Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9 signed the following direct final rule on August 5, 

2014, and EPA is submitting it for publication in the Federal Register (FR). While we have taken steps to 

ensure the accuracy of this Internet version of the direct final rule, it is not the official version of the direct 

final rule for purposes of public comment. Please refer to the official version in a forthcoming FR publication, 

which will appear on the Government Printing Office's FDsys website 

(http://fdsys.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/home.action) and on Regulations.gov (http://www.regulations.gov) in Docket 

No. [EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0529].

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA-R09-OAR-2014-0529; FRL-] 

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, California 

Air Resources Board – Consumer Products 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking 

direct final action to approve revisions to the California Air 

Resources Board portion of the California State Implementation 

Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile organic compound 

(VOC) emissions from consumer products. We are approving a local 

rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air 

Act (CAA or the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on [Insert date 60 days from the 

date of publication in the Federal Register] without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by [Insert date 30 

days from the date of publication in the Federal Register]. If we 

receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

2

will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-

OAR-2014-0529, by one of the following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, CA 94105-3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket 

without change and may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 

unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by 

statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted 

through www.regulations.gov or e-mail. www.regulations.gov is an 

“anonymous access” system, and EPA will not know your identity or 

contact information unless you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and included as part of the public 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

3

comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical 

difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may 

not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and 

be free of any defects or viruses. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are 

available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 

94105-3901. While all documents in the docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available 

only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large 

maps), and some may not be publicly available in either location 

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule 

an appointment during normal business hours with the contact 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, 

(415) 947-4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, “we,” “us,” 

and “our” refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

4

A. What rule did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of this rule? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action. 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? 

C. Public comment and final action. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews. 

I. The State’s Submittal.

A. What rule did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rule we are approving with the date it was 

amended by the State and submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB). 

Table 1 - Submitted California Air Resources Board Rule 

Regulation Amended Filed with 

California 

Secretary of 

State 

Submitted to 

EPA 

Subchapter 8.5 – Consumer

Products; Article 2 – 

Consumer Products 

March 15,2013 April 25,2013 May 28, 2014 

On July 18, 2014, EPA determined that the submittal for 

California Code of Regulations, Title 17, Division 3, Chapter 1, 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

5

Subchapter 8.5 – Consumer Products; Article 2 – Consumer Products 

met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which 

must be met before formal EPA review. 

B. Are there other versions of this rule? 

We approved an earlier version of CARB’s Consumer Products 

Regulation (amended on August 6, 2010 and submitted to EPA on 

January 28, 2011), into the SIP on February 13, 2012 (77 FR 

7535). CARB’s submittal letter advised EPA that its SIP 

submission did not include the second tier 3% VOC limits for 

Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners. CARB’s intent was to 

monitor manufacturers’ progress to meet both the technology 

forcing lower VOC limit and a less flammable product. In 2013 

CARB determined the 3% VOC limit for Multi-purpose Solvents and 

Paint Thinners was technically feasible and included the limit in 

a May 28, 2014 SIP submittal. 

On September 29, 2011, and March 15, 2013 CARB adopted 

additional revisions to the SIP-approved version and submitted 

them to us along with the 3% VOC limit for Multi-purpose Solvents 

and Paint Thinners on May 28, 2014. Table 2 lists the three 

amendments. While we can act on only the most recently amended 

version that was submitted to EPA, we have reviewed materials 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

6

provided with the SIP submittal and note that it includes and 

builds on the previous amendments. 

Table 2 – California Air Resources Board Submitted Revisions to 

its Consumer Products Regulation 

Board Hearing Amended1 Filed with 

California 

Secretary of 

State 

Submitted to 

EPA 

September 24, 

2009 

August 6, 

2010 

September 20, 

2010 

May 28, 2014 

(2nd tier – 3%

VOC limit for 

Multi-purpose 

Solvents and 

Paint Thinners

only) 

November 18, 

2010 

September 29, 

2011 

November 10, 

2011 

May 28, 2014 

October 18, 

2012 

March 15, 

2013 

April 25, 2013 May 28, 2014 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision? 

VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm 

human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA 

requires States to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. 

The California Health and Safety Code (Section 41712(b)) requires 

1 Date the Final Rulemaking Package was filed with the California 

Office of Administrative Law. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

7

CARB to adopt regulations to achieve the maximum feasible 

reduction in volatile organic compounds emitted by consumer 

products if the state board determines that adequate data exist 

to establish both of the following: 

(1) The regulations are necessary to attain state and 

federal ambient air quality standards. 

(2) The regulations are commercially and 

technologically feasible and necessary. 

CARB’s May 28, 2014 submittal contains the following three 

amendments to its Consumer Products Regulation: 1) the second 

tier 3% VOC limits for Multi-purpose Solvents and Paint Thinners 

from CARB's August 6, 2010 amendments (September 24, 2009 Board 

Hearing), but excluded from CARB’s January 28, 2011 SIP 

submittal2; 2) CARB’s September 29, 2011 amendments (November 18, 

2010 Board Hearing), which established new or lower VOC limits 

for 11 consumer product categories; and 3) CARB’s March 15, 2013 

amendments (October 18, 2012 Board Hearing), which incorporates 

additional areas where higher VOC automobile windshield washer 

fluid could be sold to accommodate mountainous areas that 

2 Robert D, Fletcher (CARB), letter to Jared Blumenfeld (EPA 

Region IX), January 28, 2011, submitting the August 6, 2010 

amendments to California’s Consumer Products Regulation. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

8

routinely experience freezing temperatures in the winter. 

The amendments also: (1) add or modify the definitions for 

artist’s solvent/thinner, oven cleaners, spot removers, and the 

“Most Restrictive Limit” provision; (2) consolidate existing 

requirements into a table listing the consumer product categories 

that prohibit the use of the toxic air contaminants methylene 

chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene. This will 

make it easier to find the requirements for all consumer product 

categories where use of these compounds is prohibited; (3) 

consolidate into a table listing the consumer product categories 

that prohibit the use of compounds with a global warming 

potential (GWP) of 150 or greater; (4) consolidate into a table 

listing the consumer products that prohibit the use of paradichlorobenzene; (5) add additional test methods to be used to 

determine the aromatic content of Multi-purpose Solvents and 

Paint Thinners and the VOC content of Fabric Softener-Single Use 

Drying Product; (6) raise the VOC limit for nonaerosol Oven or 

Grill Cleaners products to 4% to accommodate the use of 

noncaustic technologies; (7) delay the effective date until 

December 31, 2012 for Spot Removers, and until December 31, 2013 

for Flying Bug Insecticide (aerosol) and Wasp or Hornet 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

9

Insecticide (aerosol); and (8) prohibit the use of alkylphenol 

ethoxylates in certain products to ensure these compounds are not 

used when reformulating the products. 

Generally, CARB received support for its amendments from 

both the consumer products industry and environmental 

organizations. Although industry commented about the serious and 

costly reformulation challenges posed by the amendments, industry 

was committed to expending the money to conduct the research and 

development necessary to meet the new requirements. Environmental 

organizations were also generally supportive of the proactive 

approach CARB was taking to prohibit the use of certain toxic 

compounds in order to help protect the health of workers and 

consumers, and prohibiting the use of compounds with high global 

warming potential in the reformulation of products to meet lower 

VOC limits. 

CARB estimates that raising the VOC limit for Oven or Grill 

Cleaners to 4% will result in an increase of approximately 0.1 

tons per day (tpd) and that increasing the number of areas where 

higher VOC automotive windshield washer fluid could be sold will 

result in an increase of 0.12 tpd VOC. CARB’s staff reports 

indicate these increases would be offset by approximately 11 tpd 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

10

of VOC reductions from other consumer product categories. EPA's 

technical support document (TSD) has more information about this 

rule. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action.

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that regulations submitted 

to EPA for approval into a SIP must be clear and legally 

enforceable. CAA section 110(l) prohibits EPA from approving any 

SIP revision that would interfere with any applicable requirement 

concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP) or 

any other applicable requirement of the CAA. California's 

consumer products regulation covers VOC area sources and not 

stationary sources. In 1998 EPA promulgated a national rule to 

regulate VOC emissions from consumer products (63 FR 48831, 

September 11, 1998). EPA's national rule largely parallels an 

early SIP-approved version of CARB’s consumer products 

regulation. The amendments from CARB that we are approving today 

regulate nearly three times the number of consumer product 

categories and has more stringent VOC limits than categories 

covered under EPA’s 1998 national rule. CARB points out that 

although emissions from individual consumer products may not seem 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

11

large, collectively, they represent a significant source of 

emissions when taking into account 39 million California 

residents use these products and that given the severity of air 

pollution in California, “dramatic emission reductions from all 

sources contributing to ground-level ozone are necessary”.3 CARB 

estimates that ozone pollution damage to crops is estimated to 

cost agriculture over $500 million dollars annually.4

Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate 

enforceability and SIP requirements consistently include the 

following: 

1. “Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, 

and Deviations,” EPA, May 25, 1988, revised January 11, 2000 

(the Bluebook). 

2. “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); 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 

1992). 

3. “Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule 

3 Initial Statement of Reasons; Proposed Amendments to the 

California Regulation for Reducing Emissions from Consumer 

Products; Release Date: September 29, 2010. IV-25. 

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

4 Ibid. IV-19.
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

12

Deficiencies,” EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little 

Bluebook). 

4. 40 CFR 59 Subpart C, National Volatile Organic Compound 

Emission Standards for Consumer Products. 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? 

We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy 

and guidance regarding enforceability and SIP relaxations. CARB 

estimates that raising the VOC limit for Oven or Grill Cleaners 

and increasing the mountainous areas where higher VOC windshield 

washer fluid can be sold will increase VOC emissions by 

approximately 0.1 and 0.12 tpd respectively, but that these 

increases are offset by VOC reductions (approximately 11 tpd) 

from other consumer product categories. We have reviewed CARB’s 

analysis and agree that the emission increases are offset by 

greater VOC reductions achieved in other consumer product 

categories and that it will not interfere with attainment, RFP, 

or any other applicable CAA requirement. Our TSD has more 

information on our evaluation. 

Our action is being taken under CAA Title 1 part D and is 

limited to the control of criteria pollutants. However, we 

support CARB’s actions to limit toxic or potentially toxic 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

13

compounds and those compounds with a high global warming 

potential. 

C. Public comment and final action. 

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully 

approving the submitted rule because we believe it fulfills all 

relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this 

approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in 

advance. However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal 

Register, we are simultaneously proposing approval of the same 

submitted rule. If we receive adverse comments by [Insert date 30 

days from date of publication in the Federal Register], we will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the 

public that the direct final approval will not take effect and we 

will address the comments in a subsequent final action based on 

the proposal. If we do not receive timely adverse comments, the 

direct final approval will be effective without further notice on 

[Insert date 60 days from date of publication in the Federal 

Register]. This will incorporate the rule into the federally 

enforceable SIP. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

14

provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may 

adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the 

subject of an adverse comment.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews. 

Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to 

approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 

52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to 

approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves State 

law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For 

that reason, this action: 

• is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review 

by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 

12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 

seq.); 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

15

• is certified as not having a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as described in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4); 

• does not have Federalism implications as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); 

• is not an economically significant regulatory action based 

on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements 

would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and 

• does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 

address disproportionate human health or environmental 

effects with practical, appropriate, and legally permissible 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

16

methods under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 

16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal 

law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added 

by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which 

includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to 

the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other required information to 

the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the 

Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of 

the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect 

until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

17

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 

judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by [Insert date 60 

days from date of publication of this document in the Federal 

Register]. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of 

this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may 

be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice 

of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the Proposed 

Rules section of today’s Federal Register, rather than file an 

immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, 

so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the 

comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (see 

section 307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

18

Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

__________________ _______________________ 

Date Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, 

Region IX. 
This document is a prepublication version, signed by Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

9 on August 5, 2014. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the official 

version.

19

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations is amended as follows: 

PART 52 [AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as 

follows: 

AUTHORITY: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart F – California 

2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph [(c)(442)] to 

read as follows: 

§52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(442) New and amended regulations were submitted on May 28, 2014, 

by the Governor’s designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) California Air Resource Board. 

(1) Barclays Official California Code of Regulations, Title 17 

(Public Health), Division 3 (Air Resources Board), Chapter 

1 (Air Resources Board), Subchapter 8.2 (Consumer 

Products), Article 2 (Consumer Products), amendment filed 

April 25, 2013, operative July 1, 2013. 

* * * * *