Council Regulation (EC) No 161/2006 of  23 January 2006  amending Regulation (EC) No 950/2001 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain aluminium foil originating,  inter alia , in Russia
Date: 2006-01-23
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Russia, aluminium, anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping legislation, import, originating product, thin sheet

31.1.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 26/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 161/2006

of 23 January 2006

amending Regulation (EC) No 950/2001 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of
certain aluminium foil originating, inter alia, in Russia

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty
Community,

establishing the European

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)
(the
basic Regulation), and in particular Article 11(3) thereof,

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

Whereas:

A. PROCEDURE

1. Measures in force

(1)

(2)

(3)

Following an investigation (the original investigation), the
Council, by Regulation (EC) No 950/2001 (2), imposed a
definitive anti-dumping duty of 14,9 % on imports of
certain aluminium foil
(AHF) originating in Russia.
Following the acceptance of an undertaking from the
Russian exporting producer ‘United Company Siberian
Aluminium’,
since
changed its name (3)
to Open Joint Stock Company
from this exporter
Rusal Sayanal
by
were
Commission Decision 2001/381/EC (4).

stock company, which has

anti-dumping

from the

exempted

(Sayanal),

imports

joint

duty

2. Request for an interim review

A request for a partial interim review of Regulation (EC)
No 950/2001 was received from Sayanal, an exporting
producer of AHF subject to a price undertaking and part
of the Russian Aluminium group of companies (Rusal).

to Article 11(3) of

In its request pursuant
the basic
Regulation, Sayanal claimed that the circumstances with
regard to dumping, on the basis of which the measures
in force were established, had changed and that these
further
changes were of a lasting nature. Sayanal
alleged and provided prima facie evidence to show that
a comparison of normal value based on its own costs or
domestic prices and export prices to the Community

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

(EC) No 2117/2005 (OJ L 340, 23.12.2005, p. 17).

(2) OJ L 134, 17.5.2001, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation

(EC) No 998/2004 (OJ L 183, 20.5.2004, p. 4).

(3) See Notice 2004/C 193/03, OJ C 193, 29.7.2004, p. 3.
(4) OJ L 134, 17.5.2001, p. 67.

(4)

(5)

(6)

the current measures

would lead to a reduction of dumping significantly
below the level of
(14,9 %).
Therefore it claimed that the continued imposition of
measures at the existing levels, which were based on
the level of dumping previously established, was no
longer necessary to offset dumping.

3. Initiation

after

determined,
that

consulting
sufficient evidence existed for

the Advisory
Having
the
Committee,
interim review, the Commission,
initiation of a partial
by a notice published in the Official
Journal of
the
European Union (5),
interim review
initiated a partial
limited in scope to the examination of dumping in
accordance with Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation
and commenced its investigation.

The Commission officially advised the applicant, as well
as the representatives of the exporting country, of the
initiation of the interim review. Interested parties were
given the opportunity to make their views known in
writing and to request a hearing.

The Commission also sent a questionnaire to the
applicant and received a reply within the deadline. The
Commission sought and verified all the information it
deemed necessary for the determination of dumping
and carried out verification visits at the premises of the
following companies:

— Sayanal,

Sayanogorsk, Russia,

and

its

related

companies within the Rusal group:

— SAZ, Sayanogorsk, Russia (aluminium smelter),

— Rusal Sayanskaya Folga, Dmitrov, Russia (processor

of small rolls),

— Trading House Russian Foil, Moscow, Russia,

(5) OJ C 285, 23.11.2004, p. 3.

L 26/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

31.1.2006

— Trading House Safoil, Moscow, Russia,

— Rual Trade (BVI) Limited, Moscow, Russia,

— Sibirsky Aluminium GmbH, Düsseldorf, Germany.

(12)

4. Review investigation period

(7)

The investigation of dumping covered the period from 1
October 2003 to 30 September 2004 (the investigation
period or IP).

Folga (RSF), which processes the jumbo reels into small
rolls and then sells them to independent customers
within Russia.

rolls

independent

jumbo reels

There are no sales of
to independent
customers in Russia, and no representative sales of
the
to
small
Community. As
such, no proper comparison on a
model-to-model basis could be made. Therefore normal
value was constructed according to Article 2(3) of the
basic Regulation on the basis of the company’s cost of
production plus a reasonable amount for selling, general
and administrative costs (SG&A) and for profits.

customers

in

(8)

(9)

B. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT

1. Product concerned

investigation,

The product concerned by the current review is the same
as that defined in the original
i.e. certain
aluminium foil of a thickness of not less than 0,009 mm
and not more than 0,018 mm, not backed, not further
worked than rolled,
in reels of a width not exceeding
650 mm originating in Russia, currently classifiable
under CN code 7607 11 10.

2. Like product

Unlike in the previous investigation, Sayanal and its
sold AHF also on the Russian
related companies
domestic market. Whereas the product concerned sold
to the EC is in the form of ‘jumbo reels’, sales on the
Russian domestic market were in the form of ‘small rolls’.
Small rolls are processed from jumbo reels, by cutting
them to smaller lengths and packaging them for sale to
end-users. However,
it was found that AHF in jumbo
reels and small rolls both shared the same physical and
chemical characteristics and uses.

(10)

Consequently, both AHF produced and sold on the
Russian domestic market and that exported to the
Community have the same basic physical and chemical
characteristics and uses and are therefore considered to
be alike within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic
Regulation.

(13) Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation provides for the cost
of manufacturing to be adjusted where ‘costs associated
with the production and sale of the product under inves-
tigation are not reasonably reflected in the records of the
party concerned’.

(14)

The investigation established that
the related smelting
company was charged a very low price for its electricity,
which is generated at the Sayano-Shushenskoe Hydro-
Electricity Plant, compared to prices charged in third
countries with comparable hydro-electricity plants. The
prices are set by the Regional Energy Commission.
These prices were considered abnormally low and not
they were
reflecting
adjusted on the basis of the 2004 price of electricity
for energy-intensive manufacturing in another represen-
tative market, i.e. Norway, which was found to be EUR
14/MWh.

costs. Therefore

the normal

(15) As regards the SG&A, they were determined on the basis
of the company’s own data pursuant to the chapeau of
the basic Regulation. However, an
Article 2(6) of
adjustment was necessary in order to reflect
the fact
that, as pointed out in recital 12, the company does
not sell the same type of AHF rolls on the EC and
Russian markets and that,
in addition, these types are
sold at a different level of trade.

C. RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATION

1. Normal value

(11)

Sales on the domestic market are made by Sayanal via
Trading House Russian Foil (THRF) to Rusal Sayanskaya

(16)

For the same reason, the profit on domestic sales had to
be adjusted as well. In order to make such adjustment,
and given the existence of intra-group transfer prices, it
was considered appropriate to determine the profit on
the basis of the profit margin (32,1 %) found for the
audited consolidated accounts of
the Rusal Group,
expressed as a percentage of total costs.

31.1.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 26/3

2. Export price

D. LASTING NATURE OF CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES

(17)

Sales to the EU are made through a series of sales
companies within the Rusal group: THRF, Trading
House Safoil
(Safoil), Rual Trade (BVI) Limited (Rual)
and Sibirsky Aluminium GmbH (SAG).

(23)

In accordance with Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation
it was also examined whether the changed circumstances
could reasonably be said to be of a lasting nature.

(18) Where sales were made via a related importer in the
Community, the export price was constructed on the
basis of
the resale prices to independent customers.
Adjustments were made for all costs incurred between
importation and resale by that importer, including SG&A
expenses, and a reasonable profit margin, in accordance
with Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation. The latter was
based on the profit margin found for an unrelated
importer in the previous investigation.

(19)

For sales made through a related company outside the
Community, the export price was established on the basis
of the resale price paid by the first independent buyer in
the Community.

(24)

(25)

In this respect, it was considered first of all that Sayanal
has complied with its price undertaking through its
subsidiary sales company in the Community, Sibirsky
Aluminium GmbH (SAG),
imposition of
the same time, Sayanal has retained a
measures. At
substantial share of the Community market,
indicating
that it is able to compete at non-dumped price levels.

since

the

The prices of
the product concerned sold on third-
country markets were also examined in order to assess
the behaviour of the company in markets where no trade
defence measures are in force. It was found that these
prices were only slightly below the current export prices
to the Community, and no indications of dumping on
these markets were found. It is therefore considered that
there is no reason to believe that this change of circum-
stances and the findings on the absence of dumping
would not be of a lasting nature.

3. Comparison

(20)

The comparison of the export price with the constructed
normal value was made on an ex-factory basis and at the
same level of trade. In order to ensure a fair comparison,
account was taken, in accordance with Article 2(10) of
the basic Regulation, of differences in factors which were
demonstrated to affect prices and price comparability. On
this basis, allowances for differences in transport costs,
handling costs, insurance and duty payments were made,
where applicable, and justified. Adjustments were also
made where the export sales were made via a related
company located in a country other than the country
concerned or
to Article
2(10)(i) of the basic Regulation.

the Community, pursuant

4. Dumping margin

(21) As provided for under Article 2(11) of the basic Regu-
lation, the weighted average constructed normal value by
type was compared with the weighted average net ex-
works export price of
the corresponding type of the
product concerned.

E. ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES

(26) As a result of the investigation it is considered appro-
priate to amend the anti-dumping measures applicable to
imports of AHF from Sayanal.

(27)

Interested parties were informed of the essential facts and
considerations on the basis of which it is intended to
recommend an amendment of Council Regulation (EC)
No 950/2001 and were given an opportunity to
comment. Their comments were considered and taken
into account where appropriate,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

(22)

The comparison as described above did not show the
existence of any dumping.

In Article 1(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 950/2001 the
table shall be replaced by the following:

L 26/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

31.1.2006

‘Country

Company

Rate of duty
(%)

TARIC
additional code

The PRC

Russia

All companies

Open Joint Stock Company Rusal Sayanal, Prom-
ploshadka, Sayanogorsk, Republic of Khakasia
655600, Russia

All other companies

15,0

0

14,9

—

A255

A999’

Articles 1(3) and 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 950/2001 are hereby repealed.

Article 2

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

Article 3

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

Done at Brussels, 23 January 2006.

For the Council
The President

J. PRÖLL