Raymond Regulatory Resources
8 Spray June 2018
As a reminder, as of Aug. 30, 2018 the new wording for the Proposition 65 warning becomes effective.
If you have products that require a Proposition 65 warning, then everything produced after Aug.
30, 2018 needs to have the new wording on the product.
Any product manufactured before this date that requires a warning (and that has the appropriate
“old” wording) can be sold through without a problem. There are numerous changes. Make sure you
are up-to-date on this issue. “Bounty hunters,” who are always out there looking to make money, are
the ones that enforce Proposition 65.
On May 25, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) held a public hearing in Sacramento to
hear amendments to the Consumer Products Regulation. The majority of the amendments deal with
an alternative option to meet the multi-purpose lubricants (MPL) future effective limit of 10% mass-
based volatile organic compound (VOC) limit. The alternative option provides a reactivity option of
a 0.45 maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) limit with a 25% VOC cap. The alternative option
requires a registration of the formula and sales reporting for several years. It should provide the flexibility
needed for manufacturers to provide effective MPL products to the consumer.
The 10% mass based VOC limit is still in place. The effective date for the 10% VOC limit and the
0.45 MIR alternative limits have been delayed until July 1, 2019. More on this next month.
CARB Survey Results
As we go to press, we are still waiting for the results of Consumer Product Surveys from 2013, 2014
and 2015. CARB has stated that these results will have been out by May 25.
This data will show the industry what products will be targeted for the next Rule Development,
which should begin this autumn and go through 2020.
Hopefully, this new data will contradict to some extent the article in Science magazine that stated
that Consumer Product Emissions are drastically higher than previously thought.
CARB Preliminary VOC Fee
On May 3, CARB mailed out the 2018–2019 CARB Preliminary VOC Fee (industry calls this a
“VOC tax”). This notice went to all companies that sold more than 250 tons of VOCs in Consumer
Products in California during calendar year 2016. The 2014 survey data was used to estimate the 2016
If you do not believe your emissions are as high as CARB estimated, then you need to respond
to CARB within 60 days to dispute the emission estimate. After that, you will have to pay the fee as
On May 4 in Washington, DC, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) held a stakeholders
meeting to address the vacatur and remand of the 2015 SNAP rule. On April 27, 2018, the EPA released
its Guidance Document (Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Notice of Guidance & a Stakeholder Meeting
Concerning the Significant New Alternatives Policy SNAP Program).
At the meeting, several industry personnel spoke. The majority commented on their desire for
certainty regarding the use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). The EPA stated the purpose of the
Guidance Document and the meeting was to provide clarity on this issue. When asked if the Guidance
Document provides the vacatur for the industry to use HFCs previously restricted by SNAP Rule 20,
EPA answered “Yes.” The EPA stated that until it comes back with a new rule, the use of HFC-134a
in aerosols is acceptable.
This was a little surprising because, after review, the Guidance did not clearly appear to be the vacatur.
However, in further discussions, it was noted that this is the only document that the EPA intends
to release. The EPA was even asked if it plans to reissue SNAP Rule 20 with the portion of the rule
vacated due to the court decision. EPA answered “No,” referring to its Guidance Document.
continued on pg.37...