

[Federal Register: July 16, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 135)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 38951-38991]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16jy07-24]                         


[[Page 38951]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part IV





 Environmental Protection Agency





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



40 CFR Parts 51 and 59



 National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Aerosol 
Coatings; Proposed Rule


[[Page 38952]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 51 and 59

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0971; FRL-8336-5]
RIN 2060-AN69

 
National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Aerosol 
Coatings

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action proposes a national reactivity-based volatile 
organic compound (VOC) emissions regulation for the aerosol coatings 
(aerosol spray paints) category under section 183(e) of the Clean Air 
Act (CAA). The proposed standards implement section 183(e) of the CAA, 
as amended in 1990, which requires the Administrator to control VOC 
emissions from certain categories of consumer and commercial products 
for purposes of minimizing VOC emissions contributing to ozone 
formation and causing non-attainment. This regulation will establish a 
nationwide reactivity-based standard for aerosol coatings. States have 
promulgated rules for the aerosol coatings category based upon 
reductions of VOC by mass; however, the Agency believes that a national 
rule based upon the relative reactivity approach may achieve more 
reduction in ozone formation than can be achieved by a mass-based 
approach for this specific product category. EPA believes that this 
rule will better control a product's contribution to ozone formation by 
encouraging the use of less reactive VOC ingredients, rather than 
treating all VOC in a product alike through the traditional mass-based 
approach. We are also proposing to revise EPA's regulatory definition 
of VOC exempt compounds for purposes of this regulation in order to 
account for all the reactive compounds in aerosol coatings that 
contribute to ozone formation. Therefore, compounds that would not be 
VOC under the otherwise applicable definition will count towards a 
product's reactivity limits under this proposed regulation. The initial 
listing of product categories and schedule for regulation was published 
on March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15264). This proposed action announces EPA's 
final decision to list aerosol coatings for regulation under group III 
of the consumer and commercial product category for which regulations 
are mandated under section 183 (e) of the Act.

DATES: Comments. Written comments on the proposed regulation must be 
received by EPA by August 15, 2007, unless a public hearing is 
requested by July 26, 2007. If a hearing is requested, written comments 
must be received by August 30, 2007.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts EPA requesting to speak at a 
public hearing concerning the proposed regulation by July 26, 2007, we 
will hold a public hearing on July 31, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0971, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 

Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
     Fax: (202) 566-1741.
     Mail: Air and Radiation Docket, Environmental Protection 
Agency, Mailcode 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 
20460. Please include a total of two copies. We request that a separate 
copy also be sent to the contact person identified below (see FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). In addition, please mail a copy of your 
comments on the information collection provisions to the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th St., NW., Washington, DC 
20503.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA 
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to the applicable docket. EPA's 
policy is that all comments received will be included in the public 
docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov
, including any personal information provided, 

unless the comment includes information claimed to be confidential 
business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to 
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, 

which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, 

your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part 
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available 
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends 
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of 
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. 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.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at 10 
a.m. on July 31, 2007 at Building C on the EPA campus in Research 
Triangle Park, NC, or at an alternate site nearby. Persons interested 
in presenting oral testimony must contact Ms. Dorothy Apple, U.S. EPA, 
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and 
Programs Division, Natural Resources and Commerce Group (E143-03), 
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number: (919) 
541-4487, fax number (919) 541-3470, e-mail address: 
apple.dorothy@epa.gov, no later than July 26, 2007 in the Federal 

Register. Persons interested in attending the public hearing must also 
call Ms. Apple to verify the time, date, and location of the hearing. 
If no one contacts Ms. Apple by July 26, 2007 in the Federal Register 
with a request to present oral testimony at the hearing, we will cancel 
the hearing.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the 
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically through 
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, Public 

Reading Room, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC 20460. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1742, and the 
telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1744.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning the aerosol 
coatings rule, contact Ms. J. Kaye Whitfield, U.S. EPA, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, Sector

[[Page 38953]]

Policies and Programs Division, Natural Resources and Commerce Group 
(E143-03), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone 
number: (919) 541-2509, fax number (919) 541-3470, e-mail address: 
whitfield.kaye@epa.gov. For information concerning the CAA section 

183(e) consumer and commercial products program, contact Mr. Bruce 
Moore, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector 
Policies and Programs Division, Natural Resources and Commerce Group 
(E143-03), Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone 
number: (919) 541-5460, fax number (919) 541-3470, e-mail address: 
moore.bruce@epa.gov.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Entities Potentially Affected by this 
Action. The entities potentially regulated by the proposed regulation 
encompass aerosol coatings operations. This includes manufacturers, 
processors, wholesale distributors, or importers of aerosol coatings 
for sale or distribution in the United States, or manufacturers, 
processors, wholesale distributors, or importers that supply the 
entities listed with aerosol coatings for sale or distribution in 
interstate commerce in the United States. The entities potentially 
affected by this action include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Examples of
             Category               NAICS code \a\   regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paint and coating manufacturing...           32551  Manufacturing of
                                                     lacquers,
                                                     varnishes, enamels,
                                                     epoxy coatings, oil
                                                     and alkyd vehicle,
                                                     plastisols,
                                                     polyurethane,
                                                     primers, shellacs,
                                                     stains, water
                                                     repellant coatings.
All other miscellaneous chemical            325998  Aerosol can filling,
 production and preparation                          aerosol packaging
 manufacturing.                                      services.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/naics.html.


    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this 
action. To determine whether you would be affected by this action, you 
should examine the applicable industry description in section I.E of 
this notice. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of 
this action to a particular entity, consult the appropriate EPA contact 
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.
    Preparation of Comments. Do not submit information containing CBI 
to EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Send or deliver 

information identified as CBI only to the following address: Mr. 
Roberto Morales, OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-02), U.S. EPA, 
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, 
North Carolina 27711, Attention: Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0971. 
Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be 
CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark 
the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify 
electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that 
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment 
that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that 
does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for 
inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be 
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 
2.
    World Wide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, 
an electronic copy of this proposed action will also be available on 
the Worldwide Web (WWW) through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). 
Following signature, a copy of the proposed action will be posted on 
the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated 
rules at the following address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. The TTN 

provides information and technology exchange in various areas of air 
pollution control.
    Organization of This Document. The information presented in this 
notice is organized as follows:

I. Background
    A. The Ozone Problem
    B. Statutory and Regulatory Background
    C. What is Photochemical Reactivity?
    D. Role of Reactivity in VOC/Ozone Regulations
    E. The Aerosol Coating Industry
II. Summary of Proposed Standards
    A. Applicability of the Standards and Regulated Entities
    B. Regulated Pollutant
    C. Regulatory Limits
    D. Compliance Requirements
    E. Labeling Requirements
    F. Recordkeeping and Reporting
    G. Variance
    H. Test Methods
III. Summary of Impacts
    A. Environmental Impacts
    B. Energy Impacts
    C. Cost and Economic Impacts
IV. Rationale
    A. Applicability
    B. Regulated Pollutant
    C. Regulatory Approach
    D. VOC Regulatory Limits
    E. Compliance Demonstration Requirements
    F. Labeling Requirements
    G. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
    H. Variance Criteria
    I. Test Methods
V. Statutory and Executive Order (EO) Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations

I. Background

A. The Ozone Problem

    Ground-level ozone, a major component of smog, is formed in the 
atmosphere by reactions of VOC and oxides of nitrogen in the presence 
of sunlight. The formation of ground-level ozone is a complex process 
that is affected by many variables.
    Exposure to ground-level ozone is associated with a wide variety of 
human health effects, as well as agricultural crop loss, and damage to 
forests and ecosystems. Controlled human exposure studies show that 
acute health effects are induced by short-term (1 to 2 hour) exposures 
(observed at concentrations as low as 0.12 parts per million (ppm)), 
generally while individuals are engaged in moderate or heavy exertion, 
and by prolonged (6 to 8 hour) exposures to ozone (observed at 
concentrations as low as 0.08 ppm and possibly lower), typically while 
individuals are engaged

[[Page 38954]]

in moderate exertion. Transient effects from acute exposures include 
pulmonary inflammation, respiratory symptoms, effects on exercise 
performance, and increased airway responsiveness. Epidemiological 
studies have shown associations between ambient ozone levels and 
increased susceptibility to respiratory infection, increased hospital 
admissions and emergency room visits. Groups at increased risk of 
experiencing elevated exposures include active children, outdoor 
workers, and others who regularly engage in outdoor activities. Those 
most susceptible to the effects of ozone include those with preexisting 
respiratory disease, children, and older adults. The literature 
suggests the possibility that long-term exposures to ozone may cause 
chronic health effects (e.g., structural damage to lung tissue and 
accelerated decline in baseline lung function).

B. Statutory and Regulatory Background

    Under section 183(e) of the CAA, EPA conducted a study of VOC 
emissions from the use of consumer and commercial products to assess 
their potential to contribute to levels of ozone that violate the 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone, and to 
establish criteria for regulating VOC emissions from these products. 
Section 183(e) of the CAA directs EPA to list for regulation those 
categories of products that account for at least 80 percent of the VOC 
emissions, on a reactivity-adjusted basis, from consumer and commercial 
products in areas that violate the NAAQS for ozone (i.e., ozone 
nonattainment areas), and to divide the list of categories to be 
regulated into four groups.
    EPA published the initial list in the Federal Register on March 23, 
1995 (60 FR 15264). In that notice, EPA stated that it may amend the 
list of products for regulation, and the groups of product categories, 
in order to achieve an effective regulatory program in accordance with 
the Agency's discretion under CAA section 183(e). EPA has revised the 
list several times. Most recently, in May 2006, EPA revised the list to 
add one product category, portable fuel containers, and to remove one 
product category, petroleum dry cleaning solvents. See 71 FR 28320 (May 
16, 2006). The aerosol spray paints (aerosol coatings) category 
currently is listed for regulation as part of Group III of the CAA 
section 183(e) list.
    CAA section 183(e) directs EPA to regulate Consumer and Commercial 
Products using ``best available controls'' (BAC). CAA section 
183(e)(1)(A) defines BAC as ``the degree of emissions reduction that 
the Administrator determines, on the basis of technological and 
economic feasibility, health, environmental, and energy impacts, is 
achievable through the application of the most effective equipment, 
measures, processes, methods, systems or techniques, including chemical 
reformulation, product or feedstock substitution, repackaging, and 
directions for use, consumption, storage, or disposal.'' CAA section 
183(e) also provides EPA with authority to use any system or systems of 
regulation that EPA determines is the most appropriate for the product 
category. Under CAA section 183(e)(4), EPA can impose ``any system or 
systems of regulation as the Administrator deems appropriate, including 
requirements for registration and labeling, self-monitoring and 
reporting, prohibitions, limitations, or economic incentives (including 
marketable permits and auctions of emissions rights) concerning the 
manufacture, processing, distribution, use, consumption or disposal of 
the product.'' Under these provisions, EPA has previously issued 
national regulations for architectural coatings, autobody refinishing 
coatings, consumer products, and portable fuel 
containers.1, 2, 3, 4, 5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for 
Architectural Coatings'' 63 FR 48848, (September 11, 1998).
    \2\ ``National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for 
Automobile Refinish Coatings'' 63 FR 48806, (September 11, 1998).
    \3\ ``Consumer and Commercial Products: Schedule for 
Regulation'' 63 FR 48792, (September 11, 1998).
    \4\ ``National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for 
Consumer Products'' 63 FR 48819, (September 11, 1998).
    \5\ ``National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for 
Portable Fuel Containers'' 72 FR 8428, (February 26, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For any category of consumer or commercial products, the 
Administrator may issue control techniques guidelines (CTGs) in lieu of 
national regulations if the Administrator determines that such guidance 
will be substantially as effective as regulations in reducing emissions 
of volatile organic compounds which contribute to ozone levels in areas 
which violate the national ambient air quality standard for ozone. In 
many cases, CTGs can be effective regulatory approaches to reduce 
emissions of VOC in nonattainment areas because of the nature of the 
specific product and the uses of such product. A critical distinction 
between a national rule and a CTG is that a CTG may include provisions 
that affect the users of the products. For other product categories, 
such as wood furniture coatings and shipbuilding coatings, EPA has 
previously determined that, under CAA section 183(e)(3)(C), a CTG would 
be substantially as effective as a national rule and, therefore, issued 
CTGs to provide guidance to States for development of appropriate State 
regulations.
    For the category of aerosol coatings, EPA has determined that a 
national rule applicable nationwide is the best system of regulation to 
achieve necessary VOC emission reductions from this type of product. 
Aerosol coatings are typically used in relatively small amounts by 
consumers and others on an occasional basis and at varying times and 
locations. Under such circumstances, reformulation of the VOC content 
of the products is a more feasible way to achieve VOC emission 
reductions, rather than through a CTG approach that would only affect a 
smaller number of relatively large users. Aerosol coatings regulations 
are already in place in three States (California, Oregon, and 
Washington), and other States are considering developing regulations 
for these products. For the companies that market aerosol coatings in 
different States, trying to fulfill the differing requirements of State 
rules may create administrative, technical, and marketing problems. A 
Federal rule is expected to provide some degree of consistency, 
predictability, and administrative ease for the industry. A national 
rule also helps States reduce compliance problems associated with 
noncompliant coatings being transported into nonattainment areas from 
neighboring areas and neighboring States. A national rule will also 
enable States to obtain needed VOC emission reductions from this sector 
in the near term, without having to expend their limited resources to 
develop similar rules in each State.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ALARM Caucus v. EPA, 215 F.3d 61,76 (D.C. Cir. 2000), cert. 
denied, 532 U.S. 1018 (2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What Is Photochemical Reactivity?

    There are thousands of individual species of VOC chemicals that can 
participate in a series of reactions involving nitrogen oxides 
(NOX) and the energy from sunlight, resulting in the 
formation of ozone. The impact of a given species of VOC on formation 
of ground-level ozone is sometimes referred to as its ``reactivity.'' 
It is generally understood that not all VOC are equal in their effects 
on ground-level ozone formation. Some VOC react extremely slowly and 
changes in their emissions have limited effects on ozone pollution 
episodes. Some VOC form ozone more quickly than other VOCs, or they may 
form more ozone than other

[[Page 38955]]

VOC. Other VOC not only form ozone themselves, but also act as 
catalysts and enhance ozone formation from other VOC. By distinguishing 
between more reactive and less reactive VOC, however, EPA believes that 
it may be possible to develop regulations that will decrease ozone 
concentrations further or more efficiently than by controlling all VOC 
equally.
    Assigning a value to the reactivity of a specific VOC species is a 
complex undertaking. Reactivity is not simply a property of the 
compound itself; it is a property of both the compound and the 
environment in which the compound is found. Therefore, the reactivity 
of a specific VOC varies with VOC:NOX ratios, meteorological 
conditions, the mix of other VOC in the atmosphere, and the time 
interval of interest. Designing an effective regulation that takes 
account of these interactions is difficult. Implementing and enforcing 
such a regulation requires an extra burden for both industry and 
regulators, as those impacted by the rule must characterize and track 
the full chemical composition of VOC emissions rather than only having 
to track total VOC content as is required by traditional mass-based 
rules. EPA's September 13, 2005 final rule \7\ to approve a comparable 
reactivity-based aerosol coating rule as part of the California State 
Implementation Plan for ozone contains additional background 
information on photochemical reactivity. Recently, EPA issued interim 
guidance to States regarding the use of VOC reactivity information in 
the development of ozone control measures.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ ``Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan and 
Revision to the Definition of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)-
Removal of VOC Exemptions for California's Aerosol Coating Products 
Reactivity-based Regulation'' 70 FR 53930, (September 13, 2005).
    \8\ ``Interim Guidance on Control of Volatile Organic Compounds 
in Ozone State Implementation Plans'') 70 FR 54046, (September 13, 
2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. What Research Has Been Conducted in Reactivity?
    Much of the initial work on reactivity scales was funded by the 
California Air Resources Board (CARB), which was interested in 
comparing the reactivity of emissions from different alternative fueled 
vehicles. In the late 1980s, CARB provided funding to William P. L. 
Carter at the University of California to develop a reactivity scale. 
Carter investigated 18 different methods of ranking the reactivity of 
individual VOC in the atmosphere using a single-cell trajectory model 
with a state-of-the-art chemical reaction mechanism.\9\ Carter 
suggested three scales for further consideration:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Carter, W. P. L. (1994) ``Development of ozone reactivity 
scales for organic gases,'' J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc., 44: 881-
899.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    i. Maximum Incremental Reactivity (MIR) scale-an ozone yield scale 
derived by adjusting the NOX emissions in a base case to 
yield the highest incremental reactivity of the base reactive organic 
gas mixture.
    ii. Maximum Ozone Incremental Reactivity (MOIR) scale-an ozone 
yield scale derived by adjusting the NOX emission in a base 
case to yield the highest peak ozone concentration.
    iii. Equal Benefit Incremental Reactivity (EBIR) scale-an ozone 
yield scale derived by adjusting the NOX emissions in a base 
case scenario so VOC and NOX reductions are equally 
effective in reducing ozone.
    Carter concluded that, if only one scale is used for regulatory 
purposes, the maximum incremental reactivity (MIR) scale is the most 
appropriate.\10\ The MIR scale is defined in terms of environmental 
conditions where ozone production is most sensitive to changes in 
hydrocarbon emissions and, therefore, represents conditions where 
hydrocarbon controls would be the most effective. CARB therefore used 
the MIR scale to establish fuel-neutral VOC emissions limits in its 
low-emitting vehicle and alternative fuels regulation.11, 12 
Subsequently, Carter has updated the MIR scale several times as the 
chemical mechanisms in the model used to derive the scale have evolved 
with new scientific information. CARB incorporated a 1999 version of 
the MIR scale in its own aerosol coatings rule. The latest revision to 
the MIR scale was issued in 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ ``Initial Statement of Reasons for the California Aerosol 
Coatings Regulation, California Air Resources Board,'' 2000.
    \11\ California Air Resources Board ``Proposed Regulations for 
Low-Emission Vehicles and Clean Fuels--Staff Report and Technical 
Support Document,'' State of California, Air Resources Board, P.O. 
Box 2815, Sacramento, CA 95812, August 13, 1990.
    \12\ California Air Resources Board ``Proposed Regulations for 
Low-Emission Vehicles and Clean Fuels--Final Statement of Reasons,'' 
State of California, Air Resources Board, July 1991.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to Carter's work, there have been other attempts to 
create reactivity scales. One such effort is the work of R.G. Derwent 
and coworkers, who have published articles on a scale called the 
photochemical ozone creation potential (POCP) scale.13, 14 
This scale was designed for the emissions and meteorological conditions 
prevalent in Europe. The POCP scale is generally consistent with that 
of Carter, although there are some differences because it uses a 
different model, chemical mechanism, and emission and meteorological 
scenarios. Despite these differences, there is a good correlation of 
r\2\=0.9 between the results of the POCP and the MIR scales\12\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Derwent, R.G., M.E. Jenkin, S.M. Saunders and M.J. Pilling 
(2001) ``Characterization of the Reactivities of Volatile Organic 
Compounds Using a Master Chemical Mechanism,'' J. Air Waste 
Management Assoc., 51: 699-707.
    \14\ Derwent, R.G., M.E. Jenkin, S.M. Saunders and M.J. Pilling 
(1998) ``Photochemical Ozone Creation Potentials for Organic 
Compounds in Northwest Europe Calculated with a Master Chemical 
Mechanism,'' Atmos. Env., 32(14/15):2429-2441.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As CARB worked to develop reactivity-based regulations in 
California, EPA began to explore the implications of applying 
reactivity scales in other parts of the country. In developing its 
regulations, CARB has maintained that the MIR scale is the most 
appropriate metric for application in California, but cautions that its 
research has focused on California atmospheric conditions and that the 
suitability of the MIR scale for regulatory purposes in other areas has 
not been demonstrated. In particular, specific concerns have been 
raised about the suitability of using the MIR scale in relation to 
multi-day stagnation or transport scenarios or over geographic regions 
with very different VOC:NOX ratios than those of California.
    In 1998, EPA participated in the formation of the Reactivity 
Research Working Group (RRWG), which was organized to help develop an 
improved scientific basis for reactivity-related regulatory 
policies.\15\ All interested parties were invited to participate. Since 
that time, representatives from EPA, CARB, Environment Canada, States, 
academia, and industry have met in public RRWG meetings to discuss and 
coordinate research that would support this goal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See http://www.narsto.org/section.src?SID=10.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The RRWG has organized a series of research efforts to explore:
    i. The sensitivity of ozone to VOC mass reductions and changes in 
VOC composition under a variety of environmental conditions;
    ii. The derivation and evaluation of reactivity scales using 
photochemical airshed models under a variety of environmental 
conditions;
    iii. The development of emissions inventory processing tools for 
exploring reactivity-based strategies; and
    iv. The fate of VOC emissions and their availability for 
atmospheric reactions.
    This research has led to a number of findings that increase our 
confidence in

[[Page 38956]]

the ability to develop regulatory approaches that differentiate between 
specific VOC on the basis of relative reactivity. The first two 
research objectives listed above were explored in a series of three 
parallel modeling studies that resulted in four reports and one journal 
article.16, 17, 18, 19, 20 EPA commissioned a review of 
these reports to address a series of policy-relevant science 
questions.\21\ In 2007, an additional peer review was commissioned by 
EPA to assess the appropriateness of basing a national aerosol coatings 
regulation on reactivity. Generally, the peer reviews support the 
appropriateness of the use of the box-model based MIR metric nationwide 
for the aerosol coatings category. The results are available in the 
rulemaking docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Carter, W.P.L., G. Tonnesen, and G. Yarwood (2003) 
Investigation of VOC Reactivity Effects Using Existing Regional Air 
Quality Models, Report to American Chemistry Council, Contract SC-
20.0-UCR-VOC-RRWG, April 17, 2003.
    \17\ Hakami, A., M.S. Bergin, and A.G. Russell (2003) Assessment 
of the Ozone and Aerosol Formation Potentials (Reactivities) of 
Organic Compounds over the Eastern United States, Final Report, 
Prepared for California Air Resources Board, Contract No. 00-339, 
January 2003.
    \18\ Hakami, A., M.S. Bergin, and A.G. Russell (2004a) Ozone 
Formation Potential of Organic Compounds in the Eastern United 
States: A Comparison of Episodes, Inventories, and Domains, Environ. 
Sci. Technol. 2004, 38, 6748-6759.
    \19\ Hakami, A., M. Arhami, and A.G. Russell (2004b) Further 
Analysis of VOC Reactivity Metrics and Scales, Final Report to the 
U.S. EPA, Contract 4D-5751-NAEX, July 2004.
    \20\ Arunachalam S., R. Mathur, A. Holland, M.R. Lee, D. Olerud, 
Jr., and H. Jeffries (2003) Investigation of VOC Reactivity 
Assessment with Comprehensive Air Quality Modeling, Prepared for 
U.S. EPA, GSA Contract  GS-35F-0067K, Task Order ID: 
4TCG68022755, June 2003.
    \21\ Derwent, R.G. (2004) Evaluation and Characterization of 
Reactivity Metrics, Final Draft, Report to the U.S. EPA, Order No. 
4D-5844-NATX, November 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The results of the RRWG-organized study and the subsequent reviews 
suggest that there is good correlation between different relative 
reactivity metrics calculated with photochemical airshed models, 
regardless of the choice of model, model domain, scenario, or averaging 
times. Moreover, the scales calculated with photochemical airshed 
models correlate relatively well with the MIR metric derived with a 
single cell, one-dimensional box model. Prior to the RRWG-organized 
studies, little analysis of the robustness of the box-model derived MIR 
metric and its applicability to environmental conditions outside 
California had been conducted. Although these studies were not 
specifically designed to test the robustness of the box-model derived 
MIR metrics, the results suggest that the MIR metric is relatively 
robust.

D. Role of Reactivity in VOC/Ozone Regulations

    Historically, EPA's general approach to regulation of VOC emissions 
has been based upon control of total VOC by mass, without 
distinguishing between individual species of VOC. EPA considered the 
regulation of VOC by mass to be the most effective and practical 
approach based upon the scientific and technical information available 
when EPA developed its VOC control policy.
    EPA issued the first version of its VOC control policy in 1971, as 
part of EPA's State Implementation Plan (SIP) preparation guidance.\22\ 
In that guidance, EPA emphasized the need to reduce the total mass of 
VOC emissions, but also suggested that substitution of one compound for 
another might be useful when it would result in a clearly evident 
decrease in reactivity and thus tend to reduce photochemical oxidant 
formation. This latter statement encouraged States to promulgate SIPs 
with VOC emission substitution provisions similar to the Los Angeles 
County Air Pollution Control District's (LACAPCD) Rule 66, which 
allowed some VOC that were believed to have low to moderate reactivity 
to be exempted from control. The exempt status of many of those VOC was 
questioned a few years later, when research results indicated that, 
although some of those compounds do not produce much ozone close to the 
source, they may produce significant amounts of ozone after they are 
transported downwind from urban areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ ``Requirements for Preparation, Adoption and Submittal of 
Implementation Plans'', Appendix B, 36 FR 15495, (August 14, 1971).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1977, further research led EPA to issue a revised VOC policy 
under the title ``Recommended Policy on Control of Volatile Organic 
Compounds,'' (42 FR 35314, July 8, 1977), offering its own, more 
limited list of exempt organic compounds. The 1977 policy identified 
four compounds that have very low photochemical reactivity and 
determined that their contribution to ozone formation and accumulation 
could be considered negligible. The policy exempted these ``negligibly 
reactive'' compounds from VOC emissions limitations in programs 
designed to meet the ozone NAAQS. Since 1977, the EPA has added other 
compounds to the list of negligibly reactive compounds based on new 
information as it has been developed. In 1992, the EPA adopted a formal 
regulatory definition of VOC for use in SIP, which explicitly excludes 
compounds that have been identified as negligibly reactive (40 CFR 
51.100(s)).
    To date, EPA has exempted 54 compounds or classes of compounds in 
this manner. In effect, EPA's current VOC exemption policy has 
generally resulted in a two bin system in which most compounds are 
treated equally as VOC and are controlled and a separate smaller group 
of compounds are treated as negligibly reactive and are exempt from VOC 
control.\23\ This approach was intended to encourage the reduction of 
emissions of all VOC that participate in ozone formation. From one 
perspective, it appears that this approach has been relatively 
successful. EPA estimates that, between 1970 and 2003, VOC emissions 
from man-made sources nationwide declined by 54 percent. This decline 
in VOC emissions has helped to decrease average ozone concentration by 
29 percent (based on 1-hour averages) and 21 percent (based on 8-hour 
averages) between 1980 and 2003. These reductions occurred even though, 
between 1970 and 2003, population, vehicle miles traveled, and gross 
domestic product rose 39 percent, 155 percent and 176 percent 
respectively.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ For some analytical purposes, EPA has distinguished between 
VOC and ``highly reactive'' VOC, such as in the Agency's initial 
evaluation of consumer products for regulation. See, ``Final 
Listing,'' 63 FR 48792, 48795-6 (Sept. 11, 1998) (explaining EPA's 
approach); see also, ALARM Caucus v. EPA, 215 F. 3d 61, 69--73 (D.C. 
Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1018 (2001) (approving EPA's 
approach as meeting the requirements of CAA section 183(e)).
    \24\ ``Latest Findings on National Air Quality: 2002 Status and 
Trends,'' EPA 454/K-03-001, (August 2003); and ``The Ozone Report 
Measuring Progress through 2003,'' EPA 454/K-04-001, (April 2004); 
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the other hand, some have argued that a reactivity-based 
approach for reducing VOC emissions would be more effective than the 
current mass-based approach. One group of researchers conducted a 
detailed modeling study of the Los Angeles area and concluded that, 
compared to the current approach, a reactivity-based approach could 
achieve the same reductions in ozone concentrations at significantly 
less cost or, for a given cost, could achieve a significantly greater 
reduction in ozone concentrations.\25\ Although the traditional 
approach to VOC control focused on reducing the overall mass of 
emissions may be adequate in some areas of the country, EPA's recent 
guidance on control of VOC in ozone SIPs recognizes that approaches to 
VOC control that differentiate between VOC

[[Page 38957]]

based on relative reactivity are likely to be more effective and 
efficient under certain circumstances.\26\ In particular, reactivity-
based approaches are likely to be important in areas for which 
aggressive VOC control is a key strategy for reducing ozone 
concentrations. Such areas include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ A. Russell, J. Milford, M. S. Bergin, S. McBride, L. 
McNair, Y. Yang, W. R. Stockwell, B. Croes, ``Urban Ozone Control 
and Atmospheric Reactivity of Organic Gases,'' Science, 269: 491-
495, (1995).
    \26\ ``Interim Guidance on Control of Volatile Organic Compounds 
in Ozone State Implementation Plans,'' 70 FR 54046, September 13, 
2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Areas with persistent ozone nonattainment problems;
     Urbanized or other NOX-rich areas where ozone 
formation is particularly sensitive to changes in VOC emissions;
     Areas that have already implemented VOC RACT measures and 
need additional VOC emission reductions.
    In these areas, there are a variety of possible ways of addressing 
VOC reactivity in the SIP development process, including:
     Developing accurate, speciated VOC emissions inventories.
     Prioritizing control measures using reactivity metrics.
     Targeting emissions of highly-reactive VOC compounds with 
specific control measures.
     Encouraging VOC substitution and composition changes using 
reactivity-weighted emission limits.
    The CARB aerosol coatings rule is an example of this last 
application of the concept of reactivity. CARB's reactivity-based rule 
encouraged the use of compounds that were less effective at producing 
ozone. It contained limits for aerosol coatings expressed as grams of 
ozone formed per gram of product instead of the more traditional limits 
expressed as percent VOC. EPA approved CARB's aerosol coatings rule as 
part of the California SIP for ozone. EPA's national aerosol coatings 
rule builds largely upon CARB's efforts to regulate this product 
category based upon relative reactivity.

E. The Aerosol Coating Industry

    Aerosol coatings include all coatings that are specially formulated 
and packaged for use in pressurized cans. They are used by both 
professional and by do-it-yourself (DIY) consumers. The DIY segment 
accounts for approximately 80 percent of all sales. The remainder of 
aerosol coatings is sold for industrial maintenance and original 
equipment manufacturer use. Aerosol coatings are used for a number of 
applications including small domestic coating jobs, field and 
construction site marking, and touch-up of marks and scratches in 
paintwork of automobiles, appliances and machinery.
    The aerosol coatings industry includes the formulators and 
manufacturers of the concentrated product. These manufacturers may 
package the product or they may use toll fillers (processors). These 
toll fillers may work not only with the large manufacturers, but for 
other coating manufacturers who do not have the specialized equipment 
to fill aerosol containers. The fillers may then supply the product to 
coating dealers, home supply stores, distributors, company-owned 
stores, and industrial customers.
    An aerosol consists of a gas in which liquid or solid substances 
may be dispensed. Aerosol coatings are pressurized coatings that, like 
other coatings, consist of pigments and resins and solvents. However, 
aerosol coatings also contain a propellant that dispenses the product 
ingredients. A controlled amount of propellant in the product vaporizes 
as it leaves the container, creating the aerosol spray. The combination 
of product and propellant is finely tuned to produce the correct 
concentration and spray pattern for an effective product.
    Aerosol coatings can be packaged in disposable cans for hand-held 
applications or for use in specialized equipment in ground traffic/
marking applications. As with other coatings, aerosol coatings are 
available in both solvent-based and water-based formulations.
    In developing the proposed national rule for aerosol coatings, EPA 
is using the same coating categories, and the same definitions for 
those categories, previously identified by CARB in its comparable 
regulation for aerosol coatings. We believe these categories adequately 
categorize the industry and encompass the range of products included in 
our own analysis of this category that we conducted in preparing the 
Report to Congress (EPA-453/R-94-066-A). Use of the same definitions 
and categories has the added benefit of providing regulated entities 
with consistency between the CARB and national rules. The categories we 
propose include six general categories and 30 specialty categories. 
Based on a survey of aerosol coating manufacturers conducted by CARB in 
1997, VOC emissions from the six general categories together with the 
specialty category of Ground Traffic/Marking Coatings account for 
approximately 85 percent of the ozone formed as a result of the use of 
aerosol coatings. These categories are defined in this proposed 
regulation and are described in more detail in the docket to this 
rulemaking.
    There are currently no national regulations addressing VOC 
emissions from aerosol coatings. California, Oregon and Washington are 
the only States that currently regulate aerosol coating products and 
Oregon's and Washington's rules are identical to the Tier 1 VOC mass-
based limits developed by CARB that became effective in 1996. Unlike 
other EPA or State regulations and previous CARB regulations for 
aerosol coatings that regulate VOC ingredients by mass in the 
traditional approach, the current California regulation for aerosol 
coatings is designed to limit the ozone formed from VOC emissions from 
aerosol coatings by establishing limits on the reactivity of the 
cumulative VOC ingredients of such coatings. A more thorough discussion 
of the reactivity approach and the proposed reactivity limits are 
presented later in this preamble (section IV.D).

II. Summary of Proposed Standards

A. Applicability of the Standards and Regulated Entities

    The proposed Aerosol Coatings Reactivity Rule (ACRR) will apply to 
manufacturers, processors, wholesale distributors, or importers of 
aerosol coatings used by both the general population (i.e., the ``Do It 
Yourself'' market) and industrial applications (e.g., at original 
equipment manufacturers and other industrial sites). This regulation 
will also apply to distributors if those distributors are responsible 
for any of the labeling of the aerosol products. The proposed rule 
includes an exemption from the limits in Table 1 of subpart E of the 
rule for those manufacturers that manufacture very limited amounts of 
aerosol coatings, i.e., products with a total VOC content by mass of no 
more than 7,500 kilograms of VOC per year in the aggregate for all 
products. EPA notes that an exemption under EPA's national rule for 
aerosol coatings under section 183(e) does not alter any requirements 
under any applicable State or local regulations.

B. Regulated Pollutant

    The regulated pollutants under this proposed regulation are VOC, as 
that term is defined in 40 CFR 51.100(s). However, the listed exempt 
compounds that are normally excluded from the definition of VOC in 40 
CFR 51.100(s)(1) will be regulated as VOC for purposes of this 
regulation. Because all of these compounds contribute to ozone 
formation, we are proposing to amend the regulatory definition of VOC 
for purposes of this rule. While the regulated pollutants will be VOCs, 
the emission limits in the standard will be expressed in terms of 
weight of ozone generated from the VOC ingredients per

[[Page 38958]]

weight of coating material, rather than the traditional weight of VOC 
ingredients per weight or volume of product. We believe that this 
approach will allow us to reduce the overall amount of ozone that 
results from the VOCs emitted to the atmosphere from these products, 
while providing manufacturers with the flexibility to select VOC 
ingredients for their products. This approach provides incentives to 
manufacturers to reformulate their products using VOC ingredients that 
will likely result in less ozone production.

C. Regulatory Limits

    The proposed regulatory limits for the ACRR are a series of 
reactivity limits for six general coating categories and 30 
subcategories of specialty coatings. These reactivity limits are 
expressed in terms of mass of ozone generation per gram of product. In 
addition to compliance with the reactivity limits, a regulated entity 
is also required to comply with labeling, recordkeeping, and reporting 
requirements.

D. Compliance Requirements

    The proposed rule requires all regulated entities to comply by 
January 1, 2009. The proposed rule includes a provision that allows 
regulated entities that have not previously manufactured, imported, or 
distributed for sale or distribution in California any product that 
complies with applicable California regulations for aerosol coatings to 
seek an extension of the compliance date until January 1, 2011.
    After the compliance date, the regulated entity under this proposed 
rule will be required to conduct initial compliance demonstration 
calculations for all coating formulations manufactured or filled at 
each of their facilities. These calculations must be maintained on-site 
for 5 years after the product is manufactured, processed, distributed, 
or imported, and must be submitted to the Agency upon request. The 
regulated entity may use formulation data to make the compliance 
calculations; however, EPA is proposing to adopt California's Method 
310 as the underlying test method (i.e., formulation data should be 
verifiable with CARB 310, if requested). Facilities will also be 
allowed to use EPA's Test Method 311.

E. Labeling Requirements

    The proposed rule also includes labeling requirements to facilitate 
implementation and enforcement of the limits. Labels must clearly 
identify the product category or the category code provided in Table 1 
of the regulation, the limit for that category, and the product date 
code. If the date code is not easily discernable, an explanation of the 
code would need to be included in the initial notification discussed 
below.

F. Recordkeeping and Reporting

    The proposed rule includes a requirement for an initial 
notification report from all regulated entities to EPA 90 days before 
the compliance date. This report will provide basic information about 
the regulated entity and will identify all manufacturers, processors, 
wholesale distributors, or importers of aerosol coatings. In addition, 
this report will need to explain the date code system used to label 
products and it must include a statement certifying that all of the 
company's products will be in compliance with the limits by the 
compliance date.
    The regulated entity is required to maintain compliance 
calculations for each of its aerosol coatings formulations. For each 
batch of a particular formulation, the regulated entity must maintain 
records of the date(s) the batch was manufactured, the volume of the 
batch, and the VOC formula for the formulation. Records of these 
calculations must be maintained 5 years after the product is 
manufactured, processed, distributed for wholesale, or imported for 
sale or distribution in interstate commerce in the United States.
    The proposed rule does not include any regular, ongoing reporting 
requirements for most regulated entities. Reporting after the initial 
compliance report is only required when a manufacturer adds a new 
coating category. When this happens, a new notification is required. 
However, the EPA also invites public comment on the feasibility and 
need for additional reporting requirements.
    The proposed rule requires those small manufactures that qualify 
for exemption from the limits of Table 1 of subpart E of the rule to 
make an annual report to EPA providing necessary information and 
documentation to establish that the products made by the entity should 
be exempt.

G. Variance

    The proposed rule allows regulated entities to submit a written 
application to the Agency requesting a temporary variance if, for 
reasons beyond their reasonable control, they cannot comply with the 
requirements of the rule. An approved variance order would specify a 
final compliance date and a condition that imposes increments of 
progress necessary to assure timely compliance. A variance would end 
immediately if the regulated entity failed to comply with any term or 
condition of the variance. The Administrator will provide special 
consideration to variance requests from regulated entities, 
particularly small businesses that have not marketed their products in 
areas subject to State regulations for these products prior to this 
rulemaking. EPA notes that a variance under EPA's national rule for 
aerosol coatings under section 183(e) does not alter any requirements 
under any applicable state or local regulations.

H. Test Methods

    Although regulated entities may use formulation data to demonstrate 
compliance with the reactivity limits, EPA believes it is also 
necessary to have test methods in place that can be used to verify the 
accuracy of the formulation data. Therefore, we have included two test 
methods that can be used by regulated entities or the Administrator to 
determine compliance with the reactivity limits. In those cases where 
the formulation data and test data are not in agreement, data collected 
using the approved test methods will prevail. Regulated entities or 
regulatory agencies may use either CARB Method 310--Determination of 
Volatile Organic Compounds in Consumer Products and Reactive Organic 
Compounds in Aerosol Coating Products or EPA Method 311--Analysis of 
Hazardous Air Pollutant Compounds in Paints and Coatings to determine 
the reactive organic compound content of an aerosol coating. CARB 
Method 310 includes some test procedures that are not required to 
determine the VOC content of aerosol coatings; for example, Method 310 
incorporates EPA Method 24 for determining the VOC content of a 
coating. We have identified those sections of Method 310 that are not 
required for compliance demonstration purposes in the regulation. EPA 
Method 311 was originally developed for liquid coatings; so, it does 
not include provisions for the collection of the propellant portion of 
an aerosol coating. Therefore, those choosing to use Method 311 must 
separate the aerosol propellant from the coating using either ASTM 
D3063-94 or ASTM D 3074-94.

III. Summary of Impacts

    This section presents a summary of the impacts expected as a result 
of this proposed rule. To ensure that the impacts are not minimized, we 
followed an approach that would provide conservative estimates for each 
impact. For environmental impacts, we ensured that our estimated 
positive impact (i.e.,

[[Page 38959]]

emission reduction) was not overstated (i.e., conservatively low). For 
cost and economic impacts, we ensured that our estimated impacts were 
not understated (i.e., conservatively high). This approach ensures that 
conclusions drawn on the overall impact on facilities, including small 
businesses, are based on conservative assumptions.

A. Environmental Impacts

    In accordance with section 183(e), EPA has evaluated what 
regulatory approach would constitute ``best available controls'' for 
this product category, taking into account the considerations noted in 
the statute. EPA has evaluated the incremental increase or decrease in 
air pollution, water pollution, and solid waste reduction that would 
result from implementing the proposed standards.
1. Air Pollution Impacts
    The proposed rule will reduce both VOC emissions and the amount of 
ozone generated from the use of aerosol coatings. Because most States 
will use the VOC emission reductions resulting from this rule in their 
ozone SIP planning, we have calculated the reductions associated with 
the rule in terms of mass VOC emissions and we will refer to a 
reduction in mass VOC emissions when discussing the impacts of the 
proposed regulation. EPA believes this is appropriate because the 
reactivity limits were designed to ensure that the ozone reductions 
that would be achieved by the limits were equivalent to the mass VOC 
reductions that would have been achieved by the CARB 2002 mass-based 
VOC limits. However, because the limits actually reduce the amount of 
ozone generated from the VOC used in aerosol coatings rather than VOC 
content by mass, the VOC reductions that we refer to are more 
accurately described as an ``equivalent reduction in VOC emissions.'' 
We will use the term ``reduction'' in subsequent discussions. 
Additional information on the method used to calculate the air impacts 
of the proposed rule are included in the impacts calculation memo 
contained in the docket to this rulemaking.
    As proposed, EPA believes that this rule would reduce nationwide 
emissions of VOC from the use of aerosol coatings by an estimated 
15,570 Mg (17,130 tons) from the 1990 baseline. This represents a 19.4 
percent reduction from the 1990 baseline of 80,270 Mg (88,300 tons) of 
VOC emissions from the product category. While we believe that the 
above numbers accurately assess the impacts of the proposed rule for 
SIP credit purposes, we recognize that significant reductions have 
already occurred as the result of the implementation of the CARB 
aerosol coatings regulations. Because many manufacturers sell ``CARB 
compliant'' coatings across the country, some of these VOC emission 
reductions have already been achieved outside of California. We 
estimate that approximately 18 percent of the total products sold are 
not compliant with EPA's proposed limits. Therefore, we estimate that 
this rule will result in additional VOC reductions equivalent to 3,100 
tons per year (i.e., 18 percent of 17,130). We request comment on our 
estimate of the products that are not compliant with these limits 
specifically, and on our evaluation of the potential VOC emission 
reductions generally.
    The 18 percent reduction in VOC emissions represents new 
reductions. However, for ozone SIP purposes, we plan to give States 
that do not currently have aerosol coating regulations in place full 
credit for the 19.4 percent reduction from the 1990 baseline. This 19.4 
percent reduction is equivalent to a 0.114 pound of VOC reduction per 
capita.
    Although we have not quantified the anticipated impacts of this 
rule on HAP emissions, EPA expects that the proposed rule would reduce 
emissions of toluene and xylene, two highly reactive toxic compounds. 
Toluene and xylene are hazardous air pollutants that manufacturers have 
historically used extensively in some aerosol coating formulations. 
However, both of these compounds are also highly reactive VOCs. 
Therefore, it will be difficult for regulated entities to continue to 
use these compounds in significant concentrations and still meet the 
reactivity limits in the proposed rule. EPA believes that the proposed 
rule based upon VOC reactivity, rather than VOC mass, will provide a 
significant incentive for manufacturers to cease or reduce use of 
toluene and xylene in their products.
    Due to the reduction in equivalent VOC emissions and ozone 
formation and the anticipated reduction in hazardous air pollutant 
emissions, we believe the rule will improve human health and the 
environment.
2. Water and Solid Waste Impacts
    There are no adverse solid waste impacts anticipated from the 
compliance with this rule. Because companies can continue to sell and 
distribute coatings that do not meet the reactivity limits after the 
compliance date as long as those coatings were manufactured before the 
compliance date the industry does not have to dispose of aerosol cans 
containing noncompliant product, which would result in an increase in 
solid waste. It is possible that the proposed rule will actually result 
in a reduction in solid waste as more concentrated higher solids 
coatings may be used as an option for meeting the proposed limits. This 
will result in fewer containers requiring disposal when the same volume 
of solids is applied by product users.
    There are no anticipated adverse water impacts from this 
rulemaking.

B. Energy Impacts

    There are no adverse energy impacts anticipated from compliance 
with this proposed rule. EPA believes that regulated entities will 
comply through product reformulation which will not significantly alter 
energy impacts. The proposed rule does not include add-on controls or 
other measures that would add to energy usage or other impacts.

C. Cost and Economic Impacts

    There are four types of facilities that will be impacted by the 
proposed rule. These include the aerosol coating manufacturers, aerosol 
coating processors, and aerosol coating wholesale distributors, and 
importers of aerosol coatings. For some products, the manufacturer is 
also the filler and distributor, while for other products the 
manufacturing process, the filling process, and the distribution may be 
done by three separate companies. The primary focus of our cost and 
economic analysis is the aerosol coating manufacturers as we anticipate 
that the costs to the fillers, distributors, or importers will be 
minimal.
    For the aerosol coating manufacturer, we evaluated three components 
in determining the total cost of the proposed rule. These three 
components include the cost of the raw materials that the manufacturer 
will use to formulate coatings that comply with the proposed rule, the 
cost of research and development efforts that will be necessary to 
develop compliant formulations, and the cost of the recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements associated with the proposed rule. Because we 
have limited information on aerosol coating sales for the aerosol 
coating manufacturers that we have identified, we evaluated each of 
these costs on a per can basis for each of the 36 coating categories. A 
brief discussion of each of these cost components is presented below. A 
more detailed discussion of the cost analysis is presented in the cost 
analysis memorandum that is included in the docket.

[[Page 38960]]

    The proposed rule is based on reactivity limits established for six 
general coating categories and 30 specialty coating categories. To meet 
the limits, aerosol coating manufacturers may have to reformulate their 
existing coatings with different solvents and propellants, or at least 
different combinations of those compounds. The difference in the cost 
of the solvents and propellants used for formulating the complying 
coatings and those used for formulating the noncomplying coatings is 
the basis for the raw material costs.
    To determine the raw material costs, we used data compiled by CARB 
from its 1997 survey of the aerosol coatings industry. Using the data 
from the survey, CARB developed a typical formulation for a complying 
coating for each category and a typical formulation for a noncomplying 
coating for each category. We then compared the cost of the materials 
used in each formulation to determine the raw material costs per can 
for each category. The raw material costs per can ranged from a cost 
savings of $0.04/can, that is, the cost of the raw materials used in 
the complying coating was less than the cost of the raw materials used 
in the noncomplying coating, to a cost increase of $0.12/can.
    Aerosol coating manufacturers not only have to develop formulations 
that meet the reactivity limits in the proposed rule, but they also 
must ensure that the reformulated coatings have the same performance 
characteristics and the coatings that they will replace. We anticipate 
that this may require manufacturers to invest resources in research and 
development efforts. For the purposes of this analysis, we assumed that 
each aerosol coating manufacturer would have to hire one additional 
chemist to assist in reformulation efforts.
    Using a list of aerosol coating manufacturers and the categories of 
coatings they manufactured that was developed by CARB using its 1997 
survey data, we assigned chemists to each coating category based on the 
number of companies manufacturing coatings in that category. Because 
most companies manufacture coatings in more than one category, we 
assigned the chemists for each company based on the number of 
categories they manufactured. For example, if a company manufactured 
products in two categories, we assigned 0.5 chemists to that category. 
We then totaled the number of chemists required for each category.
    Using data from the American Chemical Society on chemist salaries 
and the number of chemists for each category, we then developed 
annualized research and development costs for each category. The 
annualized costs were based on a period of 10 years and an interest 
rate of 7 percent. These annualized research and development costs for 
each category were then divided by the number of aerosol cans 
manufactured in each category to determine the total research and 
development costs per can for each coating category. Research and 
development costs ranged from $0.00/can to $0.109/can.
    Aerosol coating manufacturers will also have costs associated with 
the recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the proposed rule. 
These costs include the time required for such activities as reading 
and understanding the reporting requirements of the rule, reviewing the 
compliance calculations required under the rule and implementing an 
approach for performing those calculations, and preparing the initial 
compliance report. Because the reactivity approach is new to coating 
manufacturers, we assumed that a supervisor would be performing each of 
these tasks. We estimated the total cost for recordkeeping and 
reporting for the industry at $670,140 per year which equates to 
$0.002/can.
    The total cost per can for raw materials, research and development, 
and recordkeeping and reporting requirements ranges from $0.002 to 
$0.141. Based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau on the volume of 
aerosol paint concentrates produced for packaging in aerosol coatings 
and information provided by the National Paint and Coatings Association 
(NPCA) on the amount of concentrate in a can, we estimated that 
329,536,000 10.5 ounce cans were produced in 2005. If all of these cans 
required reformulation, the total nationwide cost of the proposed rule 
would be $20,360,521. However, we know that significant progress has 
already been made in reformulating aerosol coatings to meet the 
proposed limits. Even before CARB's regulation became effective, its 
survey data showed that for 10 coating categories, 100 percent of the 
coatings were complying with the proposed limits in 1997. For the 
remaining categories, all but two had complying market shares greater 
than 20 percent in 1997. With CARB's regulation in place, we anticipate 
that the number of coatings already meeting the proposed limits has 
increased significantly.
    As discussed earlier, we do not think that fillers and distributors 
will incur additional costs from the proposed rule. The filler would 
incur additional costs only if the proposed rule would require them to 
invest in new equipment and we do not anticipate that this will be the 
case. The mix of propellants and solvents used by the manufacturer is 
expected to change, but the changes will not be so significant that the 
fillers will be unable to continue to use their existing equipment. The 
only potential costs to the distributor are the labeling requirements 
and any costs associated with not being able to sell noncompliant 
coatings. However, the proposed rule does not require the information 
to be included on the paper label and most manufacturers are meeting 
the labeling requirements associated with CARB's regulation by using an 
ink stamp on the bottom of the can. Therefore, the labeling 
requirements are not expected to have a cost impact on the distributor. 
The proposed rule also allows distributors to continue to sell products 
that were manufactured before the compliance date as long as necessary 
so they will have no lost revenue from the noncompliant coatings.

IV. Rationale

A. Applicability

    CAA section 183(e)(1)(C) of the CAA defines ``regulated entities'' 
as:

    (i) Manufacturers, processors, wholesale distributors, or 
importers of consumer or commercial products for sale or 
distribution in interstate commerce in the United States; or
    (ii) manufacturers, processors, wholesale distributors, or 
importers that supply the entities listed under clause(i) with such 
products for sale or distribution in interstate commerce in the 
United States.

    The proposed ACRR will regulate manufacturers, processors, 
wholesale distributors, or importers of aerosol coatings. This includes 
those regulated entities that make aerosol coatings for the DIY market 
and for the industrial markets. Regulated entities include processors 
commonly referred to as ``fillers'' that obtain the liquid and 
propellant portions of the coating separately and fill the aerosol can. 
In addition, the rule will regulate distributors of aerosol coatings if 
those facilities have any responsibility for the labeling of the 
coatings.
    We are proposing an exemption from the limits of the rule for those 
entities that manufacture only a small amount of aerosol coatings. We 
believe that this exemption will serve to mitigate the impacts of the 
rule upon small manufacturers for whom compliance with the rule could 
impose disproportionately high costs through reformulation of products 
produced only in small volumes. Given this objective, and in order to 
avoid unnecessary excess VOC emissions that

[[Page 38961]]

could be significant in the aggregate, we are proposing that this 
exemption from the limits would be available only for those 
manufacturers that have annual production of aerosol coatings products 
with total VOC content not in excess of 7,500 kg of VOC in all aerosol 
coating product categories. We emphasize that this to be determined by 
total VOC content by mass, in all product categories manufactured by 
the entity. We consider making this distinction based upon total VOC 
mass, rather than some reactivity-adjusted calculation, necessary both 
to minimize the analytical impacts upon the entity seeking the 
exemption from the rule, and to provide for more effective 
implementation and enforcement of this aspect of the rule.
    A manufacturer that qualifies for the exemption must notify EPA of 
this in the initial notification report required in proposed section 
59.511. As a condition for the exemption from the limits, the proposed 
rule also requires the entity to file an annual report with EPA 
providing the information necessary to evaluate and to establish that 
the products manufactured by the entity are properly exempt from the 
limits of rule. This information is necessary to assure that the entity 
is in compliance, even if its products do not meet the limits of the 
rule. EPA notes that an exemption under EPA's national rule for aerosol 
coatings under section 183(e) does not alter any requirements under any 
applicable state or local regulations.
    We specifically request comment on whether there is a need for an 
exemption of this type for very small manufacturers. In addition, we 
request comment on the features of the exemption as we have proposed 
it. Finally, in order to get better information about the number of 
manufactures that would potentially use such an exemption, we 
specifically request that interested commenters indicate whether they 
would elect to use the exemption from the limits.
    The proposed rule requires all regulated entities to comply by 
January 1, 2009. EPA believes that compliance by this date is readily 
achievable by most, if not all, regulated entities subject to this 
rule. However, in the case of regulated entities that have not 
previously met the limits already imposed by regulation in the State of 
California, EPA believes that it may be appropriate to provide an 
extension of the compliance date on a case by case basis. Therefore, 
the proposed rule includes a provision that will allow regulated 
entities that have not previously manufactured, imported, or 
distributed for sale or distribution in California any product in any 
category listed in Table 1 of this subpart that complies with 
applicable California regulations for aerosol coatings to seek an 
extension of the compliance date. Such extensions will be granted at 
the discretion of the Administrator. The grant or denial of a 
compliance date extension does not affect the right of the regulated 
entity to seek a variance under this rule.

B. Regulated Pollutant

    Under CAA section 183(e), Congress has directed EPA to issue 
regulations to reduce VOC emissions from consumer and commercial 
products. Traditionally, we have regulated the mass of VOC ingredients 
of the products to attain this end. This regulation will regulate VOC, 
but will take a different approach. With this regulation, EPA is 
proposing a rule intended to limit the amount of ozone that is 
generated by the specific VOC ingredients of the aerosol coating 
products rather than limit the VOC mass content of the product. This 
approach will allow EPA to regulate different species of VOC 
differently, depending on their relative contribution to ozone 
formation once emitted into the atmosphere. We believe that this 
approach will achieve reductions in the overall amount of ozone formed 
by the VOC emitted to the atmosphere from these products, and provide 
manufacturers with flexibility to formulate products using VOC 
ingredients. We believe that this approach provides incentives to 
manufacturers to use VOC ingredients with less reactivity and therefore 
contribute to less ozone formation.
    Under 40 CFR 51.100(s), we have previously excluded compounds from 
the definition of VOC in recognition of the fact that individual 
organic compounds differ with respect to their incremental contribution 
to ozone formation. EPA's approach to VOC exemptions separates organic 
compounds into reactive and negligibly reactive compounds. The 
reactivity based approach that EPA uses in the proposed rule, however, 
recognizes that all such compounds contribute to the formation of 
ozone. The differences in the amount of ozone that may be formed from a 
particular VOC are reflected in the reactivity factors assigned to each 
VOC in Table 2 of the rule. Compounds that EPA previously identified as 
negligibly reactive have low reactivity factors, while those that are 
more reactive have higher reactivity factors. The use of reactivity 
factors makes the distinction between negligibly reactive and reactive 
compounds unnecessary for the proposed aerosol coatings rule. These 
previously exempted compounds will continue to be excluded from the 
Federal definition of VOC for other purposes.

C. Regulatory Approach

    Section 183(e) of the CAA directs EPA to issue national regulations 
to achieve VOC emission reductions from those categories of consumer 
products that EPA has identified on the list of product categories. As 
an alternative, EPA is also authorized to issue a CTG in lieu of such a 
national regulation if the CTG would be substantially as effective as 
the rule in achieving the necessary VOC emission reductions. We have 
determined that a national rule is the best approach for this category.
    When developing a regulation under CAA section 183(e), EPA has 
broad discretion to develop the most effective approach to achieve the 
intended VOC emission reductions from a category of consumer products. 
Specifically, CAA section 183(e)(4) states:

    (4) Systems of regulation.--The regulations under this 
subsection may include any system or systems of regulation as the 
Administrator may deem appropriate, including requirements for 
registration and labeling, self-monitoring and reporting, 
prohibitions, limitations, or economic incentives (including 
marketable permits and auctions of emissions rights) concerning the 
manufacture, processing, distribution, use, consumption, or disposal 
of the product.

    This proposed regulation includes a combination of reactivity 
limits, labeling requirements, recordkeeping requirements, and 
reporting requirements. We have concluded that the only technologically 
and economically feasible option for reducing the VOC emissions from 
aerosol coatings and the ozone that is formed as a result of these 
emissions is to set VOC content limits that will result in 
reformulation. This conclusion is based on the fact that once a 
manufacturer uses a VOC as an ingredient in an aerosol coating, it will 
ultimately be emitted to the atmosphere (i.e., when the product is 
used). For stationary industrial sources of VOC emissions, EPA has 
evaluated add-on control devices as a potential option for reducing 
emissions. Installing such devices to reduce the emissions from an 
aerosol coating can is neither technologically nor economically 
feasible. Although EPA could theoretically achieve VOC emission 
reductions through requirements imposed on product users, CAA section 
183(e) only allows the regulation of users through the mechanism of a 
CTG. EPA has determined that a CTG is not the appropriate mechanism for 
aerosol

[[Page 38962]]

coatings because of the nature of the product category and its users. 
In developing this regulation, we have, therefore, focused on 
reformulation options for reducing the amount of ozone formed from VOC 
emissions from aerosol coating products.
    Most EPA and State coating standards include limits in terms of 
weight of VOC per weight (or volume) of product. However, for reasons 
discussed below in D.1, we are proposing to regulate this product 
category based upon the relative reactivity of the VOC ingredients. In 
addition to these coating limits, the standard includes other 
regulatory requirements necessary to facilitate effective 
implementation and enforcement of the coating limits.

D. VOC Regulatory Limits

1. Evolution of Reactivity-Based Requirements
    CAA section 183(e) requires EPA to regulate VOC emissions from 
consumer products for the purpose of reducing ozone. Although EPA has 
traditionally focused on reducing VOC ingredients by mass in developing 
regulations under CAA section 183(e), EPA believes that is has 
authority under that section to devise alternative approaches to reduce 
VOC emissions from consumer products where appropriate. The statute 
directs EPA to evaluate what would constitute ``best available 
controls'' (BAC) for a product category, and we believe that provision 
authorizes EPA to consider different approaches for different products.
    In determining what would be BAC for aerosol coatings, we are 
proposing a new approach to achieve the goal of the CAA 183(e) program: 
A reduction in the formation of ozone. As discussed in section I.C. of 
this preamble, we believe that the scientific understanding of VOC 
reactivity has progressed sufficiently to support a reactivity-based 
regulation for the purposes of this product category. As discussed 
previously, EPA has concluded that the only reasonable approach for 
limiting ozone formation from aerosol coatings is to impose limits that 
encourage reformulation to reduce ozone formation. A brief overview of 
the various types of rulemakings available to use, and the selection of 
reformulation levels is presented below. The labeling and other 
requirements are addressed in future sections.
i. Traditional VOC Mass-Based Limits.
    In previous national rules developed under section 183(e), EPA has 
established limits on the VOC content of coatings by mass. For the 
consumer products rule and the automotive refinishing rule, these 
limits were based on the weight percent of VOC in the coating. For the 
architectural and industrial maintenance (AIM) coatings rule, the 
limits were based on the weight of VOC per volume of coating. To meet 
traditional VOC content limits, coating manufacturers have several 
options. For example, increasing the solids content of the coating will 
result in a lower VOC content per unit of volume or weight. Replacing 
some of the organic solvent in a coating with water can also decrease 
the VOC content of the coating. Over the years, EPA has also determined 
that some compounds are negligibly reactive compared to other VOC; that 
is, they produce less ozone or produce ozone less quickly than other 
VOC. We have exempted these compounds from the generally applicable 
regulatory definition of VOC. To achieve compliance with other CAA 
section 183(e) regulations, manufacturers can use these exempt 
compounds in place of other VOCs and thereby reduce the VOC content of 
their coatings for regulatory purposes.
    The approach a manufacturer chooses to use to reduce the VOC 
content of its coatings varies depending upon many factors including 
the intended use of the product, the cost of the reformulated product, 
the performance of the reformulated product, and other environmental 
impacts of the reformulated product. For each coating in the aerosol 
coating category, the approach for reducing the VOC content may be 
different because each category, and even each product within the 
category, has different performance requirements.
    Even though reducing the VOC content of aerosol coatings could have 
a significant impact on the ozone resulting from emissions of VOC from 
aerosol coatings, this approach does have limitations. With an aerosol 
coating, manufacturers are more limited on how high the solids content 
of the coating compared to coatings applied using spray techniques or 
brushing. In addition, as the solids content increases, manufacturers 
are often forced to use more of VOC such as toluene and xylene that are 
more effective solvents but are also more reactive and hazardous air 
pollutants. Increasing water content in aerosol coatings can be a 
problem because water-based coatings take longer to dry, which is a 
particular concern in humid environments. A coating that takes longer 
to dry may impact production at an industrial facility where many 
specialty aerosol coatings are used. Replacing some VOC ingredients 
with others that are exempt from the regulatory definition of VOC can 
also have some negative implications. For example, acetone is extremely 
volatile and may dry too fast for some applications. We are also 
concerned about the environmental impacts of increasing the use of such 
solvents as methylene chloride, which although exempt from the 
definition of VOC is listed as a hazardous air pollutant.
    Although potential limitations exist for establishing limits on the 
VOC content of aerosol coatings, we believe that it is a 
technologically feasible alternative for reducing the formation of 
ozone from the use of aerosol coatings. It is an approach we have used 
in many regulatory programs, including 183(e). Our evaluation of BAC 
options for aerosol coatings includes two options for limiting the VOC 
content of coatings.
ii. Reactivity-Based Limits.
    EPA recognizes that individual VOC can react differently in the 
atmosphere and can vary in the amount of ozone generated. Organic 
compounds can produce varying amounts of ozone because they react at 
different rates and via different reaction mechanisms. One concern 
expressed by industry is that if the VOC content limits are too low 
manufacturers may be forced to use more reactive solvents to achieve 
comparable product performance. For example, as discussed earlier, 
manufacturers may have to increase the usage of toluene and xylene in 
order to reformulate to a higher solids coating. Both toluene and 
xylene are very reactive compounds and have the potential to form 
significantly larger quantities of ozone than many other solvents. If 
manufacturers use VOC with higher reactivities, it is possible that 
decreasing the VOC content of the coating potentially increases the 
actual ozone formation.
    This situation of a decrease in VOC emissions by mass but a 
potential increase in ozone formation has already been seen to occur in 
California. For example, Table 11-2 of California's 2005 Architectural 
Coatings Survey, (draft report), indicates that between 2001 and 2005, 
the sales volume for flat coatings increased by 7 percent (to 37.3 
million gallons) while the total mass of VOC for this category for the 
same period decreased by 11 percent. However, even though the total 
emissions of VOC by mass decreased, the total ozone formed as a result 
of those VOC is estimated to have increased 5.4 percent (1.88 tpd) 
during the same period. This potential increase in ozone formation, 
notwithstanding decreased VOC emissions by mass, is a result of 
manufacturers using smaller

[[Page 38963]]

amounts total VOC, but an increased amount of more reactive VOC in 
order to meet tighter VOC limits (See California's 2001 Architectural 
Coatings Survey Final Reactivity Analysis--Table 2-6 (March 2005) and 
2005 Architectural Coatings Survey DRAFT Reactivity Analysis--Table 2-2 
(January 2007)). [For a complete copy of this report, please see http://www.arb.ca.gov/coatings/arch/survey/2005/Draft_2005_Survey_Rpt.pdf.
 

http://www.arb.ca.gov/coatings/arch/reactivity/Draft_Reactivity_Rpt.pdf http://www.arb.ca.gov/coatings/arch/reactivity/final_.

://http://www.arb.ca.gov/coatings/arch/reactivity/final_al_.
.


    EPA believes that the use of relative reactivity is appropriate for 
aerosol coatings in particular, because there is a limit to the extent 
that solids contents can be increased and still have a coating that can 
be dispensed through an aerosol canister. This limitation precludes the 
range of reformulation with higher solids content that can be achieved 
for other types of coatings.
    In the past, EPA has expressed reservations about using the concept 
of VOC relative reactivity in regulations for consumer products due to 
limitations in scientific studies and practical concerns about 
developing an effective regulation based on this concept. More 
recently, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has worked to 
develop an effective way to regulate based upon this concept. In 
developing its own standards for aerosol coatings, CARB established 
limits are intended to limit the amount of ozone that is formed by a 
particular coating, rather than limit the VOC content of the coatings 
by mass. To develop a reactivity-based rule, CARB first identified the 
relative reactivity of each VOC ingredient used in aerosol coatings. 
CARB evaluated this using the Maximum Incremental Reactivity scale 
developed by Dr. William Carter.\27\ In developing this scale, Dr. 
Carter identified and quantified each mechanism for ozone production 
that would exist for specific VOC, including those used in aerosol 
coatings. The final MIR value for each VOC is expressed in units of 
weight of ozone production per weight of VOC.\28\ CARB used MIR values 
and the uncertainty values assigned particular bins of chemicals with 
product formulation data to derive, through an iterative process, a 
limit for the overall mass of ozone production allowed per mass of 
product. Because all organic compounds can contribute to the formation 
of ozone, CARB's reactivity limits include ozone formed by all VOC 
ingredients included in the coating, including compounds that EPA had 
previously exempted from the regulatory definition of VOC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Carter, W. P. L. (1994) ``Development of ozone reactivity 
scales for organic gases,'' J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc., 44: 881-
899.
    \28\ ``Initial Statement of Reasons for the California Aerosol 
Coatings Regulation, California Air Resources Board,'' May 5, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After review of Dr. Carter's work, the CARB rule, and recent 
studies organized under the RRWG (described earlier in the background 
section), we believe that the reactivity approach is a viable option 
for reducing the ozone that results from VOC emissions from the aerosol 
coatings category. These previous studies have indicated that the use 
of VOC reactivity can be effective for controlling ozone in episodes 
where NOX is at its highest levels, such as in urban areas. 
For these types of VOC-limited conditions, ozone formation is more 
sensitive to VOC emissions. In such situations, limiting the reactivity 
of the VOC emissions can be more effective than merely limiting the 
overall mass of the VOC emissions.
    EPA notes that metrics other than the MIR scale for characterizing 
reactivity have been studied, for example, the Maximum Ozone 
Incremental Reactivity (MOIR) or the Regional Average Ozone metric, but 
the box model MIR is the scale that has been most widely used and 
analyzed. Recent studies of 9 different ways of defining VOC reactivity 
have shown that all major methods are directionally consistent and 
highly correlated.\29\ Derwent (2004) further concluded that ``the most 
promising reactivity metrics are EKMA-MIR and Regional MIR or MIR-3D.'' 
Because the only metrics with detailed values available for all 
chemical species of interest are the box model (EKMA) metrics, and the 
box model MIR has been used extensively in formulations under the 
California rule, we believe that the box model MIR is the most feasible 
metric for VOC relative reactivity to use at the current time. One 
important characteristic of the box model MIR is that it has the widest 
range of all metrics, which provides the best incentive for the 
substitution of higher reactive VOC with lower-reactive VOC. While this 
might allow a larger mass of VOC to be emitted than other metrics, 
tight limits will ensure that the increased mass will be restricted to 
the least reactive VOC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Carter, et al., 2003, Derwent, R.G. (2004) ``Evaluation and 
Characterization of Reactivity Metrics,'' Final Draft, Report to the 
U.S. EPA, Order No. 4D-5844-NATX, November 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Previous studies of large-scale, equal-ozone substitutions of VOC 
species have shown that downwind ozone could increase due to upwind 
substitutions of larger amounts of lesser reactive VOCs, but any 
increases tended to be much smaller than the magnitude of concurrent 
ozone decreases. The substitutions had a larger effect on reducing the 
higher ozone concentrations in the area upwind than they did on 
increasing downwind concentrations. Even in the extreme substitution 
scenarios that have been studied, the benefits for ozone (reduction in 
ozone peak) were significant. We believe that realistic changes in 
formulation using the MIR, especially if limited to aerosol coatings, 
are unlikely to result in a noticeable increase in ozone downwind. 
First, downwind areas are usually NOX-limited, so small 
amounts of additional VOC will not influence ozone formation 
significantly. Furthermore, in cases where downwind areas are VOC-
limited, potential downwind ozone increases will be counteracted to 
some extent by ozone decreases resulting from VOC substitution 
occurring simultaneously in the downwind area. Thus, we expect VOC 
reformulations based on the MIR scale to lead to an overall net 
decrease in ozone formation and exposure.
    In the past, there has been some concern over the applicability of 
MIR values across the entire country, however studies \30\ now 
demonstrate that the calculated MIR scales do not have significant 
geographical or temporal variation. Based on this information, we 
believe that using the MIR values to establish the relative reactivity 
of VOC ingredients in a reactivity-based approach is a viable option 
for consideration in a national rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Hakami, A., M.S. Bergin, and A.G. Russell (2004a) ``Ozone 
Formation Potential of Organic Compounds in the Eastern United 
States: A Comparison of Episodes, Inventories, and Domains,'' 
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2004, 38, 6748-6759.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the chemical mechanisms for ozone production for many 
individual chemicals are somewhat to highly uncertain, this uncertainty 
is smaller for the majority of the organic compounds used as 
ingredients in aerosol coatings. Most of the VOC used in the products 
covered by this rule have been characterized as category 1 or 2 
uncertainty, which Carter classifies as relatively certain (category 1) 
or uncertainty less than a factor of 2 (category 2).\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Carter, W.P.L. (2003) ``The SAPRC-99 Chemical Mechanism and 
Updated VOC Reactivity Scales,'' Report to the California Air 
Resources Board, Contracts No. 92-329 and 95-308. http://pah.cert.ucr.edu/~carter/reactdat.htm
.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 38964]]

    Furthermore, uncertainty in the reactivity scales can be taken into 
account in the selection of reactivity limits as CARB did in defining 
the limits in its aerosol coatings regulation. CARB assigned each 
compound in its table of MIR values to one of six bins based on expert 
judgment about the level of uncertainty in the chemical mechanisms used 
to calculate the MIR value. CARB assigned an uncertainty factor to each 
of the six bins. CARB then adjusted the MIR values used in the 
calculation of the reactivity limits by multiplying each MIR by its 
assigned uncertainty factor. By applying this uncertainty factor, the 
resulting reactivity limits are more stringent than they would be 
calculated based on the MIR values alone, and provide some protection 
against setting values too low based on incomplete understanding of the 
chemistry of specific compounds.
    For some compounds used in aerosol coatings for which no MIR value 
has been calculated, CARB assigned an upper limit MIR value based on 
theoretical limits of the ozone that could be formed by the compound. 
This approach is also conservative, providing some protection against 
setting reactivity limits too low or allowing reformulations that would 
increase ozone formation. We have set the reactivity factors in the 
proposed rule equal to the MIR or upper limit MIR used by CARB. This 
ensures that the limits in our proposed rule are equivalent to CARB's 
current rule, but allows EPA flexibility in the future to change this 
approach, if warranted.
    All of the VOC that we have identified as common VOC components of 
aerosol coatings have been assigned reactivity factors. However, it is 
possible that a novel compound could be used in a product affected by 
this rule. In CARB's rule, if a VOC has not been assigned a MIR or 
upper limit MIR value, it cannot be used in a product to comply with 
that rule. In EPA's proposed rule, if a VOC is not assigned a 
reactivity factor, then the compound is assigned the maximum reactivity 
factor for any compound listed in the rule. Manufacturers and other 
interested parties can petition the Administrator to add a reactivity 
factor to the table in the rule for such a compound and are encouraged 
to provide sufficient evidence to allow the Administrator to assign a 
reactivity factor that is consistent with values assigned to the other 
listed compounds. This approach ensures that the reformulations allowed 
by the rule will not increase ozone formation.
    Based on the information that we have about VOC used in aerosol 
coatings, we believe that the relative reactivity approach for this 
particular consumer product category is appropriate. However, there may 
be other source categories EPA considers for regulation where the 
organic compounds and their relative reactivity have not been as well-
characterized. EPA has determined that it is appropriate to use the MIR 
values as the reactivity factors for this particular regulation. If a 
more suitable reactivity scale is developed in the future, EPA will 
evaluate that scale for possible regulatory use.
    Therefore, our determination that the reactivity approach using the 
MIR values as the reactivity factors is currently only applicable to 
the aerosol coatings category. EPA has not concluded that it is 
appropriate to use the MIR scale for all applications. In developing 
future regulations, EPA may determine that a reactivity approach is not 
appropriate for a particular context or that a reactivity approach 
should be based upon reactivity factors other than the MIR values. EPA 
will make such future determinations on a case-by-case basis.
    Based on EPA's determination that the reactivity approach can be 
effective in reducing the amount of ozone formed from the use of 
aerosol coatings, EPA has included the evaluation of limits based on 
reactivity in selecting BAC for the aerosol coatings category. The 
options EPA considered in developing BAC are presented in the following 
section.
2. Assessment of Best Available Controls.
    CAA section 183(e) directs EPA to regulate Consumer and Commercial 
Products using ``best available controls.'' The term ``best available 
controls'' is defined in CAA section 183(e)(1)(A) as:

    The degree of emissions reduction that the Administrator 
determines, on the basis of technological and economic feasibility, 
health, environmental, and energy impacts, is achievable through the 
application of the most effective equipment, measures, processes, 
methods, systems or techniques, including chemical reformulation, 
product or feedstock substitution, repackaging, and directions for 
use, consumption, storage, or disposal.

    EPA believes that CAA section 183(e) thus authorizes EPA to 
evaluate what approach would be ``best'' for this product category in 
light of various relevant factors.
    In order to evaluate what would constitute BAC for this source 
category, EPA examined the approaches already attempted in other 
regulations by States. As discussed above, the California Air Resources 
Board (CARB) has a history of regulating VOC emissions from the aerosol 
coatings category. While several other States have regulations under 
consideration, only Oregon and Washington have existing standards and 
both of those States' regulations are based on CARB's 1996 Tier 1 VOC 
mass-based limits. Based on the experiences of CARB, EPA has considered 
both mass-based and reactivity-based limits for this product category. 
We considered three possible options for BAC for this category based 
upon past CARB regulations:
    i. CARB 1996 VOC mass-based limits (Tier 1);
    ii. CARB 2002 VOC mass-based limits (Tier 2); and,
    iii. CARB 2002 reactivity-based limits.
    In 1996, CARB implemented its first aerosol coatings regulation. 
The 1996 regulation contained two tiers of mass-based VOC limits. The 
first tier took effect in 1996 and the second tier, which contained 
more stringent mass-based VOC limits, was scheduled to take effect in 
1999. CARB was required to conduct a public hearing on or before 
December 31, 1998, on the technological and commercial feasibility of 
achieving the 1999 limits and could grant an extension of time not to 
exceed 5 years if their Board determined that the second tier of limits 
was not technologically or commercially feasible by December 31, 1999.
    On November 19, 1998, CARB adopted amendments to its aerosol 
coatings regulation by modifying the December 31, 1999, mass-based VOC 
limits and extended the effective date for those limits to 2002. 
However, CARB's Board recognized that some of the second tier limits 
would still be technologically challenging and directed CARB staff to 
develop a compliance option based on VOC reactivity. On June 22, 2000, 
CARB amended its regulation to replace the 2002 mass-based VOC limits 
with reactivity-based VOC limits intended to achieve the same degree of 
ozone reduction.
    EPA did not consider the 1999 mass-based limits in our BAC analysis 
because CARB determined that those limits were not technologically 
feasible and never implemented the limits. CARB replaced the 1999 mass-
based limits with more stringent limits in some categories and less 
stringent limits in other categories. We did include these 2002 VOC 
mass-based limits that

[[Page 38965]]

replaced the 1999 VOC mass-based limits in our BAC analysis.
    Each of the three options EPA considered is discussed below. See 
the docket to this rulemaking for the tables of limits for each option.
i. CARB 1996 VOC Limits.
    In 1995, CARB proposed limits on the VOC content of aerosol 
coatings. These limits were based on limits established by the Bay Area 
Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) in Rule 8-49 in 1990. CARB's 
regulation included limits on six general categories of aerosol coating 
products and 29 specialty coating categories. The regulation 
established limits on the maximum VOC content, based on percent by 
weight, for each coating category. The standards were effective January 
8, 1996; therefore they are referred to throughout this preamble as 
``CARB 1996 VOC limits.''
    According to CARB's Initial Statement of Reasons, the support 
document prepared by CARB for the new regulation, the 1996 limits were 
expected to reduce VOC emissions from the use of aerosol coatings in 
California by 12 percent. CARB determined that for most of the aerosol 
coating product categories covered by the rule, there were already 
products in the marketplace that met the 1996 limits. Comments made by 
industry members on the regulation indicated that industry believed the 
limits were feasible.
    We believe that the 1996 VOC mass-based limits established by CARB 
for aerosol coatings are both technologically and economically 
feasible. Industry has complied with the 1996 limits in California for 
many years. CARB estimated that the 1996 limits would achieve a 
reduction of approximately 12 percent in VOC emissions and we believe 
that implementing these limits nationwide would result in a similar 
reduction. In 1997, CARB conducted a survey of aerosol coating 
manufacturers. For each of the major categories of aerosol coatings, 
the sales-weighted average VOC content for the category met or was 
lower than the 1996 limit. We know of no reason why these limits could 
not be established on a nationwide basis for the aerosol coatings 
category, providing a similar level of emission reduction.
ii. CARB 2002 VOC Mass-Based Limits.
    As discussed earlier, CARB's 1995 regulation established two tiers 
of mass-based limits that took effect in 1996 and 1999. In 1997, CARB 
conducted a survey of manufacturers supplying aerosol coatings in 
California. The survey requested formulation and cost data for existing 
products in each category and information on the manufacturer's 
research and development efforts to reduce the VOC content of coatings.
    Using the results from the 1997 survey and input from 
manufacturers, CARB revised the second tier aerosol coatings limits and 
extended the compliance date from 1999 to January 1, 2002. These limits 
are referred to as ``CARB 2002 VOC Limits'' in this preamble. The new 
limits were more stringent than the 1996 limits for all of the coating 
categories. CARB estimated that the 2002 limits would result in a VOC 
reduction of 3.1 tons VOC/day (or 8.4 percent) from the 1997 emission 
levels.
    Based on CARB's 1997 survey data and CARB's later conclusion that 
the second tier mass-based VOC limits may not be feasible, EPA is 
concerned about the technological feasibility and availability of 
coatings to meet the 2002 VOC limits. Although the limits appear to be 
both feasible and available for some categories of aerosol coatings, 
the survey data indicate that this may not be true for all of the 
categories. For example, for the category of flat coating products, the 
survey showed that out of a total of 129 products, none met the 2002 
VOC limits. For primers, only 5 of 162 products, less than 1 percent of 
the market, met the 2002 VOC limits. The market share for non-flat 
coatings meeting the limit was only 5 percent. These three categories, 
flat coatings, non-flat coatings, and primers, represent three of the 
four largest categories of aerosol coatings. While not dispositive, we 
think the absence of products meeting the limits is indicative of 
technological and feasibility constraints that would make the limits 
difficult to achieve.
    Although the CARB survey was conducted in 1997 and it is possible 
that the technology has advanced since that time in order to meet such 
stringent mass based limits, we are concerned that this may not have 
happened. Although CARB adopted the 2002 VOC limits, these mass-based 
limits never took effect because CARB replaced the 2002 VOC limits when 
CARB adopted new reactivity-based limits for aerosol coatings in June 
2000. It is likely that coating manufacturers have adjusted their 
research and development efforts towards reducing the reactivity of the 
VOC content of their coatings rather than the VOC mass content of their 
coatings. In some cases, a reduction in the reactivity may coincide 
with a reduction in VOC content but as discussed earlier, this is not 
necessarily the case. In fact, it may be possible to increase the VOC 
content of a coating while reducing the overall reactivity of the VOC 
ingredients. Because of this, we presume that industry may be no closer 
to meeting the 2002 VOC mass limits than they were in 1997.
    In the March 2000 edition of the ``Issue Backgrounder,'' NPCA's 
quarterly newsletter, NPCA states that the 2002 limits ``would be 
technologically impossible for water-based coatings.'' CARB has also 
indicated that some of the limits may be difficult to meet with water-
based technology. As water-based coatings are among the most 
environmentally friendly coatings, we are reluctant to base a rule on 
limits that could preclude the use of this technology.
    Although we believe the 2002 VOC limits would have a significant 
environmental benefit, we have concerns about the technological 
feasibility and availability of coatings that meet these limits and 
therefore whether these limits represent BAC for the aerosol coatings 
industry.
iii. CARB 2002 Reactivity Limits.
    As directed by its Board in 1998, CARB worked with industry to 
evaluate a VOC reactivity-based approach for the aerosol coatings 
category that would achieve a reduction in the formation of ozone 
equivalent to the 2002 mass-based VOC limits. Although CARB initially 
planned the reactivity-based approach as an alternative compliance 
method to the 2002 VOC mass-based limits, it ultimately concluded that 
having simultaneous mass-based and reactivity-based limits would cause 
confusion and decided to have only reactivity-based limits. To ensure 
the reactivity-based limits would achieve, at a minimum, an equivalent 
reduction in the formation of ozone to the 2002 VOC mass-based limits, 
CARB based its 2002 reactivity limits on the 2002 VOC limits. CARB 
first determined the amount of ozone reduction that it anticipated 
would be achieved from the implementation of the 2002 mass-based VOC 
limits. CARB then calculated, through an iterative process, an 
equivalent reactivity-based limit, so that the reactivity-based limit 
would result in the same ozone reduction as the mass-based limit. As 
described earlier, the required amount of ozone reduction was adjusted 
upwards to account for the possible uncertainty in reactivity 
values.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ ``Initial Statement of Reasons for the Proposed Amendments 
to the Regulation for Reducing Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 
from Aerosol Coating Products--California Air Resources Board,'' 
Chapter IV, May 5, 2000.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 38966]]

    The data from the 1997 survey demonstrated that complying products 
for the aerosol coatings reactivity limits were available in all but 
two specialty categories even in 1997. CARB has only received one 
variance request for the reactivity-based aerosol coating limits 
(http://www.arb.ca.gov/consprod/variance/variance.htm). NPCA has 

supported both the reactivity approach and the established limits. 
Based on a review of the limits and the supporting data, we believe 
that the reactivity limits established by CARB for the aerosol coatings 
category are technologically feasible and available as contemplated in 
section 183(e).
3. Determination of Best Available Controls (BAC)
    We believe that the 1996 VOC limits developed by CARB are 
technologically feasible and, based on CARB's cost analysis, are also 
economically feasible. Therefore, they are certainly ``available.'' 
However, these limits were based on technology that was available in 
1995, when CARB first proposed the limits. During the last 10 years, 
manufacturers of all types of paints and coatings have made significant 
technological advances in coating technology in response to the 
development of various state and national rules limiting both the VOC 
and HAP content of coatings. The 12 percent reduction in VOC emissions 
that could be achieved through the implementation of the 1996 limits is 
significantly less than the estimated 20 percent reduction in VOC 
emissions achieved by the implementation of the other national rules 
established under CAA section 183(e). We believe that the CARB 1996 VOC 
limits do not represent BAC for the aerosol coatings category if more 
stringent levels are available.
    Although we believe the industry is capable of meeting limits more 
stringent than the 1996 VOC limits, we are concerned about the 
technological feasibility of the 2002 VOC mass-based limits. The 2002 
VOC limits are more stringent than the 1996 limits. CARB's survey data 
indicated that many manufacturers would have a difficult time achieving 
the VOC content limits proposed for several of the major categories of 
aerosol coatings (See http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/conspro/aerosol/isor.pdf
). In addition, NPCA's concern that the limits may not be 

achievable through the use of water-based technology is of particular 
concern to us. Water-based coatings are an environmentally friendly 
technology that we do not want to be lost as an option to 
manufacturers. So long as VOC emission reductions contemplated by CAA 
section 183(e) are achieved, we believe that it is important that 
manufacturers retain as much flexibility as possible in selecting a 
reformulation technology to ensure they can manufacture coatings that 
meet the performance specifications required. In addition, we remain 
concerned that if water-based coatings are not an option to meet the 
limits, higher-solids coatings will be the primary alternative. 
Although we support the use of higher-solids coatings as an alternative 
to high VOC content coatings, we are concerned that if the limits are 
too stringent industry will be driven to increase its use of toluene, 
xylene, and other aromatic compounds. These aromatic compounds are all 
extremely effective solvents for use in higher-solids coatings, but 
they are also highly reactive compounds that generate more ozone than 
other solvents commonly used by the aerosols coating category.
    As discussed earlier, we believe the reactivity approach is 
appropriate for the aerosol coatings category because the organic 
compounds used by the industry are well-characterized. Because the 2002 
reactivity limits developed by CARB are based on the VOC reduction 
associated with the 2002 VOC limits, they ensure that the reactivity 
limits will achieve an equivalent environmental benefit to the 2002 VOC 
limits. The reactivity limits also offer industry significantly more 
flexibility in achieving that environmental benefit. Industry can 
substitute to lower reactivity solvents, use water-based technology, 
use higher-solids technology (without the potential drawbacks 
associated with the use of this technology in a mass-based VOC 
standard), or any combination of these approaches to meet the limits.
    We have concluded that the reactivity limits established by CARB 
are based on sound scientific principles and represent an equivalent 
environmental benefit to even the most stringent 2002 VOC limits. It is 
likely that if EPA were to use a mass-based VOC approach for the 
aerosol coatings category, we would be required to set less stringent 
limits, perhaps based on the 1996 limits. Such an approach would 
achieve less environmental benefit.
    EPA then evaluated the cost and economic impacts of the reactivity-
based limits. The economic impact assessment focuses on changes in 
market prices and output levels. A more detailed discussion of the 
economic impacts is presented in the economic impact analysis 
memorandum that is included in the docket.
    Both the magnitude of control costs needed to comply with the 
proposed rule and the distribution of these costs among affected 
facilities can have a role in determining how the market prices and 
quantities will change in response to the proposed rule when finalized. 
In this case, at the facility level, we have some uncertainty 
concerning both the amount of individual products being produced and 
whether the products currently comply with the proposed rule, or 
whether additional costs associated with reformulating the products 
will be required. Because California has a similar rule and products 
sold in California have already complied with the California rule, the 
costs imposed by the proposed EPA rule would entail only minor 
additional recordkeeping and recording costs. We also know that 
facilities are involved in production of other products not covered by 
this rule. We have no quantitative information on the relative 
contribution to revenue of products not covered by the rule in 
comparison to products covered by the rule.
    Provided with the cost analysis is a cost per can estimate of going 
from a non-complying formulation to a complying formulation, and a 
sales price per can for each of the six general coating categories and 
the thirty specialty coating categories. Also provided is an estimate 
of the fraction of each coating category that complied before the 
imposition of the CARB rule. Finally, with the cost analysis is a list 
of facilities producing products covered by the CARB rule from a 1997 
CARB survey and which categories are produced at each facility.
    The cost per can, as a percentage of prices per can for going from 
non-complying to complying on a category basis, ranges from a cost 
savings to cost of 2.71 percent for the exact match finish industrial 
category. In order to provide a very rough measure of the impact on a 
per facility basis, the cost per price measure for each category 
produced by a particular facility was multiplied by the pre-CARB rule 
non-complying percentage and averaged across categories using a 
weighting of industry-wide market share from the pre-CARB rule survey.
    The highest cost-to-sales ratio is 1.42 percent. Since this does 
not include revenues from other products, or the reduction in cost due 
to the CARB rule, it is very unlikely that the cost-to-sales ratio for 
any facility would exceed 1 percent. Thus a significant impact is not 
expected for a substantial number of small entities.
    No significant market impact is expected because of the small cost 
increase compared to the price. Neither full cost absorption nor full 
cost pass-

[[Page 38967]]

through would result in significant impacts.
4. Consideration of Other Factors
    In evaluating options for BAC, EPA must evaluate not only the 
positive environmental benefits of BAC but any potential negative 
environmental or health benefit. While reducing the population's 
exposure to ground-level ozone is important, exposing the population to 
increased levels of potentially toxic VOC is also a concern. This could 
occur since the use of relative reactivity encourages the use of 
specific (i.e., low reactivity) compounds to reduce ozone, despite 
other potential environmental and public health concerns. One compound 
that we are concerned about is methylene chloride, which has an 
extremely low MIR value and has also been listed as a HAP under section 
112 of the Clean Air Act because of its potential toxic effects on 
human health and the environment. We remain concerned about the 
potential impact of an increase in the use of this compound. There are 
some HAP that would be reduced as a result of a regulation with a 
reactivity-based approach. For example, HAP such as toluene are highly 
reactive and accordingly have high MIR values. Therefore, they are 
unlikely to be used in large quantities in any aerosol coatings subject 
to a relative reactivity based regulation. In fact, we expect their use 
to be reduced. Thus, although CAA section 183(e) directs EPA to control 
VOC emissions from consumer products only for purposes of achieving the 
ozone NAAQS, we anticipate that choices made to regulate VOC can have 
collateral benefits or disbenefits in ways not related to the ozone 
NAAQS.
    We are seeking comment on possible approaches to address the HAP 
emissions from aerosol coatings, including the use of a voluntary 
program. A voluntary program would seek to provide incentives to 
industry that voluntarily reduce the use of HAP in their product 
formulations. We request comment and suggestions on how this program 
could be identified, tracked, and recognized, including suggestions on 
the following:
     Whether the program would recognize only those 
formulations that reduced HAP content from a baseline before this rule 
was promulgated or if it should recognize all ``low HAP'' coatings.
     What should constitute ``low HAP.'' This could potentially 
be a set amount (percent or absolute) reduction or a maximum overall 
HAP content.
     What type of documentation should be required to document 
that the voluntary reduction has occurred. We are concerned that the 
documentation not be so burdensome as to be prohibitive; however, we 
want to ensure that facilities claiming ``low HAP'' coatings are 
meeting these requirements.
     What type of acknowledgement can be provided. We believe 
that some type of labeling of the product would be an option, but 
welcome other suggestions.

E. Compliance Demonstration Requirements

    EPA is proposing compliance demonstration requirements necessary to 
ensure compliance with the rule. Initial compliance demonstration with 
this rule requires the regulated entity to complete initial compliance 
calculations for all coatings and develop and submit the initial 
notification. Ongoing compliance demonstration and reporting is only 
required when a regulated entity becomes responsible for a coating 
category that was not included in the original notification.
1. Determination of Coating Content
    The ACRR allows a facility to determine compliance using either VOC 
formulation data or through the use of California's Test Method 310 or 
EPA's Test Method 311 (see Selection of Test Method). If formulation 
data are used, the regulated entity would need to identify and maintain 
records of all VOC present in the coating and propellant portions of 
the final aerosol product at a level equal to or greater than 0.1 
percent. The same levels of recordkeeping would be required if CARB 
Method 310 or EPA Method 311 were used. In the event of an 
inconsistency between the results of Method 310 or 311 test data and a 
calculation based upon formulation data, the Method 310/311 data will 
govern the compliance calculation. These formulation data will then be 
used to calculate the reactivity value for the coatings, which would be 
compared to the limits presented in Table 1 of the rule.
    We are aware that a single regulated entity may have tens, or even 
hundreds, of different product formulations, especially if different 
colors of the same basic product have slightly different formulations. 
It is not our intent to create unnecessary burden and we seek comment 
on how to limit this burden and still ensure compliance.
2. Calculation of Reactivity of Coating
    Once the coating (including coating liquid and propellant) 
formulation data are known (i.e., either through formulation 
calculations or use of an approved test method), the calculation of the 
reactivity value for the product is relatively simple. Tables 2A, 2B, 
and 2C of the regulation contain reactivity factors that are currently 
based on the MIR values, and in some cases the upper limit MIR values, 
used by CARB in its regulation. These reactivity factors are used in 
conjunction with the formulation data to demonstrate compliance with 
the reactivity limits. First the compound Weighted Reactivity Factor 
(WRF) is calculated by multiplying the weight fraction of the 
individual ingredient (obtained from the formulation data) by the 
reactivity factor (RF) for that ingredient obtained from Table 2 of the 
regulation.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16JY07.004


Where:

WRFi = Weighted reactivity factor for component i, g 
O3/g product
WFi = Weight fraction of component i
RFi = reactivity factor for component i, g O3/
compound i

    The WRFs for each component in the total coating are then summed to 
obtain the Product Weighted Reactivity (PWR).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16JY07.005


Where:

PWRp = Product weighted reactivity for product P, g 
O3/g product
WRF1 = Weighted reactivity factor for component 1, g 
O3/g component
WRF2 = Weighted reactivity factor for component 2, g 
O3/g component
WRFn = Weighted reactivity factor for component n, g 
O3/g component
    Both of these steps are incorporated into a single equation:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16JY07.006
    

Where:

PWRp = Product weighted reactivity for product P, g 
O3/g product
WFi = Weight fraction of component i

[[Page 38968]]

RFi = Reactivity factor for component i, g O3/
compound i
n = Number of components in product P

    The reactivity factor equals zero for non-solid components without 
carbon. Solid components, including but not limited to resins, 
pigments, fillers, plasticizers and extenders do not need to be 
included in this equation since the reactivity factor for all solids is 
zero. If a VOC component is not listed in Table 2, it is assigned a RF 
equal to the maximum value listed in the table.
    The PWR for each product must then be compared to the limit for the 
specific coating category, provided in Table 1 of the regulation, to 
determine compliance.

F. Labeling Requirements

    Section 183(e) of the CAA explicitly authorizes the EPA to require 
labeling and other requirements as part of a regulation. We are 
proposing to include labeling requirements that are necessary to 
implement the regulations effectively and to assure compliance. The 
requirements we propose pertain to the date the aerosol can is filled, 
the coating category of the product, and the applicable ACRR limit for 
the product.
    The proposed regulation requires that containers for all subject 
coatings display the date of manufacture (or a code indicating the 
date). The date of manufacture on the label or can allows enforcement 
personnel to determine whether the coating was manufactured prior to or 
after the compliance date. The coating category and reactivity limit 
allow enforcement personnel to select a can of aerosol coating, test it 
using either CARB Method 310 or EPA Method 311, and compare the test 
results to the reactivity limit on the can.

G. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

    CAA section 183(e) also authorizes EPA to impose recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements. We are proposing recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements that are necessary to ensure compliance with the 
regulation. We propose to require an initial notification report for 
regulated entities. This report will provide basic information on the 
regulated entity (e.g. name, location) and will identify all coating 
categories that are manufactured at the facility. This will provide the 
EPA Regional Offices with a listing of companies in their areas that 
are manufacturing, processing, distributing, or importing aerosol 
coatings so that the appropriate Regional Office can follow up with 
those companies in the event a compliance issue arises. Furthermore, 
this report will explain the date code system used to label products, 
if the date code is not immediately obvious (e.g., month-day-year 
format). This will assist EPA in identifying products that were 
manufactured after the compliance date and are therefore subject to 
this regulation. Finally, the affected entity is required to include an 
explanation of how the term ``batch'' will be interpreted for each 
formulation. This report is due 90 days before the compliance date for 
the rule.
    Under the proposed rule, the regulated entity is required to 
conduct compliance calculations for each coating formulation. These 
calculations must be maintained onsite, for 5 years. However, we are 
proposing that no reporting of these calculations or the results to EPA 
is required unless a specific request for those results is made by the 
Administrator (defined in the regulation to include EPA Regional 
Offices). We are also proposing that the regulated entity must maintain 
records of the date each batch of a particular formulation was 
manufactured, the volume of each batch, the number of cans manufactured 
in each batch and each formulation, and the recipe used for formulating 
each batch.
    After the initial compliance report, we are proposing to require 
additional reporting if a regulated entity adds a new coating category 
or changes other information in the initial report (e.g., contact 
information, file location). Specifically, when this happens, we are 
proposing to require a new notification containing the updated 
information.
    We are also requesting comment on whether the proposed 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements included in this proposed rule 
should be expanded to ensure that the Agency can verify a regulated 
entity's compliance with the regulation. To verify compliance of an 
individual product with the applicable limit, it is necessary to 
analyze its VOC composition and calculate the product-weighted 
reactivity of the mixture. Without prior information about product 
composition, identifying the VOC composition of a product is difficult. 
Therefore, we request comment on the feasibility and need for a 
requirement for regulated entities to submit to the Agency their VOC 
formulations for each product or product formulation in the initial 
report and on a periodic basis thereafter. We anticipate that such a 
report would consist of a simple listing of the following items: (1) A 
manufacturer identifier, (2) a product identifier, (3) the applicable 
product-weighted reactivity-based limit, (4) the Chemical Abstract 
Service number of each VOC component, (5) the maximum mass fraction of 
the VOC component in the product, and (6) the applicable reactivity 
factor for the VOC component. Because CAA section 183(e) is intended to 
achieve VOC emission reductions for purposes of reducing ozone, the 
composition information provided in the report would be limited to the 
VOC components of the coating and would not include information on the 
resins or other non-VOC components. Because each unit of product must 
meet the applicable limits of the rule, the report would only need to 
address VOC composition and would not include information on the 
quantity of each product produced or sold.
    Given that regulated entities are required to keep such composition 
information to demonstrate compliance under the proposed rule, a 
requirement to submit this information to EPA periodically in a simple 
format should impose minimal additional burden or cost for industry 
provided that the reporting mechanism is easy to access and use. Such a 
report would provide regulated entities an opportunity to review their 
products' compliance with the applicable standards and therefore help 
to assure compliance.
    EPA notes that the VOC composition of coatings subject to this 
proposed rule is ``emissions data'' under section 114 of the CAA, and 
EPA's regulatory definition of such term in 40 CFR part 2, because the 
information is necessary to determine compliance with applicable 
limits. As such, this information must be available to the public 
regardless of whether EPA obtains the information through a reporting 
requirement or through a specific request to the regulated entity. 
Therefore, such information is not eligible for treatment as 
``confidential business information'' under proposed section 59.516.
    We specifically solicit comment on the following questions related 
to the initial report and any potential periodic reporting requirement 
for information related to VOC composition of products subject to this 
rule: (1) Whether there is a need for such a reporting requirement to 
allow for more effective implementation and enforcement of the 
regulation; and (2) what specific contents should be required in such 
reports. With respect to any potential periodic reporting requirement, 
we also request comment on what frequency or under what circumstances 
such reporting should be required. As to the mechanism or method for 
submitting initial or periodic reports to EPA, we specifically solicit 
comment on whether, given the nature of the reports under 
consideration, it would be advantageous for regulated entities to

[[Page 38969]]

submit reports electronically. Electronic reporting to a centralized 
electronic database could help to decrease the burden and cost to 
regulated entities. A database of composition information would also 
help EPA track the effect of the rule on VOC emissions composition and 
provide information that is necessary for effective implementation and 
enforcement of the rule. For each of these questions, EPA solicits 
comment regarding the burdens and cost that reporting requirements 
might impose, and what EPA could do to minimize the burdens and cost, 
especially with respect to small entities.
    We are proposing an exemption from the limits of the rule for those 
entities that manufacturer only a small amount of aerosol coatings. We 
believe that this exemption will serve to mitigate the impacts of the 
rule upon small manufacturers for whom compliance with the rule could 
impose disproportionately high costs through reformulation of products 
produced only in small volumes. Given this objective, and in order to 
avoid unnecessary excess VOC emissions that could be significant in the 
aggregate, we are proposing that this exemption from the limits would 
be available only for those manufacturers that have annual production 
of aerosol coatings products with total VOC content not in excess of 
7,500 kg of VOC in all aerosol coating product categories. We emphasize 
that this to be determined by total VOC content by mass, in all product 
categories manufactured by the entity. We consider making this 
distinction based upon total VOC mass, rather than some reactivity-
adjusted calculation, necessary both to minimize the analytical impacts 
upon the entity seeking the exemption from the rule, and to provide for 
more effective implementation and enforcement of this aspect of the 
rule.
    A manufacturer that qualifies for the exemption must notify EPA of 
this in the initial notification report required in proposed section 
59.511. As a condition for the exemption from the limits, the proposed 
rule also requires the entity to file an annual report with EPA 
providing the information necessary to evaluate and to establish that 
the products manufactured by the entity are properly exempt from the 
limits of rule. This information is necessary to assure that the entity 
is in compliance, even if its products do not meet the limits of the 
rule. EPA notes that an exemption under EPA's national rule for aerosol 
coatings under section 183(e) does not alter any requirements under any 
applicable state or local regulations.
    We specifically request comment on whether there is a need for an 
exemption of this type for very small manufacturers. In addition, we 
request comment on the features of the exemption as we have proposed 
it. Finally, in order to get better information about the number of 
manufactures that would potentially use such an exemption, we 
specifically request that interested commenters indicate whether they 
would elect to use the exemption from the limits.
    The proposed rule requires all regulated entities to comply by 
January 1, 2009. EPA believes that compliance by this date is readily 
achievable by most, if not all, regulated entities subject to this 
rule. However, in the case of regulated entities that have not 
previously met the limits already imposed by regulation in the State of 
California, EPA believes that it may be appropriate to provide an 
extension of the compliance date on a case by case basis. Therefore, 
the proposed rule includes a provision that will allow regulated 
entities that have not previously manufactured, imported, or 
distributed for sale or distribution in California any product in any 
category listed in Table 1 of this subpart that complies with 
applicable California regulations for aerosol coatings to seek an 
extension of the compliance date. Such extensions will be granted at 
the discretion of the Administrator. The grant or denial of a 
compliance date extension does not affect the right of the regulated 
entity to seek a variance under this rule.

H. Variance Criteria

    The proposed ACRR includes a variance provision. Companies may 
require a variance for several reasons. The regulated entity may be 
responsible for a coating that has more extensive performance 
requirements than other coatings in the category so that reformulating 
that coating to meet the reactivity limits is more difficult than it is 
for other coatings. In some cases, a regulated entity may experience an 
interruption in the supply of a particular compound necessary to the 
performance of a coating due to a fire or other exceptional event at 
the supplier's facility. Furthermore, small companies may require 
longer to reformulate a coating due to limited resources. The proposed 
rule requires regulated entities to submit a written application to the 
Administrator requesting a variance if, for reasons beyond their 
reasonable control, they cannot comply with the requirements of the 
proposed rule. The application must include the following information:
    (1) The specific products for which the variance is sought;
    (2) The specific provisions of the subpart for which the variance 
is sought;
    (3) The specific grounds upon which the variance is sought;
    (4) The proposed date(s) by which compliance with the provisions of 
the rule will be achieved; and
    (5) A compliance plan detailing the method(s) by which compliance 
will be achieved.
    Upon receipt of the variance application, the Administrator will 
determine whether a variance is warranted.
    The Administrator may grant a variance if the following criteria 
are met:
    (1) Complying with the provisions of this subpart would not be 
technologically or economically feasible.
    (2) The compliance plan proposed by the applicant can reasonably be 
implemented and will achieve compliance as expeditiously as possible.
    The approved variance order will designate a final compliance date 
and a condition that specifies increments of progress necessary to 
assure timely compliance. A variance shall end immediately upon the 
failure of the regulated entity to comply with any term or condition of 
the variance.
    The EPA understands that some regulated entities may face more 
challenges in meeting the limits of the regulation than others. 
Therefore, the Administrator will carefully evaluate requests from 
regulated entities' facilities, particularly small businesses that have 
not marketed their products in regulated areas prior to this 
rulemaking.

I. Test Methods

    To demonstrate compliance with the proposed reactivity limits, it 
is necessary to identify the species of reactive organic compounds that 
are present in the coating and the percent weight of each compound. 
While regulated entities may use formulation data to demonstrate 
compliance with this rule, the rule requires that the results of 
calculations using formulation data be consistent with results of 
calculations obtained from approved test methods. CARB's Method 310 is 
the primary test method we have included in the regulation for 
demonstrating compliance with the reactivity limits. Method 310 is 
essentially a compendium of methods developed by other agencies (for 
example, ASTM, U.S. EPA, NIOSH) that focus on identifying and 
quantifying the components of an aerosol coating. Manufacturers and

[[Page 38970]]

regulatory agencies using Method 310 to determine the compliance status 
of a coating must select the appropriate methods from Method 310 that 
will ensure the necessary data are generated. There is no one method 
that will provide the necessary data. For example, as a minimum, it 
will be necessary to use one of the ASTM methods referenced in Method 
310 to separate the propellant from the liquid portion of the coating 
and another method, or in some cases, multiple methods, to analyze the 
propellant and liquid portions for VOC content. Although Method 310 is 
complex, EPA believes that it is an appropriate method to incorporate 
into the aerosol coatings regulation. The method has been used in 
California to demonstrate compliance with the reactivity limits 
developed for aerosol coatings in that state and EPA believes it is an 
effective method for demonstrating compliance with this regulation. 
[Other issues associated with this method are identified in a 
memorandum included in the docket to this rule (EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0971)].
    We have also included EPA's Test Method 311--Analysis of Hazardous 
Air Pollutant Compounds in Paints and Coatings--as an alternative test 
method to CARB's Method 310. Aerosol coating manufacturers and 
regulatory agencies can elect to use Method 311 to demonstrate 
compliance with the reactivity limits. As the title of Method 311 
suggests, EPA originally developed this method to analyze the HAP 
content of coatings. However, EPA believes that the method is 
applicable to the identification and quantification of organic 
compounds that may be present in aerosol coatings.
    As with Method 310, it is necessary that the analyst be provided 
with a list of the compounds in the coating so that the analyst can 
properly calibrate the gas chromatograph that will be used for the 
analysis. Because Method 311 was developed specifically for the 
analysis of coatings, it is in many ways a simpler and more 
straightforward method than 310. The results from Method 311 are based 
on percent by weight, so it is not necessary to convert the results to 
another metric. The sample preparation instructions in Method 311, with 
the exception of the aerosol portion of the coating, do not require any 
adjustments since they were specifically developed for the analysis of 
liquid samples. We know of no reason why the data collected using 
Method 311 should be any less accurate than those collected using 
Method 310. For these reasons, we have decided to include Method 311 as 
an alternative to Method 310.
    Because Method 311 was developed for the analysis of liquid 
coatings and aerosol coatings containing both liquid and gaseous 
components, those electing to use Method 311 must also use either ASTM 
Method D3063-94 or D3074-94 to collect the propellant for analysis. As 
discussed earlier, this is also true for those running Method 310. The 
only difference is that the ASTM methods are specifically referenced in 
Method 310.

V. Statutory and Executive Order (EO) Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), 
this action is a ``significant regulatory action'' since it raises 
novel legal or policy issues. Accordingly, EPA submitted this action to 
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under EO 12866 and 
any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been 
documented in the docket for this action.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this proposed rule have 
been submitted for approval to the OMB under the Paperwork Reduction 
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The Information Collection Request (ICR) 
document prepared by EPA has been assigned EPA ICR number 2266.01.
    The information collection requirements are based on recordkeeping 
and reporting requirements. These recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements are specifically authorized by CAA section 114 (42 U.S.C. 
7414). All information submitted to EPA pursuant to the recordkeeping 
and reporting requirements for which a claim of confidentiality is made 
is safeguarded according to Agency policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2, 
subpart B.
    The proposed standards would require regulated entities to submit 
an initial notification and other reports as outlined in section IV.F.
    We estimate that about 62 regulated entities would be subject to 
the proposed standards. New and existing regulated entities would have 
no capital costs associated with the information collection 
requirements in the proposed standards.
    The estimated recordkeeping and reporting burden in the 3rd year 
after the effective date of the promulgated rule is estimated to be 
7986 labor hours at a cost of $472,386.00. This estimate includes the 
cost of reporting, including reading instructions, information 
gathering, preparation of initial and supplemental reports, and 
variance applications. Recordkeeping cost estimates include reading 
instructions, planning activities, calculation of reactivity, and 
maintenance of batch information. The average hours and cost per 
regulated entity would be 128 hours and $7,619.00. About 62 facilities 
would respond per year.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources 
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 
provide information to or for a Federal Agency. This includes the time 
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy 
of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for 
minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection 
techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this rule, which 
includes this ICR, under Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0971. Submit 
any comments related to the ICR for this proposed rule to EPA and OMB. 
See ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this notice for where to 
submit comments to EPA. Send comments to OMB at the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 
725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for 
EPA. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR 
between 30 and 60 days after July 16, 2007 in the Federal Register, a 
comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB 
receives it by August 15, 2007 in the Federal Register. The final rule 
will respond to any OMB or public comments on the information 
collection requirements contained in this proposal.

[[Page 38971]]

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this proposed rule on 
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as 
defined by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 
CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government 
of a city, county, town, school district, or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is 
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this proposed regulatory 
action, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities because the cost to 
sales ratio is small for all of the facilities owned by small entities. 
The small entities directly regulated by this proposed rule are small 
manufacturers, processors, wholesale distributors, or importers of 
aerosol coatings for sale or distribution in interstate commerce in the 
United States. Our analysis indicates that all 43 of the identified 
small entities (seventy-two percent of all identified facilities) will 
likely experience a cost impact of less than one percent of revenues.
    Although this proposed rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has 
tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small entities in two ways. 
First, the proposed rule considers issuance of a special compliance 
extension that extends the date of compliance by two years for 
regulated entities that have never manufactured, imported, or 
distributed aerosol coatings for sale or distribution in California in 
compliance with California's Regulation for Reducing Ozone Formed from 
Aerosol Coating Product Emissions, Title 17, California Code of 
Regulations, Sections 94520-94528. Finally, the proposed rule includes 
an exemption from the limits in Table 1 of subpart E of the rule for 
those manufacturers that manufacture very limited amounts of aerosol 
coatings, i.e., products with a total VOC content by mass of no more 
than 7,500 kilograms of VOC per year in the aggregate for all products. 
We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed 
rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related to such 
impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives, and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling 
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant 
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements.
    EPA has determined that the proposed regulatory action does not 
contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 
million or more for State, local, or tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, or the private sector in any one year. Thus, this proposed 
action is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of 
the UMRA. In addition, we have determined that the proposed regulatory 
action contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments because they contain no regulatory 
requirements that apply to such governments or impose obligations upon 
them. Therefore, this action is not subject to the requirements of 
section 203 of UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the EO to 
include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government.''
    The proposed regulatory action does not have federalism 
implications. The action does not have substantial direct effects on 
the States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in EO 13132. The CAA 
establishes the relationship between the Federal Government and the 
States, and this action does not impact that relationship. Thus, EO 
13132 does not apply to the proposed regulatory action. However, in the 
spirit of EO 13132, and consistent with EPA policy to promote 
communications between EPA and State and local governments, EPA is 
soliciting comment on the proposed regulatory action from State and 
local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments

    EO 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA to 
develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input 
by Tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
Tribal implications.''
    The proposed action does not have Tribal implications as defined by 
EO 13175. The proposed regulatory action does not have a substantial 
direct effect on one or more Indian Tribes, in that the proposed action 
imposes no regulatory burdens on tribes. Furthermore, the proposed 
action does not affect the relationship or distribution of power

[[Page 38972]]

and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. 
The CAA and the Tribal Authority Rule (TAR) establish the relationship 
of the Federal Government and Tribes in implementing the Clean Air Act. 
Because the proposed rule does not have Tribal implications, EO 13175 
does not apply.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under EO 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or 
safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate 
effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, 
section 5B501 of the EO directs the Agency to evaluate the 
environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, 
and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other 
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered 
by the Agency.
    The proposed regulatory action is not subject to Executive Order 
13045 because it is not an economically significant regulatory action 
as defined by Executive Order 12866. In addition, EPA interprets 
Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that 
are based on health and safety risks, such that the analysis required 
under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has the potential to 
influence the regulations. The proposed regulatory action is not 
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not include regulatory 
requirements based on health or safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in 
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 
(May 22, 2001)) because it is not likely to have a significant adverse 
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Further, we have 
concluded that this rule is not likely to have any adverse energy 
effects.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104-113, Section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its 
regulatory activities, unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. The VCS are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
VCS bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, 
explanations when the Agency does not use available and applicable VCS.
    This proposed rule involves technical standards. The EPA cites the 
following standards in this rule: California Air Resources Board (ARB) 
Method 310, ``Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in 
Consumer Products and Reactive Organic Compounds in Aerosol Coating 
Products;'' EPA Method 311 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, in 
conjunction with American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) 
method D3063-94 or D3074-94 for analysis of the propellant portion of 
the coating; South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) 
method 318-95, ``Determination of Weight Percent Elemental Metal in 
Coatings by X-ray Diffraction'' for metal content; ASTM D523-89 (1999) 
for specular gloss of flat and nonflat coatings; and ASTM D1613-03, 
``Standard Test Method for Acidity in Volatile Solvents and Chemical 
Intermediates Used in Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, and Related Products'' 
for acid content of rust converters.
    The EPA Method 311 also is a compilation of voluntary consensus 
standards. The following are incorporated by reference in Method 311: 
ASTM D1979-91, ASTM D3432-89, ASTM D4457-85, ASTM D4747-87, ASTM D4827-
93, and ASTM PS9-94.
    Consistent with the NTTAA, EPA conducted searches to identify 
voluntary consensus standards in addition to these methods. No 
applicable voluntary consensus standards were identified.
    For the methods required by the proposed rule, a source may apply 
to EPA for permission to use alternative test methods or alternative 
monitoring requirements in place of any required testing methods, 
performance specifications, or procedures under sections 63.7(f) and 
63.8(f) of Subpart A of the General Provisions.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes 
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it increases the 
level of environmental protection for all affected populations without 
having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or 
environmental effects on any population, including any minority or low-
income populations. Further, it establishes national emission standards 
for VOC in aerosol coatings.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 51

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Intergovernmental relations, 
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compound.

40 CFR Part 59

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Consumer products, Aerosol coatings.

    Dated: June 29, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, part 59 of title 40 of the 
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 51--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for Part 51 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    2. Section 51.100 is amended by adding paragraph (s)(7) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  51.100  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (s) * * *
    (7) For the purposes of determining compliance with EPA's aerosol 
coatings

[[Page 38973]]

reactivity based regulation (as described in Part 59--National Volatile 
Organic Compound Emission Standards for Consumer and Commercial 
Products) any organic compound in the volatile portion of an aerosol 
coating is counted towards the product's reactivity-based limit. 
Therefore, the compounds identified in paragraph (s) of this section as 
negligibly reactive and excluded from EPA's definition of VOC are to be 
counted towards a product's reactivity limit for the purposes of 
determining compliance with EPA's aerosol coatings reactivity-based 
national regulation.
* * * * *

PART 59--[AMENDED]

    3. The authority citation for part 59 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414 and 7511b(e).

    4. Subpart E is added to read as follows:
Subpart E--National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for 
Aerosol Coatings
Sec.
59.500 What is the purpose of this subpart?
59.501 Am I subject to this subpart?
59.502 When do I have to comply with this subpart?
59.503 What definitions apply to this subpart?
59.504 What limits must I meet?
59.505 How do I demonstrate compliance with the reactivity limits?
59.506 How do I demonstrate compliance if I manufacture multi-
component kits?
59.507 What are the labeling requirements for aerosol coatings?
59.508 What test methods must I use?
59.509 Can I get a variance?
59.510 What records am I required to maintain?
59.511 What reports must I submit?
59.512 Addresses of EPA regional offices.
59.513 State authority.
59.514 Circumvention.
59.515 Incorporations by reference.
59.516 Availability of information and confidentiality
    Table 1 to Subpart E to Part 59--Product-Weighted Reactivity 
Limits by Coating Category
    Table 2A to Subpart E to Part 59--Reactivity Factors
    Table 2B to Subpart E to Part 59--Reactivity Factors for 
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon Solvent Mixtures
    Table 2C to Subpart E to Part 59--Reactivity Factors for 
Aromatic Hydrocarbon Solvent Mixtures

Subpart E--National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards 
for Aerosol Coatings


Sec.  59.500  What is the purpose of this subpart?

    This subpart establishes the product weighted reactivity (PWR) 
limits regulated entities must meet to in order to comply with the 
national rule for volatile organic compounds emitted from aerosol 
coatings. This subpart also establishes labeling, and recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements for regulated entities.


Sec.  59.501  Am I subject to this subpart?

    (a) You are a regulated entity under this rule and subject to this 
subpart if you are listed in either paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this 
section.
    (1) Manufacturers, processors, wholesale distributors, or importers 
of aerosol coatings for sale or distribution in interstate commerce in 
the United States; or
    (2) Manufacturers, processors, wholesale distributors, or importers 
that supply the entities listed in paragraph (a)(1) with such products 
for sale or distribution in interstate commerce in the United States.
    (b) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, as a 
manufacturer or importer of the product, you are subject to the product 
weighted reactivity limits presented in Sec.  59.504 even if you are 
not named on the label. If you are a distributor named on the label, 
you are responsible for compliance with all sections of this subpart 
except for the limits presented in Sec.  59.504. Distributors that are 
not named on the label are not subject to this subpart. If there is no 
distributor named on the label, then the manufacturer or importer is 
responsible for complying with all sections of this subpart.
    (c) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, the 
provisions of this subpart apply to aerosol coatings manufactured on or 
after January 1, 2009 for sale or distribution in the United States.
    (d) You are not a regulated entity under this subpart if you 
manufacture coatings (in or outside of the United States) that are 
exclusively for sale outside the United States.
    (e) If you are a manufacture of aerosol coatings but the total 
amount of VOC by mass in the products you manufacture, in the 
aggregate, is less than 7,500 kg per year, then the products you 
manufacture in such year are exempt from the product-weighted 
reactivity limits presented in Sec.  59.504, so long as you are in 
compliance with the other applicable provisions of this subpart.


Sec.  59.502  When do I have to comply with this subpart?

    (a) Except as provided in Sec.  59.509 and paragraph (b) of this 
section, you must be in compliance with all provisions of this subpart 
by January 1, 2009.
    (b) The Administrator will consider issuance of a special 
compliance extension that extends the date of compliance until January 
1, 2011, to regulated entities that have never manufactured, imported, 
or distributed aerosol coatings for sale or distribution in California 
in compliance with California's Regulation for Reducing Ozone Formed 
from Aerosol Coating Product Emissions, Title 17, California Code of 
Regulations, Sections 94520-94528. In order to be considered for an 
extension of the compliance date, you must submit a special compliance 
extension application to the EPA Administrator no later than 90 days 
before the compliance date or within 90 days before the date that you 
first manufacture aerosol coatings, whichever is later. This 
application must contain the information in paragraphs (b)(1) through 
(b)(5) of the section:
    (1) Company name;
    (2) A signed certification by a responsible company official that 
the regulated entity has not at any time manufactured, imported, or 
distributed for sale or distribution in California any product in any 
category listed in Table 1 of this subpart that complies with 
California's Regulation for Reducing Ozone Formed From Aerosol Coating 
Product Emissions, Title 17, California Code of Regulations, Sections 
94520-94528;
    (3) A statement that the regulated entity will, to the extent 
possible within its reasonable control, take appropriate action to 
achieve compliance with this subpart by January 1, 2011;
    (4) A list of the product categories in Table 1 of this subpart 
that the regulated entity manufactures, imports, or distributes; and,
    (5) Name, title, address, telephone, e-mail address, and signature 
of the certifying company official.
    (6) If a regulated entity remains unable to comply with the limits 
of this rule by January 1, 2011, the regulated entity may seek a 
variance in accordance with Sec.  59.509.


Sec.  59.503  What definitions apply to this subpart?

    The following terms are defined for the purposes of this subpart 
only.
    Administrator means the Administrator of the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) or an authorized 
representative.

[[Page 38974]]

    Aerosol Coating Product means a pressurized coating product 
containing pigments or resins that dispenses product ingredients by 
means of a propellant and is packaged in a disposable can for hand-held 
application or for use in specialized equipment for ground traffic/
marking applications. For the purpose of this regulation, applicable 
aerosol coatings categories are listed in Table 1 of this subpart.
    Art Fixative or Sealant means a clear coating, including art 
varnish, workable art fixative, and ceramic coating, which is designed 
and labeled exclusively for application to paintings, pencil, chalk, or 
pastel drawings, ceramic art pieces, or other closely related art uses, 
in order to provide a final protective coating or to fix preliminary 
stages of artwork while providing a workable surface for subsequent 
revisions. ASTM means the American Society for Testing and Materials.
    Autobody Primer means an automotive primer or primer surfacer 
coating designed and labeled exclusively to be applied to a vehicle 
body substrate for the purposes of corrosion resistance and building a 
repair area to a condition in which, after drying, it can be sanded to 
a smooth surface.
    Automotive Bumper and Trim Product means a product, including 
adhesion promoters and chip sealants, designed and labeled exclusively 
to repair and refinish automotive bumpers and plastic trim parts.
    Aviation Propeller Coating means a coating designed and labeled 
exclusively to provide abrasion resistance and corrosion protection for 
aircraft propellers. Aviation or Marine Primer means a coating designed 
and labeled exclusively to meet federal specification TT-P-1757.
    Clear Coating means a coating which is colorless, containing resins 
but no pigments except flatting agents, and is designed and labeled to 
form a transparent or translucent solid film.
    Coating Solids means the nonvolatile portion of an aerosol coating 
product, consisting of the film forming ingredients, including pigments 
and resins.
    Commercial Application means the use of aerosol coating products in 
the production of goods, or the providing of services for profit, 
including touch-up and repair.
    Corrosion Resistant Brass, Bronze, or Copper Coating means a clear 
coating designed and labeled exclusively to prevent tarnish and 
corrosion of uncoated brass, bronze, or copper metal surfaces.
    Distributor means any person to whom an aerosol coating product is 
sold or supplied for the purposes of resale or distribution in 
commerce, except that manufacturers, retailers, and consumers are not 
distributors.
    Enamel means a coating which cures by chemical cross-linking of its 
base resin and is not resoluble in its original solvent.
    Engine Paint means a coating designed and labeled exclusively to 
coat engines and their components.
    Exact Match Finish, Automotive means a topcoat which meets all of 
the following criteria:
    (1) The product is designed and labeled exclusively to exactly 
match the color of an original, factory-applied automotive coating 
during the touch-up of automobile finishes;
    (2) The product is labeled with the manufacturer's name for which 
they were formulated; and
    (3) The product is labeled with one of the following:
    (i) The original equipment manufacturer's (O.E.M.) color code 
number;
    (ii) The color name; or
    (iii) Other designation identifying the specific O.E.M. color to 
the purchaser. Not withstanding the foregoing, automotive clear 
coatings designed and labeled exclusively for use over automotive exact 
match finishes to replicate the original factory applied finish shall 
be considered to be automotive exact match finishes.
    Exact Match Finish, Engine Paint means a coating which meets all of 
the following criteria:
    (1) The product is designed and labeled exclusively to exactly 
match the color of an original, factory-applied engine paint;
    (2) The product is labeled with the manufacturer's name for which 
they were formulated; and
    (3) The product is labeled with one of the following:
    (i) The original equipment manufacturer's (O.E.M.) color code 
number;
    (ii) The color name; or
    (iii) Other designation identifying the specific original equipment 
manufacturer (O.E.M.) color to the purchaser.
    Exact Match Finish, Industrial means a coating which meets all of 
the following criteria:
    (1) The product is designed and labeled exclusively to exactly 
match the color of an original, factory-applied industrial coating 
during the touch-up of manufactured products;
    (2) The product is labeled with the manufacturer's name for which 
they were formulated; and
    (3) The product is labeled with one of the following:
    (i) O.E.M. color code number; (ii) the color name; or (iii) other 
designation identifying the specific O.E.M. color to the purchaser.
    Flat Paint Products means a coating which, when fully dry, 
registers specular gloss less than or equal to 15 on an 85[deg] gloss 
meter, or less than or equal to 5 on a 60[deg] gloss meter, or which is 
labeled as a flat coating.
    Flatting Agent means a compound added to a coating to reduce the 
gloss of the coating without adding color to the coating.
    Floral Spray means a coating designed and labeled exclusively for 
use on fresh flowers, dried flowers, or other items in a floral 
arrangement for the purposes of coloring, preserving or protecting 
their appearance.
    Fluorescent Coating means a coating labeled as such, which converts 
absorbed incident light energy into emitted light of a different hue.
    Glass Coating means a coating designed and labeled exclusively for 
use on glass or other transparent material to create a soft, 
translucent light effect, or to create a tinted or darkened color while 
retaining transparency.
    Ground Traffic/Marking Coating means a coating designed and labeled 
exclusively to be applied to dirt, gravel, grass, concrete, asphalt, 
warehouse floors, or parking lots. Such coatings must be in a container 
equipped with a valve and spray head designed to direct the spray 
toward the surface when the can is held in an inverted vertical 
position.
    High Temperature Coating means a coating, excluding engine paint, 
which is designed and labeled exclusively for use on substrates which 
will, in normal use, be subjected to temperatures in excess of 
400[deg]F.
    Hobby/Model/Craft Coating means a coating which is designed and 
labeled exclusively for hobby applications and is sold in aerosol 
containers of 6 ounces by weight or less.
    Impurity means an individual chemical compound present in a raw 
material which is incorporated in the final aerosol coatings 
formulation, if the compound is present in amounts below the following 
in the raw material:
    (1) For individual compounds that are carcinogens each compound 
must be present in an amount less than 0.1 percent by weight;
    (2) For all other compounds present in a raw material, a compound 
must be present in an amount less than 1 percent by weight.
    Ingredient means a component of an aerosol coating product.

[[Page 38975]]

    Lacquer means a thermoplastic film-forming material dissolved in 
organic solvent, which dries primarily by solvent evaporation, and is 
resoluble in its original solvent.
    Manufacturer means any person who imports, manufactures, assembles, 
produces, packages, repackages, or relabels a consumer product.
    Marine Spar Varnish means a coating designed and labeled 
exclusively to provide a protective sealant for marine wood products.
    Metallic Coating means a topcoat which contains at least 0.5 
percent by weight elemental metallic pigment in the formulation, 
including propellant, and is labeled as ``metallic'', or with the name 
of a specific metallic finish such as ``gold'', ``silver'', or 
``bronze.''
    Multi-Component Kit means an aerosol spray paint system which 
requires the application of more than one component (e.g. foundation 
coat and top coat), where both components are sold together in one 
package.
    Nonflat Paint Product means a coating which, when fully dry, 
registers a specular gloss greater than 15 on an 85[deg] gloss meter or 
greater than five on a 60[deg] gloss meter.
    Ozone means a colorless gas with a pungent odor, having the 
molecular form O3.
    Photograph Coating means a coating designed and labeled exclusively 
to be applied to finished photographs to allow corrective retouching, 
protection of the image, changes in gloss level, or to cover 
fingerprints.
    Pleasure Craft means privately owned vessels used for noncommercial 
purposes.
    Pleasure Craft Finish Primer/Surfacer/Undercoater means a coating 
designed and labeled exclusively to be applied prior to the application 
of a pleasure craft topcoat for the purpose of corrosion resistance and 
adhesion of the topcoat, and which promotes a uniform surface by 
filling in surface imperfections.
    Pleasure Craft Topcoat means a coating designed and labeled 
exclusively to be applied to a pleasure craft as a final coat above the 
waterline and below the waterline when stored out of water. This 
category does not include clear coatings.
    Polyolefin Adhesion Promoter means a coating designed and labeled 
exclusively to be applied to a polyolefin or polyolefin copolymer 
surface of automotive body parts, bumpers, or trim parts to provide a 
bond between the surface and subsequent coats.
    Primer means a coating labeled as such, which is designed to be 
applied to a surface to provide a bond between that surface and 
subsequent coats.
    Product Weighted Reactivity (PWR) Limit means the maximum 
``product-weighted reactivity,'' as calculated in Sec.  59.505, allowed 
in an aerosol coating product that is subject to the limits specified 
in Sec.  59.504 for a specific category, expressed as g O3/g 
product.
    Propellant means a liquefied or compressed gas that is used in 
whole or in part, such as a co-solvent, to expel a liquid or any other 
material from the same self-pressurized container or from a separate 
container.
    Reactivity Factor (RF) is a measure of the change in mass of ozone 
formed by adding a gram of a VOC to the ambient atmosphere, expressed 
to hundredths of a gram (g O3/g VOC). The RF values for 
individual compounds and hydrocarbon solvents are specified in Tables 
2A, 2B, and 2C of this subpart.
    Regulated Entity means the company, firm, or establishment which is 
listed on the product's label. If the label lists two companies, firms 
or establishments, the responsible party is the party which the product 
was ``manufactured for'' or ``distributed by'', as noted on the label.
    Retailer means any person who sells, supplies, or offers aerosol 
coating products for sale directly to consumers.
    Retail Outlet means any establishment where consumer products are 
sold, supplied, or offered for sale, directly to consumers.
    Shellac Sealer means a clear or pigmented coating formulated solely 
with the resinous secretion of the lac beetle (Laccifer lacca), thinned 
with alcohol, and formulated to dry by evaporation without a chemical 
reaction.
    Slip-Resistant Coating means a coating designed and labeled 
exclusively as such, which is formulated with synthetic grit and used 
as a safety coating.
    Spatter Coating/Multicolor Coating means a coating labeled 
exclusively as such wherein spots, globules, or spatters of contrasting 
colors appear on or within the surface of a contrasting or similar 
background.
    Stain means a coating which is designed and labeled to change the 
color of a surface but not conceal the surface.
    Vinyl/Fabric/Leather/Polycarbonate Coating means a coating designed 
and labeled exclusively to coat vinyl, fabric, leather, or 
polycarbonate substrates or to coat flexible substrates including 
rubber or thermoplastic substrates.
    Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) means any organic compound as 
defined in Sec.  51.100(s) of this chapter. Exemptions from the 
definition of VOC in Sec.  51.100(s)(1) are inapplicable for purposes 
of this subpart.
    Webbing/Veiling Coating means a coating designed and labeled 
exclusively to provide a stranded to spider webbed appearance when 
applied.
    Weight Fraction means the weight of an ingredient divided by the 
total net weight of the product, expressed to thousandths of a gram of 
ingredient per gram of product (excluding container and packaging).
    Weld-Through Primer means a coating designed and labeled 
exclusively to provide a bridging or conducting effect for corrosion 
protection following welding.
    Wood Stain means a coating which is formulated to change the color 
of a wood surface but not conceal the surface.
    Wood Touch-Up/Repair/Restoration means a coating designed and 
labeled exclusively to provide an exact color or sheen match on 
finished wood products.
    Working Day means any day between Monday and Friday, inclusive, 
except for days that are federal holidays.


Sec.  59.504  What limits must I meet?

    (a) Except as provided in Sec.  59.509, each aerosol coating 
product you manufacture or import for sale or use in the United States 
must meet the PWR limits presented in Table 1 of this subpart. These 
limits apply to the final aerosol coating, including the propellant. 
The PWR limits specified in Table 1 of this subpart are also applicable 
to any aerosol coating product that is assembled by adding bulk coating 
to aerosol containers of propellant.
    (b) If a product can be included in both a general coating category 
and a specialty coating category, and the product meets all of the 
criteria of the specialty coating category, then the specialty coating 
limit will apply instead of the general coating limit, unless the 
product is a high temperature coating. High-temperature coatings that 
contain at least 0.5 percent by weight of an elemental metallic pigment 
in the formulation, including propellant, are subject to the limit 
specified for metallic coatings.
    (c) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, if 
anywhere on the container of any aerosol coating product subject to the 
limits in Table 1 of this subpart, or on any sticker or label affixed 
to such product, or in any sales or advertising literature, the 
manufacturer, importer or distributor of the product makes any 
representation that the product may be used as, or is

[[Page 38976]]

suitable for use as a product for which a lower limit is specified, 
then the lowest applicable limit will apply.


Sec.  59.505  How do I demonstrate compliance with the reactivity 
limits?

    (a) To demonstrate compliance with the PWR limits presented in 
Table 1 of this subpart, you must calculate the product weighted 
reactivity (PWR) for each coating as described in paragraphs (a)(1) 
through (2) of this section:
    (1) Calculate the weighted reactivity factor (WRF) for each 
propellant and coating component using Equation 1:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16JY07.007


Where:

WRFi = Weighted reactivity factor of component i, g 
O3/g component i.
RFi = reactivity factor of component i, g O3/ 
g component i, from Table 2A, 2B, or 2C.
WFi = weight fraction of component i in the product.

    (2) Calculate the product weighted reactivity (PWR) of each product 
using Equation 2:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16JY07.008


Where:

PWRp = Product weighted reactivity for product P, g 
O3/g product.
WRF1 = weighted reactivity factor for component 1, g 
O3/g component.
WRF2 = weighted reactivity factor for component 2, g 
O3/g component.
WRFn = weighted reactivity factor for component n, g 
O3/g component.

    (b) In calculating the PWR you should follow the guidelines in 
paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) of this section.
    (1) Any ingredient which does not contain carbon is assigned a RF 
value of 0.
    (2) Any aerosol coating solid, including but not limited to resins, 
pigments, fillers, plasticizers, and extenders is assigned a RF of 0. 
These items do not have to be identified individually in the 
calculation.
    (3) All individual compounds present in the coating in an amount 
equal to or exceeding 0.1 percent will be considered ingredients 
regardless of whether or not the ingredient is reported to the 
manufacturer.
    (4) Any component that is a VOC but is not listed in Table 2A, 2B, 
or 2C of this subpart is assigned the maximum RF value for all 
compounds listed in Table 2A, 2B, or 2C of this subpart.
    (c) You may use either formulation data (including information for 
both the liquid and propellant phases), CARB's Method 310 
[Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Consumer Products 
and Reactive Organic Compounds in Aerosol Coating Products], or EPA's 
Method 311 [Analysis of Hazardous Air Pollutant Compounds in Paints and 
Coatings] of 40 CFR part 63 to calculate the Product Weighed 
Reactivity. However, if there are inconsistencies between the 
formulation data and the Method 310 or Method 311 results, the Method 
310 or 311 results will govern.
    (d) If you manufacture a coating containing either an aromatic or 
aliphatic hydrocarbon solvent mixture, you may use the appropriate 
reactivity factor for that mixture provided in Table 2B or 2C of this 
subpart when calculating the PWR using formulation data. However, when 
calculating the PWR for a coating containing these mixtures using data 
from EPA Method 310 of 40 CFR part 63 or CARB Method 311, you must 
identify the individual compounds that are present in the solvent 
mixture and use the weight fraction of those individual compounds and 
their reactivity factors from Table 2A of this subpart in the 
calculation.
    (e) If a VOC is not listed in Table 2A, 2B, or 2C of this subpart, 
the Reactivity Factor is assumed to be 22.04 g O3/g VOC. 
Regulated entities may petition the Administrator to add a compound to 
Table 2A, 2B, or 2C of this subpart. Petitions should provide adequate 
data for the Administrator to evaluate the reactivity of the compound 
and assign a RF value consistent with the values for the other 
compounds listed in Table 2 of this subpart.
    (f) In calculating the PWR value for a coating containing an 
aromatic hydrocarbon solvent with a boiling range different from the 
ranges specified in Table 2C of this subpart, you must assign a 
reactivity factor as described in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this 
section:
    (1) If the solvent boiling point is lower than or equal to 420 
degrees F, then you should use the reactivity factor in Table 2C of 
this subpart specified for bin 3;
    (2) If the solvent boiling point is higher than 420 degrees F, then 
you should use the reactivity factor specified in Table 2C of this 
subpart for bin 24.
    (g) For purposes of compliance with the PWR limits, all VOC 
compounds must be included in the calculation. The exemptions from the 
definition of VOC in Sec.  59.100(s)(1) are inapplicable for purposes 
of this subpart.


Sec.  59.506  How do I demonstrate compliance if I manufacture multi-
component kits?

    (a) If you manufacture multi-component kits as defined in Sec.  
59.503, then the Kit Product Weighted Reactivity must not exceed the 
Total Reactivity Limit.
    (b) You can calculate the Kit Product Weighted Reactivity and the 
Total Reactivity Limit as follows:
    (1) KIT PWR = (PWR(1) x W1) + 
(PWR(2) x W2)+. ...+(PWR(n) x 
Wn)
    (2) Total Reactivity Limit = (RL1 x W1) + 
(RL2 x W2) +...+ (RLn x 
Wn).
    (3) Kit PWR < = Total Reactivity Limit.

Where:

W = The weight of the product contents (excluding container)
RL = the Product Weighted Reactivity Limit specified in Table 1 of 
this subpart.
Subscript 1 denotes the first component product in the kit
Subscript 2 denotes the second component product in the kit
Subscript n denotes any additional component product


Sec.  59.507  What are the labeling requirements for aerosol coatings?

    (a) Aerosol coatings manufactured after January 1, 2009 must be 
labeled with the following information:
    (1) The aerosol coating category or category code shown in Table 1 
of this subpart, as defined in Sec.  59.503;
    (2) The applicable PWR limit for the product specified in Table 1 
of this subpart;
    (3) The day, month, and year on which the product was manufactured, 
or a code indicating such date;
    (4) The name and a contact address for the manufacturer, 
distributor, or importer that is the regulated entity under this rule.
    (b) The label on the product must be displayed in such a manner 
that it is readily observable without removing or disassembling any 
portion of the product container or packaging. The information may be 
displayed on the bottom of the container as long as it is clearly 
legible without removing any product packaging.


Sec.  59.508  What test methods must I use?

    (a) Except as provided in Sec.  59.505(c), you must use the 
procedures in CARB's Method 310 [Determination of Volatile Organic 
Compounds (VOC) in Consumer Products and Reactive Organic Compounds in 
Aerosol Coating

[[Page 38977]]

Products] or EPA's Method 311 [Analysis of Hazardous Air Pollutant 
Compounds in Paints and Coatings] to determine the speciated 
ingredients and weight percentage of each ingredient of each aerosol 
coating product. Method 311 should be used in conjunction with ASTM 
Method D3063-94 or D3074-94 for analysis of the propellant portion of 
the coating. Those choosing to use Method 310 should follow the 
procedures specified in section 5.0 of that method with the exception 
of section 5.3.1, which requires the analysis of the VOC content of the 
coating. For the purposes of this regulation, you are not required to 
determine the VOC content of the aerosol coating. For both Method 310 
and Method 311, you must have a listing of the VOC ingredients in the 
coating before conducting the analysis.
    (b) To determine the metal content of metallic aerosol coating 
products, you must use SCAQMD Method 318-95, ``Determination of Weight 
Percent Elemental Metal in Coatings by X-ray Diffraction.''
    (c) To determine the specular gloss of flat and nonflat coatings 
you must use ASTM Method D-523-89 (1999).
    (d) To determine the acid content of rust converters you must use 
ASTM Method D-1613-03, ``Standard Test Method for Acidity in Volatile 
Solvents and Chemical Intermediates Used in Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, 
and Related Products.''


Sec.  59.509  Can I get a variance?

    (a) Any regulated entity that cannot comply with the requirements 
of this subpart because of circumstances beyond its reasonable control 
may apply in writing to the Administrator for a temporary variance. The 
variance application must include the information specified in 
paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) of this section.
    (1) The specific products for which the variance is sought.
    (2) The specific provisions of the subpart for which the variance 
is sought.
    (3) The specific grounds upon which the variance is sought.
    (4) The proposed date(s) by which the regulated entity will achieve 
compliance with the provisions of this subpart. This date must be no 
later than 3 years after the issuance of a variance.
    (5) A compliance plan detailing the method(s) by which the 
regulated entity will achieve compliance with the provisions of this 
subpart.
    (b) Within 30 days of receipt of the original application and 
within 30 days of receipt of any supplementary information that is 
submitted, the Administrator will send a regulated entity written 
notification of whether the application contains sufficient information 
to make a determination. If an application is incomplete, the 
Administrator will specify the information needed to complete the 
application, and provide the opportunity for the regulated entity to 
submit written supplementary information or arguments to the 
Administrator to enable further action on the application. The 
regulated entity must submit this information to the Administrator 
within 30 days of being notified that its application is incomplete.
    (c) Within 60 days of receipt of sufficient information to evaluate 
the application, the Administrator will send a regulated entity written 
notification of approval or disapproval of a variance application. This 
60-day period will begin after the regulated entity has been sent 
written notification that its application is complete.
    (d) The Administrator will issue a variance if the criteria 
specified in paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) of this section are met to 
the satisfaction of the Administrator.
    (1) Complying with the provisions of this subpart would not be 
technologically or economically feasible.
    (2) The compliance plan proposed by the applicant can reasonably be 
implemented and will achieve compliance as expeditiously as possible.
    (e) A variance may specify dates by which the regulated entity will 
achieve increments of progress towards compliance, and will specify a 
final compliance date by which the regulated entity will achieve 
compliance with this subpart.
    (f) A variance will cease to be effective upon failure of the party 
to whom the variance was issued to comply with any term or condition of 
the variance.


Sec.  59.510  What records am I required to maintain?

    (a) Beginning January 1, 2009, you are required to maintain records 
of the following at the location specified in Sec.  59.511(a)(4) for 
each product subject to the PWR limits in Table 1 of this subpart: The 
product category, all product calculations, the Product Weighted 
Reactivity, and the weight fraction of all ingredients including: 
Water, solids, each VOC, and any compounds assigned a reactivity factor 
of zero as specified in Sec.  59.505. If an individual VOC is present 
in an amount less than 0.1 percent by weight, then it does not need to 
be reported as an ingredient. In addition, an impurity that meets the 
definition provided in Sec.  59.503 does not have to be reported as an 
ingredient. For each batch of each product subject to the PWR limits, 
you must maintain records of the date the batch was manufactured, the 
volume of the batch, the recipe used for formulating the batch, and the 
number of cans manufactured in each batch and each formulation.
    (b) A copy of each notification that you submit to comply with this 
subpart, the documentation supporting each notification, and a copy of 
the label for each product.
    (c) If you claim the exemption under Sec.  59.501(e), a copy of the 
initial report and each annual report that you submit to EPA, and the 
documentation supporting such report.
    (d) You must maintain all records required by this subpart for a 
period of 5 years.


Sec.  59.511  What reports must I submit?

    (a) You must submit an initial notification report no later than 90 
days before the compliance date or within 90 days before the date that 
you first manufacture, distribute, or import aerosol coatings, 
whichever is later. The initial report must include the information in 
paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(6) of this section.
    (1) Company name;
    (2) Name, title, number, address, telephone number, e-mail address, 
and signature of certifying company official;
    (3) A list of the product categories from Table 1 of this subpart 
that you manufacture, import or distribute;
    (4) The street address of each of your facilities in the United 
States that is manufacturing, packaging, or importing aerosol coatings 
that are subject to the provisions of this subpart and the street 
address where compliance records are maintained for each site, if 
different;
    (5) A description of date coding systems, clearly explaining how 
the date of manufacture is marked on each sales unit;
    (6) For each product category, an explanation of how the 
manufacturer, distributor, or importer will define a batch for the 
purpose of the recordkeeping requirements; and
    (7) A statement certifying that all products manufactured by the 
company that are subject to the limits in Table 1 of this subpart will 
be in compliance with those limits.
    (b) If you change any information included in the initial 
notification report, including the list of aerosol categories, contact 
information, records location, or the date coding system reported 
according to paragraph (a)(5) of

[[Page 38978]]

this section, you must notify the Administrator of such changes within 
30 days following the change.
    (c) Upon 60 days written notice, you must submit to the 
Administrator a written report with all the information in paragraphs 
(c)(1) through (c)(5) of this section for each product you manufacture, 
distribute, or import under your name or another company's name.
    (1) The brand name of the product;
    (2) A copy of the product label;
    (3) The owner of the trademark or brand names;
    (4) The product category as defined in Sec.  59.503;
    (5) Product formulation data for each formulation manufactured 
including the PWR and the weight fraction of all ingredients including: 
Water, solids, each VOC present in an amount greater than or equal to 
0.1 percent, and any compounds assigned a reactivity factor of zero.
    (d) If you claim the exemption under Sec.  59.501(e), you must 
submit an initial notification report no later than 90 days before the 
compliance date or within 90 days before the date that you first 
manufacture aerosol coatings, whichever is later. The initial report 
must include the information in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(6) of 
this section.
    (1) Company name;
    (2) Name, title, number, address, telephone number, e-mail address, 
and signature of certifying company official;
    (3) A list of the product categories from Table 1 of this subpart 
that you manufacture;
    (4) The total amount of product you manufacture in each category 
and the total VOC mass content of such products for the preceding 
calendar year;
    (5) The street address of each of your facilities in the United 
States that is manufacturing aerosol coatings that are subject to the 
provisions of this subpart and the street address where compliance 
records are maintained for each site, if different; and
    (6) A list of the States in which you sell or otherwise distribute 
the products you manufacture.
    After the initial report, you must file an annual report for each 
year in which you claim an exemption from the limits of this subpart. 
Such annual report must be filed by March 1 of the year following the 
year in which you manufactured the products. The annual report shall 
include the same information required in paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) 
of this section.


Sec.  59.512  Addresses of EPA regional offices.

    All requests (including variance requests), reports, submittals, 
and other communications to the Administrator pursuant to this 
regulation shall be submitted to the Regional Office of the EPA which 
serves the State or territory for the address that is listed on the 
aerosol coating product in question. These areas are indicated in the 
following list of EPA Regional Offices.
    EPA Region I (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, 
Rhode Island, Vermont), Director, Office of Environmental Stewardship, 
Mailcode: SAA, JFK Building, Boston, MA 02203.
    EPA Region II (New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands), 
Director, Division of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance, 290 
Broadway, New York, NY 10007-1866.
    EPA Region III (Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, 
Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia), Air Protection Division, 1650 
Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103.
    EPA Region IV (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, 
North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee), Director, Air, Pesticides 
and Toxics, Management Division, 345 Courtland Street, NE., Atlanta, GA 
30365.
    EPA Region V (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, 
Wisconsin), Director, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson 
Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604-3507.
    EPA Region VI (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas), 
Director, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Division, 1445 Ross Avenue, 
Dallas, TX 75202-2733.
    EPA Region VII (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska), Director, Air 
and Toxics Division, 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, KS 66101.
    EPA Region VIII (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, 
Utah, Wyoming), Director, Air and Toxics Division, 999 18th Street, 1 
Denver Place, Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202-2405.
    EPA Region IX (American Samoa, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, 
Nevada), Director, Air Division, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 
94105.
    EPA Region X (Alaska, Oregon, Idaho, Washington), Director, Air and 
Toxics Division, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.


Sec.  59.513  State authority.

    The provisions in this regulation will not be construed in any 
manner to preclude any State or political subdivision thereof from:
    (a) Adopting and enforcing any emission standard or limitation 
applicable to a manufacturer, distributor or importer of aerosol 
coatings or components in addition to the requirements of this subpart.
    (b) Requiring the manufacturer, distributor or importer of aerosol 
coatings or components to obtain permits, licenses, or approvals prior 
to initiating construction, modification, or operation of a facility 
for manufacturing an aerosol coating or component.


Sec.  59.514  Circumvention.

    Each manufacturer, distributor, and importer of an aerosol coating 
or component subject to the provisions of this subpart must not alter, 
destroy, or falsify any record or report, to conceal what would 
otherwise be noncompliance with this subpart. Such concealment 
includes, but is not limited to, refusing to provide the Administrator 
access to all required records and date-coding information, altering 
the PWR content of a coating or component batch, or altering the 
results of any required tests to determine the PWR.


Sec.  59.515  Incorporations by reference.

    (a) The following material is incorporated by reference (IBR) in 
the paragraphs noted in Sec.  59.508. These incorporations by reference 
were approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance 
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. These materials are 
incorporated as they exist on the date of approval, and notice of any 
changes in these materials will be published in the Federal Register.
    (1) California Air Resources Board Method 310, Determination of 
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Consumer Products and Reactive 
Organic Compounds in Aerosol Coating Products, IBR approved for Sec.  
59.508.
    (2) South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Test 
Method 318-95, Determination of Weight Percent Elemental Metal in 
Coatings by X-ray Diffraction, IBR approved for Sec.  59.508.
    (3) ASTM Method D-523-89 (1999), Specular Gloss of Flat and Nonflat 
Coatings, IBR approved for Sec.  59.508.
    (4) ASTM Method D-1613-03, Standard Test Method for Acidity in 
Volatile Solvents and Chemical Intermediates Used in Coating, Varnish, 
Lacquer and Related Products, IBR approved for Sec.  59.508.
    (5) EPA Method 311--Analysis of Hazardous Air Pollutant Compounds 
in Paints and Coatings by Direct Injection into a Gas Chromatograph, 
IBR approved for Sec.  59.508.
    (b) The materials are available for inspection at the National 
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For

[[Page 38979]]

information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html
; the Air and Radiation Docket 

and Information Center, U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC; 
and at the EPA Library (Mail Code C267-07), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle 
Park, North Carolina.
    (c) Reports and Applications. The content of all reports and 
applications required to be submitted to the Agency under Sec.  59.511, 
Sec.  59.509 or Sec.  59.502 of this subpart are not entitled to 
protection under section 114(c) of the Clean Air Act.


Sec.  59.516  Availability of information and confidentiality.

    (a) Availability of information. The availability to the public of 
information provided to or otherwise obtained by the Administrator 
under this part shall be governed by part 2 of this chapter.
    (b) Confidentiality. All confidential business information entitled 
to protection under section 114(c) of the Clean Air Act that must be 
submitted or maintained by each regulated entity pursuant to this 
subpart shall be treated in accordance with 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.

Tables to Subpart E

 Table 1 To Subpart E of Part 59.--Product-Weighted Reactivity Limits by
                            Coating Category
                           (g Ozone/g product)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Reactivity
          Coating category              Category code          limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clear Coatings.....................  CCP................            1.50
Flat Coatings......................  FCP................            1.20
Fluorescent Coatings...............  FLP................            1.75
Metallic Coatings..................  MCP................            1.90
Non-Flat Coatings..................  NFP................            1.40
Primers............................  PCP................            1.20
Ground Traffic/Marking.............  GTM................            1.20
Art Fixatives or Sealants..........  AFS................            1.80
Auto body primers..................  ABP................            1.55
Automotive Bumper and Trim Products  ABT................            1.75
Aviation or Marine Primers.........  AMP................            2.00
Aviation Propellor Coatings........  APC................            2.50
Corrosion Resistant Brass, Bronze,   CRB................            1.80
 or Copper Coatings.
Exact Match Finish--Engine Enamel..  EEE................            1.70
Exact Match Finish--Automotive.....  EFA................            1.50
Exact Match Finish--Industrial.....  EFI................            2.05
Floral Sprays......................  FSP................            1.70
Glass Coatings.....................  GCP................            1.40
High Temperature Coatings..........  HTC................            1.85
Hobby/Model/Craft Coatings, Enamel.  HME................            1.45
Hobby/Model/Craft Coatings, Lacquer  HML................            2.70
Hobby/Model/Craft Coatings, Clear    HMC................            1.60
 or Metallic.
Marine Spar Varnishes..............  MSV................            0.90
Photograph Coatings................  PHC................            1.00
Pleasure Craft Primers, Surfacers    PCS................            1.05
 or Undercoaters.
Pleasure Craft Topcoats............  PCT................            0.60
Polyolefin Adhesion Promoters......  PAP................            2.50
Shellac Sealers, Clear.............  SSC................            1.00
Shellac Sealers, Pigmented.........  SSP................            0.95
Slip-Resistant Coatings............  SRC................            2.45
Spatter/Multicolor Coatings........  SMC................            1.05
Vinyl/Fabric/Leather/Polycarbonate   VFL................            1.55
 Coatings.
Webbing/Veiling Coatings...........  WFC................            0.85
Weld-Through Primers...............  WTP................            1.00
Wood Stains........................  WSP................            1.40
Wood Touch-up/Repair or Restoration  WTR................            1.50
 Coatings.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


          Table 2A To Subpart E of Part 59.--Reactivity Factors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Reactivity
                    Organic compound                          factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon Monoxide.........................................            0.06
Methane.................................................            0.01
Ethane..................................................            0.31
Propane.................................................            0.56
n-Butane................................................            1.33
n-Pentane...............................................            1.54
n-Hexane................................................            1.45
n-Heptane...............................................            1.28
n-Octane................................................            1.11
n-Nonane................................................            0.95
n-Decane................................................            0.83
n-Undecane..............................................            0.74

[[Page 38980]]


n-Dodecane..............................................            0.66
n-Tridecane.............................................            0.62
n-Tetradecane...........................................            0.58
n-Pentadecane...........................................            0.56
n-C16...................................................            0.52
n-C17...................................................            0.49
n-C18...................................................            0.47
n-C19...................................................            0.44
n-C20...................................................            0.42
n-C21...................................................            0.40
n-C22...................................................            0.38
Isobutane...............................................            1.35
Isopentane..............................................            1.68
Neopentane..............................................            0.69
Branched C5 Alkanes.....................................            1.68
2,2-Dimethyl Butane.....................................            1.33
2,3-Dimethyl Butane.....................................            1.14
2-Methyl Pentane (Isohexane)............................            1.80
3-Methyl Pentane........................................            2.07
Branched C6 Alkanes.....................................            1.53
2,2,3-Trimethyl Butane..................................            1.32
2,2-Dimethyl Pentane....................................            1.22
2,3-Dimethyl Pentane....................................            1.55
2,4-Dimethyl Pentane....................................            1.65
2-Methyl Hexane.........................................            1.37
3,3-Dimethyl Pentane....................................            1.32
3-Methyl Hexane.........................................            1.86
Branched C7 Alkanes.....................................            1.63
2,2,3,3-Tetramethyl Butane..............................            0.44
2,2,4-Trimethyl Pentane (Isooctane).....................            1.44
2,2-Dimethyl Hexane.....................................            1.13
2,3,4-Trimethyl Pentane.................................            1.23
2,3-Dimethyl Hexane.....................................            1.34
2,4-Dimethyl Hexane.....................................            1.80
2,5-Dimethyl Hexane.....................................            1.68
2-Methyl Heptane........................................            1.20
3-Methyl Heptane........................................            1.35
4-Methyl Heptane........................................            1.48
Branched C8 Alkanes.....................................            1.57
2,2,5-Trimethyl Hexane..................................            1.33
2,3,5-Trimethyl Hexane..................................            1.33
2,4-Dimethyl Heptane....................................            1.48
2-Methyl Octane.........................................            0.96
3,3-Diethyl Pentane.....................................            1.35
3,5-Dimethyl Heptane....................................            1.63
4-Ethyl Heptane.........................................            1.44
4-Methyl Octane.........................................            1.08
Branched C9 Alkanes.....................................            1.25
2,4-Dimethyl Octane.....................................            1.09
2,6-Dimethyl Octane.....................................            1.27
2-Methyl Nonane.........................................            0.86
3,4-Diethyl Hexane......................................            1.20
3-Methyl Nonane.........................................            0.89
4-Methyl Nonane.........................................            0.99
4-Propyl Heptane........................................            1.24
Branched C10 Alkanes....................................            1.09
2,6-Dimethyl Nonane.....................................            0.95
3,5-Diethyl Heptane.....................................            1.21
3-Methyl Decane.........................................            0.77
4-Methyl Decane.........................................            0.80
Branched C11 Alkanes....................................            0.87
2,3,4,6-Tetramethyl Heptane.............................            1.26
2,6-Diethyl Octane......................................            1.09
3,6-Dimethyl Decane.....................................            0.88
3-Methyl Undecane.......................................            0.70
5-Methyl Undecane.......................................            0.72
Branched C12 Alkanes....................................            0.80
2,3,5,7-Tetramethyl Octane..............................            1.06
3,6-Dimethyl Undecane...................................            0.82
3,7-Diethyl Nonane......................................            1.08
3-Methyl Dodecane.......................................            0.64

[[Page 38981]]


5-Methyl Dodecane.......................................            0.64
Branched C13 Alkanes....................................            0.73
2,4,6,8-Tetramethyl Nonane..............................            0.94
2,3,6-Trimethyl 4-Isopropyl Heptane.....................            1.24
3,7-Dimethyl Dodecane...................................            0.74
3,8-Diethyl Decane......................................            0.68
3-Methyl Tridecane......................................            0.57
6-Methyl Tridecane......................................            0.62
Branched C14 Alkanes....................................            0.67
2,4,5,6,8-Pentamethyl Nonane............................            1.11
2-Methyl 3,5-Diisopropyl Heptane........................            0.78
3,7-Dimethyl Tridecane..................................            0.64
3,9-Diethyl Undecane....................................            0.62
3-Methyl Tetradecane....................................            0.53
6-Methyl Tetradecane....................................            0.57
Branched C15 Alkanes....................................            0.60
2,6,8-Trimethyl 4-Isopropyl Nonane......................            0.76
3-Methyl Pentadecane....................................            0.50
4,8-Dimethyl Tetradecane................................            0.58
7-Methyl Pentadecane....................................            0.51
Branched C16 Alkanes....................................            0.54
2,7-Dimethyl 3,5-Diisopropyl Heptane....................            0.69
Branched C17 Alkanes....................................            0.51
Branched C18 Alkanes....................................            0.48
Cyclopropane............................................            0.10
Cyclobutane.............................................            1.05
Cyclopentane............................................            2.69
Cyclohexane.............................................            1.46
Isopropyl Cyclopropane..................................            1.52
Methylcyclopentane......................................            2.42
C6 Cycloalkanes.........................................            1.46
1,3-Dimethyl Cyclopentane...............................            2.15
Cycloheptane............................................            2.26
Ethyl Cyclopentane......................................            2.27
Methylcyclohexane.......................................            1.99
C7 Cycloalkanes.........................................            1.99
C8 Bicycloalkanes.......................................            1.75
1,3-Dimethyl Cyclohexane................................            1.72
Cyclooctane.............................................            1.73
Ethylcyclohexane........................................            1.75
Propyl Cyclopentane.....................................            1.91
C8 Cycloalkanes.........................................            1.75
C9 Bicycloalkanes.......................................            1.57
1,1,3-Trimethyl Cyclohexane.............................            1.37
1-Ethyl-4-Methyl Cyclohexane............................            1.62
Propyl Cyclohexane......................................            1.47
C9 Cycloalkanes.........................................            1.55
C10 Bicycloalkanes......................................            1.29
1,3-Diethyl Cyclohexane.................................            1.34
1,4-Diethyl Cyclohexane.................................            1.49
1-Methyl-3-Isopropyl Cyclohexane........................            1.26
Butyl Cyclohexane.......................................            1.07
C10 Cycloalkanes........................................            1.27
C11 Bicycloalkanes......................................            1.01
1,3-Diethyl-5-Methyl Cyclohexane........................            1.11
1-Ethyl-2-Propyl Cyclohexane............................            0.95
Pentyl Cyclohexane......................................            0.91
C11 Cycloalkanes........................................            0.99
C12 Bicycloalkanes......................................            0.88
C12 Cycloalkanes........................................            0.87
1,3,5-Triethyl Cyclohexane..............................            1.06
1-Methyl-4-Pentyl Cyclohexane...........................            0.81
Hexyl Cyclohexane.......................................            0.75
C13 Bicycloalkanes......................................            0.79
1,3-Diethyl-5-Propyl Cyclohexane........................            0.96
1-Methyl-2-Hexyl Cyclohexane............................            0.70
Heptyl Cyclohexane......................................            0.66
C13 Cycloalkanes........................................            0.78
C14 Bicycloalkanes......................................            0.71
1,3-Dipropyl-5-Ethyl Cyclohexane........................            0.94
1-Methyl-4-Heptyl Cyclohexane...........................            0.58

[[Page 38982]]


Octyl Cyclohexane.......................................            0.60
C14 Cycloalkanes........................................            0.71
C15 Bicycloalkanes......................................            0.69
1,3,5-Tripropyl Cyclohexane.............................            0.90
1-Methyl-2-Octyl Cyclohexane............................            0.60
Nonyl Cyclohexane.......................................            0.54
C15 Cycloalkanes........................................            0.68
1,3-Dipropyl-5-Butyl Cyclohexane........................            0.77
1-Methyl-4-Nonyl Cyclohexane............................            0.55
Decyl Cyclohexane.......................................            0.50
C16 Cycloalkanes........................................            0.61
Ethene..................................................            9.08
Propene (Propylene).....................................           11.58
1-Butene................................................           10.29
C4 Terminal Alkenes.....................................           10.29
1-Pentene...............................................            7.79
3-Methyl-1-Butene.......................................            6.99
C5 Terminal Alkenes.....................................            7.79
1-Hexene................................................            6.17
3,3-Dimethyl-1-Butene...................................            6.06
3-Methyl-1-Pentene......................................            6.22
4-Methyl-1-Pentene......................................            6.26
C6 Terminal Alkenes.....................................            6.17
1-Heptene...............................................            4.56
1-Octene................................................            3.45
C8 Terminal Alkenes.....................................            3.45
1-Nonene................................................            2.76
C9 Terminal Alkenes.....................................            2.76
1-Decene................................................            2.28
C10 Terminal Alkenes....................................            2.28
1-Undecene..............................................            1.95
C11 Terminal Alkenes....................................            1.95
C12 Terminal Alkenes....................................            1.72
1-Dodecene..............................................            1.72
1-Tridecene.............................................            1.55
C13 Terminal Alkenes....................................            1.55
1-Tetradecene...........................................            1.41
C14 Terminal Alkenes....................................            1.41
1-Pentadecene...........................................            1.37
C15 Terminal Alkenes....................................            1.37
2-Methyl Pentene (Isobutene)............................            6.35
2-Methyl-1-Butene.......................................            6.51
2,3-Dimethyl-1-Butene...................................            4.77
2-Ethyl-1-Butene........................................            5.04
2-Methyl-1-Pentene......................................            5.18
2,3,3-Trimethyl-1-Butene................................            4.62
C7 Terminal Alkenes.....................................            4.56
3-Methyl-2-Isopropyl-1-Butene...........................            3.29
cis-2-Butene............................................           13.22
trans-2-Butene..........................................           13.91
C4 Internal Alkenes.....................................           13.57
2-Methyl-2-Butene.......................................           14.45
cis-2-Pentene...........................................           10.24
trans-2-Pentene.........................................           10.23
2-Pentenes..............................................           10.23
C5 Internal Alkenes.....................................           10.23
2,3-Dimethyl-2-Butene...................................           13.32
2-Methyl-2-Pentene......................................           12.28
cis-2-Hexene............................................            8.44
cis-3-Hexene............................................            8.22
cis-3-Methyl-2-Pentene..................................           12.84
cis-3-Methyl-2-Hexene...................................           13.38
trans 3-Methyl-2-Hexene.................................           14.17
trans 4-Methyl-2-Hexene.................................            7.88
trans-2-Hexene..........................................            8.44
trans-3-Hexene..........................................            8.16
2-Hexenes...............................................            8.44
C6 Internal Alkenes.....................................            8.44
2,3-Dimethyl-2-Hexene...................................           10.41
cis-3-Heptene...........................................            6.96
trans-4,4-Dimethyl-2-Pentene............................            6.99

[[Page 38983]]


trans-2-Heptene.........................................            7.33
trans-3-Heptene.........................................            6.96
2-Heptenes..............................................            6.96
C7 Internal Alkenes.....................................            6.96
cis-4-Octene............................................            5.94
trans-2,2-Dimethyl-3-Hexene.............................            5.97
trans-2,5-Dimethyl-3-Hexene.............................            5.44
trans-3-Octene..........................................            6.13
trans-4-Octene..........................................            5.90
3-Octenes...............................................            6.13
C8 Internal Alkenes.....................................            5.90
2,4,4-Trimethyl-2-Pentene...............................            5.85
3-Nonenes...............................................            5.31
C9 Internal Alkenes.....................................            5.31
trans-4-Nonene..........................................            5.23
3,4-Diethyl-2-Hexene....................................            3.95
cis-5-Decene............................................            4.89
trans-4-Decene..........................................            4.50
C10 3-Alkenes...........................................            4.50
C10 Internal Alkenes....................................            4.50
trans-5-Undecene........................................            4.23
C11 3-Alkenes...........................................            4.23
C11 Internal Alkenes....................................            4.23
C12 2-Alkenes...........................................            3.75
C12 3-Alkenes...........................................            3.75
C12 Internal Alkenes....................................            3.75
trans-5-Dodecene........................................            3.74
trans-5-Tridecene.......................................            3.38
C13 3-Alkenes...........................................            3.38
C13 Internal Alkenes....................................            3.38
trans-5-Tetradecene.....................................            3.08
C14 3-Alkenes...........................................            3.08
C14 Internal Alkenes....................................            3.08
trans-5-Pentadecene.....................................            2.82
C15 3-Alkenes...........................................            2.82
C15 Internal Alkenes....................................            2.82
C4 Alkenes..............................................           11.93
C5 Alkenes..............................................            9.01
C6 Alkenes..............................................            6.88
C7 Alkenes..............................................            5.76
C8 Alkenes..............................................            4.68
C9 Alkenes..............................................            4.03
C10 Alkenes.............................................            3.39
C11 Alkenes.............................................            3.09
C12 Alkenes.............................................            2.73
C13 Alkenes.............................................            2.46
C14 Alkenes.............................................            2.28
C15 Alkenes.............................................            2.06
Cyclopentene............................................            7.38
1-Methyl Cyclopentene...................................           13.95
Cyclohexene.............................................            5.45
1-Methyl Cyclohexene....................................            7.81
4-Methyl Cyclohexene....................................            4.48
1,2-Dimethyl Cyclohexene................................            6.77
1,3-Butadiene...........................................           13.58
Isoprene................................................           10.69
C6 Cyclic or Di-olefins.................................            8.65
C7 Cyclic or Di-olefins.................................            7.49
C8 Cyclic or Di-olefins.................................            6.01
C9 Cyclic or Di-olefins.................................            5.40
C10 Cyclic or Di-olefins................................            4.56
C11 Cyclic or Di-olefins................................            4.29
C12 Cyclic or Di-olefins................................            3.79
C13 Cyclic or Di-olefins................................            3.42
C14 Cyclic or Di-olefins................................            3.11
C15 Cyclic or Di-olefins................................            2.85
Cyclopentadiene.........................................            7.61
3-Carene................................................            3.21
a-Pinene (Pine Oil).....................................            4.29
b-Pinene................................................            3.28
d-Limonene (Dipentene or Orange Terpene)................            3.99

[[Page 38984]]


Sabinene................................................            3.67
Terpene.................................................            3.79
Styrene.................................................            1.95
a-Methyl Styrene........................................            1.72
C9 Styrenes.............................................            1.72
C10 Styrenes............................................            1.53
Benzene.................................................            0.81
Toluene.................................................            3.97
Ethyl Benzene...........................................            2.79
Cumene (Isopropyl Benzene)..............................            2.32
n-Propyl Benzene........................................            2.20
C9 Monosubstituted Benzenes.............................            2.20
s-Butyl Benzene.........................................            1.97
C10 Monosubstituted Benzenes............................            1.97
n-Butyl Benzene.........................................            1.97
C11 Monosubstituted Benzenes............................            1.78
C12 Monosubstituted Benzenes............................            1.63
C13 Monosubstituted Benzenes............................            1.50
m-Xylene................................................           10.61
o-Xylene................................................            7.49
p-Xylene................................................            4.25
C8 Disubstituted Benzenes...............................            7.48
m-Ethyl Toluene.........................................            9.37
p-Ethyl Toluene.........................................            3.75
o-Ethyl Toluene.........................................            6.61
C9 Disubstituted Benzenes...............................            6.61
o-Diethyl Benzene.......................................            5.92
m-Diethyl Benzene.......................................            8.39
p-Diethyl Benzene.......................................            3.36
C10 Disubstituted Benzenes..............................            5.92
C11 Disubstituted Benzenes..............................            5.35
C12 Disubstituted Benzenes..............................            4.90
C13 Disubstituted Benzenes..............................            4.50
Isomers of Ethylbenzene.................................            5.16
1,2,3-Trimethyl Benzene.................................           11.26
1,2,4-Trimethyl Benzene.................................            7.18
1,3,5-Trimethyl Benzene.................................           11.22
C9 Trisubstituted Benzenes..............................            9.90
Isomers of Propylbenzene................................            6.12
1,2,3,5-Tetramethyl Benzene.............................            8.25
C10 Tetrasubstituted Benzenes...........................            8.86
C10 Trisubstituted Benzenes.............................            8.86
Isomers of Butylbenzene.................................            5.48
C11 Pentasubstituted Benzenes...........................            8.03
C11 Tetrasubstituted Benzenes...........................            8.03
C11 Trisubstituted Benzenes.............................            8.03
Isomers of Pentylbenzene................................            4.96
C12 Pentasubstituted Benzenes...........................            7.33
C12 Hexasubstituted Benzenes............................            7.33
C12 Tetrasubstituted Benzenes...........................            7.33
C12 Trisubstituted Benzenes.............................            7.33
Isomers of Hexylbenzene.................................            4.53
C13 Trisubstituted Benzenes.............................            6.75
Indene..................................................            3.21
Indane..................................................            3.17
Naphthalene.............................................            3.26
Tetralin................................................            2.83
Methyl Indans...........................................            2.83
Methyl Naphthalenes.....................................            4.61
1-Methyl Naphthalene....................................            4.61
2-Methyl Naphthalene....................................            4.61
C11 Tetralin or Indane..................................            2.56
2,3-Dimethyl Naphthalene................................            5.54
C12 Disubstituted Naphthalenes..........................            5.54
Dimethyl Naphthalenes...................................            5.54
C12 Monosubstituted Naphthalenes........................            4.20
C12 Tetralin or Indane..................................            2.33
C13 Disubstituted Naphthalenes..........................            5.08
C13 Trisubstituted Naphthalenes.........................            5.08
C13 Monosubstituted Naphthalenes........................            3.86
Acetylene...............................................            1.25

[[Page 38985]]


Methyl Acetylene........................................            6.45
2-Butyne................................................           16.33
Ethyl Acetylene.........................................            6.20
Methanol................................................            0.71
Ethanol.................................................            1.69
Isopropanol (2-Propanol or Isopropyl Alcohol)...........            0.71
n-Propanol (n-Propyl Alcohol)...........................            2.74
Isobutanol (Isobutyl Alcohol)...........................            2.24
1-Butanol (n-Butyl Alcohol).............................            3.34
2-Butanol (s-Butyl Alcohol).............................            1.60
t-Butyl Alcohol.........................................            0.45
Cyclopentanol...........................................            1.96
2-Pentanol..............................................            1.74
3-Pentanol..............................................            1.73
n-Pentanol (Amyl Alcohol)...............................            3.35
Isoamyl Alcohol (3-Methyl-1-Butanol)....................            2.73
2-Methyl-1-Butanol......................................            2.60
Cyclohexanol............................................            2.25
1-Hexanol...............................................            2.74
2-Hexanol...............................................            2.46
4-Methyl-2-Pentanol (Methyl Isobutyl Carbinol)..........            2.89
1-Heptanol..............................................            2.21
Dimethylpentanol (2,3-Dimethyl-1-Pentanol)..............            2.51
1-Octanol...............................................            2.01
2-Ethyl-1-Hexanol (Ethyl Hexyl Alcohol).................            2.20
2-Octanol...............................................            2.16
3-Octanol...............................................            2.57
4-Octanol...............................................            3.07
5-Methyl-1-Heptanol.....................................            1.95
Trimethylcyclohexanol...................................            2.17
Dimethylheptanol (2,6-Dimethyl-2-Heptanol)..............            1.07
2,6-Dimethyl-4-Heptanol.................................            2.37
Menthol.................................................            1.70
Isodecyl Alcohol (8-Methyl-1-Nonanol)...................            1.23
1-Decanol...............................................            1.22
3,7-Dimethyl-1-Octanol..................................            1.42
Trimethylnonanolthreoerythro; 2,6,8-Trimethyl-4Nonanol..            1.55
Ethylene Glycol.........................................            3.36
Propylene Glycol........................................            2.75
1,2-Butanediol..........................................            2.21
Glycerol (1,2,3-Propanetriol)...........................            3.27
1,4-Butanediol..........................................            3.22
Pentaerythritol.........................................            2.42
1,2-Dihydroxy Hexane....................................            2.75
2-Methyl-2,4-Pentanediol................................            1.04
2-Ethyl-1,3-Hexanediol..................................            2.62
Dimethyl Ether..........................................            0.93
Trimethylene Oxide......................................            5.22
1,3-Dioxolane...........................................            5.47
Dimethoxymethane........................................            1.04
Tetrahydrofuran.........................................            4.95
Diethyl Ether...........................................            4.01
1,4-Dioxane.............................................            2.71
Alpha-Methyltetrahydrofuran.............................            4.62
Tetrahydropyran.........................................            3.81
Ethyl Isopropyl Ether...................................            3.86
Methyl n-Butyl Ether....................................            3.66
Methyl t-Butyl Ether....................................            0.78
2,2-Dimethoxypropane....................................            0.52
Di n-Propyl Ether.......................................            3.24
Ethyl n-Butyl Ether.....................................            3.86
Ethyl t-Butyl Ether.....................................            2.11
Methyl t-Amyl Ether.....................................            2.14
Di-isopropyl Ether......................................            3.56
Ethylene Glycol Diethyl Ether; 1,2Diethoxyethane........            2.84
Acetal (1,1-Diethoxyethane).............................            3.68
4,4-Dimethyl-3-Oxahexane................................            2.03
2-Butyl Tetrahydrofuran.................................            2.53
Di-Isobutyl Ether.......................................            1.29
Di-n-butyl Ether........................................            3.17
2-Methoxy-1-(2-Methoxy-1-Methylethoxy)Propane...........            2.09

[[Page 38986]]


Di-n-Pentyl Ether.......................................            2.64
Ethylene Glycol Monomethyl Ether (2Methoxyethanol)......            2.98
Propylene Glycol Monomethyl Ether (1-Methoxy2-Propanol).            2.62
2-Ethoxyethanol.........................................            3.78
2-Methoxy-1-Propanol....................................            3.01
3-Methoxy-1-Propanol....................................            4.01
Diethylene Glycol.......................................            3.55
Tetrahydro-2-Furanmethanol..............................            3.54
Propylene Glycol Monoethyl Ether (1-Ethoxy-2Propanol)...            3.25
Ethylene Glycol Monopropyl Ether (2Propoxyethanol)......            3.52
3-Ethoxy-1-Propanol.....................................            4.24
3-Methoxy-1-Butanol.....................................            0.97
Diethylene Glycol Methyl Ether [2-(2Methoxyethoxy)                  2.90
 Ethanol]...............................................
Propylene Glycol Monopropyl Ether (1-Propoxy2-Propanol).            2.86
Ethylene Glycol Monobutyl Ether [2Butoxyethanol]........            2.90
3-Methoxy-3-Methyl-Butanol..............................            1.74
n-Propoxypropanol.......................................            3.84
2-(2-Ethoxyethoxy) Ethanol..............................            3.19
Dipropylene Glycol......................................            2.48
Triethylene Glycol......................................            3.41
Propylene Glycol t-Butyl Ether (1-tert-Butoxy-2Propanol)            1.71
2-tert-Butoxy-1-Propanol................................            1.81
n-Butoxy-2-Propanol.....................................            2.70
Dipropylene Glycol Methyl Ether Isomer (1Methoxy-2-[2-              2.21
 Hydroxypropoxy]-Propane)...............................
Dipropylene Glycol Methyl Ether Isomer (2-                          3.02
 [2Methoxypropoxy]-1-Propanol)..........................
2-Hexyloxyethanol.......................................            2.45
2-(2-Propoxyethoxy) Ethanol.............................            3.00
2,2,4-Trimethyl-1,3-Pentanediol.........................            1.74
2-(2-Butoxyethoxy)-Ethanol..............................            2.70
2-[2-(2-Methoxyethoxy) Ethoxy] Ethanol..................            2.62
Dipropylene Glycol Ethyl Ether..........................            2.75
Ethylene Glycol 2-Ethylhexyl Ether [2-(2Ethylhexyloxy)              1.71
 Ethanol]...............................................
2-[2-(2-Ethoxyethoxy) Ethoxy] Ethanol...................            2.66
Tetraethylene Glycol....................................            2.84
1-(Butoxyethoxy)-2-Propanol.............................            2.08
2-(2-Hexyloxyethoxy) Ethanol............................            2.03
Glycol Ether dpnb (1-(2-Butoxy-1-Methylethoxy)2-                    1.96
 Propanol)..............................................
2-[2-(2-Propoxyethoxy) Ethoxy] Ethanol..................            2.46
2-[2-(2-Butoxyethoxy) Ethoxy] Ethanol...................            2.24
Tripropylene Glycol Monomethyl Ether....................            1.90
2,5,8,11-Tetraoxatridecan-13-ol.........................            2.15
3,6,9,12-Tetraoxahexadecan-1-ol.........................            1.90
Cumene Hydroperoxide (1-Methyl-                                    12.61
 1Phenylethylhydroperoxide).............................
Methyl Formate..........................................            0.06
Ethyl Formate...........................................            0.52
Methyl Acetate..........................................            0.07
gamma-Butyrolactone.....................................            1.15
Ethyl Acetate...........................................            0.64
Methyl Propionate.......................................            0.71
n-Propyl Formate........................................            0.93
Isopropyl Formate.......................................            0.42
Ethyl Propionate........................................            0.79
Isopropyl Acetate.......................................            1.12
Methyl Butyrate.........................................            1.18
Methyl Isobutyrate......................................            0.70
n-Butyl Formate.........................................            0.95
Propyl Acetate..........................................            0.87
Ethyl Butyrate..........................................            1.25
Isobutyl Acetate........................................            0.67
Methyl Pivalate (2,2-Dimethyl Propanoic Acid Methyl                 0.39
 Ester).................................................
n-Butyl Acetate.........................................            0.89
n-Propyl Propionate.....................................            0.93
s-Butyl Acetate.........................................            1.43
t-Butyl Acetate.........................................            0.20
Butyl Propionate........................................            0.89
Amyl Acetate............................................            0.96
n-Propyl Butyrate.......................................            1.17
Isoamyl Acetate (3-Methylbutyl Acetate).................            1.18
2-Methyl-1-Butyl Acetate................................            1.17
EEP Solvent (Ethyl 3-Ethoxy Propionate).................            3.61
2,3-Dimethylbutyl Acetate...............................            0.84

[[Page 38987]]


2-Methylpentyl Acetate..................................            1.11
3-Methylpentyl Acetate..................................            1.31
4-Methylpentyl Acetate..................................            0.92
Isobutyl Isobutyrate....................................            0.61
n-Butyl Butyrate........................................            1.12
n-Hexyl Acetate (Hexyl Acetate).........................            0.87
Methyl Amyl Acetate (4-Methyl-2-Pentanol Acetate).......            1.46
n-Pentyl Propionate.....................................            0.79
2,4-Dimethylpentyl Acetate..............................            0.98
2-Methylhexyl Acetate...................................            0.89
3-Ethylpentyl Acetate...................................            1.24
3-Methylhexyl Acetate...................................            1.01
4-Methylhexyl Acetate...................................            0.91
5-Methylhexyl Acetate...................................            0.79
Isoamyl Isobutyrate.....................................            0.89
n-Heptyl Acetate (Heptyl Acetate).......................            0.73
2,4-Dimethylhexyl Acetate...............................            0.93
2-Ethyl-Hexyl Acetate...................................            0.79
3,4-Dimethylhexyl Acetate...............................            1.16
3,5-Dimethylhexyl Acetate...............................            1.09
3-Ethylhexyl Acetate....................................            1.03
3-Methylheptyl Acetate..................................            0.76
4,5-Dimethylhexyl Acetate...............................            0.86
4-Methylheptyl Acetate..................................            0.72
5-Methylheptyl Acetate..................................            0.73
n-Octyl Acetate.........................................            0.64
2,3,5-Trimethylhexyl Acetate............................            0.86
2,3-Dimethylheptyl Acetate..............................            0.84
2,4-Dimethylheptyl Acetate..............................            0.88
2,5-Dimethylheptyl Acetate..............................            0.86
2-Methyloctyl Acetate...................................            0.63
3,5-Dimethylheptyl Acetate..............................            1.01
3,6-Dimethylheptyl Acetate..............................            0.87
3-Ethylheptyl Acetate...................................            0.71
4,5-Dimethylheptyl Acetate..............................            0.96
4,6-Dimethylheptyl Acetate..............................            0.83
4-Methyloctyl Acetate...................................            0.68
5-Methyloctyl Acetate...................................            0.67
n-Nonyl Acetate.........................................            0.58
3,6-Dimethyloctyl Acetate...............................            0.88
3-Isopropylheptyl Acetate...............................            0.71
4,6-Dimethyloctyl Acetate...............................            0.85
3,5,7-Trimethyloctyl Acetate............................            0.83
3-Ethyl-6-Methyloctyl Acetate...........................            0.80
4,7-Dimethylnonyl Acetate...............................            0.64
Methyl Dodecanoate (Methyl Laurate).....................            0.53
2,3,5,7-Tetramethyloctyl Acetate........................            0.74
3,5,7-Trimethylnonyl Acetate............................            0.76
3,6,8-Trimethylnonyl Acetate............................            0.72
2,4,6,8-Tetramethylnonyl Acetate........................            0.63
3-Ethyl-6,7-Dimethylnonyl Acetate.......................            0.76
4,7,9-Trimethyldecyl Acetate............................            0.55
Methyl Myristate (Methyl Tetradecanoate)................            0.47
2,3,5,6,8-Pentaamethylnonyl Acetate.....................            0.74
3,5,7,9-Tetramethyldecyl Acetate........................            0.58
5-Ethyl-3,6,8-Trimethylnonyl Acetate....................            0.77
Dimethyl Carbonate......................................            0.06
Propylene Carbonate (4-Methyl-1,3-Dioxolan-2one)........            0.25
Methyl Lactate..........................................            2.75
2-Methoxyethyl Acetate..................................            1.18
Ethyl Lactate...........................................            2.71
Methyl Isopropyl Carbonate..............................            0.69
Propylene Glycol Monomethyl Ether Acetate (1Methoxy-2-              1.71
 Propyl Acetate)........................................
2-Ethoxyethyl Acetate...................................            1.90
2-Methoxy-1-Propyl Acetate..............................            1.12
Methoxypropanol Acetate.................................            1.97
Dimethyl Succinate......................................            0.23
Ethylene Glycol Diacetate...............................            0.72
1,2-Propylene Glycol Diacetate..........................            0.94
Diisopropyl Carbonate...................................            1.04
Dimethyl Glutarate......................................            0.51

[[Page 38988]]


Ethylene Glycol Monobutyl Ether Acetate (2Butoxyethyl               1.67
 Acetate)...............................................
Dimethyl Adipate........................................            1.95
2-(2-Ethoxyethoxy) Ethyl Acetate........................            1.50
Dipropylene Glycol n-Propyl Ether Isomer 1.....            2.13
Dipropylene Glycol Methyl Ether Acetate Isomer < greek-              1.41
 i>1....................................................
Dipropylene Glycol Methyl Ether Acetate Isomer < greek-              1.58
 i>2....................................................
Dipropylene Glycol Methyl Ether Acetate.................            1.49
Glyceryl Triacetate.....................................            0.57
2-(2-Butoxyethoxy) Ethyl Acetate........................            1.38
Substituted C7 Ester (C12)..............................            0.92
1-Hydroxy-2,2,4-Trimethylpentyl-3-Isobutyrate...........            0.92
3-Hydroxy-2,2,4-Trimethylpentyl-1-Isobutyrate...........            0.88
Hydroxy-2,2,4-Trimethylpentyl Isobutyrate Isomers (2,2,4-           0.89
 Trimethyl-1,3-Pentanediol Monoisobutyrate).............
Substituted C9 Ester (C12)..............................            0.89
Dimethyl Sebacate.......................................            0.48
Diisopropyl Adipate.....................................            1.42
Ethylene Oxide..........................................            0.05
Propylene Oxide.........................................            0.32
1,2-Epoxybutane (Ethyl Oxirane).........................            1.02
Formic Acid.............................................            0.08
Acetic Acid.............................................            0.71
Glycolic Acid (Hydroxyacetic Acid)......................            2.67
Peracetic Acid (Peroxyacetic Acid)......................           12.62
Acrylic Acid............................................           11.66
Propionic Acid..........................................            1.16
Methacrylic Acid........................................           18.78
Isobutyric Acid.........................................            1.22
Butanoic Acid...........................................            1.78
Malic Acid..............................................            7.51
3-Methylbutanoic Acid...................................            4.26
Adipic Acid.............................................            3.37
2-Ethyl Hexanoic Acid...................................            4.41
Methyl Acrylate.........................................           12.24
Vinyl Acetate...........................................            3.26
2-Methyl-2-Butene-3-ol (1,2-Dimethylpropyl-1en-1-ol)....            5.12
Ethyl Acrylate..........................................            8.78
Methyl Methacrylate.....................................           15.84
Hydroxypropyl Acrylate..................................            5.56
n-Butyl Acrylate........................................            5.52
Isobutyl Acrylate.......................................            5.05
Butyl Methacrylate......................................            9.09
Isobutyl Methacrylate...................................            8.99
Isobornyl Methacrylate..................................            8.64
a-Terpineol.............................................            5.16
2-Ethyl-Hexyl Acrylate..................................            2.42
Furan...................................................           16.54
Formaldehyde............................................            8.97
Acetaldehyde............................................            6.84
Propionaldehyde.........................................            7.89
2-Methylpropanal........................................            5.87
Butanal.................................................            6.74
C4 Aldehydes............................................            6.74
2,2-Dimethylpropanal (Pivaldehyde)......................            5.40
3-Methylbutanal (Isovaleraldehyde)......................            5.52
Pentanal (Valeraldehyde)................................            5.76
C5 Aldehydes............................................            5.76
Glutaraldehyde..........................................            4.79
Hexanal.................................................            4.98
C6 Aldehydes............................................            4.98
Heptanal................................................            4.23
C7 Aldehydes............................................            4.23
2-Methyl-Hexanal........................................            3.97
Octanal.................................................            3.65
C8 Aldehydes............................................            3.65
Glyoxal.................................................           14.22
Methyl Glyoxal..........................................           16.21
Acrolein................................................            7.60
Crotonaldehyde..........................................           10.07
Methacrolein............................................            6.23
Hydroxy Methacrolein....................................            6.61
Benzaldehyde............................................            0.00

[[Page 38989]]


Tolualdehyde............................................            0.00
Acetone.................................................            0.43
Cyclobutanone...........................................            0.68
Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone)........................            1.49
Cyclopentanone..........................................            1.43
C5 Cyclic Ketones.......................................            1.43
Methyl Propyl Ketone (2-Pentanone)......................            3.07
3-Pentanone.............................................            1.45
C5 Ketones..............................................            3.07
Methyl Isopropyl Ketone.................................            1.64
2,4-Pentanedione........................................            1.02
Cyclohexanone...........................................            1.61
C6 Cyclic Ketones.......................................            1.61
Methyl Isobutyl Ketone (4-Methyl-2-Pentanone)...........            4.31
Methyl n-Butyl Ketone (2-Hexanone)......................            3.55
Methyl t-Butyl Ketone...................................            0.78
C6 Ketones..............................................            3.55
C7 Cyclic Ketones.......................................            1.41
Methyl Amyl Ketone (2-Heptanone)........................            2.80
2-Methyl-3-Hexanone.....................................            1.79
Di-Isopropyl Ketone.....................................            1.63
C7 Ketones..............................................            2.80
3-Methyl-2-Hexanone.....................................            2.81
Methyl Isoamyl Ketone (5-Methyl-2-Hexanone).............            2.10
C8 Cyclic Ketones.......................................            1.25
2-Octanone..............................................            1.66
C8 Ketones..............................................            1.66
C9 Cyclic Ketones.......................................            1.13
2-Propyl Cyclohexanone..................................            1.71
4-Propyl Cyclohexanone..................................            2.08
2-Nonanone..............................................            1.30
Di-Isobutyl Ketone (2,6-Dimethyl-4-Heptanone)...........            2.94
C9 Ketones..............................................            1.30
C10 Cyclic Ketones......................................            1.02
2-Decanone..............................................            1.06
C10 Ketones.............................................            1.06
2,6,8-Trimethyl-4-Nonanone; Isobutyl Heptyl Ketone......            1.86
Biacetyl................................................           20.73
Methylvinyl ketone......................................            8.73
Mesityl Oxide (2-Methyl-2-Penten-4-one).................           17.37
Isophorone (3,5,5-Trimethyl-2-Cyclohexenone)............           10.58
1-Nonene-4-one..........................................            3.39
Hydroxy Acetone.........................................            3.08
Dihydroxyacetone........................................            4.02
Methoxy Acetone.........................................            2.14
Diacetone Alcohol (4-Hydroxy-4-Methyl-2Pentanone).......            0.68
Phenol..................................................            1.82
C7 Alkyl Phenols........................................            2.34
m-Cresol................................................            2.34
p-Cresol................................................            2.34
o-Cresol................................................            2.34
C8 Alkyl Phenols........................................            2.07
C9 Alkyl Phenols........................................            1.86
C10 Alkyl Phenols.......................................            1.68
C11 Alkyl Phenols.......................................            1.54
C12 Alkyl Phenols.......................................            1.42
2-Phenoxyethanol; Ethylene Glycol Phenyl Ether..........            3.61
1-Phenoxy-2-Propanol....................................            1.73
Nitrobenzene............................................            0.07
Para Toluene Isocyanate.................................            0.93
Toluene Diisocyanate (Mixed Isomers)....................            0.00
Methylene Diphenylene Diisocyanate......................            0.79
N-Methyl Acetamide......................................           19.70
Dimethyl Amine..........................................            9.37
Ethyl Amine.............................................            7.80
Trimethyl Amine.........................................            7.06
Triethyl Amine..........................................           16.60
Diethylenetriamine......................................           13.03
Ethanolamine............................................            5.97
Dimethylaminoethanol....................................            4.76
Monoisopropanol Amine (1-Amino-2-Propanol)..............           13.42

[[Page 38990]]


2-Amino-2-Methyl-1-Propanol.............................           15.08
Diethanol Amine.........................................            4.05
Triethanolamine.........................................            2.76
Methyl Pyrrolidone (N-Methyl-2-Pyrrolidone).............            2.56
Morpholine..............................................           15.43
Nitroethane.............................................           12.79
Nitromethane............................................            7.86
1-Nitropropane..........................................           16.16
2-Nitropropane..........................................           16.16
Dexpanthenol (Pantothenylol)............................            9.35
Methyl Ethyl Ketoxime (Ethyl Methyl Ketone Oxime).......           22.04
Hydroxyethylethylene Urea...............................           14.75
Methyl Chloride.........................................            0.03
Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane)....................            0.07
Methyl Bromide..........................................            0.02
Chloroform..............................................            0.03
Carbon Tetrachloride....................................            0.00
Methylene Bromide.......................................            0.00
Vinyl Chloride..........................................            2.92
Ethyl Chloride..........................................            0.25
1,1-Dichloroethane......................................            0.10
1,2-Dichloroethane......................................            0.10
Ethyl Bromide...........................................            0.11
1,1,1-Trichloroethane...................................            0.00
1,1,2-Trichloroethane...................................            0.06
1,2-Dibromoethane.......................................            0.05
n-Propyl Bromide........................................            0.35
n-Butyl Bromide.........................................            0.60
trans-1,2-Dichloroethene................................            0.81
Trichloroethylene.......................................            0.60
Perchloroethylene.......................................            0.04
2-(Chloro-Methyl)-3-Chloro Propene......................            1.13
Monochlorobenzene.......................................            0.36
p-Dichlorobenzene.......................................            0.20
Benzotrifluoride........................................            0.26
PCBTF (p-Trifluoromethyl-Cl-Benzene)....................            0.11
HFC-134a (1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane)....................            0.00
HFC-152a (1,1-Difluoroethane)...........................            0.00
Dimethyl Sulfoxide......................................            6.90
Unspeciated C6 Alkanes..................................            1.48
Unspeciated C7 Alkanes..................................            1.79
Unspeciated C8 Alkanes..................................            1.64
Unspeciated C9 Alkanes..................................            2.13
Unspeciated C10 Alkanes.................................            1.16
Unspeciated C11 Alkanes.................................            0.90
Unspeciated C12 Alkanes.................................            0.81
Unspeciated C13 Alkanes.................................            0.73
Unspeciated C14 Alkanes.................................            0.67
Unspeciated C15 Alkanes.................................            0.61
Unspeciated C16 Alkanes.................................            0.55
Unspeciated C17 Alkanes.................................            0.52
Unspeciated C18 Alkanes.................................            0.49
Unspeciated C10 Aromatics...............................            5.48
Unspeciated C11 Aromatics...............................            4.96
Unspeciated C12 Aromatics...............................            4.53
Base ROG Mixture........................................            3.71
Alkane, Mixed--Predominantly (Minimally 94%) C13-14.....            0.67
Oxo-Hexyl Acetate.......................................            1.03
Oxo-Heptyl Acetate......................................            0.97
Oxo-Octyl Acetate.......................................            0.96
Oxo-Nonyl Acetate.......................................            0.85
Oxo-Decyl Acetate.......................................            0.83
Oxo-Dodecyl Acetate.....................................            0.72
Oxo-Tridecyl Acetate....................................            0.67
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 38991]]


        Table 2B To Subpart E of Part 59.--Reactivity Factors for Aliphatic Hydrocarbon Solvent Mixtures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Average
                   Bin                     Boiling Point*                 Criteria                  Reactivity
                                             (degrees F)                                              factor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................................          80-205  Alkanes (< 2% Aromatics)..............            2.08
2........................................          80-205  N- & Iso-Alkanes (>=90% and <2%                  1.59
                                                            Aromatics).
3........................................          80-205  Cyclo-Alkanes (>=90% and <2%                     2.52
                                                            Aromatics).
4........................................          80-205  Alkanes (2 to < 8% Aromatics).........            2.24
5........................................          80-205  Alkanes (8 to 22% Aromatics).........            2.56
6........................................        >205-340  Alkanes (<2% Aromatics)..............            1.41
7........................................        >205-340  N- & Iso-Alkanes (>=90% and <2%                  1.17
                                                            Aromatics).
8........................................        >205-340  Cyclo-Alkanes (>=90% and <2%                     1.65
                                                            Aromatics).
9........................................        >205-340  Alkanes (2 to <8% Aromatics).........            1.62
10.......................................        >205-340  Alkanes (8 to 22% Aromatics).........            2.03
11.......................................        >340-460  Alkanes (<2% Aromatics)..............            0.91
12.......................................        >340-460  N- & Iso-Alkanes (>=90% and <2%                  0.81
                                                            Aromatics).
13.......................................        >340-460  Cyclo-Alkanes (>=90% and <2%                     1.01
                                                            Aromatics).
14.......................................        >340-460  Alkanes (2 to <8% Aromatics).........            1.21
15.......................................        >340-460  Alkanes (8 to 22% Aromatics).........            1.82
16.......................................        >460-580  Alkanes (<2% Aromatics)..............            0.57
17.......................................        >460-580  N- & Iso-Alkanes (>=90% and <2%                  0.51
                                                            Aromatics).
18.......................................        >460-580  Cyclo-Alkanes (>90% and <2%                      0.63
                                                            Aromatics).
19.......................................        >460-580  Alkanes (2 to <8% Aromatics).........            0.88
20.......................................        >460-580  Alkanes (8 to 22% Aromatics).........           1.49
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Average Boiling Point = (Initial Boiling Point + Dry Point)/2(b) Aromatic Hydrocarbon Solvents


         Table 2C To Subpart E of Part 63.--Reactivity Factors for Aromatic Hydrocarbon Solvent Mixtures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Boiling range                                           Reactivity
                   Bin                       (degrees F)                  Criteria                    factor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21.......................................         280-290  Aromatic Content (>=98%).............            7.37
22.......................................         320-350  Aromatic Content (>=98%).............            7.51
23.......................................         355-420  Aromatic Content (>=98%).............            8.07
24.......................................         450-535  Aromatic Content (>=98%).............            5.00
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[FR Doc. E7-13108 Filed 7-13-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
