*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

1 

1 EO12866_RIN2070-AJ92Formaldehyde-Imp_NPRM_UMRA_2012-02-27.docx 

2 Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Statement

3 Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products; Proposed Rule; RIN 2070-AJ92 

4 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics 

5 January, 2012 

6 Pursuant to the Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, 

7 EPA has determined that the rule being proposed, “Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite 

8 Wood Products; Proposed Rule,” contains a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 

9 million or more by the private sector in any one year, but is not expected to result in expenditures of this 

10 magnitude by State, local, and Tribal governments in the aggregate. EPA has prepared this statement in 

11 accordance with section 202(a) of UMRA. 

12 

13 (1) Authorizing Legislation. This proposed rule is issued under the authority of Section 601 of 

14 TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2697. 

15 

16 (2) Benefit-Cost Analysis. EPA has prepared an economic analysis to evaluate, among other 

17 things, the benefits and costs of this rule as well as various regulatory options. See “Economic Analysis 

18 of the Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products Act Implementing Regulations 

19 Proposed Rule.” This document is available in the public docket for this rule. 

20 

21 The proposal is estimated to result in a total cost of $435 million to $447 million in the first year. 

22 The cost is estimated to drop to $57 million to $66 million per year in the second year. The total 

23 annualized cost of this proposal is $72 million to $81 million per year when using a 3 percent discount 

24 rate and $81 million to $89 million per year using a 7 percent discount rate. When adjusted for inflation, 

25 the $100 million UMRA threshold is equivalent to approximately $143 million in 2010 dollars. Thus, the 

26 cost of the rule to the private sector and State, local, and Tribal governments in the aggregate exceeds the 

27 inflation-adjusted UMRA threshold in the first year. 

28 

29 This proposed rule will reduce exposures to formaldehyde, resulting in benefits from avoided 

30 adverse health effects. For the subset of health effects where the results were quantified, the estimated 

31 annualized benefits (due to avoided incidence of asthma, eye irritation, nasopharyngeal cancer, and 

32 reduced female fertility) are $184 million to $278 million per year using a 3% discount rate, and $91 

33 million to $137 million per year using a 7% discount rate. There are additional unquantified benefits due 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

2 

34 to other avoided health effects (upper respiratory tract pathology, pulmonary function, allergic 

35 sensitization, immune function effects, neurological and behavioral toxicity, and developmental toxicity). 

36 

37 Net benefits are the difference between benefits and costs. The proposal is estimated to result in 

38 net benefits of $103 million to $206 million per year using a 3% discount rate, and $2 million to $57 

39 million per year using a 7% discount rate. 

40 

41 (A) Federal Financial Assistance. EPA has not identified any sources of federal 

42 financial assistance (e.g., grants or loans) that are available from either EPA or other federal 

43 agencies to defray State, local, or Tribal expenditures under this rule. 

44 

45 (B) Federal Resources. EPA has not identified any federal resources available to carry 

46 out the private sector mandate contained in this rule. 

47 

48 (3) Costs and Budgetary Impacts.

49 

50 (A) Future Compliance Costs. Total compliance costs for the proposal are estimated to 

51 be $435 million to $447 million in the first year. The cost is estimated to drop to $57 million to 

52 $66 million in the second year. The total annualized cost of this proposal is $72 million to $81 

53 million per year when using a 3 percent discount rate and $81 million to $89 million per year 

54 using a 7 percent discount rate. 

55 

56 (B) Disproportionate Budgetary Effects. EPA believes that the most relevant measure 

57 of the budgetary effect of this rule is the cost of compliance with the rule. Costs can be expected 

58 to vary from state to state, region of the country, and industry to industry, depending on the 

59 number and type of regulated firms. On an aggregate basis, the retail industry has the highest 

60 first year costs ($215 million). The industries with the highest aggregate annualized costs are 

61 laminated product producers ($32 million per year using a 3 percent discount rate) and fabricators 

62 ($21 million per year). None of these industries is likely to incur disproportionate effects. 

63 Aggregate first year costs for retailers are high because of the large number of firms (759,000) 

64 that are potentially subject to the rule. Retailers subject to the rule have an average first year cost 

65 of approximately $300, which is not disproportionate to the costs incurred by other industries. 

66 Fabricators subject to the rule have an average annualized cost of $300 to $400 per year. And of 

67 the 7,000 to 14,000 laminated product producers, much of the aggregate cost will be incurred by 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

3 

68 the 150 to 300 firms assumed to continue using formaldehyde-based resins, which will need to 

69 certify and test their products. Most laminated product producers will find it less expensive to 

70 use no-added formaldehyde resins rather than engaging in certification and testing. 

71 

72 Firms located in California are likely to have incurred costs to comply with a similar 

73 California regulation on formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, which will 

74 lower their incremental costs of complying with this rule. But many firms outside of California 

75 have also incurred these costs because their products are sold in California. EPA has no evidence 

76 to suggest that this rule will have disproportionate budgetary impacts on any particular regions of 

77 the country, or particular State, local, or tribal governments or communities, or particular 

78 segments of the private sector affected by the rule. 

79 

80 (4) Effect on National Economy. Guidance issued by the Office of Management and Budget 

81 indicates that the economic impact of a regulation on the national economy becomes measurable only if 

82 the economic impact of the regulation reaches 0.25 percent to 0.5 percent of Gross Domestic Product 

83 (GDP). See Memorandum from Sally Katzen, “Guidance for Implementing Title II of [UMRA],” March 

84 31, 1995. Given the current GDP, this is equivalent to a cost of $37 billion to $75 billion. Therefore, 

85 EPA has concluded that this rule is highly unlikely to have any measurable effect on the national 

86 economy. 

87 

88 (5) Prior consultation with affected State, local, and Tribal governments. Consistent with the 

89 intergovernmental consultation provisions of section 204 of the UMRA EPA has initiated consultations 

90 with governmental entities affected by this rule. EPA has met with officials from the state of California 

91 on numerous occasions to discuss aspects of the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) Airborne 

92 Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for composite wood products and its implementation. With the 

93 assistance of the National Conference of State Legislatures, EPA has also initiated consultations with 

94 state environmental health directors. 

95 

96 (6) Small Government Agency Plan. This rule does not contain a significant Federal 

97 intergovernmental mandate as described by § 203 of UMRA, because it neither imposes enforceable 

98 duties on State, local, or tribal governments nor reduces an authorized amount of Federal financial 

99 assistance provided to State, local, or tribal governments. And this proposed rule contains no regulatory 

100 requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The proposed rule would 

101 regulate entities that manufacture (including import), fabricate, distribute, or sell composite wood 
*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During the Review ***

4 

102 products. Governments do not typically engage in these activities, so government entities are not 

103 expected to be subject to the rule’s requirements. 

104