HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"EN
4.7.2012 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
174/5
REGULATIONS
COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 585/2012
of 26 June 2012
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes, of iron or
steel, originating in Russia and Ukraine, following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of
Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009, and terminating the expiry review proceeding concerning imports
of certain seamless pipes and tubes, of iron or steel, originating in Croatia
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
(2) Following
a
review
investigation
carried
out
in
accordance with Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation,
the Council, by Regulation (EC) No
258/2005
( 6 ),
amended the definitive measures imposed by Regulation
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
(EC) No 348/2000, repealed the possibility of exemption
Union,
from the duties provided for in Article 2 of that Regu
lation and imposed an anti-dumping duty of 38,8 % on
imports from Croatia and an anti-dumping duty of
64,1 % on imports from Ukraine with the exception of
imports from Dnepropetrovsk Tube Works (DTW),
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of
which were subject to an anti-dumping duty of 51,9 %.
30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports
from countries not members of the European Community ( 1 )
(‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Articles 9(2), 9(4) and
11(2) thereof,
(3) By
Decision
2005/133/EC
( 7 ), the Commission partially
suspended the definitive measures regarding Croatia and
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the European
Ukraine for a period of nine months, with effect from
Commission (‘the Commission’) after consulting the Advisory
18 February 2005. The partial extension was extended
Committee,
for a further period of one year by Council Regulation
(EC) No 1866/2005 ( 8 ).
Whereas:
(4) By
Regulation
(EC)
No
954/2006
( 9 ) the Council imposed
definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of certain
1.
seamless pipes and tubes originating in, inter alia,
PROCEDURE
Croatia, Russia and Ukraine, repealed Regulations (EC)
1.1. Previous investigations and existing measures
No 2320/97 and (EC) No 348/2000, terminated the
interim and expiry reviews of the anti-dumping duties
(1) By
Regulation
(EC)
No
2320/97
( 2 ) the Council imposed
on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes or iron
anti-dumping duties on imports of certain seamless pipes
or non-alloy steel originating, inter alia, in Russia and
and tubes of iron or non-alloy steel, originating in, inter
terminated the interim reviews of the anti-dumping
alia, Russia. By Commission Decision 2000/70/EC ( 3 ), an
duties on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes
undertaking was accepted from an exporter in Russia. By
of iron or non-alloy steel originating in, inter alia,
Regulation (EC) No 348/2000 ( 4 ) the Council imposed
Croatia, Russia and Ukraine (‘the latest investigation’).
anti-dumping duties on imports of certain seamless
pipes and tubes, of iron or steel, originating in Croatia
and Ukraine. By Council Regulation (EC)
No 1322/2004 ( 5 ), it was decided to no longer apply
the measures in force on imports from, inter alia,
Russia as a matter of prudence in connection with the
(5) Therefore,
the
measures
in
force
are
those
established
by
anti-competitive behaviour of certain Union producers in
Regulation (EC) No 954/2006, i.e. 29,8 % for imports
the past (see recital 9 of that Regulation).
from Croatia, 35,8 % for imports from Russia, with the
exception of the Joint Stock Company Chelyabinsk Tube
( 1 ) OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.
( 2 ) OJ L 322, 25.11.1997, p. 1.
( 6 ) OJ L 46, 17.2.2005, p. 7.
( 3 ) OJ L 23, 28.1.2000, p. 78.
( 7 ) OJ L 46, 17.2.2005, p. 46.
( 4 ) OJ L 45, 17.2.2000, p. 1.
( 8 ) OJ L 300, 17.11.2005, p. 1.
( 5 ) OJ L 246, 20.7.2004, p. 10.
( 9 ) OJ L 175, 29.6.2006, p. 4.

---

L 174/6
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
4.7.2012
Rolling Plant and Joint Stock Company Pervouralsky
(10) Further
to the expiry review mentioned above, the
Novotrubny Works (24,1 %), OAO Volzhsky Pipe Plant,
Commission has, in parallel, initiated two partial
OAO Taganrog Metallurgical Works, OAO Sinarsky Pipe
reviews pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation
Plant and OAO Seversky Tube Works (27,2 %), and
concerning imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes,
25,7 % for imports from Ukraine, with the exception
of iron or steel, originating in Ukraine and Russia ( 5 ).
of OJSC Dnepropetrovsk Tube Works (12,3 %), CJSJ
These partial reviews were requested by one group of
Nikopolsky Seamless Tubes Plant Niko Tube and OJSC
exporting producers in Ukraine, the Interpipe group,
Nizhnedneprovsky Tube Rolling Plant (25,1 %).
and one group of exporting producers in Russia, the
TMK group, respectively. Both reviews are limited in
scope to the examination of dumping only as far as
the applicants are concerned.
(6)
With regard to CJSC Nikopolosky Seamless Tubes Plant
Niko Tube and OJSC Nizhnedneprovsky Tube Rolling
Plant (NTRP) it is recalled that their company names
1.3. Investigation
changed in February 2007 to CJSC Interpipe Nikopolsky
Seamless Tubes Plant Niko Tube and OJSC Interpipe
(11) The Commission officially advised the exporting
Nizhnedneprovsky Tube Rolling Plant, respectively (
producers, importers, known users, the representatives

1 ).
Subsequently, CJSC Interpipe Nikopolsky Seamless
of the exporting countries, the applicant and the Union
Tubes Plant Niko Tube has been discontinued as a
producers mentioned in the request of the initiation of
legal entity and all its property and non-property rights
the review. Interested parties were given the opportunity
and liabilities was taken over by LLC Interpipe Niko
to make their views known in writing and to request a
Tube, which was established in December 2007.
hearing within the time limit set out in the notice of
initiation.
(7) In
accordance
with
Article
266
of
the
Treaty
on
the (12) In view of the large number of exporting producers in
Functioning of the European Union, the anti-dumping
Russia and Ukraine, of Union producers and of importers
duty rate for the Interpipe group was recalculated on
involved in the investigation, sampling was initially
the basis of the judgment of the ECJ of 12 February
envisaged in the notice of initiation in accordance with
2012 (
Article 17 of the basic Regulation. In order to enable the

2 ). The duty currently in force for this group is
17,7 % as established by Council Regulation (EU)
Commission to decide whether sampling would be
No 540/2012 (
indeed necessary and, if so, to select a sample, the

3 ) implementing this judgment of the ECJ.
above parties were requested, to make themselves
known within 15 days of the initiation of the proceeding
and to provide the Commission with the information
requested in the notice of initiation.
1.2. Request for an expiry review
(8) On
28
June
2011,
the
Commission
announced
by
a
notice published in the Official Journal of the European
(13) Given
that
only
one
exporting
producer
in
Russia
and
Union the initiation of an expiry review (‘Notice of initi
only one exporting producer in Ukraine provided the
ation’) (
information requested in the notice of initiation and

4 ) of the anti-dumping measures applicable to
imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes, of iron or
expressed their willingness to further cooperate with
steel, originating in Croatia, Russia and Ukraine pursuant
the Commission, it was decided not to apply sampling
to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation.
in the case of the exporting producers in Russia and
Ukraine, but to send a questionnaire to those producers.
Thereafter, the exporting producer in Russia which
provided the information requested in the notice of
initiation decided not to cooperate further, by sending
a reply to the questionnaire intended for the exporting
(9) The
review
was
initiated
following
a
substantiated
request
producer in Russia.
lodged on 29 March 2011 by the Defence Committee of
the Seamless Steel Tubes Industry of the European Union
(‘the applicant’) on behalf of Union producers repre
senting a major proportion, in this case more than
50 %, of the total Union production of certain seamless
(14) Nineteen Union producers
provided the information
pipes and tubes. The request was based on the grounds
requested for the selection of a sample and expressed
that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result
their willingness to cooperate with the Commission.
in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to
On the basis of the information received from the
the Union Industry.
Union producers, the Commission had, prior to the initi

ation, provisionally selected a sample of four producers,
which were found to be representative of the Union
( 1 ) OJ C 288, 30.11.2007, p. 34.
industry in terms of volume of production and sales of
( 2 ) Case C-191/09 — Interpipe Niko Tube and Interpipe NTRP v Council.
( 3 ) OJ L 165, 26.6.2012, p. 1.
( 4 ) OJ C 187, 28.6.2011, p. 16.
( 5 ) OJ C 223, 29.7.2011, p. 8 and OJ C 303, 14.10.2011, p. 11.

---

EN
4.7.2012 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
174/7
the like product in the Union. Following comments
(b) Exporting producer in Croatia:
received on the appropriateness of this choice within
the deadline of 15 days after the initiation, the
Commission replaced one of the provisionally selected
— CMC Sisak d.o.o.;
producers by another producer.
(c) Exporting producer in Ukraine:
(15) Four
importers
provided
the
information
requested
in
the
notice of initiation and expressed their willingness to
cooperate with the Commission. Therefore the
— The Interpipe Group (OJSC Interpipe NTRP,
Commission decided not to apply sampling and to
Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine, LLC Interpipe Niko
send a questionnaire to those importers instead.
Tube, Nikopol, Ukraine) and their related
trading companies LLC Interpipe Ukraine,
Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine and Interpipe Europe
SA, Lugano, Switzerland);
(16) Questionnaires
were
therefore
sent
to
the
four
sampled
Union producers, to four importers and to all exporting
producers in the three countries concerned that came
(d) Importers/users:
forward.
— Castellan Maria & C SPS, San Dona di Piave, Italy,
(17) All
exporting
producers
in
Russia
failed
to
submit
a
reply
to the questionnaire. It is therefore considered that no
exporting producer in Russia cooperated in the investi
— TAL Group, Siderpighi, Pontenure, Piacenza, Italy.
gation.
(22) The investigation regarding the continuation or
(18) One
group
of
exporting
producers
in
Ukraine
submitted
recurrence of dumping and injury covered the period
a reply to the questionnaire.
from 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2011 (‘review investi
gation period’ or ‘RIP’). The examination of the trends
relevant for the assessment of a likelihood of a
continuation or recurrence of injury covered the period
(19) One
exporting
producer
in
Croatia
submitted
a
reply
to
the questionnaire.
from 1 January 2008 up to the end of the RIP (‘period

considered’).
(20) Replies
to
the
questionnaires
were
further
received
from
2. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT
the four sampled Union producers, three importers and
one user.
2.1. Product concerned
(23) The product concerned is the same as that in the last
(21) The
Commission
sought
and
verified
all
information
it
investigation which led to the imposition of measures
deemed necessary for the purpose of determining the
currently in force, i.e. certain seamless pipes and tubes
likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping
of iron or steel (SPT), of circular cross-section, of an
and resulting injury and of the Union interest. Verifi
external diameter not exceeding 406,4 mm with a
cation visits were carried out at the premises of the
carbon equivalent value (CEV) not exceeding 0,86
following companies:
according to the International Institute of Welding
(IIW) formula and chemical analysis ( 1 ), originating in
Croatia, Russia and Ukraine (‘the product concerned’),
currently falling within CN codes ex
7304
11
00,
(a) Union producers:
ex 7304 19 10,
ex 7304 19 30,
ex 7304 22 00,
ex 7304 23 00,
ex 7304 24 00,
ex 7304 29 10,
ex 7304 29 30,
ex 7304 31 80,
ex 7304 39 58,
— Arcelor Mittal Tubular products Ostrava, Czech
ex 7304 39 92,
ex 7304 39 93,
ex 7304 51 89,
Republic,
ex 7304 59 92 and ex 7304 59 93.
— Tenaris Dalmine SpA, Bergamo, Italy, and its
(24) The
product
concerned
is
used
in
a
wide
variety
of
appli
related company TGS UK, Aberdeen, UK,
cations, like transport of gas and liquids, in the
construction business for piling, for mechanical uses,
gas tubes, boiler tubes as well as oil and country
tubular goods (OCTG) for drilling, casing and tubing
— Tubos Reunidos SA, Amurrio, Spain, and its
for the oil industry.
related company Almesa, Barcelona, Spain,
( 1 ) The CEV shall be determined in accordance with Technical Report,
1967, IIW doc. IX-555-67, published by the International Institute
— V & M Deutschland GmbH, Düsseldorf, Germany;
of Welding (IIW).

---

L 174/8
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
4.7.2012
(25) SPT
take
very
different
forms
at
the
time
of
their
delivery
for each of the countries concerned therefore only
to the users. They can be e.g. galvanised, threaded,
describes what is specific for each exporting country.
delivered as green tubes (i.e. without any heat treatment),
With regard to Russia, in the absence of cooperation
with special ends, different cross-sections, cut to size or
from either of the existing Russian exporting producers
not. There are no generalised standard sizes for the tubes,
the overall analysis, including the dumping calculation, is
which explains why most of the SPT are made upon
based on the best facts available pursuant to Article 18
customers’ orders. SPT are normally connected by
of the basic Regulation.
welding. However, in particular cases they can be
connected by their thread or be used alone, although
they remain weldable. The investigation showed that all
SPT share the same basic physical, chemical and technical
3.2.2. Normal value
characteristics and the same basic uses.
(31) In
accordance
with
Article
2(2)
of
the
basic
Regulation
it
was first examined for each cooperating producer
whether its total volume of domestic sales of the like
2.2. Like product
product to independent customers was representative in
comparison with its total volume of export sales to the
(26) As established in previous as well as in the latest inves
Union, i.e. whether the total volume of such sales repre
tigation, this expiry review investigation confirmed that
sented at least 5 % of the total volume of export sales of
the product exported to the Union from Croatia, Russia
the product concerned to the Union.
and Ukraine, the product produced and sold on the
domestic markets of Croatia, Russia and Ukraine, and
the product produced and sold in the Union by the
Union producers have the same basic physical and
(32) For
each
product
type
sold
by
an
exporting
producer
on
technical characteristics and end uses and are therefore
its domestic market and found to be directly comparable
considered to be like products within the meaning of
with the product type sold for export to the Union, it
Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.
was established whether domestic sales were sufficiently
representative for the purposes of Article 2(2) of the
basic Regulation. Domestic sales of a particular product
type were considered sufficiently representative when the
3. DUMPING
total volume of that product type sold by the exporting
producer on the domestic market to independent
(27) In
accordance
with
Article
11(2)
of
the
basic
Regulation,
customers during the RIP represented at least 5 % of its
it was examined whether dumping was likely to continue
total sales volume of the comparable product type
or recur upon a possible expiry of the measures in force.
exported to the Union.
3.1. Preliminary remarks
(33) It
was
also
examined
whether
the
domestic
sales
of
each
product type could be regarded as being made in the
(28) During
the
RIP,
the
total
import
volume,
as
recorded
in
Eurostat, of SPT from Croatia, Russia and Ukraine
ordinary course of trade pursuant to Article 2(4) of the
amounted to 42 723 tonnes, representing 2,5 % of the
basic Regulation. This was done by establishing the
Union market share.
proportion of domestic sales to independent customers

on the domestic market which were profitable for each
exported type of the product concerned during the RIP.
(29) In
accordance
with
Article
11(9)
of
the
basic
Regulation,
the same methodology was used as in the latest investi
gation, whenever circumstances have not changed or
(34) For
those
product
types
where
more
than
80
% by
whenever the information was available. In case of
volume of sales on the domestic market of the product
non-cooperation, such as in the case of Russia, use had
type were above cost and the weighted average sales
to be made of facts available in accordance with
price of that type was equal to or above the unit cost
Article 18 of the basic Regulation. As far as Croatia
of production, normal value, by product type, was
and Ukraine are concerned, information made available
calculated as the weighted average of the actual
by the cooperating companies as well as publicly
domestic prices of all sales of the type in question, irre
available information were used.
spective of whether those sales were profitable or not.
3.2. Dumping of imports during the RIP
(35) Where the volume of profitable sales of a product type
represented 80 % or less of the total sales volume of that
3.2.1. General methodology
type, or where the weighted average price of that type
was below the unit cost of production, normal value was
(30) The general methodology set out hereafter has been
based on the actual domestic price, which was calculated
applied to all cooperating producers in Croatia and in
as a weighted average price of only the profitable
Ukraine. The presentation of the findings on dumping
domestic sales of that type made during the RIP.

---

EN
4.7.2012 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
174/9
(36) Wherever
there
were
no
domestic
sales
of
a
particular
(43) As
a
result,
the
normal
value
was
constructed
on
the
product type and for product types where the domestic
basis of the cost of manufacturing to which a reasonable
sales were insufficient, the normal value was constructed
amount for profit and for selling, general and adminis
in accordance with Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation.
trative expenses (SG&A) was added, based on facts
available.
(37) When constructing normal value pursuant to Article 2(3)
of the basic Regulation, the amounts for selling, general
and administrative costs and for profits have been based,
3.3.2. Export price
pursuant to Article 2(6), introductory phrase, of the basic
Regulation, on the actual data pertaining to the
(44) The cooperating producer exported the product
concerned either directly or via their related trading
production and sales, in the ordinary course of trade,
of the like product, by the exporting producer or on
company in Switzerland to independent customers in
facts available.
the Union. Export prices were therefore, in accordance
with Article 2(8) of the basic Regulation, established on
the basis of the prices actually paid or payable by the
first independent customer in the Union.
3.2.3. Export price
(38) In
all
cases
where
the
product
concerned
was
exported
to
independent customers in the Union, the export price
3.3.3. Comparison
was established in accordance with Article 2(8) of the
basic Regulation, namely on the basis of export prices
(45) The
comparison
between
the
constructed
normal
value
actually paid or payable.
and the export price was made on an ex-works basis.
3.2.4. Comparison
(46) For
the
purpose
of
ensuring
a
fair
comparison
at
the
(39) The normal value and the export price of the exporting
same level of trade due allowance was made for
producers of the cooperating group were compared on
differences that were found to affect price comparability.
an ex-works basis. For the purpose of ensuring a fair
Adjustments pursuant to Article 2(10) of the basic Regu
comparison between the normal value and export
lation were thus made in respect of transport costs,
price, due allowance in the form of adjustments was
rebates and discounts, commissions and credit costs.
made for differences affecting prices and price compara
bility in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regu
lation.
3.3.4. Dumping margin
3.2.5. Dumping margin for the cooperating exporting
(47) In
accordance
with
Article
2(11)
of
the
basic
Regulation,
producers
the dumping margin was established on the basis of a

comparison of the weighted average of the constructed
(40) According
to
Article
2(11)
and
(12)
of
the
basic
Regu
normal value with the weighted average export price to
lation the weighted average normal value was compared
the Union. This comparison showed the existence of
with the weighted average export price per product type
significant dumping of over 60 % during the RIP.
on an ex-works basis for each cooperating company.
3.4. Russia
3.3. Croatia
(48) During the RIP, as recorded in Eurostat, the total import
(41) During the RIP, the total import volume of SPT from
volume of SPT from Russia amounted to 10 785 tonnes,
CMC Sisak, which is the sole exporting producer of SPT
representing around 1 % of the Union market share.
in Croatia, represented less than 1 % of the total Union
consumption.
3.4.1. Normal value
3.3.1. Normal value
(49) As
mentioned
above,
in
the
absence
of
cooperation
by
(42) The
investigation
established
that
while
the
domestic
exporting producers in Russia, resort had to be made to
sales of the product concerned were representative in
facts available to determine whether dumping existed in
accordance with recitals 30 and 31 above, there were
the RIP. Pursuant to Article 18 of the basic Regulation
no sales in the ordinary course of trade. Accordingly,
and in the absence of questionnaire data, normal value
the normal value for the cooperating producer was
was calculated based on data from the review request and
constructed pursuant to Article 2(3) of the basic Regu
the Metal Expert periodical publications for the most
lation.
basic quality of seamless hot finished tubes.

---

L 174/10
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
4.7.2012
(50) In
regard
to
gas
prices
in
Russia,
it
was
noted
that
an
recitals 31 to 33 above. Therefore, normal value was
adjustment had to be made under Article 2(5) of the
established in accordance with recitals 34 to 37 as above.
basic Regulation when measures were imposed in the
latest investigation ( 1 ). However, in the current investi
gation, the normal value was determined without
considering whether an adjustment was necessary for
(56) In
regard
to
energy
prices
in
Ukraine,
it
was
noted
that
the gas costs borne by Russian exporting producers in
an adjustment had to be made under Article 2(5) of the
accordance with Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation. This
basic Regulation when measures were imposed in the
was because, as shown in recital 53, the use of an
latest investigation ( 2 ). However, in the current investi
unadjusted cost of production already clearly shows
gation, the normal value was determined without
that dumping took place during the RIP. As a
considering whether an adjustment was necessary for
consequence, and given the fact that the purpose of an
energy costs borne by Ukrainian exporting producers in
expiry review is to determine whether dumping would be
accordance with Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation. This
likely to continue or recur should measures be repealed
was because, as shown in recital 61 below, the use of an
in order to determine whether the currently applicable
unadjusted cost of production already clearly shows that
measures should be maintained or repealed, it was
dumping took place during the RIP. As a consequence,
considered that it was not necessary to examine
and given the fact that the purpose of an expiry review is
whether an adjustment under Article 2(5) of the basic
to determine whether dumping would be likely to
Regulation was justified in this case.
continue or recur should measures be repealed in order
to determine whether the currently applicable measures
should be maintained or repealed, it was considered that
3.4.2. Export price
it was not necessary to examine whether an adjustment
under Article 2(5) of the basic Regulation was justified in
(51) Average
export
price
was
calculated
based
on
the
cif
this case.
value from Eurostat for the corresponding types of
seamless hot finished tubes.
3.5.2. Export price
3.4.3. Comparison
(57) The
Interpipe
group
exported
the
product
concerned
(52) In the absence of verified questionnaire data, the
through their related trading company located in Swit
comparison between the normal value and the export
zerland directly to independent customers in the Union.
price was made using data found in the request in
Export prices were therefore established in accordance
accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation.
with recital 38.
3.4.4. Dumping margin
3.5.3. Comparison
(53) In
accordance
with
Article
18(5)
of
the
basic
Regulation,
(58) The
normal
value
and
the
export
price
of
the
Interpipe
the dumping margin was established on the basis of a
group were compared in accordance with recital 39. On
comparison of the calculated average normal value with
this basis, adjustments for transport, insurance, handling,
the weighted average export price to the Union, by
loading and ancillary costs, credit costs, and commissions
product type. This comparison showed the existence of
have been made where applicable and justified.
dumping amounting to 38,4 %, which is higher than the
dumping margin of 35,8 % found in the latest investi
gation.
3.5.4. Dumping margin
3.5. Ukraine
(59) The
dumping
margin
was
calculated
in
accordance
with
recital 40.
(54) Of
three
known
exporting
producers
in
Ukraine
only
one
group of exporting producers cooperated with the
Commission in the current review investigation; the
Interpipe group. This exporting producer accounted for
(60) As in the last investigation, and in line with the institu
approximately 70 % of Ukraine’s total SPT production
tions’ standard practice, a single dumping margin was
and more than 80 % of Ukraine’s total exports to the
calculated for the whole group. In the method used for
Union. During the RIP, the share of Ukraine’s exports to
doing so the amount of dumping was calculated for each
the Union in relation to Union consumption amounted
individual exporting producer before determining a
to less than 2 %.
weighted average rate of dumping for the group as a
whole. It should be noted that this methodology was
different from the methodology applied in the last inves
3.5.1. Normal value
tigation, where the dumping calculation was done by
collapsing all production, profitability and sales in the
(55) The
investigation
established
that
the
domestic
sales
of
Union of the producing entities. The change in circum
the like product were representative in accordance with
stances that warrants this change in methodology is due
( 1 ) See recitals 87 and 94 to 99 of Regulation (EC) No 954/2006.
( 2 ) See recitals 119 to 127 of Regulation (EC) No 954/2006.

---

EN
4.7.2012 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
174/11
to a change in the corporate structure of the group
production capacity and the spare capacity in Russia, the
allowing the identification of the producer within the
attractiveness of the Union market and other third
group in respect to sales and production.
markets.
4.1.2.2. V o l u m e a n d p r i c e s o f d u m p e d
(61) The
comparison
showed
the
existence
of
dumping
of
i m p o r t s f r o m R u s s i a
more than 10
% for the cooperating group of
exporting producers that exported to the Union in
(68) After the imposition of definitive measures in June 2006,
the RIP.
and their revision in August 2008 by Council Regulation
(EC) No 812/2008 ( 1 ), imports declared as originating in
Russia decreased steadily and remained low until the end
of the RIP.
4. LIKELIHOOD OF A CONTINUATION OF DUMPING
4.1. Preliminary remarks
(69) In
the
same
period,
prices
of
dumped
imports
from
(62) It
follows
from
the
above
considerations
that
dumping
Russia remained relatively low.
continued to be present during the review investigation
period. Therefore, the likelihood of continuation of
dumping in case the measures would be allowed to
4.1.2.3. P r o d u c t i o n c a p a c i t y a n d s p a r e
lapse is examined in the following.
c a p a c i t y i n R u s s i a
(70) As far as the total production capacity of the SPT in
Russia is concerned, and in the absence of verified
4.1.1. Croatia
data, different sources of information publicly available
point to a production capacity that is largely in excess of
(63) As
noted
above
in
recital
46,
a
significant
dumping
demand on the domestic market.
margin was found to exist during the review investi
gation period. However, the owner of the exporting
producer has subsequently decided to divest the
company and, as a consequence, the exporting
(71) Even though the Russian Union market share is not
producer stopped accepting new orders in autumn
significantly above 1 %, the estimated installed Russian
2011 and ceased all production of SPT by the end of
capacity is close to 4 million tonnes per annum. The
2011. Accordingly, as of 2012 there is no production of
Russian industry only operates on an estimated 70 %
seamless pipes and tubes in Croatia and exports in the
of its production capacity. By deducting the known
post-RIP period have been of very limited quantities.
domestic consumption and the export volumes to
other markets according to the Russian export statistics
there is a current spare capacity exceeding 1 million
tonnes per annum which represents almost 65 % of the
(64) The
investigation
showed
that
no
significant
stocks
are
Union consumption. In spite of this current overcapacity
held by the company which produced to order. Indeed,
and based on information provided by the complainant
due to the wide variety of pipes and high costs, no
which was not contested by the interested parties, it
economical benefits can be realised by holding large
appears that the Russian capacity may be further
stocks.
increased in the next years. One exporting producer in
Russia argued that it was operating at a higher capacity
rate and had no intention to expand its production
capacity in the near future. This export producer also
claimed that according to a reputable market publication,
(65) In
view
of
the
above
consideration
and
taking
into
account that the process of selling the company is still
the Russian industry SPT capacity utilisation rates were
ongoing, a continuation of dumping of SPT originating
‘high’ and that the amount of production of product
in Croatia is highly unlikely in the short to medium term.
concerned in Russia was in line with domestic
consumption. However, the information provided by
the company was not available in the file as the
company had chosen not to cooperate, nor could it be
4.1.2. Russia
verified. Furthermore, the term ‘high’ was not quantified
in the publication and it was not possible to reach a
4.1.2.1. P r e l i m i n a r y r e m a r k s
conclusion on this.. Hence the comments regarding
production and consumption levels in Russia of the
(66) Further to the analysis of the existence of dumping
product concerned had no devaluating effects on the
during the RIP, the likelihood of continuation of
existence of significant spare capacity in Russia. It
dumping was also investigated.
should be noted that the estimated installed capacity of
close to 4 million tonnes per annum has not been
contested after disclosure of the investigation findings
to all interested parties.
(67) In
this
respect,
the
following
elements
were
analysed:
the
volume and prices of dumped imports from Russia, the
( 1 ) OJ L 220, 15.8.2008, p. 1.

---

L 174/12
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
4.7.2012
4.1.2.4. A t t r a c t i v e n e s s
o f
t h e
U n i o n
4.1.3.2. V o l u m e a n d p r i c e s o f d u m p e d
m a r k e t a n d o t h e r t h i r d c o u n t r i e s
i m p o r t s f r o m U k r a i n e
m a r k e t s
(77) After the imposition of definitive measures in June 2006,
(72) As mentioned above, there is an important production
imports from Ukraine decreased significantly and have
overcapacity on the Russian domestic market suggesting
remained at a rather low level with a Union market
a strong and natural need to find alternative markets to
share of below 2 %. In the same period, prices of
absorb this excess in production capacity.
dumped imports from Ukraine remained relatively low.
In addition, the average sales prices to other export
markets than the Union, where no anti-dumping duties
are applied, were found to be at a similar or even lower
(73) The Union market is one of the biggest markets in the
level than the sales prices to the Union.
world and is still growing. It is also clear, based on
information collected during the investigation that
Russian companies have shown a big interest in
developing their presence on one of the biggest
4.1.3.3. P r o d u c t i o n c a p a c i t y a n d s p a r e
markets in the world and maintaining a significant
c a p a c i t y i n U k r a i n e
market share on the Union market. One exporting
producer in Russia argued that the information
(78) Based
on
information
available
in
the
public
domain
submitted as requested in the notice of initiation
there are three main Ukrainian producers of SPT with
should have been the basis for the findings regarding
a total estimated production capacity of around 1,5
the existence of dumping and the likelihood of
million tonnes annually or almost equal to the total
recurrence of dumping and injury rather than making a
Union consumption.
determination based on best facts available. However,
when this exporting producer in Russia chose to not
further cooperate, it stated that due to internal restruc
turing processes, the completion of the questionnaire,
(79) Even
though,
the
Ukrainian
Union
market
share
is
just
which would include the information submitted after
below 2 %, the estimated spare capacity in Ukraine is
initiation, could not be used to determine in its case
50 % or 750 000 tonnes per annum, which represents
whether there is a likelihood of continuation or
almost half of the Union consumption.
recurrence of dumping or whether the circumstances
changed to the degree justifying the review of the level
of the measures. Therefore, it was considered that this
4.1.3.4. A t t r a c t i v e n e s s
o f
t h e
U n i o n
information could not be used.
m a r k e t a n d o t h e r t h i r d m a r k e t s
(80) The
investigation has confirmed that all three main
4.1.2.5. C o n c l u s i o n o f t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f
Ukrainian producers of SPT are exporting the product
c o n t i n u a t i o n o f d u m p i n g
concerned to the Union. The investigation has further

established that the cooperating party is exporting to
(74) In
view of the findings described above, it can be
the Union at dumped prices. Information available in
concluded that imports from Russia are still being
the public domain further indicates that the other main
dumped and that there is a strong likelihood of
Ukrainian producers export SPT to the Union at prices
continuation of dumping. Given the current and
below those of the cooperating company.
potential future spare capacity in Russia and the fact
that the Union market is one of the largest market in
the world with attractive level of prices, it can be
4.1.3.5. C o n c l u s i o n o f t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f
concluded that the Russian exporters are likely to
c o n t i n u a t i o n o f d u m p i n g
further increase their exports to the Union at dumped

prices should the anti-dumping measures be allowed to
(81) Considering
imports
from
Ukraine
are
still
being
dumped
lapse.
and that export sales to export markets other than the
European Union are made at prices similar or even lower
than the Union prices and, given the significant spare
4.1.3. Ukraine
capacity in Ukraine and the fact that the Union market
is one of the largest markets in the world, it can be
4.1.3.1. P r e l i m i n a r y r e m a r k s
concluded that the Ukrainian exporters are likely to
further increase their exports to the Union at dumped
(75) Further to the analysis of the existence of dumping
prices should the anti-dumping measures be allowed to
during the RIP (recitals 54 to 61 above), the likelihood
lapse.
of continuation of dumping was also examined.
4.2. Conclusion
(76) In
this
respect,
the
following
elements
were
analysed;
the
volume and prices of dumped imports from Ukraine, the
(82) In light of the above considerations it is concluded that
production capacity and the spare capacity in Ukraine
there is a significant and real risk of continuation of
and the attractiveness of the Union market and other
dumping with regard to seamless pipes and tubes orig
third markets.
inating in Ukraine and Russia should the existing

---

EN
4.7.2012 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
174/13
measures lapse. On the other hand, the particular circum
— V & M, France,
stances that have been found to exist with regard to
Croatia lead to the conclusion that there is no risk of
continuation of dumping should the existing anti-
— Voest Alpine Tubulars, Austria,
dumping measures expire with regard to imports of
seamless pipes and tubes originating in Croatia.
— eleziarne Podbrezová, Slovak Republic.
5. UNION PRODUCTION AND UNION INDUSTRY
(83) Within
the
Union,
SPT
are
manufactured
by
some
19
(85) It is noted that the four sampled Union producers
producers/groups of producers which constitute the
accounted for 30 % of the total Union production
Union industry within the meaning of Article 4(1) and
during the RIP and 35 % of total sales on the Union
Article 5(4) of the basic Regulation.
market, whilst the above 19 Union producers
accounted for 100 % of the total Union production
during the RIP which is considered to be representative
(84) As
indicated
under
recital
14,
a
sample
consisting
of
four
of the entire Union production.
producers/producer groups companies was selected out
of the following 19 Union producers which submitted
the required information:
6. SITUATION ON THE UNION MARKET
6.1. Consumption in the Union market
— Arcelor Mittal Tubular Products Ostrava, Czech
Republic,
(86) Union
consumption
was
established
on
the
basis
of
the
sales volumes of the Union industry on the Union
market, and Eurostat data for all EU imports.
— Arcelor Mittal Tubular Products Roman SA, Romania,
(87) On the basis of those data, it was found that the Union
— Benteler Stahl/Rohr GmbH, Germany,
consumption decreased by 34 % from 2 597 110 tonnes
to 1 724 743 tonnes between 2008 and the RIP.
Consumption in 2008 was very high, which could be
— Huta Batory, Poland,
explained by the fact that high oil and gas prices in
2008 encouraged investments in these sectors and
therefore increased the demand. The decrease took
— Ovako Steel AB, Sweden,
place fully in 2009, in which consumption decreased
by almost 50 %. After 2009 consumption started
increasing again, a trend which continued up to the RIP.
— Productos Tubulares SA, Spain,
— Rohrwerk Max Hütte GmbH, Germany,
2008 2009 2010 RIP
Union
2 597 110 1
345
551 1
609
118 1
724
743
— Rurexpol Sp. z o.o., Poland,
consump
tion (in
tonnes)
— Silcotub, Romania,
Index 100 52 62 66
— Tenaris Dalmine SpA, Bergamo, Italy,
6.2. Imports from the countries concerned
6.2.1. Cumulation
— Tubos Reunidos SA, Amurrio, Spain,

(88) In
the
previous
investigations,
imports
of
SPT
originating
in Croatia, Russia and Ukraine were assessed cumu
— TMK Artrom, Romania,
latively in accordance with Article 3(4) of the basic Regu
lation. It was examined whether a cumulative assessment
— Valcovny Trub Chomutov, Czech Republic,
was also appropriate in the current investigation.
— Vallourec Mannesmann Oil and Gas, France,
(89) In
this
respect,
it
was
found
that
the
margin
of
dumping
established in relation to the imports from each country
was more than de minimis. As regards the quantities, a
— Vitkovice Valcovnatrub AS, Czech Republic,
prospective analysis of the likely export volumes by each
country, should measures be repealed, was performed. It
revealed that imports from Russia and Ukraine, unlike
— V & M Deutschland GmbH, Düsseldorf, Germany,
Croatia, would likely increase to levels significantly

---

L 174/14
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
4.7.2012
above those reached in the RIP and certainly exceed the
2008 2009 2010 RIP
negligibility threshold, if measures were repealed. As to
Croatia, it was found that imports into the Union were
Import (tonnes) 72
328 40
611 39
505 38
108
negligible in the period considered and production had
Index 100 56 55 53
even completely ceased after the RIP. It is thus not very
likely that this situation will change in the short term.
Market share % 2,8
% 3,0
% 2,5
% 2,2
%
Index 100 111 93 88
(90) Given
the
fact
that
the
volume
of
dumped
imports
from
Price of import 741,03 627,66 649,96 734,22
Croatia during the RIP was negligible and that it is not
Index 100 85 88 99
likely to increase due to reasons explained in recital 88
above, it was considered that the criteria set out in
Article 3(4) of the basic Regulation were not met with
6.3.2. Price undercutting
regard to imports from Croatia.
(96) In
view
of
the
absence
of
cooperation
by
the
Russian
exporting producers, price undercutting regarding
imports from Russia had to be established on import
(91) Regarding
imports
from
the
three
countries
concerned,
statistics by CN code using information collected on
the investigation has found that the imported SPT from
the basis of Article 14(6) of the basic Regulation. Price
these countries were alike in their basic physical and
undercutting regarding imports from Ukraine was estab
technical characteristics. Furthermore, the various types
lished using the export prices of the cooperating
of imported SPT were interchangeable with types
Ukrainian exporting producer, without anti-dumping
produced in the Union and they were marketed in the
duty. The relevant sales prices of the Union industry
Union during the same period. In light of the above, it
were those to independent customers, adjusted where
was considered that the imported SPT originating in the
needed to an ex-works level. In the RIP, the undercutting
countries concerned competed with the SPT produced in
margin for imports of SPT originating in Russia and
the Union.
Ukraine ranged, anti-dumping duty excluded, from
20,4 % to 55,4 %.
(92) On
the
basis
of
the
above,
it
was
therefore
considered
that the criteria set out in Article 3(4) of the basic Regu
lation were met with regard to Russia and Ukraine.
6.4. Imports from Croatia
Imports from these two countries were therefore
examined cumulatively. Since the criteria set in
6.4.1. Volume, market share and prices of imports from
Article 3(4) of the basic Regulation and in particular
Croatia
the conditions of competition between imported
(97) According to Eurostat data, the volume of imports of the
products thereof, were not met with regard to Croatia,
product concerned originating in Croatia increased by
imports originating in this country were examined indi
133 % during the period considered. Very few imports
vidually.
took place in 2008, then imports increased up to 2010,
and in the RIP they slightly decreased again. Overall, the
level of imports from Croatia has remained very low
6.3. Imports from Russia and Ukraine
during the whole period considered.
6.3.1. Volume, market share and prices of imports
(93) According to Eurostat data, the volume of imports of the
(98) The
market
share
of
Croatian
imports
has
increased
from
product concerned originating in Russia and Ukraine
0,1 % to 0,3 % during the period considered.
decreased by 47 % during the period considered. More
precisely, a major drop of 44 % took place in 2009 and,
since then, imports have slightly decreased from
40 611 to 38 108 tonnes. This has to be seen against
(99) As far as import prices are concerned, they have
the background of declining consumption.
decreased steadily by 23 % over the period considered.
(94) The
market
share
of
Russian
and
Ukrainian
imports
decreased from 2,7 % to 2,2 % during the period
2008 2009 2010 RIP
considered.
Imports
Index 100 153 251 233
(95) As far as the weighted average prices of imports of SPT
Market share % 0,1
% 0,2
% 0,3
% 0,3
%
are concerned, they decreased by 15 % points in 2009,
and then increased again to reach in the RIP the same
Price of import
level as in 2008. This decrease and subsequent increase
followed roughly the trend of the cost of raw materials.
Index 100 89 74 77

---

EN
4.7.2012 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
174/15
6.4.2. Price undercutting
no longer reached the level of 2008. The production
volume showed a similar trend to that of consumption,
(100) Price undercutting was established using the export prices
but decreased less than the consumption on the Union
of the cooperating Croatian producer, without anti-
market as a consequence of the demand on non-EU
dumping duty, and was found to be 29,3 %. In view of
markets.
the absence of any other exporting producer in Croatia,
this conclusion is also valid for the country as a whole.
Union
industry
2008 2009 2010 RIP
6.5. Other country concerned by anti-dumping
measures
Producti
3 479 266 1
979
967 2
675
053 2
917
325
on
(101) According to Eurostat data, the volume of imports of
volume
SPT originating in the People’s Republic of China, as
(tonnes)
defined in Article 1(1) of Council Regulation (EC)
Index 100 57 77 84
No 926/2009 ( 1 ) decreased by 80 % during the period
considered.
(b) Capacity and capacity utilisation rates
(102) The market share of Chinese imports decreased from
(107) Production capacity remained stable during the period
20,5 % in 2008 to 3,1 % in the RIP.
considered. As production decreased by 16 %, the
resulting capacity utilisation declined, from 80 % in
2008 to 67 % in the RIP. However, the major decline
from 80 % to 45 %took place in 2009 as a result of the
7. ECONOMIC SITUATION OF THE UNION INDUSTRY
decrease in the production volume. In 2010 and the RIP
(103) Pursuant to Article 3(5) of the basic Regulation, the
capacity utilisation grew steadily.
Commission examined all relevant economic factors
and indices having a bearing on the state of the Union
industry.
Union
industry
2008 2009 2010 RIP
Capacity 4
334
520 4
378
520 4
332
520 4
357
520
7.1. Preliminary remarks
Index 100 101 100 101
(104) In view of the fact that sampling was used with regard to
the Union industry, the injury was assessed both on the
Capacity
80 % 45
% 62
% 67
%
basis of information collected at the level of the entire
utilisation
Union industry as defined in recital 57 and on the basis
Index 100 56 77 83
of information collected at the level of the sampled
Union producers.
(c) Stocks
(105) Where recourse is made to sampling, in accordance with
(108) As far as stocks are concerned, the vast majority of
established practice, certain injury indicators (production,
production is made to order. Therefore, whilst the level
capacity, productivity, sales, market share, growth and
of stocks of the sampled producers decreased signifi
employment) are analysed for the Union Industry as a
cantly in 2009, but increased, with slight fluctuation in
whole, while those injury indicators relating to the
2010 to the RIP, almost to the 2008 level, it is
performance of individual companies, i.e. prices, costs
considered that in this case stocks were not a relevant
of production, profitability, wages, investments, return
indicator of injury.
on investment, cash flow, ability to raise capital are
examined on the basis of the information collected at
the level of the sampled Union producers.
Sampled
producers
2008 2009 2010 RIP
Closing
106 078 82
788 107
490 104
184
7.2. Data relating to the Union industry
stock
(tonnes)
(a) Production
Index 100 78 101 98
(106) The Union industry’s production decreased by 16 %
between 2008 and the RIP, i.e. from 3 479 266 tonnes
to 2
917
325 tonnes. Production volume dropped
(d) Sales volume
significantly by 43 % in 2009 as a consequence of the
global economic downturn. In line with the improved of
(109) The sales by the Union industry on the Union market
demand situation, it recovered in 2010 and in the RIP,
decreased by 21 % between 2008 and the RIP. After
and increased by 27 % between 2009 and the RIP, but
decreasing by 42 % in 2009, sales volume increased
again by 21 percentage points up to the RIP. This devel
( 1 ) OJ L 262, 6.10.2009, p. 19.
opment is in line with the evolution of the consumption

---

L 174/16
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
4.7.2012
in the Union market, which declined by 48 % in 2009 as
Union industry 2008 2009 2010 RIP
a result of the economic downturn and started recovering
afterwards.
Productivity
240,7 150,8 221,6 218,2
tonnes/per
employee
Union
Index 100 63 92 91
industry
2008 2009 2010 RIP
Sales to 1 445 070 841
514 1
060
349 1
135
572
unrelated
(i) Magnitude of dumping margin
parties in
the
(114) As concerns the impact on the Union industry of the
Union
magnitude of the actual margins of dumping, this impact
(tonnes)
cannot be considered negligible, in view of the overall
volume of the imports from the countries concerned.
Index 100 58 73 79
(e) Market share
7.3. Data relating to the sampled Union producers
(110) The Union industry managed to increase its market share
(a) Sales prices and factors affecting domestic prices
gradually from 2008 up to the RIP. This increase is
mainly due to the anti-dumping measures that are in
(115) Unit sales prices of the Union industry decreased by
place against imports from the People’s Republic of
13 % between 2008 and the RIP. Prices increased
China since 2009. The market share below is the share
slightly in 2009 before dropping by 17 % in 2010. In
of total sales of the Union industry, both to unrelated
the RIP prices went slightly up compared to 2010. This
and related customers, in the Union as a percentage of
price development is linked to the fact that 2008 was a
the Union consumption.
year with a very high demand and high prices of raw
materials resulting in higher sales prices. The effects of it
could still be felt in the first part of 2009. As from the
Union industry 2008 2009 2010 RIP
second part of 2009, demand decreased significantly and
prices dropped following the trend of decreasing prices
Market share 70,2
% 78,7
% 84,5
% 85,2
%
of raw materials. In the RIP the decrease of the prices
Index 100 112 120 121
seemed to have stopped.
(f) Growth
Sampled producers 2008 2009 2010 RIP
(111) Between 2008 and the RIP, when the Union
consumption decreased by 34 %, the sales volume of
Average unit sales 1 286 1
300 1
086 1
115
the Union industry decreased by only 21 %. The Union
price in the EU
industry thus gained market share, whereas the imports
(EUR/tonne)
from Russia and Ukraine lost 0,6 % during the same
Index 100 101 84 87
period.
(g) Employment
(b) Wages
(112) The level of employment of the Union industry declined
(116) Between 2008 and the RIP, the average wage per FTE
by 8 % between 2008 and the RIP. The decrease started
decreased by 12 % during the period considered. No
in 2009, continued in 2010, but in the RIP increased
meaningful conclusion should, however, be drawn.
again by 11 % in relation to 2010. This shows that the
Union industry was able to adapt to the new market
situation.
(c) Investments and ability to raise capital
Union industry 2008 2009 2010 RIP
(117) Investments in SPT increased by 24 % over the period
Employment 14
456 13
131 12
073 13
368
considered. Investments were significant and amounted
to over EUR 100 million in the RIP. SPT is a capital
Index 100 91 84 92
intensive industry which requires significant investments
in the production lines in order to remain competitive.
The investigation revealed that the investments were
(h) Productivity
made to maintain production capacity at its current
level and not with the purpose to increase the production
(113) Productivity of the Union industry’s workforce, measured
volume. It was also found that the sampled producers did
as output per full-time equivalent (FTE) employed per
not face difficulties in raising capital over the period
year, was volatile over the period considered.
considered.

---

EN
4.7.2012 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
174/17
Sampled producers 2008 2009 2010 RIP
Sampled producers 2008 2009 2010 RIP
Investments
83 334 91
330 101
775 103
635
Cash flow
466 198 345
152 45
562 33
614
(EUR 1 000)
(EUR 1 000)
Index 100 110 122 124
Index 100 74 10
7
(d) Profitability on the Union market
(g) Recovery from the effects of past dumping
(118) Although profitability dropped by 66 % during the
(121) While the indicators examined above show that the
period considered, the sampled producers managed to
Union industry suffered from the economic downturn
achieve profits over the whole period considered. The
as sales volume, production volume, ROI and cash flow
profits achieved from 2008 to the RIP were above the
went down, they also indicate that the Union industry
target profit of 3 % set in the latest investigation. 2008
adapted its production equipment to better face the new
was a very good year with high profits. In 2009 and also
economic environment and be able to seize opportunities
in 2010 profitability dropped by 50 % compared to the
on Union and non-Union markets, in particular in
previous year, but in the RIP profitability raised again by
segments where high margins can be achieved. The
35 % compared to 2010 and was 6,6 %. The Union
improvement in the economic and financial situation
industry managed to adapt to the decreased demand in
of the Union industry, further to the imposition of
the EU and was helped by the sustained global demand
anti-dumping measures in 2006 against imports from
for the sampled producers that enabled them to dilute fix
the countries concerned and in 2009 against imports
costs. The drop in profitability after 2008 is explained by
from the People’s Republic of China, shows that the
the economic downturn which resulted in a significant
measures are effective and that the Union industry
drop of demand, a drop in prices and by a decrease in
recovered from the effects of past dumping practices,
production volume which had a negative impact on cost
though no longer reaches the profitability level of 2008.
of production.
7.4. Conclusion
Sampled producers 2008 2009 2010 RIP
(122) Although consumption decreased by 34 %, the Union
industry managed to increase its market share, and
Profitability on the 19,7 % 9,6
% 4,9
% 6,7
%
production volume and sales volume decreased less
Union market (%)
than consumption. In terms of profitability, the Union
Index 100 49 25 34
industry was profitable throughout the period considered.
In view of the above, it can be concluded that the Union
industry did not suffer material injury over the period
considered.
(e) Return on investments
(119) The return on investments (ROI), expressed as the total
profit generated by the SPT activity as a percentage of the
8.
net book value of assets directly and indirectly related to
LIKELIHOOD OF RECURRENCE OF INJURY
the production of SPT, broadly followed the above profit
(123) As explained in recitals 69, 70, 77 and 78, the exporting
ability trends over the whole period considered and
producers in Russia and Ukraine have the potential to
remained positive during the whole period considered.
substantially raise their exports volume to the Union by
The ROI dropped by 80 % during the period considered
using available spare capacity of some 1 750 000 tonnes,
but in the RIP increased again by 50 % compared to
which is equal to the entire Union consumption. The
2010.
total capacity of the exporting producers in Russia and
Ukraine amounts to 5 500 000 tonnes. It is therefore
likely that substantial quantities of Russian and
Ukrainian SPT will penetrate the Union market to
regain lost market share due to the anti-dumping
Sampled producers 2008 2009 2010 RIP
duties in force and increase it further should measures
ROI (%) 30
% 7
% 4
% 6
%
be repealed.
Index 100 23 13 20
(124) As highlighted in recital 95 prices of imports from Russia
(f) Cash flow
and Ukraine were found to be low and to undercut EU
prices. These low prices would most likely continue to be
(120) The cash-flow situation deteriorated significantly between
charged. Indeed in the case of Ukraine, as indicated in
2008 and the RIP, as it dropped with 93 %. The trend in
recital 80 prices may even drop further. Such price
cash flow did not evolve in line with the trend in profit
behaviour, coupled with the ability of the exporters in
ability which could be explained by the cost of depreci
those countries to deliver significant quantities of the
ation, which is typically high for this capital intensive
product concerned to the Union market, would in all
industry.
likelihood have a downward effect on prices in the

---

L 174/18
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
4.7.2012
Union market, with an expected negative impact on the
been in place, allows the assessment of any undue
economic situation of the Union industry. As shown
negative impact on the parties concerned by the
above, the financial performance of the Union industry
current anti-dumping measures.
is closely linked to the price level on the Union market.
It is therefore likely that if the Union industry was
exposed to increased volumes of imports from Russia
and Ukraine at dumped prices it would result in a
deterioration of its financial situation as found in the
(129) On this basis, it was examined whether, despite the
latest investigation. On this basis, it is concluded that
conclusions on the likelihood of recurrence of injurious
the repeal of the measures against imports originating
dumping, compelling reasons existed which would lead
in Russia and Ukraine would in all likelihood result in
to the conclusion that it is not in the Union interest to
the recurrence of injury to the Union industry.
maintain measures against imports originating in Russia
and Ukraine in this particular case.
(125) It is important to recall that antidumping measures were
imposed in 2006 to counteract the injurious dumping
caused by imports from, inter alia, Croatia, Russia and
9.2. Interest of the Union industry
Ukraine. However, the Union industry could not benefit
(130) The Union industry has proven to be a structurally viable
fully from these measures since the market shares of
industry. This was confirmed by the positive devel
these countries have been substituted by low priced
opment of its economic situation observed during the
Chinese imports. This certainly had an effect in limiting
period considered. In particular, the fact that the Union
the recovery of the Union industry until the moment
industry increased its market share over the period
measures were imposed against China in 2009. It can
considered is a strong indicator that the Union industry
therefore be concluded that the recovery of the Union
managed to adapt to the changed market circumstances.
industry from past dumping cannot be considered as
Also, the Union industry remained profitable throughout
complete and that the Union industry remains vulnerable
the period considered.
to the injurious effect possibly caused by the presence of
substantial quantities of dumped imports in the Union
market.
(131) It can reasonably be expected that the Union industry
will continue to benefit if the measures are maintained.
(126) As far as Croatia is concerned and as indicated in recital
The imposition of measures will enable the Union
60, the sole plant is for sale, production has ceased
industry to increase its sales volume and profit level to
completely and is not likely to resume shortly. In
allow continued investment in its production facilities.
addition, given the negligible volumes exported to the
Should the measures against imports originating in
Union, even if production is to be resumed shortly, it
Russia and Ukraine not be maintained, it is likely that
is very unlikely that the volume that can be exported to
the Union industry will again suffer injury from increased
the Union will reach the volumes exported in the past.
imports at dumped prices from these countries and that
its financial situation will deteriorate.
(127) Therefore, in view of the negligible exports in the period
considered and the fact that production has ceased
completely after the RIP, it is concluded that the repeal
9.3. Interest of importers
of the measures on imports originating in Croatia would
in all likelihood not result in the recurrence of injury to
(132) It is recalled that in the previous investigations it was
the Union industry.
found that the impact of the imposition of measures
would not be significant to importers. As indicated in
recital 18, three importers replied to the questionnaire
and cooperated fully in this investigation. They indicated
9. UNION INTEREST
that measures were pushing prices up. However, as the
investigation showed that the cooperating importers
9.1. Introduction
source SPT from various suppliers from many different
countries and that prices were at competitive levels, the
(128) In compliance with Article 21 of the basic Regulation, it
possible impact of a continuation of measures on
was examined whether maintenance of the existing anti-
imports from Russia and Ukraine will be limited.
dumping measures against Russia and Ukraine would be
against the interest of the Union as a whole. The deter
mination of the Union interest was based on an
appreciation of all the various interests involved. It
should be recalled that, in the previous investigations,
(133) In view of the above, it was concluded that the current
the adoption of measures was considered not to be
measures in force had no substantial negative effect on
against the interest of the Union. Furthermore, the fact
the importers’ financial situation and that the
that the present investigation is a review, thus analysing a
continuation of the measures would not unduly affect
situation in which anti-dumping measures have already
them.

---

EN
4.7.2012 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
174/19
9.4. Interest of users
However, in the latest investigation, imports from
Russia and Ukraine were assessed cumulatively
(134) On the basis of the information available it would appear
(together with imports from Croatia). As the conditions
that the share of SPT in the costs of production of users
of Article 3(4) of the basic Regulation are still met with
is quite low. SPT are, in general, part of larger projects
regard to imports from Russia and Ukraine, the effects of
(boilers, pipelines, construction) of which they form only
such imports were cumulatively assessed as set out in
a limited part. The possible impact of a continuation of
recitals 88 to 92. No arguments were brought forward
measures may, therefore, not be significant.
that would justify a change in methodology in this
respect.
(135) The Commission sent questionnaires to all known users.
As mentioned in recital 18, only one user cooperated in
(141) Several interested parties argued that the situation of the
this investigation. It indicated that it did not suffer from
Union industry does not warrant maintenance of the
the existence of the measures as other sources were
measures as the recurrence of injury is unlikely.
available and that SPT did not represent a significant
However, no new arguments were brought forward
share of its cost of production. In this context, it was
that would lead to a different conclusion regarding the
concluded that given the negligible incidence of the cost
recurrence of injury as set out in recitals 123 to 127
of SPT on the user industries and the existence of other
above.
available sources of supply, the measures in force do not
have a significant effect on the user industry.
(142) It was also argued by several interested parties that the
long duration of the measures is unjustified and calls for
9.5. Conclusion on Union interest
their expiry. In this respect it has to be recalled that this
is the first expiry review regarding the current product
(136) Given the above, it is concluded that there are no
scope. Measures regarding this product scope are only in
compelling reasons against the maintenance of the
force since 2006, which cannot be considered as an
current anti-dumping measures.
unjustifiably long duration. Indeed measures were in
force between 1997 and 2004 regarding imports from
Russia and between 2000 and 2004 regarding imports
10. ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES
from Croatia and Ukraine, but these measures concerned
a much smaller product scope. In any event, as it has
(137) All parties were informed of the essential facts and
been found in this investigation that the conditions in
considerations on the basis of which it is intended to
Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation have been met for
recommend that the existing measures be maintained
the continuation of the measures, the fact that measures
on imports of the product concerned originating in
may have been in place for a number of years is irrel
Russia and Ukraine and be terminated with regard to
evant.
imports originating in Croatia. They were also granted
a period to make representations subsequent to this
disclosure.
(143) Finally it was stated that imports from Russia are treated
differently than imports from Belarus and Croatia, which
can be considered discriminatory. This statement does
(138) One Russian exporter requested and was granted a
not reflect reality as the situation with regard to these
hearing with the Hearing Officer. That exporter argued
countries is completely different. The complaint
that the Commission incorrectly concluded that it did
regarding imports from Belarus was withdrawn and the
not cooperate in the investigation. This exporter had
proceeding was subsequently terminated in accordance
come forward as an interested party and provided the
with Article 9(1) of the basic Regulation ( 1 ). Following
Commission with two submissions, mainly related to
disclosure, no indications were provided showing that
injury, which were duly taken into consideration by the
such termination would not be in the Union interest.
Commission. However, that exporter did not reply to the
With regard to Croatia, as set out in recitals 63 to 65,
AD questionnaire and did not provide any information
production in Croatia ceased.
regarding its export price. Therefore the Commission had
no option but to calculate the normal value with regard
to Russia based on best facts available. The use of this
(144) Therefore, it can be concluded that the comments
methodology was not questioned by that exporter. Under
received were not of such nature as to change the
these circumstances this exporter cannot be considered
above conclusions.
to have fully cooperated in the investigation.
(145) It follows from the above that, as provided for by
(139) The same exporter also claimed that the disclosure was
Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, the anti-dumping
vague, contradictory and insufficiently motivated.
measures applicable to imports of SPT, originating in
However, this claim was not substantiated.
Russia and Ukraine should be maintained. Conversely,
the measures applicable to imports from Croatia should
be allowed to lapse,
(140) Another Russian exporter argued that imports from
Russia should be de-cumulated for those of Ukraine.
( 1 ) OJ L 121, 8.5.2012, p. 36.

---

L 174/20
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
4.7.2012
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Anti-dumping
TARIC
Country Company
duty
additional
Article 1
(%)
code
1. A
definitive
anti-dumping
duty
is
hereby
imposed
on
All other companies 35,8 A999
imports of seamless pipes and tubes of iron or steel, of
circular cross-section, of an external diameter not exceeding
Ukraine OJSC
Dnepropetrovsk
Tube 12,3 A742
Works
406,4 mm with a carbon equivalent value (CEV) not
exceeding 0,86 according to the International Institute of
LLC Interpipe Niko Tube
17,7 A743
Welding (IIW) formula and chemical analysis ( 1 ), currently
and OJSC Interpipe
falling within CN codes ex 7304 11 00, ex 7304 19 10,
Nizhnedneprovsky Tube
ex 7304 19 30, ex 7304 22 00, ex 7304 23 00, ex 7304 24 00,
Rolling Plant (Interpipe
ex 7304 29 10, ex 7304 29 30, ex 7304 31 80, ex 7304 39 58,
NTRP)
ex 7304 39 92, ex 7304 39 93, ex 7304 51 89, ex 7304 59 92
and ex
7304
59
93
(
CJSC Nikopol Steel Pipe
25,7 A744

2 ) (TARIC codes 7304
11
00
10,
7304 19 10 20,
7304 19 30 20,
7304 22 00 20,
Plant Yutist
7304 23 00 20,
7304 24 00 20,
7304 29 10 20,
All other companies 25,7 A999
7304 29 30 20,
7304 31 80 30,
7304 39 58 30,
7304 39 92 30,
7304 39 93 20,
7304 51 89 30,
7304 59 92 30 and 7304 59 93 20) and originating in Russia
and Ukraine.
3. Unless
otherwise
specified,
the
provisions
in
force
concerning customs duties shall apply.
2. The
rate
of
the
definitive
anti-dumping
duty
applicable
to
the net, free-at-Union-frontier price, before duty, of the product
described in paragraph 1 and produced by the companies below
4. The
review
proceeding
concerning
imports
of
seamless
shall be as follows:
pipes and tubes of iron or steel, of circular cross-section, of
an external diameter not exceeding 406,4 mm with a carbon
Anti-dumping
TARIC
equivalent value (CEV) not exceeding 0,86 according to the
Country Company
duty
additional
International Institute of Welding (IIW) formula and chemical
(%)
code
analysis, currently falling within CN codes ex 7304 11 00,
ex 7304 19 10, ex 7304 19 30, ex 7304 22 00, ex 7304 23 00,
Russia Joint
Stock
Company
24,1 A741
Chelyabinsk Tube Rolling
ex 7304 24 00, ex 7304 29 10, ex 7304 29 30, ex 7304 31 80,
Plant and Joint Stock
ex 7304 39 58, ex 7304 39 92, ex 7304 39 93, ex 7304 51 89,
Company Pervouralsky
ex 7304 59 92 and ex 7304 59 93 and originating in Croatia is
Novotrubny Works
hereby terminated.
OAO Volzhsky Pipe Plant,
27,2 A859
OAO Taganrog Metal
lurgical Works, OAO
Article 2
Sinarsky Pipe Plant and
OAO Seversky Tube Works
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 Luxembourg, 26 June 2012.
For the Council
The President
N. WAMMEN
( 1 ) The CEV shall be determined in accordance with Technical Report,
1967, IIW doc. IX-555-67, published by the International Institute
of Welding (IIW).
( 2 ) As currently defined in Commission Regulation (EU) No 1006/2011
of 27 September 2011 amending Annex I to Council Regulation
(EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on
the Common Customs Tariff (OJ L 282, 28.10.2011, p. 1). The
product coverage is determined in combining the product
description in Article 1(1) and the product description of the
corresponding CN codes taken together.

---

Document Outline

• �

---