UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION IX AIR DIVISION

Technical Support Document

for

EPA ’ s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

for the

California State Implementation Plan

California Air Resources Board (CARB ) Regulation for Reducing Emissions From

Consumer Products

California Code of Regulations Title 17, Division 3, Chapter 1 Subchapter 8.5 Consumer Products

Article 2 Consumer Products

Prepared by: Stanley Tong

Ju ly 2014- 2

-

RULE IDENTIFICATION

-

Agency: California Air Resources Board (CARB)

Submitted Rule s : California Code of Regulations Title 17 , Division 3, Chapter

1

, Subchapter 8.5

- Consumer Products;

Article 2

– Consumer Products

Hearing Amended 1 Filed with Calif. Secretary of State Submitted to EPA

September 24, 2009 August 6, 2010 September 20, 2010 May 28, 2014
(2 nd tier

– 3% VOC limit for

Multi

- purpose Solvent and

Paint Thinner only )

Hearing Amended 1 Filed with Calif. Secretary of State Submitted to EPA

November 18, 2010 September 29, 2011 November 10, 2011 May 28, 2014

Hearing Amended 1 Filed with Calif. Secretary of State Submitted to EPA

October 18, 2012 March 15, 2013 April 25, 2013 May 28, 2014

SIP Approved Rule: Hearing Amended 1 Filed with Calif. Secretary of State Submitted to EPA

September 24, 2009 August 6, 2010 September 20, 2010 January 28, 2011
( Did not include 2 nd tier 3%
VOC limit for Multi

- purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner) 2 Approved into the SIP February 13, 2012 ( 77 FR 7535 )

RULE BACKGROUND

-

The California Health and Safety Code (Section 41712(b )) requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to adopt regulations to achieve the maximum feasible

1 Date the Final Rulemaking Package was filed with the California Office of

Administrative Law

.

2 CARB’s January 28, 2011 SIP submittal states “This SIP submission does not include

the second tier emission limits and the corresponding emission reduction for Multi

purpose Solvent and Paint Thinner.”- 3

-

reduction in volatile organic compounds (VOC) emitted by consumer products if the

state board determines t hat adequate data exist to establish both o f the following : (1) The regulations are necessary to attain state and federal ambient air quality

s tandards. (2) The regulations are commercially and technologically feasible and necessary.

CARB ’s consumer products regulations are found under the California Code of Regulations Title 17 , Division 3, Chapter 1

, Subchapter 8.5 and include:

Article 1

– Antiperspirants and Deodorants

Article 2

– Consumer Products

Article 3

– Aerosol Coating Products

Article 4

– Alternative Control Plan

Article 5

– Hairspray Credit Program 3

The current submittal involves amendments to Article 2, CARB's gener al Consumer Products regulation. Table 1 below lists CARB’s estimates of the statewide VOC reductions achieved by its amendments.

Table 1 Submitted Amendments and Emission Reductions

Board Hearing Date VOC reductions

- tons per day (tpd) (statewide) September 24, 2009 3.9 ( 2 nd tier 3% VOC limit for multi

- purpose solvents and paint

thinners ; does not include reductions in South Coast Air Basin )

Reference: Table ES

- 2 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/cpmthd310/cpmthdisor.pdf ) November 18, 2010 6.9 Reference : Updated Informative Digest pg 2 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp2010/cpuid.pdf October 18, 2012

- 0.12 Reference: Updated Informative Digest pg 2 http ://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2012/cp2012/cpuid.pdf

RULE SUMMARY

–

On May 28, 2014, C ARB submitted amendments to its Consumer Products r e gulation

for inclusion into the State Implementation Plan ( SIP )

. These amendments were presented at CARB's September 24, 2009, November 18, 2010 and October 18, 2012

Board Hearing s and added or modified definitions, added new consumer product categories for regulation, and generally set lower VOC limits for existing c onsumer product categories

.

3 CARB’s recent September 26, 2013 Board Hearing repealed the Hairspray Credit Program. The regulation was designed to sunset in 2010. See transcript page 37 http://www.arb.ca.gov/board/mt/2013 /mt092613.pdf and Hairspray Credit Program Regulation http://www.arb.ca.gov/consprod/regs/2012/6hcp50411.pdf

.- 4

-

CARB ’s Septemb er 29, 2010 Initial Statement of Reasons (ISOR) states that despite reducing emissions by 225 tons per day, it estimates that in 2010 consumer product VOC emissions will represent approximately 2 4 5 tons per day, or about 12 percent of

the overall statewide VOC inventory. CARB states t his equates to approximately 1 8 and 7 percent of the VOC emissions in the South Coast Air Quality Management District ( SCAQMD ) and San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD), respectively. CARB estimates that without further actions, consumer product emissions are expected to grow to approximately 2 70 tons per day in 2020, representing 14 percent of stat ewide VOC emissions. 4 The ISOR further states that: " Further reductions from consumer products are important because VOC emissions from consumer products are predicted to become the largest source of VOC emissions in the South Coast Air Basin, and the thir d largest source in the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin by

2020. " 5

Over the last twenty years CARB has adopted three regulations limiting emissions from consumer products . These regulations cover 12 7 product categories and w hen fully effective, will have res ulted in reducing VOC emissions by approximately 2 25 tons per day or an overall 50 percent reduction in VOC emissions compared to 1990 levels. 6 Although emissions from individual consumer products may seem small , collectively, they represent a significant source of emissions given that 39 million California

residents use these products

.

The following is a summary of the individual Board Hearing actions we are acting on.

September 24, 2009 Board Hearing (August 6, 2010 amendments)

On February 13, 2012 ( 77 FR 7535 ) , EPA approved the majority of CARB’s August 6,

2010 amendments to its Consumer Products Regulation. CARB added or modified several consumer product category definitions and established new or lowered existing VOC limits for three categories: 1) Double Phase Aerosol Air Fresheners, 2) Multi

purpose Solvents and 3) Paint Thinners. CARB’s amendments also prohibit ed the use of methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichl oroethylene, and, until December 31, 2015, prohibit ed manufacturers of flammable or extremely flammable products from using generic product names such as “ Multi

- purpose Solvent,” “Paint Thinner,” or “Paint

Clean

- up ” unless a hang tag or sticker with the st atement “Formulated to meet

California VOC lim its, see warnings on label; ” or unless the pro duct displays the name

4 CARB Initial Statement of Reasons, September 29, 2010, Executive Summary

- 3. http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp2010/cpisor.pdf

. 5 CARB Initial Statement of Reasons, September 29, 2010, Chapter III

- 15. http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp2010/cpisor.pdf

. 6 CARB Initial Statement of Reasons, September 29, 2010, Executive Summary

- 2. http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp20 10/cpisor.pdf

.- 5

-

of the chemical that results in the product meeting the criteria for flammable in a font size at least as large as all other words on the pri nciple display panel. 7

CARB’s January 28, 2011 submittal letter for the September 24, 2009 Board Hearing advised EPA that the more stringent second tier 3% VOC limits (effective December 31, 2013) for Multi

- purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners were not part of the 2011

submittal

. CARB’s intent was to monitor manufacturers ’ progress to meet both the technology forcing lower VOC limit s and a less flammable product. 8 CARB’s rule also

allows manufacturers until December 2013 to comply with the 3% limit . CARB received some comments pointing out that South Coast AQMD R ule 1143 Consumer Paint

Thinners and Multi

- purpose Solvents has a similar VOC limit (25 g/l) but required compliance by January 1, 2011. In responding to these comments

, CARB’s Final Statement of Reasons for its 2009 Board Hearing states it did not change its 2013 compliance date because it has not been demonstrated that low VOC products were available in commerce to adequately thin all types of coatings and that the additional

t ime was also needed to develop less flammable and/or less costly product technologies that may also provide greater ozone reductions. 9

In 2013, CARB determined the 3% VOC limit s for Multi

- purpose Solvents and Paint

Thinners were technically feasible 10 and on May 28, 2014 submit ted those limits for SIP approval. These limits do not apply in the SCAQ M D, since the SCAQMD adopted its regulation for these two categories before CARB adopted its limits. CARB’s regulation

for Multi

- purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners also impose a 1% by weight limit on the

aromatic content. The 3% VOC limit is expected to achieve 3.9 tons per day reduction

state

- wide, not including SCAQMD.

November 18, 2010 Board Hearing (September 29, 2011 amendments)

7 CARB Updated Informative Digest for September 24, 2009 Board Hearing http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/cpmthd310/cpuid.pdf

.

8 CARB’s Board Resolution 09

- 51 directs the Executive Officer to “perform a technical assessment of manufacturers’ progress towards meeting the three percent VOC limits

for Multi

- purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners, commencing June 30, 2012.” and that

the “ ...the Executive Officer shall delay submitting [to the U.S. EPA for inclusion in the SIP] the future three percent VOC limit for Multi

- purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners until after the completion of the technical assessment, and staff’s determination of

w hether a reactivity

- based approach to regulating these products would be more appropriate than a mass

- based approach.” http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/cpmthd310/res0951.pdf

.

9 Final Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking, September 24, 2009, Agenda Item No.:

09

- 804, Response to comments D

- 6 through D

- 14, http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/cpmthd310/cpfsor.pdf

.
10 http://www.arb.ca.gov/board/books/2013/092613/13

- 8

- 3pres.pdf

.- 6

-

Of the three amendments contained in CA R B’s May 28, 2014 submittal to EPA , the November 18, 2010 Board Hearing action involved the greate st number of c hanges

. CARB estimates the product categories affected by its November 2010 action emit approximately 22 tons per day of VOC

. CARB added and modified several definitions and established new or lower VOC limits for several categories. These amendments

included:

1. Artist’s Solvent/Thinner

– modified the definition to state the category only applied to products p ackaged in containers of 34 ounces or less. CARB’s staff report indicates this change was made because some Artist’s Solvents/Thinners are commonly packaged in one liter containers (~33.8 ounces) rather than quart containers (32 ounces). CARB ’s Initial Sta tement of Reasons states the proposed change will have negligible impacts on emissions because over time the same amount of thinner

would be used.

2. Oven Cleaners

a. The definition was expanded to include grill cleaning products. Newly covered grill cleaning products were required to comply with the VOC limits by December 31, 2012.

b. The VOC limit for nonaerosol Oven or Grill Cleaners was increased from 1 percent to 4 percent t o accommodate the use of noncaustic technologies.

CARB estimates the increase in the VOC limit will result in an additional 0.1 ton per day, and will be offset by VOC reductions in other consumer product categories.

3. Spot Remover

– added spot remover prod ucts are used on “dry clean only” fabrics

and used primarily at dry cleaning operations. The effective date to comply with the VOC limit for Spot Removers was extended from December 31, 2010 until December 31, 2012 to allow time to reformulate products. CA RB estimates the additional compliance time will result in delaying reductions of approximately 0.25 tons per day of VOC.

4. Methylene Chloride, Perchloroethylene, and Trichloroethylene

– CARB extended t he prohibition on using these compounds to the followin g additional consumer product categories to ensure these toxic air contaminants are not used when reformulating products to meet the new or lower VOC limits.

a. Anti

- Seize Lubricant

b. Cutting or Tapping Oil

c. Gear, Chain, or Wire Lubricant

d. Metal Polish or Cleanse r

e. Rust Preventative or Rust Control Lubricant

f. Silicone

- based Multi

- purpose Lubricant

5. Global Warming Potential Limit

– CARB extended the prohibition on the use of compounds with a global warming potential value of 150 or greater to ensure such- 7

-

compounds ar e not used when the following product categories are reformulated to
meet new or lower VOC limits

. a. Anti

- Seize Lubricant

b. Cutting or Tapping Oil

c. Flying Bug Insecticide

d. Furniture Maintenance Product

e. Gear, Chain, or Wire Lubricant

f. Metal Polish or Cleanser

g. Rust Preventative or Rust Control Lubricant

h. Spot Remover

i. Wasp or Hornet Insecticide

6. Alkylphenol Ethoxylate Surfactants

– CARB’s November 2010 action also included a prohibition on the use of alkylphenol ethoxylate surfactants

. CARB’s staff report 11

indicates one reformulation pathway to meet its proposed VOC limits is to replace VOC solvents with surfactants. Under this scenario, alkylphenol ethoxylates would

not be counted towards a product’s VOC limit since they meet the definition for a low

vapor pressure VOC (LVP

- VOC) compound. CARB’s consumer products regulation exempts LVP

- VOC compounds from being counted towards a VOC limit.

CARB’s staff report further states that alkylphenol ethoxylates are used as wetting agents, emulsifiers, and dispersants in clean ing and degreasing products, and once introduced into a wastewater stream, do not readily degrade. CARB indicates scientific evidence implicates these compounds are toxic to aquatic species

, are suspected hormone disruptors, and have been found in measurab le concentrations in California’s receiving waters. CARB’s prohibition of alkylphenol ethoxylate s in the following products is to ensure these compounds are not used to reformulate products to meet the proposed VOC limits.

a. General Purpose Cleaner (nonaeros ol)

b. General Purpose Degreaser (nonaerosol)

c. Glass Cleaner (nonaerosol)

d. Heavy

- duty Hand Cleaner or Soap (nonaerosol)

e. Oven or Grill Cleaners

7. Methylene Chloride, Perchloroethylene, and Trichloroethylene

– CARB consolidated existing requirements that prohibit the use of these toxic air contaminates into a single table . This would make it easier to find the requirements for all consumer product categories where use of these compounds is prohibited. The amendment also consolidates the provisions that spe cify the sell

- through dates and exemption from the prohibition when these compounds are an impurity in a combined amount equal to or less than 0.01% by weight.

11 Initial Statement of Reasons, September 29, 2010, Chapter VI

- 50 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp2010/cpisor.pdf

.- 8

-

8. Para

- dichlorobenzene

– CARB consolidated existing requirements that prohibit the

use of the to xic air contaminant para

- dichlorobenzene i nto a table. The amendment

also consolidates the sell

- through dates for this compound.

9. Global Warming Potential

– CARB consolidated into a table, the existing consumer product categories that are prohibit ed from using compounds with GWP values of

150 or greater . The table includes the effective and sell

- through date s for the prohibition

. The amendment also consolidate s the stipulation that the requirements do not apply to chemical compounds that may be present as an impurity in a combined amount equal to or less than 0.1% by weight.

10. Most Restrictive Limit

– CARB amended this provision to clarify when two defined categories exclude each other from their definitions, the product will be subject to the
VOC limit for whichever category has the lower limit.

11. Method 310

– CARB incorporated additional test methods into Method 310 to be

used to determine the aromatic content of Multi

- purpose Solvents and Paint

Thinners and the VOC content of Fabric Softener

- Single Use Dryi ng Product.

In summary, in addition to lowering the VOC limits for existing categories and establishing VOC limits for new categories, CARB’s November 18, 2010 action also raised the VOC limit for nonaerosol Oven or Grill Cleaner products ( VOC limit was raised from 1% up to 4% resulting in about 0.1 ton per day VOC reduction shortfall )

, and delayed the effective date for some categories ( Flying Bug Insecticide (aerosol) and Wasp or Hornet Insecticide (aerosol) and Spot Remover resulting in delayed reducti ons of 0.2 and 0.25 tons per day reduction respectively ) . CARB states the emission

reduction shortfalls will be offset by emission reductions obtained from other categories. 12 CARB estimates total emission reductions expected from the 2010 action

to be 6. 9 tpd when the limits are fully effective

.

October 18, 2012 Board Hearing (March 15, 2013 amendments) The October 18, 2012 hearing covers Automotive Windshield Washer Fluid (AWWF) products and expands the areas where higher VOC automobile windshield washer fluid

could be sold to accommodate those ar eas that routinely experience freezing temperatures in the winter. CARB first regulated the VOC content of AWWF products in October 1990. At that time, it was acknowledged that areas which had freezing temperatures in the winter would be allowed to sell AWWF products with a higher VOC content. The initial limit for these areas was 35% VOC, and 10% VOC for other areas which d id not routinely experience freezing wintertime temperatures. The 10% VOC limit

was subsequently reduced to 1% VOC effective December 2002. The 35% VOC limit

12 CARB Resolution 10

- 40 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp2010/res 1040.pdf

.- 9

-

was subsequently reduced to 25%, effective December 20 08 . CARB estimates that

AWWF product emissio ns have been reduced by over 25 tons per day. 13

The October 18, 2012 Board Hearing expands the areas where the 25% VOC limit appl ies because CARB determined that the existing description did not include some

mountainous areas that routinely experience free zing winter temperatures

. CARB staff

reviewed d ata for the months of December to March for 1970 to 2000 to identify areas

in California where the overall average temperature was below 32 degrees. 14 The 2012 amendments allow the following areas to sell 25% V OC AWWF products: the mountainous areas of Butte, Fresno, Glenn, Humboldt, Kern, Madera, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Tehama, Tulare, and Ventura

counties. An additional portion of Placer County was also included in the amendments. In addition, t he new areas where the higher VOC limit is effective is described by ZIP code rather than by air basin to make it easier to understand.

By adding additional mountainous areas that routinely experience freezing winter time temperatures, CARB estimates the action would result in a loss of 0.12 t ons per day VOC reductions, but that this loss would be offset by greater VOC reductions from other consumer product categories. 15

EPA EVALUATION

–

The following statutory criteria

, regulations and guidance documents were used to

evaluate the submitted rule.

1. Enforceability

– The Bluebook ( Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations , EPA, May 25, 1988 , revised 1/11/1990 ) and the Little Bluebook ( Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001) were used to help evaluate compliance with the CAA
§ 110(a)(2)(A) requirement for enforceability.

2. SIP Revisions

- CAA section 110(I) prohibits EPA from approving any SIP revision that

would interfere with any applicable requirement of the CAA, including requirements for reasonable further progress (RFP) toward or attainment of the NAAQS. We evaluated
this SIP revision to determine whether full approval of the revision is consistent with these requirements.

13 Updated Informative Guidance for October 18, 2012 Board Hearing http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2012/cp2012/cpuid.pdf

.

14 Initial Statement of Reasons, August 29, 2012, Chapter II

- 9 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2012/cp2012/cpisor.pdf

.

15 CARB Resolution 12

- 32 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2012/cp2012/res12

- 32.pdf

.- 10

-

3. State Implementation Plans, General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498; April 16, 1992) was used to help evaluate enforceability of CARB's submittal

.

4

. EPA ’ s Nation al Consumer Products rule (40 C FR 59 Subpart C) was used to evaluate
CARB’s amendments against the national rule.

CARB’s Consumer P roducts regulation meets the evaluation criteria listed above. The regulation contains definitions, emission limits, compliance times, reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and test methods for compliance determination. CARB’s regulation also allow s manufactur ers an alternative compliance strategy to meet the
VOC limits by participating in an Alternative Control Plan ( ACP ) . EPA has not approved
CARB's ACP into the SIP due to issues such as Executive Officer discretion and the public’s access to emissions data 16

.

W e note that CARB's Consumer Products § 94517 Federal Enforceability

, states EPA is not subject to any approval determinations for innovative products, variances, or alternative test methods made by the Executive Officer. Any such approval determinations for innovative products/variance s /alternative test methods has no effect under federal law, unless the Executive Officer submits the innovative product

d etermination/variance/alternative test method to EPA as a source

- specific SIP revision

a nd EPA approves it under section 110 of the CAA. The rule requires the Executive Officer to submit an innovative product determination/variance/alternative test method to EPA as a SIP revision request, following public notice and hearing, within 180 days o f a request from a person who has received the innovative product determination, variance

or alternative test method approval

.

CARB’s Consumer Products regulation is more stringent than EPA’s national rule in

several areas:

 CARB' s regulation covers nearl y three times the number of consumer product categories tha t EPA ’s rule covers

.

 CARB's Consumer Products regulation contains m ore stringent V OC limits than

EPA ’s national Consumer Products Rule for many product categorie s

.

16 The Clean Air Act §114(c) generally requires that emissions data be made available to the public. EPA has defined emissions data in 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2) as information necessary to determine the identity, amount, frequency, concentration or any other characteristics (to the extent related to air quality) of any emissions which has been emitted by the source or authorized to emit. For CARB's ACP, we believe this may include, not only the VOC concentration of the product, but also the product sales volume necessary to calculate total emissions being averaged between complying and

non

- complying product lines.- 11

- o EPA does not currently regulate the VOC content of Multi

- purpose Solvents

or Paint Thinners

, Artist’s Solvents/Thinners, Spot Removers, or

Lubricants.

o EPA agrees that continued VOC reductions in consumer products are important to reduce ambient ozone concentrations in California’s non

attainment areas

. In addition to the human health impacts of ozone, there are significant agricultural impacts. CARB indicates that ozone pollution damage to crops is estimated to cost agriculture over $500 million dollars annually. 17 CARB point s out that while the VOC limits may be challenging, they are commercially and t echnologically feasible.

 CARB determines c ompliance to the emissions limit by laboratory testing or

calculation

.

o EPA determines compliance with the VOC limits in the national consumer products rule by c alculation

.

 CARB p rohibits or limits the use of certain toxic air contaminants

, compounds with adverse impacts on other media, ozone depleting substances , and greenhouse

gas compounds in specified produ c ts

.

o EPA’s action is being taken under CAA Title 1 part D and is limited to the

control of criteria pollutants

.

 CARB's regulation c overs retailers

.

o EPA’s rule does not cover retailers.

During CARB’s 45

- day public comment period for the November 18, 2010 Board Hearing, industry and environmental groups generally supported CARB’s amendments but each group also raised concerns such as the following:

Consumer p roducts industry representatives and trade associations, while gen erally supportive of CARB’s amendments, expressed concerns that many of the proposed regulations present serious and costly reformulation challenges but were committed to expending the money to conduct the research and development necessary to meet the

new requirements. In some cases, such as that for special purpose lubricants, CARB agreed with industry’s request that new VOC limits for special purpose lubricants have an effective date of December 31, 2013 (instead of December 31, 2012) to allow adequate t ime to reformulate hundreds of products and to be consistent with previously adopted new VOC limits for Multi

- purpose Lubricant products. 18

17 CARB Initial Statement of Reasons, September 29, 2010 , Chapter IV

- 19 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp2010/cpisor.pdf

.

18 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp2010/cpfsor.pdf comment B

- 36.- 12

-

Environmental organizations, service workers, and members of the public generally supported the proactive approach t o prohibit toxic air contaminants and compounds with high global warming potential from being used to reformulate products to meet lower VOC limits and asked for help to reduce the use of toxic chemicals at car washes, and prohibit the use of alkylphenol e thoxylate surfactants in cleaners, degreasers, heavy

duty hand cleaners, and oven or grill cleaners.

CARB’s Final Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking 19 for the November 18, 2010 Board Hearing and the Addendum to the Final Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking 20 provides a summary of the comments received and CARB’s response to those

comments.

We are not aware of any variance requests indicating the second tier 3% VOC limit for

Multi

- purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners were unachievable or variances from requirements for other consumer product categories that were part of the three submitted

amendments from CARB.

CARB estimates that increasing the VOC limit for Oven or Grill Cleaner and expansion of the mountainous areas (that routinely experience freezing temperatures in the winter) where higher VOC content automotive windshield washer fluid can be sold will result in an increase of approximately 0.1 and 0. 12 tons per day respectively, but will be more than offset by the estimated 3.9 tons per day (2009 Board Hearing) and the 6.9 tons per day (2010 Board hearing) emission reductions achieved by amendments to other consumer product categories. We have reviewe d CARB’s analysis and agree the emission increases are more than offset by VOC reductions achieved in other consumer product categories and that it will not interfere with attainment, reasonable further progress, or any other applicable CAA requirement.

EPA ACTION

–

The submitted Consumer Products r egulation fulfil l s the relevant CAA § 110 and Title 1 part D requirements

. EPA staff recommends approval of the submitted amendments to
CARB’s Consumer Products R egulation consistent with CAA § 110(k)(3)

.

We recommend approval of CARB’s amendments to its Consumer Products Regulation.

Our action is being taken under CAA Title 1 part D and is limited to the control of criteria pollutants. However, w e support CARB’s actions to limit toxic or potentially toxic

co mpounds and those compounds with a high global warming potential

.

19 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp2010/cpfsor.pdf

.

20 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp2010/cpaddendum.pdf

.- 13

-

REFERENCES

–

1. California Code of Regulations Title 17 Chapter 1 Subchapter 8.5

- Consumer Products; Article 2

– Consumer Products

– as submitted on May 28, 2014

. 2. California Code of Regulations Title 17 Chapter 1 Subchapter 8.5

- Consumer Products; Article 2

– Consumer Products

– as approved on February 13 , 201 2

. http://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/AgencyProvision/A9C27498A14C828B882579 A400602E02?OpenDocument

3. National Volatile Organic Compound Emissi on Standards for Consumer Products

, 40 CFR 59, Subpart C

. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR

- 2013

- title40

- vol6/pdf/CFR

- 2013

- title40

- vol6

- part59

- s ubpartC.pdf

4. CARB Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed Amendments to the
C alifornia Consumer Products Regulation, August 7, 2009

, http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/cpmthd310/cpmthdisor.pdf

. 5. CARB Initial Statement of Reasons, September 29, 2010, http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp2010/cpisor.pdf

. 6. CARB Updated Infor mative Digest for September 24, 2009 Board Hearing http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/cpmthd310/cpuid.pdf

. 7. State of California Air Resources Board Resolution 0 9

- 51

, September 24, 2009

, A genda Item No. 09

- 8

- 4 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/cpmthd310/res0951.pdf

. 8. Final Statement of Reasons for Rulemaking, Including Summary of Comments and Agency Responses

– Considered at a Public Hearing on September 24, 2009

, Agenda Item No. 09

- 8

- 4

, http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/cpmthd310/cpfsor.pdf

. 9. Consumer Products Regulations Overview and Propose d Amendments, September
26, 2013, http://www.arb.ca.gov/board/books/2013/092613/13

- 8

- 3pres.pdf

. 10. CARB Resolution 10

- 40 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp2010/res1040.pdf

. 11. Updated Informative Digest for October 18, 2012 Board Hearing http:/ /www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2012/cp2012/cpuid.pdf

. 12. Initial Statement of Reasons, August 29, 2012, Chapter II

- 9 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2012/cp2012/cpisor.pdf

. 13. CARB Resolution 12

- 32 http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2012/cp2012/res12

- 32.pdf

. 14. CARB Final Statement of Reasons for Rulemakings, Including Summary of Public Comments and Agency Responses , Hearing Date November 18, 2010 ; Agenda

Item: 10

- 10

- 7. http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2010/cp2010/cpfsor.pdf

. 15. State of California Air Resources Board Executive Order R10

- 013, August 6, 2010. http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/cpmthd310/cpeo.pdf

. p 16. “Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,” EPA, May 25, 1988, revised January 11, 2000 (the Blueboo k). http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ozone/ozonetech/voc_bluebook.pdf

. 17. State Implementation Plans, General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of

the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498; April 16, 1992).

18. “Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,” EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook). http://www.epa.g ov/region9/air/sips/littlebluebook2001.pdf

.