2008/649/EC: Commission Decision of 3 July 2008 accepting an undertaking offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of solutions of urea and ammonium nitrate originating in Russia
Date: 2008-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Russia, anti-dumping legislation, chemical fertiliser, chemical salt, import (EU), originating product

8.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 213/39

COMMISSION

COMMISSION DECISION

of 3 July 2008

accepting an undertaking offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning
imports of solutions of urea and ammonium nitrate originating in Russia

(2008/649/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(3)

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 Articles 8 and 9 thereof,

After consulting the Advisory Committee,

Whereas:

the Council

interim review the

The definitive findings and conclusions of
the partial
interim review concerning the exporting producer were
in Council Regulation (EC) No 238/2008 (5).
set out
During the
exporting producer
in offering a price undertaking
expressed an interest
but failed to submit a duly substantiated offer within
the deadline as set out in Article 8(2) of the basic Regu­
lation. However, as stated in the abovementioned Regu­
exporting
lation,
producer should exceptionally be allowed to complete
its undertaking offer within 10 calendar days from
entry into force of that Regulation due to reasons set
out
in recitals 57 and 58 of Regulation (EC) No
238/2008. Subsequent to the publication of the above­
mentioned Regulation and within the deadline as set out
in that Regulation, the exporting producer submitted an
acceptable price undertaking offer in accordance with
Article 8(1) of the basic Regulation.

considered that

the

B. UNDERTAKING

(1)

(2)

A. PROCEDURE

The Council, by Regulation (EC) No 1995/2000 (2),
imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of
solutions of urea and ammonium nitrate
(product
in Russia. Following
concerned) originating,
an expiry review initiated in September 2005,
the
Council, by Regulation (EC) No 1911/2006 (3), renewed
for five years these measures at their current level.

inter alia,

The Commission announced on 19 December 2006 the
initiation of a partial interim review of those measures by
a notice of initiation published in the Official Journal of
the European Union (4) upon request of the Open Joint
Chemical
Stock
Company Eurochem’,
the holding company of OJSC
Novomoskovskiy Azot and OJSC Nevinnomyssky Azot,
Russia (the exporting producer).

‘Mineral

Company

(OJSC)

and

(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 238, 22.9.2000, p. 15. Regulation as amended by Regulation

(EC) No 1675/2003 (OJ L 238, 25.9.2003, p. 4).

(3) OJ L 365, 21.12.2006, p. 26.
(4) OJ C 311, 19.12.2006, p. 51.

(4)

(5)

quotations

international

The exporting producer offered to sell
the product
concerned falling under CN code 3102 80 00 at or
above price levels which eliminate the injurious effects
In addition, the offer made foresees the
of dumping.
indexation of the minimum price in accordance with
the
public
product
concerned,
the product
concerned vary significantly. The exporting producer
also offered to respect a certain quantitative ceiling in
order
its imports could influence the
prices in France as those prices serve as a basis for the
indexation. The level of the quantitative ceiling is set in
total around 10 % of the total Community consumption
of the product concerned.

the prices of

to avoid that

given that

of

Moreover, the exporting producer — in order to reduce
the risk of price violation by means of cross-compen­
sation of the prices — offered not to sell the product
covered by the undertaking to the same customers in the
European Community to which they sell other products,
with the exception of certain other products for which
the exporting producer undertakes to respect a specific
price regime.

(5) OJ L 75, 18.3.2008, p. 14.

(6)

(7)

(8)

L 213/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

8.8.2008

also

provide

exporting

producer will

the
The
Commission with regular
and detailed information
concerning its exports to the Community, so that the
the
undertaking
the
Commission. Furthermore,
exporting producer
the Commission
considers that the risk of circumventing the undertaking
is limited.

can be monitored effectively by
the sales structure of

such that

is

the prices on which the indexation of minimum price is
based. It should also be noted that in case of a breach of
the undertaking, the acceptance of the undertaking as
such may be withdrawn.

(10)

In view of the above, the undertaking offered by the
Russian exporting producer is acceptable.

Subsequent to the disclosure of the undertaking offer, the
Community industry objected to this undertaking offer.
The Community industry argued that the prices of the
product concerned are volatile and that an indexation of
the minimum price based on the quoted prices of the
product concerned is not workable under all market
conditions, in particular it would not be workable in a
supply driven market, i.e. a market situation in which the
buyer can determine the prices due to high supply.
Therefore the Community industry suggested to base
the indexation of the minimum prices on the prices of
in this
natural gas as quoted at Waidhaus. However,
regard it has to be noted that a natural gas price based
indexation is not considered to be feasible in this case
due to the poor correlation of the product concerned and
natural gas prices. As concerns the Community industry's
comments that on a supply driven market the current
indexation formula will not be workable, it is noted that
the Commission will monitor
this undertaking and
should prima facie evidence exist that the undertaking is
no longer workable, the Commission should act expedi­
tiously to remedy the situation, as set out in recital 11.

able

to influence

It claimed that

to be set maximum at 3 % of

The Community industry further argued that the level of
the quantitative ceiling would be too high and requested
it
total Community
consumption.
the exporting producer
the prices on the
would be
Community market with a higher amount and thus
make the indexation of the minimum price unworkable.
In this respect it should be noted that the quantitative
ceiling was established at a level which was considered to
(i) satisfactorily limit the risk of the exporting producer
influencing the prices on the French market
thus
rendering the indexation formula unworkable (ii) be suf­
ficiently high so that the undertaking remains practicable
at the same time. Moreover, the Community industry
to how any
failed to substantiate its argument as
quantity
total Community
exceeding 3 % of
consumption would have a detrimental impact on prices.

the

(9)

The Community industry proposed moreover the intro­
duction of a ‘progressive quantitative ceiling’ whereby the
quantitative ceiling of the exporting producer shall be
increased on a yearly basis depending on the exporting
producer respecting the terms of the undertaking. This
suggestion is however rejected because the sole aim of
the quantitative ceiling is to limit the risk of influencing

is not

restricted to,

(11) However, due to the special elements of this undertaking
(i.e. in particular the indexation formula) the Commission
will assess the practicability of the undertaking regularly.
the Commission will
For its practicability assessment,
take
the
into account, but
following criteria: the prices of the product concerned
in the French market; the level of the coefficient of the
the exporting
indexation formula;
producer as reported by them in their quarterly sales
reports; profitability of
In
particular, should this practicability assessment show
that the decrease of the profitability of the Community
the
to
industry
Commission endeavours to withdraw the acceptance of
the undertaking
in accordance with
Article 8(9) of the basic Regulation.

the Community industry.

the sales prices of

expeditiously

undertaking,

attributable

the

is

(12)

(13)

(14)

In order to enable the Commission to monitor ‘effec­
tively the companies’ compliance with the undertaking,
when the request
for release into free circulation is
presented to the relevant customs authority, exemption
from the anti-dumping duty will be conditional on (i) the
presentation of an undertaking invoice containing at least
the elements listed in the Annex to Council Regulation
(EC) No 789/2008 (1): (ii) the fact that imported goods
are manufactured, shipped and invoiced directly by the
said companies to the first independent customer in the
Community; and (iii) the fact that the goods declared and
presented to customs
correspond precisely to the
description on the undertaking invoice. Where no such
invoice is presented, or when it does not correspond to
the product presented to customs, the appropriate rate of
anti-dumping duty shall instead be payable.

To further ensure the respect of
this undertaking,
importers have been made aware by the Regulation
(EC) No 789/2008 that
the
conditions provided for by this Regulation, or the with­
drawal by the Commission of
the
undertaking, may lead to the customs debt being
incurred for the relevant transactions.

the non-fulfillment of

the acceptance of

In the event of a breach or withdrawal of the undertaking
or in case of withdrawal of acceptance of the undertaking
by the Commission, the anti-dumping duty imposed in
accordance with Article 9(4) of the basic Regulation shall
automatically apply pursuant to Article 8(9) of the basic
Regulation,

(1) See page 14 of this Official Journal.

8.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 213/41

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The undertaking offered by the exporting producer mentioned below in connection with the anti-dumping
proceeding concerning imports of mixtures of urea and ammonium nitrate in aqueous or ammoniacal
solution originating in Russia is hereby accepted.

Country

Russia

Company

Open Joint Stock Company (OJSC) Mineral and Chemical Company ‘Eurochem’,
member of the Eurochem group of companies, Moscow, Russia,
for goods
produced by its related company OJSC NAK Azot, Novomoskovsk, Russia, or
by its related company OJSC Nevinnomyssky Azot, Nevinnomyssk, Russia, either
sold directly to the first independent customer in the Community or the same
goods sold by Eurochem Trading GmbH, Zug, Switzerland, to the first inde­
pendent customer in the Community

Taric Additional
Code

A885

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

Article 2

Done at Brussels, 3 July 2008.

For the Commission

Peter MANDELSON
Member of the Commission