CELEX: 51983PC0459
Language: en
Date: 1983-07-05
Title: Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of urea ammonium nitrate solution fertiliser (UAN) originating in the U.S.A. (submitted to the Council by the Commission)

ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES
DE LA COMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEE DES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM (83) 459
Vol. 1983/0174
 ---pagebreak--- Disclaimer
Conformément au règlement (CEE, Euratom) n° 354/83 du Conseil du 1er février 1983
concernant l'ouverture au public des archives historiques de la Communauté économique
européenne et de la Communauté européenne de l'énergie atomique (JO L 43 du 15.2.1983,
p. 1), tel que modifié par le règlement (CE, Euratom) n° 1700/2003 du 22 septembre 2003
(JO L 243 du 27.9.2003, p. 1), ce dossier est ouvert au public. Le cas échéant, les documents
classifiés présents dans ce dossier ont été déclassifiés conformément à l'article 5 dudit
règlement.
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983
concerning the opening to the public of the historical archives of the European Economic
Community and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ L 43, 15.2.1983, p. 1), as
amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 (OJ L 243,
27.9.2003, p. 1), this file is open to the public. Where necessary, classified documents in this
file have been declassified in conformity with Article 5 of the aforementioned regulation.
In Übereinstimmung mit der Verordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr. 354/83 des Rates vom 1.
Februar 1983 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Europäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI. L 43 vom 15.2.1983,
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. September 2003
(ABI. L 243 vom 27.9.2003, S. 1), ist diese Datei der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit
erforderlich, wurden die Verschlusssachen in dieser Datei in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5
der genannten Verordnung freigegeben.
 ---pagebreak--- COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
                                                                      C0M(83)      459 f i n a l
                                                                      B russels,       5 July       1983
                                                       Proposal       fo r a
                                               COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC)
     im posing a d e f i n i t i v e  a n t i - d u m p i n g d u t y on i m p o r t s   of     urea  ammonium n i t r a t e
                               s o lu tio n      fe rtilis e r      (UAN) o r i g i n a t i n g   in
                                                           th e U.S.A.
                          (subm itted           to   the     C ouncil   by t h e    Commission)
 C0MC83)  459 f i n a l
 ---pagebreak---                                               EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
The C o m m i s s i o n     reopened th e p ro c e e d in g s                  in      J u ly                  1982 on r e c e i v i n g
a request         fo r    review       from     CM C-Engrais,                re p re se n tin g    alm ost     a ll   Co mmu n i ty
pro d u ctio n      of    UAN s o l u t i o n ,      s u ffic ie n t         in fo rm a tio n    regarding         a lle g a tio n s      of
ren e w e d d u m p i n g b y US e x p o r t e r s            and r e s u l t a n t      in ju ry .
A US e x p o r t e r w h i c h        had a l s o       requested a review                  subsequently,            along w ith          two
o ther e x p o rte rs ,          w ithdrew      from t h e i r           p ric e    u ndertaking s         and t h e      Cc\ n e ' l    has,
by R e g u l a t i o n       iQl       /83    (OJ No L                19.1 .1 983        )  imposed d e f i n i t i v e        a n t i - lum ping
d u tie s    on t h e s e      companies.
O n l y one o t h e r       US p r o d u c e r ,      A grico        Chemi caL        C o rp o ra tio n ,    in d ic a te d    that      it
had e x p o r t e d     to     the    C o m m u n i t y and t h e           Commission h a v in g          conducted          its     review
in v e s tig a tio n ,      imposed,         by R e g u l a t i o n         290/83      (OJ No L 3 3 ,         4.2.1983 ),          a
p ro v is io n a l     anti-d u m p in g      duty        of     4 . 1 4 % on i m p o r t s     from t h i s      c o m p an y .      The
v a lid ity      of    th is     duty     was t h e n        e x t e n d e d by t w o m o n t h s       to   a llo w    the p a r t ie s      to
discuss        mor e f u l l y       the   m ajor area o f                d isagreem ent,         i.e .    w hether       c e rta in
costs      in cu rre d       by A g r i c o    p rio r       to     the     sales     under c o n s id e ra tio n         s h o u l d be
 considered          a le g itim a te        d e duction            in    e s ta b lis h in g   normal       vlaue.         The C o m m i s s i o n
 continues         to    take      the    view     that        such       costs      are not a llo w a b le .           The d e f i n i t i v e
margin        found      fo llo w in g      some a d j u s t m e n t s          to   the p r o v is io n a l     duty      is   3 . 9%.
 As r e g a r d s    in ju ry      A g ric o 's    exports            to    the    C om mu ni t y i n c r e a s e d   by 203% d u r i n g
 the    firs t     f o u r months o f          1982 by c o m p a r i s o n t o             th e whole o f         1981.         T hese
 1982 s h i p m e n t s      were a l l      at    dumped           le v e ls     and a c c o u n t e d   fo r   some 9% o f
 C o mm u ni ty c o n s u m p t i o n .      Taken w i t h            o t h e r dumped s h i p m e n t s       from     t h e US i n
 1982 t h e      to ta l     market       share        h e l d was some 21% and was s o l d                      at   p ric e s     con­
 s id e ra b ly    below        the    C o m mu ni t y p r o d u c e r s '        costs.
 On t h e       ba*si s o f       these     fa cts       the      Commission t h e r e f o r e          subm its      to     the     C ouncil
 its    proposal          fo r    a C ouncil         R e g u la tio n        im posing a d e f i n i t i v e       anti-dum ping
 duty     on u r e a      ammonium n i t r a t e           s o lu tio n        fe rtiliz e r    exported         by t h e US c o m p a n y ,
 A g rico      C hem ical       C orporation           at     the      le v e l   of   3.9%. I t       is   also    proposed to
  c o lle c t   d e fin itiv e ly        the    amounts            s e c u r e d as p r o v i s i o n a l   duty    to     a maximum
  of    3.9%.
 ---pagebreak---                            Proposal          fo r    a
                                COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC)
           imposing a d e f i n i t i v e            a n t i - d u m p i n g d u t y on i m p o r t s        of   urea
           ammonium n i t r a t e         s o lu tio n        fe rtilis e r         ( UAN)     o rig in a tin g      in  the
           U.S.A.
 THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
 Having r e g a r d t o          the T re a ty         e s ta b lis h in g         the    European       Economic        Community,
 Having r e g a r d t o           Council        R egulation            (EEC) No 3 0 1 7 / 7 9 o f 2 0 December                  1979
 on p r o t e c t i o n    against        dumped o r            subsidized            im p o rts     from    c o u n trie s  not
 members o f t h e           European           Com m unityO ) ,           as amended b y R e g u l a t i o n            (EEC)
 No 1 5 8 0 / 8 2 ( 2 ) ,    and i n p a r t i c u l a r           a rtic le       12 t h e r e o f ,
 Having        regard to the p roposal                     s u b m i t t e d by th e         Commission a f t e r
 c o n s u lta tio n     w ith in     the       A dvisory          C o m m i t t e e as p r o v i d e d    fo r   under
 th e above R e g u l a t i o n ,
 W h er e a s ,
A.       P ro visio n a l       a ctio n
The C o m m i s s i o n , by R e g u l a t i o n            (EEC)       No 2 9 0 / 8 3     (3),      imposed a p r o v i s i o n a l    ant
d u m pi n g d u t y on u r e a        ammonium n i t r a t e              s o lu tio n      fe rtilis e r      (UAN)     o rig in a tin g
 T h at d u t y was e x t e n d e d f o r            a maximum p e r i o d              of   t w o m o n t h s by
 R egulation          (EEC)      No1368/ 83 ( 4)           at      the    request         of   the e x p o r te r
                     concerned.
 B.      Subsequent p r o c e d u r e s
   F ollow ing        the im p o s itio n o f the p r o v i s i o n a l a n ti-d u m p in g d u ty                        the
                    and
 e x p o r t e r / c e r t a i n . , C o mm u ni ty p r o d u c e r s c o n c e r n e d r e q u e s t e d , and
 we r e g r a n t e d ,    an o p p o r t u n i t y     to      be h e a r d b y t h e          Commission         .
The     exporter                             . -s'      ·,                             ..           also     made w r i t t e n
 s u b m i s s i o n s m a k i n g known           its        v i e w s on t h e        duty      .
 (1)    0J No L 3 3 9 , 3 1 . 1 2 . 1 9 7 9 , p . 1 .
 (2)      0J No L 1 7 8, · 2 2 . 6 . 1 9 8 2 , p . 9 .
 (3)      0J No L 3 3 , 4 . 2 . 1 9 8 3 , p . 9 .
 (4)      0J No L                  31 . 5 . 1 9 8 3 , p . 21
 ---pagebreak---                                                   -    2   -
     The e x p o r t e r       concerned f u r t h e r           requested to              be i n f o r m e d o f      c e rta in
     facts         and e s s e n t i a l    co n sid e ra tio n s        on t h e     basis      of     w hich     it    was
      intended to            recommend d e f i n i t i v e            a ctio n     and t h i s       request       was g r a n t e d .
      C.       Dumping
3 . For t h e         im p o s itio n    o f the p r o v is io n a l           d uty the         Commission,           in    a rriv in g
      at     t h e m o st a p p r o p r i a t e     le v e l   at     which t o        make t h e       co m parison between
     normal         v a l u e and e x p o r t p r i c e s ,         took      account       of    the     fact      th a t   ^g ric o
      su p p lie d      almost      a ll    its      dom estic          customers e x - t e r m i n a l ;             these     storage
      te rm in a ls        are s i t u a t e d   in    areas o f           high    c o n s u m p t i o n and a r e        s u pplied
      m ostly       by d i r e c t    p ip e lin e     from the m a n u fa ctu rin g                   p la n t   and a l s o     by
      barge o r t r u c k .           The C o m m i s s i o n ,        in    its   p ro v is io n a l     d e te rm in a tio n
      considered th a t             the     costs o f        o p e ra tin g      these       te rm in a ls       were,      by n a t u r e ,
      overheads            and a c c o r d i n g l y    no a l l o w a n c e      c o u l d be made f o r           these      costs.
 4 . The e x p o r t e r ,      A g rico ,      contested t h i s             d e te rm in a tio n       and s u b m i t t e d    fu rth e r
      evidence           in   support       of    its     argument           that     c e rta in         o f these         costs    were
      t r e a t e d by th e       company as v a r i a b l e               and t h a t , i n     any e v e n t ,       a d ire c t    re la tio n s h ip
n     terms o f          A rtic le    2 ( 1 0 ) ( c ) o f R e g u l a t i o n (EEC) No 3 0 1 7 / 7 9 e x i s t e d b e t w e e n a l l
      the       costs o f      the te r m in a l        and t h e        sales      under      co n s id e ra tio n .
  5 . In      its     d e fin itiv e       d e te rm in a tio n        the     Commission t o o k            the     view t h a t ,
       s i n c e such c o s ts         we r e   in c u rre d       p rio r     to   the                  sale      to purchasers
      on t h e       dom estic m arket, 0 r              w o u l d ha ve b e en          in c u rre d     whether or          not    any
       p a rtic u la r       sale     was made, no               d ire c t     re la tio n s h ip       betw een th e s e
        costs       and t h e s e     sales      c o u l d be e s t a b l i s h e d        and a c c o r d i n g l y     no a l l o w a n c e
        could       be made;
  6 . A l l o w a n c e was, h o w e v e r , made f o r t h e c o s t o f t r a n s p o r t i n g                       the p ro d u ct      to
       the te r m in a l,        a s im ila r        d e d u c t i o n b e i n g made i n           the    c a se o f      export     sa le s
       fo r      the   cost o f tra n s p o rt           from the p la n t            to    an f . o . b .      le v e l.
   7 . A c c o u n t was               taken o f                          d iffe re n c e s     in    the    term s      and c o n d i t i o n s
 ---pagebreak---                                                                         -    3 -
                of     s a le ,   n am el y c r e d i t     term s      and s a l e s m e n ' s       s a la rie s      ,     and
                0f        d iffe re n c e s       in the     c o n ce n tra tio n        o f n itro g e n        in   the product             in
                  question;          a number o f          expenses         w hich A g r i c o        c l a i m e d as a n c i l l a r y        to
                 salesm en's           s a la rie s    wer e n o t      d e d u c t e d s i n c e no d i r e c t           re la tio n s h ip
                 bet w e e n t h e s e e x p e n s e s and t h e s a l e s u n d e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n was e s t a b l i s h e d ,                   in
a d d i t i o n no a l l o w a n c e was made f o r q u a n t i t y d i f f e r e n c e s c l a i m e d by A g r i c o s i n c e t h e s e
c la im s d i d n o t f a l l i n t o any o f t h e c a t e g o r i e s s p e c i f i e d i n A r t i c l e 2 ( 1 0 ) b) o f R e g u la tio n
(EEC) No 3 0 1 7 / 7 9 .
       8.       The e x p o r t e r a l s o s u b m i t t e d e v i d e n c e r e l a t i n g t o t r a n s p o r t c o s t s t o t h e
                 Communi ty f r o n t i e r w h i c h has l e d t h e C o m m i s s i o n t o a d j u s t t h e w e i g h t e d
                 a v e r a g e dumpi ng m a r g i n e x p r e s s e d as a p e r c e n t a g e o f                    the     c .i.f.       Community
                 fro n tie r      p ric e      t o 3.9%.
                D.       In ju ry
                No f r e s h e v i d e n c e        regarding        in ju ry      to     the     C o m mu ni t y     in d u s try       has be e n
                subm itted,           the      C o m mi ss io n has t h e r e f o r e         confirm ed the               conclusions           on
                in ju ry       reached in           R egulation        (EEC)       No 2 9 0 / 8 3 .
      10.       In the         C om m ission's        view ,     th e re fo re ,       the      facts       as f i n a l l y      determ ined
                show t h a t       the      in ju ry    being      c a u s e d b y dumped i m p o r t s              of     UAN
               o rig in a tin g         in the       U .S.A.,     taken       in      is o la     ion    from       th a t    c a u s e d by
               other fa c to r s ,            has t o    be c o n s i d e r e d as m a t e - r i a l .
               E.       Communi ty I n t e r e s t
     11 .      A l t h o u g h no r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s     h av e been          r e c e iv e d by th e           Commission fro m
               c on s u me rs      in the         Community,        im porters           to    the     C o m m u n i t y ha ve        argued t h a t
               the      in tro d u c tio n        of p ro te c tiv e      measures           would       s ig n ific a n tly          increase
               costs        in   the a g r i c u l t u r a l    in d u s try      and t h e r e f o r e        not     be    in    the     C o m m u n ity's
               in te re s ts ;      however, th e            Commission c o n s i d e r s             th a t     the      in te re s ts      of   the
               Communi ty a r e n o t                 served          in    the      long      term     b y a C o mm u ni ty            in d u s try
               weakened o r            r e d u c e d by p e r s i s t e n t    dumping and               in    view o f        the p a r t i c u l a r l y
               serious         d iffic u ltie s        fa cin g     the     C o mm u ni ty       in d u s try      and t h e       re la tiv e ly
                                                                                                                                                                i
 ---pagebreak---                                                      '   4 -
      Low i n c i d e n c e o f      a p ric e     i n c r e a s e on t h e      costs      of    the    a g ric u ltu ra l       in d u stry
     concerned, the              Council       has,      however,         come t o      the     conclusion           that     it
     is    in    the    Community's           in te re s ts       that    a c tio n   be t a k e n .
     In these         circum stances,            p ro te c tio n       o f the     C om m unity's        in te re s ts
     c a lls     fo r   the    im p o s itio n     of     a d e fin itiv e       anti-dum ping          d u t y on
     im ports       of    UAN   o rig in a tin g       in     the    U.S.A.       and e x p o r t e d by A g r i c o .
     F.      D e fin itiv e     duty
12.  In th e       lig h t   of   t h e a bo v e d e t e r m i n a t i o n     the    a m ou nt     o f the     d e fin itiv e
    a nti-dum ping           duty     re la tin g      to     exports      by A g r i c o     should      be e q u a l       to  the
    dumping m a r g i n f o u n d           in   the     subsequent          e xam ination.
13. The i m p o s i t i o n o f       s u ch a d u t y        does        not    a ffe ct     the     continued a p p lic a t io n
    of    the d e f i n i t i v e     a n ti-d u m p in g        d u tie s   on i m n o r t s    of    UAN   o rig in a tin g       in   the
    USA i m p o s e d b y R e g u l a t i o n         (EEC)       No   349/81(5)        since       the    C o m m i s s i o n has
    r e c e i v e d no e v i d e n c e t o       a lte r      its    view     that    such      continued         a p p lic a tio n
     is     a requirem ent            fo r   the     e lim in a tio n       of   in ju ry     and t h e p r e v e n t i o n      of
    its     recurrence.
    G.      C o lle c tio n     o f p ro v is io n a l       duty
14. The a m o u n t s s e c u r e d by way o f               p ro v is io n a l   anti-dum ping           d u tie s      should
    be c o l l e c t e d t o      a maximum o f t h e d u t y d e f i n i t i v e l y               imposed.
    HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
                                                       A rtic le      1
    1.      A d e fin itiv e        a nti-dum ping           duty      is   hereby      i m p o s e d on u r e a       ammonium
    n itra te       s o lu tio n    fe rtilis e r        fa llin g      w ith in    sub-heading           ex 3 1 . 0 2      c
    of   the      Common Customs T a r i f f               (NIMEXE co d e ex 3 1 . 0 2 - 9 0 )            e x p o r t e d by
    A g rico      Chemical        Company, T u l s a ,           Oklahoma,        USA.
 ---pagebreak---                                             - 5 -
 2.      The amount of the duty s h a l l be 3.9%.
 3.      The pr ovi si ons in f o r c e with regard to customs d u t i e s s h a l l apply to
 the s a i d duty.
                                           A rticle 2
 The lums secured by way o f p r o v i s i o n a l anti~dumping duty under Regulation
 (EEC) No 290/83              s h a l l be d e f i n i t i v e l y c o l l e c t e d up to a maximum of 3.9%.
                                          Article 3
This Regulation s h a l l e n t e r int o for ce on the t h i r d day following i t s
p u b l i c a t i o n in th e O f f i c i a l Journal of the European communities.
This Regulation s h a l l be binding in i t s e n t i r e t y and d i r e c t l y a p p l i c a b l e
in a l l Member S t a t e s .
Done at B ru sse ls ,                                            For the council