Australia's anti-dumping investigation against China's PV

Abstract On October 6, the Australian Anti-Dumping Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Investigation Agency”) issued an announcement deciding to end the investigation of China's PV anti-dumping on the grounds that the damage was negligible. The case was filed on May 14, 2014, involving the case...
On October 6, the Australian Anti-Dumping Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Investigation Agency”) issued an announcement deciding to end the investigation of China's PV anti-dumping on the grounds that the damage was negligible. The case was filed on May 14, 2014, involving about 300 companies, involving a total amount of about 780 million US dollars. Under the guidance of the Trade Relief Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce, the Chamber of Mechanical and Electrical Affairs actively mobilized and organized 60 companies involved in the industry to defend against industrial damage. The main companies involved in the case also carried out active dumping defenses.

On April 7, 2015, the investigating agency published a basic factual statement and recommended that the investigation be terminated, requiring the parties to submit comments by April 27. In the case where the prosecution submitted the comments within 7 days of overdue, the investigating agency still accepted and decided to investigate again and postpone the final ruling. Since May 2015, the Trade Relief Bureau of the Ministry of Commerce has made several negotiations with the investigation agencies, and the Chamber of Commerce and Industry has actively defended this and submitted defense opinions on behalf of the industry.

In this final ruling report, the investigation agency paid full attention to the industry damage defense opinions submitted by the Chamber of Commerce of the Electrical and Mechanical Industry, and accepted the opinions of the Chamber of Commerce on the difference between metal silicon and solar grade silicon materials and the negligible damage, and finally The investigation was terminated on the grounds that the damage was negligible.

The above-mentioned announcement of the investigation institution is final and the prosecution may apply to the investigation agency for review within 30 days from the date of publication of the announcement.

Palisade fencing, as effective security fencing, is the widest used type in the UK. The forbidding appearance, inherent strength and high damage resistance make the palisade fencing one of the best choices of premise protection.
Designed with smooth surface, rigidity structure, sharp prongs and narrow pale spacing, the palisade fences are normally considered to be difficult even impossible to climb, straddle, grab and gain foot-hold. Thereby, it effective deters would to be intruders and trespassers, protects your assets, office and factory from damages.

Palisade pales are available in D section, W section and angle steel types. All the pales are bolts to two horizontal palisade rails as standards. Once the fence height is over 3 meters, one more palisade rail is needed to maintain the integrity for high security.

Palisade Fence

Palisade Fence,Euro Fence,Palisade Fence Panel,Steel Palisade Fence Designs

Anping County Kairong Wire Mesh Products Co., Ltd. , https://www.krmeshfence.com