25. 11. 97 Official Journal of the European Communities L 322/63 COMMISSION DECISION of 24 October 1997 accepting undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceedings concerning imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes of iron or non-alloy steel originating in Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania and the Slovak Republic and repealing Commission Decision 93/260/EEC (97/790/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Com- munity ('), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2331/96 (3, and in particular Article 8 (1) thereof, After consulting the Advisory Committee, Whereas: (1) By Regulation (EEC) No 1189/93 (%), the Council imposed definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes of iron or non- alloy steel originating in Hungary, Poland and the Republic of Croatia. In addition, the Commission accepted undertakings (%) offered by the Hungarian, Polish and Croatian exporters. (2 On 31 August 1996, the Commission announced by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (%) the initiation of an interim review of Regulation (EEC) No 1189/93 in respect of imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes of iron or non-alloy steel originating in Hungary, Poland and the Republic of Croatia and commenced an investigation pursuant to Article 11 (3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (here- inafter referred to as ‘the Basic Regulation’). (3)  This interim review investigation was initiated in parallel with the initiation of a proceeding on the same date () in respect of such imports originating in Russia, the Czech Republic, Romania and the Slovak Republic following a complaint lodged by the Defence Committee of the Seamless Steel Tube Industry of the European Union. (4 By Regulation (EC) No 981/97() (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Provisional Regulation’), the Commission imposed a provisional anti-dumping L 56, 6. 3. 1996, p. 1. L 317, 6. 12. 1996, p. 1. L 120, 15. 5. 1993, p. 34. L 120, 15. 5. 1993, p. 42. C 253, 31. 8. 1996, p. 25. C 253, 31. 8. 1996, p. 26. L 141, 31. 5. 1997, p. 36. ) (6) @ ®) duty on imports into the Community of the product in question originating in Russia, the Czech Republic, Romania and the Slovak Republic. Following the imposition of the provisional anti- dumping measures, the Commission sought and verified all information that it deemed necessary for the purpose of its definitive findings. It was established that, both for the countries under the new investigation and under the review invest- igation, with the exception of the Republic of Croatia, definitive anti-dumping measures should be imposed in order to eliminate the injurious effects of dumping. The findings and conclusions on all aspects of both investigations are set out in the Commission’s proposal to the Council for the imposition of de- finitive duties (¥). Having been informed of the Commission’s tindings, the Hungarian, Polish, Czech, Romanian and Slovak producers referred to in Article 1 of the present Decision offered undertakings pursuant to Article 8 of the Basic Regulation. According to these undertakings, the producers in question have offered to sell to their independent customers, up to a certain quantity of the product concerned for export to the Community at revised prices so that the injurious effects of the dumping are eliminated. In addition, they have offered to ensure that their prices per product group fall into line with the price structure in use in the Com- munity. Having carefully examined the abovementioned proposals, the Commission is satisfied that the elimination of the injury will be achieved, in case of acceptance, by two means: first, a price under- taking up to an annual volume threshold, and then an ad valorem duty for the remainder. The Commission notes that, to ensure that the quantity of imports exempted from the ad valorem duty does not exceed the quantity offered by each undertaking, the exemption should be conditional on the presentation to the Community customs of (*) See page 1 of this Official Journal.