PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CALIFORNIA

CONSUMER PRODUCTS REGULATIONS

INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS

Release Date: August 7, 2009

### State of California

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

INITIAL STATEMENT OF REASONS

FOR PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE

CALIFORNIA CONSUMER PRODUCTS REGULATIONS

To be considered by the Air Resources Board at a Public Hearing on September 24-25, 2009, at:

South Coast Air Quality Management District

Auditorium 21865 E. Copley Dr. Diamond Bar, CA 91765

Air Resources Board

P.O. Box 2815 Sacramento, CA 95812

This report has been prepared by the staff of the C alifornia Air Resources Board. Publication does not signify that the contents refl ect the views and policies of the Air Resources Board, nor does the mention or repres entation of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recom mendation for use.

### State of California

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE

CALIFORNIA CONSUMER PRODUCTS REGULATIONS

Prepared by:

Stationary Source Division

Air Resources Board

Reviewed by:

David Mallory, P.E., Manager, Measures Development Section Carla D. Takemoto, Manager, Technical Evaluation Se ction Judy Yee, Manager, Implementation Section James F. Nyarady, P.E., Manager, Strategy Evaluatio n Section Janette M. Brooks, Chief, Air Quality Measures Bran ch Robert Fletcher, P.E., Chief, Stationary Source Div ision

August 2009

### ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This report and the proposed amendments to the Cons umer Products Regulation were developed by the following Air Resources Board staf f:

Trish Johnson (Lead)

Robert Barrera Margaret Chu, Ph. D.

Terri Edwards Steve Giorgi

Russell Grace

Marline Hicks Robert Jenne, Esq. Jenifer Kiger Reza Mahdavi, Ph.D.

Irina Malkina Tina Najjar Jasmine Nguyen Ravi RamalingamTABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary

................................................... ............................................. ES-1

A. Authority to Regulate Consumer Products ............ ......................................... ES-2

B. Existing Regulations ...............................

................................................... ..... ES-3

C. Regulatory Development Process ..................... ............................................. ES-3

D. VOC Emissions ......................................

................................................... ..... ES-4

E. Consumer Product VOC Emission Reduction Commitments in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) .................... ................................................ ES- 5

F. SCAQMD Rule 1143 – Consumer Paint Thinners and Multi-purpose Solvents .............................

................................................... ... ES-7

G. Estimated VOC Emissions from Categories Proposed to be Regulated......... ES-8

H. Summary of Proposed Amendments..................... ......................................... ES-8

I. Compliance with the Proposed Amendments............ ................................... ES-12

J. Economic Impacts ...................................

................................................... .. ES-14

K. Environmental Impacts ..............................

................................................... ES-16

L. Environmental Justice ..............................

................................................... . ES-18

M. Future Plans .......................................

................................................... ....... ES-19

N. Recommendation .....................................

................................................... . ES-19

Appendix A: Technical Support Document

I. Introduction.......................................

................................................... ................. 1

A. Overview ...........................................

................................................... ................ 1

B. Enabling Legislation ...............................

................................................... ........... 2

C. Background .........................................

................................................... .............. 3

II. Development of Proposed Amendments ................. ........................................... 10

A. Public Process for Developing Proposed Limits ...... ........................................... 10

B. Staff Evalation of Emission Reduction Opportunities .......................................... 11

C. Alternatives Considered ............................

................................................... ...... 12

III. Statutory Requirements for Emission Reductions ..... ......................................... 14

A. VOC Reductions.....................................

................................................... ......... 14

B. Greenhouse Gas Reductions ..........................

................................................... 15

C. Technological and Commercial Feasibility of VOC Lim its .................................. 15

D. Compliance with the Proposed Amendments............ ......................................... 17IV. Emissions ..........................................

................................................... .............. 20

A. Criteria Pollutants, Ambient Air Quality Standards, Climate Change, and

Toxic Air Contaminants .............................

................................................... ...... 20

B. Importance of Regulating Consumer Products VOC and GHG Emissions and

Toxic Air Contaminants .............................

................................................... ...... 30

C. Estimated Emissions from Categories Proposed to be Regulated ..................... 34

V. Proposed Amendments to the Consumer Products Regula tion and

Method 310.........................................

................................................... ............. 42

A. Definitions (Section 94508) ........................

................................................... ..... 42

B. Standards For Consumer Products (Section 94509).... ...................................... 43

C. Temporary Exemption for Small Containers – Proposed New Subsection 94510(m) ...........................................

................................................... .............. 46

D. Labeling Requirements for Multi-Purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner – Proposed New Subsection 94512(e)................... ............................................... 46

E. Proposed New Subsection 94513(g): Special Reporting Requirements for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner............ ................................................ 47

F. Proposed Amendments to Section 94515, Test Methods: VOC Aromatic Compound Content ...................................

................................................... ...... 47

G. “Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Consumer Products and Reactive Organic Compounds in Aerosol Coating P roducts” (Method 310) .......................................

................................................... ............ 48

VI. Description of Product Categories..................

................................................... . 50

A. Air Freshener: Double Phase Aerosol ................ ................................................ 50

B. Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner............ ................................................ 58

VII. Economic Impacts ...................................

................................................... ........ 72

A. Summary of Economic Impacts........................ .................................................. 7 2

B. Costs of Compliance ................................

................................................... ....... 74

C. Return on Owners’ Equity...........................

................................................... ..... 84

D. Impacts on California Businesses, Consumers, and St ate and Local Agencies .....................................

................................................... ........... 88

E. Other Possible Economic Impacts of Regulatory Chang es ................................ 91

F. Mitigation of Potential Impacts Through Additional Regulatory Flexibility........... 91

VIII. Environmental Impacts ..............................

................................................... ...... 95

A. Legal Requirements Applicable to the Analysis...... ............................................ 96

B. Summary of Proposed Amendments..................... ............................................. 96

C. Summary of Impacts on Atmospheric Processes ........ ....................................... 97D. Other Potential Environmental Impacts .............. .............................................. 112

E. Analysis of Need for Reasonably Foreseeable Mitigat ion Measures................ 120

F. Risk Assessment for Reduced Exposure to Ozone and T ACs ......................... 122

G. Alternative Means of Compliance.................... ................................................. 12 4

H. Environmental Justice ..............................

................................................... ..... 124

IX. Future and Ongoing Activities......................

................................................... .. 129

A. Consumer Product Emissions Reduction Commitments in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) .................... .................................................. 1 29

B. Greenhouse Gas Reductions from Consumer Products... ................................ 130

C. 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey Data S ummaries .............. 130

D. Nail Coatings Exposure Assessment.................. .............................................. 131

E. Dry Clean Only Spot Removers....................... ................................................. 13 1

F. Paint Removers/ Strippers..........................

................................................... ... 131

G. Cleaning Products ..................................

................................................... ....... 131

Appendix B: Proposed Amendments to the Regulation for Reducing

Emissions from Consumer Products and Method 310

Appendix C: Summary of Consumer Products Regulator y Actions

Appendix D: Summary of Ingredient Reformulation Co sts

Appendix E: Nonrecurring Costs Calculations

Appendix F: Chemical Characteristics of Convention al and Potential

Replacement Solvents/Products

### LIST OF TABLES

Table ES-1 Consumer Product VOC Reductions Accredited Toward

SIP Committment.................................... ........................................... ES-6

Table ES-2 Proposed VOC Limits, Emissions, Reductions at

Effective Date..................................... ................................................ ES- 9

Table ES-3 Summary of Complying Products and Complying Markets hares ..... ES-13

Table III-1 Summary of Complying Products and Complying Markets hares ........... 18

Table IV-1 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone, PM 10 and PM 2.5 .................... 23

Table IV-2 Global Warming Potential of Selected Compounds Used in

Consumer Products .................................. ............................................. 33

Table IV-3 Proposed VOC Limits, Emissions, and Reductions at E ffective Date .... 35

Table V-1 Proposed VOC Limits, Product Forms, and Effective D ates .................. 44

Table VI-1 Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener................. .................................... 52

Table VI-2 Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener Proposal........ .............................. 54

Table VI-3 Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner ............ ................................... 60

Table VI-4 Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner Proposal... ............................. 61

Table VII-1a Estimated Change in Formula Cost per Unit.......... ................................ 76

Table VII-1b Total Estimated Recurring Cost ..................... ........................................ 77

Table VII-2 Estimated Nonrecurring Per Product Costs to Comply with the

Proposed Limits .................................... ................................................. 78

Table VII-3 Estimated Total Nonrecurring Cost per Category ..... ............................. 80

Table VII-4 Estimated Total Costs to Compy with the Proposed VO C Limits........... 81

Table VII-5 Estimated Per-Unit Cost Increases from Both Annuali zed Nonrecurring

and Annual Recurring Costs ......................... ......................................... 83

Table VII-6 Comparison of Cost-Effectiveness for ARB Consumer P roduct

Regulations/Measures ............................... ............................................ 84

Table VII-7 Summary of Decline in Return on Owners’ Equity (ROE ) ...................... 87

Table VII-8 California Employment and Payroll in Affected Indus tries...................... 89

Table VIII-1 Proposed VOC Limits, Emissions, and Reductions at E ffective Date .... 98

Table IX-1 Consumer Product VOC Reductions Accredited Toward

SIP Committment.................................... ............................................. 129

### LIST OF FIGURES

Figure ES-1 Consumer Products VOC Emission Trends.............. ......................... ES-5

Figure IV-1 2007 Area Designations for State Ambient Air Qualit y Standards –

OZONE ..............................................

................................................... . 24

Figure IV-2 South Coast Air Basin Ozone Trend .................. .................................... 25

Figure IV-3 San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Ozone Trend ........... ................................ 26

Figure IV-4 2007 Area Designations for State Ambient Air Qualit y

Standards – PM2.5 .................................. .............................................. 27

Figure IV-5 Consumer Products VOC Emission Trends.............. ............................. 31

### State of California

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed Amendment s to the

California Consumer Products Regulations

Executive SummaryExecutive Summary - 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In this rulemaking, California Air Resources Board (ARB or Board) staff is proposing amendments to the Regulation for Reducing Emissions from Consumer Products (Consumer Products Regulation) and to Method 310 – Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Consumer Products and Reactive O rganic Compounds in Aerosol Coating Products (Method 310). The amendments are designed to reduce VOC emissions. The proposed amendments would set new V OC limits for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products and lower the ex isting VOC limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners. When fully implemented, ab out 14.7 tons per day of VOC emission reductions would be achieved. We are prop osing to prohibit the use of the Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC) methylene chloride, pe rchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene in Multi-purpose Solvent and Pain t Thinner products. In addition, the aromatic content would be limited to 1 percent by w eight in these categories. Compounds with high global warming potential (GWP) would be prohibited, under the proposal, in all three of the categories proposed f or regulation.

The proposed toxic compound prohibitions and the GW P limits are mitigation measures designed to ensure that exposure to chlorinated sol vent compounds and compounds with a high GWP are not used, respectively, as prod ucts are reformulated to meet new VOC limits. Further, the limit on the use of aroma tic compounds is a mitigation measure designed to prevent an increase in ozone forming po tential of reformulated products.

The regulation is codified in title 17, California Code of Regulations, sections 94507- 94517. The proposed amendments to reduce VOC emiss ions would partially fulfill the consumer products reduction commitment contained in the State Strategy for California’s 2007 State Implementation Plan (Strate gy).

As proposed, new language additions to Method 310 w ould clarify analytical methods used to test low VOC or high water content consumer products. Other amendments would clarify and improve existing regulatory provi sions.

This Executive Summary, together with Appendix A, t he Technical Support Document, is the Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed Ru lemaking required by the California Administrative Procedure Act. Appendix B contains the regulation, and Method 310, with the proposed changes shown in underline and strikeout format.

Among other things, this Executive Summary provides a description of the proposed amendments to the Consumer Products Regulation and to Method 310, and explains the rationale for the proposed changes. In accorda nce with Government Code section 11346.2(a)(1), a “plain English” summary of the proposal is provided in Chapter V of the Technical Support Document (Append ix A).Executive Summary - 2

A. AUTHORITY TO REGULATE CONSUMER PRODUCTS

Consumer products are chemically formulated product s used by household and institutional consumers. Examples include detergen ts; cleaning products; floor finishes; personal care products; lawn and garden products; a ir fresheners; disinfectants; automotive specialty products; paint thinners; mult i-purpose solvents; and aerosol paints.

The Health and Safety Code sets forth ARB’s authori ty to regulate consumer products to control VOCs and greenhouse gases (GHG). Sectio n 41712 specifies requirements to reduce VOC emissions as a ground-level ozone con trol strategy. Section 38500 et

seq. , establishes authority to reduce the impacts of GH Gs used in consumer products to slow climate change.

1. Health and Safety Code section 41712

In 1988, the California Clean Air Act (CCAA or “the Act”) added section 41712 to the California Health and Safety Code. The intent of s ection 41712 is primarily to reduce ground-level ozone concentrations. Section 41712, along with subsequent amendments, requires ARB to adopt regulations to ac hieve the maximum feasible reduction in VOC emissions from consumer products. The CCAA specified that attainment of the California State ambient air qual ity standards is necessary to promote and protect public health, particularly of children , older people, and those with respiratory diseases. The Legislature also directe d that these standards be attained by the earliest practicable date.

Prior to adoption, the Board must determine that ad equate data exist to establish that the regulations are necessary to attain State and f ederal ambient air quality standards; and the regulations are commercially and technologi cally feasible. The Act further stipulates that regulations adopted must not elimin ate any product form, and that recommendations from health professionals be consid ered when developing VOC control measures for health benefit products.

2. Health and Safety Code section 38500 et seq.

In 2006, Assembly Bill (AB) 32, The California Glob al Warming Solutions Act of 2006, was signed into law. This law created a comprehens ive, multi-year program to reduce

GHG emissions in California. The California Health and Safety Code, commencing with section 38500, contains the provisions. AB 32 requ ires ARB to develop regulations and consider market-based compliance mechanisms that wi ll ultimately restore California’s GHG emissions to the 1990 baseline year by 2020. B eyond the requirements of AB 32,

the Governor’s Executive Order EO-S-03-05 calls for an 80 percent GHG reduction from 1990 levels by 2050.Executive Summary - 3

AB 32, among other things, requires immediate progr ess, described as Discrete Early Action Measures, to reduce GHGs. Discrete Early Ac tion Measures are defined as regulations adopted to reduce GHG emissions that be come enforceable by January 1, 2010. Reduction of compounds with high GWP that are used in consumer products has been designated as a Discrete Early Ac tion Measure (ARB, 2007b).

B. EXISTING REGULATIONS

Over the last twenty years, the Board has taken num erous actions to fulfill the legislative mandates pertaining to the regulation of consumer p roducts. Three regulations have been adopted that affect 125 consumer product categ ories by setting 174 VOC limits. These limits, when fully effective, will have resul ted in reducing emissions by about 200 tons per day, an overall 44 percent reduction i n VOC emissions from consumer products. At its June 26, 2008, hearing, the Board approved amendments that set new or lower VOC limits for 19 categories of consumer p roducts with an additional 25 VOC limits (ARB, 2008e). These amendments became legal ly effective on July 18, 2009 and will reduce VOC emissions by an additional 5.8 tons per day when fully effective. The

June 2008 amendments also established the first lim it to reduce the impact of Pressurized Gas Duster product emissions on global warming. Limiting the emissions of GHGs in this category is equivalent to reducing about 0.2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year.

We have also reduced exposure to Toxic Air Contamin ants (TACs). Emissions of TACs have been reduced by over 13 tons per day by prohib iting use of chlorinated compounds in 70 categories.

In addition, two voluntary regulations, the Alterna tive Control Plan and the Hairspray Credit Program, have been adopted to provide compli ance flexibility to companies. These five regulations are codified in title 17, Ca lifornia Code of Regulations,

sections 94500 to 94575.

C. REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

In order to involve the public, the Consumer Produc ts Regulation Workgroup (CPRWG), was reconvened in 2004. Participation in the CPRWG was, and continues to be, open to any member of the public. The CPRWG participate d in the development of the 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey (2006 Surve y) and 2008 Paint Thinner and Multi-purpose Solvent Survey Update (Survey Update) . These surveys serve as the basis for this proposal. The CPRWG was instrumenta l in the development of these proposed amendments. Consumer product manufacturer s; chemical producers; marketers; trade associations; environmental groups ; air districts; and various other stakeholders are all active participants.

In addition to the CPRWG meetings, an initial publi c meeting was held in August of 2008 to begin the public process of developing this proposal. A public workshop to discuss the data from the 2006 Survey and Survey Up date, as well as proposed VOCExecutive Summary - 4

limits, was held on April 1, 2009. Prior to the Ap ril workshop, we posted materials to the consumer products program website for review and co mment. A second public workshop to discuss the proposed amendments with st akeholders is scheduled for early August 2009.

D. VOC EMISSIONS

Although each consumer product may seem to be a sma ll source of VOC emissions, the cumulative use of these products by over 38 mil lion Californians results in significant VOC emissions (DOF, 2008). Given the severity of the air pollution problems in California, further emission reductions from all so urces contributing to the formation of ground-level ozone are necessary.

Emissions of VOCs from consumer products contribute to the formation of both groundlevel ozone and particulate matter pollution. This section, however, focuses on reducing emissions from consumer products as a grou nd-level ozone control strategy. As evidence of the magnitude of consumer product VO C emissions, it is estimated that in 2010 consumer products emissions will be approxi mately 255 tons per day, or about 12 percent of the overall Statewide VOC inventory. In this same year, consumer product emissions will comprise about 19 and 7 perc ent of VOC emissions in the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), respectively. Without further actions, consumer product emissions are expected to grow to approxima tely 283 tons per day in 2020, representing 14 percent of statewide VOC emissions (ARB, 2009a).

As control measures for other VOC sources become ef fective, consumer product emissions become more important in the SCAQMD. It is estimated that emissions from consumer products will be the largest source of VOC emissions in the SCAQMD in 2020. While the ozone forming potential of consume r product emissions is less than some other source categories (e.g., light duty pass enger vehicles), clearly, further reductions in VOC emissions from consumer products and other VOC sources are

needed if attainment of the State and federal ozone standards are to be achieved.

Despite these projections, ARB’s consumer products program has made significant progress. Since 1989, ARB regulations, along with numerous amendments to the regulations, have substantially reduced VOC emissio ns from consumer products. Absent these regulations today, consumer product em issions would likely be about 450 tons per day. Figure ES-1 shows that statewide con sumer product VOC emissions have been reduced by over 200 tons per day in 2010. However, Figure ES-1 also shows that without further actions population growt h will likely reverse the trend.Executive Summary - 5 

### Figure ES-1

Consumer Products VOC Emission Trends

225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 525

199 0

1 99 2 19 9 4 19 9 6 19 9 8 20 0 0 2002 2004 200

6 200 8
2 01 0
2 01 2 20 1 4 20 1 6 20 1 8 2020

YearEmissions (tpd) Emissions (with population growth only)

Emissions (with population growth and emission redu ctions)

The emission values in Figure ES-1 are derived from several data sources.

The 1990 to 2007 emissions are taken from the ARB F orecasted Emissions by Summary Category, 2008 Almanac (ARB, 2008c). Emiss ions are then grown in proportion to population increase. Population grow th is in accordance with estimates in the California Environmental Protection Agency’s (C al/EPA) Statewide Human Population Table found in the Population and Vehicl e Trends Report (ARB, 2008d). For categories regulated in the 2006 and 2008 Consumer Products Amendments, emission

values from the 2003 Consumer and Commercial Produc ts Survey and the projected emissions reductions resulting from the VOC limits approved in 2006 and 2008, are reflected in Figure ES-1.

E. CONSUMER PRODUCT VOC EMISSION REDUCTION COMMITM ENTS IN THE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP)

Reduction of VOC emissions is necessary to attain t he ambient air quality standards for ozone. In 1988, with the passing of the CCAA, the importance of controlling emissions from consumer products was set forth. To meet the federal ozone standard, in 1994 emission reductions from consumer products became p art of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone. In this SIP, consumer produc ts measures were put in place to work towards attaining the federal peak one-hour am bient air quality standard for ozone. In the 2003 SIP, ARB again reiterated the commitmen t to reduce consumer products

VOC emissions to meet the one-hour federal ozone st andard. 200 tpdExecutive Summary - 6

In response to these mandates, three regulations wi th 174 VOC limits for 125 categories of consumer products (including antiperspirants and deodorants and 36 aerosol coating products categories) were establ ished. The adopted limits to meet these commitments will achieve a 44 percent reducti on in overall VOC emissions from consumer products by the year 2010.

However, the 2003 SIP was withdrawn and the remaini ng consumer product emission reduction commitment was incorporated into the 2007 Strategy. This Strategy includes California’s plan to attain the national ozone stan dard of 0.08 parts per million (ppm) averaged over eight-hours. In the Strategy, ARB ha s committed to an additional 30 to 40 tons per day VOC reduction from consumer p roducts by January 1, 2014. The amendments that became effective on July 18, 2009, provide the first increment, about 4.5 tons per day, toward meeting the commitment. A n additional emission reduction of about 1.3 tons per day will be achieved in 2015.

Table ES-1 shows our progress toward meeting the co nsumer products commitment in the Strategy. The anticipated 2010 Amendments incl ude four cleaning products categories, (non-aerosol General Purpose Cleaners a nd Degreasers, Glass Cleaners, and aerosol Furniture Maintenance Products) which s taff are currently evaluating for further reductions. Additional discussion regardin g these categories can be found in section L, Future Plans. We are continuing the rev iew of data from the 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey as a further basis f or identifying and evaluating additional categories for emission reduction opport unities. If feasible, additional proposals would be brought for consideration before the Board in 2010.

Table ES-1

Consumer Product VOC Reductions Accredited Toward S IP Commitment

Consumer Products Rulemaking VOC Reductions (tons p er day)

June 2008 Amendments 4.5

September 2009 Amendments (this proposal) 14.7

2010 Cleaning Products Amendments (under development) 5 – 8

Additional Reductions from 2006 Survey Product Categories 5.8 – 12.8

Totals Reductions by January 1, 2014 30 – 40

The Strategy also acknowledges that VOC reductions from consumer products are becoming more difficult to achieve. In light of th is, the Strategy includes a commitment to explore innovative reduction strategies in the l onger term. These measures would include investigating emission reduction opportunit ies through reactivity-based

standards and alternative market-based mechanisms. If these mechanisms cannot produce meaningful emission reductions from the con sumer products source category, then other approaches would be evaluated. Some of these approaches include the purchase of VOC emission reduction credits; and fun ding of special projects to reduceExecutive Summary - 7

emissions or accelerate reductions from pollution s ources outside of the consumer products industry.

The amendments proposed in this rulemaking are the second increment of emission reductions which further fulfill the Strategy commi tment for VOC reductions from consumer products.

F. SCAQMD RULE 1143 – CONSUMER PAINT THINNERS AND

MULTI-PURPOSE SOLVENTS

In March 2009, SCAQMD adopted Rule 1143, “Consumer Paint Thinners and MultiPurpose Solvents” which, upon the effective date, w ill achieve VOC emissions reductions from consumer Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners used in the South Coast Air Basin. The VOC limits we are proposing f or Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners are new limits for previously unregulated categories. In absence of a statewide regulation, SCAQMD has the authority to a dopt limits affecting these products.

Upon approval of this proposal and implementation o f SCAQMD Rule 1143, manufacturers of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Th inner products will be required to meet the Rule 1143 limits for products sold or supp lied for use in the South Coast Air Basin, and the statewide limits for products sold t o all areas of California, outside the South Coast Air Basin. The VOC limits we are propo sing are virtually equivalent to those adopted by SCAQMD, however, the effective dat es are different. The effective dates for Rule 1143 are January 1, 2010, and Januar y 1, 2011 for the first and second tier VOC limits respectively, while our proposed ef fective dates are December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2013.

We are proposing to provide one additional year for manufacturers to meet the first tier limit simply due to the time necessary for State re gulations to become legally effective, per State law, compared to the shortened time frame for local air district rules to become legally effective. For the second tier limi t, we believe it has not been demonstrated that products meeting the 3 percent VO C limit will function as paint thinners for all solvent-borne coatings available i n commerce. While we are encouraged about the future viability of low VOC th inners, such as soy based products, it has not yet been demonstrated that they are read y for introduction into the market. There is still a need for paint thinners that are c ompatible with solvent-borne coatings, for a period of time, in areas of the State other t han the South Coast Air Basin because SCAQMD has more stringent VOC coating limits than m any other areas of the state. Therefore, we determined it was appropriate that th e second tier, 3 percent VOC limit be effective December 31, 2013, giving manufacturer s sufficent time to develop low VOC thinners that are compatible with solvent-borne coatings.

Additionally, the second tier limit could lead to a n increase in sales of more highly flammable products, such as acetone. An acetone-ba sed “Paint Thinner” product will function differently than the former “Paint Thinner ” product. Without enough lead time,Executive Summary - 8

we are concerned that acetone products will be the most likely pathway to compliance. To allow sufficient time for development of less fl ammable, and/or less costly alternatives, we are proposing an effective date of December 31, 2013 for the 3 percent

VOC limit.

In order to avoid double-counting category sales an d VOC emissions, we have subtracted from the statewide values, the portion o f Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner sales, VOC emissions, and reductions that o ccur in the South Coast Air Basin, based on population (DOF, 2008). The calculated VO C emissions and reductions for the Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner categor ies listed in Table ES-2, are the correct values which can be credited toward the pro posed regulation. More detail on our proposal for the Multi-purpose Solvent and Pain t Thinner categories can be found in the Technical Support Document, Chapter VI, section B.

G. ESTIMATED VOC EMISSIONS FROM CATEGORIES PROPOSED TO BE

REGULATED

The 2006 Survey and the Survey Update serve as the basis for the proposed

amendments to reduce VOC emissions. The 2006 Surve y and the Survey Update provided detailed information on the formulations o f consumer products proposed for regulation, including complete speciation of VOCs, low vapor pressure VOC (LVP-VOC) solvents, and key exempt ingredients. Total volume s of inorganic and other compounds were also reported. Information on sales, product form, customer types, and company

size and economics were also included. For this ru lemaking, the 2009 emissions and reduction estimates were grown from 2006 and 2008 s ales. Annual population growth factors were calculated using the California Enviro nmental Protection Agency’s (Cal/EPA) Statewide Human Population Table found in the Population and Vehicle Trends Report (ARB, 2008d). We estimate that the 2 009 VOC emissions from the categories proposed for regulation are more than 22 tons per day.

H. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Amendments are being proposed to the following sect ions in the Consumer Products Regulation: section 94508 “Definitions;” section 94 509 “Standards for Consumer Products;” section 94510 “Exemptions;” section 9451 2 “Administrative Requirements;” section 94513 “Reporting Requirements;” and section 94515 “Test Methods.” The proposed amendments to these sections are summarize d below. In this section, we are also providing a summary of amendments to Method 31 0. Chapter V of the Technical Support Document contains more detailed information on each proposed requirement.

1. Definitions (Section 94508)

Section 94508 “Definitions,” provides all of the te rms used in the Consumer Products Regulation which are not self-explanatory. The pro posed amendments to the Regulation include the modification of three definitions, and the addition of six new definitions. These definitions are necessary to de fine categories proposed for VOCExecutive Summary - 9

limits, clarify products that are not subject to th e VOC limits, or to improve the enforceability of the Consumer Products Regulation.

2. Proposed Amendments to Standards for Consumer Pr oducts (Section 94509)

Table of Standards : The proposed regulatory action would amend the e xisting Consumer Products Regulation by specifying VOC limi ts for the product categories

shown in Table ES-2. Note that for Double Phase Ae rosol Air Freshener we are proposing to lower the existing VOC limit to 20 per cent, effective December 31, 2012.

Table ES-2 also shows that statewide VOC emissions would be reduced by approximately 14.7 tons per day when the limits are fully effective. These reductions would provide further progress toward fulfilling th e consumer products element in the Strategy.

Table ES-2 Proposed VOC Limits, Emissions, and Reductions at E ffective Date
Product Category Product

Form Proposed

VOC Limit
(percent by weight) 2009 VOC

Emissions*
(tons per day) Effective

Date Reductions

Upon

Effective

Date
(tons per day)

Double Phase Aerosol

Air Freshener Aerosol 20 10.2 12/31/2012 2.0

tier 1: 30 12.5 + 12/31/2010 8.4 + Multi-purpose Solvent

& Paint Thinner Non-aerosol tier 2: 3 --- 12/31/2013 3.9 +

Total Emissions 2009 22.6 tons per day

Total VOC Reductions by end of 2013 14.7 tons per day

* Survey emissions adjusted for market coverage, g rown to the 2009 calendar year, and rounded.

+ Does not include emissions or reductions in the S outh Coast Air Basin.

It should be noted that the emissions and reduction s listed for the Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner categories are combined because w e have determined that the products are used interchangeably. A further discu ssion can be found in the Technical Support Document, Chapter VI, section B, “Multi-pur pose Solvent and Paint Thinner.”

Other Provisions :

a. Automotive Windshield Washer Fluid Label Clarifi cation

Minor clarifying changes are proposed to the labeli ng requirements pertaining to

dilutable automotive windshield washer fluid in sec tion 94509(b). This proposal will require automotive windshield washer fluid manufact urers to clearly identify on the product label when the product is ready to use vers us dilutable. This change is intended to ensure that the lowest VOC products are used and previously calculated

emissions reductions are achieved.Executive Summary - 10

b. Limit on Use of Global Warming Compounds

In accordance with AB 32, we are proposing to prohi bit the use of compounds with global warming potential (GWP) values of 150 or gre ater in “Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener,” “Multi-Purpose Solvent,” and “Paint Thi nner” products. These provisions are contained in new subsections 94509(t) and (u). These proposals are intended to minimize the climate change impacts of products ref ormulated to comply with the proposed VOC limits.

c. Toxics Prohibition

Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQ A), ARB is required to identify and mitigate any possible significant adverse environme ntal impacts of regulatory actions. It is unlikely, but possible, that manufacturers may, in response to new VOC limits for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, c hoose to reformulate with chlorinated solvents that are TACs. Therefore, in accordance with CEQA, we are proposing in new subsection 94509(u), a prohibition of the use of methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene in the “Mu lti-purpose Solvent,” and “Paint Thinner” categories.

d. Photochemical Reactivity

Also in section 94509(u), there is a proposal to li mit the use of aromatic compounds in “Multi-Purpose Solvent” and “Paint Thinner” product s to 1 percent by weight. This requirement is intended to mitigate the possibility that manufacturers could replace current VOC solvents used in Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products with highly reactive compounds.

3. Proposed Amendments to Exemptions, Section 94510 (m)

Proposed Temporary Small Size Exemption for Paint T hinner : The proposal contains a provision to temporarily exempt very small (eight f luid ounces or less) containers of Paint Thinner from compliance with the VOC limits u ntil December 31, 2013. This exemption is designed to allow consumers to continu e to be able to purchase typical Paint Thinners to be used with paints where the est ablished VOC limit allows for fairly high concentrations of solvents. In addition, ther e is an existing exemption from the VOC limits for architectural coatings packaged in c ontainers with a volume of one liter (1.057 quart) or less. Therefore, we believe a lim ited and temporary small container exemption is appropriate for Paint Thinners. Absen t this provision, these solvent-borne paint products may be discarded, resulting in incre asing the solid or hazardous waste stream or affecting water quality. This proposal s hould mitigate these potential consequences. We expect that the emissions impacts of this small size exemption will

be minimal.Executive Summary - 11

4. Proposed Amendments to Administrative Requiremen ts, Section 94512(e)

Proposed Modification to Labeling Requirements : Under the proposal, Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products would be require d to display the percent VOC content, by weight, as determined from actual formu lation data. This requirement will enhance the enforceability of the proposed VOC limi ts for these products and provide

useful information to the consumer.

On May 25, 2000, the Board approved a labeling requ irement for Aerosol Adhesive Products, requiring that products display the VOC s tandard as is specified in the California Consumer Products Regulation (ARB, 2000) . Additionally, on June 24, 2004, the Board approved the addition of four other produ ct categories to this requirement. While the requirement we are proposing for Multi-pu rpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products is slightly different, requiring the VOC c ontent of the product rather than the VOC standard, it parallels the labeling requirement s previously approved by the Board.

Also, to address the concern regarding the flammabi lity of low-VOC Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, “Flammable” or “Extremely Flammable” products would not be able to display a general name on the principle display panel, such as “Paint Thinner;” “Multi-purpose Solvent;” “Clean-up Solvent;” or “Paint Clean-up.” Manufacturers may choose to sell a “Flammable” or “ Extremely Flammable” product with one of these general names if they do one of t he following: provide an attached hang tag or sticker that includes the statement “Fo rmulated to meet California VOC limits, see warnings on label;” or display on the p rinciple display panel in a font size as large as or larger than any other words on the pane l, the common name of the chemical compound that results in the product meeting the cr iteria for “Flammable” or “Extremely

Flammable.”

These requirements are intended to alert the consum er of a potential change in formulation of these products which could present a fire hazard if used improperly. Additional discussion regarding the flammability co ncern is provided in K. Environmental Impacts.

5. Proposed Amendments to Reporting Requirements, S ection 94513(g)

We are proposing 30 percent by weight VOC limits fo r Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, effective December 31, 2010. The se limits are challenging, but

feasible for manufacturers to meet within the time- frame proposed. We are also proposing technology forcing 3 percent by weight se cond tier VOC limits for Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, effecti ve December 31, 2013. To ascertain if manufacturers are on track, and that t echnology advances as expected, we are proposing that manufacturers report their progr ess towards meeting these limits.

As proposed in new subsection 94513(g), Multi-purpo se Solvent and Paint Thinner manufacturers would be required to supply by June 3 0, 2012, detailed written updatesExecutive Summary - 12

on their research and development efforts undertake n to achieve compliance with the 3 percent by weight VOC limits. The reports would include sales and formulation data for products sold in 2011, as well as detailed info rmation on the raw materials evaluated for use; maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) value s for any VOC or LVP-VOC used or evaluated; the function of the raw material evaluat ed; hardware evaluated; testing protocols used; the results of the testing; and the cost of reformulation efforts.

6. Proposed Amendments to Test Methods, Section 945 15

To ensure the ozone forming potential of Multi-purp ose Solvent and Paint Thinner products does not increase as a result of the imple mentation of the proposed VOC limits, staff is proposing to limit the use of VOC aromatic compound content to no more than 1 percent by weight, effective December 31, 20 10. A further discussion regarding the need for limiting the use of these highly react ive ingredients is provided in the Technical Support Document, Chapter VIII, Environme ntal Impacts.

I. COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Manufacturers have the flexibility to choose from a variety of formulation options to meet the applicable limits (see Chapter VI, Description of Product Categories). To comply with VOC limits, VOC solvents or propellants may ne ed to be replaced, or partially replaced, with VOC exempt ingredients. This may re quire using acetone or another exempt solvent, or formulating with a VOC exempt pr opellant. Manufacturers may also need to change the valve, container, delivery syste m, or the other components of the consumer product depending on the individual formul ation.

To meet the VOC limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners, the most straightforward reformulation pathway is to utilize less hydrocarbon propellant in the

formulation and add more water. Another reformulat ion option is to use VOC exempt propellants such as HFC-152a or HFC-134a. The like lihood of this reformulation choice is minimal because of the increased cost of these p ropellants. However, we are proposing a GWP limit of 150 for the category to en sure that high GWP propellants are

not used in reformulations to meet the VOC limit. The proposed VOC limits can be met without a significant increase in the use of TACs o r GHGs. We believe that products can and will be reformulated primarily through redu ction in the amount of hydrocarbon propellant with possibly some modification or adjus tments to the surfactants and/or the valve/spray nozzle.

To meet the proposed first tier VOC limits for Mult i-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, the most likely “reformulation” pathway i s product substitution (i.e. increasing the sales of existing complying products and discon tinuing sale of non-complying products). To meet the proposed second tier VOC li mit for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, reformulation options inclu de developing water-based formulations, in addition to product substitution. We believe that products can and will be reformulated through reduction or replacement of VOC solvents with VOC exempt ingredients or through technologies that include us ing LVP–methyl esters, hydrocarbonExecutive Summary - 13

solvents, or water emulsion technology. Possible r eformulation options could also include chlorinated toxic compounds, and compounds that could compromise the predicted ozone benefits of the limits. However, b ecause these formulation options are not necessary, and the proposal includes specific p rohibitions to prevent them, products cannot be reformulated using these options and poss ible adverse impacts will be prevented.

Table ES-3 summarizes, for the proposed VOC limits, data related to the complying marketshares (based on sales), as well as the numbe r of products that currently comply relative to total number of products reported. It should be noted that there are currently a few Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner produ cts, with significant market presence, formulated slightly above 30 percent VOC by weight. These products will only need a modest reformulation to comply with the proposed 30 percent standard. The complying marketshare in Table ES-3, for the fi rst tier limit for the Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner categories, would be sign ificantly higher if these products already complied with the proposed 30 percent VOC l imit.

Table ES-3 Summary of Complying Products and Complying Marketshares

Product Category Product

Form Proposed

VOC Limit (wt%) Number of

Complying

Products/Total Complying

Marketshare (%)

Double Phase Aerosol Air

Freshener Aerosol 20 <10 / 60* <1

tier 1: 30 18 / 165 11.3 Multi-purpose Solvent

& Paint Thinner Non-aerosol tier 2: 3 15 / 165 11.2

Source: 2006 Consumer & Commercial Products Survey and Paint Thinner & Multi-purpose Solvent Survey U pdate. *60 products (product groups) reported. Total of 2 31 products reported if fragrance variants are cons idered.

Manufacturers can also comply with the proposed ame ndments through the use of the Innovative Products Provision (IPP) or the Alternat ive Control Plan (ACP). The IPP allows manufacturers of “innovative products” to co mply with the Consumer Products Regulation if they demonstrate through clear and co nvincing evidence that their product will result in less VOC emissions than a complying product that meets the applicable VOC limit. The innovative product may result in le ss emissions due to some characteristic of the product formulation, design, delivery system, or other factors.

The ACP allows manufacturers to average the emissio ns from products above and below the applicable VOC limits, as long as the ove rall emissions are less than or equal

to the emissions that would have occurred had all t he products complied with the VOC limits. Manufacturers must submit an application w hich includes the VOC content of the products in the plan, a method of verifying the sal es of each product in the plan, and other information necessary to track overall emissi ons.Executive Summary - 14

J. ECONOMIC IMPACTS

The economic impacts of the proposed amendments are summarized here. Our complete analysis of these impacts is contained in Chapter VII of the Technical Support

Document.

1. Overall Cost

We estimate that the overall cost to comply with th e proposed amendments is about $3.1 million per year for ten years, for a total of $31 million. This amount includes both recurring (e.g., raw materials) and nonrecurring (e .g., research and development) costs and is estimated based on assumptions specific to e ach category. The cost represents the average of low and high cost estimates and repr esents our prediction of the costs most likely to be incurred.

2. Cost Effectiveness

Another measure of the economic impacts of the prop osal is to determine the “dollars to be spent per pound of VOC reduced,” or cost effecti veness (CE). The CE of the proposed amendments has been calculated to be about $0.29 per pound of VOC reduced. This is based on expected emission reduct ions of about 14.7 tons per day.

This cost effectiveness is better than other recent consumer products rulemakings. The CE of amendments proposed in 2004, 2006, and 2008 w as about $2.40, $2.35 and $6.23 per pound of VOC reduced, respectively. The lower cost per pound of VOC reduced for this rulemaking results from the relati vely large reduction in VOC emissions being achieved from only three product categories.

3. Return on Owner’s Equity (ROE)

Another measure of the impacts of the proposed amen dments on manufacturers is to determine the ROE. ROE is a calculation which comp ares a company’s percentage reduction in profitability after incurring the cost s associated with the proposed amendments. In calculating ROE, we make the conser vative assumption that manufacturers will absorb all compliance costs with out passing any of these costs on to the consumer. Our analysis found that the overall reduction in profitability ranges from 5.4 percent to about 24.2 percent, with an average reduction in profitability of about 14.8 percent. The ROE of about 24.2 percent combin ed the ROEs estimated from the first tier and second tier limits for the Multi-pur pose Solvent and Paint Thinner categories. Thus, the potential exists that some b usinesses may experience a significant impact in their profitability. In ligh t of this, the assessment of ROE requires further explanation.

The ROE for sample businesses complying with the pr oposed limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, and the first tier limit for the Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner categories, declined by about 7.5 percent. This is not a significant change in the average profitability of typical businesses in California. In factoring in the secondExecutive Summary - 15

tier limit for the Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner categories, however, we estimated the ROE to decline by up to 14.7 percent. The overall average reduction in profitability from complying with all of the VOC li mits is 14.8 percent. Because of the predicted magnitude of the percent decline in profi tability for Multi-purpose Solvent/Paint Thinner product manufacturers, we believe they will pass through to the consumer a portion, or all, compliance costs to maintain their profitability. We also would expect the impact on profitability to be lessened, to a degree , if we assume a normal growth pattern occurs for this affected industry sector, w ith the sales and profits increasing over

time.

We believe that overall, most affected businesses p rofitability will not be adversely affected. If they are unable to absorb all or a po rtion of the compliance costs, these costs will be passed through to the consumer.

4. Impacts on California Businesses

Because we believe that manufacturers will pass the ir compliance costs onto the consumer, we believe the proposed amendments would not significantly alter the profitability of most businesses, as shown in our R OE analysis, we do not expect a noticeable change in employment; business creation; elimination or expansion; and business competitiveness in California. However, t he proposed amendments may impose economic hardship on businesses with very li ttle or no margin of profitability.

5. Increased Cost to Consumers and Licensed Contrac tors

As a result of this proposal, consumers may have to pay more for some products, depending on the extent to which manufacturers pass along their compliance costs. If all assumed compliance costs are passed on to the c onsumer, we estimate the cost per unit increase would range from negligible or no cos t for a Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener product to about $0.75 for a Multi-purpos e Solvent/Paint Thinner product reformulated to meet both tiers of proposed VOC lim its. The aforementioned costs do not include typical retail mark-up.

Because we expect that to maintain profitability (s ee ROE analysis) some businesses will pass on compliance costs to the consumer, we e stimated the increased cost the consumer may experience. By apportioning annual sa les of Multi-purpose Solvent/Paint Thinner products to the California po pulation, we estimated that residents purchase less than one container of Multi-purpose S olvent/Paint Thinner product per year. Thus, considering normal retail mark-up, the consumers’ cost increase to purchase a Multi-purpose Solvent/Paint Thinner prod uct would increase by about $1.50 per gallon.

However, Multi-purpose Solvent/Paint Thinner produc ts are more commonly purchased by contractors. If we apportion all sales of the M ulti-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner categories to licensed contractors, we estimate pur chases of approximately five gallons per year, per contractor. Considering normal retai l mark-up, the cost increase perExecutive Summary - 16

product to licensed contractors purchasing Multi-pu rpose Solvent/Paint Thinner products would be about $8 per year (CDCA, 2009).

6. Fiscal Impacts

No significant adverse economic impacts to any loca l or State agency were identified.

K. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

The proposed amendments to the Consumer Products Re gulation are primarily designed to reduce VOC emissions. Therefore, imple menting the proposed VOC limits would have an overall positive impact on the enviro nment by reducing exposure to ground-level ozone. Other proposed amendments woul d either have no impact or would have beneficial impacts on the environment. No significant adverse impacts were

identified.

We evaluated how the proposed amendments would impa ct ground-level ozone concentrations; particulate matter (particularly se condary organic aerosols); climate change; stratospheric ozone depletion; solid waste disposal; water quality; energy use; public safety; agricultural resources; and air toxi c emission exposure. While no significant adverse impacts are expected, in instan ces where a potential adverse impact was identified, staff is proposing mitigation measu res in accordance with CEQA or authority granted under AB 32. A complete analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the proposal is contained in Chapter VII I of the Technical Support Document.

The proposed amendments would result in a VOC reduc tion of about 14.7 tons per day by the end of 2013. Our qualitative health risk as sessment concludes that because VOCs are ozone precursors, public health is further protected by reducing these emissions. The actual lowering of health risks has not been quantified. However, it has been estimated (Ostro et al., 2006) that about 630 fewer premature deaths would occur each year in California from exposure to ozone if C alifornia were to attain the State ozone standard. The reductions resulting from this proposal would be an incremental step toward achieving the State ozone standard. Im plementing the proposed VOC limits, however, could lead to potential adverse im pacts. The potential impacts identified and measures to mitigate the impact foll ows.

1. Limit on Use of Global Warming Compounds

Several compounds with high global warming potentia ls could be used in reformulated products. For Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener p roducts, the use of VOC-exempt propellants such as hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) 152a an d HFC-134a are reformulation options. For Multi-Purpose Solvent and Paint Thinn er products, there is a slight possibility that solvents with high global warming potentials could be used. To minimize climate change impacts from implementing the propos ed VOC limits, we are proposing to prohibit use of compounds with GWP values above 150 in Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multi-Purpose Solvent, and Paint Thinner products. These provisions areExecutive Summary - 17

proposed in subsections 94509(t) and 94509(u). Thi s proposal would allow use of the propellant HFC-152a in Double Phase Aerosol Air Fre shener. However, the proposed VOC limit for this category is feasible without the use of this compound.

2. Potential Toxics Impacts

In the Survey Update, no use of methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloroethylene was reported for Multi-purpose So lvent and Paint Thinner products. However, use of these chlorinated TAC solvents, par ticularly the VOC-exempt compounds methylene chloride and perchloroethylene, is a potential option as products are reformulated to comply with the proposed limits . Therefore, to ensure that the public is not exposed to these chlorinated TAC solv ents from use of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, we are proposin g in new section 94509(u), to prohibit the use of methylene chloride, perchloroet hylene, and trichloroethylene in Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. No adv erse impacts on other media are expected from this proposal.

3. Photochemical Reactivity Considerations

During development of the proposal for Multi-purpos e Solvent and Paint Thinner products, we evaluated the reduction in ozone formi ng potential that would occur from implementation of the first tier 30 percent by weig ht VOC limit and the second tier 3 percent by weight VOC limit. This analysis showed that some reformulation options could result in products with higher ozone forming potential, which could erode the expected air quality benefits. To ensure that pred icted reductions in ozone forming potential occur, we are proposing to limit the VOC aromatic compound content of products to 1 percent by weight. This proposal wou ld not result in further VOC mass reductions, but would result in further reducing th e ozone formation potential of reformulated products.

4. Safety

Reformulations of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint T hinner products could result in

increased fire hazards should manufacturers choose to reformulate using highly flammable solvents such as acetone or methyl acetat e, both exempt VOCs. Several amendments are proposed to mitigate this potential hazard. First, new provisions are proposed in subsection 94512(e). This provision wo uld apply to Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products required to be labeled “ Flammable” or “Extremely Flammable,” to comply with federal regulations. As proposed, these products would not be able to display a general name on the principle display panel, such as “Paint Thinner;” “Multi-purpose Solvent;” “Clean-up Solven t;” “Paint Clean-up;” or other similar name. Manufacturers may choose to sell a “Flammabl e” or “Extremely Flammable” product with one of these general names if they do one of the following: provide an attached hang tag or sticker that includes the stat ement “Formulated to meet California VOC limits, see warnings on label;” or display on t he principle display panel, in a font size as large as or larger than any other words on the panel, the common name of theExecutive Summary - 18

chemical compound that results in the product meeti ng the criteria for “Flammable” or “Extremely Flammable.”

Additionally, to potentially minimize the increased fire hazard from the use of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, w e are proposing an effective date of December 31, 2013 for the second tier VOC limit. T his additional compliance time is provided to allow for development of additional ref ormulation technologies and development of potentially less flammable products. We will assess progress of development of low VOC, less flammable products thr ough a technical assessment prior to the effective date of the second tier limi t. This is described below in “Technical

Assessment.”

We are also proposing to temporarily exempt very sm all (eight fluid ounces or less) containers of Paint Thinner from compliance with th e VOC limit until December 31, 2013. This measure is designed to all ow consumers to purchase currently marketed Paint Thinner products to be use d with previously purchased solvent-borne paints. This should further reduce p otential fire hazards. Also, absent this provision, these paint products could be disca rded, resulting in increasing solid or hazardous waste disposal or adversely affecting wat er quality. Therefore, this proposal is designed to mitigate these potential consequence s.

5. Technical Assessment

As described above, several adverse impacts could o ccur as products reformulate to meet the proposed VOC limits, particularly the seco nd tier VOC limit for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. Because of thi s, we believe that an assessment of reformulations should be conducted prior to the Dec ember 31, 2013 effective date. As proposed in new subsection 94513(g), Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner manufacturers would be required to supply formulati on data and detailed written updates on research and development efforts underta ken to achieve compliance with the second tier, 3 percent by weight VOC limit. Th ese data will enable staff to perform a technology assessment in mid-2012 to evaluate manuf acturers’ progress toward meeting this limit. We also intend to evaluate the safety and ozone forming potential of reformulation options, and, if necessary propose fu rther measures to ensure that ozone

reduction benefits occur and that fire hazards are minimized.

L. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

This proposal is consistent with the ARB’s Environm ental Justice Policy to reduce health risks in all communities, including low-inco me and minority communities. Generally, use of consumer products is fairly unifo rm across the State, tracking with population, and their emissions are spread over the course of a day, rather than concentrated at a particular time of day. For thes e reasons, we do not believe that people of any given race, culture, or income would be more impacted than any others would. All Californians should benefit equally fro m the reduction in VOC emissions from the consumer product categories proposed for regula tion.Executive Summary - 19

M. FUTURE PLANS

Future activities include continued review of the 2 006 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey. This survey will serve as the bas is for additional VOC and GHG reductions measures for consumer products. Additio nal reductions are needed to meet consumer product VOC reduction commitments in the S trategy and to reduce the GWP of consumer products, under AB 32.

During 2009, we are conducting a risk assessment re garding public exposure to the potentially toxic compounds xylenes, toluene, dibut yl phthalate, and formaldehyde in nail coating formulations used in nail salons. Air quality modeling is being done to estimate outdoor exposure to these compounds from a n individual business, as well as, cumulative emissions from multiple facilities.

The Paint Remover/Stripper category will also be ev aluated during 2009 for potential VOC and toxic air contaminant reductions upon the c ompletion of the 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey Data Summaries.

Non-aerosol General Purpose Cleaners, General Purpo se Degreasers, Glass Cleaners,

and aerosol Furniture Maintenance Products are unde r evaluation for further regulation. Part of this evaluation is to determine if potentia l adverse impacts would result from the use of predicted reformulations used to comply with proposed lower VOC limits. We are working with Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment staff to develop health values for various LVP-VOC glycol ethers that could be used in reformulated products. We are also working with State Water Resources Cont rol Board staff to evaluate water quality impacts from use of cleaning products. Of particular concern is a family of surfactants, the alkylphenol ethoxylates. Evidence indicates these surfactants are toxic to aquatic organisms, with the main concern being t he estrogenic effects of their degradation products. Upon completion of this eval uation, we intend to propose to the Board in 2010, new limits for these categories, whi ch we expect to achieve 5 – 8 tons per day VOC reductions toward the consumer products commitment in the Strategy.

Sales and formulation information for Dry Clean Onl y Spot Removers obtained from a separate survey sent out to dry cleaning chemical m anufacturers on January 14, 2009, is currently being evaluated. This evaluation will enable staff to determine if reductions of VOCs and/or TACs from Dry Clean Only Spot Remove rs is feasible.

N. RECOMMENDATION

We recommend that the Board adopt the proposed amen dments to the Consumer Products Regulation and Method 310.Executive Summary - 20

REFERENCES

1. Air Resources Board. 2008 Statewide Emissions I nventory by Summary Category, 2009 Almanac page 2-7

. http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanac09/almanac 09.htm 2009. (ARB, 2009a)

2. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation

. May 9, 2008. (ARB, 2008e)

3. Air Resources Board. 2006 Statewide Emissions In ventory by Summary Category, 2008 Almanac page 2-7

. http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanac08/almanac 08.htm 2008. (ARB, 2008c)

4. Air Resources Board. Statewide Human Population Chart: Population and Vehicle Trends Report . 2008. (ARB, 2008d)

5. Air Resources Board. Expanded List Of Early Act ion Measures To Reduce

Greenhouse Gas Emissions In California Recommended For Board

Consideration . October 17, 2007. (ARB, 2007b)

6. Air Resources Board. 2006 Consumer & Commercial Products Survey

. July 24, 2007. (ARB, 2007f)

7. Air Resources Board. ARB Forecasted Emissions b y Summary Category, 2007

Almanac . http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/fcemssumcat2007. php . 2007. (ARB, 2007h)

8. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation Relatin g to Aerosol Adhesives

. April 7, 2000. (ARB, 2000)

9. California Department of Consumer Affairs, Cont ractors State License Board. Telephone Conversation with ARB Staff . April 28, 2009. (CDCA, 2009)

10. California Department of Finance, Population E stimates and Components of Change by County, July 1, 2000-2008 . December 2008. (DOF, 2008)

11. Ostro, B.D., H. Tran, and J. I. Levy. The hea lth benefits of reduced tropospheric

ozone in California ,” 2006. Journal of Air & Waste Management Assoc 56: 1007-1021. (Ostro et al., 2006)

### Appendix A

Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed Amendment s to the

California Consumer Products Regulations

Technical Support DocumentTechnical Support Document Chapter I - 1

I. INTRODUCTION

A. OVERVIEW

In this rulemaking, California Air Resources Board (ARB or Board) staff is proposing amendments to the Regulation for Reducing Emissions from Consumer Products (Consumer Products Regulation) and to Method 310 – Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Consumer Products and Reactive O rganic Compounds in Aerosol Coating Products (Method 310). The amendments are designed to reduce VOC emissions. The proposed amendments would set new V OC limits for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products and lower the ex isting VOC limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners. When fully implemented, ab out 14.7 tons per day of VOC emission reductions would be achieved by December 3 1, 2013. We are proposing to prohibit the use of the toxic air contaminants meth ylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene in Multi-purpose Solvent and Pain t Thinner products. In addition, the aromatic content would be limited to 1 percent in t hese categories. Compounds with high global warming potential (GWP) would be prohib ited, under the proposal, in all three of the categories proposed for regulation.

The proposed amendments to reduce VOC emissions wou ld partially fulfill the consumer product reduction commitment contained in the State Strategy for California’s 2007 State Implementation Plan. The proposed toxic compound prohibition and the GWP limit are mitigation measures designed to ensur e that exposure to chlorinated solvents and climate change impacts are minimized, respectively, as products are

reformulated to meet new VOC limits. The limitatio n on the use of aromatic compounds is proposed to ensure that reductions of ozone gene rated from Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products being reformulated to me et the mass VOC limits occur as predicted. The amendment to Method 310 is to add n ew language that would clarify analytical methods used to test low VOC or high wat er content consumer products.

This Technical Support Document, Appendix A, is ARB staff’s technical justification and analysis of the proposed amendments. It is part of the Initial Statement of Reasons (ISOR) for Proposed Amendments to the California Co nsumer Products Regulations. The proposed amendments can be found in Appendix B of this document.

Included in this Technical Support Document is the following information:

• background information on the consumer products pr ogram related to the control of VOC and GHG emissions;

• information on the process used to develop the pro posed amendments;

• an assessment of why the proposed amendments meet the requirements of State law;

• a review of the emissions from the categories prop osed for regulation and the overall need for the emission reductions;Technical Support Document Chapter I - 2

• a description of the proposed amendments;

• an analysis of the estimated economic and environm ental impacts of the proposed amendments; and

• a summary of future activities.

B. ENABLING LEGISLATION

In 1988, the California Clean Air Act (CCAA or “the Act”) became law and was enacted to address the State’s serious air pollution proble ms and the inability of many areas in

California to attain the State and federal ambient air quality standards. The CCAA

added section 41712 to the California Health and Sa fety Code. Section 41712, along with subsequent amendments, requires ARB to adopt r egulations to achieve the

maximum feasible reduction in VOC emissions from co nsumer products. Prior to adoption, the Board must determine that adequate da ta exist to establish that the regulations are necessary to attain State and feder al ambient air quality standards. The regulations must also be commercially and technolog ically feasible.

Section 41712 defines a consumer product as a chemi cally formulated product used by household and institutional consumers. Consumer pr oducts include, but are not limited to: detergents; cleaning compounds; air fresheners ; polishes; floor finishes; paint thinner; multi-purpose solvents; cosmetics; persona l care products such as antiperspirants and hairsprays; home, lawn, and gar den products; disinfectants; sanitizers; automotive specialty products; and aero sol paints. Other paint products, such as furniture or architectural coatings, are no t part of ARB’s consumer products program because local air districts regulate them.

The Act further stipulates that regulations adopted must not eliminate any product form, and that recommendations from health professionals be considered when developing VOC control measures for health benefit products. Health and Safety Code section 41712, gives ARB authority to control emiss ions from a very diverse number of products sold statewide to household, commercial an d institutional consumers. The primary goal of this section was to set forth a pro gram to reduce ground-level ozone concentrations, as part of the overall effort to at tain ambient air quality standards.

In 2006, Assembly Bill (AB) 32 was signed into law. This law created a comprehensive, multi-year program to reduce global warming compoun d emissions in California. AB 32 added section 1 division 25.5 (commencing with sect ion 38500) to the California Health and Safety Code. These sections require ARB to dev elop regulations and consider market mechanisms that will ultimately reduce Calif ornia’s GHG emissions equivalent to the 1990 baseline year by 2020. Among other things , AB 32 requires ARB to make immediate progress towards the reduction of GHG emi ssions. Specific Discrete Early Action Measures were to be identified and regulatio ns for the identified sources are to be adopted and enforceable by January 1, 2010. Bey ond the requirements of AB 32,

the Governor’s Executive Order EO-S-03-05 calls for an 80 percent GHG reduction from 1990 levels by 2050.Technical Support Document Chapter I - 3

C. BACKGROUND

1. Existing Consumer Product Regulations

To date, the Board has taken numerous actions to fu lfill the legislative mandate pertaining to the regulation of VOCs in consumer pr oducts, including antiperspirants, deodorants, and aerosol coating products. Three re gulations have been adopted that affect 125 consumer product categories by setting 1 74 VOC limits. These limits have resulted in reducing emissions by about 200 tons pe r day, an overall 44 percent

reduction in VOC emissions.

We have also reduced exposure to toxic air contamin ants (TAC). Emissions of TACs have been reduced by 13 tons per day by prohibiting use of certain chlorinated compounds in 63 categories.

In addition, two voluntary regulations, the Alterna tive Control Plan and the Hairspray Credit Program have been adopted to provide complia nce flexibility to companies. The five consumer product regulations are codified in t itle 17, California Code of Regulations, sections 94500 to 94575:

• Antiperspirants and Deodorants (Article 1, section s 94500-94506.5);

• Consumer Products (Article 2, sections 94507-94517 );

• Aerosol Coating Products (Article 3, sections 9452 0-94528);

• Alternative Control Plan (Article 4, sections 9454 0-94555); and

• Hairspray Credit Program (Article 5, sections 9456 0-94575).

Regulation of consumer products began in 1989 with adoption of the Antiperspirants and Deodorants Regulation. The “general” Consumer Products Regulation was approved in 1990 and has been amended numerous time s. The most recent amendments to the Consumer Products Regulation were approved June 26, 2008 (ARB, 2008e). At the June hearing, the Board appro ved amendments that would set new or lower VOC limits for 19 categories of consum er products. These approved amendments will reduce VOC emissions by an addition al 5.8 tons per day statewide when fully effective. Also at the June hearing, th e Board approved amendments that would prohibit use of certain chlorinated compounds in an additional seven categories of consumer products. These approved amendments wi ll reduce TAC emissions by an additional 0.2 tons per day when fully effective. The Aerosol Coatings Regulation was adopted in 1995 and was amended in 2000. A complet e summary of consumer products program regulatory actions with dates of r egulatory amendments are provided in Appendix C.Technical Support Document Chapter I - 4

2. Consumer Products and the State Implementation Plan (SIP)

a. State Implementation Plans

Federal clean air laws require areas with unhealthy levels of ozone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and inhalable part iculate matter to develop State Implementation Plans (SIPs) describing how they wil l attain national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).

A SIP is a compilation of new and previously submit ted plans, programs (such as monitoring, modeling, permitting, etc.), local air district rules, and State and federal regulations. Many of California's strategies apply statewide, including emission standards for cars and heavy-duty trucks, fuel regu lations, and limits on emissions from consumer products. State law designates ARB as the lead agency for all purposes

related to the SIP. Local air districts and other agencies, such as the Department of Pesticide Regulation, prepare SIP elements and subm it them to ARB for review and approval. ARB forwards SIP revisions to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) for approval and publication in t he Federal Register. The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40, Chapter I, Part 52, Subpart F, Section 52.220 lists

all of the items which are included in the Californ ia SIP. Some California SIP submittals are pending U.S. EPA approval.

Consumer product VOC emissions are known to contrib ute to concentrations of both ground-level ozone and particulate matter with diam eters of 2.5 micrometers or less (PM 2.5 ). The link between consumer product VOC emissions and ground-level ozone concentrations is well-established. However, their impact on PM 2.5 concentrations is less clear. Because VOCs are ozone precursors, spe cific consumer product control measures have been developed related to ozone contr ol. These measures have been included in SIPs. For this reason, our summary her e focuses on consumer product strategies that have been, and are, designed to mee t ambient air quality standards for

ozone.

b. 1994 California State Implementation Plan for Oz one

On November 15, 1994, ARB adopted the California St ate Implementation Plan for Ozone (1994 SIP). This plan included measures desi gned to meet the previous federal peak one-hour ozone standard of 0.12 parts per mill ion (ppm). Achieving significant VOC reductions from consumer products was a key ele ment of the 1994 SIP. Several rulemakings were proposed and adopted to work towar d meeting the SIP commitment.

c. 2003 State and Federal Strategy and 2003 South Coast SIP

On October 23, 2003, the ARB adopted the 2003 State wide Strategy, which identified the Board’s near term regulatory agenda to reduce o zone and particulate matter and to adopt new measures for each year from 2003 to 2008. The ozone control elements were again designed toward attaining the federal on e-hour ozone standard.Technical Support Document Chapter I - 5

The 2003 SIP contained two measures for consumer pr oducts. These measures were designated as CONS-1 and CONS-2. The CONS-1 measure was designed to achieve VOC emission reductions from consumer products of a t least 2.3 tons per day in the South Coast Air Basin and 5.3 tons per day statewid e by 2010. On June 26, 2004, the Board approved a CONS-1 measure (the “2004 Amendmen ts”), which will achieve 3.0 tons per day in VOC emission reductions in the South Coast Air Basin by 2010, and achieve 6.9 tons per day in VOC emission reductions statewide by 2010 (ARB, 2004b). The CONS-1 measure became legally effective on June 20, 2005. As of this writing, all

but one of the CONS-1 VOC limits are in full effect . The CONS-1 commitment has been

fulfilled.

The ARB also committed to present new consumer prod uct category limits to the Board

between 2006 and 2008 to achieve VOC emission reduc tions from consumer products of between 8.5 tons per day and 15 tons per day in the South Coast Air Basin by 2010. Statewide, the CONS-2 measure was to achieve 20-35 tons per day in emission reductions by 2010. Amendments to the Consumer Pro ducts Regulation in 2006, which will result in reductions of 4.9 tons per day in So uth Coast and 11.5 tons per day statewide, partially fulfilled this commitment (ARB , 2006a).

The 2003 SIP was withdrawn from consideration and i s no longer in effect. However, the remaining commitment from the CONS-2 measure ha s been incorporated in the 2007 Strategy commitment which is described below.

d. State Strategy for California’s 2007 State Imple mentation Plan (Strategy)

In July 1997, U.S. EPA established a new federal oz one standard. As opposed to a one-hour peak ozone standard, the new ozone standar d established a limit of 0.08 ppm averaged over eight hours (U.S. EPA, 1997). On Apr il 15, 2004, U.S. EPA designated

15 areas as non-attainment in California for the ei ght-hour ozone standard (ARB, 2008e). Many, but not all of these areas were also designated as non-attainment for

the federal one-hour standard. New non-attainment areas include a number of rural Sierra Nevada foothill counties and additional part s of the Sacramento Valley. The onehour standard was revoked on June 15, 2005, one yea r after the effective date of the new designation, and SIPs showing how each area wil l meet the eight-hour standard

were submitted to U.S. EPA in 2007.

To address the eight-hour standard, the Strategy wa s adopted at the September 25, 2007, Board hearing (ARB, 2007d). Th e Strategy describes the scope

of the State’s ozone and PM 2.5 non-attainment problems and sets forth ARB’s plan on how California can comply with federal standards. This is a comprehensive Strategy designed to attain federal air quality standards th rough technologically feasible, cost effective, and far reaching measures.

The Strategy is the first plan designed to show how California will meet the national eight-hour ozone standard. Because the eight-hour standard is more stringent than the one-hour standard, U.S. EPA set presumptive deadlin es that allow more time forTechnical Support Document Chapter I - 6

attainment. Nonetheless, the measures California h as adopted to meet the one-hour standard remain in place and will deliver substanti al new reductions over the next few

years.

Specific to consumer products, in the Strategy, ARB committed to reducing consumer product VOC emissions statewide by 30 to 40 tons pe r day by 2014. The amendments approved at the June 26, 2008, hearing will provide about 4.5 tons per day toward meeting the commitment. An additional 1.3 tons per day of VOC emission reductions will occur by the end of 2015.

Further reductions from consumer products are impor tant because VOC emissions from consumer products are predicted to become the large st source of VOC emissions in the South Coast Air Basin, and the third largest source in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin by 2020. The Strategy, in combination with local a ctions, provides emission reductions necessary to meet the eight-hour ozone standard in these two most challenging regions.

VOC reductions from consumer products are becoming more difficult to achieve. In light of this, the Strategy includes a commitment t o explore innovative reduction strategies in the longer term. One such measure wo uld include investigating emission reduction opportunities through reactivity-based st andards. A reactivity-based approach relies on the scientific principle that different c hemical compounds react to form different amounts of ozone in the atmosphere. Reactivity-bas ed standards reduce emissions of the most photochemically reactive compounds.

Alternative market-based mechanisms would also be e xplored to encourage the development, distribution, and purchase of cleaner, very low, or zero VOC emitting products. Examples of mechanisms to explore are an environmental product labeling program, programs where companies set their own emi ssion reduction goals, and the use of print and broadcast media for public educati on. If these mechanisms cannot produce meaningful emission reductions from the con sumer products source category, then other approaches would be evaluated. Some of these other approaches include the purchase of VOC emission reduction credits; and funding of special projects to reduce emissions or accelerate reductions from poll ution sources outside of the consumer products industry.

e. Future State Implementation Plans

Up-to-date information on SIP activities can be fou nd on ARB’s website at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/sip.htm. ARB st aff proposes to revise the 2007 SIP as may be appropriate in a 2010 mid-course review S IP update to: reflect the emission benefits of newly adopted regulations; provide more detail on the State's intended

actions to fulfill the commitment to achieve emissi on reductions in total by specific dates; update as necessary the emissions inventorie s for federal ozone and PM 2.5 nonattainment areas; and revise as necessary other pla n aspects, including motor vehicle emissions budgets. The 2010 mid-course review may show the need for additionalTechnical Support Document Chapter I - 7

emission reductions from consumer products.

On March 12, 2008, U.S. EPA reduced the eight-hour “primary” ozone standard to a level of 0.075 ppm. U.S. EPA also strengthened the secondary eight-hour ozone standard to the level of 0.075 ppm, making it ident ical to the revised primary standard. The final rule became effective on May 27, 2008. These changes will require that new SIPs be drafted. A complete new state strategy wil l be developed for 2013. The 2013 SIP will likely require more VOC reductions from co nsumer products.

3. Consumer Products and the California Global War ming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32)

Various consumer products may contain GHGs in their formulations. Most often these GHGs are propellants such as hydrofluorocarbons (HF Cs) and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ).

To a lesser extent some GHGs are used as solvents.

As mentioned earlier, AB 32 requires immediate prog ress, described as Discrete Early Action Measures. ARB was required to identify meas ures and adopt regulations to reduce GHG emissions, that would be enforceable by January 1, 2010. ARB has since approved those early measures and incorporated them into California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) that was approved by th e Board in December 2008. Reduction of compounds with high global warming pot ential (GWP) used in consumer products was designated a Discrete Early Action Mea sure. Therefore, as an approved measure, ARB staff has committed to eliminate or re duce the use of GHG compounds with high GWP that are used in consumer products.

The GHG emission reduction from consumer products i s estimated to be 0.25 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) equivalents or more, if feasible. The amendments approved at the June 26, 2008, Board hearing will p rovide about 0.23 million metric tons

of CO 2 equivalents per year toward meeting the estimated feasible reduction target. In this rulemaking, we are proposing GWP limits as mit igation measures to ensure that

GHG emission do not increase. These measures will not provide additional GHG reductions. However, from information we have gath ered from consumer product surveys, we are currently evaluating whether GHG em ission reductions from other consumer product categories are feasible. Based on this evaluation, staff may propose

additional GHG reduction measures in future rulemak ings.

4. National Consumer Products Regulations

On September 11, 1998, U.S. EPA promulgated a natio nal consumer products regulation, the “National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Consumer Products (40 CFR Part 59, Subpart C, Sections 59.20 1 et seq.).” This action set national VOC emission standards for 24 categories o f consumer products. The regulation became effective on September 11, 1998, and the VOC limits became effective on December 10, 1998. There are similari ties and differences between theTechnical Support Document Chapter I - 8

California and national consumer products regulatio ns; however, the national regulation does not preclude states from adopting more stringe nt regulations. In 2006, U.S. EPA began work on amendments to their existing national consumer products regulation. Their amendments are based on California’s CONS-1 (2004 Consumer Products Regulation Amendment s) categories and limits. The amendments are expected to become effective in 2009, with a compliance date of January 2010.

U.S. EPA has also recently promulgated a national r egulation for aerosol coatings (spray paints) based on ARB’s Aerosol Coatings Regu lation. This is a reactivity-based regulation. The national aerosol coatings regulati on was promulgated on March 24, 2008. The compliance date is currently b eing amended to July 1, 2009, (U.S. EPA, 2008).

The national consumer products regulation is simila r in many aspects to the California regulation. However, even after the federal 2009 a mendments become effective; it will still be less effective in reducing VOC emissions f rom consumer products. The national regulation does not regulate a number of product ca tegories that are currently regulated under the ARB regulation. For the categories that are regulated under both regulations, many of ARB’s limits are more stringent than the fe deral limits. Therefore, ARB’s consumer products regulations have achieved signifi cant additional reductions over those that would be achieved by federal regulation alone.

The federal regulation also does not prohibit the u se of certain toxic air contaminants. The California Consumer Products Regulation already includes prohibitions on the use of certain toxic air contaminants in 70 categories, including the amendments approved at the June 26, 2008, Board hearing, resulting in a reduction of toxic compound emissions of over 13 tons per day.

Because California has unique air quality problems, reducing VOC emissions from all categories, including consumer products, to the max imum extent feasible, is necessary to attain the federal and State ambient air quality standards for ozone.

As of the date of this staff report, there are no n ational consumer products regulations related to reducing GHG emissions.Technical Support Document Chapter I - 9

REFERENCES

1. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for Proposed Rulemaking Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Prod ucts Regulation

. May 9, 2008. (ARB, 2008e)

2. Air Resources Board. Technical and Clarifying Mo difications to April 26, 2007 Revised Draft Air Resources Board’s State Strategy for California’s 2007 Implementation Plan . Released April 26, 2007. Adopted by the Air Resources Board on September 27, 2007. (ARB, 20 07d)

3. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation and the Aerosol Coatings Regulation . September 29, 2006. (ARB, 2006a)

4. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for the Proposed Amendments to the California Aerosol Coating Produc ts, Antiperspirants and Deodorants, and Consumer Products Regulations, Test Method 310, and Airborne Toxic Control Measure for para-Dichloroben zene Solid Air Fresheners

and Toilet/Urinal Care Products . May 7, 2004. (ARB, 2004b)

5. United States Environmental Protection Agency. N ational Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Aerosol Coatings; D irect Final Rule. (40 CFR Parts 51 and 59) Federal Register: March 24, 2008. Volume 73. Numbe r 57. (U.S. EPA, 2008)

6. United States Environmental Protection Agency. N ational Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone; Final Rule . Federal Register: July 18, 1997. Volume 62. Number 138: 38855-38896. (U.S. EPA, 1997 )Technical Support Document Chapter II - 10

II. DEVELOPMENT OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

This chapter contains a description of the public p rocess used to develop the proposed amendments. The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (Government Code

section 11340 et seq .) requires that development of regulations must al low for public input. This chapter also describes our evaluation of emission reduction opportunities, and alternatives to the final proposal that were co nsidered.

A. PUBLIC PROCESS FOR DEVELOPING PROPOSED LIMITS

In order to involve the public, the Consumer Produc ts Regulation Workgroup (CPRWG), was reconvened in 2004. Participation in the CPRWG was, and continues to be open to any member of the public. The CPRWG participated i n the development of the 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey (2006 Surve y), which serves as the basis for portions of this proposal (ARB, 2007f). The CP RWG was also involved in the development of these proposed amendments.

Further outreach, beyond the CPRWG, was conducted t o identify and involve stakeholders in the development of the proposed pai nt thinner and multi-purpose solvent amendments. As part of the process, in Nov ember 2008, ARB conducted a survey update for the Paint Thinner and Multi-purpo se Solvent categories (ARB, 2008f). The intent of the survey update was to obtain sales data for the 12-month period starting from October 1, 2007, thro ugh September 30, 2008. The survey was conducted in response to comments from s takeholders that indicated the market for Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinner s had changed since our 2003 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey.

Consumer product manufacturers, chemical producers, marketers, trade associations, consultants, and various other stakeholders listed below, have actively participated in the process.

• American Chemistry Council

• Coalition for Clean Air

• Consumer Specialty Products Association

• Environmental Working Group

• Institute for Research and Technical Assistance

• National Aerosol Association

• National Paint and Coatings Association

• Office of the State Fire Marshal

• Western Aerosol Information Bureau

Representatives from local air districts and agenci es, including the South Coast Air Quality Management District and the United States E nvironmental Protection Agency were also involved in the process.Technical Support Document Chapter II - 11

ARB staff maintains a mailing list of over 5,000 co mpanies and interested parties, including environmental and community organizations , which received information throughout the development of the proposed amendmen ts. We have established an

electronic list serve for ARB’s Consumer Products P rogram, which has over 1,300 subscribers, to allow subscribers to receive timely, pertinent information. We also have a consumer products program public website wit h a webpage for the 2009 Consumer Products Regulatory Work Group Activity.

An initial public meeting was held in August of 200 8 to announce to interested parties ARB’s intent to regulate the products affected by t his proposal. On March 30, 2009, staff posted draft volatile organic compound (VOC) limits and definitions for the categories proposed for regulation to the website. The data and proposals were discussed at a public workshop on April 1, 2009. A t the meeting, staff discussed the draft regulatory categories, proposed limits, and t he rulemaking timeline. The meeting served as a forum for stakeholder comments on the p roposals and schedule. A second public workshop for this rulemaking is scheduled fo r early August 2009 to seek further input on the staff’s proposal.

To solicit additional information and comments, num erous individual meetings and

teleconferences were held with stakeholders. At se veral of these meetings, which were requested by industry associations, interested part ies presented technical information related to reformulation of products. We also revi ewed survey data, and researched technical literature, patents, and trade journals d uring the development of this proposal.

B. STAFF EVALUATION OF EMISSION REDUCTION OPPORTUNI TIES

Development of the proposed amendments began with r eview of the data submitted for the categories proposed for regulation. These data were reported as part of the 2006 Survey and the 2008 Paint Thinner and Multi-purpose Solvent Survey Update (Survey Update). Over 570 companies responded to t he surveys with information on over 12,000 products (ARB, 2007f). The 2006 Survey was designed to obtain the comprehensive information necessary to develop new consumer product emission standards that together would achieve a minimum VOC emission reduction of 30 to 40 tons per day by 2014, and GHG emission reductions e quivalent to reducing an

estimated 0.25 million metric tons of CO 2 (MMT CO 2 e) by 2020. The Survey Update was designed to obtain sales data for the 12 month period starting from October 1, 2007, through September 30, 2008.

In addition to the survey data and staff’s research , the proposal also considered technical information provided by interested partie s. During the workgroup and workshop process, we presented specific proposals a nd alternatives to the public for consideration. Modifications were made to the orig inal proposal after consideration and

evaluation of comments.Technical Support Document Chapter II - 12

C. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

Government Code section 11346.2 requires ARB to con sider and evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed regulation and provide reasons for rejecting those alternatives. We identified three alternative appr oaches to the current proposal: “No Action,” “Set Different Limits,” and “Set Limits fo r Different Categories.”

1. Alternative One – No Action

A “No Action” alternative would be to forego adopti ng the proposed amendments, or delay adoption of the proposed measures. The “No A ction” alternative would result in failing to make progress toward meeting our SIP com mitments (see Chapter I, Introduction). In the case of not meeting the SIP commitments, there is a potential for

loss of federal funds. The citizens of California would not benefit from the improved air quality that would result from the reduction of emi ssions being proposed. This

alternative would have no cost to business.

2. Alternative Two – Set Different Limits

As was discussed in section B above, we thoroughly evaluated each category for which a limit is proposed. Limits were proposed based on low emitting technologies reported in the 2006 Survey and Survey Update. Stakeholders provided additional information pertinent to the categories and, in some cases, pro posed alternative limits. We

evaluated all comments and determined the most feas ible limit and effective dates from all of the alternatives proposed or considered. Th e final proposal contains limits that

were determined to obtain the maximum feasible redu ction, were commercially and technologically feasible, preserved product forms ( as required by Health and Safety Code Section 41712), and together achieved the nece ssary emission reductions to partially fulfill ARB’s SIP commitments.

3. Alternative Three – Set Different Effective Dat es

For the Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner cat egories, a specific alternative we analyzed was to propose the same VOC limits and tim e frames that the SCAQMD approved in March 2009 under Rule 1143, Consumer Pa int Thinners and Multi-purpose

Solvents. Rule 1143 contains two tiers of VOC limi ts, virtually equivalent to our proposed limits. However, the effective dates are significantly different; Rule 1143 being January 1, 2010, and January 1, 2011 for the first and second tier VOC limits respectively, while our proposed effective dates ar e December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2013. In our proposal, we are providi ng one additional year for manufacturers to meet the first tier limit simply d ue to the time necessary for State regulations to become legally effective, per State law, compared to the shortened time frame for local air district rules to become legall y effective.

For the second tier limit, we believe it has not be en demonstrated that products meeting the 3 percent VOC limit will function as paint thin ners for all solvent-borne coatingsTechnical Support Document Chapter II - 13

available in commerce. While we are encouraged abo ut the future viability of low VOC thinners, such as soy based products, it has not ye t been demonstrated that they are ready for introduction into the market. There is s till a need for paint thinners that are compatible with solvent-borne coatings, for a perio d of time, in areas of the State other than SCAQMD because SCAQMD has more stringent VOC c oating limits than many other areas of the state. Therefore, we determined it was appropriate that the second tier, 3 percent VOC limit be effective December 31, 2013, giving manufacturers ample time to develop low VOC thinners that are compatibl e with solvent-borne coatings.

Additionally, the second tier limit could lead to a n increase in sales of extremely flammable products, such as acetone. An acetone-ba sed product labeled “Paint Thinner,” will be formulated differently than the f ormer “Paint Thinner” product and will behave differently than what the household consumer is used to. Without enough lead time for manufacturers, we are concerned that aceto ne products will be the most likely of a limited number of known pathways to compliance . To allow ample time for development of less flammable, and/or less costly a lternatives, we are proposing an effective date of December 31, 2013 for the 3 perce nt VOC limit.

4. Alternative Four – Set Limits for Different Cat egories

The proposed categories, for this current action, i nclude three categories that were deferred during the June 2008 Amendments to the Cal ifornia Consumer Products Regulation, because at the time, staff could not se t limits and demonstrate that the limits were commercially or technologically feasible witho ut further investigation.

For this current action, staff is proposing new or lower VOC limits for three categories that would achieve the maximum feasible reductions, and partially fulfill ARB’s SIP

commitments. It should be noted that ARB has alrea dy set 174 VOC limits which, when fully effective, will have resulted in reducing emi ssions by about 200 tons per day, an overall 44 percent reduction in VOC emissions from consumer products. Additional product categories surveyed in the 2006 Survey will be evaluated for future regulatory

action.

REFERENCES

1. Air Resources Board. Paint Thinner and Multi-pu rpose Solvent Survey Update

. November 4, 2008. (ARB, 2008f)

2. Air Resources Board. 2006 Consumer & Commercial Products Survey

. July 24, 2007. (ARB, 2007f)Technical Support Document Chapter III - 14

III. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR EMISSION REDUCTIONS

In this chapter, we describe State law requirements related to setting volatile organic compound (VOC) limits, and how our proposals meet t hese criteria. We also provide information related to the number of complying prod ucts and the marketshare they hold, which indicates that the limits are commercially an d technologically feasible within the timeframes provided.

A. VOC REDUCTIONS

Health and Safety Code section 41712 gives ARB auth ority to control emissions from a very diverse number of products sold statewide to h ousehold and commercial consumers. By law, “Consumer Product" means a chem ically formulated product used by household and institutional consumers, including , but not limited to, detergents; cleaning compounds; polishes; floor finishes; cosme tics; personal care products; home, lawn, and garden products; disinfectants; sanitizer s; aerosol paints; and automotive specialty products; but does not include other pain t products, furniture coatings, or architectural coatings.

Section 41712 requires the Board to adopt regulatio ns to achieve the maximum feasible reduction in VOCs emitted by consumer products afte r making certain determinations. Prior to adoption, the Board must determine that ad equate data exist to establish that the regulations are necessary to attain State and f ederal ambient air quality standards and the regulations are commercially and technologi cally feasible, and necessary. Amendments to section 41712 in 1996 specified that regulations adopted by the Board cannot result in the elimination of a product form. Product form refers to the shape and/or structure of the product such as liquid; sol id; powder; gel; crystal; aerosol; or

pump spray.

The Board must consider the effect that the limits or requirements proposed for health benefit products will have on the efficacy of those products in killing or inactivating agents of infectious diseases such as viruses, bact eria, and fungi. In this regard, the Board must consult with health professionals when d eveloping VOC control measures for health benefit products.

The Board must also meet its obligations under the State Implementation Plan (SIP).

ARB’s SIP commitments are described in both the Exe cutive Summary and in Chapter I.

Related to VOC reductions, Chapter IV describes why the proposed amendments are necessary to attain ambient air quality standards, and why the data are adequate to adopt the proposed limits. Our focus in this chapt er is on why the proposed VOC limits are commercially and technologically feasible. Dur ing the early development of consumer product regulations, guidelines were estab lished to ensure that these statutory criteria were met when setting limits. T hese guidelines and statutory criteria were followed in developing the proposed amendments . Section C, below, describesTechnical Support Document Chapter III - 15

the terms “technologically feasible” and “commercia lly feasible,” as they relate to VOC

reductions.

B. GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS

Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) was signed into law in 200 6. It is codified in Health and Safety Code section 38500 et. seq . These sections require ARB to develop regulation s and consider market mechanisms that will ultimately reduce California’s greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to the 1990 levels by 2020 . It required ARB to identify a list of “discrete early action greenhouse gas reduction mea sures” by June 30, 2007. Once on the list, these measures are to be developed into r egulatory proposals, adopted by the Board, and made legally enforceable (approved by Of fice of Administrative Law) by January 1, 2010. Reduction of compounds with high GWP that are used in consumer products was designated as one of these measures, a nd became part of the State’s comprehensive strategy when the Board approved the Scoping Plan on December 12, 2008.

In accordance with section 38562, certain criteria are to be met in developing regulations to meet GHG reduction goals. Among oth er things, the regulations must be equitable, minimize costs, and maximize the benefit s to California. The GHG regulations are also required to be technologically feasible and cost-effective. AB 32 requires ARB to identify and evaluate emission redu ction and mitigation opportunities for anthropogenic non-CO 2 GHGs such as sulfur hexafluoride (SF 6 ) and hydrofluorocarbons (HFC).

For this rulemaking, we evaluated the potential use of GHGs as products are

reformulated to meet the VOC limits. As we found t hat there existed a possibility that high GWP compounds could be used, we are proposing mitigation measures.

C. TECHNOLOGICAL AND COMMERCIAL FEASIBILITY OF VOC LIMITS

The proposed VOC limits were set based on the lower VOC content technologies existing within a product category, or are based on low emitting technology transfer from other products. In doing this, staff made sure tha t the various product forms within each category would be preserved. For the categories pr oposed for regulation, there are products on the market which currently comply. Whe re there is low complying market share, lower emission technology exists that can pr ovide a pathway for compliance.

1. Technologically Feasible

Health and Safety Code section 41712(b) requires th at the Board adopt consumer product regulations that are “technologically feasi ble.” Technological feasibility is a different concept than "commercial feasibility," an d does not take into account the cost of reformulating a product. We believe that a prop osed limit is technologically feasible if it meets at least one of the following criteria: ( 1) the limit is already being met by atTechnical Support Document Chapter III - 16

least one product within the same category, or (2) the limit can reasonably be expected to be met in the time frame provided through additi onal development efforts.

In setting the proposed VOC limits, an effort was m ade, wherever possible, to ensure that multiple reformulation technologies exist whic h would allow products to comply. Proposed limits were set at VOC levels that staff d etermined could be met without increased use of toxic air contaminants, greenhouse gases, or ozone-depleting compounds. General reformulation options include a ddition of exempt solvents such as acetone, use of low vapor pressure (LVP)-VOC solven ts, use of VOC exempt propellants, increased use of surfactants, and use of inorganic compounds.

2. Commercially Feasible

Health and Safety Code section 41712(b) also requir es the Board to adopt consumer product regulations that are “commercially feasible .” The term “commercially feasible” is not defined in State law. In interpreting this term, the staff has utilized the reasoning employed by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in interpreting the federal Clean Air Act. In the lea ding case of International Harvester Company v. Ruckelshaus , (D.C. Cir. 1973) 478 F. 2d 615, the Court held th at the U.S. EPA could promulgate technology-forcing motor vehicle emission limits which might result in fewer models and a more limited cho ice of engine types for consumers, as long as the basic market demand for new passenge r automobiles could be generally

met.

Following this reasoning, we have concluded that a regulation is “commercially feasible” as long as the “basic market demand” for a particul ar consumer product can be met. “Basic market demand” is the underlying need of con sumers for a product to fulfill a basic, necessary function. This must be distinguis hed from consumer “preference,” which may be towards specific attributes of a parti cular product. A “preference” is the choice of consumers for a certain product or produc ts based upon fragrance, cost,
texture, etc.

By way of example, a consumer has a basic market de mand for a glass cleaner to remove soils, grease, dirt or grime from their wind ows. Glass cleaners may be formulated with glycol ether solvents or with ammon ia. Consumers may choose an ammoniated glass cleaner because they prefer the performance characteristics, or they may choose a non-ammoniated glass cleaner because t hey dislike the smell of ammonia. This distinction is not recognized by all parties. Some stakeholders have expressed the view that consumers do not have a “ba sic market demand” for a general class of products, but that consumers instead have a number of separate and distinct “basic market demands” for many specialty products with differing characteristics.

ARB staff believes the consumer “preference” interp retation of “basic market demand” is inconsistent with the reasoning from the Internatio nal Harvester case. To adopt such a narrow interpretation would be inconsistent with th e clearly expressed legislative intent that “...the State board shall adopt regulations to achieve the maximum feasibleTechnical Support Document Chapter III - 17

reduction in reactive organic compounds emitted by consumer products...” (Health and Safety Code section 41712(a)). In order to achieve emission reductions, manufacturers of high VOC products which perform the same basic f unction as lower VOC counterparts must reduce the amount of VOCs in thei r products. It is expected that when a product’s formulation changes, some attribut es of the product will also change.

If ARB were to establish limits which accounted for every distinct feature of every product, then each product would require a limit un to itself. Using this approach, it would be impossible to achieve the maximum feasible reduction in VOC emissions.

Most currently marketed products have some unique f eatures that differentiate them from other products. Consumers who purchase a prod uct have demonstrated a preference over other competing products. This dis tinction between “preference” and “basic market demand” was clearly made in the Inter national Harvester case. In the International Harvester case, the court stated that the proposed emission limits would be feasible even though they may result in the unav ailability of certain kinds of vehicles and engine types people preferred, as long as the b asic market demand for passenger cars could be generally met. Applying this princip le to consumer products, the proposed amendments allow the basic market demand t o be met for each product category, even though it may no longer be possible to manufacture products with some specific attributes. ARB staff believes that this approach complies with Health and Safety Code section 41712.

D. COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Manufacturers have the flexibility to choose from a variety of formulation options to meet the applicable limits (see Chapter VI). To comply with VOC limits, VOC solvents or propellants may need to be replaced, or partially r eplaced, with VOC exempt ingredients. This may require using acetone or ano ther exempt solvent, increasing product solids, or formulating with a VOC exempt pr opellant. Manufacturers may also need to change the valve, container, delivery syste m, or the other components of the consumer product depending on the individual formul ation.

To meet the VOC limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners, the most straightforward reformulation pathway for manufactu rers of non-complying products is to replace some of the hydrocarbon propellant with wat er. Although another reformulation option is to use VOC exempt propellants such as HFC -152a or HFC-134a. The

likelihood of this reformulation choice is minimal because of the increased cost of these propellants. However, we are proposing a GWP limit of 150 for the category to ensure that incremental use of high GWP propellants are no t used in reformulations to meet the VOC limit. ARB staff has proposed VOC limits that can be met without a significant increase in the use of Toxic Air Contaminants or gr eenhouse gases. We believe that products can and will be reformulated primarily thr ough reduction in the amount of hydrocarbon propellant with possibly some modificat ion or adjustments to the surfactants and/or the valve/spray nozzle.Technical Support Document Chapter III - 18

To meet the proposed Multi-purpose Solvent and Pain t Thinner first tier VOC limit, the most likely “reformulation” pathway is product subs titution (i.e. increasing the sales of existing complying products and discontinuing sale of non-complying products). To meet the proposed second tier Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner VOC limits, reformulation options for manufacturers of non-comp lying products include, in addition to product substitution, developing water-based for mulations. We believe that products can and will be reformulated through reduction or r eplacement of VOC solvents with VOC exempt ingredients, such as LVP-methyl esters, or water emulsion technology. Possible reformulation options could also include c hlorinated toxic compounds, and compounds that could compromise the predicted ozone benefits of the limits. However, because these formulation options are not necessary , and the proposal includes specific prohibitions to prevent them, products can not be reformulated using these options and possible adverse impacts will be preven ted.

Table III-1 summarizes, for the proposed VOC limits , data related to the complying market shares (based on sales), as well as the numb er of products or product groups that currently comply relative to total number of p roducts reported.

Table III-1 Summary of Complying Products and Complying Markets hares

Product Category Product

Form Proposed

VOC Limit (wt%) Number of

Complying

Products/Total Complying

Market Share (%)

Double Phase Aerosol Air

Freshener Aerosol 20 <10 / 60 <1

Tier 1: 30 18 / 165 11.3 Multi-purpose Solvent &

Paint Thinner Non-aerosol Tier 2: 3 15 / 165 11.2

Source: 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products Surv ey and 2008 Paint Thinner and Multi-purpose Solvent

Survey Update.

Table III-1 shows that the complying marketshares r ange from less than 1 percent to 11.3 percent. Based on these complying marketshare s and the number of complying products, we believe the proposed VOC limits, altho ugh challenging, are commercially and technologically feasible within the timeframes proposed. It should be noted that there are currently a few Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, with significant market presence, formulated slightly ab ove 30 percent VOC by weight. These products will only need a modest reformulatio n to comply with the proposed 30 percent standard. The complying marketshare in Table III-1, for the first tier limit for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner, would be s ignificantly higher if these products already complied with the proposed 30 percent VOC l imit.

Manufacturers can also comply with the proposed ame ndments through the use of the Innovative Products Provision (IPP) or the Alternat ive Control Plan (ACP). The IPP allows manufacturers of “innovative products” to co mply with the Consumer Products Regulation if they demonstrate through clear and co nvincing evidence that their product will result in less VOC emissions than a complying product that meets the applicable VOC limit. The innovative product may result in le ss emissions due to some characteristic of the product formulation, design, delivery system, or other factors.Technical Support Document Chapter III - 19

The ACP allows manufacturers to average the emissio ns from products above and below the applicable VOC limits, as long as the ove rall emissions are less than or equal

to the emissions that would have occurred had all t he products complied with the VOC limits. Manufacturers must submit an application w hich includes the VOC content of the products in the plan, a method of verifying the sal es of each product in the plan, and other information necessary to track overall emissi ons.Technical Support Document Chapter IV - 20

IV. EMISSIONS

California’s extreme air quality problems require u nique strategies for improving air quality and slowing climate change. In this chapte r, we provide an overview of criteria pollutant air quality and climate change problems w hich are germane to the regulation of consumer products. We also describe the need fo r significant emission reductions from all sources contributing to these problems. T his chapter includes a description of the need for the regulation of consumer products an d provides a summary of the emissions from the categories proposed for regulati on. For a detailed summary of the product categories, the reader is referred to Chapt er VI.

A. CRITERIA POLLUTANTS, AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDAR DS, CLIMATE CHANGE, AND TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANTS

Federal and state ambient air quality standards hav e been established to protect California’s population from the harmful effects of ozone and particulate matter (PM). An ambient air quality standard sets legal limits o n the level of an air pollutant in the outdoor (ambient) air necessary to protect public h ealth. Both ARB and U.S. EPA are authorized to set standards. Assembly Bill 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), was signed into law by the Gov ernor in September 2006 to address climate change.

Volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from cons umer products contribute to the

formation of both ozone and fine PM. Other sources of VOCs include emissions from fuel combustion, coatings and paints. PM pollution is the result of both direct and

indirect emissions. Direct sources of PM include e missions from fuel combustion and

wind erosion of soil. Indirect PM emissions result from the chemical reaction of VOCs, nitrogen oxides (NO
x ), sulfur oxides, and other chemicals in the atmosp here. While carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is the greenhouse gas (GHG) emitted in the larges t quantity, other significant GHGs include, but are not limited to, m ethane, nitrous oxide, and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Related to the role of consumer products, HFCs are the primary source of GHG emissions. To a lesser exten t hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFC), and hydrofluoroethers (HFE) play a role.

1. Ozone

Ozone formation in the lower atmosphere results fro m a series of chemical reactions between VOCs and nitrogen oxides in the presence of sunlight. The rate of ozone generation is related closely to both the amount an d reactivity of VOC emissions as well

as the amount of NO
x

emissions available in the atmosphere (Seinfeld an d Pandis, 1998). Ozone is a colorless gas and the chief comp onent of urban smog. It is one of the State’s more persistent air quality problems. Ninety-three percent of Californians, or 36 million people, live in areas designated as non- attainment for the federal eight-hour ozone standard. California experienced 41 percent of the total national ozone exposure, based on analysis of population exposure conducted by ARB staff for theTechnical Support Document Chapter IV - 21

years 2000 through 2002 (ARB, 2006b). California o ccupies the top five spots and has six out of the top ten areas with the highest level s of ozone (2004 design values).

It has been well documented that ozone adversely af fects the respiratory function of humans and animals. Research has shown that, when inhaled, ozone can cause respiratory problems, aggravate asthma, impair the immune system, and cause increased risk of premature death. Human health st udies show that short-term exposure to ozone injures the lung (ARB, 2008e). I n some animal studies, permanent structural changes with long-term exposures to ozon e concentrations considerably above ambient were seen; these changes remain even after periods of exposure to clean air (U.S. EPA, 2006). Exposure to levels of ozone above the current ambient air quality standard can lead to lung inflammation, lun g tissue damage, and a reduction in the amount of air inhaled into the lungs.

Ozone is a strong irritant that can cause constrict ion of the muscle cells in the airways that result in symptoms such as coughing, chest tig htness, shortness of breath, and increased asthma symptoms (ARB, 2008e). Recent evi dence suggests that ozone may be linked to the onset of new asthma in very active children (McConnell et al ., 2002). Ozone has also been associated with premature death . Based on 2004 - 2006 data, premature deaths from ozone exposure in California are estimated at 590. Ozone in sufficient doses can also increase the permeability of lung cells, rendering them more susceptible to toxins and microorganisms. Other he alth effects associated with ozone exposure include hospitalizations and school absenc es. Of course, the greatest risk from ozone exposure is to those who are active outd oors during smoggy periods, such as children, athletes, and outdoor workers.

Not only does ozone adversely affect human and anim al health, but it also affects vegetation, resulting in reduced yield and quality in agricultural crops, disfiguration or unsatisfactory growth in ornamental vegetation, and damage to native plants. During the summer, ozone levels are often highest in the u rban centers in Southern California, the San Joaquin Valley, and Sacramento Valley, whic h are adjacent to the principal production areas in the State’s multibillion-dollar agricultural industry (USDA, 2006). ARB studies indicate that ozone pollution damage to crops is estimated to cost agriculture over $500 million dollars annually (ARB , 1987; ARB, 2006b).

2. Fine Particulate Matter

Particulate matter (PM) is a complex mixture of tin y particles that may consist of dry solid fragments, solid cores with liquid coatings, and small droplets of liquid. These particles vary greatly in shape, size and chemical composition, and can be made up of many different materials such as metals, soot, soil , and dust. As described above, PM can be directly emitted from sources, such as diese l PM, or can be produced indirectly from sources which emit precursors that are convert ed to PM by atmospheric processes. Particles ten micrometers or less in di ameter are defined as "respirable particulate matter" or "PM 10 .” PM 10 and particles 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter (PM 2.5 ) can be inhaled deep into the lungs. PM 2.5 contributes significantly to regionalTechnical Support Document Chapter IV - 22

haze and reduction of visibility in California. Be sides reducing visibility, the acidic portion of PM (nitrates, sulfates) can harm crops, forests, aquatic and other ecosystems (ARB, 2002).

Considerable epidemiologic research over the past 1 5 years has investigated the responses of humans to PM. The principal health ef fects of PM exposure are

summarized below:

• Many studies have consistently found statistical a ssociations between PM 2.5 and premature death with both long-term (Pope et al ., 2004; Pope et al

., 2002;

Krewski et al

., 2000; Laden et al

., 2006) and daily exposures (e.g., Dominici et

al ., 2005; Dominici et al., 2003; Laden et al ., 2000). The association with premature mortality is considerably stronger for an nual average PM 2.5 exposure than for daily average PM 2.5 . That is, long-term exposure appears to pose a greater risk of death than short-term exposure.

• A recent study suggests that long-term exposure to PM 2.5 may influence the risk of adverse cardiovascular events in women (Miller et al ., 2007), including hospitalization or death from heart attack or strok e.

• Daily exposure to PM 2.5 has been associated with hospitalization for heart and lung related causes (Moolgavkar, 2003; Zanobetti et al ., 2003). Others have found that exposure to PM 2.5 resulted in increased emergency room visits, exacerbation of asthma, and other respiratory disea ses (Peel et al ., 2005; Sheppard et al

., 2003). Other research indicates that exposure t o PM 2.5 leads to increased asthma medication usage (Gent et al ., 2003), and increased asthma symptoms (e.g., Delfino et al ., 2002; Whittemore and Korn, 1980). Exposure to

PM 2.5 has also been associated with an increase in the l oss of work days (Ostro

et al ., 1993; Ostro et al

., 1989).

• Older adults with pre-existing chronic heart or lu ng disease are at greatest risk of experiencing adverse effects related to PM 2.5 exposure (Moolgavkar, 2003;

Dominici et al

., 2006; Symons et al

., 2006).

There is some evidence that particulate matter and ozone may have greater effects in children than in adults. This may be because they inhale more PM 2.5 and ozone per pound of body weight than do adults, and because th ey breathe more rapidly than adults. Adverse effects reported in children inclu de reduced lung function and reduced lung growth in higher pollution areas (Gauderman et al ., 2004; Gauderman et al ., 2002;
Gauderman et al

., 2000) that may at least partially reverse if the child moves to an area with cleaner air (Avol et al ., 2001); increased asthma and bronchitis symptoms (Gauderman et al

., 2005; McConnell et al ., 1999); increased school absenteeism (Gilliland et al

., 2001); and increased risk of acquiring asthma fo r children who engage in three or more outdoor sports and live in areas w ith high ozone concentrations (McConnell et al

., 2002).Technical Support Document Chapter IV - 23

3. Ambient Air Quality Standards

In April 2005, the Board reviewed California's one- hour peak standard for ozone and determined that it alone was not sufficiently prote cting public health. Consequently, ARB adopted a new eight-hour ozone standard of 0.07 parts per million (ppm) averaged over eight hours, while retaining the existing one- hour ozone standard at 0.09 ppm. Regarding particulate matter, the Board adopted str icter standards in 2002, which

include a PM 10 annual average standard of 20 micrograms per cubic meter ( μ g/m 3 ) and a new annual average PM 2.5 standard of 12 μ g/m 3 . The State PM 10 standard for a 24-hour period remains at 50 μ g/m 3 . The national and State ambient air quality

standards for ozone and PM are shown in Table IV-1.

Table IV-1 Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone, PM 10 and PM 2.5

Pollutant Averaging Time State Standard National Standard

Ozone 1 hour 0.09 ppm (180 μ g/m 3 ) ---------

8 hour 0.070 ppm

(137 μ g/m 3 ) 0.075 ppm*

( 147 μ g/m 3 )

PM 10 24 hour

Annual Arithmetic Mean 50 μ g/m 3

20 μ g/m 3 150 μ g/m 3

---------

PM 2.5 24 hour

Annual Arithmetic Mean --------- 12 μ g/m 3 35 μ g/m 3

15 μ g/m 3

Source: Air Resources Board, Ambient Air Quality Standards April 1, 2008 (ARB, 2008a). * This standard became effective on March 27, 2008 . The 2007 SIP demonstrates attainment with the previous standard of 0.08ppm.

Table IV-1 reflects the newly revised national eigh t-hour standard for ozone of 0.075 ppm, which was promulgated on March 27, 2008. The U.S. EPA’s rescission of its one-hour ozone standard is also reflected (U.S. EPA, 1997). Despite these revisions to the national standards, Table IV-1 shows that Ca lifornia's standards for PM and ozone continue to be more heath protective than tho se at the federal level.

4. Area Designations for California Ambient Air O zone Standard

The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) of 1988 has the fundamental goal that all areas of California are to attain the State ambient air qual ity standards for ozone by the earliest practicable date. As specified in the CCAA, ARB ha s designated areas of California to

be in "attainment" or "non-attainment" for the Stat e ozone standards.

For the year 2007, Figure IV-1 shows the counties d esignated as non-attainment (or non-attainment transitional, which is a subcategory of non-attainment) for the State ozone standard. As shown, unhealthy levels of ozon e are not limited to urban areas,Technical Support Document Chapter IV - 24

but can be found in nearly every county in Californ ia. This map clearly indicates the extent and magnitude of the ozone problem in Califo rnia.

Figure IV-1Technical Support Document Chapter IV - 25

The areas that are non-attainment for the State ozo ne standards are also nonattainment for the previous 0.08 ppm federal eight- hour ozone standard. The new federal non-attainment designations include a numbe r of rural Sierra Nevada foothill counties and additional parts of the Sacramento Val ley. The federal one-hour standard was revoked on June 15, 2005, one year after the ef fective date of the designations. SIPs showing how each non-attainment area would mee t the previous 0.08 ppm eighthour ozone standard were submitted in 2007. In ord er to maintain progress towards clean air, the federal Clean Air Act prohibits back sliding on the control program.

Recent air quality trends have shown that progress is being made towards achieving the

State ozone standard. For the South Coast Air Basi n all of the ozone statistics between 1988 and 2008, show an overall steady decline, as s een in Figure IV-2. The average maximum 8-hour ozone concentration for the three ye ar period, 2006 to 2008, was over 41 percent lower than the maximum 8-hour ozone conc entration in 1990. Also, the number of days above the standards has declined dra matically. The downward trend for both the eight-hour and one-hour ozone concentr ations is similar (ARB, 2009).

Figure IV-2

South Coast Air Basin Ozone Trend

Source: ARB 2009 Almanac

The ozone problem in the San Joaquin Valley ranks a mong the most severe in the State. Looking at ozone air quality from a histori cal perspective is challenging because of the lack of long-term monitors prior to 1990. F urthermore, monitoring did not include the sites in the portions of the basin with the wor st pollution problems until 1990. ForTechnical Support Document Chapter IV - 26

this reason, we are using 1990 as the beginning yea r to characterize trends. Similar to other areas of the state, exceedence days have decl ined at a faster rate than peak levels. From 1990 to 2008, peak levels declined by an average of 10 percent while the number of State and national eight-hour standard ex ceedence days declined by 17 percent and 21 percent, respectively. Most of t his progress has occurred since 2003. However, the number of exceedence days in 20 05 and 2007 were among the lowest in this eighteen year period (ARB, 2009). F igure IV-3 shows the ozone trend between years 1988 and 2008 for the San Joaquin Val ley Air Basin.

Figure IV-3 San Joaquin Valley Air Basin Ozone Trend

Source: ARB 2009 Almanac

Despite over 25 years of regulatory efforts and the decline of smog levels in areas such as the South Coast Air Basin and the San Joaquin Ai r Basin, ozone continues to be an important environmental and health concern in Calif ornia and more emission reductions are necessary. The State Strategy for California’s 2007 State Implementation Plan addresses the State measures necessary to meet the previous national ozone standard of 0.08 ppm averaged over eight hours.

5. Area Designations for California Ambient Air PM 2.5 Standard

Figure IV-4 shows the counties designated as non-at tainment for the State PM 2.5 standard. As with ozone, unhealthy levels of PM 2.5 are not limited to urban areas, but can be found in many counties throughout California

.Technical Support Document Chapter IV - 27 Figure IV-4Technical Support Document Chapter IV - 28

Related to the federal PM 2.5 standard, in December 2007, ARB submitted nonattainment area recommendations and appropriate bou ndaries to U.S. EPA, in response to the new federal 24-hour PM 2.5 standard of 35 μ g/m 3 established on December 18, 2006. The non-attainment area recomme ndations are based on

2004-2006 PM 2.5 air quality monitoring data. ARB recommended that the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD); San Joaqu in Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD); Bay Area Air Quality Management District; Sacramento Metro Air Quality Management District; the combined cities of Marysville/Yuba City; the City of Chico; and the City of Calexico be designated as no n-attainment for the new 24-hour

PM 2.5 standard. Thus, most of the areas shown in Figure IV-4 are also non-attainment

for the federal 24-hour PM 2.5 standard.

The PM 2.5 SIP for SCAQMD was approved by the Board in Septem ber 2007 and was

submitted to U.S. EPA in November 2007. The PM 2.5 SIP for SJVAPCD was approved by the Board in May 2008 and was submitted to U.S. EPA in June 2008.

6. Climate Change

Climate change, or global warming, is the process w hereby emissions of anthropogenic pollutants, together with other naturally-occuring gases, absorb infrared radiation in the atmosphere, leading to increases in the overall ave rage global temperature. Changes in the atmospheric abundance of GHGs alter the ener gy balance of the climate system. These changes are expressed in terms of radiative f orcing. The standard definition of “greenhouse gas” includes, but is not limited to, s ix substances as identified in the Kyoto Protocol; carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), methane (CH 4 ), nitrous oxide (N 2 O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexaflu oride (SF 6 ).

The Global Warming Potential (GWP) of a compound ma y reflect a direct effect as well as an indirect effect on global warming. The direc t effect is the warming due to the absorption of radiation by molecules of the compoun d in question. VOCs, CO 2 , and

HFCs all have direct effects. The indirect effect is due to the impact that the presence of the compound has on the concentration of other G HGs. For example, VOCs contribute indirectly to global warming, because th ey react chemically in the atmosphere

to increase GHG concentrations of ozone and methane . While VOCs do have direct effects, they are considered GHGs primarily because of their role in creating ozone, and in prolonging the life of methane in the atmosphere

.

By convention, the GWP index is defined relative to CO 2 which has a GWP of 1. The Second Assessment Report (SAR) (IPCC, 1996), define s the GWP of a GHG as the ratio of the time-integrated radiative forcing impa ct from an instantaneous release of 1 kilogram (kg) of a trace substance relative to that of 1 kg of CO 2 . The standard units of measurement used to express the emissions of a G HG is, million metric tons of CO 2 equivalents (MMT CO 2 e) per year.

The GWP values used by ARB are generally the 1996 S AR GWP values (ARB, 2007c). These values are used when converting emissions of GHGs to carbon dioxideTechnical Support Document Chapter IV - 29

equivalent values (CO 2 e). The SAR GWP values are used to be consistent w ith the Board’s Discrete Early Action Report, other statewi de and national GHG inventories, and ARB’s Scoping Plan. When no SAR GWP value is l isted, ARB uses the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report (FAR) GWP value (IPCC, 200 7).

The climate warming impact from emissions of GHGs i s the product of two factors: (1) the mass of GHG emitted, and (2) its warming po tential. In addition to uncertainty in the mass of emissions, there is also uncertainty in attributes of warming potential (as a function of direct and indirect warming impacts and the atmospheric lifetime) and thus in

the assessment of GWP.

7. Toxic Air Contaminants

As part of our obligations under CEQA, the ARB staf f is required to evaluate and mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts re sulting from regulatory proposals. Also, pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 39 650 et seq., the ARB is required to identify and control toxic air contaminants (TACs). The Health and Safety Code defines a TAC as “...an air pollutant which may cause or co ntribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or which may pose a hazard to huma n health.” Moreover, in accordance with section 39666 of the Health and Safety Code, f or TACs for which no safe exposure threshold has been established, the ARB is required to “.... reduce emissions to the lowest level achievable through application of best available control technology or a

more effective control method....”

Several chemicals currently used in the consumer pr oduct formulations considered for regulation have been identified as TACs. An increa sed or continued use of TACs in any of the consumer product categories considered for r egulation could lead to a potential adverse environmental impact. ARB staff has evalua ted this potential and has concluded that there would be a potential adverse e nvironmental impact of implementing the VOC limits. Therefore, staff is p roposing mitigation measures designed to ensure that use of TACs will be reduced or prohibited, resulting in a positive environmental impact.

In the federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, th e United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) identified perchloroet hylene (Perc), methylene chloride (MeCl), and trichloroethylene (TCE) as hazardous ai r pollutants (HAPs) because evidence indicated the substances may have adverse effects on human health or the

environment.

Staff found that the proposed prohibition on use of Perc, MeCl, and TCE in Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products is neces sary to reduce the health risk associated with use of these compounds. Staff has identified the potential for increased chances of contracting cancer from using products c ontaining these compounds. The proposed prohibitions are necessary to mitigate pot ential adverse impacts that would result from implementing VOC limits for these categ ories. The prohibitions would alsoTechnical Support Document Chapter IV - 30

align with State law that requires use of BACT in i nstances where no safe exposure

threshold is known.

B. IMPORTANCE OF REGULATING CONSUMER PRODUCTS VOC AND GHG

EMISSIONS AND TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANTS

In Section A above, we described how consumer produ cts’ emissions contribute to the formation of ground level ozone and PM 2.5 and climate change. In this section, we provide information on the importance of regulating VOC and GHG emissions.

1. VOC Emissions

Consumer products are a significant source of VOC e missions in California. This section focuses on reducing emissions from consumer products as a ground-level ozone control strategy. Although each consumer pro duct may seem to be a small source of emissions, the cumulative use of these pr oducts by over 38 million Californians results in significant emissions (DOF, 2007). Given the severity of the air pollution problems in California, further dramatic emission reductions from all sources contributing to ground-level ozone are necessary.

As evidence of the magnitude of consumer product VO C emissions, it is estimated that in 2010 consumer products emissions will be approxi mately 255 tons per day, or about 12 percent of the overall statewide VOC inventory. In this same year, consumer product emissions will comprise about 19 and 7 perc ent of VOC emissions in SCAQMD and SJVAPCD, respectively. Without further actions , consumer product emissions are expected to grow to approximately 283 tons per day in 2020, representing 14 percent of statewide VOC emissions (ARB, 2007h).

As control measures for other VOC sources (i.e. mob ile sources) become effective, consumer product emissions become more important in the SCAQMD. It is estimated that emissions from consumer products will be the l argest source of VOC emissions in the SCAQMD in 2020. However, using the maximum inc remental reactivity (MIR) scale (see Title 17, CCR section 94700-94701) as the basi s for comparison of ozone forming potential, consumer product emissions are over two times less reactive than are emissions from on-road motor vehicles. Regardless of the ozone-forming potential of various source categories, clearly, further reducti ons in VOC emissions from consumer products and other VOC sources are needed, if ozone attainment is to be achieved and

maintained.

Despite these projections, ARB’s consumer products program has made significant progress. Since 1989, regulations adopted by the A RB, along with numerous amendments to the regulations, have substantially r educed VOC emissions from consumer products. Absent these regulations today, consumer product emissions would likely be about 450 tons per day. Figure IV- 5 shows that statewide consumer product VOC emissions have been reduced by over 200 tons per day in 2010. However, Figure IV-5 also shows that without furthe r actions population growth wouldTechnical Support Document Chapter IV - 31

likely reverse the trend.



### Figure IV-5

Consumer Products VOC Emission Trends

225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 475 500 525

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006
2 0 08 2010
2

0 12 2014
2

0 16 2018
2

0 20

YearEmissions (tpd) Emissions (with population growth only)

Emissions (with population growth and emission redu ctions)

The emission values in Figure IV-5 are derived from several data sources.

The 1990 to 2007 emissions are taken from the ARB F orecasted Emissions by Summary Category, 2008 Almanac (ARB 2008c). Emissi ons are then grown in proportion to expected population increase. Popula tion growth is in accordance with

estimates in the California Environmental Protectio n Agency’s (Cal/EPA) Statewide Human Population Table found in the Population and Vehicle Trends Report (ARB, 2008d). For categories regulated in the 2008 Consu mer Products Regulation Amendments, emission values from the 2003 Survey an d the projected emissions reductions resulting from the VOC limits approved b y the Board at its June 2008, hearing, are reflected in Figure IV-5.

As shown in Figure IV-5, the important emission red uctions that have been realized from the ARB’s Consumer Products Program are beginn ing to be partially offset by population growth. California’s population is expe cted to grow to 40 million by 2010 (DOF, 2007). Therefore, ARB must continue its comm itment to pursue additional technologically and commercially feasible reduction s in consumer products emissions.

As was described in Chapter I, the Health and Safet y Code, as well as SIPs, set forth requirements to control emissions. To meet the fed eral standards, emission reductions from consumer products became part of the Californi a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone in 1994. In this SIP, consumer products measures were put in place to work 

### 200 tpdTechnical Support Document Chapter IV - 32

towards attaining the federal one-hour ambient air quality standard for ozone. In the 2003 SIP, ARB reiterated the commitment to reduce c onsumer products VOC

emissions to meet the one-hour federal ozone standa rd.

In response to these mandates, adopted limits will achieve a 44 percent reduction in overall VOC emissions from consumer products by the year 2010. Despite these reductions, more are necessary to attain the federa l ozone standard.

In 2007, a new SIP was adopted. This State Strateg y for California’s 2007 State Implementation Plan (Strategy) includes California’ s plan to attain the federal ozone standard of 0.08 ppm averaged over eight hours. Th e consumer products commitment in this strategy supplements the 1994 and 2003 comm itments. In the Strategy, ARB has committed to an additional 30 to 40 tons per da y VOC emissions reduction from consumer products by 2014.

Because significant further VOC emissions reduction s are necessary to attain the federal ozone standard, the reductions from the ame ndments proposed in this report are therefore “necessary” within the meaning of sec tion 41712 of the Health and Safety Code. In addition, section 41712(b)(1) of the Heal th and Safety Code provides that a regulation’s “necessity” is to be evaluated in term s of both the State and federal

standards.

The applicable State and federal laws show that bot h the U.S. Congress and the California Legislature intended progress toward cle an air be made as quickly as possible. The CCAA specifically declares that it i s the intent of the Legislature that the State air quality standards be achieved “...by the earliest practicable date...” (See Health and Safety Code, sections 40910 and 40913(a); see a lso the uncodified section 1(b)(2) of the Act (Stats. 1988, Chapter 1568)). A similar intent is expressed in the federal Clean Air Act, which declares that the federal air quality standards are to be achieved “...as expeditiously as practicable...” (See sectio ns 172(a)(2), 181(a), and 188(c) of the federal Clean Air Act). For all of the reasons des cribed above, the proposed amendments are “necessary” within the meaning of se ction 41712 of the Health and Safety Code.

The amendments proposed in this rulemaking are the second increment toward fulfilling the 2007 Strategy commitment for VOC reductions fro m consumer products.

2. Greenhouse Gas Emissions

We acknowledge that the GHG emissions contribution of consumer products is modest relative to other sources, such as vehicle exhaust. However, the severe consequences of climate change requires reductions from any sour ce where it is feasible. While staff is still in the process of developing the consumer product GHG inventory, we do know from past surveys that several GHGs are used in con sumer products. For categories proposed for regulation, no GHGs of concern were re ported. However, several GHG could be used as products reformulate.Technical Support Document Chapter IV - 33

GHG propellants and several solvents with fairly hi gh GWPs could be used to meet the proposed VOC limits. These compounds are typically low photochemically reactive compounds that are VOC exempt and have been used as a reformulation strategy to reduce VOC content in other categories. Compounds of interest include HFCs, HCFCs, HFEs, CO 2 , and N 2 O. However, the propellants HFC-134a and HFC-152a are the predominate GHGs used in consumer products today. In instances where flammability is a concern, HFC-134a is used. HFC-134a is a non-flammable propellant, whereas HFC-152a is minimally flammable . Compressed CO 2 is also used as a propellant, but the GHG emissions are negligib le compared to the emissions from HFCs. Table IV-2 shows some examples of GHGs that are used in consumer products.

Table IV-2 Global Warming Potential of Selected Compounds Used in Consumer Products

Compound SAR GWP* FAR GWP**

CO 2 1 1

HFE-7200 N/A 59

HFC-152a 140 124

HCFC-141b N/A 725

HFC-134a 1300 1430

HFC-43 10mee 1300 1640
* 100 year timeframe, SAR value ** 100 year timeframe, FAR value

As shown in Table IV-2, HFC-152a has a GWP of 140, while HFC-134a has a GWP of 1300. The value for HFC-134a is approximate ly ten times greater than the GWP of HFC-152a and 1300 times greater than CO 2

.

GHG emissions data are available from the 2006 Cons umer and Commercial Products Survey (2006 Survey). In the 2006 Survey, we surve yed manufacturers of consumer products to determine the usage of compounds with h igh GWP in several categories of consumer products. The 2006 Survey will be used to develop the GHG inventory for consumer products. We will evaluate the survey dat a for product categories where compounds with high GWP are used to determine if th ere is a potential to reduce them without increasing the use of VOCs. Additionally, we will identify product categories where the pathway to reformulation may increase the use of high GWP compounds and set GWP limits as a mitigation measure.

To minimize climate change impacts, we are proposin g to prohibit the use of compounds with a GWP of 150 or higher.

3. Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions

Under the California Environmental Quality Act, ARB is required to identify and mitigate any possible significant adverse environmental impa cts of regulatory actions. It is unlikely, but possible, that manufacturers may, in response to new VOC limits for Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, choose to reformulate with chlorinatedTechnical Support Document Chapter IV - 34

solvents that are TACs. Therefore, in accordance w ith CEQA, we are proposing in new subsection 94509(u), a prohibition of the use of me thylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene in the “Multi-purpose Solvent ,” and “Paint Thinner” categories.

C. ESTIMATED EMISSIONS FROM CATEGORIES PROPOSED TO BE

REGULATED

1. Consumer and Commercial Products Surveys

The 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey (2 006 Survey) was mailed to over 5,000 companies in July 2007. The Paint Thinn er and Multi-purpose Solvent Survey Update (Survey Update) was sent to twenty-on e companies in November 2008. Data received from the 2006 Survey and the Survey U pdate formed the basis for the emissions used in this rulemaking.

The 2006 Survey and the Survey Update provided staf f with detailed information on the formulations of consumer products proposed for regu lation, including complete speciation of VOCs, low vapor pressure VOC (LVP-VOC ) solvents, and key exempt ingredients (ARB, 2007f; ARB, 2008f). Total volume s of inorganic and other compounds were also provided. Information on sales , product form, customer types, and company size and economics were also requested.

The results of the Surveys for the categories propo sed for regulation were discussed at the April 1, 2009, public workshop, and input from industry was used to correct inaccuracies in the data. For this rulemaking, the 2009 emissions and reduction estimates, when the limits become effective, were g rown from 2006 and 2008 sales data and the State Department of Finance’s 2008 pop ulation estimates. Population growth is in accordance with estimates in the Calif ornia Environmental Protection Agency’s (Cal/EPA) Statewide Human Population Table found in the Population and Vehicle Trends Report (ARB, 2008d).

Staff is confident that the 2006 Survey had adequat e representation of the available technologies for Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener , and the Survey Update had adequate representation of the Multi-purpose Solven t and Paint Thinner technologies, in the market place and finds that the data meet the r equirement in Health and Safety Code section 41712(b) to base regulations on “adequ ate data.” This assumption has been verified by discussions with manufacturers, ca tegory research, shelf surveys, and the wide range of VOC content reported for products in the categories slated for regulation.

The proposed amendments were developed based on the 2006 Survey results, as well as results from the Survey Update conducted in Nove mber 2008. The intent of the survey update was to obtain sales data for the 12 m onth period starting from October 1, 2007, through September 30, 2008. The s urvey was conducted in response

to comments from stakeholders that indicated the ma rket for Multi-purpose Solvent andTechnical Support Document Chapter IV - 35

Paint Thinner had changed since these categories we re last surveyed during our 2003 Survey.

In developing these proposals, we worked with stake holders on each category proposed for regulation. Numerous product labels a nd associated literature for each category were analyzed. Category information was a lso obtained from shelf surveys, trade journals, Internet sites, textbooks, patents, and directly from manufacturers.

2. Emission Estimates for Categories

The total VOC emissions from the categories propose d for regulation are estimated to be about 22.7 tons per day in 2009. Table IV-3 sum marizes these emissions, as well as the anticipated VOC emission reductions when the pr oposed limits become effective.

In March 2009, the South Coast Air Quality Manageme nt District (SCAQMD) adopted Rule 1143, Consumer Paint Thinners and Multi-purpos e Solvents (Rule 1143) which will achieve VOC emission reductions from consumer paint thinners and multi-purpose

solvents used in the South Coast Air Basin. In ord er to avoid double-counting of VOC emissions and emission reductions, staff has subtra cted from the statewide values, the portion of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner VOC emissions and reductions that can be attributed to the South Coast Air Basin, bas ed on population (DOF, 2008). Approximately 43 percent of California’s population resides in the South Coast Air Basin, therefore 43 percent of the VOC emissions an d reductions from the Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner categories were s ubtracted from the statewide

values shown in Table IV-3.

If adopted, once all limits become effective, the V OC emission reductions will be approximately 14.7 tons per day.

Table IV-3 Proposed VOC Limits, Emissions, and Reductions at E ffective Date

Product Category Product

Form Proposed

VOC Limit
(percent by weight) 2009 VOC

Emissions*
(tons per day) Effective

Date Reductions

Upon

Effective

Date
(tons per day)

Double Phase Aerosol

Air Freshener Aerosol 20 10.2 12/31/2012 2.0

Tier 1: 30 12.5 + 12/31/2010 8.4 + Multi-purpose Solvent &

Paint Thinner Nonaerosol Tier 2: 3 --- 12/31/2013 3.9 +

Total Emissions 2009 22.6 tons per day
Total Reductions by

end of 2013 14.7 tons per day

* Survey emissions adjusted for market coverage, g rown to the 2009 calendar year, and rounded.

+ Does not include SCAQMD Rule 1143 reductions.Technical Support Document Chapter IV - 36

3. Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Development of the proposed amendments to minimize use of high GWP value compounds began with the emissions data and product formula data from the 2006 Survey and the Survey Update. According to the dat a reported, hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) propellants are not currently used in Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener. In addition, no high GWP solvents are used in Multi-pu rpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. This finding demonstrates that HFC prope llants and high GWP solvents, are

not critical to the formulation of Double Phase Aer osol Air Freshener, Multi-purpose Solvent, or Paint Thinner products.

However, one reformulation pathway to meet the prop osed VOC limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, could be to replace some of the VOC propellant with VOC exempt propellants such as HFC-152a or HFC-134a. H FC-134a has a GWP of 1300 while HFC-152a has a GWP of 140. In addition, it i s possible that manufacturers could choose to use high GWP solvents as a reformulation option in response to the VOC limits for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner. Consequently, in this rulemaking, we are proposing a GWP limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products, Multipurpose Solvent, and Paint Thinner products as a mi tigation measure to minimize climate change impacts as products are reformulated

.

The proposed GWP limit of 150 prevents the use of H FC-134a in reformulated Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, which would potentiall y significantly increase GHG emissions, but would allow use of HFC-152a. If a s mall amount of HFC-152a were used in formulations the impact on climate change w ould likely be negligible. The proposed GWP limit also prevents the use of high GW P solvents in Multi-purpose

Solvent and Paint Thinner. Because of cost and cor porate policies, we also do not believe that it is likely that manufacturers would choose options that would significantly increase GHG emissions in these categories. If ado pted by ARB, this will be the second and third GWP standards in place for consume r products in California.

3. Toxic Air Contaminants

In the Survey Update, no use of methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloroethylene was reported for Multi-purpose So lvent and Paint Thinner products. However, use of these chlorinated TAC solvents, par ticularly the VOC-exempt compounds methylene chloride and perchloroethylene, is a potential option as products are reformulated to comply with the proposed limits . Therefore, to ensure that the public is not exposed to these chlorinated TAC solv ents from use of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, we are proposin g in new section 94509(u), to prohibit the use of methylene chloride, perchloroet hylene, and trichloroethylene in Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. No adv erse impacts on other media are expected from this proposal.Technical Support Document Chapter IV - 37

REFERENCES

1. Air Resources Board. The California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality –

2009 Edition . 2009. (ARB, 2009)

2. Air Resources Board. Ambient Air Quality Standa rds . April 1, 2008 (ARB, 2008a).

3. Air Resources Board. 2006 Statewide Emissions I nventory by Summary Category, 2008 Almanac page 2-7

. http://www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanac08/almanac 08.htm . 2008. (ARB, 2008c)

4. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for Proposed Rulemaking Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Prod ucts Regulation

. May 9, 2008. (ARB, 2008e)

5. Air Resources Board. Statewide Human Population Chart: Population and Vehicle Trends Report . (ARB, 2008d)

6. Air Resources Board. Paint Thinner and Multi-p urpose Solvent Survey Update. November 4, 2008. (ARB, 2008f)

7. Air Resources Board. ARB Compendium of Emission Factors and Methods to Support Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emiss ions . October 2007. (ARB, 2007c)

8. Air Resources Board. State Strategy for Califor nia’s 2007 Implementation Plan

. Released April 26, 2007. Adopted by the Air Resourc es Board on September 27, 2007. (ARB, 2007d)

9. Air Resources Board. 2006 Consumer & Commercial Products Survey

. July 24, 2007. (ARB, 2007f)

10. Air Resources Board. ARB Forecasted Emissions b y Summary Category, 2007

Almanac . http://www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/fcemssumcat2007. php . 2007. (ARB, 2007h)

11. Air Resources Board. Comparison of California’ s Ozone Problem to the Rest of the Country . July 29, 2006. (ARB, 2006b)

12. Air Resources Board and Office of Environmenta l Health Hazard Assessment. Staff Report - Public Hearing to Consider Amendment s to the Ambient Air Quality

Standards for Particulate Matter and Sulfates . May 3, 2002. (ARB, 2002)Technical Support Document Chapter IV - 38

13. Air Resources Board. Effect of Ozone on Vegeta tion and Possible Alternative Ambient Air Quality Standards . March, 1987. (ARB, 1987)

14. Avol, E. L., W. J. Gauderman, S. M. Tan, S. J. London, and J. M. Peters. Respiratory Effects of Relocating to Areas of Diffe ring Air Pollution Levels . 2001. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care M edicine. Volume 164: 2067-2072. (Avol, et al ., 2001)

15. California Department of Finance. Report: Sta te Adds 470,000 in 2006: 2007 Population Nears 37.7 Million . May 1, 2007. (DOF, 2007)

16. California Department of Finance. Population Estimates and Components of Change by County, July 1, 2000-2008 . December 2008. (DOF, 2008)

17. Delfino, R. J., R. S. Zeiger, J. M. Seltzer, D . H. Street, C. E. McLaren. Association of Asthma Symptoms with Peak Particulat e Air Pollution and Effect Modification by Anti-inflammatory Medication Use . 2002. Environmental Health Perspectives. Volume 110. Number 10: A607-617. (Del fino, et al ., 2002)

18. Dominici , F., R. D. Peng, M. L. Bell, L. Pham , A. McDermott, S. L. Zeger,

J. M. Samet. Fine Particulate Air Pollution and H ospital Admission for Cardiovascular and Respiratory Diseases . 2006. Journal of American Medical Association. Volume 295. Number 10: 1127-1134. (D ominici et al ., 2006)

19. Dominici, F., A. McDermott, M. Daniels, S. L. Zeger, J. M. Samet. Revised Analyses of the National Morbidity, Mortality, and Air Pollution Study: Mortality Among Residents of 90 Cities . 2005. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health. A. 68:1071-92. (Dominici et al ., 2005)

20. Dominici, F., A. McDermott, M. Daniels, S. L. Zeger, J. M. Samet. Revised Analyses of the National Morbidity, Mortality, and Air Pollution Study, Part II

. 2003. Health Effects Institute Special Report. (Do minici et al ., 2003)

21. Gauderman, W. J., E. Avol, F. Lurmann, N. Kuen zli, F. Gilliland, J. Peters, and R. McConnell. Childhood Asthma and Exposure to Traffi c and Nitrogen Dioxide

. 2005. Epidemiology. Volume 16. Number 6: 737-743 . (Gauderman et al ., 2005)

22. Gauderman, W. J., H. Vora, R. McConnell, K. B erhane, F. Gilliland, D. Thomas, F. Lurmann, E. Avol, D. Bates, H. Margolis, E. Rapp aport, N. Kuenzli, M. Jerrett, and J. Peters. The Effect of Air Pollution on Lung Development from 10 to 18 Years of Age . 2004. New England Journal of Medicine. Volume 351. Number 11: 1057-1067. (Gauderman et al ., 2004)Technical Support Document Chapter IV - 39

23. Gauderman, W. J., G. F. Gilliland, H. Vora, E. Avol, D. Stram, R. McConnell, D. Thomas, F. Lurmann, H. G. Margolis, E. B. Rappaport , K. Berhane, and J. M. Peters. Association between Air Pollution and Lung Function Growth in Southern

California Children: Results from a Second Cohort . 2002. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. Volume 166: 76-84. (Gauderman et al ., 2002)

24. Gauderman, W. J., R. McConnell, F. Gilliland, S. London, D. Thomas, E. Avol, H. Vora, K. Berhane, E. B. Rappaport, F. Lurmann, H. G . Margolis, and J. Peters. Association Between Air Pollution and Lung Function Growth in Southern

California Children . 2000. American Journal Respiratory and Critical C are Medicine. Volume 162. pp.1383-1390. (Gauderman et al ., 2000)

25. Gent, J. F., E. W. Triche, T. R. Holford, K. B elanger, M. B. Bracken, W. S. Beckett, B. P. Leaderer. Association of Low-level Ozone and Fine Particles with Respiratory Symptoms in Children with Asthma . 2003. Journal of American

Medical Association. Volume 290. Number 14: 1859-1 867. (Gent et al ., 2003)

26. Gilliland, F. D., K. Berhand, E. B. Rappaport, D. C. Thomas, E. Avol, W. J. Gauderman, S. J. London, H. G. Margolis, R. McConne ll, K. T. Islam, and J. M.

Peters. The Effects of Ambient Air Pollution on Sc hool Absenteeism Due to Respiratory Illnesses . 2001. Epidemiology. Volume 12. Number 1: 43-54. (Gilliland et al

., 2001)

27. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Fo rster, P., V. Ramaswamy, P. Artaxo, T. Berntsen, R. Betts, D.W. Fahey, J. Haywo od, J. Lean, D.C. Lowe, G. Myhre, J. Nganga, R. Prinn, G. Raga, M. Schulz and R. Van Dorland, 2007: Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiativ e Forcing. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribut ion of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernment al Panel on Climate Change

. [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marqu is, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge Univer sity Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. (IPCC, 2007)

28. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPC C Climate Change 1995: Second Assessment Report: The Science of Climate C hange. (1996) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . [J.T. Houghton, L.G. Meira Filho, B.A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg, and K. Ma skell, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom. (IPCC , 1996)

29. Krewski, D., R. Burnett, M. S. Goldberg, K. Ho over, J. Siemiatycki, M. Jerrett. et

al . Reanalysis of the Harvard Six Cities Study and t he American Cancer Society Study of Particulate Air Pollution and Mort ality . 2000. Research Report of the Health Effects Institute. (Krewski et al ., 2000)Technical Support Document Chapter IV - 40

30. Laden, F., J. Schwartz F. E. Speizer D. W. Doc kery. Reduction in Fine Particulate Air Pollution and Mortality . 2006. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. Volume 173: 667-672. (Laden et al ., 2006)

31. Laden, F., L. M. Neas, D. W. Dockery, J. Schwa rtz. Association of Fine

Particulate Matter from Different Sources with Dail y Mortality in Six U.S. Cities

. 2000. Environmental Health Perspectives. Volume 10 8. Number 10: 941-947. (Laden et al

., 2000)

32. McConnell, R., K. Berhane, F. Gilliland, S. J. London, T. Islam, W. J. Gauderman, E. Avol, H. G. Margolis, and J. M. Peter s. Asthma in Exercising Children Exposed to Ozone: A Cohort Study . 2002. Lancet. Volume 359: 386- 391. (McConnell et al

., 2002)

33. McConnell, R., K. Berhane, S. J. London, H. Vo ra, E. Avol, W. J. Gauderman, H. G. Margolis, F. Lurmann, D. C. Thomas, and J. M. Pe ters. Air Pollution and Bronchitic Symptoms in Southern California Children with Asthma . 1999. Environmental Health Perspectives. Volume 107. Numb er 9: 757-760. (McConnell et al

., 1999)

34. Miller, K. A., D. S. Siscovick, L. Sheppard, K . Shepherd, J. H. Sullivan, G. L. Anderson and J. D. Kaufman. Long-term Exposure to Air Pollution and Incidence

of Cardiovascular Events in Women . 2007. New England Journal of Medicine. Volume 356. Number 5: 447-458. (Miller et al ., 2007)

35. Moolgavkar, S. H. Air Pollution and Daily Dea ths and Hospital Admissions in Los Angeles and Cook Counties. Revised Analyses of Time -Series Studies of Air

Pollution and Health . 2003. Special Report. Health Effects Institute: 1 83-198. (Moolgavkar, 2003)

36. Ostro, B. D., M. J. Mann, A. Krupnick, W. Harr ington. Air Pollution and Respiratory Morbidity among Adults in Southern Cali fornia . 1993. American Journal of Epidemiology. Volume 137. Number 7: 691- 700. (Ostro et al ., 1993)

37. Ostro, B. D., S. Rothschild. Air Pollution an d Acute Respiratory Morbidity: An Observational Study of Multiple Pollutants . 1989. Environmental Research. Volume 50: 238-247. (Ostro et al ., 1989)

38. Peel, J. L., P. E. Tolbert, M. Klein, K. B. Me tzger, W. D. Flanders, K. Todd, J. A. Mulholland, P. B. Ryan, H. Frumkin. Ambient Air Po llution and Respiratory Emergency Department Visits . 2005. Epidemiology. Volume 16. Number 2: 164- 174. (Peel et al

., 2005)

39. Pope, C. A., 3 rd , R. T. Burnett, G. D. Thurston, M. J. Thun, E. E. Calle, D. Krewski, and J. J. Godleski. Cardiovascular Mortal ity and Long-Term Exposure to Particulate Air Pollution: Epidemiological Evide nce of GeneralTechnical Support Document Chapter IV - 41

Pathophysiological Pathways of Disease . 2004. Circulation. Volume 109: 71-77. (Pope et al

., 2004)

40. Pope, C. A., 3 rd , R. T. Burnett, M. J. Thun, E. E. Calle, D. Krewsk i, K. Ito, G. D. Thurston. Lung Cancer, Cardiopulmonary Mortality, and Long-term Exposure to

Fine Particulate Air Pollution . 2002. Journal of American Medical Association. Volume 287. Number 9: 1132-41. (Pope et al ., 2002)

41. Seinfeld, John H., and Spyros N. Pandis. Atmo spheric Chemistry and Physics-From Air Pollution to Climate Change . John Wiley & Sons. New York. 1998. (Seinfeld and Pandis, 1998)

42. Sheppard, L. Ambient Air Pollution and Noneld erly Asthma Hospital Admissions in Seattle, Washington, 1987-1994. Revised Analyses of Time-Series Studies of Air Pollution and Health. Special Report . 2003. Health Effects Institute. pp. 227-240. (Sheppard et al ., 2003)

43. Symons, J. M., L. Wang, E. Guallar, E. Howell, F. Dominici, M. Schwab, B. A. Ange, J. Samet, J. Ondov, D. Harrison, A. Geyh. A Case-crossover Study of

Fine Particulate Matter Air Pollution and Onset of Congestive Heart Failure Symptom Exacerbation Leading to Hospitalization . 2006. American Journal of Epidemiology. Volume 164. Number 5: 421-433. (Symon s et al ., 2006)

44. United States Department of Agriculture. Agri cultural Outlook: Statistical Indicators, Table 34.-Cash Receipts from Farm Marke ting, by State . July, 2006, http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/Agoutlook/AOTa bles/ . (USDA, 2006)

45. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: Policy Assessment of Scientific and Technical Information OAQPS Staff Paper – Second Draft . July, 2006. (U.S. EPA, 2006)

46. United States Environmental Protection Agency. National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone; Final Rule . Federal Register: July 18, 1997. Volume 62. Number 138. (U.S. EPA, 1997)

47. Whittemore, A., E. Korn. Asthma and Air Pollu tion in the Los Angeles Area

. 1980. American Journal of Public Health. Volume 70 . Number 7: 687-696. (Whittemore and Korn, 1980)

48. Zanobetti, A, J. Schwartz. Airborne particles and hospital admissions for heart and lung disease. Revised Analyses of Time-Series S tudies of Air Pollution and Health. Special Report . 2003. Health Effects Institute. pp. 241-248. (Zanobetti et al

., 2003)Technical Support Document Chapter V - 42

V. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSUMER PRODUCTS REG ULATION

AND METHOD 310

In this chapter, we provide a plain English descrip tion of the proposed amendments to the California Regulation for Reducing Emissions fr om Consumer Products (Consumer Products Regulation) and explain the rationale for the amendments. The regulation is codified in title 17, California Code of Regulation s, Division 3, Chapter 1, Subchapter 8.5, Article 2, Consumer Products , sections 94507-94517. A description of the proposed changes to Method 310 “Determination of Vo latile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Consumer Products and Reactive Organic Compounds in Aerosol Coating Products” (Method 310) is also included.

Where applicable, key terms or concepts involved in each proposed amendment are described. The discussion in this chapter is inten ded to satisfy the requirements of Government Code section 11343.2, which requires tha t a non-controlling “plain English” summary of the regulation be made available to the public. The proposed amendments to the Consumer Products Regulation and Method 310 can be found in Appendix B.

Amendments are being proposed to the following sect ions in the Consumer Products Regulation: section 94508 “Definitions;” section 9 4509 “Standards for Consumer Products;” section 94510 “Exemptions;” section 9451 1 “Innovative Products;” section 94512 “Administrative Requirements;” section 94513 “Reporting Requirements;” and

section 94515 “Test Methods.” New sections are bei ng proposed for Method 310. The Method 310 new sections are: 3.3.7, 4.3, 4.3.1, an d 4.3.2. All of these amendments

are discussed below in detail.

In the sections below, we describe the proposed ame ndments and the rationale for them. The proposal includes six new definitions, t he modification of three existing definitions, a lower VOC limit for one category, ne w VOC limits for two categories and a global warming potential (GWP) limit for the three categories. For Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners, our proposal also incl udes special labeling and reporting requirements; a prohibition on the use of Toxic Air Contaminant (TAC) chlorinated solvents; a limitation on the VOC aromatic compound content along with a requirement to supply information to aid in enforcing this prov ision; and special labeling and reporting requirements. A more detailed discussion of the existing regulatory requirements for consumer products can be found in additional ARB publications which are referenced at the end of this chapter (ARB, 200 8b; ARB, 2006a; ARB, 2004b; ARB, 1999; ARB, 1997b; ARB, 1991a; ARB, 1990c).

A. DEFINITIONS (SECTION 94508)

Section 94508, “Definitions,” provides all the term s used in the Consumer Products Regulation which are not self-explanatory. The pro posed amendments to the regulation include new definitions for “Aromatic Compound;” “A rtist’s Solvent/Thinner;” “HighTemperature Coating;” “Industrial Maintenance Coati ng;” “Paint Clean-up;” and “ZincRich Primer.” These new definitions are in support of the new Paint Thinner standardsTechnical Support Document Chapter V - 43

to help clarify products that are not subject to th e VOC limits. The proposed amendments include modified definitions of “ASTM,” “Multi-purpose Solvent,” and “Paint Thinner.” The ASTM definition was changed to refle ct the proper name of the organization that develops standard analytical test methods. We are proposing to modify the “Multi-purpose Solvent” and “Paint Thinn er” definitions to clarify products included in or excluded from the categories, and to improve enforcement of the regulation. The “Paint Thinner” definition was rev ised to make it clear that it does not include “Artist’s Solvent/Thinner” and, therefore, these products are not subject to the regulation if the size requirements in the new “Art ist’s Solvent/Thinner” definition are

met.

Artists’ Solvents and Thinners were surveyed in ARB ’s 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey (ARB, 2007f). The categ ory sales and emissions reported for these products were minuscule. Also, based on market research and consultations with industry experts, we have learned that these p roducts are required to meet the Labeling of Hazardous Art Materials Act (LHAMA) wit hin the Federal Hazardous Substances Act. LHAMA requires that any art materi al, including solvents, meet ASTM D 4236, Standard Practice for Labeling Art Material s for Chronic Health Hazards, to protect consumers of any age from potential health hazards of these products (ASTM, 2005). ASTM D 4236 requires that the art material must be reviewed by a board certified or qualified toxicologist and labeled con sistent with the standard. We visited

several art material stores and noted that the sale s price of Artists’ Solvents and Thinners was substantially higher compared to the s ales prices per volume of Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products sold at home improvement and paint stores. Therefore, we believe that these products are unlikely substitutes for Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products and an e xemption from the proposed VOC limits and provisions is appropriate for Artist’s S olvents/Thinners, labeled to meet ASTM D 4236 and packaged in containers with a capacity l ess than or equal to 32 fluid

ounces.

The proposed amendments to the regulation also incl ude new size parameters for both the dilutable and pre-mixed “Automotive Windshield Washer Fluid” products. These modifications are intended to clarify the types of products that are included in these categories. This change would allow a wider range of dilutable products, to encourage manufacturers to ship concentrated products. Allow ing smaller containers to be sold in concentrated form should reduce product weight lead ing to reduced transportation costs

and the air emissions associated with the movement of such products by truck or other

conveyance.

B. STANDARDS FOR CONSUMER PRODUCTS (SECTION 94509)

1. Proposed Amendments to Section 94509(a) - Table of Standards

The proposed regulatory action would amend the exis ting Consumer Products Regulation by specifying VOC limits for the product categories shown inTechnical Support Document Chapter V - 44

Table V-1. Of the three proposed limits, Double Ph ase Aerosol Air Freshener been has previously regulated, while there are two tiers of new limits proposed for Multi-purpose

Solvent and Paint Thinner. The effective dates of these VOC limits are shown in

Table V-1 below.

Table V-1

Proposed VOC Limits, Product Forms, and Effective D ates

Product Category Product Form Proposed
VOC Limit
(percent by weight) Effective

Date

Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener Aerosol 20 12/31/2012 Multi-purpose Solvent: Tier 1 Non-aerosol 30 12/31/ 2010 Multi-purpose Solvent: Tier 2 Non-aerosol 3 12/31/2 013

Paint Thinner: Tier 1 Non-aerosol 30 12/31/2010

Paint Thinner: Tier 2 Non-aerosol 3 12/31/2013 Total Emissions 2009 22.6 tons per day Total VOC Reductions 2013 14.7 tons per day

We are also proposing to modify the Table of Standa rds to delete the “(all forms) dilutable and pre-mixed” description under “All oth er areas” from “Automotive Windshield Washer Fluids.” This proposal is intend ed to clarify that the 1 percent VOC limit by weight in non-Type A Areas, applies to con centrates as well as dilutable products (after the label recommended dilution has taken place). This proposed

modification should end the confusion that led some affected parties to believe that

limits varied for these situations. It should be n oted that there are different VOC limits pertaining to products sold in different areas of C alifornia, Type “A” areas and all other areas (non-Type A areas). Type A areas are those p ortions of California where freezing temperatures are expected to occur frequently.

2. Other Proposed Amendments to Section 94509

Modification to 94509(b)(3)

We are proposing to modify the provision in subsect ion 94509(b)(3) related to “Automotive Windshield Washer Fluids (Dilutable)” t o specify that a product must specifically state on the front panel that the prod uct should be diluted prior to use. This proposed modification is intended to make it clear to the consumer when a product should be diluted prior to use, to ensure that emis sion reductions continue to occur, and to enhance enforceability of the regulation.

Proposed GWP Limit – 94509(t) and (u)

For Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners, one possib le reformulation pathway to meet lower VOC limits would be to replace, or partially replace, hydrocarbon propellant with VOC exempt propellants which could have higher Glob al Warming Potential (GWP)

values. To ensure that this does not occur in refo rmulations to meet the proposed VOC limit, we are proposing in new subsection 94509(t)( 1) to prohibit the use of any chemicalTechnical Support Document Chapter V - 45

with a GWP value of 150 or greater. In new subsect ion 94509(u)(1)(A), we are proposing language prohibiting the use of any chemi cal with a GWP value of 150 or greater in Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinner s. This provision is proposed because there is a slight possibility that manufact urers could replace current VOC solvents used in Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint T hinners with compounds with high GWP. In subsections 94509(t)(2),(3), and (4), and 94509(u)(2),(3) and (4), we are adding provisions, virtually identical to those in provisions pertaining to GWP limits for other categories, to support the GWP Value limit. Specifically, these provisions include a three year product sell-through allowance for pro ducts manufactured prior to the effective date, a notification to purchasers from t he supplier for products sold during the last six months of the sell-through period, and all owance for impurities. These proposals are in accordance with ARB’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases under

AB 32.

Proposed Toxic Air Contaminant Prohibition 94509(u)

In section 94509(u)(1)(B) we are proposing to prohi bit the use of specific chlorinated TACs in “Multi-purpose Solvent,” and “Paint Thinner .” We believe that it is unlikely, but possible, that manufacturers may, in response to ne w VOC limits, choose to reformulate

with chlorinated solvents that are Toxic Air Contam inants. To ensure that this does not occur, we are proposing in new subsection 94509(u)( 1)(B), to prohibit the use of methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichlor oethylene. Therefore, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA ), we are proposing mitigating measures for these two categories for which we are setting new VOC limits. In subsection 94509(u)(2), we are proposing language t o allow a three year sell through for products manufactured prior to the effective da te of the TAC prohibition.

Proposed Aromatic Compound Content Limit Section 94 509(u)

Further, in section 94509(u)(1)(C), we are proposin g to limit the VOC aromatic compound content of “Multi-Purpose Solvent” and “Pa int Thinner” products to 1 percent by weight, also in accordance with CEQA. This mitigation measure is proposed to ensure that in response to new VOC limi ts for “Multi-Purpose Solvent” and “Paint Thinner,” manufacturers do not formulate wit h compounds that have the potential to increase the ozone forming potential of the prod ucts. We conducted an analysis and determined that products reformulating to meet the 30 percent limit using highly reactive aromatic VOCs would erode or negate the expected oz one reduction benefits predicted. For more detail regarding the reactivity analysis s ee Chapter VIII, Environmental Impacts.

Finally, in section 94509(u)(2), (3) and (4), in ad dition to the proposals described above, we are proposing the following provisions: a three- year product sell-through allowance for products manufactured prior to the limit effect ive date; a notification to purchasers from the supplier for products sold during the last six months of the sell-through period; and an allowance for impurities with regards to the GWP limit and TAC prohibition.Technical Support Document Chapter V - 46

C. TEMPORARY EXEMPTION FOR SMALL CONTAINERS – PROP OSED NEW SUBSECTION 94510(m)

We are proposing in section 94510(m) to exempt smal l containers of “Paint Thinner” from the VOC and aromatic compound limits until Dec ember 31, 2013. To qualify for the exemption, products must be sold and packaged i n containers less than or equal to eight fluid ounces. We determined that consumers m ay need small amounts of paint thinner to thin solvent-borne paints. These solven t-borne paints might have been purchased years ago, before the lower VOC limits fo r architectural coatings came into effect, or are products in small containers that ar e exempt from such limits. This exemption allows these coatings to be used and, if necessary, allowed to be thinned by the consumer, rather than having the coatings becom e unusable and discarded. Discarded coatings could cause environmental impact s such as contaminated groundwater, or increased landfill load.

D. LABELING REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTI-PURPOSE SOLVENT AND PAINT THINNER – PROPOSED NEW SUBSECTION 94512(e)

As proposed in new subsection 94512(e)(1)(A), Multi -purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products would be required to clearly displ ay on the product container, the total VOC content as a percent by weight contained in the product formulation. This proposal would aid with the enforceability of the V OC limits for these categories and provide the consumer the information they need to p urchase the product with the lowest

VOC content.

We have also proposed in subsection 94512(e)(2) tha t Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products manufactured after December 31, 20 10 until December 31, 2015, and labeled “Flammable” or “Extremely Flammable” per fe deral laws, would not be able to display a general name on the principle display pan el, such as “Paint Thinner;” “Multipurpose Solvent;” “Clean-up Solvent;” or “Paint Cle an-up.” Manufacturers may choose to sell a “Flammable” or “Extremely Flammable” prod uct with one of these general names if they do one of the following: provide an a ttached hang tag or sticker that

includes the statement “Formulated to meet Californ ia VOC limits, see warnings on label;” or display on the principle display panel i n a font size as large as or larger than any other words on the panel, the common name of th e chemical compound that results in the product meeting the criteria for “Flammable” or “Extremely Flammable.”

Specific federal definitions exist for Combustible, Flammable, and Extremely Flammable products that are determined by the liquid’s flashp oint, or the lowest temperature at which the vapor of a combustible liquid can be igni ted in air. Flammable and Extremely Flammable liquids have a lower flashpoint than Comb ustible liquids and, therefore, ignite or burn easier than combustible liquids, mak ing them more hazardous. The above proposed requirement is a mitigation measure under CEQA because we determined that in response to the new VOC limits, manufacturers may switch a Combustible product with a product that is Flammabl e or Extremely Flammable. IfTechnical Support Document Chapter V - 47

consumers were used to a product that is Combustibl e and, after the implementation of the VOC limits, purchase a Flammable or Extremely F lammable product, they could unknowingly risk injury or fire loss if they misuse d the product near an open flame or were otherwise careless with the product. It is th e intent of this regulatory requirement to alert the consumer that a newly relabeled or new ly reformulated product may perform differently or may have an increased fire hazard po tential than the previous formulation

and should be used with caution.

E. PROPOSED NEW SUBSECTION 94513(g): SPECIAL REPOR TING
REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTI-PURPOSE SOLVENT AND PAINT TH INNER

As specified in a new subsection 94513(g), all resp onsible parties for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products must report the product formulation and sales information to the ARB prior to June 30, 2012. The se special reporting requirements are necessary to perform a technical assessment of each category prior to the implementation of the second tier VOC limits. The technical assessment will include an analysis of manufacturers’ progress in developing l ow flammability and low VOC Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products to meet the 3 percent VOC limit, effective on December 31, 2013. In addition, the data collec ted will enable ARB staff to determine whether a reactivity based approach to re gulating these products would be more appropriate than a mass based approach, and if compounds to be used in the new formulations present any unforeseen potential h azards.

F. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 94515, TEST METH ODS:

VOC AROMATIC COMPOUND CONTENT

We are proposing to limit the VOC aromatic compound content of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products to no more than 1 percen t by weight. First, in section 94515(h)(1) we are proposing to specify tha t the VOC content for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner is to be determined by Me thod 310, or an alternative method approved by the Executive Officer. To enforce the VOC aromatic compound content limit provision, we are proposing in subsection 945 15(h)(2) that specific formulation information be provided to ARB. Upon receipt of wr itten notice, responsible parties would have ten days to supply formulation data to g uide the analytical testing.

In section 94515(h)(2)(A)(i), the formulation data to be provided would include the weight fraction to the nearest 0.1 percent of each ingredient including: water; VOC; low vapor pressure (LVP)-VOC; total inorganic compounds ; and exempt compounds specified in section 94508(a). For hydrocarbon sol vents, the bin number as listed in the Tables of Maximum Incremental Reactivity (MIR) Valu es in section 94701 (a) or (b), and the initial boiling point and dry point of the solv ent would be required to be provided.

To ensure that the notification letter is delivered to the correct responsible party, we are proposing in section 94515(h)(2)(A)(ii) that by Mar ch 1, 2010, and each year thereafter, the responsible party would provide to the Executiv e Officer contact information for the person who is to receive the notification letter. We are also clarifying inTechnical Support Document Chapter V - 48

section 94515(h)(2)(A)(iii) that a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) does not meet the requirement for formulation data because the inform ation is not detailed enough to guide analytical testing.

Finally, we are proposing in section 94515(h)(2)(B) (i) and (ii) to clarify that a violation is established if the formulation data supplied by the responsible party shows that the product does not meet the applicable VOC or aromati c content standard; and/or the manufacturer fails to respond to the notice and pro vide formulation data within the ten day specified time frame.

G. “DETERMINATION OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (V OC) IN

CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND REACTIVE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN AEROSOL COATING PRODUCTS” (METHOD 310)

Method 310 is the analytical test method utilized t o determine compliance with the VOC limits and other prohibitions in the Consumer Produ cts Regulation.

The proposed changes to Method 310 are clarificatio ns to specify the analytical approach to be used in instances where a product’s VOC content is below 1 percent. These methods are already being used and/or are nee ded to enhance the enforceability of the new, lower VOC limits that will become effec tive by 2010. The proposed changes also include new VOC content calculations for produ cts with high water content or low

VOC content.

New section 3.3.7 is proposed to specify the method s to be utilized for low level VOC content samples; new section 4.3 is proposed to cla rify that products subject to VOC limits below 5 percent by weight will have their VO C content determined by a low level direct determination; new section 4.3.1 is proposed to specify the equation used to determine the VOC content for aerosol products; and new section 4.3.2 is proposed to specify the equation used to determine the VOC cont ent of non-aerosol products.

Previously in section B, number 2 (Proposed Aromati c Compound Content Limit Section 94509(u)), we describe the proposed aromatic compou nd content limit for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. Under the proc edures and testing methods specified under Method 310, laboratory staff routin ely quantifies the percent by weight of many common aromatic compounds that are expected to be found in Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. These aromatic compounds include, but are not limited to, benzene, xylenes, toluene, and ethyl be nzene. Further method development may be needed and additional amendments specified i n Method 310 may be necessary in order to identify and quantify additional aromat ic compounds that may be found in Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. Work on additional method development is currently underway. If further modi fications to Method 310 or the Consumer Products Regulations are needed to address the aromatic compound content limit requirements, they would be included in the n ext round of regulation amendments, which are anticipated to occur in 2010.Technical Support Document Chapter V - 49

REFERENCES

1. Air Resources Board. Environmental Impact Asse ssment of Selected Halogenated Chemicals – Staff Report . March, 2008. (ARB, 2008b)

2. Air Resources Board. 2006 Consumer and Commercia l Products Survey

. July 24, 2007. (ARB, 2007f)

3. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation and the Aerosol Coatings Regulation . September 29, 2006. (ARB, 2006a)

4. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reas ons for Proposed Amendments to the California Aerosol Coating Products, Antiperspi rants and Deodorants, and Consumer Products Regulations, Test Method 310, and Airborne Toxic Control Measure for para-Dichlorobenzene Solid Air Freshene rs and Toilet/Urinal Care

Products . May 7, 2004. (ARB, 2004b)

5. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation: Mid-te rm Measures II

. September 10, 1999. (ARB, 1999)

6. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reaso ns for Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation: Midter m Measures

. June 6, 1997. (ARB, 1997b)

7. Air Resources Board. Proposed Amendments to the Statewide Regulation to Reduce Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Con sumer Products – Phase II – Technical Support Document . October, 1991. (ARB, 1991a)

8. Air Resources Board. Proposed Regulation to Red uce Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Consumer Products – Technic al Support Document

. August, 1990. (ARB, 1990c)

9. ASTM International. D 4236 – 94 Standard Practi ce for Labeling Art Materials for

Chronic Health Hazards . March 1, 2005. (ASTM, 2005)Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 50

VI. DESCRIPTION OF PRODUCT CATEGORIES

In this chapter, we provide the technical basis for the proposed limits for each category proposed for regulation. The following inf ormation is described for each of the product categories:

• a product category description;

• information on product use and marketing;

• information on the product formulations;

• a discussion of the proposed volatile organic comp ound (VOC) and/or global warming potential (GWP) limit, our rationale for th e proposed limit, and the options for compliance; and

• a discussion of outstanding issues associated with the proposal.

A. AIR FRESHENER: DOUBLE PHASE AEROSOL

Product Category Description :

Air Fresheners are currently regulated under the CA RB Consumer Products Regulation in five subcategories: Double Phase Aerosols; Singl e Phase Aerosols; Dual Purpose Air Fresheners/Disinfectant aerosols; liquid/pump spray s; and solids/semisolid (ARB, 2007a). The proposal described here relates solely to Double Phase Aerosol Air

Fresheners.

The definition for an Air Freshener is the followin g: “Air Freshener” means any product including, but not limited to, sprays, wicks, wipes , diffusers, powders, and crystals, designed or labeled for the purpose of masking odor s, or freshening, cleaning, scenting, or deodorizing the air. “Air Freshener” includes du al purpose air freshener/disinfectant products. “Air Freshener” does not include product s that are used on the human body, products that function primarily as cleaning produc ts as indicated on a product label, Odor Remover/Eliminator,” or “Toilet/Urinal Care Pr oduct.”

A Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener is defined as an aerosol air freshener with the liquid contents in two or more distinct phases that require the product container be shaken before use to mix the phases, producing an e mulsion (ARB, 2007a). An aerosol product is a pressurized spray system that dispense s product ingredients by means of a propellant contained in a product or a product’s co ntainer or a mechanically induced

force.

Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners were first regu lated under “Phase I” of the Consumer Products Regulation adopted in October 199 0. A description of these products is included in the Technical Support Docum ent for that rulemaking (ARB, 1990b). Products were required to meet a VOC limit of 30 percent by weight, effective January 1, 1993. In an effort to obtain further emission reductions, the Board adopted in October 1999, as part of “Midterm Measur es II” of the Consumer ProductsTechnical Support Document Chapter VI - 51

rulemaking, a VOC limit of 25 percent by weight eff ective December 31, 2004 (ARB, 1999a; ARB 1999b). In this rulemaking, we are prop osing to further reduce the VOC

limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners and a dd a limit on the GWP of chemical compounds used in the products.

Product Use and Marketing :

According to ARB’s 2006 Consumer and Commercial Pro ducts Survey (2006 Survey) and product labels, aerosol air fresheners are gene rally used in household, institutional and commercial settings, and automobiles (ARB, 2007 f). These products are used to treat unpleasant odors and fragrance the air in bat hrooms, laundry areas, food preparation areas, and institutional settings. Acc ording to recent articles in industry journals and Internet sites, home fragrance retail sales in the United States in 2007 were over $5 billion (Esposito, 2008; Euromonitor, 2008). Aerosol air fresheners were reported to be the fastest growing home fragrance p roduct category in 2007 with sales of almost $500 million.

Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners are “instant ac tion” products that produce a fine mist when sprayed. The amount of product emitted, or fragrance released, is controlled by the user by depressing the actuator button (nozz le) on the product container. According to the 2006 Survey, Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products are sold predominantly to household consumers (ARB, 2007f). These products can be purchased through supermarkets; grocery stores; dis count stores; mass merchandisers; hardware stores; automotive parts stores; warehouse stores; and home centers. Consumers may also purchase products through home s ales, catalog sales, and the

Internet.

Table VI-1 summarizes the sales and emissions from Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products, based on the 2006 Survey (ARB, 2007f). Sixty products or product groups were reported in the 2006 Survey by about tw o dozen companies. Each product group may have multiple fragrance variants or produ ct sizes, or a combination of both. Considering fragrance variants, 231 total individua l products were reported for this category. The data have been grown to the 2009 cal endar year. Total category sales are about 82,912 pounds per day with estimated VOC emissions of 20,309 pounds (ten tons) per day in California. Although not shown in Table VI-1, the sales-weighted average VOC content for this category is 24.5 perce nt by weight, excluding fragrance. This indicates most of the product formulations hav e VOC content very near the maximum allowed by the current 25 percent by weight VOC limit (ARB, 2007f).Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 52 Table VI-1

Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener*

Product Form Number of

Products/Product Groups 2009 Category Sales

(lbs/day)** 2009 Adjusted

VOC Emissions (lbs/day)**

Aerosol 60 82,912 20,309

* Based on 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products S urvey (ARB, 2007f). ** Survey data adjusted for complete market covera ge and grown by population to 2009 (see Chapter IV, Emissions).

Product Formulation :

The main ingredients found in Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products are water, propellants, and fragrance mixtures. Other ingredi ents in the product formulation may include solvents; co-solvents; emulsifiers; surfact ants; and corrosion inhibitors.

Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener ingredients cont ain liquid contents in two or more distinct phases that require the product container to be shaken before use to mix the phases, producing an emulsion. The top phase consi sts of hydrocarbon propellant and some fragrance or emulsifier. The bottom phase con sists of water, which may be as high as 80 percent of the product by weight accordi ng to the 2006 Survey, and some fragrance or emulsifier (CSPA, 2009; ARB, 2007f).

The propellants used are typically hydrocarbon blen ds of n-butane, isobutane and propane. However, products formulated with dimethy l ether as a propellant were also reported in the 2006 Survey (ARB, 2007f). Blends u sed may vary depending on the desired pressure, container and components used. A ccording to the 2006 Survey, propellant content in the Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener category ranged from 15 percent to about 27 percent of product weight (A RB, 2007f). 1

As in most aerosol products, the propellants in aer osol air fresheners are present in both liquid and gas phases. The liquid propellant sits atop the denser liquid phase(s) and functions as a reservoir to replenish the prope llant in the gas phase. The gas phase provides the pressure that discharges the pro duct. When the product is shaken, the fragrance and, if present, solvents, emulsifier s and surfactants, produce a homogenous oil-in-water emulsion that allows the pr oduct to be uniformly sprayed (ARB, 1999a).

Fragrance mixtures typically constitute less than 2 percent of product weight, according to the 2006 Survey. Fragrance mixtures contain aro ma and other ingredients that scent

1 Products with VOC content greater than 25 percent b y weight reported in the 2006 Survey were assumed to qualify for the “sell-through of product s” provision of the Consumer Products Regulations i n section 94509(c) (ARB, 2007a). Since there was a D ecember 31, 2004, effective date for the 25 percent by weight VOC limit, the sell-through period for Do uble Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products did not e nd until December 31, 2007. For evaluations of VOC re ductions achieved by this proposal, we assumed that such products had been reformulated to comply with the 25 percent by weight VOC limit.Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 53

the air, or mask odors. Fragrance mixtures are typ ically composed of many ingredients, including VOC and low vapor pressure-VOC (LVP-VOC) ingredients (FMA, 2006). The Consumer Products Regulation allows an exemption fr om the VOC limits in the Table of Standards for fragrance up to 2 percent by weight o f the product. Fragrance is defined as a substance or complex mixture of aroma chemical s, natural essential oils, and other functional components with a combined vapor pressur e not in excess of 2 millimeters mercury (mm Hg) at 20 degrees Celsius (ARB, 2007a).

Solvents; co-solvents; emulsifiers; surfactants; an d corrosion inhibitors may be used in the product formulation and are typically present i n small amounts. Some ingredients may be present to solubilize fragrance, aid mixing of fragrance to create a homogeneous liquid that can be sprayed, and control volatilization of the air freshener mist droplets. Solvent and other ingredients may b e present to increase the vapor pressure in a product, and, along with the product valve and nozzle, serve to control mist droplet or particle size. VOC solvents report ed in the 2006 Survey include ethanol and isopropanol. Acetone and Isopar M are examples of exempt and LVP-VOC solvents, respectively, that were reported. Emulsi fiers and surfactant materials are typically LVP-VOC materials (ARB, 2007f; ARB, 1999a ).

LVP-VOC glycols, such as dipropylene glycol and pro pylene glycol, were reported in the 2006 Survey for some of the Double Phase Aerosol Ai r Freshener products (ARB, 2007f). Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener p roducts that contained these glycols generally made “Deodorizer” and “Odor Elimi nator” claims on their labels (ARB, 2007f).

Proposed VOC Limit and Compliance :

The proposed VOC limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener is 20 percent by weight with an effective date of December 31, 2012. As shown in Table VI-2, the proposal would result in emission reductions of 3,9 00 pounds per day, or about 2.0 tons per day, statewide in 2012. As indicated previously, adjusted VOC emissions from Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products ar e about 20,300 pounds per day, or about 10.2 tons per day. The sales weighted ave rage VOC content is 24.5 percent by weight, excluding fragrance. A limited number o f products with VOC content equal to or lower than 20 percent by weight were reported in the 2006 Survey, indicating that further reductions can be achieved from this catego ry and that the proposed limit, while challenging, is both technologically and commercial ly feasible (ARB, 2007f). However, the complying products represent less than 1 percen t of the category sales.

Recognizing that the 20 percent by weight VOC limit is challenging for manufacturers to meet, this proposal provides an extended period of over three years, until December 31, 2012, for manufacturers to produce com plying products. The extended time is proposed to accommodate the complex and len gthy product development process necessary for reformulating approximately 2 00 non-complying products and fragrance variants.Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 54 Table VI-2 Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener Proposal*

Product

Form Proposed

VOC Limit (wt. %) Complying

Products/

Product Groups Complying

Market Share (%) 2009

Adjusted

Emission

Reductions (lbs/day)** 2012

Adjusted

Emission

Reductions (lbs/day)+
Aerosol 20 <10 <1 3,750 3,900

* Based on 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey (ARB, 2007f). ** Emission reductions adjusted for complete market coverage, grown by population to 2009, and rounded (see Chapter IV, Emissions). + Emission reductions adjusted for complete market coverage, grown by population to 2012, and rounded (see Chapter IV, Emissions).

As described earlier, Double Phase Aerosol Air Fres hener ingredients include water, emulsifiers, surfactants, glycols, solvents, hydroc arbon propellants, and fragrance mixtures. The emulsifiers, surfactants and glycols typically used are LVP- VOCs which are exempt from applicable VOC limits. Materials s uch as acetone and Isopar M are also exempt from applicable VOC limits. In general , other than the fragrance mixtures and VOC solvents such as ethanol or isopropanol, wh ich are found in small amounts, the predominant VOC ingredients are the hydrocarbon propellants (ARB, 2007f). For most Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners, reformula tion to meet the proposed VOC limit of 20 percent by weight will involve replacin g some of the hydrocarbon propellant or VOC solvent with water or a VOC exempt solvent. Ch anges to product components such as valves and actuators may be necessary to re tain acceptable product performance characteristics such as spray mist size and pattern.

According to the 2006 Survey, exempt compounds, ace tone and Isopar M, are used in some Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners (ARB, 2007 f). Acetone is an exempt VOC solvent that is fast drying and is completely misci ble with water. The use of acetone increases the vapor pressure in the product, reduci ng the amount of propellant needed to discharge the product. An example formulation t hat may include acetone would use water along with the higher pressure propellants pr opane and dimethyl ether (ARB, 1999a). Another example would be to use a LV P-VOC hydrocarbon solvent, such as Isopar M, in place of a solvent containing VOCs.

During discussions with industry representatives in January and March 2009, we learned that it would be challenging to reformulate large numbers of non-complying products and the removal of propellant would affect product performance. Industry representatives stated that lowering the propellant content to comply with the proposed 20 percent by weight VOC limit would most likely re quire adjustments to other product ingredients, and/or addition of ingredients to ensu re acceptable product performance, stability, and consumer acceptance of fragrance (CS PA, 2009; S.C. Johnson, 2009b; Reckitt Benckiser, 2009). It was indicated that ch anges in the valve, actuator and propellant would likely need to take place to accom modate the formulation adjustments. As a result of these changes, additional consumer u sage and fragrance preference

studies would also need to be conducted.Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 55

In light of the potential technical modifications n eeded to the aerosol spray dispensing system, we acknowledge that the reformulation effor t will be challenging for manufacturers. However, we also believe that produ cts with less propellant can be developed. Given these challenges, we determined t hat an implementation date of December 31, 2012, would allow for the necessary mo difications and additional testing of products to comply with the proposed 20 percent by weight VOC limit. Discussions with industry representatives, evaluation of produc ts reported in the 2006 Survey for Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners, and our resear ch demonstrate that the proposal for a 20 percent by weight VOC limit, effective Dec ember 31, 2012, although challenging, is both technologically and commercial ly feasible (ARB, 2007f; CSPA, 2009a).

Proposed Global Warming Potential (GWP) Limit and C ompliance :

Pursuant to ARB’s responsibilities under Assembly B ill 32, reductions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) from consumer products are necessary ( ARB, 2008e). Consumer products use various GHGs, mostly as propellants. Although the GHG emissions contribution from consumer products can be relative ly low, the severity of the climate change problem requires reductions from any source where it is feasible. In this rulemaking, we are proposing a GWP value 2 limit of 150 for Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners. No high GWP chemical compounds, such a s HFC-152a or HFC-134a, were reported in the product formulations in the 2006 Survey (ARB, 2007f). However, to ensure that there is no significant inc rease in GHG emissions from products reformulated to comply with the proposed 2 0 percent by weight VOC limit, we are proposing, as a mitigation measure, a limit on the GWP for any chemical compound used in Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products , effective December 31, 2012. The GWP limit of 150 does not apply to any chemical s present as contaminants, which in aggregate are 0.1 percent by weight or less.

The VOC exempt propellants, HFC-134a and HFC-152a, are the predominant GHGs used in consumer products today. When flammability is a concern, HFC-134a is used because it is a non-flammable propellant. HFC-152a is minimally flammable. HFC-152a has a GWP value of 140, which is one hundr ed and forty times greater than

the GWP value of CO 2 . HFC-134a has a GWP value of 1300, which is appro ximately ten times greater than the GWP value of HFC-152a an d 1300 times greater than CO 2 (ARB, 2008e).

2 We are using the GWP definition of the Intergovernm ental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). GWP provides a measure of a compound’s impact on global warming compared to carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). The GWP value definition specifies that the 100-year GW P values in the Second Assessment Report (SAR) of IPCC would be used to determine compliance (IPCC, 1 996). The definition further specifies that, if th e SAR does not contain a GWP value for a specific che mical or compound, then the IPCC, Fourth Assessment Report (FAR) GWP value for that chemical or compound can be used (IPCC, 2007). If there is no GWP value listed for a specific chemical or c ompound in the SAR or the FAR, then the GWP value is assumed to be equal to the applicable GWP value standard.Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 56

According to the 2006 Survey, hydrocarbon propellan ts such as n-butane, isobutane and propane are the ‘propellant of choice’ for Doub le Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products (ARB, 2007f). As stated previously, HFC-1 52a and HFC-134a were not present in the products reported, which demonstrate s that these VOC exempt propellants are not critical to the formulation of Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products. The hydrocarbon propellants and other ma terials reported in the 2006 Survey, such as dimethyl ether, acetone and ethanol have GWP values that are less than ten or are not listed by the IPCC. In the cas e where the IPCC does not list a GWP value for ingredients used, then the GWP value is a ssumed to be equal to the emission

standard.

Manufacturers can reformulate their products to com ply with the proposed 20 percent by weight VOC limit without the use of VOC exempt p ropellants such as HFC-152a or HFC-134a. If a manufacturer finds it necessary to formulate a product with a VOC exempt propellant, the GWP limit of 150 allows the option of using HFC-152a, but not HFC-134a with its higher GWP value of 1300. Incorp orating HFC-152a or HFC-134a would take considerable product development resourc es and increase propellant costs by as much as 350 percent over hydrocarbon propella nts currently in use (ARB, 2008e). Because of the additional cost, if a manufacturer w ere to use a VOC exempt propellant to comply with the proposed VOC limit, we would exp ect small amounts of HFC-152a to be blended with less expensive hydrocarbon propella nts.

As previously stated, the proposed GWP limit of 150 , effective December 31, 2012, is a mitigation measure designed to cap, or limit, the p otential for GHG emissions increases

from Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners reformulat ed to meet the proposed 20 percent by weight VOC limit. The GWP limit allo ws the use of a VOC exempt propellant, if necessary. However, no increase in GHG emissions from Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners is expected as products are most likely to be reformulated to meet both the 20 percent by weight VOC limit and th e GWP limit of 150 without the use of HFC-152a (ARB, 2007f; Reckitt Benckiser, 2009; SC Johnson, 2009b ).

Issues :

a. Issue : A 20 percent by weight VOC limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners does not seem realistic; especially when there is very little complying market share and very few products that comply with the proposed limit.

Response : We acknowledge that only a limited number of produc ts with VOC content equal to or lower than 20 percent by weight , representing less than 1 percent of the category sales, were reported in t he 2006 Survey. However, our

evaluation of the Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshene r products reported in the 2006 Survey and discussions with industry represent atives demonstrate that our proposal of 20 percent by weight VOC limit, effecti ve December 31, 2012, for this category, while challenging, is both technologicall y and commercially feasible.

b. Issue : The 20 percent by weight VOC limit for Double Pha se Aerosol Air Fresheners will be a challenge to meet. December 3 1, 2011, the effective date inTechnical Support Document Chapter VI - 57

the original proposal published in August 2008, doe s not provide sufficient time for manufacturers to reformulate all their products to meet the proposed VOC limit. More time is needed to evaluate propellants and valve/actuator combinations, conduct laboratory tests, and conduct consumer fragrance acceptance and use studies.

Response : Recognizing that the 20 percent by weight VOC limit may be challenging for manufacturers to meet, we agree tha t an additional year should be added to the effective date primarily due to the large number of products predicted to be reformulated. An effective date of December 31, 2012, will provide manufacturers with additional time that wil l accommodate the complex and lengthy product development process necessary f or reformulating approximately 200 products and fragrance variants.

c. Issue : A study funded by a prominent environmental group indicated that several different types of air fresheners contain h igh levels of a number of phthalates. ARB should consider banning the use of phthalates in air fresheners.

Response : The most commonly used phthalate in cosmetics and p ersonal care products according to the literature is diethyl pht halate (DEP). When present in fragrances, perfumes and other products, it is used as a solvent to help blend fragrance ingredients and as a fixative to make fra grances last longer (CI, 2009). No phthalates were specifically reported for any Do uble Phase Aerosol Air Freshener product in the 2006 Survey.

We understand, however, that the air freshener indu stry has taken voluntary action to reduce the use of phthalates. The United States fragrance industry has instructed its members to use DEP in fragrances and not to use dibutyl phthalate (DBP) and diethyl hexyl phthalate (DEHP) (FMA, 2007 ). Additionally, major manufacturers of air fresheners have taken proactiv e positions and have adopted, or are in the process of adopting, a “no-p hthalates” policy for their products (SC Johnson, 2009a; SC Johnson, 2009b; Rec kitt Benckiser

, 2009 ). As reported in the 2006 Survey, fragrance in Double Ph ase Aerosol Air Freshener products ranged from 0.1 to about 2 percent by weig ht of total product formulation. Therefore, DEP, if used in the fragra nce mixtures at all, would most likely be present in minimal amounts. We would not expect DBP or DEHP to be

used in Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners because of their chemical properties and industry policies. Considering the industry policies, and the limited use, exposure to phthalates in Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners, if any, would be negligible. Therefore, we believe th at mitigation measures related to the use of phthalates in Double Phase Aerosol Ai r Fresheners cannot be justified without additional data.

d. Issue : Industry representatives recommend that no GWP li mit be adopted by ARB to allow for the formulation of products with H FC-134a for certain critical uses requiring total non-flammability.Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 58

Response : Industry representatives have not indicated that th ey are aware of products containing HFC-134a currently in commerce and have not identified any specific critical uses (CSPA, 2009a). Additionally , no non-flammable products were reported in the 2006 Survey. Therefore, prohi biting the use of HFC-134a (GWP value of 1300) while allowing the use of HFC-1 52a (GWP value of 140), is an appropriate mitigation measure to limit GHG emis sions increases from Double

Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners reformulated to meet t he proposed 20 percent by weight VOC limit.

B. MULTI-PURPOSE SOLVENT AND PAINT THINNER

This section provides information on two proposals that are related, one for the category "Multi-purpose Solvent," and another for "Paint Thi nner." The information in this section is presented in the following parts, first, a produ ct category description for Multi-purpose Solvent followed by a product category description for Paint Thinner. These descriptions will be followed by a discussion of “T hinners and Solvents” combined.

Product Category Descriptions :

Multi-purpose Solvent :

Multi-purpose Solvent (MPS) products are liquid pro ducts designed or labeled to be used for dispersing, dissolving, or removing contam inants or other organic materials. The category also includes products that do not dis play specific use instructions or a specific end-use function on the product container or packaging. MPS also includes “Paint Clean-up” products, products labeled to prep are surfaces for painting, and solvents used in institutional facilities, except f or laboratory reagents used in analytical; educational; research; scientific; or other laborat ories.

MPS does not include solvents used in cold cleaners , vapor degreasers, conveyorized degreasers or film cleaning machines; solvents labe led for the clean-up of application equipment used for polyaspartic and polyurea coatin gs; or solvents that are incorporated into, or used exclusively in the manuf acture or construction of, the goods

or commodities at the site of the establishment.

The category also does not include any product maki ng any representation that the product may be used as, or is suitable for use as, a consumer product which qualifies under another definition in section 94508 (the “def initions” section of the general consumer products regulation). Such products are n ot MPS and are subject to the “Most Restrictive Limit” provision of section 94512 . For example, adhesive removers which can technically meet the definition of Multi- purpose Solvent, are not MPS because they are defined in section 94508 as “Adhes ive Remover.”

“Multi-Purpose Solvent” was originally defined as a n exclusion to the definition of “Spot Remover” in the Consumer Products Regulation Amendm ents of July 1997 (ARB,Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 59

1997). In the November 2006 Consumer Products Regu lation Amendments, the definition was modified to clearly exclude multi-fu nction products (products that make multiple regulated claims on the label) and clearly include packaged solvents (organic solvents without specific use claims, such as miner al spirits or methyl ethyl ketone) (ARB, 2006). The above description for MPS, includ es new proposed language to the existing regulatory definition that will clarify pr oducts that are included in the category and products that are not included in the category.

Paint Thinner :

Paint Thinner products are liquid products used for reducing the viscosity of coating compositions or components, that prominently displa y the term “Paint Thinner,” “Lacquer Thinner,” “Thinner,” or “Reducer” on the f ront panel of its packaging.

The Board originally approved a definition for “Pai nt Thinner” in the Consumer Products Regulation Amendments of June 2004. We are proposi ng the following new language to the existing regulatory definition that will cla rify products that are not included in the category. Paint Thinner does not include thinners labeled for the thinning of Industrial Maintenance Coatings, Zinc-Rich Primers, and High T emperature Coatings. This category also does not include products labeled and used exclusively as a component in a specific coating or “Artist’s Solvent/Thinner. ”

Thinners and Solvents :

We conducted shelf surveys at more than 100 home im provement and mass market retail stores throughout California and always foun d Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products sold adjacently on store shelves ( ARB, 2009). Based on market research and consultations with industry experts, w e concluded that these products are often used interchangeably by consumers to thin sol vent-borne paint, clean application equipment, and remove contaminants from a variety o f surfaces. Therefore, we consider it appropriate to present the remaining in formation in this section for Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner, in one combined discussion, referred to as

“Thinners and Solvents.”

Table VI-3 below summarizes the sales and emissions from Thinners and Solvents

based on the results of the ARB’s Paint Thinner and Multi-purpose Solvent Survey Update (ARB, 2008f). In November 2008, we conducte d a Paint Thinner and Multipurpose Solvent Survey Update for the 12-month peri od, October 1, 2007 through September 30, 2008, because of recent, significant changes to the Thinner and Solvent market. Previous to the survey update, we used dat a from the 2003 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey to evaluate these catego ries (ARB, 2004). We have held multiple meetings throughout the development of thi s proposal. Stakeholders requested an update to the 2003 survey data. We conducted th e survey update and posted updated Thinners and Solvents data to the Consumer Products Program website in early March 2009.Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 60 Table VI-3

Thinners and Solvents*

Product

Form Number of

Products Jurisdiction 2009 Category Sales (lbs/day) 2009 Adjusted

VOC Emissions (lbs/day)**

Liquid 165 Statewide 54,380 43,620

SCAQMD 23,320 18,700

Total*** 31,060 + 24,920 +

* Based on Paint Thinner and Multi-purpose Solvent Survey Update. (ARB, 2008f)

** Survey emissions adjusted for complete market cove rage and rounded (see Chapter IV, Emissions).

+ Does not include Rule 1143 sales or VOC emissions.

On March 6, 2009, the South Coast Air Quality Manag ement District (SCAQMD) adopted Rule 1143, “Consumer Paint Thinners and Mul ti-Purpose Solvents” (Rule 1143) which, upon the effective date, will ac hieve VOC emissions reductions from consumer Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners used in the South Coast Air

Basin.

In order to avoid double-counting category sales an d VOC emissions, we have subtracted from the statewide values in Table VI-3, the portion that can be attributed to the South Coast Air Basin based on population (DOF, 2008). Table VI-3 above (see “Total” row) shows that Thinners and Solvents have estimated VOC emissions of about 12.5 tons per day (24,920 pounds per day) in Califo rnia, excluding the South Coast Air

Basin.

Product Uses and Marketing :

Thinners and Solvents are used by individual consum ers, commercial services, and institutional users to thin paint prior to applying to surfaces. They are also used to remove general contaminants and organic material, o ther than those contaminants removed by products in currently defined categories . These products are used on a variety of solvent resistant substrates such as cem ent and paint application equipment.

Thinners and Solvents are typically sold to househo ld consumers and paint contractors in one quart or one gallon metal containers, and ar e sold primarily in home improvement stores; retail paint stores; general mass market st ores; discount stores; and automotive aftermarket retail stores. These products are also sold to industrial or institutional users through distributors.

Product Formulations :

Thinners and Solvents are comprised of chemical com pounds such as ethyl alcohol, methyl ethyl ketone, toluene, xylene isomers, or ac etone; a mixture of these or similar chemical compounds; or packaged as hydrocarbon solv ents labeled “mineral spirits.”Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 61

Some products may contain LVP-VOC or VOC exempt com pounds, though most products are nearly 100 percent VOC.

Proposed VOC Limits and Compliance :

We are proposing two tiers of VOC limits for Multi- purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner. The first tier VOC limit is 30 percent by weight, e ffective December 31, 2010. As shown in Table VI-4, using adjusted emissions, the propos ed 30 percent limit will result in an estimated VOC emission reduction of about 17,000 po unds per day, or about 8.4 tons per day, in 2010. As stated previously, the VOC em ission reductions shown in Table VI-4 do not include the reductions achieved by Rule 1143.

Table VI-4 Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner Proposal*

Product

Form Proposed

VOC

Limit (wt. %) Complying

Products Complying

Market Share (%) Jurisdiction 2009

Emissions

Reductions (lbs/day)** Emissions

Reductions (lbs/day) +

Statewide 29,140 29,510
SCAQMD 12,500 12,640 Liquid 30 18 11.3

Total*** 16,640*** 16,870*** Statewide 13,030 13,710
SCAQMD 5,590 5,850 Liquid 3 15 11.2

Total*** 7,440*** 7,860***

* Based on Paint Thinner and Multi-purpose Solvent Survey Update. (ARB, 2008f)

** Survey emissions adjusted for complete market cov erage, grown by population to 2009, and rounded (see Chapter IV, Emissions).

*** Does not include Rule 1143 reductions.

+ Emissions reductions adjusted for complete market coverage, grown by population to 2010 for the 30 percent VOC limit; and to 2013 for the 3 percent VO C limit; and rounded (see Chapter IV, Emissions).

Table VI-4 also shows that 18 products, representin g approximately 11.3 percent of the

total Thinners and Solvents market on a sales basis , currently comply with the proposed 30 percent VOC limit. There are also a number of w ater/hydrocarbon solvent emulsions, currently in commerce, that are formulat ed slightly above 30 percent VOC. These products will only need a modest reformulatio n to comply with the 30 percent VOC standard. It should be noted that the 11.3 per cent complying marketshare, in Table VI-4, would be significantly higher if these products already complied with the proposed 30 percent VOC limit. We believe this dem onstrates that the first tier VOC limit of 30 percent by weight can be met using exis ting technology.

A technology forcing second tier limit of 3 percent VOC by weight, effective December 31, 2013, is also proposed. As shown in T able VI-4, the 3 percent limit would reduce emissions by nearly 8,000 additional p ounds per day VOC or 3.9 tons per day. Table VI-4 also shows that 15 products, repre senting 11.2 percent of the market, currently comply with the proposed 3 percent limit.Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 62

The overwhelming majority of existing products that meet the 3 percent VOC limit are formulated with pure acetone. We believe that the 3 percent VOC limit is challenging because products formulated with pure acetone have not been demonstrated to adequately thin all types of coatings. In addition , concerns regarding the flammability of acetone have been raised. Later in this section, w e discuss our response to this concern. Chapter VIII, Environmental Impacts, also contains a discussion regarding flammability. When fully effective, these two limi ts would reduce VOC emissions from Thinners and Solvents by about 12.7 tons per day in the State, outside of the South

Coast Air Basin.

The proposed VOC limits are designed to reduce the use of VOCs in Thinner and Solvent formulations, resulting in a reduction of a mbient ozone formation. For the 30 percent limit, reformulation options include inc reasing production of existing complying products, switching to water-based formul ations, or replacing VOC solvents with VOC exempt ingredients. Reformulation options to meet the proposed 3 percent limit include emerging technologies such as soy-bas ed products, in addition to the methods listed previously with the 30 percent limit

.

Upon approval of the proposed VOC limits, and imple mentation of SCAQMD Rule 1143, manufacturers of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Th inner products will be required to meet the Rule 1143 limits for products sold or supp lied for use in the South Coast Air Basin, and the statewide limits for products sold t o all areas of California, outside the South Coast Air Basin. The VOC limits we are propo sing are virtually equivalent to those adopted by SCAQMD, however, the effective dat es are different. The effective dates for Rule 1143 are January 1, 2010, and Januar y 1, 2011 for the first and second tier VOC limits respectively, while our proposed ef fective dates are December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2013.

To ensure the ozone forming potential of Multi-purp ose Solvent and Paint Thinner products does not increase as a result of the imple mentation of the proposed VOC limits, we are proposing to limit the use of VOC ar omatic compounds to no more than 1 percent by weight, effective December 31, 2010. We are proposing that Thinners and Solvents available Statewide meet this requirement. The proposed limitation on the use of VOC aromatic compounds is unique to the State re gulation, and is not required by SCAQMD Rule 1143. Therefore, this provision would apply statewide and result in an
additional ozone reduction benefit in the SCAQMD. Additional discussion regarding the need for limiting the use of these highly reactive ingredients can be found in Chapter VIII, Environmental Impacts.

While we believe that there are several products an d reformulation pathways currently available to meet the 30 percent VOC limit, we ackn owledge that technology advances are necessary to meet the future 3 percent limit. To that end, we are proposing to work with industry to assess progress as the December 31 , 2013, compliance date approaches. We are proposing a technology assessme nt in 2012, to evaluate manufacturers’ progress toward meeting the 3 percen t limit.Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 63

Proposed Global Warming Potential (GWP) Limit and C ompliance :

Pursuant to ARB’s responsibilities under Assembly B ill 32, reductions of GHGs from consumer products are necessary (ARB, 2008e). Cons umer products use various GHGs, mostly as propellants and to a limited extent as solvents. Although the GHG emissions contribution from consumer products can b e relatively low, the severity of the climate change problem requires reductions or limit ations from any source where it is feasible. No solvents with high GWP values were re ported in the Paint Thinner and Multi-purpose Solvent Survey Update (ARB, 2008f). However, to ensure that there is no significant increase in GHG emissions from produ cts reformulated to comply with the proposed VOC limits, we are proposing, as a Statewi de mitigation measure, a GWP limit of 150 for any chemical compound used in Thin ner and Solvent products, effective December 31, 2010. The proposed GWP limit is uniqu e to the State regulation, and is not required by SCAQMD Rule 1143. Therefore, this provision would apply statewide

and result in an additional GHG reduction benefit i n the SCAQMD.

Proposed Toxics Prohibition :

None of the products reported in the survey update, including products that comply with the proposed VOC limits, are currently formulated w ith methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloroethylene. To preven t the potential use of these Toxic Air Contaminants as manufacturers reformulate products to comply with the proposed limits, we are proposing to prohibit their use in t he Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner categories effective December 31, 2010. Me thylene chloride and perchloroethylene are exempt VOC solvents, therefor e, without the prohibition, high

concentrations of these solvents could be used as r eformulation options. While trichloroethylene meets the definition of VOC, with out the prohibition, it could be used in Thinner and Solvent formulations that meet the prop osed VOC limits. The health effects associated with exposure to perchloroethyle ne, methylene chloride and trichloroethylene, are well established. More info rmation on the health effects of these solvents can be found in Chapter VIII of the Techni cal Support Document for the June 2008 Consumer Products Regulation Amendments (ARB, 2008e). In Rule 1143, SCAQMD has prohibited from consumer paint thinners and multi-purpose solvents, greater than 0.1 percent by weight of “Group II exe mpt compounds listed in Rule 102.” Group II exempt compounds include methylene chlorid e and perchloroethylene. Therefore, the statewide toxics prohibition differs slightly from SCAQMD Rule 1143 in that it prohibits one additional toxic compound, tr ichloroethylene.

Photochemical Reactivity :

As mentioned previously, we are proposing in sectio n 94509(u), to limit the use of aromatic compounds in products in the Multi-Purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner categories to 1 percent by weight, effective Decemb er 31, 2010. This Statewide requirement is intended to mitigate the possibility that manufacturers could replace

current VOC solvents used in Thinners and Solvents with highly reactive compounds. ATechnical Support Document Chapter VI - 64

discussion related to this proposal and the potenti al for the VOC reductions achieved from the proposed limits for Thinners and Solvents to be eroded without this measure, is provided in Chapter VIII, Environmental Impacts. T he proposed limitation on the use of VOC aromatic compounds is unique to the State regul ation, and is not required by SCAQMD Rule 1143. Therefore, this provision would apply statewide and result in an
additional ozone reduction benefit in the SCAQMD.

Small Size Exemption :

We are proposing to temporarily exempt very small ( 8 fluid ounces or less) containers of Paint Thinner from compliance with the VOC limits u ntil December 31, 2013. This exemption is designed to allow consumers to continu e to be able to purchase typical Paint Thinners to be used with paints where the est ablished VOC limit allows for fairly high concentrations of solvents. In addition, ther e is an existing exemption from the VOC limits for architectural coatings packaged in c ontainers with a volume of one liter (1.057 quart) or less. Therefore, we believe a lim ited, temporary small container exemption is appropriate for Paint Thinner. Absent this provision, these solvent-borne paint products may be discarded, resulting in incre asing the solid or hazardous waste stream or affecting water quality. This proposal s hould mitigate these potential consequences. We expect the emissions impacts of t his small size exemption will be minimal. The proposed small size exemption is uniq ue to the State regulation, therefore, this provision would only apply to areas of California outside the South Coast

Air Basin.

Proposed Labeling Requirements :

To enhance the enforceability of the regulation, we are proposing that Thinners and Solvents would be subject to labeling requirements as specified in proposed new subsection 94512(e) of the Consumer Products Regula tion. This proposed requirement would ensure that all products clearly display the VOC content of the product, in percent by weight, as determined from actual formulation da ta. This information would be required to be displayed on the product container s uch that it is readily observable without removing or disassembling any portion of th e product container or packaging. This requirement would only apply to areas of Calif ornia outside the South Coast Air
Basin because SCAQMD has a well established labelin g rule, Rule 443.1, Labeling of Materials Containing Organic Solvents (SCAQMD, 1986 ). SCAQMD Rule 443.1 specifies that within the South Coast Air Basin, pr oducts in containers of 0.94 liter (one quart) capacity or larger and containing any VOC or material containing VOC manufactured after July 1, 1987, must display on th e product container, the maximum VOC expressed in grams of VOC per liter of material

.

Proposal to Address Product Flammability :

During the development of the Thinners and Solvents regulation proposal, numerous stakeholders expressed concern with the flammabilit y of low-VOC products such as those containing acetone. It was brought to our at tention by staff of California’s OfficeTechnical Support Document Chapter VI - 65

of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM) and some local fir e department representatives, that an increased availability of flammable or extremely flammable Thinners and Solvents may contribute to additional fire losses. The fire officials believe that consumers may not realize that characteristics of products named with general terms such as “Paint Thinner” have changed as a result of the proposed V OC limits. Thus, without clear notification of this change, they contend the poten tial for additional fire losses is possible.

The United States Consumer Product Safety Commissio n (CPSC) regulations require precautionary labeling of hazardous household produ cts, including combustible, flammable, and extremely flammable thinners and sol vents (USCPSC, 2009a). CPSC labeling requirements for hazardous household produ cts are intended to help the consumer safely use and store hazardous products an d provide information that may be necessary in the event of an accident.

Many products currently in commerce, such as “Paint Thinner” and “Mineral Spirits” are combustible products per CPSC because they have “a flashpoint at or above 100 o F (37.8 o C) to and including 150 o F (65.6 o C)” (USCPSC, 2009a). “Acetone” and many currently available “Lacquer Thinner” products are considered extremely flammable per federal law because they have “a flashpoint at or b elow 20 o F (-6.7 o C)” (USCPSC, 2009a). The lower the flash point, the more likely the material will ignite.

As described earlier, we believe manufacturers will meet the proposed VOC limits by increasing production of existing complying product s, using water-based formulations, or replacing VOC solvents with VOC exempt ingredien ts. Based on market research

and data we received in the Paint Thinner and Multi -purpose Solvent Survey Update, an overwhelming majority of products that currently co mply with the proposed VOC limits include products labeled as “Acetone” and acetone-b ased formulations (ARB, 2008f).

It should be mentioned that water-based Thinners an d Solvents, which comply with the proposed limits, also have a presence in the market . While water-based Thinners and

Solvents meet the CPSC definition of a hazardous su bstance and require precautionary labeling, most do not meet the combustible, flammab le, or extremely flammable definitions; they have flashpoints above 150 o F (65.6 o C) (ARB, 2008f). A flashpoint

above 150 o F (65.6 o C) can be attributed to the use of water in the pro duct.

Because we believe some manufacturers may replace s ome of their high VOC, combustible Thinners and Solvents with lower VOC, f lammable or extremely flammable products, we are proposing to prohibit manufacturer s from placing general product names on the principle display panel of “Flammable, ” or “Extremely Flammable” Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. The ge neral product names used on products currently in commerce include, “Paint Thin ner,” “Multi-purpose Solvent,” “Clean-up Solvent,” “Paint Clean-up.” The proposed prohibition includes two alternatives that manufacturers may choose from to continue selling generally named “Flammable,” or “Extremely Flammable” Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners. The first alternative includes providing a “hang ta g” or “sticker” affixed to the productTechnical Support Document Chapter VI - 66

that includes the statement “Formulated to meet Cal ifornia VOC limits, see warnings on label.” Manufacturers may also choose to display t he common name of the chemical that results in the product meeting the criteria fo r “Flammable” or “Extremely Flammable,” in a font as large as or larger, than a ny of the words on the principle display panel.

The proposed prohibition does not apply to products named “Lacquer Thinner.” Many currently available Lacquer Thinners are “Extremely Flammable” because they contain greater than 1 percent acetone.

The proposed Statewide requirement would complement and be in addition to CPSC’s labeling requirement for hazardous Thinners and Sol vents. Essentially, upon approval of the proposed requirement, California will have m ore stringent labeling requirements for hazardous Thinners and Solvents, as a result of stakeholders’ concern. We believe additional labeling is necessary to alert the consu mer of a potential change in formulation of these products which could present a fire hazard if used improperly.

Additionally, to potentially minimize the increased fire hazard from the use of Thinners and Solvents, we have proposed an effectiv e date for the 3 percent VOC limit of December 31, 2013. This additional compliance t ime allows for development of less flammable products. The reporting requirement ment ioned previously will also allow us to evaluate potential reformulations to determine a vailability of less flammable products.

Proposed Technology Assessment :

As proposed in new subsection 94513(g), Thinner and Solvent manufacturers of products available Statewide would be required to s upply detailed written updates on research and development efforts undertaken to achi eve future compliance with the 3 percent VOC limit. The reports would include sal es and formulation data for products,

as well as detailed information on the raw material s evaluated for use; maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) values for any VOC or LVP-VOC used or evaluated; the function of the raw material evaluated; testing pro tocols used; the results of the testing; and the cost of reformulation efforts. The report would be due on June 30, 2012, and would provide data for the 2011 calendar year.

Issues :

a. Issue : The effective date of the proposed 3 percent VOC l imit for Multi-purpose Solvents should be earlier than December 31, 2013.

Response : As described earlier, Multi-purpose Solvent and Pa int Thinner products are used interchangeably by consumers. An earlier effective date for the proposed 3 percent VOC limit for Multi-purpose Solvent would provide an opportunity for manufacturers to circumvent the lim it by adding Paint Thinner claims to the product label. We believe the emissi on reductions attained from anTechnical Support Document Chapter VI - 67

earlier implementation of the 3 percent VOC limit f or Multi-purpose Solvent would

not be achieved.

b. Issue : ARB’s proposed VOC limits will likely be met with an increase of acetone or acetone-based products because acetone is exempt as a VOC. Acetone is an extremely flammable solvent that cannot be used in the same manner as a combustible product, such as Odorless Mineral Spiri ts. For a limited time, ARB should educate the public to prevent any additional fire losses as a result of the proposed limits.

Response : We agree that the availability of acetone and acet one-based products will likely increase as a result of the pr oposed VOC limits. We also agree that an education effort is necessary to aler t people to the additional hazards of using a flammable or extremely flammable product compared to a combustible product such as Odorless Mineral Spirit s. We are proposing to prohibit manufacturers from placing general product names on the principle display panel of “Flammable” or “Extremely Flammabl e” Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. Manufacturers may choo se to continue selling generally named “Flammable” or “Extremely Flammable ” Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners as long as they either: provide a “hang tag” or “sticker” affixed to the product that includes the statement “Formula ted to meet California VOC limits, see warnings on label;” or display the comm on name of the chemical that results in the product meeting the criteria for “Fl ammable” or “Extremely Flammable,” in a font as large as or larger, than a ny of the words on the principle display panel. We believe the proposed requirement will alert the consumer of a potential change in formulation of these products w hich could present a fire hazard if used improperly.

c. Issue : ARB should consider MIR standards for the Multi-pu rpose Solvent and Paint Thinner categories. Reactivity-based regulat ions will provide manufacturers more flexibility in reformulation opt ions and may achieve greater

ozone reductions.

Response : We have maintained that a mass-based VOC strategy would be the primary focus of this regulatory effort and that a reactivity strategy would only be employed if the mass-based strategies did not provi de the necessary reductions. We believe the proposed mass-based limits are feasi ble and will achieve significant emissions reductions. Notwithstanding the above, we acknowledge that it is possible that some existing products tha t are 100 percent VOC could have a lower reactivity compared to some complying 30 percent products. In addition, some complying 30 percent products could have lower reactivity compared to some technologies available to meet the 3 percent limit, thus achieving no additional air quality benefit. As su ch, we are proposing to limit the aromatic content of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner to 1 percent by weight, effective December 31, 2010.Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 68

We believe that limiting the aromatic compound cont ent of these products will ensure that the ozone forming potential of reformul ated products does not increase and the maximum air quality benefits are a chieved. We are also proposing to conduct a technology assessment on or before June 30, 2012, to assess manufacturers’ progress towards developing p roducts that meet the proposed 3 percent VOC limit. We also intend to ev aluate whether a reactivitybased regulation would achieve greater ozone reduct ions as opposed to the mass-based 3 percent VOC limit.

d. Issue : ARB should consider exempting Tertiary Butyl Aceta te (TBAc) from the

definition of VOC.

Response : The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessme nt considers TBAc a possible human carcinogen, therefore we are not considering exempting it as a VOC at this time. However, because we are proposing to exempt Paint Thinner products labeled to be used exclusively for Industrial Maintenance Coatings, TBAc could be used in those specific inst ances, if necessary.

e. Issue : ARB should consider a permanent small container ex emption for Paint Thinner products intended for use with the solvent- borne paint. Without a small container exemption, consumers may resort to gasoli ne to thin their solventborne paint.

Response : We acknowledge that there continues to be a limite d need for thinning small quantities of solvent-borne paint. Based on discussions with ARB’s Architectural Coatings Program staff, there a re several categories of architectural paints with VOC limits that allow for fairly high concentrations of solvents. In addition, there is an existing exempt ion from the VOC limits for architectural coatings packaged in containers with a volume of one liter (1.057 quart) or less. Therefore, we believe a lim ited, temporary small container exemption is appropriate for Paint Thinner. Additi onally, this will give manufacturers time to develop low VOC thinners that are compatible with solvent-borne coatings. We are proposing an exempt ion for Paint Thinner products, packaged in containers with a capacity le ss than or equal to 8 fluid ounces, until December 31, 2013.

f. Issue : ARB may be preempted by federal law from requiring additional labeling on flammable and extremely flammable Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products.

Response : We have consulted with staff from the United State s Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) who have explained the federal preemption clause as it pertains to federal labeling for hazar dous consumer products. Based on discussions with CPSC staff, we have written a p roposal that does not conflict with federal requirements.Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 69

g. Issue : The proposed 3 percent VOC limit for Paint Thinner s will not allow for products that will effectively thin all paints, inc luding solvent-borne paint.

Response : As described earlier, we are proposing to conduct a technology assessment on or before June 30, 2012, to assess ma nufacturers’ progress towards developing products that can meet the propo sed 3 percent VOC limit. We are aware that that currently, there are only a few reformulation pathways that meet the 3 percent limit. However, there is i nformation that indicates that new technologies are under development. We will ev aluate progress toward meeting the 3 percent limit in the technology asses sment.

h. Issue : ARB should consider exempting natural solvents, su ch as d-limonene,

because of its carbon neutral attributes.

Response : D-limonene is a highly reactive VOC that contribut es significantly to ground level ozone formation. Also, none of the pr oducts reported in the Survey Update were formulated with d-limonene. The commen ter did not provide a definition for natural solvent or any data about th e attributes of natural solvents. Therefore, we do not believe it is appropriate at t his time to consider this exemption.

REFERENCES FOR DOUBLE PHASE AEROSOL AIR FRESHENERS

1. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reaso ns for Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation. May, 2008. (ARB, 2008e)

2. Air Resources Board. The California Consumer Pr oducts Regulations

. December, 2007. (ARB, 2007a)

3. Air Resources Board. 2006 Consumer and Commerci al Products Survey

. August, 2007. (ARB, 2007f)

4. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reaso ns for Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation. September, 1999. (ARB, 1999a)

5. Air Resources Board. Final Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking, Including Summary of Comments and Agency Responses Public Hea ring to Consider Adoption of Amendments to the California Consumer P roducts Regulation –

Mid-term Measures II. October, 1999. (ARB, 1999b)

6. Air Resources Board. Proposed Regulation to Red uce Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Consumer Products Technical Support Document. August, 1990. (ARB, 1990b)

7. Consumer Specialty Products Association. CSPA P roduct Technology Seminar

for CARB Staff. January, 2009. (CSPA, 2009)Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 70

8. Consumer Specialty Products Association. Draft Staff Proposal for June 2009

Consumer Products Amendments . Comment Letter to ARB Staff. April, 2009. (CSPA, 2009a)

9. CosmeticsInfo.org (sponsored by the Personal Ca re Products Council).

Phthalates . April, 2009. http://www.CosmeticsInfo.org . (CI, 2009)

10. Fragrance Materials Association of the United S tates. RE: Docket EPA-HQOPPT-2007-1016, “Citizen Petition to EPA and CPSC R egarding Air

Fresheners ”. November, 2007. (FMA, 2007)

11. Fragrance Materials Association. Fragrances an d the Regulation of Volatile Organic Compounds . July, 2006. (FMA, 2006)

12. Esposito, Christine. Home Sweet Home Fragrance . Household and Personal Products Industry. September, 2008. (Esposito, 200 8)

13. Euromonitor International. Home Fragrance: Air Care in the US Market By Euromonitor International (Excerpt Only Posted Nove mber 12, 2008, from November 2008 Issue of P&F Magazine) . November, 2008. http://PerfumerFlavorist.com . (Euromonitor, 2008)

14. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. For ster, P., V. Ramaswamy, P. Artaxo, T. Berntsen, R. Betts, D.W. Fahey, J. Haywo od, J. Lean, D.C. Lowe, G. Myhre, J. Nganga, R. Prinn, G. Raga, M. Schulz and R. Van Dorland, 2007: Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiativ e Forcing. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribut ion of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernment al Panel on Climate Change

. [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marqu is, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge Univer sity Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. (IPCC, 2007)

15. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC Climate Change 1995: Second Assessment Report: The Science of Climate C hange. (1996) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . [J.T. Houghton, L.G. Meira Filho, B.A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg, and K. Ma skell, (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom. (IPCC , 1996)

16. Reckitt Benckiser. Telephone Conversation with ARB staff . March 25, 2009. (Reckitt Benckiser, 2009)

17. S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc. March 12, 2009, Press Release: Phthalates Phasing Out and Innovative Ingredient Communication Launche d. http://www.scjohnson.com/family/fam_pre_pre_news.as p?art_id=390 (SC Johnson, 2009a)Technical Support Document Chapter VI - 71

18. S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc. Telephone Conversati on with ARB Staff. March 24, 2009. (SC Johnson, 2009b)

REFERENCES FOR MULTI-PURPOSE SOLVENT AND PAINT THIN NER

1. Air Resources Board. Results of Thinners Solven ts Shelf Surveys

. January, 2009. (ARB, 2009)

2. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation . May, 2008. (ARB, 2008e)

3. Air Resources Board. Paint Thinner and Multi-pu rpose Solvent Survey Update

. November 4, 2008. (ARB, 2008f)

4. Air Resources Board. 2003 Consumer and Commerci al Products Survey

. November 3, 2004. (ARB, 2004)

5. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reaso ns for Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation: Midte rm Measures

. June 6, 1997. (ARB, 1997)

6. California Department of Finance, Population Est imates and Components of Change by County, July 1, 2000-2008 . December 2008. (DOF, 2008)

7. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCA QMD). Rule 443.1. Labeling of Materials Containing Organic Solvents. December 5, 1986. (SCAQMD, 1986)

8. United States, Consumer Product Safety Commissio n, Title 16 Commercial

Practices Part 1500 Hazardous Substances and Articl es; Administration and Enforcement Regulations . April 2009. (USCPSC, 2009a)Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 72

VII. ECONOMIC IMPACTS

This chapter provides our analysis of the estimated economic and fiscal impacts of the proposed amendments. The analysis focuses on costs to comply with the proposed VOC limits. We expect the other proposals to resul t in negligible or no costs. Businesses that manufacture air fresheners, multi-p urpose solvents and paint thinners with VOC contents above the proposed VOC limits wou ld incur costs to reformulate their products. Potential fiscal impacts would be costs incurred by State agencies to administer, enforce, or comply with the proposal.

Economic impact analyses are inherently imprecise, given the unpredictable behavior of companies in a highly competitive market such as co nsumer products. While staff has quantified the economic impacts to the extent feasi ble, some projections are necessarily qualitative, and based on general observations and facts known about the consumer products industry. This analysis, therefore, serve s to provide a general picture of the economic impacts typical businesses might encounter . Individual companies may experience different impacts than projected.

The summary of economic impacts of the proposed lim its is presented in Section A. Other possible economic impacts and mitigation path s are provided in the following

sections:

B. Costs of Compliance C. Return on Owners’ Equity D. Impacts on California Businesses, Consumers, an d State and Local

Agencies E. Other Possible Economic Impacts of Regulatory Ch anges F. Mitigation of Potential Impacts through Addition al Regulatory Flexibility

This economic impacts analysis was conducted in acc ordance with the current legal requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). This analysis uses similar methodologies and assumptions as were used in the l ast consumer products rulemakings (ARB, 2004b; ARB, 2006a; ARB, 2008e).

A. SUMMARY OF ECONOMIC IMPACTS

Staff has estimated that the overall cost to comply with the proposed VOC limits is about $3.1 million per year for ten years ($31 mill ion in total). This amount includes both recurring ( e.g. , raw materials) and nonrecurring ( e.g. , research and development) costs and is estimated based on assumptions specifi c to each category. The cost represents the average of low and high cost estimat es and represents staff’s prediction of the costs businesses would most likely incur.

Another measure of the economic impacts of the prop osal is to determine the “dollars to be spent per pound of VOC reduced,” or cost effecti veness. The cost effectiveness of the proposed amendments has been calculated to be a bout $0.29 per pound of VOCTechnical Support Document Chapter VII - 73

reduced. This is based on expected emission reduct ions of about 14.7 tons per day. This cost effectiveness is comparatively less costl y than some other recent consumer products rulemakings.

The impacts of the proposed amendments on manufactu rers are estimated by determining the “return on owner’s equity” (ROE). ROE is a calculation which compares a company’s percentage reduction in profitability b efore and after incurring the costs associated with the proposed amendments. The analy sis found that the overall reduction in profitability ranges from 5.4 percent for Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener to about 24 percent for reformulation cos ts incurred for both the first tier and second tier limits for Multi-purpose Solvent and Pa int Thinner products. Thus, the potential exists that some manufacturers of Multi-p urpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products may experience a significant impact in the ir profitability. In light of this, the assessment of ROE requires further explanation.

Our analysis of ROE found that sample businesses in the affected industries complying with the proposed first tier limit for Multi-purpos e Solvent and Paint Thinner, declined by about 9.5 percent. When the second tier limit for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner is calculated, the ROE of the affected indu stries is estimated to decline by up to 24 percent. This analysis assumes that all complia nce costs will be absorbed by the affected industry. However, it is most likely that affected businesses will be able to pass on at least part of the cost increase to consumers. Since consumers spend only a small portion of their annual budget on affected products , they are not expected to be sensitive to a small increase in the prices of thos e products. To the extent that the projected costs are passed on to consumers, the imp act on business profitability is likely to be much less than estimated in our projection.

Because we expect businesses will pass on complianc e costs to the consumer, we estimated the increased cost the consumer may exper ience. If all assumed compliance costs are passed on to the consumer, without consid eration of typical retail mark-up, we estimate the cost per unit increase would range fro m negligible cost (net savings or no cost) for a Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener prod uct to about $0.75 for a Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner product reformula ted to meet the proposed second tier limit unit of 3 percent VOC by weight. The va lue of $0.75 represents the summed per-unit cost increase for a one gallon of product reformulated to meet the first tier limits

and reformulated a second time to meet the second t ier limits. By apportioning annual sales of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner pr oducts to the California population, we estimated that residents purchase less than one container of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner per year. Thus, considering norm al retail mark-up of 100 percent, the consumer’s cost increase to purchase Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner would increase by about $1.50 per gallon.

We also estimated costs to contractors because they commonly purchase Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. If we apportio n all sales of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products to licensed contractors, we estimate purchases of approximately five gallons per year. Considering n ormal retail mark-up and using ourTechnical Support Document Chapter VII - 74

high cost estimate, the cost increase to licensed c ontractors purchasing Multi-purpose Solvent/Paint Thinner products would be about $8 pe r year (CDCA, 2009).

Based on our ROE calculations, we believe that over all, most affected businesses will be able to absorb the costs, or will pass through s ome of the costs to the consumer, such that there will be no significant adverse impa cts on their profitability. Therefore, we do not expect a noticeable change in employment; business creation, elimination or expansion; or business competitiveness in Californi a. However, the proposed amendments may impose economic hardship on some bus inesses with very little or no margin of profitability.

We determined that there would be no significant ad verse fiscal impacts to any local or State agencies.

Staff believes that the regulation cost and CE dete rmination methodologies are conservative. For example, the average cost scenar io of low and high determines the overall cost and cost effectiveness of the regulati on. The low cost scenario assumes that companies would choose the lowest cost reformu lation pathway, making minor adjustments to a product’s formulation, or simply c easing sale of some non-complying products. We believe that most manufacturers would choose the lowest cost reformulation option. For the high cost scenario, it is assumed that there is significant research and development, and new equipment is need ed to reformulate the product.

We believe that few manufacturers would need to tak e the high cost reformulation approach.

Details of our cost analysis are in the following s ections. Additional information as to how recurring and nonrecurring costs were estimated is contained in Appendices D

and E.

B. COSTS OF COMPLIANCE

The total cost of compliance of the proposal requir es an estimation of the recurring and nonrecurring costs that would be expended to reform ulate and bring a product to market. Recurring costs for this analysis are thos e associated with the cost of the raw materials. Nonrecurring costs are assumed to be on e time costs and are those associated with research, development, and plant ch anges that may be necessary to develop a reformulated complying product. Our anal ysis further assumes that nonrecurring costs will be amortized over a project horizon of ten years. Summing the recurring and amortized nonrecurring costs represen ts the total cost to reformulate a product. We then use the total cost to estimate th e potential cost per unit increase to the consumer, the cost effectiveness (CE) of the pr oposed amendments, and the ROE.

There are many variables in producing a product for market, and assumptions about those variables will greatly affect the outcome of any cost analysis. For each assumption, staff applied a test of “reasonableness ” to determine if this was a likely approach to take, or if the event had a high probab ility of occurring. The followingTechnical Support Document Chapter VII - 75

sections describe our process for arriving at the c osts to comply with the proposed

amendments.

1. Recurring Costs

As part of the economic impact analysis, we evaluat ed the expected cost impacts from complying with the proposed VOC limits on raw mater ial costs. The change in the cost of raw material costs are expected to be ongoing, i.e. , they are recurring costs.

a. Methodology

Using the data from the 2006 Survey for Double Phas e Aerosol Air Freshener products and the Survey Update for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, we determined the formulations which most closely refl ect the “typical” compliant and noncompliant product contents. For each category staf f estimated a “low cost” and “high cost” by varying costs for ingredients. Informatio n on how raw material costs were estimated, as well as formulations evaluated (with individual weight fractions and unit prices per pound), are shown in Appendix D. While these formulations may not reflect the exact composition of existing non-compliant pro ducts and compliant products that will be marketed, we believe they are reasonably re presentative for the purposes of this analysis.

In this rulemaking, we used the same raw material c osts as were used in the June 2008 rulemaking for consumer products (ARB, 2008e). We believe this is reasonable, if not conservative, given the declining price of oil and general economic downturn that has occurred since that rulemaking.

Except for ingredient costs, we assumed changes in packaging, delivery systems, labeling, distribution and other recurring costs wo uld be negligible relative to baseline levels of these costs (ARB, 1997b). We believe thi s assumption is valid because the proposed limits should not require significant pack aging or delivery system

modifications. We also believe distribution costs would be the same because we do not expect manufacturers to sell and distribute “Califo rnia only products.” The most likely pathway for reformulation was assumed for non-compl iant products. Despite this assumption, alternative formulations may allow lowe r-cost compliant products than shown in our analysis.

b. Results

The estimated cost of typical non-compliant and com pliant formulations for each category is displayed in Table VII-1a. The values are taken from Appendix D. The difference between high and low cost non-compliant and compliant formulations yields the change in ingredient costs. As shown in Table VII-1a, Columns C 1 and C 2 , the anticipated raw materials cost change ranges from n o cost (net savings or no cost) to about $0.50 increase per unit (per 83 fluid ounces average unit size of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner complying with the tier 2 limit). Note that when the cost forTechnical Support Document Chapter VII - 76

raw materials in the predicted reformulated product are comparable or slightly cheaper to those currently used, rather than assigning a ne gative cost, we assume there will be no change in the cost of raw materials.

Table VII-1a Estimated Change in Formula Cost per Unit*

Formula Cost per Unit
Non-compliant Low High Compliant

Low High Cost Increase to Comply per Unit Low High

Category A 1 A 2 B 1 B 2 C 1 = B 1 – A 1 C 2 =

B 2 –A 2 Air Freshener –

Double Phase (aerosol) $0.10 $0.20 $0.10 $0.20 $0.00 + $0.00 +

Multi-purpose

Solvent & Paint

Thinner

tier 1 $3.20 $4.70 $2.90 $4.30 $0.00 + $0.00 +

tier 2 $2.90 $4.30 $2.80 $4.80 $0.00 + $0.50 +

* Raw material costs are assumed to be $0.00 when staff estimates that materials used to reformulate are comparably priced to current materials or a re less expensive than currently used. + Numbers have been rounded in tables, however unr ounded numbers are used for calculations in subsequent tables.

Using the change in the cost per unit from Table VI I-1a, the total recurring costs per category are calculated as shown in Table VII-1b. To arrive at the total cost per category, estimated non-compliant unit sales (Colum n D) are multiplied by the recurring costs per unit taken from Table VII-1a. As shown i n Table VII-1b, Column E 3 the average total recurring cost per category ranges fr om no cost to about $850,000 for the Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products re formulated to comply with the tier 2

VOC limit.Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 77 Table VII-1b Total Estimated Recurring Cost

Annual

California Noncomplying

Unit Sales* Total Annual Recurring Cost per Category +

Low Cost High Cost Average

Category D E 1 = D X C 1 E 2 =

D X C 2 E 3 =

(E 1 + E 2 )/2

Air Freshener –

Double Phase (aerosol) 53,748,100 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Multi-purpose

Solvent & Paint

Thinner

tier 1 1,723,300 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

tier 2 1,699,000 $0.00 $854,000 $427,000

* Assumes “typical” unit size as shown in Appendix D.

+ See Table VII-1a footnote about the use of unroun ded numbers in calculations.

2. Nonrecurring Costs

In this portion of the analysis, we evaluated the i mpacts of nonrecurring costs likely to be expended to comply with the proposed limits. Th ese are assumed to be costs incurred once to conduct the necessary research and development to produce a complying product. Technical literature and indust ry trade journals provide little information to estimate nonrecurring costs directly . This is not surprising because the consumer products industry is very competitive, and production cost data specific to a company are closely guarded trade secrets. Stakeho lders have generally concurred that our assumptions for nonrecurring costs are rea sonable. Appendix E displays the various phases of product development and the costs that are assigned to each phase.

a. Methodology

To estimate nonrecurring costs, we used two approac hes for each product category, one for low cost, and one for high cost, with a dif ferent set of assumptions for each approach. The categories proposed for regulation a re considered “household care” products. Appendix E displays how nonrecurring cos ts were apportioned for both high and low cost scenarios. For each category only new or additional costs were

considered. Costs were not considered that would h ave been expected in the normal course of business if the regulation had not been i n effect.Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 78

b. Results

Table VII-2, Columns A 1 and A 2 , display the results of our assessment of the nonrecurring costs to be incurred for each category . These costs are taken from Appendix E. Estimated nonrecurring costs for the l ow cost scenario for the categories range from about $11,200 to $15,100 per product. N ote also that nonrecurring costs for the high cost scenario range from about $50,000 to $75,000 per product.

Table VII-2 Estimated Nonrecurring per Product Costs to Comply with the Proposed Limits

Cost Per Product Low High Amortized Cost Per Product Low High

Category A 1 A 2 B 1 = A 1 X CRF* B 2 =

A 2 X CRF*

Air Freshener –

Double Phase (aerosol) $11,200 $50,100 $1,800 $8,200

Multi-purpose

Solvent & Paint

Thinner

tier 1 $15,100 $74,600 $2,500 $12,100

tier 2 $15,100 $74,600 $2,500 $12,100

*CRF = Capital Recovery Factor of 0.16275

c. Amortizing Nonrecurring Costs

The next part of our analysis assumes that nonrecur ring costs will not be incurred in a single year, but would instead be amortized over te n years. To amortize nonrecurring costs, the costs shown in Columns A 1 and A 2 are then amortized using the Capital Recovery Method. This is a standard methodology an d it is recommended under guidelines issued by the California Environmental P rotection Agency (Cal/EPA).

The equation below shows that the estimated total n onrecurring costs per product is multiplied by the Capital Recovery Factor (CRF) to convert these costs into equal annual payments over a project horizon (i.e., the p rojected useful life of the investment)

at a discount rate.

Annualized nonrecurring costs = (Nonrecurring Cost s) X [i(1 + i) n /((1 + i) n -1)]

Where:
i(1 + i) n /((1 + i) n -1) = Capital Recovery Factor (CRF) i = discount interest rate over project horizo n, % n = number of years in project horizon Nonrecurring Costs = total nonrecurring cost p er productTechnical Support Document Chapter VII - 79

We assumed a project horizon of ten years, a common ly cited period for an investment’s useful lifetime in the chemical proces sing industry. We also assumed a fixed interest rate of 10 percent throughout the pr oject horizon. These assumptions are conservative and constitute standard practice in an alyses of consumer products regulations, including previous consumer product ru lemakings. Based on these assumptions, the Capital Recovery Factor (CRF), as shown below, is 0.16275.

CRF = 0.1(1+0.1) 10 /((1+0.1) 10 -1) = 0.1(2.59)/1.59

= 0.259/1.59 = 0.163 (rounded)

Using the low cost estimate for Double Phase Aeroso l Air Fresheners from Table VII-2,

Column A 1 , then the amortized cost is:

Amortized Cost: $11,200 X 0.16275 = $1,822.80

For the low cost scenario, as shown in Column B 1 , of Table VII-2, we project perproduct annualized nonrecurring costs to be about $ 1,800 to $2,500 for each of ten years. For the high cost scenario (Column B 2 ), we project per-product annualized nonrecurring costs to range from about $8,200 to $1 2,100 for ten years.

Next, nonrecurring costs for all non-compliant prod ucts per category are calculated by using the low and high amortized costs from Table V II-2. To arrive at the range of total nonrecurring cost per category, two different scena rios are calculated. In the low cost scenario, we assume that manufacturers will conduct research and other product development once for a given product category, and use these efforts as a basis to reformulate all their other non-complying products in the same category. As shown in Table VII-3, the low cost incurred by all businesse s is the product of the low product cost (Column C) and number of companies (Column B) that have non-complying products within the given category.

In the total nonrecurring high cost scenario, we as sume that reformulation costs would be incurred per product. This means that companies that have multiple non-complying products in a given category would conduct separate research and development efforts for each product in their respective product lines. Thus in this case, the high amortized cost (Column D) is multiplied by the number of non- compliant products (Column A).

As shown in Table VII-3, total category annualized nonrecurring costs range from about $43,000 to about $50,000 for the low cost scenario, and from $1.7 million to $1.8 million for the high cost scenario. Also as shown in Table VII-3, the total nonrecurring cost to industry is projected to range from about $143,000 to just over $5 million dollars per year for ten years.Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 80 Table VII-3 Estimated Total Nonrecurring Cost per Category

# Noncomplying

Products* #

Companies Low Cost

Per Unit High Cost

Per Unit Total Nonrecurring Cost

per Category ++ Low High

Category A B C D E 1 = B X C E 2 =D X A

Air Freshener

Double Phase (aerosol) 218 24 $1,800 $8,200 $43,200 $1,787,600

Multipurpose Solvent &

Paint Thinner

tier 1 137 20 $2,500 $12,100 $50,000 $1,657,700

tier 2 140 20 $2,500 $12,100 $50,000 $1,694,000

Total: 495 + 44 + $143,200 $5,139,300

* Adjusted for market covered in survey. Assume 9 0% for all categories.

+ Tier 1 and 2 Multi-purpose Solvent & Paint Thinne r products are counted twice because they will be reformulated twice. Number of Multi-purpose Solvent & Paint Thinner companies are not counted twice.

++ See Table VII-1a footnote about the use of unroun ded numbers in calculations.

3. Total Costs

For each category, the total cost of reformulation is estimated by summing recurring costs (see Table VII-1b) with nonrecurring amortize d costs (see Table VII-3). Table VII-4 displays the total low and high cost to reformulate all non-complying products for each category. We estimate the indust ry compliance costs to range from a low of about $43,000 per year for aerosol Double Ph ase Air Freshener products, to a high of about $2.5 million per year to comply with the second tier 2 VOC limit for Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. Table VII-4 (Column C 3 ) also shows the average cost estimate to range from about $854,000 to $1.3 million. As shown in

Column C 3 , the overall average cost to reformulate all non-c ompliant products for all categories is about $3.1 million.Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 81 Table VII-4 Estimated Total Costs to Comply with the Proposed V OC Limits

Nonrecurring Costs Recurring Costs *

Low High Low High

A 1 A 2 B 1 B 2

Air Freshener –

Double Phase (aerosol) $43,200 $1,787,600 $0 $0

Multi-purpose

Solvent & Paint

Thinner

tier 1 $50,000 $1,657,700 $0 $0

tier 2 $50,000 $1,694,000 $0 $845,000

Nonrecurring and Recurring Costs +

Low High Average

C 1 = C 2 = C 3 = A 1 + B 1 A 2 + B 2 (C 1 + C 2 )/2

Air Freshener –

Double Phase (aerosol) $43,200 $1,787,600 $915,400

Multi-purpose

Solvent & Paint

Thinner

tier 1 $50,000 $1,657,700 $853,900

tier 2 $50,000 $2,548,000 $1,299,000

TOTAL: $143,200 $5,993,300 $3,068,300

* A cost of $0 may indicate a per unit cost of less than one-half of one cent.

+ See Table VII-1a footnote about the use of unroun ded numbers in calculations.Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 82

4. Cost per Unit

We also evaluated the potential increased cost the consumer would pay if all costs of compliance were passed onto the consumer (not inclu ding retail mark-up). For this estimate, we assumed that all recurring and nonrecu rring costs are assessed only to the number of non-complying units in each category. Ta ble VII-5 displays the result of this analysis.

For this rulemaking, as with others, we assumed pro ducts reformulated to meet the proposed limits will be marketed throughout the Uni ted States by national marketers. From our experience, we know that businesses genera lly formulate and distribute to the entire nation, products complying with California r egulations, rather than incurring the additional cost of setting up a California specific product distribution system. This assumption is valid especially considering the numb er of jurisdictions that have and are continuing to adopt California standards.

Therefore, we assume that the costs of compliance w ill not be assessed only to products sold in California, but will be spread ove r products sold across the country. To do this, our analysis used the California-apportion ed (by population) high and low nonrecurring costs (Table VII-3). Using this alter native approach, we discounted the nonrecurring cost per unit by the California-apport ionment factor ( i.e. , the current ratio of California to U.S. population, or 12.5 percent (CA DOF, 2007)). To illustrate, using the total tier 1 nonrecurring high cost for Multi-purpo se Solvent and Paint Thinner products of $1,657,700 the nonrecurring portion of cost that would be passed onto the consumer is 12.5 percent of this amount, or $207,000. The C alifornia portion of low and high nonrecurring costs are each divided by the number o f non-complying units sold in California per year (see column D of Table VII-1b). The resulting nonrecurring high and low cost per unit is then added to the recurring hi gh and low cost per unit (taken from Table VII-1a) to arrive at the total increase in co st per unit to the consumer.

For Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners, the total cost of reformulating one 9 ounce product is estimated to be quite minimal. The recu rring raw materials costs to

reformulate Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners to meet the proposed limit is projected to be zero. This is because the costs of ingredients of a complying product are actually less than the cost of ingredients of a non-complying product. For the purposes of our cost calculations, in this case, as was done in economic analyses for previous rulemakings, we assume that the ingredient costs are zero. As for the recurring (research and development) while the over all costs are significant, the costs are spread over more than 50 million units, resulti ng in an overall negligible cost per

unit.

As shown in Table VII-5, we estimate the average co st per unit increase to the California consumer to range from no cost increase to about $0.62 for the tier 2 limit for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. Taken together (summing cost for tier 1 and tier 2), the worst case scenario cost in crease would be about $0.75 per unit.Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 83

Because of unpredictable factors such as the highly competitive nature of the consumer products market, it is not possible to accurately p redict the final retail price of products that will comply with the proposed limits when they become effective. To the extent the cost impacts are passed on to consumers, the final retail prices may be lower or higher than suggested by this analysis.

Table VII-5

Estimated Per-Unit Cost Increases from Both Annuali zed Nonrecurring and Annual Recurring Costs

Estimated Noncompliant

Unit Sales Per Day in CA Annualized

Nonrecurring

Low
Cost/Unit Annualized

Nonrecurring High
Cost/Unit Annual

Recurring

Low
Cost/Unit Annual

Recurring High
Cost/Unit

Category A B 1 B 2 C 1 C 2

Air Freshener –

Double Phase (aerosol) 147,300 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Multi-purpose Solvent

& Paint Thinner

tier 1 4,700 $0.00 $0.12 $0.00 $0.00
tier 2 4,700 $0.00 $0.12 $0.00 $0.50

Total

Increase
Low/Unit Total

Increase High/Unit Total

Increase
Mid/Unit

D 1 D 2 D 3

Air Freshener –

Double Phase (aerosol) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Multi-purpose Solvent

& Paint Thinner

tier 1 $0.00 $0.12 $0.06 tier 2 $0.00 $0.62 $0.31

* A cost of $0 may indicate a per unit cost of less than one-half of one cent.

+ See Table VII-1a footnote about the use of unroun ded numbers in calculations.

5. Cost-Effectiveness (CE)

Using the total costs displayed in Table VII-4, we evaluated the anticipated CE of the proposed new limits. Such an evaluation allows us to compare the efficiency of the proposed limits in reducing a pound of VOC relative to other existing regulatory

programs.

The CE of a reduction strategy is generally defined as the ratio of total dollars to be spent to comply with the strategy (as an annual cos t) to the mass reduction of theTechnical Support Document Chapter VII - 84

pollutant(s) to be achieved by complying with that strategy (in annual pounds). The CE is calculated as shown by the following general equ ation:

Cost Effectiveness = Total Cost to Comply

Annual Mass Reduction in VOC

We estimate that, when fully effective, the propose d VOC limits will result in an emission reduction of about 14.7 tons per day, or 10,731,000 pounds per year. In this chapter, we have calculated that the average total cost to c omply with the proposed VOC limits

is three million dollars.

The CE of the proposed amendments related to comply ing with the VOC limits is about $0.29 per pound of VOC reduced, as shown by the fol lowing equation:

$3,068,300 = $0.29 per pound 10,731,000 pounds

Table VII-6 shows a comparison of the CE for the pr oposed limits relative to other recent ARB consumer product regulations and control measures.

Table VII-6 Comparison of Cost-Effectiveness for ARB Consumer P roduct

Regulations/Measures

Regulation/Control Measure Cost-Effectiveness (Dollars per Pound VOC Reduced)

2009 Amendments $0.29

2008 Amendments (ARB, 2008e) $6.23

2006 Amendments (ARB, 2006a) $2.35

2004 Amendments (ARB, 2004b) $2.01 to $2.34

Aerosol Adhesives (ARB, 2000c) $6.00

Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings (ARB, 2007i) $1.12

As shown in Table VII-6, the CE is considerably low er compared to several other recent rulemakings.

C. RETURN ON OWNERS’ EQUITY

Typical California businesses are affected by the p roposed new limits to the extent that the implementation of these requirements would chan ge their profitability. To estimate reduction in profitability, this portion of the eco nomic impacts analysis compares the Return on Owners’ Equity (ROE) for affected busines ses before and after inclusion of the cost to comply with the proposed requirements. The data used in this analysis are obtained from Dun and Bradstreet Industry Norms and Key Business Ratio (D&B,Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 85

2009), the ARB’s 2006 Consumer and Commercial Produ cts Survey (ARB, 2007f), the Survey Update for Paint Thinner and Multi-purpose S olvent products (ARB, 2008f), and the CE analysis described previously in section B.

1. Affected Businesses

Any business which manufactures or markets consumer products subject to the proposed new limits and requirements can be directl y affected by this regulation. Also potentially affected are businesses which supply ra w materials or equipment to manufacturers or marketers, and those that distribu te or sell consumer products in California. The focus of this analysis, however, w ill be on manufacturers, marketers, and distributors that are most affected by the prop osed measures.

The consumer products subject to the proposed measu res are manufactured, marketed, or distributed by a large number of companies world wide. According to our Surveys, there are about 44 companies that market the affect ed products in California. Many of these companies manufacture, market, and distribute a broad range of solvent, adhesive, household, and personal care products. H owever, some companies’

business is limited to solvent manufacture. All to gether, there are 495 non-complying products (based on reported figures). Of the compa nies manufacturing these products,

two small-sized firms are located in California.

These 44 companies can be described by the North Am erican Industry Classification System codes (NAICS): 325612, Polish and Other San itation Good Manufacturing; and 325510, Paint and Coatings Manufacturing.

2. Analysis Approach

This analysis covers two industries with at least t hree affected businesses. The approach used in evaluating the potential economic impact of the proposed measures

on these businesses is as follows:

(1) A typical business from each product category w as selected from the Surveys respondents. (2) A range of compliance costs were estimated for each affected product category. The average cost (see Table VII-4) for e ach category was used in this analysis. (3) Compliance cost to a typical business was then estimated based on a weighted average of all product category costs in t he affected industry. (4) Estimated cost was adjusted for federal and Sta te taxes. (5) The ROE was calculated for each of these busine sses by dividing the net profit by the net worth. The adjusted cost was the n subtracted from net profit data. The results were used to calculate an adjusted ROE. (6) The adjusted ROE was then compared with the ROE before the subtraction of the cost to determine the potential impact on the profitability

of the business.Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 86

An ROE reduction of more than 10 percent in profita bility assuming that all costs are absorbed by the affected company and not passed on to the consumer, is considered to indicate a potential for significant adverse econom ic impacts. This value has been used consistently by the ARB staff to determine impact s everity and is consistent with that used by the U.S. EPA.

3. Assumptions

This analysis uses 2007-2008 Dun and Bradstreet fin ancial data (D&B, 2009) for a nationwide typical business in the Polish and Other Sanitation Good Manufacturing industry (325612 NAICS code) and Paint and Coatings Manufacturing (325510 NAICS code). These data were used to calculate the ROEs before and after the subtraction of the compliance costs for a typical business. The c alculations were based on the following assumptions:

(1) A typical business on a nationwide basis in eac h industry is representative of a typical California business in that industry; (2) All affected businesses were subject to federal and State tax rates of 35 percent and 9.3 percent respectively; and (3) Affected businesses are not able to increase th e prices of their products, nor can they lower their costs of doing business th rough short-term costcutting measures.

Given the limitation of available data, we believe these assumptions are reasonable for most businesses at least in the short run; however, they may not be applicable to all

businesses.

4. Results

Table VII-7 shows the results of our analysis of RO E. The percentage in reduction of profitability ranges from 5.4 percent for Double Ph ase Aerosol Air Fresheners to about 24.2 percent for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Th inner products. The ROE of 24.2 percent combines the ROEs estimated for the ti er 1 and tier 2 limits for Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. The av erage reduction in profitability is about 14.8 percent.Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 87 Table VII-7 Summary of Decline in Return on Owners’ Equity (ROE )

NAICS Company Name Percent Change in ROE

325612 Polish and Other Sanitation Good

Manufacturing

Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener -5.4 325510 Paint and Coatings Manufacturing

Multi-purpose Solvent & Paint Thinner –tier 1 -9.5
Multi-purpose Solvent & Paint Thinner –tier 2 -14.7

Total tier 1 & tier 2 -24.2 Average for both

Industries -14.8

Because we calculated a reduction in ROE of more th an 10 percent for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, we have determi ned that there is a potential for significant impact on profitability. In light of t his, the assessment of ROE requires further explanation.

The results in Table VII-7 show that our analysis o f ROE found that sample businesses in the affected industries, complying with the prop osed limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, declined in profitability by about 5 .4 percent. The ROE for a business affected by the tier 1 limit for Multi-purpose Solv ent and Paint Thinner, declined by about 9.5 percent. These ROE values are not consid ered significant.

Factoring in the tier 2 limit for Multi-purpose Sol vent and Paint Thinner products, the ROE is estimated to decline by up to 24.2 percent ( combining both limits for Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner). However, our a nalysis assumes that all compliance costs will be absorbed by the affected i ndustry. However, it is most likely that affected businesses will be able to pass on at least part of the cost increase to consumers. Since consumers spend only a small port ion of their annual budget on affected products, they are not expected to be sens itive to a small increase in the prices of those products. To the extent that the projecte d costs are passed on to consumers, the impact on business profitability is likely to b e much less than estimated in our projection.

We believe that overall, most affected businesses w ill be able to absorb the costs, or will pass through some of the costs to the consumer , such that there will be no significant adverse impacts on their profitability. However, the proposed amendments may impose economic hardship on some businesses wit h very little or no margin of profitability.Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 88

D. IMPACTS ON CALIFORNIA BUSINESSES, CONSUMERS, AND STATE AND

LOCAL AGENCIES

Section 11346.3 of the Government Code requires Sta te agencies to assess the potential for adverse economic impacts on Californi a business enterprises and individuals when proposing to adopt or amend any ad ministrative regulation. The assessment must include a consideration of the impa ct of the proposed regulation on California jobs; business expansion, elimination or creation; and the ability of California business to compete with businesses in other states

.

1. Potential Impact on California Businesses

Our profitability analysis shows a significant chan ge in the average profitability of affected businesses that manufacture Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, if they absorbed the entire cost of compl iance. We believe that these manufacturers will pass through at least a portion of their compliance costs to maintain profitability. Based on sales of Multi-purpose Sol vent and Paint Thinner products, we expect the average California resident to buy no mo re than one product per year. Therefore, purchase of Multi-purpose Solvent and Pa int Thinner products only accounts for a small portion of the consumer’s annual budget . Thus, consumers are likely less sensitive to the price changes. For this reason, w e believe businesses will be able to pass through compliance costs, and are likely to be able to recover the bulk of the cost

increase from consumers. To the extent that busine sses are able to pass on the increased cost to consumers, the adverse impact of the proposed measures would be less than projected in this analysis. Furthermore, the projected impact will be less if businesses are able to improve their operational ef ficiency, thus reducing their costs.

Nonetheless, the proposed measures may impose econo mic hardship on some businesses with very little or no margin of profita bility. These businesses, if hard pressed, can seek relief under the variance provisi on of the consumer products regulation for extensions to their compliance dates . Such extensions may provide sufficient time to minimize the cost impacts to the se businesses. Additional mitigation may be achieved by taking advantage of the complian ce flexibility offered by the existing Innovative Product Provision (IPP) and the Alternative Control Plan (ACP) Regulation (see Section F of this chapter).

2. Potential Impact on Business Creation, Eliminat ion or Expansion

The proposed amendments would have no noticeable impact on the status of California

businesses. This is because most affected business es are expected to be able to pass

on the bulk of the reformulation cost to consumers in terms of higher prices for their products. However, if either of the two small Cali fornia businesses that reported sales to us in the Survey Update have little or no margin of profitability, they may lack the financial resources to reformulate their products o n a timely basis. Should the proposed measures impose significant hardship on these busin esses, temporary relief in the form of a compliance date extension under the variance p rovision may be warranted.Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 89

On the other hand, the proposed measures may provid e business opportunities for

some California businesses or result in the creatio n of new businesses. California businesses which supply raw materials and equipment or provide consulting services to affected industries may benefit from increased indu stry spending on reformulation.

3. Potential Impact on Business Competitiveness

The proposed measures would have no significant imp act on the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other stat es. Because the proposed measures would apply to all businesses that manufac ture or market certain consumer products regardless of their location, the staff’s proposal should not present any economic disadvantages specific to California businesses.

Nonetheless, the proposed amendments may have an ad verse impact on the competitive position of some small, marginal busine sses in California if these businesses lack resources to develop commercially a cceptable products in a timely manner. As stated above, such impacts can be mitig ated to a degree with a justified compliance extension under the variance provision o f the Consumer Products Regulation, or through additional regulatory flexib ility afforded by the IPP or the ACP Regulation (see Section F).

4. Potential Impact on California Employment

The proposed amendments are not expected to cause a noticeable change in California employment and payroll. As shown in Table VII-8, a ccording to the U.S. Department of Commerce, California employment in the industries a ffected by the proposed amendments was about 4,627 in 2006, or about 7 perc ent of national employment in the affected industries. This represents less than 1 p ercent of manufacturing employment in California. Also, as shown in Table VII-8, thes e employees generated about $211,541 million in payroll, or about 6.3 percent o f national payroll in the affected industries. This also accounts for less than 1 per cent of the total California manufacturing payroll in 2006.

Table VII-8

California Employment and Payroll in Affected Indus tries

NAICS Number of Employees Payroll

California California Share as

Percent of U.S. California

(thousand dollars in 2006) California Share

as Percent of

U.S.

325612 1,159 6.5 49,738 5.7

325510 3,468 7.5 161,803 6.5

Total 4,627 7.2 211,541 6.3

Source: (U.S. Census, 2006)Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 90

5. Impacts on California Consumers

The potential impact of the proposed amendments on consumers depends upon the ability of affected businesses to pass on the cost increases to consumers. For the Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener proposed VOC lim it and proposed tier 1 VOC limit for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner, compet itive market forces may prevent businesses from passing their cost increases on to consumers. Thus, we do not expect a significant change in retail prices. However, fo r the proposed tier 2 VOC limit for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, b usinesses will likely be unable to absorb their costs of doing business. They will li kely pass their cost increases on to

consumers.

Assuming the affected industry will pass on the ent ire compliance costs to consumers in terms of higher prices, we estimate the average pri ce of a product (including typical retail mark-up) would not increase for Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners, and would increase by about $0.75 per unit for Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners. For Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners, while the over all costs to comply with the proposed limit are significant, spreading costs ove r more than 50 million units, results in an overall negligible cost per product.

For Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner product s, apportioning annual sales of the categories to the California population, we estimat ed that residents purchase less than one container of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Th inner per year. We also estimated in Section B of this chapter that the potential cos t increase per unit from compliance with both limits would be about $0.75. Thus, consi dering normal retail mark-up, the consumer’s cost increase to purchase Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner would increase by about $1.50 per gallon.

However, Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner pr oducts are more commonly purchased by contractors. If we apportion all sale s of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner to licensed contractors we estimate purchas es of approximately five gallons per year. Considering normal retail mark-up, the cost increase to licensed contractors purchasing Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products would be about $8 per

year.

The proposed amendments may also affect consumers a dversely if they result in reduced performance attributes of the products. Ho wever, this scenario is unlikely to occur for the following reasons. First, for the pr oposed limits, there are already complying products with a market presence. Thus, t he industry already has the technology to manufacture compliant products that s atisfy consumers. Second, marketers are unlikely to introduce a product which does not meet their consumers’ expectations. This is because such an introduction would be damaging not only to the product sale, but also to the sale of other product s sold under the same brand name (impairing so-called “brand loyalty”). Finally, th e Board has provided flexibility, under the existing consumer products program, to business es whose situations warrant an extension to their compliance dates. For companies that can justify such variances, theTechnical Support Document Chapter VII - 91

additional time may afford more opportunity to expl ore different formulation, cost-cutting, performance-enhancing, or other marketing strategie s which can help make the transition to new complying products nearly transpa rent to consumers.

6. Potential Impacts to California State or Local A gencies

State agencies are required to estimate the cost or savings to any State or local agency

and school district in accordance with instructions adopted by the Department of Finance. The estimate shall include any non-discre tionary cost or savings to local agencies and the cost or savings in federal funding to the State.

We have determined that the proposed limits will no t create costs or savings, as defined in Government Code section 11346.5(a)(6), to any St ate agency or in federal funding to the State, costs or mandate to any local agency or school district whether or not reimbursable by the State pursuant to Part 7 (comme ncing with section 17500), Division 4, title 2 of the Government Code, or othe r non-discretionary savings to local agencies.

E. OTHER POSSIBLE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF REGULATORY C HANGES

In addition to the proposed VOC limits, there are o ther proposed amendments to the Consumer Products Regulation, some of which may hav e a potential economic impact on affected businesses. While we do not expect any significant economic impact from any of the proposals, it is possible that there cou ld be some increased cost to business resulting from proposed changes.

The proposed amendments would require additional la beling for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products would be required to include VOC content information on t heir labels, as well as a sticker or hanging tag if their product is considered “flammab le” or “extremely flammable.” It is likely there will be costs associated with this lab eling requirement. We considered these costs in determining the total nonrecurring costs. The cost estimates for labeling are shown in Appendix E and range from about $1,500 to $7,000.

F. MITIGATION OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS THROUGH ADDITION AL

REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY

If adopted by the Board, the proposed limits will b e incorporated in section 94509 of the Consumer Products Regulation (title 17, California Code of Regulations, sections 94507-94517). To complement the mandatory VOC limits, the existing consumer products program provides a very high degr ee of compliance flexibility, through two voluntary, market-based programs: the IPP and the ACP Regulation. These options could be evaluated to minimize cost i mpacts. The IPP (section 94511) allows qualified manufacturers to sell products tha t have VOC contents greater than the applicable VOC limit, provided they demonstrate tha t such products actually emit less VOCs than representative products that comply with the VOC limit. Using theTechnical Support Document Chapter VII - 92

emissions averaging approach, the ACP is a voluntar y regulation (title 17, CCR, sections 94540-94555) designed to allow multi-produ ct VOC averaging as an alternative means of complying with the VOC limits.

Various manufacturers have formulated technological ly-advanced IPP products that are more concentrated, higher in efficacy, or have some other chemical or physical properties that permit users to release less VOCs w hen using such products. To date, 14 manufacturers have submitted 26 original applica tions and obtained approval for 25 IPP applications involving 23 products. Based o n their participation in the program, it

is reasonable to conclude that manufacturers are us ing this program to provide consumers with products that meet their needs, whil e lowering costs, improving the “market value” of their products, or otherwise main taining profit margins.

The potential benefits of emissions averaging or “b ubbling” for consumer product manufacturers under the ACP regulation have been do cumented by ARB staff (ARB, 1994). In general, emissions averaging under appro ved ACPs allows manufacturers to choose the least cost or other advantageous reformu lation options for its product lines. Rather than directly complying with each and every VOC limit, manufacturers can choose to “over-comply” with some reformulations in order to offset the “undercompliance” of other product lines. The ACP regula tion requires the net resulting emissions from products under such averaging plans to be no greater than the level which would have resulted had all the products unde r the ACP bubble directly complied with the applicable limits. In short, the same emi ssion reductions are achieved while providing a high degree of formulation and marketin g flexibility to manufacturers. To date, five manufacturers have implemented approved ACP averaging programs, reducing VOC emissions by about 8.2 million pounds more than would have occurred under the mandatory VOC limits. We expect that suc h emissions averaging will also benefit manufacturers subject to the proposed limit s.

Overall, most affected businesses will benefit from the IPP and the ACP Regulation. Both programs are completely voluntary and impose n o additional costs to businesses to meet the requirements other than testing and rep orting requirements. Manufacturers who take advantage of these market-based programs p resumably do so because it costs less than direct compliance with the limits o r it provides some other market

benefits.

According to previous analyses, the potential cost differential which might result from competition under the ACP between small and large f irms would not necessarily cause extreme hardship on small firms. However, inclusio n of products subject to the proposed limits in an ACP may affect the level of c ompetition between companies, which could lead to the elimination of some margina l producers for those products. Such competition may also have minor impacts on Cal ifornia employment and payroll. However, the impact is expected to be positive in t he long term. Any potential impacts on the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states are also expected to be minimal.Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 93

REFERENCES

1. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reaso ns, Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation. May, 2008. (ARB, 2008e)

2. Air Resources Board. Paint Thinner and Multi-pu rpose Solvent Survey Update

. November 4, 2008. (ARB, 2008f)

3. Air Resources Board. 2006 Consumer and Commercia l Products Survey (Including Aerosol Coating Products) . July 24, 2007. (ARB, 2007f)

4. Air Resources Board. Technical Support Document for Proposed Amendments to the Suggested Control Measure for Architectural Coa tings. September, 2007. (ARB, 2007i)

5. Air Resources Board. Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation and the Aerosol Coatings Regula tion . September 29, 2006. (ARB, 2006a)

6. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for the Proposed Amendments to the California Aerosol Coating Produc ts, Antiperspirants and Deodorants, and Consumer Products Regulations, Test Method 310, and Airborne Toxic Control Measure for para-Dichloroben zene Solid Air Fresheners

and Toilet/Urinal Care Products . May 7, 2004. (ARB, 2004b)

7. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for the Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regu lation Relating to

Aerosol Adhesives . April 7, 2000. (ARB, 2000c)

8. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for Proposed Amendments to the California Consumer Products Regulation: Midter m Measures I

. June 6, 1997. (ARB, 1997b)

9. Air Resources Board. Proposed Alternative Contro l Plan for Consumer Products

. August, 1994. (ARB, 1994)

10. California Department of Finance. Report: State Adds Almost 470,000 in 2006: 2007 Population Nears 37.7 Million . May 1, 2007. (CA DOF, 2007)

11. California Department of Consumer Affairs, Con tractors State License Board. Telephone Conversation with ARB Staff . April 28, 2009. (CDCA, 2009)

12. D&B Industry and Financial Consulting Services. Industry Norms & Key Business Ratios, Manufacturing – Volume 1. SIC #20 00-2999. Three Year

Edition 2007-2008 . January, 2009. (D&B, 2009)Technical Support Document Chapter VII - 94

13. United States Census Bureau. 2006 County Busi ness Patterns (NAICS)

. March 12, 2006. http://censtats.census.gov/cgi-bin/cbpnaic/cbpdetl. pl (U.S. Census, 2006)Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 95

VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

In this rulemaking, ARB staff is proposing amendmen ts to the Consumer Products Regulation that are designed to reduce volatile org anic compound (VOC) emissions. We have evaluated the environmental impacts of the proposed amendments on atmospheric processes and other media. Overall, we found that the proposed amendments would have beneficial effects by reducin g emissions that contribute to the formation of ground-level ozone. Because the pathw ays for reformulation to comply with the proposed amendments vary, and are only pre dicted, there may be some, but not significant, potential adverse impacts that cou ld occur as a result of adoption of this proposal. Several potential adverse impacts are id entified and discussed in this chapter along with measures to mitigate the potential for a dverse impacts to occur.

We conducted a qualitative health risk assessment t hat concludes that because VOCs are ozone precursors, public health is further prot ected by reducing VOC emissions.

The actual reduction of health risks that would res ult from reducing VOC emissions, if the staff’s proposal were to be adopted, is not qua ntified in this report. However, it has been estimated that each year about 630 fewer peopl e would die prematurely from exposure to ozone if California was to attain the S tate ambient air quality standard for ozone (Ostro et al. , 2006). About 90 percent of California residents live in areas where ozone levels exceed State and federal air quality s tandards. Therefore, reducing VOC emissions from these consumer product categories, b ecause of their role as ozone precursors, will result in incremental improvement of the public’s health – whether it is in terms of fewer incidences of asthma or hospitalizat ions, improvement in lung function, or fewer premature deaths.

Our analysis of the reasonably foreseeable environm ental impacts of the methods of compliance is presented in subsections C through H below. Regarding reasonably foreseeable mitigation measures, the California Env ironmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires an agency to identify and adopt feasible m itigation measures that would minimize any significant adverse environmental impa cts described in the environmental analysis. In addition, Senate Bill 97 (SB 97) requ ires the impact on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to be analyzed as part of the analy sis under CEQA.

We have evaluated how the proposed amendments would impact ground-level ozone concentrations; particulate matter (particularly se condary organic aerosols); climate change; stratospheric ozone depletion; solid waste disposal; water quality; energy use; public safety; agricultural resources; and air toxi c emission exposure.

We also reviewed the South Coast Air Quality Manage ment District’s (SCAQMD) Final

Environmental Assessment for Rule 1143 – Consumer P aint Thinners and Multipurpose Solvents, and used the report as part of ou r evaluation of the impacts of the proposed amendments for Multi-purpose Solvent and P aint Thinner products (SCAQMD, 2009).Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 96

A. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO THE ANALYSIS

CEQA and ARB policy require an analysis to determin e the potential adverse environmental impacts of proposed regulations. Bec ause ARB’s program involving the adoption of regulations has been certified by the S ecretary of Resources (see Public Resources Code section 21080.5), the CEQA environme ntal analysis requirements are

allowed to be included in ARB’s Initial Statement o f Reasons instead of preparing an environmental impact report or negative declaration . In addition, ARB will respond in writing to all significant environmental points rai sed by the public during the public review period or at the Board hearing. These respo nses will be contained in the Final Statement of Reasons for the proposed amendments to the Consumer Products Regulation.

Public Resources Code section 21159 requires that t he environmental impact analysis conducted by ARB include the following: (1) an anal ysis of the reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts of the methods of compliance; (2) an analysis of reasonably foreseeable feasible mitigation measures; and, (3) an analysis of reasonably foreseeable alternative means of compliance with th e regulation. For ease of the reader, the proposed amendments are summarized belo w.

B. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

We are proposing to establish new or lower VOC limi ts for the categories of Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multi-purpose Solvent, and Paint Thinner. These limits would reduce VOC emissions by about 14.7 tons per d ay when fully effective and would partially fulfill the consumer products reduction c ommitment contained in the 2007 Strategy to meet the federal ozone standard. To fu rther reduce the ozone formation potential of emissions from Multi-purpose Solvent a nd Paint Thinner products, the proposal limits the amount of aromatic VOC solvent to 1 percent by weight. The proposal would also exempt eight fluid ounce contai ners of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products from compliance with the VOC limits until December 31, 2013.

Artists’ solvents certified to meet ASTM Internatio nal’s D4236 standard, and that are packaged in containers equal to or less than 32 flu id ounces, would be excluded from compliance with the VOC limits.

Several other regulatory modifications are proposed and necessary to implement the new requirements. These other regulatory proposals include:

• Several new and modified definitions;

• Prohibitions on the use of perchloroethylene, tric hloroethylene, and methylene chloride in Multi-purpose Solvent and Pai nt Thinner products;

• Establishing a Global Warming Potential (GWP) limi t for compounds used in Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multi-purpose S olvent, and Paint Thinner products;

• Specific labeling requirements for Multi-purpose S olvent and Paint Thinner products;Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 97

• A special reporting requirement for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products; and

• Other clarifying language.

Amendments to ARB Method 310 are also proposed. Th e proposed changes are clarifications to analytical methods already being used and/or are needed to enhance the enforceability of lower VOC limits and the arom atic compound content limit.

C. SUMMARY OF IMPACTS ON ATMOSPHERIC PROCESSES

In this section, we evaluate the impacts of the pro posed amendments on atmospheric processes. The evaluation includes our assessment as to whether the proposed amendments would have positive, negative, or no imp acts on these atmospheric

processes.

1. Impacts of Proposed Amendments on Ground-level O zone Concentrations

Enhanced ground-level ozone formation involves the interaction between VOCs and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) in the presence of sunligh t. The rate of ozone generation is related closely to both the amount and reactivity o f VOC emissions as well as the amount of NOx emissions available in the atmosphere (Seinfeld and Pandis,1998). Ozone is a colorless gas and the chief component of urban smog. It is one of the State’s more persistent air quality problems. Nine ty-three percent of Californians, or 36 million people, live in areas designated as non- attainment for the federal 8-hour

ozone standard. It has been well documented that o zone adversely affects respiratory

function of humans and animals. Research has shown that, when inhaled, ozone can cause respiratory problems, aggravate asthma, impai r the immune system, and cause increased risk of premature death.

Not only does ozone adversely affect human and anim al health, but it also affects vegetation throughout most of California resulting in reduced yield and quality in agricultural crops, disfiguration or unsatisfactory growth in ornamental vegetation, and damage to native plants. More information on the i mpacts of exposure to ozone can be found in Chapter IV, Emissions.

a. Proposed VOC Standards

The proposed amendments would reduce VOC emissions by about 14.7 tons per day. Therefore, we expect an overall positive impact on the environment because VOCs are precursors to the formation of ground level ozone. Specific to consumer products, ARB committed to reducing consumer product VOC emission s statewide by 30 to 40 tons per day by 2014. The amendments approved at the June 2 6, 2008, hearing will provide about 4.5 tons per day toward meeting the commitmen t. Upon approval of this proposal, we will have achieved 19.2 tons per day r eduction from consumer products toward the 30 to 40 commitment. In addition, staff is currently evaluating furtherTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 98

reductions from four cleaning products categories w hich we plan to take to the Board in 2010. We expect to achieve 5 to 10 tons per day re ductions from the cleaning products categories. The categories proposed for regulation and the corresponding VOC

emission reductions are shown in Table VIII-1.

Table VIII-1 Proposed VOC Limits, Emissions, and Reductions at E ffective Date

Product Category Product

Form Proposed

VOC Limit
(percent by weight) 2009 VOC

Emissions*
(tons per day) Effective

Date Reductions

Upon

Effective

Date
(tons per day)

Double Phase Aerosol

Air Freshener Aerosol 20 10.2 12/31/2012 2.0

tier 1: 30 12.5 + 12/31/2010 8.4 + Multi-purpose Solvent and

Paint Thinner Nonaerosol tier 2: 3 --- 12/31/2013 3.9 +

Total Emissions 2009 22.6 tons per day

Total VOC Reductions by end of 2013 14.7 tons per day

* Survey emissions adjusted for market coverage, g rown to the 2009 calendar year, and rounded.

+ Does not include emissions or reductions in the S outh Coast Air Basin.

As indicated in Table VIII-1, we are proposing to r educe the VOC content of Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products to 20 percent by weight, effective December 31, 2012. The proposed limit would reduce VOC emissions by about two tons per day at the effective date.

We are also proposing two tiers of VOC limits for M ulti-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. As noted in the table above, emi ssions and emission reductions are adjusted to account for VOC reductions already clai med via implementation of SCAQMD’s Rule 1143. Thus, the VOC limits and effec tive dates proposed by ARB staff in this rulemaking would only apply to products sol d in areas of California outside the

South Coast Air Basin.

Discussion Related to First Tier Standard for Multi -purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner:

As proposed, the first tier limit for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products would reduce VOC content to 30 percent by weight, e ffective December 31, 2010. The

second tier limit would further reduce the VOC cont ent of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products to 3 percent by weight, effe ctive December 31, 2013. In combination, these limits would reduce the mass of VOC emissions by about 12.7 tons per day (note that reductions from the first tier l imit are grown from the effective date to December 31, 2013). In developing the proposal for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, we analyzed the tons of ozone tha t, potentially, would not be formed as a result of reducing VOC emissions by mass limit ations. This analysis found that theTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 99

first tier limit would likely provide a large reduc tion in the amount of ground level ozone formed from emissions of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products.

However, the analysis also revealed that, depending on the reformulation option chosen, the expected ozone reduction benefit of the first tier limit could be eroded. Additionally, the analysis found, that reformulatio ns to meet the second tier limit, could result in increasing the ozone forming potential of products, depending on the compliance path chosen. A further discussion of th is analysis, and proposals to ensure that the maximum air quality benefit from the limit s is achieved, follows. The data used in this analysis are apportioned to account for ado ption of SCAQMD’s Rule 1143. VOC

emissions and sales data are from the 2008 Paint Th inner and Multi-purpose Solvent Survey Update (Survey Update). Reactivity data are derived by using the July 7, 2004, maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) values contain ed in title 17, California Code of Regulations, sections 94700-94701.

In 2009, sales of 15.5 tons per day of Multi-purpos e Solvent and Paint Thinner products result in about 12.5 tons per day VOC emissions. A bsent regulation, by 2013 sales and VOC emissions would grow to 16.4 and 13.1 tons per day, respectively. Examples of reported products include products named Paint Thin ner; Lacquer Thinners; Mineral Spirits; Acetone; Denatured Alcohol; Methyl Ethyl K etone (MEK); Xylene; Toluene; and Paint Clean-up or surface preparation products. Al though the Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner categories are defined separately in the regulation, it was apparent in our evaluation of reported Survey Update products t hat these products are used interchangeably. Thus, to ensure that all reductio ns are achieved in the shortest timeframe, staff is proposing limits for both categ ories with the same effective dates. While we believe that Multi-purpose Solvent product s could potentially comply with the second tier, 3 percent by weight VOC limit in a sho rter timeframe, because of the interchangeability of these products, we expect mos t manufacturers would simply relabel their Multi-purpose Solvent products as “Pain t Thinner,” resulting in less reductions than anticipated. Harmonizing the effective dates maximizes the reductions achievable by 2010, using existing technologies. Providing un til December 31, 2013, for implementation of the second tier, 3 percent by wei ght VOC limit, allows time for development of additional reformulation technologie s.

In the combined category of Multi-purpose Solvent a nd Paint Thinner products, the VOC content ranges from 0-100 percent, with a sales-wei ghted average VOC content of 80 percent. Products reported as containing no VOC s are comprised of solvents that

have been excluded from the definition of VOC due t o their low propensity to react to form ozone, or are formulated with low vapor pressu re (LVP) VOC solvents. The salesweighted average reactivity of the VOCs in the repo rted products is about 1.9 grams of ozone per gram of VOC (g O 3 /g VOC). This reactivity value means that, on aver age, each gram of VOC emitted from these products will r eact in the atmosphere to form almost two grams of ozone. Therefore, the VOC emis sions are estimated to react to lead to formation of about 24 tons per day of ozone . When considering the reactivity of the product (rather than just the reactivity of the VOCs), the product-weighted maximumTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 100

incremental reactivity (PWMIR) is about 1.5 grams o f ozone per gram of product (g O 3 /g product). The reported PWMIRs range from < 0.1 – 7 .5 g O 3 /g product.

As shown in Table VIII-1, once fully effective, the proposed VOC limits for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products would reduce VOC emissions by about 12.7 tons per day, with the most reductions, 8.4 tons per day , achieved by the first tier, 30 percent by weight limit. Not withstanding the above, a num ber of factors, including ambient pollution levels and meteorology, would affect the actual ozone reduction that would be achieved. If we use the sales-weighted average rea ctivity of the VOCs (1.9 g O 3 /g VOC), we predict the 8.4 tons of VOC emission reduc tions from the first tier limit would reduce the formation of ozone by about 16 tons per day. However, the wide range of reported PWMIRs also indicates that reformulation o ptions are available that would significantly erode—if not negate—the predicted ben efit of reduced formation of ozone.

Therefore, we are proposing to limit the use of hig hly reactive VOC aromatic compounds (i.e., xylenes and toluene) to no more th an 1 percent by weight in Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, effecti ve December 31, 2010. This provision would not only ensure that the predicted reduction in ozone generation would be preserved, but would increase the ozone reductio n benefits of the proposal. By way of example, in combination, the two tons per day re ported emissions of xylenes and toluene (MIR values of 7.37 and 3.97 g O 3 /g VOC, respectively) react leading to formation of over ten tons per day of ozone. Thus, about 16 percent of emissions represent about 43 percent of the ozone forming pot ential of the category. For this example, we assumed that as products reformulate, t he species profile remains the same, but the relative amounts are reduced. In oth er words, the relative proportion of VOCs remains as they were reported in the Survey Up date, but the mass of each VOC is reduced by 70 percent to meet the 30 percent by weight limit. Using this approach, we assume that the emissions of xylenes and toluene would be reduced to about 0.6 tons per day, with a resulting ozone forming potent ial of about three tons per day. If the 0.6 tons per day were to be replaced with an odorle ss mineral spirit product (MIR value = 0.91 g O 3 /g VOC), the ozone forming potential would be reduc ed to about 0.5 tons per day, resulting in additional ozone reduction benefi ts.

The reader is reminded that the analysis only consi dered reported xylenes and toluene emissions. Other aromatic compounds are contained as fractions of various hydrocarbon solvents but are not speciated. Thus, the proposal would provide an additional air quality benefit than we are able to estimate because these aromatic constituents would be limited as well. The propose d limitation on the use of VOC aromatic compounds is unique to the State regulatio n, and is not required by SCAQMD Rule 1143. Therefore, this provision would apply s tatewide and result in an additional
ozone reduction benefit in the SCAQMD.

In another scenario, if we further assume that the sales of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products remain about 16 tons of prod uct per day and the PWMIR was about 0.35 g O 3 /g product (similar to a 30 percent by weight VOC h ydrocarbon solventTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 101

emulsion product), we would expect about 6 tons per day of ozone to be generated from complying 30 percent by weight products. If all pr oducts were to reformulate to a 30 percent xylenes product with a PWMIR of about 2. 0 g O 3 /g product, the predicted ozone formation would be about 32 tons per day, a d ifference of about 26 tons per day. Assuming a similar scenario based on toluene (PWMIR ~ 1.2), the reformulated products would result in ozone generation of about 19 tons per day, over three times more than the ozone generated from the lower reacti ve emulsion product.

These scenarios do overstate what would likely occu r without the proposed limitation on aromatic content. However, we note that there are currently products in commerce with

similar formulations to those described here. This analysis is also oversimplified because of a variety of factors including the produ cts reported in the Survey Update; the distribution of emissions; meteorology; and ambient pollution concentrations that affect ozone generation; but serves as an example of why t he provision to limit use of highly reactive VOC aromatics in reformulated products is appropriate. Together, these provisions would maximize the air quality benefit o f the first tier limit, while preserving a variety of feasible reformulation pathways.

Discussion Related to Second Tier Standard for Mult i-purpose Solvent and Paint

Thinner:

The ozone reduction benefit from the proposed 30 pe rcent by weight VOC and 1 percent by weight VOC aromatic content limits is clear. However, depending on reformulation options chosen to meet the proposed 3 percent by weight VOC limit, an increase in ozone generation could occur. Products formulated to meet the 3 percent by weight VOC limit, utilizing low reactive exempt VOC solvents could be more reactive than some products formulated at the 30 percent by weight VOC limit. This means potentially more ozone would be generated by the co mplying 3 percent by weight VOC products. Because we can only postulate the reform ulations and reactivities of Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinners products develop ed to comply with the 30 percent by weight limit, quantifying the potential ozone di sbenefit from implementing the 3 percent by weight VOC limit is not possible. We can however, provide some examples of when ozone disbenefits would occur from reformulations.

Based on the Survey Update, the weighted reactivity of products complying with the 3 percent by weight limit ranges from 0–0.83 g O 3 /g product. The sales-weighted average reactivity of a 0.38 g O 3 /g product is very close to the reactivity of a pur ely acetone product (0.43 g O 3 /g product). We compared the weighted reactivity t o some products already in compliance, or near compliance, with the 30 percent by weight limit (products with PWMIR less than 0.83) and discovered that there are at least three technologies that, at a mass limit of 30 percent, w ould have PWMIRs below those of complying 3 percent by weight products. This demon strates that reducing VOC content from 30 to 3 percent by weight may not always resul t in an air quality benefit.

Based on our understanding of the existing market f or Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, including products recently intro duced into the market, we believe theTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 102

most likely reformulation path to meet the 30 perce nt by weight limit would include hydrocarbon solvent emulsion products. In the case of the hydrocarbon solvent emulsion products, we estimate that these products’ PWMIRs would be about 0.3-0.4 g O 3 /g product, which is lower than some complying 3 pe rcent by weight products. It is unlikely that products based on th is emulsion technology could reformulate to meet a 3 percent by weight limit. C onsequently, these products’ sales would be replaced, most likely, by the VOC-exempt, but slightly higher reactive solvent, acetone. In this case, the 3 percent by weight lim it would either provide no additional air quality improvement, or could result in a slight di sbenefit.

However, if products reformulated to meet the 30 pe rcent by weight limit by blending 30 percent MEK with 70 percent acetone, the weighte d reactivity would be about 0.7 g O 3 /g product. In this scenario, a further ozone bene fit would be achieved by implementing the 3 percent by weight limit, if thes e products’ sales were to be replaced with a purely acetone product.

We are also aware of low VOC/exempt solvent product s under development. Examples of these include soy methyl ester-based products. While likely to comply with the proposed 3 percent by weight limit, the reactivity of these products is unknown at this

time.

While the 3 percent by weight limit is technologica lly feasible, based on complying products already being sold, and the timeframe prop osed for compliance, this analysis demonstrates that to fully assess the impact of the 3 percent by weight limit requires firm knowledge of pathways chosen to reformulate to meet the 30 percent by weight limit. Absent this information, we can only postul ate that some reformulations will result in further air quality improvement, while others ma y not.

Additionally, the 3 percent by weight limit could l ead to an increase in sales of extremely flammable products, such as acetone. This type of product named “Paint Thinner” is unlike what the household consumer may be used to. Without enough lead time for manufacturers, we are concerned that acetone produc ts will be the most likely of a limited number of known pathways to compliance. To allow ample time for development of less flammable, potentially more beneficial in t erms of ozone reduction, and/or less costly alternatives, we are proposing an effective date for the 3 percent by weight limit of December 31, 2013.

As just mentioned, to fully evaluate the air qualit y impact of implementing the 3 percent by weight limit, and flammability of likely reformu lations, would require accurate data on products reformulated to comply with the proposed 3 0 percent by weight VOC limit and the 1 percent by weight VOC aromatic compound limit . Thus, in new subsection 94513(g), we are proposing that manufacturers submi t to ARB data for reformulated products sold in calendar year 2011 by June 30, 201 2. Data required include product formulation, sales, and VOC and reactivity content. Manufacturers must also provide written updates on the research and development eff orts undertaken to achieve the 3 percent by weight VOC limit.Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 103

Based on data from the 2012 reporting requirement, we will reassess the feasibility of the proposed 3 percent by weight VOC limit to ensur e that further air quality benefits will be achieved. Depending on the outcome of this revi ew, we may modify the requirements for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Th inner products. This may include consideration of a reactivity-based strategy rather than requiring further reductions in

the mass of VOCs.

b. Proposed New or Modified Definitions and Clarify ing Language

We are proposing a new definition for “Artist’s Sol vent/Thinner,” and proposing to exclude products meeting this definition from compl iance with the VOC limits for Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner. This proposal w ould result in forgoing about an additional 200 pounds per day VOC reduction. We be lieve the provision is necessary, however, because Artist’s Solvent/Thinner products are designed to be used with specialty artist’s, solvent-borne paints and their formulations are required to be reviewed by a toxicologist to meet specific ASTM standards.

We expect no other impact on ground level ozone con centrations from the proposed new and modified definitions and clarifying languag e. These language modification proposals are necessary to clarify regulatory provi sions, or implement the proposed

VOC limits.

c. Proposed Toxics Prohibition

We are proposing a prohibition on the use of perchl oroethylene, trichloroethylene, and methylene chloride in Multi-purpose Solvent and Pai nt Thinner products. No products were reported that currently use these chlorinated Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC). Methylene chloride and perchloroethylene are exempt VOC solvents, while trichloroethylene is a VOC. Thus, the prohibition would remove potential exempt VOC reformulation options for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. Without this proposed prohibition, there would be a potenti al that the proposed VOC limits could result in some additional, but small, reduction in the formation of ozone. This is because methylene chloride and perchloroethylene ar e both considerably less reactive than other exempt VOC solvents such as acetone. Fo rmulating with trichloroethylene would not be likely because it is a VOC, and its us e would be restricted by the proposed VOC limits. However, we believe that preventing ex posure to these TAC solvents that are potential human carcinogens outweighs the small additional ozone benefit that

would be achieved.

d. Proposed Global Warming Potential Limits

The proposed global warming potential (GWP) limit o f 150 for compounds used in Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multi-purpose S olvent and Paint Thinner products is expected to have a negligible, if any, impact on ground level ozone concentrations.Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 104

As for Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products, no use of the exempt VOC propellants hydrofluorocarbon-152a (HFC-152a) and h ydrofluorocarbon-134a (HFC134a) were reported. However, use of these propell ants is a potential reformulation option to meet the proposed 20 percent by weight VO C limit. The proposed GWP limit of 150 would allow use of HFC-152a, with a GWP of 1 40, but would preclude use of the propellant HFC-134a, which has a GWP of 1,300. The GWP values are 100 year values taken from the Second Assessment Report cont ained within the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (IPCC, 2007). While the proposal allows use of HFC-152a, we do not expect it to be used extensively, if at all. In determining a feasible limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products we considered the impacts of eac h potential VOC limit on climate change. To balance reductions in ground level ozon e without increasing GHG emissions, we proposed a VOC limit that is feasible without use of these propellants. This balance means that we are potentially forgoing additional VOC reductions.

In the categories of Multi-purpose Solvent and Pain t Thinner, no use of compounds with high GWPs was reported in the Survey Update. There fore, we believe that chemical compounds that have a GWP greater than 150 are not critical to the formulation of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. We would expect a negligible, if any, additional ozone reduction benefit if compounds wit h higher GWPs could be used. The main reformulation options such as use of water, od orless mineral spirits, and VOC exempt compounds, including acetone, reported in th e Survey Update, have GWP values that are below 150 or are not listed by the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC (IPCC, 2007).

e. Proposed Changes to Method 310

The proposed changes to Method 310 are clarificatio ns to analytical methods already being used and/or that are needed to enhance the en forceability of the lower VOC limits. These clarifications are expected to have no impact on ground level ozone

concentrations.

2. Impacts of Proposed Amendments on Particulate Ma tter (Secondary Organic Aerosols)

Fine particulate matter (PM) is prevalent in the ur ban atmosphere (see, for example,

Pandis et al., 1992), and ambient PM, especially those with diamet ers less than two and a half micrometers (PM 2.5 ), is known to have negative impacts on human healt h (Schwartz et al. ,1996; Moolgavkar and Luebeck, 1996). Like ozone, PM can be formed via atmospheric oxidation of organic compounds (Fin layson-Pitts and Pitts, 2000). Significant advances have been made in the theoreti cal and the experimental studies of the formation of secondary organic aerosols (SOA) ( Pankow, 1994a; Pankow, 1994b;
Odum et al. , 1996; Seinfeld and Pandis,1998; Harner and Bidlem an, 1998; Kleindienst,

et al. , 1999; Yu et al. , 1999). In addition, modeling techniques to deter mine the amount

of ozone as well as the amount of aerosol formed fr om a VOC have been established (Bowman et al. , 1994), and the concept similar to maximum increme ntal reactivity isTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 105

being applied to quantitatively assess the aerosol formation potential of a VOC ( i.e. incremental aerosol reactivity) (Griffin et al. , 1999).

Based on the results of these studies, we now know that there is a mechanistic linkage between the ozone formation and SOA formation poten tials of a VOC. Because of this relationship, the proposed amendments may also affe ct the SOA formation potential of the products proposed for regulation. The analysis of the impact on SOA formation resulting from implementing the proposed VOC limits and other amendments is detailed

below.

Although most organic compounds contribute to ozone formation, SOA is usually formed from photooxidation of organic compounds wit h carbon numbers equal to six or more (Seinfeld and Pandis, 1998). It has also been shown that aromatic compounds are more likely to participate in the formation of SOA than are alkanes (Grosjean, 1992;

Pandis et al., 1992). In other words, only chemicals that react f ast enough in the atmosphere will generate sufficient amounts of low volatility products for forming aerosols. In general terms, the potential to form SOA among commonly used classes of VOCs used in consumer products could be described b y the following order, with the lower molecular weight alkanes and ketones being le ast likely:

Least Likely Lower molecular weight alkanes and ke tones (6 carbons or

less) Higher molecular weight alkanes Higher molecular weight aromatics (polysubstituted benzenes) More Likely Lower molecular weight aromatics (C6 - C8 compounds)

a. Proposed VOC Standards

The analysis of the potential impact on PM formatio n from the proposed VOC limits assumes that to meet the proposed limits will requi re replacing 14.7 tons per day of VOCs with14.7 tons per day of VOC exempt ingredient s. To meet the proposed VOC limits, manufacturers generally have four reformula tion options: use of exempt VOCs, such as acetone, para-chloro-benzotrifluoride (PCBT F), or methyl acetate; use of LVPVOC solvents; use of water; or use of exempt VOC pr opellants. Substitution for VOCs with water, or VOC exempt propellants would likely result in a small reduction in SOA formation. Two of the more likely exempt VOC solve nts to be used to comply, acetone, and methyl acetate, both having three carbon atoms, have little potential to contribute to SOA formation. Indeed, it has been predicted that there would be no SOA yield from acetone (Pandis et al., 1992). Hence, use of these compounds could also re sult in a reduction in SOA. Use of PCBTF, although a heavy m olecule that contains seven carbon atoms, is not likely a strong PM precursor d ue to its low reactivity. Therefore, use of PCBTF should not result in increasing the fo rmation of SOA.

The proposal to limit the VOC aromatic compound con tent of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products to 1 percent by weight may p rovide a small reduction in SOA formation. This is because aromatic compounds, suc h as xylenes and toluene, areTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 106

known to have higher SOA potentials than other comm only used VOCs. However,

substitution of LVP-VOC solvents for VOCs could res ult in a slight SOA increase (Chan

et.al. , 2009). Biogenic hydrocarbons, such as isoprene, emitted from vegetation are known to be an important source of SOA (Ng et al., 2008). Based on this study, it is

reasonable to assume that some use of some bio-base d solvents useful in reformulations, such as soy methyl esters, may lead to increasing SOA formation.

Because we cannot predict how manufacturers will ch oose to reformulate, we cannot fully evaluate the potential for an impact on SOA f ormation. However, it is likely to be only a slight potential for increase, if any, due t o the variety of reformulation options available. At any rate, it would not be a signific ant adverse impact. Additionally, any reformulations that result in increasing SOA would likely be offset by reformulations which have a lower propensity to form SOA. We will continue to monitor implementation of the regulation and reassess the i mpacts as more data become

available.

b. Proposed New or Modified Definitions and Clarify ing Language

We expect no impact on SOA formation from the propo sed new and modified definitions and clarifying language. These language modificati on proposals are necessary to clarify regulatory provisions, or implement the new VOC limits.

c. Proposed Toxics Prohibition

The proposal to prohibit use of perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene, and methylene chloride in Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products should have negligible or no impact on SOA formation. No products were repor ted in the Survey Update that use these chlorinated TAC solvents. Methylene chloride and perchloroethylene are exempt VOC solvents, while trichloroethylene is a VOC. Th ese compounds are not expected to be potent participants in SOA formation because the y are relatively small molecules. By precluding use of these solvents as a reformulat ion option, we would potentially forgo some additional small reduction in the produc tion of SOA. For example, if these solvents, rather than LVP-VOC or bio-based solvents were to be used, the SOA formation potential of reformulated Multi-purpose S olvent and Paint Thinner products could be slightly lower. However, preventing the p ublic’s exposure to these TAC solvents that are potential human carcinogens outwe ighs, we believe, the uncertain small potential for a reduction in SOA.

d. Proposed Global Warming Potential Limits

The proposed GWP limit of 150 for compounds used in the reformulation of Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multi-purpose Solvent, and Paint Thinner products is expected to have negligible or no impact on PM or S OA formation. We do not believe that compounds with GWP values above 150 could be s ubstituted in such a way to significantly change the amount of SOA formed from these categories.Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 107 e. Proposed Changes to Method 310

The proposed changes to Method 310 are clarificatio ns to analytical methods already being used and/or are needed to enhance the enforce ability of the lower VOC limits. Such changes are not expected to have an impact on SOA formation.

3. Impacts of Proposed Amendments on Climate Change

Climate change, or global warming, is the process w hereby emissions of anthropogenic pollutants, together with other naturally-occurring gases, absorb infrared radiation in the atmosphere, leading to increases in the overall ave rage global temperature. While carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is the largest contributor to radiative forcing l eading to warming, methane, halocarbons, nitrous oxide (N 2 O), and other species also contribute to climate change.

Gases in the atmosphere can contribute to the green house effect both directly and indirectly. Direct effects occur when the gas itse lf is a GHG. While there is relative agreement on how to account for these direct effect s of GHG emissions, accounting for indirect effects is more problematic. Indirect rad iative forcing occurs when chemical transformations of the original gas produce other G HGs, when a gas influences the atmospheric lifetimes of methane, and/or when a gas affects atmospheric processes that alter the radiative balance of the earth (e.g. , affect cloud formation).

As mentioned earlier, the GWP of a compound may ref lect a direct effect as well as an indirect effect on global warming. The direct effe ct is the warming due to the absorption of radiation by molecules of the compound in questi on. Compounds with direct effects include VOCs, CO 2 , HFCs, hydrofluoroethers (HFE), and hydrochloroflu orocarbons (HCFC). Even though VOCs have direct effects, they are considered GHGs primarily because of their role in creating ozone and in prol onging the life of methane in the atmosphere, although the effect varies depending on local air quality.

The indirect effect is warming due to the impact th at the presence of the compound has on the concentration of other GHGs. For example, VOCs contribute indirectly to global warming, in-so-far as they react chemically in the atmosphere in ways that increase GHG concentrations, most notably, concentrations of ozone and methane. The indirect forcing effects of VOCs is, however, still poorly q uantified and requires the use of global three-dimensional chemical transport models.

a. Proposed VOC Standards

As just described, VOCs are considered GHGs because of their role in the creation of ozone. However, because the VOC limits will reduce the total amount of VOCs, and thereby ground-level ozone concentrations, the prop osed VOC limits should have a slightly beneficial impact on climate change.Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 108

For Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products, we are aware that use of the VOC exempt propellants, HFC-152a or HFC-134a, is a comp liance option for these products. Because these propellants are viable reformulation pathways, a lower VOC limit could have been set to achieve a larger VOC reduction. H owever, HFC-152a and HFC-134a have GWPs of 140 and 1,300, respectively (IPCC, 200 7). Therefore, to minimize climate change impacts, a VOC limit was proposed wh ich we believe to be technologically feasible without the use of compoun ds with high GWPs, such as HFC134a. By considering climate change impacts, we ar e forgoing some additional VOC

reductions.

The proposed VOC limits for Multi-purpose Solvent a nd Paint Thinner products are achievable without use of compounds with high GWPs. We note that no products were reported to contain high GWP compounds in the Surve y Update. Therefore, chemical compounds that have high GWPs are not critical to t he formulation of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. We are aware o f several HFC and HCFC solvents, with relatively high GWP values, that may have limi ted use in Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. However, most of these sol vents are considered VOCs in California, and/or are stratospheric ozone depletin g compounds. Because of these designations, the use of these compounds with high GWP values is limited with the proposed VOC limits. Thus, they are not expected t o be reformulation options. The ingredients used in predicted reformulation pathway s have GWP values below 150 or

have no GWP value listed in the Fourth Assessment R eport of the IPCC (IPCC, 2007). Therefore, the implementation of the proposed VOC l imits for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products is not expected to impact cl imate change emissions.

b. Proposed New or Modified Definitions and Clarify ing Language

We expect no impact on climate change resulting fro m the proposed new and modified definitions and clarifying language. These languag e modification proposals are necessary to clarify regulatory provisions, or impl ement the new VOC limits.

c. Proposed Toxics Prohibition

The proposal to prohibit the use of perchloroethyle ne, trichloroethylene, and methylene chloride in Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products should have no impact on climate change. No use of these compounds was repo rted in the Survey Update. However, the proposed prohibition would prevent som e potential reformulation pathways, particularly the option to use methylene chloride and perchloroethylene, which are exempt VOCs. The GWP value for methylene chloride is low and no value for perchloroethylene is listed in the Fourth Asses sment Report of the IPCC (IPCC, 2007), so no additional benefit to minimizing clima te change impacts would be expected in the absence of this proposal. As stated above, the proposed prohibition is not expected to increase GHG emissions because the pred icted reformulation pathways rely on use of compounds that are not significant c ontributors to global warming.Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 109 d. Proposed Global Warming Potential Limits

In accordance with Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the pr oposed GWP limit of 150 for compounds used in Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshene r, Multi-purpose Solvent, and Paint Thinner products is designed to minimize the climate change impacts of the emissions from products in these categories. There fore, we expect the limit to have beneficial impacts on climate change by preventing additional GHG emissions.

For Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products, tw o exempt VOC propellants are reformulation options: HFC-152a and HFC-134a. HFC- 152a and HFC-134a have GWPs of 140 and 1,300, respectively (IPCC, 2007). Therefore, the GWP limit of 150

would allow use of HFC-152a but not HFC-134a. Whil e HFC-152a is a viable reformulation option, we do not believe it would be used for the following reasons. First, we believe the more likely path to comply with the proposed VOC limit is to make modifications or adjustments of the valve and spray nozzle to reduce the amount of propellant needed to expel the product. We are als o aware of manufacturers with internal environmental polices that preclude the us e of HFCs. The comparatively high

cost of HFC-152a also makes its use a less desirabl e alternative. We also note that to minimize use of HFC-152a, the VOC limit is proposed at a level which we believe to be technologically feasible without the use of compoun ds with high GWPs. Nevertheless, the proposal would allow for use of the propellant HFC-152a. If manufacturers choose

to use HFC-152a in their reformulated Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products, there is potential for very slight increases in GHG emissions.

As for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner prod ucts, no products that contain compounds with high GWP values were reported in the Survey Update. Therefore, chemical compounds that have a GWP greater than 150 are not critical to the formulation of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thin ner products. We are aware of several HFC and HCFC solvents, with relatively high GWP values, that may have limited use in Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thin ner products. Many of these solvents are considered VOCs in California, and/or are stratospheric ozone depleting compounds. Because of these designations, the use of these compounds with high GWPs is already limited by the proposed VOC limits or prohibitions already existing on use of stratospheric ozone depleting compounds in t he Consumer Products Regulation, section 94509(e). The GWP limit of 150 should furt her ensure that global warming emissions from use of Multi-purpose Solvent and Pai nt Thinner products do not increase. We also note that the ingredients used i n predicted reformulation pathways

have GWP values below 150 or have no GWP value list ed in the listed in the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC (IPCC, 2007).

Another aspect to consider with respect to the prop osed GWP limit for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, is flammability . Although unlikely, as mentioned above, several HFC and HCFC solvents with high GWP values could be blended into reformulated products. Some of these solvents are non-flammable, therefore, the proposed GWP limit would preclude an option to redu ce flammability. However, asTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 110

stated above, the use of most of these compounds is already prohibited, or limited, because of their status as VOCs or stratospheric oz one depleting compounds.

e. Proposed Changes to Method 310

The proposed changes to Method 310 are clarificatio ns to analytical methods already being used and/or are needed to enhance the enforce ability of the lower VOC limits. Such changes are expected to have no impact on clim ate change.

4. Impacts of Proposed Amendments on Stratospheric Ozone Depletion

The stratospheric ozone layer shields the earth fro m harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Depletion of the earth’s ozone layer allows a highe r penetration of UV radiation to the earth's surface. This increase in UV radiation pen etration leads to a greater incidence of skin cancer, cataracts, and impaired immune syst ems. Reduced crop yields and diminished ocean productivity are also expected. B ecause the chemical reactions which form ground-level ozone are driven by UV radi ation, it is conceivable that a reduction in stratospheric ozone may also result in an increase in the formation of photochemical smog because of the increased levels of UV radiation on the earth’s surface (ARB, 2000b). The chemicals most implicate d as causing stratospheric ozone depletion are chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), HCFCs, an d other halons (U.S. EPA, 2003). Specifically, the chlorine or bromine atoms release d by photolysis of the compounds react in chain reactions leading to the catalytic d estruction of ozone (Finlayson-Pitts and Pitts, 2000).

Solar irradiation in the stratosphere contains suff icient UV light to break down CFCs and HCFCs to yield chlorine atoms that convert ozone to molecular oxygen. However, this UV light is not strong enough to break down HFCs an d HFEs to yield fluorine atoms. In addition, the molecular structure of HFCs and HFEs includes hydrogen atoms, which renders them susceptible to attack by hydroxyl radi cals in the troposphere. Therefore, these chemicals have a relatively short atmospheric lifetime which does not allow any appreciable amounts to penetrate into the stratosph ere (ARB, 2008b).

To address stratospheric ozone depletion, the Montr eal protocol was enacted in 1989, to phase out a number of CFCs, HCFCs, and halons. As a signatory of this protocol, the United States, in the Federal Clean Air Act of 1990, established timetables for ceasing production (see Title 6, Clean Air Act, sec tion 602). In general, the protocol establishes dates by which certain compounds can no longer be manufactured; however, existing stocks can continue to be used in some applications until exhausted.

a. Proposed VOC Standards

Reducing VOC emissions and reformulating products w ith HFCs with low GWP values will have negligible or no impact on stratospheric ozone depletion. As products reformulate to meet the proposed VOC limits, provis ions in the Consumer Products Regulation (see section 94509(e)) already prohibit the use of various stratosphericTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 111

ozone depleting compounds. This provision ensures there will be no increased use of stratospheric ozone depleting compounds. We also n ote that predicted reformulation options such as LVP-VOCs and exempt VOCs, lack chlo rine. Therefore, reformulating with these compounds is not expected to increase th e rate of stratospheric ozone depletion. PCBTF, an exempt VOC that is a viable r eformulation option, is a chlorinated compound. It is listed under the Significant New A lternatives Program (SNAP) as an alternative for ozone-depleting substances (U.S. EP A, 2008), therefore its ozone depleting potential is likely low.

b. Proposed New or Modified Definitions and Clarify ing Language

We expect no impact on stratospheric ozone depletio n as a result of the proposed new and modified definitions and clarifying language. These language modification proposals are necessary to clarify regulatory provi sions, or implement the new VOC

limits.

c. Proposed Toxics Prohibition

The proposal to prohibit the use of perchloroethyle ne, trichloroethylene, and methylene chloride in Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products should have no impact on stratospheric ozone depletion. This is because pre dicted reformulation options rely on compounds that are not considered stratospheric ozo ne depleting compounds. We note that no products were reported that contained the above toxic compounds in the Survey Update. It should also be noted that use of stratospheric ozone depleting compounds is already restricted by section 94509(e)

.

d. Proposed Global Warming Potential Limits

The proposed GWP limit of 150 for compounds used in Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multi-purpose Solvent, and Paint Thinner products could have a slight benefit of preventing an increase in stratospheric ozone depleting compounds. This is because some compounds with higher GWPs are also st ratospheric ozone depleting compounds.

e. Proposed Changes to Method 310

The proposed changes to Method 310 are clarificatio ns to analytical methods already being used and/or are needed to enhance the enforce ability of the lower VOC limits. Such changes are expected to have no impact on stra tospheric ozone depletion.Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 112

D. OTHER POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

1. Impacts of Proposed Amendments on Solid Waste Di sposal

Consumer products contribute to the solid waste str eam by the nature of their packaging, such as containers used to deliver the p roducts. Therefore, we evaluated the potential impacts of the proposed amendments on solid waste disposal.

a. Proposed VOC Standards

In the case of Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener p roducts, we do not expect an adverse impact on solid waste disposal from the pro posed amendments relating to VOC limits. This is because we do not anticipate any c hanges in packaging or disposal due

to the amendments.

In the case of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thin ner products, reformulation options include increasing production of existing complying products, using water-based formulations, or replacing VOC solvents with VOC ex empt ingredients. Other reformulation options that could be used by manufac turers include exploring emerging technologies such as soy-based products. None of t hese reformulation options are expected to alter the current methods of packaging or disposal.

We believe that one of the most likely reformulatio n pathways is replacing solvents used currently in Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinne r products with acetone. Some

stakeholders have asserted that this will result in an increase in the amount of Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products used bec ause of the faster evaporation rate of acetone. Hence more packaging, due to incr eased product use for the same task, could occur. While acetone does evaporate fa ster than the solvents it is predicted to replace, an increase in product use would be lik ely only if the lid of the product container is removed, or the product is transferred to a container with a large surface area and is exposed to open air for significant per iods of time. Therefore, the increase, if any, is expected to be relatively small. Accord ing to the Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA) report titled “Assessme nt, Development, and Demonstration of Low-VOC Cleaning Systems for SCAQM D Rule 1171,” several facilities tested reported they used about ten perc ent more acetone than their current cleaning solvent (IRTA, 2003). We believe this sma ll percentage increase in solvent use would not significantly increase sales such tha t there would be a significant increase in the generation of solid waste.

To further reduce the potential adverse impacts on solid waste disposal, we are proposing to temporarily allow small containers (ei ght fluid ounces or less) of Paint Thinner products to exceed the 30 percent by weight VOC limit until December 31, 2013. It was brought to our attention that consumers may have significant quantities of previously purchased solv ent-borne paint, that is either in quart containers that are not subject to low VOC limits, or are larger sizes that were manufactured prior to the effective date of lower V OC limits. If consumers are unable toTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 113

thin these products, and they do not perform as exp ected, the products may be discarded. Consequently, the temporary small size exemption for Paint Thinner is intended to mitigate a possible increase of solid w aste disposal that could also affect water quality in the instance where discarded solve nts, from solvent-borne paint, leach into ground water.

We also note that most air district architectural c oatings rules continue to include an exemption from compliance with VOC limits for one l iter (1.057 quart) or less containers of solvent-borne coatings. There are also a number of paint categories in air district rules that have high enough VOC limits that allow f or solvent-borne coatings. Exempting small sizes of Paint Thinner from the 30 percent by weight limit allows these paints to continue to be used. In addition, the pr oposed small container exemption allows manufacturers time to develop low VOC produc ts that are compatible with solvent-borne coatings.

b. Proposed New or Modified Definitions and Clarify ing Language

We expect a negligible increase in waste disposal f rom the proposed special reporting and labeling requirements for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. Depending upon how manufacturers choose to name the ir flammable products, additional paper waste could be generated. However , the improvement in public safety that would result from the labeling outweighs this negligible increase in waste generation.

In the case of the proposed modifications related t o Automotive Windshield Washer Fluid products, we expect a benefit to waste dispos al as the proposed amendment would allow additional smaller sizes of dilutable p roducts to be manufactured and sold which should result in reduced product weights.

Other proposed new and modified definitions and cla rifying language should have no impact on solid waste. These language modification proposals are necessary to clarify regulatory provisions, or implement the new VOC lim its.

c. Proposed Toxics Prohibition

The proposal to prohibit the use of perchloroethyle ne, trichloroethylene, and methylene chloride in Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products should have no impact on solid waste disposal. This is because the amount o f packaging waste to be disposed of would not change with or without this proposal. Th is proposed prohibition on use of the

chlorinated TAC solvents should ensure that there i s no increased hazardous waste disposal.

d. Proposed Global Warming Potential Limits

The proposed GWP limit of 150 for compounds used in reformulated Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multi-purpose Solvent, and P aint Thinner products is expected toTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 114

have no impact on waste disposal. Implementing thi s proposal does not cause a change in the manner in which products are to be di sposed.

e. Proposed Changes to Method 310

The proposed changes to Method 310 are clarificatio ns to analytical methods already being used and/or are needed to enhance the enforce ability of the lower VOC limits. Such changes are not expected to have any impact on waste disposal.

2. Impacts of Proposed Amendments on Water Quality

Because of how consumer products are used and dispo sed of, there are potential water quality impacts. Therefore, we evaluated the impac ts of the proposed amendments on water quality.

a. Proposed VOC Standards

Reducing VOCs should have no impact on water qualit y and could ultimately result in a positive impact if more water-based products are us ed. As products are reformulated to meet the proposed VOC limits, to a limited extent, water may replace VOCs in some products. This would have a positive impact on wat er quality by reducing the quantity of VOCs that might be introduced to the water supply.

In the case of Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener p roducts, we do not expect an adverse impact on water quality. Because these pro ducts are designed to be sprayed in indoor air environments, the emissions of these products after reformulation would continue to have an air fate and would be unlikely to enter the water system. It is possible that some reformulations could result in s lightly increasing the use of water.

In the case of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thin ner products, reformulation options include increasing production of existing complying products, using water-based formulations, or replacing VOC solvents with VOC ex empt ingredients. While we expect no impact on water quality from implementing the fi rst tier and second tier limits of this proposal, it is possible that more water will be us ed to meet the limits. We are not proposing to mitigate the potential increased use o f water because the amount of increase is uncertain given the variety of reformul ation options. We also believe the air quality benefits of the proposal outweigh this pote ntial impact. We will continue to monitor implementation of the regulation and the po tential impacts on water quality.

b. Proposed New or Modified Definitions and Clarify ing Language

We expect no impact on water quality resulting from the proposed new and modified definitions and clarifying language. These languag e modification proposals are necessary to clarify regulatory provisions, or impl ement the new VOC limits.Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 115 c. Proposed Toxics Prohibition

The proposal to prohibit in the use of perchloroeth ylene, trichloroethylene, and methylene chloride in Multi-purpose Solvent and Pai nt Thinner products should have a positive impact on water quality by ensuring that t hese TACs will not enter the water system and subsequently effect influent and effluen t at publicly owned treatment works (POTW).

d. Proposed Global Warming Potential Limits

The proposed GWP limit of 150 for compounds used in Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multi-purpose Solvent, and Paint Thinner products is expected to have no impact on water quality. We are not aware of compo unds with GWP values greater than 150 that could lead to improving water quality if they were to be used in formulations. Therefore, we expect no significant adverse impacts from this proposed

limit.

e. Proposed Changes to Method 310

The proposed changes to Method 310 are clarificatio ns to analytical methods already being used and/or are needed to enhance the enforce ability of the lower VOC limits. Such changes are expected to have no impact on wate r quality.

3. Impacts of Proposed Amendments on Energy

Use of energy to produce and sell various consumer products primarily comes from the manufacturing process and distribution of the produ cts to the point of sale. Therefore, we considered whether the proposed amendments would impact energy use.

a. Proposed VOC Standards

Reformulation of products to meet the proposed VOC limits should have no impact on energy use because we do not expect the manufacturi ng processes or shipping practices to be changed. We also do not expect the manufacture of compounds used in reformulations to result in energy use above the cu rrent situation because the types of chemicals predicted to be used are similar to those to be replaced.

b. Proposed New or Modified Definitions and Clarify ing Language

Proposed modifications related to Automotive Windsh ield Washer Fluid products should result in reduced energy usage. The proposals woul d allow additional smaller sizes of dilutable products to be used, which, in turn, shou ld result in reduced product weights. Thus, we would expect less energy costs related to transportation. We expect no impact on energy use resulting from the other propo sed new and modified definitions, and clarifying language. These language modificati on proposals are necessary to clarify regulatory provisions, or implement the new VOC limits.Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 116 c. Proposed Toxics Prohibition

The proposed prohibition on use of perchloroethylen e, methylene chloride, and trichloroethylene in Multi-purpose Solvent and Pain t Thinner products is expected to have negligible, or no impact on energy use. We ar e not aware of how these compounds could be used in Multi-purpose Solvent an d Paint Thinner products such that there would be an appreciable change in energy use or savings. We also note that no use of these compounds was reported in the Surve y Update.

d. Proposed Global Warming Potential Limits

The proposed GWP limit of 150 for compounds used in aerosol Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multi-purpose Solvent, and Paint Thi nner products is expected to have no impact on energy use. In the absence of this pr ovision we are not aware of compounds that could be used in reformulations that would result in less energy consumption.

e. Proposed Changes to Method 310

The proposed changes to Method 310 are clarificatio ns to analytical methods already being used and/or are needed to enhance the enforce ability of the lower VOC limits. Such changes are expected to have no impact on ener gy consumption.

4. Impact on Public Safety

As Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multi-purpos e Solvent, and Paint Thinner products are reformulated to meet the proposed VOC limits, the ingredients used or proposed prohibition of certain compounds, could re nder the reformulated products more or less flammable than existing products.

Because we expect the proposals related to Double P hase Aerosol Air Freshener products to reduce the flammability of these produc ts, the focus of this section will be on potential impacts from use of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products.

a. Proposed VOC Standards

To meet the proposed VOC limits (especially the fut ure effective 3 percent by weight VOC limit) for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thin ner products, increased use of acetone is a likely, cost-effective compliance path , because it is an exempt VOC compound. However, staff, as well as stakeholders, has expressed safety concerns related to increased use of acetone. The use of gr eater than 1 percent acetone in a product meets the federal definition of an “extreme ly flammable” product. “Extremely flammable” is defined as a substance with a flashpo int at or below 20 degrees Fahrenheit ( o F). The flashpoint of acetone is -4 o F. This flashpoint means that at a temperature of -4 o F, vapors of acetone will ignite and quickly propag ate. Thus,Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 117

incorrect handling of acetone can create a fire haz ard. Appendix F contains information related to flammability and other characteristics o f a variety of solvents that are currently used, or could be used in Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products.

Pure acetone has been widely used as an ingredient in a variety of consumer products and is readily available for sale as a stand-alone solvent. However, acetone has not been widely used by consumers in containers labeled “Paint Thinner” or “Paint Cleanup.” Currently available Paint Thinner products ar e generally formulated with hydrocarbon solvents such as mineral spirits and na phthas. Flash points for these products generally range from 80-120 o F. Products with flash points in this temperature range still present hazards if used incorrectly, ho wever the risk of fire is not as great as acetone-containing products. Many Paint Thinner pr oducts in commerce meet the federal definition of a “combustible” product. “Co mbustible” is defined as a substance with a flashpoint at or above 100 o F to an including 150 o F.

When ARB began the public process of developing the VOC limits for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, the SCAQMD conc urrently proposed Rule 1143. This rule and ARB staff’s proposal are similar, wit h respect to VOC limits, but differ in effective dates for the limits. As proposals were being developed, safety concerns were raised by the Office of the State Fire Marshal, loc al fire departments and industry stakeholders that very low VOC limits would necessi tate increased use of acetone. This

increased use of acetone could increase fire hazard s. The concerns relate to the significant difference in the flash points between “typical” products labeled as “Paint Thinner,” which are generally formulated with hydro carbon solvents, and “reformulated” products labeled as “Paint Thinner,” which may util ize acetone to meet the proposed VOC limits. Although the reformulated, acetone-con taining products would be labeled as “extremely flammable,” a typical consumer may no t notice the designation, and may handle the reformulated product in the same manner as the former product. Thus, a potential increase in fire hazards could occur.

We agree that this is a potential safety issue. To address this issue, we worked with the stakeholders mentioned above on approaches to notif y the household consumer, for a period of time adjacent to the effective dates of t he proposed VOC limits, that they are purchasing a more flammable product with different use instructions. As a result, we are proposing additional requirements for certain M ulti-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products, which are required under federal law, to be labeled “Flammable” or “Extremely Flammable.”

In new subsection 94512(e), beginning December 31, 2010, until December 31, 2015, we are proposing to prohibit manufacturers from pla cing general product names on the principle display panel of “Flammable,” or “Extreme ly Flammable” Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. The general product na mes used on products currently in commerce include, “Paint Thinner,” “Multi-purpose S olvent,” “Clean-up Solvent,” “Paint Clean-up.”Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 118

The proposed prohibition includes two alternatives that manufacturers may choose from to continue selling generally named “Flammable,” or“Extremely Flammable” Multipurpose Solvents and Paint Thinners. The first alt ernative includes providing a “hang tag” or “sticker” affixed to the product that inclu des the statement “Formulated to meet California VOC limits, see warnings on label.” Man ufacturers may also choose to display the common name of the chemical that result s in the product meeting the criteria for “Flammable” or “Extremely Flammable,” in a font as large as or larger, than any of the words on the principle display panel.

The proposed prohibition does not apply to products named “Lacquer Thinner.” Many currently available Lacquer Thinners are “Extremely Flammable” because they contain greater than 1 percent acetone. We, and the intere sted stakeholders, believe consumers are already aware of the hazards associat ed with these products and it is not necessary to extend the proposed labeling requi rement to these products.

Additionally, to potentially reduce the increased f ire hazard from reliance on highly flammable Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner p roducts, we have proposed an effective date for the 3 percent by weight limit of December 31, 2013. This additional compliance time should allow for development of add itional, less flammable products.

Also, to assess progress on products being develope d to comply with the proposed 3 percent by weight VOC limit, as proposed in new s ubsection 94513(g), manufacturers must submit data for reformulated products sold in calendar year 2011 by June 30, 2012. Data required includes product form ulation, sales, flammability, and VOC and reactivity content. Based on data received from the 2012 reporting requirement, we will reassess the feasibility of th e proposed 3 percent by weight VOC limit. Depending upon the outcome of this review, we may modify the requirements for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products.

b. Proposed New or Modified Definitions and Clarify ing Language

We expect a net benefit on safety resulting from th e labeling proposal for “Flammable,” or “Extremely Flammable” Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. Other proposals are language modifications and are necess ary to clarify regulatory provisions, or implement the new VOC limits.

c. Proposed Toxics Prohibition

We are proposing a prohibition on the use of perchl oroethylene, trichloroethylene, and methylene chloride in Multi-purpose Solvent and Pai nt Thinner products. Use of perchloroethylene and methylene chloride could redu ce product flammability. However, because these are TACs designated as potential huma n carcinogens, we believe preventing the public’s exposure to these compounds outweighs the potential reduction in flammability.Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 119 d. Proposed Global Warming Potential Limits

The proposed GWP limit of 150 for compounds used in the reformulation of Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products is expec ted to have no impact on safety. In the absence of this limit there is a remote pote ntial that some solvents with higher GWP values could be used in product reformulations, and potentially lower the flammability of products. This will be further eva luated as part of the technical

assessment in 2012.

e. Proposed Changes to Method 310

The proposed changes to Method 310 are clarificatio ns to analytical methods already being used and/or are clarifications needed to enha nce the enforceability of the lower VOC limits. The changes themselves are expected to have no impact on safety.

5. Impact on Agricultural Resources

As discussed in Chapter VI, one of the reformulatio n options manufacturers may choose to comply with the proposed limits for Multi-purpos e Solvents and Paint Thinners is the use of soy methyl esters.

a. Proposed VOC Standards

Soy methyl esters are LVP-VOC solvents that have be en shown to be useful as ingredients in Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thin ner products. However, we believe that not all manufacturers will choose this option, because of the relatively high cost of soy methyl esters. For those manufacturers that do choose to formulate with soy methyl esters, we believe most will formulate with mixtures of soy and other compounds because mixtures containing less than 5 percent soy by weight, have been shown to function as Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinne rs for some applications (IRTA, 2007). Because soy methyl esters are a possible re formulation, below, we provide our analysis on the potential impact our proposal could have on worldwide soy production.

It is estimated that about 230 million acres worldw ide are dedicated to soybean production, and each acre of soy beans is estimated to yield approximately 460 pounds of soy oil (USDA, 2009; Maier et al. , 1998). If we assume that as a worst case scenari o, the entire 15.5 tons per day of Multi-purpose Solve nt and Paint Thinner products sold were reformulated with 100 percent of soy methyl es ters, we predict an increase demand of soy oil of about 11.4 million pounds per year. Using the above soy oil per acre data, it would take approximately 24,600 acres to produce the soy oil needed for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products in California. This represents an increased demand of about 0.01 percent of worldwide soybean production. We, therefore, believe that the impacts on soy producti on and any environmental impacts associated with it are negligible.Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 120 b. Proposed New or Modified Definitions and Clarify ing Language

We expect no impact on agricultural resources from the proposed new and modified definitions and clarifying language. These languag e modifications and are necessary to clarify regulatory provisions, or implement the new VOC limits.

c. Proposed Toxics Prohibition

The proposed prohibition on use of perchloroethylen e, methylene chloride, and trichloroethylene in Multi-purpose Solvent and Pain t Thinner products is expected to have negligible, or no impact on agricultural resou rces. We note that no use of these compounds was reported in the Survey Update.

d. Proposed Global Warming Potential Limits

The proposed GWP limit of 150 for compounds used in the reformulation of Multipurpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products is expec ted to have no impact on agricultural resources. This is because compounds with GWPs greater than 150 are not likely reformulation options. Therefore, impac ts on agricultural resources are unchanged by this proposal.

e. Proposed Changes to Method 310

The proposed changes to Method 310 are clarificatio ns to analytical methods already being used and/or are clarifications needed to enha nce the enforceability of the lower VOC limits. The changes themselves are expected to have no impact on agricultural

resources.

E. ANALYSIS OF NEED FOR REASONABLY FORESEEABLE MIT IGATION

MEASURES

As part of our obligations under CEQA and AB 32, AR B staff is required to evaluate and mitigate potential adverse environmental impacts re sulting from regulatory proposals. Also, pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 39 650 et seq ., the ARB is required to identify and control TACs. The Health and Safety C ode defines a TAC as “...an air pollutant which may cause or contribute to an incre ase in mortality or serious illness, or which may pose a hazard to human health.” Moreover , in accordance with section 39666 of the Health and Safety Code, for TA Cs for which no safe exposure threshold has been established, the ARB is required to “.... reduce emissions to the lowest level achievable through application of best available control technology or a

more effective control method....”Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 121

1. Proposed Mitigation Measure Related to Use of F lammable and

Extremely Flammable Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner

Products

In the categories of Multi-purpose Solvent and Pain t Thinner, a likely reformulation pathway would be to replace VOC solvent with aceton e, an exempt VOC solvent. Because acetone is an extremely flammable solvent, due to its low flashpoint, we have evaluated the need for mitigation measures related to its use.

As discussed at length previously, see Section D, n umber 4 of this chapter, and in accordance with CEQA, we are proposing additional l abeling for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products that, in accordance with federal law, are labeled as “flammable” or “extremely flammable.” This measure is designed to inform the public that they may be using a reformulated product and u se instructions should be noted. This proposal is contained in new subsection 94512( e).

Further, we are proposing a small container (eight fluid ounces) exemption for Paint Thinner products, until December 31, 2013, to allow consumers to purchase small amounts of thinners to be used with previously purc hased solvent-borne paints that may require thinning. This measure also could mitigate an increased fire hazard by allowing less flammable products to continue to be used for a short period of time.

2. Proposed Mitigation Measure Related to Greenhou se Gas Emissions

We are proposing new or lower VOC limits for Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multi-purpose Solvent, and Paint Thinner products. To comply with these limits, some manufacturers could choose to replace all or a port ion of their VOC hydrocarbon propellant in Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener pr oducts with the exempt VOC propellants HFC-152a or HFC-134a. In addition, it is possible that manufacturers could use solvents with high GWP values in reformulated M ulti-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. Increased use, or new use of com pounds with high GWP would have adverse impacts on climate change.

AB 32 requires GHG emissions to be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020, and also requires that increased use of these gases be minimized. Th erefore, we are proposing a

measure to minimize the use of GHGs in Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multipurpose Solvent, and Paint Thinner products. As pr oposed, and contained in subsection 94509(u), Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresh ener, Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products could not contain compounds that have GWP values greater than 150. To determine the GWP of compounds, the S econd Assessment Report 100 year values contained in the Fourth Assessment Repo rt of the IPPC are to be used (IPPC, 2007).

Reformulation options for aerosol Double Phase Aero sol Air Freshener products include the use of the exempt VOC propellants HFC-152a and HFC-134a to meet the proposedTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 122

20 percent by weight VOC limit. The proposed GWP l imit of 150 would allow use of HFC-152a, with a GWP of 140, but would preclude use of the propellant HFC-134a, which has a GWP of 1,300. While the proposal allow s use of HFC-152a, we do not expect it to be used extensively, if at all. In de termining a feasible limit for Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products, staff conside red the impacts of a VOC limit on climate change. To balance reductions in ground le vel ozone and increasing GHG emissions, we proposed a VOC limit that is feasible without use of these GHGs. This balance means that we are potentially forgoing addi tional VOC reductions.

We also note that in discussions with some major ma nufacturers of Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener products, it was indicated th at they intend to comply with the proposal without the use of HFCs. We are aware of manufacturers with internal environmental polices precluding the use of HFCs. Finally, HFC-152a is quite expensive relative to VOC hydrocarbon propellants c urrently in commerce. For all of these reasons we do not expect much, if any, HFC-15 2a to be used.

In the categories of Multi-purpose Solvent and Pain t Thinner, no use of compounds with GWP values above 150 was reported in the Survey Upd ate. Therefore, chemical compounds that have a GWP greater than 150 are not critical to the formulation of Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products. We would expect a negligible, or no, additional ozone reduction benefit if compounds wit h higher GWPs could be used. The main reformulation options such as use of water, od orless mineral spirits, acetone, and other exempt VOC compounds reported in the Survey U pdate, have GWP values that are below 150, or are not listed by the Fourth Asse ssment Report of the IPCC (IPPC, 2007).

Although we do not expect increased use of GHGs wit h high GWP values to be used in these products, to prevent this possibility, in acc ordance with AB 32, we are proposing a prohibition on the use of any compound with a GWP v alue of 150 or greater in Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products as a mitigation measure.

F. RISK ASSESSMENT FOR REDUCED EXPOSURE TO OZONE A ND TACS

The health risks associated with ozone exposure hav e been known for many years and are discussed in further in Chapter IV. Studies ha ve shown that when inhaled, even at relatively low levels, ozone can impact lung tissue and lung function. The greatest risk is to those who are more active outdoors during smo ggy periods, such as children, athletes, and outdoor workers. Exposure to levels of ozone above the current ambient air standard leads to lung inflammation and lung ti ssue damage, and a reduction in the amount of air inhaled into the lungs. Recent evide nce has, for the first time, linked the onset of asthma to exposure to elevated ozone level s in exercising children (McConnell

et al. , 2002).

The actual lowering of health risks from reducing V OC emissions, if the proposal is adopted, is not quantified in this report. However , it has been estimated that aboutTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 123

630 fewer people would die prematurely each year in California from exposure to ozone if the State were to attain the ozone standard (Ost ro et al., 2006). In a 2008 report, “Estimating Mortality Risk Reduction and Economic B enefits from Controlling Ozone Air

Pollution ,” the National Research Council’s (NRC), Committee on Estimating Mortality Risk Reduction Benefits from Decreasing Tropospheri c Ozone Exposure, of the Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology in the Divi sion on Earth and Life Studies, concluded that it is appropriate for regulatory age ncies to used mortality risk to analyze cost and benefits in setting ozone standards (NRC, 2008).

About 93 percent of California residents live in ar eas where ozone levels exceed State and federal ambient air quality standards. Qualita tively, we conclude that reducing VOC emissions, because of their role as ozone precursor s, will result in incremental improvement of the public’s health – whether it is in fewer incidences of asthma or hospitalizations, improvement in lung function, or fewer premature deaths.

The VOC reductions from the proposed amendments are designed as partial fulfillment of the State Strategy for California’s 2007 State I mplementation Plan. Thus, one can conclude that increments of progress towards attain ment improve the public’s health. As shown in Table VIII-1, the proposed amendments t o the Regulation are designed to

achieve the maximum feasible VOC emission reduction from the categories proposed for regulation at this time. When fully effective, adopting the amendments would result in a VOC emissions reduction of about 14.7 tons per day. The impacts of our proposal on SOA formation are not clear, although we do not expect a disbenefit.

The proposal for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Th inner products that would limit the amount of aromatic VOC hydrocarbon solvents to no m ore than 1 percent by weight is designed to reduce ground level ozone concentration s. However, as an ancillary benefit, this proposal will also reduce exposure to xylenes, ethyl benzene, and toluene. These compounds are identified TACs (OEHHA, 2000, 2 005). Xylenes cause central nervous system effects in humans and irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat. Ethyl benzene is a development toxicant (OEHHA, 2005). T oluene is a reproductive toxicant (OEHHA, 2005).

In addition, the proposed prohibition on the use of methylene chloride , trichloroethylene, and perchloroethylene in Multi-p urpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products will prevent public exposure to these TACs (ARB, 1989b, 1990d and 1991b) resulting in public health protection.

In summary, our health risk analysis shows that the proposed amendments would reduce health risks posed by emissions of Double Ph ase Aerosol Air Freshener, Multipurpose Solvent, and Paint Thinner products by lowe ring ground level ozone concentrations and by reducing or preventing exposu re to TACs.Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 124

G. ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF COMPLIANCE

Two alternative means of compliance with the Consum er Products Regulation have been developed. A current compliance alternative f or manufacturers of consumer products is the Alternative Control Plan (ACP). Th e ACP Regulation (see title 17, CCR, sections 94540-94555), is a voluntary emissions ave raging program. Under the ACP, an overall limit on the VOC emissions from a group of products in the ACP is determined. To be approved, an ACP must demonstrat e that the total VOC emissions

within the ACP would not exceed the emissions that would have resulted had the products been formulated to meet the VOC limit esta blished for each product category. In other words, some products in the ACP could exce ed the established VOC limits in the Consumer Products Regulation as long as those i ncreased emissions were offset by additional products that over-comply with the estab lished VOC limits. The ACP provides manufacturers with flexibility, but preser ves the overall environmental benefits

of emission reductions.

Another compliance alternative that is available fo r manufacturers is the Innovative Products Provision (see title 17, CCR, section 9451 1). This provision allows a manufacturer to formulate products that exceed the mass-based VOC limit specified in the Consumer Products Regulation for a particular p roduct category. The manufacturer must demonstrate that, through some characteristic of the higher VOC product, its use will result in less VOC emissions compared to a rep resentative complying product. This alternative is also specifically designed to allow manufacturers flexibility, while preserving the emission benefits of the Consumer Pr oducts Regulation.

Absent use of either of these alternatives, staff i s not aware of any additional compliance means, other than direct compliance with the proposed amendments.

H. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

State law defines environmental justice as the fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, and incomes with respect to the developme nt, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. The ARB is committed to evaluating community impacts of proposed regulation s, including environmental justice

concerns.

Consumer products are considered area sources. Thi s is because their use is fairly uniform across the State, tracking with housing uni ts, and their emissions are spread over the course of a day, rather than concentrated at a particular time of day. For these reasons, we do not believe that people of any given race, culture, or income would be more impacted than any others would. All Californi ans should benefit equally from the reduction in VOC emissions from the consumer produc t categories proposed for regulation.Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 125

REFERENCES

1. Air Resources Board. Environmental Impact Assess ment of Selected Halogenated Chemicals – Staff Report . March, 2008. (ARB, 2008b)

2. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for the Proposed Amendments to the Regulation for Reducing Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Aerosol Coating Products and Propose d Tables of Maximum Incremental Reactivity (MIR) Values, and Proposed A mendments to Method 310, “Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds in Con sumer Products

. May 5, 2000. (ARB, 2000b)

3. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for Rulemaking, Staff Report/Executive Summary, Proposed Identification o f Perchloroethylene as a

Toxic Air Contaminant . August, 1991. (ARB, 1991b)

4. Air Resources Board. Proposed Identification of Trichloroethylene as a Toxic Air Contaminant - Staff Report/Executive Summary . August, 1990. (ARB, 1990d)

5. Air Resources Board. Proposed Identification of Methylene Chloride as a Toxic Air Contaminant - Technical Support Document . May, 1989. (ARB, 1989b)

6. Bowman, F. M., Pilinis, C. and Seinfeld, J. H. O zone and Aerosol Productivity of Reactive Organics . 1994. Atmospheric Environment. Volume 29: 579-589

. (Bowman et al

., 1994)

7. Chan, A., Kautzman, B., Surratt, J. Chhabra, P. , Chan, M. N., Crounse, J., Wennberg, P., Flagan, R., John Seinfeld, J., Unders tanding Secondary Organic Aerosol (SOA) Formation from Lower-Volatility Precu rsors: Photooxidation of Naphthalene and Alkyl-naphthalenes , DOE ASP February 27, 2009. (Chan et al., 2009)

8. Finlayson-Pitts, B. J. and J. N. Pitts Jr. Chemi stry of the Upper and Lower Atmosphere . Chapter 9, Academic Press, New York, 2000. (Finlayson-Pitts and Pitts, 2000)

9. Griffin, R. J., Cocker III, D. R., and Seinfeld, J. H. Incremental Aerosol Reactivity: Application to Aromatic and Biogenic Hydrocarbons . 1999. Environmental Science & Technology. Volume 33: 2403-2408. (Griffi n et al. , 1999)

10. Grosjean, D. In Situ Organic Aerosol Formation during a Smog Episode: Estimated Production and Chemical Functionality . 1992. Atmospheric Environment. Volume 26A. Number 6: 953-963. (Grosje an, 1992)Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 126

11. Harner, T. and Bidleman, T. F. Octanol-air Part ition Coefficient for Describing Particle/Gas Partitioning of Aromatic Compounds in Urban Air . 1998. Environmental Science & Technology. Volume 32: 1494 -1502. (Harner and Bidleman, 1998)

12. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. For ster, P., V. Ramaswamy, P. Artaxo, T. Berntsen, R. Betts, D.W. Fahey, J. Haywo od, J. Lean, D.C. Lowe, G. Myhre, J. Nganga, R. Prinn, G. Raga, M. Schulz and R. Van Dorland, 2007: Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiativ e Forcing. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribut ion of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernment al Panel on Climate Change

. [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marqu is, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge Univer sity Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. (IPCC, 2007)

13. Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA). Assessment, Development and Demonstration of Low-VOC Cleaning S ystems for South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1172 Prepared for South Coast Air Quality Management District Under Contract # 01172, prepare d by Mike Morris and Katy Wolf of IRTA, August 2003. (IRTA, 2003)

14. Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA). Low-VOC, Low Toxicity Alternatives for Consumer Product Cleanup and Thinn ing Solvents . Prepared for Cal/EPA’s Department of Toxic Substances Control, p repared by Katy Wolf and Mike Morris of IRTA, March 2007. (IRTA, 2007)

15. Kleindienst, T. E., Smith, D. F., Li, W., Edney , E. O., Driscoll, D. J., Speer, R. E., and Weathers, W. S. Secondary Organic Aerosol Forma tion from the Oxidation of Aromatic Hydrocarbons in the Presence of Dry Sub micron Ammonium Sulfate

Aerosol . 1999. Atmospheric Environment. Volume 33 : 3669-3 681. (Kleindienst et al. , 1999)

16. Maier,D. E., et al. , Purdue University Grain Quality Task Force Fact S heet #39, High Value Soybean Composition November 23, 1998. (Maier et al, 1998)

17. McConnell, R., K. Berhane, F. Gilliland, S.J. L ondon, T. Islam, W.J. Gauderman, E. Avol, H.G. Margolis, and J.M. Peters. Asthma in Exercising Children Exposed to Ozone: A Cohort Study . 2002. Lancet. Volume 359: 386-391. (McConnell et al ., 2002)

18. Moolgavkar, S. H. and Luebeck, E. G. A Critical Review of the Evidence on Particulate Air Pollution and Mortality . 1996. Epidemiology. Volume 7. Number 4: 420-428. (Moolgavkar and Luebeck, 1996)

19. National Research Council (NRC), Committee on E stimating Mortality Risk Reduction Benefits from Decreasing Tropospheric Ozo ne Exposure, Board onTechnical Support Document Chapter VIII - 127

Environmental Studies and Toxicology, Division on E arth and Life Studies. Estimating Mortality Risk Reduction and Economic Be nefits from Controlling

Ozone Air Pollution . 2008. (NRC, 2008)

20. Ng, N.L., Kwan, A.J., Surratt, J.D., Chan, A.W. H, Chhabra, P.S., Sorooshian, A., Pye, H.O.T., Crounse, J.D., Wennberg, P.O., Flahan, R.C., Seinfeld, J.H. Secondary Organic Aerosol (SOA) Formation from Reac tion of Isoprene with Nitrate Radicals (NO 3 ). Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss., 8, 3163-3226, 2008. (Ng et al., 2008)

21. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessmen t. All Chronic Reference Exposure Levels Adopted by OEHHA as of February 200 5 . (OEHHA, 2005)

22. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessmen t. All Acute Reference Exposure Levels Developed by the Office of Environm ental Health Hazard Assessment as of May 2000 . (OEHHA, 2000)

23. Odum, J. R., T. Hoffmann, F. Bowman, D. Collins , R. C. Flagan, and J. H. Seinfeld. Gas/Particle Partitioning and Secon dary Organic Aerosol Yields

. 1996. Environmental Science & Technology. Volume 30 . Number 8: 2580-2585. (Odum et al. , 1996)

24. Ostro, B.D., H. Tran, and J.I. Levy. The healt h benefits of reduced tropospheric

ozone in California ,” 2006. J of Air & Waste Management Assoc 56: 10 07-1021. (Ostro et al., 2006)

25. Pandis, S. N., R. A. Harley, G. R. Cass, and J. H. Seinfeld. Secondary Organic Aerosol Formation and Transport . 1992. Atmospheric Environment. Volume 26A: 2269-2282. (Pandis et al. , 1992)

26. Pankow, J. F. An Absorption Model of Gas/Partic le Partitioning of Organic Compounds in the Atmosphere . 1994. Atmospheric Environment. Volume 28. Number 2: 185-188. (Pankow, 1994a)

27. Pankow, J. F. An Absorption Model of the Gas/Ae rosol Partitioning Involved in the Formation of Secondary Organic Aerosol . 1994. Atmospheric Environment. Volume 28. Number 2: 189-193. (Pankow, 1994b)

28. Seinfeld J. H. and Pandis S. N. Atmospheric Che mistry and Physics-from Air Pollution to Climate Change . John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1998. (Seinfeld and Pandis, 1998)

29. Schwartz, J., Dockery, D. W., and Neas, L. M. I s Daily Mortality Associated Specifically with Fine Particles . 1996. Journal of Air & Waste Management Association. Volume 46: 927-939. (Schwartz et al. , 1996)Technical Support Document Chapter VIII - 128

30. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SC AQMD). Final Environmental Assessment for Proposed Rule 1143 – Consumer Paint Thinners and MultiPurpose Solvents. February 2009. (SCAQMD, 2009)

31. United States Department of Agriculture. Unite d States Department of Agriculture, U. S. Acreage for soybeans http://www.nass.usda.gov/QuickStats/index2.jsp , March 31, 2009. (USDA 2009)

32. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Indicators: Ozone Depletion . July 7, 2003. http://www.epa.gov/spdpublc/science/indicat/

. July 8, 2003. (U.S. EPA, 2003)

33. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Questions and Answers on

Alternative Solvents . August 25, 2008. http://www.epa.gov/Ozone/snap/solvents/qa.html (U.S. EPA, 2008)

34. Yu, J., Cocker III, D. R., Griffin, R. J., Flag an, R. C., and Seinfeld, J. H. Gas-phase Ozone Oxidation of Monoterpenes: Gaseous and Particulate

Products . 1999. Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry. Volume 34 : 207-258. (Yu et al. , 1999)Technical Support Document Chapter IX - 129

IX. FUTURE AND ONGOING ACTIVITIES

In this chapter, we describe future and ongoing act ivities related to the consumer products program. These activities are directed at developing proposals to further reduce volatile organic compounds (VOC), air toxic, and greenhouse gas emissions from consumer products. As always, our rulemaking activities will be conducted using a transparent process, allowing for stakeholder input . Major activities are summarized

below.

A. CONSUMER PRODUCT EMISSIONS REDUCTION COMMITMENTS IN THE

STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

As described in Chapter I, in the current SIP, the State Strategy for California’s 2007 State Implementation Plan (Strategy), ARB committed to achieving a further 30 to 40 tons per day VOC emissions reduction from consum er products statewide by 2014. Initial measures were adopted in the 2007 to 2008 t imeframe, with emission reductions achieved by 2010. Additional measures to achieve t he overall reduction commitment are to be adopted between 2010 and 2012 with implem entation within the 2012 to 2014 timeframe. The majority of the 5.8 tons per day of VOC reductions approved by the Board at its June 26, 2008, hearing constituted the first increment in meeting this commitment. About 1.3 tons per day of the 5.8 tons per day achieved will actually occur in 2015, and would be credited toward VOC reduction s commitments in the post-2014 timeframe. The 14.7 tons per day VOC reduction tha t would occur from adoption of the amendments proposed in this rulemaking, mark furthe r progress toward meeting the consumer products commitment in the Strategy. Tabl e IX-1 shows our progress toward meeting the consumer products commitment in the Str ategy.

Table IX-1

Consumer Product VOC Reductions Accredited Toward S IP Commitment

Consumer Products Rulemaking VOC Reductions (tons p er day)

June 2008 Amendments 4.5

September 2009 Amendments (this proposal) 14.7

2010 Cleaning Products Amendments (under development) 5 – 8

Additional Reductions from 2006 Survey Product Categories 5.8 – 12.8

Totals Reductions by January 1, 2014 30 – 40

We are continuing the review of data from the 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey as a further basis for identifying and evaluating additional categories for emission reduction opportunities. This survey was designed to collect 2006 calendar year product sales and formulation data for a varie ty of consumer products including aerosol coatings; personal care products; other cle aning products; lubricants; pesticides; and others. Some categories such as ho bby, sporting, and party productsTechnical Support Document Chapter IX - 130

were specifically surveyed to evaluate the use of G HGs. If feasible, additional proposals would be brought for consideration before the Board in 2010.

ARB staff proposes to revise the Strategy as may be appropriate in a 2010 mid-course update: to reflect the emission benefits of newly a dopted regulations; provide more

detail on the State’s intended actions to fulfill t he commitment to achieve emission reductions in total by specific dates; update as ne cessary the emissions inventories for

federal ozone and PM 2.5 non-attainment areas; and revise as necessary othe r plan aspects, including motor vehicle emissions budgets. The 2010 mid-course review may

show the need for additional emission reductions fr om consumer products.

On March 12, 2008, U.S. EPA reduced the eight-hour “primary” ozone standard to a level of 0.075 ppm. U.S. EPA also strengthened the secondary eight-hour ozone standard to the level of 0.075 ppm, making it ident ical to the revised primary standard. The final rule became effective on May 27, 2008. These changes will require that new State Implementation Plans (SIP) be drafted. A com plete new state strategy will be developed for 2013. The 2013 SIP will likely requir e more VOC reductions from consumer products.

B. GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS FROM CONSUMER PRODUCTS

As described in Chapter I, the California Global Wa rming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) specifies that Discrete Early Action Measures are t o be adopted and implemented by 2010. Greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions from consume r products have been designated as a Discrete Early Action Measure. The overall estimate is that greenhouse gas emissions from consumer products cou ld be reduced by 0.25 MMT

CO 2 e per year. The Pressurized Gas Duster proposal, a pproved by the Board on June 26, 2008, will achieve approximately 0.20 MMT CO 2 e per year in 2010, and 0.23

MMT CO 2 e per year by 2020. From information we have gathe red from consumer product surveys, we are currently evaluating whethe r GHG emissions reductions from Tire Sealants and Inflators and Chewing Gum Remover s is feasible. We also intend to continue to evaluate data collected on other catego ries to determine if GHG emission reductions are technologically feasible and cost-ef fective to implement.

C. 2006 CONSUMER AND COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS SURVEY DAT A

SUMMARIES

We are continuing the review of data from the 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey. Over 500 surveys have been receiv ed. We expect to release nonconfidential data summaries in the summer of 2009. These data summaries will serve

as the basis for additional VOC and GHG emissions r eduction proposals.Technical Support Document Chapter IX - 131

D. NAIL COATINGS EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT

Stakeholders have expressed concerns regarding the use of the toxic compounds xylenes; toluene; dibutyl phthalate; and formaldehy de in nail coating formulations. We are actively evaluating these concerns to determine if use of these compounds in nail coatings pose a health hazard in the outdoor ambien t air around nail salons. We are modeling emissions of these toxic compounds from an individual business, as well as cumulative emissions from multiple facilities. The goal of these analyses is to assess the potential risk posed to people living in close proximity to these emission sources. Should an adverse health impact in the outdoor ambi ent air be identified, we would evaluate mitigation strategies under our authority to reduce Toxic Air Contaminants.

E. DRY CLEAN ONLY SPOT REMOVERS

Based on comments from stakeholders, we are current ly evaluating spot remover formulas used in commercial dry cleaning facilities . A survey was sent out to dry cleaning chemical manufacturers on January 14, 2009 , to gather sales and formulation data on Dry Clean Only Spot Removers. The data rec eived from this survey are currently under review.

The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQM D) adopted amendments to District Regulation 11, Rule 16 and Regulation 8, R ule 17 which pertain to Dry Cleaning Operations. The BAAQMD rules prohibit the use of h alogenated solvents, such as perchloroethylene and trichloroethylene in spotting solutions. We will evaluate the feasibility of regulating Dry Clean Only Spot Remov ers once the survey data are compiled.

F. PAINT REMOVERS/ STRIPPERS

The Paint Remover/Stripper category will also be ev aluated for potential VOC and Toxic Air Contaminant reductions upon the completion of t he 2006 Consumer and Commercial Products Survey Data Summaries.

G. CLEANING PRODUCTS

Non-aerosol General Purpose Cleaners, General Purpo se Degreasers, Glass Cleaners,

and aerosol Furniture Maintenance Products are unde r evaluation for further regulation. Part of this evaluation is to determine if potentia l adverse impacts would result from the use of predicted reformulations used to comply with proposed lower VOC limits. We are working with Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment staff who are developing health values for various low vapor pres sure-VOC glycol ethers that could be used in reformulated products. In accordance wi th State law, any new health values will need to undergo scientific peer review. Conco mitant with this work, exposure scenarios are being developed to simulate usage of cleaning products in household and institutional settings. Air concentrations resulti ng from modeling these scenarios will beTechnical Support Document Chapter IX - 132

compared to health values to determine if adverse h ealth impacts would result from use of potential reformulations.

We are also working with State Water Resources Cont rol Board staff to evaluate water quality impacts from use of cleaning products. Of particular concern is a family of surfactants, the alkylphenol ethoxylates. Evidence indicates these surfactants are toxic to aquatic organisms, with the main concern being t he estrogenic effects of their degradation products.

If these assessments indicate that there is a poten tial for adverse environmental impacts from the proposals to establish lower VOC l imits for these categories, then mitigation measures will need to be evaluated. Dur ing this continued evaluation, stakeholders will be given the opportunity to comme nt and provide input on specific proposals. Upon completion of this evaluation, we intend to propose to the Board in 2010, new limits for these categories, which we exp ect to achieve 5 – 8 tons per day VOC reductions toward the consumer products commitm ent in the Strategy.

### Appendix B

Proposed Amendments to the Regulation for Reducing

Emissions from Consumer Products and Revisions to T est Method 310Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-1 [Note: Proposed amendments are shown in underline to indicate additions and

strikeout to indicate deletions.]

Proposed Amendments to the

REGULATION FOR REDUCING EMISSIONS

FROM CONSUMER PRODUCTS

SUBCHAPTER 8.5 CONSUMER PRODUCTS

Amend title 17, California Code of Regulation, sect ions 94508, 94509, 94510, 94512, 94513, and 94515 to read as follows:

Article 2. Consumer Products

94507. Applicability.

Except as provided in Sections 94509(i) and 94510, this article shall apply to any person who sells, supplies, offers for sale, or man ufactures consumer products

for use in the state of California.

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, and 41712, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39600, 40000, and 41712 , Health and Safety Code.

§ 94508. Definitions.

(a) For the purpose of this article, the following definitions apply:

(1) “Adhesive” means any product that is used to bo nd one surface to another by attachment. “Adhesive” does not include products u sed on humans and animals, adhesive tape, contact paper, wallpaper, shelf line rs, or any other product with an adhesive incorporated onto or in an inert substrate . For “Contact Adhesive,” “Construction, Panel, and Floor Covering Adhesive,” and “General Purpose Adhesive” only, “adhesive” also does not include un its of product, less packaging, which weigh more than one pound and cons ist of more than 16 fluid ounces. This limitation does not apply to aerosol adhesives.

(2) “Adhesive Remover” means a product designed to remove adhesive from either a specific substrate or a variety of substrates. “ Adhesive Remover” does not include products that remove adhesives intended for use on humans or animals.

For the purpose of this definition and “Adhesive R emover” subcategories (A-D),

the term “adhesive” shall mean a substance used to bond one or more materials.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-2 Adhesive includes, but is not limited to: caulks; s ealants; glues; or similar substances used for the purpose of forming a bond.

(A) “Floor t or

Wall Covering Adhesive Remover” means a product designed or labeled to remove floor or wall coverin gs and associated adhesive from the underlying substrate.

(B) “Gasket or Thread Locking Adhesive Remover” me ans a product designed or labeled to remove gaskets or thread locking adhe sives. Products labeled for dual use as a paint stripper and gasket remover and/or thread locking adhesive remover are considered “Gasket or Thread Locking

Adhesive Remover.”

(C) “General Purpose Adhesive Remover” means a prod uct designed or labeled to remove cyanoacrylate adhesives as well a s non-reactive adhesives or residue from a variety of substrates. “General Purpose Adhesive Remover” includes, but is not limited to, products that remove thermoplastic adhesives; pressure sensitive adhesiv es; dextrine or starch-based adhesives; casein glues; rubber or lat ex-based adhesives; as well as products that remove stickers; decals; s tencils; or similar materials. “General Purpose Adhesive Remover” does not include “Floor or Wall Covering Adhesive Remover.”

(D) “Specialty Adhesive Remover” means a product de signed to remove reactive adhesives from a variety of substrates. R eactive adhesives include adhesives that require a hardener or cataly st in order for the bond to occur. Examples of reactive adhesives include, but are not limited to: epoxies; urethanes; silicones. “Specialty Adhesive Remover” does not include “Gasket or Thread Locking Adhesive Remover. ”

(3) “Aerosol Adhesive” means any adhesive packaged as an aerosol product in which the spray mechanism is permanently housed in a nonrefillable can designed for hand-held application without the need for ancillary hoses or spray equipment. Aerosol adhesives include special purpo se spray adhesives, mist spray adhesives, and web spray adhesives.

(4) “Aerosol Cooking Spray” means any aerosol produ ct designed either to reduce sticking on cooking and baking surfaces or to be ap plied on food, or both.

(5) “Aerosol Product” means a pressurized spray sys tem that dispenses product ingredients by means of a propellant contained in a product or a product's container, or by means of a mechanically induced fo rce. “Aerosol Product” does not include “Pump Spray.”Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-3 (6) “Agricultural Use” means the use of any pestici de or method or device for the control of pests in connection with the commercial production, storage or processing of any animal or plant crop. “Agricultu ral Use” does not include the sale or use of pesticides in properly labeled packa ges or containers which are intended for: (A) Home use, (B) Use in structural pest control, or (C) Industrial or Institutional use. For the purposes of this defini tion only:

“Home use” means use in a household or its immediat e environment.

“Structural pest control” means a use requiring a l icense under Chapter 14 (commencing with Section 8500), Division 3, of the Business and

Professions Code.

“Industrial use” means use for or in a manufacturin g, mining, or chemical process or use in the operation of factories, proce ssing plants, and similar

sites.

“Institutional use” means use within the confines o f, or on property necessary for the operation of buildings such as ho spitals, schools, libraries, auditoriums, and office complexes.

(7) “Air Freshener” means any product including, bu t not limited to, sprays, wicks, wipes, diffusers, powders, and crystals, designed o r labeled for the purpose of masking odors, or freshening, cleaning, scenting, o r deodorizing the air. “Air Freshener” includes dual purpose air freshener/disi nfectant products. “Air Freshener” does not include products that are used on the human body, products that function primarily as cleaning products as ind icated on a product label, “Odor Remover/Eliminator,” or “Toilet/Urinal Care Product .”

(8) “All Other Carbon-Containing Compounds” means a ll other compounds which

contain at least one carbon atom and are not a “Tab le B” or a “LVP-VOC.”

(9) “All Other Forms” means all consumer product fo rms for which no form-specific VOC standard is specified. Unless specified otherw ise by the applicable VOC standard, “all other forms” include, but are not li mited to, solids, liquids (which includes the liquid containing or liquid impregnate d portion of the cloth or paper wipes (towelettes), wicks, powders, and crystals.

(10) “Antimicrobial Hand or Body Cleaner or Soap” m eans a cleaner or soap which is designed to reduce the level of microorganisms on t he skin through germicidal activity, and is regulated as an over-the-counter d rug by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. “Antimicrobial Hand or Body Cleane r or Soap” includes, but is not limited to, (A) antimicrobial hand or body wash es/cleaners, (B) foodhandler hand washes, (C) healthcare personnel hand washes, (D) pre-operative skin preparations and (E) surgical scrubs. “Antimicrobi al Hand or Body Cleaner or Soap” does not include prescription drug products, antiperspirants,Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-4 “Astringent/Toner,” deodorant, “Facial Cleaner or S oap,” “General-use Hand or Body Cleaner or Soap,” “Hand Dishwashing Detergent” (including antimicrobial), “Heavy-duty Hand Cleaner or Soap,” “Medicated Astri ngent/Medicated Toner,” and “Rubbing Alcohol.”

(11) “Anti-Static Product” means a product that is labeled to eliminate, prevent, or inhibit the accumulation of static electricity. “A nti-Static Product” does not include “Electronic Cleaner,” “Floor Polish or Wax,” “Floor Coating,” and products that meet the definition of “Aerosol Coating Product” or “Architectural Coating.”

(12) “Architectural Coating” means a coating appli ed to stationary structures and their appurtenances, to mobile homes, to pavements, or to curbs.

(13) “Aromatic Compound” means a VOC that contains one or more benzene or equivalent heterocyclic rings.

(14) “Artist’s Solvent/Thinner” means any liquid produc t, labeled to meet ASTM D4236 – 95 (March 1, 2005) Standard Practice for La beling Art Materials for Chronic Health Hazards, which is incorporated by re ference herein, and packaged in a container equal to or less than 32 fl uid ounces, labeled to reduce the viscosity of, and or remove, art coating compos itions or components

.

(15) (13) “ASTM” means the American Society for Testing and M aterials ASTM

International

.

(16) ( 14) “Astringent/Toner” means any product designed or la beled to be applied to the skin for the purpose of cleaning or tightening pore s. This category also includes clarifiers and substrate-impregnated products. Thi s category does not include any hand, face, or body cleaner or soap product, “M edicated Astringent/Medicated Toner,” cold cream, lotion, an tiperspirant, or any Astringent/Toner product regulated as a drug by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

(17) ( 1 5 ) “Automotive Hard Paste Wax” means an automotive wax or polish which is: (A) designed to protect and improve the appearance of automotive paint surfaces; and (B) a solid at room temperature; and (C) contains 0% water by

formulation.

(18) ( 1 6 ) “Automotive Instant Detailer” means a product desig ned for use in a pump spray that is applied to the painted surface of aut omobiles and wiped off prior to the product being allowed to dry.

(19) ( 1 7 ) “Automotive Rubbing or Polishing Compound” means a product designed primarily to remove oxidation, old paint, scratches or “swirl marks,” and other defects from the painted surfaces of motor vehicles without leaving a protective

barrier.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-5 (20) ( 1 8 ) “Automotive Wax, Polish, Sealant or Glaze” means a product designed to seal out moisture, increase gloss, or otherwise enhance a motor vehicle’s painted surfaces. “Automotive Wax, Polish, Sealant or Glaz e” includes, but is not limited to, products designed for use in autobody repair sh ops and “drive-through” car washes, as well as products designed for the genera l public. “Automotive Wax, Polish, Sealant or Glaze” does not include “Automot ive Rubbing or Polishing Compound,” automotive wash and wax products, surfac tant-containing car wash products, and products designed for use on unpainte d surfaces such as bare metal, chrome, glass, or plastic.

(21) ( 1 9 ) “Automotive Windshield Washer Fluid (Dilutable)” me ans any liquid which meets the following criteria:

(A) the product is sold either in a container with a capacity of 55 10 gallons or more, or a container with a capacity of one quart o r less; and

(B) the product is designed or labeled for use in a motor vehicle windshield washer fluid system either as an anti-freeze or for the purpose of cleaning, washing, bug removal, or wetting the windshield(s).

“Automotive Windshield Washer Fluid (Dilutable)” do es not include any fluid which is placed in a new motor vehicle at the time the vehicle is manufactured.

(22) ( 2 0 ) “Automotive Windshield Washer Fluid (Pre-Mixed)” me ans any liquid which meets the following criteria:

(A) the product is sold in a container with a capac ity that is greater than one quart, but less than 55 10 gallons; and

(B) the product is designed or labeled for use in a motor vehicle windshield washer fluid system as an anti-freeze or for the pu rpose of cleaning, washing, bug removal, or wetting the windshield(s).

“Automotive Windshield Washer Fluid (Pre-Mixed)” do es not include any fluid which is placed in a new motor vehicle at the time the vehicle is manufactured.

(23) (2 1 ) “Bathroom and Tile Cleaner” means a product designe d or labeled to clean tile

or surfaces in bathrooms. “Bathroom and Tile Clean er” does not include

“Toilet/Urinal Care Product.”

(24) ( 22 ) “Brake Cleaner” means a cleaning product designed o r labeled to remove oil, grease, brake fluid, brake pad material or dirt fro m motor vehicle brake

mechanisms.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-6 (25) (23) “Bug and Tar Remover” means a product labeled to re move either or both of the following from painted motor vehicle surfaces witho ut causing damage to the finish: (A) biological-type residues such as insect carcasses and tree sap and, (B) road grime, such as road tar, roadway paint mar kings, and asphalt.

(26) (24) “California Sales” means the sales (net pounds of p roduct, less packaging and container, per year) in California for either the c alendar year immediately prior to the year that the information required by the Execu tive Officer pursuant to section 94513 (required information) is due or, if that dat a is not available, any consecutive 12 month period commencing no earlier t han 2 years prior to the due date of the required information. If direct sales data for California is not available, sales may be estimated by prorating national or reg ional sales data by population.

(27) (25) “Carburetor or Fuel-Injection Air Intake Cleaner” m eans a product designed or labeled to remove fuel deposits, dirt, or other con taminants from a carburetor, choke, throttle body of a fuel-injection system, or associated linkages. “Carburetor or Fuel-injection Air Intake Cleaner” d oes not include products designed or labeled exclusively to be introduced di rectly into the fuel lines or fuel storage tank prior to introduction into the carbure tor or fuel injectors, or products designed or labeled exclusively to be introduced du ring engine operation directly into air intake vacuum lines by using a pressurized sprayer wand.

(28) ( 26) “Carpet/Upholstery Cleaner” means a cleaning produc t designed or labeled for the purpose of eliminating dirt or stains on rugs, carpeting, or objects upholstered or covered with fabrics such as wool, cotton, nylon or other synthetic fabrics. “Carpet/Upholstery Cleaner” includes, but is not li mited to, products used on household furniture, the interior of motor vehicles , and products that make ”Fabric Protectant” claims. “Carpet/Upholstery Cle aner” does not include “Spot Remover,” vinyl or leather cleaners, ”Dry Cleaning Fluids ,” or products designed exclusively for use at industrial facilities engage d in furniture or carpet manufacturing.

(29) ( 27) “Charcoal Lighter Material” means any combustible m aterial designed to be applied on, incorporated in, added to, or used with charcoal to enhance ignition. “Charcoal Lighter Material” does not include any of the following: (A) electrical starters and probes, (B) metallic cylinders using p aper tinder, (C) natural gas, (D) propane, and (E) fat wood.

(30) ( 28) “Colorant” means any pigment or coloring material u sed in a consumer product for an aesthetic effect, or to dramatize an ingredi ent.

(31) ( 29) “Construction, Panel, and Floor Covering Adhesive” means any non-aerosol, one-component adhesive that is designed or labeled for the installation, remodeling, maintenance, or repair of: (A) structu ral and building components that include, but are not limited to, beams, trusse s, studs, paneling (drywall or drywall laminates, fiberglass reinforced plastic (F RP), plywood, particle board,Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-7 insulation board, pre-decorated hardboard or tilebo ard, etc.), ceiling and acoustical tile, molding, fixtures, countertops or countertop laminates, cove or wall bases, and flooring or subflooring; or (B) flo or or wall coverings that include, but are not limited to, wood or simulated wood cove ring, carpet, carpet pad or cushion, vinyl-backed carpet, flexible flooring mat erial, nonresilient flooring material, mirror tiles and other types of tiles, an d artificial grass. “Construction, Panel, and Floor Covering Adhesive” does not includ e “Floor Seam Sealer.”

(32) ( 30) “Consumer” means any person who seeks, purchases, o r acquires any consumer product for personal, family, household, o r institutional use. Persons acquiring a consumer product for resale are not “co nsumers” for that product.

(33) ( 31) “Consumer Product” means a chemically formulated pr oduct used by household and institutional consumers including, but not limi ted to, detergents; cleaning compounds; polishes; floor finishes; cosmetics; per sonal care products; home, lawn, and garden products; disinfectants; sanitizer s; aerosol paints; and automotive specialty products ; but does not include other paint products, furniture coatings, or architectural coatings. As used in this article, the term “consumer product” shall also refer to aerosol adhe sives, including aerosol adhesives used for consumer, industrial, and commer cial uses.

(34) ( 32) “Contact Adhesive” means a non-aerosol adhesive tha t: (A) is designed for application to both surfaces to be bonded together, and (B) is allowed to dry before the two surfaces are placed in contact with each other, and (C) forms an immediate bond that is impossible, or difficult, to reposition after both adhesivecoated surfaces are placed in contact with each oth er, and (D) does not need sustained pressure or clamping of surfaces after th e adhesive-coated surfaces have been brought together using sufficient momenta ry pressure to establish full

contact between both surfaces. “Contact Adhesive” does not include rubber cements that are primarily intended for use on pape r substrates. “Contact Adhesive” also does not include vulcanizing fluids that are designed and labeled for tire repair only.

(35) ( 33) “Contact Adhesive - General Purpose” means any cont act adhesive that is not a “Contact Adhesive - Special Purpose.”

(36) ( 34) “Contact Adhesive - Special Purpose” means a contac t adhesive that: (A) is used to bond melamine-covered board, unprimed metal , unsupported vinyl, Teflon, ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene, r ubber, high pressure laminate

or wood veneer 1/16 inch or less in thickness to an y porous or nonporous surface, and is sold in units of product, less pack aging, that contain more than eight fluid ounces, or (B) is used in automotive ap plications that are (1.) automotive under-the-hood applications requiring he at, oil or gasoline resistance, or (2.) body-side molding, automotive weatherstrip or decorative trim.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-8 (37) ( 35) “Container/Packaging” means the part or parts of th e consumer or institutional product which serve only to contain, enclose, incor porate, deliver, dispense, wrap or store the chemically formulated substance or mix ture of substances which is solely responsible for accomplishing the purposes f or which the product was designed or intended. “Container/Packaging” includ es any article onto or into which the principal display panel and other accompa nying literature or graphics are incorporated, etched, printed or attached.

(38) ( 3 6) “Crawling Bug Insecticide” means any insecticide pr oduct that is designed for use against ants, cockroaches, or other household c rawling arthropods, including, but not limited to, mites, silverfish or spiders. “Crawling Bug Insecticide” does not include products designed to be used exclusively on humans or animals, or any house dust mite product. For the purposes of this definition only:

“House dust mite product” means a product whose lab el, packaging, or accompanying literature states that the product is suitable for use against house dust mites, but does not indicate that the pr oduct is suitable for use against ants, cockroaches, or other household crawl ing arthropods.

“House dust mite” means mites which feed primarily on skin cells shed in the home by humans and pets and which belong to the phy lum Arthropoda, the subphylum Chelicerata, the class Arachnida, the sub class Acari, the order Astigmata, and the family Pyroglyphidae.

(39) ( 37) “Deodorant Body Spray” means:

(A) for products manufactured before January 1, 200 6: a “Personal Fragrance Product” with 20 percent or less fragranc e.

(B) for products manufactured on or after January 1 , 2006: a “Personal Fragrance Product” with 20 percent or less fragranc e, that is designed for application all over the human body to provide a scent. A “Deodorant Body Spray” product that indicates or de picts on the container or packaging, or on any sticker or label affixed thereto, that it can be used on or applied to the human axilla, is a “Deodorant” as defined in section 94501(d).

(40) ( 38) “Device” means any instrument or contrivance (other than a firearm) which is designed for trapping, destroying, repelling, or mi tigating any pest or any other form of plant or animal life (other than man and ot her than bacteria, virus, or other microorganism on or in living man or other li ving animals); but not including equipment used for the application of pesticides wh en sold separately therefrom.

(41) (39) “Disinfectant” means a product that is labeled as a “disinfectant”, or is labeled to destroy or irreversibly inactivate infectious or ot her undesirable bacteria, pathogenic fungi, or viruses on surfaces or inanima te objects and whose label isConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-9 registered as a “disinfectant” under the Federal In secticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136, et seq.). Pr oducts that are labeled as

both a “sanitizer” and a “disinfectant” are conside red disinfectants. “Disinfectant” does not include any of the following: (A) product s labeled solely for use on

humans or animals, (B) products labeled solely for agricu ltural use, (C) products labeled solely for use in swimming pools, therapeut ic tubs, or hot tubs, (D) products which are labeled to be used on heat sensi tive critical or semi-critical medical devices or medical equipment surfaces, (E) products which are premoistened wipes or towelettes sold exclusively to m edical, convalescent, or veterinary establishments, (F) products which are l abeled to be applied to food-contact surfaces and are not required to be ri nsed prior to contact with food, or (G) products which are labeled as “Bathroom and Tile Cleaners ,” “Glass

Cleaners ,” “General Purpose Cleaners ,” “Toilet/Urinal Care Products ,” “Metal

Polishe s ,” “Carpet Cleaners ,” or “Fabric Refreshers ” that may also make disinfecting or anti-microbial claims on the label.

(42) ( 40) “Distributor” means any person to whom a consumer p roduct is sold or supplied for the purposes of resale or distribution in comme rce, except that manufacturers, retailers, and consumers are not dis tributors.

(43) (41) “Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener” means an aeros ol air freshener with the liquid contents in two or more distinct phases that requires the product container be shaken before use to mix the phases, producing a n emulsion.

(44) ( 42) “Dry Cleaning Fluid” means any non-aqueous liquid p roduct designed and labeled exclusively for use on: (1) fabrics which a re labeled “for dry clean only,” such as clothing or drapery; or (2) “S-coded” fabri cs. “Dry Cleaning Fluid” includes, but is not limited to, those products use d by commercial dry cleaners

and commercial businesses that clean fabrics such a s draperies at the customer’s residence or work place. “Dry Cleaning Fluid” does not include “Spot Remover” or “Carpet/Upholstery Cleaner.” For the p urposes of this definition, Scoded fabric means an upholstery fabric designed to be cleaned only with waterfree spot cleaning products as specified by the Joi nt Industry Fabric Standards

Committee.”

(45) ( 43) “Dual Purpose Air Freshener/Disinfectant” means an aerosol product that is represented on the product container for use as bot h a disinfectant and an air freshener, or is so represented on any sticker, lab el, packaging, or literature attached to the product container.

(46) ( 44) “Dusting Aid” means a product designed or labeled t o assist in removing dust

and other soils from floors and other surfaces with out leaving a wax or silicone based coating. “Dusting Aid” does not include “Pre ssurized Gas Duster.”

(47) ( 45) “Electrical Cleaner” means a product labeled to rem ove heavy soils such as grease, grime, or oil from electrical equipment, including, but not limitedConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-10 to, electric motors, armatures, relays, electric pa nels, or generators. Electrical Cleaner does not include “General Purpose Cleaner,” “General Purpose Degreaser,” “Dusting Aid,” “Electronic Cleaner,” “E nergized Electrical Cleaner,” “Pressurized Gas Duster,” “Engine Degreaser,” “Anti -Static Product,” or products designed to clean the casings or housings of electr ical equipment.

(48) ( 46) “Electronic Cleaner” means a product labeled for th e removal of dirt, moisture, dust, flux, or oxides from the internal components of electronic or precision equipment such as circuit boards, and the internal components of electronic devices, including but not limited to, radios, comp act disc (CD) players, digital video disc (DVD) players, and computers. “Electron ic Cleaner” does not include “General Purpose Cleaner,” “General Purpose Degreas er,” “Dusting Aid,” “Pressurized Gas Duster,” “Engine Degreaser,” “Elec trical Cleaner,” “Energized Electrical Cleaner,” “Anti-Static Product,” or prod ucts labeled to clean the casings or housings of electronic equipment. “Electronic C leaner” does not include any product that meets both of the following criteria:

1) the product is labeled to clean and/or degrease electronic equipment, where cleaning and/or degreasing is accomplished when ele ctrical current exists, or when there is a residual electrical potential from a component;

2) the product label clearly displays the stateme nts: “Energized Electronic Equipment use only.”

(49) ( 47) “Energized Electrical Cleaner” means a product that meets both of the following

criteria:

1) the product is labeled to clean and/or degrease electrical equipment, where cleaning and/or degreasing is accomplished when ele ctrical current exists, or when there is a residual electrical potential from a component such as a capacitor;

2) the product label clearly displays the stateme nts: “Energized Equipment use

only. Not to be used for motorized vehicle mainten ance, or their parts.”

“Energized Electrical Cleaner” does not include “ Electronic Cleaner.”

(50) ( 4 8 ) “Engine Degreaser” means a cleaning product designe d or labeled to remove grease, grime, oil and other contaminants from the external surfaces of engines and other mechanical parts.

(51) ( 49 ) “Executive Officer” means the Executive Officer of the Air Resources Board, or his or her delegate.

(52) ( 5 0 ) “Existing Product” means any formulation of the sam e product category and form sold, supplied, manufactured, or offered for s ale in California prior to theConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-11 following dates, or any subsequently introduced ide ntical formulation:

(A) October 21, 1991, for all products listed in section 94509(a) that have initial

effective dates of January 1, 1993, or January 1, 1 994;

(B) January 6, 1993, for all products listed in s ection 94509(a) that have initial

effective dates of January 1, 1995, or January 1, 1 997, and charcoal lighter materials subject to section 94509(h);

(C) August 16, 1998, for all products listed in s ection 94509(a) that have initial

effective dates of January 1, 2001, January 1, 2002 , January 1, 2003, or January 1, 2005;

(D) November 19, 2000, for all products in the fo llowing product categories

listed in section 94509(a): “Non-aerosol General Pu rpose Degreaser,” “Sealant and Caulking Compound,” and “Tire Sealant and Inflator.”

(E) July 20, 2005, for all products listed in sec tion 94509(a) that have an

effective date of December 31, 2006, December 31, 2008, or December 31, 2009; and

(F) December 8, 2007, for all products listed in section 94509(a) that have an

initial effective date of December 31, 2008, or Dec ember 31, 2010 for Brake Cleaner, Carburetor or Fuel-Injection Air Intake Cl eaner, Aerosol Engine Degreaser, Resilient Flooring Material, Nonresilien t Flooring Material, Aerosol General Purpose Degreaser, and Aerosol Temp orary Hair Color.

(G) July 18, 2009, for all products listed in sec tion 94509(a) that have an initial

effective date of December 31, 2010, or December 31 , 2012, December 31, 2013, or December 31, 2014.

(53) ( 51) “Fabric Protectant” means:

(A) for products manufactured before December 31, 2008: a product designed

or labeled to be applied to fabric substrates to pr otect the surface from soiling from dirt and other impurities or to reduce absorption of liquid into the

fabric’s fibers. “Fabric Protectant” does not incl ude “Waterproofers,” products designed for use solely on leather, or pro ducts designed for use solely on fabrics which are labeled “for dry clean only” and sold in containers

of 10 fluid ounces or less.

(B) for products manufactured on or after Decembe r 31, 2008: a product

designed or labeled to be applied to fabric substra tes to protect the surface from soiling from dirt or other impurities or to re duce absorption of liquid into

the fabric’s fibers. “Fabric Protectant” does not include “Waterproofers,” or products labeled for use solely on leather. “Fabri c Protectant” does notConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-12 include pigmented products that are designed or lab eled to be used primarily for coloring, products used for construction, recon struction, modification, structural maintenance or repair of fabric substrat es, or products that renew or restore fabric and qualifying as either “Clear C oating” or “Vinyl/Fabric/Leather/Polycarbonate Coating” under section 94521(a).

(54) ( 52) “Fabric Refresher” means a product labeled to neutr alize or eliminate odors on non-laundered fabric including, but not limited to, soft household surfaces, rugs, carpeting, draperies, bedding, automotive interiors , footwear, athletic equipment, clothing and/or on household furniture or objects u pholstered or covered with fabrics such as, but not limited to, wool, cotton, or nylon. “Fabric Refresher” does not include “Anti-static Product,” “Carpet/Upholste ry Cleaner,” “Footwear or Leather Care Product,” “Spot Remover,” or “Disinfec tant,” or products labeled for application to both fabric and human skin.

(55) (53 ) “Fabric Softener-Single Use Dryer Product” means a laundry care product designed or labeled for single use in the clothes d ryer to impart softness to, or control static cling of, a load of washable fabrics ; and may impart a fragrance or scent. For the purpose of this definition only, “s ingle use” means a product that is intended for one time use during a single drying cycle and is removed after completion of the drying cycle. A “load” is the am ount of washable fabrics in a single drying cycle. “Fabric Softener-Single Use D ryer Product” includes treated nonwoven sheets which are typically packaged in box es with a multiple number of sheets. “Fabric Softener-Single Use Dryer Produ ct” does not include products applied to washable fabrics prior to placing the wa shable fabrics in the clothes dryer.

(56) (54) “Facial Cleaner or Soap” means a cleaner or soap de signed primarily to clean the face. “Facial Cleaner or Soap” includes, but i s not limited to, facial cleansing creams, semisolids, liquids, lotions, and substrate -impregnated forms. “Facial Cleaner or Soap” does not include prescription drug products, “Antimicrobial Hand or Body Cleaner or Soap,” “Astringent/Toner,” “General-use Hand or Body Cleaner or Soap,” “Medicated Astringent/Medicated T oner,” or “Rubbing Alcohol.”

(57) (55) “Fat Wood” means pieces of wood kindling with high naturally-occurring levels of sap or resin which enhance ignition of the kindl ing. “Fat wood” does not include any kindling with substances added to enhan ce flammability, such as wax-covered or wax-impregnated wood-based products.

(58) (56) “Flea and Tick Insecticide” means any insecticide p roduct that is designed for use against fleas, ticks, their larvae, or their eg gs. “Flea and Tick Insecticide” does not include products that are designed to be u sed exclusively on humans or animals and their bedding.

(59) (57) “Floor Coating” means an opaque coating that is lab eled and designed for application to flooring, including but not limited to, decks, porches, steps, andConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-13 other horizontal surfaces which may be subject to f oot traffic.

(60) (58 ) “Floor Maintenance Product” means any product desig ned or labeled to restore, maintain, or enhance a previously applied floor fin ish. “Floor Maintenance Product” includes, but is not limited to, products that are labeled as Spray Buff products or Floor Maintainers or Restorers. “Floor Maintenance Product” does not include floor polish products, products designe d solely for the purpose of cleaning, products designed or labeled exclusively for use on marble floors, or coatings subject to architectural coatings regulati ons.

(61) (59) ”Floor Polish or Wax” means a product designed or l abeled to polish, wax, condition, protect, temporarily seal, or otherwise enhance floor surfaces by leaving a protective finish that is designed or lab eled to be periodically replenished. “Floor Polish or Wax” does not includ e “Floor Maintenance Products,” “Floor Wax Stripper,” or coatings subjec t to architectural coatings regulations.

“Floor Polish or Wax” is divided into three subcat egories: products for resilient flooring materials, products for nonresilient floor ing materials and wood floor wax. For the purposes of this article:

(A) “Resilient Flooring Material” means flexible f looring material including but is not limited to, asphalt, cork, linoleum, no-wax, rubber, seamless vinyl, and vinyl composite flooring.

(B) “Nonresilient Flooring Material” means floor ing of a mineral content which

is not flexible. “Nonresilient Flooring material” includes but is not limited to terrazzo, marble, slate, granite, brick, stone, cer amic tile, and concrete.

(C) “Wood Floor Wax” means any wax-based products designed or labeled for

use solely on wood floors. “Wood Floor Wax” does n ot include products

that make the claim to “clean and wax” or “clean an d polish.”

(62) (60) “Floor Seam Sealer” means any product designed and labeled exclusively for bonding, fusing, or sealing (coating) seams between adjoining rolls of installed flexible sheet flooring.

(63) (61) “Floor Wax Stripper” means a product designed to re move natural or synthetic floor polishes or waxes through breakdown of the po lish or wax polymers, or by dissolving or emulsifying the polish or wax. “Floo r Wax Stripper” does not include aerosol floor wax strippers or products des igned to remove floor wax solely through abrasion.

(64) (62) “Flying Bug Insecticide” means any insecticide prod uct that is designed for use against flying insects or other flying arthropods, including but not limited to flies, mosquitoes, moths, or gnats. “Flying Bug Insectici de” does not include “waspConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-14 and hornet insecticide,” products that are designed to be used exclusively on humans or animals, or any moth-proofing product. F or the purposes of this definition only, “moth-proofing product” means a pr oduct whose label, packaging, or accompanying literature indicates that the produ ct is designed to protect fabrics from damage by moths, but does not indicate that the product is suitable for use against flying insects or other flying arth ropods.

(65) (63) “Footwear or Leather Care Product” means any produc t designed or labeled to be applied to footwear or to other leather articles /components, to maintain, enhance, clean, protect, or modify the appearance, durability, fit, or flexibility of the footwear or leather article/component. Footwea r includes both leather and non-leather foot apparel. “Footwear or Leather Car e Product” does not include “Fabric Protectant,” “General Purpose Adhesive,” “C ontact Adhesive,” “Vinyl/Fabric/Leather/Polycarbonate Coating,” as de fined in section 94521(a), “Rubber/Vinyl Protectant,” “Fabric Refresher,” prod ucts solely for deodorizing, or sealant products with adhesive properties used to c reate external protective layers greater than 2 millimeters thick.

(66) (64) “Fragrance” means a substance or complex mixture of aroma chemicals, natural essential oils, and other functional compon ents with a combined vapor pressure not in excess of 2 mm of Hg at 20 o C, the sole purpose of which is to impart an odor or scent, or to counteract a malodor

.

(67) (65) “Furniture Maintenance Product” means a wax, polish , conditioner, or any other product labeled for the purpose of polishing, prote cting or enhancing finished wood surfaces other than floors, and other furniture surfaces including but not limited to acrylics, ceramic, plastics, stone surfa ces, metal surfaces, and fiberglass. “Furniture Maintenance Product” does n ot include “Dusting Aids ,”

“Wood Cleaners ,” and products designed solely for the purpose of cleaning, or products designed to leave a permanent finish such as stains, sanding sealers and lacquers.

(68) (66) “Furniture Coating” means any paint designed for ap plication to room furnishings including, but not limited to, cabinets (kitchen, bath and vanity), tables, chairs, beds, and sofas.

(69) (67) “Gel” means a colloid in which the disperse phase h as combined with the continuous phase to produce a semisolid material, s uch as jelly.

(70) (68) “General Purpose Adhesive” means any non-aerosol ad hesive designed for use on a variety of substrates. “General Purpose Adhes ive” does not include (A) contact adhesives, (B) construction, panel, an d floor covering adhesives, (C) adhesives designed exclusively for application on one specific category of substrates (i.e., substrates that are composed of s imilar materials, such as different types of metals, paper products, ceramics , plastics, rubbers, or vinyls), or (D) adhesives designed exclusively for use on on e specific category of articlesConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-15 (i.e., articles that may be composed of different m aterials but perform a specific function, such as gaskets, automotive trim, weather -stripping, or carpets).

(71) (69) “General Purpose Cleaner” means a general purpose c leaning product labeled for use on a variety of hard surfaces, including sm all appliances. “General Purpose Cleaner” includes, but is not limited to, p roducts designed or labeled for general floor cleaning, kitchen, countertop, or si nk cleaning, and cleaners designed or labeled to be used on a variety of hard surfaces such as stovetops, cooktops, or microwaves.

(72) (70) “General Purpose Degreaser” means any product label ed to remove or dissolve grease, grime, oil and other oil-based contaminants from a variety of substrates, including automotive or miscellaneous metallic part s. “General Purpose Degreaser” does not include “Engine Degreaser,” “Ge neral Purpose Cleaner,” “Adhesive Remover,” “Electronic Cleaner,” “Electric al Cleaner,” “Energized Electrical Cleaner,” “Metal Polish/Cleanser,” produ cts used exclusively in “solvent cleaning tanks or related equipment,” or products t hat are (A) sold exclusively to establishments which manufacture or construct goods or commodities; and (B) labeled “not for retail sale.” “Solvent cleaning t anks or related equipment” includes, but is not limited to, cold cleaners, vap or degreasers, conveyorized degreasers, film cleaning machines, or products des igned to clean miscellaneous metallic parts by immersion in a container.

(73) (71) “General-use Hand or Body Cleaner or Soap” means a cleaner or soap designed to be used routinely on the skin to clean or remove typical or common dirt and soils. “General-use Hand or Body Cleaner or Soap” includes, but is not limited to, hand or body washes, dual-purpose shamp oo-body cleaners, shower or bath gels, and moisturizing cleaners or soaps. “General-use Hand or Body Cleaner or Soap” does not include prescription drug products, “Antimicrobial Hand or Body Cleaner or Soap,” “Astringent/Toner,” “Facial Cleaner or Soap,” “Hand Dishwashing Detergent” (including antimicrobi al), “Heavy-duty Hand Cleaner or Soap,” “Medicated Astringent/Medicated T oner,” or “Rubbing Alcohol.”

(74) (72) “Glass Cleaner” means a cleaning product designed o r labeled primarily for cleaning surfaces made of glass. “Glass Cleaner” d oes not include products designed or labeled solely for the purpose of cleaning optical material s used in eyeglasses, photographic equipment, scientific equi pment and photocopying

machines.

(75) (73) “Global Warming Potential (GWP)” means the radiati ve forcing impact of one mass-based unit of a given greenhouse gas relative to an equivalent unit of carbon dioxide over a given period of time.

(76) (74) “Global Warming Potential Value” or “GWP Value” mea ns the global warming potential value of a chemical or compound as specif ied in the IPCC: 1995 Second Assessment Report (SAR), Table 2.14, in Clim ate Change 2007: TheConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-16 Physical Sciences Basis. Contribution of Working Gr oup I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which is incorporated by reference herein.

If Table 2.14 does not contain a SAR 100-year GWP V alue for a specific chemical or compound, then the 100-year GWP Value i n Table 2.14 for that chemical or compound shall be used. If there is no 100-year GWP Value for a chemical or compound listed in Table 2.14 or GWP Va lue listed in Table 2.15, then the GWP Value is assumed to be equal to the GW P limit of the applicable product category.

(77) (75) “Graffiti Remover” means a product labeled to remov e spray paint, ink, marker, crayon, lipstick, nail polish, or shoe polish, from a variety of non-cloth or

non-fabric substrates. “Graffiti Remover” does not include “Paint Remover or Stripper,” “Nail Polish Remover,” or “Spot Remover. ” Products labeled for dual use as both a paint stripper and graffiti remover a re considered “Graffiti

Removers.”

(78) (76) ”Hair Mousse” means a hairstyling foam designed to facilitate styling of a coiffure and provide limited holding power.

(79) (77) ”Hair Shine” means any product designed for the pri mary purpose of creating a shine when applied to the hair. “Hair Shine” inclu des, but is not limited to, dual-use products designed primarily to impart a sh een to the hair. “Hair Shine” does not include “Hair Spray,” “Hair Mousse,” “Hair Styling Product,” “Hair Styling Gel,” or products whose primary purpose is to condi tion or hold the hair.

(80) (78) ”Hair Styling Gel” means a consumer product manufac tured before December 31, 2006, that is a high viscosity, often gelatinous, product that contains a resin and is designed for the applicatio n to hair to aid in styling and sculpting of the hair coiffure.

(81) (79) ”Hair Spray” means:

(A) for products manufactured before December 31, 2 006: a consumer product designed primarily for the purpose of dispensing dr oplets of a resin on and into a hair coiffure which will impart sufficient r igidity to the coiffure to establish or retain the style for a period of time, and

(B) for products manufactured on or after December 31, 2006: a consumer product that is applied to styled hair, and is desi gned or labeled to provide sufficient rigidity, to hold, retain and/or (finish ) the style of the hair for a period of time. “Hair Spray” includes aerosol hair sprays, pump hair sprays, spray waxes; color, glitter, or sparkle hairsprays that make finishing claims; and products that are both a styling and finishing product. “Hair Spray” does not include spray products that are intended to aid in styling but does notConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-17 provide finishing of a hairstyle.

For the purposes of this subchapter, “finish” or “f inishing” means the maintaining and/or holding of previously styled hair for a peri od of time.

For the purposes of this subchapter, “styling” mean s the forming, sculpting, or manipulating the hair to temporarily alter the hair 's shape.

(82) (80) ”Hair Styling Product” means a consumer product man ufactured on or after December 31, 2006, that is designed or labeled for the application to wet, damp or dry hair to aid in defining, shaping, lifting, s tyling and/or sculpting of the hair. “Hair Styling Product” includes, but is not limited to hair balm, clay, cream, creme, curl straightener, gel, liquid, lotion, past e, pomade, putty, root lifter, serum, spray gel, stick, temporary hair straightene r, wax, spray products that aid in styling but do not provide finishing of a hairst yle, and leave-in volumizers, detanglers and/or conditioners that make styling cl aims. “Hair Styling Product” does not include “Hair Mousse,” “Hair Shine,” “Hair Spray,” or shampoos and/or conditioners that are rinsed from the hair prior to styling.

For the purposes of this subchapter, “finish” or “f inishing” means the maintaining and/or holding of previously styled hair for a peri od of time. For the purposes of this subchapter, “styling” mean s the forming, sculpting, or manipulating the hair to temporarily alter the hair 's shape.

(83) (81) “Heavy-Duty Hand Cleaner or Soap” means a product d esigned to clean or remove difficult dirt and soils such as oil, grease , grime, tar, shellac, putty, printer’s ink, paint, graphite, cement, carbon, asp halt, or adhesives from the hand with or without the use of water. “Heavy-duty Hand Cleaner or Soap” does not include prescription drug products, “Antimicrobial Hand or Body Cleaner or Soap,” “Astringent/Toner,” “Facial Cleaner or Soap, ” “General-use Hand or Body Cleaner or Soap,” “Medicated Astringent/Medicated T oner” or “Rubbing Alcohol.”

(84) (82) “Herbicide” means a pesticide product designed to k ill or retard a plant’s growth, but excludes products that are: (A) for agr icultural use, or (B) restricted materials that require a permit for use and possession.

(85) “High-Temperature Coating” means a high performance coating labeled and formulated for application to substrates exposed co ntinuously or intermittently to temperatures above 204 o C (400 o F).

(86) (83) “Household Product” means any consumer product that is primarily designed to be used inside or outside of living quarters or res idences that are occupied or intended for occupation by individuals, including t he immediate surroundings.

(87) “Industrial Maintenance Coating” means a high performance architectural coating, including primers, sealers, undercoaters, intermediate coats, andConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-18 topcoats formulated for application to substrates, including floors, exposed to one or more of the following extreme environmental cond itions listed below and labeled “For industrial use only” or “For professio nal use only.”

(A) Immersion in water, wastewater, or chemical s olutions (aqueous and nonaqueous solutions), or chronic exposure of interior surfaces to moisture condensation; or

(B) Acute or chronic exposure to corrosive, caust ic or acidic agents, or to chemicals, chemical fumes, or chemical mixtures or solutions; or

(C) Frequent exposure to temperatures above 121 o C (250 o F); or

(D) Frequent heavy abrasion, including mechanical wear and frequent scrubbing with industrial solvents, cleansers, or s couring agents; or

(E) Exterior exposure of metal structures and str uctural components.

(88) (84) “Insect Repellent” means a pesticide product that i s designed to be applied on human skin, hair or attire worn on humans in order to prevent contact with or repel biting insects or arthropods.

(89) (85) “Insecticide” means a pesticide product that is des igned for use against insects or other arthropods, but excluding products that ar e: (A) for agricultural use, or (B) for a use which requires a structural pest cont rol license under Chapter 14 (commencing with Section 8500) of the Business and Professions Code, or (C) restricted materials that require a permit for use and possession.

(90) (86) “Insecticide Fogger” means any insecticide product designed to release all or most of its content, as a fog or mist, into indoor areas during a single application.

(91) (87) “Institutional Product” or “Industrial and Institut ional (I&I) Product” means a consumer product that is designed for use in the ma intenance or operation of an establishment that: (A) manufactures, transports, or sells goods or commodities, or provides services for profit; or (B) is engaged in the nonprofit promotion of a particular public, educational, or charitable cause . “Establishments” include, but are not limited to, government agencies, factories, schools, hospitals, sanitariums, prisons, restaurants, hotels, stores, automobile service and parts centers, health clubs, theaters, or transportation companies. “Institutional Product” does not include household products and pr oducts that are incorporated into or used exclusively in the manufacture or cons truction of the goods or

commodities at the site of the establishment.

(92) (88) “Label” means any written, printed, or graphic matt er affixed to, applied to, attached to, blown into, formed, molded into, embos sed on, or appearing upon any consumer product or consumer product package, f or purposes of branding,Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-19 identifying, or giving information with respect to the product or to the contents of the package.

(93) (89) “Laundry Prewash” means a product that is designed for application to a fabric prior to laundering and that supplements and contri butes to the effectiveness of laundry detergents and/or provides specialized perf ormance.

(94) (90) “Laundry Starch/Sizing/Fabric Finish Product” means a product that is labeled for application to a fabric, either during or after laundering, to impart and prolong a crisp, fresh look and may also act to help ease i roning of the fabric. “Laundry Starch/Sizing/Fabric Finish Product” includes, but is not limited to, starch, sizing,

and fabric finish.

(95) (91) “Lawn and Garden Insecticide” means an insecticide product labeled primarily to be used in household lawn and garden areas to pr otect plants from insects or other arthropods. Notwithstanding the requirements of section 94512(a) aerosol “Lawn and Garden Insecticide” may claim to kill ins ects or other arthropods.

(96) (92) “Liquid” means a substance or mixture of substances which is capable of a visually detectable flow as determined under ASTM D -4359-90 (May 25, 1990) Standard Test Method for Determining Whether a Mate rial Is a Liquid or a Solid, which is incorporated by reference herein . “Liquid” does not include powders or other materials that are composed entirely of solid particles.

(97) (93) ”Lubricant” means a product that reduces friction, heat, noise, or wear between moving parts, or loosens rusted or immovable parts or mechanisms. “Lubricant” does not include automotive power steering fluids; products for use inside power generating motors, engines, and turbines, and their associated power-transfer gearboxes; two cycle oils or other products designe d to be added to fuels; products for use on the human body or animals or pr oducts that are (1) sold exclusively to establishments which manufacture or construct goods or commodities, and (2) labeled “not for retail sale.”

(98) (94) “LVP-VOC” means a chemical “compound” or “mixture” that contains at least

one carbon atom and meets one of the following:

(A) has a vapor pressure less than 0.1 mm Hg at 20 o C, as determined by ARB Method 310; or

(B) is a chemical “compound” with more than 12 car bon atoms, or a chemical

“mixture” comprised solely of “compounds” with more than 12 carbon atoms, as verified by formulation data, and the vapor pres sure and boiling point are unknown; or

(C) is a chemical “compound” with a boiling point greater than 216 o C, as

determined by ARB Method 310; orConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-20 (D) is the weight percent of a chemical “mixture” t hat boils above 216 o C, as determined by ARB Method 310.

For the purposes of the definition of LVP-VOC, chem ical “compound” means a

molecule of definite chemical formula and isomeric structure, and chemical “mixture” means a substance comprised of two or mor e chemical “compounds.”

(99) (95) “Manufacturer” means any person who imports, manufa ctures, assembles, produces, packages, repackages, or relabels a consu mer product.

(100) (96) “Medicated Astringent/Medicated Toner” means any pr oduct regulated as a drug by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) whic h is applied to the skin for the purpose of cleaning or tightening pores. “Medi cated Astringent/Medicated Toner” includes, but is not limited to, clarifiers and substrate-impregnated products. “Medicated Astringent/Medicated Toner” d oes not include hand, face, or body cleaner or soap products, “Personal Fragran ce Product,” “Astringent/Toner,” cold cream, lotion, antiperspir ants, or products that must be purchased with a doctor’s prescription.

(101) (97) “Metal Polish/Cleanser” means any product designed primarily to improve the appearance of finished metal, metallic, or metalliz ed surfaces by physical or chemical action. To “improve the appearance” means to remove or reduce stains, impurities, or oxidation from surfaces or t o make surfaces smooth and shiny. “Metal Polish/Cleanser” includes, but is no t limited to, metal polishes used on brass, silver, chrome, copper, stainless steel a nd other ornamental metals.

“Metal Polish/Cleanser” does not include “Automotiv e Wax, Polish, Sealant or Glaze,” Tire or Wheel Cleaner,” “Paint Remover or S tripper,” products designed and labeled exclusively for automotive and marine d etailing, or products designed for use in degreasing tanks.

(102) (98) ”Mist Spray Adhesive” means any aerosol adhesive w hich is not a “Special Purpose Spray Adhesive” and which delivers a partic le or mist spray, resulting in the formation of fine, discrete particles that yiel d a generally uniform and smooth application of adhesive to the substrate.

(103) (99) “Motor Vehicle Wash” means a product designed or l abeled to wash, wash and wax, wash and shine, or wash and/or clean the e xterior surface of motor vehicles. “Motor Vehicle Wash” includes, but is no t limited to, products for use in commercial, fleet, hand, and “drive through” car wa shes; commercial truck washing or large vehicle washing stations; vehicle dealers and repair shops as well as products intended for household consumer us e. “Motor Vehicle Wash” does not include “Bug and Tar Remover,” “Glass Clea ner,” “Tire or Wheel Cleaner,” and products labeled for use exclusively on locomotives or aircraft.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-21 (104) (100) “Multi-purpose Dry Lubricant” means any lubricant w hich is: (A) designed or labeled to provide lubricity solely by depositing a thin film of graphite, molybdenum disulfide (“moly”), or polytetrafluoroet hylene or closely related fluoropolymer (“teflon”) on surfaces, and (B) desig ned or labeled for general purpose lubrication, or for use in a wide variety o f applications.

(105) (101) “Multi-purpose Lubricant” means any lubricant desig ned or labeled for general purpose lubrication, or a lubricant labeled for use in a wide variety of applications. “Multi-purpose Lubricant” does not i nclude “Multi-purpose Dry Lubricant,” “Penetrant,” or “Silicone-based Multi-P urpose Lubricant.”

(106) (102) ”Multi-purpose Solvent” means:

(A) for products manufactured before January 1, 200 8: any organic liquid designed to be used for a variety of purposes, incl uding cleaning or degreasing of a variety of substrates, or thinning, dispersing or dissolving other organic materials. “Multi-purpose Solvent” i ncludes solvents used in institutional facilities, except for laboratory rea gents used in analytical, educational, research, scientific or other laborato ries. “Multi-purpose

Solvent” does not include solvents used in cold cle aners, vapor degreasers, conveyorized degreasers or film cleaning machines, or solvents that are incorporated into, or used exclusively in the manuf acture or construction of, the goods or commodities at the site of the establi shment.

(B) for products manufactured on or after January 1 , 2008: any liquid product designed or labeled to be used for dispersing, or dissolving, or removing contaminants or other organic materials. “Multi-pu rpose Solvent” also

includes: (A) (1) products that do not display specific use instruct ions on the product container or packaging, (B) (2) products that do not specify an enduse function or application on the product containe r or packaging, and (C) (3) solvents used in institutional facilities, except f or laboratory reagents used in analytical, educational, research, scientific or ot her laboratories. , (4) “Paint Clean-up” products, and (5) products labeled to pre pare surfaces for painting. “Multi-purpose Solvent” does not include solvents used in cold cleaners, vapor degreasers, conveyorized degreasers or film cleaning machines, solvents labeled exclusively for the clea n-up of application equipment used for polyaspartic and polyurea coatin gs, or solvents that are incorporated into, or used exclusively in the manuf acture or construction of, the goods or commodities at the site of the establi shment. “Multi-purpose Solvent” also does not include any product making a ny representation that the product may be used as, or is suitable for use as a consumer product which qualifies under another definition in section 94508; such products are not Multi-purpose Solvents and are subject to the “ Most Restrictive Limit” provision of section 94512.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-22 (107) (103) “Nail Polish” means any clear or colored coating de signed for application to the fingernails or toenails and including but not l imited to, lacquers, enamels, acrylics, base coats and top coats.

(108) (104) “Nail Polish Remover” means a product designed to r emove nail polish and coatings from fingernails or toenails.

(109) (105) “Non-Carbon Containing Compound” means any compound which does not contain any carbon atoms.

(110) (106) “Non-Selective Terrestrial Herbicide” means a terre strial herbicide product that is toxic to plants without regard to species.

(111) (107) “Odor Remover/Eliminator” means a product that is designed or labeled to be applied exclusively to hard surfaces to inhibit the ability of soils to create malodors, or functions to entrap, encapsulate, neut ralize, convert or eliminate

malodor molecules. “Odor Remover/Eliminator” does n ot include products designed or labeled for use in cleaning soils from hard surfaces, laundering, softening, de-wrinkling or cleaning fabrics, or dis hwashing, or products that are defined as “Air Freshener,” “Bathroom and Tile Clea ner,” “Carpet/Upholstery Cleaner,” “Fabric Refresher,” “General Purpose Clea ner,” “Toilet/Urinal Care Product,” “Disinfectant,” or “Sanitizer.”

(112) (108) “Oven Cleaner” means any cleaning product designed or labeled to clean and to remove dried or baked on food deposits from oven walls.

(113) (109) “Paint” means any pigmented liquid, liquefiable, or mastic composition designed for application to a substrate in a thin l ayer which is converted to an opaque solid film after application and is used for protection, decoration or identification, or to serve some functional purpose such as the filling or concealing of surface irregularities or the modific ation of light and heat radiation

characteristics.

(114) “Paint Clean-up” means any liquid product labeled for cleaning oil-based or water-based paint, lacquer, varnish, or related coa tings from, but not limited to, painting equipment or tools, plastics, or metals.

(115) (110) “Paint Remover or Stripper” means any product desig ned to strip or remove paints or other related coatings, by chemical actio n, from a substrate without markedly affecting the substrate. “Paint Remover o r Stripper” does not include “Multi-purpose Solvent,” paint brush cleaners, prod ucts designed and labeled exclusively as “Graffiti Remover,” and hand cleaner products that claim to remove paints and other related coatings from skin.

(116) (111) “Paint Thinner” means any liquid product used for r educing the viscosity of coating compositions or components, that prominentl y displays the term “PaintConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-23 Thinner,” “Lacquer Thinner,” “Thinner,” or “Reducer ” on the front panel of its packaging. “Paint Thinner” does not include thinne rs labeled for the thinning of Industrial Maintenance Coatings, Zinc-Rich Primers, and High Temperature Coatings. “Paint Thinner” also does not include pro ducts labeled and used exclusively as a component in a specific coating. “Paint Thinner” also does not

include “Artist’s Solvent/Thinner.”

(117) (112) “Penetrant” means a lubricant designed or labeled primarily to loosen metal parts that have bonded together due to rusting, oxi dation, or other causes. “Penetrant” does not include “Multi-purpose Lubrica nt” that claim to have penetrating qualities, but are not labeled primaril y to loosen bonded parts.

(118) (113) “Person” shall have the same meaning as defined in Health and Safety Code

Section 39047.

(119) (114) “Personal Fragrance Product” means any product whi ch is applied to the human body or clothing for the primary purpose of a dding a scent or masking a malodor, including, but not limited to, cologne, pe rfume, aftershave, toilet water, lotion, powder, body mist, and body spray. “Person al Fragrance Product” does not include: (A) Deodorant, as defined in section 94501(d); (B) medicated products designed primarily to alleviate fungal or bacterial growth on feet or other areas of the body; (C) mouthwashes, breath freshene rs and deodorizers; (D) lotions, moisturizers, powders or other skin care p roducts designed or labeled to be used primarily to alleviate skin conditions such as dryness and irritations; (E) products designed exclusively to be applied to huma n genitalia areas, undergarments, and any paper products, napkins or o ther products that are affixed to undergarments, such as sanitary pads; (F ) soaps, shampoos, and products primarily used to clean the human body; an d (G) fragrance products designed to be used exclusively on non-human animal s.

(120) (115) “Pesticide” means and includes any substance or mix ture of substances labeled, designed, or intended for use in preventin g, destroying, repelling or mitigating any pest, or any substance or mixture of substances labeled, designed, or intended for use as a defoliant, desic cant, or plant regulator, provided that the term “pesticide” will not include any substance, mixture of substances, or device which the United States Envir onmental Protection Agency does not consider to be a pesticide.

(121) (116) “Pressurized Gas Duster” means a pressurized produc t labeled to remove dust from a surface solely by means of mass air or gas flow, including surfaces such as photographs, photographic film negatives, c omputer keyboards, and other types of surfaces that cannot be cleaned with solvents. “Pressurized Gas Duster” does not include “Dusting Aid,” “General Pu rpose Cleaner,” “Electrical Cleaner,” “Electronic Cleaner,” “Energized Electric al Cleaner,” or “Anti-Static Product.” Pressurized Gas Duster does not include p roducts labeled exclusively to remove dust from equipment where dust removal is accomplished when: electric current exists; residual electrical potent ial from a component such as aConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-24 capacitor exists; or an open flame exists, as long as the “Principal Display Panel” clearly displays the statement: “Energized Equipme nt use only.”

(122) (117) “Principal Display Panel or Panels” means that part , or those parts of a label that are so designed as to most likely be displayed , presented, shown or examined under normal and customary conditions of d isplay or purchase. Whenever a principal display panel appears more tha n once, all requirements pertaining to the “principal display panel” shall p ertain to all such “principal display panels.”

(123) (118) “Product Brand Name” means the name of the product exactly as it appears on the principal display panel of the product.

(124) (119) “Product Category” means the applicable category wh ich best describes the product as listed in this Section 94508.

(125) (120) “Product Form,” for the purpose of complying with S ection 94513 only, means the applicable form which most accurately describes the product's dispensing

form as follows:

A = Aerosol Product

S = Solid P = Pump Spray L = Liquid

SS = Semisolid

O = Other

(126) (121) “Propellant” means a liquefied or compressed gas t hat is used in whole or in part, such as a cosolvent, to expel a liquid or any other material from the same self-pressurized container or from a separate conta iner.

(127) (122) “Pump Spray” means a packaging system in which the product ingredients within the container are not under pressure and in which the product is expelled only while a pumping action is applied to a button, trigger or other actuator.

(128) (123) “Responsible Party” means the company, firm or est ablishment which is listed on the product' s label. If the label lists two companies, firms o r establishments, the responsible party is the party which the product was “manufactured for” or “distributed by,” as noted on the label.

(129) (124) ”Restricted Materials” means pesticides established as restricted materials under Title 3, California Code of Regulations, sect ion 6400.

(130) (125) ”Retailer” means any person who sells, supplies, or offers consumer products for sale directly to consumers.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-25 (131) (126) ”Retail Outlet” means any establishment at which co nsumer products are sold, supplied, or offered for sale directly to con sumers.

(132) (127) ”Rubber/Vinyl Protectant” means:

(A) for products manufactured before December 31, 2008: any product

designed to protect, preserve or renew vinyl, rubbe r, and plastic on vehicles, tires, luggage, furniture, and household products s uch as vinyl covers, clothing, and accessories. “Rubber/Vinyl Protectan t” does not include products primarily designed to clean the wheel rim, such as aluminum or magnesium wheel cleaners, and tire cleaners that do not leave an appearance-enhancing or protective substance on the tire.

(B) for products manufactured on or after Decembe r 31, 2008: any product

labeled to protect, preserve or renew vinyl, or rub ber on vehicles, tires, luggage, furniture, and/or household products such as vinyl covers, clothing, or accessories. “Rubber/Vinyl Protectant” does not include: products labeled to clean the wheel rim, such as aluminum or magnesi um wheel cleaners; tire cleaners that do not leave an appearance-enhancing or protective substance on the tire; pigmented products designed or labeled to be used primarily for coloring; products used for construction, reconstru ction, modification, structural maintenance or repair of rubber or vinyl substrates; or products,

other than those labeled to be used on vehicle tire s, qualifying as either “Clear Coating” or “Vinyl/Fabric/Leather/Polycarbon ate Coating” under section 94521(a).

(133) (128) ”Rubbing Alcohol” means any product containing isop ropyl alcohol (also called isopropanol) or denatured ethanol and labele d for topical use, usually to decrease germs in minor cuts and scrapes, to reliev e minor muscle aches, as a rubefacient, and for massage.

(134) (129) ”Sanitizer” means a product that is labeled as a “s anitizer,” or is labeled to reduce, but not necessarily eliminate, microorganis ms in the air, on surfaces, or on inanimate objects, and whose label is registered as a “sanitizer” under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA; 7 U.S.C. section 136 et seq.). Products that are labeled as both a “sanitizer” and a “disinfectant”

are considered disinfectants. “Sanitizer” does not include (A) “Disinfectant,” (B) products labeled solely for use on humans or an imals, (C) products labeled solely for agricultural use, (D) products labeled s olely for use in swimming pools, therapeutic tubs, or hot tubs, (E) products which a re labeled to be used on heat

sensitive critical or semi-critical medical devices or medical equipment surfaces, (F) products which are pre-moistened wipes or towel ettes sold exclusively to medical, convalescent or veterinary establishments (G) products which are labeled to be applied to food-contact surfaces and are not required to be rinsed prior to contact with food, or (H) products which a re labeled as “Bathroom and Tile Cleaner,” “Glass Cleaner,” “General Purpose Cl eaner,” “Toilet/Urinal CareConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-26 Product,” “Metal Polish,” “Carpet Cleaner,” or “Fab ric Refresher” that may also make sanitizing or anti-microbial claims on the lab el.

(135) (130) ”Sealant or Caulking Compound” means any product wi th adhesive properties that is designed to fill, seal, waterpro of, or weatherproof gaps or joints between two surfaces. “Sealant or Caulking Compoun d” does not include roof cements and roof sealants; insulating foams; remova ble caulking compounds; clear/paintable/water resistant caulking compounds; floor seam sealers; products designed exclusively for automotive uses; or sealer s that are applied as continuous coatings. “Sealant or Caulking Compound” also does not include units of product, less packaging, which weigh more than one pound and consist of more than 16 fluid ounces. For the purposes of t his definition only:

“Removable caulking compounds” means a compound whi ch temporarily seals

windows or doors for three to six month time interv als.

“Clear/paintable/water resistant caulking compounds ” means a compound which contains no appreciable level of opaque fillers or pigments; transmits most or all visible light through the caulk when cured; is pain table; and is immediately resistant to precipitation upon application.

“Sealant or Caulking Compound” is divided into two subcategories:

(A) “Chemically Curing Sealant or Caulking Compound ” means any “Sealant or Caulking Compound” which achieves its final composi tion and physical form through a chemical curing process, where product in gredients participate in a chemical reaction in the presence of a catalyst tha t causes a change in

chemical structure and leads to the release of chem ical byproducts. “Chemically Curing Sealant or Caulking Compound” in cludes, but is not limited to, products that utilize silicone, polyure thane, silyl-terminated polyether, or silyl-terminated polyurethane reactiv e chemistries. “Chemically Curing Sealant or Caulking Compound” does not inclu de products which are not solely dependent on a chemically curing process to achieve the cured

state.

(B) “Non-Chemically Curing Sealant or Caulking Comp ound” means any “Sealant or Caulking Compound” not defined under “Chemically Curing Sealant or Caulking Compound.”

(136) (131) “Semisolid” means a product that, at room temperatu re, will not pour, but will spread or deform easily, including but not limited to gels, pastes, and greases.

(137) (132) ”Shaving Cream” means an aerosol product which disp enses a foam lather intended to be used with a blade or cartridge razor , or other wet-shaving system, in the removal of facial or other bodily hair. “Sh aving Cream” does not include “Shaving Gel.”Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-27 (138) (133) “Shaving Gel” means an aerosol product which dispe nses a post-foaming semi-solid designed to be used with a blade, cartri dge razor, or other shaving system in the removal of facial or other bodily hai r. “Shaving Gel” does not include “Shaving Cream.”

(139) (134) ”Silicone-based Multi-purpose Lubricant” means any lubricant which is:

(A) designed and labeled to provide lubricity prim arily through the use of silicone compounds including, but not limited to, polydimeth ylsiloxane, and

(B) designed and labeled for general purpose lubri cation, or for use in a wide variety of applications. “Silicone-based Multi-pur pose Lubricant” does not include products designed and labeled exclusively to releas e manufactured products

from molds.

(140) (135) “Single Phase Aerosol Air Freshener” means an aeros ol air freshener with the liquid contents in a single homogeneous phase a nd which does not require that the product container be shaken before use.

(141) (136) “Solid” means a substance or mixture of substances which, either whole or subdivided (such as the particles comprising a powd er), is not capable of visually

detectable flow as determined under ASTM D-4359-90 (May 25, 1990) Standard Test Method for Determining Whether a Material Is a Liquid or a Solid, which is incorporated by reference herein

.

(142) (137) “Special Purpose Spray Adhesive” means an aerosol a dhesive that meets any of the following definitions:

(A) “Mounting Adhesive” means an aerosol adhesive d esigned to permanently mount photographs, artwork, and any other drawn or printed media to a backing (paper, board, cloth, etc.) without causing discoloration to the

artwork.

(B) “Flexible Vinyl Adhesive” means an aerosol adhe sive designed to bond flexible vinyl to substrates. Flexible vinyl means a nonrigid polyvinyl chloride plastic with at least five percent, by weight, of p lasticizer content. A plasticizer is a material, such as a high boiling p oint organic solvent, that is incorporated into a vinyl to increase its flexibili ty, workability, or distensibility, and may be determined using ASTM Method E260-91 (Ja n. 25, 1991) Standard Practice for Packed Column Gas Chromatogra phy, which is incorporated by reference herein, or from product formulation data.

(C) “Polystyrene Foam Adhesive” means an aerosol ad hesive designed to bond polystyrene foam (e.g. Styrofoam®, expanded polysty rene foam, etc.) to

substrates.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-28 (D) “Automobile Headliner Adhesive” means an aeroso l adhesive designed to bond together layers in motor vehicle headliners.

(E) “Polyolefin Adhesive” means an aerosol adhesive designed to bond polyolefins (e.g. polyethylene, polypropylene, etc. ) to substrates.

(F) “Laminate Repair/Edgebanding Adhesive” means an aerosol adhesive designed for:

(1) the touch-up or repair of items laminated with high pressure laminates (e.g. lifted edges, delaminations, etc.), or for (2) the touch-up, repair, or attachment of edgeban ding materials, including, but not limited to, other laminates, synthetic marb le, veneers, wood moulding, and decorative metals.

For the purposes of this definition “high pressur e laminate” means sheet materials which consist of paper, fabric, or other core material that have been laminated at temperatures exceeding 265 degree s F, and at pressures between 1,000 and 1,400 psi.

(G) “Automotive Engine Compartment Adhesive” means an aerosol adhesive designed for use in motor vehicle under-the-hood ap plications which require oil and plasticizer resistance, as well as high she ar strength, at temperatures

of 200-275 o F.

(143) (138) “Spot Remover” means any product labeled to clean localized areas, or remove localized spots or stains on cloth or fabric such as drapes, carpets, upholstery, or clothing, that does not require subs equent laundering to achieve stain removal. “Spot Remover” does not include “Dr y Cleaning Fluid,” “Laundry Prewash,” or aerosol products labeled solely for gu m removal.

(144) (139) “Spray Buff Product” means a product designed to re store a worn floor finish in conjunction with a floor buffing machine and spe cial pad.

(145) (140) ”Table B Compound” means any carbon-containing comp ound listed as an exception to the definition of VOC in Section 94508

.

(146) (141) ”Temporary Hair Color” means any product that appli es color, glitter, or UV-active pigments to hair, wigs, or fur and is removable when washed. “Temporary Hair Color” includes hair color mousses and products labeled to add texture or thickness to cover thinning/baldi ng areas. “Temporary Hair Color” does not include “Hair Spray,” “Hair St yling Product,” or “Hair

Mousse.”

(147) (142) ”Terrestrial” means to live on or grow from land.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-29 (148) (143) “Tire or Wheel Cleaner” means a product designed or labeled exclusively to clean either tires, wheels, or both. “Tire or Wheel Cleaner” includes, but is not limited to, products for use i n commercial, fleet, hand, and “drive-through” car washes; commercial truck wa shing or large vehicle washing stations; vehicle dealers and repair shops, as well as household consumer products. “Tire or Wheel Cleaner” does no t include products labeled for use exclusively on locomotives or aircr aft.

(149) (144) ”Tire Sealant and Inflator” means any pressurized p roduct that is designed to temporarily inflate and seal a leaking tire.

(150) (145) ”Toilet/Urinal Care Product” means any product desi gned or labeled to cleanand/or to deodorize toilet bowls, t oilet tanks, or urinals. Toilet bowls, toilet tanks, or urinals includes, but is no t limited to, toilets or urinals connected to permanent plumbing in buildings and ot her structures, portable toilets or urinals placed at temporary or remote lo cations, and toilet or urinals in vehicles such as buses, recreational motor homes, b oats, ships, and aircraft.

“Toilet/Urinal Care Product” does not include “Bath room and Tile Cleaner” or “General Purpose Cleaner.”

(151) (146) ”Type A Propellent” means a compressed gas such as CO 2 , N 2 , N 2 O, or compressed air which is used as a propellent, and i s either incorporated with the product or contained in a separate chamber within t he product's packaging.

(152) (147) ”Type B Propellent” means any halocarbon which is u sed as a propellent including chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofl uorocarbons (HCFCs), and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs).

(153) (148) “Type C Propellent” means any propellent which is not a Type A or Type B propellent, including propane, isobutane, n-butane, and dimethyl ether (also known as dimethyl oxide).

(154) (149) “Undercoating” means any aerosol product designed to impart a protective, non-paint layer to the undercarriage, trunk interio r, and/or firewall of motor vehicles to prevent the formation of rust or to dea den sound. “Undercoating” includes, but is not limited to, rubberized, mastic , or asphaltic products.

(155) (150) ”Usage Directions” means the text or graphics on th e product's principal display panel, label, or accompanying literature wh ich describes to the end user how and in what quantity the product is to be used.

(156) (151) ”Volatile Organic Compound (VOC)” means any compoun d containing at least one atom of carbon, excluding carbon monoxide , carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, and excluding the following:Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-30 (A) methane, methylene chloride (dichloromethane), 1,1,1-trichloroethane (methyl chloroform), trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11), dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12), 1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane (CFC-113), 1,2-dichloro-1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (CFC-114), chloropentafluoroethane (CFC-115), chlorodifluoromethane (HCFC-22), 1,1,1-trifluoro-2,2-dichloroethane (HCFC-123), 1,1-dichloro-1-fluoroethane (HCFC-141b), 1-chloro-1,1-difluoroethane (HCFC-142b), 2-chloro-1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HCFC-124), trifluoromethane (HFC-23), 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134), 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a), pentafluoroethane (HFC-125), 1,1,1-trifluoroethane (HFC-143a), 1,1-difluoroethane (HFC-152a), ethoxy-nonafluorobutane (HFE 7200), cyclic, branched, or linear completely methylated siloxanes, the following classes of perfluorocarbons:

1. cyclic, branched, or linear, completely fluori nated alkanes;

2. cyclic, branched, or linear, completely fluorin ated ethers with no unsaturations; 3. cyclic, branched, or linear, completely fluorin ated tertiary amines with no unsaturations; and 4. sulfur-containing perfluorocarbons with no unsa turations and with the sulfur bonds to carbon and fluorine, and

(B) the following low-reactive organic compounds wh ich have been exempted by

the U.S. EPA:

acetone, ethane, methyl acetate, parachlorobenzotrifluoride (1-chloro-4-trifluoromet hyl benzene), perchloroethylene (tetrachloroethylene).

(157) (152) ”VOC Content” means the total weight of VOC in a pr oduct expressed as a percentage of the product weight (exclusive of the container or packaging), as determined pursuant to sections 94515(a) and (b).

(158) (153) ”Wasp and Hornet Insecticide” means any insecticide product that is designed for use against wasps, hornets, yellow jac kets or bees by allowing theConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-31 user to spray from a distance a directed stream or burst at the intended insects, or their hiding place.

(159) (154) ”Waterproofer” means a product designed and labeled exclusively to repel water from fabric or leather substrates. “Waterpro ofer” does not include “Fabric

Protectant.”

(160) (155) ”Wax” means a material or synthetic thermoplastic s ubstance generally of high molecular weight hydrocarbons or high molecula r weight esters of fatty acids or alcohols, except glycerol and high polymer s (plastics). “Wax” includes, but is not limited to, substances derived from the secretions of plants and animals such as carnuba wax and beeswax, substances of a mineral origin such as ozocerite and paraffin, and synthetic polymers s uch as polyethylene.

(161) (156) ”Web Spray Adhesive” means any aerosol adhesive whi ch is not a “Mist Spray Adhesive” or “Special Purpose Spray Adhesive. ”

(162) (157) “Windshield Water Repellent” means a product desig ned or labeled exclusively to repel water from motor vehicle exter ior automotive glass surfaces. “Windshield Water Repellent” does not include “Auto motive Windshield Washer

Fluid.”

(163) (158) “Wood Cleaner” means a product labeled to clean woo den materials including but not limited to decking, fences, floor ing, logs, cabinetry, and

furniture. “Wood Cleaner” does not include “Dustin g Aid,” General Purpose Cleaner,” “Furniture Maintenance Product,” “Floor W ax Stripper,” “Floor Polish or Wax,” or products designed and labeled exclusively to preserve or color wood.

(164) “Zinc-Rich Primer” means a coating that meets all the following specifications: (A) coating contains at least 65 percent metallic zinc powder or zinc dust by weight of total solids; and (B) coating is formulated for application to metal substrates to provide a firm bond between the substrate and subse quent applications of coatings; and (C) coating is intended for professio nal use only and labeled “For Professional Use Only.”

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 38501, 38510, 385 60, 38560.5, 38562, 38580, 39601, 39601, and 41712, Health and Safety Code. Referenc e: Sections 38501, 38510,
38560, 38560.5, 38562, 38580, 39002, 39600, 40000, and 41712, Health and Safety

Code.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-32 § 94509. Standards for Consumer Products.

(a) Except as provided in Sections 94510 (Exemption s), 94511 (Innovative Products), 94514 (Variances), 94540 through 94555 ( Alternative Control Plan), and 94567(a)(1) (Hairspray Credit Program), Title 1 7, California Code of Regulations, no person shall sell, supply, offer fo r sale, or manufacture for sale in California any consumer product which, at the time of sale or manufacture, contains volatile organic compounds in excess of th e limits specified in the following Table of Standards after the specified ef fective dates.

Table of Standards Percent Volatile Organic Compound by Weight

Product Category Effective

Date 1 VOC

Standard 2

Adhesive *:

Aerosol**

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Mist Spray Adhesive**

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Web Spray Adhesive**

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Special Purpose Spray Adhesive** Mounting, Automotive Engine Compartment, and Flexible Vinyl Adhesive Polystyrene Foam and Automobile Headliner

Adhesive Polyolefin and Laminate Repair/Edgebanding

Adhesive

======================================== [**See 94509(i), 94512(d), and 94513(d) for additio nal requirements that apply to aerosol adhesive.]

--------------------------------------------------- ------------------- Construction, Panel, and Floor Covering#

======================================= [#See section 94509(k) for the effective date of th e VOC limit for certain types of “Construction, Panel

, and Floor Covering Adhesive, and section 94509(p) for additional requirements that apply to Construct ion, Panel, and Floor Covering Adhesive.]

--------------------------------------------------- ------------------- Contact## Contact Adhesive – General Purpose Contact Adhesive – Special Purpose 1/1/95

-------------------- 1/1/2002

-------------------- 1/1/2002

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

1/1/2002

1/1/2002

1/1/2002

===========

-------------------- 1/1/95

12/31/2002

12/31/2008

==========

------------------- 1/1/95

12/31/2006

12/31/2006 75

----------------- 65

----------------- 55

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

70

65

60

==========

----------------- 40

15

7

==========

------------------ 80

55

80Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-33 ======================================== [##See sections 94509(m) and 94512(d) for additiona l requirements that apply to Contact Adhesive.]

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- General Purpose

======================================== *See section 94510(i) for an exemption that applies to
adhesives sold in containers of one fluid ounce or

less. ===========

-------------------- 1/1/95

=========== ==========

----------------- 10

=========

Adhesive Remover*: Floor or Wall Covering Adhesive Remover

--------------------------------------------------- ----------------- Gasket or Thread Locking Adhesive Remover

--------------------------------------------------- ----------------- General Purpose Adhesive Remover

--------------------------------------------------- ----------------- Specialty Adhesive Remover

======================================= [*See sections 94509(n) and 94512(d) for additional requirements that apply to Adhesive Remover.] 12/31/2006

-------------------- 12/31/2006

-------------------- 12/31/2006

-------------------- 12/31/2006

=========== 5

------------------ 50

------------------ 20

------------------ 70

==========

Aerosol Cooking Spray 1/1/95 18

Air Freshener*:

Double Phase Aerosol [*See section 94509(t) for additional requirements that apply to Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener.]

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Single Phase Aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Dual Purpose Air Freshener/Disinfectant

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- liquid/pump spray

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- solid/semisolid

======================================== [*See sections 94510(f) and 94510(g)(2) for exemptions that apply to certain Air Fresheners, an d 94509(o) for additional requirements that apply to Air Freshener.] 1/1/93

12/31/2004

12/31/2012

-------------------- 1/1/93

1/1/96

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

1/1/94

-------------------- 1/1/93

-------------------- 1/1/93

=========== 30

25

20

------------------ 70

30

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

60

------------------ 18

------------------ 3

==========

Anti-static Product:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol 12/31/2008

-------------------- 12/31/2006 80

------------------ 11 Astringent/Toner (Non-FDA regulated) 12/31/2010 35 Automotive Rubbing or Polishing Compound 1/1/2005 1 7Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-34 Automotive Wax/Polish/Sealant/Glaze:

all other forms

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- hard paste wax

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- instant detailer 1/1/2005

-------------------- 1/1/2005

-------------------- 1/1/2001 15

------------------ 45

------------------ 3

Automotive Windshield Washer Fluid: Type “A” areas *

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- All other areas (all forms)

Dilutable and Pre

- Mixed **

======================================== **See section 94508(a)(19), section 94508(a)(20), and section 94509(l) for provisions that apply to

Automotive Windshield Washer Fluid.

========================================

* Type “A” areas include only the following: Del Norte, Shasta and Trinity Counties; the Great Basin Valley, Lake Tahoe, Mountain Counties, and Northeast Plateau Air Basins, as defined in Title 1 7, California Code of Regulations, Sections 60105, 60108, 60111, and 60113. 1/1/93

12/31/2008

-------------------- 1/1/93

12/31/2002

===========

=========== 35

25

------------------ 10

1

==========

==========

Bathroom and Tile Cleaner*:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- all other forms

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol

======================================== [*See section 94509(p) for additional requirements that apply to Bathroom and Tile Cleaner.] 1/1/94

-------------------- 1/1/94

-------------------- 12/31/2008

=========== 7

------------------ 5

------------------ 1

=========

Brake Cleaners 1/1/97

12/31/2002

12/31/2008

12/31/2010 50

45

20

10 Bug and Tar Remover 1/1/2002 40

Carburetor or Fuel-injection Air Intake

Cleaner *

======================================== *See section 94509(k) for the effective date of the VOC limit for Carburetor or Fuel-injection Air Inta ke

Cleaner. 1/1/95

12/31/2002

12/31/2008

12/31/2010

=========== 75

45

20

10

==========Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-35 Carpet /Upholstery Cleaner*:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol (dilutable)

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol (ready-to-use)

======================================== [*See section 94509(q) for additional requirements that apply to Carpet/Upholstery Cleaner] 1/1/2001

12/31/2010

-------------------- 1/1/2001

-------------------- 1/1/2001

12/31/2010

=========== 7

5

------------------ 0

. 1

------------------ 3

1

==========

Charcoal Lighter Material See Section 94509(h)

Disinfectant:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol 12/31/2008

------------------ 12/31/2008 70

------------------ 1 Dusting Aid:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol 1/1/95

1/1/97

12/31/2010

-------------------- 1/1/95

12/31/2010 35

25

17

------------------ 7

3

Electrical Cleaner*

======================================== [*See sections 94509(n) and 94512(d) for additional requirements that apply to Electrical Cleaner.] 12/31/2006

=========== 45

==========

Electronic Cleaner*

======================================= [*See sections 94509(m) and 94512(d) for additional requirements that apply to Electronic Cleaner.] 12/31/2007

=========== 75

==========

Engine Degreaser:

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol 1/1/93

1/1/96

-------------------- 12/31/2004

12/31/2010

-------------------- 12/31/2004 75

50

------------------ 35

10

------------------ 5Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-36 Fabric Protectant*

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol

======================================== [*See section 94509(q) for additional requirements that apply to Fabric Protectant] 1/1/95

1/1/97

-------------------- 1/1/95

1/1/97

12/31/2010

=========== 75

60

------------------ 75

60

1

==========

Fabric Refresher:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol 12/31/2006

-------------------- 12/31/2006 15

------------------ 6 Fabric Softener – Single Use Dryer Product See Sect ion 94509(s)

Floor Maintenance Product 12/31/2010 1

Floor Polish or Wax: Resilient Flooring Material

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Nonresilient Flooring Material

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Wood Floor Wax 1/1/94

12/31/2010

-------------------- 1/1/94

12/31/2010

-------------------- 1/1/94

12/31/2010 7

1

------------------ 10

1

------------------ 90

70 Floor Wax Stripper:

non-aerosol See Section 94509(j)

Footwear or Leather Care Product*:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- solid

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- all other forms

======================================= [*See section 94509(m) for additional requirements that apply to Footwear or Leather Care Product.] 12/31/2006

-------------------- 12/31/2006

-------------------- 12/31/2006

=========== 75

------------------ 55

------------------ 15

==========

Furniture Maintenance Product:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- all other forms (except solid/paste forms)

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol (except solid/paste forms) 1/1/94

12/31/2004

-------------------- 1/1/94

-------------------- 12/31/2008 25

17

------------------ 7

----------------- 3Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-37 General Purpose Cleaner*:

aerosol and non-aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol

======================================== [*See section 94509(p) for additional requirements that apply to General Purpose Cleaner.] 1/1/94

-------------------- 12/31/2008

-------------------- 12/31/2004

=========== 10

------------------ 8

------------------ 4

==========

General Purpose Degreaser*:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol

======================================== [*See section 94509(m) for additional requirements that apply to General Purpose Degreaser.] 1/1/2002

12/31/2008

12/31/2010

-------------------- 12/31/2004

=========== 50

20

10

------------------ 4

==========

Glass Cleaner:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol 1/1/93

12/31/2012

-------------------- 1/1/93

1/1/96

12/31/2004 12

10

------------------ 8

6

4

Graffiti Remover*:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- ------------------- non-aerosol

======================================= [*See section 94509(n) for additional requirements that apply to Graffiti Remover.] 12/31/2006

-------------------- 12/31/2006

=========== 50

------------------ 30

==========

Hair Mousse 1/1/94

12/31/2002 16

6

Hair Shine 1/1/2005 55 Hair Spray 1/1/93

6/1/99 80

55 Hair Styling Gel 1/1/94 6 Hair Styling Product: aerosol and pump spray

--------------------------------------------------- ------------------- all other forms 12/31/2006

-------------------- 12/31/2006 6

------------------ 2 Heavy-duty Hand Cleaner or Soap 1/1/2005 8 Insect Repellent:

aerosol 1/1/94 65Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-38 Insecticide*: Crawling Bug Insecticide (all forms):

--------------------------------------------------- ------------------- aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Flea and Tick Insecticide

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Flying Bug Insecticide (all forms):

--------------------------------------------------- ------------------- aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Fogger

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Lawn and Garden Insecticide (all forms)

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Wasp and Hornet Insecticide

======================================== *See sections 94510(g)(1) and 94510(k) for exemptions that apply to certain insecticides. 1/1/95

1/1/98

-------------------- 12/31/2004

-------------------- 1/1/95

-------------------- 1/1/95

-------------------- 12/31/2003

-------------------- 1/1/95

-------------------- 1/1/95

-------------------- 12/31/2003

----------------- 1/1/2005

=========== 40

20

------------------ 15

------------------ 25

------------------ 35

------------------ 25

------------------ 45

------------------ 20

----------------- 3

----------------- 40

==========

Laundry Prewash:

aerosol/solid

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- all other forms 1/1/94

-------------------- 1/1/94 22

------------------ 5 Laundry Starch/Sizing/Fabric Finish Product: 1/1/95

12/31/2008 5

4.5

Metal Polish/Cleanser 1/1/2005 30

Motor Vehicle Wash

non-aerosol 12/31/10 0.2 Multi-purpose Lubricant: (excluding solid or semisolid products)

======================================== [*See sections 94509(q) and 94513(f) for additional requirements that apply to Multi-purpose Lubricant] 1/1/2003

12/31/2013

12/31/2015

=========== 50

25

10

==========

Multi-purpose Solvent

======================================== [*See sections 94509(u), 94512(e), and 94513(g) for additional requirements that apply to Multi-purpose Solvent.] 12/31/2010

12/31/2013

============ 30

3

==========Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-39 Nail Polish Remover 1/1/94

1/1/96

12/31/2004

12/31/2007 85

75

0

1

Non-selective Terrestrial Herbicide:

non-aerosol 1/1/2002 3

Odor Remover/Eliminator

aerosol

-------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol 12/31/2010

-------------------- 12/31/2010 25

------------------ 6

Oven Cleaner*: aerosol/pump spray

-------------------------------------------------- -------------------- liquid

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol (including pump spray and liquid)

======================================= [*See section 94509(p) for additional requirements that apply to Oven Cleaner.] 1/1/93

-------------------- 1/1/93

-------------------- 12/31/2008

=========== 8

------------------ 5

------------------ 1

==========

Paint Remover or Stripper 1/1/2005 50

Paint Thinner

======================================== [*See sections 94509(u), 94510(m), 94512(e), and 94513(g) for additional requirements that apply to Paint Thinner.] 12/31/2010

12/31/2013

============ 30

3

==========

Penetrant*

======================================== [*See section 94509(q) and 94513(f) for additional requirements that apply to Penetrant] 1/1/2003

12/31/2013

=========== 50

25

==========

Personal Fragrance Product*: products with 20% or less fragrance

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- products with more than 20% fragrance

======================================== *See sections 94510(h), 94510(j), and 94510(l) for exemptions and requirements that apply to Personal Fragrance Products

. 1/1/95

1/1/99

-------------------- 1/1/95

1/1/99

=========== 80

75

------------------ 70

65

==========

Pressurized Gas Duster*

======================================== [*See section 94509(r) and 94510(c) for additional provisions that apply to Pressurized Gas Duster] 12/31/2010

=========== 1

==========Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-40 Rubber /Vinyl Protectant:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol 1/1/2005

------------------ 1/1/2003 10

------------------ 3

Sanitizer:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol 12/31/2008

-------------------- 12/31/2008 70

------------------ 1

Sealant or Caulking Compound*

all forms

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Chemically Curing

non-aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- Non-chemically Curing

non-aerosol

======================================== [*See sections 94509(q) and 94512(d) for additiona l requirements that apply to Sealant or Caulking Compound] 12/31/2002

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

12/31/2012

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

12/31/2010

=========== 4

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

3

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

1.5

==========

Shaving Cream 1/1/94 5 Shaving Gel 12/31/2006

12/31/2009 7

4 Silicone-based Multi-purpose Lubricant: (excluding solid or semisolid products) 1/1/2005 60

Spot Remover*:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol

======================================== [*See section 94509(q) for additional requirements that apply to Spot Remover] 1/1/2001

12/31/2010

------------------ 1/1/2001

12/31/2010

=========== 25

15

------------------ 8

3

==========

Temporary Hair Color:

aerosol 12/31/2010 55

Tire or Wheel Cleaner

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol 12/31/2010

-------------------- 12/31/2010 8

------------------ 2

Tire Sealant and Inflator 12/31/2002 20Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-41 Toilet/Urinal Care Product:*

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol

======================================== [*See section 94509(o) for additional requirements that apply to Toilet/Urinal Care Product] 12/31/2006

-------------------- 12/31/2006

=========== 10

------------------ 3

==========

Undercoating:

aerosol 1/1/2002 40 Windshield Water Repellent 12/31/2010 75

Wood Cleaner:

aerosol

--------------------------------------------------- -------------------- non-aerosol 12/31/2006

-------------------- 12/31/2006 17

------------------ 4

1 See section 94509(d) for the effective date of the VOC standards for products registered under FIFRA, and section 94509(c) and (d) for the “sell-through” allowed for products manufactured prior to the

effective date of standards.

2 See section 94510(c) for an exemption that applies to fragrances in consumer products, and section 94510(d) for an exemption that applies to LVP-VOCs.

(b) Products that are diluted prior to use

(1) Except for “Automotive Windshield Washer Flui d (Dilutable),” for consumer

products for which the label, packaging, or accompa nying literature specifically states that the product should be diluted with wate r or non-VOC solvent prior to use, the limits specified in subsection (a) shall a pply to the product only after the minimum recommended dilution has taken place. For purposes of this subsection (b), “minimum recommended dilution” shall not inclu de recommendations for incidental use of a concentrated product to deal wi th limited special applications

such as hard-to-remove soils or stains.

(2) For consumer products for which the label, pa ckaging, or accompanying literature

states that the product should be diluted with any VOC solvent prior to use, the limits specified in subsection (a) shall apply to t he product only after the maximum recommended dilution has taken place.

(3) For “Automotive Windshield Washer Fluids (Dilutable)” for which the label, packaging, or accompanying literature front panel of the product label specifically states that the product should be diluted with wate r or non

- VOC solvent (e.g. identified as a “concentrate”) prior to use;

(A) the VOC limits specified in section 94509(a) sh all apply to the product only after the minimum recommended dilution has taken pl ace;

(B) for the purpose of complying with the VOC limit s specified in section 94509(a), different dilution instructions for “Type A areas” and other areas of CaliforniaConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-42 may be specified on the product label if the diluti on instructions meet the following criteria:

1. The instructions are readily visible, and

2. The instructions can be easily understood by the consumer, and

3. The instructions clearly specify the recommended dilutions to apply in “Type A areas” and in other areas of California, and

If the dilution instructions specified on the prod uct label meet these criteria, the VOC limits specified in section 94509 (a) shall apply to the product only after the minimum recommended dilution has taken place for the area in which the product is sold, supplied, or offered for sale.

(4) For products sold in pump spray containers, the VOC limits specified in section 94509(a) shall apply to the product prior to any mi nimum recommended dilution.

(c) Sell-through of products.

(1) Sell-through period

. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 94509( a) or 94509(j), a consumer product manufactured prior to each of the effective dates specified for that product in the Table of Standard s may be sold, supplied, or offered for sale for up to three years after each o f the specified effective dates. This subsection (c) does not apply to:

(A) any consumer product that does not display on t he product container or package the date on which the product was manufactu red, or a code indicating such date, or

(B) any consumer product on which the manufacturer has used a code indicating

the date of manufacture that is different than the code specified in section 94512(b)(2), but an explanation of the code has not been filed with the ARB Executive Officer by the deadlines specified in section 94512(c)(1) or section 94512(c)(2), or

(C) Solid “Air Fresheners” and “Toilet/Urinal Care Product” that contain paradichlorobenzene; these products are subject to the one-year sell-through period specified in section 94509(o).

(D) Products contained in multi-unit packages, as s pecified below:

1. Subsection (c)(1) does not apply to any individ ual consumer products unit contained within a multi-unit package that is produ ced or assembled after January 1, 2006, where the multi-unit package does not display the date(s) or date-code(s) of the individual product units, or display the date ofConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-43 assembly, such that the displayed information is no t readily observable without irreversibly disassembling any portion of t he container or packaging.

2. For the purposes of this section, “date of asse mbly” means the date that the individual product units are assembled into the fin ished multi-unit package.

3. For multi-unit packages that display the “date of assembly” instead of the date(s) or date-code(s) of the individual product u nits, the “date of assembly” shall be the “date of manufacture” for al l of the product units contained within the multi-unit package. In other words, all of the product

units shall be deemed to have been manufactured on the date these units are assembled into the multi-unit package, even if the individual product units show different date(s) or date-code(s).

(2) Notification for products sold during the sell-thro ugh period. Any person who sells or supplies a consumer product subject to the Table of Standards in section 94509 must notify the purchaser of the product in w riting of the date on which the sell-through period for that product will end, prov ided, however, that this notification must be given only if all of the follo wing conditions are met:

(A) the product is being sold or supplied to a dis tributor or retailer;

(B) the sell-through period for the product will ex pire 6 months or less from the date the product is sold or supplied;

(C) the product does not comply with the lowest VOC standard that applies on the date the sell-through period ends; and

(D) the product is subject to a VOC standard with a n effective date on or after December 31, 2004.

(d) Products registered under FIFRA. For those consumer products that are registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide , and Rodenticide Act, (FIFRA; 7 U.S.C. Section 136-136y), the effective d ate of the VOC standards specified in subsection (a) is one year after the d ate specified in the Table of Standards. For those consumer products that are re gistered under FIFRA, the three year period provided in subsection (c) shall also begin one year after the date specified in the Table of Standards.

(e) Products containing ozone-depleting compounds. For any consumer product for which VOC standards are specified under subsection (a), no person shall sell, supply, offer for sale, or manufacture for sale in California any consumer product which contains any of the following ozone-depleting compounds:

CFC-11 (trichlorofluoromethane), CFC-12 (dichlorodifluoromethane),Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-44 CFC-113 (1,1,1-trichloro-2,2,2-trifluoroethane), CFC-114 (1-chloro-1,1-difluoro-2-chloro-2,2-difl uoroethane), CFC-115 (chloropentafluoroethane), halon 1211 (b romochlorodifluoromethane), halon 1301 (bromotrifluoromethane), halon 2402 ( dibromotetrafluoroethane), HCFC-22 (chlorodifluoromethane), HCFC-123 (2,2-dichloro-1,1,1-trifluoroethane), HCFC-124 (2-chloro-1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane), HCFC-141b (1,1-dichloro-1-fluoroethane), HCFC-142b (1-chloro-1,1-difluoroethane), 1,1,1-tric hloroethane, and carbon

tetrachloride.

(f) The requirements of section 94509 (e) shall no t apply to any existing product formulation that complies with the Table of Standar ds or any existing product

formulation that is reformulated to meet the Table of Standards, provided the ozone depleting compound content of the reformulate d product does not

increase.

(g) The requirements of section 94509 (e) shall no t apply to any ozone depleting compounds that may be present as impurities in a co nsumer product in an amount equal to or less than 0.01% by weight of the product.

(h) Requirements for charcoal lighter materials. The following requirements shall apply to all charcoal lighter material products as defined in section 94508(a):

(1) Regulatory Standards

(A) In all areas of California except the S outh Coast Air Quality Management

District, no person shall sell, supply, or offer fo r sale after January 1, 1993 any charcoal lighter material product unless at the time of the transaction:

1. the manufacturer or distributor of the charco al lighter material has been

issued a currently effective certification pursuant to subsection (h)(2).

2. the charcoal lighter material meets the formulat ion criteria and other conditions specified in the applicable Executive Or der issued pursuant to subsection (h)(2).

3. the product usage directions for the charcoal lighter material are the

same as those provided to the Executive Officer pur suant to subsection (h)(2)(C).

(B) In the South Coast Air Quality Management Distr ict, the regulatory standards specified in subsection (h)(1)(A) shall b e applicable upon the

effective date of this subsection.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-45 (2) Certification Requirements

(A) No charcoal lighter material formulation shall be certified under this

subsection unless the applicant for certification d emonstrates to the

Executive Officer's satisfaction that the VOC emiss ions from the ignition of charcoal with the charcoal lighter material are les s than or equal to 0.020 pound of VOC per start, using the procedures specif ied in the South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1174 Ignition Method Compliance Certification Protocol, dated February 27, 1991 (th e “SCAQMD Rule 1174 Testing Protocol”). The provisions relating to LVP -VOC in sections 94508(a) and 94510(d) shall not apply to any charcoal lighte r material subject to the requirements of sections 94509(a) an d (h).

(B) The Executive Officer may approve alternative t est procedures which are shown to provide equivalent results to those obtain ed using the SCAQMD Rule 1174 Testing Protocol.

(C) A manufacturer or distributor of charcoal light er material may apply to the

Executive Officer for certification of a charcoal l ighter material formulation in accordance with this subsection (h)(2). The app lication shall be in writing and shall include, at a minimum, the follow ing:

1. the results of testing conducted pursuant to the procedures specified in

SCAQMD Rule 1174 Testing Protocol.

2. the exact text and/or graphics that will app ear on the charcoal lighter

material's principal display panel, label, and any accompanying literature. The provided material shall clearly show the usage directions for the product. These directions shall accurately reflect the quantity of charcoal lighter material per pound of charcoal that was use d in the SCAQMD Rule 1174 Testing Protocol for that product, unless :

i) the charcoal lighter material is intended to be used in fixed amounts

independent of the amount of charcoal used, such as certain paraffin cubes, or

ii) the charcoal lighter material is already in corporated into the

charcoal, such as certain “bag light,” “instant lig ht,” or “match light” products.

3. For a charcoal lighter material which meets t he criteria specified in

subsection (h)(2)(C)(2.)(i), the usage instructions provided to the Executive Officer shall accurately reflect the quan tity of charcoal lighter material used in the SCAQMD Rule 1174 Testing Proto col for that product.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-46 4. Any physical property data, formulation data , or other information

required by the Executive Officer for use in determ ining when a product

modification has occurred and for use in determinin g compliance with the conditions specified on the Executive Order iss ued pursuant to section (h)(2).

(D) Within 30 days of receipt of an application, th e Executive Officer shall advise the applicant in writing either that it is complete or that specified additional information is required to make it complete. Withi n 30 days of receipt of additional information, the Executive Officer shall advise the applicant in writing either that the application is complete, or that specified additional information or testing is still required before it can be deemed complete.

(E) If the Executive Officer finds that an applicat ion meets the requirements of

this subsection (h)(2), then he or she shall issue an Executive Ord er certifying the charcoal lighter material formulatio n and specifying such conditions as are necessary to insure that the requ irements of this subsection (h) are met. The Executive Officer shal l act on a complete application within 90 days after the application is deemed complete.

(3) Notice of Modifications

For any charcoal lighter material for which certifi cation has been granted pursuant to subsection (h)(2), the applicant for ce rtification shall notify the Executive Officer in writing within 30 days of: (i ) any change in the usage directions, or (ii) any change in product formulati on, test results, or any other information submitted pursuant to subsection (h)(2) which may result in VOC emissions greater than 0.020 pound of VOC per start

.

(4) Revocation of Certification

If the Executive Officer determines that any certif ied charcoal lighter material formulation results in VOC emissions from the ignit ion of charcoal which are greater than 0.020 pound of VOC per start, as deter mined by the SCAQMD Rule 1174 Testing Protocol and the statistical anal ysis procedures contained therein, the Executive Officer shall revoke or modi fy the certification as is necessary to assure that the charcoal lighter mater ial will result in VOC emissions of less than or equal to 0.020 pound of V OC per start. The Executive Officer shall not revoke or modify the prior certif ication without first affording the applicant for the certification an opportunity for a hearing in accordance with the procedures specified in Title 17, California Code o f Regulations, Division 3, Chapter 1, Subchapter 1, Article 4 (commencing with section 60040), to

determine if the certification should be modified o r revoked.

(5) Notwithstanding any other provision of this su bsection 94509(h), charcoal lighter material products manufactured prior to January 1, 1993, may be sold, supplied,Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-47 or offered for sale until July 1, 1994, in all area s of California except the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Charcoal li ghter material products subject to SCAQMD Rule 1174 and sold, supplied, or offered for sale in the South Coast Air Quality Management District shall m eet the requirements of section 94509(h) upon the effective date of this su bsection, regardless of the date on which the products were manufactured.

(i) Requirements for aerosol adhesives (as defined in sections 94508(a)(1) and 94508(a)(3)).

(1) As specified in Health and Safety Code sectio n 41712(h)(2), the standards for

aerosol adhesives apply to all uses of aerosol adhe sives, including consumer, industrial, and commercial uses. Except as otherwi se provided in sections 94509(c), 94510, 94511, and 94514, no person shall sell, supply, offer for sale, use or manufacture for sale in California any aeros ol adhesive which, at the time of sale, use, or manufacture, contains VOCs in excess of the specified

standard.

(2)(A) In order to qualify as a “Special Purpose S pray Adhesive” the product must

meet one or more of the definitions for “Special Pu rpose Spray Adhesive” specified in section 94508(a), but if the product label indicates that the product is suitable for use on any substrate or app lication not listed in one of the definitions for “Special Purpose Spray Adhes ive,” then the product shall be classified as either a “Web Spray Adhesive ” or a “Mist Spray

Adhesive.”

(B) If a product meets more than one of the d efinitions specified in section

94508(a) for “Special Purpose Spray Adhesive,” and is not classified as a “Web Spray Adhesive” or “Mist Spray Adhesive” under subsection (2)(A), then the VOC limit for the product shall be the low est applicable VOC limit specified in section 94509(a).

(3) Effective 1/1/2002, no person shall sel l, supply, offer for sale, or manufacture for use in California any aerosol ad hesive which contains any

of the following compounds: methylene chloride, pe rchloroethylene, or trichloroethylene, except that an aerosol adhesive manufactured before 1/1/2002 may be sold, supplied, or offered for sale until 1/1/2005, so long as the product container or package displays the date on which the product was manufactured, or a code indicating such date product complies with product dating requirements in section 94512(b)

.

(4) All aerosol adhesives must comply with the la beling requirements specified

in section 94512(d), and all manufacturers and resp onsible parties for aerosol adhesives must comply with the special repo rting requirements specified in section 94513(d).Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-48 (j) Requirements for Floor Wax Strippers. After an effective date of January 1, 2002, no person shall sell, supply, of fer for sale, or manufacture for use in California any floor wax stripper unle ss the following requirements

are met:

(1) The label of each non-aerosol floor wax stripp er must specify a dilution ratio for light or medium build-up of polish that results in an as-used VOC concentration of 3 percent by weight or less.

(2) If a non-aerosol floor wax stripper is also in tended to be used for removal of heavy build-up of polish, the label of that floor w ax stripper must specify a dilution ratio for heavy build-up of polish that results in an as-used VOC concentration of 12 percent by weight or less.

(3) The terms “light build-up,” “medium build-up” o r “heavy build-up” are not specifically required, as long as comparable termin ology is used.

(k) Effective dates of the VOC limits for “ Carburetor or Fuel-injection Air Intake

Cleaners ” and “ Construction, Panel, and Floor Covering Adhesives. “ “The definitions for the product categories of “Carburet or or Fuel-injection Air Intake Cleaners” and “Construction, Panel, and Floor Cover ing Adhesives” were modified as part of the “Mid-term Measures II” rule making action that was considered by the Board in October 1999. As a resu lt of these modifications, certain types of consumer products were included in these definitions that had not previously been included. For those consumer p roducts that were included in

these definitions for the first time as a result of the “Mid-term Measures II” rulemaking action, the VOC limits (in section 94509 (a)) applicable to these newly included products shall not become legally effectiv e until December 31, 2002.

(l) Automotive Windshield Washer Fluids. The provisions of subsection 94509(b)(1) shall not apply to “Automotive Windshield Washer Fl uid (Pre-Mixed)” as defined in section 94508(a).

(m) Requirements for Contact Adhesives, Electronic Clea ners, Footwear or Leather Care Products, and General Purpose Degreasers.

(1) Except as provided below in sections 94509(m )(2) and (m)(4), effective

December 31, 2005, no person shall sell, supply, of fer for sale, or manufacture for use in California any Contact Adhes ive, Electronic Cleaner,

Footwear or Leather Care Product

, or General Purpose Degreaser that contains any of the following compounds: methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloroethylene.

(2) Sell-through of Products . Contact Adhesives, Electronic Cleaners, Footwear or Leather Care Products, and General Purpose Degre asers that containConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-49 methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloro ethylene and were manufactured before December 31, 2005, may be sold, supplied, or offered for sale until December 31, 2008, so long as the pr oduct container or package displays the date on which the product was manufact ured, or a code indicating such date product complies with product dating requirements i n section 94512(b)

.

(3) Notification for products sold during the sell-thro ugh period. Any person who sells or supplies a consumer product identified abo ve in section 94509(m)(1) must notify the purchaser of the product in writing that the sell-through period for that product will end on December 31, 2008, pro vided, however, that this notification must be given only if both of the foll owing conditions are met:

(A) the product is sold or supplied to a distribu tor or retailer; and

(B) the product is sold or supplied on or aft er June 30, 2008.

(4) Impurities . The requirements of section 94509(m)(1) and (m)(3 ) shall not apply to any Contact Adhesive, Electronic Cleaner, Footwear or Leather Care Product, or General Purpose Degreaser containing me thylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloroethylene that is pre sent as an impurity in a combined amount equal to or less than 0.01% by weig ht.

(n) Requirements for Adhesive Removers, Electrical Clea ners, and Graffiti

Removers.

(1) Except as provided below in sections 94509(n) (2) and (n)(4), effective

December 31, 2006, no person shall sell, supply, of fer for sale, or manufacture for use in California any Adhesive Remo ver, Electrical Cleaner, or Graffiti Remover that contains any of the follow ing compounds: methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloro ethylene.

(2) Sell-through of Products . Adhesive Removers, Electrical Cleaners, and Graffiti Removers that contain methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloroethylene and were manufactured before Dece mber 31, 2006, may be sold, supplied, or offered for sale until December 31, 2009, so long as the product container or package displays the date on which the product was manufactured, or a code indicating such date product complies with product dating requirements in section 94512(b)

.

(3) Notification for products sold during the sell-thro ugh period. Any person who sells or supplies a consumer product identified abo ve in section 94509(n)(1) must notify the purchaser of the product in writing that the sell-through period for that product will end on December 31, 2009, pro vided, however, that this notification must be given only if both of the foll owing conditions are met:Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-50 (A) the product is sold or supplied to a distribu tor or retailer; and

(B) the product is sold or supplied on or aft er June 30, 2009.

(4) Impurities . The requirements of section 94509(n)(1) and (n)(3 ) shall not apply to any Adhesive Remover, Electrical Cleaner, or Gra ffiti Remover containing methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloro ethylene that is present as an impurity in a combined amount equal to or less t han 0.01% by weight.

(o) Requirements for Solid Air Fresheners and Toilet/Ur inal Care Products.

(1) Effective December 31, 2005, no person shall se ll, supply, offer for sale, or manufacture for use in California any Solid Air Fre sheners or Toilet/Urinal Care Products that contain para-dichlorobenzene, ex cept that those Solid Air

Fresheners and Toilet/Urinal Care Products that con tain paradichlorobenzene and were manufactured before Decemb er 31, 2005 may be sold, supplied, or offered for sale until December 31, 2006, so long as the product container or package displays the date on w hich the product was manufactured, or a code indicating such date.

(2) Notification for products sold during the sell-thro ugh period. Any person who sells or supplies any Solid Air Freshener or Toilet /Urinal Care Product that contains para-dichlorobenzene must notify the purch aser of the product in writing that the sell-through period for the produc t will end on December 31, 2006, provided, however, that this notification mus t be given only if both of the following conditions are met:

(A) the product is sold or supplied to a distribu tor or retailer; and

(B) the product is sold or supplied on or after June 30, 2006.

(p) Requirements for Bathroom and Tile Cleaners, Constr uction, Panel, and Floor Covering Adhesives, electronic cleaners labeled as energized electronic equipment use only, General Purpose Cleaners, and O ven Cleaners.

(1) Except as provided below in sections 94509(p) (2) and (p)(4), effective

December 31, 2008, no person shall sell, supply, of fer for sale, or manufacture for use in California any Bathroom and Tile Cleaner, Construction, Panel, and Floor Covering Adhesive, e lectronic cleaners labeled as energized electronic equipment use only, General Purpose Cleaner, or Oven Cleaner that contains any of the f ollowing compounds: methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloro ethylene.

(2) Sell-through of Products. Bathroom and Tile Cleaners, Construction, Panel, and Floor Covering Adhesives, electronic cleaners l abeled as energized electronic equipment use only, General Purpose Clea ners, and OvenConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-51 Cleaners that contain methylene chloride, perchloro ethylene, or trichloroethylene and were manufactured before Dece mber 31, 2008, may be sold, supplied, or offered for sale until December 31, 2011, so long as the product complies with the product dating requiremen ts in section 94512(b)

(3) Notification for products sold during the sell-thro ugh period. Any person who sells or supplies a consumer product identified abo ve in section 94509(p)(1) must notify the purchaser of the product in writing that the sell-through period for that product will end on December 31, 2011, pro vided, however, that this notification must be given only if both of the foll owing conditions are met:

(A) the product is sold or supplied to a distribu tor or retailer; and

(B) the product is sold or supplied on or after June 30, 2011.

(4) Impurities . The requirements of section 94509(p)(1) and (p)(3 ) shall not apply to any Bathroom and Tile Cleaner, Construction, Pan el, and Floor Covering Adhesive, electronic cleaner labeled as energized e lectronic equipment use only, General Purpose Cleaner, or Oven Cleaner cont aining methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloroethylene t hat is present as an impurity in a combined amount equal to or less than 0.01% by weight.

(q) Requirements for Carpet/Upholstery Cleaner, Fabric Protectant, Multi-Purpose Lubricant, Penetrant, Sealant or Caulking Compound, and Spot R emover.

(1) Except as provided below in sections 94509(q)(2 ), (q)(4), and (q)(5), effective December 31, 2010, no person shall sell, supply, of fer for sale, or manufacture for use in California any Carpet/Uphols tery Cleaner, Fabric Protectant, Multi-Purpose Lubricant, Penetrant, Sealant or Caulking Compound, or Spot Remover that contains any of the following compounds: methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloro ethylene.

(2) Sell-through of Products. Carpet/Upholstery Cleaners, Fabric Protectants, Multi-Purpose Lubricants, Penetrants, Sealant or Caulking Compound and Spot Removers that contain methylene chloride, perc hloroethylene, or trichloroethylene and were manufactured before Dece mber 31, 2010, may be sold, supplied, or offered for sale until December 31, 2013, so long as the product complies with the product dating requiremen ts in section 94512(b).

(3) Notification for products sold during the sell-thro ugh period. Any person who sells or supplies a consumer product identified abo ve in section 94509(q)(1) must notify the purchaser of the product in writing that the sell-through period for that product will end on December 31, 2013, pro vided, however, that this notification must be given only if both of the foll owing conditions are met:

(A) the product is sold or supplied to a distribu tor or retailer; andConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-52 (B) the product is sold or supplied on or after June 30, 2013.

(4) Impurities. The requirements of section 94509(q)(1) and (q)(3) shall not apply to any Carpet/Upholstery Cleaner, Fabric Protectant , Multi-Purpose Lubricant, Penetrant, Sealant or Caulking Compound, or Spot Re mover containing methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloro ethylene that is present as an impurity in a combined amount equal to or less t han 0.01% by weight.

(5) The requirements of this section 94509(q) shall not apply to “Penetrant” products used on equipment when electrical current exists; residual electrical potential from a component exists; or an open flame exists, as long as the “Principal Display Panel” clearly displays the stat ement: “Non-flammable: For use on energized equipment only.”

(r) Requirements for Pressurized Gas Duster.

(1) Except as provided below in sections 94509(r)(2 ) and (r)(3), effective December 31, 2010, no person shall sell, supply, of fer for sale, or manufacture for use in California any Pressurized G as Duster product that contains methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or any chemical compound that has a Global Warming Potential (GWP) Value of 150 or greater.

(2) Sell-through of Products. Pressurized Gas Duster products that contain any chemical compound that has a GWP Value greater than 150, and were manufactured before December 31, 2010, may be sold, supplied, or offered for sale until December 31, 2011, so long as the pr oduct complies with the product dating requirements in section 94512(b).

(3) Notification for products sold during the sell-thro ugh period. Any person who sells or supplies a Pressurized Gas Duster identifi ed above in section 94509(r)(2) must notify the purchaser of the produc t, in writing, that the sellthrough period for that product will end on Decembe r 31, 2011, provided, however, that this notification must be given only if both of the following

conditions are met:

(A) the product is sold or supplied to a distributo r or retailer; and

(B) the product is sold or supplied on or after Jun e 30, 2011.

(4) The provisions relating to fragrance in sectio n 94510(c) shall not apply to any

Pressurized Gas Duster subject to the requirements of this subsection 94509(r).

(5) Impurities. The requirements of section 94509(r)(1), (r)(2), a nd (r)(3) shall not apply to any Pressurized Gas Duster containing any chemical compound thatConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-53 is present as an impurity in a combined amount equa l to or less than 0.1% by weight.

(s) Requirements for Fabric Softener – Single Use Dryer Product.

(1) Effective December 31, 2010, Fabric Softener – Single Use Dryer Product shall not contain more than 0.05 grams of VOC per use. C ompliance with the VOC limit shall be determined per sheet, or equivalent delivery substrate, based on the minimum recommended use for a single drying cycle s pecified on the product packaging or label. In other words, if one sheet i s the minimum recommended use for a single drying cycle, then the VOC limit a pplies per sheet. If two sheets are the minimum recommended use for a single drying cycle, then the VOC limit applies to the aggregate VOC content in two sheets. For purposes of this subsection, “minimum recommended use” shall not inc lude recommendations for incidental use of additional sheets, or equivalent delivery substrate, for limited applications such as for extra large or double load s of washable fabrics in large capacity clothes dryers.

(2) The provisions relating to fragrance in section 94510(c) shall not apply to Fabric Softener – Single Use Dryer Product subject to the requirements of this subsection 94509(s)(1).

(t) Requirements for Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener

.

(1) Except as provided below in sections 94509(t)(2) a nd (t)(4), effective December 31, 2012, no person shall sell, supply, of fer for sale, or manufacture for use in California any Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshener that contains any chemical compound that has a Glob al Warming Potential (GWP) Value of 150 or greater.

(2) Sell-through of Products. Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners that contain any chemical compound that has a GWP Value of 150 o r greater, and were manufactured before December 31, 2012, may be sold, supplied, or offered for sale until December 31, 2015, so long as the pr oduct complies with the product dating requirements in section 94512(b).

(3) Notification for products sold during the sell-thro ugh period. Any person who sells or supplies a Double Phase Aerosol Air Freshe ner identified above in section 94509(t)(2) must notify the purchaser of th e product, in writing, that the sell-through period for that product will end o n December 31, 2015, provided, however, that this notification must be g iven only if both of the following conditions are met:

(A) the product is sold or supplied to a distributor o r retailer; and

(B) the product is sold or supplied on or after June 3 0, 2015.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-54 (4) Impurities. The requirements of section 94509(t)(1), (t)(2), an d (t)(3) shall not apply to any chemical compound that is present as a n impurity in a combined amount equal to or less than 0.1% by weight.

(u) Requirements for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Th inner.

(1) Except as provided below in sections 94509(u)(2 ) and (u)(4), effective December 31, 2010, no person shall sell, supply, of fer for sale, or manufacture for use in California any Multi-purpose Solvent or Paint Thinner that contains any of the following:

(A) chemical compounds that have a Global Warming Pote ntial (GWP) Value of 150 or greater;

(B) methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichlor oethylene;

(C) greater than 1% “Aromatic Compounds” by weight.

(2) Sell-through of Products. Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners that contain any chemical compound that has a GWP Value of 150 or greater; methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichloro ethylene; or greater than 1% “Aromatic Compounds” by weight; and were manufac tured before December 31, 2010, may be sold, supplied, or offere d for sale until December 31, 2013, so long as the product complies with the product dating requirements in section 94512(b).

(3) Notification for products sold during the sell-thro ugh period. Any person who sells or supplies a consumer product identified abo ve in section 94509(u)(2) must notify the purchaser of the product in writing that the sell-through period for that product will end on December 31, 2013, pro vided, however, this notification must be given only if both of the foll owing conditions are met:

(A) the product is sold or supplied to a distributo r or retailer; and

(B) the product is sold or supplied on or aft er June 30, 2013.

(4) Impurities. The requirements of section 94509(u)(1), (u)(2) an d (u)(3) shall not apply to any Multi-purpose Solvent, or Paint Thinne r that contains any of the following:

(A) chemical compounds that have a Global Warming Pote ntial (GWP) Value of 150 or greater and are present as impuriti es in a combined amount equal to or less than 0.1% by weight;Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-55 (B) methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, or trichlor oethylene that is present as an impurity in a combined amount equal t o or less than 0.01% by weight.

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 38500, 38501, 3851 0, 38560, 38560.5, 38562, 38580, 39600, 39601, 39650, 39658, 39659, 39666, and 41712 , Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 38505, 39002, 39600, 39650, 39 655, 39656, 39658, 39659, 39666, 40000, and 41712, Health and Safety Code.

§ 94510. Exemptions.

(a) This article shall not apply to any consumer pr oduct manufactured in California for shipment and use outside of California.

(b) The provisions of this article shall not apply to a manufacturer or distributor who sells, supplies, or offers for sale in California a consumer product that does not comply with the VOC standards specified in Section 94509, as long as the

manufacturer or distributor can demonstrate both th at the consumer product is intended for shipment and use outside of California , and that the manufacturer or distributor has taken reasonable prudent precaution s to assure that the consumer product is not distributed to California. This sub section (b) does not apply to consumer products that are sold, supplied, or offer ed for sale by any person to retail

outlets in California.

(c) Except for Fabric Softener – Single Use Dryer P roduct and Pressurized Gas Duster, the VOC limits specified in Section 94509(a) shall not apply to fragrances up to a combined level of 2 percent by weight contained in any consumer product.

(d) The VOC limits specified in Section 94509(a) sh all not apply to any LVP-VOC.

(e) The requirements of Section 94512(b) shall not apply to consumer products registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide , and Rodenticide Act, (FIFRA; 7 U.S.C. Section 136-36y).

(f) The VOC limits specified in Section 94509(a) sh all not apply to air fresheners that are comprised entirely of fragrance, less compounds not defined as VOCs under Section 94508 or exempted under Section 94510(d).

(g) The VOC limits specified in Section 94509(a) s hall not apply to:

(1) insecticides containing at least 98% para- dichlorobenzene.

(2) Until December 30, 2006, the VOC limits specif ied in Section 94509(a) shall not apply to solid air fresheners containing at least 9 8% para-dichlorobenzene. On or after December 31, 2006, the provisions of section 94509(o) apply to solid air fresheners containing para-dichlorobenzene.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-56 (h) Except as specified in 94510(h)(3) below, the V OC limits specified in Section 94509(a) shall not apply to:

(1) existing personal fragrance products or persona l fragrance products in development on or before April 1, 1992, provided th at both (i) the registration data specified in section 94513 is submitted for every s uch product by the date specified in section 94513(a), or prior to July 1, 1993, whichever date occurs later, and (ii) such product is sold in California prior t o January 1, 1994. For the purposes of this subsection, a product “in developm ent” means:

(A) a product which a fragrance materials manufac turer is designing at the

request of a personal fragrance product manufacture r, or

(B) a product which is the subject of a written m arketing profile or other

documentation authorizing the creation and marketin g of the product.

(2) personal fragrance products in development may be registered to qualify for this exemption under hypothetical trade names or pseudon yms, provided that the actual trade name is supplied to the Executive Offi cer within 30 days of marketing such products, or January 1, 1994, whiche ver occurs first.

(3) Effective December 31, 2014, subsections 94510( h)(1) and 94510(h)(2) shall no longer apply to any “Personal Fragrance Product” th at contains 20 percent or less fragrance. Products manufactured before Decem ber 31, 2014 may be sold, supplied, or offered for sale until December 31, 20 17, so long as the product complies with the product dating requirements in Se ction 94512(b).

(i) The VOC limits specified in Section 94509(a) sh all not apply to adhesives sold in

containers of 1 fluid ounce or less.

(j) The VOC limits specified in Section 94509(a) sh all not apply to any VOC which is a fragrance in a personal fragrance product.

(k) The VOC limits specified in Section 94509(a) sh all not apply to bait station insecticides. For the purpose of this section, bai t station insecticides are containers enclosing an insecticidal bait that is not more tha n 0.5 ounce by weight, where the bait is designed to be ingested by insects and is c omposed of solid material feeding stimulants with less than 5 percent (%) active ingr edients.

(l) Except as specified in 94510(l)(1), the 1/1/99 VOC limits specified in Section 94509(a) for personal fragrance products shall not apply to such products which have been sold in California prior to 1/1/99.

(1) On or after December 31, 2014, the 75 percent b y weight VOC limit shall apply to any “Personal Fragrance Product” that contains 20 p ercent or less fragrance.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-57 Products manufactured before December 31, 2014 may be sold, supplied, or offered for sale until December 31, 2017, so long a s the product complies with the product dating requirements in Section 94512(b)

.

(m) Until December 31, 2013, the VOC limits specified in Section 94509(a), and the prohibition of Aromatic Compounds listed in section 94509(u)(5), shall not apply to Paint Thinners that are packaged in containers with a capacity less than or equal to

8 fluid ounces.

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601 and 4 1712, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39600, 40000, and 41712 , Health and Safety Code.

§ 94511. Innovative Products.

(a) The Executive Officer shall exempt a consumer p roduct from the VOC limits specified in Section 94509(a) if a manufacturer dem onstrates by clear and convincing evidence that, due to some characteristi c of the product formulation, design, delivery systems or other factors, the use of the product will result in less VOC emissions as compared to:

(1) the VOC emissions from a representative consum er product which complies with the VOC limits specified in Section 94509(a), or

(2) the calculated VOC emissions from a noncomplyi ng representative product, if the product had been reformulated to comply with the VO C limits specified in section 94509(a). VOC emissions shall be calculated using the following equation:



## E R 

## = E NC 

## x VOC STD 

## ÷ VOC NC

where:

E R = The VOC emissions from the noncomplying repres entative product, had it been reformulated.

E NC = The VOC emissions from the noncomplying represe ntative

product in its current formulation.

VOC STD = the VOC limit specified in 94509(a).

VOC NC = the VOC content of the noncomplying product in its current

formulation.

If a manufacturer demonstrates that this equation y ields inaccurate results due to some characteristic of the product formulation or o ther factors, an alternative method which accurately calculates emissions may be used upon approval of the

Executive Officer.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-58 (b) For the purposes of this section, “representati ve consumer product” means a consumer product which meets all of the following c riteria:

(1) the representative product shall be subject to the same VOC limit in Section 94509(a) as the innovative product.

(2) the representative product shall be of the sam e product form as the innovative product, unless the innovative product uses a new f orm which does not exist in the product category at the time the application is made.

(3) the representative product shall have at least similar efficacy as other consumer products in the same product category based on test s generally accepted for that product category by the consumer products industry.

(c) A manufacturer shall apply in writing to the Ex ecutive Officer for any exemption claimed under subsection (a). The application shal l include the supporting

documentation that demonstrates the reduction of em issions from the innovative product, including the actual physical test methods used to generate the data and, if necessary, the consumer testing undertaken to docum ent product usage. In addition, the applicant must provide any informatio n necessary to enable the

Executive Officer to establish enforceable conditio ns for granting the exemption including the VOC content for the innovative produc t and test methods for determining the VOC content. All information submi tted by a manufacturer pursuant

to this section shall be handled in accordance with the procedures specified in Title 17, California Code of Regulations, Sections 91000- 91022.

(d) Within 30 days of receipt of the exemption appl ication the Executive Officer shall determine whether an application is complete as pro vided in section 60030(a), Title 17, California Code of Regulations.

(e) Within 90 days after an application has been de emed complete, the Executive Officer shall determine whether, under what conditi ons, and to what extent, an exemption from the requirements of Section 94509(a) will be permitted. The applicant and the Executive Officer may mutually ag ree to a longer time period for reaching a decision, and additional supporting docu mentation may be submitted by the applicant before a decision has been reached. The Executive Officer shall notify the applicant of the decision in writing and specif y such terms and conditions that are necessary to insure ensure that emissions from the product will meet the emissions reductions specified in subsection (a), a nd that such emissions reductions

can be enforced.

(f) In granting an exemption for a product the Exec utive Officer shall establish

conditions that are enforceable. These conditions shall include the VOC content of the innovative product, dispensing rates, applicati on rates, application rates , and any other parameters determined by the Executive Office r to be necessary. The Executive Officer shall also specify the test metho ds for determining conformance toConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-59 the conditions established. The test methods shall include criteria for reproducibility, accuracy, and sampling and laboratory procedures.

(g) For any product for which an exemption has been granted pursuant to this section, the manufacturer shall notify the Executive Officer in writing within 30 days of any change in the product formulation or recommended pr oduct usage directions, and shall also notify the Executive Officer within 30 d ays if the manufacturer learns of any information which would alter the emissions est imates submitted to the Executive Officer in support of the exemption appli cation.

(h) If the VOC limits specified in Section 94509(a) are lowered for a product category through any subsequent rulemaking, all innovative p roduct exemptions granted for products in the product category, except as provide d in this subsection (h), shall

have no force and effect as of the effective date o f the modified VOC standard. This subsection (h) shall not apply to those innovative products which have VOC emissions less than the applicable lowered VOC limi t and for which a written notification of the product's emissions status vers us the lowered VOC limit has been submitted to and approved by the Executive Officer at least 60 days before the

effective date of such limits.

(i) If the Executive Officer believes that a consum er product for which an exemption has been granted no longer meets the criteria for a n innovative product specified in subsection (a), the Executive Officer may modify or revoke the exemption as necessary to assure that the product will meet thes e criteria. The Executive Officer shall not modify or revoke an exemption without fir st affording the applicant an opportunity for a public hearing held in accordance with the procedures specified in Title 17, California Code of Regulations, Division 3, Chapter 1, Subchapter 1, Article 4 (commencing with Section 60040), to deter mine if the exemption should be

modified or revoked.

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, and 41712, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39600, 40000, and 41712 , Health and Safety Code.

§ 94512. Administrative Requirements.

(a) Most Restrictive Limit

.

(1) Products Manufactured Before January 1, 2007, and F IFRA-registered Insecticides Manufactured Before January 1, 2008. Notwithstanding the definition of “Product Category” in Section 94508, if anywhere on the principal display panel of any consumer product manufactured before January 1, 2007, or any FIFRA-registered insecticide manufactured before Ja nuary 1, 2008 , any representation is made that the product may be used as, or is suitable for use as a consumer product for which a lower VOC limit is spe cified in Section 94509(a), then the lowest VOC limit shall apply. This requirement does not apply to general purpose cleaners and insecticide foggers.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-60 (2) Products Manufactured on or After January 1, 2007, and FIFRA-registered Insecticides Manufactured on or After January 1, 20 08. Notwithstanding the definition of “product category” in Section 94508, if anywhere on the container or packaging of any consumer product manufactured on o r after January 1, 2007, or any FIFRA-registered insecticide manufactured on or after January 1, 2008, or on any sticker or label affixed thereto, any represent ation is made that the product may be used as, or is suitable for use as a consumer pr oduct for which a lower VOC limit is specified in Section 94509(a), then the lowest V OC limit shall apply. This requirement does not apply to general purpose clean ers and insecticide foggers.

(3) Rules that Apply when a Product Category Definition Excludes Other Product Categories.

If a definition of a regulated product category in section 94508(a) states that the product category “does not include” one or more oth er product categories, the “most restrictive limit” provisions of section 94512(a) a pply to regulated products that meet the definition of the regulated product category an d also make any representation that the regulated product may be used as (or is su itable for use as) a product that falls within one or more of the excluded product ca tegories. Notwithstanding the foregoing above, this provision does not apply to “Disinfectant”/”Sanitizer” products labeled as “Bathroom and Tile Cleaners,” “Glass Cle aners,” “General Purpose Cleaners,” “Toilet/Urinal Care Products,” “Metal Po lishes,” “Carpet Cleaners,” or “Fabric Refreshers” that may also make disinfecting /sanitizing or anti-microbial

claims on the label.

For example, if the definition for Regulated Produc t Category A states that it “does not include” Regulated Product Category B, then the “most restrictive limit” provisions apply to a regulated product that meets the definition of Regulated Product Category A, but also makes a representation that it may be used as (or is suitable for use as) Regulated Product Category B. In other words, if the regulated product makes any representation that it may be use d as (or is suitable for use as) Regulated Category Product B, then the regulated pr oduct would be subject to the lowest VOC limit specified in section 94509(a) for either Product Category A or Product Category B. For the purposes of this section:

“Regulated product” means a consumer product for wh ich a VOC standard is specified in section 94509(a), and

“Representation” has the same meaning as used above in subsections 94512(a)(1) and 94512(a)(2) (i.e., what statements qualify as a “representation” depends on the date the product was manufactured an d whether the statements appear on the “principal display panel” or other pa rts of the product container or packaging.)Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-61 (b) Product Dating

.

(1) Each manufacturer of a consumer product subject to Section 94509 shall clearly display on each consumer product container or packa ge, the day, month, and year on which the product was manufactured, or a co de indicating such date. Codes that represent a sequential batch number, or that otherwise cannot be attributed to a specific day, month, and year, do n ot satisfy this requirement.

(2) A manufacturer who uses the following code to i ndicate the date of manufacture shall not be subject to the requirements of section 94512(c)(1), if the code is represented separately from other codes on the prod uct container so that it is easily recognizable:

YY DDD = year year day day day

Where: “YY” = two digits representing the yea r in which the product was

manufactured, and

“DDD” = three digits representing the day of the year on which the product was manufactured, with “001” representing t he first day of the year, “002” representing the second day of the year , and so forth (i.e. the “Julian date”).

(3) This date or code shall be displayed on each c onsumer product container or package no later than twelve months prior to the ef fective date of the applicable standard specified in Section 94509.

(4) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b)( 5), for products manufactured on or after January 1, 2006, the date or code shall be displayed on the product container such that it is readily observable withou t irreversibly disassembling any portion of the product container or packaging. For the purposes of this subsection, information may be displayed on the bot tom of a container as long as it is clearly legible without removing any product packaging.

(5) Products Sold in Multi-unit Packages.

(A) Products sold, supplied, or offered for sale in multi-unit packages are not required to comply with subsection (b)(4).

(B) If a multi-unit package does not comply with su bsection (b)(4), the “sell-through” provisions of section 94509(c)(1) sh all not apply to the individual product units contained within the multi -unit package. In other words, if any multi-unit package produced or assemb led after January 1, 2006, does not display the date(s) or da te-code(s) of the product units, such that the displayed information is readi ly observable without irreversibly disassembling any portion of the conta iner or packaging, theConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-62 individual product units shall be subject to the VO C standards in effect when the multi-unit package is sold, supplied, or offere d for sale, regardless of the date on which the product units were manufactured.

(C) A multi-unit package may comply with subsectio n (b)(4) by displaying the

date of assembly instead of the date(s) or date-cod e(s) of the individual product units, so long as the date of assembly is r eadily observable without irreversibly disassembling any portion of the conta iner or packaging. The “date of assembly” means the date that the individu al product units are assembled into the finished multi-unit package. If the date of assembly is displayed instead of the individual date(s) or date -code(s), the “date of assembly” shall be the “date of manufacture” for al l of the product units contained within the multi-unit package. In other words, all of the product

units shall be deemed to have been manufactured on the date these units are assembled into the multi-unit package, even if the individual product units show different date(s) or date-code(s), and the “da te of assembly” shall be “date of manufacture” of each product unit for the purposes of applying the “sell-through” provisions of section 94509(c).

(6) The requirements of this subsection (b) shall n ot apply to:

(A) personal fragrance products of 2 milliliters or less, which are offered to consumers free of charge for the purpose of samplin g the product; or

(B) products containing no VOCs (as defined in sect ion 94508), or containing VOCs at 0.10% by weight or less.

(c) Additional Product Dating Requirements

.

(1) If a manufacturer uses a code indicating the da te of manufacture, for any consumer product subject to section 94509 an explan ation of the code must

be filed with the Executive Officer of the ARB no l ater than twelve months prior to the effective date of the applicable stand ard specified in section 94509. Thereafter, manufacturers using a code must file an explanation of

the code with the Executive Officer on an annual ba sis, beginning in 2006. The explanation of the code must be received by the Executive Officer on or before January 31 st of each year, with the first explanation due on or before January 31, 2006.

(2) If a manufacturer changes any code indicating t he date of manufacture for any consumer product subject to subsection (c)(1), an explanation of the modified code must be received by the Executive Off icer before any products displaying the modified code are sold, supplied, or offered for sale in

California.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-63 (3) No person shall erase, alter, deface, or othe rwise remove or make illegible any date or code indicating the date of manufacture from any regulated product container without the express authorization of the manufacturer.

(4) Codes indicating the date of manufacture are public information and may not

be claimed as confidential.

(d) Additional Labeling Requirements for Aerosol Adhesi ve, Adhesive Remover, Electronic Cleaner, Electrical Cleaner, Energ ized Electrical Cleaner, Contact Adhesive, and Sealant or Caulking Compound (non-ae rosol).

(1) In addition to the requirements specified in subsections (a), (b), and (c), both the manufacturer and responsible party for each a erosol adhesive, adhesive remover, electronic cleaner, electrical cleaner, en ergized electrical cleaner, contact adhesive product, and sealant or caulking c ompound (non-aerosol) subject to this article shall ensure that all produ cts clearly display the following information on each product container whi ch is manufactured on or after the effective date for the category specified in section 94509(a), except that for non-chemically curing sealant or caulking compound (non-aerosol), the effective date of this requirement is December 31, 2010, and for chemically curing sealant or caulking compound (non -aerosol), the effective date of this requirement is December 31, 2012:

(A) The product category as specified in sectio n 94509(a) or an

abbreviation of the category shall be displayed;

(B) 1. The applicable VOC standard for the prod uct that is specified in

section 94509(a), except for Energized Electrical C leaner, expressed as a percentage by weight, shall be displ ayed unless the product is included in an alternative control p lan approved by the Executive Officer, as provided in Article 4, Se ctions 94540- 94555, Title 17, California Code of Regulations, an d the product exceeds the applicable VOC standard;

2. If the product is included in an alternati ve control plan approved

by the Executive Officer, and the product exceeds t he applicable VOC standard specified in section 94509(a), the pro duct shall be labeled with the term “ACP” or “ACP product;”

(C) If the product is classified as a special p urpose spray adhesive, the

applicable substrate and/or application or an abbre viation of the substrate/application that qualifies the product as special purpose shall be displayed;

(D) If the manufacturer or responsible party use s an abbreviation as allowed

by this subsection 94512(d)(1)(A), an explanation o f the abbreviation

must be filed with the Executive Officer before the abbreviation is used.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-64 (2) The information required in section 94512(d)(1 ), shall be displayed on the

product container such that it is readily observabl e without removing or disassembling any portion of the product container or packaging. For the purposes of this subsection, information may be dis played on the bottom of a container as long as it is clearly legible without removing any product packaging.

(3) No person shall remove, alter, conceal, or def ace the information required in

section 94512(d)(1) prior to final sale of the prod uct.

(e) Additional Requirements for Multi-purpose Solvent a nd Paint Thinner.

(1) In addition to the requirements specified in secti on 94512(a), (b), and (c), both

the manufacturer and responsible party for each Mul ti-purpose Solvent and

Paint Thinner sold or offered for sale in areas of California outside the South Coast Air Quality Management District shall ensure that all products

manufactured on or after the effective date for the category specified in section 94509(a), meet the following requirements:

(A) Each product container must clearly display the VO C content in percent

by weight as determined from actual formulation dat a.

(B) The information required by this subsection 94512 (e)(1), shall be

displayed on the product container such that it is readily observable without removing or disassembling any portion of th e product container or packaging.

(C) No person shall remove, alter, conceal, or deface the information

required by this subsection 94512(e)(1) prior to fi nal sale of the product.

(2) In addition to the requirements specified in sect ion 94512(a), (b), (c), and (e)(1):

(A) Except as provided below in section 94512(e)(2)(B ), effective December

31, 2010, until December 31, 2015, no person shall sell, supply, offer for sale, or manufacture for use in California any “Fla mmable” or “Extremely Flammable” Multi-purpose Solvent or Paint Thinner n amed, on the Principle Display Panel as “Paint Thinner,” “Multi- purpose Solvent,” “Clean-up Solvent,” or “Paint Clean-up.”

(B) Section 94512(e)(2)(A) does not apply to products that meet any of the

following criteria:

1. Products which include an attached “hang tag ” or sticker that

displays, at a minimum, the following statement: “F ormulated toConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-65 meet California VOC limits; see warnings on label.”

2. Products where the Principle Display Panel d isplays, in a font size

as large as or larger than the font size of any oth er words on the panel, the common name of the chemical compound (e. g., “Acetone,” “Methyl acetate,” etc.) that results in the product meeting the criteria for “Flammable” or “Extremely Flammable.”

(C) For the purposes of this subsection (e)(2), a product is “Flammable” or

Extremely Flammable” if it is labeled as “Flammable ” or “Extremely Flammable” on the product container, or if the prod uct meets the criteria for these terms specified in title16, Code of Feder al Regulations, section 1500.3(c)(6).

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, and 41712, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39600, 40000, and 41712 , Health and Safety Code.

§ 94513. Reporting Requirements.

(a) Upon 90 days written notice, the Executive Offi cer may require any responsible party to report information for any con sumer product or products the Executive Officer may specify including, but not li mited to, all or part of the

information: specified in the following subsections (a)(1) through (a)(12). If the responsible party does not have or does not provide the information requested by the Executive Officer, the Executive Officer may re quire the reporting of this information by the person that has the information, including, but not limited to, any formulator, manufacturer, supplier, parent company, private labeler, distributor, or repackager.

(1) the company name, address, telephone number, an d designated contact person;

(2) any claim of confidentiality made pursuant to T itle 17, California Code of Regulations, Section 91011;

(3) the product brand name for each consumer produc t and the product label;

(4) the product category to which the consumer prod uct belongs;

(5) the applicable product form(s) listed separatel y;

(6) an identification of each product brand name an d form as a “Household Product,” “I&I Product,” or both;

(7) separate California sales in pounds per year, t o the nearest pound, and the

method used to calculate California sales for each product form;Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-66 (8) for information submitted by multiple companies , an identification of each company which is submitting relevant data separate from that submitted by the responsible party. All information from all compan ies shall be submitted by the date specified in Section 94513(a);

(9) for each product brand name and form, the net percent by weight of the total product, less container and packaging, comprised of the following, rounded to the nearest one-tenth of a percent (0.1%):

(A) Total Table B Compounds (B) Total LVP-VOCs that are not fragrances (C) Total All Other Carbon-Containing Compounds t hat are not fragrances (D) Total All Non-Carbon-Containing Compounds (E) Total Fragrance (F) For products containing greater than two perc ent by weight fragrance, but

excluding “personal fragrance products”: (i) the percent of fragrance that are LVP-VOCs, and (ii) the percent of fragrance that are all other carbon-containing compounds (G) For “personal fragrance products,” the densit y of the fragrance (H) Total Para-dichlorobenzene

(10) for each product brand name and form, the ide ntity, including the specific

chemical name and associated Chemical Abstract Serv ices (CAS) number, of the following:

(A) Each Table B Compound (B) Each LVP-VOC that is not a fragrance

(11) if applicable, the weight percent comprised o f propellant for each product;

(12) if applicable, an identification of the type of propellant (Type A, Type B, Type C, or a blend of the different types);

(b) In addition to the requirements of section 9451 3(a)(10), the responsible party shall report or shall arrange to have reported to the Exe cutive Officer the net percent by weight of each ozone-depleting compound which is (1 ) listed in section 94509(e) and (2) contained in a product subject to reporting und er section 94513(a) in any amount greater than 0.1 percent by weight.

(c) All information submitted by any person pursuan t to Section 94513 shall be handled in accordance with the procedures specified in Titl e 17, California Code of Regulations, Sections 91000-91022.

(d) Special Reporting Requirements for Aerosol Adhesive s

On or before March 31, 2004, all responsible partie s for aerosol adhesives shallConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-67 report to the Executive Officer the following infor mation for products sold or offered

for sale in California:

(1) data regarding product sales and composition f or the year 2003, including the information listed in Section 94513(a), and any oth er information that the Executive Officer may specify; and

(2) a written update of the research and developmen t efforts undertaken to achieve VOC limits lower than the limits specified in secti on 94509(a). The written update

must include detailed information about the raw mat erials (solvents, propellants, resins, and polymers) and hardware (valves, actuato rs, cans) used in product reformulation, the testing protocols used, the resu lts of the testing, and the cost

of reformulation efforts.

(3) On or before December 31, 2003, the Executive O fficer shall notify responsible parties in writing that they are to submit aerosol adhesive product and research data by March 31, 2004.

(e) Special Reporting Requirements for Consumer Product s that Contain Perchloroethylene or Methylene Chloride :

(1) The requirements of this subsection shall apply to all responsible parties for:

(A) consumer products that are subject to section 94509(a) and contain perchloroethylene or methylene chloride, and

(B) Energized Electrical Cleaners as defined in se ction 94508(a), that contain perchloroethylene or methylene chloride. For the p urposes of this subsection, a product “contains perchloroethylene or methylene chloride” if the product contains 1.0 percent or more by weight (exclusive o f the container or packaging) of either perchloroethylene or methylene chloride.

(2) For each consumer product that contains perchl oroethylene or methylene chloride, the responsible party shall report the fo llowing information for products sold in California during each calendar year, begin ning with the year 2000, and ending with the year 2010.

(A) the product brand name and a copy of the produc t label with legible usage instructions;

(B) the product category to which the consumer prod uct belongs;

(C) the applicable product form(s) (listed separate ly);

(D) for each product form listed in (C), the total sales in California during the calendar year to the nearest pound (exclusive of th e container or packaging),Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-68 and the method used for calculating the California sales;

(E) the weight percent, to the nearest 0.10 percent , of perchloroethylene and methylene chloride in the consumer product.

(3) The information specified in subsection 94513( e)(2) shall be reported for each calendar year by March 1 of the following year. Th e first report shall be due on March 1, 2001, for calendar year 2000. A new repor t is due on March 1 of each year thereafter, until March 1, 2011, when the last report is due.

(4) Upon request, the Executive Officer shall make the perchloroethylene information submitted pursuant to this subsection available to publicly owned treatment works in California, in accordance with the procedu res for handling of confidential information specified in Title 17, California Code of Regulations, sections 91000-

91022.

(A) On or before July 1, 2002, the Executive Office r shall evaluate the information, along with data on influent and efflue nt levels of perchloroethylene as reported by publicly-owned tre atment works personnel and any other relevant information, to determine if it is likely that publicly-owned treatment works are experiencing inc reased levels of perchloroethylene, relative to 1996 levels, that ca n be attributed to consumer products which contain perchloroethylene.

(B) If the Executive Officer determines that it i s likely that increased

perchloroethylene levels at the publicly-owned trea tment works are caused by increased levels of perchloroethylene in consume r products subject to this regulation, then the Executive Officer shall, in co njunction with the publicly-owned treatment works and other appropriat e parties, implement measures which are feasible, appropriate, and neces sary for reducing perchloroethylene levels at the publicly-owned trea tment works.

(f) Special Reporting Requirements for Multi-purpos e Lubricant and Penetrant products

(1) On or before March 31, 2012, all responsible p arties for Multi-purpose Lubricant and Penetrant products shall report to the Executiv e Officer the following information for products sold or offered for sale i n California:

(A) data regarding product sales and composition for the year 2011, including

the information listed in section 94513(a), and the entire product label; and

(B) a written update of the research and developme nt efforts undertaken to achieve the 25 percent VOC limits specified in sect ion 94509(a). The written update must include detailed information about the raw materials evaluated for use, maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) value s for any VOC or LVPVOC used or evaluated, the function of the raw mate rial evaluated, hardwareConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-69 used in product reformulation, the testing protocol s used, the results of the testing, and the cost of reformulation efforts.

(2) On or before March 31, 2014, all responsible p arties for Multi-purpose Lubricant products shall report to the Executive Officer the following information for products sold or offered for sale in California:

(a) data regarding product sales and composition for the year 2013, including

the information listed in Section 94513(a), and the entire product label; and

(b) a written update of the research and developme nt efforts undertaken to achieve the 10 percent VOC limit specified in secti on 94509(a). The written update must include detailed information about the raw materials evaluated for use, MIR values for any VOC or LVP-VOC used or evaluated, the function of the raw material evaluated, hardware us ed in product reformulation, the testing protocols used, the resu lts of the testing, and the

cost of reformulation efforts.

(g) Special Reporting Requirements for Multi-purpose So lvent and Paint Thinner products

(1) On or before June 30, 2012, all responsible parti es for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products shall report to the Exec utive Officer the following information for products sold or offered for sale i n California:

(a) data regarding product sales and composition for t he year 2011, including

the information listed in section 94513(a), and the entire product label; and

(b) a written update of the research and development e fforts undertaken to achieve the 3 percent VOC limits specified in secti on 94509(a). The written update must include detailed information about the raw materials evaluated for use; maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) value s for any VOC or LVPVOC used or evaluated; the function of the raw mate rial evaluated; the testing protocols used; the results of the testing; and the cost of

reformulation efforts.

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, 415 11, and 41712, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39600, 40000, 41 511, and 41712, Health and Safety Code.

§ 94514. Variances

.

(a) Applications for variances. Any person who cannot comply with the requirement s set forth in Section 94509, because of extraordinar y reasons beyond the person's reasonable control may apply in writing to the Exec utive Officer for a variance. TheConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-70 variance application shall set forth:

(1) the specific grounds upon which the variance i s sought;

(2) the proposed date(s) by which compliance with the provisions of Section 94509 will be achieved;

(3) a compliance report reasonably detailing the m ethod(s) by which compliance will be achieved, and

(4) for applicants requesting a variance from the June 1, 1999, 55 percent VOC standard for hairspray products, the variance appli cation shall also include a plan describing how the applicant will mitigate the exce ss VOC emissions that would be emitted during the period of the variance.

(b) Notices and public hearings for variances. Upon receipt of a variance application containing the information required in subsection ( a), the Executive Officer shall hold a public hearing to determine whether, under what c onditions, and to what extent, a variance from the requirements in Section 94509 is necessary and will be permitted. A hearing shall be initiated no later than 75 days after receipt of a variance application. Notice of the time and place of the h earing shall be sent to the applicant by certified mail not less than 30 days prior to th e hearing. Notice of the hearing shall also be submitted for publication in the Cali fornia Regulatory Notice Register and sent to every person who requests such notice, not less than 30 days prior to the hearing. The notice shall state that the parti es may, but need not be, represented by counsel at the hearing. At least 30 days prior to the hearing, the variance application shall be made available to the public for inspection. Interested members of the public shall be allowed a reasonable opportunity to testify at the hearing and their testimony shall be considered.

(c) Treatment of confidential information. Information submitted to the Executive Officer by a variance applicant may be claimed as confident ial, and such information shall be handled in accordance with the procedures specif ied in Title 17, California Code of Regulations, Sections 91000-91022. The Executiv e Officer may consider such confidential information in reaching a decision on a variance application.

(d) Necessary findings for granting variances. No variance shall be granted unless all of the following findings are made:

(1) that, because of reasons beyond the reasonable control of the applicant, requiring compliance with Section 94509 would resul t in extraordinary economic hardship.

(2) that the public interest in mitigating the ext raordinary hardship to the applicant by issuing the variance outweighs the public interest in avoiding any increased

emissions of air contaminants which would result fr om issuing the variance.Consumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-71 (3) that the compliance report proposed by the app licant can reasonably be implemented, and will achieve compliance as expedit iously as possible.

(e) Variance orders. Any variance order shall specify a final complian ce date by which the requirements of Section 94509 will be achieved. Any variance order shall contain a condition that specifies increments of pr ogress necessary to assure timely compliance, and such other conditions that the Exec utive Officer, in consideration of the testimony received at the hearing, finds necess ary to carry out the purposes of Division 26 of the Health and Safety Code.

(f) Situations in which variances shall cease to be eff ective. A variance shall cease to be effective upon failure of the party to whom the variance was granted to comply with any term or condition of the variance.

(g) Modification and revocation of variances. Upon the application of any person, the Executive Officer may review, and for good cause, m odify or revoke a variance from requirements of Section 94509 after holding a publi c hearing in accordance with the provisions of subsection (b).

(h) Special conditions in variance orders for hairspray products.

In imposing conditions in variance orders granted f rom the June 1, 1999, 55 percent VOC standard for hairspray products, the Executive Officer, in addition to any other conditions that may be imposed, shall require the a pplicant to mitigate the excess VOC emissions that would be emitted during the peri od of the variance. If this mitigation requirement would result in an extraordi nary economic hardship to the applicant, or if other good cause exists, the Execu tive Officer may waive all or part of this requirement.

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, and 41712, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39600, 40000, and 41712 , Health and Safety Code.

§ 94515. Test Methods

.

(a)(1) VOC and GWP compound content determination using ARB Method 310

. Testing to determine compliance with the requiremen ts of this article, shall be performed using Air Resources Board Method 310, Det ermination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Consumer Products, adopt ed September 25, 1997 and as last amended on [Date of Amendment] May 5, 2005 , which is incorporated herein by reference. Alternative meth ods which are shown to accurately determine the concentration of VOCs in a subject product or its emissions may be used upon approval of the Executiv e Officer.

(2) In sections 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7 of Air Resourc es Board (ARB) Method 310, a process is specified for the “Initial Determination of VOC Content” and the “FinalConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-72 Determination of VOC Content”. This process is an integral part of testing procedure set forth in ARB Method 310, and is repro duced below:

Sections 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7 of Air Resources Board Method 310

3.5 Initial Determination of VOC Content. The Executive Officer will

determine the VOC content pursuant to sections 3.2 and 3.3. Only those components with concentrations equal to or greater than 0.1 percent by weight will be reported.

3.5.1 Using the appropriate formula specified in section 4.0, the Executive

Officer will make an initial determination of wheth er the product meets the applicable VOC standards specified in ARB regul ations. If initial results show that the product does not meet the app licable VOC standards, the Executive Officer may perform additi onal testing to

confirm the initial results.

3.5.2 If the results obtained under section 3.5.1 s how that the product does not meet the applicable VOC standards, the Executiv e Officer will request the product manufacturer or responsible par ty to supply product formulation data. The manufacturer or responsible party shall supply the requested information. Information submitted t o the ARB Executive Officer may be claimed as confidential; such inform ation will be handled in accordance with the confidentiality procedures s pecified in Title 17, California Code of Regulations, sections 91000 to 9 1022.

3.5.3 If the information supplied by the manufac turer or responsible party

shows that the product does not meet the applicable VOC standards, then the Executive Officer will take appropriate en forcement action.

3.5.4 If the manufacturer or responsible party f ails to provide formulation

data as specified in section 3.5.2, the initial det ermination of VOC

content under this section 3.5 shall determine if t he product is in compliance with the applicable VOC standards. This determination may be used to establish a violation of ARB regulat ions.

3.6 Determination of the LVP-VOC status of compou nds and mixtures. This

section does not apply to antiperspirant and deodor ants or aerosol coating products because there is no LVP-VOC exemption for these products.

3.6.1 Formulation data. If the vapor pressure i s unknown, the following

ASTM methods, which are incorporated by reference h erein, may be used to determine the LVP-VOC status of compounds a nd mixtures: ASTM D 86-01 (Aug. 10, 2001) , ASTM D 850-00 (Dec. 10, 2000)

, ASTM D 1078-01 (June 10, 2001) , ASTM D 2879-97 (April 10, 1997)

, as modified in Appendix B to this Method 310, ASTM D 2887-01 (MayConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-73 10, 2001) and ASTM E 1719-97 (March 10, 1997)

.

3.6.2 LVP-VOC status of “compounds” or “mixtures .” The Executive Officer

will test a sample of the LVP-VOC used in the produ ct formulation to determine the boiling point for a compound or for a mixture. If the boiling point exceeds 216 o C, the compound or mixture is an LVP-VOC. If the boiling point is less than 216 o C, then the weight percent of the

mixture which boils above 216 o C is an LVP-VOC. The Executive Officer will use the nearest 5 percent distillation cut that is greater than

216 o C as determined under 3.6.1 to determine the percen tage of the mixture qualifying as an LVP-VOC.

3.6.3 Reference method for identification of LVP -VOC compounds and

mixtures. If a product does not qualify as an LVP- VOC under 3.6.2, the Executive Officer will test a sample of the com pound or mixture used in a product’ s formulation utilizing one or both of the followin g: ASTM D 2879-97 (April 10, 1997) , as modified in Appendix B to this Method 310, and ASTM E 1719-97 (March 10, 1997) , to determine if the compound or mixture meets the requirements of T itle 17, CCR, section 94508(a)(94)(A).

3.7 Final Determination of VOC Content . If a product’s compliance status is not satisfactorily resolved under sections 3.5 and 3.6, the Executive Officer will conduct further analyses and testing as necessary t o verify the formulation

data.

3.7.1 If the accuracy of the supplied formulat ion data is verified and the

product sample is determined to meet the applicable VOC standards,

then no enforcement action for violation of the VOC standards will be

taken.

3.7.2 If the Executive Officer is unable to ve rify the accuracy of the supplied

formulation data, then the Executive Officer will r equest the product manufacturer or responsible party to supply informa tion to explain the discrepancy.

3.7.3 If there exists a discrepancy that cannot be resolved between the

results of Method 310 and the supplied formulation data, then the results of Method 310 shall take precedence over th e supplied

formulation data. The results of Method 310 shall then determine if the product is in compliance with the applicable VOC st andards, and may be used to establish a violation of ARB regulations

.

(b) VOC content determinations using product formul ation and records. Testing to determine compliance with the requirements of this article may also be demonstrated through calculation of the VOC content from records of the amounts ofConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-74 constituents used to make the product pursuant to t he following criteria:

(1) Compliance determination s based on these records may not be used unless the manufacturer of a consumer product keeps accura te records for each day of production of the amount and chemical compositio n of the individual product constituents. These records must be kept f or at least three years.

(2) For the purposes of this section 94515(b), the VOC content shall be calculated according to the following equation:

where,

A = total net weight of unit (excluding container and packaging)

B = total weight of all VOCs, as defined in Sectio n 94508(a), per unit

C = total weight of VOCs exempted under Section 94 510, per unit

(3) If product records appear to demonstrate compli ance with the VOC limits, but these records are contradicted by product testing p erformed using ARB Method 310, the results of ARB Method 310 shall ta ke precedence over the product records and may be used to establish a viol ation of the requirements of

this article.

(c) Determination of liquid or solid. Testing to d etermine whether a product is a liquid or solid shall be performed using ASTM D4359-90 (May 2 5, 1990) , which is incorporated by reference herein.

(d) Compliance determinations for charcoal lighter material products. Testing to determine compliance with the certification require ments for charcoal lighter material shall be performed using the procedures specified i n the South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1174 Ignition Method Compl iance Certification Protocol (February 28, 1991), which is incorporated by refer ence herein.

(e) Testing to determine distillation points of pet roleum distillate-based charcoal lighter materials shall be performed using ASTM D86-01 Aug. 10, 2001 , which is incorporated by reference herein.

(f) Fragrance content determinations for personal f ragrance products. Testing to determine the percent by weight of fragrance in per sonal fragrance products shall be performed according to the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) Official Method of Analysis No. 932.11, 1990, “Esse ntial Oil in Flavor Extracts and Toilet Preparations, Babcock Method” (AOAC Official Methods of Analysis, 15th Edition, 1990), which is incorporated by refe rence herein. VOC Content = B - C x 100

AConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-75 (g) No person shall create, alter, falsify, or othe rwise modify records in such a way that the records do not accurately reflect the constitue nts used to manufacture a product, the chemical composition of the individual product, and any other test, processes, or records used in connection with product manufacture

.

(h) VOC and Aromatic compound content determination for Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner products using ARB Method 310

.

(1) VOC content: Testing to determine compliance with the requirem ents of this article, shall be performed using Air Resources Board Method 310, Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Consumer Produc ts, adopted September 25, 1997 and as last amended on [Date of Amendment], which is incorporated herein by reference. Alternative meth ods which are shown to accurately determine the concentration of VOCs in a subject product or its emissions may be used upon approval of the Executiv e Officer.

(2) Aromatic compound content:

Testing to determine aromatic compound content shal l be conducted using ARB Method 310 in conjunction with product formulat ion data.

(A) Upon written notification from the Executive Of ficer, the Multi-purpose Solvent or Paint Thinner responsible party or manuf acturer shall have 10 working days to provide to the Executive Officer, i n writing, formulation data as specified in part (i) for products selected for compliance testing:

(1) The weight fraction to the nearest 0.1 percent of each ingredient

including: water, VOC, LVP-VOC, total inorganic co mpounds, and any compound specified in section 94508(a)(152) . For hydrocarbon solvents the BIN number as listed in se ction 94701 (a) or (b), and the initial boiling point and dry p oint of the solvent shall be specified. Individual compounds present i n an amount less than 0.1 percent by weight, are not required t o be reported. (2) By March 1, 2010, and each year thereafter th e responsible party

shall provide to the Executive Officer contact info rmation for the person who is to receive the letter. (3) For the purpose of this subsection a Material Safe ty Data Sheet

does not meet the requirement for formulation data.

(B) A violation is established if:

(1) the formulation data supplied by the responsib le party or manufacturer shows that the product does not meet t he applicable VOC or aromatic content standard; and/or (2) the responsible party or manufacturer fails t o respond to theConsumer Products Regulation 2009 Proposed Amendme nts B-76 notice and provide formulation data with the 10 day specified time frame specified in this subsection.

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, 396 07, 41511, and 41712, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39600, 39 607, 40000, 41511, and 41712, Health and Safety Code.

94516. Severability

.

Each part of this article shall be deemed severable , and in the event that any part of this article is held to be invalid, the remainder o f this article shall continue in full force

and effect.

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 39600, 39601, and 41712, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39600, 40000, and 41712 , Health and Safety Code.

94517. Federal Enforceability

.

For purposes of federal enforceability of this arti cle, the Environmental Protection Agency is not subject to approval determinations ma de by the Executive Officer under Sections 94511, 94514, and 94515. Within 180 days of a request from a person who has been granted an exemption or varianc e under Section 94511 or 94514, an exemption or variance meeting the require ments of the Clean Air Act shall be submitted by the Executive Officer to the Enviro nmental Protection Agency for inclusion in the applicable implementation plan app roved or promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to Section 110 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C., Section 7410. Prior to submitting an ex emption granted under Section 94511 as a revision to the applicable implementatio n plan, the Executive Officer shall hold a public hearing on the proposed exempti on. Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be sent to the applicant by ce rtified mail not less than 30 days prior to the hearing. Notice of the hearing shall also be submitted for publication in the California Regulatory Notice Register and sent to the Environmental Protection Agency, every person who requests such notice, and to any person or group of persons whom the Executive Officer believes may be interested in the application. Within 30 days of the hearing the Executive Officer shall notify the applicant of the decision in writing as provided in Section 94511(f) . The decision may approve, disapprove, or modify an exemption previously grant ed pursuant to Section 94511.

NOTE: Authority cited: Section 39600, 39601, 39602, and 41712, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 39002, 39600, 39602, 40 000, and 41712, Health and Safety Code.2009 Proposed Amendments 

## METHOD 310

DETERMINATION OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOC) IN CONSUMER PRODUCTS AND REACTIVE ORGANIC

COMPOUNDS IN AEROSOL COATING PRODUCTS

(Including Appendices A and B)

Adopted: September 25, 1997 Amended: September 3, 1999 Amended: July 18, 2001 Amended: May 5, 2005

Amended: ****

DISCLAIMER: Mention of any trade name or commercia l product in Method 310 does not constitute endorsement or recommendation of this pr oduct by the Air Resources Board.2009 Proposed Amendments 

### METHOD 310

DETERMINATION OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS (VOC) I N CONSUMER

PRODUCTS AND REACTIVE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS IN AEROSOL COATING

PRODUCTS

1 APPLICABILITY

1.1 This method (Method 310) applies to the determ ination of the percent by weight of:

(1) volatile organic compounds (VOC) in consumer pr oducts, antiperspirant and deodorant products, and aerosol coatings products a s those terms are defined in Title 17, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, C hapter 1, Subchapter 8.5 (Consumer Products), commencing with section 94500, and

(2) low vapor pressure-volatile organic compounds ( LVP-VOC) as that term is defined in section 94508(a), and

(3) the reactive organic compounds (ROC) contained in aerosol coating products, as that
term is defined in Title 17, CCR, section 94521.

1.2 Method 310 determines the total volatile mater ial in a product and the presence of any compounds prohibited by ARB regulations (“prohibite d compounds”). Components of the product that do not meet the definition of a VO C or are exempted by ARB regulations for a specific product category (“exempt compounds” ) are subtracted from the total

volatile material to determine the final VOC conten t for the product. Method 310 is also used to determine the percent by weight of the ROCs contained in aerosol coating products, for the purpose of determining compliance with the Regulation for Reducing the Ozone Formed from Aerosol Coating Product Emiss ions, Title 17, CCR, sections 94520 to 94528 (the “Aerosol Coatings Regulation”).

1.3 Method 310 does not apply to the determination of the composition or concentration of fragrance components in products.

1.4 The term “Executive Officer” as used in this d ocument means the Executive Officer of

the Air Resources Board or his or her authorized re presentative.

2 TEST METHODS

Method 310 incorporates by reference the following American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) International , National Institute for Occupational Safety and He alth (NIOSH), and United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) analytical test

methods:2009 Proposed Amendments

2.1 ASTM D 2369-01: Standard Test Method for Volat ile Content of Coatings (January 10, 2001).

2.2 ASTM D 1426-98: Standard Test Methods for Ammo nia Nitrogen in Water (December 10, 1998).

2.3 ASTM D 4017-96a: Standard Test Method for Wate r in Paints and Paint Materials by the Karl Fisher Titration Method (July 10, 1996).

2.4 ASTM D 3792-99: Standard Test Method for Water Content of Water-Reducible Paints by Direct Injection Into a Gas Chromatograph (May 1 0, 1999).

2.5 ASTM D 859-00: Standard Test Method for Silica in Water (determination of polymethylsiloxanes after digestion) (June 10, 2000 ).

2.6 ASTM D 3074-94: Standard Test Methods for Pres sure in Metal Aerosol Containers (November 15, 1994) with the modifications found in Appendix A to this Method 310.

2.7 ASTM D 3063-94: Standard Test Methods for Pres sure in Glass Aerosol Bottles (November 15, 1994) with the modifications found in Appendix A to this Method 310.

2.8 ASTM D 3064-97: Standard Terminology Relating to Aerosol Products (September 10, 1997).

2.9 NIOSH: Method 1400 Alcohols I (analysis of ace tone and ethanol by gas chromatography). NIOSH Manual of Analytical Method s, Volume 1 (August 1994).

2.10 Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry for Volat ile Organics (analysis of exempt and prohibited compounds in the product by headspace/ga s chromatography/mass spectrometry).

2.10.1 US EPA Method 8240B, September 1994, Revisi on 2, Volatile Organic Compounds

by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS), Te st Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Volume 1 B, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2: Laboratory Manual Physical/Chemical Methods, SW-846, September 1994.

2.10.2 US EPA Method 8260B, December 1996, Revisio n 2, Volatile Organic Compounds

by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS), Te st Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Volume 1 B, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2: Laboratory Manual Physical/Chemical Methods, SW-846, December 1996.2009 Proposed Amendments

2.11 US EPA Reference Method 24, Determination of V olatile Matter Content, Water Content, Density, Volume Solids, and Weight Solids of Surface Coatings: 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 60, Appendix A, as i t existed on September 11, 1995.

2.12 US EPA Reference Method 24A, Determination of Volatile Matter Content and Density of Printing Inks and Related Coatings: 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A, as it existed on July
1, 1994.

2.13 US EPA Reference Method 18, Measurement of Gas eous Organic Compound Emissions by Gas Chromatography: 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A, as it existed on September 25,

1996.

2.14 US EPA Method 300.7, March 1986. Dissolved So dium, Ammonium, Potassium, and Calcium in Wet Deposition by Chemically Suppressed Ion Chromatography.

2.15 ASTM D 86-01: Standard Test Methods for Distil lation of Petroleum Products (August 10, 2001).

2.16 ASTM D 850-00: Standard Test Methods for Disti llation of Industrial Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Related Materials (December 10, 20 00).

2.17 ASTM D 1078-01: Standard Test Methods for Dist illation Range of Volatile Liquids (June 10, 2001).

2.18 ASTM D 2879-97: Standard Test Method for Vapor -Pressure-Temperature Relationship and Initial Decomposition Temperature of Liquids by Isoteniscope (April 10, 1997) with the modifications found in Appendix B to this Metho d 310.

2.19 ASTM D 2887-01: Standard Test Method for Boili ng Range Distribution of Petroleum Fractions by Gas Chromatography (May 10, 2001).

2.20 ASTM E 1719-97: Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Liquids by Ebulliometry (March 10, 1997).

3 CONSUMER PRODUCTS TESTING PROCEDURE

3.1 The testing begins when the Executive Officer selects a product for analysis by Method 310. The Executive Officer will maintain sample ch ain of custody throughout the selection and analytical process.

3.2 Initial Testing of Aerosol Products

If the sample is an aerosol product, the aerosol pr opellant is separated from the nonpropellant portion of the product by using ASTM D 3 074-94 (as modified in Appendix A2009 Proposed Amendments

for metal aerosol container) or ASTM D 3063-94 (as modified in Appendix A for glass aerosol container). The propellant portion is anal yzed for exempt or prohibited compounds by using US EPA Reference Method 18. The remaining non-propellant portion of the product is then analyzed as specifie d in section 3.3.

3.3 Initial Testing of Non-Aerosol Products and th e Non-Propellant Portion of Aerosol

Products

The non-aerosol product or non-propellant portion of an aerosol product is analyzed to determine the total volatile material present in th e sample and to determine the presence of any exempt or prohibited compounds. This analys is is conducted by performing the following tests: 1

3.3.1 Gravimetric analysis of samples to determine the weight percent of total volatile

material, using US EPA Reference Methods 24/24A, AS TM D 2369-01.

3.3.2 Determination of sample water content. For determination of water content either

ASTM D 4017-96a, or ASTM D 3792-99 may be used, or results from both procedures may be averaged and that value reported.

3.3.3 Determination of ammonium content using ASTM D 1426-98 or US EPA Method

300.7.

3.3.4 Determination of ketones and alcohol content using NIOSH Method 1400.

3.3.5 Analysis of exempt and prohibited compounds, if present (US EPA Reference

Method 18, US EPA Method 8240B, US EPA Method 8260B , ASTM D 859-00, NIOSH Method 1400).

3.3.6 If LVP-VOC status is claimed or the analysis indicates the presence of an LVP-VOC

component and the percent VOC is not in compliance, the Executive Officer will request formulation data as specified in Section 3. 5.2.

3.3.7 For low level VOC content samples, direct determina tion using US EPA Reference

Method 18, US EPA Method 8240B, US EPA Method 8260B , ASTM D 859-00,

NIOSH Method 1400.

3.4 Prohibited Compounds

If the sample is found to contain compounds prohibi ted by ARB regulations (i.e., ozonedepleting compounds) at concentrations equal to or exceeding 0.1 percent by weight, the Executive Officer will reanalyze the sample for con firmation.

1 Alternate test methods may be used, as provided in section 7.02009 Proposed Amendments

3.5 Initial Determination of VOC Content

The Executive Officer will determine the VOC conten t pursuant to sections 3.2 and 3.3. Only those components with concentrations equal to or greater than 0.1 percent by weight will be reported.

3.5.1 Using the appropriate formula specified in s ection 4.0, the Executive Officer will

make an initial determination of whether the produc t meets the applicable VOC standards specified in ARB regulations. If initial results show that the product does not meet the applicable VOC standards, the Executiv e Officer may perform additional testing to confirm the initial results.

3.5.2 If the results obtained under section 3.5.1 show that the product does not meet the

applicable VOC standards

, the Executive Officer will request the product manufacturer or responsible party to supply product formulation data. The manufacturer or responsible party shall supply the requested information.

Information submitted to the ARB Executive Officer may be claimed as confidential;

such information will be handled in accordance with the confidentiality procedures specified in Title 17, California Code of Regulatio ns, sections 91000 to 91022.

3.5.3 If the information supplied by the manufactu rer or responsible party shows that the

product does not meet the applicable VOC standards, then the Executive Officer will take appropriate enforcement action.

3.5.4 If the manufacturer or responsible party fai ls to provide formulation data as specified

in section 3.5.2, the initial determination of VOC content under this section 3.5 shall determine if the product is in compliance with the applicable VOC standards. This determination may be used to establish a violation of ARB regulations.

3.6 Determination of the LVP-VOC status of compoun ds and mixtures. This section does not apply to antiperspirants and deodorants or aero sol coatings products because there is no LVP-VOC exemption for these products.

3.6.1 Formulation data. If the vapor pressure is unknown, the following ASTM methods

may be used to determine the LVP-VOC status of comp ounds and mixtures: ASTM
D 86-01, ASTM D 850-00, ASTM D 1078-01, ASTM D 2879 -97, as modified in Appendix B to this Method 310, ASTM D 2887-01 and A STM E 1719-97.

3.6.2 LVP-VOC status of “compounds” or “mixtures.” The Executive Officer will test a

sample of the LVP-VOC used in the product formulati on to determine the boiling point for a compound or for a mixture. If the boil ing point exceeds 216 o C, the compound or mixture is an LVP-VOC. If the boiling point is less than 216 o C, then the weight percent of the mixture which boils above 216 o C is an LVP-VOC. The2009 Proposed Amendments Executive Officer will use the nearest 5 percent di stillation cut that is greater than

216 o C as determined under 3.6.1 to determine the percen tage of the mixture qualifying as an LVP-VOC.

3.6.3 Reference method for identification of LVP-V OC compounds and mixtures. If a

product does not qualify as an LVP-VOC under 3.6.2, the Executive Officer will test a sample of the compound or mixture used in a produ ct’s formulation utilizing one or both of the following: ASTM D 2879-97, as modified in Appendix B to this Method 310, and ASTM E 1719-97, to determine if the compou nd or mixture meets the definition of LVP-VOC as specified in Title 17, CCR , section 94508(a).

3.7 Final Determination of VOC Content

If a product’s compliance status is not satisfactor ily resolved under sections 3.5 and 3.6, the Executive Officer will conduct further analyses and testing as necessary to verify the

formulation data.

3.7.1 If the accuracy of the supplied formulation data is verified and the product sample is

determined to meet the applicable VOC standards, th en no enforcement action for

violation of the VOC standards will be taken.

3.7.2 If the Executive Officer is unable to verify the accuracy of the supplied formulation

data, then the Executive Officer will request the p roduct manufacturer or responsible party to supply information to explain the discrepa ncy.

3.7.3 If there exists a discrepancy that cannot be resolved between the results of Method

310 and the supplied formulation data, then the res ults of Method 310 shall take precedence over the supplied formulation data. The results of Method 310 shall then determine if the product is in compliance with the applicable VOC standards, and may be used to establish a violation of ARB regulat ions.

4 CALCULATION OF VOC CONTENT

This section specifies the procedure for determinin g the final VOC content of a product, which is reported as percent by weight of VOC.

4.1 Aerosol Products

4.1.1 For aerosol products, except those containin g LVP-VOC, the percent VOC content

shall be calculated using the following equation:2009 Proposed Amendments

Where 2 :

WL = weight (gm) of the non-propellant portion, excluding container and packaging.

TV = weight fraction of non-propellant total vo latile material.

A = weight fraction of ammonia (as NH 4 ) in the non-propellant portion.

H = weight fraction of water in the non-propel lant portion.

EL = weight fraction of exempt compounds in th e non-propellant portion.

WP = weight (gm) of propellant.

EP = weight (gm) of exempt compounds in propel lant.

4.1.2 For aerosol products containing LVP-VOC, the percen t VOC shall be calculated using

the following equation:

Where:

LVP = weight fraction of LVP-VOC compounds and/ or mixtures in the nonpropellant, non-aqueous portion.

1 – H = weight fraction of the non-propellant portion that does not contai n

water.

1 – LVP= weight fraction of the non-propellant, non-aqueous portion that is

volatile.

4.2 Non-Aerosol Products

2 Alternate test methods, as provided in section 7.0, or appropriate approved methods from section 2.0 may be used. 100 WP WL EP

WP ) EL H A TV( WL VOC % ×
+ − +

− − −

=



## ) )

( ( 

## [ ] )

( 100 WP WL EP

WP EL LVP 1 H 1 WL VOC % ×
+ − +

− − ×

−

=2009 Proposed Amendments

4.2.1 For non-aerosol products, except those conta ining LVP-VOC

, the percent VOC

content shall be calculated using the following equ ation:

4.2.2 For non-aerosol products containing LVP-VOC, the percent VOC shall be calculated

using the following equation:

4.3 Consumer products subject to low VOC limits (below 5.0%) may have their VOC

content characterized by a low level direct determi nation.

4.3.1 For aerosol products the percent VOC content may be calculated using the following

equation:

Where:

V = weight fraction of non-exempted volatile organic compounds in the non-propellant portion.

n = number of non-exempted volatile organic compounds in the non-propellant portion.

WL = weight (gm) of the non-propellant portion, exc luding container and packaging.

WP = weight (gm) of propellant.

EP = weight (gm) of exempt compounds in propellant.

4.3.2 For non-aerosol products the percent VOC conten t shall be calculated using the

following equation:



# [ ] 100 % × = 

# ∑

n V VOC 100

) EL H A TV( VOC % ×

− − − =



## ) ( ) ( 

## [ ] 100

EL LVP 1 H 1 VOC % ×

− − ×

− =



# [ ]

100 % ×

+ − +

= 

## ∑

WP

WL EP WP V WL VOC n2009 Proposed Amendments

5 TESTING TO DETERMINE REACTIVE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS I N AEROSOL

COATING PRODUCTS

This section specifies the procedure for determinin g the percent by weight of the reactive organic compounds contained in aerosol coating prod ucts, for the purpose of determining compliance with the Aerosol Coatings Regulation.

5.1 The testing begins when the Executive Officer selects a product for analysis. The Executive Officer will maintain sample chain of cus tody throughout the selection and analytical process. When a product is selected for testing, the Executive Officer will request the product manufacturer or responsible par ty to supply the product formulation data specified in Title 17, CCR, section 94526(b)(2 ). The manufacturer or responsible party shall supply the requested information within 10 working days. Information submitted to the Executive Officer may be claimed a s confidential; such information will be handled in accordance with the confidentiality p rocedures specified in sections 91000
to 91022, Title 17, CCR.

5.2 Initial Testing of the Propellant Portion of A erosol Coating Products

The aerosol propellant is separated from the non-pr opellant portion of the product by using ASTM D 3074-94 (as modified in Appendix A for metal aerosol container) or ASTM D 3063-94 (as modified in Appendix A for glass aerosol container). The propellant portion is analyzed for reactive organic compounds and other compounds by using US EPA Reference Method 18. The remaining no n-propellant portion of the product is then analyzed as specified in section 5. 3.

5.3 Initial Testing of the Non-Propellant Portion o f Aerosol Coating Products

The non-propellant portion of the product sample is analyzed to determine the reactive organic compounds in the sample, including the pres ence of any prohibited compounds. This analysis is conducted by performing the follow ing tests: 3

5.3.1 Gravimetric analysis of samples to determine the weight percent of total volatile

material, using US EPA Reference Methods 24/24A, AS TM D 2369-01.

5.3.2 Determination of sample water content. For determination of water content either

ASTM D 4017

- 96a, or ASTM D 3792-99 may be used, or results from both procedures may be averaged and that value reported.

5.3.3 Determination of ammonium content using ASTM D 1426-98 or US EPA Method

300.7.

3 Alternate test methods may be used, as provided in section 7.02009 Proposed Amendments

5.3.4 Determination of ketones and alcohol content using NIOSH Method 1400.

5.3.5 Analysis of reactive organic compounds and, if present, prohibited compounds (US

EPA Reference Method 18, US EPA Method 8240B, US EP A Method 8260B, ASTM D 859-00, NIOSH Method 1400).

5.4 Prohibited Compounds

If the sample is found to contain compounds prohibi ted by the Aerosol Coatings Regulation (e.g., ozone-depleting compounds) at con centrations equal to or exceeding 0.1 percent by weight, the Executive Officer will reana lyze the sample for confirmation.

5.5 Initial Determination and Verification of Reac tive Organic Compound Content

The Executive Officer will determine the reactive o rganic compound content by verifying formulation data pursuant to sections 5.2 and 5.3. Only those components with concentrations equal to or greater than 0.1 percent by weight will be reported.

5.5.1 Based on manufacturers formulation data and the analysis conducted under section 5,

the Executive Officer will make an initial determin ation of whether the product meets the applicable requirements specified in the Aeroso l Coatings Regulation. If initial results show that the product does not meet the app licable requirements, the Executive Officer may perform additional testing to confirm the initial results.

5.6 Final Determination of Reactive Organic Compou nd Content

If a product’s status is not satisfactorily resolve d under section 5.1 - 5.5, the Executive Officer may conduct additional analyses and testing as necessary to verify the

formulation data.

5.6.1 If the Executive Officer is unable to verify the accuracy of the supplied formulation

data, then the Executive Officer will request the p roduct manufacturer or responsible party to supply additional information to explain t he discrepancy.

5.6.2 If the additional information supplied by th e manufacturer or responsible party shows

that the product does not meet the applicable requi rements, then the Executive Officer will take appropriate enforcement action.

5.6.3 If the manufacturer or responsible party fa ils to provide additional information as

specified in section 5.6.1, the initial determinati on of reactive organic compound

content under section 5.1 – 5.5 shall determine if the product is in compliance with the applicable reactive organic compound limits. T his determination may be used to establish a violation of the Aerosol Coatings Regul ation.2009 Proposed Amendments

5.6.4 If there exists a discrepancy that cannot be resolved between the results of Method

310 and the formulation data or additional informat ion supplied by the manufacturer or responsible party, then the results of Method 31 0 shall take precedence over the supplied formulation data or additional information . The results of Method 310 shall then determine if the product is in compliance with the applicable requirements, and may be used to establish a violation of the Aerosol Coatings Regulation.

6 METHOD PRECISION AND ACCURACY

6.1 The precision of Method 310 for determining VO C content was evaluated using seven representative products with known volatile organic compound (VOC) contents ranging from 6.2 to 81.2 percent VOC by weight. Each sampl e was divided into six portions, and each portion was separately analyzed to determine t he VOC content. Based on the results of this analysis, the 95 percent confidence interva l for Method 310 is 3.0 percent by weight (Wt/Wt%).

6.2 For determining the percent by weight of the i ndividual ingredients in aerosol coating products, the precision and accuracy of the determi nation for each ingredient is governed by the precision and accuracy of the test method us ed to ascertain the percent by weight of each ingredient.

7 ALTERNATE TEST METHODS

Alternative test methods which are shown to accurat ely determine the concentration of VOCs or constituent components in antiperspirant/deodora nts, consumer products, or aerosol coating products (or their emissions) may be used u pon written approval of the Executive

Officer.Appendix A: Method 310 Page 1

2009 Proposed Amendments 

### Method 310 - Appendix A

PROPELLANT COLLECTION PROCEDURES

1 APPLICATION

The procedure applies to modify ASTM D 3074-94 and D 3063-94 to allow collection of the propellant for analysis and density measurement for metal aerosol containers and glass aerosol containers, respectively. These modified p rocedures also retain the aerosol standard terminology listed in ASTM D 3064-97.

2 LIMITATIONS

Nitrogen analysis: Nitrogen may be used as a compo nent of the propellant system. Ambient air is 78 percent nitrogen and may be present as a contaminate in the system prior to sample collection. This is eliminated by sweeping out any connecting lines to the Tedlar bag with product before starting sample collection. This pr ocedure will eliminate or reduce nitrogen contamination to less than 0.1% by weight of the sa mple and the analysis of the propellant gas will be unaffected.

3 APPARATUS AND MATERIALS

3.1 Propellant Collection System: See Figure 1 (me tal containers) and Figure 3 (glass containers).

3.2 Tedlar Bags equipped with slip valve and septu m

3.3 Density Measurement

3.3.1 250 mL gas dilution bulb, or

3.3.2 Density/Specific gravity meter meeting the f ollowing minimum specifications:

3.3.2.1 Measurement Range: 0 – 3 +/- 0.00001 g/cm 3

3.3.2.2 Measurement Temperature Range: 4 o C ~ 70 o C.

3.4 Balance, capable of accurately weighing to 0.1 mgAppendix A: Method 310 Page 2

2009 Proposed Amendments 3.5 Sample Venting Platform. See Figure 2 (metal c ontainers) 1 and Figure 4 (glass containers) 2

.

3.6 Platform Shaker, equivalent to Thermolyne M491 25

3.7 Cork Rings, 80 x 32 mm

4 PROCEDURE

4.1 Propellant Collection for Metal Aerosol Contai ners

4.1.1 Close valves on Propellant Collection System (see Figure 1).

4.1.2 Remove the actuator from valve on the aeroso l can and weigh can to the nearest

0.01 g.

4.1.3 Place the can in an inverted position onto t he Sample Venting Platform, stabilized by

cork rings.

4.1.4 Slowly raise the hydraulic jack until the c an is pierced. Note the pressure of the can.

4.1.5 Vent the can until propellant is seen flowin g from output 1. Collect the propellant in

the Tedlar bag from output 1. Density is determine d from this same Tedlar bag, as

necessary.

4.1.6 After the propellant is collected, close an d remove the Tedlar bag and vent the

remainder of the propellant.

4.1.7 After the flow ceases from the can, it is rem oved from the assembly and allowed to

vent overnight on a platform shaker, to vent the re mainder of the propellant.

4.1.8 Reweigh the can to the nearest 0.01 gm and r ecord weight loss (total gms propellant).

The can may now be opened for analysis of the non-p ropellant portion of the sample.

4.2 Propellant Collection for Glass Aerosol Contai ners

1 The metal piercing adaptor is available from Mid-We st Screw Products, Inc., 3523 North Kenton Ave., Ch icago,

IL 60641. Interim Part Number: 8013A-3/4 45TAPER R EV. The gasket is available from Alltech Associate 2051 Waukegan road, Deerfield, IL 60015, part number 80 -16.

2 The glass aerosol tapered adaptor is available from Armstrong Technologies, Inc. 12780 Earhart Ave., A uburn, CA

95602.Appendix A: Method 310 Page 3

2009 Proposed Amendments 4.2.1 Remove the actuator from valve of the aeroso l glass container and weigh container to

the nearest 0.01 gm.

4.2.2 With container in an inverted position place the v alve onto the tapered adaptor.

4.2.3 Pressurize the air cylinder to actuate the s ample container valve onto the tapered

adaptor. Note the pressure of the sample container

.

4.2.4 Open the sample valve and collect propellant sample into the Tedlar bag. Density is

determined from this same Tedlar bag, as necessary.

4.2.5 After the propellant is collected, close and remove the Tedlar bag and vent the

remainder of the propellant.

4.2.6 Continue to vent the container on the platfo rm assembly until no pressure registers on

the sample gauge and there in no visable propellant flowing from the sampling tube.

4.2.7 Remove the container from the platform.

4.2.8 Loosen and remove the container valve assemb ly.

4.2.9 Place the container on a platform shaker to vent the remainder of the propellant.

4.2.10 Reweigh the container and valve assembly t o the nearest 0.01 gm and record weight

loss (total gms propellant). The non-propellant portion of the sample is ready to be analyzed.Appendix A: Method 310 Page 4

2009 Proposed Amendments FIGURE 1



### PROPELLANT COLLECTION SYSTEM

METAL AEROSOL CONTAINERAppendix A: Method 310 Page 5

2009 Proposed Amendments FIGURE 2



### SAMPLE VENTING PLATFORM

METAL AEROSOL CONTAINERAppendix A: Method 310 Page 6

2009 Proposed Amendments FIGURE 3



### PROPELLANT COLLECTION SYSTEM

GLASS AEROSOL CONTAINERAppendix A: Method 310 Page 7

2009 Proposed Amendments FIGURE 4



### SAMPLE VENTING PLATFORM

GLASS AEROSOL CONTAINERAppendix B: Method 310 Page 1

2009 Proposed Amendments 

### Method 310 - Appendix B

MODIFICATIONS to ASTM D-2879-97

This procedure modifies ASTM D-2879-97 as follows:

1. Modifications to the isoteniscope apparatus incl ude:

a. capacitance manometers and digital readout b. manifold system made of stainless steel and modi fied in design c. Ultra-torr fittings and Ultra-torr flex-lines d. ballast on the vacuum side of the isoteniscope m anifold as depicted in ASTM D 2879-97
schematics, has been removed. e. stainless steel liquid nitrogen trap (Cold Trap) f. stainless steel high vacuum valves g. recirculating cooling system (required for extre mely low pressure work only) h. diffusion pump (required for extremely low press ure work only) i. hot ion cathode vacuum gauges (required for extr emely low pressure work only)

2. A purge and degassing procedure consisting of lo wer pressures and a liquid nitrogen bath replaces the step of lightly boiling the sample as outlined in ASTM D 2879-97.

3. Purge and Degassing Cycle

a. With the U-tube connected, the system is evacuat ed to approximately 1.0 mm Hg. This readily removes most of the higher volatility gases from the sample.

b. The stainless steel, liquid nitrogen cold trap i s filled. The manifold is now brought to approximately 300 mm Hg with the purified nitrogen, regulated through the needle valve.

c. The isoteniscope tube is carefully placed into a Dewar of liquid nitrogen. The 1⁄2 atmosphere pressure of nitrogen prevents the sample from splashing while being frozen. After the sample freezes, the system is evacuated t o 0.05 mm Hg.

d. The U-tube is removed from the Dewar, secured an d allowed to warm to room temperature. The U-tube bulb head should be angled so the dissolved gases will be readily evacuated as the frozen sample starts to me lt. When gases build up, it may be necessary to tilt the U-tube to release the gases.

e. Repeat the freeze and degas process once, reduci ng pressure each time to less than 0.05 mm Hg. After the sample has returned to room tempe rature, close valve #3. ThereAppendix B: Method 310 Page 2

2009 Proposed Amendments should be minimal dissolved gases left once the fro zen sample starts to melt. Tilt the tube to release any gas pockets (if necessary). Do not push nitrogen into the evacuated space between the sample in the arm and the sample in the reservoir. At this point, if the sample is properly degassed, a “natural break” shou ld form in the sample. This creates a vapor space as the liquid level in the bulb leg of the manometer falls to a quasiequilibrium position, usually with the fluid level higher in the long manometer leg. If there is no pendulum effect, and the liquid level i n the long leg of the manometer is significantly higher than the level in the short le g (> 2 mm), degassing is probably incomplete, and the degassing procedure should be r epeated.

4. Data Evaluation

The regression based on the plot of Log P vs. 1/T a s outlined in ASTM D 2879-97 has been removed and replaced with a nonlinear regression to generate the coefficients for an Antoine equation. The data analysis procedure assumes that the measured pressure is the sum of the compound’s vapor pressure and a residual fixed gas pressure. The vapor pressure’s dependence on absolute temperature is represented b y an Antoine expression, and the fixed gas as pressure is directly proportional to absolut e temperature as outlined in ASTM 2879. This leads to the model equations:

where T is the absolute temperature (K) and B0, B1, B2 and B3 are coefficients to be determined via a nonlinear regression which minimiz es the sum of squares

2

el mod meas 

# ) P P (

− ∑ for all experimental data points. The vapor press ure at 20 o C is then

calculated as:

)) 2 B 15. 293 (/1 B (

vapor 

# 10

0 B ) K 15. 293 ( P +



# ∗ = T

3 B 10 0 B P )) 2 B T (/ 1 B (

el mod 

# ∗

+ ∗ = +



## P P P

gas fixed vapor el mod + =Appendix B: Method 310 Page 3

2009 Proposed Amendments With a set of pressure vs. temperature measurements , the nonlinear regression can be performed using a statistical software packages. T he following constraints are imposed to obtain meaningful Antoine equation coefficients for low vapor pressure samples:

a. Pressures shall be measured at temperatures ran ging from room temperature to about

180 o C. Narrower ranges will not provide sufficient in formation to determine the
Antoine curvature, i.e., B2 coefficient. Wider ran ges can lead to experimental difficulties maintaining the vapor space in the isoteniscope. A minimum of 12 points is necessary to provide ample degrees of freedom for the calculatio ns.

b. Initial pressures at room temperature shall be less than 1 mm Hg. Higher values are indicative of significant levels of dissolved fixed gases. These will vaporize during the course of the experiment as temperature is increase d and invalidate the model’s assumption for the fixed gas contribution.

c. -235 ≤ B 2 ≤ 0. Positive values of B2 imply that the heat of v aporization of the substance increases with increasing temperature. Thermodynam ic data for many compounds suggests this is unrealistic. Large negative value s can lead to unrealistically low vapor pressure values coupled with excessive fixed gas co ntributions. The -235(K) bound is

chosen to be consistent with literature values of B 2 for many pure compounds. For
hydrocarbons in the LVP-VOC range, B2 ≥ -100 provides reasonable agreement between measured and literature vapor pressures.

d. The fixed gas coefficient, B3, should normally be ≥ 0.Appendix B: Method 310 Page 4

2009 Proposed Amendments 

### Figure 1

ISOTENISCOPE VAPOR PRESSURE MEASUREMENT APPARATUS

3 4 5

7 Pressure Transducer

Ballast

Heating Chamber / U-Tube

Vacuum Pump Diffusion Pump

1 2 Cold Trap

Nitrogen Gas Needle ValveAppendix B: Method 310 Page 5

2009 Proposed Amendments

### Appendix C

Summary of Consumer Products Regulatory ActionsSummary of Consumer Products Regulatory Actions

C-1 2009 Proposed Amendments Action

Date/ (Effective Date) Regulatory Action Site Comments

6/16/89 Consumer Products

Control Plan. N/A First Board action on consumer products. Board approved overall plan to fulfill H&SC Section 41712 mandate and a goal of achieving a 50 percent reduction in VOC emissions from consumer products.

11/8/89/ (2/27/91) Regulation to

Reduce VOC

Emissions from Antiperspirants and

Deodorants. Article 2, Sections 94500-94506, Title 17, CCR. First consumer product regulation adopted pursuant to the CCAA. Established VOC

content limits for aerosol and non-aerosol antiperspirants and deodorants.

6/15/90 Regulation for

Reducing VOC

Emissions from

Consumer Products in the Bay Area
AQMD. Article 2, Consumer Products, Sections 94520-94527, Title 17, CCR. This regulation was adopted to reduce VOC emissions from consumer products in the Bay
Area AQMD and establishes VOC limits for 6 consumer products.

10/11/90/ (10/21/91) Regulation for

Reducing VOC

Emissions from

Consumer Products -

Phase I. Article 2, Consumer Products, Sections

94507-94516 and 94503.5, Title 17,

CCR

Amendments to Article 2, Section 94505, Title 17,

CCR Establishes VOC limits for 16 consumer products, repeals the Bay Area consumer product regulation, and amends the AP/DO regulation to include an innovative product provision and a revised variance procedure.

1/9/92/ (1/6/93) Adoption of

Amendments to the Regulation for Reducing VOC

Emissions from

Consumer Products -

Phase II. Article 2, Consumer Products, Sections 94507-94517, Title 17, CCR. Establishes standards for 10 additional categories of consumer products and several amendments to the existing regulation for clarification and improvement.

9/22/94/ (9/9/95) Adoption of the

Alternative Control Plan Regulation for

Consumer Products. Article 4, Sections 94540-94555, Title 17, CCR. A voluntary market-based regulation which supplements the existing consumer products regulation by providing manufacturers with additional flexibility for formulating products.

11/15/94/ (2/14/95) Approval of the

California State Implementation Plan

for Ozone. N/A Board approval of Ozone SIP which includes consumer products element comprised of near, midterm, and long term measures.

3/23/95/ (1/8/96) Regulation for

Reducing VOC

Emissions from Aerosol Coating

Products and

Amendments to the

Alternative Control (ACP) Plan. Article 3, Sections 94520-94528, Title 17, CCR

Amendments to Article 4, Sections
94540 to 94543, 94547, 94550, 94551, and 94553, Title 17, CCR. Establishes VOC content limits for 35 categories of aerosol paints. Amendments to ACP to incorporate aerosol coating products.Summary of Consumer Products Regulatory Actions

C-2 2009 Proposed Amendments Action

Date/ (Effective Date) Regulatory Action Site Comments

9/28/95/ (2/29/96) Amendments to the

California Regulations for Reducing VOC

Emissions from Antiperspirants and Deodorants, Consumer Products, and Aerosol Coating

Products. Amendments to Article 1, Sections 94500-94504, Title 17, CCR, Article 2,

Section 94508(a)(90), Title17, CCR, and Article 3, Section 94521(a)(62), Title 17, CCR. The amendments to the AP/DO regulation address fairness concerns, preserves projected emission reductions required by the SIP, ensures that manufacturers will continue their efforts to develop zero percent products and provides a vehicle to monitor progress and

to make the VOC definition more consistent

with EPA's VOC definition. The consumer products regulation and the aerosol coatings regulation is modified to revise the VOC

definition consistent with EPA's.

11/21/96/ (11/18/97) Amendments to the

California Regulations for Reducing VOC

Emissions from

Consumer Products and Aerosol Coating

Products. Amendments to Article 2; Sections
94508, 94515 94517 and Article 3; Section 94521, Title 17, CCR. The amendments to the consumer products regulation address postponement of the 25 percent standard for aerosol adhesives, modification to the VOC definition, amendment of various regulatory provisions to enhance clarity and compliance, and amendment to the test methods sections. The proposed amendments also modify the VOC definition in the aerosol coatings regulation.

3/27/97/ (8/24/98) Amendments

Pertaining to Hairspray in the

California Consumer Products Regulation. Amendments to Article 2, Sections 94509, 94513, and 94514,Title 17,

CCR. Postpones the hairspray 55 percent VOC standard from 1/1/98 to 6/1/99, require plans demonstrating progress toward compliance from manufacturers selling hairspray not meeting the 55 percent VOC standard from 1/1/98 to 6/1/99, and modifies the variance provision to include a requirement for VOC emissions mitigation when granting a variance request for hairsprays from the 6/1/99

standard.

7/24/97/ (7/1/98) Amendments to the

Consumer Products Regulation, Mid-term

Measures I. Amendments to Article 2, Sections
94508, 94509, 94510, 94512, 94513, and 94514, Title 17, CCR. All VOC standards with 1/1/2000, effective dates were extended to 1/1/2001; First tiers of

the two-tiered VOC standards and additional reporting requirements for four product categories were eliminated; Effective dates of the VOC standard were changed for five product categories.

11/19/98/ (6/24/99) Amendments to the

Aerosol Coating Products, the Antiperspirants and

Deodorants Regulation, and the

Consumer Products Regulation. Amendments to Article 3, Section 94521, 94522, and 94524, Title 17, CCR; Article 1, Section 94501, Title 17, CCR; and to Article 2, Section 94508(a)(124), Title 17, CCR. Relaxation of the second-tier VOC limits of the Aerosol Coating Products Regulation. Exemption of methyl acetate from the VOC definition in the Antiperspirants and Deodorants Regulation, the Consumer Products Regulation, and the Aerosol Coating Products Regulation.Summary of Consumer Products Regulatory Actions

C-3 2009 Proposed Amendments Action

Date/ (Effective Date) Regulatory Action Site Comments

10/28/99/

11/19/2000 Amendments to the

Consumer ProductsRegulation, Midterm Measures II. Amendments to Article 2, Section 94508, 94509, and

94513. Amends the Consumer Products Regulation by adding product category definitions, VOC limits for two new categories, more stringent VOC limits for fifteen existing categories, and adding subcategories for some of the existing product categories with separate VOC limits for each subcategory. New or modified VOC limits become effective from 12/31/2000, to

12/31/2004. Amendments consolidates and expands the existing reporting requirements for products containing methylene chloride or perchloroethylene.

5/25/2000/ (5/18/2001) Amendments to the

Consumer Products Regulation relating

to Aerosol

Adhesives

. Amendments to Article 1, Sections
94508, 94509, 94512, and 94513, Title 17, CCR. Amendments eliminate the 25 percent VOC

limit and establish new VOC limits for three new categories of aerosol adhesives, effective January 1, 2002. Amendments also include labeling and other requirements to facilitate compliance and enforcement of the new standards. Effective 1/1/2002, amendments also prohibit the use of methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene, which are toxic air contaminants, in aerosol

adhesives manufactured for use in California.

6/22/2000/ (7/18/2001) Consumer Products

Relating to Aerosol Coating Products, Proposed Tables of

Maximum

Incremental Reactivity (MIR) Values, and

Amendments to

Method 310

. Amendments to Article 3, Sections
94521, 94522, 94523, 94524, and

94526. Added new

sections 94700 and 94701, to Title 17,

CCR. Amendments replace the second tier massbased VOC limits for 35 product categories with equivalent reactivity-based limits. In addition, a new subchapter, Subchapter 8.6, in title 17, CCR was adopted. New Subchapter 8.6, in sections 94700 and 94701, contains

Tables of MIR Values that are used to set reactivity-based limits and determine compliance.

10/26/2000/ (4/24/2001) Amendments to the

Regulation to

Reduce VOC

Emissions from Antiperspirants and

Deodorants. Amendments to Article 2, Sections 94502 and 94504, Title 17, CCR. Amendments increased the HVOC limit for aerosol antiperspirants to 40 percent from the current zero percent limit, beginning 1/1/2001. The MVOC limit of 10 percent remains unchanged.

6/24/2004/ (7/20/2005)

Continues
next page Amendments to the

Consumer Products, Test Method 310, Antiperspirants and Deodorants, Aerosol Coating Products,

and an Airborne

Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for

ParaAmendments to sections 94501,
94506, 94507, 94508, 94509, 94510, 94512, 94513, 94515, and 94526, title 17,

California Code of Regulations (CCR) and adoption of Amendments established new VOC limits for 15 product categories. Regulatory action also prohibited the use of three toxic air contaminants--methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene--in seven product categories. The ATCM prohibits the use of para-dicholorobenzene in toilet/urinal care products and solid air

fresheners. Amendments also modified and updated Method 310 used to determine theSummary of Consumer Products Regulatory Actions

C-4 2009 Proposed Amendments Action

Date/ (Effective Date) Regulatory Action Site Comments

Continued Dichlorobenzene amendments to ARB Method 310,

which is incorporated by

reference in sections 94506, 94515, and 94526, title 17, CCR. percent by weight of reactive organic compounds in aerosol coating products and VOCs in consumer products and AP/DO products.

6/24/2004/ (7/20/2005) Amendments to the

Consumer Products, Test Method 310, Antiperspirants and Deodorants, Aerosol Coating Products,

and an Airborne

Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for

ParaDichlorobenzene Amendments to sections 94501,
94506, 94507, 94508, 94509, 94510, 94512, 94513, 94515, and 94526, title 17,

California Code of Regulations (CCR) and adoption of

amendments to ARB Method 310,

which is incorporated by

reference in sections 94506, 94515, and 94526, title 17, CCR. Amendments established new VOC limits for 15 product categories. Regulatory action also prohibited the use of three toxic air contaminants--methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene--in seven product categories. The ATCM prohibits the use of para-dicholorobenzene in toilet/urinal care products and solid air

fresheners. Amendments also modified and updated Method 310 used to determine the percent by weight of reactive organic compounds in aerosol coating products and VOCs in consumer products and AP/DO products.

11/16/2006/ (12/08/2007) Amendments to the

Aerosol Coating Products Regulation

and the Consumer Products Regulation Amendments to sections 94508, 94509, 94510, 94513, and 94523 to title 17, California Code of Regulations(CCR). Nonsubstantial or solely grammatical changes are also proposed to sections 94507,
94511, 94512, 94514, 94515, 94516, and 94517. Consumer Products Regulation amended by adding and modifying product category definitions and by establishing new VOC limits for 16 product categories. For some of the categories, separate VOC limits are specified for different product forms. New or modified VOC limits become effective on December 31, 2008, remainder become effective on December 31, 2010. Regulatory action also prohibits use of three toxic air contaminants-- methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene--in the following products categories: “Bathroom and Tile Cleaner,” “Construction, Panel, and Floor Covering Adhesive,” “General Purpose Cleaner,” and

“Oven Cleaner.” Amendment was also adopted to section 94523 (Exemptions) of the Aerosol Coatings Regulation. Amendment clarifies several product categories are exempt from regulation under the Aerosol Coatings Regulation.Summary of Consumer Products Regulatory Actions

C-5 2009 Proposed Amendments Action

Date/ (Effective Date) Regulatory Action Site Comments

11/16/2006/ (12/08/2007) Amendments to the

Aerosol Coating

Products Regulation and the

Consumer

Products Regulation Amendments to

sections 94508,
94509, 94510, 94513, and 94523 to title 17, California Code of Regulations(CCR). Nonsubstantial or solely grammatical changes are also proposed to sections 94507,
94511, 94512, 94514, 94515, 94516, and 94517. Consumer Products Regulation amended by adding and modifying product category definitions and by establishing new VOC limits for 16 product categories. For some of the categories, separate VOC limits are specified for different product forms. New or modified VOC limits become effective on December 31, 2008, remainder become effective on December 31, 2010. Regulatory action also prohibits use of three toxic air contaminants-- methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene--in the following products categories: “Bathroom and Tile Cleaner,” “Construction, Panel, and Floor Covering Adhesive,” “General Purpose Cleaner,” and

“Oven Cleaner.” Amendment was also adopted to section 94523 (Exemptions) of the Aerosol Coatings Regulation. Amendment clarifies several product categories are exempt from regulation under the Aerosol Coatings Regulation.

6/26/2008/ (7/18/2009)

Continues
next page Amendments to the

Consumer

Products Regulation Amendments to

sections 94508,
94509, 94510, 94512, 94513, and 94515 to title 17,

California Code of Regulations. Regulation was amended by adding and modifying product category definitions and by establishing new or lower VOC limits for 19 product categories. A mass limit was adopted for fabric softener products used in clothes dryers. An additional amendment removed the “grandfather” clause that pertains to Personal Fragrance Products with 20 percent or less fragrance. Removal of this clause requires all Personal Fragrance Products with 20 percent or less fragrance to meet a single VOC limit.

The new or modified VOC limits become effective between December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2015. This action also prohibits

the use of three toxic air contaminants-- methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene--in the following product categories: “Carpet/Upholstery Cleaner,” “Fabric Protectant,” “Multi-Purpose Lubricant,” “Penetrant,” “Sealant or Caulking Compound,” and “Spot Remover.” Use of methylene chloride and perchloroethylene are also prohibited in “Pressurized Gas Duster” products. To partially fulfill the Discrete Early Action Measure for consumer products, the

amendments will reduce the use of compounds with high GWP in Pressurized Gas Duster products. These products can only use compounds with GWP factors below 150. TheSummary of Consumer Products Regulatory Actions

C-6 2009 Proposed Amendments Date Regulatory Action Site Comments

Continued GWP values used to determine compliance are those set forth in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Second Assessment Report. The Board also adopted

a modification to the definition of VOC. This modification excludes hydrofluoroether 7200 from the definition based on its negligible impacts on ground-level ozone formation.

### Appendix D

Summary of Ingredient Reformulation CostsD-1 2009 Proposed Amendments

Methodology of Recurring Cost Research and Analysis

For each category proposed for regulation staff eva luates formulations of complying and non-complying products. These formulations are the n used to develop example, nonconfidential formulas that are representative of th e category. These representative complying and non-complying formulas are used to es timate the cost of raw materials to produce each formulation. The difference in cost b etween a pound of complying and noncomplying formula is then calculated. Next, the average unit size is used to calculate the cost to comply per unit. The average unit size is the predominant unit size in a category as reported in the survey.

To assign costs, distributor-level ingredient price s from ICIS Chemical Business website (ICIS, 2008), and chemical materials distributors w ere used to calculate the baseline and compliant material costs for these formulations . Low and high cost scenarios are calculated for each category. In the low cost scen ario, the cost per pound of product is calculated using the low end estimate of the cost o f each raw material. In the high cost scenario, the high end of the raw material price ra nge is used. Other than compounds that were to be quantified, the 2006 Survey did not ask for specific ingredient details for exempt compounds, fragrance materials, some low vap or pressure VOCs, and inorganic compounds. Therefore, unspecified ingred ients or ingredients for which prices were unknown were grouped into an “all other s” classification and assigned a default low and high cost of $3.50 and $7.00 per po und, respectively (ARB, 1997c), low and high cost for fragrance materials were estimate d at $5.00 and $10.00 per pound respectively. Inorganic compounds were assigned a low and high cost of $0.09 and $0.91 per pound, respectively, based on the costs f ound of the most common inorganic compounds found in the product categories.

In some cases, the compliant formula is less expens ive than the typical non-compliant formula. This is true, for example, when some amou nt of VOC solvent is replaced with water. Also, if the high cost estimate of the solv ent is significantly higher than the low cost estimate, the net savings to reformulate will increase in the high cost scenario, because the cost per pound of the water did not inc rease in the high cost scenario.

The costs calculated here are then copied into Tabl e VII-1a in Chapter VII, Economic Impacts and used to determine total costs of the pr oposed amendments.D-2 2009 Proposed Amendments

Air Freshener: Double Phase Aerosol

Category: Air Freshener Subcategory Aerosol – Double Phase Typical non-compliant: 24.5 % by weight Proposed Limit: 20 % by weight Average Unit Size 9.00 wt. oz.

LOW COST

Formulation and Cost Comparison Typical Non-compliant VOC Compliant Component (A) Unit Cost $/lb (B) Cost

Wt. % (C) (B)x(C)/100 Cost Wt. % (D) (B)x(D)/100

Water 0.002 72.80 0.00 77.80 0.00 HC Propellant 0.700 24.00 0.17 19.00 0.13

Alcohol 0.457 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Glycols 0.620 1.00 0.01 1.00 0.01 Inorganics 0.090 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 Fragrance 5.000 0.70 0.04 0.70 0.04

Total Cost, $/pound: 0.22 0.18

Total Cost, $/Unit: 0.12 0.10

Cost increase to comply, $/unit: (0.02)

HIGH COST

Typical Non-compliant VOC Compliant Component (A) Unit Cost $/lb (B) Cost

Wt. % (C) (B)x(C)/100 Cost Wt. % (D) (B)x(D)/100

Water 0.002 72.80 0.00 77.80 0.00 HC Propellant 1.050 24.00 0.25 19.00 0.20

Alcohol 0.940 1.00 0.01 1.00 0.01 Glycols 0.960 1.00 0.01 1.00 0.01 Inorganics 0.910 0.50 0.00 0.50 0.00 Fragrance 10.000 0.70 0.07 0.70 0.07

Total Cost, $/pound: 0.35 0.29

Total Cost, $/Unit: 0.20 0.17

Cost increase to comply, $/unit: (0.03)D-3 2009 Proposed Amendments

Multi-purpose Solvent/Paint Thinner – Tier 1

Category: Multi-purpose Solvent/Paint Thinner Subcategory Non-aerosol Typical non-compliant: 100 % by weight Proposed Limit: 30 % by weight Average Unit Size 93.40 wt. oz.

LOW COST

Formulation and Cost Comparison Typical Non-compliant VOC Compliant

TIER 1 – 30% Component (A) Unit Cost $/lb (B) Cost

Wt. % (C) (B)x(C)/100 Cost Wt. % (D) (B)x(D)/100 Hydrocarbon solvent 0.540 100.00 0.54 25.00 0.13

Water 0.002 0.00 0.00 37.00 0.00 VOC Glycol Ether 1.150 5.00 0.06

Acetone 0.402 25.00 0.10 Exempt Compound 2.000 5.00 0.10

Non-solvent LVP 3.500 3.00 0.11

Total Cost, $/pound: 0.54 0.50

Total Cost, $/Unit: 3.15 2.91

Cost increase to comply, $/unit: (0.24)

HIGH COST

Typical Non-compliant VOC Compliant

TIER 1 – 30% Component (A) Unit Cost $/lb (B) Cost

Wt. % (C) (B)x(C)/100 Cost Wt. % (D) (B)x(D)/100 Hydrocarbon solvent 0.800 100.00 0.80 25.00 0.20

Water 0.002 0.00 0.00 37.00 0.00 VOC Glycol Ether 1.200 5.00 0.06

Acetone 0.459 25.00 0.12 Exempt Compound 3.000 5.00 0.15

Non-solvent LVP 7.000 3.00 0.21

Total Cost, $/pound: 0.80 0.74

Total Cost, $/Unit: 4.67 4.29

Cost increase to comply, $/unit: (0.38)D-4 2009 Proposed Amendments

Multi-purpose Solvent/Paint Thinner – Tier 2

Category: Multi-purpose Solvent/Paint Thinner Subcategory Non-aerosol Typical non-compliant: 30 % by weight Proposed Limit: 3 % by weight Average Unit Size 93.40 wt. oz.

LOW COST

Formulation and Cost Comparison Typical Non-compliant VOC Compliant

TIER 2 – 3% Component (A) Unit Cost $/lb (B) Cost

Wt. % (C) (B)x(C)/100 Cost Wt. % (D) (B)x(D)/100 Hydrocarbon solvent 0.540 25.00 0.13 0.00 0.00

Water 0.002 37.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 VOC Glycol Ether 1.150 5.00 0.06 0.00 0.00

Acetone 0.402 25.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 Exempt Compound 2.000 5.00 0.10 0.00 0.00

Non-solvent LVP 3.500 3.00 0.11 0.00 0.00

VOC Mixture 0.845 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.03 Exempt/LVP Emulsion 0.461 0.00 0.00 97.00 0.45

Total Cost, $/pound: 0.50 0.47

Total Cost, $/Unit: 2.91 2.76

Cost increase to comply, $/unit: (0.16)

HIGH COST

Typical Non-compliant VOC Compliant

TIER 2 – 3% Component (A) Unit Cost $/lb (B) Cost

Wt. % (C) (B)x(C)/100 Cost Wt. % (D) (B)x(D)/100 Hydrocarbon solvent 0.800 25.00 0.20 0.00 0.00

Water 0.002 37.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 VOC Glycol Ether 1.200 5.00 0.06 0.00 0.00

Acetone 0.459 25.00 0.12 0.00 0.00 Exempt Compound 3.000 5.00 0.15 0.00 0.00

Non-solvent LVP 7.000 3.00 0.21 0.00 0.00

VOC mixture 1.000 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.03 Exempt/LVP emulsion 0.816 0.00 0.00 97.00 0.79

Total Cost, $/pound: 0.74 0.82

Total Cost, $/Unit: 4.29 4.80

Cost increase to comply, $/unit: 0.50D-5 2009 Proposed Amendments

REFERENCES

1. Air Resources Board. Initial Statement of Reason s for Proposed Amendments Pertaining to Hairspray in the California Consumer Products Regulation

. February 7, 1997. (ARB, 1997c)

2. ICIS. ICIS Chemical Business

. http://icispricing.com . April 11, 2008. (ICIS, 2008)

### Appendix E

Nonrecurring Costs CalculationsE-1 2009 Proposed Amendments

Appendix E contains the methodology and costs staff used to assign nonrecurring costs for each category. Nonrecurring costs are those as sociated with research and development to reformulate complying products and a re independent of, and in addition to, the costs of ingredients to produce a product. For each category proposed for regulation, staff estimated a low cost and a high c ost.

For both low and high cost scenarios, the initial s tatement of development goals to final delivery of the new product to the marketplace shel ves was divided into eight phases. The phases are: product development, including ref ormulation and development of a new delivery system if necessary; stability testing ; efficacy testing; safety testing; labeling modification; registration with regulatory agencies, if necessary; manufacturing change; and marketing.

A detailed description of each of the nonrecurring cost factors listed on the tables

follows:

Product Development Given a set of new product requirements, develop a laboratory prototype for product evaluation and testing. This includes formulating the contents and specifying the packaging and raw materials. New packaging and che mical formula components might

need to be sourced.

Stability Testing Stability testing ensures that the newly formulated chemical composition and/or package are compatible with each other and with pro duct function for a reasonable period of time. FDA and EPA regulated products req uire extra steps to ensure the stability of active ingredients and kill claims of products such as disinfectant for bacteria and germs, for example.

Efficacy testing Efficacy testing seeks to ensure that the product m aintains the ability to perform label claims and to meet customer expectations. For EPA registered products (for example, those which make bacterial kill claims) this will r equire extensive testing by a specialized laboratory (most likely not the manufacturer’s own laboratory). The testing must be documented with and meet the approval of the EPA.

Safety Test This includes testing of the new product to ensure safety to manufacturing personnel during fabrication, logistics personnel during tran sit and to consumers during use and storage.

Labeling Modifications Labeling modifications are required when product qu alities or use instructions change.E-2 2009 Proposed Amendments

Registration Fees Registration expenses are incurred for products req uiring EPA registration or FDA regulation whenever changes are made to the label o r formula.

Marketing The factors for marketing include: focus group test ing, conducting surveys, advertising and design and publication of print and internet ma terials.

Manufacturing This includes technology and infrastructure require d to mass-produce a product. A new VOC limit which must be met by changes to the se production requirements will incur a manufacturing cost proportional to the magn itude of the change. Manufacturing cost to comply with proposed standards can include ‘pilot plant’ testing and/or retooling of production lines or construction of completely n ew facilities.

A pilot plant test is a small scale version of full scale production which is large enough to approximate the physical characteristics and challe nges which will be encountered in the full-scale version. A pilot test run consumes considerably less resources and raw materials than a full scale run to produce a batch of product which will not necessarily be ready or suitable for a commercial market.

Literature

Literature costs are incurred when new sales and ma rketing and/or technical literature need to be developed and distributed in order to in form customers of the attributes of a new product.

Since 1999, a set of per product reformulation cost s in 1991 dollars had been established for each phase of bringing a reformulat ed product into the market. The costs are adjusted to 2008 dollars using a well-est ablished method of rationing chemical engineering plant cost indices as follows (Peters a nd Timmerhaus, 1980):

Index 1991 C.E. Index 2008 C.E. dollars) 1991 (in Costs Recurring

- Non dollars) 2008 (in Costs Recurring

- Non × =

where,

C.E. 2008 index = 2008 Chemical Engineering Plant Cost Index = 592.0 (Chemical Engineering, 2009).

C.E. 1991 index = 1991 Chemical Engineering Plant Cost Index = 361.3 (Chemical Engineering, 1997).

Table Appendix E-1 shows the cost assigned to each phase for the low and high cost scenario for a “household product.” Both categorie s in this rulemaking are considered “household products”.E-3 2009 Proposed Amendments

To develop the costs shown in Table Appendix E-1, p ersonnel costs are assigned. Beyond personnel costs, additional cost elements we re considered at each phase and added as appropriate. These cost elements are faci lity; equipment; tool; jig; fixture and miscellaneous materials handling equipment; purchas ed material; packaging; distribution; warehousing; technical data; research studies and tests; promotional literature; residual inventory and disposal; consum er tests; general and administrative expense; patent; registration fees; and computer su pport. The result of these considerations is a per-product cost for developing a reformulated product and bringing

it to market.

The length of time in each phase was estimated base d on an industry analysis of 80 new product innovations. Most of the phases occ ur in sequence; however, there is some time overlap in each phase.

Next, estimated personnel resources were allocated against each phase considering the most probable types of skills needed including general engineering; technician; drafting; packaging engineering; specification engi neering; model making; chemical engineering; technical publication; production supp ort; quality assurance; marketing; warehousing; word processing; and clerical. For hi gh cost elements, additional personnel were allocated to each phase.

Staff used different assumptions for the low and hi gh cost analyses, and considered the specific likelihood that each of the cost elements would occur for each product category individually.E-4 2009 Proposed Amendments Table Appendix E-1 Assigned Costs for Product Development Generic Per Product Reformulation Costs (low and hi gh cost approach)

Household Low Cost High Cost

Product Development

Material $163.85 $819.26

Computer Support $163.85 $983.12

Personnel/Formulation $6,062.55 $20,809.30

Personnel/Delivery System $0.00 $26,544.15

Prototype Equipment $0.00 $1,638.53

Testing

Material $491.56 $491.56

Computer Support $0.00 $491.56

Personnel/Stability Test $1,310.82 $7,373.37

Personnel/Efficacy Test $1,310.82 $6,062.55

Personnel/Safety Test $3,277.06 $10,978.13

Labeling Modifications

Material $163.85 $327.71

Technical Data $327.71 $983.12

Personnel $983.12 $5,898.70

Registration/Fees $327.71 $491.56

Personnel $655.41 $4,915.58

Manufacturing Equipment $0.00 $40,963.19

Technical Data $163.85 $819.26

Computer Support $0.00 $163.85

Other $0.00 $1,146.97

Personnel $1,474.67 $33,753.67

Marketing

Studies $327.71 $1,638.53

Literature $163.85 $819.26

Inventory $0.00 $3,277.06

Computer Support $0.00 $163.85

Personnel $327.71 $13,435.93

TOTAL $17,696.10 $184,989.77

2008 C.E. Plant Cost Index = 592 (Final Oct. ’08)

1991 C.E. Plant Cost Index = 361.3E-5 2009 Proposed Amendments

i. Low Cost Scenario

In the low cost scenario it is assumed that only mi nor modification to the current formulation is necessary to come into compliance. Therefore, for the low cost analysis no major costs were added for changing delivery sys tems or other product attributes.

In addition, it is common that large companies havi ng significant market share and broad product lines offer both low VOC complying pr oducts and higher VOC noncomplying products. In many cases, relatively low costs would be incurred where these companies could increase sales and distribution of complying products and discontinue non-complying products.

If products do not change significantly, it is assu med that major retooling of manufacturing equipment would not be required, tech nical data changes would be minor, and the change in marketing costs would be s mall. It was also assumed that these reformulated products would be marketed natio nally.

ii. High Cost Scenario

Each category was analyzed individually to determin e which of the elements, discussed above, and shown in Table Appendix E-1, manufacture rs would likely include in their reformulation efforts. High costs for specific ste ps of the reformulation process were only included in the cost analysis where staff beli eved they were likely to occur. If staff believed a markedly different product would be need ed to comply with the proposed limit, such as a new delivery system, then high per sonnel and capital resources, especially in product development and manufacturing changes, were assumed. In addition, a new delivery system would require inves tment for prototypes, new filling machines training, and technical data, so these hig h costs were also included in these scenarios. Additional costs were also added for pa ckaging, distribution and warehousing. In areas where it was expected that l ittle or no reformulation would occur, or that the cost of reformulation would be minimal, the value for low cost was used.

For especially challenging limits, it was assumed f or the high cost approach that, because of a markedly different product, there woul d also be additional marketing costs, including research studies and tests, promotional l iterature, and consumer tests. These costs vary by the type of product, however the hous ehold products being proposed for further regulation typically having a larger expens e in this area. The cost analysis did not include the costs for an extensive advertising campaign. New products are regularly brought onto the market, and the advertising for a new product, whether reformulated or not, would replace the advertising for the existing product, and would be a normal cost. It was assumed that the new product would be market ed nationally.

The staff also recognized that development of a new product does not occur in isolation. Few companies have only one product line; for those that have more than one product line, the product lines can be very similar. Devel opment and production tasks, from the initial concept through marketing, would be proceed ing simultaneously on more thanE-6 2009 Proposed Amendments

one product line, with a transfer of information an d work-sharing between the products. For these companies, this “technology transfer” wou ld substantially reduce the cost of developing and marketing a new product on a per pro duct basis. For categories where the majority of products were held by a few compani es it was assumed that this “technology transfer” would occur, and high costs a djusted accordingly.

iii. Other Assumptions

Staff considered only nonrecurring costs that are l ikely to occur on a per category basis. Costs are adjusted from those determined in 1991 by using the Chemical Engineering

Plant Cost Index. If it was determined that for a majority of products in the category, the most likely scenario was that only minor changes to the product’s reformulation were necessary to comply with the new proposed limit the n only the lower end of the nonrecurring cost was included. For some categorie s, it was appropriate, based on the variety of products and reformulation approaches ne eded to meet the proposed limit, that certain high cost factors be included in the a nalysis, but not others, on a case-bycase basis. We believe that this approach gives a more realistic estimate of the costs of a given limit

The high and low nonrecurring cost assumptions for each category are shown in Tables Appendix E-2, E-3, and E-4.E-7 2009 Proposed Amendments Table Appendix E-2 Air Freshener Per Product Reformulation Costs (low and high cost approach)

Household Low Cost High Cost

Product Development

Material $163.85 $409.63

Computer Support $0.00 $0.00

Personnel/Formulation $6,062.55 $10,404.65

Personnel/Delivery System $0.00 $13,272.07

Prototype Equipment $0.00 $819.26

Testing

Material $245.78 $245.78

Computer Support $0.00 $0.00

Personnel/Stability Test $1,310.82 $3,686.69

Personnel/Efficacy Test $1,310.82 $3,031.28

Personnel/Safety Test $0.00 $0.00

Labeling Modifications

Material $0.00 $0.00

Technical Data $0.00 $0.00

Personnel $0.00 $0.00

Registration/Fees $0.00 $0.00

Personnel $0.00 $0.00

Manufacturing

Equipment $0.00 $0.00

Technical Data $163.85 $409.63

Computer Support $0.00 $0.00

Other $0.00 $0.00

Personnel $1,474.67 $16,876.83

Marketing

Studies $327.71 $819.26

Literature $0.00 $0.00

Inventory $0.00 $0.00

Computer Support $0.00 $0.00

Personnel $163.85 $163.85

TOTAL $11,223.90 $50,138.93

2008 C.E. Plant Cost Index = 592 (Final Oct. ’08)

1991 C.E. Plant Cost Index = 361.3E-8 2009 Proposed Amendments Table Appendix E-3 Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner – Tier 1 Per Product Reformulation Costs (low and hig h cost approach)

Household Low Cost High Cost

Product Development

Material $163.85 $819.26

Computer Support $163.85 $983.12

Personnel/Formulation $6,062.55 $20,809.30

Personnel/Delivery System $0.00 $0.00

Prototype Equipment $0.00 $0.00

Testing

Material $491.56 $491.56

Computer Support $0.00 $491.56

Personnel/Stability Test $1,310.82 $7,373.37

Personnel/Efficacy Test $1,310.82 $6,062.55

Personnel/Safety Test $3,277.06 $10,978.13

Labeling Modifications

Material $163.85 $327.71

Technical Data $327.71 $983.12

Personnel $983.12 $5,898.70

Registration/Fees $0.00 $0.00

Personnel $0.00 $0.00

Manufacturing

Equipment $0.00 $0.00

Technical Data $0.00 $0.00

Computer Support $0.00 $0.00

Other $0.00 $0.00

Personnel $0.00 $0.00

Marketing

Studies $327.71 $1,638.53

Literature $163.85 $819.26

Inventory $0.00 $3,277.06

Computer Support $0.00 $163.85

Personnel $327.71 $13,435.93

TOTAL $15,074.46 $74,553.01

2008 C.E. Plant Cost Index = 592

1991 C.E. Plant Cost Index = 361.3E-9 2009 Proposed Amendments Table Appendix E-4 Multi-purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner – Tier 2 Per Product Reformulation Costs (low and hig h cost approach)

Household Low Cost High Cost

Product Development

Material $163.85 $819.26

Computer Support $163.85 $983.12

Personnel/Formulation $6,062.55 $20,809.30

Personnel/Delivery System $0.00 $0.00

Prototype Equipment $0.00 $0.00

Testing

Material $491.56 $491.56

Computer Support $0.00 $491.56

Personnel/Stability Test $1,310.82 $7,373.37

Personnel/Efficacy Test $1,310.82 $6,062.55

Personnel/Safety Test $3,277.06 $10,978.13

Labeling Modifications

Material $163.85 $327.71

Technical Data $327.71 $983.12

Personnel $983.12 $5,898.70

Registration/Fees $0.00 $0.00

Personnel $0.00 $0.00

Manufacturing

Equipment $0.00 $0.00

Technical Data $0.00 $0.00

Computer Support $0.00 $0.00

Other $0.00 $0.00

Personnel $0.00 $0.00

Marketing

Studies $327.71 $1,638.53

Literature $163.85 $819.26

Inventory $0.00 $3,277.06

Computer Support $0.00 $163.85

Personnel $327.71 $13,435.93

TOTAL $15,074.46 $74,553.01

2008 C.E. Plant Cost Index = 592

1991 C.E. Plant Cost Index = 361.3E-10 2009 Proposed Amendments

REFERENCES

1. Chemical Engineering magazine. Chemical Engineer ing Plant Cost Index

. February, 2009. (Chemical Engineering, 2009)

2. Chemical Engineering magazine. Chemical Engineer ing Plant Cost Index

. April, 1997. (Chemical Engineering, 1997)

3. Peters, M. S. and Timmerhaus, K. D. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers . 3 rd Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1980, pp. 159-1 62 (Peters and Timmerhaus, 1980)

### Appendix F

Chemical Characteristics of Conventional and Potent ial

Replacement Solvents/ProductsF-1 2009 Proposed Amendments Conventional Solvents Sold Today – Phased Out with Rule Implementation

Chemical Compound M.W. a Boiling Point (@760 mmHg, o F) Evaporation

Rate (@25 o C) Flash

Point ( o F) LEL/UEL b

(% by Vol.) Auto-ignition

Temperature ( o C) Vapor

Pressure (mmHg @

20 o C)

Denatured

Alcohol (Ethanol) 46 78 2.3 56 3.3/19 435 44

Isopropyl

Alcohol 60 180 2.3 53 2/12.7 399 33

Lacquer

Thinner f -- 212.6 2.7 7.4 2/18.4 238 97.7

MEK 72 80 4.0 25 1.8/11.5 474 8.7

Mineral Spirits (Stoddard) 144 154-188 0.1 109-113 1.0 / 7 232 1.1

Paint

Thinner g -- 299.6 1.4 81- 117 1.0 / 7.3 229 2

Toluene 92 111 2.0 41 1.3 / 7 538 22 Turpentine 136 323.7 0.7 94.3 0.8/ n/a 253 5

VM&P Naphtha 87 266.9 1.2 53.1 1.2/6 288 20

Xylene 106 139 0.8 81 1.0/6.6 499 6

Exempt Solvents Used Today, with possible increase in use

Chemical Compound M.W. a Boiling

Point (@760 mmHg, o F) Evaporation

Rate (@25 o C) Flash

Point ( o F) LEL/UEL b

(% by Vol.) Auto-ignition

Temperature ( o C) Vapor

Pressure (mmHg @

20 o C)

Acetone 58 56 6.1 -4 2.6/12.8 538 180 Methyl

Acetate 74 56 5.3 15 3/16 501 171

PCBTF h 181 282 0.9 109 0.9/10.5 97 5.3

Other Technologies Used Today, with possible increa se in use

Chemical Compound M.W. a Boiling

Point (@760 mmHg, o F) Evaporation

Rate (@25 o C) Flash

Point ( o F) LEL/UEL b

(% by Vol.) Auto-ignition

Temperature ( o C) Vapor

Pressure (mmHg @

20 o C) Aqueous

Based - Ethoxylates 211.7 1.0 208

Soy-Based

Products 516.2 2.0 254.9

a Molecular Weight

b Lower Explosive Limit / Upper Explosive Limit

f Lacquer thinner is manufactured from petroleum dist illates and blended with other solvents, such as xylene, toluene, isopropyl alcohol, acetone, met hanol, and light aliphatic solvent naphtha. Exact blending ratios vary widely.

g While paint thinner is predominantly referred to as “mineral spirits” or “Stoddard solvent” (listed elsewhere in this table, paint thinner is broadl y described as being manufactured from petroleum distillates and can be a blend of multiple solve nts, including but not limited to, mineral spirits, naphtha, nonanes (mixture), 1,2,4-trimethyl benzene, ethy l benzene, diacetone alcohol, n-butyl acetate, meth yl isobutyl ketone, cumene and xylene.

h Source: OxyChem Specialty Business Group
*Table Derived from SCAQMD Final Environmental Asse ssment for: Proposed Rule 1143F-2 2009 Proposed Amendments

REFERENCES

1. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCA QMD). Final Environmental Assessment for Proposed Rule 1143 – Consumer Paint Thinners and MultiPurpose Solvents . February 2009.