HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"L 124/2
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
13.5.2011
REGULATIONS
COUNCIL IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 457/2011
of 10 May 2011
imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on
imports of melamine originating in the People’s Republic of China
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
impose provisional anti-dumping measures (provisional
disclosure), several interested parties made written
submissions making their views known on the provi
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
sional findings. The parties who so requested were
Union,
granted an opportunity to be heard.
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of
(5)
The Commission sought and verifed all information it
30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports
deemed necessary for its definitive findings. To this end
from countries not members of the European Community ( 1 )
a verification visit was carried out at the premises of the
(the basic Regulation), and in particular Article 9 thereof,
following user company in order to assess the possible
impact of the imposition of definitive anti-dumping
measures:
Having regard to the proposal submitted by the European
Commission (Commission) after having consulted the
Advisory Committee,
— Coveright Surfaces Spain, Martorelles (Barcelona),
Spain.
Whereas:
(6)
Subsequently all parties were informed of the essential
facts and considerations on the basis of which it was
A. PROCEDURE
intended to recommend the imposition of a definitive
1. Provisional measures
anti-dumping duty on imports of melamine originating
in the PRC and the definitive collection of the amounts
(1) By
Regulation
(EU)
No
1035/2010
( 2 ) (the provisional
secured by way of the provisional duty (final disclosure).
Regulation) the Commission imposed a provisional
All parties were granted a period within which they
anti-dumping duty on imports of melamine originating
could make comments on the final disclosure.
in the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The provisional
anti-dumping duties ranged from 44,9 % to 65,2 %.
(7) The
oral
and
written
comments
submitted
by
the
interested parties were considered and taken into
(2)
The proceedings were initiated as a result of a complaint
account where appropriate.
lodged on 4 January 2010 by EU producers Borealis
Agrolinz Melamine GmbH, DSM Melamine BV and
Zakady Azotowe Puawy (the complainant), representing
3. Parties concerned by the proceeding
a major proportion, in this case more than 50 %, of the
total Union production of melamine.
(8) In
the
absence
of
any
comments
with
regard
to
the
parties concerned by the proceeding, recitals 4 to 10
of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
(3) The
investigation
of
dumping
and
injury
covered
the
period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2009
(‘investigation period’ or ‘IP’). The examination of the
B. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT
trends relevant for the assessment of injury covered the
period from 1 January 2006 to the end of the IP (period
1. Product concerned
considered).
(9)
It is recalled that in recital 12 of the provisional Regu
lation the product concerned is defined as melamine,
2. Subsequent procedure
currently falling within CN code 2933 61 00 and orig
inating in the PRC.
(4)
Subsequent to the disclosure of the essential facts and
considerations on the basis of which it was decided to
(10) Melamine
is
a
white
crystalline
powder
obtained
from
( 1 ) OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51.
urea. It is used mainly in laminates, moulding powders,
( 2 ) OJ L 298, 16.11.2010, p. 10.
wood-based panels and coating resins.

---

EN
13.5.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
124/3
2. Like product
the conclusion that the costs of major inputs were
distorted was not correct.
(11) One
exporting
producer
reiterated
the
claim
made
in
recital 65 of the provisional Regulation that the
melamine produced and exported from the PRC was in
general of a slightly lower quality compared to the
(17) However,
the
initial
conclusion
that
the
urea
market
in
melamine produced by the Union industry and could
the PRC was subject to significant State interference, as
not be used for certain surface applications. The
set out in recitals 23 and 24 of the provisional Regu
argument of difference in quality was also brought
lation, was not questioned. This element is already
forward by several users located in the Union.
sufficient to conclude that criterion 1 of point (c) of
Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation is not fulfilled. This
conclusion is not affected by the fact that at a certain
point in time urea prices in the PRC and in some other
(12) The investigation has shown that although melamine
parts of the world prices might have been roughly at the
may vary slightly in colour, it is not sold on the basis
same level.
of different quality standards, either on the domestic
market or on export markets. No evidence was
provided which would point to the fact that possible
slight variations in melamine would lead to different
(18) One
exporting
group
disagreed
with
the
refusal
of
MET
basic physical and chemical characteristics and end
and individual treatment (IT) based on the fact that the
uses. The issue was not raised by the other exporting
Commission did not receive full MET claim forms for all
producers. Moreover, the investigation has also shown
related companies. In its comments on the disclosure,
that the exporting producer in question was using a
this group offered full cooperation but did not question
similar production process as the Union industry.
the fact that one of its related companies did not provide
a MET claim form at the same time as the rest of the
group. Therefore this claim is rejected.
(13) Based on the above, the claim is rejected and it is hereby
confirmed that melamine produced and sold by the
(19) In the absence of any other comments concerning MET,
Union industry in the Union, melamine produced and
recitals 16 to 32 are hereby confirmed.
sold on the domestic market of the PRC and melamine
imported into the Union from the PRC, as well as that
produced and sold in Indonesia, which served as the
analogue country, are considered to be alike within the
2. Individual treatment
meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.
(20) It
was
provisionally
established
that
three
of
the
five
exporting producer companies or groups in the PRC
met all the requirements for IT.
(14) In
the
absence
of
any
other
comments
regarding
the
like
product, recitals 12 to 15 of the provisional Regulation
are hereby confirmed.
(21) The
Union
industry
questioned
the
decision
to
grant
IT
to three groups of companies by arguing that one
exporting producer was owned by the Chinese State
and another exporting producer had various links at
C. DUMPING
management level to companies that were ultimately
controlled by the State. In addition, the extent of State
1. Market economy treatment
interference was such that it would allow circumvention
of the measures with respect to all three exporting
(15) Market
economy
treatment
(MET)
was
initially
refused
to
all exporting producers that requested it on the grounds
producers.
that the costs of the major inputs did not substantially
reflect market values as required under Article 2(7)(c) of
the basic Regulation. As set out in recitals 20 to 24 of
(22) The investigation has shown that none of the exporting
the provisional Regulation, the MET investigation
producers initially granted IT were State-owned. In
determined that this was due to State interference in
addition, the claim that the management of one
both the natural gas market and the urea market in the
exporting producer had links to State-controlled
PRC. In addition to this general situation, there were also
companies was not substantiated. With regard to the
company-specific reasons for refusing MET as set out in
possible risk of circumvention, it should be noted that
recitals 25 to 28 of the provisional Regulation.
the investigation showed that export prices, quantities,
conditions and terms of sale were freely negotiated and
determined and that the exporting producers were
neither State-owned nor otherwise subject to dominant
(16) One
exporting
producer
argued
that
the
urea
price
in
the
State influence at management level. Hence it may be
PRC was in line with the prices in other parts of the
concluded that State interference is not such as to
world, such as Indonesia and the Middle East, therefore
permit circumvention of measures.

---

L 124/4
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
13.5.2011
(23) In view of the above, the claims of the Union industry
(d) Comparison
are rejected. The initial conclusion that three of the five
exporting producers meet all requirements for IT is
(31) One
exporting
producer
questioned
the
comparison
of
therefore confirmed.
the normal value and the export price with regard to
the issue of VAT. However, as normal value and export
price were compared at the same level of indirect
taxation, i.e. VAT included, in line with point (c) of
3. Normal value
Article 2(10), no change to this method is needed.
Therefore recitals 47 and 48 of the provisional Regu
(a) Choice of the analogue country
lation are hereby confirmed.
(24) Indonesia
was
chosen
as
the
analogue
country.
The
data
submitted in the cooperating Indonesian producer’s reply
were verified in situ and found to be reliable and a
4. Dumping margins
suitable basis for the normal value.
(a) For the cooperating exporting producers granted IT
(32) In
the
absence
of
any
comments
with
regard
to
the
(25) One exporting producer questioned the choice of
dumping margins, recital 49 of the provisional Regu
Indonesia as analogue country on the grounds that
lation is hereby confirmed.
interested parties had not had the opportunity to
comment on this choice. However, since May 2010 the
file open for inspection had contained a note explaining
why Indonesia had been chosen as analogue country.
(33) On
that
basis
the
definitive
dumping
margins
expressed
Thus, as parties had had ample opportunity to
as a percentage of the CIF Union frontier price, duty
comment on this choice, their procedural rights had
unpaid, are as follows:
been respected in full. No further comments were
received on the choice of the analogue country.
Company
Definitive
dumping margin
(26) It is therefore confirmed that Indonesia is an appropriate
and reasonable analogue country in accordance with
Sichuan Jade Elephant Melamine S&T Co. Ltd 44,9
%
Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation.
Shandong Liaherd Chemical Industry Co. Ltd 47,6
%
Henan Junhua Development Company Ltd 49,0
%
(b) Determination of normal value
(27) It
is
recalled
that
normal
value
was
constructed
using
the
(b) For all other exporting producers
cost of manufacturing of the Indonesian producer plus a
reasonable amount for SG & A and for profit on the
(34) In
the
absence
of
any
comments
with
regard
to
the
domestic market.
dumping margins recitals 51 to 52 of the provisional
Regulation are hereby confirmed.
(28) One exporting producer questioned the level of the
constructed normal value, in particular the SG & A and
On this basis the country-wide level of dumping is
profit that were based on those of the Union industry.
definitely established at 65,6 % of the CIF Union
However, this method is in line with point (c) of
frontier price, duty unpaid, and recital 53 of the provi
Article 2(6) and considered appropriate. No other data
sional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
were available that could be used as a basis for SG & A
and profit as there were no other exporters or producers
subject to investigation in the analogue country and the
D. INJURY
producer subject to the investigation did not sell any
other category of products in the IP.
1. Injury
1.1. Union production and Union industry
(29) Therefore this claim is rejected. Recitals 35 to 45 with
(35) In the absence of any comments concerning the Union
regard to the determination of the normal value are
production and the Union industry, recitals 54 to 56 of
hereby confirmed.
the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
(c) Export prices for the exporting producers granted IT
1.2. Union consumption
(30) In
the
absence
of
any
comments
with
regard
to
the
(36) Some
parties
claimed
that
Eurostat
figures
concerning
determination of the export price, recital 46 of the provi
imports of melamine from the PRC were not reliable
sional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
in terms of quantity. A verification of Eurostat data

---

EN
13.5.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
124/5
led to minor changes in the import figures and
melamine from the PRC. They alleged that the purchase
consequently in the Union consumption as shown in
price of Chinese melamine did not include this type of
the tables below. These changes are not such as to
cost.
affect the analysis of the Union consumption in recitals
57 to 59 of the provisional Regulation which can thus
be confirmed.
(41) The
examination
of
this
claim
showed
that
there
was
no
reliable basis to establish under what conditions
melamine from the PRC was imported and the possible
Table 1
amount of costs which may have been incurred in
addition to the purchase price. In addition, no evidence
2006 2007 2008 IP
was provided de by the above parties, hence, the claim is
rejected.
Volume
368 873 392
691 326
409 267
226
(tonnes)
(42) As was the case at the time of imposition of provisional
Indexed 100 106 88 72
measures, some parties claimed that the undercutting
calculation should be based on Eurostat data instead of
Source: Updated Eurostat data and questionnaire replies.
the data verified from only 30 % of cooperating Chinese
companies.
1.3. Imports into the European Union from the country
concerned
(43) As
mentioned
in
recital
66
of
the
provisional
Regulation,
the data of cooperating exporters was used for the under
1.3.1. Volume, price and market share of imports from the
cutting calculation. This data has been verified and is
PRC
therefore considered to be more reliable than data
retrieved from Eurostat. This claim is therefore rejected.
Table 2
Imports from
(44) In the absence of any other comments concerning price
the PRC
2006 2007 2008 IP
undercutting, the methodology described in recitals 66
and 67 of the provisional Regulation to establish price
Volume
26 962 46
874 37
366 18
482
(tonnes)
undercutting is hereby confirmed.
Indexed 100 174 139 69
1.4. Economic situation of the Union industry
Source: Updated Eurostat data.
(45) In the absence of any comments regarding the economic
situation of the Union industry, recitals 68 to 82 of the
provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
(37) The above changes in the import volumes of the
countries concerned are not as such as to affect the
findings in recitals 61 and 62 of the provisional Regu
1.5. Conclusion on injury
lation which can thus be confirmed.
(46) In the absence of any comments regarding the
(38) Several
users
claimed
that
they
did
not
import
melamine
conclusion on injury, recitals 83 to 86 of the provisional
from the PRC in 2009 and 2010 because the Chinese
Regulation are hereby confirmed.
prices were too high compared to the prices prevailing in
the EU. They were therefore questioning the undercutting
by Chinese exporters found during the IP.
2. Causality
2.1. Preliminary remark
(39) As mentioned in recitals 63 and 64 of the provisional
Regulation, cooperation from Chinese exporters was low.
(47) As
mentioned
in
recital
87
of
the
provisional
Regulation
Hence, the information verified on the spot with the
it was examined whether the dumped imports of the
cooperating Chinese companies was used to establish
product concerned originating in the PRC caused injury
undercutting. As mentioned in recitals 66 and 67 of
to the Union industry to a degree that can be considered
the provisional Regulation the imports of the cooperating
as material. In addition, known factors other than the
exporting producers were undercutting the Union
dumped imports, which could at the same time be
industry prices during the IP by 10,3 %. Given that no
injuring the Union industry, were also examined to
new evidence is provided compared to that available at
ensure that possible injury caused by these other
the time of the imposition of the provisional measures,
factors was not attributed to the dumped imports.
this claim is rejected.
2.2. Effect of the dumped imports
1.3.2. Price undercutting
(48) Based on the revised import data shown in table 2 above,
(40) Some users claimed that an allowance should be made
the comments made in recitals 88 to 95 of the provi
for extra work involved with the handling of imported
sional Regulation remain valid. Overall, imports from

---

L 124/6
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
13.5.2011
the PRC decreased significantly by 31 % during the
conclusion that dumped imports caused material injury
period considered following the decrease in Union
to the Union industry is therefore confirmed.
consumption (–
28
%). With regard to prices, the
export price verified at the premises of the cooperating
Chinese producers was lower than the average import
price reported in Eurostat. The verified cooperating
3. Union interest
Chinese exporters, representing about 30 % of total
3.1. Interest of the Union industry
imports from the PRC, were found to be undercutting
the Union industry price during the IP by 10,3 %.
(54) It is recalled that the Union industry is composed of
three producers located in different Member States,
employing directly over 600 people in activities related
(49) The
investigation
revealed
that
in
certain
months
of
the
to melamine.
IP the Chinese exporters were selling their surplus of
melamine on the Union market when prices were
attractive for them, and withdrawing when prices
(55) Some
users
claimed
that
the
employment
figures
of
the
started to fall. This policy of targeted pricing continued
complainants were overstated. No evidence was provided
to have negative effects on the Union market during the
to show that the verified data used in this investigation
whole IP given that prices may be fixed for a period of
was unreliable and therefore the claim is rejected.
three to six months. Thus it is confirmed that the
presence of low-priced dumped imports on the Union
market played a role in further exacerbating the
negative trend in sales prices on the market in the
(56) One user claimed that the Union industry closed
medium term after they withdrew. The low level of
production sites due to technical problems, and not as
sales prices contributed to the dramatic level of losses
a result of allegedly dumped imports.
incurred by the Union industry and was identified as a
major factor in the material injury found.
(57) Some
plants
of
the
Union
industry
indeed
incurred
some
technical difficulties, but this was mainly after the IP.
(50) On
this basis,
the causal
link between the dumped
Following the imposition of provisional measures, the
imports and the injury suffered by the Union industry
Union industry has submitted evidence that factories
can be confirmed.
that had been idle due to the dumped imports have
recently been reopened. This shows that measures have
already had a positive impact on the Union industry.
2.3. Effect of other factors
(51) On
this
point,
interested
parties
basically
reiterated
most
(58) It
is
expected
that
the
imposition
of
definitive
anti-
of the comments made at the provisional stage. As far as
dumping duties against imports originating in the PRC
the effect of dumped imports are concerned, some parties
would have a further positive impact on the economic
claimed again that Eurostat figures should prevail over
situation of the Union industry and would enable it to
the data verified at the premises of the cooperating
regain at least part of its lost profitability.
exporting producers. Such a claim would render the
on-spot investigations meaningless and could therefore
not be accepted. No evidence was provided to show
(59) In
the
absence
of
any
other
comments
with
regard
to
the
that the data used in this investigation were unreliable.
interest of the Union industry, recitals 112 to 115 of the
This claim is therefore rejected.
provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
(52) Some
parties
claimed
that
the
injury
suffered
by
the
3.2. Interest of importers
Union industry is not caused by the imports from the
PRC, but by the global economic crisis. However, there
(60) In
the
absence
of
comments
on
the
interest
of
importers,
was no evidence submitted by these parties showing that
it was concluded that the imposition of definitive
the data used in this investigation was unreliable. In
measures on imports of melamine originating in the
addition, the dumped imports have intensified the
PRC would not be against the interests of importers.
effect of the economic crisis and consequently further
exacerbated the situation of the Union industry. This
claim is therefore rejected.
3.3. Interest of users
(61) At the provisional stage cooperation by the users was
(53) The comments received and the evidence provided
relatively low. Of the 44 questionnaires sent, only
regarding other factors were not such as to change the
seven replies which could be considered meaningful
conclusion made in recitals 108 to 110 of the provi
were received. Imports by the cooperating users repre
sional Regulation that none of these factors could
sented around 10 % of Union consumption. It was
break the link between the dumped imports and the
concluded at that stage that the impact of the
injury suffered by the Union industry. The provisional
proposed measures would be relatively limited.

---

EN
13.5.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
124/7
(62) After
provisional
measures
were
imposed
a
verification
(71) One user claimed that it stopped building a new
visit was made to the premises of the main cooperating
production plant because it realised that they would no
user in the Union. The investigation showed that the
longer be competitive on their main export markets with
share of melamine in its cost of production is between
the level of the provisional measures imposed.
8 % and 15 %, depending on the activity. The possible
impact of measures may therefore be relatively significant
depending on the share of melamine in the costs and the
(72) Some
users
claimed
that
if
provisional
measures
are
level of profitability, which was relatively low.
confirmed, the downstream products in the Union will
no longer be competitive compared to imports of the
same downstream products from the PRC. Hence, these
(63) In
submissions
received
from
a
number
of
users
it
was
users will either close down or move their production
alleged that after the imposition of provisional measures,
facilities outside the Union.
a shortage of melamine in the Union market occurred
and that this led to significant and continuous price
increases. Whilst the sales price of melamine was
(73) One association of users claimed that only the sector of
around EUR 900 per tonne during the IP, post IP
wood-based panel producers generates thousands of jobs
prices vary between EUR 1 200 and EUR 1 500 per
so a much higher number compared to the EU melamine
tonne.
producers. Hence the imposition of definitive measures
were therefore not in the interest of the Union.
(64) The
verification
visit
carried
out
at
the
premises
of
the
cooperating user confirmed that the provisional measures
(74) The
parties
above
did
not
provide
convincing
evidence
to
have had an impact on its activities, combined with the
support their claims, recitals 116 to 121 of the provi
price increase which the Union industry has applied to its
sional Regulation are therefore hereby confirmed.
melamine. Indeed, the Union industry holds a market
share of around 85 % in the Union market and thus
basically all users are sourcing large part of their
3.4. Conclusion on Union interest
melamine from Union producers.
(75) Based
on
the
above,
it
was
concluded
that
there
are
no
compelling reasons against the imposition of definitive
anti-dumping duties against imports of melamine orig
(65) The information gathered during the investigation also
inating in the PRC.
suggests that prices are still expected to increase in the
period following the IP. Hence, it would appear to be
justified, in the Union interest, to change the form of the
(76) However,
based
on
the
above,
it
appears
to
be
in
the
provisional measures to limit any further price increase
Union interest to change the form of the proposed
of melamine which would seriously affect the overall
measures to limit any possible serious impact on the
users’ business.
overall users’ business which is heavily dependent on
melamine supply.
(66) Some
users
claim
that
in
2010
a
melamine
shortage
developed on the market and that EU producers were
4. Definitive anti-dumping measures
not able to meet demand on the Union market and
that the imposition of provisional measures increased
4.1. Injury elimination level
this shortage.
(77) In
the
absence
of
any
substantiated
comments
that
would
alter the conclusion regarding the injury elimination
level, recitals 123 to 127 of the provisional Regulation
(67) Analysis
of
the
available
data
showed
that
the
melamine
market was indeed short for a certain period, but that
are hereby confirmed.
this was not caused by the provisional duties, but was
due to the worldwide evolution of the market.
4.2. Definitive measures
(78) In the light of the foregoing, it is concluded to change
(68) Some
users
claim
that
the
EU
producers
failed
to
supply
the form of the measures by imposing definitive
the required quantities of melamine to maintain their
measures in the form of a minimum import price
production.
(MIP) for the cooperating exporters who are granted IT
and a fixed duty of EUR 415 per tonne net product
weight for all the others. Imports from the cooperating
(69) Analysis of the available data showed that the shortage
exporters who are granted IT would be subject to a MIP
only appeared on the ‘spot-market’, but that contractual
of EUR 1 153 per tonne net product weight.
agreed quantities were supplied.
(79) That MIP is based on the normal value established in the
(70) Moreover,
additional
production
capacity
has
been
put
analogue country, increased to a CIF Union border price
online by the EU producers and by producers in third
level using export data from the cooperating Chinese
countries, ensuring a stable supply of melamine to Union
exporters and then expressed in EUR/tonne net product
users.
weight.

---

L 124/8
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
13.5.2011
(80) Where
imports
are
undertaken
at
a
CIF
Union
border
production or sales entities) should be addressed to the
price equal to or above the minimum import price estab
Commission ( 1 ) forthwith with all relevant information,
lished, no duty would be payable. If imports are
in particular any modification in the company’s activities
undertaken at a lower price, the difference between the
linked to production, domestic and export sales
actual price and the minimum import price established
associated with, for instance, that name change or that
would become payable.
change in the production and sales entities. If appro
priate, this Regulation will then be amended accordingly
by updating the list of companies benefiting from indi
vidual anti-dumping duty rates.
(81) Non-cooperating exporters and exporters not granted IT
would be subject to the residual duty of EUR 415 per
tonne net product weight (based the difference between
the non-injurious price as mentioned in recital 126 of
(86) In
order
to
minimise
the
risks
of
circumvention,
it
is
the provisional Regulation and the most injurious trans
considered that special measures are needed in this case
action of a cooperating exporter during the IP) regardless
to ensure the proper application of the anti-dumping
of the import price.
duties. These special measures include the following:
The presentation to the customs authorities of the
Member States of a valid commercial invoice, which
shall conform to the requirements set out in the
Annex to this Regulation. Imports not accompanied by
(82) That
form
of
measures
would
allow
EU
producers
to
recover from the effects of injurious dumping and
such an invoice shall be made subject to the residual
should also prevent any undue price increases which
anti-dumping duty applicable to all other exporters.
could have a significant negative impact on the users’
business.
(87) Should the exports by one of the companies benefiting
from the MIP increase significantly in volume after the
imposition of the measures concerned, such an increase
(83) All
parties
were
informed
of
the
essential
facts
and
in volume could be considered as constituting in itself a
considerations on the basis of which it was intended to
change in the pattern of trade due to the imposition of
recommend the imposition of definitive anti-dumping
measures within the meaning of Article 13(1) of the
duties. They were also granted a period of time within
basic Regulation. In such circumstances, and provided
which they could make representations following this
the conditions are met, an anti-circumvention investi
disclosure. The Union industry subsequently contested
gation may be initiated. This investigation may, inter
the allegations made by the users concerning the
alia, examine the need for the removal of the MIP and
shortage of the product concerned as well as the
the consequent imposition of a duty.
evolution of prices after the IP on the Union market.
With regard to the shortage, the Union industry argued
that their industry was cyclical and that there were other
sources of supply such as Trinidad and Qatar. As to the
(88) If market conditions change significantly after the
trend in prices, they contended that the increase had
imposition of definitive measures, the Commission
started well before the imposition of provisional
may, on its own initiative, review the form of the
measures. However, it cannot be denied that prices
measures in order to assess whether the measures are
have continued to increase since the imposition of the
achieving the intended results in removing the injury
provisional measures and that the imports from other
and whether a change in the form of the measures is
sources are not significant. The comments submitted by
warranted.
other parties were duly considered but were not such as
to change the conclusions.
4.3. Definitive collection of provisional anti-dumping
duties
(84) The individual company anti-dumping duty rates
(89) In
view
of
the
magnitude
of
the
dumping
margins
found
specified in this Regulation are solely applicable to
and in the light of the level of the injury caused to the
imports of the product concerned produced by these
Union industry, it is considered necessary that the
companies and thus by the specific legal entities
amounts secured by way of the provisional anti-
mentioned. Imports of the product concerned manu
dumping duty, imposed by the provisional Regulation,
factured by any other company not specifically
should be definitively collected to the extent of the
mentioned in Article 1 with its name and address,
amount of the definitive duties imposed. Where the
including entities related to those specifically mentioned,
definitive duties are lower than the provisional duties,
cannot benefit from these rates and shall be subject to
amounts provisionally secured in excess of the definitive
the duty rate applicable to ‘all other companies’.
rate of anti-dumping duties shall be released. Where the
definitive duties are higher than the provisional duties,
only the amounts secured at the level of the provisional
duties shall be definitively collected,
(85) Any
claim
requesting
the
application
of
these
individual
anti-dumping duty rates (e.g. following a change in the
( 1 ) European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade, Directorate H,
name of the entity or following the setting up of new
NERV-105, 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel, BELGIUM.

---

EN
13.5.2011 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
124/9
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
requirements set out in the Annex. If no such invoice is
presented, the duty applicable to all other companies shall
Article 1
apply.
1. A
definitive
anti-dumping
duty
is
hereby
imposed
on
3. For
the
individually
named
producers
and
in
cases
where
imports of melamine, currently falling within CN code
goods have been damaged before entry into free circulation and,
2933 61 00 and originating in the People’s Republic of China.
therefore, the price actually paid or payable is apportioned for
the determination of the customs value pursuant to Article 145
2. The
rate
of
the
definitive
anti-dumping
duty
applicable
to of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993
the product described in paragraph 1 and produced by the
laying down provisions for the implementation of Council
companies below shall be as follows:
Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community

Customs Code ( 1 ), the minimum import price set out above
shall be reduced by a percentage which corresponds to the
Minimum
apportioning of the price actually paid or payable. The duty
Duty
payable will then be equal to the difference between the
Company
import price
TARIC
(EUR/tonne net (EUR/tonne net additional code
reduced minimum import price and the reduced net, free-at-
product weight) product weight)
Union-frontier price, before customs clearance.
Sichuan Jade Elephant
1 153
— A986
Melamine S&T Co. Ltd
For all other companies and in cases where goods have been
damaged before entry into free circulation and, therefore, the
Shandong Liaherd
1 153
— A987
price actually paid or payable is apportioned for the deter
Chemical Industry Co.
mination of the customs value pursuant to Article 145 of
Ltd
Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93, the amount of the anti-
dumping duty, calculated on the basis of paragraph 2 above,
Henan Junhua Devel
1 153
— A988
shall be reduced by a percentage which corresponds to the
opment Company Ltd
apportioning of the price actually paid or payable.
All other companies
— 415 A999
4. Unless
otherwise
specified,
the
provisions
in
force
concerning customs duties shall apply.
For the individually named producers, the amount of the
definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to the product
Article 2
described in paragraph 1 shall be the difference between the
minimum import price and the net, free-at-Union-frontier price,
The amounts secured by way of the provisional anti-dumping
before duty, in all cases where the latter is less than the
duty pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1035/2010 shall be
definitively collected. The amounts secured in excess of the
minimum import price. For these individually named producers,
definitive rates of the anti-dumping duty shall be released.
no duty shall be collected where the net free-at-Union-frontier
Where the definitive duties are higher than the provisional
price, before duty, is equal to or higher than the corresponding
duties, only the amounts secured at the level of the provisional
minimum import price.
duties shall be definitively collected.
The application of the minimum import price specified for the
Article 3
companies mentioned in this paragraph shall be conditional
upon presentation to the customs authorities of the Member
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its
States of a valid commercial invoice, which shall conform to the
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, 10 May 2011.
For the Council
The President
MARTONYI J.
( 1 ) OJ L 253, 11.10.1993, p. 1.

---

L 124/10
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
13.5.2011
ANNEX
A declaration signed by an official of the entity issuing the commercial invoice, in the following format, must appear on
the valid commercial invoice referred to in Article 1(2):
1. The name and function of the official of the entity issuing the commercial invoice.
2. The following declaration:
‘I, the undersigned, certify that the (volume) of melamine sold for export to the European Union covered by this
invoice was manufactured by (company name and registered seat) (TARIC additional code) in the People’s Republic of
China. I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct.
Date and signature’

---