[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 212 (Friday, October 31, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64914-64916]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-26032]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-588-046]


Polychloroprene Rubber from Japan: Final Results of Changed 
Circumstances Review and Determination to Revoke Antidumping Duty 
Finding in Part

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On March 11, 2008, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published a notice of initiation and preliminary results of a changed 
circumstances review with intent to revoke, in part, the antidumping 
duty (AD) finding on polychloroprene rubber from Japan. See 
Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan: Notice of Initiation and Preliminary 
Results of Changed Circumstances Review, and Intent To Revoke 
Antidumping Duty Finding in Part, 73 FR 12954 (March 11, 2008) 
(Initiation and Preliminary Results). We are now revoking this AD 
finding, in part, with regard to certain polychloroprene rubber 
products from Japan, as described in the ``Scope of Changed 
Circumstances Review'' section of this notice, based on the fact that 
domestic parties have expressed no further interest in the relief 
provided by the AD finding with respect to the imports of such 
products.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 31, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Lindsay or Summer Avery, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-
0780 or (202) 482-4052, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On January 23, 2008, the Department received a request on behalf of 
the petitioner, DuPont Performance Elastomers L.L.C. (DPE),\1\ for 
revocation in part of the AD finding on polychloroprene rubber from 
Japan pursuant to sections 751(b)(1) and 782(h) of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (the Act). DPE requested partial revocation of the AD 
finding with respect to certain polychloroprene rubber products, listed 
below in the section entitled ``Scope of Changed Circumstances 
Review.'' In its January 23, 2008, submission, DPE stated that it no 
longer has any interest in antidumping relief from imports of such 
polychloroprene rubber from Japan. On March 11, 2008, the Department 
published a notice of initiation and preliminary results of a changed 
circumstances review with intent to revoke, in part, the AD finding on 
polychloroprene rubber from Japan. See Initiation and Preliminary 
Results. The Department provided interested parties with a deadline to 
submit written comments no later than 30 days after the date of 
publication of the Initiation and Preliminary Results. Id. The 
Department received timely comments on the Department's preliminary 
results from The Adhesive and Sealant Council, Inc. (ASC), Clifton 
Adhesive, Inc. (Clifton), Royal Adhesives & Sealants, LLC (RAS), Showa 
Denko America, Inc. (Showa Denko), The W.W. Henry Company (W.W. Henry), 
and DPE. The comments by these parties are discussed below in the 
section entitled ``Summary of Comments Received.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ DPE is the sole petitioner in this antidumping proceeding. 
See Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan: Final Results of the 
Expedited Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Finding, 69 FR 64276 
(November 4, 2004). DPE has been the sole U.S. producer of 
polychloroprene rubber since 1998, when Bayer Group closed its 
polychloroprene rubber plant in Houston, Texas. See Polychloroprene 
Rubber from Japan, Inv. No. AA-1921-129 (Second Review), U.S. ITC 
Pub. 3786 (June 2005), at 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of Changed Circumstances Review

    The merchandise subject to DPE's request and covered by this 
changed circumstances review is polychloroprene rubber from Japan with 
solid polychloroprenes that are dipolymers of chloroprene and 
methacrylic acid having methacrylic acid comonomer content in the 1.0 
percent to 5.0 percent range (this category does not include aqueous 
chloroprene/methacrylic acid dipolymer dispersion products or solvent 
solutions of chloroprene/methacrylic acid dipolymers). This changed 
circumstances review covers polychloroprene rubber from Japan meeting 
the specifications as described above. Effective upon publication of 
these final results of changed circumstances review in the Federal 
Register, the amended scope of the AD finding will read as identified 
in the ``Scope of the Finding (As Amended By These Final Results of 
Changed Circumstances)'' section of this notice.

Summary of Comments Received

    After the Department issued its Initiation and Preliminary Results, 
we received timely comments from several parties. On April 3, 2008, we 
received comments from Clifton, a domestic industrial user of 
polychloroprene rubber, and on April 8, 2008, we received comments from 
ASC, an international trade association representing 125 manufacturers 
of adhesives and sealants. Both Clifton and ASC argued that the 
proposed scope amendment by the changed circumstances review would not 
provide any relief to the affected U.S. industries because their 
Japanese supplier provides polychloroprene rubber that contains 
dipolymers of chloroprene and methacrylic acid having methacrylic acid 
comonomer at less than 1.0 percent. Clifton and ASC contended that 
imports of this product would still be within the proposed amended 
scope of the AD finding. Therefore, they proposed that the excluded 
subject merchandise include ``dipolymers of chloroprene and methacrylic 
acid having methacrylic acid comonomer content of less than 5.0 
percent.''
    On April 9, 2008, the Department received comments from Showa 
Denko, a Japanese producer and U.S. importer of polychloroprene rubber. 
Showa Denko indicated that DPE had requested this changed circumstances 
review

[[Page 64915]]

because DPE has ceased domestic production of its product, Neoprene 
AF\TM\, which falls within the category of products for which DPE has 
requested revocation. Showa Denko also pointed out that its product 
that competed with Neoprene AF\TM\ has a methacrylic acid comonomer 
content of less than 1.0 percent. Therefore, Showa Denko argued, in 
order to make possible antidumping duty-free imports from Japan of a 
product that is competitive with DPE's former product, the revocation 
needs to include dipolymers of chloroprene and methacrylic acid having 
methacrylic acid comonomer content of less than 1.0 percent. As such, 
Showa Denko recommended the range for methacrylic acid comonomer 
content be changed to read ``0.1 percent to 5.0 percent.''
    The Department also received comments from RAS, a domestic 
manufacturer of, inter alia, adhesives and sealants, and W.W. Henry, a 
domestic manufacturer of flooring adhesives and installation products. 
The comments submitted by RAS and W.W. Henry were timely received and 
subsequently placed on the record by the Department on August 20, 2008. 
See Memorandum to File, ``Polychloroprene Rubber from Japan: Changed 
Circumstances Review: Comments from Royal Adhesives and Sealants and 
The W.W. Henry Company,'' dated August 20, 2008. In their comments, 
both parties stated their understanding that a true replacement for the 
products to be removed from the scope of the AD finding (i.e. solid 
polychloroprenes that are dipolymers of chloroprene and methacrylic 
acid having methacrylic acid comonomer content in the 1.0 percent to 
5.0 percent range) actually contains 0.2-0.3 percent methacrylic acid 
comonomer content and thus requested that the scope of formulation 
definition be modified accordingly in the final AD finding.
    On April 14, 2008, and again on August 25, 2008, DPE responded to 
the above comments. DPE partially agreed that, in general, the scope 
language needed to be expanded from its January 23, 2008 request to 
allow certain Japanese products to be excluded from the AD finding. 
However, DPE disagreed with the comments from ASC, Clifton, and Showa 
Denko that the lower limit be set below 0.2 percent. Rather, DPE agreed 
with the comments from RAS and W.W. Henry that the range for 
methacrylic acid comonomer content should be amended to read ``0.2 
percent to 5.0 percent,'' rather than ``1.0 percent to 5.0 percent,'' 
as stated in the Initiation and Preliminary Results. According to DPE, 
this change will have the desired effect of excluding the specified 
Japanese products from the scope of the AD finding, while still 
providing the antidumping relief necessary to the continued health and 
well-being of the domestic industry.

Analysis of Comments Received

    The commenting parties are in agreement with DPE's original request 
to amend the scope language to exclude certain polychloroprene rubber 
from the AD finding. The comments received only address the issue of 
the specific language to be used in making this exclusion. Clifton and 
ASC recommend that the range for methacrylic acid comonomer content be 
changed to read ``less than 5.0 percent,'' rather than ``1.0 percent to 
5.0 percent.'' Showa Denko recommends that the range be ``0.1 percent 
to 5.0 percent.'' RAS, W.W. Henry, and DPE all recommend that the range 
be ``0.2 percent to 5.0 percent.''
    In initiating this review, the Department found that, as the sole 
domestic producer accounting for substantially all of the production of 
the domestic like product, DPE's expression of no interest in the 
continued application of the AD finding on certain polychloroprene 
rubber was sufficient to both initiate and preliminarily revoke, in 
part, the AD finding as it relates to imports of certain 
polychloroprene rubber products from Japan. See Initiation and 
Preliminary Results. DPE, as the sole domestic producer, is the only 
party in this proceeding in a position to determine the products for 
which it no longer has any interest in being provided antidumping 
relief. Therefore, the Department finds that it will make DPE's 
recommended changes to the exclusion language found in the Initiation 
and Preliminary Results.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made a 
change in these final results from our Initiation and Preliminary 
Results. We are incorporating DPE's requested amendment to the scope 
language regarding the subject merchandise excluded from this AD 
finding. Specifically, for these final results, the methacrylic acid 
comonomer content range will be expanded from ``1.0 percent to 5.0 
percent'' to ``0.2 percent to 5.0 percent.''

Scope of the Finding (As Amended By These Final Results of Changed 
Circumstances)

    The merchandise covered are shipments of polychloroprene rubber, an 
oil resistant synthetic rubber also known as polymerized 
chlorobutadiene or neoprene, currently classifiable under items 
4002.41.00, 4002.49.00, and 4003.00.00 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although HTSUS item numbers are 
provided for convenience and customs purpose, the Department's written 
description of the scope remains dispositive.
    The following types of polychloroprene rubber from Japan are 
excluded from the scope: (1) aqueous dispersions of polychloroprenes 
that are dipolymers of chloroprene and methacrylic acid, where the 
dispersion has a pH of 8 or lower (this category is limited to aqueous 
dispersions of these polymers and does not include aqueous dispersions 
of these polychloroprenes that contain comonomers other than 
methacrylic acid); (2) aqueous dispersions of polychloroprenes that are 
dipolymers of chloroprene and 2,3-dichlorobutadiene-1,3 modified with 
xanthogen disulfides, where the dispersion has a solids content of 
greater than 59 percent (this category is limited to aqueous 
dispersions of these polymers and does not include aqueous dispersions 
of polychloroprenes that contain comonomers other than 2,3-
dichlorobutadiene-1,3); and (3) solid polychloroprenes that are 
dipolymers of chloroprene and 2,3-dichlorobutadiene-1,3 having a 2,3-
dichlorobutadiene-1,3 content of 15 percent or greater (this category 
is limited to polychloroprenes in solid form and does not include 
aqueous dispersions).
    In addition, the following type of polychloroprene rubber is 
excluded from the scope: solid polychloroprenes that are dipolymers of 
chloroprene and methacrylic acid having methacrylic acid comonomer 
content in the 0.2 percent to 5.0 percent range (this category does not 
include aqueous chloroprene/methacrylic acid diploymer dispersion 
products or solvent solutions of chloroprene/methacrylic acid 
dipolymers).

Final Results of Review: Partial Revocation of Antidumping Duty Finding

    The affirmative statement of no interest by the petitioner 
concerning certain polychloroprene rubber from Japan, as described 
herein, constitutes changed circumstances sufficient to warrant 
revocation of this AD finding in part. The Department has considered 
the comments found above in making its determination. Therefore, the 
Department is partially revoking the AD finding with respect to certain 
polychloroprene rubber from Japan with

[[Page 64916]]

regard to products which meet the specifications detailed above, in 
accordance with sections 751(b) and (d) and 782(h) of the Act and 19 
CFR 351.216(d) and 351.222(g). We will instruct the U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection to liquidate without regard to antidumping duties, as 
applicable, and to refund any estimated antidumping duties collected 
for all unliquidated entries of certain polychloroprene rubber, meeting 
the specifications indicated above, as of the date of publication in 
the Federal Register of the final results of this changed circumstances 
review in accordance with 19 CFR 351.222(g)(4).
    This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.306. Timely written notification of 
the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial 
protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply is a violation 
of the APO which may be subject to sanctions.
    The Department is issuing this changed circumstances review, 
partial revocation of the AD finding and notice in accordance with 
sections 751(b) and (d), 777(i), and 782(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.216(e) and 351.222(g).

    Dated: October 24, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-26032 Filed 10-30-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S