 
EU. 

2. Comments received from Member States 

(11)  The  Member  States  have  made  their  views  known  and  the  majority  of  them  support 
adapting  the  measures  in  order  to  take  account  of  the  enlargement  of  the  European 
Union.  

3. Assessment  

(12)  An analysis was made of the available data and information which confirmed that the 
import volumes of the product concerned from Russia into the EU10 were significant. 
Considering  that  the  volume  of  imports  subject  to  the  undertaking  currently  in  force 
was established on the basis of the imports into the Community of 15 Member States, 
it does not take into account the increased imports volume to the enlarged Community 
of 25 Member States.  

4. Conclusion 

(13)  Considering  the  above,  it  is  concluded  that  to  take  account  of  Enlargement  it  is 
appropriate to adapt the measures in order to cater for the additional imports volume 
into the EU 10 market.  

(14)  The  original  volume  of  imports  subject  to  the  undertaking  for  the  Community  of  15 
Member States was calculated and established for each subsequent year in the second 
half of the current year as a proportion of the Community consumption on the basis of 
the year previous to the current. The amount of the increase of the volume of imports 
subject to the undertaking has been calculated following the same calculation method.  

(15)  Accordingly, it is considered appropriate that the Commission may accept a proposal 
for a modified undertaking reflecting the situation after Enlargement and on the basis 
of the method described in recital 11.  

5 

 
 
  
 
II. REGARDING SILICON CARBIDE ORIGINATING IN UKRAINE 

1. Submissions of interested parties in exporting countries 

(16)  The  Ukrainian  authorities  and  Ukrainian  exporting  producer  claimed  that  due  to  the 
high  level  of  the  anti-dumping  duties  and  as  a  consequence  of  the  extension  of  the 
measures to the EU10, their traditional trade flows to the EU10 would be significantly 
disrupted.  

(17) 

In particular, they claimed that the sudden sharp price increases triggered by the high 
level  of  the  anti-dumping  duties  rendered  the  product  prohibitively  expensive  for 
metallurgical briquettes production. 

2. Comments received from the Community Industry 

(18)  The  Community  Industry  stated  that  it  would  not  oppose  any  proposals  for 
intermediate  measures  to  be  taken  over  a  transitional  period  which  do  not  adversely 
affect its situation.  

3. Comments received from Member States 

(19)  The authorities of the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovak Republic considered that 
special  transitional  arrangements  should  apply  to  imports  of  the  product  concerned 
from Ukraine following Enlargement. It was argued that the product concerned is of 
significant importance for industrial end-users in the EU10 since it is not produced in 
these countries. 

(20)  Accordingly,  certain  of  these  authorities  took  the  view  that  the  anti-dumping  duties 
should  be  suspended  with  regard  to  imports  of  the  product  concerned  originating  in 
Ukraine.  

4. Assessment  

(21)  On  the  basis  of  the  available  data  and  information,  an  analysis  was  made  which 
confirmed that the import volumes of the product concerned coming from Ukraine into 
the EU10 were significant in 2003 year. 

(22)  Considering  that  the  product  concerned  is  of  significant  importance  for  traditional 
industrial end-users in the EU10 and the relatively high level of anti-dumping duty, it 
was  therefore  concluded  that  it  is  in  the  Community  interest  to  gradually  adapt  the 
measures currently in force in order to avoid a sudden and excessively negative effect 
on all interested parties. 

6 

 
 
  
 
5. Conclusion 

(23)  All these various aspects and interests have been taken into account and considered as 
a whole. It emerges from this that the EU10 importers’ and users’ interests would be 
substantially negatively affected by the sudden application of the existing measures if 
they were not to be temporarily adapted. 

(24)  However, by contrast, as the interest of the Community Industry itself confirmed it, its 
interests  would  not  be  unduly  negatively  affected  if  the  measures  were  to  be 
temporarily adapted as they cannot currently fully satisfy the demands of customers in 
the EU10.  

(25) 

In  such  circumstances,  it  can  reasonably  be  concluded  that  is  not  in  the  Community 
interest  to  apply  the  existing  measures  without  adaptation  and  than  the  temporary 
adaptation  of  the  existing  measures  with  regard  to  imports  of  the  product  concerned 
into  the  EU10  would  not  be  such  as  to  significantly  undermine  the  desired  level  of 
trade defence.  

(26)  To  this  end,  different  ways  were  examined  on  how  to  best  protect  the  Community 
Industry  from  injurious  dumping  whilst,  at  the  same  time,  taking  into  account  the 
Community  interest  aspects  by  lessening  the  economic  shock  of  the  anti-dumping 
duties  to  traditional  buyers  in  the  EU10  during  the  period  of  economic  adjustment 
following Enlargement.  

(27) 

It  was  considered  that  this  could  be  best  achieved  by  allowing  the  traditional  export 
volumes from Ukraine to the EU10 to be imported free of anti-dumping duties for a 
transitional  period.  In  this  context,  any  exports  to  the  EU10  above  these  traditional 
export volumes would be subject to the normal anti-dumping duties, as would exports 
to the EU15. 

6. Undertaking 

(28)  Having  assessed  the  different  options  on  how  best  to  allow  these  traditional  export 
flows to the EU10 to continue, it was considered that the most appropriate means was 
through  the  acceptance  of  voluntary  undertakings  from  the  cooperating  party  with 
element  for  quantitative  ceilings.  Therefore,  in  accordance  with  Article  8  (2)  of  the 
basic  Regulation,  undertakings  was  suggested  by  the  Commission  to  the  exporting 
producer  concerned  and,  as  a  result,  undertaking  was  subsequently  offered  by  1 
exporting producer of the product concerned in Ukraine.  

(29) 

(30) 

In this context, it should be noted that in accordance with Article 22 (c) of the basic 
Regulation,  the  special  circumstances  of  Enlargement  were  taken  into  account  when 
the  terms  of  the  undertaking  were  established.  They  constitute  a  special  measure  in 
that  they  provide  a  temporary  way  of  adapting  existing  measures  for  the  enlarged 
Community of 25 Member States.  

Import  volumes  (“ceilings”)  were  therefore  established  for  the  exporting  producer  in 
Ukraine, using as a basis their traditional export volumes to EU10 in 2001, 2002 and 
2003.  It should  be noted,  however, that abnormal increases in export volumes to the 
EU10  observed  in  the  last  few  months  of  2003  and  the  first  months  of  2004  were 
deducted from its traditional volumes used for determining the ceilings.  

7 

 
 
  
 
(31)  When  selling  to  the  EU10  under  the  terms  of  their  undertakings,  the  exporting 
producers concerned should agree to broadly respect their traditional selling patterns to 
individual  customers  in  the  EU10.  The  exporting  producers  should  therefore  aware 
that  any  undertaking  offer  can  only  be  considered  as  practicable,  and  therefore 
acceptable if, for sales covered by the undertakings, they would broadly maintain such 
traditional patterns of trade with their customers in the EU10.  

(32)  The  exporting  producers  should  also  be  aware  that,  under  the  terms  of  the 
undertakings,  if  it  is  found  that  these  sales  patterns  change  significantly,  or  that  the 
undertakings become in any way difficult or impossible to monitor, the Commission is 
entitled  to  withdraw  acceptance  of  the  company’s  undertaking  resulting  in  definitive 
anti-dumping  duties  being  imposed  in  its  place  at  the  level  specified  in  Regulation 
(EC)  No  1100/2000  or  it  may  adjust  the  level  of  the  ceiling,  or  it  may  take  other 
remedial action.  

(33)  Accordingly, any undertaking offers respecting the above conditions may be accepted 

by the Commission by Commission Regulation. 

D. AMENDMENT OF REGULATION (EC) NO 1100/2000 

(34) 

In  view  of  the  above,  it  is  necessary  to  provide,  in  the  event  of  undertakings  being 
accepted  by  the  Commission  in  a  subsequent  Commission  Regulation,  for  the 
possibility  to  exempt  imports  to  the  Community  made  under  the  terms  of  such 
undertakings from the anti-dumping duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1100/2000 
by amending that Regulation.  

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 

1. 

The  Commission  may  accept  a  proposal  for  a  modified  undertaking  increasing  the 
volume  of  imports  subject  to  the  undertaking  accepted  by  Commission  Decision 
(94/202/EC)  of  9  March  1994  as  regards  imports  of  silicon  carbide  originating  in 
Russia. Any such increase shall be calculated by using the same calculation method 
that  was  used  when  the  original  ceiling  was  calculated  for  the  Community  of  15 
Member  States.  The  original  ceiling  was  calculated  and  established  for  each 
subsequent  year  in  the  second  half  of  the  current  year  as  a  proportion  of  the 
Community consumption on the basis of the year previous to the current year.  

2. 

The Commission may modify the undertaking accordingly. 

Article 2 

Article  1  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  1100/2000  is  hereby  amended  by  adding  the  following 
paragraph: 

‘4.  Imports  declared  for  release  into  free  circulation shall be exempt from the anti-
dumping duties imposed by Article 1, provided that they are produced by companies 
from  which  undertakings  are  accepted  by  the  Commission  and  whose  names  are 
listed  in  the  relevant  Commission  Regulation,  as  from  time  to  time  amended,  and 
have  been  imported  in  conformity  with  the  provisions  of  the  same  Commission 

8 

 
 
  
 
Regulation. These imports shall be exempt from the anti-dumping duty on condition 
that:  

(a) the goods declared and presented to customs correspond precisely to the product 
described in Article 1, 

(b)  a  commercial  invoice  containing  at  least  the  elements  listed  in  the  Annex  is 
presented to Member States' customs authorities upon presentation of the declaration 
for release into free circulation; and 

(c)  the  goods  declared  and  presented  to  customs  correspond  precisely  to  the 
description on the commercial invoice.’  

Article 3 

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

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

Done at Brussels,  

For the Council 

9 

 
 
  
 
 
The  following  elements  shall  be  indicated  on  the  commercial  invoice  accompanying  the 
company's sales of silicon carbide to the Community which are subject to the Undertaking: 

ANNEX  

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

The  heading  "COMMERCIAL  INVOICE  ACCOMPANYING  GOODS  SUBJECT 
TO AN UNDERTAKING". 

The  name  of  the  company  mentioned  in  Article  1  of  Commission  Regulation 
[INSERT NUMBER] issuing the commercial invoice. 

The commercial invoice number. 

The date of issue of the commercial invoice. 

The TARIC additional code under which the goods on the invoice are to be customs 
cleared at the Community frontier.  

The exact description of the goods, including: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Product Code Number (PCN) used for the purposes of the investigation and the 
undertaking (e.g. PCN I, PCN 2 etc), 

plain  language  description  of  the  goods  corresponding  to  the  PCN  concerned 
(e.g. PCN 1: PCN 2: etc), 

company product code number (CPC) (if applicable),  

CN code, 

quantity (to be given in tonnes). 

7. 

The description of the terms of the sale, including: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

price per tonne, 

the applicable payment terms, 

the applicable delivery terms, 

total discounts and rebates. 

8. 

9. 

Name  of  the  company  acting  as  an  importer  in  the  Community  to  which  the 
commercial invoice accompanying goods subject to an undertaking is issued directly 
by the company. 

The name of the official of the company that has issued the invoice and the following 
signed declaration: 

“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 

10 

 
 
  
 
Regulation  [INSERT  NUMBER].  I  declare  that  the  information  provided  in  this  invoice  is 
complete and correct.” 

11