Comment Log Display

COALITION FOR CLEAN AIR * COMMONWEAL *
LONG BEACH ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN WITH ASTHMA * COALITION FOR A
SAFE ENVIRONMENT * 
HEALTHY CHILDREN ORGANIZING PROJECT * REGIONAL ASTHMA MANAGEMENT
AND PREVENTION (RAMP) INITIATIVE * SIERRA CLUB CALIFORNIA *
WOMEN'S VOICES FOR THE EARTH *
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL *
ENVIRONMENT CALIFORNIA * CLEAN WATER ACTION *
BAY AREA HEALTHY 880 COMMUNITIES-SL *
CENTER FOR PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL OVERSIGHT * NATIONAL TOXIC
ENCEPHALOPATHY FOUNDATION * WORKSAFE, INC. * INSTITUTE FOR
CHILDREN'S ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH * CONSEJO DE FEDERACIONES
MEXICANAS EN NORTEAMÉRICA * CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE
FOUNDATION * BOYLE HEIGHTS RESIDENT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION *
RESIDENTS OF PICO RIVERA FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE * 
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA COALITION FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH * 
PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY-LOS ANGELES * GREEN SCHOOLS
INITIATIVE * 
CLEAN AIR NOW * PLANNING AND CONSERVATION LEAGUE * GREENACTION FOR
HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE * 
MERCED/MARIPOSA COUNTY ASTHMA COALITION * COMITE CIVICO DEL VALLE
* 
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WATERSHEDALLIANCE * 
URBAN SEMILLAS * ASIAN HEALTH SERVICES * LABOR/COMMUNITY STRATEGY
CENTER











June 25, 2008


Mary Nichols
Chairman
California Air Resources Board
1001 “I” Street
P.O. Box 2815 
Sacramento, CA 95812

Via e-mail


Re:	2008 Consumer Products Regulation Amendments

Dear Chairman Nichols:

We the cosigners are writing to comment on the revised proposal
for categories to be considered in the 2008 Consumer Products
Regulation Amendments.  We applaud CARB’s efforts to reduce
emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in consumer
products. However, we encourage you to direct staff to protect the
health of California residents, consumers and workers. 

According to your staff’s own estimates, after SIP measures are
implemented, 2010 VOC emissions from consumer products will be
approximately 220 to 235 tons per day (tpd ). Additionally,
consumer products will be the second largest source category of
VOC emissions in 2010 (tied with trucks and buses), and in 2020
these products will be the leading source of VOC emissions.
Unfortunately, the current version of the Consumer Products
Regulation will reduce VOCs by just 1.7 tpd in 2010, less than one
percent of total expected emissions. Yielding to industry demands,
staff has suggested numerous delays in deadlines associated with
emission reductions for different consumer product categories,
such that full benefits associated with the 2008 proposal will not
be achieved until 2015.

We would like to start by highlighting staff’s improvements on
this proposal and commend them for their foresight in addressing
the following issues:

 REDEFINITION OF DILUTABLE PRODUCTS 

We are very pleased that staff included language redefining
dilatable products (pg. ES-13) in spray bottles. Dilutable
products bottled in containers that appear to be for immediate use
should be required to reduce their VOC limits. 

We want to use this opportunity to encourage CARB to also pay
attention to other products designed to be diluted. It is very
important that we assume that not all consumers follow diluting
instructions to the letter. Therefore, in an effort to continue
identifying emissions reductions alternatives, CARB should account
for the potential emissions of other consumer products that should
be diluted.


GLOBAL WARMING EMISSIONS FROM CONSUMER PRODUCTS

We are very supportive of staff’s efforts to start looking at
global warming emissions from consumer products. Many consumer
products and their ingredients contribute directly and indirectly
to the GHG emissions. We want to encourage this agency to think
about the possibility of addressing those products and or their
ingredients and make California the first State that officially
takes steps to reduce our Global Warming foot print.


The following is a list of concerns, which we discuss in detail
bellow, we have identified on the most recent draft staff
proposal, released May 9, 2008:  

JANITORIAL PRODUCTS
PAINT AND LACQUER THINNER AND MULTIPURPOSE SOLVENT 
PROHIBITION OF TOXICS FROM SPECIFIC CATEGORIES
•	DRY-CLEANING “SPOT REMOVERS”
•	PAINT STRIPPER METHYLENE CHLORIDE
INCREASED VOC LIMITS AND COMPLIANCE DATES FOR SEVERAL CATEGORIES
•	ODOR REMOVER (LIQUID/NON-AEROSOL)
•	ASTRINGENT/TONER
•	FABRIC SOFTENER-SINGLE USE DRYER PRODUCT
•	GLASS CLEANERS (AEROSOL FORM)
•	MULTI-PURPOSE LUBRICANTS
•	PENETRANT
•	PERSONAL FRAGRANCE NON-CHEMICALLY CURING SEALANT
CATEGORIES DELETED FROM THE DRAFT LANGUAGE
•	LIQUID AIR FRESHENERS
•	POST-SHAVE PRODUCTS

The first three categories we list in this letter will help CARB
more than triple the calculated emissions reductions expected by
staff from ALL the categories in their proposal. 
We encourage you to review this list and adopt our suggestions.


JANITORIAL PRODUCTS (Not in current draft)

The SCAQMD has joined us in this request that you direct staff to
include janitorial cleaning products in the regulation draft staff
will prepare for a vote in November.  Staff has mentioned they are
in the process of compiling data from previous surveys about
possible VOC limits in cleaning products; we want this Board to
encourage staff to look at the data available and to work closely
with SCAQMD staff and advocates when setting VOC limits on
cleaning products.

SCAQMD has been researching possible VOC reductions in a broad
category of janitorial cleaning products.  SCAQMD tested 21
"environmentally preferable" cleaning products from six different
manufacturers. Of the 21 products tested, 12 were General Purpose
Cleaners, General Purpose Degreasers and/or Glass Cleaners, and
all met the VOC content standard. To date, 17 products have been
certified under SCAQMD’s Voluntary Clean Air Choices Cleaner
Certification Program. When calculating the VOC content, no
exemptions were made for fragrance or low vapor pressure (LVP)
solvents. 

SCAQMD staff calculates the state would achieve a reduction of 4.5
tons per day of VOC emissions if CARB agreed to set VOC content of
institutional and industrial janitorial products to one percent by
weight (10 g/l).  

CARB staff has indicated that it is likely that several categories
originally delayed for the November hearing will not be ready to be
included in draft after all. If this is the case, we ask that you
to direct staff to gather data and prepare language to regulate
VOC emissions, toxics and other environmentally "unfriendly"
ingredients from cleaning products.  If adopted, these reductions
will further benefit water quality, workers’ safety and consumers’
health. In addition, the extra emissions reductions will help
out-of-compliance districts to fill in the void left by the 2007
SIP “Black Box.”


PAINT AND LACQUER THINNER AND MULTIPURPOSE SOLVENT (Categories
delayed for future consideration)

CARB staff had informed us it was going to coordinate a work group
to discuss ideas to implement reductions from this category.
However, staff has now indicated it is unlikely this process will
take place soon enough to ensure this category is included in the
November hearing.  We ask CARB to commit to setting a
health-focused emissions limit from those products and set a
timeline to regulate this category.

A VOC limit of 3% for these products will result in a huge
emissions reduction of 13.85 tpd; more than two times the
emissions reduction expected by staff from the current proposal. 


The Institute for Research and Technical Assistance (IRTA)
conducted a project sponsored by Cal/EPA's Department of Toxic
Substances Control. This project involved working with wood
furniture refinishers, auto body shops, architectural contractors
and various manufacturers of metal parts. Low-VOC safer
alternatives were tested for cleaning up coating application
equipment like spray guns, brushes and rollers and for thinning
the coatings. Alternatives that performed well and were
cost-effective included acetone, water-based cleaners and
soy-based cleaners .  

Furthermore, SCAQMD’s Rule 1171 established a 2.5% VOC requirement
for cleaning solvents in many applications, including general
cleaning during manufacturing, maintenance and repair cleaning,
and coating equipment clean-up. Every related industry has met
this regulation in the South Coast Air Basin. Unfortunately,
hobbyists and home-based businesses do not have to comply with
SCAQMD’s rule because they have access to high VOC-emitting
products at their neighborhood superstores. 

We urge CARB to ensure the Paint and Lacquer Thinners work group
takes into account IRTA’s research, which has been backed by
SCAQMD and that the category is included in the November 2008
board meeting agenda.  Additionally, CARB staff should work
closely with the SCAQMD to create and implement statewide health
protective standards with a limit of 3% or lower for Paint and
Lacquer Thinner and Multipurpose Solvent, which are already in use
in Southern California. 


PROHIBITION OF TOXICS FROM SPECIFIC CATEGORIES

We are pleased that staff included language for the regulation of
toxics in specific categories, the proposal asks for a prohibition
 of methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and trichloroethylene in
Carpet/Upholstery Cleaner,” “Fabric Protectant,” “Multi-purpose
Lubricant,” “Penetrants,” “Sealant or Caulking Compound,” and
“Spot Removers.” We support staff’s decision to prohibit those
toxics.

•	DRY-CLEANING “SPOT REMOVERS”:
 It is very unfortunate, however, that the language staff drafted
does not address “Spot Removers” used in dry-cleaners. In January
2007, CARB approved a regulation to ban PERC dry cleaners. CARB
staff informed us that they are considering removing the
exemptions that prevent them from regulating spot removers used at
dry cleaning facilities.  However, this category is not yet on the
draft and staff has not indicated if the category will be included
in the November board hearing.

According to Dr. Katy Wolf, IRTA director, there are a number of
cleaners—including those dry cleaning businesses that have adopted
safer alternatives—that use trichloroethylene (TCE) and PERC
spotting chemicals.  These chemicals are carcinogens and TCE, the
most commonly used, is a VOC. 

IRTA conducted a project sponsored by Cal/EPA's Department of
Toxic Substances Control and US EPA to identify, develop, test and
demonstrate alternative spotting agents for the dry cleaning
industry.  This project involved working with seven textile
cleaning facilities that have adopted alternatives to PERC in dry
cleaning.  IRTA identified safer, water-based and soy-based
alternatives that performed as well as the TCE and PERC
alternatives currently used by dry cleaners.  The cost analysis
indicates that the alternatives are less costly than the spotting
agents used today .

We ask that CARB accelerate the process to remove the exemptions
that prevent them from regulating spot removers so they can be
regulated during the November rulemaking processes.

•	PAINT STRIPPER METHYLENE CHLORIDE:
Despite our requests, staff did not include language for a
prohibition of methylene chloride (METH or MECL) in Paint
Strippers. 

According to CARB’s own survey, annual reporting of METH tonnage
in Paint Strippers for 2006 was about 1.9 tpd. A known carcinogen,
METH is not a VOC and, thus, the challenge is finding alternatives
to this chemical that are not VOCs.  
DTSC contracted with IRTA to identify, test, develop and
demonstrate alternative non-METH stripping formulations in
consumer product applications. The aim of the project was to find
safer alternative non-METH strippers that minimized the increase
in VOC emissions. 
The project involved testing alternative non-METH stripping
formulations in four sectors including:
•	Large furniture stripping companies that use equipment to apply
stripper; 
•	Small furniture stripping companies that apply stripper by hand;

•	Contract stripping companies that strip on-site and apply
stripper by hand; and 
•	Consumer stripping where consumers apply the stripper by hand. 
This research found effective alternatives that will be classified
as Low Vapor Pressure (LVP) materials, which CARB classifies as
non-VOC emitting materials .  

We want to encourage CARB to ban METH as a toxic and set a low VOC
limit.


INCREASED VOC LIMITS AND COMPLIANCE DATES FOR SEVERAL CATEGORIES

We are very disappointed that staff increased VOC limits and
compliance dates for several categories, most of which we believe
could comply with more health-focused limits and shorter
deadlines. During the development of this regulation, our
preliminary conversations with staff indicated it would establish
more health-focused limits and shorter deadlines for the following
categories. 

 
•	ODOR REMOVER (LIQUID/NON-AEROSOL): VOC limits increased from
0.1% to 6% for non-aerosol, and 25% for aerosol; compliance dates
increased from 2012 to 2013.

In addition to increasing the VOC limits and compliance dates for
this category, CARB staff does not want to disclose the total
amount of 2008 VOC emissions created by ALL the aerosol odor
removers/eliminators in the market arguing possible damage
“confidentiality”.  It is important that CARB staff finds a way to
inform the public about the amount of emissions created by this
industry.

Failing to release generic statistics on releases of VOC’S or
toxins into the air because of patent issues isn’t really a valid
argument, although it is used in the food industry as well as the
various chemicals industries. (That’s why foods can say “natural
flavors” and have in it any ingredient with a primary purpose of
only adding flavor.)   Please note: any of these products can be
deformulated by a laboratory in Florida which specializes in
deconstructing fragrance formulae for the industry.  The claim
that a patent might be at risk is therefore invalid.  Releasing
the total pounds of emissions no more reveals the exact formula
than does deformulation by gas chromatography.   


•	ASTRINGENT/TONER: VOC limits increased from 10% to 35%. Although
we support staff’s efforts to reduce the VOC limits for this
category, we would like to see a standardization of this industry.
Many manufacturers of non-medicinal, non-FDA regulated
astringent/toners already manufacture 10% VOC limit products. 

•	FABRIC SOFTENER-SINGLE USE DRYER PRODUCT: VOC limits increased
from .05% to .1%. 

•	GLASS CLEANERS (AEROSOL FORM): VOC limit increased from 8% to
10%; compliance dates increased from 2010 to 2012. 

•	MULTI-PURPOSE LUBRICANTS: Compliance date moved from 2012 to
2013. 
	We are very pleased and supportive, however, that staff added a
new VOC limit 	of 10% to be met in 2015 - one positive improvement
we support.

•	PENETRANT: Compliance dates increased from 2012 to 2013.
Additionally, we feel that technology allows and staff could have
set this category’s limit at 10%, instead of the 25% VOC limit
suggested. 

•	PERSONAL FRAGRANCE: Compliance dates increased from 2010 to
2014. Personal fragrances are a large emitter of VOCs in the
consumer products category (10.77 tpd), thus we are pleased staff
will remove grandfather clauses from all products with 20% or less
fragrance. However, staff should increase the scope of products
whose grandfather clause will be removed and strengthen the VOC
limits suggested—currently at 25%.

•	NON-CHEMICALLY CURING SEALANT: VOC limit increased from 0.5% to
1.5%.


CATEGORIES DELETED FROM THE DRAFT LANGUAGE
We have informed staff that we are concerned about removing the
following categories from the regulation draft. We ask CARB to
commit to reduce emissions from those products and set a
reasonable timeline to bring this category back.

•	LIQUID AIR FRESHENERS: It is our understanding that CARB learned
about a patent problem that might prevent them from demanding a
lower VOC limit. In addition to setting a reasonable timeline for
VOC reductions from this category, CARB staff needs to provide
stakeholders more details about the stumbling blocks. 
 
•	POST-SHAVE PRODUCTS: CARB staff was having a hard time coming up
with a good way to define post-shave products, such as skin
conditioners, as separate from aftershave products like fragrance.
CARB staff has indicated they need more time to develop this
subcategory, so they have pulled it from the proposed regulation.

As CARB weighs its decision to regulate these chemicals, we urge
you to work with other stakeholders and consider the health of
those who are most exposed, and to protect the health of the most
vulnerable among us. CARB’s own Resolution No. 05-28, approved on
March 17, 2005, in response to the Indoor Air Pollution in
California study, “directs staff to promote ‘Best Practices’ for
the… maintenance of school facilities…in conjunction with other
State agencies and relevant private sector groups.” 

These protections are critical in the work and home environment,
where exposure to emissions from products tends to be more than
outdoors. These emissions can be significantly influenced by
regulatory decisions. In this regard, spot removers and
cleaning/janitorial chemicals are particularly important.

Part of Cal-EPA’s mission is to ensure that environmental
regulations not only protect the environment but also protect
public health, water quality, and worker safety, while minimizing
waste generation. The agency has recognized this fact in a variety
of ways, most recently in the Green Chemistry Initiative. One of
the challenges is to ensure that toxics are not in products,
either by design or by accident. We encourage CARB to not only
choose the most environmentally friendly VOC limit but also one
that is health protective and in line with the laudable goals put
forward by the Green Chemistry Initiative. 

Again, thank you for your commitment to regulate VOCs in consumer
products. We are very hopeful about this regulation’s potential to
help protect the health of California residents, consumers and
workers who deal with these products on a daily basis. 

We look forward to continuing working with your staff on this
issue and urge you to include us in CARB’s decision making
process. 

Sincerely,


 
Luis R. Cabrales
Senior Campaign and Outreach Associate
Coalition for Clean Air

Charlotte Brody, RN
Executive Director
Commonweal

Elina Green, MPH
Program Coordinator
Long Beach Alliance for Children with Asthma

Jesse Marquez
Executive Director
Coalition for a Safe Environment

Neil Gendel
Director 
Healthy Children Organizing Project

Joel Ervice
Interim Director
Regional Asthma Management and Prevention (RAMP) Initiative

Bill Magavern
Director
Sierra Club California


Dori Gilels
Executive Director
Women's Voices for the Earth

Adrian Martinez
Project Attorney
Natural Resources Defense Council

Rachel L. Gibson
Environmental Health Advocate & Staff Attorney
Environment California

Andrea Ventura
Program Manager
Clean Water Action

Wafaa Aborashed 
Executive Director 
Bay Area Healthy 880 Communities-SL

Lenny Siegel
Executive Director
Center for Public Environmental Oversight

Angel De Fazio, BSAT
President
National Toxic Encephalopathy Foundation



M. Suzanne Murphy,
Executive Director
Worksafe, Inc.

Elise Miller 
Executive Director
Institute for Children's Environmental Health

Arturo Carmona 
Executive Director
Consejo de Federaciones Mexicanas en Norteamérica 
(COFEM)

Anne Katten
Pesticide and Work Safety Specialist
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation

Teresa Marquez
Land use Committee Chair
Boyle Heights Resident Homeowners Association

James Roybal
President
Residents of Pico Rivera for Environmental Justice

Eden Flynn
Coordinator 
Southern California Coalition for Occupational Safety & Health 
(SoCalCOSH) 

Martha Dina Arguello
Executive Director
Physicians for Social Responsibility-Los Angeles




Deborah Moore
Executive Director
Green Schools Initiative

James Provenzano
President
Clean Air Now

René L. Guerrero
Legislative Advocate
Planning and Conservation League 

David Lighthall, Ph.D. 
Senior Scientist for Environmental Health, 
Central Valley Health Policy Institute*
(* For identification purposes only)

Bradley Angel
Executive Director
Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice

Allyson Holman
Chair
Merced/Mariposa County Asthma Coalition

Jose Luis Olmedo
Executive Director
Comite Civico Del Valle

Conner Everts
Executive Director
Southern California Watershed Alliance

Miguel A. Luna
Urban Semillas

Julia Liou
Planning and Development Manager
Asian Health Services

Manuel Criollo
Lead Organizer 
Labor/Community Strategy Center
 
Cc (via electronic mail): 

 
James Goldstene
EO
jgoldste@arb.ca.gov

Carla Takemoto
Manager, Technical Evaluation Section
ctakemoto@arb.ca.gov   


David Mallory 
Measures Development Section Manager
dmallory@arb.ca.gov

Femi Olaluwoye
Regulatory Amendments
folaluwoye@arb.ca.gov