The U.S. International Trade Commission yesterday voted to impose countervailing duties on enriched uranium imports from France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.  Commissioners also voted to impose anti-dumping duties on French enriched uranium imports (see GSN, Dec. 10, 2001).

European imports were causing harm to the U.S. uranium enrichment industry, the commissioners said (U.S. State Department release, Jan. 22).

Disagreement between the United States and the Europeans began when the U.S. Enrichment Corporation, the sole U.S. provider of enriched uranium, filed an unfair pricing lawsuit against the French-owned Eurodif and the British-Dutch-German consortium Urenco (USEC press release, Jan. 22).

In December 2001, the U.S. Commerce Department issued a preliminary ruling that U.S. imports from the four countries hurt and threatened USEC.  The department ruled that the dumping rate, which is the difference between the fair-value price for uranium and the dumped price, was almost 20 percent.  The countervailing subsidy rate ranged up to 13 percent. 

The U.S. trade commission’s decision allows the U.S. Customs Service to impose anti-dumping duties equal to the dumping margins and countervailing duties equal to the net subsidy rates on the European imports. (U.S. State Department release, Jan. 22).

USEC supported the commission’s decision.

“The U.S. government’s decision will help ensure that the U.S. enrichment market remains open for strong, healthy competition,” said USEC President and Chief Executive Officer William Timbers.  “We believe this is in the long-term interests of our industry, our customers and the nation’s energy security” (USEC press release, Jan. 22). 

European Reaction

Officials at Cogema, Inc., the Canadian partner of Eurodif, said they adamantly opposed the U.S. Commerce Department’s earlier ruling in favor of USEC.

“We are extremely disappointed with the decision issued by the [U.S. Commerce Department],” officials said in a December 2001 press release.  “[The Department’s] interpretation of the facts and application of the law are simply wrong.  Had the law been correctly applied to the real facts, the right conclusion is that Eurodif is neither dumping nor subsidized.”

“We sincerely wish that USEC and [the Department] had not enmeshed all of us — the providers of enrichment services and the U.S. utilities — in a legal proceeding because of USEC’s commercial problems,” Cogema said (Cogema press release, Dec. 19, 2001).

Urenco officials said last year they were pleased that the Commerce Department did not find them guilty of dumping enriched uranium on the U.S. market, but they disagreed that their imports harmed USEC.

“We have always sought to compete fairly in all world markets, including the U.S.  We are pleased that the [Commerce Department] confirmed that Urenco is not dumping with imports from our three countries,” Urenco said.  “We will continue our efforts to persuade [USITC] that our imports have not injured, and do not threaten, the U.S. enrichment industry” (Urenco press release, Dec. 17, 2001).

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP

Back to top