Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1212/2005 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain castings originating in the People’s Republic of China
Date: 2009-05-15
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: China, anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping legislation, cast-iron, import, iron and steel product, originating product

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 15.5.2009 
COM(2009) 233 final 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EC) No 1212/2005 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on 
imports of certain castings originating in the People’s Republic of China 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1) 

110 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

•  Grounds for and objectives of the proposal 

This  proposal  concerns  the  application  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  384/96  of 
22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members 
of  the  European  Community,  as  last  amended  by  Council  Regulation  (EC) 
No 2117/2005  of  21  December  2005  ("the  basic  Regulation"),  in  the  proceeding 
concerning imports of certain castings originating in the People’s Republic of China.  

120 

•  General context 

This proposal is made in the context of the implementation of the basic Regulation and 
is the result of an investigation which was carried out in line with the substantive and 
procedural requirements laid out in the basic Regulation. 

•  Existing provisions in the area of the proposal 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1212/2005  imposing  a  definitive  anti-dumping  duty  on 
imports  of  certain  castings  originating  in  the  People’s  Republic  of  China  as  last 
amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 282/2009 of 6 April 2009. 

•  Consistency with other policies and objectives of the Union 

Not applicable. 

139 

141 

2) 

CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

•  Consultation of interested parties 

219 

229 

230 

3) 

305 

The interested parties concerned by the proceeding have already had the possibility to 
defend their interests during the investigation, in line with the provisions of the basic 
Regulation. 

•  Collection and use of expertise 

There was no need for external expertise. 

•  Impact assessment 

This proposal is the result of the implementation of the basic Regulation. 

The  basic  Regulation  does  not  make  provision  for  a  general  impact  assessment  but 
contains an exhaustive list of conditions that have to be assessed. 

LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL 

•  Summary of the proposed action 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
By  Regulation  (EC)  No  1212/2005,  the  Council  imposed  a  definitive  anti-dumping 
duty on imports of certain castings originating in the People’s Republic of China made 
of non-malleable cast iron.  

On  20  March  2008,  the  Commission  initiated  an  interim  review,  pursuant  to  Article 
11(3)  of  the  basic  Regulation.  The  review  was  limited  to  the  examination  of  the 
product scope.  

The investigation concluded that the original investigation had covered castings made 
of  grey  and  of  ductile  cast  iron.  It  was  confirmed  that  although  there  are  slight 
differences between castings made of grey or ductile cast iron, they can be considered 
as one single product.  

Furthermore, it was concluded that castings made from ductile cast iron should not be 
qualified  as  "non-malleable"  from  a  technical  point  of  view  as  iron  can  be  deformed 
under compressive stress without breaking.  

It is therefore proposed that the Council adopts the attached proposal for a Regulation, 
which sets out the amendment of Regulation (EC) No 1212/2005 in order to clarify the 
scope  of  the  products  covered  by  that  Regulation  and  to  exclude  any  possible 
ambiguity  in  the  interpretation.  The  Regulation  should  be  published  in  the  Official 
Journal of the European Union by 20 June 2009 at the latest. 

310 

•  Legal basis 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  384/96  of  22  December  1995  on  protection  against 
dumped  imports  from  countries  not  members  of  the  European  Community  as  last 
amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 2117/2005 of 21 December 2005 ("the basic 
Regulation"). 

329 

•  Subsidiarity principle 

The proposal falls under the exclusive competence of the Community. The subsidiarity 
principle therefore does not apply. 

•  Proportionality principle 

The proposal complies with the proportionality principle for the following reasons: 

331 

332 

–  The  form  of  action  is  described  in  the  basic  Regulation  and  leaves  no  scope  for 

national decision. 

–  Indication of how financial and administrative burden falling upon the Community, 
national  governments,  regional  and  local  authorities,  economic  operators  and 
citizens  is  minimized  and  proportionate  to  the  objective  of  the  proposal  is  not 
applicable. 

•  Choice of instruments 

341 

Proposed instruments: Regulation. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
 
 
342 

4) 

409 

Other means would not be adequate for the following reason: 

–  the above-mentioned basic Regulation does not foresee alternative options. 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATION 

The proposal has no implication for the Community budget. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
 
Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EC) No 1212/2005 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on 
imports of certain castings originating in the People’s Republic of China 

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 (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.  MEASURES IN FORCE 

(1) 

(2) 

By  Regulation  (EC)  No  1212/2005  the  Council  imposed  definitive  anti-dumping 
duties  on  imports  of  certain  castings  originating  in  the  People’s  Republic  of  China 
(‘PRC’)2  ('definitive  measures  Regulation').  Individual  duty  rates  ranged  from  0%  to 
37,9%,  and  the  residual  duty  level  was  set  at  47,8%.  A  joint  undertaking  offer  was 
accepted from a number of companies together with the China Chamber of Commerce 
for Import and Export of Machinery and Electronic Products (CCME) by Commission 
Decision  2006/109/EC3  and  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  268/20064.  In  view  of 
several  new  exporting  producer  requests,  the  definitive  measures  Regulation  was 
amended from time to time – most recently in April 20095.  

B. 

INITIATION OF REVIEW INVESTIGATION AND PROCEDURE  

On  8  November  2007,  the  Commission  received  a  request  for  an  interim  review, 
pursuant  to  Article  11(3)  of  the  basic  Regulation.  The  request  was  lodged  by 
Eurofonte ('the applicant'), acting on behalf of nine European producers. The applicant 
alleged that there was a lack of clarity as to the scope of the measure as set out in the 
definitive measures Regulation. The applicant alleged that the product scope should be 
clarified as far as castings of ductile iron are concerned and in particular whether this 
kind of castings should fall within the definition of the product concerned.  

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 

OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. 
OJ L 199, 29.7.2005, p. 1. 
OJ L 47, 17.2.2006, p. 59. 
OJ L 47, 17.2.2006, p. 3. 
OJ L 94, 8.4.2009, p. 1. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

Having determined that sufficient evidence existed for the initiation of a partial interim 
review,  and  after  consulting  the  Advisory  Committee,  the  Commission,  by  a  notice 
(‘the  review  Notice  of  initiation’)  published  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the  European 
Union6,  initiated  an  investigation  in  accordance  with  Article  11(3)  of  the  basic 
Regulation.  The  investigation  was  limited  in  scope  to  the  definition  of  the  product 
subject to the measures in force.  

The Commission advised the known Community producers, importers and users, the 
representatives of the exporting country as well as all known exporters in the PRC of 
the  initiation  of  the  review.  The  Commission  requested  information  from  all  above-
mentioned  parties  and  from  those  other  parties  who  made  themselves  known  within 
the  time  limit  set  in  the  review  Notice  of  initiation.  The  Commission  also  gave 
interested parties the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request 
a hearing.  

15  Community  producers,  nine  importers  in  the  Community  unrelated  to  Chinese 
exporting  producers,  one  Community  user  and  17  Chinese  exporting  producers 
submitted a questionnaire reply.  

Hearings  were  granted  upon  request  to  six  interested  parties:  to  the  applicant,  one 
Community producer and four importers.  

C. 

PRODUCT CONCERNED 

The product concerned, as defined in Article 1 of the definitive measures Regulation, 
is  castings  of  non-malleable  cast  iron  of  a  kind  used  to  cover  and/or  give  access  to 
ground or sub-surface systems, and parts thereof, whether or not machined, coated or 
painted or fitted with other materials, excluding fire hydrants, originating in the PRC 
and falling within CN codes 7325 10 50, 7325 10 92 and ex 7325 10 99 (Taric code 
7325 10 99 10).  

In  the  product  definition  part  of  the  same  Regulation,  notably  in  recital  (18),  it  is 
mentioned  that  castings  are  made  of  grey  or  ductile  iron  and  that  despite  certain 
differences described in recitals (20) to (21), it is concluded in recitals (22) and (29) 
that  all  types  of  castings  have  the  same  basic  physical,  chemical  and  technical 
characteristics, they are basically used for the same purposes and can be regarded as 
different types of the same product.  

According  to  several  parties,  the  term  used  in  Article  1  of  the  definitive  measures 
Regulation to describe the product subject to the measures ("castings of non-malleable 
cast iron") does not cover castings made of ductile iron. Some parties made reference 
to another CN subheading concerning tube or pipe fittings of malleable cast iron (CN 
code 7307 19 10) where the relevant explanatory note of the Combined Nomenclature 
states that spheroidal cast iron (ductile iron) is malleable. It was therefore claimed that 
castings made of ductile iron would not be covered by the Regulation, even if in the 
descriptive part of that Regulation it is stated that all types of castings can be regarded 
as different types of the same product. 

D. 

FINDINGS OF THE INVESTIGATION 

6 

OJ C 74, 20.3.2008, p. 66. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
1. 

Preliminary comments 

(10)  Several  interested  parties  claimed  that  a  product  scope  review  would  not  be  the 
appropriate  investigation  to  tackle  the  above  issue,  but  that  the  Commission  would 
have  to  initiate  either  a  new  anti-dumping  investigation  pursuant  to  Article  5  of  the 
basic Regulation or an anti-circumvention review pursuant to Article 13 of the basic 
Regulation.  

(11)  Given  that  the  purpose  of  the  investigation  is  primarily  to  examine  the  scope  of  the 
original  investigation  and  to  adapt,  if  necessary,  the  operative  part  accordingly,  a 
review of the product scope based on Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation is in this 
particular case the appropriate procedure. A new investigation pursuant to Article 5 of 
the basic Regulation and an anti-circumvention investigation pursuant to Article 13 of 
the basic Regulation each address different circumstances. The former may, inter alia, 
be  used  to  launch  an  investigation  into  a  product  which  was  not  investigated  in  the 
original  investigation  (for  example  by  using  a  different  product  definition  or 
originating in countries not subject to measures). The latter may be used as the basis 
for an investigation of whether there is circumvention with regard to a product subject 
to  measures.  These  two  types  of  investigation  are  therefore  not  appropriate  in  the 
present circumstances.  

(12)  The initiation of this review was therefore warranted to ensure the proper application 

of the anti-dumping measures.  

2.  Analysis of the original investigation 

(13) 

(14) 

In  a  first  step,  the  original  investigation  was  analysed  in  order  to  determine  if  that 
investigation  had  fully  covered  not  only  castings  made  of  grey  iron,  but  also  those 
made of ductile cast iron.  

It  is  firstly  noted  that  in  the  Notice  of  initiation  of  the  original  investigation7,  the 
product  is  described  as  "certain  articles  of  non-malleable  cast  iron  of  a  kind  used  to 
cover and/or to give access to ground or sub-surface systems, (…) originating in the 
People's Republic of China (…), normally declared within CN-codes 7325 10 50, 7325 
10 92 and 7325 10 99."  

(15)  The  words  "normally  declared  under"  clarify  that  the  CN-codes  mentioned  in  the 
Notice  of  initiation  were  –  as  they  usually  are  -  given  "for  information  only".  Thus, 
interested  parties  could  not  assume  that  only  products  covered  by  those  CN  codes 
would  form  part  of  the  investigation.  Complementary  to  the  information  on  the 
product scope given in the Notice of initiation, the information in the non-confidential 
version  of  the  original  complaint  that  was  accessible  to  all  interested  parties  of  the 
proceeding and that was sent to all exporting producers, importers and users listed in 
the complaint contained further information.  

(16) 

In  the  non-confidential  version  of  the  complaint,  the  definition  of  the  product 
concerned is exactly the one published in the Notice of initiation. Further explanations 
of  that  general  description  follow  in  points  3.2-3.7  of  the  complaint.  It  follows  from 
various  elements  in  those  points  that  the  complaint  covered  products  made  of  both 

7 

OJ C 104, 30.4.2004, p. 62. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
grey and ductile cast iron. For instance, in point 3.5., it is mentioned that "the product 
is  made  of  non-malleable  cast  iron,  which  can  be  grey  or  ductile  cast  iron". 
Furthermore,  the  production  process  of  castings  made  of  both  grey  and  ductile  cast 
iron is described in point 3.4. of the non-confidential version of the complaint.  

(17)  Moreover,  there  was  no  indication  that  the  Notice  of  initiation  was  intended  to  be 

more limited than the scope of the complaint. 

(18)  Furthermore, during the original investigation, dumping and injury data was collected 
concerning  castings  made  from  both  grey  and  ductile  cast  iron.  In  particular,  in  the 
questionnaires that were sent to known interested parties and to those interested parties 
who made themselves known and requested a questionnaire, both types were included 
in  the  description  of  the  product  types  which  had  to  be  reported  in  the  product 
classification  (product  control  numbers).  Therefore,  it  was  clear  to  all  cooperating 
parties that received a questionnaire that castings made of grey and of ductile cast iron 
were  covered  by  the  investigation.  Moreover,  the  fact  that  the  product  classification 
contained  both  types  ensured  that  all  findings  concerning  dumping,  injury,  causality 
and Community interest of the original investigation related to castings made of grey 
and ductile cast iron. 

(19) 

In  addition,  the  final  disclosure  text  sent  to  all  interested  parties  and  the  definitive 
measures  Regulation  mentioned at several points that castings can either  be  made of 
grey  or  of  ductile  cast  iron  (see  in  particular  recitals  (18),  (20)  and  (21)).  The 
differences  between  both  types  of  castings  were  examined  and  explained  (see 
aforementioned  recitals).  Finally,  the  conclusion  drawn  in  the  definitive  measures 
Regulation as stipulated in recital (22) is that the investigation had shown that despite 
the differences in terms of grey or ductile cast iron, all types of castings share the same 
basic physical, chemical and technical characteristics, that they are basically used for 
the  same  purposes  and  that  they  can  be  regarded  as  different  types  of  the  same 
product. 

(20) 

In the light of the foregoing, it can be concluded that the original investigation covered 
both castings made of grey and of ductile cast iron. Even assuming that this was not 
fully  clear  from  the  Notice  of  initiation  alone,  interested  parties  had  several 
possibilities to learn that the investigation covered castings made of grey and ductile 
cast  iron,  as  it  was  mentioned  in  the  non-confidential  version  of  the  complaint,  the 
questionnaires and as it was disclosed at definitive stage to interested parties.  

(21)  After disclosure of the final findings of this review, one interested party claimed that 
the Notice of initiation of the original investigation had to clearly indicate the product 
scope.  Given  that  this  Notice  of  initiation  only  mentioned  castings  made  of  non-
malleable  cast  iron,  an  importer  of  castings  made  of  malleable  cast  iron  could  be 
reassured that its products were not covered by the investigation and had no need to 
consult the non-confidential version of the complaint.  

(22) 

In  view  of  the  wording  of  the  original  Notice  of  initiation  it  cannot  be  argued  that 
castings  made  of  ductile  cast  iron  were  explicitly  or  implicitly  excluded  from  the 
definition  of  the  product  concerned.  As  a  starting  point  it  must  be  noted  that  in  the 
original Notice of initiation, first paragraph, it was said that the Commission received 
"a complaint (…), alleging that imports of certain castings, originating in the People's 
Republic of China (…), are being dumped and are thereby causing material injury to 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
(23) 

the Community industry". Secondly, section two ("product") mentioned  that castings 
made  of  non-malleable  cast  iron  of  a  kind  used  to  cover  and/or  to  give  access  to 
ground or sub-surface systems would be covered, but without further specifying what 
could be understood as "non malleable". It is recalled in this context that the CN-codes 
mentioned in the Notice of initiation were explicitly "only given for information" and 
thus can not be argued to have limited the product scope of the original investigation. 
Thus, the Notice of initiation already contained elements indicating to the importer or 
exporting producer of castings made of ductile iron of a kind to cover or give access to 
ground  or  sub-surface  systems  that  ductile  castings  could  be  covered  by  the 
investigation. In view of the above, this argument is rejected.  

In any case, even assuming that this was not the case, the review Notice of initiation 
was clear on that matter. It noted in section 3 (ground for the review) that whereas the 
descriptive  part  of  the  definitive  measures  Regulation  also  covered  castings  made  of 
ductile cast iron, on this point the scope of the operative part of that Regulation might 
have to be clarified. It explicitly invited all operators to make their views known, and 
to submit any evidence supporting those views. However, the importer concerned has 
not submitted any evidence that one or more of his supplier(s) which are subject to the 
duty had not understood that the original investigation also covered castings of ductile 
iron.  In  this  context,  it  should  also  be  noted  that  the  review  Notice  of  initiation 
underlined in section 9 that any party wishing to do so could claim another review on 
the  basis  of  Article  11(3)  of  the  basic  Regulation.  However,  no  exporter  whose 
products  are  subject  to  the  duty  has  claimed  that  it  did  not  understood,  during  the 
original  investigation,  that  also  castings  of  ductile  iron  were  covered,  and  that, 
therefore,  now,  an  additional  review  should  be  launched  to  recalculate  the  duty 
applicable to his products, including those of ductile iron.  

(24) 

In view of the above, the argument made by the interested party is rejected. 

3.  Comparison between ductile iron castings and grey iron castings 

(25) 

In  order  to  clarify  whether  the  findings  with  regard  to  castings  made  of  grey  and 
ductile cast iron as set out in the definitive measures Regulation were indeed correct, it 
was  examined  whether  ductile  iron  castings  and  grey  iron  castings  were  rightly 
considered to share the same physical, chemical and technical characteristics and end 
uses, as indicated in the definitive measures Regulation.  

(a) 

Physical, chemical, technical characteristics and interchangeability 

(26) 

In terms of physical characteristics, the final form of the casting is influenced by the 
purpose  and installation conditions  of the product but in any case the product has to 
conform to the standards in force, as laid down in, inter alia, EN 1561, EN 1563, EN 
124 and EN 1433. 

(27)  Concerning  the  chemical  characteristics  of  castings,  both  grey  and  ductile  cast  iron 
are alloys of iron and carbon. While there are slight differences in the structure of the 
raw  material  and  also  the  materials  added  during  the  production  process  (e.g. 
magnesium) the final products do not show a significant difference in this respect.  

(28) 

It is noted that due to the magnesium added during the production process of ductile 
iron, the microstructure of the cast iron changes from a flake/lamellar form (grey cast 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
iron)  to  a  spheroidal  structure.  The  more  accurate  term  for  ductile  iron  is  therefore 
"spheroidal graphite cast iron".  

(29)  As concerns the technical characteristics, the investigation demonstrated that ductile 
cast iron, in contrast to grey cast iron, has technical properties that allow the material 
to resist higher rupture stress and, more importantly, to be deformed to a significantly 
higher extent under compressive stress without fracture, i.e. ductile cast iron possesses 
plastic ductility whereas grey cast iron breaks under compressive stress, i.e. is brittle. 
this  difference,  other  basic 
The 
mechanical/technical characteristics such as the moulding ability, wear resistance and 
elasticity are comparable for grey cast iron and ductile cast iron. 

investigation  has  also  shown 

that  despite 

(30)  Moreover,  the  differences  between  grey  and  ductile  cast  iron  mentioned  above  only 
affect the required design of the casting (i.e. whether a locking device is required), but 
not the fitness for the purpose of the casting, which is to cover and/or give access to 
ground or sub-surface systems. 

(31)  Cast iron products serving the above mentioned end uses must fulfil the requirements 
of standards EN 124 (manhole covers and gully tops) and EN 1433 (channel gratings). 
Both standards specify that cast iron materials have to meet the requirements of either 
EN 1561 or EN 1563 (i.e. grey or ductile cast iron). Therefore, both grey and ductile 
cast iron fulfil the requirements of the standards, so they can be considered as being 
interchangeable.  

(b) 

End uses 

(32)  Consumers  perceive  both  types  of  casting  to  be  the  same  product  used  to  cover 
manholes,  resist  traffic  load,  provide  safe  and  easy  access  to  buried  networks  or  to 
collect surface water (gratings). Both types provide long term durable solutions. 

(c) 

Conclusion 

(33) 

It is consequently concluded that although there are slight differences between the two 
product types, they were rightly considered as a single product as they share the same 
physical, chemical and technical characteristics, can be used for the same purposes and 
are  interchangeable.  This  confirms  the  findings  of  the  original  investigation  and 
recitals (18) and (20) – (22) of the definitive measures Regulation.  

(34)  After final disclosure, several interested parties contested these  findings and stressed 
that  already  in  the  original  investigation,  it  was  erroneously  concluded  that  castings 
made  of  grey  and  of  ductile  cast  iron  share  the  same  characteristics  and  should  be 
regarded  as  one  single  product  for  the  purpose  of  the  investigation.  These  parties 
argued  that  several  factors  would  demonstrate  that  both  types  of  castings  are  not 
comparable  and  should  be  treated  as  different  products.  In  particular,  these  parties 
mentioned (i) the differences in the production process which lead to (ii) completely 
different  physical,  chemical  and  technical  characteristics  and  (iii)  a  different  cost 
structure and lastly (iv) a different consumer perception. To support this claim, several 
expert opinions as well as publications in professional journals were submitted to the 
Commission.  These  experts'  opinions  mainly  highlighted  the  differences  between 
ductile  cast  iron  and  grey  cast  iron  in  the  graphite  structure  as  well  as  the  technical 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
(35) 

differences,  i.e.  the  fact  that  ductile  iron  can  be  deformed  under  compressive  stress 
whereas grey iron breaks under the same conditions.  

In  this  respect,  it  is  noted  that  this  investigation  confirmed  that  there  are  indeed 
differences  between  both  product  types,  i.e.  castings  made  of  grey  cast  iron  and 
castings  made  of  ductile  cast  iron.  The  fact  that  magnesium  is  added  during  the 
production process of a casting made of ductile cast iron changes the graphite structure 
from flake/lamellar to spheroidal and gives it different mechanical properties such as a 
certain  deformability  under  compressive  stress.  In  addition,  castings  made  of  ductile 
cast iron normally require a special design to lock it with the surface. However, it is 
recalled that it is consistent practice to examine if products or product types share the 
same basic physical, chemical and technical characteristics and are basically used for 
the same purposes in order to determine whether they should form one single product 
for the purpose of an anti-dumping investigation. This means that product types do not 
have  to  be  identical  in  all  aspects  from  a  scientific  (or  other)  point  of  view,  but  that 
certain  differences  can  be  accepted  as  long  as  the  above  mentioned  basic 
characteristics  are  shared.  Moreover,  it  is  recalled  that  the  proceeding  is  not  against 
imports of the material as such, i.e. cast iron, but against castings used to cover and/or 
give  access  to  ground  or  sub-surface  systems  and  parts  thereof.  This  investigation 
confirmed that a casting made of ductile cast iron shares the same basic characteristics 
as a casting made of grey cast iron (see arguments in recitals (24)-(30) above). Thus, 
the  argument  that  castings  made  of  grey  cast  iron  and  castings  made  of  ductile  cast 
iron do not share the same basic characteristics is rejected.  

4.  Channel gratings  

(36) 

In the framework of this investigation, two companies claimed that drainage systems 
covered  by  standard  EN  1433  should  not  fall  under  the  scope  of  the  measures.  To 
support  their  claim,  the  interested  parties  pointed  out  that  in  the  definitive  measures 
Regulation  only  another  standard  (EN  124)  applicable  to  manhole  covers  and  gully 
tops,  is  mentioned,  and  that  the  original  investigation  clearly  focussed  on  manhole 
covers.  

(37)  The complainant argued that the review Notice of initiation setting out the grounds of 
this  partial  interim  review  did  not  mention  the  issue  of  channel  gratings  and  that 
therefore  the  arguments  in  this  regard  should  be  ignored.  This  argument  is  however 
rejected in view of the fact that the review Notice of initiation also stipulated that the 
product  scope  should  be  clarified.  The  fact  that  a  special  focus  was  given  to  the 
question whether castings made of ductile cast iron are covered by the measures does 
not exclude that other claims regarding the product scope can be analysed.  

(38) 

It was firstly examined if channel gratings were covered by the original investigation. 

(39)  As stated in recital (14), the Notice of initiation of the original investigation described 
the product under consideration as "certain articles of non-malleable cast iron of a kind 
used  to  cover  and/or  to  give  access  to  ground  or  sub-surface  systems,  and  parts 
thereof,  (…)".  As  channel  gratings  are  articles  used  to  cover  ground  or  sub-surface 
systems and parts thereof, the Notice of initiation had to be read as covering channel 
gratings as a type of castings.  

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
(40)  Moreover, the non-confidential version of the original complaint explicitly stated that 
the  product  concerned  "is  usually  named  by reference  to  its  purpose  that  is  manhole 
top  (or  manhole  covers),  gully  top  or  channel  grating  and  surface  box"  (see  point 
3.2.). Another reference to channel gratings as being part of the product concerned can 
be found in point 3.5 (efficient surface water drainage) and 3.6.  

(41)  Moreover, channel gratings were also included in the description of the product types 
which  had  to  be  reported  in  the  questionnaire  (product  control  numbers)  and  all 
cooperating parties that received a questionnaire had to report sales of channel gratings 
as  well.  Thus,  all  findings  concerning  dumping,  injury,  causality  and  Community 
interest of the original investigation also included channel gratings.  

(42)  Furthermore,  in  the  definitive  measures  Regulation  which  was  also  disclosed  to  all 
interested  parties,  notably  in  the  recitals  (15)-(17),  it  is  mentioned  that  castings  are 
generally comprised of a frame which is embedded in the ground and either a cover or 
a grate which sits flush with any surface. Recital (17) mentions that cover and grates 
are  available  in  any  shape  including  but  not  limited  to  triangular,  circular,  square  or 
rectangular.  In  the  same  vein,  in  recital  (19)  it  is  stated  that  the  different  possible 
presentations  of  castings  such  as  manhole  covers,  gully  tops  and  surface  boxes,  are 
sufficiently similar and therefore constitute one single product for the purpose of the 
investigation.  Thus,  the  wording  of  the  definitive  measures  Regulation  indicates  that 
channel gratings were also included as a type of a possible presentation of castings.  

(43)  To  conclude,  channel  gratings  were  included  in  the  product  scope  of  the  original 
investigation, and this could have been determined on the basis of the above.  

(44)  After final disclosure, one interested party claimed that neither the Notice of initiation 
nor  the  definitive  measures  Regulation  was  clear  with  regard  to  the  inclusion  of 
channel gratings in the scope of the investigation. This party argued that whereas the 
Notice of initiation was at least unclear with regard to channel gratings, recital (16) of 
the definitive measures Regulation specified clearly that "castings must allow for safe 
and easy access to the underground chamber, may it be for the purpose of man entry 
or  visual  inspection".  As  linear  drainage  systems  do  not  allow  for  access  of  human 
beings to an underground chamber, but serve the purpose of draining water, it would 
be clear that channel gratings were not covered. 

(45) 

It  is  not  refuted  that  channel  gratings/linear  drainage  systems  which  are  usually 
composed  of  a  drain  channel  and  a  grate  on  the  top  mainly  serve  the  purpose  of 
draining water from a surface. However, they also allow for safe and easy access to an 
underground  chamber  which  would  be,  in  this  case,  the  drain  channel.  Should,  for 
instance, the drain channel be blocked by leaves or other objects, a person could after 
having  lifted  the  grate,  access  the  drain  channel  to  remove  the  blockage.  Even 
assuming  that  the  drain  channel  cannot  be  considered  as  forming  part  of  the 
underground  chamber  as  the  whole  casting  should  give  access  to  it,  it  can  still  be 
argued that the channel grating covers a linear cavity in the earth that has been dug to 
allow  for  water  drainage.  It  is  further  emphasized  that  the  sentence  in  the  recital  in 
question mentioned that the access can be for the purpose of visual inspection which is 
undoubtedly  possible  for  channel  gratings.  In  addition,  the  sentence  quoted  by  that 
party  has  to  be  read  in  context,  i.e.  together  with  recital  (15)  and  the  beginning  of 
recital  (16).  As  mentioned  above,  there  it  is  stipulated  that  "castings  are  generally 
comprised of a frame, which is embedded in the ground, and either a cover or a grate, 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
which  sits  flush  with  any  surface  used  by  pedestrians  and/or  vehicles  and  which 
directly  withstand  the  weight  and  impact  of  pedestrian  and/or  vehicle  traffic.  (…) 
Castings  serve  the  purpose  of  covering  an  underground  chamber  and  must  bear  load 
resistance of motored vehicles and/or pedestrian traffic. The cover or grate is required 
to remain secure within the frame in order to avoid noise pollution, human injury and 
vehicle  damage."  The  investigation  showed  that  the  channel  gratings  are  generally 
comprised of a drain channel which is embedded in the ground, and a grate, which sits 
flush  with  any  surface  used  by  pedestrians  and/or  vehicles  and  which  directly 
withstand  the  weight  and  impact  of  pedestrian  and/or  vehicle  traffic.  Moreover,  the 
channel  grating  can also  be used to give access and/or gain entry to an underground 
chamber and they also must bear load resistance of motored vehicles and/or pedestrian 
traffic.  Therefore,  the  argument  that  channel  gratings  were  clearly  not  covered  is 
rejected.  

(46) 

In  a  second  step,  in  order  to  clarify  whether  the  findings  with  regard  to  channel 
gratings  were  indeed  correct,  it  was  further  examined  if  channel  gratings  share  the 
same basic physical and technical characteristics as other types of castings and could 
therefore  rightly  be  considered  as  .  constituting,  together  with  the  other  types  of 
castings, one single product.  

(47)  The investigation confirmed that channel gratings are castings made of grey or ductile 
cast iron, and that they are generally comprised of a frame which is embedded in the 
ground and a grate which sits flush with any surface. The frame is placed directly on 
top of a chamber top. The channel gratings are used to cover the ground and allow for 
visual inspection.  

(48)  While it is true that the main purpose of a channel grating is to drain the surface from 
excessive water so that vehicles or planes can safely use the road/runway, this does not 
exclude  that  channel  gratings  also  serve  the  purpose  of  covering  an  underground 
chamber,  as  stated  above,  and  they  also  must  bear  load  resistance  of  vehicles. 
Moreover,  other  types  of  castings  (such  as  gully  tops),  too,  have  the  function  of 
draining excessive water. 

(49)  Concerning the argument of the missing standard EN 1433 in the definitive measures 
Regulation, it is noted that in recitals (26) and (27) reference was made to EN 124 in 
the  like  product  part  in  connection  with  a  claim  by  interested  parties  that  castings 
produced and sold in the PRC and the castings produced and sold by the Community 
industry are not alike. This, in turn, does not mean that products covered by EN 1433 
were  not  covered.  The  reference  (or  not)  of  a  specific  EN  norm  in  a  Regulation  is 
given for information only, but does not mean that there is no other norm that could be 
applicable.  Moreover,  the  standard  EN  1433  was  a  new  standard  at  the  time  of  the 
original  investigation  period  (April  2003  –  March  2004),  applicable  from  August 
2003, and co-existed with the national standards until August 2004. Therefore, at the 
time  of  data  collection  during  the  original  investigation,  this  standard  was  not  fully 
operational and existed in parallel to other standards covering the same product. 

(50)  Therefore, it is confirmed that this particular presentation of a casting shares the same 
basic  physical,  technical  and  chemical  characteristics  as  other  manhole  covers,  gully 
tops or surface boxes.  

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
(51) 

In light of the above, it is clarified that products falling under EN1433 were subject to 
the product scope and should remain subject to the measures as the difference in the 
main purpose found cannot be considered significant enough to justify an exclusion of 
this presentation of a casting.  

5.  Necessity  for  the  amendment  of  the  operative  part  of  the  definitive 

measures Regulation - final remarks  

(52) 

In  view  of  the  above  analysis,  it  was  finally  considered  appropriate  to  examine 
whether  the  wording  of  Article  1  of  the  definitive  measures  Regulation  and  recitals 
(18) - (29) of that Regulation is in line with the findings of the original investigation 
and the findings above. Put differently, the question was examined whether there was, 
perhaps,  no  need  for  an  amendment  of  the  operative  part  of  the  final  measures 
Regulation after all, and whether it could be argued that the current version of Article 
1  already  clearly  covered  castings  of  ductile  iron.  In  this  respect,  the  comments 
received  from  the  interested  parties  on  the  product  definition  part  of  the  definitive 
measures Regulation were also duly considered. 

(53) 

It  is  recalled  that  Article  1(1)  of  the  definitive  measures  Regulation  sets  out  that 
castings  made  of  "non-malleable"  cast  iron  should  be  covered.  It  is  further  recalled 
that  the  investigation  showed  that  ductile  cast  iron  possesses  plastic  ductility  (see 
recital 30).  

(54)  The question thus arose whether ductile cast iron must always be considered as "non-
malleable"  from  a  technical  point  of  view  despite  the  fact  that  it  possesses  plastic 
ductility.  In  material  science  "malleability"  refers  to  a  material's  ability  to  deform 
under compressive stress which is often characterized by the material's ability to form 
a  thin  sheet  by  hammering  or  rolling.  In  this  context,  it  was  claimed  by  the 
Community industry that the notion of castings made of "non-malleable" cast iron in 
Article 1 of the definitive measures Regulation could refer to all castings that are not 
made from malleable cast iron, and this would include castings made from grey cast 
iron  and  ductile  cast  iron.  It  was  thus  claimed  that  in  this  sense,  it  could  indeed  be 
argued  that  also  castings  made  from  ductile  cast  iron,  as  opposed  to  malleable  cast 
iron,  are  non-malleable  and  thus  covered  by  Article  1  of  the  definitive  measures 
Regulation since its entry into force. 

(55)  However, it is noted that ductility and malleability do not always correlate with each 
other;  for  instance,  gold  is  both  ductile  and  malleable,  but  lead  is  only  malleable. 
Moreover, during the review investigation evidence was provided that ductile cast iron 
is  not  only  deformable  under  tensile  stress,  but  also  under  compressive  stress  to  a 
certain degree. Therefore, it appears that from a technical point of view, it is difficult 
to  argue  that  ductile  cast  iron  must  always  be  regarded  as  non-malleable  (in  which 
case there might be no need for an amendment of the operative part of the definitive 
measures regulation). 

(56)  Nevertheless,  the  fact  remains  that  castings  of  ductile  cast  iron  were  covered  by  the 
original investigation. In order to exclude any possible ambiguity in the interpretation, 
the  definitive  measures  Regulation  should  be  revised  accordingly.  In  particular,  it 
should  be  clarified  that  the  product  scope  covers  castings  of  non-malleable  cast  iron 
and of spheroidal graphite cast iron (ductile iron). Moreover, an additional CN-Code 
should be included, i.e. CN-Code ex 7325 99 10, referring to "other cast articles made 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
of  iron  and  steel  of  malleable  cast  iron".  This  is  necessary  to  ensure  that  the  anti-
dumping duty which was determined to be appropriate for (inter alia) such castings of 
ductile cast iron during the original investigation will as of now be certainly levied on 
them. 

6.  Retroactivity 

(57) 

(58) 

In the review Notice of initiation, interested parties were explicitly invited to comment 
on a possible retroactive effect the conclusions might have. The issue of retroactivity 
was  addressed  by  several  parties  during  the  hearings  and  in  the  submissions.  In 
general,  all  parties  except  the  Community  industry  expressed  their  opposition  to  the 
retroactive application of the results of the review.  

In this respect, it is noted that the current investigation showed that the operative part 
of  the  definitive  measures  Regulation  should  be  amended  in  order  to  clarify  the 
product  scope  and  that  an  additional  CN-Code  should  be  added.  Moreover,  it  also 
seems  that  during  the  past  period,  some  operators  have  based  their  commercial 
conduct on the assumption that castings of ductile iron were not covered by the anti-
dumping duty. Retro-actively subjecting imports of such castings into the Community 
to  the  anti-dumping  duty  could  seriously  affect  the  economic  operations  of  those 
operators. In view of those factors, it is deemed more appropriate that the clarification 
of the product scope should have an effect exclusively for the future.  

E. 

CONCLUSION 

(59) 

In view of the above findings, it is considered appropriate to revise Regulation (EC) 
No 1212/2005 in order to clarify the scope of the product covered by that Regulation 
and to insert that the product scope covers castings of non-malleable cast iron and of 
spheroidal graphite cast iron (ductile iron). Moreover, an additional CN-Code should 
be included, i.e. CN-Code ex 7325 99 10. 

(60)  The  findings  and  the  proposal  has  been  disclosed  to  the  parties  concerned  and  their 

comments were taken into account where appropriate, 

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 

Article 1 (1) of Regulation (EC) No 1212/2005 shall be replaced by the following: 

"1. A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of castings of non-malleable 
cast iron and spheroidal graphite cast iron (ductile iron) of a kind used to cover and/or to give 
access to ground or sub-surface systems, and parts thereof, whether or not machined, coated 
or  painted  or  fitted  with  other  materials,  excluding  fire  hydrants,  originating  in  the  People's 
Republic of China, currently classifiable within CN codes 7325 10 50, 7325 10 92, ex 7325 
10 99 (Taric code 7325 10 99 10), and ex 7325 99 10 (Taric code 7325 99 10 10)." 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
Article 2 

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 
The President 

EN 

16 

   EN