CARB
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) staff had two workgroup meetings planned for March 10 and
March 19.
The March 10 meeting was on Hair Care Products, Personal Fragrance Products (<20% Fragrance), Manual
Aerosol Air Fresheners and the sunset of the 2% Fragrance Exemption. Approximately 27 Industry members
attended in person with many more on the phone—it was the largest in-person group in attendance for this
rulemaking so far.
CARB staff started with Hair Care Products and expressed its desire to have all products (Hair Finishing
Spray, Dry Shampoo, Dry Conditioner, Hair Shine and Temporary Hair Color) have the same volatile organic
compound (VOC) limit by 2031. This was the first time this was mentioned in this rulemaking.
Industry had comments on the definition of Hair Finishing Spray, Dry Shampoo and Dry Conditioner. No
meaningful dialogue was had on VOC limits.
There was significant discussion of the Personal Fragrance Products (<20% Fragrance) category. However, no
consensus was reached on a VOC limit or definition.
Next on the agenda was the newly created category of Manual Aerosol Air Fresheners, which combines the
old Single Phase and Double Phase air freshener categories. Industry appears to accept these CARB-proposed
limits, except for possibly some subcategories.
The final discussion was the sunsetting of the 2% fragrance exemption. Like the Personal Fragrance category,
there was significant discussion but no consensus between CARB and Industry.
If you have products in the above categories or an interest in the 2% Fragrance Exemption, you are urged to
comment to CARB, which is currently seeking comments on this rulemaking from Industry.
Remember, this is a zero sum game for the rulemaking, meaning what one category does not achieve in emission
reductions, another category must compensate for with a larger reduction. Currently, CARB is required to
get 2.4–4.8 tons per day (tpd) statewide emission reduction by 2023 and a 9.5–11.9 tpd by 2031 (total, not in
addition to, 2023 statewide emission reductions).
From listening to Industry, I gather there does not appear to be a consensus to achieve the required tonnage
emission reduction.
During the March 10 workgroup meeting, CARB stated that no reactivity limits would be considered for any
product categories. This is both disappointing and discouraging. In February, CARB agreed to give Industry
equivalent Maximum Incremental Reactivity (MIR) values for the VOC limits. This provided some hope that
CARB would consider reactivity. Remember, with the use of reactivity, the reduction of a product category
MIR value always means a reduction in ozone production. This cannot be said for the use of mass base limits.
If reactivity is important to you, please let CARB know your thoughts. Send comments to Joe Calavita at
joe.calavita@arb.ca.gov or Ravi Ramalingam at ravi.ramalingam@arb.ca.gov.
The March 19 workgroup meeting was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as CARB having
some technical issues. CARB did post information on its website pertaining to 310 Test Method proposed
changes. Industry should review these proposed changes and comment at arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/consumer
products-program/regulatory-activity-workshops-meetings.
The next CARB meeting was a webinar on April 14 and a CARB workgroup meeting on April 20. More on
this in next month’s column.
More meetings as follows:
• June or July 2020: CARB staff’s final proposal; there is still the ability to change the proposal but it may
be difficult.
• July or August 2020: Final Workshop.
• September 2020: Release of amendments for comment; this is the start of formal rulemaking and there
will be 45 days to comment.
• November 2020: Board Hearing; Industry has three minutes to comment on staff proposals.
As we go to press, CARB is on schedule. However, my belief is that, given the COVID-19 pandemic, some
activities may be delayed until the first quarter of next year. We will need to wait and see.
Regulations on Hydrofluorocarbon (HFCs)
Numerous States have started to implement regulations or legislation on HFC-134a. Currently, there are 16
States with activity on HFC-134a, all of which are in different stages of adoption. The good news is that most
States are copying the original U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Significant New Alternatives
aeropres.com
dscontainers.com
diversifiedcpc.com
ikimfg.com
powercontainer.com
precisionglobal.com
terco.com
Regulatory Issues
Doug Raymond
Raymond Regulatory Resources
summitpackagingsystems.com
8 Spray May 2020
Continued on page 35