Final Rule for Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products. April, 2016

Transcription

1 Final Rule for Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products April, 2016

2 BACKGROUND ON TSCA TITLE VI July 7, the Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products Act was signed into law to become the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) Title VI. TSCA Title VI establishes numerical formaldehyde emission standards that are identical to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Phase II limits for: hardwood plywood particleboard medium-density fiberboard (MDF) TSCA Title VI directs the implementing regulations to cover a number of areas that help ensure compliance with the formaldehyde emission standards. EPA coordinated with CARB while developing the implementing regulations and sought to harmonize with the CARB s program. 2

3 BACKGROUND ON TSCA TITLE VI. Product Hardwood Plywood Veneer Core Emission Standard in TSCA Title VI 0.05 ppm of formaldehyde Hardwood Plywood Composite Core 0.05 ppm of formaldehyde Medium-Density Fiberboard 0.11 ppm of formaldehyde Thin Medium-Density Fiberboard 0.13 ppm of formaldehyde Particleboard 0.09 ppm of formaldehyde 3

4 EPA developed the proposed regulations with input from CARB. EPA harmonized with CARB regulations wherever practicable. CARB submitted comments on EPA s proposal covering topics such as: Recordkeeping (suggesting EPA require distributors and retailers to obtain and keep records to document purchase of compliant products). Definitions (raised panel, purchaser, veneer, etc). Third-party certifiers (TPCs) approving NAF/ULEF applications (possible conflict of interests). Laminated products (CARB is open to exploring options related to laminated products). De minims (CARB is open to exploring a de minimis exemption). EPA attended CARB s workshops and is in continuing discussions with CARB regarding potential changes to the CARB ATCM. 4

5 PROPOSALS On June 10, 2013, two separate proposals published: Third-party certification framework. Remainder of implementing provisions. Comment period, as extended, closed on September 25, 2013 for TPC rule and October 9, 2013 for implementation rule. 37 comments received on TPC rule. Comments came from CARB, industry, TPCs, trade associations, accreditation bodies (ABs) and their associations, public health/environmental groups, Small Business Administration (SBA), China, and the European Union. 107 comments submitted to the implementation rule docket, hundreds of form letters received by . Held a public meeting specifically on laminated products on April 28, The meeting allowed the public to further discuss their comments on laminated products, including discussion of CARB s proposed revisions to their ATCM addressing laminated products. 5

6 STATUS/PROCESS GOING FORWARD The proposals have been combined as one rule. Final Regulation is under review now by the Office of Management & Budget, with a 90-day review period. Final regulation will be published in the Federal Register. Emission standards will not go into effect immediately. EPA proposed a 1-year effective date for the emission standards. EPA will continue to work with CARB. EPA will publish Small Entity Compliance Guides for various entities (mills, fabricators, importers, distributors, retailors, TPCs, and ABs). EPA will publish other outreach materials. 6

7 CATEGORIES OF REGULATED ENTITIES Composite Wood Product Producers Third-party Certifiers (TPCs) Laminated Product Producers Fabricators (other than laminated product producers) Importers Distributors and Retailers Office of Pollution Prevention & Toxics 7

8 KEY RULE PROVISIONS Third-Party Certification Program Laminated Products NAF and ULEF Provisions Labeling Reporting and Recordkeeping De minimis Exemption Import Certification Non Complying Lots Office of Pollution Prevention & Toxics 8

9 THIRD-PARTY CERTIFICATION PROGRAM EPA s goal is to have a strong overall framework for its composite wood product testing and certification program, including equal oversight of TPCs, whether domestic or international. Accreditation bodies (ABs) operate internationally, so they are better positioned to provide oversight of foreign TPCs than CARB or EPA. Proposal Producers of composite wood products would have quarterly and quality control testing done to ensure that their products meet the statutory emission standards. Composite wood products would be certified by TPCs who would perform the quarterly testing and either perform or oversee the quality control testing. Limited exemption from testing and certification would be available for products made with no-added formaldehyde-based (NAF-based) or ultra low-emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) resins. EPA would sign recognition agreements with ABs who would accredit TPCs to voluntary consensus standards and also approve TPCs into the EPA program. TPCs would be audited initially and on a periodic basis by their ABs. 9

10 THIRD-PARTY CERTIFICATION PROGRAM Public Comments Some commenters generally unsupportive of having ABs approve TPCs into EPA s program and of reporting TPC activity information to EPA. Some worried about capacity in the TPC program, especially if laminated product producers were regulated as panel producers. Many objected to the requirement for having an US Agent for Service. Several commenters asked for CARB/EPA reciprocity and the direct acceptance of CARB TPCs into the EPA TPC program. Some commenters stated that EPA should approve TPCs directly and not involve ABs. A few ABs commented that they preferred not to enter into a recognition agreement with EPA. 10

11 LAMINATED PRODUCTS Proposal Laminated products are produced by gluing a wood veneer onto a composite wood product platform. TSCA Title VI includes laminated products as hardwood plywood and defines laminated product as component part used in construction/assembly of a finished good produced by the manufacturer/fabricator of the finished good. TSCA Title VI gives EPA authority to modify definition and exempt some or all laminated products. CARB exempts laminated products from testing and certification requirements. CARB testing shows that some laminated product emissions exceed standards, so CARB is considering how to address in revisions to their ATCM. CARB released discussion drafts of the ATCM with changes to address issues with laminated products (e.g., an emission limit for laminated products). The statute gives EPA the authority to analyze relevant and available information to determine whether the definition of hardwood plywood should exempt any laminated product. EPA proposed to exempt laminated products made by using a NAF-based resin to attach a wood veneer to a compliant composite wood product platform. 11

12 LAMINATED PRODUCTS Public Comments Laminated product producers commented that EPA should treat producers of laminated products as fabricators and not require them to comply with the testing and certification requirements for hardwood plywood. This would align with CARB s ATCM as currently written. Many newly affected laminated product producers will need more time to come into compliance with the regulations. The proposal could lead to high cost burdens on laminated product producers, many of which are small businesses. 12

13 PROPOSED NAF AND ULEF PROVISIONS Proposal EPA proposed provisions for a 2-year exemption from testing and certification requirements for products made with NAF-based resins. EPA prosed provisions less frequent testing and provisions for a 2-year exemption from testing and certification requirements for products made with ULEF resins. Public Comments Most commenters supported EPA s proposal to match CARB s NAF and ULEF exemptions. Some commenters believed EPA should take a performance based approach and not have special provisions based on technology. 13

14 LABELING Proposal Panels or bundles of panels that are sold, supplied, or offered for sale in the United States would be labeled with: the name of the panel producer; the lot or batch number; the number of the TSCA Title VI accredited TPC; and markings indicating that the product complies with the TSCA Title VI emission standards. Fabricators must label their finished goods with: the fabricator s name; the date the finished good was produced; and a statement that the finished goods are TSCA Title VI compliant. Fabricators may use barcodes. Labels for products produced under the NAF or ULEF exemptions would also have to include the designation no-added formaldehyde or ultra-low emitting formaldehyde. EPA s proposed labeling requirements harmonize with CARB requirements and one label could be used provided the TSCA Title VI statement of compliance is present. 14

15 LABELING Public Comments Some comments favor allowing the use of barcodes, CARB comments against use of barcodes. Reduce the label to a simple text statement of compliance. Many commenters objected to inclusion of the fabricator s name on the labels of finished goods. Some comments objected to special labeling indicating a product is exempt from testing/certification under their NAF/ULEF provisions. Allow products to be labeled by box or bundle rather than individually. 15

16 RECORDKEEPING CARB requires all entities who purchase composite wood products, including laminators, fabricators, importers, distributors, and retailers, to take reasonably prudent precautions to ensure that the composite wood products and finished goods they purchase are CARB compliant. This includes: Written documentation that supplier(s) were instructed to furnish compliant goods and that the supplier(s) agree to do so. Records showing purchase date and identity of supplier. Manufacturers (panel producers), fabricators and distributors must include a statement of compliance on each bill of lading or invoice. EPA Proposal - requirements similar to CARB s for panel producers, fabricators, and importers, but did not propose to require special recordkeeping for distributors and retailers. Importers would be required to keep records identifying the panel producer and the date the composite wood products were produced. Distributors and retailers would be required to keep ordinary business records (bills of lading and invoices), but a compliance statement on these records would not be required. 16

17 RECORDKEEPING Public Comments Many comments suggested EPA match CARB s two-year record retention period, another suggested a longer record retention period for upstream entities. Most commenters believed EPA s recordkeeping requirements should be consistent with CARB s, but they did not object to EPA s reduced recordkeeping requirements for distributors and retailers. Some commenters objected to the proposed requirement that panel producers provide test results to purchasers (e.g., fabricators); one comment stated that this testing information was important to fabricators and that smaller fabricators may have difficulties in contracting for this information. 17

18 DE MINIMIS EXCEPTION Proposal EPA did not propose a de minimis exception. Public Comments Most commenters supported a de minimis exception to the labeling and/or recordkeeping requirements. One comment suggested de minimis exception for products with less than 144 square inches of regulated composite wood product. Some commenters suggested a de minimis exception for finished goods/component parts with less than 0.02 cubic meters (20,000 cubic centimeters) of composite wood products, or (b) less than 15% by volume of composite wood products. 18

19 IMPORT REQUIREMENTS Proposal EPA proposed an import certification requirement. EPA proposed that importers of regulated composite wood products (and products that contain regulated composite wood products) would have to follow the regulations at found at 19 CFR through Public Comments Import certification is unnecessary given that importers are already subject to recordkeeping and labeling requirements. EPA has not traditionally applied the import certification requirements to articles (such as composite wood products). Some commenters believed that import certification would stigmatize their products. Some commenters believed import certification would not result in added health benefits and would result in significant additional paperwork and training burdens. 19

20 NON-COMPLYING LOTS Proposal EPA proposed that panel producers must retain lots of composite wood products from which quality control or quarterly samples have been selected until the samples have been tested and the results received to ensure that they comply with the emission standards. Public Comments Some commenters suggested this was unnecessary given the costs and the relative rarity of non-complying lots. One commenter noted that downstream purchasers had occasionally received non-complying lots and that this requirement would rectify the problem. 20

21 OUTREACH OPPORTUNITIES Once the final regulations are published in the Federal Register, EPA will publish additional outreach material: Questions? Opportunities for future engagement? Contact: Erik Winchester, USEPA, Office of Pollution, Prevention and Toxics ; 21