DOC establishes dumping margin for EuroChem

Washington-The U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) International Trade Administration has issued a preliminary finding that Russian fertilizer producer MCC EuroChem sold solid urea in the U.S. market at less than normal value during a period of review from July 1, 2008, though June 30, 2009. As a result, a dumping margin of 20.92 percent was established for EuroChem urea exports to the U.S. for that period. According to a Federal Register notice, the Ad Hoc Committee of Domestic Nitrogen Producers and its urea-producing members, CF Industries Inc. and PCS Nitrogen, requested the review on July 31, 2009, and the Department published a notice on Aug. 25, 2009, saying that it was initiating such a review. The Department said the EuroChem urea was sold by a U.S. seller affiliated with the producer through a single channel of distribution. The constructed export price was calculated based on the FOB or delivered price to unaffiliated purchasers in – or for exportation to – the U.S. The Department said it will issue final results of the review within 120 days of the April 15 Federal Register notice, and it invited interested parties to submit comments on the preliminary results within 30 days, with rebuttals submitted within 35 days of the notice. The Department said it will issue assessment instructions directly to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of the administrative review. In 2008 (GM May 26, 2008), the Department of Commerce awarded EuroChem zero percent weighted-average margins on solid urea imports from the Russian Federation under a “new shipper review.” EuroChem successfully argued at that time that it had never been affiliated with any Russian exporter or producer who exported solid urea to the U.S. during the antidumping duty order period of investigation. This was contested by the Ad Hoc Committee of Domestic Nitrogen Producers, which argued that EuroChem was not eligible for a new-shipper review because its factories existed and produced urea during the period of investigation, and because it was affiliated with entities that were part of the non-market-economy entity that produced and exported subject merchandise during the period of investigation.