State ofRhode Island Department ofEnvironrnental Management Office ofAir Resources
In Re: Adoption ofproposed amendments toAir Pollution Control Regulations Nos. 25, 31 and 33 and proposed new Air Pollution Control Regulation No. 44.

DECISION Introduction
On 20 January 2009 a notice was published in the Providence Journal-Bulletin and was mailed to interested parties announcing a public hearing and commentperiod to accept comments on the adoption ofproposed amendments to AirPollution Control Regulations Nos. 25, 31 and 33 and proposed new AirPollution Cont rol Regulation No. 44. Thepublichearingwas held on 20 February 2009 in Room 300 ofthe Department ofEnvironmental Management Building, 235 Promenade Street, Providence, RhodeIsland. Thepublic commentperiod extended until 4:00 PM on 20 February 2009. Theproposed revisions toRegulation No. 31, "Control ofVolatile Organic Compounds (VOC) from Consumer Products," and No. 33, "Control ofVOC from Architectural Coatings and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings," and proposed newRegulation No. 44, "Control of VOC from Adhesives and Sealants," would limit the volatile organic compound (VOC) content of102 categories ofconsumerproducts, 53 categories ofarchitectural and industrial maintenance coatings and 40 categories ofadhesive and sealant products. Theserules also include the following provisions:

• Limits on toxic contaminants in antiperspirants and deodorants and otherconsumerproducts (Regulation No. 31); • Requirements for charcoal lighter materials, aerosol adhesives and floor wax strippers (Regulation No. 31), • Requirements for products containing ozone-depleting compounds (Regulation No. 31); • Paintingpractice and thinning specifications (Regulation No. 33); • Requirements for rust preventative coatings, lacquers, and AIM coatings not specifically listed in the Regulation No
. 33; • VOC content and vaporpressure limits for surfacepreparation solvents (Regulation No. 44); • Specifications for the content and use ofcleanup solvents, includingthe removal ofadhesives and sealants from
. the parts ofspray equipment (Regulation No. 44); • Specifications for airpollution control equipment ifsuch equipment is employed in lieu of the use ofcompliant adhesive/sealant products (Regulation No. 44);• Specifications for the storage and disposal of absorbent materia l s contaminated with adhesives, sealants, primers or solvents subject to Regulation No. 44: • Product labeling requirements (Regulations Nos. 31, 33 and 44); and • Record keeping, reporting and testing requirements (Regulations Nos. 31, 33 and 44). The proposed revision to Regulation No. 25, "Control ofYolatile Organic Compound Emissions from Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt," would prohibit the use of cutback asphalt and limit the YOC content of emulsified asphalt used for road paving, maintenance or repair during the ozone season (April through September). The proposed amendments and new regulation are based on control measures developed by the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) and have previously been adopted by neighboring states. Based on the OTC analysis of the technical and economic feasibility of these measures, the Office of Air Resources has determ i ned that implementation of these regulatory changes significantly reduce YOC emissions but would not have a significan t adverse economic impact on small businesses , cities or towns. Deci s ion It is the decision of the Hearing Officer to adopt the proposed amendments to Air Pollution Control Regulations Nos. 25, 31 and 33 and proposed new Air Pollution Control Regulation No. 44, modified as discussed in the response to comments that follows. The final amended regulations and new regulation are appended to this Decision. Since the compl i ance date for the Regulation No. 25 amendments has been changed to May 1, 2010 , the amended regulation will not be filed with the Secretary of State until October 2009, so

that the existing limitations in Regulation No . 25 will remain in effect unti l the end of the 2009 ozone season. I

Date Approved: Date W. Michael Sullivan Director 2Response to Comments This section will present the Rhode Island Department ofEnvironmental Management's 

### (RJ DEM's) response to the comments received at the public hearing and during the public c<;:>mment period. Each commenthas been paraphrased and is followed by

### Rl DEM's response. Similar comments have been grouped together. A list ofcommenters is attached
. General Comments Comment: The regulations are consistent with the Ozone Transport Commission's (OTC's) model rules for these source categories. Rhode Island should submit these rules to EPA as a StateImplementation Plan (SIP) revision once adopted. (EPA) Response: Theregulations will be submitted as SIP revisions when final.
Comments on Air Pollution Regulation No. 25, "Control ofVolatile Organic Compound Emissions from Cutback and Emulsified Asphalt" Comment: Forconsistencypurposes, the effective date in subsection 25.2.1 shouldread, "on or after." (EPA) Response: The wording in subsection 25
.2.1. hasbeen changed inresponse to this comment.
Comment: There are two subsections "25
.2
.2
." This shouldbecorrected. (EPA) Response: The numbering error was corrected in response to this comment.
Comment: Subsection 25.2.2 refers to an exemptiop that is allowed with written approval of the Director. This should be revised to read: "written approval is granted bythe Director and the EPA." (EPA) Response: Theregulation was changed as suggested in response to thecomment.
Comment: Rhode Island is movingtoo fast in adopting this regulation. The compliance date ofJuly-1, 2009 does not allow sufficient time for affected parties to evaluate the ramifications of the amendments. Existing Depart ment ofTransportation (DOT) specifications and municipal budgets may interfere with compliance this year. (Hudson) I'm concerned about possible consequences to mybusiness ifthis regulation is adopted this year. (Peckham)


### 3Response : The DOT and the public works departments of all of the municipalities in the State were notified about the proposed amendments and none of these entities submitted comments. However, to allow affected parties (primarily municipalities) and private companies such as Mr. Peckham's sufficient time to identify alternative products , the compliance date in the regulation has been changed to May 2010. In a further effort to ease any in convenience that th e regulation may cause to the State or municipalities or private busin e sses, the effective period for the restrictions has be e n changed from April through September to May through September to allow sufficient t ime for patching winter potholes. Note that the regulation applies only to road paving , so paving of other surfaces, such as parking lots and driveways, is not affected by t he rule. Comment: The Public Hearing Notice states that "these regulatory changes significantly reduce YOC emissions but would not have a significant economic impact on small business,

cities and towns . " Has Rl DEM adequately detern1ined that this is true? The only neighboring state tha t has thus far adopted a similar regulation is Connecticut and that regulation will not be effective until th is coming ozone season. (Hudson) Response: RI DEM has received information that indicates that alternative products are

available and are not significantly more expensive than the ones currently in use. However, the postponement of the compliance date to 20 1 0 will allow for Rl DEM to evaluate the succ e ss of the implementation of a similar regulation this summer in Connecticut to determine whether the Rhode Is l and regulation should be further amended prior to implementation . Comment : The proposed changes leave much to in terpretation. Areas that need further clarifica t ion include: • Use of cold patching materials • Definition of road paving- does it mean on l y public roads? • Application of asphalt for use other than on roads • S hou ld specify that cutback asphalt may be manufactured in Rhode I sland for sale outside the State or for applications other than on roads (Hudson) Response: The regulation was not changed in response to this comment. RI . DEM believes th e re gulat io n is clear on each point the commenter suggested were in need of further clarification. The regulation, as proposed , does not include exemptions for cold patching materia1s. The term " ro ad" is gene rall y understood to mean an open way (generally public) for travel or transportation. Although roads open to the public are generally owned by the State or municipalities, there may be instances where they are privately owned. Adding a definition of "road" to the regulation would not serve to further clarify applicability. 4Further, the applicability section clearly states that theregulation applies to "anyperson who....... solicitstheuse oforapplies asphaltforroadpaving, maintenanceorrepairs." Manufactureofasphalt and application ofasphalt on surfaces otherthanroads are notcoveredby thisregulation. Comments on Regulation No. 31, "Control ofVolatile Organic Compounds (VOC) from ConsumerProducts" Comment: Sections 31.2.3, 31.2.4 and 31.2.5 should required EPAapproval ofinnovative products exemptions, alternative control plans and variances, respectively, to ensure that they are consistentwith the emissionsreductions 

### in the SIP. (EPA) Response: Sin ceRegulation No. 31 recognizes innovativeproducts exemptions, alternative control plans and variances that are in effect in otherstates, there is no approval process specified in the regulation for those exemptions. However, thepersons claimingsuch exemptions must supplydocumentation ofthe other state'sapproval to the Rl DEM upon request. Inresponse to the comment, thisrequirementwasrevised in each ofthe above sections to requirethatthe documentation be submitted to bothRIDEM and theEPA

**~** Comment: The VOC limitfor charcoal lightermaterial should referto subsection 31.3.5, not 31.3
.7
. (EPA, CSPA) Response: This typographical errorwas corrected inresponse to thecomment. Comment: TheConsumer SpecialtyProductsAssociation (CSPA) and thePersonal Care Products Council (PCPC) supporttheDEM'sproposalto develop regulatoryrequirements for consumerproducts that arebased on the the OTCModel Ruleand areconsistentwiththe requirements in otherStates. (CSP A and PCPC) Response: Noresponserequired. Comment: Theproposed regulation includes an exemption forproductsthat are "sold, offered for saleormanufactured in Rhode Island for shipment and use outside ofRhode Island" (paragraph 31.2.2(a). RhodeIsland should also include a provision thathas been adopted in otherstatesthat exempts companies that exercise "reasonableprudentprecaution"to ensure that a non-compliant product isnot shipped to the State. (CSP A)



### 5Respo n se: The regulation was not changed in response to this comment. Should the circumstances described by the commenter occur in Rl, Rl DEM will conduct an evaluation on a

case-by-case basis considering a variety of factors, including intent, in determining the

appropriate enforcement response to alleged violations o f the regulati o n . C om men t : The exemption for air fresheners comprised entirely of fragrance should be modified to b e consistent with the OTC Model Rule. (CSPA ) Response : In response to this comment, paragraph 31.2.2(d) has been modified to exe m pt "air fresheners comprised entirely of fragrance, compounds not defined as VOCs in the Rhode I s land Air P o llution C o ntrol General Definitio ns Regulation and LVP - VOCs. " Co mment: In the Table of Standards, subsection 31.3. 9 is incorrectly referenced as being applicable to automotive brake cleaners, carburetor or fuel-injection air intake cleaners and engine degreasers. Those references should be removed. (CSPA ) R es po nse : The Table of Standards was corrected in response to this comment to remove the incorrect references. Co mm e n t : RI DEM omitted the 6 percent VOC limit for Hair Styling Gels that is contained in 12 states ' fi.nal regulations and the California Air Resources Boar d (CARB ' s) current regulation . This category should be added to the regulation. (CSP A) Re s p on se: In the proposed regulation , hair stylin g gels are includ e d in the definition of"hair styl i ng product." The VOC limits for hair styling products i n the Table of Standards are 6 percent for aerosols and pump sprays and 2 percent for other forms. This is consistent with the recently promulgated amended con s umer product rules in Massachusetts and Co nne cticut. The regulation was not changed in response to this commen t. Co mm e n t : CSPA supports the July 1 , 20 0 9 compliance date in the proposed regulation. (CSPA). The PCPC supports having one date apply to all limits. (PCPC) R e sp onse : That date will remain i n the final regulation. Note tha t the CSP A also commented on labeling requirements in the proposed regulation but that comment was withdrawn in an email from Joseph Yost to Barbara Morin dat e d February 27, 2 00 9. 6Comments on Regulation No. 33, "Control ofVOC from Architectural Coatings and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings" Comment: Although the compliance date is in section 33.3, Rl DEM should consider also adding it to the applicabilitysection, 33.2.1, as was done in the otherproposedregulations. (EPA) Response: comment. For clarity, the compliance date was added to section 33.2.1 in response to the

Comment: 

### In order to allow time for RI DEM to adopt these amendments and for paint manufacturers and distributors to implement these changes, the compliancedate should be moved from July 1, 2009 to January 1, 2010. (National Painting and Coating Association (NPCA)) Response: The regulation was not changed in response to this comment. Rules with the same VOC limits and labeling requirements as those in the RhodeIsland rule havebeen in effect in Connecticut since May 1, 2008 and in Massachusetts since January 1, 2009, so compliant products are currently available intheregion. Moreover, the regulation allows the sale and use ofnoncompliant products manufactured prior to July 1, 2009 as long as the labels reflect the manufacturing date, so distributors and sellers will beallowed to sell existinginventory.
Comment: Tobe consistent withtherecently amended Illinois AIM rule, a defmition for "stone consolidant," along with a VOC limit of450 g/1 for that category shouldbe added to the regulation. (NPCA) Response: The regulation was not changed in response to this comment. RlDEM believes thatregional consistency is essential in regulating AIM coatings, and nearby states, including Connecticut and Massachusetts, havenot adopted a separate limit for this category. Itdoes not appear that Illinois has adopted an AIM rule, as stated in the comment. However, Indianahas adopted a limit of450 g/1 for

**s~one** consolidants. This limit is included in the 2007 CARB Suggested Control Measures (SCM) for architectural coatings. The SCM recommends a number ofchanges to the rule, including the deletion of 15 coating categories, the addition ofstone consolidants and nine othercategories, lowering the VOC·limits for 19 categories,revising numerous definitions for clarification orto make the definition more stringent, modifying provisions for exceptions to the MostRestrictive VOC Limit provision, deleting theAveraging Compliance Option and changingreporting requirements.1 The OTC states are now evaluating

I State ofCalifornia, "2007 Air Resources Board Suggested Control Measures for Architecrural Coatings." http://www.arb.ca.gov /coatings/arch!TSD Chapters J-4.pdf
7the California recommendations and may recommend that they be adopted as part of a strategy to further reduce emissions in OTC states in order to meet the 2007 ozone standard. . Comment : For consistency with the AIM rules in OTC states, the words "to seal in effloresecence" should be added to the definition of"specialty primer, sealer and undercoater" and in 33.4.1(g), which lists labeling requirements for that source category. (NPCA) Response: The suggested phrase was added to the definition and labeling requirements, as suggested. This phrase is not included in the Massachusetts or Connecticut AlM regulati on, but it is included in those in Delaware and Pennsylvania and, according to the Hearing Officer's Decision on the amended Delaware regulation, this addition received no negative comments when proposed in t hat state. Comment : To be consistent w i th the recently amended Ohio AIM rule, add "conjugated oil varnish" to the definitions and to the VOC table with a limit of 450 g/1. (NPCA) Response: The regulation was not changed in response to this comment in order to be consistent with the regulations in the other OTC states, which have not adopted a limit for this

category. The NPCA may want to suggest this revision to the OTC as it considers reco mmending further amendments to AIM requirements in the states in the region . Comment : Since protection of carbonate stone used in institutional construction requires the use of penetrating reactive sealers that are incompatible with aqueous carriers, add "reactive penetrating carbonate stone sealer" to the definitions and to the VOC table with a limit of 600 g/1. (NPCA) Response: The regulation was not changed in response to this comment in order to be consistent with the regulations in the other OTC states, which have not adopted a limit for this

category. The NPCA may want to suggest this revision to the OTC as it considers recommending further amendments to AlM requirements in the states i n the region. Comment: NPCA appreciates that Rl DEM included a 90 day period for manufacturers to report information on coatings containing perchloroethylene and methylene chloride upon request However, since the 2007 CARB SCM discontinued this reporting requirement, RI DEM should

consider deleting it. 8Response: Theregulation was not changed in response to this comment. California deleted the requirement because it had collected sufficient dataonthe use ofcoatings containing those toxics in that state, but Rhode Island mayalso want to gatherstate-specific information about the usage of those materials. Note that Massachusetts also requires this information to be maintained bythe manufacturer and that the information has to bereported to RI DEM only ifrequested.

Comments on Regulation No
. 44, "Control ofVOC from Adhesives and Sealants" Comment: Forconsistencywith otherregulations, the compliance date in 44.2.1 should read "on or after" instead of"on and after." (EPA) Response: The wording of44.2.1 was changed in response to this comment.
Comment: Additional regulation ofindustrial use ofadhesives is not necessary because many ofthose companies are already subjectto YOC and Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) standards which are policed through facility operatingpermits. Additional requirements would make compliance more complicated, limit operationa l flexibility and increase the regulatory burden on those facilities. (Lord) Response: Theregulation was notchanged in response to this comment. The OTC model rule, which is the basis ofRegulationNo. 44, was developed after extensive discussions with potentiallyaffected industry groups and contains numerous exemptions aimed at limitingits applicability to operations that are not adequately addressed byotherregulatory requirements.
Comment: Theregulation allows for use ofa control device to meet the limits, but, ifa facility determines that a control device is necessary, the compliance deadline ofJuly 1, 2009 does not leave enough time for such a device to be installed. (Lord) Response: In response to this comment, a newparagraph hasbeen added to subsection 44.3.5 which states the following: "Facilities that intend to complywith this regulation using air pollution control equipment may apply to the Directorfor an extension to the compliance date specified in subsection 44.2.1. Extension requests mustbereceived, in writing, byJuly 1, 2009 and must include the date bywhich a permit application orregistration form will be submitted and the date by which the control equipment will be installed



### 9Co mment: RI DEM should include an exemption for use of noncomplying adhesives or solvents in the repair and manufacture of submari n es if necessary to meet military perfonnance specifica t io n , similar to that adopted by the CT DEP. (General Dynamics) . Response: In response to this comment, the **foll~wing** exemp t ion was added to the list in subsection 44.2.3: "The use of adhesives, cleanup solvents and surface preparation solvents in th e repair and manufa ctur e of submarines, when th e use of noncomplying m aterial is necessary t o meet m i litary perfonnance specifications, provided that records of the use of such noncompliant materials are maintained in accordance with the specifications in section 44.5 of this regulation. "

Comme nt: The tem1s "as applied" and "as supplied" should be defined. (Genera l Dynamics) R esponse: The regulation was not changed in response to this comment. Those tenns are used throughout Rhode Island regulation without definition and are understood by the regulated community. RI DEM will consider adding a definition for those tenn.s to the Rhode Island General Definitions Regulation the next time that regu l ation is amended. Comment: "Chlo rinated polyvinyl chloride plastic" or "CPVC plastic" is defined in the

regulation as "a polymer of the vinyl chloride monomer that contains 67% chlori n e and is

nonnally identified with a CPVC marking." CPVC can have a ch l orine content ranging from 56 . 7% to 74% by mass. Since CPVC plastic is readily identified in commercia l use, CT DEP deleted this definition from its regulation. RI DEM shou ld do the same. (General Dynamics) Respon se : The definition was de l eted in response to this comment. Note that Regulation No. 44 continues to include a definition for "chlorinated polyvinyl chloride welding adhesive" or "CPVC welding adhesi v e" as "an adhesive labeled for welding of chlorinated po l yvinyl chloride plastic." Comment : Regulation No. 44 defines "cleanup solvent" as "a VOC-cont a ining material used to remo ve a loosely held uncured (i. e . , not dry to the touch) adhesive or sealant from a substrate, or clean equipment used in applying a material." To be consistent with an updated definition in the CT DEP regulation, this definitio n should be changed to "a VOC-containing solvent used to remove a loosely held uncured adhesive or sealant from a substrate or to clean equipment used in applying an adhesive, seal ant or a priiner." (General Dynamics) Response: The definition of"cleanup solvent" was changed as suggested in the comment. 10Comment: The term "reactive adhesive" used in thedefinition for "cyanoacrylate adhesive" shouldbechanged to "reactivediluent adhesive" since that term is defined in the regulation. This is consistent with CTDEP's regulation. (General Dynamics) Response: The suggested change was made to the definition of"cyanoacrylate adhesive" in response to the comment.
Comment: To avoid confusion, the definition of"laminate" should bechanged to "aproduct madebybonding two ormore sheets or layers." (General Dynamics) Response: comment. The suggested change was made to the definition of"laminate" in response to the

Comment: Forclarity, a statement should be added to the definition of"nonmembraneroof installation orrepair adhesive" that states, "Adhesive intended for use in the installation ofprefabricated single

-plyroo(membrane is not 'nonmembrane roofinstallation or repair adhesive.'" (General Dynamics) Response: Theregulation wasnot changed in response to this comment because the definition of"nonrnembraneroofinstallation orrepair adhesive" in the proposed regulation states that it is "not intended for the installation ofprefabricated single-plyflexible roofing membrane."
Comment: The definition of"polyvinyl chloride plastic" specifies that it contains 57% chlorine. Like with CPVC, PVC canhave a range ofchlorine concentrations. Since PVC plastic is readily identified in commercial use, RlDEM should delete this definition, as was done in Connecticut. (General Dynamics) Response: In response to this comment, the definition of"polyvinyl chlorideplastic" was deleted. Note that the regulation continues to define "polyvinyl chloride welding adhesive" or "PVC welding adhesive" as "anyadhesive intended by the manufacturer for use in the welding of PVC plastic pipe."
Comment: The following statement should be added to the definition of"sealant": "Sealers and othermaterials that are applied to a single substrate to protect ordecorate are not "sealants." (General Dynamics) Response: To be consistent with the CTDEP regulation, the above statement was added to the definition of"sealant."

I IComme n t: The wording of the definition of"single-ply roof membrane" should be changed to be consistent with the CT DEP regulation. (General Dynan1ics) Response: The wording change was made in response to the comment. Comment : The tem1 "tire tread adhesive" in the definitions should be changed to "tire retread

adhesive to be consistent with Table 44-1 . (General Dynamics) Res p onse : That tem1 was changed in response to the comment. Comment: Paragraphs 44.2.3(d) and 44.3.3(b) and the footnote to Table 44-2 should clarify that exempt compounds, as well as water, are not inc l uded in VOC content. Response: The words "and exempt compounds" were added to the exclusion of water in the calc u lation ofthe vapor pressure of a s u rface preparation solvent in 44 . 3.3(b). That phrase was not added to 44.2.3(d) or to the footnote because those statements refer to the weight VOC, Jess water, and VOC is defined to exclude the exempt compounds. 12Commenters: AnneArnold, Manager Air Quality

**~Janning** Unit US EPA Region 1

.1 Congress St., Suite 1100 Boston, MA 02114-2023 Karen Hudson Desrosiers The Hudson Companies 89 Ship St. Providence, RI 02903 Julian Peckham PeckhamBrothers Asphalt 220ParadiseAvenue, Middletown, RI 02842 D. Douglas Fratz, Vice President, Scientific & Technical Affairs Joseph T. Yost, Director, Strategic Issues Advocacy Consumer SpecialtyProducts Associa tion 900 17'h St,NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006 Frances K. Wu, Associate General Counsel Personal Care Products Council 1101 17'h St., NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20036 David F. Darling, P.E. Director, Environmental Affairs National Paint and Coatings Association 1500 Rhode Island Ave., NW Washington, DC 20005 Karen M. Bond Environmental Compliance Specialist Lord Corporation 

### 1000West Grandview Blvd. Erie,PA 16509

13 Donna F. Elks Manager, Environmental Resources Management General Dynamics

- Electric Boat 75 Eastern Point Road Groton, CT 06340