Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products, 89674-89743 [2016-27987]
Download as PDF
89674
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 770
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0461; FRL–9949–90]
RIN 2070–AJ44
Formaldehyde Emission Standards for
Composite Wood Products
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is issuing a final rule to
implement the Formaldehyde Standards
for Composite Wood Products Act,
which added Title VI to the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA). The
purpose of TSCA Title VI is to reduce
formaldehyde emissions from composite
wood products, which will reduce
exposures to formaldehyde and result in
benefits from avoided adverse health
effects. This final rule includes
formaldehyde emission standards
applicable to hardwood plywood,
medium-density fiberboard, and
particleboard, and finished goods
containing these products, that are sold,
supplied, offered for sale, or
manufactured (including imported) in
the United States. This final rule
includes provisions relating to, among
other things, laminated products,
products made with no-added
formaldehyde resins or ultra lowemitting formaldehyde resins, testing
requirements, product labeling, chain of
custody documentation and other
recordkeeping requirements,
enforcement, import certification, and
product inventory sell-through
provisions, including a product
stockpiling prohibition. This final rule
also establishes a third-party
certification program for hardwood
plywood, medium-density fiberboard,
and particleboard and includes
procedures for the accreditation of
third-party certifiers and general
requirements for accreditation bodies
and third-party certifiers.
DATES: This final rule is effective
February 10, 2017. The incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed
in the regulations is approved by the
Director of the Federal Register as of
February 10, 2017.
ADDRESSES: The dockets for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
numbers EPA–HQ–OPPT–2011–0380,
EPA–HQ–OPPT–2012–0018, and EPA–
HQ–OPPT–2016–0461 are available at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket),
Environmental Protection Agency
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. 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) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the OPPT
Docket is (202) 566–0280. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For technical information contact:
Erik Winchester, National Program
Chemicals Division, Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001;
telephone number: (202) 564–6450;
email address: winchester.erik@epa.gov.
For general information contact: The
TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422
South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY
14620; telephone number: (202) 554–
1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you manufacture
(including import), sell, supply, or offer
for sale hardwood plywood, mediumdensity fiberboard, particleboard, and/or
products containing these composite
wood materials in the United States.
The following list of North American
Industrial Classification System
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
to help readers determine whether this
document applies to them. Potentially
affected entities may include:
• Veneer, plywood, and engineered
wood product manufacturing (NAICS
code 3212).
• Manufactured home (mobile home)
manufacturing (NAICS code 321991).
• Prefabricated wood building
manufacturing (NAICS code 321992).
• Furniture and related product
manufacturing (NAICS code 337).
• Furniture merchant wholesalers
(NAICS code 42321).
• Lumber, plywood, millwork, and
wood panel merchant wholesalers
(NAICS code 42331).
• Other construction material
merchant wholesalers (NAICS code
423390), e.g., merchant wholesale
distributors of manufactured homes
(i.e., mobile homes) and/or
prefabricated buildings.
• Furniture stores (NAICS code 4421).
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
• Building material and supplies
dealers (NAICS code 4441).
• Manufactured (mobile) home
dealers (NAICS code 45393).
• Motor home manufacturing (NAICS
code 336213).
• Travel trailer and camper
manufacturing (NAICS code 336214).
• Recreational vehicle (RV) dealers
(NAICS code 441210).
• Recreational vehicle merchant
wholesalers (NAICS code 423110).
• Engineering services (NAICS code
541330).
• Testing laboratories (NAICS code
541380).
• Administrative management and
general management consulting services
(NAICS code 541611).
• All other professional, scientific,
and technical services (NAICS code
541990).
• All other support services (NAICS
code 561990).
• Business associations (NAICS code
813910).
• Professional organizations (NAICS
code 813920).
If you have any questions regarding
the applicability of this action, please
consult the technical person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
B. What is the Agency’s authority for
taking this action?
This final rule is being issued under
the authority of section 601 of TSCA, 15
U.S.C. 2697. EPA has also been mindful
of environmental, economic, and social
impacts consistent with section 2(c) of
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2601.
C. What action is the agency taking?
EPA is issuing a final rule that
implements TSCA Title VI. The final
rule includes provisions on labeling;
chain of custody requirements; sellthrough provisions; ultra low-emitting
formaldehyde resins (ULEF); no-added
formaldehyde-based resins (NAF);
finished goods; third-party testing and
certification; auditing and reporting of
third-party certifiers (TPCs);
recordkeeping; enforcement; laminated
products; and exceptions from
regulatory requirements for products
and components containing de minimis
amounts of composite wood products.
The final rule incorporates the emission
standards established by TSCA Title VI
for hardwood plywood, medium-density
fiberboard (MDF) and particleboard, and
products containing these composite
wood materials, that are sold, supplied,
offered for sale, or manufactured
(defined by statute to include import) in
the United States.
The emission standards established
by TSCA Title VI are not altered in this
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
final rule. The requirements in this final
rule are consistent, to the extent EPA
deemed appropriate and practical
considering TSCA Title VI, with the
requirements currently in effect in
California under the California Air
Resources Board’s (CARB) Air Toxics
Control Measure to Reduce
Formaldehyde Emissions from
Composite Wood Products (ATCM) (Ref.
1).
Under this final rule, the definition of
hardwood plywood exempts laminated
products made by attaching a wood or
woody grass veneer to a compliant core
or platform with a phenol-formaldehyde
resin or a resin formulated with no
added formaldehyde as part of the resin
cross-linking structure. To be eligible for
the exemption, laminated product
producers must maintain records
demonstrating eligibility for the
exemption.
This final rule establishes the
manufactured-by date for composite
wood products at December 12, 2017.
After this date, hardwood plywood
made with either a combination core or
a veneer core, particleboard, and MDF
must be manufactured (including
imported) in compliance with the
provisions of this final rule. This final
rule establishes the manufactured-by
date for laminated products at December
12, 2023. Before that date, laminated
product producers must use compliant
composite wood product platforms and
comply with the recordkeeping and
labeling requirements for fabricators.
After that date, laminated products that
are exempt from the definition of
hardwood plywood must also keep, as
a condition of the exemption, records
89675
demonstrating eligibility for the
exemption. Other laminated products
will have to be made in compliance
with the testing and TPC certification
requirements for hardwood plywood.
Table 1 is a summary of the regulatory
requirements by regulated entity. This is
not meant to be an exhaustive list of
requirements, nor is it intended to
replace the provisions of the regulatory
text. For specific information on any of
these requirements, interested persons
should consult the referenced regulatory
provisions. Entities who fit into more
than one category must comply with the
requirements for all applicable
categories. For example, an importer of
composite wood product panels who
also fabricates finished goods must
comply with the requirements for
importers and the requirements for
fabricators.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS
Requirement
Compliance date
Composite Wood Product Producers
Products must comply with emission standards:
Hardwood plywood (made with a veneer core or a composite core) = 0.05 ppm ........................................................
Particleboard = 0.09 ppm
MDF = 0.11 ppm
Thin MDF = 0.13 ppm
(40 CFR 770.10)
Products must be certified by an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC unless they are eligible for a limited exemption for products
made with NAF-based or ULEF resins.
(40 CFR 770.15, 770. 17, 770.18)
Products must undergo quarterly testing and routine quality control testing using specified methods ...............................
(40 CFR 770.20)
Panels must be labeled with the producer’s name (or other identification), lot number, TPC number, and a statement of
compliance with TSCA Title VI.
(40 CFR 770.45)
Records, including testing, production, purchaser, transporter, and non-complying lot information, must be kept for 3
years.
Records demonstrating initial eligibility for reduced testing or a limited third-party certification exemption for products
made with NAF-based or ULEF resins must be kept for as long as exemption eligibility is claimed.
(40 CFR 770.40)
December 12, 2017.
December 12, 2017.
December 12, 2017.
December 12, 2017.
December 12, 2017.
Producers of Laminated Products That Are Not Exempt From the Definition of Hardwood Plywood
Bills of lading, invoices, or comparable documents must be obtained and maintained for 3 years ....................................
(40 CFR 770.30, 770.40)
Finished goods must be labeled with the producer’s name, the date the good was produced, and a statement of TSCA
Title VI compliance.
(40 CFR 770.45)
Laminated products must comply with the hardwood plywood emission standard of 0.05 ppm, and the testing, certification, and recordkeeping requirements for composite wood products.
(40 CFR 770.10, 770.15, 770.20, 770.40)
December 12, 2017.
December 12, 2017.
December 12, 2023.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Producers of Laminated Products That Are Exempt From the Definition of Hardwood Plywood
Records demonstrating purchase/use of compliant platforms and NAF or PF resins and bills of lading, invoices, or
comparable documents must be obtained and maintained for 3 years.
(40 CFR 770.40)
Bills of lading, invoices, or comparable documents must be obtained and maintained for 3 years ....................................
(40 CFR 770.30, 770.40)
Finished goods must be labeled with the producer’s name, the date the good was produced, and a statement of TSCA
Title VI compliance.
(40 CFR 770.45)
December 12, 2023.
December 12, 2017.
December 12, 2017.
Fabricators (Other Than Laminated Product Producers)
Bills of lading, invoices, or comparable documents must be obtained and maintained for 3 years. ...................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
December 12, 2017
89676
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS—Continued
Requirement
Compliance date
(40 CFR 770.30, 770.40)
Finished goods must be labeled with the producer’s name, the date the good was produced, and a statement of TSCA
Title VI compliance.
(40 CFR 770.45)
December 12, 2017.
Importers
Bills of lading, invoices, or comparable documents bearing a statement of TSCA Title VI compliance must be obtained
and maintained for 3 years. In addition, must have the ability to make records identifying the panel producer, the
date the products were produced, the supplier (if different) and the date the products were purchased available to
EPA within 30 calendar days of request.
(40 CFR 770.30, 770.40)
Import certification under TSCA section 13 is required ........................................................................................................
(40 CFR 770.30, 770.40)
December 12, 2017.
December 12, 2018.
Distributors and Retailers
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Bills of lading, invoices, or comparable documents must be obtained and maintained for 3 years. ...................................
(40 CFR 770.30, 770.40)
This final rule also establishes an EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program to ensure that composite wood
panel producers comply with the
statutory formaldehyde emission limits.
Under the EPA TSCA Title VI ThirdParty Certification Program, TPCs will
regularly inspect composite wood panel
producers, and conduct, oversee, and
verify formaldehyde emissions tests.
TPCs who wish to participate in the
EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program must apply to
EPA for approval and receive
recognition from EPA before certifying
products under this rule. The
requirements for TPCs to receive EPA
recognition include being accredited by
EPA-recognized accreditation bodies
(ABs) to specific voluntary consensus
standards and to the regulatory
requirements in this rule. In addition,
TPCs approved by CARB are eligible for
EPA TSCA Title VI recognition through
reciprocity, provided that they meet all
applicable requirements. Existing CARB
TPCs and TPCs approved by CARB
during the two-year transition period
that are recognized by EPA may certify
composite wood products under TSCA
Title VI until December 12, 2018. After
that time, EPA will only recognize
TPCs, including CARB-approved TPCs,
who are accredited by EPA-recognized
ABs.
Under this final rule, composite wood
products must be certified by an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC. To obtain and
maintain certification, panel producers
must establish quality assurance/quality
control programs, conduct regular
quality control testing of product
emissions, and have an EPA-recognized
TPC conduct or oversee quarterly
formaldehyde emissions testing.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
Composite wood products made with
NAF-based or ULEF resins may be
eligible for reduced testing and/or a
limited exemption from TPC oversight
after an initial testing period of three
months, for NAF, or six months, for
ULEF.
This action includes labeling
requirements for composite wood
products and finished goods as well as
‘‘chain of custody’’ and recordkeeping
requirements with a three year record
retention period. Products that contain
de minimis amounts of composite wood
products, defined as products
containing 144 square inches or less of
regulated composite wood products, are
exempt from the labeling requirements,
but not the recordkeeping requirements
or other provisions. TSCA section 13
import certification for composite wood
products that are articles is also
required.
Notable changes from EPA’s proposed
regulations include the clarification of
certain terms under TSCA Title VI to
exclude renovation and construction
activities, applicability of the hardwood
plywood emission standard limited to
hardwood plywood made with either a
composite or a veneer core, an
expanded exemption for laminated
products to products laminated with
phenol-formaldehyde resins in addition
to those laminated with resins
formulated with no added formaldehyde
as part of the resin cross-linking
structure, a manufactured-by date for
non-exempt laminated products that is
seven years after publication of this
final rule, the addition of a petition
process through which any person can
petition the Agency to expand the
exemption for laminated products from
the definition of the term ‘‘hardwood
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
December 12, 2017
plywood’’, elimination of the
requirement to hold lots selected for
testing until test results are received,
specific notification requirements for
non-complying lots, reduced
recordkeeping for non-laminating
fabricators, and allowing two years after
date of final publication of the rule,
instead of one year, for importers to
certify that imports are in compliance
with TSCA Title VI pursuant to TSCA
section 13.
D. Why is the Agency taking this action?
EPA is promulgating this final rule to
reduce formaldehyde emissions from
composite wood products, and thereby
reduce exposures to formaldehyde and
avoid adverse health effects. TSCA Title
VI directs EPA to promulgate
regulations that include provisions on
labeling; chain of custody requirements;
sell-through provisions; ULEF and NAF
resins; finished goods; third-party
testing and certification; auditing and
reporting of TPCs; recordkeeping;
enforcement; laminated products; and
exceptions from regulatory requirements
for products and components containing
de minimis amounts of composite wood
products.
E. What are the estimated impacts of
this action?
EPA’s analysis of the potential costs,
benefits, and impacts associated with
this rulemaking is summarized in Table
2, and additional detail is provided in
Unit VI.A. The quantified costs of the
rule may exceed the quantified benefits
under certain conditions. There are
additional unquantified benefits due to
other avoided health effects. There is
not sufficient information at this time
on the relationship between
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
formaldehyde exposure and myeloid
leukemia, respiratory related effects, or
reduced fertility to include a valuation
estimate in the overall benefits analysis.
Although uncertainty remains regarding
how best to quantify the effect of
formaldehyde exposure on these health
endpoints, reducing these effects is an
important non-monetized impact that
contributes to the overall benefits of the
rule.
89677
After assessing both the costs and the
benefits of the rule, including the
unquantified benefits, EPA has made a
reasoned determination that the benefits
of the rule justify its costs.
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF COSTS AND BENEFITS OF RULE
Category
Description
Benefits ......................................................
This rule will reduce exposures to formaldehyde, resulting in benefits from avoided adverse health
effects. For the subset of health effects where the results were quantified, the estimated
annualized benefits (due to avoided incidence of eye irritation and nasopharyngeal cancer) are
$64 million to $186 million per year using a 3% discount rate, and $26 million to $79 million per
year using a 7% discount rate. There are additional unquantified benefits due to other avoided
health effects.
The annualized costs of this rule are estimated at $38 million to $83 million per year using a 3%
discount rate, and $43 million to $78 million per year using a 7% discount rate.
Government entities are not expected to be subject to the rule’s requirements, which apply to entities that accredit TPCs, certify panel producers, or manufacture, fabricate, distribute, or sell composite wood products. The rule does not have a significant intergovernmental mandate, significant
or unique effect on small governments, or have Federalism implications.
This rule would impact approximately 922,000 small businesses: almost 910,000 have costs impacts
less than 1% of revenues, over 6,000 have impacts between 1% and 3%, and over 5,000 have
impacts greater than 3% of revenues. Approximately 99% of firms with impacts over 1% have
annualized costs of less than $250 per year.
This rule 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 population or children.
Costs ..........................................................
Effects on State, Local, and Tribal Governments.
Small Entity Impacts ..................................
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Environmental Justice and Protection of
Children.
F. Children’s Environmental Health
Consistent with the Agency’s Policy
on Evaluating Health Risks to Children
(Ref. 2), EPA has evaluated the
environmental health effects of
formaldehyde emissions from composite
wood products on children. The results
of this evaluation are described in
Chapter 7.7 of the economic analysis
(Ref. 3). The economic analysis only
monetizes the potential benefits
associated with avoided cases of
nasopharyngeal cancer and eye
irritation, some of which clearly would
accrue to children. However, some
studies have reported associations
between elevated levels of
formaldehyde and other health
endpoints, such as respiratory
symptoms. The World Health
Organization (WHO) (Ref. 4) and the
Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry (ATSDR) (Ref. 5) have
raised questions about the potential role
of formaldehyde in increasing risk of
asthma or allergic conditions,
particularly among children. In addition
to a study observing an association with
increased chronic respiratory symptoms
and decreased pulmonary function
among children (Ref. 6), 96% of whom
lived in households with formaldehyde
levels below 0.075 milligrams per cubic
meter (mg/m3), more recent studies
since the WHO and ATSDR reviews
observed increased risks of allergic
conditions among adults and children,
and increased severity of asthma
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
symptoms among children with
‘‘wheeze’’ in the previous year (Refs. 7–
10). To the extent that the reductions
reported in this rule would lead to
reduced respiratory symptoms in
children, the monetized estimate for
cancer and eye irritation alone is likely
an underestimate. The analysis shows
that children aged zero through one
represent three percent of the
individuals affected by the rule and are
estimated to accrue 2% to 10% of the
rule’s total quantified benefits. Children
aged two through fifteen represent
twenty percent of the individuals
affected by the rule and are estimated to
accrue 15% to 21% of the rule’s total
quantified benefits. Exposure to
formaldehyde may cause
disproportionate effects on children
compared to adults. The emission
standards and other requirements of this
rule will reduce emissions of
formaldehyde from composite wood
products for individuals of all ages that
are exposed and children may accrue
higher benefits from the exposure
reductions compared to adults.
II. Background
A. Formaldehyde Sources and Health
Effects
Formaldehyde is a colorless,
flammable gas at room temperature and
has a strong odor. It is found in certain
resins used in the manufacture of
composite wood products (i.e.,
hardwood plywood, particleboard and
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
MDF). It is also found in certain
household products such as glues,
permanent press fabrics, carpets,
antiseptics, medicines, cosmetics,
dishwashing liquids, fabric softeners,
shoe care agents, lacquers, plastics and
paper product coatings. It is a byproduct of combustion and certain other
natural processes. Examples of sources
of formaldehyde gas inside homes
include cigarette smoke, unvented, fuelburning appliances (e.g., gas stoves,
kerosene space heaters), and composite
wood products made using
formaldehyde-based resins (Ref. 5). In
addition, formaldehyde is a by-product
of human metabolism, and thus
endogenous levels are present in the
body.
Formaldehyde is an irritant and the
National Toxicology Program (NTP) and
the International Agency for Research
on Cancer (IARC) have classified it as a
known human carcinogen based on
sufficient evidence in humans that
formaldehyde causes nasopharyngeal
cancer and leukemia (Refs. 11–12), a
classification supported by the National
Research Council of the National
Academy of Sciences (NRC) in their
2014 review of the NTP assessment (Ref.
13). Depending on concentration,
formaldehyde can cause eye, nose, and
throat irritation, even when exposure is
of relatively short duration. In the
indoor environment, sensory reactions
and various symptoms as a result of
mucous membrane irritation are
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
89678
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
potential effects, including respiratory
symptoms as previously discussed.
Formaldehyde is also listed under
section 112(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act as
a hazardous air pollutant (Ref. 14).
In 1991, EPA classified formaldehyde
as a probable human carcinogen, ‘‘based
on limited evidence in humans, and
sufficient evidence in animals,’’ and
derived an inhalation unit risk factor for
assessing formaldehyde cancer risk. The
risk factor and supporting
documentation is included in EPA’s
Integrated Risk Information System
(IRIS) database (https://www.epa.gov/
iris/) (Ref. 15). The IRIS program in
EPA’s Office of Research and
Development (ORD) completed a draft
assessment of the potential cancer and
non-cancer health effects that may result
from chronic exposure to formaldehyde
by inhalation (Ref. 16). This draft IRIS
assessment was peer reviewed by the
NRC in 2011. The draft formaldehyde
IRIS assessment is being revised in
response to the NRC peer review and
public comments, and the final
assessment will be posted on the IRIS
database. In the interim, this final rule
estimates benefits using the 1991 IRIS
inhalation unit risk value of 1.3 × 10¥5
per mg/m3 (Ref. 15).
In addition, EPA used concentrationresponse functions to estimate the
impact of exposure to formaldehyde on
eye irritation for use in the non-cancer
benefits assessment to support this rule,
as discussed in the proposal. The
derivation of these concentrationresponse functions, uncertainties, and
EPA’s proposed approach for using the
concentration-response functions in the
benefits assessment were externally peer
reviewed (Ref. 17). While the economic
analysis of cancer benefits is based on
the unit risk, which is a reasonable
upper bound on the central estimate of
risk, the non-cancer benefits were
evaluated using the estimated
concentration-response functions which
reflect the central effect estimates rather
than upper bounds.
B. History of This Rulemaking
1. The CARB ATCM. In 2007, CARB
issued an ATCM to reduce
formaldehyde emissions from hardwood
plywood with a composite or veneer
core, MDF, and particleboard, products
referred to collectively as composite
wood products. The CARB ATCM was
approved on April 18, 2008, by the
California Office of Administrative Law
and the first emission standards took
effect on January 1, 2009 (Ref. 1).
Additional emission standards followed
through 2012. The CARB ATCM
requires manufacturers to meet
formaldehyde emission standards for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
the regulated composite wood products
that are sold, offered for sale, supplied,
imported or manufactured for use in
California. The CARB ATCM also
requires that compliant composite wood
products be used in finished goods sold,
offered for sale, supplied, imported or
manufactured for sale in California. The
CARB ATCM does not apply to
hardwood plywood and particleboard
materials when installed in
manufactured homes subject to
regulations promulgated by the United
States Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD).
On March 24, 2008, 25 organizations
and approximately 5,000 individuals
petitioned EPA under section 21 of
TSCA to use its authority under section
6 of TSCA to adopt the CARB ATCM
nationally. On June 27, 2008, EPA
denied the petitioners’ request to
immediately pursue a TSCA section 6
rulemaking, stating that the available
information at the time was insufficient
to support an evaluation of whether
formaldehyde emitted from hardwood
plywood, particleboard, and mediumdensity fiberboard presents or will
present an unreasonable risk to human
health (including cancer and non-cancer
endpoints) under TSCA section 6 (Ref.
18). On December 3, 2008, EPA issued
an Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPR) that announced
EPA’s intention to investigate whether
and what regulatory or other action
might be appropriate to protect against
risks posed by formaldehyde emitted
from the products covered by the CARB
ATCM as well as other pressed wood
products. (Ref. 19)
2. The Formaldehyde Standards for
Composite Wood Products Act. The
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite
Wood Products Act, or Title VI of TSCA,
15 U.S.C. 2697, was enacted on July 7,
2010 (Ref. 20). The statute establishes
formaldehyde emission standards that
are identical to the CARB ATCM Phase
2 standards for hardwood plywood with
a composite or veneer core, MDF, and
particleboard sold, supplied, offered for
sale, or manufactured in the United
States. Pursuant to TSCA section 3(7),
the definition of the term
‘‘manufacture’’ includes import. The
statute directs EPA to issue final
implementing regulations by January 1,
2013. The Act specifically covers
composite wood products used in
manufactured housing and directs HUD
to update its regulation to ensure that it
reflects the emission standards in the
Act. TSCA Title VI does not give EPA
the authority to raise or lower the
established emission standards, and
EPA must generally promulgate the
implementing regulations in a manner
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
that ensures compliance with the
standards. Congress directed EPA to
consider a number of elements for
inclusion in the implementing
regulations, many of which are aspects
of the CARB program.
3. EPA’s proposed rules. On June 10,
2013, EPA issued two Notices of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRMs)
containing proposed requirements to
implement TSCA Title VI. The first
NPRM (the TPC proposal) included a
proposed framework for a TSCA Title VI
TPC Program (Ref. 21), while the second
NPRM included the remainder of the
proposed implementing regulations for
TSCA Title VI (Ref. 22).
The initial comment period on the
TPC proposal was scheduled to end on
August 9, 2013, but was extended twice,
ultimately closing on September 25,
2013. Information pertaining
specifically to the TPC proposal,
including the comments received, can
be found at https://www.regulations.gov
under docket number EPA–HQ–OPPT–
2011–0380.
The initial comment period on the
implementation proposal was scheduled
to end on August 9, 2013, but was also
extended twice, ultimately closing on
October 9, 2013. The comment period
was specifically reopened for additional
comments on the laminated products
issue from April 8, 2014 to May 26,
2014, including one extension. EPA also
held a public meeting on laminated
products on April 28, 2014. Information
pertaining specifically to the
implementation proposal, including the
comments received during both
comment periods, can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov under
docket number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2012–
0018.
EPA is finalizing both proposed rules
in a single final rule under RIN 2070–
AJ44. Although this final rule document
and supporting information will appear
in docket EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0461,
both dockets for the proposed rules
(EPA–HQ–OPPT–2011–0380 and EPA–
HQ–OPPT–2012–0018) contain
supporting information with respect to
this rule and should be considered
merged for the purpose of this final rule.
III. Provisions of This Final Rule
A. Scope and Applicability
1. Composite wood product. The final
rule defines the term ‘‘composite wood
product’’ as including only those
products subject to a formaldehyde
emission standard, i.e., hardwood
plywood with a composite or veneer
core, MDF, and particleboard. EPA has
also clarified throughout the regulatory
text whether particular provisions apply
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
to panels, component parts, or finished
goods, or all three.
2. Finished good. EPA’s proposed rule
included a definition of the term
‘‘finished good’’ that was virtually
identical to the definition in TSCA Title
VI. Although EPA did not receive any
comments directly addressing the
proposed definition, other comments on
the scope and applicability of the
regulation have caused EPA to clarify
what is meant by the term ‘‘finished
good.’’ Specifically, EPA has
determined that Congressional intent
with respect to the regulation of
finished goods under TSCA Title VI was
to regulate goods that move freely
through commerce and that are
produced through a manufacturing
process at a manufacturing facility, not
objects like buildings or other structures
that are constructed on site and become
a permanent addition to real property
Thus, the production of manufactured
housing or prefabricated buildings at a
factory is covered by this final rule,
while the construction of housing or
other real property on site, or the
assembly and placement of
prefabricated buildings or manufactured
housing at a site, is not. The NAICS,
used by Federal statistical agencies to
classify business establishments for data
analysis purposes, recognizes the
significant differences between these
activities by including the production of
manufactured housing or prefabricated
buildings in the Manufacturing
economic sector rather than the
Construction economic sector. More
specifically, the production of both
manufactured housing and prefabricated
buildings is included in the Wood
Product Manufacturing subsector, along
with the production of composite wood
product panels. Therefore, to ensure
that this distinction is clear, the
definition of ‘‘finished good’’
incorporated into this final rule
specifically excludes buildings and
similar structures that are constructed
on-site.
3. Hardwood plywood. a. General
definition. As proposed, EPA is
incorporating the basic statutory
definition of hardwood plywood and
the statutory exclusions into the
regulation with the addition of veneer
core to the list of cores in the statutory
definition. As TSCA section
601(b)(2)(A) establishes a formaldehyde
emission standard for hardwood
plywood with a veneer core, EPA is
including the phrase ‘‘veneer core’’ in
the regulatory definition of hardwood
plywood to avoid any potential
confusion over whether hardwood
plywood made with a veneer core is
covered by the regulations. In addition,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
as discussed in the next section, the
regulatory definition specifically
includes laminated products, except for
those laminated products made by
attaching a wood or woody grass veneer
with a phenol-formaldehyde resin or a
resin formulated with no added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure to a compliant core or
platform. The Agency has also included
a petition process through which any
person can petition the Agency to
expand the exemption for laminated
products from the definition of the term
‘‘hardwood plywood.’’
The statutory definition of hardwood
plywood only includes products that are
panels and that are intended for interior
use. As part of this rulemaking, EPA
convened a Small Business Advocacy
Review (SBAR) Panel (Ref. 23). More
information on the Panel process can be
found in the preamble to the proposed
rule (Ref. 22). Among the
recommendations made by the SBAR
Panel was a recommendation that EPA,
to reduce uncertainty in the regulated
community as to which products are
covered, include definitions of the term
‘‘panel’’ and the phrase ‘‘intended for
interior use’’ (Ref. 23). Accordingly,
EPA is defining the term ‘‘panel’’ as a
thin (usually less than two inches
thick), flat, usually rectangular piece of
particleboard, medium density
fiberboard or hardwood plywood.
Embossing or imparting of an irregular
surface on the composite wood products
by the original panel producer during
pressing does not remove the product
from this definition. EPA has
determined, based on the comments
received, this definition is consistent
with both the CARB ATCM and
common industry usage. EPA has added
the parenthetical indicating that panels
are usually less than two inches thick to
provide some additional guidance on
panel thinness (Ref. 24). The definition
of panel also includes a sentence added
because EPA agrees with those
commenters who stated that the purpose
of the CARB ATCM and of TSCA Title
VI is to regulate composite wood
products as they come out of the press.
Finally, EPA also added a sentence to
clarify the term ‘‘panel’’ does not
include items made for the purpose of
research and development.
EPA is also promulgating a definition
of the phrase ‘‘intended for interior
use.’’ Recognizing that the primary
purpose of TSCA Title VI is to reduce
formaldehyde emissions from composite
wood products inside buildings and
similar living areas in recreational
vehicles, EPA’s definition includes
products intended for use or storage
inside a building or recreational vehicle,
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89679
or constructed in such a way that they
are not suitable for long term use in a
location exposed to the elements. EPA
received very few comments on this
definition, and is finalizing the
definition as proposed. The purpose of
this definition is to help explain
coverage of miscellaneous finished
goods, such as sporting goods, that are
made of at least some hardwood
plywood and that may be used indoors
or outdoors. This definition does not
exclude windows and exterior doors,
including garage doors, which are
clearly intended to be covered by TSCA
Title VI. The statute contains specific
exemptions for windows that contain
less than five percent by volume of
composite wood products, exterior
doors and garage doors that contain less
than three percent by volume of
composite wood products, and exterior
and garage doors that are made with
NAF-based or ULEF resins.
TSCA Title VI also directs EPA to
determine whether the definition of
hardwood plywood should exempt
engineered veneer. Engineered veneer is
a type of veneer that is created by
dyeing and gluing together veneer
leaves in a mold to produce a block. The
block is then sliced into leaves of veneer
with a designed appearance that is
highly repeatable. EPA did not propose
to exempt any engineered veneer
because EPA did not have any
information to support such an
exemption. One commenter, the
Hardwood Plywood and Veneer
Association (HPVA), clarified that it did
not consider the production of
engineered veneer, or the resulting
engineered veneer product, to be
hardwood plywood (Ref. 25). HPVA
noted that engineered veneer, once
manufactured, could be used as a
component in the production of
hardwood plywood. EPA agrees that
engineered veneer, by itself, is not
hardwood plywood because it is not an
assembly of veneer plies joined by
adhesive to a core. EPA interprets TSCA
Title VI and its implementing
regulations to apply to hardwood
plywood that incorporates engineered
veneer, but not to the production of
engineered veneer itself.
b. Laminated products. As discussed
in more detail in this Unit, the
definition of ‘‘hardwood plywood’’
exempts laminated products made by
attaching a wood or woody grass veneer
to a compliant core or platform with
either a phenol-formaldehyde resin or a
resin formulated with no added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure. Additionally, the
Agency has included a petition process
through which any person can petition
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89680
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the Agency to expand the exemption for
laminated products from the definition
of the term ‘‘hardwood plywood’’.
Further, this final rule establishes the
manufactured-by date for laminated
products as December 12, 2023. After
that date, producers of laminated
products that are exempt from the
definition of ‘‘hardwood plywood’’ must
maintain records that demonstrate
eligibility for the exemption in order to
claim the exemption. Also after that
date, other laminated products will have
to be produced in compliance with the
testing and certification requirements
applicable to hardwood plywood. EPA
is also promulgating a definition of
laminated product that limits
applicability of the term to products
made with composite wood product
platforms. As is the case with any
component part, composite wood
products used to make laminated
products must be either certified
pursuant to this regulation or compliant
with the provisions for composite wood
products made with NAF-based or
ULEF resins. Also, as discussed in this
Unit, the term ‘‘laminated product’’ is
further limited to those products that
are produced by fabricators of the
component parts or finished goods in
which the laminated products are
incorporated. Regardless of whether
laminated product producers are
producing exempt or non-exempt
laminated products, they are fabricators
and must also comply with the
fabricator recordkeeping requirements
as of the manufactured-by date for
composite wood products, which is
December 12, 2017.
i. Background. TSCA Title VI defines
laminated product as a product made by
affixing a wood veneer to a
particleboard, MDF, or veneer-core
platform. The statutory definition
further provides that laminated
products are component parts used in
the construction or assembly of a
finished good, and that a laminated
product is produced by the
manufacturer or fabricator of the
finished good in which the product is
incorporated. Congress granted EPA the
authority to promulgate a modified
definition of laminated product through
rulemaking. The statute also directs EPA
to conduct a rulemaking process
pursuant to TSCA section 601(d) that
uses all available and relevant
information from State authorities,
industry, and other available sources of
such information, and analyzes that
information to determine, at the
discretion of the Administrator, whether
the definition of the term ‘‘hardwood
plywood’’ should exempt any laminated
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
product. Section 601(d) of TSCA states,
among other things, that EPA must
promulgate implementing regulations in
a manner that ensures compliance with
the statutory emission standards.
The CARB ATCM defines laminated
product as a finished good or
component part of a finished good made
by a fabricator in which a laminate or
laminates are affixed to a platform.
Under this definition, if the platform
consists of a composite wood product,
the platform must comply with the
applicable emission standards. The
CARB ATCM defines fabricator as any
person who uses composite wood
products to make finished goods,
including producers of laminated
products. Laminate is defined under the
CARB ATCM as a veneer or other
material affixed as a decorative surface
to a platform. Under the CARB ATCM,
fabricators or laminated product
manufacturers have different
requirements compared with
requirements for manufacturers of
composite wood products. In particular,
fabricators do not need to conduct
formaldehyde emissions testing or
comply with third-party certification
requirements; instead, fabricators need
to ensure that they are using compliant
composite wood products and they have
recordkeeping and labeling obligations.
CARB is currently considering
changes to its ATCM. At a workshop in
March 2014, CARB presented a
discussion draft of a proposal to set a
formaldehyde emission standard of 0.13
parts per million (ppm) for unfinished
laminated products made with wood
veneers, but not require testing or
certification. If the platform is a
composite wood product, the platform
would have to be certified (Ref. 26).
Given the importance of the
laminated products issue to so many
commenters, the potential impacts on
the large number of laminated product
producers, and the fact that CARB was
presenting new ideas regarding
laminated products, EPA decided to
reopen the comment period on this
issue and specifically solicit public
comment on the approach in the March
2014 CARB proposal, as well as
suggestions in the comments received
during EPA’s 2013 public comment
period on the TSCA Title VI
formaldehyde regulations.
ii. Final rule provisions. As directed
by Congress, EPA has evaluated
available and relevant information from
State authorities, industry, and other
sources to determine whether the
definition of the term ‘‘hardwood
plywood’’ should exempt engineered
veneer or any laminated product. For
the reasons described in this Unit, EPA
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
has decided to exempt those laminated
products made by attaching a wood or
woody grass veneer to a core or platform
consisting of compliant MDF, compliant
particleboard, or compliant veneer, with
either a phenol-formaldehyde resin or a
resin formulated with no added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure. EPA considers these
provisions for laminated products made
with phenol-formaldehyde resins and
laminated products made with resins
formulated with no added formaldehyde
as part of the resin cross-linking
structure to be mutually complementary
but independent provisions, such that
either one could be implemented even
in the absence of the other.
Additionally, the Agency has included
a petition process through which any
person can petition the Agency to
expand the exemption for laminated
products from the definition of the term
‘‘hardwood plywood’’.
1. Information reviewed by EPA. EPA
reviewed a wide variety of available
information on resins, the chemistry of
formaldehyde-based resins, and
formaldehyde emissions from composite
wood products. Urea-formaldehyde
resins have been around since the 1920s
and they have been the most common
resins used in the manufacture of
hardwood plywood, particleboard, and
MDF. Urea-formaldehyde resins have
several advantages, including low cost,
a rapid cure rate, and a light color.
These resins are generally used for
interior applications because they are
not water-resistant. As described by
CARB, ‘‘[t]he reactions that occur during
UF resin synthesis are reversible. During
the forward reaction, water is
eliminated. However, if moisture
interacts with the UF resin,
depolymerization may occur, leading to
hydrolysis or the release of
formaldehyde’’ (Ref. 27). This
characteristic of reversibility, in
addition to the presence of small
amounts of free formaldehyde in the
resins, leads to continuing
formaldehyde emissions from composite
wood products made with ureaformaldehyde resins, sometimes for
years, although the emission potential
decreases with increasing age (Ref. 28).
The available emissions data from
composite wood products made with
urea-formaldehyde resins bears this
out—composite wood products made
with urea-formaldehyde resins can have
high formaldehyde emissions. For
example, in a study of the formaldehyde
emission rates of products likely to be
found or used in California homes, the
results of 19 samples of unfinished
wood products made with ureaformaldehyde resins ranged from 8.6 to
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
1580 mg/m2/h (Ref. 29). Using the
conversion used by CARB (Ref. 30), the
highest emissions translate to 1.09 ppm.
Although the median was 164 mg/m2/h,
which translates to 0.11 ppm, the study
results demonstrate that wood products
made with urea-formaldehyde resins are
as likely to have high formaldehyde
emissions as not (Refs. 28–29). Further,
the results of a 2003 survey of wood
product manufacturers conducted by
CARB in support of their rulemaking
indicated that the highest
formaldehyde-emitting composite wood
products were hardwood plywood,
particleboard, and medium-density
fiberboard for interior applications (Ref.
27). CARB further determined that the
majority of these products are made
with urea-formaldehyde resins, which
emit more formaldehyde than products
made with other resins (Ref. 27).
Finally, the results of CARB’s testing of
particleboard and MDF laminated using
urea-formaldehyde resins confirms that
products laminated with ureaformaldehyde resins can have high
formaldehyde emissions (Ref. 31).
Although the median of the samples
tested in either a finished or an
unfinished state was 0.09 ppm (Ref. 30),
many samples were well above that, two
of them were over 1.25 ppm.
As mentioned by commenters,
advancements in resin technology,
which have accelerated due to the
CARB ATCM, have made it possible to
make composite wood products that
have very low formaldehyde emissions,
even if urea-formaldehyde resins are
used (Refs. 32–33). CARB described
strategies for reducing formaldehyde
emissions from composite wood
products made with urea formaldehyde
resins (Ref. 27). These include
modifications to the resins themselves,
such as reductions in the mole ratio of
formaldehyde to urea or the addition of
scavengers such as hexamine or
melamine, and changes in the
production process, such as reduced
press times or temperatures. Some
commenters noted the difficulty in
meeting the CARB ATCM emission
standard for hardwood plywood, even
with advanced urea formaldehyde resin
technology (Refs. 34–35).
EPA determined that there are several
other formaldehyde-based resins that
are used in the production of composite
wood products. Phenol-formaldehyde
resins, also developed in the early 20th
century, have ‘‘outstanding durability
and high polymer strength due to good
adhesion to wood surfaces.’’ (Ref. 27).
Composite wood products made with
phenol formaldehyde resins are
typically used for exterior applications
because of their high water resistance
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
(Ref. 27). However, phenol
formaldehyde resins are dark in color,
making them unsuitable for some
decorative applications, and they
require longer press times and higher
press temperatures (Ref. 27). In contrast
to the synthesis of urea-formaldehyde
resins, the reactions involved in phenol
formaldehyde resin synthesis are more
stable, resulting in composite wood
products with comparatively low
formaldehyde emission potentials (Ref.
28). The data reviewed by EPA support
this conclusion. In particular, the
California homes study (Ref. 29), the
Riedlinger study (Ref. 36), discussed in
Unit III.F. of the preamble to the
proposed Implementation Rule (Ref. 22),
and test data from a hardboard
manufacturer (Ref. 37) provide evidence
that products made with phenolformaldehyde resins have lower
formaldehyde emissions than products
made with urea-formaldehyde resins. In
the California homes study, the results
from four samples of unfinished wood
products made with phenolformaldehyde resins ranged from 4.1 to
9.2 mg/m2/h or, using CARB’s
conversion, 0.0028 ppm to 0.0063 ppm.
These results are markedly lower than
the results from the urea-formaldehyde
products in the same study (Ref. 29). As
discussed in the proposed rule, the
Riedlinger study was designed to
evaluate the effects of higher
temperatures and humidities on
formaldehyde emissions from wood
products made with different resin
systems (Ref. 36). The study involved
testing particleboard panels constructed
in the laboratory using resin recipes
that, according to the study designers,
are a close approximation to recipes
used in the particleboard industry. The
particleboard panels constructed from
urea-formaldehyde resins were the
highest-emitting panels, at 0.063 ppm
after 7 days of conditioning when tested
at standard temperature and humidity
for the ASTM D–6007 method. The
formaldehyde emission rate for the
melamine-urea-formaldehyde panels
with the same conditions was a close
second at 0.057 ppm. The formaldehyde
emission rate for the panels made with
phenol-formaldehyde resins was much
lower, at 0.011 ppm. Finally, a
hardboard manufacturer submitted test
data on hardboard produced with a
phenol-formaldehyde resin (Ref. 37). As
described by the submitter, the test data
show results well below ‘‘any emission
threshold defined in the legislation.’’
Melamine-formaldehyde resins are
also available. Being resistant to moist
conditions, they are most commonly
used for exterior and semi-exterior
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89681
applications, but they are also used for
decorative laminates, paper treating,
and paper coating (Ref. 27). The
synthesis of melamine-formaldehyde
resins is similar to that of ureaformaldehyde resins, except that
melamine is a stronger nucleophile than
urea, resulting in a faster and more
complete reaction between melamine
and formaldehyde than between urea
and formaldehyde (Ref. 27). Melamineformaldehyde resins are lighter in color
than phenol-formaldehyde resins, but
the cost of melamine makes these resins
relatively expensive. The cost of
melamine contributed to the
development of melamine-ureaformaldehyde resins, which are also
water resistant at a lower cost. However,
these resins may not provide the low
formaldehyde emission potential that
would be expected from a melamineformaldehyde resin without urea (Ref.
38), a concern that is supported by the
limited results of the Riedlinger study
(Ref. 36).
There are limited formaldehyde
emissions data available on melamineformaldehyde resins without added
urea. CARB described a study of
formaldehyde emissions from MDF
made with melamine-formaldehyde
resins and a study of particleboard made
with two different melamineformaldehyde resin formulations (Ref.
27). Formaldehyde emissions from these
two studies were measured by test
methods that are not directly
comparable to the TSCA Title VI
emission standards, which are
presented in terms of the ASTM E–
1333–96 (2002) method (Ref. 39). Using
comparisons developed by CARB (Ref.
40), it appears that the results from both
studies are within the range of the
formaldehyde emission standards
established by TSCA Title VI. However,
in light of the limited amount of data,
and the uncertainties involved in
comparing results from different test
methods, EPA is unable to determine
that this is the case.
EPA also reviewed the documents
available from CARB’s rulemaking
process for the ATCM. In developing the
CARB ATCM, CARB did a significant
amount of research into available resins
and their relative formaldehyde
emissions potentials. CARB
commissioned a study on formaldehyde
and toluene diisocyanate emissions
from interior residential sources (Ref.
29). In 2003, CARB also surveyed
composite wood product manufacturers
across the U.S., asking them for a variety
of information including formaldehyde
emissions data from products. This
research led CARB to conclude that
formaldehyde emission control
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89682
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
measures for hardwood plywood,
medium-density fiberboard, and
particleboard were warranted, because
these three products were primarily
being made with urea-formaldehyde
resins that ‘‘have the highest
formaldehyde emission rates.’’ (Ref. 27).
According to CARB, formaldehyde
emission rates from other composite
wood products, products used primarily
in exterior applications, such as
oriented strand board, hardboard, and
peg board, were about 90% lower and
contributed far less to formaldehyde
concentrations in California. CARB
went on to note that the primary
composite wood products using phenolformaldehyde resins were oriented
strand board and softwood, or structural
plywood, which were mainly used for
exterior sidings. Thus, many of the
products excluded from the CARB
ATCM, and later from TSCA title VI,
such as hardboard, oriented strand
board, structural plywood, structural
panels, and structural composite
lumber, were so excluded because
CARB determined that they were
already being made with resins with
limited formaldehyde emissions
potential. Based on the available
information that EPA has reviewed as
part of this rulemaking, EPA agrees with
CARB’s determination that composite
wood products made with phenolformaldehyde resins are much less
likely to emit formaldehyde than
products made with urea-formaldehyde
resins.
EPA also observes that, as noted by a
commenter (Ref. 25), the Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design
(LEED) 2009 green building certification
program allowed a low-emitting
materials credit for the use of composite
wood products made with no added
urea-formaldehyde resins. This credit
was available without formaldehyde
emissions testing. A 2013 interpretation
of the requirements allowed composite
wood products that met the CARB
ATCM standard for a ULEF exemption
to obtain the credit, but only with the
CARB-required testing to confirm low
formaldehyde emissions. This credit has
been expanded in LEED v4, the most
recent LEED standard, to encompass
materials that, with testing, meet the
CARB ATCM standard for either a NAF
or ULEF exemption.
EPA carefully considered all of the
public comments, as well as information
that EPA compiled on the wood
products industry in order to develop
this rule and analyze its economic
impacts. Based on the information
provided by commenters on the
differences between hardwood plywood
production and laminated product
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
production, EPA agrees with the
numerous commenters who asserted
that laminated product producers are
truly different from composite wood
product mills. It is EPA’s understanding
that laminated product producers are
generally smaller businesses that make
fewer individual items per product type
than mills do, although EPA recognizes
that this is not universally true. There
are also many more laminated product
producers (an estimated 7,000 to 14,000)
than composite wood product mills (an
estimated 90, operated by 54 firms) (Ref.
3). Laminated product producers are
often small custom shops who laminate
on a per order basis. While each
laminated product would not have to be
tested, as some commenters asserted,
the product grouping conventions used
by TPCs and mills to reduce the number
and frequency of required tests could
still result in significantly more tests for
a given production volume for a custom
shop as compared to a hardwood
plywood mill. In addition, because
composite wood product mills typically
make many more individual items of
each product type than most laminated
product producers, mills can amortize
the fixed costs of testing over a larger
volume of production, resulting in only
a small cost increase per unit.
EPA considered the costs that
laminated product producers would
bear under a variety of options to
address formaldehyde emissions from
laminated products, including options
involving an emission standard but no
testing and reduced testing without
certification, as well as the option
chosen for this final rule. As more fully
described in Chapter 2 of the economic
analysis (Ref. 3), EPA estimated the size
of the laminated product producer
universe, how many of them used ureaformaldehyde resins, and how much it
would cost for testing, certification, and
switching from a urea-formaldehyde
resin to a phenol-formaldehyde resin or
a resin formulated with no added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure. EPA assumed that
laminated product producers would
switch from a urea-formaldehyde resin
to a qualified resin, or purchase alreadyveneered panels from a hardwood
plywood panel producer or another
laminated product producer, if it made
economic sense for them to do so.
Taking all of this into account, EPA
estimated that the aggregate annualized
costs for laminated product producers
would be $26 million to $72 million
using a three percent discount rate, and
$26 million to $62 million using a seven
percent discount rate.
Also as described in the economic
analysis (Ref. 3), EPA estimated the
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
human health benefits that would result
from reductions in formaldehyde
exposure attributable to this final rule.
Because most domestic composite wood
product panel producers are producing
only CARB compliant products,
exposure reductions due to this rule are
expected to come primarily from two
sources: Laminated products and
imported composite wood products.
EPA was able to quantify the benefits
attributable to avoided eye irritation and
nasopharyngeal cancer, but there are
additional unquantified benefits due to
other avoided health effects. There is
not sufficient information at this time
on the relationship between
formaldehyde exposure and myeloid
leukemia, respiratory related effects, or
reduced fertility to include a valuation
estimate in the overall benefits analysis.
The quantified benefits attributable to
reductions in laminated product
emissions are $35 million to $104
million using a three percent discount
rate, and $13 million to $42 million
using a seven percent discount rate.
These benefits represent approximately
half of all quantified benefits
attributable to the final rule.
2. Rationale for exemption. EPA based
its proposed exemption for laminated
products made with NAF-based resins
on a reading of the statute that requires
any exemption for laminated products
to be promulgated in accordance with
TSCA section 601(d)(1), in a manner
that ensures compliance with the
statutory emission standards. EPA’s
rationale was that, if the platform
complied with the applicable emission
standards for the platform, the addition
of a veneer with a NAF-based resin was
unlikely to cause the resulting
laminated product to exceed the
applicable emission standard for the
platform. Although some commenters
supported the proposed exemption,
others thought it wasn’t broad enough,
and still others noted that laminated
products were covered by TSCA Title VI
as hardwood plywood, and should,
therefore, be required to meet the
hardwood plywood emission standard.
Although EPA referred to the laminated
products exemption in the proposed
rule as a NAF exemption, this
terminology likely causes confusion
between the exemption for laminated
products and the limited testing and
certification exemptions discussed in
Unit III.G. that are available to panel
producers who use NAF-based or ULEF
resins. EPA is therefore avoiding the use
of the term ‘‘NAF-based’’ in connection
with the laminated products exemption
in this final rule.
Upon further reflection, and
consideration of public comments, EPA
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
has concluded that the better reading of
the statute is that EPA need not make a
finding that exempt laminated products
will meet the statutory emission
standards, whether for hardwood
plywood or for the underlying platform.
Rather, EPA must make a reasoned
determination, based upon a review of
all of the available and relevant
information, that some or all laminated
products should be exempt. This
provides EPA with the discretion to
consider a wide variety of factors,
including formaldehyde emission
potential, business demographics, and
resin chemistry, as well as costs and
benefits. EPA views the formaldehyde
emission potential and the benefits of
reductions in emissions as the most
important considerations. The purpose
of TSCA Title VI is to reduce
formaldehyde emissions from composite
wood products in order to protect
human health. The central feature of
Title VI is the range of formaldehyde
emissions that Congress established
considering all of the factors then
known. And Congress chose to include
laminated products within the
definition of hardwood plywood unless
EPA exempts them. Consequently,
although EPA has concluded that Title
VI does not require strict compliance
with the standards as the test for EPA’s
exemption decision, EPA continues to
believe that consideration of the
formaldehyde emission potential of
laminated products and the estimated
health benefits from reductions in such
emissions are the most important
considerations, and the statutory
emission standards provide the best
baseline for evaluating these
considerations.
That having been said, Congress most
likely treated laminated products
differently from other covered products
because of the real differences between
laminated product producers and
composite wood product mills (see
earlier discussion). Notably, laminated
product producers are generally of a
smaller size and more numerous as
compared to mills. Thus, EPA has
carefully considered the costs and
benefits in deciding whether to exempt
laminated products, including the costs
and benefits of testing and certification
and of allowing time for the
demonstration and development of
lower-emitting resin substitutions. In
this regard, an integral part of this
determination is the decision to
establish the manufactured-by date for
laminated products at December 12,
2023, as discussed later in this Unit.
EPA’s decision to retain coverage of
laminated products other than products
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
made by using, during the lamination
step, either a phenol-formaldehyde resin
or a resin formulated with no added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure hinges in part upon
laminated product producers having the
ability to fully evaluate options for
compliance.
Congress also clearly modeled
portions of TSCA Title VI on the CARB
ATCM. For laminated products,
Congress expressly included
information from State authorities
among the things that EPA must
consider in deciding whether to exempt
any laminated products. At that time,
CARB’s regulations did not regulate
laminated products as hardwood
plywood. However, Congress clearly did
not direct EPA to mimic CARB exactly.
EPA therefore has considered not only
what CARB’s regulations were at that
time but also the current concerns and
direction of their program.
Some commenters supported an
exemption for laminated products that
are made without urea-formaldehyde
resins. In fact, one observed that CARB,
in a presentation at an August 2013
stakeholder meeting on the differences
between the ATCM and the EPA
proposal, suggested an alternative
approach to laminated products that
would not require testing or certification
unless the producer uses ureaformaldehyde resins (Ref. 41). As
previously discussed, EPA knows of two
other formaldehyde-based resins that
would fit within the suggested category
of no-added urea-formaldehyde resins,
i.e., phenol-formaldehyde resin and
melamine-formaldehyde resin. At the
present time, EPA has determined that
the available data supports an
exemption for laminated products made
with phenol-formaldehyde resins, but
not an exemption for products made
with melamine-formaldehyde resins.
Many more commenters supported
other options, such as an exemption for
all laminated products or the CARB
discussion proposal of March 2014. EPA
is not promulgating an exemption for all
laminated products because the
available information indicates that
laminated products made with ureaformaldehyde resins can have high
formaldehyde emissions and laminated
product producers have several
alternatives to choose from in
determining how best to comply with
this final rule. Many laminated product
producers are already using resins
formulated with no-added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure (Ref. 3) and more are
likely to switch to that type of resin or
a phenol-formaldehyde resin in order to
avoid having to comply with the testing
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89683
and certification requirements.
Laminated product producers can
choose to purchase already-veneered
panels if that is more cost-effective.
Laminated product producers can also
choose to consult with an EPA TSC
Title VI TPC to design a workable
testing and certification program.
With respect to the CARB discussion
proposal, it is a significant improvement
over a complete exemption. However,
EPA is concerned that, without either a
requirement to use phenolformaldehyde resins or resins
formulated with no-added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure or a requirement for
some testing, there is no assurance that
the products will meet CARB’s
suggested emission standard of 0.13
ppm. The record, especially the CARB/
AHFA data set, demonstrates that some
laminated products have high
formaldehyde emissions, so a
requirement that the platform be
compliant does not ensure that the
laminated product will also be
compliant, particularly if ureaformaldehyde resins are used.
This final rule also does not include
an exemption for laminated products
made with compliant platforms and
ULEF resins that contain ureaformaldehyde. The resins eligible for
this exemption can be defined by their
composition. For the purpose of this
exemption, because specific resin
formulation information was not
available for the formaldehyde
emissions data that EPA reviewed on
phenol-formaldehyde resins, EPA has
defined phenol-formaldehyde resin to
be a resin that is primarily composed of
phenol and formaldehyde, with no
added urea. Similarly, the other resins
eligible for the laminated products
exemption do not contain added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure by definition.
However, the available information
reviewed by EPA in this rulemaking
indicates that the only way to determine
whether urea-formaldehyde resins are
also ULEF resins is through emissions
testing. Indeed, in responding to another
commenter’s suggestion that EPA
approve resin systems that demonstrate
consistent compliance with emission
limits when properly used, one
commenter stated that ULEF is not a
resin type (Ref. 42). According to this
commenter, the term describes an
emission result when measured in a
variety of different tests over different
time frames and a resin that meets the
ULEF limits in one product setting and
application may not in another. This
commenter noted that application rates,
laminate and substrate porosity and
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89684
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
other factors affect emissions from
products made with ULEF resins. EPA
agrees that there are a number of factors
that affect the formaldehyde emission
rates of products made with ULEF
resins and that, in order to exempt
laminated products made with ULEF
resins, EPA would have to require
upfront testing to demonstrate that
product emissions are in the range of
the statutory emission limits. There
would be no meaningful difference
between the testing EPA would require
of laminated product producers to
demonstrate low emissions and the
testing that will be required of mills
who are applying for the limited
exemption from testing and TPC
oversight for products made with ULEF
resins. Laminated product producers are
free to take advantage of the third-party
certification exemption or reduced
testing provisions under § 770.18.
In deciding on the scope and structure
of the laminated products exemption,
EPA was mindful of the scope of the
CARB regulations and the consideration
being given by CARB to amendment of
those regulations, and EPA consulted
extensively with CARB. It would not be
appropriate for EPA to mirror the
current CARB regulations and simply
exempt laminated products, for the
reasons stated above, and also because
CARB is considering amendment to its
regulations to cover laminated products.
EPA cannot speculate whether or how
CARB will amend its regulations, but
the approach taken in today’s rule is
consistent overall with the concept of
CARB’s March 2014 discussion
proposal, in that it uses the upper
bound of the Title VI emission
standards as the most important guide
in determining whether laminated
products should be exempted. While
CARB’s proposal would not have
required testing and certification, for the
reasons stated above, EPA is concerned
that a program without testing or
certification would not be effective in
achieving the objective to keep
emissions below the target level. Thus,
EPA has determined today’s rule
properly accounts both for CARB’s
regulatory direction and for the
numerous additional considerations
appropriate under Title VI, as discussed
herein.
3. Manufactured-by date for
laminated products. EPA has
determined that testing and certification
is necessary for laminated products
unless they are made by attaching a
wood or woody grass veneer to a
compliant platform with either a
phenol-formaldehyde resin or a resin
formulated with no-added
formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
linking structure. However, EPA agrees
with the numerous commenters who
argued that EPA could not realistically
expect those laminated product
producers that are currently regulated
under CARB only as fabricators to attain
compliance with this rule’s testing and
certification requirements within a year.
As a result of EPA’s consideration of the
public comments and EPA’s review of
the available and relevant information
on laminated products as directed by
the statute, EPA is establishing the
manufactured-by date for laminated
products at December 12, 2023. After
the manufactured-by date for composite
wood products, which is December 12,
2017, all laminated product producers
must comply with the general
requirements for fabricators, i.e., they
must use compliant cores or platforms,
they must keep fabricator records, and
they must follow the labeling
requirements for fabricators. After the
manufactured-by date for laminated
products, laminated product producers
making exempt laminated products also
must, as a condition of the exemption,
maintain records demonstrating that
exempt products made after the
manufactured-by date for laminated
products are eligible for the exemption.
Also after the manufactured-by date for
laminated products, producers of nonexempt laminated products must
comply with the testing, certification,
and recordkeeping requirements for
hardwood plywood in addition to the
requirements for fabricators.
EPA recognizes the significant
challenges described by many
commenters in switching from ureaformaldehyde resins to other resin
technologies and EPA realizes that it
will take considerable time in some
instances to successfully do so. Not only
must fabricators find a way to make
their products with new resin
technology, they must also have time to
observe how these products perform in
use. Several commenters mentioned the
difficulty of evaluating new resin
technologies for products that have 25year warranties. In addition, because the
formaldehyde emission standard for
hardwood plywood is lower than the
standards for particleboard and MDF,
even those laminated product producers
that choose not to switch to an
exemption-eligible resin technology
may have to change resin formulations
or purchase lower-emitting platforms in
order to meet the hardwood plywood
emission standard. These laminated
product producers will also need time
to evaluate strategies for compliance
that may involve different production
processes and different supply chains.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Another consideration is TPC
capacity. EPA shares the concerns of
those commenters who thought that the
addition of large numbers of laminated
product producers to the pool of
businesses needing testing and TPC
certification services might overwhelm
available TPC capacity, at least at first.
Although there is some uncertainty as to
exactly how many laminated product
producers will be able to switch to
either phenol-formaldehyde resins or
resins formulated with no-added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure and thereby avoid
testing and certification requirements,
EPA anticipates that a significant
number of them will do so. Currently,
there are about 40 CARB-approved
TPCs, with 11 of them located in the
United States and EPA expects them to
participate in the TSCA Title VI
program. It would not take many of the
estimated 7,000 to 14,000 laminated
product producers, currently not
regulated by CARB as hardwood
plywood producers, to overwhelm this
capacity.
Some commenters asked for
additional time to conduct studies in
order to demonstrate that other
laminated products should be exempt
from the testing and certification
requirements. These commenters cited
products with thicker veneers as an
example of laminated products that
would likely be able to demonstrate
consistently low emissions. EPA agrees
that this approach has merit, in that it
could potentially enable EPA to make a
finding that exemptions for other
laminated products are also warranted.
For example, although the limited data
available meant that EPA was unable to
determine that an exemption for
laminated products made with
melamine-formaldehyde resins was
warranted, it is entirely possible that
additional data would confirm that
products made with melamineformaldehyde resins have consistently
low formaldehyde emissions. It is also
possible that studies could demonstrate
that certain combinations of resin
formulation and manufacturing
processes consistently result in products
with low formaldehyde emissions, as
suggested by another commenter. In
order for EPA to base findings for
additional exemptions on product
studies, such studies should be
performed in accordance with accepted
scientific principles. Studies offered in
support of a potential exemption that
include, for example, a representative
sampling of products belonging to the
product category suggested for
exemption, especially with
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
formaldehyde emission results from
testing performed in accordance with
ASTM E1333–10 or ASTM D6007–02
(Refs. 43–44), are likely to facilitate a
preliminary EPA determination on the
merits of the suggested exemption.
However, other types of studies could
also be used to support an exemption.
In general, EPA intends to evaluate any
data submitted in support of an
exemption using the factors outlined in
the July 2003 document entitled ‘‘A
Summary of General Assessment
Factors for Evaluating the Quality of
Scientific and Technical Information’’
(Ref. 45). Persons interested in
demonstrating that additional
exemptions are warranted are
encouraged to contact the technical
person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATON CONTACT. The process from
study initiation to final EPA
rulemaking, if warranted, would be a
multi-year effort. It is likely that
designing and conducting a robust study
in support of an exemption for other
laminated products would take a couple
of years. Upon study completion, it
would take EPA some time to review the
study and determine whether to
undertake rulemaking to exempt
additional laminated products. Once a
decision to undertake rulemaking had
been made, EPA’s rulemaking process
would take several more years.
There may also be other opportunities
to reduce the burdens associated with
the testing and certification
requirements for laminated product
producers. For example, there may be
other test methods or testing protocols
that, when applied to laminated product
production, may ensure that laminated
product emissions are consistently
within the range of emissions permitted
for laminated product platforms. EPA
encourages laminated product
producers to think creatively about how
to approach the problem of
demonstrating consistently low
formaldehyde emissions, whether by the
type of resin used or the manufacturing
process, or by using alternatives to
existing test methods and testing
protocols. Some commenters suggested
alternative testing protocols for
laminated products, such as testing a
worst-case scenario for that producer
once a quarter. There may also be
alternative methods for testing
laminated products that would be less
burdensome than either using ASTM
E1333–10 or ASTM D6007–02 or a
correlated quality control method. In
order for EPA to incorporate any such
alternatives, EPA would have to have
data upon which to determine that the
alternative does in fact provide accurate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
and repeatable results that demonstrate
consistently low formaldehyde
emissions.
To this end and consistent with 5
U.S.C. 553(e), EPA has established a
process at § 770.4 through which any
person may petition the Agency to
initiate a rulemaking to expand the
exemption for laminated products from
the definition of the term ‘‘hardwood
plywood’’. EPA considers establishment
of the petition process at § 770.4 to be
a rule of Agency procedure, and it is
therefore not subject to prior notice and
comment. Petitioners should include
with their petitions all available and
relevant data to support the requested
exemption(s) and enable EPA to make a
reasoned determination that the petition
should be granted. This provides EPA
with the discretion to consider a wide
variety of factors, including
formaldehyde emission potential,
business demographics, and resin
chemistry, as well as costs and benefits.
EPA views the formaldehyde emission
potential and the benefits of reductions
in emissions as the most important
considerations.
EPA’s goal will be to promptly review
the petition and supporting data. The
Agency’s review will be hastened to the
extent that the petition fully addresses
the factors EPA would take into
account. EPA will acknowledge receipt
of the petition within 15 calendar days
by sending a letter to the petitioner and
subsequently communicate in another
letter to the petitioner the Agency’s
decision to initiate rulemaking or deny
the petition. The petition and any
accompanying data, together with the
letters acknowledging EPA’s receipt of
the petition and communicating EPA’s
subsequent decision in response to the
petition will be placed in a public
docket.
Following a decision to initiate
rulemaking based on a petition, EPA
will publish in the Federal Register a
proposed rule that would expand the
laminated products exemption based on
the petition, and provide a 30-day
public comment period. Based on the
petition and any public comments, EPA
would take final action on the proposal.
If EPA expands the exemption for
laminated products to include
additional resin formulations, laminated
product producers using those
additional resin formulations will be
subject to the same recordkeeping
requirements as those laminated
product producers who use NAF and
phenol-formaldehyde resins; that is,
they must maintain records
demonstrating eligibility for the
exemption.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89685
EPA agrees with the commenters who
suggested that additional time should be
given to laminated product producers
before they are required to comply with
the testing and certification provisions
of this final rule. In fact, considering in
part all of the comments advocating for
a permanent exemption, EPA has
determined that the three years
suggested by several commenters is not
likely to be sufficient for some
laminated product producers to fully
evaluate different resin technologies to
determine whether they can qualify for
the exemption and to either successfully
implement an alternative resin in their
production process or turn to evaluating
strategies for achieving compliance with
the hardwood plywood emission
standard and the testing and
certification provisions. Neither would
it be sufficient to design and conduct
studies and allow EPA to conduct
rulemaking to provide additional
exemptions if warranted.
In EPA’s view, seven years is a more
realistic timeframe for acting on any
additional warranted exemptions, and
should also provide sufficient time for
laminated product producers to either
switch to a resin that renders them
eligible for the exemption or figure out
how to implement a testing and
certification program for their laminated
products. EPA based the seven year
timeframe on the Agency’s best
professional judgment of the estimated
time it likely takes to conduct product
testing, especially to prove that a
particular technology sufficiently
reduces emissions in a broad array of
applications and for EPA to evaluate
and act upon a petition to expand the
exemption for laminated products from
the definition of the term ‘‘hardwood
plywood.’’ EPA assumed that it would
take at least a year to design a study that
would result in the generation of data to
support an exemption for a category of
products, and another year to acquire
the products and actually perform the
product testing. The amount of time
needed for EPA’s review of the data
could vary substantially, depending on
the amount, robustness, and sufficiency
of provided supporting information.
Finally, EPA wanted to ensure that there
would be enough time for laminated
product producers to develop data to
support any petitions and submit them
to EPA for evaluation before the testing
and certification requirements take
effect for laminated products without
feeling compelled to expend resources
for the otherwise-required testing and
certification to avoid potential
noncompliance.
EPA considered establishing a shorter
sell-through period, which would have
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89686
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
required producers of laminated
products to incur the cost of complying
with the testing and certification
requirements while also making
financial investments in determining
whether they are able to switch to a
qualified resin or conducting a robust
study to justify a subsequent exemption.
However, EPA does not think this
approach is justified for several reasons,
and as indicated above, EPA’s decision
not to exempt laminated products other
than products made by using, during the
lamination step, either a phenolformaldehyde resin or a resin
formulated with no added formaldehyde
as part of the resin cross-linking
structures is premised in part of the
decision to establish the seven-year sellthrough period. Even aside from efforts
to develop alternatives to compliance
with today’s standards, laminated
product producers could not
realistically be expected to be in full
compliance with this regulation in one
year in view of the considerations
discussed herein (such as TPC capacity
and process changes the producers may
need to make). In addition, because of
the large number of laminated product
producers that are subject to this rule,
the fact that many of them are very
small businesses that laminate on a perorder basis, and the significant upfront
costs involved in designing and
implementing a testing and certification
program, it does not make sense, in
EPA’s view, to require producers to
simultaneously incur compliance costs
while investigating whether they are
able to switch to a qualified resin or
while conducting a robust study to
justify a subsequent exemption or the
effectiveness of alternative test methods
or protocols. EPA wants to encourage
these investigations, which may well
reveal approaches that are as or more
reliable in ensuring low emissions at a
lower cost, and EPA is concerned that
requiring the investment and process
changes needed to comply with the rule
certification and testing requirements on
a shorter timeframe might reduce the
incentive for the development of
alternative approaches. EPA also does
not think it makes sense to stimulate a
large expansion of TPC capacity in the
short term that may be unnecessary and/
or may result in excess capacity over
time.
Overall, EPA has exercised its
discretion in making its determination
so as to fulfill the primary purpose of
TSCA Title VI without impeding unduly
or creating unnecessary economic
barriers to technological innovation. See
15 U.S.C. 2601(b)(3). In fact, EPA
encourages laminated product
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
producers and the wood products
industry to explore all avenues for
reducing formaldehyde emissions from
composite wood products. In addition
to established resins, such as soy-based
resins or phenol formaldehyde resins,
new resin technologies may be
developed that provide adequate
performance while contributing
minimal formaldehyde emissions.
Similarly, while there are established
alternatives to regulated composite
wood products, e.g., lumber or solid
wood, it is likely that new alternatives
will be developed. For example, in
2014, EPA awarded a grant through
EPA’s Small Business Innovation
Research program competition to
Ecovative Design, LLC. Ecovative makes
packaging, building materials (furniture
and panels) and automotive products by
growing them from agricultural
byproducts and mycelium, a fungal
network of threadlike cells that are like
the roots of mushrooms. These materials
are not hardwood plywood,
particleboard, or MDF, and thus are not
subject to this final regulation. EPA
encourages laminated product
producers to consider all aspects of their
production processes when deciding
how best to lower formaldehyde
emissions from laminated products and
achieve compliance with this
regulation.
4. Definitions associated with
laminated products. EPA is
promulgating the definitions associated
with laminated products essentially as
proposed, except that the term
‘‘laminated product’’ is limited to those
products that are produced either by the
fabricator of the finished good in which
the product is incorporated or by a
fabricator who uses the laminated
product in the further construction or
assembly of a component part. EPA’s
proposed definition did not include any
provisions restricting applicability of
the term to certain entities because of
concerns over potentially inequitable
results. EPA did not intend for the term
‘‘laminated product’’ to be expanded to
the extent that virtually all hardwood
plywood panels could be considered
laminated products. Rather, EPA’s
intention was to allow fabricators of
component parts, e.g., cabinet door
fabricators, to be afforded similar
treatment under the TSCA Title VI
regulations as fabricators of finished
goods, e.g., entire cabinets. The
laminated product definition in this
final rule addresses EPA’s concerns
without being overly broad.
EPA’s proposed definition of
laminated product also expanded upon
the statutory definition to include
products made by attaching woody-
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
grass veneers to particleboard, MDF, or
veneer-core platforms. In addition, EPA
proposed related definitions for the
terms ‘‘veneer’’ and ‘‘woody-grass.’’
While some commenters objected to the
expansion of the definition of laminated
products to include woody-grass
veneers, CARB and another commenter
supported including woody-grass
veneers, and the February 2014 draft
amendments to the CARB ATCM
include woody grass in the definition of
veneer. Therefore, for the reasons stated
in the proposal, that woody-grass
veneers can be porous and therefore not
effective barriers to formaldehyde
emissions, that woody grass veneers can
be affixed to cores and platforms using
urea-formaldehyde resins, and that
including woody grass veneers is
consistent with the definition of
hardwood plywood in the ANSI/HPVA
HP–1 standard (Ref. 46), the definition
of laminated product in the final rule
includes woody grass as well as wood
veneers. EPA notes that the term
‘‘laminated product’’ does not include
those products made by attaching
something other than a wood or woody
grass veneer (e.g., plastic, vinyl, or film)
to a core or platform.
In addition, because the term ‘‘core’’
and the term ‘‘platform’’ can both be
used to describe the wood product to
which a wood or woody grass veneer is
affixed, the final rule’s laminated
product definition includes both terms.
EPA is promulgating the definition of
the term ‘‘veneer’’ as proposed, with the
addition of a maximum thickness limit
of 6.4 millimeters (1⁄4 inch, the thickest
veneer allowed under the ANSI/HPVA
HP–1 standard) to distinguish it from
lumber or sawn veneer, a specialty
product typically used in the restoration
of antique furniture.
EPA also proposed to define
component part as a part that contains
one or more composite wood products
and is used in the assembly of finished
goods. EPA is promulgating the
definition of component part as
proposed, except that EPA has added
the unintentionally-omitted phrase
‘‘construction or’’ to the definition, as
well as a clarification regarding parts
sold individually to end users. Such
items are not component parts but are
more properly classified as finished
goods because their commercial
assembly process is complete. This
clarification is consistent with CARB’s
proposal to modify their definition of
the term ‘‘finished good’’ so that it
means any good or product, other than
a panel, containing hardwood plywood,
particleboard, or MDF.
4. Particleboard and medium-density
fiberboard. As proposed, EPA is
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
incorporating the statutory definitions
of the terms ‘‘particleboard’’ and
‘‘medium-density fiberboard’’ into the
regulations without change. In addition,
EPA is finalizing the proposed
definition for the term ‘‘thin mediumdensity fiberboard’’ that incorporates a
maximum thickness of 8 millimeters or
0.315 inches and is consistent with both
CARB and the voluntary consensus
standard for medium-density fiberboard
(Ref. 47). EPA is aware that some
products are marketed as ‘‘high-density
fiberboard.’’ If these products meet the
definition of medium-density
fiberboard, they are regulated as
medium-density fiberboard. If they meet
the definition of ‘‘hardboard’’ they are
exempt as hardboard.
5. Exemptions. a. Statutory
exemptions. TSCA section 601(c)
exempts a number of products from the
formaldehyde emission standards for
composite wood products. These
exemptions include, but are not limited
to: Hardboard, structural plywood,
structural panels, oriented strandboard,
glued laminated lumber, prefabricated
wood I-joists, finger-jointed lumber,
wood packaging, composite wood
products used inside new vehicles other
than recreational vehicles, windows that
contain less than five percent by volume
of composite wood products, exterior
doors and garage doors that contain less
than three percent by volume of
composite wood products, and exterior
and garage doors that are made with
NAF-based or ULEF resins. EPA is
incorporating these exemptions into the
implementing regulations. Composite
wood products, component parts, and
finished goods that qualify for these
exemptions are exempt from all of the
provisions of the implementing
regulations. However, component parts
and finished goods made of a mixture of
exempt products and regulated products
are not exempt. For example, a cabinet
made up of structural plywood and
hardwood plywood would be subject to
the labeling and recordkeeping
requirements of this final rule. The
hardwood plywood in the cabinet
would also be subject to the emission
standard for hardwood plywood as well
as the testing and certification
provisions of this rule.
The statute exempts any finished
good that has previously been sold or
supplied to an individual or entity that
purchased or acquired the finished good
in good faith for purposes other than
resale. The statute provides two
examples: Antiques and secondhand
furniture. Thus, dealers in secondhand
furniture do not have any obligations
under this regulation solely due to the
fact that some of the furniture may
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
contain composite wood products.
Similarly, refurbishment of antique
furniture and in-house repairs of
previously sold finished goods, such as
cabinetry and furniture, are not covered
by this regulation. However, there is no
exemption for panel producers,
importers, and fabricators of composite
wood products and component parts
that are intended to be used in repairs.
Unless another exemption is applicable,
these entities may only make compliant
products available in the market place,
including to end users and other parties
that intend to use these products in
repairs.
With respect to exterior and garage
doors made with NAF-based or ULEF
resins, these resin types are defined
elsewhere in the statute, with reference
to both the composition of the resin and
the formaldehyde emissions of
composite wood products made with
the resin. EPA is promulgating these
exemptions as proposed and will
interpret the statutory language to mean
that, in order to be eligible for this
exemption, the composite wood
products used to make exterior and
garage doors must comply with the
emission standards contained in the
statutory definitions of NAF-based
resins and ULEF resins, as measured by
the testing described in the statutory
definitions of these resin types.
However, manufacturers, fabricators,
distributors, or retailers of these doors
are not required to comply with the
third-party certification, recordkeeping,
or labeling provisions of this final rule.
b. Hardboard. TSCA Title VI exempts
hardboard, but directs EPA to define it.
EPA proposed to define hardboard with
reference to, and consistent with, three
relevant ANSI standards: ANSI A135.4
(Basic Hardboard), ANSI A135.5
(Prefinished Hardboard Paneling), or
ANSI A135.6 (Hardboard Siding) (Refs.
48–50). EPA is concerned that, because
hardboard and thin MDF share similar
appearances and end uses, a broad
definition of hardboard could lead to
thin MDF being erroneously categorized
as hardboard and exempted from the
emission standards. Subsequent to
EPA’s proposal, CARB issued proposed
amendments to its ATCM that would
limit the hardboard exemption to
hardboard that emits less than 0.06 ppm
formaldehyde (Ref. 51).
The definition of hardboard in the
final rule references the latest ANSI
standards, as suggested in comments
from the Composite Panel Association,
the accredited developer for these
standards. As noted in the standard
itself, the name of the standard
pertaining to siding was changed from
‘‘Hardboard Siding’’ to ‘‘Engineered
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89687
Wood Siding’’ in order to more
accurately describe the product (Ref.
52). The definition in the final rule also
references the standard for engineered
wood trim because the Composite Panel
Association indicated that products
conforming to this standard were also
considered hardboard (Ref. 53).
Although specific ANSI standards are
referenced in the definition, minor
unintentional deviations from the cited
ANSI standards do not necessarily mean
that a product is medium-density
fiberboard and not hardboard. EPA has
also added a rebuttable presumption
that products emitting more than 0.06
ppm formaldehyde are not hardboard.
Based on assertions from CARB and the
Composite Panel Association, EPA has
determined that products made
according to the ANSI standards for
hardboard are not likely to emit above
0.06 ppm formaldehyde (Ref. 54). This
presumption is designed to ensure that
MDF is not sold as hardboard. Some
commenters suggested that EPA address
this concern by excluding ‘‘dry process’’
hardboard from the definition of
hardboard and treating it as MDF, while
others thought this was unnecessary,
because ‘‘dry process’’ hardboard is
typically made with a small amount of
phenol formaldehyde resins and has
low formaldehyde emissions. The 0.06
ppm presumption is more enforceable
than a process-based exclusion, and is
in keeping with industry expectations of
hardboard.
c. Other requested exemptions.
Several commenters suggested that EPA
adopt other, non-statutory, exemptions.
As a general matter, EPA has
determined that it can best ensure
compliance with the emission standards
by applying the regulatory requirements
uniformly to all composite wood
products sold, supplied, offered for sale,
or manufactured in the United States. If
EPA were to promulgate exemptions at
the manufacturing level, exempt
composite wood products could later be
incorporated into finished goods,
possibly with non-exempt composite
wood products. This could make it
difficult for downstream purchasers,
EPA, and end consumers to assess
whether finished goods are made from
compliant composite wood products. It
would also complicate the labeling and
recordkeeping requirements, because
without records passed down through
the supply chain, it would be difficult
to ascertain whether finished goods
were made from compliant panels,
exempt panels, regulated panels that
were manufactured in violation of the
regulations, or some combination
thereof. Exemptions tied to the ultimate
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89688
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
end use of the product, if applied at the
manufacturing level, would make it
difficult to ensure that none of the
composite wood products are diverted
to other end uses, either intentionally or
accidentally. Such exemptions would
require labeling, recordkeeping, and
chain-of-custody systems specific to the
ultimate uses of the products. EPA
notes, however, that military-specified
plywood is excluded from the definition
of the term ‘‘hardwood plywood’’ and
thus military-specified plywood to be
used in new vehicles, rail cars, boats,
aerospace craft, and aircraft is not
subject to these regulations.
Commenters suggested that EPA
promulgate exemptions for products
made by educational institutions, for
products manufactured for export, and
for products intended for exempt uses
(e.g., inside new vehicles). Because the
statute provides that the emission
standards apply to composite wood
products sold, supplied, offered for sale,
or manufactured in the United States,
EPA does not believe it is appropriate to
provide such exemptions, except to the
extent an entity can demonstrate they
meet the criteria for the exemption at
TSCA section 12(a)(1). With respect to
composite wood products and finished
goods produced and labeled solely for
export, an entity would bear the burden
of demonstrating the applicability of
TSCA section 12(a)(1). EPA further
notes the regulations allow for the
transportation and importation of panels
for testing purposes, provided they are
appropriately marked. In response to
requests for a research and development
exemption, EPA notes that the final
definition of the term ‘‘panel’’ does not
include items produced for the purpose
of research and development, provided
those items are not sold, supplied or
offered for sale. Thus, those items are
not subject to the panel certification
requirements.
6. Other definitions. EPA is defining
a number of other terms to ensure that
the meaning and applicability of the
regulatory requirements are clear. EPA
is using the term ‘‘panel producer’’ to
refer to those facilities that actually
make composite wood products,
including laminated products that are
not exempt from the definition of
hardwood plywood, but excluding
importers that do not also make the
products. As discussed in the preamble
of the proposed rule, because TSCA
section 3 defines the term
‘‘manufacture’’ to include import, EPA
is using another term to clarify the
regulation by referring to facilities that
actually make the products regulated
under TSCA Title VI for the purposes of
the testing, certification, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
recordkeeping requirements. The term
‘‘panel producer’’ applies separately to
each specific facility because facilities
under a common entity often operate
under separate quality management
systems and procedures and therefore
have their own quality control program
specific to their staff and operational
capabilities. Other terms associated with
the testing requirements are discussed
in Unit III.E., while terms associated
with the third-party certification
program are discussed in Unit III.B.
Other terms for which EPA proposed
definitions include ‘‘importer,’’
‘‘fabricator,’’ ‘‘retailer,’’ ‘‘distributor,’’
and ‘‘purchaser.’’ EPA is finalizing the
term ‘‘importer’’ as proposed because it
is consistent with the definition of the
term ‘‘manufacturer’’ in TSCA section 3
and the definition of the term
‘‘importer’’ in 40 CFR 710.3. An
importer is an entity that imports
composite wood products, component
parts, or finished goods into the customs
territory of the United States and the
term includes the entity primarily liable
for the payment of any duties on the
products, or an authorized agent acting
on the entity’s behalf.
EPA proposed to define the term
‘‘fabricator’’ as an entity that
incorporates composite wood products
into component parts or into finished
goods and ‘‘retailer’’ as an entity that
generally sells smaller quantities of
composite wood products directly to
consumers. In considering comments
received from the renovation industry
on whether renovators should be
considered fabricators or retailers, EPA
reviewed the language of TSCA Title VI
as well as the guidance available on
CARB’s Web site. EPA has determined
that the activities of renovators are not
the kinds of activities that Congress
intended to regulate under TSCA Title
VI. Renovators are neither fabricating
finished goods to be sold in the
marketplace nor are they actually
retailing finished goods. Renovators
perform their work on real property on
behalf of, and at the direction of, the
building owner or lessee and, as such,
are neither selling nor supplying
composite wood products to the
building owner or lessee. EPA has
added an express exception for
renovators to both the definition of the
term ‘‘fabricator’’ and the term
‘‘retailer,’’ to ensure that it is clear that
they are not intended to be covered by
the definitions.
The renovator exception from the
term ‘‘retailer’’ does not encompass
retailers who sell building materials and
finished goods such as cabinets, and
also offer installation services to
consumers. For these retailers, the sale
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
of composite wood products to
consumers as part of a contract to
perform renovation services would be
covered by these regulations and the
retailer would be required to maintain
records of the transaction. The activities
of the subcontractor who installs the
composite wood products under
contract to the retailer would not be
covered.
EPA did not receive any other
comments specifically on the language
of the proposed definition of
‘‘fabricator.’’ EPA is adding the phrase
‘‘or entity’’ to the definitions of
distributor, fabricator, importer, and
retailer to ensure that it is clear that
both natural persons and corporate
entities have obligations under these
regulations. EPA is also adding the term
‘‘component part’’ to the definition of
retailer to make it clear that persons
who sell parts that contain composite
wood products directly to consumers
are retailers because these parts have
completed their commercial assembly
and are more appropriately classified as
finished goods. Finally, in response to
those commenters who thought that the
proposed definition was unclear, EPA is
promulgating a definition of the term
‘‘purchaser’’ that clearly states that
panel producers, importers, fabricators,
distributors, and retailers are included,
while excluding the end user.
EPA proposed to define the term
‘‘panel’’ as ‘‘a flat or raised piece of
composite wood product.’’ In the final
regulation EPA is defining the term
panel as ‘‘a thin (usually less than two
inches thick), flat, usually rectangular
piece of particleboard, medium-density
fiberboard or hardwood plywood.
Embossing or imparting of an irregular
surface on the composite wood products
by the original panel producer during
pressing does not remove the product
from this definition. Cutting a panel into
smaller pieces, without additional
fabrication, does not make the panel
into a component part or finished good.
This does not include items made for
the purpose of research and
development, provided such items are
not sold, supplied, or offered for sale.’’
In this definition, EPA is clarifying that
items produced solely for the purpose of
research and development are not
‘‘panels’’ within the intended meaning
of TSCA Title VI and do not require
certification unless they are sold,
supplied, or offered for sale.
B. EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program
1. Overview. The basic framework of
EPA’s TPC proposal was that ABs
interested in participating in the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Program would apply to EPA, and if
deemed qualified, would enter into a
recognition agreement with EPA. After
being recognized by EPA, ABs would
accredit TPCs based on the TPC
requirements established in § 770.7 of
the proposed rule. The EPA-recognized
ABs would then approve or deny TPC
applications for acceptance into the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program. Under the proposal, TSCA
Title VI TPCs would certify panel
producers’ composite wood products as
meeting all necessary requirements
under TSCA Title VI.
EPA received several comments,
discussed in more detail in Unit
III.B.2.f., expressing concern over the
proposed requirement that EPArecognized ABs review and approve or
deny TPC applications to participate in
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program. Based on these
comments, this final rule requires
candidate TPCs to seek approval and
recognition directly from EPA after
being accredited by EPA-recognized
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
ABs to the necessary standards
developed by the International
Organization for Standards (ISO) and
the International Electrochemical
Commission (IEC) and the TSCA Title
VI regulatory requirements in 40 CFR
part 770. In addition, TPCs approved by
CARB under the formaldehyde ATCM
will also be eligible for recognition
under the EPA TSCA Title VI ThirdParty Certification Program through
reciprocity with CARB assuming they
meet all applicable requirements of this
final rule. The requirements for a TPC
to obtain EPA recognition through
reciprocity are discussed in Unit
III.B.5.b.
In this final rule, EPA is retaining the
proposed requirement that ABs
interested in participating in the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program must apply to EPA and enter
into a recognition agreement with the
Agency to become an EPA TSCA Title
VI AB. Following the two-year
transitional period for CARB TPCs
discussed in Unit III.B.5.a., EPA will
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89689
only recognize TPCs, including CARBapproved TPCs, who are accredited by
EPA-recognized ABs. The Agency will,
as proposed, require that TPCs under
TSCA Title VI certify a composite wood
panel producer’s products by verifying
the accuracy of formaldehyde emissions
testing of composite wood products by
the panel producer, monitoring panel
producer quality assurance programs for
composite wood products, and by
conducting inspections of panel
producers’ activities and products,
discussed in more detail in Unit
III.B.3.c. Illustration 1 shown below
provides an overview of the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program.
EPA aligned, to the extent practicable,
the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
requirements with those in the CARB
ATCM to avoid placing differing or
duplicative regulatory requirements on
the regulated community.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C
1 TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program
formerly called the TSCA Title VI Proposed ThirdParty Certification Framework in the proposed rule.
2 ABs recognized by EPA pursuant to 40 CFR part
770 are termed EPA TSCA Title VI ABs in this final
rule.
3 The International Organization for
Standardization (ISO) and the International
Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) develop and
publish consensus-based International Standards
utilized by accreditation organizations IAF and
ILAC.
4 ISO/IEC 17011—General requirements for
accreditation bodies accrediting conformity
assessment bodies.
5 MLA—IAF’s Multilateral Recognition
Arrangement requires AB signatories to
demonstrate they are capable of accrediting product
certification bodies to ISO/IEC 17065—
Requirements for bodies certifying products,
processes or services.
6 MRA—ILAC’s Mutual Recognition Arrangement
requires AB signatories to demonstrate they are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
a. Terminology. EPA is finalizing most
of the definitions associated with the
TPC program as proposed. However, as
a result of public comment, and in some
cases to improve clarity or to be
consistent with terms used in the
referenced international consensus
standards, in this final rule EPA has
made some minor changes to
terminology used in the proposed rule.
capable of accrediting testing laboratories to ISO/
IEC 17025—General requirements for the
competence of testing and calibration laboratories
and ISO/IEC 17020—General criteria for the
operation of various types of bodies performing
inspection.
7 TPCs recognized by EPA pursuant to 40 CFR
part 770 are termed ‘‘EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs’’ in
this final rule.
8 TPCs may include contracted independent
testing labs and inspection bodies that are
accredited by EPA TSCA Title VI ABs.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Based on the comments received on a
number of the AB and TPC provisions,
EPA realizes that, where the proposal
used the term ‘‘accreditation,’’ the term
‘‘recognition’’ would have been a more
accurate description of the activities
EPA intends to take with respect to ABs
and TPCs. In this final rule, the term
‘‘recognition’’ is used instead of the
term ‘‘accreditation’’ to refer to EPA’s
recognition of ABs or TPCs, including
when discussing EPA’s proposal. The
term ‘‘accreditation’’ is retained in the
final rule to refer to an activity that ABs
perform as part of evaluating the
competency of TPCs. Additionally, in
this final rule, ABs recognized by EPA
under the EPA TSCA Title VI ThirdParty Certification Program are more
specifically termed EPA TSCA Title VI
Product ABs or EPA TSCA Title VI
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
ER12DE16.000
89690
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Laboratory ABs (both are also referred to
as EPA-recognized ABs). TPCs approved
to certify products under the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program are termed EPA TSCA Title VI
TPCs (also referred to as EPArecognized TPCs). A TPC laboratory
means a laboratory or contract
laboratory of an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
that is accredited by an EPA TSCA Title
VI Laboratory AB.
EPA proposed that EPA-recognized
Product and Laboratory ABs perform indepth system audits on each candidate
TPC as part of the accreditation process.
This requirement is still maintained;
however, in this final rule the term ‘‘onsite assessment’’ is used instead of the
term ‘‘in-depth systems audit.’’ The
standard ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E),
entitled ‘‘Conformity assessment—
General requirements for accreditation
bodies accrediting conformity
assessment bodies,’’ uses the terms
‘‘assessment,’’ ‘‘reassessment,’’ and
‘‘surveillance on-site assessment’’ (Ref.
55). EPA uses these terms to describe
the activities EPA-recognized ABs are
required to perform to evaluate the
competency of TPCs to conduct the
TSCA Title VI implementing
regulations. The terms ‘‘assessment,’’
‘‘reassessment,’’ and ‘‘surveillance onsite assessment’’ are defined in § 770.3.
EPA has also incorporated comments on
the proposed regulation related to ISO/
IEC 17020:2012(E), entitled ‘‘Conformity
assessment—Requirements for the
operation of various bodies performing
inspection,’’ so that the term ‘‘audit’’ is
replaced with the term ‘‘inspection’’ as
it relates to a TPC’s evaluation of a
panel producer in this final rule (Ref.
56).
EPA is finalizing as proposed that
EPA-recognized ABs may suspend,
modify or revoke a TPC’s accreditation,
as necessary. However, in this final rule,
the terms ‘‘modify’’ and ‘‘revoke’’ have
been replaced by the terms ‘‘reduce’’
and ‘‘withdraw’’ to make the
terminology consistent with the terms
used in ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E). The
terms ‘‘reduce’’ and ‘‘withdraw’’ are
more familiar to the ABs that will be
performing TPC accreditation activities
under the rule. However, this final rule
continues to use the terms ‘‘suspend,’’
‘‘modify,’’ and ‘‘revoke’’ to describe
potential EPA actions with respect to
EPA recognition of ABs and TPCs under
TSCA Title VI because they more
accurately describe the types of actions
that EPA may need to take under this
final rule.
b. ISO/IEC Standard Revisions. Since
publication of the proposed rule, two of
the ISO/IEC standards have been
updated and this final rule incorporates
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
the most current versions of those
standards. EPA agrees with those
commenters that thought that the final
rule should incorporate the updated
version of the standards because ABs
will not be able to accredit to the
previous versions once the transition
period expires.
EPA proposed that TPCs be accredited
to ISO/IEC Guide 65:1996(E) (Ref. 57),
which was subsequently revised to be
ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E), entitled
‘‘Conformity assessment—Requirements
for bodies certifying products, processes
or services’’ (Ref. 58). In this final rule,
EPA is incorporating by reference ISO/
IEC 17065:2012(E). This requirement
reflects the change required by
International Accreditation Forum (IAF)
that Multilateral Recognition
Arrangement (MLA) signatories
transition their accreditation of TPCs to
ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) no later than
September 14, 2015. In this final rule,
EPA is also incorporating by reference
ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E), which is an
updated version of ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E) referenced in the
proposed rule (Ref. 59).
2. Requirements for Accreditation
Bodies. There are two primary types of
ABs that will be involved in the
implementation of the EPA TSCA Title
VI Third-Party Certification Program:
Product ABs and Laboratory ABs. EPA
recognizes it is also possible that a
single AB may be qualified to perform
the roles of both types of ABs, and
accredit a TPC for both its product
certification capabilities and
formaldehyde emissions laboratory
testing capabilities. This scenario is
shown as ‘‘AB Type #3’’ in Illustration
1 (see Unit III.B.1.). In such a case, only
a single AB would need to be involved
in implementing the two AB roles under
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program.
a. Necessary qualifications of Product
ABs. EPA proposed that to be an EPArecognized Product AB, among other
requirements, Product ABs must be
signatories to the IAF MLA, or a
member of an equivalent oversight
body. As noted by commenters, in the
proposal, EPA incorrectly stated that the
IAF MLA level three endorsement
ensures that the AB has demonstrated
basic competence to perform
accreditation activities for ISO/
IEC17020:1998(E). The endorsement to
accredit TPCs to ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E),
now ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E), instead
falls under the International Laboratory
Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC)
Mutual Recognition Arrangement
(MRA), which is discussed later in this
final rule. The requirements in this final
rule pertaining to ISO/IEC
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89691
17020:2012(E) are discussed in Unit
III.B.3.a.i.
In this final rule, EPA retains the
requirement that Product ABs be
signatories to the IAF MLA and be
endorsed by IAF through level three, the
‘‘main scope’’ of the IAF MLA, which
ensures that the AB has policies and
procedures in place in its operations
and management plans to accredit a
TPC for product certification to ISO/IEC
17065:2012(E). EPA will also recognize
members of IAF regional bodies, as
suggested by public comments. The four
regional cooperations that are currently
recognized by both IAF and ILAC as
equivalent are the Asia Pacific
Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation
(APLAC), the European Accreditation
Cooperation (EA), the Inter-American
Accreditation Cooperation (IAAC), and
the Pacific Accreditation Cooperation
(PAC). However, EPA disagrees with a
comment to remove the phrase ‘‘or
equivalent oversight body’’ and, as
proposed, EPA will still consider
accepting into the program ABs that are
members of organizations that EPA has
determined to be equivalent. If any
other oversight bodies exist in the
future, ABs that are members of those
oversight bodies should have the
opportunity to be recognized under the
EPA program, if EPA determines that
membership in the new oversight body
is equivalent to being an ILAC or IAF
signatory.
b. Required qualifications of
Laboratory ABs. A Laboratory AB is
responsible for accrediting the TPC
formaldehyde emissions testing
laboratory. EPA proposed that
Laboratory ABs be signatories to the
ILAC MRA or a member of an
equivalent organization.
As discussed for Product ABs in Unit
III.B.2.a., EPA received similar
comments that Laboratory ABs who are
members of ILAC-recognized Regional
Cooperations provide accreditation
services that are equivalent to those
provided by ILAC MRA signatories. EPA
agrees and, as for Product ABs, in this
final rule EPA will consider a
Laboratory AB’s membership in a
regional ILAC cooperation as being
equivalent to being a signatory to the
ILAC MRA for the purposes of eligibility
in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program. The four regional
cooperations that are currently
recognized by both IAF and ILAC as
equivalent are the APLAC, the EA, the
IAAC, and the PAC. EPA will also
consider accepting into the program
Laboratory ABs that are members of
organizations equivalent to ILAC, as
determined by EPA.
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89692
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
c. Recognition agreement between
EPA and ABs. EPA proposed that
Product ABs and Laboratory ABs
interested in participating in the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program would be required to submit an
application to EPA to be formally
recognized by EPA. Once EPA reviewed
the AB’s credentials and deemed that
the AB was qualified, EPA proposed
that it would enter into a recognition
agreement with each Product and
Laboratory AB to formally recognize
each type of AB (or a single AB
performing both AB roles) as qualified
to implement their respective roles
under the EPA TSCA Title VI ThirdParty Certification Program. The
proposed recognition agreement was
proposed to be a signed agreement
between EPA and each Product AB or
Laboratory AB to abide by the proposed
regulatory requirements.
EPA received several comments about
the proposed requirement that each AB
enter into a recognition agreement with
EPA. These commenters opposed or
questioned requiring ABs to enter into
a recognition agreement with EPA,
stating that an AB’s status as a signatory
to the IAF MLA and/or ILAC MRA
should be sufficient without any further
review by EPA.
Because many ABs and the TPCs that
they accredit are not located in the
United States, it is necessary for ABs to
enter into a recognition agreement with
EPA to establish a closer relationship
between EPA and the ABs for the proper
EPA oversight of its regulatory program.
Furthermore, this requirement is not
without precedent, as there are several
third-party certification programs where
ABs must enter into such agreements
with government agencies to provide
accreditation services to third-party
certifiers, such as the EPA WaterSense
Program and the EPA Energy Star
Program. EPA also believes that
requiring ABs through recognition
agreements to meet with EPA in person,
via teleconference, or other virtual
methods on some regular or as-needed
basis to discuss the implementation of
the accreditation program strengthens
the ongoing relationship between EPA
and participating ABs, which in turn
improves the overall implementation of
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program. For these reasons,
EPA in this final rule is retaining the
requirement for ABs to apply to EPA
and enter into a recognition agreement
in order to become an EPA TSCA Title
VI AB.
EPA also received comment that EPA
should lengthen the recognition
agreement with ABs from three years as
proposed to four years to reflect the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
length of time between normal AB peer
evaluations under the ILAC and IAF
programs. Because the timing of the
EPA recognition agreement with the
ABs is unlikely to match the individual
AB peer review cycles, matching up the
two periods would not have any impact
on the responsibilities of the ABs under
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program. For these reasons,
EPA will retain the provision for threeyear recognition agreement cycles in the
final rule.
d. Agent for service requirement for
EPA TSCA Title VI ABs. In the event
that legal notices would need to be
served to an EPA-recognized AB, or
should the need for administrative and
judicial proceedings occur with an EPArecognized AB, EPA proposed requiring
ABs to designate an agent for service in
the United States in their applications.
The agent would need to be capable of
accepting service of notices and
processes made in administrative and
judicial proceedings. Any information
provided by EPA to the designated agent
for service would be equivalent to
providing that information directly to
the EPA-recognized AB. Requiring a
designated agent for service in the
United States will help to facilitate
communication between EPA and ABs
and ensure compliance with the
formaldehyde emission standards by
facilitating the ability of EPA to enforce
TSCA Title VI and its implementing
regulations, which in turn encourages
the regulated entities to fulfill their
obligations under the statute and
regulations.
EPA received several comments
regarding the agent for service
requirement for ABs. Some commenters
misinterpreted this requirement to mean
that an AB employee is expected to
physically work or have an office in the
United States, which it does not.
Additionally, commenters expressed
concern that ABs who function as part
of foreign governments may have
difficulty designating an agent for
service.
EPA determined that an agent for
service is necessary for legal matters,
and is available at a relatively low cost
from private firms that specialize in this
role. Therefore, the Agency is retaining
this requirement in this final rule. In
response to public comments, EPA
clarifies that the requirement permits
EPA TSCA Title VI ABs and TPCs to
share an agent for service. EPA TSCA
Title VI ABs that are part of a foreign
government or act on behalf of a foreign
government may designate their U.S.
embassy or a U.S. consulate as their
agent for service.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
e. EPA Recognition Agreement
Implementation Officer. As discussed in
the proposal and retained in this final
rule, the EPA Recognition Agreement
Implementation Officer is the EPA point
of contact for ABs to consult with on the
implementation of the recognition
agreement with EPA and matters
pertaining to the EPA-recognized AB’s
responsibilities under the recognition
agreement. The EPA-recognized AB will
also have an Implementation Officer
that will serve as the point of contact for
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program. The respective
EPA and EPA-recognized AB
Implementation Officers are identified
in each recognition agreement between
EPA and the EPA-recognized Product
and/or Laboratory AB.
f. Requirements for EPA TSCA Title
VI ABs. EPA proposed that once EPA
had entered into a recognition
agreement with an AB, that AB would
become recognized by EPA as an EPA
TSCA Title VI Product AB, Laboratory
AB, or both. This section discusses the
proposed EPA-recognized AB
responsibilities and the public
comments, as well as the AB
responsibilities established in this final
rule.
i. Responsibilities of EPA TSCA Title
VI Product ABs in the TPC application
process. EPA proposed that EPArecognized Product AB responsibilities
would include receiving and acting on
applications from TPCs seeking to
participate in the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program. EPA
also proposed that the EPA-recognized
Product ABs send TPC applications and
required supporting documentation to
EPA and assign the TPC a unique
number once the TPC became an EPA
TSCA Title VI Accredited TPC.
EPA received several comments
expressing concern with these
responsibilities. Some commenters felt
that the proposed approach would
provide an increased burden on EPArecognized ABs beyond normal industry
accreditation practice, leading to
increased costs passed on to TPCs.
Based on these comments, EPA will not
require Product ABs to review and
approve or deny TPC applications from
candidate TPCs that want to participate
in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program. Instead, under
this final rule, EPA will approve TPC
applications directly or will recognize
CARB-approved TPCs under the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-party Certification
Program through the EPA/CARB
memorandum of agreement (see Unit
III.B.5.b.).
ii. Responsibilities of ABs after TPC
recognition into the EPA TSCA Title VI
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Third-Party Certification Program.
Under the proposal, EPA-recognized
Product ABs, when accrediting a TPC,
would be responsible for ensuring that
the TPC has a process in place to verify
the accuracy of the formaldehyde
quarterly and quality control tests. EPA
TSCA Title VI Product ABs would also
ensure the TPC has a process in place
to monitor panel producer quality
assurance programs, and conduct
independent audits and inspections of
panel producers, their quality control
testing facilities and their laboratories.
EPA also proposed that Product ABs
keep certain records including
checklists and other records
documenting TPC compliance with the
accreditation requirements and provide
them to EPA within 30 calendar days
upon request.
Several commenters thought the
proposed requirement for ABs to make
available to EPA on request, certain
accreditation information such as
checklists and other records
documenting adherence to specific
requirements under the ISO standards,
such as inspections and on-site
assessments, would present issues with
the confidentiality agreements between
ABs and TPCs and would violate the
ISO/IEC17011:2004(E) confidentiality
requirements (Ref. 55). EPA also was
informed that it could obtain such
information through the TPCs rather
than the ABs. Based on these comments,
in this final rule, EPA is requiring
information pertaining to assessment
results of a TPC from the TPC instead
of the AB.
Under this final rule, as proposed,
EPA-recognized Product ABs will retain
the responsibility to accredit TPCs (if
the TPC is found to be eligible) seeking
recognition under the EPA TSCA Title
VI Third-Party Certification Program by
performing an initial assessment of each
TPC. Once EPA recognizes the
accredited TPC, EPA-recognized ABs
must perform a reassessment or
surveillance on-site assessment (as
defined in section 770.3) of EPArecognized TPCs in accordance with
ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E) at least every
two years.
Commenters also suggested that EPA
require that TPCs have this final rule’s
requirements listed within their scope
of accreditation for both ISO/IEC
17065:2012(E) and ISO/IEC
17025:2005(E) (Refs. 58, 60). They
indicated that this would help to
provide enough specificity in the
certification scheme to ensure
consistent performance by all the ABs,
TPCs and panel producers in this
program.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
Because of this information, EPA is
clarifying in this final rule that EPArecognized Product ABs (and Laboratory
ABs as discussed later in this unit) are
required to include, as part of their
initial ISO accreditation related
assessment, reassessment and
surveillance on-site assessment of a
TPC, a review of the TPC’s competence
to perform its responsibilities under this
rule pursuant to ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E).
Additionally, a TPC’s certificate of
accreditation issued by the EPArecognized Product AB must
specifically include a written reference
that the TPC scope of accreditation
includes ‘‘40 CFR part 770—
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite
Wood Products.’’
EPA proposed that EPA-recognized
Laboratory ABs would be responsible
for verifying initially, and on an ongoing
basis, that the TPC laboratory is
experienced and capable of conducting
formaldehyde emissions tests according
to the requirements of TSCA Title VI
and its implementing regulations.
In this final rule, the EPA-recognized
Laboratory AB responsibilities remain
largely unchanged from the proposal.
EPA-recognized Laboratory ABs, like
Product ABs, are required as part of
their initial assessment, reassessment,
and surveillance on-site assessment of a
TPC, to conduct a review of the TPC’s
competence to perform its laboratory
related responsibilities under this rule
pursuant to ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E). The
TPC’s accreditation certificate issued by
the EPA-recognized Laboratory AB must
specifically include a written reference
that the TPC’s scope of accreditation
includes ‘‘40 CFR part 770—
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite
Wood Products’’ and the formaldehyde
test methods ASTM E1333–10 and
ASTM D6007–02, if used.
EPA proposed that, upon request,
EPA-recognized Laboratory ABs would
allow EPA representatives to
accompany their assessors during onsite assessments to observe the audit of
a TPC. EPA received comments from
ABs opposing this requirement. In
response to these comments in this final
rule, EPA will instead require that TPCs,
upon request by EPA, allow EPA to
attend their assessment, reassessment or
surveillance on-site assessments
conducted by their EPA-recognized AB.
g. Revocation of EPA’s recognition of
an AB. EPA proposed that it may
suspend, revoke, or modify the
recognition of an EPA-recognized AB, if
the AB is not complying with the
requirements promulgated for ABs
under TSCA Title VI. As proposed, if an
EPA-recognized AB is removed or
withdraws from the EPA TSCA Title VI
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89693
Third-Party Certification Program, that
AB would be responsible for promptly
notifying EPA and all EPA-recognized
TPCs that receive its accreditation
services. EPA proposed to allow the
TPCs that were accredited by that EPArecognized AB to have 365 calendar
days, or 180 calendar days, if less than
365 calendar days were left on their
three-year recognition period, to be
accredited and recognized again as an
EPA-recognized TPC by another EPArecognized AB. EPA proposed that this
grace period would not be afforded to
TPCs if their EPA recognized-AB is
removed or withdraws from the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program for fraud or providing false or
misleading statements related to a
particular EPA-recognized TPC or TPCs,
or any reason that implicates a
particular TPC or TPCs in a violation of
TSCA Title VI or its implementing
regulations. While seeking accreditation
from an alternate EPA-recognized AB,
EPA proposed that an EPA-recognized
TPC would need to continue to comply
with all other aspects of TSCA Title VI
and its implementing regulations, and
the TPC could continue to certify
composite wood products.
Based on comments received, under
this final rule, EPA is retaining the
authority to suspend, revoke or modify
the recognition of an EPA-recognized
AB, if the AB is not complying with the
requirements promulgated for ABs
under TSCA Title VI. If an EPArecognized AB is removed or voluntarily
withdraws from the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program, that
AB is responsible for promptly notifying
all EPA-recognized TPCs that receive its
accreditation services and EPA, in the
case of a withdrawal. The regulations
allow the TPCs that were accredited by
that EPA-recognized AB to have 180
calendar days to be accredited by
another EPA-recognized AB. This 180
day grace period would not be afforded
to TPCs if their EPA-recognized AB is
removed or withdraws from the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program for fraud or providing false or
misleading statements related to a
particular EPA-recognized TPC or TPCs,
or any reason that implicates a
particular TPC or TPCs in a violation of
TSCA Title VI or its implementing
regulations. During the 180-day period
TPCs may continue to certify products
under TSCA Title VI. EPA agrees with
those commenters who thought that
portions of the EPA-recognized TPC’s
previous assessments could be
considered by the new EPA-recognized
AB in its reaccreditation of the TPC and
therefore would not require the
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89694
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
proposed 365 calendar days. In this
final rule, as proposed, if an EPArecognized AB is removed from the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program due to fraud for providing false
or misleading statements with respect to
a particular TPC, or for any other reason
that implicates a particular TPC in a
violation of TSCA Title VI or this final
rule, that TPC may not provide any
TSCA Title VI certification services
until it has been accredited by another
EPA-recognized AB. Should this
situation occur, EPA will provide
notifications to the affected EPArecognized TPCs at the time it
commences formal action (i.e. an action
to suspend, modify or revoke a
recognition under the procedures
established in 40 CFR 770.7(e)) against
the AB. Also under this final rule, and
as proposed, any action EPA takes
against an AB would not preclude an
enforcement action against a TPC.
3. Requirements for third-party
certifiers of composite wood products. a.
Requirements to apply for participation
in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program. EPA proposed
that TPCs meet several qualifications to
demonstrate experience and
competency in certain areas that EPA
believed were important to ensure a
TPC’s ability to conduct audits,
inspections, testing, and certification of
composite wood products. The basic
requirements for candidate TPCs to
qualify to participate in the TSCA Title
VI program remain largely the same in
this final rule except as noted in the
following discussions.
EPA had proposed that the TPC must
apply to an EPA-recognized Product AB
to certify composite wood products
pursuant to TSCA Title VI. As discussed
in Unit III.B.2.f.i., EPA will instead
require in this final rule that TPCs apply
directly to EPA for recognition or for
CARB-approved TPCs to provide EPA
with documentation from CARB that
specifies a TPC’s eligibility for
reciprocity as discussed in Unit
III.B.5.b. TPCs must apply for EPA
TSCA Title VI recognition electronically
through the EPA CDX via https://
cdx.epa.gov (discussed in more detail in
Unit III.B.6.) or, if notified by EPA that
the CDX portal is not available, via an
online application on the EPA Web site
found at: https://www.epa.gov/
formaldehyde/.
i. TPC accreditation requirements. As
discussed in Unit III.B.2.f.ii., candidate
TPCs must be accredited to ISO/IEC
17065:2012 (E), and the accreditation
must include a scope of accreditation to
40 CFR part 770—Formaldehyde
Standards for Composite Wood
Products.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
EPA proposed that TPCs have
experience in conducting inspections of
panel producers pursuant to ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E). Some commenters noted
that the proposal was unclear on
whether TPCs needed to be accredited
to ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E) or be in
conformance with ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E). Other commenters stated
that accreditation to ISO/IEC
17020:2012(E) is duplicative because
inspection qualifications and
responsibilities for TPCs and their subcontractors are already incorporated
into the required ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E)
accreditation. Based on these comments,
EPA is requiring in this final rule that
EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs be in
conformance with (but not necessarily
accredited to) ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E), as
is required under ISO/IEC
17065:2012(E) section 6.2.1. EPA TSCA
Title VI TPCs must also be able to
conduct inspections of panel producers
and their products and properly train
and supervise inspectors to inspect in
conformance with ISO/IEC
17020:2012(E).
EPA also proposed that TPCs have
experience operating or using
laboratories that are accredited to ISO/
IEC 17025:2005(E). EPA did not receive
comments on this point and is therefore
finalizing this requirement as proposed.
Also, as previously noted, the TPCs’
scope of accreditation to ISO/IEC
17025:2005(E) must include 40 CFR part
770—Formaldehyde Standards for
Composite Wood Products and the
formaldehyde test methods ASTM
E1333–10 and ASTM D6007–02, if used.
ii. TPC recognition periods. EPA
proposed that TPCs would be required
to renew their application to EPArecognized ABs every three years. EPA
requested and received comments on
the costs and benefits of a three-year
renewal period for recognition under
the TSCA Title VI Program as compared
to a two-year renewal period (as under
the CARB ATCM). EPA also requested
and received comments on whether the
proposed requirement for EPA TSCA
Title VI ABs to audit TPCs and their
laboratories every two years should be
extended to every three years to align
with the proposed three-year TPC
recognition period.
Many commenters supported the
proposed renewal periods of three years
for TPCs. Other commenters also stated
that the renewal periods should be in
line with intervals of assessments as
required by the ISO standards. The twoyear renewal period is consistent with
the maximum amount of time allowed
between on-site assessments under ISO/
IEC 17011:2004(E) and is also is
consistent with ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E).
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
In an effort to harmonize this final rule
with the existing CARB regulations and
better align with the on-site assessment
requirements of the ISO standards
highlighted above, EPA is requiring that
all EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs submit a
renewal application to EPA, or
documentation to renew their eligibility
for reciprocity every two years for EPA
recognition and to have a reassessment
or surveillance on-site assessment
conducted by their EPA TSCA Title VI
AB every two years to maintain their
accreditation.
iii. Experience in composite wood
products. EPA proposed that TPCs must
have experience in the composite wood
products industry because
understanding the processes used by
panel producers to produce composite
wood products is crucial for the EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC to adequately
inspect panel producers. EPA requested
comment on whether EPA should
require that a TPC have experience with
the specific type of composite wood
product that it would certify or if
experience with one type of product is
sufficient to certify all types of
composite wood product.
Several commenters stated that
experience with one product type is
sufficient to certify all composite wood
products because the TPC’s objectives to
certify compliance with emission
standards and correlation to quality
control test methods are independent of
product type. EPA agrees with the
commenters, and will require in this
final rule that TPCs have experience
with at least one type of composite
wood product. EPA is also requiring
each TPC applicant to state its
experience in the composite wood
products industry and include the
specific type of composite wood
product(s) that it intends to certify.
iv. Agent for service requirement for
EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs. In order to
facilitate communication between EPA
and TPCs, EPA proposed to require
TPCs to designate an agent for service in
the United States in their applications.
EPA received several comments
regarding the agent for service
requirement for TPCs. As discussed in
Unit III.B.2.d., for EPA-recognized ABs,
an agent for service is necessary for legal
matters and is available at a relatively
low cost from private firms that
specialize in this role. Therefore, the
Agency is retaining this requirement in
this final rule. However, in response to
public comments, EPA clarifies that the
requirement permits EPA TSCA Title VI
ABs and TPCs to share an agent for
service.
v. Experience in formaldehyde testing.
The proposed TPC qualification
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
requiring TPC laboratories to have
experience in performing or verifying
formaldehyde emissions testing on
composite wood products has been
retained in this final rule. The proposed
requirement for TPC laboratories to have
experience with test method ASTM
E1333–10 and experience evaluating
correlation between test methods has
been modified in the final rule. Based
on public comment, candidate TPCs
may provide a description of experience
with test method ASTM E1333–10 and/
or ASTM D6007–02, if used, and
experience evaluating correlation
between test methods when applying for
EPA recognition into the TSCA Title VI
program. Note, in a situation where a
TPC is only providing a description of
experience with ASTM D6007–02, the
TPC must be contracting testing with a
lab that has a large chamber and
experience with ASTM E1333–10.
b. Denied TPC applicants. Under this
final rule, if EPA denies a TPC’s
application for recognition in the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program for failure to submit a complete
application or for being unqualified,
EPA will notify the TPC of the legal and
factual basis for the denial, and actions,
if any, which the affected TPC may take
to receive recognition in the future.
EPA maintains the authority to deny
recognition of CARB-approved TPCs
who apply to be recognized through
reciprocity (as discussed in more detail
in Unit III.B.5.b.) in the EPA TSCA Title
VI Third-Party Certification Program if
the Agency believes the TPC is not
qualified according to this rule.
c. Responsibilities once a TPC is
recognized into the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program. EPA
proposed that once an applicant is
recognized as a TPC under the TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program, the EPA-recognized TPC
would then certify panel producers’
composite wood products under the
requirements of TSCA Title VI and its
implementing regulations.
In the proposed rule, EPA also
required that EPA-recognized TPCs
review and approve, when appropriate,
applications from panel producers for
reduced testing or exemption from
third-party certification requirements
for products made with ULEF or NAFbased resins. Under the CARB ATCM,
CARB, not the TPCs, reviews and
approves these applications. Several
commenters opposed TPCs reviewing
and approving applications for NAF and
ULEF approvals. Their concerns include
potential conflicts of interest, potential
for inconsistency among TPC reviews,
and the potential for inadvertent misuse
of confidential business information.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
One commenter suggested that EPA
conduct reviews and issue approvals,
accept all current CARB approvals, and
work with CARB as an alternate
approval authority going forward. CARB
requested reciprocity in its comments.
Another commenter said that EPA may
want to grandfather existing resin
approvals made by CARB and continue
to coordinate decisions with CARB.
To address these concerns, in this
final rule, under the terms of reciprocity
with CARB, EPA will accept CARB’s
NAF and ULEF approvals, as long as
CARB’s requirements for products made
with NAF-based and ULEF resins are at
least as stringent as EPA’s requirements,
which EPA affirms is currently true.
Should EPA determine that CARB’s
requirements are no longer at least as
stringent was EPA’s requirements, then
EPA will publish a notice in the Federal
Register announcing EPA’s
determination.
Alternatively, panel producers can
apply to an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC for
NAF and ULEF approvals. EPA also
notes that the provisions requiring TPC
impartiality are applicable to TPCs
reviewing and approving NAF/ULEF
applications (see Unit III.B.7.). EPA
believes the ability to apply to CARB for
NAF and ULEF approvals, the dynamic
market amongst TPCs, and the
impartiality requirements for TPCs,
mitigate any concerns about potential
TPC conflicts of interest. As proposed,
EPA is also separately requiring EPA
TSCA Title VI TPCs to review and
approve or deny applications from
panel producers for reduced quality
control testing for particleboard and
medium-density fiberboard under the
provisions discussed in Unit G.
EPA proposed to require that EPArecognized TPCs inspect and provide an
on-site audit of panel producers and
their records at least quarterly and
conform to ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E)
(subsequently updated to ISO/IEC
17020:2012(E)) when conducting their
inspections. EPA requested comment on
whether enhanced testing or inspection
requirements should be required where
a TPC finds that a panel producer has
failed quality control or quarterly tests
at a certain frequency, or upon other
circumstances. Considering comments
received on this issue, in this final rule,
EPA will not require additional
enhanced testing. Instead, it would be
most appropriate for each EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC to establish its own process
for determining the conditions that
warrant enhanced testing and/or
inspections as needed for panel
producers with failed quality control or
quarterly tests. However, this final rule
requires that EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89695
notify panel producers and EPA within
72 hours of a failed quarterly test result.
An EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must also
notify EPA within 72 hours of becoming
aware that a panel producer has
exceeded its established quality control
limit (QCL) for two or more consecutive
quality control tests. EPA is not
requiring TPCs to notify EPA each time
a QCL is exceeded because isolated QCL
exceedances, where potentially noncomplying products have not left the
panel producer, can be addressed by the
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC and the panel
producer without EPA intervention.
Additionally, the panel producer will
have to comply with the non-complying
lot provisions of 40 CFR 770.22 with
respect to any lot represented by a
sample result that exceeds the
applicable formaldehyde emission
standard or indicates that the lot may
exceed the applicable standard. Where
multiple products are grouped in a
single product type for testing, this
includes all products in the group
represented by the sample.
In the proposed rule, an EPArecognized Product AB would supply
the TPC with a unique TPC
identification number once it has been
accredited for TSCA Title VI purposes.
Under this final rule, EPA TSCA Title
VI TPCs will be supplied with a TPC
identification number by EPA unless the
TPC is CARB-approved and received
EPA TSCA Title VI recognition through
reciprocity. In this case, CARBapproved TPCs will use their CARBissued TPC identification numbers. EPA
TSCA Title VI TPCs must provide their
identification numbers to panel
producers so that the panel producers
can include the TPC number on the
label of their certified products and in
their records.
EPA proposed to require EPArecognized TPCs to maintain various
records in electronic form for three
years. EPA received several comments
pertaining to the proposed three-year
recordkeeping requirement. Two
commenters contended that EPA should
maintain CARB’s two-year
recordkeeping period for TPCs, one
commenter supported recordkeeping
beyond three years, and another
commenter was supportive of EPA’s
proposed three-year record retention
period for TPCs.
Under this final rule, EPA is
maintaining its requirement that records
be held in electronic form for three
years. EPA has determined that certain
records will assist EPA in monitoring
compliance with the emission standards
and other provisions. The records
required are largely the same as
proposed, but have been modified to
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89696
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
better align with the CARB ATCM and
are listed in § 770.7(c)(4)(vii) of this
rule.
EPA proposed to require EPArecognized TPCs to submit an annual
report to EPA and the EPA-recognized
AB that accredits the TPC. Under this
final rule, EPA will not require that this
report be provided to the TPC’s AB but
will still require the EPA-recognized
TPCs to submit these reports to EPA
through the EPA CDX database. (Ref.
61). If the CDX database becomes
unavailable for any reason, EPA will
provide an alternate electronic reporting
method and notify the EPA-recognized
TPCs of how to access the alternate
method. In addition, the requirements of
this report have been, for the most part,
modified to align with CARB’s annual
report requirements for consistency
between the two programs and to
respond to public comments. Aligning
with CARB’s annual report
requirements expands the number of
data elements beyond what EPA
specifically proposed. However, adding
these data elements will streamline
annual reporting requirements for EPArecognized and CARB-approved TPCs
by allowing the acceptance of a single
annual report by both regulatory
programs. Under this final rule, EPA
TSCA Title VI TPCs must electronically
submit an annual report on or before
March 1st of each year for TPC services
performed during the previous calendar
year. The required reporting elements of
the annual report are listed at
§ 770.7(c)(4)(viii) of this rule.
d. TPC Interlaboratory Comparison.
EPA proposed to require EPArecognized TPCs to participate annually
in an EPA-recognized interlaboratory
comparison program or, if developed, a
proficiency testing program. EPA
requested comment on: Ways it might
integrate with CARB’s interlaboratory
comparison program; the frequency of
interlaboratory comparisons; what
criteria should be used to determine the
adequacy of performance; how and
whether participating Laboratory ABs
could administer an interlaboratory
comparison or proficiency testing
program for the TPCs that it accredits;
and the cost of such a program.
Commenters supported either CARB
or EPA conducting an interlaboratory
comparison program for TPCs in both
the state and federal programs. One
commenter also provided suggestions
on how to strengthen the existing CARB
interlaboratory comparison program. In
addition, EPA received several
comments regarding the frequency of
interlaboratory comparisons and/or
proficiency testing. Most commenters
felt that an annual interlaboratory
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
comparison was sufficient to meet EPA
and CARB’s goal that laboratories
regularly demonstrate their proficiency
at testing formaldehyde emissions of
composite wood products. Three
commenters also supported the use of a
standard reference material as a possible
alternative material for using in
interlaboratory comparison or similar
testing.
Based on comments received, in this
final rule, EPA is requiring all EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC laboratories, of both
CARB TPCs and non-CARB TPCs, to
participate in the CARB interlaboratory
comparison for formaldehyde emissions
from composite wood products when
offered. CARB intends to conduct the
interlaboratory comparisons no less
frequently than every two years. EPA
has determined that requiring
participation in the CARB
interlaboratory comparison on a regular
basis is necessary to verify that TPC
laboratories under TSCA Title VI are
able to properly measure formaldehyde
emissions from composite wood
products. EPA’s decision to utilize the
pre-existing CARB interlaboratory
comparison program under the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program is supported by public
comments and will allow for one
consolidated interlaboratory comparison
program and further establish
consistency between the CARB and
federal regulatory programs. EPA will
consult on a regular basis with CARB
regarding the EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs’
interlaboratory results, any other
testing-related information, and the
ongoing operation of the CARB
interlaboratory comparison testing
program. EPA will also require TPCs to
submit to EPA the results compared
with the mean of any interlaboratory
comparison for formaldehyde emissions
in which the TPC laboratory participates
other than the CARB interlaboratory
comparison or, if available, the TPC
laboratory results from an EPArecognized proficiency testing program.
EPA retains the authority to make its
own independent decision on the
performance of an EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC under the CARB interlaboratory
comparison or any other future EPArecognized interlaboratory comparison
or proficiency testing program. EPA also
retains the authority to derecognize the
CARB interlaboratory comparison or
any other future EPA-recognized
interlaboratory comparison or
proficiency testing program if it no
longer meets the needs of the EPA TSCA
Title VI Program.
Currently no reference material for
formaldehyde emission is available. If a
reference material for formaldehyde is
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
developed and then approved by EPA,
EPA will consider incorporating the use
of that reference material into an EPArecognized interlaboratory or
proficiency testing program. As
supported by public comment, if such
an EPA-recognized interlaboratory or
proficiency testing program by means of
a reference material becomes available,
EPA would also consider initiating a
rulemaking to require any EPArecognized third-party proficiency
testing provider to be accredited to ISO/
IEC 17043:2010(E).
e. Removal, reaccreditation and
reapplication process for third-party
certifiers. As proposed, if an EPArecognized TPC loses its accreditation or
discontinues participation in the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program for any reason, it would be
responsible for promptly notifying EPA
and all panel producers to which it
provides TSCA Title VI certification
services. EPA proposed that panel
producers that used the TPC to certify
their products would need to enlist
another EPA-recognized TPC to certify
their products within 90 calendar days.
This 90 day grace period would not be
afforded if their EPA-recognized TPC
loses its accreditation or discontinues
participation in the program for fraud or
providing false or misleading
statements, or any reason that
implicates a particular panel producer
in a violation of TSCA Title VI or its
implementing regulations.
EPA requested comment on whether
it provided adequate time in the
proposal for a panel producer to seek an
alternate certification should their TPC
lose its EPA recognition under TSCA
Title VI. Based on the public comments,
this final rule allows panel producers 90
calendar days to obtain a new EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC in the event that
their previous TPC loses its
accreditation or recognition in the TSCA
Title VI Program as long as they remain
in compliance with all other relevant
aspects of the rule. Panel producers who
are not able to obtain a new EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC within 90 calendar days
may request from EPA a 90 calendar day
extension, for good cause. If the panel
producer does not obtain a new TPC
within 90 calendar days, or if granted an
extension by EPA, 180 calendar days,
composite wood products produced
thereafter are not certified and may not
be sold, supplied or offered for sale.
4. Enforcement, suspension and
revocation. a. Enforcement under TSCA
sections 15–17. EPA proposed to
conduct inspections of participating
TPCs and ABs and issue subpoenas
according to the requirements for
recognition and/or pursuant to the
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
provisions of TSCA section 11 (15
U.S.C. 2610) to ensure compliance with
TSCA Title VI and the regulations
promulgated thereunder. EPA proposed
to exercise the authority to withdraw
from a recognition agreement with an
EPA-recognized AB and pursue
penalties under TSCA section 15 (15
U.S.C. 2614) for any violation of TSCA
Title VI or the regulations promulgated
thereunder. In addition to an
administrative or judicial finding of
violation, EPA proposed the grounds for
withdrawing from a recognition
agreement and/or pursuing an
enforcement action against an EPArecognized AB would include
submitting false information to EPA,
falsifying records, or failing to comply
with program requirements. EPA is
finalizing these enforcement provisions
as proposed.
b. Suspension, revocation and
modification of TPC and AB
recognition. EPA proposed to exercise
the authority to suspend, revoke, or
modify a TPC’s TSCA Title VI
recognition, with or without the
participation of the EPA-recognized AB
that provided the accreditation, if the
EPA-recognized TPC fails to comply
with TSCA Title VI or the regulations
promulgated thereunder. EPA proposed
that any violation of TSCA Title VI or
the regulations promulgated thereunder
would also be a prohibited act under
TSCA section 15. Proposed grounds for
suspending, modifying, or revoking an
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC’s recognition
included submitting false information to
EPA or an AB, falsifying records, or
failing to comply with program
requirements.
EPA proposed that should an EPArecognized AB identify a nonconformity or discrepancy with the
EPA-recognized TPC’s implementation
of one of the ISO standards via an
internal audit or other means, that TPC
must take remedial action within the
timeframe specified by the AB or the
time specified in the TPC’s quality
management plan. Timely remedial
action would not preclude enforcement
actions by EPA for non-conformities or
discrepancies that constitute violations
of TSCA Title VI or these implementing
regulations. Prior to withdrawal from a
recognition agreement with an EPArecognized AB, or the suspension,
revocation, or modification of an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC’s recognition, EPA
proposed to provide notification to the
affected AB or TPC of the action.
EPA proposed that an individual or
organization may request a hearing prior
to the final action. EPA would appoint
an impartial official of EPA as Presiding
Officer to conduct a hearing within 90
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
calendar days of the request. The
Presiding Officer would consider all
relevant evidence, explanations,
comments, and arguments submitted
and notify the affected entity in writing
within 90 calendar days of completion
of the hearing of his or her decision and
order. EPA clarifies that, depending on
the circumstances, a hearing need not
involve real-time exchanges and may be
conducted through written
correspondence, for example.
EPA proposed that if it determines
that the public health, interest, or
welfare warrants immediate action to
suspend the recognition of an AB or a
TPC prior to the opportunity for a
hearing, it would notify the affected AB
or TPC of its right to request a hearing
on the immediate suspension within 15
calendar days of the suspension taking
place and the procedures for the
conduct of such a hearing.
EPA proposed that any notice,
decision, or order issued by EPA in
response to a hearing, any transcript or
other verbatim record of oral testimony,
and any documents filed in response to
a hearing will be available to the public,
except as otherwise provided by TSCA
section 14. Any such hearing at which
oral testimony is presented will be open
to the public, except that the Presiding
Officer may exclude the public to the
extent necessary to allow presentation
of information which may be entitled to
confidential treatment under TSCA
section 14.
Commenters pointed out that EPA
cannot revoke a TPC’s accreditation but
rather its recognition in the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program. As discussed in Unit III.B.1.a,
EPA agrees that recognition is the
correct term. In this final rule EPA may
revoke a TPC’s recognition in the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-party Certification
Program for the conditions mentioned
previously. EPA is otherwise finalizing
these provisions for suspension,
modification and revocation as
proposed.
5. CARB-approved TPC transitional
period and reciprocity. EPA proposed
that CARB-approved TPCs have one
year after the promulgation of the TSCA
Title VI implementing regulations to
become accredited by an AB that has
entered into a recognition agreement
with EPA. The Agency also proposed
that for one year after promulgation of
the final rule CARB-approved TPCs
would be allowed to carry out
certification activities under TSCA Title
VI provided that they were compliant
with all other aspects of TSCA Title VI
and the regulations promulgated
thereunder. EPA requested comment on
ways to better synchronize the timing
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89697
for the TSCA Title VI recognition period
for existing CARB-approved TPCs. EPA
also asked whether the TPCs should be
required to obtain accreditation from an
EPA-recognized AB no later than oneyear after the first EPA-recognized AB
enters into a recognition agreement with
the EPA under the TSCA Title VI.
EPA agrees with comments received
that it could take longer than one year
for CARB TPCs to align with the EPA
requirements including being accredited
by an AB that has entered into a
recognition agreement with EPA. EPA
will therefore allow for a two-year
transition period in this final rule.
a. Transitional Period for CARBApproved TPCs. Under this final rule, a
TPC approved by CARB may certify
composite wood products under TSCA
Title VI for a two-year transitional
period that begins February 10, 2017 so
long as the TPC remains approved by
CARB and complies with all aspects of
the final rule other than the
accreditation requirements under this
rule.
Existing CARB TPCs and CARB TPCs
approved during the transition period
must provide panel producers with their
TPC number issued by CARB. The
annual report must be provided to
CARB and EPA during the two-year
transitional period. Notifications to EPA
must also be provided during the twoyear transition period.
After the two-year transition period,
CARB-approved TPCs may continue to
certify composite wood products under
TSCA Title VI provided the TPC
maintains its CARB approval, follows
all the requirements under this part
(including the accreditation
requirements), submits to EPA
documentation from CARB supporting
their eligibility for reciprocity and has
received EPA recognition as an EPArecognized TPC.
b. Reciprocity for CARB TPCs. EPA
received several comments that asked
EPA to align with the CARB program
and accept CARB-approved TPCs into
the EPA program. CARB suggested that
EPA enter into a mutual recognition
agreement with them to accept CARB
TPC approvals through reciprocity such
that CARB TPC approvals would be
accepted by the EPA without need for
further review.
EPA has worked closely with CARB to
establish a means for reciprocity and
will enter into a memorandum of
agreement that recites the requirements
in this rule for CARB-approved TPCs to
receive EPA recognition through
reciprocity and the process that EPA
and CARB will use to implement
reciprocity. To be eligible to obtain EPA
recognition through reciprocity, CARB-
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
89698
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
approved TPCs must meet all of the TPC
qualifications discussed in Unit
III.B.3.a. and provide EPA with
documentation from CARB that
specifies their eligibility for reciprocity
via the EPA CDX at https://cdx.epa.gov.
In the event that CDX becomes
unavailable, EPA will provide an
alternate electronic submission method
and inform TPCs how to access the
alternate method at https://www.epa.gov/
formaldehyde. EPA maintains the
authority to deny recognition of CARBapproved TPCs who apply to be
recognized through reciprocity in the
EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program if the Agency
believes the TPC is not qualified under
this rule. An overview of the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program and CARB TPC reciprocity is
shown in Illustration 2.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Illustration 2: Overview of the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program and CARB TPC Reciprocity
Memorandum
of Agreement
EPA
CARB
EPA TSCA Title VI
Product & Laboratory ABs
• ABs are ILACIIAF signatories
• Recognition agreement with EPA
• ABs accredit TPCs to:
ISO/IEC International
Standards
EPA Regulation 40 CFR part
770
TPCs
EPA Recognition of
CARB-Approved TPCs
(per terms of
Memorandum of Agreement)
• TPCs approved by CARB_and
recognized by EPA
• TPCs accredited by EPA TSCA
Title VI ABs
Certified by EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C
6. Electronic reporting. The
Government Paperwork Elimination Act
(GPEA), 44 U.S.C. 3504 note, provides
that, when practicable, Federal
organizations use electronic forms,
electronic filings, and electronic
signatures to conduct official business
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
with the public. EPA’s Cross-Media
Electronic Reporting Regulation
(CROMERR) (40 CFR part 3) (Ref. 62),
provides that any requirement in title 40
of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
to submit a report directly to EPA can
be satisfied with an electronic
submission that meets certain
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
conditions once the Agency publishes a
regulation that an electronic document
submission process is available for that
requirement. In addition, the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) requires Federal
agencies to manage information
resources to reduce information
collection burdens on the public;
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
ER12DE16.001
Panel Producer
Product #2
Certified by EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Panel Producer
Product #1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
increase program efficiency and
effectiveness; and improve the integrity,
quality, and utility of information to all
users within and outside an agency,
including capabilities for ensuring
dissemination of public information,
public access to Federal Government
information, and protections for privacy
and security (44 U.S.C. 3506). Section 2
of TSCA expresses the intent of
Congress that EPA carry out TSCA in a
reasonable and prudent manner, and in
consideration of the impacts that any
action taken under TSCA may have on
the environment, the economy, and
society (15 U.S.C. 2601). Electronic
reporting was not available when TSCA
was enacted nor when several
underlying reporting requirements were
subsequently promulgated by EPA. EPA
believes that it is now reasonable and
prudent to manage and leverage its
information resources, including
information technology (IT), to require
the use of electronic reporting in the
implementation of certain TSCA
provisions. Electronic reporting can
reduce burden and costs for the
regulated entities by eliminating the
costs associated with printing and
mailing this information to EPA, while
at the same time improving EPA’s
efficiency in reviewing submitted
information and making decisions.
EPA proposed requiring that
information reported to EPA from TPCs
and ABs be reported electronically
through EPA’s CDX. EPA requested
comment on whether it should require
mandatory electronic reporting. Most
commenters were not opposed to
electronic reporting and some
commenters were amenable to
electronic reporting but did not want it
required. One commenter also
contended that, no matter what form of
reporting is eventually utilized, all
proprietary business information should
be kept confidential by the EPA.
In this final rule, EPA will require
TPCs and ABs to report electronically
because such a requirement streamlines
the reporting process and reduces the
administrative costs associated with
information submission and
recordkeeping. In light of the limited
number of reporting entities (TPCs and
ABs) participating in the TSCA Title VI
program, the most cost-effective and
efficient solution for all concerned is a
single database developed by EPA.
Most of the information requested in
the reporting requirements of these
collections is not of a confidential
nature. Nonetheless, the application is
designed to support acceptance of TSCA
confidential business information (CBI)
by providing a secure environment that
meets Federal standards.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
While information collected under
TSCA may be entitled to confidential
treatment if it meets the standard for
Exemption 4 in the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C.
552(b)(4), TSCA section 14 provides that
health and safety studies and data
derived from health and safety studies,
are not entitled to confidential
treatment, irrespective of the Exemption
4 standard, unless the release of data
derived from such studies would
disclose processes used in the
manufacturing or processing of a
chemical substance or mixture or, in the
case of a mixture, would disclose the
portion of the mixture comprised by any
of its chemical substances. EPA has
determined that certain information that
is submitted by TPCs in their annual
reports and notifications is not eligible
for treatment as CBI, irrespective of the
Exemption 4 standard, because that
information is health and safety studies
and data derived from health and safety
studies. This includes information
pertaining to the compliance status of a
particular lot, batch, or shipment of
composite wood. Quarterly test results,
the test date, the panel producer and
product tested, test method and test
results cannot be claimed CBI. The
‘‘product tested’’ can be a general
product description such as particle
board of a certain thickness.
TPCs and ABs will be able to submit
CBI claims on behalf of themselves or
their clients for the other information
reported to EPA. CBI claims for
information that is generally already
publicly available (status of a TPC or
AB’s participation in the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
program, and the basic credentials and
contact information for those entities)
may be substantiated
contemporaneously. This type of
information is expected to typically be
publicly available (e.g., on an entity’s
own Web site or marketing material),
but in case there are exceptions EPA is
allowing the opportunity to claim this
information as CBI with
contemporaneous substantiation. EPA
notes that ABs and TPCs may use a
business email and phone number, and
write the descriptions of their
credentials broadly so that it excludes
information the entity considers to be
confidential.
The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical
Safety for the 21st Century Act (Pub. L.
114–182) was signed into law on June
22, 2016, and became immediately
effective. Section 14(c) now requires a
supporting statement and certification
for confidentiality claims asserted after
June 22, 2016. The final rule contains
one minor change to reflect the new
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89699
statutory requirements for asserting
confidentiality claims. EPA is requiring
a statement and certification consistent
with the section 14(c)(1)(B) statement
(and with a related certification
requirement in section 14(c)(5) of the
revised statute) to meet the new
statutory requirements. While this
change was not discussed in the
proposed rule, EPA finds there is good
cause to make this change without
notice and comment. Notice and
comment are unnecessary because the
new statement is required by statute,
and EPA anticipates no significant effect
of the change on companies reporting
under the rule or on the public in
general.
To submit information via the CDX,
each AB and TPC must designate an
individual representative (registrant)
who will then register with the CDX
system at https://cdx.epa.gov. The
registration process includes completing
an electronic signature agreement,
preparing a data file for submission,
agreeing to the Terms and Conditions of
CDX, providing information about the
submitter and organization, selecting a
user name and password, and following
the procedures outlined in the guidance
document for CDX available at: https://
cdx.epa.gov/Content/Documents/CDX_
Quick_User_Guide.pdf. (Ref. 63). The
registrant must select a role and
complete an electronic signature
agreement either through electronic
validation or through wet ink signature.
To streamline reporting, CARB may,
at a future date, offer their approved
TPCs the choice of submitting the CARB
annual report and other ongoing
reporting obligations through the CDX
electronic reporting database.
7. Impartiality provisions for TPCs
and ABs. EPA received comments from
CARB that EPA should specifically state
that a panel producer cannot be a TPC
under the EPA program. EPA has
determined that such a prohibition
would be a useful clarification of the
impartiality provisions of the ISO/IEC
standards that EPA proposed to
incorporate and is incorporating into
this rule. Therefore, this final rule
expressly prohibits a panel producer
from also being a TPC. Additionally, as
a result of a review of the impartiality
provisions of the ISO/IEC standards in
response to CARB’s comment, EPA is
specifying other impartiality
requirements to highlight key portions
of the ISO/IEC standards that are
incorporated by reference in the
proposed and final regulations. In
addition to requiring that a TPC not be
a panel producer, a TPC is not allowed
to be a laminated product producer,
designer, distributor or retailer of
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
89700
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
composite wood products, or have a
financial interest in any of these
entities. EPA is also requiring that
employees and management personnel
of a TPC involved in the panel producer
review and product certification
decision-making process cannot be
involved in advocacy or consulting
activities on behalf of the composite
wood industry. To further document
impartiality, EPA-recognized TPC and
EPA-recognized AB management
personnel and personnel involved in
certifying products are required to
commit in writing that they will receive
no financial benefit from the outcome of
certification testing. Finally, EPA is
requiring that an EPA-recognized AB
ensure that an accreditation decision
regarding a TPC is made by persons
different from those who conducted the
assessment of the TPC. All of these
points reflect provisions in the ISO/IEC
standards that EPA believes are worth
underscoring.
C. Formaldehyde Emission Standards
TSCA Title VI establishes
formaldehyde emission standards for
composite wood products (hardwood
plywood, particleboard, and mediumdensity fiberboard) so that when they
take effect on December 12, 2017, as
discussed in Unit III.C., the standards
are identical to the CARB ATCM Phase
2 emission levels. The emission
standards will be 0.05 ppm
formaldehyde for hardwood plywood,
0.09 ppm formaldehyde for
particleboard, 0.11 ppm formaldehyde
for medium-density fiberboard, and 0.13
ppm formaldehyde for thin mediumdensity fiberboard. The statute does not
give EPA authority to modify these
emission standards.
TSCA Title VI describes two emission
standards for hardwood plywood, one
for that made with a veneer core and the
other for that made with a composite
core. In the preamble to the proposed
regulations, EPA argued that, because
the two standards are the same, 0.05
ppm formaldehyde, for implementing
regulations taking effect after July 1,
2012, the 0.05 ppm limit should be
applied to all composite wood products
that meet the definition of hardwood
plywood, regardless of the core type.
Many commenters opposed this
interpretation and urged EPA to be
consistent with the CARB ATCM in this
area. The CARB ATCM has a similar
definition of hardwood plywood. It
includes a variety of core types, but the
CARB ATCM emission standards apply
only to hardwood plywood made with
a veneer core or a composite core. Thus,
for example, hardwood plywood made
with a lumber core or a hardboard core
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
is not required to comply with the
emission standards or the testing and
certification requirements of the ATCM.
EPA agrees with those commenters that
recommended consistency with the
CARB ATCM. In EPA’s view, the better
reading of TSCA Title VI is that it only
imposes the hardwood plywood
formaldehyde emission standard on
hardwood plywood made with a veneer
or a composite core. Therefore, EPA is
promulgating a hardwood plywood
emission standard that specifically
applies only to hardwood plywood with
either a veneer core or a composite core.
D. Product Certification in General
Under this final rule, composite wood
products that are sold, supplied, offered
for sale, or manufactured (including
imported) within the United States must
be certified, unless they are specifically
exempted by TSCA or excluded by this
final rule. In general, this means that the
formaldehyde emission levels from the
composite wood products would have
been demonstrated to be below the
emission standards in TSCA Title VI.
This demonstration would be through a
combination of testing performed by an
accredited TPC laboratory, and repeated
on a quarterly basis, and more frequent
quality control testing performed by the
Panel Producer of the composite wood
product, an accredited TPC laboratory,
or a contract laboratory. Specific
requirements for this testing are
discussed in Unit III.E.
EPA is requiring panel producers of
composite wood products to apply to an
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC for product
certification, and to design and establish
a quality control program, including
testing, that is both approved by the
TPC and specific to the panel producer.
EPA has slightly different requirements
for certification, depending on whether
the panel producer has other product
types that are already certified under the
CARB ATCM or TSCA Title VI. For a
panel producer that does not have any
certifications from a CARB-approved
TPC or an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC, or
that is switching to a new TPC, the
panel producer must provide to the TPC
the panel producer’s contact
information, a copy of its quality control
manual, contact information for its
quality control manager, an
identification of the specific products
for which certification is requested and
the resin system used, results from at
least five quarterly and five quality
control tests, a linear regression
equation and correlation data, and
results of an initial, on-site inspection
by a TPC. For panel producers applying
for certification of a new product type
but that have previous product
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
certifications from a CARB-approved
TPC or an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC, the
application must contain the panel
producer’s contact information, an
identification of the specific products
for which certification is requested and
the resin system used, at least five
quarterly and five quality control tests,
a linear regression equation and
correlation data, and a description of
any changes in the panel producer’s
quality control manual and a copy of
those changes. Regardless of whether
panel producers are applying for
certification of a new product type, the
test results must demonstrate an
adequate correlation between the
quality control test results and the TPC’s
quarterly test results as described in
Unit III.E. Test results must also
indicate that the formaldehyde
emissions of the products are below the
emission standards established by TSCA
Title VI as discussed in greater detail in
Unit III.C. The initial on-site inspection
must demonstrate that the panel
producer has the required quality
control and quality assurance
procedures in place to ensure that the
products will continue to meet the
emission standards. Multiple products
can be grouped into a single product
type for certification; however,
formaldehyde emissions test results
must demonstrate that grouped products
have similar formaldehyde emission
characteristics and that their emissions
fit the same correlation curve or linear
regression. Uncertified product
produced after the manufactured-by
date cannot be sold, supplied, or offered
for sale in the United States.
EPA had proposed to require three
months of quality control testing prior
to certification but received numerous
comments stating that this requirement
was unnecessary, would create an
undue delay in bringing new products
to the market, and is not required by
CARB. Commenters recommended that
EPA’s requirements for certification be
consistent with the requirements in the
CARB ATCM. EPA has decided to
harmonize with the CARB ATCM by
requiring correlation data and an initial
on-site inspection conducted by the
TPC, but not the proposed three months
of testing. This is consistent with how
products are being certified under the
CARB ATCM and is sufficient to
demonstrate that the panel producer is
manufacturing products that meet the
emission standard and has quality
control procedures in place to ensure
that the product will continue to meet
the standards. Under this final rule,
products currently certified by CARBapproved TPCs will be considered
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
certified for purposes of TSCA Title VI.
However, as described in Unit III.B.,
EPA is allowing CARB-approved TPCs
two years to become recognized by EPA
under TSCA Title VI. Therefore, a panel
producer whose TPC does not become
recognized under TSCA Title VI in a
timely manner would have to apply to
an EPA-Recognized TPC to continue to
make certified products after the
manufactured-by date.
E. Formaldehyde Emissions Testing
Requirements
TSCA Title VI requires that composite
wood products be measured for
compliance with the statutory emission
standards by quarterly tests pursuant to
test methods ASTM E1333–96 (2002) or
ASTM D6007–02 (Refs. 39, 64). TSCA
Title VI also requires that quality
control tests be conducted pursuant to
ASTM D6007–02, ASTM D–5582 (Ref.
65), or such other test methods as may
be established by EPA through
rulemaking. Under the statute, test
results conducted using any test method
other than ASTM E1333–96 (2002) must
include a showing of equivalence by
means that EPA must establish through
rulemaking. Under TSCA Title VI, EPA
must also establish, through rulemaking,
the number and frequency of tests
required to demonstrate compliance
with the emission standards. This unit
of the preamble discusses EPA’s
rulemaking on each of these statutory
elements.
1. General testing requirements. EPA
is finalizing the testing requirements as
proposed with a few minor changes to
definitions and terms used in the
requirements based on public
comments.
EPA received numerous comments on
the proposed definitions of the terms
‘‘product type,’’ ‘‘production line,’’
‘‘lot,’’ and the lack of definitions for the
terms ‘‘production run’’ and ‘‘batch.’’
Many commenters were concerned that
as proposed, every single batch or lot of
product would need to be tested, and
commenters stated that under the
proposed definitions, producers of low
volume specialty products would need
to test more often than large volume
producers. Therefore, EPA has made
some changes to these definitions and to
the terms used in the testing
requirements to clarify that products
with similar formaldehyde emissions
can be grouped for testing purposes
(both quality control testing and
quarterly testing). EPA is adding a
definition of the term ‘‘resin system’’.
EPA is changing the definition of ‘‘lot’’
to be consistent with the definition in
the CARB ATCM. In addition, EPA is no
longer using the term ‘‘batch’’ as it was
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
redundant with use of the term ‘‘lot’’ in
the proposed rule and was confusing.
EPA is modifying the definition of the
term ‘‘production line’’ slightly to be
consistent with use of the term not only
in the particleboard and medium
density fiberboard industry, but also the
hardwood plywood industry. In
addition, EPA is no longer using the
term ‘‘production run.’’
EPA is finalizing as proposed the
requirement that entities conducting
formaldehyde testing must use the
procedures, such as testing conditions
and loading ratios, specified in the
method being used. EPA is also
finalizing the requirement that all
equipment used in formaldehyde testing
be calibrated and otherwise maintained
and used in accordance with the
equipment manufacturer’s instructions.
EPA received numerous public
comments supporting these
requirements. EPA is also finalizing the
requirement that all panels be tested in
an unfinished condition, prior to the
application of a finishing or topcoat.
a. Quarterly testing requirements. EPA
proposed to require that accredited
TPCs conduct the quarterly tests
required by TSCA Title VI. EPA is
finalizing this requirement essentially as
proposed except to clarify that the
quarterly testing must be overseen by an
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC but that the
testing can be conducted by an
accredited laboratory, owned or
operated by a TPC or an accredited
contract laboratory, which this final rule
will refer to as a ‘‘TPC laboratory.’’ The
statute requires these tests to be
performed using ASTM E1333–96
(2002) or, upon a showing of
equivalence as discussed in this Unit,
ASTM D6007–02 (Refs. 39, 64). Under
the authority provided by TSCA section
601(d)(5), EPA is incorporating ASTM
E1333–10 into the final rule’s testing
requirements, rather than the 2002
version (Ref. 43). EPA is aware that
these test methods and several other
standards referenced in this final rule
have been updated and plans to
substitute successor standards after
public notice and opportunity for
comment, as appropriate.
Under the final rule, TPC laboratories
must test randomly chosen samples
from a single lot that is ready for
shipment by the panel producer.
Neither the top nor bottom composite
wood product of a bundle can be
selected because the emissions from
these products may not be
representative of the bundle. For
particleboard and medium-density
fiberboard, quarterly tests must be
conducted on randomly selected
samples of each product type (unless
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89701
they qualify for reduced testing based
on ULEF or NAF-based resin). For
hardwood plywood, in consideration of
a comment from HPVA that hardwood
plywood producers may not be
producing all of their product types
when the TPC selects samples for
testing, EPA is removing the
requirement that samples be selected
from the hardwood plywood product
with the highest potential to emit
formaldehyde and, instead, is requiring
TPCs to randomly select samples for
testing that are representative of the
range of products produced by the panel
producer.
As discussed previously, EPA is
allowing products to be grouped for
quarterly and quality control testing.
EPA is allowing EPA TSCA Title VI
TPCs to approve the grouping of
products with similar formaldehyde
emission characteristics, based on
correlation data as described in Unit
III.E.
EPA is finalizing the quarterly sample
handling requirements as proposed,
except for minor changes in use of the
terms ‘‘lot’’ and ‘‘product type,’’ and in
the requirements for product grouping
as discussed in this Unit. Samples must
be closely stacked or air tight wrapped
between the time of sample selection
and the start of test conditioning.
Samples will also have to be labeled as
such, signed by the TPC, protected by
cover sheets, and promptly shipped to
the laboratory testing facility. EPA is
finalizing the requirement that
conditioning begin as soon as possible,
but no more than 30 calendar days after
production.
b. Quality control test methods. With
a showing of adequate correlation, EPA
is allowing use of the following
methods: ASTM D6007–02, ASTM
D5582, EN 717–2 (Gas Analysis Method)
(Ref. 66), DMC (Dynamic
Microchamber) (Refs. 67–68), EN 120
(Perforator Method) (Ref. 69), and JIS A
1460 (24-hr Desiccator Method) (Ref.
70). EPA has determined that these are
appropriate methods for quality control
testing based on public comments,
CARB’s evaluation and approval of
these methods as alternative small scale
test methods, and because test results
using these methods have been
demonstrated to have adequate
correlations with test results using
ASTM E1333–10. EPA is establishing
these methods pursuant to section
601(b)(3)(A)(ii) for quality control
testing. EPA does not endorse any
particular method over others.
Few comments were received in
support of the addition of any other
method, and the supporting commenters
did not provide data or information
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89702
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
demonstrating equivalence or adequate
correlation with ASTM E1333 that
would justify their inclusion with the
established methods. However, if EPA
receives additional information and
chooses to pursue adding another
method, EPA will provide notice in the
Federal Register and an opportunity for
public comment as required by TSCA
Title VI. EPA received several
comments indicating that both the 2012
and 2007 user’s manuals should be
allowed for the Dynamic Microchamber
Method; therefore, EPA is incorporating
by reference both versions of the user’s
manuals.
For each quality control test method
that will be used to perform quality
control testing for a particular panel
producer, the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
must establish, in consultation with the
panel producer, a QCL. The QCL is the
quality control test value that is the
correlative equivalent to the emission
standard based on the ASTM E1333–10
method. The QCL is established by
using a simple linear regression where
the dependent variables (Y-axis) are the
quality control test results and the
independent variables (X-axis) are the
ASTM E1333–10 test results.
c. Quality control testing frequency for
particleboard and medium-density
fiberboard that do not qualify for
reduced testing based on ULEF or NAFbased resins. EPA is finalizing the
quality control testing frequency for
particleboard and medium-density
fiberboard as proposed. Quality control
tests will be required at least once per
shift for each production line for each
product type. Quality control tests must
also be conducted whenever a product
type production ends, whenever there is
a significant change to resin formulation
or use, when a decrease in press time of
more than 20 percent occurs, and any
time quality control employees have
reason to believe that the panel being
produced may not meet the
requirements of the applicable
standards.
EPA is finalizing reduced quality
control testing requirements as
proposed for particleboard and mediumdensity fiberboard when the panel
producer demonstrates consistent
operations and low variability of test
values. The panel producer must
request approval from an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC. If approved, quality
control testing will still have to occur at
least once per 48-hour production
period. As proposed, a 30 panel running
average, consisting of the average of the
results of the 30 most recently sampled
panels, must be maintained, and
depending on whether the average
remains two or three standard
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
deviations below the designated QCL for
the previous 60 consecutive days or
more, testing frequency may be reduced
to one test per 24-hour or 48-hour
production period, respectively. An
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must approve
a request for reduced quality control
testing as long as the data submitted by
the panel producer demonstrate
compliance with the criteria and the
TPC does not otherwise have reason to
believe that the data are inaccurate or
that the panel producer’s production
processes are inadequate to ensure
continued compliance with the
emission standards. Based on comments
received, EPA is clarifying in this final
rule that reduced testing privileges will
continue unless revoked by a TPC as a
result of an emission test exceedance or
if testing indicates the panel producer
no longer meets the eligibility
requirements.
d. Proposed quality control testing
frequency for hardwood plywood that
does not qualify for reduced testing
based on ULEF or NAF-based resins.
EPA is finalizing the frequency of
quality control testing for hardwood
plywood essentially as proposed. EPA is
removing the proposed requirement to
test per production line based on
comments indicating that a hardwood
plywood panel producer’s production
line can consist of several multipleopening hot presses and glue spreaders
that are often used to produce any and
all of the panel producer’s certified
product types. EPA’s quality control
testing frequency requirements for
hardwood plywood are generally similar
to CARB’s requirements and are
likewise based on production volume.
Hardwood plywood panel producers
must generally test each product type
weekly, with one to four tests being
required based on total weekly
hardwood plywood production by the
panel producer. For some small
specialty panel producers, even one
quality control test per week per
product type would be excessive. In
order to address the inequity of
requiring small manufacturers to
conduct many more tests than required
of large manufacturers for the same
production volume, if weekly
production of hardwood plywood at the
panel producer is less than 100,000
square feet, but more than 100,000
square feet is produced per month, EPA
is requiring one quality control test per
100,000 square feet of each product type
produced. If the panel producer
produces less than 100,000 square feet
of a particular product type per month,
EPA is requiring only one quality
control test of that product type per
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
month when the product type is
produced. For low volume producers,
EPA had proposed to require testing per
production run and per lot; however,
numerous commenters pointed out that
with the proposed definition of lot, this
requirement could lead to low volume
producers testing at a higher frequency
than some high volume producers. By
removing the requirement to test per
production run and per lot, EPA is
ensuring that the testing requirement
will not be too burdensome for panel
producers that manufacture low
volumes of hardwood plywood. EPA is
including the requirement of periodic
testing to ensure that if a product type
is produced several times per year, at
less than 100,000 square feet, several
quality control tests will be conducted.
EPA is concerned that one test would
not be sufficient to ensure compliance if
there is a gap in production of more
than one month. In addition, EPA is
clarifying that product types not being
manufactured during a particular week
do not need to be manufactured just so
that they can be tested.
Based on supporting comments, EPA
is also including a requirement for
hardwood plywood panel producers to
conduct quality control testing when
certain changes are made to resin
formulation or use, press time is
reduced by more than 20%, or quality
control employees have reason to
believe that the panel being produced
may not meet the requirements of the
applicable standard. CARB included
these requirements in the March 2014
mark-up of the ATCM (Ref. 51).
EPA is not promulgating a reduced
quality control testing provision for
hardwood plywood similar to the
provision for particle board and
medium-density fiberboard because
HPVA’s comments indicated that such a
provision is not necessary and because
no commenters suggested criteria for
qualification.
2. Means of showing test method
equivalence. EPA is finalizing the
means of showing test method
equivalence essentially as proposed.
EPA proposed to require that
equivalence between ASTM E1333–10
and any other test method used be
demonstrated by the TPC for each
laboratory used by the TPC or panel
producer that is using the alternative
method at least once each year or
whenever there is a significant change
in equipment, procedures, or the
qualifications of testing personnel. In
this final rule, EPA is clarifying that
TPCs are responsible for demonstrating
equivalence between ASTM E1333–10
and ASTM D6007–02 if the TPC
laboratory uses ASTM D6007–02 for
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
quarterly or verification testing. In this
final rule, EPA is allowing
demonstration of equivalence to be
reduced to at least once every two years
once it has been established every year
for three consecutive years. EPA is
making this change to match CARB
amendments to the ATCM currently
under consideration by CARB (Ref. 51)
and because CARB recommended this
in submitted comments. In EPA’s view,
after a TPC has consistently
demonstrated equivalence over a three
year period, it is not necessary to
require the TPC to continue to
demonstrate equivalence every year.
Many commenters indicated that EPA
used the term ‘‘equivalence’’ incorrectly
in the proposed rule when referring to
comparison of ASTM E1333–10 and
quality control test methods. EPA used
the term ‘‘equivalence’’ because it is the
term used in TSCA Title VI. However,
in this final rule, EPA will use the term
‘‘correlation’’ for the comparison of
ASTM E1333–10 and quality control
methods to meet the TSCA Title VI
requirement of demonstrating
equivalence. EPA is also clarifying in
this final rule that the panel producer is
responsible for ensuring that an
adequate correlation has been
demonstrated between the quality
control methods that are used for testing
its products annually or at least once
every two years once it has been
established for three consecutive years.
Panel producers must also establish a
new correlation whenever there is a
significant change in equipment,
procedures, or the qualifications of
testing personnel. EPA is requiring that
a new correlation needs to be
established whenever a TPC’s quarterly
test results compared with the panel
producer’s quality control test results do
not fit the previously established
correlation. In addition, if a panel
producer fails two quarterly tests in a
row, a new correlation curve needs to be
established. EPA did not receive any
adverse comments regarding these
requirements. The panel producer may
use its own laboratory, a TPC laboratory,
or any other laboratory for testing, but
it is the panel producer’s responsibility
to ensure that this requirement is met.
The panel producer’s TPC (or the TPC’s
laboratory) will evaluate the quality
control data and compare it with the
quarterly test data to establish a linear
regression equation and determine
whether the correlation is adequate as
described later in this Unit.
One commenter stated that EPA
should clarify that the equivalence is
specific not only to the test methods,
but also the equipment. EPA agrees and
is therefore clarifying in this final rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
that equivalence or correlation must be
demonstrated for each testing apparatus.
Several commenters indicated that EPA
should not require the equivalence
protocol when ASTM D6007–02 is used
as a quality control method and that the
equivalence protocol should only be
required for TPCs or their contract
laboratories using ASTM D6007–02 for
quarterly testing. Therefore, EPA is
clarifying in this final rule that when
ASTM D6007–02 is used for quality
control testing, only a demonstration of
correlation between ASTM D6007–02
and ASTM E1333–10 is required.
EPA is requiring that equivalence be
demonstrated in the ranges of
formaldehyde concentrations that are
representative of the emissions of the
products that the TPC certifies. EPA is
requiring a minimum of five comparison
sample sets. In addition, EPA is
allowing for flexibility in sampling and
not requiring testing of nine specimens
representing evenly distributed portions
of an entire panel for demonstrating
equivalence between ASTM D6007–02
and ASTM E1333–10 as is required in
the CARB ATCM. Most commenters
support this flexibility. For some types
of panels, within panel variability is
such that fewer specimens can be tested,
but for other panels, testing of at least
nine specimens will be needed. TPCs
and panel producers are best able to
determine the sampling and testing
needed to account for within panel
variability for a specific product type,
and EPA is therefore allowing for
flexibility in the distribution and
number of specimens to require for the
small chamber test comparison sample
set. If laboratories have difficulty
meeting the equivalence or correlation
requirements, they may need to increase
the number of samples. Specifics on
how the equivalence demonstration
must be performed can be found in 40
CFR 770.20(d)(1).
For the purposes of meeting the TSCA
Title VI requirement of demonstrating
equivalence between ASTM E1333–10
and any quality control test method
used for measuring formaldehyde
emissions, EPA is requiring a
demonstration of correlation. A linear
regression with an acceptable
correlation must be established, as
defined by the correlation coefficient, or
‘‘r’’ value. As discussed in the preamble
of the proposed rule, although
correlation does not show that the test
methods give equal results, it
demonstrates whether a quality control
test method can be used to adequately
estimate the corresponding ASTM
E1333–10 test result. Therefore, if there
is an acceptable correlation, the quality
control test method can be used to
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89703
estimate whether the product meets the
emission standards. The correlation will
be based on a minimum sample size of
five data pairs and a simple linear
regression where the dependent variable
(Y-axis) is the quality control test value
and the independent variable (X-axis) is
the ASTM E1333–10 test value. EPA is
finalizing the minimum acceptable
correlation coefficients (‘‘r’’ values) for
the correlation as proposed; they can be
found at § 770.20(d)(2) of this rule. The
number of data pairs is represented by
the letter ‘‘n’’ in the regulatory text. For
example, correlations based on five data
pairs have 3-degrees of freedom, and the
correlation coefficient needs to be 0.878
or greater. As discussed in the proposed
rule, because of the low emissions
required for composite wood products,
it may be necessary to include more
than five data pairs and/or a range of
products (with a suitable range in
emissions, e.g., 0–0.1 ppm) in the
testing to achieve acceptable correlation
coefficients.
3. Non-complying lots. EPA received
many comments on the proposed
provisions for non-complying lots.
Nearly all commenters objected to EPA’s
proposed requirement that a panel
producer retain product belonging to
lots selected for sampling until the
panel producer receives the test result.
Commenters also made suggestions with
regard to the definition of noncomplying lot.
EPA agrees with the commenter who
noted that quality control tests are often
not directly comparable to the emission
standard and has modified the proposed
definition so that the term ‘‘noncomplying lot’’ means any lot of
composite wood product represented by
a quarterly test value or quality control
test result that indicates that the lot
exceeds the applicable standard for the
particular composite wood product in
§ 770.10(b). EPA is also clarifying in the
definition that a quality control test
result that exceeds the QCL is
considered a test result that indicates
that the lot from which the sample was
taken exceeds the applicable standard.
As proposed, the definition in the final
rule also states that, in the case of a
quarterly test value, only the particular
lot from which the sample was taken
would be considered a non-complying
lot; lots produced after the previous
quarterly test but before the lot from
which the sample was taken would still
be considered certified product. The
final rule definition further states that
future production of product type(s)
represented by a failed quarterly test
would not be considered certified and
would have to be treated as a noncomplying lot until the product type(s)
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89704
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
are re-qualified through a successful
quarterly test.
Most commenters did not support
EPA’s proposed requirement that panel
producers retain product belonging to
lots selected for sampling until the test
results are received by the panel
producer. EPA proposed this
requirement to ensure that noncomplying products do not end up in
the stream of commerce. However,
commenters thought that this would
disrupt supply chains and be very costly
for panel producers, particularly in the
case of quarterly tests, because of the
time involved in shipping and testing
product. Commenters were concerned
that panel producers would not have
sufficient warehouse capacity to store
lots associated with quarterly test
samples until the test results are
received. On the other hand, a trade
association representing fabricators
supported EPA’s proposed requirement,
stating that fabricators have been in the
position of receiving non-complying
product from panel producers but not
being informed of the product’s noncomplying status until after the product
had moved into downstream
production. In EPA’s view, holding lots
until test results are received is the best
way to ensure that non-complying
product is not distributed in commerce,
but EPA is also concerned about the
impacts on industry supply chains from
holding product, particularly product
belonging to lots selected for quarterly
testing. Most commenters supported a
requirement to notify customers that
had received products belonging to a
non-complying lot. Many automatically
assumed that panel producers would
support their customers and address
non-complying product that had been
distributed before the test results were
received, whether by recalling the
product, by retesting samples retained
by the panel producer, or by working
with the customer to age or otherwise
treat the product. The panel producer is
responsible for non-complying product
that it has inadvertently distributed, but
EPA also understands the importance of
allowing panel producers flexibility in
managing their responsibility.
Therefore, the final rule requires panel
producers to notify, within 72 hours of
receiving notice of a failing test result,
any fabricators, distributors, or retailers
that received non-complying product.
The notification must inform the
customer of the type of test failed and
include a description of the composite
wood product belonging to the noncomplying lot, a statement that the noncomplying product must be isolated
from other composite wood products
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
and must not be further distributed in
commerce, and a description of the
steps the panel producer intends to take
with respect to the product. The rule
further requires panel producers to
either treat, retest, and certify the noncomplying product while it remains in
the possession of the customer or recall
the non-complying product and dispose
of it or treat, retest and certify it.
EPA is generally finalizing the rest of
the provisions relating to the handling
of non-complying lots as proposed,
except that several commenter
suggestions for clarification were
incorporated. Under this final rule,
panel producers must segregate the noncomplying lot from other product and
products in non-complying lots must
only be sold, supplied, or offered for
sale in the United States if a test value
that meets the applicable standard is
obtained after the products are treated
with scavengers to absorb excess
formaldehyde, or treated through
another process that reduces
formaldehyde emissions, e.g. aging.
Retesting must include at least one test
panel selected from each of three
separate bundles, with the selected
panels being representative of the entire
non-complying lot and not from the top
or bottom of a bundle. The test panels
may be selected from properly stored
samples set aside by the panel producer
for retest in the event of a failure. In
order to recertify the lot, the average of
all of the samples must test below the
applicable standard. EPA also proposed
to require panel producers to keep
records of the disposition of noncomplying lots, including the specific
treatment used and the subsequent test
results demonstrating compliance. As
pointed out by commenters, quality
control test results are not always
directly comparable with the emission
standards, so the test result language in
this section clarifies that results of a
retest of a failed quarterly test must
demonstrate compliance with the
applicable emission standard, while
results of a retest of a failed quality
control test must be at or below the level
that indicates that the product is in
compliance with the emission
standards. Finally, in response to
commenter suggestions, EPA is
promulgating a definition of the term
‘‘scavenger’’ that more precisely
describes the role of scavengers in the
context of this regulation.
F. Quality Assurance and Quality
Control Requirements for Composite
Wood Product Panel Producers
Panel producers are responsible for
ensuring that their products meet the
emission standards of TSCA Title VI.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Quality assurance and quality control
requirements for panel producers are
necessary to ensure that all of their
products comply with the applicable
standards, including those that are not
actually tested. EPA proposed quality
assurance and quality control
requirements that would be virtually
identical to the requirements of the
CARB ATCM and that would help
ensure proper handling of test samples,
test equipment, and quality control
testing. EPA is generally finalizing these
provisions as proposed, with some
clarifications and additions suggested
by commenters that address important
aspects of producing and supplying a
product that meets TSCA Title VI
requirements.
The final rule requires each panel
producer to have a written quality
control manual at each location that
produces composite wood products.
The manual must include a description
of the organization of the quality control
department, sampling procedures and
sample handling, quality control testing
frequency, procedures to identify
production changes that may result in
changes in formaldehyde emissions,
recordkeeping and labeling procedures,
description of product type, and resin
percentage and press time for each
product type, and procedures for
handling non-complying lots, including
a description of how the panel producer
will ensure compliance with the
notification requirements. The manual
must be reviewed and approved by an
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC to ensure that
the manual is complete and that the
panel producer’s procedures are
adequate to ensure that the TSCA Title
VI emission standards are being met on
an ongoing basis. The requirement for a
quality control manual is consistent
with CARB.
Each panel producer must designate a
quality control facility for conducting
quality control formaldehyde testing of
their product. The quality control
facility must be a laboratory owned and
operated by the panel producer, a TPC,
or a contract laboratory.
Each panel producer must also
designate a person as quality control
manager with adequate experience and/
or training to be responsible for
formaldehyde emissions quality control.
The quality control manager must have
the authority to take actions necessary
to ensure that applicable emission
standards are being met. The panel
producer must identify the quality
control manager and his or her
qualifications in writing to the TPC and
must notify the TPC in writing within
ten calendar days of any change in the
identity of the quality control manager
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
and provide the TPC with the new
quality control manager’s qualifications.
The quality control manager must
review and approve all reports of
quality control testing conducted on the
production of the panel producer. The
quality control manager is also
responsible for ensuring that the
samples are collected, packaged, and
shipped according to the procedures
specified in the quality control manual.
The panel producer quality control
manager must monitor the testing
facility’s results, and immediately
inform the TPC in writing of any
significant changes in production that
could affect formaldehyde emission
rates.
Each quality control facility must
have quality control employees with
adequate experience and/or training to
conduct accurate and precise chemical
quantitative analytical tests. The quality
control manager must identify each
person conducting formaldehyde
quality control testing in the quality
control manual.
EPA requested comment on whether
the regulation should include minimum
qualifications for quality control
managers and quality control staff, such
as education, experience, or training
requirements. Commenters did not favor
minimum qualifications, preferring
instead to allow panel producers, with
TPC input, more flexibility in choosing
quality control managers and employees
that are capable of performing the
required duties. EPA agrees with these
commenters and is not incorporating
minimum education, experience, or
training requirements into the
regulation.
Panel producers are required to
submit monthly product data reports for
each panel producer, production line
and product type, to their TPC. The
content requirements for the product
data reports are virtually identical to the
CARB requirements and include a data
sheet for each specific product type
with test and production information, a
quality control graph containing the
established QCL and shipping QCL (if
applicable) the results of quality control
tests, and retest values. As discussed in
more detail in Unit III.F., these quality
assurance and quality control
requirements do not apply to any
product type made with a NAF-based
resin or ULEF resin for which the panel
producer is eligible for an exemption
from the third-party certification
requirements, except for the purpose of
applying for re-approval for the
exemption.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
G. NAF-Based and ULEF Resins
TSCA Title VI section 601(d)(2)(D)
and (E) directs EPA to include, in its
implementing regulations, provisions
related to products made with NAFbased and ULEF resins. The statute also
defines, under section 601(a)(7) and (10)
respectively, what constitutes NAFbased and ULEF resins, in terms of the
composition of the resin system and
maximum formaldehyde emissions for
composite wood products made with
these resin systems. In general, a NAF
composite wood product cannot
incorporate a resin formulated with
formaldehyde as part of the crosslinking
structure. A ULEF composite wood
product is one made from resins that
may contain formaldehyde, but emit it
at particularly low levels. The statutory
maximum emissions for products made
with NAF-based or ULEF resins are
identical to those in the CARB ATCM.
EPA is finalizing NAF and ULEF
provisions essentially as proposed. If
certain emission thresholds are met,
EPA is providing producers of panels
made with NAF-based resins or ULEF
resins with an exemption from TPC
oversight and formaldehyde emissions
testing after an initial testing period of
three months for each product type
made with NAF-based resins or six
months for each product type made
with ULEF resins. These specific initial
testing periods are required by the
statute and are designed to ensure that
the products meet the TSCA section
601(a) formaldehyde emission standards
for products made with NAF-based or
ULEF resins. Because EPA is only
requiring quality control testing when
products are actually produced and is
including provisions for reduced testing
for hardwood plywood panel producers
that manufacture low volumes of
products, EPA is adding the clarification
that the three or six months of quality
control testing must include at least 5
quality control tests for NAF approvals
and at least 10 quality control tests for
ULEF approvals. This requirement is
meant to preclude the possibility of
panel producers manufacturing low
volumes or infrequently just to qualify
for NAF or ULEF reduced testing or
exemption from certification, and
because fewer quality control tests
would be insufficient to judge whether
a product should qualify for reduced
testing or exemption from certification.
EPA chose a minimum of five tests for
NAF approval because this is the
minimum needed for demonstrating
correlation. EPA is requiring at least 10
quality control tests for ULEF approvals
because the statutory testing
requirements for ULEF qualification
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89705
under TSCA Title VI are double those
for NAF qualification.
Whether using a NAF-based or ULEF
resin to qualify for the exemption from
TPC oversight and formaldehyde
emissions testing for a particular
product type, there can be no test result
indicating emissions higher than 0.05
ppm of formaldehyde for hardwood
plywood and 0.06 ppm for
particleboard, medium-density
fiberboard, and thin medium-density
fiberboard during the initial testing
period. In addition, test results for 90
percent of the required quality control
testing must indicate emissions of no
higher than 0.04 ppm of formaldehyde.
If less stringent emission standards
than these are met, producers of panels
made with ULEF resins may still qualify
for reduced formaldehyde emissions
testing—but not the third-party
certification exemption or the
exemption from emissions testing after
the initial six months. To qualify for this
reduced testing provision for products
made with ULEF resins, there can be no
test result indicating emissions higher
than 0.05 ppm of formaldehyde for
hardwood plywood, 0.08 ppm for
particleboard, 0.09 ppm for mediumdensity fiberboard, and 0.11 ppm for
thin medium-density fiberboard during
the initial six month testing period. In
addition, test results for 90 percent of
the required quality control testing must
indicate emissions of no higher than
0.05 ppm of formaldehyde for
particleboard, 0.06 ppm for mediumdensity fiberboard, and 0.08 ppm for
thin medium-density fiberboard. Under
this reduced testing provision,
qualifying panels would only need to be
quality control tested at least once per
week per product type, except that
hardwood plywood panel producers
who qualify for less frequent quality
control testing may continue to perform
the lesser amount of testing. For these
panels, what would otherwise be
quarterly testing by an EPA TSCA Title
VI TPC would instead only be required
every six months.
An EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must
oversee the testing during the initial
testing period, which must include at
least one test result for the NAF
exemption or two test results for either
ULEF provision under ASTM E1333–10
or, upon a showing of equivalence as
discussed in this Unit, ASTM D6007–02
(Refs. 43–44). To receive a third-party
certification exemption or reduced
testing under this NAF/ULEF provision,
the panel producer will be required to
apply to an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC or
CARB for approval for reduced testing
or a third-party certification exemption
based on the regulatory requirements.
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89706
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
EPA had proposed to have TPCs review
all of the applications; however, several
commenters expressed concern about
this. Their concerns include potential
conflicts of interest, and potential for
inconsistency among TPC reviews.
Therefore, EPA is also allowing CARB to
review applications for NAF and ULEF
under the TSCA Title VI program, as
long as CARB continues to have
requirements that are at least as
stringent as EPA’s requirements, which
EPA affirms is currently true. Should
EPA determine that CARB’s
requirements are no longer at least as
stringent was EPA’s requirements, then
EPA will publish a notice in the Federal
Register announcing EPA’s
determination.
As noted, panel producers can also
apply to their EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
for NAF and ULEF approvals. EPA has
determined that allowing TPCs to
approve applications for NAF/ULEF
reduced testing and/or a limited
exemption from TPC oversight does not
inherently present a conflict of interest
and the provisions of this final rule that
require TPC impartiality are applicable
to TPCs reviewing and approving NAF/
ULEF applications (see Unit III.B.7.).
The specific testing requirements and
eligibility criteria applicable to NAF/
ULEF exemptions will greatly reduce
the likelihood of inconsistency in TPC
reviews.
To maintain eligibility for a thirdparty certification exemption, at least
once every two years after the
conclusion of the initial testing period,
the panel producer must reapply for
exemption to an EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC or CARB. Because the CARB ATCM
requires applications and reapplications
for these third-party certification
exemptions to be submitted to CARB,
EPA will accept CARB approvals and reapprovals for as long as CARB’s
exemption criteria remain at least as
stringent as EPA’s. This will avoid
duplicate applications for those panel
producers that operate in California. Reapplicants to the EPA program must
include one test result for NAF renewal
and two test results for ULEF renewal
under ASTM E1333–10 or, upon a
showing of equivalence as discussed in
this Unit, ASTM D6007–02, that
demonstrate continued compliance with
the reduced formaldehyde emission
standards for each product type (Refs.
43–44). The test(s) must be based on
products randomly selected and tested
by a TPC laboratory. In the case of
approval for ULEF reduced testing, no
periodic reapplication to a TPC is
necessary because the panel producer
must have ongoing TPC oversight.
However, if CARB approves reduced
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
testing for ULEF, CARB may require
periodic reapplications. The current
CARB regulations require panel
producers eligible for reduced testing to
reapply to CARB every two years.
In general, testing records and other
records demonstrating eligibility for a
third-party certification exemption or
reduced testing, such as records
showing the resin used to manufacture
the eligible products, must be
maintained for a minimum of three
years from the date that the record was
created. Commenters generally
indicated that initial testing records
should be kept for as long as a panel
producer claims exemption or reduced
testing. EPA agrees with these
commenters. In addition, EPA agrees
that a review of the initial testing period
documentation may be useful in the
event that a product made under a NAF
or ULEF exemption is determined to
exceed the applicable standard.
Therefore, the final rule requires records
of the initial testing period be kept for
as long as a panel producer is producing
composite wood products under an
exemption.
Numerous commenters indicated that
EPA should minimize the amount of
potentially confidential information
(e.g., resin formulation) that TPCs are
required to maintain. To address the
comments on CBI concerns, EPA is
removing the requirement included in
the proposal that specific resin
formulation information be included
with applications for NAF and ULEF
approvals and instead only requiring
identification of the resin system. The
resin system is meant to be a
generalized description of the type of
resin used. This is unlikely to be CBI,
but an entity that believes the resin
system is CBI can have their TPC submit
a claim for this information on their
behalf.
EPA proposed that any change in the
resin formulation, the core material, or
any other part of the manufacturing
process that may affect formaldehyde
emission rates would render the product
ineligible for the reduced testing
approval or third-party certification
exemption and requested comment on
whether other events, such as failed
quarterly or routine quality control tests,
should invalidate a reduced testing
approval. Commenters provided
suggestions for how EPA should handle
changes in manufacture or emission test
result failures for products that have
received NAF or ULEF approvals.
Taking these comments into
consideration, EPA is requiring at least
one quality control test and one
quarterly test for NAF products, or five
quality control tests and one quarterly
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
test for ULEF products, every time there
is an operational or process change that
may affect formaldehyde emissions,
such as a change in resin formulation,
press cycle duration, temperature, or
amount of resin used per panel. EPA has
concluded that a change in resin system
and addition of products requires a new
NAF or ULEF application for third-party
certification exemption or reduced
testing since these are major changes,
which could require designation as a
new product type, rather than
operational or process changes. In
addition, EPA is including in this final
rule that a failed TPC quarterly test or
quality control test invalidates an
approval for a third-party certification
exemption or reduced testing, and EPA
is requiring that a panel producer
reapply with a complete new
application if its approval is invalidated
because of a failed test result. A failed
test is a serious concern and therefore,
a panel producer needs to be able to
demonstrate that its product can meet
the NAF or ULEF requirements by
requalifying with the full testing
requirements.
EPA proposed a ULEF reduced testing
provision and requested comment on
the utility of this option. Very few
manufacturers have sought the ULEF
reduced testing provision under the
CARB ATCM in lieu of the total
exemption from TPC oversight and
formaldehyde emissions testing
requirements after the initial testing
period. As such, EPA anticipates that
the vast majority of ULEF resin-based
composite wood product manufacturers
will apply for the full exemption from
TPC oversight and formaldehyde
emissions testing after the initial testing
period. However, commenters indicated
that they support the reduced testing
provision; therefore, EPA is including
this provision in this final rule.
EPA also requested comments,
information, and data on the broader
question of giving composite wood
products made with ULEF resins
preferential treatment under TSCA. EPA
discussed some concerns about
products made with urea-formaldehydebased resins. In EPA’s view, it is more
difficult to ensure that formaldehyde
emissions from products made with
these resins remain low over time,
irrespective of environmental
conditions. It is well known that ureaformaldehyde resins can release
formaldehyde when exposed to heat and
humidity because of the chemistry of
the resin, and EPA discussed some
studies in the proposed rule on
formaldehyde emissions under
conditions of high heat and humidity.
Several commenters expressed concern
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
about these studies, indicating that
TSCA Title VI cites test methods that
specify temperature and humidity; these
commenters argue that the studies are
therefore inappropriate and irrelevant.
EPA specifically requested comment
on whether the ULEF provisions should
be limited to products made with a
subset of ULEF resins that do not
contain urea-formaldehyde polymer—in
other words, limited to no-added urea
formaldehyde-based (NAUF) resins.
Most commenters were opposed to this
idea and instead support having both
NAF and ULEF provisions that are
identical to the provisions in the CARB
ATCM. In contrast, one commenter only
supports NAF and NAUF exemptions
from TPC oversight, not ULEF. This
commenter stated that ‘‘UF resin, with
its propensity to emit formaldehyde
continuously upon aging, makes it
distinct from all other formaldehydebased resin systems’’ (Ref. 71). EPA
recognizes that the chemistry of ureaformaldehyde resins presents challenges
for controlling formaldehyde emissions
from the resulting composite wood
products. However, EPA is finalizing
the NAF and ULEF provisions as
proposed. In making this decision, EPA
considered the fact that TSCA Title VI
requires upfront testing to confirm that
panels made with ULEF resins (as well
as panels made with NAF-based resins)
meet statutory emission limits that are
lower than the basic emission standards
for composite wood products. EPA also
considered Congressional intent and the
interest in harmonization with the
CARB ATCM.
H. De Minimis Exception
Section 601(d)(2)(L) of TSCA allows
EPA to promulgate, for products and
components containing de minimis
amounts of composite wood products,
an exception to all of the requirements
of the implementing regulations other
than the formaldehyde emission
standards. While EPA did not propose
an exception from any of the regulatory
requirements for products containing de
minimis amounts of composite wood
products, commenters overwhelmingly
favored a de minimis exception.
After considering the comments, EPA
is promulgating a de minimis exception
from the labeling requirements for
finished goods and component parts
sold separately to end users that contain
no more than 144 square inches of
composite wood products, based on the
surface area of its largest face. For
example, a frame for an eight-inch by
ten-inch picture is made up of two-inch
wide and one-inch thick composite
wood product strips. The outer
dimensions of the frame would be 14
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
inches by 12 inches and the inner
dimensions would be 10 inches by 8
inches. This frame contains 88 square
inches of composite wood product and
would qualify for the de minimis
exception ([12 × 14]¥[10 × 8]). This de
minimis level, suggested by a
commenter, is appropriate because it
would eliminate the labeling
requirements for very small products. It
would also eliminate the labeling
requirements for finished goods made of
non-regulated material, such as solid
wood, that contain small amounts of
composite wood, such as hardwood
plywood joining biscuits. A labeling
requirement for such products could
create confusion amongst consumers as
to whether or not the product is solid
wood. Finally, in this context, EPA has
determined that 144 square inches of
composite wood product in a finished
good actually represents a trivial
amount of composite wood product, as
opposed to the much larger thresholds
suggested by some commenters.
The exception does not apply to
finished goods (and component parts
sold separately to end users) which are
used in combination or in multiples in
order to create larger surfaces in the
final use, such as flooring or ceiling
tiles. Products that are sold separately to
consumers and not intended to be used
in multiples would be eligible for this
exception (e.g., a plywood rack designed
to be attached to a bicycle). Component
parts that are sold to fabricators of
finished goods would not be eligible for
this exception.
EPA notes that this exception is for
the labeling requirements alone. EPA
does not believe it can ensure
compliance with the emission standards
if it finalizes a de minimis exception to
the recordkeeping requirements. EPA
notes that its authority to establish a de
minimis exception applies only to the
regulatory requirements, not the
statutory emission standards. Thus,
even products containing a de minimis
amount of composite wood must be
made from panels that are compliant
with the regulatory requirements and
emission standards. Without records,
there would be no way for the Agency,
or a downstream purchaser, to
determine whether these products were
made from compliant composite wood
panels.
I. Chain-of-Custody, Recordkeeping, and
Labeling Requirements
Section 601(d)(2) of TSCA Title VI
also directs EPA to consider chain of
custody, recordkeeping, and labeling
requirements. EPA proposed chain of
custody, recordkeeping, and labeling
requirements that were similar to those
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89707
under the CARB ATCM, reasoning that
these requirements also support
compliance with TSCA Title VI without
undue burden. EPA’s proposal departed
from the CARB ATCM approach by
including a three-year recordkeeping
period, instead of CARB’s two years,
and by reducing recordkeeping for
distributors and retailers. EPA also
proposed to require that panel
producers make quarterly and quality
control testing records available to their
customers upon request. All of these
elements are discussed in more detail in
this Unit.
1. Chain of custody and
recordkeeping requirements. Most
records required to be retained under
this regulation must be kept for a period
of three years from the date that they are
generated. Many commenters supported
a two-year recordkeeping requirement,
citing consistency with the CARB
ATCM, while others supported longer
periods. The three-year recordkeeping
period is reasonable, given that EPA
must monitor TSCA Title VI compliance
on the part of hundreds of thousands of
entities nationwide. In addition,
required records would have to be
provided to EPA upon request to
facilitate compliance monitoring
activities.
As proposed, producers of hardwood
plywood, particleboard, and mediumdensity fiberboard panels must maintain
records of quarterly emissions testing
and records of quality control testing.
These records must identify the TPC
conducting or overseeing the testing,
and must include the date, the product
type tested, the lot number that the
tested material represents, and the test
results. In addition, panel producers
must maintain production records,
purchaser and transporter information,
and information on the disposition of
non-complying lots.
After December 12, 2023, laminated
product producers whose products are
exempt from the definition of hardwood
plywood will have to maintain records
demonstrating use of compliant cores or
platforms and phenol-formaldehyde
resins or resins formulated with no
added formaldehyde as part of the resin
cross-linking structure, including
platform production or purchase
records, the resin trade name, resin
manufacturer contact information, and
resin supplier contact information, or, if
the resin is made in-house, records
sufficient to demonstrate that the resin
qualifies for the exemption.
In order to assist customers such as
fabricators, distributors, importers, and
retailers in determining whether they
are purchasing compliant composite
wood products, EPA is requiring that
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89708
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
panel producers make available to their
direct customers, upon request, the
results of quarterly emissions test
results for the product types purchased.
While information collected under
TSCA may be entitled to confidential
treatment if it meets the standard for
Exemption 4 in the Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C.
552(b)(4), TSCA section 14 provides that
health and safety studies and data
derived from health and safety studies,
are not entitled to confidential
treatment, irrespective of the Exemption
4 standard, unless the release of data
derived from such studies would
disclose confidential processes used in
the manufacturing or processing of a
chemical substance or mixture or, in the
case of a mixture, disclose the
confidential portion of the mixture
comprised by any of its chemical
substances. For the reasons discussed in
the proposal, EPA has determined that
quarterly test results are not entitled to
treatment as CBI. In order to minimize
paperwork and preserve the
confidentiality of the supply chain, EPA
is limiting the disclosure requirement to
direct purchasers (i.e., those purchasing
directly from mills). Thus the quarterly
test results and associated information
(date of test, test method, panel
producer name and produce
description) do not need to be carried
with the product through the supply
chain.
Because of the volume and
complexity of quality control test
results, EPA is not requiring panel
producers to release this quality control
information to direct purchasers.
However, EPA considers quality control
test results and the fact that a mill has
had failed quality control tests to be
health and safety studies and data
derived from health and safety studies.
Also as proposed, producers of
hardwood plywood, particleboard and
medium-density fiberboard panels using
NAF-based resins or ULEF resins who
qualify for the reduced testing and/or
third-party certification exemption
discussed in Unit III.G. must maintain
records demonstrating initial and
continued eligibility for the reduced
testing or third-party certification
exemption. In addition, the panel
producer must keep production records
and information on resin trade name,
resin manufacturer and supplier contact
information, and resin use.
Under the proposal, importers,
fabricators, distributors, and retailers
would be required to take steps to
ensure that they are purchasing
composite wood products or component
parts that comply with the emission
standards and to document these steps.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
As proposed, in order to document
compliance, the importer or fabricator
would have to obtain from the supplier
records identifying the panel
producer(s) that produced the
composite wood products and the dates
that the composite wood products were
manufactured and purchased from the
panel producer(s), as well as bills of
lading or invoices that include a written
affirmation from the supplier that the
composite wood products, whether in
the form of panels or incorporated into
component parts or finished goods, are
compliant with this subpart.
The proposed requirement to take
steps to ensure that compliant products
are being purchased would also have
applied to distributors and retailers.
Rather than include specific required
documentation for these entities, the
proposal requested comment on the
documentation that should be required.
The only specific records the proposal
would have required distributors and
retailers to keep were invoices and bills
of lading, and compliance statements on
these documents would not have been
mandatory. EPA reasoned in the
proposal that this would be sufficient
because these records would enable
EPA to identify the producer or
importer of composite wood panels,
component parts, or finished goods
being sold by distributors and retailers.
EPA also stated that, for finished goods,
these records would also permit the
identification of the producer of the
composite wood panels that make up
the finished goods. EPA concluded that,
without imposing additional
recordkeeping burdens on most
distributors and retailers, these records
would allow EPA to effectively monitor
compliance with TSCA Title VI.
EPA received a number of comments
on these requirements, some specific to
importer responsibilities. Commenters
argued that, in many cases, the importer
is two or more steps in the supply chain
removed from the panel producer and
would not be able to obtain this
information, particularly for imported
finished goods. Some commenters were
concerned about supply chain
confidentiality and objected to a
requirement that distributors disclose
their suppliers to their customers. EPA
understands the concerns expressed by
these commenters. However, in order to
be able to ensure that imported
composite wood products, component
parts, and finished goods were
produced in compliance with TSCA
Title VI, EPA needs to know the mill
and the date that the composite wood
products were produced. For composite
wood products made by overseas mills,
EPA must look to the importer for this
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
information. Without mill and
production date information, EPA will
not be able to check with the
appropriate TPC to determine whether
the product was certified. For these
reasons, EPA is finalizing a requirement
that the importer be able to provide
these records to EPA within 30 calendar
days of request. Because of the supplier
chain issues raised by commenters, EPA
is not requiring importers to obtain
these records directly from suppliers.
Importers may arrange, by contact or
some other means, to have their
suppliers provide these records directly
to EPA within 30 calendar days of
request. Importers must keep the
compliance statements located on
invoices, bills of lading, or other
comparable documents. EPA notes that
the recordkeeping requirements for
imported products will be equivalent to
the aggregate recordkeeping
requirements for domestically produced
products. The only distinction would be
that the responsibility for ensuring preimportation supply chain records are
maintained would fall on the importer
instead of being spread out amongst
different entities in the supply chain.
For the reason stated in the proposal,
that invoices and bills of lading will
permit EPA to identify the sources of
composite wood products, component
parts, or finished goods for a particular
distributor or retailer, EPA is also
finalizing the recordkeeping
requirements for distributors and
retailers as proposed. In addition,
because invoices and bills of lading will
allow EPA to identify a fabricator’s
sources of composite wood products or
component parts, just as such records
facilitate the identification of
distributor’s or retailer’s sources, EPA
will only require fabricators to keep
invoices and bills of lading. Fabricators
who are also laminators must keep these
records as well as the records required
for laminated product producers.
EPA specifically asked for comment
on whether distributors and retailers
should be required to obtain and retain
bills of lading or invoices with a written
affirmation from the supplier, and
whether other recordkeeping
requirements would be appropriate.
While CARB’s comments indicated that
these statements were required under
CARB and recommended that EPA
require the same, other commenters
believed that the requirement was
unnecessary. EPA has determined that
requiring a compliance statement is
minimally burdensome, that many are
already complying with the CARB
requirement, and that obtaining these
statements will enlist fabricators,
distributors, and retailers in helping to
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
ensure compliance with TSCA Title VI
by requiring them to ask questions of
their suppliers if they do not see the
compliance statement on their purchase
documentation. The compliance
statement refers to the compliance of the
products as of the date of manufacture.
So, for example, non-exempt laminated
products made after December 12, 2023
would need to be compliant with the
requirements for hardwood plywood in
order to affirm compliance with TSCA
Title VI. Obtaining and maintaining
these bills of lading and invoices, or
comparable documents, with a written
statement from the supplier are
reasonable precautions taken to
purchase compliant products for
fabricators, distributors, and retailers.
Entities that fit within two or more of
these recordkeeping categories, such as
a distributor that buys finished goods
from both foreign and domestic
companies for resale, must keep only
the records for each product that
correspond to the activities the entity
undertook with respect to that product.
For example, a distributor who
purchases both foreign and domestic
finished goods for resale must keep the
following records:
• For foreign finished goods that the
distributor imports, records identifying
the panel producer(s) that produced the
composite wood products incorporated
into the finished goods and the dates
that the products were produced or the
ability to produce this information
within 30 days, records identifying the
supplier and the date of purchase, and
bills of lading or invoices that include
a written statement from the supplier
that the composite wood products,
whether in the form of panels or
incorporated into component parts or
finished goods, are either compliant
with this subpart or were manufactured
before the manufactured-by date.
• For domestic finished goods, only
bills of lading or invoices would need
to be kept.
In the case of imported finished
goods, only the importer would be
responsible for ensuring that the records
identifying the panel producer and the
date that the composite wood products
were manufactured are accessible to
EPA upon request. For example, if the
importer sells the goods to a domestic
distributor, who then sells them to a
domestic retailer, only the importer
would have to ensure the additional
records are kept. The domestic
distributor and retailer would only be
required to keep invoices and bills of
lading.
2. Labeling. EPA is finalizing the
labeling provisions as proposed, with
several minor modifications. Panels or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
bundles of panels that are sold,
supplied, or offered for sale in the
United States must be labeled with the
name of the panel producer, the lot
number, the number of the accredited
TPC, and markings indicating that the
product complies with the TSCA Title
VI emission standards. Fabricators of
finished goods containing composite
wood products must label every
finished good they produce, or every
box containing finished goods. These
labels must contain the fabricator’s
name, the date the finished good was
produced, and a statement that the
finished goods are TSCA Title VI
compliant. Panels may be shipped into,
out of, and around the United States for
quality control or quarterly tests
provided that they are labeled ‘‘For
TSCA Title VI testing only, not for sale
in the United States.’’ The information
required on the labels must be legible
and in English, but it need not all be on
a single label. Also, entities are free to
combine the TSCA Title VI labels with
CARB labels so long as all the required
information is present, legible, in
English and accurate. EPA notes that the
phrase ‘‘the date the finished good was
produced’’ means the actual date of
production in ‘‘Month/Year’’ format, not
the date the product was imported.
EPA does agree that in certain
situations, this information has the
potential to confuse consumers and may
take up additional space on labels. For
example, where a finished good is
composed of multiple composite wood
products, some of which are not
produced under the NAF or ULEF
provisions, and some of which are, it
may be difficult for fabricators to design
a label that efficiently describes the
product. Thus, in the final regulations,
labeling indicating that the composite
wood products are NAF or ULEF is
voluntary and at the discretion of the
panel producer or fabricator. For
finished goods that are partially made
with panels produced under the NAF or
ULEF exemptions, they may, at the
discretion of the fabricator, be labeled
with phrases such as ‘‘product contains
TSCA Title VI products and NAF/ULEF
products,’’ ‘‘product contains TSCA
Title VI products and NAF products,’’ or
‘‘product contains TSCA Title VI
products and ULEF products,’’ if is this
is accurate. EPA disagrees with those
commenters who thought that the
labeling of products as NAF or ULEF
creates an inappropriate market bias.
TSCA Title VI explicitly allows EPA to
provide an exemption from third-party
certification and testing for these
products, so the statute itself confers the
opportunity for special treatment on
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89709
these products. Far from creating an
inappropriate market bias, labeling a
product as NAF and ULEF provides
valuable information to consumers (e.g.,
some panels may not have a TPC
because they are exempt from thirdparty certification), and allows
consumers to know that these products
meet the emission standards described
in Unit III.C. EPA also notes that the
CARB ATCM has NAF/ULEF labeling
requirements.
The final rule allows panel producers
to use a panel producer number or other
identifier to protect supply chain
confidentiality, as long as EPA is
ultimately able to use the label
information along with the records
required by this rule to identify the
panel producer. The expectation is that
EPA will be able to trace back through
the supply chain, using records
identifying each entity’s supplier, to
eventually arrive at the panel producer,
or an importer for composite wood
products not produced domestically.
For finished goods, EPA is requiring
either the fabricator’s name on the label
or the name of a responsible
downstream entity (e.g., an importer,
wholesaler, distributor, or retailer).
Where a non-fabricator’s name appears
on the label, that entity is responsible
for identifying the fabricator, and is
responsible for the compliance of the
labeled products, as if they were the
fabricator. Fabricators may not put a
downstream entity’s name on the labels
unless they have written consent from
that entity to do so.
Although EPA proposed to allow
labels to be in barcode format, the
Agency agrees with commenters who
thought that a barcode, as the sole form
of label, would inhibit transparency.
Even if the barcode was a universal
open system, all entities along the
supply chain may not have access to
smartphones or barcode readers. This
would create a technology barrier to
accessing this information, and could
prevent retailers that wish to check the
information on labels to ensure it
conforms to the information provided to
them by their supplier. Thus, the final
rule prohibits the use of barcodes, or
non-text labels, as the sole label. Entities
that wish to use barcodes or other nontext labels may do so but must also have
the encoded TSCA Title VI information
printed on the label in English text.
The final rule allows composite wood
products and finished goods to be
labeled by bundle or box, as opposed to
being labeled individually. EPA
generally agrees with those commenters
who cited cost and feasibility concerns
with an individual product labeling
requirement. In addition, as noted by
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
89710
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
some commenters, EPA agrees that an
individual labeling requirement
provides minimal benefit when applied
to composite wood products supplied to
fabricators who then incorporate them
into finished goods. In lieu of labeling
of individual products, EPA is requiring
entities that divide and repackage
bundles of regulated composite wood
products or purchase these products for
resale to have a system sufficient to
identify the supplier of the panel and
link the information on the label to the
products. This information must be
made available to potential customers
upon request. Similarly, entities
importing, selling, offering for sale or
supplying finished goods that are not
individually labeled must retain a copy
of the label and make it available to
potential customers upon request.
J. Sell-Through Provisions and
Stockpiling
TSCA Title VI directs EPA to establish
sell-through provisions for composite
wood products, and finished goods
containing regulated composite wood
products, based on a designated date of
manufacture, or ‘‘manufactured-by’’
date. Under the statute, composite wood
products or finished goods
manufactured before the specified
manufactured-by date are not subject to
statutory emission standards or testing
requirements. TSCA Title VI requires
that the manufactured-by date be no
earlier than 180 calendar days after
promulgation of the final implementing
regulations.
TSCA Title VI also directs EPA to
prohibit the sale of inventory that was
stockpiled, which is defined in the
statute as manufacturing or purchasing
composite wood products between the
date the statute was enacted and the
date 180 calendar days following the
promulgation of these regulations at a
rate significantly greater than the rate
during a particular base period. EPA is
directed to define what constitutes ‘‘a
rate significantly greater’’ and to
establish the base period. Under the
statute, the base period must end before
July 7, 2010, the date that the
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite
Wood Products Act was enacted.
As proposed, EPA is finalizing the
manufactured-by date at December 12,
2017, except that, as discussed in Unit
III.A., the manufactured-by date for
laminated products is December 12,
2023. EPA has determined that, for
panel producers other than laminated
product producers, this year will be
sufficient to get all of the infrastructure
in place.
The manufactured-by dates apply to
regulated composite wood products,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
including laminated products, as well as
finished goods containing such
products. Composite wood products
manufactured before the applicable
manufactured-by date are not subject to
the emission standards, nor are they
required to be labeled or tested for
emissions. Laminated products
manufactured before the manufacturedby date for laminated products are not
subject to the emission standards, but,
after the manufactured-by date for
composite wood products other than
laminated products, they must be made
with compliant composite wood
product platforms and must be labeled
in accordance with the fabricator
labeling requirements. Composite wood
products and laminated products
manufactured before the applicable
manufactured-by date can be
incorporated into finished goods at any
time. Retailers, fabricators, and
distributors are permitted to continue to
buy and sell these composite wood
products and laminated products, as
well as finished goods that incorporate
these products, because they would be
considered compliant with TSCA Title
VI and its implementing regulations,
assuming the absence of stockpiling as
discussed later. Under TSCA, the term
‘‘manufacture’’ includes import, so the
‘‘manufactured-by’’ date would
effectively be an ‘‘imported-by’’ date for
imported goods.
In order to establish that a regulated
composite wood product was made
before the manufactured-by date, the
panel producer or importer and any
subsequent distributor, retailer or
fabricator must document when the
product was manufactured or that the
panel was in their inventory on or
before the date 180 calendar days after
promulgation of these regulations. In the
case of a finished good, any subsequent
distributor, retailer or fabricator must
document that the composite wood
products making up the finished good
were either manufactured before the
manufactured-by date or were
manufactured in accordance with TSCA
Title VI. Documentation that the
finished goods were in their inventory
on or before that date 180 calendar days
after promulgation of these regulations
would be sufficient for these purposes.
In order to reduce consumer confusion,
products that are entirely made before
the manufactured-by date may not be
labeled as compliant with TSCA Title
VI.
Selling stockpiled regulated
composite wood panels and finished
goods containing regulated composite
wood products is prohibited. EPA
proposed to define stockpiling as
manufacturing or purchasing composite
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
wood products between July 7, 2010,
the date that the Formaldehyde
Standards for Composite Wood Products
Act was signed into law by the
President, and 180 calendar days after
promulgation of these regulations, for
the purpose of circumventing the TSCA
Title VI emission standards, at an
average annual rate 20 percent greater
than the amount manufactured or
purchased during the 2009 calendar
year. EPA is finalizing the provisions
substantially as proposed, but clarifying
that the Agency has the burden of
showing that an increase in production
or purchasing was for the purpose of
circumventing the emission standards.
Entities that have a greater than 20
percent increase in purchasing or
production of regulated composite wood
panels for some reason other than
circumventing the emission standards
will not be deemed to be stockpiling.
Other reasons may include an
immediate increase in customer demand
or sales, or a planned business
expansion. The stockpiling provisions
do not apply to entities that were not in
existence at the beginning of calendar
year 2009 because a pre-TSCA Title VI
baseline of production does not exist for
these companies.
K. Import Certification
TSCA Title VI directs EPA, in
coordination with U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) and other
appropriate Federal departments and
agencies, to revise regulations
promulgated pursuant to TSCA section
13 as necessary to ensure compliance.
The TSCA section 13 regulations,
promulgated by CBP, require importers
to certify that shipments of chemical
substances and mixtures are either in
compliance with TSCA or not subject to
TSCA. Most, if not all, products subject
to TSCA Title VI would be considered
articles. Articles, defined in 19 CFR
12.120(a), are generally formed to
specific shapes or designs during
manufacture and have end use functions
related to their shape or design. Articles
are generally exempt from the TSCA
section 13 certification requirements,
but the regulations at 19 CFR 12.121(b)
recognize that EPA has the authority to,
by regulation or order, make the
requirements applicable to articles.
As proposed, no changes are being
made to the regulations promulgated
pursuant to TSCA section 13, but this
final rule requires TSCA section 13
import certification for composite wood
products that are articles. This does not
represent a statement on the relative
toxicity of formaldehyde, or of
composite wood products; rather, it is a
certification of compliance with TSCA.
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Although this requirement is being
finalized as proposed, EPA is delaying
the compliance date for the import
certification requirements until two
years after the date of the publication of
this rule to provide additional time for
the supply chain to become familiar
with the requirements and make any
necessary adjustments to existing
business processes. The Agency is
committed to conducting outreach with
regulated parties and working with
industry associations to help educate
producers and importers of composite
wood products about the requirements
of this final rule, including the TSCA
section 13 import certification
requirements. Beginning shortly after
publication of the final rule, EPA will
conduct outreach to the importer
community which will entail providing
training on the importer provisions and
how to comply with the certification
requirement. The outreach will include
webinars, attending industry
conferences, and meeting with
interested groups. In addition, EPA is
developing guidance for importers with
additional information about how to
comply with the certification
requirement. The guidance will be in
the form of documents that can be
downloaded from EPA’s Web site at:
https://www.epa.gov/formaldehyde.
To comply with the import
certification requirements, importers (or
their agents) will be required to provide
the following certification statement
with other paperwork accompanying the
imported shipment:
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
I certify that all chemical substances in this
shipment comply with all applicable rules or
orders under TSCA and that I am not offering
a chemical substance for entry in violation of
TSCA or any applicable rule or order
thereunder.
The documentation required by this
final rule will generally be a sufficient
basis for the import certification to the
extent that such documentation
demonstrates compliance. TSCA
certification statements provided in
paper have commonly been included on
or attached to bills of lading,
commercial invoices, or comparable
documents. In order to submit a TSCA
certification statement electronically,
importers or their agents would need to
submit it with their Customs entry
filings for shipments in the Automated
Commercial Environment (i.e., CBP’s
primary automated and electronic
system for commercial trade
processing.) or any other CBPauthorized electronic data interchange
system.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
L. Enforcement
The failure to comply with any
provision of TSCA Title VI, or the
regulations implementing TSCA Title
VI, is a prohibited act under TSCA
section 15. Any person who commits a
prohibited act under TSCA section 15
can be held liable for civil and criminal
penalties, as appropriate.
M. HUD’s Manufactured Housing
Program
Under the authority of the National
Manufactured Housing Construction
and Safety Standards Act of 1974, 42
U.S.C. 5401 et seq., HUD regulates the
construction of all manufactured homes
built in the United States. The HUD
standards established pursuant to the
1974 Act cover many aspects of
manufactured home construction,
including body and frame requirements,
thermal protection, plumbing, electrical,
and fire safety. (See 24 CFR parts 3280
and 3282). HUD oversees the
enforcement of the construction
standards through third party inspection
agencies and State governments.
EPA and HUD are working together to
ensure the appropriate application and
implementation of requirements under
the Formaldehyde Standards for
Composite Wood Products Act of 2010.
The HUD standards for manufactured
housing include specific formaldehyde
emission limits for plywood and
particleboard materials installed in
manufactured housing. In contrast,
TSCA Title VI covers only hardwood
plywood, a subset of plywood. In
addition, TSCA Title VI also covers
medium-density fiberboard, which is
not covered by the current HUD
standards. The HUD emission limits
apply to any plywood or particleboard
bonded with a resin system and to any
plywood or particleboard coated with a
surface finish containing formaldehyde.
HUD’s current formaldehyde emission
limits are 0.2 ppm for plywood and 0.3
ppm for particleboard, as measured by
ASTM E1333–96. These emission limits
are higher than those established by the
2010 Act, but section 4 of the 2010 Act
directs HUD to update its regulations to
ensure that the regulations reflect the
standards established by section 601 of
TSCA.
In addition, the 2010 Act established
a definition of ‘‘recreational vehicle’’
that is based on the definition
established by HUD that is in effect at
24 CFR 3282.8 on the date of
promulgation of regulations pursuant to
TSCA Title VI. EPA acknowledges that
HUD issued a proposed rule (81 FR
6806, February 9, 2016) that would,
among other things, remove the current
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89711
definition of ‘‘recreational vehicle’’ from
24 CFR 3282.8 and add an amended
version of this definition in a proposed
new CFR section. EPA and HUD believe
that it was the intent of Congress that
same definition of ‘‘recreational
vehicle’’ be used in both this final rule
and HUD’s manufactured housing
regulations. Therefore, EPA and HUD
will continue working together to
ensure that the regulatory definition is
appropriately harmonized.
In the proposal, EPA requested
comment on how best to harmonize
EPA’s regulatory program under TSCA
Title VI with HUD’s manufactured
homes program. EPA received a handful
of comments on this aspect of the
proposal. Two commenters
recommended a general consistency
between the EPA and HUD regulations,
although they did not offer specifics. At
the suggestion of one of the
commenters, EPA has added a sentence
to the applicability provisions of the
final rule to make it clear that the
requirements apply to composite wood
products used in manufactured housing.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
This final rule incorporates a variety
of voluntary consensus standards by
reference. In many cases, the consensus
standards are used because TSCA Title
VI directs that they be used. TSCA Title
VI provides for quarterly and quality
control testing for hardwood plywood,
particleboard, and MDF using specified
methods developed by ASTM
International. TSCA Title VI also refers
freely to voluntary consensus standards
to assist in defining the composite wood
products that are subject to the statute,
such as hardwood plywood (ANSI/
HPVA HP–1–2009), particleboard (ANSI
A208.1–2009), and medium-density
fiberboard (ANSI A208.2–2009) (Refs.
26, 47, and 72). Other voluntary
consensus standards are being
incorporated by reference into this final
rule to provide flexibility to panel
producers by permitting them to use
additional quality control test methods
already allowed by CARB under their
ATCM. Finally, EPA is relying on
voluntary consensus standards
developed by ISO/IEC and already in
use in the conformity assessment sector
to establish a third-party certification
program that is as robust as possible.
Most of the entities that would have to
comply with one of these standards, or
at least have a good understanding of
the contents of one of these standards,
already own a copy. It would be
difficult to be in business as a hardwood
plywood mill, for example, if you were
not familiar with the industry consensus
on what is hardwood plywood. The
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89712
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
standards are all readily available
electronically or in print, and are
relatively inexpensive (less than $150 a
copy).
The voluntary consensus standards
being incorporated by reference into this
final rule are summarized in this unit,
along with contact information for
purchasing a copy of each standard.
Each of these standards is available for
inspection at the OPPT Docket in the
EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm.
3334, EPA, West Bldg., 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number of
the EPA/DC Public Reading room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the OPPT Docket is (202)
566–0280.
(a) AITC, CPA, and HPVA standards.
Copies of these standards may be
obtained from the specific publisher, as
noted below, or from the American
National Standards Institute, 1899 L
Street NW., 11th Floor, Washington, DC
20036, or by calling (202) 293–8020, or
at https://ansi.org/. Note that ANSI/AITC
A190.1–2002 is published by the
American Institute of Timber
Construction. ANSI A135.4–2012, ANSI
A135.5–2012, ANSI A135.6–2012, ANSI
A135.7–2012, ANSI A208.1–2009, and
ANSI A208.2–2009 are published by the
Composite Panel Association. And
ANSI ANSI/HPVA–HP–1–2009 is
published by the Hardwood Plywood
Veneer Association.
1. ANSI A135.4–2012, American
National Standard, Basic Hardboard.
This standard defines hardboard and
describes requirements and test
methods for water absorption, thickness
swelling, modulus of rupture, tensile
strength, surface finish, dimensions,
squareness, moisture content, and edge
straightness of five classes of basic
hardboard, along with methods of
identifying products conforming to the
standard.
2. ANSI A135.5–2012, American
National Standard, Prefinished
Hardboard Paneling. This standard
describes requirements and methods of
testing for the dimensions, squareness,
edge straightness, and moisture content
of prefinished hardboard paneling and
for the finish of the paneling, along with
methods of identifying products
conforming to the standard.
3. ANSI A135.6–2012, American
National Standard, Engineered Wood
Siding. This standard describes
requirements and methods of testing for
the dimensions, straightness,
squareness, physical properties, and
surface characteristics of engineered
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
wood siding. This standard also defines
trade terms used and describes methods
of identifying products conforming to
the standard.
4. ANSI A135.7–2012, American
National Standard, Engineered Wood
Trim. This standard describes
requirements and methods of testing for
the properties of engineered wood trim
intended to be used as architectural
trim. While primarily for exterior
applications, these products can also be
used indoors. Trim is the woodwork in
the finish of a building, especially
around openings and at corners, that is
intended to be decorative and/or
provide protection for joints covered by
the product. Typical exterior trim
includes corner boards, fascia, brick
mold and window trim. Because
engineered wood trim is not intended to
be used as a structural material, it has
no structural load-bearing performance
requirements.
5. ANSI A208.1–2009, American
National Standard, Particleboard. This
standard describes the requirements and
test methods for dimensional tolerances,
physical and mechanical properties and
formaldehyde emissions for
particleboard, along with methods of
identifying products conforming to the
standard.
6. ANSI A208.2–2009, American
National Standard, Medium Density
Fiberboard (MDF) for Interior
Applications. This standard describes
the requirements and test methods for
dimensional tolerances, physical and
mechanical properties and
formaldehyde emissions for MDF, along
with methods of identifying products
conforming to the standard.
7. ANSI/AITC A190.1–2002,
American National Standard for Wood
Products, Structural Glued Laminated
Timber. This standard describes
minimum requirements for the
manufacture and production of
structural glued laminated timber,
including size tolerances, grade
combinations, lumber, adhesives, and
appearance grades.
8. ANSI/HPVA HP–1–2009, American
National Standard for Hardwood and
Decorative Plywood. This standard
details the specific requirements for all
face, back, and inner ply grades of
hardwood plywood as well as
formaldehyde emission limits, moisture
content, tolerances, sanding, and grade
marking.
(b) ASTM material. Copies of these
materials may be obtained from ASTM
International, 100 Barr Harbor Dr., P.O.
Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA
19428–2959, or by calling (877) 909–
ASTM, or at https://www.astm.org.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
1. ASTM D5055–05, Standard
Specification for Establishing and
Monitoring Structural Capacities of
Prefabricated Wood I-Joists. This
specification gives procedures for
establishing, monitoring, and
reevaluating structural capacities of
prefabricated wood I-joists, such as
shear, moment, and stiffness. The
specification also provides procedures
for establishing common details and
itemizes certain design considerations
specific to wood I-joists.
2. ASTM D5456–06, Standard
Specification for Evaluation of
Structural Composite Lumber Products.
This specification describes initial
qualification sampling, mechanical and
physical tests, analysis, and design
value assignments. Requirements for a
quality-control program and cumulative
evaluations are included to ensure
maintenance of allowable design values
for the product.
3. ASTM D5582–00 (Reapproved
2006), Standard Test Method for
Determining Formaldehyde Levels from
Wood Products Using a Desiccator. This
test method describes a small scale
procedure for measuring formaldehyde
emissions potential from wood
products. The formaldehyde level is
determined by collecting airborne
formaldehyde in a small distilled water
reservoir within a closed desiccator. The
quantity of formaldehyde is determined
by a chromotropic acid test procedure.
4. ASTM D6007–02, Standard Test
Method for Determining Formaldehyde
Concentrations in Air from Wood
Products Using a Small-Scale Chamber.
This test method measures the
formaldehyde concentrations in air from
wood products under defined test
conditions of temperature and relative
humidity. Results obtained from this
small-scale chamber test method are
intended to be comparable to results
obtained testing larger product samples
by the large chamber test method for
wood products, Test Method E 1333.
5. ASTM E1333–10, Standard Test
Method for Determining Formaldehyde
Concentrations in Air and Emission
Rates from Wood Products Using a
Large Chamber. This test method
measures the formaldehyde
concentration in air and emission rate
from wood products containing
formaldehyde under conditions
designed to simulate product use. The
concentration in air and emission rate is
determined in a large chamber under
specific test conditions of temperature
and relative humidity. The general
procedures are also intended for testing
product combinations at productloading ratios and at air-exchange rates
typical of the indoor environment.
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(c) CEN materials. Copies of these
materials are not directly available from
the European Committee for
Standardization, but from one of CEN’s
National Members, Affiliates, or Partner
Standardization Bodies. To purchase a
standard, go to CEN’s Web site, https://
www.cen.eu, and select ‘‘Products’’ for
more detailed information.
1. BS EN 120:1992, Wood based
panels. Determination of formaldehyde
content- Extraction method called the
perforator method, English Version.
This European standard describes an
extraction method, known as the
perforator method, for determining the
formaldehyde content of unlaminated
and uncoated wood-based panels.
2. BS EN 717–2:1995, Wood-based
panels—Determination of formaldehyde
release—Part 2: Formaldehyde release
by the gas analysis method, English
Version. This European standard
describes a procedure for determination
of accelerated formaldehyde release
from wood-based panels.
(d) Georgia Pacific material. Copies of
this material may be obtained from
Georgia-Pacific Chemicals LLC, 133
Peachtree Street, Atlanta, GA 30303, or
by calling (877) 377–2737, or at https://
www.gp-dmc.com/default.aspx.
1. The GP Dynamic Microchamber
computer-integrated formaldehyde test
system, User Manual. Copyright 2012.
The Dynamic Micro Chamber is a
patented process for testing
formaldehyde emissions (U.S. Patent #
5,286,363). The DMC provides a means
of obtaining accurate formaldehyde
emissions information from pressed
panel products. This Manual describes
the process for using the DMC.
2. The Dynamic Microchamber
computer integrated formaldehyde test
system, User Manual, Copyright 2007.
This is the older version of the DMC
Manual, which may also be followed
when using the DMC to conduct
formaldehyde emissions testing.
(e) ISO material. Copies of these
materials may be obtained from the
International Organization for
Standardization, 1, ch. de la VoieCreuse, CP 56, CH–1211, Geneve 20,
Switzerland, or by calling +41–22–749–
01–11, or at https://www.iso.org.
1. ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E), Conformity
assessments—General requirements for
accreditation bodies accrediting
conformity assessment bodies (First
edition), September 1, 2004. This
standard specifies general requirements
for accreditation bodies assessing and
accrediting conformity assessment
bodies. For the purposes of this
standard, conformity assessment bodies
are organizations providing the
following conformity assessment
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
services: Testing, inspection,
management system certification,
personnel certification, product
certification and, in the context of this
standard, calibration.
2. ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E), General
criteria for the operation of various
types of bodies performing inspections
(Second Edition) March 1, 2012. This
standard covers the activities of
inspection bodies whose work can
include the examination of materials,
products, installations, plants,
processes, work procedures or services,
and the determination of their
conformity with requirements and the
subsequent reporting of results of these
activities.
3. ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), General
requirements for the competence of
testing and calibration laboratories
(Second Edition), May 15, 2005. This
standard specifies the general
requirements for the competence to
carry out tests or calibrations, including
sampling. It covers testing and
calibration performed using standard
methods, non-standard methods, and
laboratory-developed methods.
4. ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E), Conformity
assessment—Requirements for bodies
certifying products, processes and
services (First Edition), September 15,
2012. This standard specifies
requirements that are intended to ensure
that certification bodies operate
certification schemes in a competent,
consistent and impartial manner. This
standard can be used as a criteria
document for accreditation or peer
assessment or designation by
governmental authorities, scheme
owners and others.
(f) Copies of JIS A 1460:2001 Building
boards-Determination of formaldehyde
emission-Desiccator method, English
Version, may be obtained from Japanese
Industrial Standards, 1–24, Akasaka 4,
Minatoku, Tokyo 107–8440, Japan, or by
calling +81–3–3583–8000, or at https://
www.jsa.or.jp/. This method describes a
method for testing formaldehyde
emissions from construction boards by
measuring the concentration of
formaldehyde absorbed in distilled or
deionized water from samples of a
specified surface area placed in a glass
desiccator for 24 hours.
(g) NIST material. Copies of these
materials may be obtained from the
National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) by calling (800) 553–
6847 or from the U.S. Government
Printing Office (GPO). To purchase a
NIST publication you must have the
order number. Order numbers may be
obtained from the Public Inquiries Unit
at (301) 975–NIST. Mailing address:
Public Inquiries Unit, NIST, 100 Bureau
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89713
Dr., Stop 1070, Gaithersburg, MD
20899–1070. If you have a GPO stock
number, you can purchase printed
copies of NIST publications from GPO.
GPO orders may be mailed to: U.S.
Government Printing Office, P.O. Box
979050, St. Louis, MO 63197–9000,
placed by telephone at (866) 512–1800
(DC Area only: (202) 512–1800), or
faxed to (202) 512–2104. Additional
information is available online at:
https://www.nist.gov.
1. Voluntary Product Standard PS 1–
07 (2007), Structural Plywood. This
standard describes the principal types
and grades of structural plywood,
covering the wood species, veneer
grading, adhesive bonds, panel
construction and workmanship,
dimensions and tolerances, marking,
moisture content and packaging of
structural plywood intended for
construction and industrial uses. Test
methods to determine compliance and a
glossary of trade terms and definitions
are included, as is a quality certification
program involving inspection, sampling,
and testing of products identified as
complying with this standard by
qualified testing agencies.
2. Voluntary Product Standard PS 2–
04 (2004), Performance Standard for
Wood-Based Structural-Use Panels. This
standard covers performance
requirements, adhesive bond
performance, panel construction and
workmanship, dimensions and
tolerances, marking, and moisture
content of structural-use panels, such as
plywood, waferboard, oriented strand
board (OSB), structural particle board,
and composite panels. The standard
includes test methods, a glossary of
trade terms and definitions, and a
quality certification program involving
inspection, sampling, and testing of
products for qualification under the
standard.
V. References
The following is a listing of the
documents that are specifically
referenced in this document. The docket
includes these documents and other
information considered by EPA,
including documents that are referenced
within the documents that are included
in the docket, even if the referenced
document is not physically located in
the docket. For assistance in locating
these other documents, please consult
the technical person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
1. California Environmental Protection
Agency Air Resources Board (CARB).
Airborne Toxic Control Measure to
Reduce Formaldehyde Emissions from
Composite Wood Products. Final
Regulation Order. April 2008. https://
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89714
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/
compwood07/compwood07.htm.
2. USEPA. Policy on Evaluating Health Risks
to Children. 1995. https://www.epa.gov/
sites/production/files/2014-5/
documents/1995_childrens_health_
policy_statement.pdf.
3. USEPA, Office of Chemical Safety and
Pollution Prevention (OCSPP). Economic
Analysis of the Formaldehyde Standards
for Composite Wood Products Act Final
Rule (Economic Analysis). December
2015.
4. World Health Organization. Concise
International Chemical Assessment
Document 40: Formaldehyde. Published
under the joint sponsorship of the
United Nations Environment
Programme, the International Labour
Organization, and the World Health
Organization, and produced within the
framework of the Inter-Organization
Programme for the Sound Management
of Chemicals. Geneva. 2002.
5. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry. Toxicological Profile for
Formaldehyde and 2010 Addendum to
the Profile. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services, Public
Health Service. 1999. https://
www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/
tp111.html.
6. Krzyzanowski M, Quackenboss JJ,
Lebowitz MD. Chronic respiratory effects
of indoor formaldehyde exposure.
Environ Res 52(2):117–125. 1990.
7. Matsunaga, I, Miyake, Y, et al. Ambient
formaldehyde levels and allergic
disorders among Japanese pregnant
women: baseline data from the Osaka
maternal and child health study. Annals
of Epidemiology 18(1): 78–84. (2008).
8. Annesi-Maesano I, Huilin M, Lavaud F,
Raherison C, Kopferschmitt C, de Blay F,
Andre Charpin D, Denis C. Poor air
quality in classrooms related to asthma
and rhinitis in primary schoolchildren in
the French 6 Cities Study. Thorax
67:682–688. 2012.
9. Venn AJ, Cooper M, Antoniak M, Laughlin
C, Britton, Lewis SA. Effects of volatile
organic compounds, damp, and other
environmental exposures in the home on
wheezing illness in children. Thorax
58:955–960. 2003.
10. Dannemiller, KC; Murphy, JS; Dixon, SL;
Pennell, KG; Suuberg, EM; Jacobs, DE;
Sandel, M. Formaldehyde concentrations
in household air of asthma patients
determined using colorimetric detector
tubes. Indoor Air 23: 285–294. 2013.
11. National Toxicology Program. Report on
carcinogens. Thirteenth edition.
Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S.
Department of Health and Human
Services, Public Health Service. 2014.
https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/pubhealth/roc/
roc13/.
12. International Agency for Research on
Cancer. Formaldehyde [IARC
Monograph]. In A review of human
carcinogens: Chemical agents and related
occupations (pp. 401–435). Lyon, France.
2012. https://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/
Monographs/vol100F/index.php.
13. National Research Council (NRC). Review
of the Formaldehyde Assessment in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
National Toxicology Program 12th
Report on Carcinogens. Washington DC:
National Academies Press (US). 2014.
14. USEPA, Office of Air and Radiation.
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and
Composite Wood Products; List of
Hazardous Air Pollutants, Lesser
Quantity Designations, Source Category
List; Final Rule. Federal Register (71 FR
8341, February 16, 2006) (FRL–8028–9).
https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/plypart/
fr16fe06.pdf.
15. USEPA, Office of Research and
Development. Formaldehyde. Integrated
Risk Information System (IRIS). 1991.
https://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0419.htm.
16. USEPA, ORD. IRIS Toxicological Review
of Formaldehyde-Inhalation Assessment
(2010 External Review Draft). https://
cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris_drafts/
recordisplay.cfm?deid=223614.
17. USEPA. Approach to Assessing Noncancer Health Effects from
Formaldehyde and Benefits from
Reducing Non-cancer Health Effects as a
Result of Implementing Formaldehyde
Emission Limits for Composite Wood
Products. 2013.
18. USEPA. Formaldehyde Emissions from
Composite Wood Products; Disposition
of TSCA Section 21 Petition; Notice.
Federal Register (73 FR 36504, June 27,
2008).
19. USEPA. Formaldehyde Emissions from
Composite Wood Products; Advanced
notice of proposed rulemaking and
notice of public meetings. Federal
Register. (73 FR 73620, December 3,
2008) (FRL–8386–3).
20. Public Law 111–199, Title VI—
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite
Wood Products Act, enacted July 7,
2010. (TSCA section 601(d), 15 U.S.C.
2601 et seq.).
21. USEPA. Formaldehyde; Third-Party
Certification Framework for the
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite
Wood Products; Formaldehyde
Emissions Standards for Composite
Wood Products; Proposed Rule. Federal
Register (78 FR 34796, June 10, 2013)
(FRL–9342–4).
22. USEPA. Formaldehyde Emissions
Standards for Composite Wood Products;
Proposed Rule. Federal Register (78 FR
34820, June 10, 2013) (FRL–9342–3).
23. USEPA. Report of the Small Business
Advocacy Review Panel on EPA’s
Planned Proposed Rule Implementing
the Formaldehyde Standards for
Composite Wood Products Act (TSCA
Title VI). April 4, 2011.
24. Composite Panel Association. 2015
Surface and Panel Buyers Guide: A
Guide to Sourcing and Specifying
Composite Panels and Decorative
Surfaces. https://www.compositepanel.
org/education-resources/buyersguide.html.
25. HPVA. Comments to EPA on Laminated
Products & Formaldehyde Regulation.
May 23, 2014. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2012–
0018–0615.
26. CARB. Staff Proposal: Alternate
Regulatory Approach for Laminated
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Products Made with Wood Veneer.
March 13, 2014.
27. CARB. Staff Report: Initial Statement of
Reasons for Proposed Rulemaking.
March 9, 2007.
28. Salthammer, T., Mentese, S., Marutzky, R.
Formaldehyde in the Indoor
Environment. Chem. Rev., 110 (4), pp
2536–2572. 2010.
29. Kelly, T.I., D.L. Smith, J. Satola. Emission
Rates of Formaldehyde from Materials
and Consumer Products Found in
California Homes. Environmental
Science & Technology Vol. 33: 81–88.
1999.
30. CARB. Staff Report: Initial Statement of
Reasons for Proposed Rulemaking,
Appendix D. March 9, 2007.
31. CARB. Summary of ARB Testing of
Laminated Products. August 19, 2013.
32. Comment submitted by Jackson Morrill,
Director, and Laura Brust, Assistant
General Counsel, American Chemistry
Council Formaldehyde Panel. October 9,
2013. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2012–0018–0581.
33. Comment submitted by Bill Perdue, Vice
President, Regulatory Affairs, American
Home Furnishings Alliance. October
2013. EPA–HQ–OPPT–2012–0018–0562.
34. Remarks by Kelly Shotbolt, President,
Flakeboard. Transcript of the April 28,
2014 Public Meeting. EPA–HQ–OPPT–
2012–0018–0631, pp. 47–55.
35. Comment submitted by Gail Overgard,
Advisor to the Board, Timber Products
Company. April 2014. EPA–HQ–OPPT–
2012–0018–0601.
36. Riedlinger, D., Martin, P., and Holloway,
T. Particleboard Formaldehyde
Emissions and Decay under Elevated
Temperature and Humidity Conditions,
study conducted for Arclin. March 28,
2012.
37. Georgia Pacific. Letter to Lynn
Vendinello. August, 15, 2011.
38. Chimar-Hellas. Update on the
Formaldehyde Release from Wood-Based
Panels. Undated.
39. ASTM E1333–96 (Reapproved 2002).
Standard Test Method for Determining
Formaldehyde Concentrations in Air and
Emission Rates from Wood Products
Using a Large Chamber.
40. CARB. Staff Report: Initial Statement of
Reasons for Proposed Rulemaking,
Appendix H. March 9, 2007.
41. Comment submitted by Winslow
Sargeant, Ph.D., Chief Counsel for
Advocacy and David Rostker, Assistant
Chief Counsel Office of Advocacy, U. S.
Small Business Administration’s Office
of Advocacy. May 20, 2014. EPA–HQ–
OPPT–2012–0018–0529.
42. Comment submitted by the Federal Wood
Industries Coalition. May 8, 2014. EPA–
HQ–OPPT–2012–0018–0623
43. ASTM International. ASTM E–1333–10,
Standard Test Method for Determining
Formaldehyde Concentrations in Air and
Emission Rates from Wood Products
Using a Large Chamber.
44. ASTM International. ASTM D–6007–02
(2008), Standard Test Method for
Determining Formaldehyde
Concentrations in Air from Wood
Products Using a Small Scale Chamber.
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
45. USEPA, Science Policy Council. A
Summary of General Assessment Factors
for Evaluating the Quality of Scientific
and Technical Information. June 2003.
EPA 100/B–03/001. https://www.epa.gov/
risk/summary-general-assessmentfactors-evaluating-quality-scientific-andtechnical-information.
46. American National Standards Institute
(ANSI)/Hardwood Plywood and Veneer
Association (HPVA). American National
Standard for Hardwood and Decorative
Plywood, ANSI/HPVA HP–1–2009.
47. ANSI. American National Standard for
Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF) for
Interior Applications, ANSI A208.2
2009.
48. ANSI. American National Standard, Basic
Hardboard, ANSI A135.4 2004.
49. ANSI. American National Standard,
Prefinished Hardboard Paneling, ANSI
A135.5 2004.
50. ANSI. American National Standard,
Hardboard Siding, ANSI A135.6 2006.
51. CARB. Workshop Discussion Draft,
Amended Regulation Order. March 18,
2014. https://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/
compwood/amended0318.pdf.
52. ANSI. American National Standard,
Engineered Wood Siding, ANSI A135.6–
2012.
53. ANSI. American National Standard,
Engineered Wood Trim. ANSI A135.7–
2012.
54. Comments from the Federal Wood
Industries Coalition (‘‘FWIC’’) on the
March 18, 2014 Preliminary Draft
Amendments to the Air Toxic Control
Measure to Reduce Formaldehyde
Emissions from Composite Wood
Products. April 22, 2014.
55. ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E), Conformity
assessments—General requirements for
accreditation bodies accrediting
conformity assessments bodies (First
Edition). 2004.
56. ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E), Conformity
assessment—Requirements for the
operation of various bodies performing
inspection (Second Edition). 2012.
57. ISO/IEC Guide 65:1996(E), General
requirements for bodies operating
product certification systems (First
Edition). 1996.
58. ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E), Conformity
assessment—Requirements for bodies
certifying products, processes and
services (First Edition). 2012.
59. ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E), General criteria
for the operation of various types of
bodies performing inspections (First
Edition). 1998.
60. ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), General
requirements for the competence of
testing and calibration laboratories
(Second Edition). May 15, 2005.
61. USEPA. Central Data Exchange. https://
cdx.epa.gov/.
62. USEPA. Cross-Media Electronic
Reporting Regulation (CROMERR) (40
CFR part 3), Federal Register. October
13, 2005 (70 FR 59848) (FRL–7977–1).
63. USEPA. Central Data Exchange (CDX).
Registration User Guide. https://
cdx.epa.gov/Content/Documents/CDX_
Quick_User_Guide.pdf.
64. ASTM D6007–02 (Reapproved 2008),
October 1, 2008. Standard Test Method
for Determining Formaldehyde
Concentrations in Air from Wood
Products Using a Small-Scale Chamber.
65. ASTM D5582–00 (Reapproved 2006).
Standard Test Method for Determining
Formaldehyde Levels from Wood
Products Using a Desiccator.
66. EN 717–2:1995, Wood-based panels.
Determination of formaldehyde release—
Formaldehyde release by the gas analysis
method.
67. Georgia Pacific. DMC (Dynamic Micro
Chamber) Manual, 2012 Edition.
68. Georgia Pacific. DMC (Dynamic Micro
Chamber) Manual, 2007 Edition.
69. EN 120:1992, Wood based panels.
Determination of formaldehyde contentExtraction method called the perforator
method, English Version.
70. JIS A 1460:2001 Building boards
Determination of formaldehyde
emission—Desiccator method, English
Version.
71. Comments from Ashland Water
Technologies, September 9, 2013. EPA–
HQ–OPPT–0018–0521.
72. ANSI A208.1–2009, American National
Standard, Particleboard.
73. NRC. Review of the Environmental
Protection Agency’s Draft IRIS
Assessment of Formaldehyde: National
Academies Press (US). 2011.
74. USEPA. Information Collection Request
(ICR) for the Formaldehyde Emission
Standards for Composite Wood Products
Act Final Regulations. EPA ICR No.
2446.02 and OMB No. 2070–0185.
75. USEPA. Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis for Formaldehyde Emission
89715
Standards for Composite Wood Products.
December 2015.
76. USEPA. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Statement. Formaldehyde Emission
Standards for Composite Wood Products;
Final. December 2015.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive Orders can be
found at https://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is an economically
significant regulatory action that was
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and Executive Order
13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
Any changes made in response to OMB
recommendations have been
documented in the docket. EPA
prepared an analysis of the potential
costs and benefits associated with this
action. This analysis, ‘‘Economic
Analysis of the Formaldehyde
Standards for Composite Wood Products
Act Final Rule’’ (Economic Analysis,
Ref. 3) is available in the docket and is
summarized here.
1. Entities subject to the rule. EPA
analyzed the effect of this rule on
accreditation bodies, TPCs, panel
producers, fabricators, wholesalers (i.e.,
distributors and importers), and
retailers. Due to the similarities between
this rule and the CARB ATCM, the
incremental costs and benefits of this
rule are determined in part by the
degree to which firms are already
complying with the ATCM. Table 3
summarizes the estimated number of
entities subject to the TSCA Title VI rule
and their baseline compliance with the
CARB ATCM.
TABLE 3—NUMBER OF ENTITIES IN THE UNITED STATES SUBJECT TO THE RULE
TSCA universe
Baseline condition
(CARB ATCM universe)
Accreditation bodies ........................
4 firms ............................................
Third-party certifiers ........................
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Type
11 firms ..........................................
Stock panel producers (i.e., manufacturers).
90 mills operated by 54 firms ........
Laminated product producers (i.e.,
laminators).
Fabricators ......................................
7,000 to 14,000 firms ....................
All 4 ABs currently accredit TPCs participating in the CARB ATCM
program.
All 11 TPCs currently certify stock panels mills under the CARB
ATCM.
79 mills have been certified by CARB for at least one product, but 16
mills make at least one product that is not CARB certified. Depending on the product type, 98% to 100% of U.S. production volume is
CARB certified.
Laminators are considered fabricators under the CARB ATCM. Nationally, 32,000 of the combined group are subject to CARB ATCM
requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
66,000 to 73,000 firms ..................
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
89716
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 3—NUMBER OF ENTITIES IN THE UNITED STATES SUBJECT TO THE RULE—Continued
Type
TSCA universe
Baseline condition
(CARB ATCM universe)
Wholesalers (i.e., distributors) ........
Retailers ..........................................
86,000 firms, of which 24,000 are
importers.
759,000 firms .................................
32,000 are subject to CARB ATCM requirements, of which 9,000 are
importers.
195,000 are subject to CARB ATCM requirements.
Total .........................................
925,000 firms .................................
2. Options evaluated. Congress
directed EPA to consider a number of
elements for inclusion in the
implementing regulations, and EPA
considered various options for
addressing these elements. For many of
the provisions, such as the product-
inventory sell-through provision and the
stockpiling prohibition, EPA did not
have the data needed to make
quantitative estimates of the effects of
different options. EPA did have
sufficient information to analyze
options for how the definition of
hardwood plywood addresses laminated
products, the recordkeeping required by
the rule, and the frequency of quality
control testing for small production
volumes of hardwood plywood. The
options EPA analyzed are displayed in
Table 4.
TABLE 4—OPTIONS ANALYZED IN THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Option
Description
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Option 1: Laminates included in hardwood ply- Laminated products made with resins formulated with no-added formaldehyde as part of the
wood (HWPW) definition with NAF exemption.
resin cross-linking structure are exempt from the definition of hardwood plywood. Otherwise,
laminated product producers must be certified by a TPC, and have products tested to demonstrate that they meet a 0.05 ppm emission standard beginning 1 year after promulgation
of the final rule. This option is equivalent to EPA’s proposed rule from June 2013. Reduced
recordkeeping for wholesalers and retailers that do not import. Reduced quality control (QC)
testing for small hardwood plywood production.
Option 2 (Final Rule): Laminates included in Laminated products made with phenol-formaldehyde (PF) resins or resins formulated with noHWPW definition with NAF and PF exemption.
added formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-linking structure are exempt from the definition of hardwood plywood. Otherwise, laminated product producers have 7 years after promulgation of the rule to be certified by a TPC, and have products tested to demonstrate that
they meet a 0.05 ppm emission standard. Construction firms are not considered fabricators
or retailers. Reduced recordkeeping for fabricators, wholesalers and retailers that do not import. Reduced QC testing for small hardwood plywood production.
Option 3: Platform-specific emissions limits for Laminated products made with phenol-formaldehyde resins or resins formulated with no-added
laminates with reduced testing with NAF and
formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-linking structure are exempt from the definition of
PF exemption.
hardwood plywood. Otherwise, laminated products must have an annual small chamber test
demonstrating that they meet the emission standards of the platform used (0.05, 0.09, 0.11,
or 0.13 ppm) beginning 2 years after promulgation, but certification is not required. Reduced
recordkeeping for wholesalers and retailers that do not import. Reduced QC testing for small
hardwood plywood production.
Option 4: Laminate emissions standard con- Laminated products must meet an emissions standard of 0.13 ppm beginning 3 years after
sistent with CARB discussion draft.
promulgation, but no testing or certification is required for laminated product producers. (The
laminated product requirements are consistent with the CARB discussion proposal for laminated products from March 2014.) Reduced recordkeeping for wholesalers and retailers that
do not import. Reduced QC testing for small hardwood plywood production. Supplier notification required.
Option 5: All laminates exempt from HWPW No emission standards apply to laminated products, and there are no testing or certification redefinition.
quirements for laminated product producers. Reduced recordkeeping for wholesalers and retailers that do not import. Reduced QC testing for small hardwood plywood production. Supplier notification required.
Option 6: Fully consistent with current CARB No emissions standard and no testing or certification required for laminated products. This opATCM.
tion does not include the reductions in recordkeeping requirements or the reductions in QC
testing for small volume hardwood plywood production that are included in the other options.
Supplier notification required.
3. Benefits. Reductions in
formaldehyde emissions from composite
wood products benefits individuals who
reside, work, or otherwise spend a
substantial amount of time where new
composite wood products are
introduced to an indoor space. The
Economic Analysis (Ref. 3) estimates the
benefits of lowering formaldehyde
emissions from composite wood
products.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
Formaldehyde is classified as a
known human carcinogen by the
National Toxicology Program, based on
evidence in humans and animals (Ref.
3). EPA’s quantified benefits estimates
include the avoided cases of
nasopharyngeal cancer (representing
upper respiratory tract cancers caused
by exposure to formaldehyde). The
National Toxicology Program (NTP) has
identified formaldehyde as causing
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
myeloid leukemia, and the NRC review
of the formaldehyde assessment in
NTP’s 12th Report on Carcinogens (Ref.
13) concluded that there is a causal
association between formaldehyde
exposure and myeloid leukemia. The
International Agency for Research on
Cancer Monograph 100F concluded that
formaldehyde causes leukemia with a
majority of the Working Group viewing
the evidence as sufficient. EPA did not
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
have sufficient information to derive a
concentration-response function for
myeloid leukemia and thus could not
estimate the number of cases that would
be avoided by reducing formaldehyde
exposure.
In addition to cancer, the 2010 draft
IRIS assessment identified seven
categories of non-cancer health effects
from formaldehyde exposure (sensory
irritation, upper respiratory tract
pathology, pulmonary function effects,
asthma and allergic sensitization,
immune function effects, neurological
and behavioral toxicity, and
developmental and reproductive
toxicity) and it proposed reference
concentrations (RfCs) based on four
effects: sensory irritation, pulmonary
function effects, asthma and allergic
sensitization (atopy), and reproductive
toxicity. The NRC review of the draft
IRIS assessment was released in April
2011 (Ref. 73), and EPA is currently
revising the draft in response.
Overall, EPA concluded that, at this
time, it only has sufficient information
on the relationship between
formaldehyde exposure and sensory
irritation (i.e., irritation of the eye, nose,
and throat) to include a valuation
estimate in the overall benefits analysis.
However, the valuation studies that
were the basis of EPA’s benefits estimate
only reflected the willingness to pay to
avoid eye irritation or itching eyes.
EPA’s quantified benefits calculation
may be underestimating the benefits of
avoided exposures, because individuals
are likely to have a higher willingness
to pay to avoid the additional symptoms
of nose and throat irritation.
Formaldehyde exposure is associated
with a range of respiratory related
effects. Effects from repeated exposure
in humans include irritation of the
upper respiratory tract, decrements in
pulmonary function, and nasal
epithelial lesions such as metaplasia
and loss of cilia. Animal studies suggest
that formaldehyde may also cause
airway inflammation. The potential
effects of occupational and residential
formaldehyde exposure on asthma have
been investigated in a number of
studies. Although findings are mixed,
formaldehyde appears to trigger asthma
attacks or related respiratory symptoms
(such as wheezing or decreased
pulmonary function) in those
occupationally exposed and/or
sensitized. A number of studies have
found no association between
formaldehyde exposure and the
prevalence of asthma symptoms at low
exposure levels; other studies, however,
observed increased risks of other
allergic conditions or increased severity
of asthma symptoms among children
with wheeze in the previous year. There
are several studies that suggest that
formaldehyde may increase the risk of
asthma, particularly in the young,
including a study that provided
suggestive evidence that children are
more sensitive than adults to exposure
to formaldehyde in relation to chronic
respiratory symptoms and pulmonary
function. Formaldehyde exposure has
been associated with immune system
perturbations, suggesting that potential
89717
effects of formaldehyde exposure on the
immune system may be an important
part of biological pathways for triggering
asthmatic responses or the severity of
asthma symptoms. EPA does not feel
that it has sufficient information at this
time on the relationship between
formaldehyde exposure and respiratory
outcomes to include a valuation
estimate in the overall benefits analysis.
Epidemiologic studies suggest an
association between occupational
exposure to formaldehyde and adverse
reproductive outcomes in women,
including reduced fertility. EPA does
not feel that it has sufficient information
at this time on the relationship between
formaldehyde exposure and reduced
fertility to include a valuation estimate
in the overall benefits analysis.
EPA concluded that, at this time, it
only has sufficient information about
the relationship of formaldehyde
exposure and the number of cases of
nasopharyngeal cancer and eye
irritation to include valuation estimates
of the endpoints in the quantified
benefits analysis. Although uncertainty
remains regarding how best to quantify
formaldehyde exposure’s effect on other
health outcomes, EPA considers these
effects to be important unquantified
impacts that contribute to the overall
benefits of this rule, as indicated by the
‘‘+B’’ in the various tables summarizing
benefits.
Table 5 shows the number of cases
avoided for an average year of
regulation. The avoided cancer cases
occur over the lifetimes of the
individuals with exposure reductions.
TABLE 5—NUMBER OF CASES AVOIDED FOR AN AVERAGE YEAR OF REGULATION
Cancer
Option
Lower
estimate
Option 1: Laminates Included in HWPW Definition with NAF Exemption ......................
Option 2: Final Rule—Laminates Included in HWPW Definition after 7 Years with NAF
and PF Exemption .......................................................................................................
Option 3: Platform-Specific Emissions Limits for Laminates with Reduced Testing ......
Option 4: Laminate Emissions Standard Consistent with CARB Discussion Draft ........
Option 5: Exempt All Laminates from HWPW Definition ................................................
Option 6: Fully Consistent with Current CARB ATCM ....................................................
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Table 6 displays the benefits for the
options. The total quantified benefits of
the rule are between $64 million and
$186 million per year (in 2013 dollars)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
using a 3% discount rate for
annualization, and between $26 million
and $79 million per year using a 7%
discount rate. The majority of the
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Eye irritation
Higher
estimate
Lower
estimate
Higher
estimate
30
74
101,840
686,754
26
28
19
11
11
65
69
64
27
27
92,218
98,279
79,190
53,730
53,730
604,155
642,120
600,072
273,758
273,758
quantified benefits are attributable to
reductions in cancer risk.
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
89718
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 6—BENEFITS OF THE OPTIONS
[Millions 2013$]
3% Discount rate
Option
Lower
estimate
Option 1: Laminates included in HWPW Definition with NAF Exemption ......................
Option 2: Final Rule—Laminates included in HWPW definition after 7 Years with
NAF and PF Exemption.
Option 3: Platform-Specific Emissions Limits for Laminates with Reduced Testing .....
Option 4: Laminate Emissions Standard Consistent with CARB Discussion Draft .......
Option 5: All Laminates Exempt from HWPW Definition ...............................................
Option 6: Fully Consistent with Current CARB ATCM ...................................................
7% Discount rate
Higher
estimate
Lower
estimate
Higher
estimate
$77 + B
64 + B
$226 + B
186 + B
$34 + B
26 + B
$105 + B
79 + B
71
48
29
29
207 + B
189 + B
82 + B
82 + B
30
21
13
13
95
86
37
37
+
+
+
+
B
B
B
B
+
+
+
+
B
B
B
B
+
+
+
+
B
B
B
B
‘‘B’’ represents the unquantified health benefits
There are various reasons why the
total quantified benefits may be
underestimated. For example, there are
a number of potential health effects that
are not included in this analysis, which
are represented in the table using the
indicator ‘‘+B’’. Monetization of any
health endpoint identified requires an
estimated concentration-response
function that can be appropriately
linked for use in the economic analyses.
At this time, EPA only has sufficient
data to quantify the benefits of avoided
to the activities that firms are already
undertaking, often in response to the
CARB ATCM. The total costs by option
are displayed in Table 7. Annualized
costs of the rule are $38 million to $83
million per year using a 3% discount
rate and $43 million to $78 million per
year using a 7% discount rate.
Annualized costs for the other options
ranged from $87 million to $297 million
per year using a 3% discount rate, and
$105 million to $301 million per year
using a 7% discount rate.
cases of cancer and sensory irritation,
and the benefits estimates for these two
endpoints are incomplete. The
estimated cancer benefits do not include
avoided cases of myeloid leukemia. The
estimated benefits for sensory irritation
are only based on eye irritation, and do
not reflect the benefits of avoiding nose
and throat irritation.
4. Costs. The Economic Analysis
estimates the incremental cost to firms
located in the U.S. of complying with
the requirements of the rule compared
TABLE 7—TOTAL COSTS BY OPTION
[Millions 2013$]
Annualized
(3%)
Option
Low
Option 1: Laminates included in hardwood plywood (HWPW) definition with NAF exemption .........................................................................................................................
Option 2: Final Rule—Laminates included in HWPW definition with NAF and PF exemption .........................................................................................................................
Option 3: Platform-specific emissions limits for laminates with reduced testing ............
Option 4: Laminate emissions standard consistent with CARB discussion draft ...........
Option 5: All laminates exempt from HWPW definition ...................................................
Option 6: Fully consistent with current CARB ATCM .....................................................
Annualized
(7%)
High
Low
High
$155
$297
$167
$301
38
97
88
87
124
83
102
88
87
124
43
114
105
105
142
78
119
105
105
142
Table 8 indicates the cost of the final
rule (Option 2) by industry type.
TABLE 8—COSTS OF FINAL RULE BY INDUSTRY TYPE
[Millions 2013$]
Annualized
(3%)
Industry type
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Low
Annualized
(7%)
High
Low
High
Accreditation Bodies ........................................................................................................
Third-Party Certifiers ........................................................................................................
Stock panel producers .....................................................................................................
Laminators .......................................................................................................................
Fabricators (excluding laminators) ..................................................................................
Wholesalers .....................................................................................................................
Retailers ...........................................................................................................................
$0.01
0.01
2
26
6
1
3
$0.01
0.01
2
72
5
1
3
$0.01
0.01
2
26
9
2
5
$0.01
0.01
2
62
8
2
5
Total ..........................................................................................................................
38
83
43
78
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
The cost estimates for Options 1 and
2 may be overestimates, in that they
underestimate the savings that may
accrue to laminated product producers
that switch to phenol-formaldehyde
resins or resins formulated with noadded formaldehyde as part of the resin
cross-linking structure in order to avoid
the costs of TPC certification and
product testing. EPA’s calculations
assumed that producers switching to
qualified resins may incur capital costs
for new equipment in order to use
qualified resins, and ongoing costs (such
as decreases in productivity, or
increases in resin costs and product
rejection rates) such that the total cost
of switching resins would be equivalent
to the cost of certification and testing. In
reality, EPA believes that Option 1’s
NAF exemption and Option 2’s NAF
and PF exemption would result in
significant cost savings for some
producers. However, EPA lacked
sufficient information to estimate the
magnitude of such cost savings.
Furthermore, EPA may be
overestimating the cost for Option 2
because the analysis does not account
89719
exemption of their laminated product
from the definition of hardwood
plywood. Again, EPA was unable to
predict the cost savings that may result
from such activities.
5. Net benefits. Net benefits are the
difference between benefits and costs.
The net benefits for the options are
displayed in Table 9. The rule is
estimated to result in quantified net
benefits of ¥$19 million to $148
million per year using a 3% discount
rate, and ¥$53 million to $36 million
per year using a 7% discount rate.
Quantified net benefits for the other
options range from ¥$220 million to
$109 million per year using a 3%
discount rate and ¥$268 million to
¥$20 million per year using a 7%
discount rate. There are additional
unquantified benefits due to other
avoided health effects. EPA considers
health benefits from avoided health
effects to be potentially important nonmonetized impacts that contribute to the
overall net benefits of this rule, and has
represented their inclusion in Table 9
using the letter ‘‘B’’.
for potential long-term savings that may
accrue as a result of setting the
manufactured-by date for laminated
products 7 years from the promulgation
of the rule. EPA believes that the 7 year
period will reduce costs because
laminated product producers will be
able to more efficiently evaluate
different resin technologies and, where
they choose to switch to a phenolformaldehyde resin or a resin
formulated with no-added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure, to successfully
implement a new resin in their
production process. There may also be
technological innovation during this 7
year period that will reduce the cost or
remove some of the technical barriers to
using qualified resins in some
applications. However, EPA did not
have sufficient information to estimate
the savings to due efficiencies or
innovation. Furthermore, the industry
may be able to develop and conduct
studies that support additional
exemptions or changes to the rule
during this 7 year period, or after that
period, and apply to the Agency for an
TABLE 9—NET BENEFITS OF THE OPTIONS
[Millions 2013$]
3% Discount rate
Option
Lower
estimate
Option 1: Laminates included in HWPW Definition with NAF Exemption ......................
Option 2: Final Rule—Laminates included in HWPW definition after 7 Years with
NAF and PF Exemption.
Option 3: Platform-Specific Emissions Limits for Laminates with Reduced Testing .....
Option 4: Laminate Emissions Standard Consistent with CARB Discussion Draft .......
Option 5: All Laminates Exempt from HWPW Definition ...............................................
Option 6: Fully Consistent with Current CARB ATCM ...................................................
Higher
estimate
7% Discount rate
Lower
estimate
Higher
estimate
($220) + B
($19) + B
$71 + B
$148 + B
($268) + B
($53) + B
($62) + B
$36 + B
($31)
($40)
($58)
($95)
$109 + B
$101 + B
($6) + B
($43) + B
($88) + B
($85) + B
($92) + B
($130) + B
($20) + B
($20) + B
($67) + B
($105) + B
+
+
+
+
B
B
B
B
‘‘B’’ represents the unquantified health benefits.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
The final rule (Option 2) has higher
estimated net benefits than the other
options. The lower estimate of
quantified net benefits for the final rule
are negative, but EPA believes these
quantified estimates overstate costs and
significantly undercount the benefits.
After assessing both the costs and the
benefits of the rule, and considering the
unquantified cost savings and benefits,
EPA has made a reasoned determination
that the benefits of the rule justify its
costs.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection
requirements in this rule have been
submitted to OMB for review and
approval under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq. The Information Collection
Request (ICR) document prepared by
EPA has been assigned EPA ICR number
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
2446.02, and the OMB Control No.
2070–0185 (Ref. 74). You can find a
copy of the ICR in the docket for this
rule, and it is briefly summarized here.
The information collection requirements
are not enforceable until OMB approves
them.
The new information collection
activities contained in this rule are
designed to assist the Agency in meeting
the requirement in section 601(d) of
TSCA that EPA promulgate
implementing regulations in a manner
that ensures compliance with the TSCA
Title VI emission standards. The new
information collection requirements
affect firms that sell, supply, offer for
sale, or manufacture (including import)
hardwood plywood, particleboard,
MDF, or finished goods containing these
materials in the United States, as well
as firms that provide testing and third-
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
party certification or oversight services.
Although firms have the option of
choosing to engage in the covered
activities, once a firm chooses to do so,
the information collection activities
contained in this rule become
mandatory for that firm.
Respondents/affected entities: Panel
producers, fabricators, distributors,
retailers, TPCs, and ABs.
Respondent’s obligation to respond:
Mandatory (15 U.S.C. 2697 et seq.).
Estimated number of respondents:
990,000 firms, including 66,000 foreign
firms.
Frequency of response: On occasion.
Total estimated burden: 1.5 million
hours per year when excluding burden
for activities performed in the baseline;
1.7 million hours per year when
including burden for activities
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
89720
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
performed in the baseline. Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: $105 million per
year when excluding cost for activities
performed in the baseline; $138 million
per year when including cost for
activities performed in the baseline;
with no annualized capital or operation
& maintenance costs. 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. When OMB approves this
ICR, the Agency will announce that
approval in the Federal Register and
publish a technical amendment to 40
CFR part 9 to display the OMB control
number for the approved information
collection activities contained in this
final rule.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
Pursuant to sections 603 and 609(b) of
the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., EPA
prepared an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis (IRFA) for the proposed rule
and convened a Small Business
Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel to
obtain advice and recommendations
from small entity representatives that
potentially would be subject to the
rule’s requirements. Summaries of the
IRFA and Panel recommendations are
presented in the proposed rule at 78 FR
34820.
As required by section 604 of the
RFA, the EPA prepared a final
regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) for
this action (Ref. 75). The complete
FRFA is available in the docket and is
summarized here.
1. Need For and Objectives of the
Rule. TSCA section 601(d) directs EPA
to promulgate regulations to implement
the formaldehyde standards for
composite wood products described in
TSCA section 601(b)(2). EPA is issuing
this rule under TSCA Title VI to
implement the statutory formaldehyde
emission standards for hardwood
plywood, medium-density fiberboard,
and particleboard sold, supplied,
offered for sale, or manufactured
(including imported) in the United
States. As directed by the statute, this
rule includes provisions relating to,
among other things, laminated products,
products made with ultra-low emitting
formaldehyde or no-added
formaldehyde resins, third-party testing
and certification requirements, product
labeling, chain of custody
documentation and other recordkeeping
requirements, and product inventory
sell-through provisions, including a
product stockpiling prohibition.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
The legal basis for the rule is TSCA
section 601(d), which provides
authority for the Administrator to
‘‘promulgate regulations to implement
the standards required under subsection
(b) in a manner that ensures compliance
with the emission standards described
in subsection (b)(2).’’ Therefore, the
central objective of this rule is to ensure
compliance with the TSCA Title VI
formaldehyde emission standards.
2. Description and Number of Small
Entities to Which the Rule Will Apply.
The rule potentially affects small ABs
and TPCs, as well as manufacturers
(including importers), fabricators,
distributors, and retailers of composite
wood products. For purposes of
assessing the impacts of the 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-forprofit enterprise which is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field. EPA estimates that
the rule will affect approximately
922,000 small entities.
3. Projected Compliance
Requirements. As directed by the
statute, this rule includes provisions
relating to, among other things,
laminated products, products made
with no-added formaldehyde resins or
ultra-low emitting formaldehyde resins,
third-party testing and certification
requirements, product labeling, chain of
custody documentation and other
recordkeeping requirements, and
product inventory sell-through
provisions, including a product
stockpiling prohibition. This rule
establishes requirements for ABs, TPCs,
manufacturers (including importers),
fabricators, distributors, and retailers of
composite wood products.
The regulatory provisions in this rule
are designed to ensure compliance with
the TSCA Title VI formaldehyde
emission standards while aligning,
where practical, with the regulatory
requirements under the CARB ATCM to
reduce formaldehyde emissions from
composite wood products. By aligning
itself with the existing CARB
requirements where practical, EPA
seeks to avoid differing or duplicative
regulatory requirements that would
result in an increased burden on the
regulated community. However, EPA
deviated from the CARB ATCM where
doing so would reduce burden while
still ensuring compliance with the
TSCA Title VI emission standards. The
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
rule has annualized costs that are $41
million to $99 million per year less than
an alternative that is fully consistent
with the CARB ATCM, and benefits that
are $13 million to $104 million per year
higher.
4. Classes of Small Entities Subject to
the Compliance Requirements. Small
entities include small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions. The small businesses that
are potentially directly regulated by this
rule are ABs, TPCs, manufacturers
(including importers), fabricators,
distributors, or retailers of composite
wood products. The small organizations
that are potentially directly regulated by
the rule are small ABs and TPCs. No
small governments are expected to be
directly regulated by the rule.
5. Professional Skills Needed to
Comply. ABs must assess TPCs to
determine whether they are eligible for
accreditation. Product ABs are
responsible for ensuring that a TPC has
a process in place to verify the accuracy
of the formaldehyde quarterly and
quality control tests, and that the TPC
has a process in place to monitor panel
producer quality assurance programs,
and conduct independent inspections of
panel producers, their quality control
testing facilities and their laboratories.
Laboratory ABs are responsible for
verifying that the TPC laboratory is
experienced and capable of conducting
formaldehyde emissions tests. These
activities are the part of the basic
function of ABs, so qualified ABs
should already have the skills needed to
conduct them. ABs must also submit an
application to EPA and enter into a
recognition agreement, keep records,
and submit notifications and an annual
report, but these activities do not
require any special skills.
TPCs must conduct inspections of
composite wood products and properly
train and supervise inspectors to inspect
composite wood products, and have
demonstrated experience in performing
or verifying formaldehyde emissions
testing on composite wood products.
TPCs must also verify that each panel
producer has adequate quality assurance
and quality control procedures and
inspect each panel producer, its
products, and its records at least
quarterly. These activities are the part of
the basic function of TPCs, so qualified
TPCs should already have the skills
needed to conduct them. TPCs must
also submit an application to EPA, keep
records, and submit notifications and an
annual report, but these activities do not
require any special skills.
Each panel producer must designate a
person as quality control manager with
adequate experience and/or training to
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
be responsible for formaldehyde
emission quality control. EPA has not
incorporated minimum education,
experience, or training requirements for
this position, but experience in the
wood products industry or a degree in
chemistry or a related field might
provide the skills needed to comply
with the requirements.
A panel producer must be able to
follow sampling and handling
procedures for the material that is to be
tested. However, those procedures must
be described in the facility’s quality
control manual, and specified skills
should not be needed to follow the
written procedures.
Each panel producer must also
designate a quality control facility for
conducting quality control
formaldehyde testing, and the quality
control facility must have quality
control employees with adequate
experience and/or training to conduct
accurate chemical quantitative
analytical tests. But instead of
performing these functions themselves,
panel producers have the option of
hiring an accredited TPC or a contract
laboratory to fulfill these requirements.
To obtain product certification, a
panel producer must apply to an
accredited TPC, and must provide
information and notifications to the
TPC. Finally, manufacturers, fabricators,
distributors, or retailers of composite
wood products must maintain records.
None of these activities requires any
special skills.
6. Other Federal Rules that may
Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict with the
Rule. HUD has regulations governing
formaldehyde emission levels from
plywood and particleboard materials
installed in manufactured homes. (See
24 CFR 3280.308.) However, TSCA Title
VI establishes specific formaldehyde
emission standards for hardwood
plywood, particleboard, and mediumdensity fiberboard and does not provide
EPA with the authority to modify these
standards. Furthermore, the
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite
Wood Products Act, which includes
TSCA Title VI, directs HUD to revise
their regulations to ensure that they
reflect the emission standards in TSCA
Title VI. And the HUD regulations do
not deal with the other elements
addressed in these implementing
regulations (where EPA does have the
authority to make determinations) such
as laminated products, products made
with no-added formaldehyde resins or
ultra-low emitting formaldehyde resins,
testing requirements, chain of custody
documentation, and product inventory
sell-through provisions. Therefore, the
regulatory provisions for which EPA has
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
flexibility in implementing the statute
do not duplicate, overlap, or conflict
with any other Federal rules.
7. Potential Economic Impacts on
Small Entities. Of the approximately
922,000 small entities affected by the
rule, almost 910,000 (about 99 percent)
are expected to have costs impacts that
are less than one percent of their
revenues, nearly 7,000 entities (less than
1 percent) are expected to experience
impacts at levels between one and three
percent of their revenue, and 5,000
entities (less than 1 percent) are
expected to incur costs exceeding three
percent of their revenues.
Many of the entities with cost impacts
above 1 percent of their revenues are
fabricators, wholesalers, and retailers
with annualized costs less than $250
(i.e., they are firms with annual
revenues below $25,000). These entities
account for 98 percent of those with cost
impacts that are between 1 and 3
percent and 100 percent of those with
cost impacts that exceed 3 percent.
8. Small Business Advocacy Review
Panel. As required by section 609(b) of
the RFA, as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act (SBREFA), EPA conducted
outreach to small entities and convened
a Small Business Advocacy Review
Panel to obtain advice and
recommendations of representatives of
the small entities that potentially would
be subject to the rule’s requirements.
The Panel solicited input on all aspects
of the rule. Consistent with the RFA/
SBREFA requirements, the Panel
evaluated the assembled materials and
small-entity comments on issues related
to elements of the FRFA. It is important
to note that the Panel’s findings and
discussion were based on the
information available at the time the
final report was prepared (Ref. 23). EPA
has continued to conduct analyses
relevant to the rule. The Panel’s most
significant findings and
recommendations on the TSCA Title VI
implementing regulations are discussed
in the preamble to the proposed rule
and in the FRFA for this action.
9. Alternatives incorporated into the
rule. Over the course of this rulemaking,
EPA considered alternatives for various
provisions of the rule. EPA made a
concerted effort to keep the costs and
burdens associated with this rule as low
as possible while still ensuring
compliance with the TSCA Title VI
emission standards. In developing the
rule, EPA considered the statutory
requirements and the benefits from
protection of human health and the
environment, as well as the compliance
costs imposed by the rule, both in
general and on small entities. EPA took
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89721
a number of steps to reduce the
economic impact that might be imposed
by this rule, on both small and large
entities, where doing so was consistent
with the statutory mandate. For
example, EPA established a different
compliance schedule for laminated
product producers by setting the
manufactured-by date for laminated
products at 7 years after promulgation.
As another example, EPA has simplified
compliance requirements by allowing
laminated product producers,
wholesalers, and retailers that do not
import products to use invoices, bills of
lading, or comparable documents to
fulfil their recordkeeping and chain-ofcustody obligations. The emission
standards are performance standards
rather than design standards. And the
rule does not regulate construction firms
that are renovating, remodeling, or
selling buildings from the definitions of
fabricator and retailer. These provisions
are not limited to small entities but,
given the number of small entities in the
affected industries, they will benefit
many small entities.
EPA’s Economic Analysis analyzed
options with different provisions for the
definition of hardwood plywood; the
emission standards for laminated
products; the testing and certification
requirements for laminated products;
the implementation dates for laminated
product emissions, testing and
certification requirements; and the
chain of custody and recordkeeping
requirements. Although EPA did not
have sufficient information to analyze
and quantify the cost and burden
reductions resulting from many of the
provisions it adopted, they still reduce
the impacts of the rule. Some of the
steps that EPA took include the
following, which are described in more
detail in the FRFA for this action. These
steps include:
• Aligning with the CARB ATCM
where practical.
• Defining hardwood plywood to
exempt laminated products made with
phenol-formaldehyde resins or resins
formulated with no-added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure and compliant
platforms, and allowing laminated
products made into component parts to
take advantage of the exemption.
• Establishing the manufactured-by
date for laminated products at 7 years
after promulgation.
• Reducing recordkeeping for nonmanufacturers.
• Reducing testing for NAF and ULEF
products.
• Not requiring retailers to relabel
products that they divide or repackage.
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89722
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
• Reducing quality control testing for
small hardwood plywood production.
• Reducing quality control testing for
certain panel producers with consistent
operations.
• Allowing grouping of products and
product types for testing.
• Defining hardboard based on
industry standards.
• Extending the manufactured-by
date for the sell-through provisions.
• Allowing alternate test methods for
quality control testing.
• Not requiring recordkeeping for
most exempt products.
• Allowing TPCs approved by CARB
to certify products under TSCA Title VI
for two years after the publication of the
final rule.
• Allowing reciprocity for CARBapproved TPCs.
• Allowing representative emission
levels to be used to demonstrate test
method equivalence.
• Creating a de minimis exception.
• Not requiring retention of tested
lots while awaiting the test results.
10. Alternatives considered but not
incorporated into the rule. EPA also
considered and rejected several
alternatives for the regulation of
laminated products, which could have
reduced the economic impacts of the
rule on small entities. For the reasons
described below, these alternatives are
not consistent with the statutory
objectives and thus are not incorporated
in the final rule. Additional information
on the alternatives that EPA considered
is presented elsewhere in this notice.
a. Complete exemption of laminated
products from the definition of
hardwood plywood. This alternative is
consistent with the current CARB
ATCM. However, the rulemaking record
contains ample evidence that some
laminated products can have high
formaldehyde emissions. CARB
provided data on laminated product
testing conducted in cooperation with
the American Home Furnishings
Alliance (AHFA). CARB tested 16
different sets of samples, each
consisting of the same type of MDF or
particleboard panel in three different
states: Raw; with a veneer attached with
a urea-formaldehyde resin; and with a
stain or finish applied to the veneer. In
most cases, the laminated products
emitted more formaldehyde than was
emitted by the platforms, likely due to
the resin used to affix the veneer. In
several cases, the formaldehyde
emissions from the laminated product
were considerably higher than the
emissions from the platform.
Considering the laminated products
in the CARB/AHFA data set without
stain or finish (which is how the TSCA
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
Title VI emission standards are applied),
only one of the 16 samples had
emissions below 0.05 ppm, the standard
for hardwood plywood. For 13 of 16
samples, the emissions from the
veneered product were higher than from
the corresponding raw platform, with
increases ranging from 0.04 ppm to 1.17
ppm. Laminated product often had
emissions that were an order of
magnitude higher than the particleboard
or MDF platforms that they were made
from. Eleven of the 16 samples had
emissions above the standard for their
platform type. Five of the eight samples
made with MDF exceeded the 0.11 ppm
Phase II standard for MDF, with
emissions ranging from 0.17 ppm to
1.35 ppm. Six of the eight samples made
with particleboard exceeded the 0.09
ppm Phase II standard for particleboard,
with emissions ranging from 0.13 to
1.29 ppm.
EPA reads TSCA Title VI to include
laminated products as hardwood
plywood unless EPA can make the case,
based on available and relevant
information, that they should be
excluded. EPA finds that the CARB/
AHFA data set provides ample evidence
that the process of lamination with ureaformaldehyde resins generally increases
formaldehyde emissions from composite
wood products. Therefore, completely
exempting laminated products from the
definition of hardwood plywood would
not be consistent with the statutory
objectives.
b. Emission standard of 0.13 ppm for
laminated products with no testing or
certification. This alternative is
consistent with CARB’s March 2014
discussion draft. The record, especially
the CARB/AHFA data set, demonstrates
that some laminated products have high
formaldehyde emissions, so a
requirement that the platform be
compliant does not ensure that a
laminated product made with ureaformaldehyde resin will also be
compliant with a 0.13 ppm standard.
While thirteen of the raw platforms in
the CARB/AHFA data set complied with
the relevant Phase II emissions
standard, only 5 of the 16 veneered
samples without stain or finish met the
0.13 ppm level. Nine of the 16 samples
had emissions ranging from 0.17 to 1.35
ppm. For 13 of 16 samples, the
emissions from the veneered product
were higher than from the raw platform.
These increases ranged from 0.04 ppm
to 1.17 ppm, and represented an
increase of 57 percent to 2,533 percent
compared to the platform emissions.
Given the CARB/AHFA data set, with
formaldehyde emissions from most
veneered samples exceeding 0.13 ppm,
EPA is unable to find that this approach
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
is consistent with the statutory
objectives. To the contrary, this data set
provides evidence that without some
sort of active effort to control
formaldehyde emissions, whether
through the use of phenol-formaldehyde
resins or resins formulated with noadded formaldehyde as part of the resin
cross-linking structure or some
emissions testing, it is likely that many
laminated products will exceed a 0.13
ppm emission standard. Therefore, a
0.13 ppm emission standard for
laminated products with no testing or
certification would not be consistent
with the statutory objectives.
c. Platform-specific emission
standards, annual testing, no
certification. Under this alternative,
unfinished laminated products would
have to meet the emissions limit for the
type of platform they are made with
(0.05 ppm for veneer core, 0.09 ppm for
particleboard, 0.11 ppm for MDF, and
0.13 ppm for thin MDF). An annual
emissions test would be required, but
TPC certification would not be required.
The record, especially the CARB/
AHFA data set, demonstrates that some
laminated products have high
formaldehyde emissions, so a
requirement that the platform be
compliant does not, by itself, ensure
that a laminated product made with
urea-formaldehyde resin will also be
compliant with the platform emission
standard. While 13 of the 16 platforms
met the Phase II emission standards,
only 5 of 16 of the veneered products
without stain or finish met the emission
standard for their platform.
Furthermore, an annual emission test
may not be sufficient to ensure
compliance for products, particularly
those made with urea-formaldehyde
resin. Several public commenters were
concerned about the effect of reduced
testing requirements for laminated
products. One questioned whether an
annual test could account for variation
in production processes and seasonal
variations. Another claimed that it is
inconceivable that an effective and
reliable enforcement scheme could be
developed that hinged on a single yearly
test. Yet another stated that annual
testing could be misleading, because the
testing may not be accurate or
representative of average emissions.
EPA agrees that more than one test per
year is important to ensure that
laminated products that are not made
with phenol-formaldehyde resins or
resins formulated with no-added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure comply with the
emission standard.
EPA also believes that TPCs have an
important role to play in ensuring
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
compliance. Various factors (such as
resin system, core type, core resin type,
veneer type, and number of plies) could
influence formaldehyde emissions from
hardwood plywood, including
laminated products. EPA is allowing
TPCs to approve the grouping of
products with similar formaldehyde
emission characteristics for quarterly
and quality control testing. EPA believes
that the TPC, working in conjunction
with the platform producer, is in the
best position to select the product(s) to
be tested in order to determine whether
production at the facility is in
compliance with the emission
standards.
Therefore, a platform-specific
emission standard for laminated
products with annual testing but no
certification would not be consistent
with the statutory objectives.
d. Conclusion. On the basis of
information currently available to the
Agency, EPA has concluded that these
alternative options are not consistent
with TSCA Title VI’s statutory objective
to reduce formaldehyde emissions from
composite wood products.
In addition, EPA is preparing a Small
Entity Compliance Guide to help small
entities comply with this rule. The
guide or guides will have information to
assist small TPCs, ABs, fabricators,
panel producers, importers, distributors,
and retailers. After the date that this
rule’s requirements take effect the guide
or guides will be available on EPA’s
Web site https://www.epa.gov/
formaldehyde.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action contains a Federal
mandate under UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–
1538, that may result in expenditures of
$100 million or more for State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or the private sector in any one year.
Accordingly, EPA has prepared a
written statement required under
section 202 of UMRA (Ref. 76). The
statement is included in the docket for
this action and briefly summarized here.
1. Authorizing legislation. This rule is
issued under the authority of section
601 of TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2697.
2. Cost-benefit analysis. The
Economic Analysis (Ref. 3) presents the
costs of the rule as well as various
regulatory options and is summarized in
Unit VI.A. The rule is calculated to
result in a total cost of $253 million to
$359 million in the first year, although
this is likely an overestimate. (The rule
allows laminators 7 years before they
must begin using NAF or PF resins and
compliant platforms, or have their
products tested and certified. EPA’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
analysis assumes that laminated product
producers that decide to switch to
qualified resins would incur all the
transition costs in the first year, while
in reality those costs are likely to be
spread over the 6 year period.) The
subsequent year costs are lower, so that
the total annualized cost of this rule is
$38 million to $83 million per year
when using a 3 percent discount rate
and $43 million to $78 million per year
using a 7 percent discount rate. When
adjusted for inflation, the $100 million
UMRA threshold is equivalent to
approximately $153 million in 2013
dollars. Thus, the first cost of the rule
to the private sector and State, local,
and Tribal governments in the aggregate
may exceed the inflation-adjusted
UMRA threshold.
This rule will reduce exposures to
formaldehyde, resulting in benefits from
avoided adverse health effects. For the
subset of health effects where the results
were quantified, the estimated
annualized benefits (due to avoided
incidence of nasopharyngeal cancer and
eye irritation) are $64 million to $186
million per year using a 3% discount
rate, and $26 million to $79 million per
year using a 7% discount rate. There are
additional unquantified benefits due to
other avoided health effects.
Net benefits are the difference
between benefits and costs. The rule is
estimated to result in quantified net
benefits of ¥$19 million to $148
million per year using a 3% discount
rate, and ¥$53 million to $36 million
per year using a 7% discount rate. EPA
considers unquantified cost savings for
laminated product producers (from the
NAF and PF exemption and the 7 year
period to meet the emission standards)
as well as the additional unquantified
health benefits to be potentially
important non-monetized impacts that
contribute to the overall net benefits of
this rule.
3. State, local, and Tribal government
input. Consistent with the
intergovernmental consultation
provisions of section 204 of the UMRA
EPA has consulted with governmental
entities affected by this rule. With the
assistance of the National Conference of
State Legislatures, EPA consulted with
state environmental health directors,
who were generally supportive of EPA’s
efforts. And EPA has met with officials
from the state of California on numerous
occasions to discuss aspects of the
CARB ATCM and its implementation.
California is very supportive of EPA’s
efforts to promulgate regulations to
implement national composite wood
product formaldehyde emission
standards that are modeled on the CARB
ATCM.
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89723
4. Least burdensome option.
Consistent with section 205, EPA has
identified and considered a reasonable
number of regulatory alternatives. TSCA
Title VI establishes specific
formaldehyde emission standards for
hardwood plywood, particleboard, and
medium-density fiberboard and does
not provide EPA with the authority to
modify these standards. The statute
further directs EPA to promulgate
implementing regulations that address
elements such as laminated products,
products made with ultra low-emitting
formaldehyde resins, products made
with no-added formaldehyde resins,
testing requirements, product labeling,
chain of custody documentation and
other recordkeeping requirements, and
product inventory sell-through
provisions. EPA has considered a
number of regulatory alternatives for
regulating laminated products, as
described in Unit III and elsewhere in
this Unit, as well as in the Economic
Analysis (Ref. 3). The final rule has the
lowest cost of the alternatives that EPA
considered. Furthermore, the available
information indicates that laminated
products made with urea-formaldehyde
resins can have high formaldehyde
emissions. Therefore, on the basis of
information currently available to the
Agency, EPA has concluded that the
alternative options for laminated
products would not be consistent with
the statutory objective to reduce
formaldehyde emissions from composite
wood products. After assessing both the
costs and the benefits of the rule (both
quantified and unquantified), EPA has
determined that the rule is the least
burdensome option that is consistent
with TSCA Title VI’s objective.
This action is not subject to the
requirements of section 203 of UMRA
because it contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999). It will 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.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000). The rule would not regulate tribal
governments directly, it would regulate
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
89724
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
entities that accredit TPCs, certify panel
producers, or manufacture (including
import), fabricate, distribute, or sell
composite wood products. Governments
do not typically engage in these
activities. Tribal governments do not
typically engage in these activities.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
This action is subject to Executive
Order 13045 because it is an
economically significant regulatory
action as defined by Executive Order
12866, and the EPA believes that the
environmental health or safety risk
addressed by this action may have a
disproportionate effect on children.
Accordingly, we have evaluated the
environmental health or safety effects
on children. This action’s health and
risk assessments are described in Units
I.F. and II.A. and contained in the
economic analysis (Ref. 3). As described
therein, exposure to formaldehyde may
cause disproportionate effects on
children compared to adults both in
terms of cancer risk, and respiratory
effects. The rule itself will not have
disproportionally high and adverse
effects on children. Rather, these
standards would reduce emissions of
formaldehyde from composite wood
products for individuals of all ages that
are exposed and children may accrue
higher benefits from the exposure
reductions compared to adults.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
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 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001),
because it is not likely to have any
adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Further,
this rule is not likely to have any
adverse energy effects because it
regulates formaldehyde emissions from
composite wood products and does not
require any action related to the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This action involves technical
standards, many of which EPA is
directed to use by TSCA Title VI.
Technical standards identified in the
statute include the two quarterly test
methods, ASTM E1333–96 and ASTM
D6007–02, a quality control test method,
ASTM D5582–00, and various standards
that define specific composite wood
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
products, such as ASTM D–5456–06
(Structural Composite Lumber
Products), ASTM D–5055–05
(Prefabricated Wood I-Joists), ANSI/
AITC A190.1 (Structural Glued
Laminated Timber), ANSI/HPVA HP–1–
2009 (Hardwood and Decorative
Plywood), ANSI A208.2–2009 (Medium
Density Fiberboard), ANSI A208.1–2009
(Particleboard), PS 1–07 (Structural
Plywood), and PS 2–04 (Wood-Based
Structural-Use Panels).
In addition, EPA has identified other
voluntary consensus standards and
incorporated them into this action.
These include standards for
accreditation and certification (ISO/IEC
17011, ISO/IEC 17020, ISO/IEC 17025,
and ISO/IEC 17065), as well as the
revised quarterly test method, ASTM
E1333–10, and standards that define
hardboard, ANSI A135.4, ANSI A135.5,
ANSI A135.6, and ANSI 135.7. EPA is
allowing certain alternative quality
control test methods that are
incorporated in voluntary consensus
standards, EN 717–2 (gas analysis), EN
120 (perforator), and JIS A 1460 (24hour desiccator).
EPA is using voluntary consensus
standards issued by the International
Organization for Standardization, ASTM
International, the American National
Standards Institute, the National
Institute of Standards and Technology,
the European Committee for
Standardization, Georgia Pacific
Chemicals LLC, and the Japanese
Standards Association. Copies of the
standards referenced in the regulatory
text have been placed in the docket for
this rule. See Unit IV for information on
how to obtain copies of these standards
from other sources.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
EPA has determined that the human
health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority, low-income or indigenous
populations, as specified in Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994). The results of this evaluation are
contained in the Economic Analysis
(Ref. 3).
The Economic Analysis, described in
Unit VI.A, monetizes the benefits from
reducing the number of cases of
nasopharyngeal cancer and sensory
irritation and includes an
environmental justice analysis that
expands on the primary benefits
analysis by analyzing the monetized
impacts specifically for minority and
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
low-income populations. Results
indicate that disaggregation of total
benefits by population groups leads to
variation in the range of individual
benefits, by minority population. The
affected Non-Hispanic White population
accounts for 63% of the total affected
population, and accrues 59% of the
quantified benefits. In comparison, for
minority populations the quantified
benefits equal or exceed their share of
the total population. Minority
populations represent about 37% of the
individuals affected by the rule and are
estimated to accrue about 41% of the
rule’s quantified benefits. The affected
Non-Hispanic Black population account
for 11% of the total affected population,
accrue 12% of the quantified benefits.
The affected Hispanic population
account for 17% of the total affected
population, and accrue 19% of the
quantified benefits. The affected NonHispanic American Indian or Alaska
Native population account for 0.7% of
the total affected population, accrue
0.7% of the quantified benefits. The
affected low-income population account
for 15% of the total affected population
and accrue 18% of the quantified
benefits.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., and EPA will submit
a rule report to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. This action is a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 770
Environmental protection,
Formaldehyde, Incorporation by
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Third-party certification,
Toxic substances, Wood.
Dated: July 27, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I,
subchapter R, is amended by adding
part 770 to read as follows:
PART 770—FORMALDEHYDE
STANDARDS FOR COMPOSITE WOOD
PRODUCTS
Subpart A—General Provisions
Sec.
770.1 Scope and applicability.
770.2 Effective dates.
770.3 Definitions.
770.4 Exemption from the hardwood
plywood definition for certain laminated
products.
770.5 Prohibited acts.
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Subpart B—EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program
770.7 Third-party certification.
770.8 Applications, notifications, and
reports.
Subpart C—Composite Wood Products
770.10 Formaldehyde emission standards.
770.12 Stockpiling.
770.15 Composite wood product
certification.
770.17 No-added formaldehyde-based
resins.
770.18 Ultra low-emitting formaldehyde
resins.
770.20 Testing requirements.
770.21 Quality control manual, facilities,
and personnel.
770.22 Non-complying lots.
770.24 Samples for testing.
770.30 Importers, fabricators, distributors,
and retailers.
770.40 Reporting and recordkeeping.
770.45 Labeling.
Subpart D—Incorporation by Reference
770.99 Incorporation by reference.
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2697(d).
Subpart A—General Provisions
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
§ 770.1
Scope and applicability.
(a) This part contains formaldehyde
emission standards, testing and
certification provisions, and other
requirements for the manufacture
(including import), distribution, and
sale of composite wood products,
component parts that contain composite
wood products, and finished goods that
contain composite wood products.
(b) This part applies to:
(1) Laboratory Accreditation Bodies
(ABs) and Product ABs that are
accrediting third-party certifiers (TPCs)
for TSCA Title VI (15 U.S.C. 2697(d))
purposes and those that wish to
commence accrediting TPCs for TSCA
Title VI purposes.
(2) TPCs that are certifying composite
wood products for TSCA Title VI
compliance and those that wish to
commence certifying composite wood
products for TSCA Title VI compliance.
(3) Any composite wood products,
and component parts or finished goods
containing these materials, that are sold,
supplied, offered for sale, or
manufactured (including imported) in
the United States, including composite
wood products used or installed in
manufactured housing.
(c) Subparts B, C, and D of this part
do not apply to the following:
(1) Any finished good that has
previously been sold or supplied to an
end user, an individual or entity that
purchased or acquired the finished good
in good faith for purposes other than
resale. For example, subparts B, C, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
D of this part do not apply to antiques
or secondhand furniture.
(2) Hardboard.
(3) Structural plywood, as specified in
PS 1–07, Voluntary Product Standard—
Structural Plywood (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99).
(4) Structural panels, as specified in
PS 2–04, Voluntary Product Standard—
Performance Standard for Wood-Based
Structural-Use Panels (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99).
(5) Structural composite lumber, as
specified in ASTM D5456–06, Standard
Specification for Evaluation of
Structural Composite Lumber Products
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
(6) Oriented strand board.
(7) Glued laminated lumber, as
specified in ANSI/AITC A190.1–2002,
Structural Glued Laminated Timber
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
(8) Prefabricated wood I-joists, as
specified in ASTM D5055–05, Standard
Specification for Establishing and
Monitoring Structural Capacities of
Prefabricated Wood I-Joists
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
(9) Finger-jointed lumber.
(10) Wood packaging, including
pallets, crates, spools, and dunnage.
(11) Composite wood products used
inside the following:
(i) New vehicles (other than
recreational vehicles) that are
constructed entirely from new parts and
that have never been the subject of a
retail sale or registered with the
applicable State or other governmental
agency.
(ii) New rail cars.
(iii) New boats.
(iv) New aerospace craft.
(v) New aircraft.
(d) The emission standards in
§ 770.10 do not apply to windows that
contain composite wood products, if the
windows contain less than five percent
by volume of composite wood products,
combined, in relation to the total
volume of the finished window.
(e) The emission standards in § 770.10
do not apply to exterior doors and
garage doors that contain composite
wood products, if:
(1) The doors are made from
composite wood products manufactured
with no-added formaldehyde-based
resins or ultra low-emitting
formaldehyde resins; or
(2) The doors contain less than three
percent by volume of composite wood
products, combined, in relation to the
total volume of the finished exterior
door or garage door.
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
§ 770.2
89725
Effective dates.
(a) This rule is effective February 10,
2017.
(b) Laboratory and Product ABs that
wish to accredit TPCs for TSCA Title VI
purposes may apply to EPA beginning
February 10, 2017 to become
recognized. Laboratory and Product ABs
must be recognized by EPA before they
begin to provide and at all times while
providing TSCA Title VI accreditation
services.
(c) TPCs that are not approved by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB)
that wish to provide TSCA Title VI
certification services may apply to EPA
beginning February 10, 2017 to become
recognized. TPCs must be recognized by
EPA and comply with all of the
applicable requirements of this part
before they begin to provide and at all
times while providing TSCA Title VI
certification services.
(d) Notwithstanding any other
provision of this part, TPCs that are
approved by CARB to certify composite
wood products have until December 12,
2018 to become accredited by an EPA
TSCA Title VI AB(s) pursuant to the
requirements of this part. During this
two-year transition period, existing
CARB-approved TPCs and CARB TPCs
approved during this transition period
may carry out certification activities
under TSCA Title VI, provided that they
remain approved by CARB and comply
with all aspects of this part other than
the requirements of § 770.7(c)(1)(i) and
(ii) and (c)(2)(iii) and (iv). After the twoyear transition period, CARB-approved
TPCs may continue to certify composite
wood products under TSCA Title VI
provided the TPC maintains its CARB
approval, follows the requirements
under this part, submits to EPA
documentation from CARB supporting
their eligibility for reciprocity and has
received EPA recognition as an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC. All TPCs that are
certifying products as compliant with
TSCA Title VI, both during and after the
transition period, are subject to
enforcement actions for any violations
of TSCA Title VI or these regulations.
(e) After December 12, 2017, all
manufacturers (including importers),
fabricators, suppliers, distributors, and
retailers of composite wood products,
and component parts or finished goods
containing these materials, must comply
with this part, subject to the following:
(1) After December 12, 2017,
laminated product producers must
comply with the requirements of this
part that are applicable to fabricators.
(2) After December 12, 2023,
producers of laminated products must
comply with the requirements of this
part that are applicable to hardwood
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
89726
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
plywood panel producers (in addition to
the requirements of this part that are
applicable to fabricators) except as
provided at § 770.4.
(3) After December 12, 2023,
producers of laminated products that, as
provided at § 770.4, are exempt from the
definition of ‘‘hardwood plywood’’ must
comply with the recordkeeping
requirements in § 770.40(c) and (d) (in
addition to the requirements of this part
that are applicable to fabricators).
(4) Composite wood products
manufactured (including imported)
before December 12, 2017 may be sold,
supplied, offered for sale, or used to
fabricate component parts or finished
goods at any time.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
§ 770.3
Definitions.
For the purposes of this part, the
following definitions apply:
Accreditation Body or AB means an
organization that provides an impartial
verification of the competency of
conformity assessment bodies or TPCs.
Agent for Service means an entity
designated by a TPC or AB to receive
legal documents on their behalf.
Article means a manufactured item
which:
(1) Is formed to a specific shape or
design during manufacture;
(2) Has end use functions dependent
in whole or in part upon its shape or
design during the end use; and
(3) Has either no change of chemical
composition during its end use or only
those changes of composition which
have no commercial purpose separate
from that of the article and that may
occur as described in 19 CFR
12.120(a)(2), except that fluids and
particles are not considered articles
regardless of shape or design.
Assessment means a process to
include an on-site review undertaken by
an AB to assess the competence of all
operations of a conformity assessment
body and TPC, based on particular
standard(s) and/or other normative
documents for a defined scope of
accreditation, as defined in ISO/IEC
17011:2004(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99).
Bundle means more than one
composite wood product, component
part, or finished good fastened together
for transportation or sale.
Combination core means a platform
for making hardwood plywood or
laminated products that consists of a
combination of layers of veneer and
particleboard or medium density
fiberboard.
Component part means an object
other than a panel that contains one or
more composite wood products and is
used in the construction or assembly of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
finished goods. Component parts that
are sold directly to consumers are
considered finished goods.
Composite core means a platform for
making hardwood plywood or
laminated products that consists of
particleboard and/or medium density
fiberboard, or combination core.
Composite wood product means
hardwood plywood made with a veneer
or composite core, medium-density
fiberboard, and particleboard.
Distributor means any person or entity
to whom a composite wood product,
component part, or finished good is sold
or supplied for the purposes of resale or
distribution in commerce, except that
manufacturers and retailers are not
distributors.
Engineered veneer means a type of
veneer that is created by dyeing and
gluing together leaves of veneer in a
mold to produce a block. The block is
then sliced into leaves of veneer with a
designed appearance that is highly
repeatable.
EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory
Accreditation Body or EPA TSCA Title
VI Laboratory AB means an AB that has
a recognition agreement with EPA under
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program, accredits a TPC’s
testing laboratory or contract testing
laboratory to ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E)
(incorporated by reference, see § 770.99)
with a scope of accreditation to include
this part and the formaldehyde test
methods used to comply with this part,
and assesses the testing laboratory’s
conformance to ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E)
(incorporated by reference, see § 770.99)
in order to perform laboratory testing
services.
EPA TSCA Title VI Product
Accreditation Body or EPA TSCA Title
VI Product AB means an AB that has a
recognition agreement with EPA under
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program, accredits a TPC to
ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99) with a scope of
accreditation to include composite
wood products and this part, and
assesses the TPC’s conformance to ISO/
IEC 17020:1998(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99) in order to
perform product certification.
EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certifier or EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
means a conformity assessment body
that provides both product certification
services and laboratory testing services
(either directly or through contracted
services), is accredited by an EPA TSCA
Title VI Product AB and an EPA TSCA
Title VI Laboratory AB (unless the
laboratory testing services are
contracted to a laboratory accredited by
an EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB),
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
and is recognized by EPA pursuant to
§ 770.7(c).
Fabricator means a person or entity
who incorporates composite wood
products into component parts or into
finished goods. This includes laminated
product producers, but persons or
entities in the construction trades are
not fabricators by renovating or
remodeling buildings.
Finished good means any good or
product, other than a panel, that
contains hardwood plywood (with a
veneer or composite core),
particleboard, or medium-density
fiberboard and that is not a component
part or other part used in the assembly
of a finished good. Site-built buildings
or other site-built real property
improvements are not considered
finished goods.
Hardboard means a composite panel
composed of cellulosic fibers,
consolidated under heat and pressure in
a hot press by: A wet process; or a dry
process that uses a phenolic resin, or a
resin system in which there is no
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure; or a wet formed/dry
pressed process; and that is commonly
or commercially known, or sold, as
hardboard, including any product
conforming to one of the following
ANSI standards: Basic Hardboard (ANSI
A135.4–2012) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99), Prefinished
Hardboard Paneling (ANSI A135.5–
2012) (incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99), Engineered Wood Siding
(ANSI A135.6–2012) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99), or Engineered
Wood Trim (ANSI A135.7–2012)
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99). There is a rebuttable
presumption that products emitting
more than 0.06 ppm formaldehyde as
measured by ASTM E1333–10
(incorporated by reference, see § 770.99)
or ASTM D6007–02 (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99) are not
hardboard.
Hardwood plywood means a
hardwood or decorative panel that is
intended for interior use and composed
of (as determined under ANSI/HPVA
HP–1–2009 (incorporated by reference,
see § 770.99)) an assembly of layers or
plies of veneer, joined by an adhesive
with a lumber core, a particleboard core,
a medium-density fiberboard core, a
hardboard core, a veneer core, or any
other special core or special back
material. Hardwood plywood does not
include military-specified plywood,
curved plywood, or any plywood
specified in PS 1–07, Voluntary Product
Standard—Structural Plywood
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99), or PS 2–04, Voluntary Product
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Standard—Performance Standard for
Wood-Based Structural-Use Panels
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99). In addition, hardwood
plywood includes laminated products
except as provided at § 770.4.
Importer means any person or entity
who imports composite wood products,
component parts, or finished goods into
the customs territory of the United
States (as defined in general note 2 of
the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the
United States pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
2612(a)(1)). Importer includes:
(1) The entity primarily liable for the
payment of any duties on the products;
or
(2) An authorized agent acting on the
entity’s behalf.
Intended for interior use means
intended for use or storage inside a
building or recreational vehicle, or
constructed in such a way that it is not
suitable for long-term use in a location
exposed to the elements. Windows,
doors, and garage doors with at least one
interior-facing side are intended for
interior use.
Laboratory Accreditation Body or
Laboratory AB means an AB that
accredits conformity assessment body
testing laboratories.
Laminated product means a product
in which a wood or woody grass veneer
is affixed to a particleboard core or
platform, a medium-density fiberboard
core or platform, or a veneer core or
platform. A laminated product is a
component part used in the
construction or assembly of a finished
good. In addition, a laminated product
is produced by either the fabricator of
the finished good in which the product
is incorporated or a fabricator who uses
the laminated product in the further
construction or assembly of a
component part.
Laminated product producer means a
manufacturing plant or other facility
that manufactures (excluding facilities
that solely import products) laminated
products on the premises. Laminated
product producers are fabricators and,
after December 12, 2023, laminated
product producers are also hardwood
plywood panel producers except as
provided at § 770.4.
Lot means the panels produced from
the beginning of production of a product
type until the first quality control test;
between one quality control test and the
next; or from the last quality control test
to the end of production for a particular
product type.
Medium-density fiberboard means a
panel composed of cellulosic fibers
made by dry forming and pressing a
resinated fiber mat (as determined
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
under ANSI A208.2–2009 (incorporated
by reference, see § 770.99)).
No-added formaldehyde-based resin
means a resin formulated with no added
formaldehyde as part of the resin
crosslinking structure in a composite
wood product that meets the emission
standards in § 770.17(c).
Non-complying lot means any lot of
composite wood product represented by
a quarterly test value or quality control
test result that indicates that the lot
exceeds the applicable standard for the
particular composite wood product in
§ 770.10(b). A quality control test result
that exceeds the QCL is considered a
test result that indicates that the lot
exceeds the applicable standard. Future
production of the product type(s)
represented by a failed quarterly test are
not considered certified and must be
treated as a non-complying lot until the
product type(s) are re-qualified through
a successful quarterly test.
Panel means a thin (usually less than
two inches thick), flat, usually
rectangular piece of particleboard,
medium-density fiberboard or
hardwood plywood. Embossing or
imparting of an irregular surface on the
composite wood products by the
original panel producer during pressing
does not remove the product from this
definition. Cutting a panel into smaller
pieces, without additional fabrication,
does not make the panel into a
component part or finished good. This
does not include items made for the
purpose of research and development,
provided such items are not sold,
supplied, or offered for sale.
Panel producer means a
manufacturing plant or other facility
that manufactures (excluding facilities
that solely import products) composite
wood products on the premises.
Phenol-formaldehyde resin means a
resin that consists primarily of phenol
and formaldehyde and does not contain
urea-formaldehyde.
Particleboard means a panel
composed of cellulosic material in the
form of discrete particles (as
distinguished from fibers, flakes, or
strands) that are pressed together with
resin (as determined under ANSI
A208.1–2009 (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99)). Particleboard
does not include any product specified
in PS 2–04, Performance Standard for
Wood-Based Structural-Use Panels
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
Product Accreditation Body or
Product AB means an AB that accredits
conformity assessment bodies who
perform product certification.
Product type means a type of
composite wood product, or group of
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89727
composite wood products, made by the
same panel producer with the same
resin system that differs from another
product type based on panel
composition and formaldehyde
emission characteristics. Grouped
products must have similar
formaldehyde emission characteristics
and their emissions must fit the same
correlation curve or linear regression.
Production line means a set of
operations and physical industrial or
mechanical equipment used to produce
a composite wood product in one
facility utilizing the same or similar
equipment and quality assurance and
quality control procedures.
Purchaser means any panel producer,
importer, fabricator, distributor, or
retailer that acquires composite wood
products, component parts, or finished
goods for purposes of resale in exchange
for money or its equivalent.
Quality control limit or QCL means
the value from the quality control
method test that is the correlative
equivalent to the applicable emission
standard based on the ASTM E1333–10
method (incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
Reassessment means an assessment,
as described in sections 7.5 to 7.11 of
ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99), except that
experience gained during previous
assessments shall be taken into account.
Recreational vehicle means a vehicle
which is:
(1) Built on a single chassis;
(2) Four hundred square feet or less
when measured at the largest horizontal
projections;
(3) Self-propelled or permanently
towable by a light duty truck; and
(4) Designed primarily not for use as
a permanent dwelling but as temporary
living quarters for recreational,
camping, travel, or seasonal use.
Retailer means any person or entity
that sells, offers for sale, or supplies
directly to consumers composite wood
products, component parts or finished
goods that contain composite wood
products, except that persons or entities
in the construction trades are not
considered retailers by selling,
renovating, or remodeling buildings.
Resin system means type of resin
used, including but not limited to ureaformaldehyde, soy, phenolformaldehyde, or melamine-ureaformaldehyde.
Scavenger means a chemical or
chemicals that can be applied to resins
or composite wood products either
during or after manufacture and that
react with residual or excess
formaldehyde to reduce the amount of
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89728
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
formaldehyde that can be emitted from
composite wood products.
Shipping quality control limit means
a quality control limit that is developed
in conjunction with an EPA TSCA Title
VI TPC that is based on panels prior to
shipment rather than immediately after
manufacturing.
Stockpiling means manufacturing or
purchasing composite wood products,
whether in the form of panels or
incorporated into component parts or
finished goods, between July 7, 2010
and June 12, 2017 at an average rate at
least 20% greater than the average rate
of manufacture or purchase during the
2009 calendar year for the purpose of
circumventing the emission standards
and other requirements of this subpart.
Thin medium-density fiberboard
means medium-density fiberboard that
has a thickness less than or equal to 8
millimeters or 0.315 inches.
Third-party certifier or TPC means a
conformity assessment body that
provides both product certification
services and laboratory testing services
(either directly or through contracted
services).
TPC laboratory means a laboratory or
contract laboratory of an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC that is accredited by an
EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB to
ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99), and whose
inspection activities are in conformance
with ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E)
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
Surveillance On-Site Assessment
means a set of on-site activities that are
less comprehensive than reassessment,
to monitor the continued fulfilment by
accredited conformance assessment
bodies of requirements for accreditation,
as described in sections 7.5 to 7.11 of
ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99).
Ultra low-emitting formaldehyde resin
means a resin in a composite wood
product that meets the emission
standards in § 770.18(c).
Veneer means a sheet of wood or
woody grass with a maximum thickness
of 6.4 millimeters (1⁄4 inch) that is rotary
cut, sliced, or sawed from a log, bolt,
flitch, block, or culm; including
engineered veneer.
Veneer core means a platform for
making hardwood plywood or
laminated products that consists of
veneer.
Woody grass means a plant of the
family Poaceae (formerly Gramineae)
with hard lignified tissues or woody
parts.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
§ 770.4 Exemption from the hardwood
plywood definition for certain laminated
products.
(a) Current exemptions. The
definition of the term ‘‘hardwood
plywood’’ in § 770.3 does not include:
(1) Laminated products made by
attaching a wood or woody grass veneer
with a phenol-formaldehyde resin to a
platform that has been manufactured in
compliance with this part (including
either certified in accordance with
§ 770.15, manufactured with no-added
formaldehyde-based resins under
§ 770.17, or manufactured with ultra
low-emitting formaldehyde-based resins
under § 770.18).
(2) Laminated products made by
attaching a wood or woody grass veneer
with a resin formulated with no-added
formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure to a platform that has
been manufactured in compliance with
this part (including either certified in
accordance with § 770.15, manufactured
with no-added formaldehyde-based
resins under § 770.17, or manufactured
with ultra low-emitting formaldehydebased resins under § 770.18).
(b) Rulemaking petitions for
exemption. (1) Any person may petition
the Agency to initiate a rulemaking for
additional exemptions for laminated
products from the definition of the term
‘‘hardwood plywood,’’ pursuant to 15
U.S.C. 2697(a)(3)(C)(i)(I).
(2) Each petition should provide all
available and relevant information,
including studies conducted and
formaldehyde emissions data, and
should be submitted to: Director,
National Program Chemicals Division,
Office of Pollution Prevention and
Toxics (MC 7404T), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave NW., Washington, DC 20460–001.
(3) EPA will promptly review each
submitted petition and, where
appropriate, publish a proposed rule in
the Federal Register based on the
petition and provide a public comment
period of generally 30 days before taking
a final action.
§ 770.5
Prohibited acts.
(a) Failure or refusal to comply with
any requirement of TSCA section 601
(15 U.S.C. 2697) or this part is a
violation of TSCA section 15 (15 U.S.C.
2614).
(b) Failure or refusal to establish and
maintain records or to make available or
permit access to or copying of records,
as required by this part, is a violation of
TSCA section 15 (15 U.S.C. 2614).
(c) Making false or misleading
statements in any statement,
certification, or record required by this
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
part is a violation of TSCA section 15
(15 U.S.C. 2614).
(d) Violators may be subject to civil
and criminal sanctions pursuant to
TSCA section 16 (15 U.S.C. 2615) for
each violation.
Subpart B—EPA TSCA Title VI ThirdParty Certification Program
§ 770.7
Third-party certification.
(a) EPA TSCA Title VI Product ABs.
To participate in the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program as an
EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB, a
Product AB must have the qualifications
described in this section, submit an
application and enter into a recognition
agreement with EPA as described in this
section, and, upon recognition from
EPA, impartially perform the
responsibilities described in this
section.
(1) Qualifications. To qualify for
recognition by EPA in the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program as an EPA TSCA Title VI
Product AB, an applicant Product AB
must:
(i) Be a signatory to the International
Accreditation Forum, Inc.’s (IAF)
Multilateral Recognition Arrangement
(MLA) through level three, or have
membership in one of the IAF
recognized regional accreditation
cooperations, or an equivalent
organization as determined by EPA;
(ii) Be in conformance with ISO/IEC
17011:2004(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99); and
(iii) Be competent to perform
accreditation activities for product
certification according to ISO/IEC
17065:2012(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99).
(2) Application. To be recognized by
EPA under the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program, a
Product AB must submit an application
to EPA in accordance with § 770.8 that
contains the following:
(i) Name, address, telephone number,
and email address of the organization or
primary contact;
(ii) Documentation of IAF MLA
signatory status, membership in one of
the IAF recognized regional
accreditation cooperations, or an
equivalent organization as determined
by EPA;
(iii) Description of any other
qualifications related to the Product
AB’s experience in performing product
accreditation of TPCs for manufactured
products including an affirmation that
assessors will be technically competent
to assess a TPC’s ability to perform their
activities under paragraph (c)(4) of this
section; and
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(iv) If not a domestic entity, name and
address of an agent for service located
in the United States. Service on this
agent constitutes service on the AB or
any of its officers or employees for any
action by EPA or otherwise by the
United States related to the
requirements of this part. ABs may
share an agent for service.
(3) Recognition agreement. To be
recognized by EPA under the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program, a Product AB must enter into
a recognition agreement with EPA that
describes the EPA TSCA Title VI
Product AB’s responsibilities under this
subpart.
(i) Each recognition agreement will be
valid for three years.
(ii) Each recognition agreement will
identify an EPA Recognition Agreement
Implementation Officer and an EPA
TSCA Title VI Product AB
Implementation Officer that will serve
as the point of contact for the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program.
(iii) To renew a recognition agreement
for an additional three-year period, the
EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB must
submit an application for renewal in
accordance with § 770.8 before the
three-year period of the recognition
agreement lapses. The application must
indicate any changes from the EPA
TSCA Title VI Product AB’s initial
application or most recent renewal
application.
(iv) If an EPA TSCA Title VI Product
AB fails to submit an application for
renewal prior to the expiration of the
previous recognition agreement, its
recognition will lapse and the EPA
TSCA Title VI Product AB may not
provide accreditation services under
TSCA Title VI.
(v) If an EPA TSCA Title VI Product
AB does submit an application for
renewal prior to the expiration of the
previous recognition agreement, it may
continue to provide TSCA Title VI
accreditation services under the terms of
its previous recognition agreement until
EPA has taken action on its application
for renewal of the recognition
agreement.
(4) Impartiality. EPA TSCA Title VI
Product ABs must act impartially when
performing activities under the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program. To demonstrate impartiality,
Product ABs must:
(i) Ensure that an accreditation
decision regarding a TPC is made by
persons different from those who
conducted the assessment of the TPC;
and
(ii) Ensure that the AB’s personnel
who assess TPCs or make decisions
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
regarding accreditation do not receive
financial benefit from the outcome of an
accreditation decision.
(5) Responsibilities. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI Product AB has the following
responsibilities under the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program:
(i) Accreditation. EPA TSCA Title VI
Product ABs must determine the
accreditation eligibility, and accredit if
appropriate, each TPC seeking
recognition under the EPA TSCA Title
VI Third-Party Certification Program by
performing an assessment of each TPC
as described in this section. The
assessment must include all of the
following components:
(A) An on-site assessment by the EPA
TSCA Title VI Product AB to determine
whether the TPC meets the
requirements of ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E),
is in conformance with ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E) as required under ISO/
IEC 17065:2012(E) section 6.2.1
(incorporated by reference, see § 770.99)
and the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
requirements under this part. In
performing the on-site assessment, the
EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB must:
(1) Develop a checklist of the EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC requirements under
paragraph (c)(4) of this section and the
key accreditation elements of ISO/IEC
17065:2012(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99); and
(2) Use the checklist for each on-site
assessment.
(B) A review of the approach that the
TPC will use to verify the accuracy of
the formaldehyde emissions tests
conducted by the TPC laboratory and
the formaldehyde quality control tests
conducted by or for the panel producers
producing composite wood products
that are subject to the requirements of
TSCA Title VI.
(C) A review of the approach that the
TPC will use for evaluating a panel
producer’s quality assurance and quality
control processes, the proficiency of the
panel producer’s quality assurance and
quality control personnel, the required
elements of a panel producer’s quality
assurance and quality control manual,
and sufficiency of on-site testing
facilities as applicable.
(D) A review of the approach that the
TPC laboratory will use for establishing
correlation or equivalence between
ASTM E1333–10 and ASTM D6007–02,
if used, (incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99) or allowable formaldehyde test
methods listed under § 770.20.
(E) A review of the approach that the
TPC will use for evaluating the process
for sample selection, handling, and
shipping procedures that the panel
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89729
producer will use for quality control
testing as applicable.
(F) A review of the accreditation
credentials of the TPC laboratory,
including a verification that the
laboratory has been accredited to ISO/
IEC 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99) with a scope of
accreditation to include this part—
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite
Wood Products and the formaldehyde
test methods ASTM E1333–10 and
ASTM D6007–02, if used, by an EPA
TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
(ii) Reassessment. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI Product AB must, in accordance
with ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E) section
7.11 (incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99), conduct an on-site
reassessment or surveillance on-site
assessment at least every two years of
each EPA TSCA Title VI TPC that the
AB has accredited.
(iii) Suspension, reduction,
withdrawal. Each EPA TSCA Title VI
Product AB must suspend, reduce, or
withdraw the accreditation of an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC that the AB has
accredited when circumstances warrant.
(iv) Notifications. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI Product AB must provide, in
accordance with § 770.8, the following
notifications to EPA, as applicable:
(A) Notification of the loss of its status
as a signatory to the IAF MLA, or loss
of membership in one of the IAF
recognized regional accreditation
cooperations, or an equivalent
organization as determined by EPA
must be provided within five calendar
days of the date that the body receives
notification of the loss of its signatory or
membership status.
(B) Notification that an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC has failed to comply with
any provision of this part must be
provided within 72 hours of the time
the Product AB identifies the
deficiency. The notice must include a
description of the steps taken to address
the deficiency.
(C) Notification of suspension,
reduction or withdrawal of an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC’s accreditation must
be provided within 72 hours of the time
that the suspension, reduction or
withdrawal takes effect.
(D) Notification of a change in a nondomestic Product AB’s agent for service
must be provided within five calendar
days.
(v) Records. Each EPA TSCA Title VI
Product AB must maintain, in electronic
form, the checklists and other records
documenting compliance with the
requirements for assessment,
reassessment, and surveillance on-site
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89730
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
assessments of EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs
for three years.
(vi) Annual report. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI Product AB must provide, in
accordance with § 770.8, an annual
report on or before March 1st of each
year for the AB services performed
during the previous calendar year
including the number and locations of
assessment, reassessment, and
surveillance on-site assessments
performed for each EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC.
(vii) EPA meetings. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI Product AB must meet with
EPA at least once every two years in
person, via teleconference, or through
other virtual methods to discuss the
implementation of the EPA TSCA Title
VI Third-Party Certification Program.
(viii) Inspections. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI Product AB must allow
inspections of the AB’s facilities by
EPA, at reasonable times, within
reasonable limits, and in a reasonable
manner, upon the presentation of
appropriate credentials and a written
notification to the AB.
(b) EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory
ABs. To participate in the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program as an EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB, a Laboratory AB must
have the qualifications described in this
section, submit an application and enter
into a recognition agreement with EPA
as described in this section, and, upon
recognition from EPA, impartially
perform the responsibilities described in
this section.
(1) Qualifications. To qualify for
recognition by EPA under the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program as an EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB, an applicant Laboratory
AB must:
(i) Be a signatory to the International
Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation
(ILAC) Mutual Recognition
Arrangement (MRA), or have
membership in one of the ILAC
recognized regional accreditation
cooperations, or an equivalent
organization as determined by EPA;
(ii) Be in conformance with ISO/IEC
17011:2004(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99);
(iii) Be competent to perform
accreditation activities for laboratory
accreditation according to ISO/IEC
17025:2005(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99); and
(iv) Be competent to ensure EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC inspection activities
are in conformance with ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99).
(2) Application. To be recognized by
EPA under the EPA TSCA Title VI
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
Third-Party Certification Program, a
Laboratory AB must submit an
application to EPA, which may be
submitted in conjunction with a Product
AB application. For recognition, a
Laboratory AB must submit an
application in accordance with § 770.8
that contains the following:
(i) Name, address, telephone number,
and email address of the organization or
primary contact;
(ii) Documentation of ILAC MRA
signatory status, membership in one of
the ILAC recognized regional
accreditation cooperations, or an
equivalent organization as determined
by EPA;
(iii) Description of any other
qualifications related to the Laboratory
AB’s experience in performing
laboratory accreditation and inspection
certification of TPCs including an
affirmation that assessors will be
technically competent to assess TPCs
ability to perform their activities under
paragraph (c)(4) of this section; and
(iv) If not a domestic entity, name and
address of an agent for service located
in the United States. Service on this
agent constitutes service on the AB or
any of its officers or employees for any
action by EPA or otherwise by the
United States related to the
requirements of this part. ABs may
share an agent for service.
(3) Recognition agreement. To be
recognized by EPA under the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program, a Laboratory AB must enter
into a recognition agreement with EPA
that describes the EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB’s responsibilities under
this subpart.
(i) Each recognition agreement will be
valid for three years.
(ii) Each recognition agreement will
identify an EPA Recognition Agreement
Implementation Officer and an EPA
TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB
Implementation Officer that will serve
as the point of contact for the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program.
(iii) To renew a recognition agreement
for an additional three-year period, the
EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB must
submit an application for renewal in
accordance with § 770.8 before the
three-year period of the recognition
agreement lapses. The application must
indicate any changes from the EPA
TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB’s initial
application or most recent renewal
application.
(iv) If an EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB fails to submit an
application for renewal prior to the
expiration of the previous recognition
agreement, its recognition will lapse and
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
the EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB
may not provide accreditation services
under TSCA Title VI.
(v) If an EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB does submit an
application for renewal prior to the
expiration of the previous recognition
agreement, it may continue to provide
TSCA Title VI accreditation services
under the terms of its previous
recognition agreement until EPA has
taken action on its application for
renewal of the recognition agreement.
(4) Impartiality. EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory ABs must act impartially
when performing activities under the
EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program. To demonstrate
impartiality, Laboratory ABs must:
(i) Ensure that an accreditation
decision regarding a TPC is made by
persons different from those who
conducted the assessment of the TPC;
and
(ii) Ensure that the AB’s personnel
who assess TPCs or make decisions
regarding accreditation do not receive
financial benefit from the outcome of an
accreditation decision.
(5) Responsibilities. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI Laboratory AB has the following
responsibilities under the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program:
(i) Accreditation. EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory ABs must determine the
accreditation eligibility, and accredit if
appropriate, each TPC seeking
recognition under the EPA TSCA Title
VI Third-Party Certification Program by
performing an assessment of each TPC.
The assessment must include an on-site
assessment by the EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB to determine whether the
laboratory meets the requirements of
ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99), is in
conformance with ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99) and the EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC requirements under
this part including the formaldehyde
test methods ASTM E1333–10 and
ASTM D6007–02 (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99), if used. In
performing the on-site assessment, the
EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB must:
(A) Develop a checklist of the TPC
requirements under paragraph (c)(4) of
this section and the key conformity
elements of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E)
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99); and
(B) Use the checklist for each on-site
assessment.
(ii) Reassessment. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI Laboratory AB must, in
accordance with ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E)
section 7.11 (incorporated by reference,
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
see § 770.99), conduct a follow-up
reassessment or surveillance on-site
assessment of each TPC laboratory that
the AB has accredited.
(iii) Proficiency. Each EPA TSCA Title
VI Laboratory AB must verify the
accuracy of the formaldehyde emissions
tests conducted by the TPC laboratory
by ensuring the TPC laboratory
participates in the CARB interlaboratory
comparison for formaldehyde emissions
when offered. In lieu of participation in
the CARB interlaboratory comparison
ensure that the TPC laboratory
participates in an EPA-recognized
proficiency testing program, if available.
(iv) Suspension, reduction,
withdrawal. Each EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB must suspend, reduce, or
withdraw the accreditation of a TPC
laboratory that the AB has accredited
when circumstances warrant.
(v) Notifications. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI Laboratory AB must provide, in
accordance with § 770.8, the following
notifications to EPA as applicable:
(A) Notification of the loss of its status
as a signatory to the ILAC MRA, or loss
of membership in one of the ILAC
recognized regional accreditation
cooperations, or an equivalent
organization as determined by EPA,
within five calendar days of the date
that the body receives notice of the loss
of its signatory or membership status.
(B) Notification that a TPC laboratory
has failed to comply with any provision
of this part within 72 hours of the time
the Laboratory AB identifies the
deficiency. The notice must include a
description of the steps taken to address
the deficiency.
(C) Notification of suspension,
reduction or withdrawal of a TPC
laboratory’s accreditation within 72
hours of the time that the suspension,
reduction or withdrawal takes effect.
(D) Notification of a change in a nondomestic Laboratory AB’s agent for
service within five calendar days.
(vi) Records. Each EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB must maintain, in
electronic form, the checklists and other
records documenting compliance with
the requirements for assessment,
reassessment, and surveillance on-site
assessments of TPC laboratories for
three years.
(vii) Annual report. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI Laboratory AB must provide, in
accordance with § 770.8, an annual
report to EPA on or before March 1st of
each year for AB services performed
during the previous calendar year
including the number and locations of
assessment, reassessment, and
surveillance on-site assessments
performed for each TPC laboratory.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
(viii) EPA meetings. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI Laboratory AB must meet with
EPA at least once every two years in
person, via teleconference, or through
other virtual methods to discuss the
implementation of the EPA TSCA Title
VI Third-Party Certification Program.
(ix) Inspections. Each EPA TSCA Title
VI Laboratory AB must allow
inspections of the AB’s facilities by
EPA, at reasonable times, within
reasonable limits, and in a reasonable
manner, upon the presentation of
appropriate credentials and a written
notification to the AB.
(c) EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certifiers. To participate in the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program as an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC,
a TPC must be accredited by an EPA
TSCA Title VI Product AB, use a
laboratory that is accredited by an EPA
TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB, have the
other qualifications described in this
subsection, submit an application and
be recognized by EPA, and, upon
recognition from EPA, impartially
perform the responsibilities described in
this section. Alternatively, CARBapproved TPCs must meet the criteria
for reciprocity in paragraph (d) of this
section and comply with the
requirements of this part in order to be
recognized by EPA as an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC.
(1) Qualifications. To qualify for
recognition by EPA in the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program as an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC,
an applicant TPC must:
(i) Be accredited by an EPA TSCA
Title VI Product AB to ISO/IEC
17065:2012(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99), with a scope of
accreditation that includes include
composite wood products and this
part—Formaldehyde Standards for
Composite Wood Products;
(ii) Be, or have a contract with a
laboratory that is, accredited by an EPA
TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB to ISO/IEC
17025:2005(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99) with a scope of
accreditation to include this part—
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite
Wood Products and the formaldehyde
test methods ASTM E1333–10 and
ASTM D6007–02, if used (incorporated
by reference, see § 770.99);
(iii) Have the ability to conduct
inspections of composite wood products
and properly train and supervise
inspectors to inspect composite wood
products in conformance with ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E) as required under ISO/
IEC 17065:2012(E) section 6.2.1
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99);
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89731
(iv) Have demonstrated experience in
the composite wood product industry
with at least one type of composite
wood product and indicated the specific
product(s) the applicant intends to
certify; and
(v) Have demonstrated experience in
performing or verifying formaldehyde
emissions testing on composite wood
products, including experience with test
method ASTM E1333–10 and ASTM
D6007–02, if used, (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99), and experience
evaluating correlation between test
methods. Applicant TPCs that have
demonstrated experience with test
method ASTM D6007–02 only, must be
contracting testing with a laboratory that
has a large chamber and demonstrate its
experience with ASTM E1333–10.
(2) Application. Before certifying any
products under this part, a TPC must be
recognized by EPA under the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program. To be recognized by EPA, a
TPC must submit an application in
accordance with § 770.8 and renew that
application every two years. The
application must contain the following:
(i) Email address of the organization
or primary contact, organization name,
organization telephone number, and
organization address;
(ii) Type of composite wood products
that the applicant intends to certify;
(iii) A copy of the TPC’s certificate of
accreditation from an EPA TSCA Title
VI Product AB to ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E)
(incorporated by reference, see § 770.99)
with a scope of accreditation that
includes composite wood products and
this part—Formaldehyde Standards for
Composite Wood Products;
(iv) A copy of the TPC laboratory’s
certificate of accreditation from an EPA
TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB to ISO/IEC
17025:2005(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99) with a scope of
accreditation to include this part—
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite
Wood Products and the formaldehyde
test methods ASTM E1333–10 and
ASTM D6007–02 (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99), if used;
(v) An affirmation of the TPC’s ability
to conduct inspections of composite
wood products and properly train and
supervise inspectors to inspect
composite wood products in
conformance with ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E) as required under ISO/
IEC 17065:2012(E) section 6.2.1
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99);
(vi) A description of the TPC’s
experience in the composite wood
product industry with at least one type
of composite wood product and indicate
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89732
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the specific product(s) the applicant
intends to certify;
(vii) A description of the TPC’s
experience in performing or verifying
formaldehyde emissions testing on
composite wood products;
(viii) A description of the TPC’s
experience with test method ASTM
E1333–10 and/or ASTM D6007–02, if
used, (incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99), and experience evaluating
correlation between test methods.
Applicant TPCs that have experience
with test method ASTM D6007–02 only,
must be contracting testing with a
laboratory that has a large chamber and
describe its experience with ASTM
E1333–10; and
(ix) If not a domestic entity, the name
and address of an agent for service
located in the United States. Service on
this agent constitutes service on the TPC
or any of its officers or employees for
any action by EPA or otherwise by the
United States related to the
requirements of this part. TPCs may
share an agent for service.
(3) Impartiality. EPA TSCA Title VI
TPCs must act impartially in accordance
with their accreditation when
performing activities under the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program. To demonstrate impartiality,
TPCs must:
(i) Not also be, or have a financial
interest in a panel producer, fabricator,
laminated product producer, importer,
designer, distributor or retailer of
composite wood products;
(ii) Ensure that TPC management
personnel and TPC personnel involved
in the review and certification decisionmaking process for composite wood
products are not involved in activities
within the same or separate legal entity
that may compromise the impartiality of
its certification decision-making
process, such as advocacy or consulting
activities;
(iii) Ensure that TPC management
personnel and TPC personnel of the
same or separate legal entity involved in
activities such as advocacy or
consulting are not involved in the
management of the certification body,
the review, or the certification
decisions; and
(iv) Ensure that TPC management
personnel and TPC personnel certifying
composite wood products sign a conflict
of interest statement attesting that they
will receive no financial benefit from
the outcome of certification.
(4) Responsibilities. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC has the following
responsibilities under the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
(i) Certification. EPA TSCA Title VI
TPCs certify composite wood products
that are produced in accordance with
this part and that comply with the
emission standards of TSCA Title VI
and this part, in accordance with ISO/
IEC 17065:2012(E) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99). For each panel
producer making composite wood
products certified by the TPC, the EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC must:
(A) Verify that each panel producer
has adequate quality assurance and
quality control procedures and is
complying with the applicable quality
assurance and quality control
requirements of this part;
(B) Verify each panel producer’s
quality control test results compared
with test results from ASTM E1333–10
and ASTM D6007–02, if used,
(incorporated by reference, see § 770.99)
by having the TPC laboratory conduct
quarterly tests and evaluate test method
equivalence and correlation as required
under § 770.20;
(C) In consultation with the panel
producer, establish quality control
limits (QCLs) for formaldehyde
emissions, and, if applicable, shipping
quality control limits or other
formaldehyde emission limits, for each
panel producer and product type;
(D) Establish, for each panel producer,
the process that will be used to
determine if products are exceeding the
applicable QCL;
(E) Provide its CARB or EPA TPC
number to each panel producer for
labeling and recordkeeping; and
(F) Inspect each panel producer, its
products, and its records at least
quarterly in conformance with ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E) as required under ISO/
IEC 17065:2012(E) section 6.2.1
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
(ii) Laboratories. For quarterly testing,
each EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must use
only laboratories that have been
accredited by an EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB and that either
participate in the CARB interlaboratory
comparison for formaldehyde emissions
when offered or in an EPA-recognized
proficiency or interlaboratory program,
if available.
(iii) NAF and ULEF. For panel
producers that do not receive approval
for NAF or ULEF third-party
certification exemptions or ULEF
reduced testing from CARB, EPA TSCA
Title VI TPCs must review applications
for NAF or ULEF third-party
certification exemptions or ULEF
reduced testing. Each EPA TSCA Title
VI TPC must approve these applications
within 90 calendar days of receipt if the
panel producer demonstrates that the
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
requirements for third-party
certification exemption under § 770.17
or § 770.18 or reduced testing under
§ 770.18 are met.
(iv) Reduced testing for mediumdensity fiberboard or fiberboard. EPA
TSCA Title VI TPCs must review
applications from panel producers to
reduce the number of quality control
tests for particleboard and mediumdensity fiberboard, and approve these
applications within 90 calendar days of
receipt if the panel producer
demonstrates that the requirements for
reduced testing under § 770.20(b)(2)(ii)
are met.
(v) Notifications to EPA. Each EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC must provide, in
accordance with § 770.8, the following
notifications to EPA, as applicable:
(A) Notification of an approved or
rejected application, including a
renewal application, for a NAF or ULEF
third-party certification exemption or
ULEF reduced testing within five
calendar days of the approval or
rejection with copies of all approved
applications forwarded to EPA within
30 calendar days of approval.
(B) Notification of an approved or
rejected application, including a
renewal application, for reduced testing
for medium-density fiberboard or
particleboard within five calendar days
of the approval or rejection with copies
of all approved applications forwarded
to EPA within 30 calendar days of
approval.
(C) Notification of a panel producer
exceeding its established QCL for more
than two consecutive quality control
tests within 72 hours of the time that the
TPC becomes aware of the second
exceedance. The notice must include
the product type, dates of the quality
control tests that exceeded the QCL,
quality control test results, ASTM
E1333–10 (incorporated by reference,
see § 770.99) correlative equivalent
values, the established QCL value(s) and
the quality control method used.
(D) Notification of each failed
quarterly test, that is any sample that
exceeds the applicable formaldehyde
emission standard in § 770.10, within 72
hours. Information in this notification is
not eligible for treatment as confidential
business information.
(E) Notification of a change in a nondomestic TPC’s agent for service within
five calendar days.
(F) Notification of a loss of
accreditation or notification that the
TPC has discontinued its participation
in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program must be provided
within 72 hours.
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(vi) Other notifications. Each EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC must provide the
following notifications, if applicable:
(A) Notification of each failed
quarterly test, that is any sample that
exceeds the applicable formaldehyde
emission standard in § 770.10, to the
panel producer in writing within 72
hours. Information in this notification is
not eligible for treatment as confidential
business information.
(B) Notification of a loss of
accreditation or notification that the
TPC has discontinued its participation
in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program within 72 hours to
all panel producers for which it
provides EPA TSCA Title VI
certification services.
(C) Notification of any changes in
personnel qualifications, procedures, or
laboratories used, to the TPC’s EPA
TSCA Title VI ABs within 30 calendar
days.
(vii) Records. Each EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC must maintain, in electronic form,
the following records for three years
from the date the record is created, and
provide them to EPA within 30 calendar
days of a request from EPA:
(A) A list of panel producers and their
respective products and product types,
including type of resin systems used,
that the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC has
certified;
(B) Results of inspections and
formaldehyde emissions tests conducted
for and linked to each panel producer
and product type;
(C) A list of laboratories used by the
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC, as well as all
test methods used, including test
conditions and conditioning time, and
quarterly test results;
(D) Methods and results for
establishing test method correlations
and equivalence;
(E) Documentation for NAF or ULEF
third-party certification exemptions or
ULEF reduced testing approvals,
including the name of the panel
producer, facility, products approved,
type of resin systems used and dates of
approval;
(F) Documentation of reduced testing
approval for panel producers of
medium-density fiberboard or
particleboard, including the name of the
panel producer, products approved and
dates of approval; and
(G) A copy of the most recent
assessment, reassessment, and/or
surveillance on-site assessment report
provided by its EPA TSCA Title VI ABs.
(viii) Annual report. Each EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC must provide, in
accordance with § 770.8, an annual
report on or before March 1st of each
year for the TPC services performed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
during the previous calendar year.
Quarterly test results, the test method,
date of test, and product tested
(including the product name or
description and panel producer name)
are not eligible for treatment as
confidential business information. The
report must contain all of the following
elements, as applicable:
(A) The following information for
each panel producer making composite
wood products certified by the TPC, the
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC:
(1) Composite wood products that the
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC has certified
during the previous calendar year;
(2) Types of resin systems used for the
composite wood products certified;
(3) Dates of quarterly inspections;
(4) For each quarterly test, the date,
result, test method, and whether a
contract laboratory was used;
(5) For each failed quarterly test, the
product type, the volume of product
affected, the results of recertification
testing, and a description of the final
disposition of the affected product,
including how the non-complying lot
was addressed;
(6) For each non-complying lot
resulting from a failed quality control
test, the test date, method, product type,
volume of product affected, lot
numbers, the results of retesting, and a
description of the final disposition of
the affected product, including how the
non-complying lot was addressed; and
(7) Any corrective actions that
resulted from quarterly tests and
inspections.
(B) A list of laboratories and test
methods used by the TPC, number and
volume (cubic meters) of large and small
chambers, date of equivalence
determination and equivalence data.
(C) Any non-conformities identified
by its EPA TSCA Title VI AB(s) and how
they were addressed.
(D) The results compared with the
mean of the interlaboratory comparison
for all formaldehyde emissions
interlaboratory comparison tests other
than the CARB interlaboratory
comparison or, if available, the results
of an EPA-recognized proficiency
testing program.
(ix) Assessments and inspections.
Upon request, each EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC must allow EPA representatives to:
(A) Accompany the TPC’s staff during
an assessment, reassessment or
surveillance on-site assessment of the
TPC by its AB(s); and
(B) Inspect the TPC’s facilities, at
reasonable times, within reasonable
limits, and in a reasonable manner,
upon the presentation of appropriate
credentials and a written notification to
the TPC.
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89733
(d) Reciprocity for third-party
certifiers approved by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB)—(1) During
transitional period. The transitional
period is defined as the two-year period
beginning on December 12, 2016 and
ending on December 12, 2018. TPCs
already approved by CARB and TPCs
subsequently approved by CARB during
the transition period must apply for
EPA recognition in accordance with
§ 770.8 before they can certify any
products under this part. Once
recognized by EPA, CARB-approved
TPCs become EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs
and may certify composite wood
products under TSCA Title VI until
December 12, 2018 as long as they:
(i) Remain approved by CARB; and
(ii) Comply with all aspects of this
part other than the requirements of
paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) and (c)(2)(iii)
and (iv) of this section. This includes:
(A) Provide panel producers with the
TPC number issued by CARB; and
(B) Provide the annual report required
by paragraph (c)(4)(viii) of this section
to CARB and EPA during the two-year
transitional period.
(C) Provide notifications required by
paragraph (c)(4)(v) to EPA.
(2) After transition period. (i) TPCs
approved by CARB may continue to
certify composite wood products under
TSCA Title VI after the two-year
transitional period if the TPC:
(A) Maintains its CARB approval;
(B) Complies with the requirements of
this part;
(C) Submits to EPA, in accordance
with § 770.8:
(1) Documentation from CARB that
specifies eligibility for reciprocity; and
(2) A copy of the application
submitted to CARB to be recognized as
a TPC under the CARB ATCM.
(D) Receives EPA recognition as an
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC.
(ii) EPA retains the authority to deny
recognition of CARB-approved TPCs
who seek recognition through
reciprocity in the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program if EPA
has information indicating that the TPC
is not qualified.
(e) Suspension, revocation or
modification of recognition—(1) Thirdparty certifiers. EPA may suspend,
revoke or modify the recognition of a
TPC, if the TPC:
(i) Fails to comply with any
requirement of TSCA Title VI or this
part;
(ii) Makes any false or misleading
statements on its application, records, or
reports; or
(iii) Makes substantial changes to
personnel qualifications, procedures, or
laboratories that make the TPC or TPC
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89734
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
laboratory unable to comply with any
applicable requirements of this part.
(2) ABs. EPA may suspend, revoke or
modify the recognition of an AB if the
AB:
(i) No longer maintains signatory
status to the IAF MLA or ILAC MRA,
membership in one of the IAF/ILAC
recognized regional accreditation
cooperations, or an equivalent
organization as determined by EPA;
(ii) Fails to comply with any
requirement of TSCA Title VI or this
part;
(iii) Makes any false or misleading
statements on its application, records, or
reports; or
(iv) Makes substantial changes to
personnel qualifications or procedures
that make the AB, TPC and/or TPC
laboratory unable to comply with any
applicable requirements of this part.
(3) Process for suspending, revoking
or modifying recognition. (i) Prior to
taking action to suspend, revoke or
modify recognition, EPA will notify the
participant AB or the participant TPC in
writing of the following:
(A) The legal and factual basis for the
proposed suspension, revocation or
modification;
(B) The anticipated commencement
date and duration of the suspension,
revocation or modification;
(C) Actions, if any, which the affected
AB or TPC may take to avoid
suspension, revocation or modification,
or to receive recognition in the future;
and
(D) The opportunity and method for
requesting a hearing with EPA prior to
final suspension, revocation or
modification.
(ii) If the affected AB or TPC requests
a hearing in writing to EPA within 30
calendar days of receipt of the
notification, EPA will:
(A) Provide the affected AB or TPC an
opportunity to offer written statements
in response to EPA’s assertions of the
legal and factual basis for the proposed
action; and
(B) Appoint an impartial EPA official
as Presiding Officer to conduct the
hearing. The Presiding Officer will:
(1) Conduct a fair, orderly, and
impartial hearing within 90 calendar
days of the request for a hearing;
(2) Consider all relevant evidence,
explanations, comments, and arguments
submitted; and
(3) Notify the affected AB or TPC in
writing within calendar 90 days of
completion of the hearing of his or her
decision and order. Such an order is a
final EPA action which may be subject
to judicial review. The order must
contain the basis, commencement date,
and duration of the suspension,
revocation or modification.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
(iii) If EPA determines that the public
health, interest, or welfare warrants
immediate action to revoke the
recognition of an AB or TPC prior to the
opportunity for a hearing, it will notify
the affected AB or TPC of its right to
request a hearing on the immediate
revocation within 15 calendar days of
the revocation taking place and the
procedures for the conduct of such a
hearing.
(iv) Any notification, decision, or
order issued by EPA under this section,
any transcript or other verbatim record
of oral testimony, and any documents
filed by a certified individual or firm in
a hearing under this section will be
available to the public, except as
otherwise provided by TSCA section 14.
Any such hearing at which oral
testimony is presented will be open to
the public, except that the Presiding
Officer may exclude the public to the
extent necessary to allow presentation
of information which may be entitled to
confidential treatment under TSCA
section 14.
(v) EPA will maintain a publicly
available list of ABs on its Web site
whose recognition has been suspended,
revoked or modified, or reinstated and
a publicly available list of TPCs whose
recognition has been suspended,
revoked, modified, or reinstated.
(vi) Unless the decision and order
issued under paragraph (e)(3) of this
section specify otherwise, an AB or a
TPC whose recognition has been
revoked must reapply for recognition in
order to become recognized under this
part again.
(vii) Unless the decision and order
issued under paragraph (e)(3) of this
section specify otherwise, an AB whose
recognition has been revoked or a TPC
whose recognition has been revoked,
must immediately notify all TPCs or
panel producers to which it provides
TSCA Title VI accreditation or
certification services of the revocation.
(f) Effect of the loss of recognition or
accreditation. (1) If an AB is removed or
withdraws from the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program:
(i) For reasons other than fraud or
providing false or misleading
statements, and other than a reason that
implicates a particular TPC in a
violation of TSCA Title VI, TPCs
accredited by that AB can continue to
certify products under TSCA Title VI for
180 calendar days, after which the TPCs
must be accredited again by another
EPA TSCA Title VI AB and rerecognized by EPA.
(ii) Due to fraud or providing false or
misleading statements with respect to a
particular TPC, or for any other reason
that implicates a particular TPC in a
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
violation of TSCA Title VI, that TPC
may not provide any TSCA Title VI
certification services until it has been
accredited again by another EPA TSCA
Title VI AB and re-recognized by EPA.
(2) If a TPC loses its accreditation, or
if TPC is removed or withdraws from
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program:
(i) For reasons other than fraud or
providing false or misleading
statements, and other than a reason that
implicates a particular panel producer
in a violation of TSCA Title VI, the
panel producers that used the TPC to
certify their products must enlist
another EPA TSCA Title VI TPC to
certify their products within 90 calendar
days. If the panel producer is not able
to obtain the services of another EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC within 90 days, the
panel producer may request from EPA a
90 calendar day extension. During the
time a panel producer is seeking a new
TPC, it must continue to comply with
all other requirements of TSCA Title VI,
including quality control testing.
(ii) Due to fraud or providing false or
misleading statements with respect to a
particular panel producer, or for any
other reason that implicates a particular
panel producer in a violation of TSCA
Title VI, that panel producer may not
sell, supply, offer for sale, or
manufacture composite wood products
for sale in the United States until its
composite wood products have been
recertified by another EPA TSCA Title
VI TPC.
(g) Process for denying EPA TSCA
Title VI recognition. (1) Upon EPA
denying a request for recognition of an
AB or TPC, EPA will notify the AB or
TPC in writing of the following:
(i) The legal and factual basis for the
denial; and
(ii) Actions, if any, which the affected
AB or TPC may take to receive
recognition in the future.
(2) [Reserved]
§ 770.8 Applications, notifications, and
reports.
(a) All applications, notifications, and
reports that are required to be submitted
to EPA under this subpart must be
submitted via the EPA Central Data
Exchange (CDX) found at https://
cdx.epa.gov.
(b) If the EPA CDX is unavailable,
EPA will so inform EPA TSCA Title VI
ABs and TPCs and will make electronic
applications and reporting forms
available online at https://www.epa.gov/
formaldehyde.
(c)(1) Persons submitting a notice
under this rule are subject to EPA
confidentiality regulations at 40 CFR
part 2, subpart B, except that the
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
certification in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section must also be provided when
asserting a claim of confidentiality.
(2) In submitting a claim of
confidentiality, a person must certify
the truth of the following four
statements concerning all information
which is claimed as confidential:
(i) My company has taken measures to
protect the confidentiality of the
information.
(ii) I have determined that the
information is not required to be
disclosed or otherwise made available to
the public under any other Federal law.
(iii) I have a reasonable basis to
conclude that disclosure of the
information is likely to cause substantial
harm to the competitive position of the
person.
(iv) I have a reasonable basis to
believe that the information is not
readily discoverable through reverse
engineering.
Subpart C—Composite Wood Products
§ 770.10 Formaldehyde emission
standards.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in
this part, the emission standards in this
section apply to composite wood
products sold, supplied, offered for sale,
or manufactured (including imported)
on or after December 12, 2017 in the
United States. These emission standards
apply regardless of whether the
composite wood product is in the form
of a panel, a component part, or
incorporated into a finished good.
(b) The emission standards are based
on test method ASTM E1333–10
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99), and are as follows:
(1) For hardwood plywood made with
a veneer core or a composite core, 0.05
parts per million (ppm) of
formaldehyde.
(2) For medium-density fiberboard,
0.11 ppm of formaldehyde.
(3) For thin medium-density
fiberboard, 0.13 ppm of formaldehyde.
(4) For particleboard, 0.09 ppm of
formaldehyde.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
§ 770.12
Stockpiling.
(a) The sale of stockpiled inventory of
composite wood products, whether in
the form of panels or incorporated into
component parts or finished goods, is
prohibited after December 12, 2017.
(b) To determine whether stockpiling
has occurred, the rate of manufacture or
purchase is measured as follows:
(1) For composite wood products in
the form of panels, the rate is measured
in terms of square footage of panels
produced.
(2) For composite wood products
incorporated into component parts or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
finished goods, the rate is measured in
terms of the square footage of composite
wood product panels purchased for the
purpose of incorporating them into
component parts or finished goods.
(c) Manufacturers or purchasers who
have, in an annual year, a greater than
20% increase in manufacturing or
purchasing composite wood products
relative to annual year 2009 for some
reason other than circumventing the
emission standards would not be in
violation of this section. Such reasons
may include, but are not limited to:
(1) A quantifiable immediate increase
in customer demand or sales.
(2) A documented and planned
business expansion.
(3) The manufacturer or purchaser
was not in business at the beginning of
calendar year 2009.
(4) An increase in production to meet
increased demand resulting from an
emergency event or natural disaster.
(d) In order to be found to be
stockpiling an entity must be increasing
the rate of manufacturing or purchasing
for the purpose of circumventing the
emission standards.
§ 770.15 Composite wood product
certification.
(a) After December 12, 2017, only
certified composite wood products,
whether in the form of panels or
incorporated into component parts or
finished goods, are permitted to be sold,
supplied, offered for sale, or
manufactured (including imported) in
the United States, unless the product is
specifically exempted by this part.
(b) Certified composite wood products
are those that are produced or fabricated
in accordance with all of the provisions
of this part.
(c) To obtain product certification, a
panel producer must apply to an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC.
(1) For panel producers that do not
have any previous product certifications
from a CARB-approved TPC or an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC, the application
must contain the following:
(i) The panel producer’s name,
address, telephone number, and other
contact information;
(ii) A copy of the panel producer’s
quality control manual as required by
§ 770.21(a);
(iii) Name and contact information for
the panel producer’s quality control
manager;
(iv) An identification of the specific
products for which certification is
requested, and the resin system used in
panel production;
(v) At least five tests conducted under
the supervision of an EPA TSCA Title
VI TPC pursuant to test method ASTM
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89735
E1333–10 or ASTM D6007–02
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99). Test results obtained by
ASTM D6007–02 must include a
showing of equivalence in accordance
with § 770.20(d)(1);
(vi) At least five quality control tests
conducted in accordance with
§ 770.20(b)(1);
(vii) Linear regression equation and
correlation data; and
(viii) Results of an initial, on-site
inspection by the TPC of the panel
producer.
(2) For panel producers applying for
certification of a new product type but
that have previous product certifications
from a CARB-approved TPC or an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC, the application
must contain the following:
(i) The panel producer’s name,
address, and telephone number;
(ii) An identification of the specific
products for which certification is
requested, and the resin system used in
panel production;
(iii) At least five tests conducted
under the supervision of an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC pursuant to test method
ASTM E1333–10 or ASTM D6007–02
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99). Test results obtained by
ASTM D6007– 02 must include a
showing of equivalence in accordance
with § 770.20(d)(1);
(iv) At least five quality control tests
conducted in accordance with
§ 770.20(b)(1);
(v) Linear regression equation and
correlation data; and
(vi) Description of any changes in the
panel producer’s quality control manual
and a copy of those changes.
(d) The EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must
act on a panel producer’s complete
application within 90 calendar days of
receipt by reviewing all of the
components of the application.
(1) If the application indicates that the
candidate product achieves the
applicable emission standards described
in § 770.10, adequate correlation as
described in § 770.20(d)(2), and that the
panel producer is meeting the
requirements in § 770.21, the EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC will approve the
application.
(2) If the application is from a panel
producer that did not previously have
products certified by a CARB-approved
TPC or an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC, the
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC will review the
quality control manual and results of
the on-site initial inspection and
approve or disapprove the quality
control manual.
(3) If the application does not
demonstrate that the candidate product
achieves the applicable emission
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
89736
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
standards described in § 770.10, the
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC will disapprove
the application. A new application may
be submitted for the candidate product
at any time.
(e) If a product is certified by a CARBapproved TPC, it will also be considered
certified under TSCA Title VI until
December 12, 2018 after which the TPC
needs to receive recognition as an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC under § 770.7(d) in
order for the product to remain certified.
(f) To maintain certification, the panel
producer making the certified product
must get inspected by its EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC quarterly as well as meet
the testing requirements under § 770.20.
(g) If the certified product fails a
quarterly test, certification for any
product types represented by the sample
is suspended until a compliant quarterly
test result is obtained in accordance
with § 770.22.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
§ 770.17
resins.
No-added formaldehyde-based
(a) Producers of composite wood
product panels made with no-added
formaldehyde-based resins may apply to
an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC or to CARB
for a two-year exemption from the
testing requirements in § 770.20 and
certification requirements in §§ 770.15
and 770.40(b). The application must
contain the following:
(1) The panel producer’s name,
address, and telephone number;
(2) An identification of the specific
product and the resin system;
(3) At least one test conducted under
the supervision of an EPA TSCA Title
VI TPC pursuant to test method ASTM
E1333–10 or ASTM D6007–02
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99). Test results obtained by
ASTM D6007–02 must include a
showing of equivalence in accordance
with § 770.20(d)(1); and
(4) Three months of routine quality
control tests under § 770.20, including a
showing of correlation in accordance
with § 770.20(d)(2), totaling not less
than five quality control tests.
(b) The EPA TSCA Title VI TPC will
approve a panel producer’s application
within 90 calendar days of receipt if the
application is complete and
demonstrates that the candidate product
achieves the emission standards
described in paragraph (c) of this
section.
(c) As measured according to
paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) of this section,
the emission standards for composite
wood products made with no-added
formaldehyde-based resins are as
follows:
(1) No test result higher than 0.05
parts per million (ppm) of formaldehyde
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
for hardwood plywood and 0.06 ppm
for particleboard, medium-density
fiberboard, and thin medium-density
fiberboard.
(2) No higher than 0.04 ppm of
formaldehyde for 90% of the three
months of routine quality control testing
data required under paragraph (a)(4) of
this section.
(d) Products that meet the
requirements specified under
§ 770.17(c)(1) and (2) and have obtained
exemption from the California Air
Resources Board will also be exempt
from the requirements in §§ 770.15,
770.20, and 770.40(b), as long as the
requirements of the California Air
Resources Board remain as stringent as
EPA’s requirements.
(e) After the two-year period of the
initial exemption, and every two years
thereafter, in order to continue to
qualify for the exemption from the
testing and certification requirements,
the panel producer must reapply to an
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC or to CARB and
obtain at least one test result in
accordance with paragraph (a)(3) of this
section that complies with the emission
standards in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section.
(f) Any time there is an operational or
process change that is likely to affect
formaldehyde emissions, such as a
change in resin formulation, press cycle
duration, temperature, or amount of
resin used per panel, at least one quality
control test under § 770.20 and at least
one test result in accordance with
paragraph (a)(3) of this section that
indicate compliance with the emission
standards in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section are required.
(g) A change in the resin system
invalidates the exemption for any
product produced with the different
resin after such a change.
§ 770.18
resins.
Ultra low-emitting formaldehyde
(a) Producers of composite wood
product panels made with ultra lowemitting formaldehyde resins may apply
to an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC or CARB
for approval either to conduct less
frequent testing than is specified in
§ 770.20 or approval for a two-year
exemption from the testing
requirements in § 770.20 and
certification requirements in §§ 770.15
and 770.40(b). The application must
contain the following:
(1) The panel producer’s name,
address, and telephone number;
(2) An identification of the specific
product type, including resin system;
(3) At least two tests conducted under
the supervision of an EPA TSCA Title
VI TPC pursuant to test method ASTM
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E1333–10 or ASTM D6007–02
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99). Test results obtained by
ASTM D6007–02 must include a
showing of equivalence in accordance
with § 770.20(d)(1); and
(4) Six months of routine quality
control tests under § 770.20, including a
showing of correlation in accordance
with § 770.20(d)(2), totaling not less
than ten quality control tests.
(b) The EPA TSCA Title VI TPC will
approve a panel producer’s application
within 90 calendar days of receipt if the
application is complete and
demonstrates that the candidate product
achieves the emission standards
required for reduced testing as
described in paragraph (c) of this
section or the emission standards
required for a two-year exemption as
described in paragraph (d) of this
section.
(c) As measured according to
paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) of this section,
the emission standards for reduced
testing for composite wood products
made with ultra low-emitting
formaldehyde resins are as follows:
(1) No test result higher than 0.05
parts per million (ppm) of formaldehyde
for hardwood plywood, 0.08 ppm for
particleboard, 0.09 ppm for mediumdensity fiberboard, and 0.11 ppm for
thin medium-density fiberboard.
(2) For 90% of the six months of
routine quality control testing data
required under paragraph (a)(4) of this
section, no higher than 0.05 ppm of
formaldehyde for particleboard, no
higher than 0.06 ppm of formaldehyde
for medium-density fiberboard, and no
higher than 0.08 ppm of formaldehyde
for thin medium-density fiberboard.
(d) As measured according to
paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) of this section,
the emission standards for an exemption
from the testing and certification
requirements of § 770.20 for composite
wood products made with ultra lowemitting formaldehyde resins are as
follows:
(1) No test result higher than 0.05
ppm of formaldehyde for hardwood
plywood or 0.06 ppm of formaldehyde
for particleboard, medium-density
fiberboard, and thin medium-density
fiberboard.
(2) For 90% of the six months of
routine quality control testing data
required under paragraph (a)(4) of this
section, no higher than 0.04 parts per
million of formaldehyde.
(e) Products that have obtained an
exemption from the California Air
Resources Board will also be exempt
from the requirements in §§ 770.15,
770.20, and 770.40(b) if they meet the
requirements under § 770.18(d) and the
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
requirements of the California Air
Resources Board remain as stringent as
EPA’s requirements. Products that have
obtained approval for reduced testing
from the California Air Resources Board
will be granted approval to conduct less
frequent testing than is specified in
§ 770.20 if they meet the requirements
under § 770.18(c) and the requirements
of the California Air Resources Board
remain as stringent as EPA’s
requirements.
(f) Products that are represented by a
quarterly test result that exceeds the
applicable emission standard in this
section or a quality control test that
indicates that the product exceeds the
applicable emission standard in this
section lose their reduced testing
approval and must reapply as specified
under § 770.18(a).
(g) After the two-year period of the
initial exemption, and every two years
thereafter, in order to continue to
qualify for the exemption from the
testing and certification requirements,
the panel producer must reapply to an
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC or CARB and
obtain at least two test results in
accordance with paragraph (a)(3) of this
section that comply with the emission
standards in paragraph (d)(1) of this
section.
(h) Any time there is an operational
or process change such as a change in
resin formulation, press cycle duration,
temperature, or amount of resin used
per panel, at least five quality control
tests under § 770.20 and at least one test
result in accordance with paragraph
(a)(3) of this section that indicate
compliance with the emission standards
in paragraph (d)(1) of this section are
required.
(i) A change in the resin system
invalidates the exemption or reduced
testing approval for any product type
produced after such a change.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
§ 770.20
Testing requirements.
(a) General requirements. (1) All
panels must be tested in an unfinished
condition, prior to the application of a
finishing or topcoat, as soon as possible
after their production but no later than
30 calendar days after production.
(2) Facilities that conduct the
formaldehyde testing required by this
section must follow the procedures and
specifications, such as testing
conditions and loading ratios, of the test
method being used.
(3) All equipment used in the
formaldehyde testing required by this
section must be calibrated and
otherwise maintained and used in
accordance with the equipment
manufacturer’s instructions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
(b) Quality control testing—(1)
Allowable methods. Quality control
testing must be performed using any of
the following methods, with a showing
of correlation for each method pursuant
to paragraph (d) of this section:
(i) ASTM D6007–02 (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99).
(ii) ASTM D5582–00 (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99).
(iii) BS EN 717–2:1995 (Gas Analysis
Method) (incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
(iv) DMC 2007 User’s Manual
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
(v) DMC 2012 GP User’s Manual
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
(vi) BS EN 120:1992 (Perforator
Method) (incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
(vii) JIS A 1460:2001(E) (24-hr
Desiccator Method) (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99).
(2) Frequency of testing. (i)
Particleboard and medium-density
fiberboard must be tested at least once
per shift (eight or twelve hours, plus or
minus one hour of production) for each
production line for each product type.
Quality control tests must also be
conducted whenever:
(A) A product type production ends,
even if eight hours of production has
not been reached;
(B) The resin formulation is changed
so that the formaldehyde to urea ratio is
increased;
(C) There is an increase by more than
ten percent in the amount of
formaldehyde resin used, by square foot
or by panel;
(D) There is a decrease in the
designated press time by more than
20%; or
(E) The quality control manager or
quality control employee has reason to
believe that the panel being produced
may not meet the requirements of the
applicable standards.
(ii) Particleboard and medium-density
fiberboard panel producers are eligible
for reduced quality control testing if
they demonstrate consistent operations
and low variability of test values.
(A) To qualify, panel producers must:
(1) Apply in writing to an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC; and
(2) Maintain a 30 panel running
average.
(B) With respect to reduced quality
control testing, EPA TSCA Title VI
TPCs:
(1) May approve a reduction to one
quality control test per 24-hour
production period if the 30 panel
running average remains two standard
deviations below the designated QCL for
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89737
the previous 60 consecutive calendar
days or more;
(2) May approve a reduction to one
quality control test per 48-hour
production period if the 30 panel
running average remains three standard
deviations below the designated QCL for
the previous 60 consecutive calendar
days or more;
(3) Will approve a request for reduced
quality control testing as long as the
data submitted by the panel producer
demonstrate compliance with the
criteria and the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
does not otherwise have reason to
believe that the data are inaccurate or
the panel producer’s production
processes are inadequate to ensure
continued compliance with the
emission standards; and
(4) Will revoke approval for reduced
quality control testing if testing or
inspections indicate a panel producer
no longer demonstrates consistent
operations and low variability of test
values.
(iii) Hardwood plywood must be
tested as follows:
(A) At least one test per week per
product type if the weekly hardwood
plywood production at the panel
producer is more than 100,000 but less
than 200,000 square feet.
(B) At least two tests per week per
product type if the weekly hardwood
plywood production at the panel
producer is 200,000 square feet or more,
but less than 400,000 square feet.
(C) At least four tests per week per
product type if the weekly hardwood
plywood production at the panel
producer is 400,000 square feet or more.
(D) If weekly production of hardwood
plywood at the panel producer is
100,000 square feet or less, at least one
test per 100,000 square feet for each
product type produced; or, if less than
100,000 square feet of a particular
product type is produced, one quality
control test of that product type every
month that it is produced.
(E) Quality control tests must also be
conducted whenever:
(1) The resin formulation is changed
so that the formaldehyde to urea ratio is
increased;
(2) There is an increase by more than
ten percent in the amount of
formaldehyde resin used, by square foot
or by panel;
(3) There is an increase by more than
20% in the adhesive application rate;
(4) There is a decrease in the
designated press time by more than
20%; or
(5) The quality control manager or
quality control employee has reason to
believe that the panel being produced
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
89738
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
whenever there is a significant change
in equipment, procedure, or the
qualifications of testing personnel.
(1) Equivalence between ASTM
E1333–10 and ASTM D6007–02 when
used by the TPC for quarterly testing.
Equivalence must be demonstrated for
at least five comparison sample sets,
which compare the results of the two
methods. Equivalence must be
demonstrated for each small chamber
used and for the ranges of emissions of
composite wood products tested by the
TPC.
(i) Samples. (A) For the ASTM
E1333–10 method (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99), each
comparison sample must consist of the
result of testing panels, using the
applicable loading ratios specified in
the ASTM E1333–10 method
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99), from similar panels of the
same product type tested by the ASTM
D6007–02 method (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99).
(B) For the ASTM D6007–02 method
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99), each comparison sample shall
consist of testing specimens
representing portions of panels similar
to the panels tested in the ASTM
E1333–10 method (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99) and matched to
their respective ASTM E1333–10
method (incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99) comparison sample result. The
ratio of air flow to sample surface area
specified in ASTM D6007–02
(incorporated by reference, see § 770.99)
must be used.
(C) The five comparison sample—
must consist of testing a minimum of
five sample sets as measured by the
ASTM E1333–10 method (incorporated
by reference, see § 770.99).
(ii) Average and standard deviation.
The arithmetic mean, x, and standard
deviation, S, of the difference of all
comparison sets must be calculated as
follows:
¯
Where x = arithmetic mean; S =
standard deviation; n = number of sets;
Di = difference between the ASTM
E1333–10 and ASTM D6007–02 method
(incorporated by reference, see § 770.99)
values for the ith set; and i ranges from
1 to n.
(iii) Equivalence determination. The
ASTM D6007–02 method (incorporated
by reference, see § 770.99) is considered
equivalent to the ASTM E1333–10
method (incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99) if the following condition is
met:
Where C is equal to 0.026.
(2) Correlation between ASTM E1333–
10 and any quality control test method.
Correlation must be demonstrated by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
ER12DE16.003
(iii) Samples must not include the top
or the bottom composite wood product
of a bundle.
(3) Sample handling. Samples must
be closely stacked or air-tight wrapped
between the time of sample selection
and the start of test conditioning.
Samples must be labeled as such, signed
by the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC, bundled
air-tight, wrapped in polyethylene,
protected by cover sheets, and promptly
shipped to the TPC laboratory.
Conditioning must begin as soon as
possible, but no later than 30 calendar
days after the samples were produced.
(4) Results. Any sample that exceeds
the applicable formaldehyde emission
standard in § 770.10 must be reported
by the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC to the
panel producer in writing and to EPA,
in accordance with § 770.8, within 72
hours. The panel producer must comply
with § 770.22 with respect to any lot
represented by a sample result that
exceeds the applicable formaldehyde
emission standard. Where multiple
products are grouped in a single product
type for testing, this includes all
products in the group represented by
the sample.
(5) Reduced testing frequency.
Composite wood products that have
been approved by an EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC or CARB for reduced testing under
§ 770.18(c) need only undergo quarterly
testing every six months.
(d) Equivalence or correlation.
Equivalence or correlation between
ASTM E1333–10 (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99) and any other
test method used for quarterly or quality
control testing must be demonstrated by
EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs or panel
producers, respectively, at least once
each year for each testing apparatus or
whenever there is a significant change
in equipment, procedure, or the
qualifications of testing personnel. Once
equivalence or correlation have been
established for three consecutive years,
equivalence or correlation must be
demonstrated every two years or
ER12DE16.002
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
may not meet the requirements of the
applicable standard.
(iv) Composite wood products that
have been approved by an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC or CARB for reduced
testing under § 770.18(b) through (c)
must be tested at least once per week
per product type and, for particle board
and medium-density fiberboard, per
production line, for products produced
that week, except that hardwood
plywood panel producers who qualify
for less frequent testing under paragraph
(b)(2)(iii)(D) of this section may
continue to perform quality control
testing under that provision.
(3) Results. Any test result that
exceeds the QCL established pursuant to
§ 770.7(c)(4)(i)(C) must be reported to
the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC in writing
within 72 hours. The panel producer
must comply with § 770.22 with respect
to any lot represented by a quality
control sample that exceeds the QCL.
Where multiple products are grouped in
a single product type for testing, this
includes all products in the group
represented by the sample.
(c) Quarterly testing. Quarterly testing
must be supervised by EPA TSCA Title
VI TPCs and performed by TPC
laboratories.
(1) Allowable methods. Quarterly
testing must be performed using ASTM
E1333–10 (incorporated by reference,
see § 770.99) or, with a showing of
equivalence pursuant to paragraph (d) of
this section, ASTM D6007–02
(incorporated by reference, see
§ 770.99).
(2) Sample selection. (i) Samples must
be randomly chosen by an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC.
(ii) Samples must be selected from
each certified product type for quarterly
testing purposes. For hardwood
plywood samples, the samples must be
randomly selected from products that
represent the range of formaldehyde
emissions of products produced by the
panel producer.
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(iv) A description of the frequency of
quality control testing;
(v) A description of the procedures
used to identify changes in
formaldehyde emissions resulting from
production changes (e.g., increase in the
percentage of resin, increase in
formaldehyde/urea molar ratio in the
resin, or decrease in press time);
(vi) A description of provisions for
additional testing;
(vii) A description of recordkeeping
procedures;
(viii) A description of labeling
procedures;
(ix) The average percentage of resin
and press time for each product type;
(x) A description of product types,
and if applicable, a description of
product variables covered under each
product type;
Degrees of freedom
(xi) Procedures for reduced quality
‘‘r’’ value
(n-2)
control testing, if applicable; and
(xii) Procedures for handling non3 ............................................
0.878
4 ............................................
0.811 complying lots, including a description
5 ............................................
0.754 of how the panel producer will ensure
6 ............................................
0.707 compliance with the notification
7 ............................................
0.666 requirements of § 770.22(d)(1).
8 ............................................
0.632
(2) The quality control manual must
9 ............................................
0.602 be approved by an EPA TSCA Title VI
10 or more ............................
0.576
TPC.
(b) Quality control facilities. Each
(iii) Variation from previous results. If
panel producer must designate a quality
data from an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC’s
control facility for conducting quality
quarterly test results and a panel
producer’s quality control test results do control formaldehyde testing.
(1) The quality control facility must
not fit the previously established
be an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC, a
correlation, the panel producer must
have its TPC establish a new correlation contract laboratory, or a laboratory
owned and operated by the panel
and new QCLs.
producer.
(iv) Failed quarterly tests. If a panel
(2) Each quality control facility must
producer fails two quarterly tests in a
row for the same product type, the panel have quality control employees with
adequate experience and/or training to
producer must have its TPC establish a
conduct accurate chemical quantitative
new correlation curve.
analytical tests. The quality control
(e) Quality assurance and quality
manager must identify each person
control requirements for panel
conducting formaldehyde quality
producers. Panel producers are
control testing to the EPA TSCA Title VI
responsible for product compliance
with the applicable emission standards. TPC.
(c) Quality control manager. Each
§ 770.21 Quality control manual, facilities,
panel producer must designate a person
and personnel.
as quality control manager with
adequate experience and/or training to
(a) Quality control manual. (1) Each
be responsible for formaldehyde
panel producer must have a written
emissions quality control. The quality
quality control manual. The manual
control manager must:
must contain, at a minimum, the
(1) Have the authority to take actions
following:
(i) A description of the organizational necessary to ensure that applicable
formaldehyde emission standards are
structure of the quality control
being met on an ongoing basis;
department, including the names of the
(2) Be identified to the EPA TSCA
quality control manager and quality
Title VI TPC that will be overseeing the
control employees;
(ii) A description of the sampling
quality control testing. The panel
procedures to be followed;
producer must notify the EPA TSCA
(iii) A description of the method of
Title VI TPC in writing within ten
handling samples, including a specific
calendar days of any change in the
maximum time period for analyzing
identity of the quality control manager
quality control samples;
and provide the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
establishing an acceptable correlation
coefficient (‘‘r’’ value).
(i) Correlation. The correlation must
be based on a minimum sample size of
five data pairs and a simple linear
regression where the dependent variable
(Y-axis) is the quality control test value
and the independent variable (X-axis) is
the ASTM E1333–10 (incorporated by
reference, see § 770.99) test value. Either
composite wood products or
formaldehyde emissions reference
materials can be used to establish the
correlation.
(ii) Minimum acceptable correlation
coefficients (‘‘r’’ values). The minimum
acceptable correlation coefficients are as
follows, where ‘‘n’’ is equal to the
number of data pairs, and ‘‘r’’ is the
correlation coefficient:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89739
with the new quality control manager’s
qualifications;
(3) Review and approve all reports of
quality control testing conducted on the
production of the panel producer;
(4) Ensure that the samples are
collected, packaged, and shipped
according to the procedures specified in
the quality control manual; and
(5) Inform the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
in writing of any significant changes in
production that could affect
formaldehyde emissions within 72
hours of making those changes.
§ 770.22
Non-complying lots.
(a) Non-complying lots are not
certified composite wood products and
they may not be sold, supplied or
offered for sale in the United States
except in accordance with this section.
(b) Non-complying lots must be
isolated from certified lots.
(c) Non-complying lots must either be
disposed of or retested and certified
using the same test method, if each
panel is treated with a scavenger or
handled by other means of reducing
formaldehyde emissions, such as aging.
Tests must be performed as follows:
(1) Quality control tests. (i) At least
one test panel must be selected from
each of three separate bundles. The
panels must be selected so that they are
representative of the entire noncomplying lot and they are not the top
or bottom panel of a bundle. The panels
may be selected from properly stored
samples set aside by the panel producer
for retest in the event of a failure.
(ii) All samples must test at or below
the level that indicates that the product
is in compliance with the applicable
emission standards in § 770.10.
(2) Quarterly tests. (i) At least one test
panel must be randomly selected so that
it is representative of the entire noncomplying lot and is not the top or
bottom panel of a bundle. The panel
may be selected from properly stored
samples set aside by the panel producer
for retest in the event of a failure.
(ii) The sample must test at or below
the applicable emission standards in
§ 770.10.
(d) If composite wood products
belonging to a non-complying lot have
been shipped to a fabricator, importer,
distributor, or retailer before the test
results are received, the panel producer
must:
(1) Ensure that the composite wood
products are not distributed further by
notifying, within 72 hours of the time
that the panel producer is made aware
of the failing test result, the fabricators,
importers, distributors, and retailers that
received the composite wood products.
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
89740
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
The notification must include the
following:
(i) Panel producer name, contact
information, and date of notice;
(ii) A description of the composite
wood products that belong to the noncomplying lot that is sufficient to allow
the fabricator, importer, distributor, or
retailer to identify the products;
(iii) Whether the failed test result was
of a quarterly test, a quality control test,
or a retest of composite wood products
belonging to a non-complying lot;
(iv) A statement that composite wood
products belonging to the noncomplying lot must be isolated from
other composite wood products and
cannot be further distributed in
commerce; and
(v) A description of the steps the
panel producer intends to take to either
recall the composite wood products
belonging to the non-complying lot or to
treat and retest the products and certify
the lot.
(2) Do one of the following:
(i) Recall the composite wood
products belonging to the noncomplying lot and either treat and retest
products belonging to the noncomplying lot or dispose of them; or
(ii) Treat and retest composite wood
products belonging to the noncomplying lot while they remain in
possession of a fabricator, importer,
distributor, or retailer.
(e) Information on the disposition of
non-complying lots, including product
type and amount of composite wood
products affected, lot numbers,
mitigation measures used, results of
retesting, and final disposition, must be
provided to the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
within seven calendar days of final
disposition.
(f) Fabricators, importers, distributors,
or retailers who are notified that they
have received composite wood products
belonging to a non-complying lot and
who have further distributed the
composite wood products are
responsible for notifying the purchasers
of the composite wood products in
accordance with paragraph (d)(1) of this
section.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
§ 770.24
Samples for testing.
(a) Composite wood products may be
shipped into and transported across the
United States for quality control or
quarterly tests. TPCs that ship
composite panels into or across the
United States solely for quality control
or quarterly tests are not considered
importers or distributors or importers
for the purposes of § 770.7(c)(3)(i).
(1) Such panels must not be sold,
offered for sale or supplied to any entity
other than a TPC laboratory before
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
testing in accordance with § 770.17,
§ 770.18, or § 770.20.
(2) If test results for such products
demonstrate compliance with the
emission standards in this subpart, the
panels may be relabeled in accordance
with § 770.45 and sold, offered for sale,
or supplied.
(b) [Reserved]
§ 770.30 Importers, fabricators,
distributors, and retailers.
(a) Importers, fabricators, distributors,
and retailers must take reasonable
precautions to ensure that the composite
wood products they sell, supply, offer
for sale, or hold for sale, whether in the
form of panels, component parts, or
finished goods, comply with the
emission standards and other
requirements of this subpart.
(b) Importers must demonstrate that
they have taken reasonable precautions
by maintaining, for three years, bills of
lading, invoices, or comparable
documents that include a written
statement from the supplier that the
composite wood products, component
parts, or finished goods are TSCA Title
VI compliant or were produced before
December 12, 2017 and by ensuring the
following records are made available to
EPA within 30 calendar days of request:
(1) Records identifying the panel
producer and the date the composite
wood products were produced; and
(2) Records identifying the supplier, if
different, and the date the composite
wood products, component parts, or
finished goods were purchased.
(c) Fabricators, distributors, and
retailers must demonstrate that they
have taken reasonable precautions by
obtaining bills of lading, invoices, or
comparable documents that include a
written statement from the supplier that
the composite wood products,
component parts, or finished goods are
TSCA Title VI compliant or that the
composite wood products were
produced before December 12, 2017.
(d) On and after December 12, 2018,
importers of articles that are regulated
composite wood products, or articles
that contain regulated composite wood
products, must comply with the import
certification regulations for ‘‘Chemical
Substances in Bulk and As Part of
Mixtures and Articles,’’ as found at 19
CFR 12.118 through 12.127.
(e) Records required by this section
must be maintained in accordance with
§ 770.40(d).
§ 770.40
Reporting and recordkeeping.
(a) Panel producers must maintain the
following records for a period of three
years, except that records demonstrating
initial eligibility for reduced testing or
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
third-party certification exemption
under § 770.17 or § 770.18 must be kept
for as long as the panel producer is
producing composite wood products
with reduced testing or under a thirdparty certification exemption. The
following records must also be made
available to the panel producers’ EPA
TSCA Title VI TPCs. Panel producers
must make the records described in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section available
to direct purchasers of their composite
wood products. This information may
not be withheld from direct purchasers
as confidential business information.
(1) Records of all quarterly emissions
testing. These records must identify the
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC conducting or
overseeing the testing. These records
must also include the date, the product
type tested, the lot number that the
tested material represents, the test
method used, and the test results.
(2) Records of all ongoing quality
control testing. These records must
identify the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
conducting or overseeing the testing and
the facility actually performing the
testing. These records must also include
the date, the product type tested, the lot
number that the tested material
represents, the test method used, and
the test results.
(3) Production records, including a
description of the composite wood
product(s), the date of manufacture, lot
numbers, and tracking information
allowing each product to be traced to a
specific lot produced.
(4) Records of changes in production,
including changes of more than ten
percent in the resin use percentage,
changes in resin composition that result
in a higher ratio of formaldehyde to
other resin components, and changes in
the process, such as changes in press
time by more than 20%.
(5) Records demonstrating initial and
continued eligibility for the reduced
testing provisions in §§ 770.17 and
770.18, if applicable. These records
must include:
(i) Approval for reduced testing from
an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC or CARB;
(ii) Amount of resin use reported by
volume and weight;
(iii) Production volume reported as
square feet per product type;
(iv) Resin trade name, resin
manufacturer contact information
(name, address, phone number, and
email), and resin supplier contact
information (name, address, phone
number, and email); and
(v) Any changes in the formulation of
the resin.
(6) Purchaser information for each
composite wood product, if applicable,
including the name, contact person if
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
available, address, telephone number,
email address if available, purchase
order or invoice number, and amount
purchased.
(7) Transporter information for each
composite wood product, if applicable,
including name, contact person,
address, telephone number, email
address if available, and shipping
invoice number.
(8) Information on the disposition of
non-complying lots, including product
type and amount of composite wood
products affected, lot numbers,
purchasers who received product
belonging to non-complying lots (if
any), copies of purchaser notifications
used (if any), mitigation measures used,
results of retesting, and final
disposition.
(9) Representative copies of labels
used.
(b) Panel producers must provide
their EPA TSCA Title VI TPC with
monthly product data reports for each
production facility, production line, and
product type, maintain copies of the
reports for a minimum of three years
from the date that they are produced.
Monthly product data reports must
contain a data sheet for each specific
product type with test and production
information, and a quality control graph
containing the following:
(1) QCL;
(2) Shipping QCL (if applicable);
(3) Results of quality control tests; and
(4) Retest values.
(c) Laminated product producers
whose products are exempt from the
definition of hardwood plywood must
keep records demonstrating eligibility
for the exemption. These records must
be kept for a minimum of three years
from the date they are produced and
must include:
(1) Resin trade name, resin
manufacturer contact information
(name, address, phone number, and
email), resin supplier contact
information (name, address, phone
number, and email), and resin purchase
records;
(2) Panel producer contact
information and panel purchase records;
(3) For panels produced in-house,
records demonstrating that the panels
have been certified by an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC; and
(4) For resins produced in-house,
records demonstrating the production of
phenol-formaldehyde resins or resins
formulated with no added formaldehyde
as part of the resin cross-linking
structure.
(d) Importers, fabricators, distributors,
and retailers must maintain the records
described in § 770.30 for a minimum of
three years from the import date or the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
date of the purchases or shipments
described therein.
§ 770.45
Labeling.
(a) Panels or bundles of panels that
are sold, supplied, or offered for sale in
the United States must be labeled with
the panel producer’s name, the lot
number, the number of the EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC, and a statement that the
products are TSCA Title VI certified. If
a composite wood panel is not
individually labeled, the panel
producer, importer, distributor,
fabricator, or retailer must have a
method (e.g., color-coded edge marking)
sufficient to identify the supplier of the
panel and linking the information on
the label to the products. This
information must be made available to
potential customers upon request. The
label may be applied as a stamp, tag, or
sticker.
(1) A panel producer number may be
used instead of a name to protect
identity, so long as the identity of the
panel producer can be determined at the
request of EPA.
(2) Only panels or bundles of panels
manufactured in accordance with
§ 770.17 may also be labeled that they
were made with no-added
formaldehyde-based resins in addition
to the other information required by this
section.
(3) Only panels or bundles of panels
manufactured in accordance with
§ 770.18 may also be labeled that they
were made with ultra low-emitting
formaldehyde resins in addition to the
other information required by this
section.
(b) Panels imported into or
transported across the United States for
quarterly or quality control testing
purposes in accordance with § 770.20
must be labeled ‘‘For TSCA Title VI
testing only, not for sale in the United
States.’’ The panels may be re-labeled if
test results are below the applicable
emission standards in this subpart.
(c) Fabricators of finished goods
containing composite wood products
must label every finished good they
produce or every box or bundle
containing finished goods. If a finished
good (including component parts sold
separately to end users) is not
individually labeled, the importer,
distributor, or retailer must retain a
copy of the label, be able to identify the
products associated with that label, and
make the label information available to
potential customers upon request.
(1) The label may be applied as a
stamp, tag, or sticker.
(2) The label must include, at a
minimum, in legible English text, the
fabricator’s name, the date the finished
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
89741
good was produced (in month/year
format), and a statement that the
finished goods are TSCA Title VI
compliant.
(3) Finished goods made from panels
manufactured in accordance with
§ 770.17 and/or § 770.18 may also be
labeled that they were made with noadded formaldehyde-based resins, or
ultra low-emitting formaldehyde resins
in addition to the other information
required by this section. They may be
labeled as being made with a
combination of compliant composite
wood, no-added formaldehyde-based
resins, and ultra low-emitting
formaldehyde resins, if this is accurate.
(4) Fabricators may substitute the
name of a responsible downstream
fabricator, importer, distributor, or
retailer for their name on the label if
they obtain and maintain written
consent from the downstream entity.
(d) Importers, distributors, and
retailers must leave intact labels on
finished goods, including component
parts sold separately to end users.
(e) Finished goods, including
component parts sold separately to end
users, containing only a de minimis
amount of regulated composite wood
product are excepted from the labeling
requirements. A finished good,
including component parts sold directly
to consumers, contains a de minimis
amount of regulated composite wood
product if its regulated composite wood
product content does not exceed 144
square inches, based on the surface area
of its largest face. The exception does
not apply to finished goods or
component parts that are designed to be
used in combination or in multiples to
create larger surfaces, finished goods, or
component parts.
(f) Composite wood products and
finished goods made entirely of
composite wood products manufactured
before the manufactured-by date must
not be labeled as TSCA Title VI
compliant.
Subpart D—Incorporation by
Reference
§ 770.99
Incorporation by reference.
The materials listed in this section are
incorporated by reference into this part
with the approval of the Director of the
Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a)
and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any
edition other than that specified in this
section, a document must be published
in the Federal Register and the material
must be available to the public. All
approved materials are available for
inspection at the OPPT Docket in the
Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
89742
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number of
the EPA/DC Public Reading room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the OPPT Docket is (202)
566–0280. In addition, these materials
are also available for inspection at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call (202) 741–6030
or go to https://www.archives.gov/
federal_register/code_of_federal_
regulations/ibr_locations.html. These
materials may also be obtained from the
sources listed in this section.
(a) CPA, AITC, and HPVA material.
Copies of these materials may be
obtained from the specific publisher, as
noted below, or from the American
National Standards Institute, 1899 L
Street NW., 11th Floor, Washington, DC
20036, or by calling (202) 293–8020, or
at https://ansi.org/. Note that ANSI/AITC
A190.1–2002 is published by the
American Institute of Timber
Construction; ANSI A135.4–2012, ANSI
A135.5–2012, ANSI A135.6–2012, ANSI
A135.7–2012, ANSI A208.1–2009, and
ANSI A208.2–2009 are published by the
Composite Panel Association; and ANSI
ANSI/HPVA–HP–1–2009 is published
by the Hardwood Plywood Veneer
Association.
(1) ANSI A135.4–2012, Basic
Hardboard, Approved June 8, 2012, IBR
approved for § 770.3.
(2) ANSI A135.5–2012, Prefinished
Hardboard Paneling, Approved March
29, 2012, IBR approved for § 770.3.
(3) ANSI A135.6–2012, Engineered
Wood Siding, Approved June 5, 2012,
IBR approved for § 770.3.
(4) ANSI A135.7–2012, Engineered
Wood Trim, Approved July 17, 2012,
IBR approved for § 770.3.
(5) ANSI A208.1–2009, Particleboard,
Approved February 2, 2009, IBR
approved for § 770.3.
(6) ANSI A208.2–2009, Medium
Density Fiberboard (MDF) for Interior
Applications, Approved February 2,
2009, IBR approved for § 770.3.
(7) ANSI/AITC A190.1–2002,
American National Standard for Wood
Products—Structural Glued Laminated
Timber, Approved October 10, 2002,
IBR approved for § 770.1(c).
(8) ANSI/HPVA HP–1–2009,
American National Standard for
Hardwood and Decorative Plywood,
Approved January 26, 2010, IBR
approved for § 770.3.
(b) ASTM material. Copies of these
materials may be obtained from ASTM
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
International, 100 Barr Harbor Dr., P.O.
Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA
19428–2959, or by calling (877) 909–
ASTM, or at https://www.astm.org.
(1) ASTM D5055–05, Standard
Specification for Establishing and
Monitoring Structural Capacities of
Prefabricated Wood I-Joists, Approved
October 1, 2005, IBR approved for
§ 770.1(c).
(2) ASTM D5456–06, Standard
Specification for Evaluation of
Structural Composite Lumber Products,
Approved March 1, 2006, IBR approved
for § 770.1(c).
(3) ASTM D5582–00 (Reapproved
2006), Standard Test Method for
Determining Formaldehyde Levels from
Wood Products Using a Desiccator,
October 1, 2006, IBR approved for
§ 770.20(b).
(4) ASTM D6007–02, Standard Test
Method for Determining Formaldehyde
Concentrations in Air from Wood
Products Using a Small Scale Chamber,
Approved April 10, 2002, IBR approved
for §§ 770.3, 770.7(a) through (c),
770.15(c), 770.17(a), 770.18(a) and
770.20(b) through (d).
(5) ASTM E1333–10, Standard Test
Method for Determining Formaldehyde
Concentrations in Air and Emission
Rates from Wood Products Using a
Large Chamber, Approved May 1, 2010,
IBR approved for §§ 770.3, 770.7(a)
through (c), 770.10(b), 770.15(c),
770.17(a), 770.18(a) and 770.20(c)
through (d).
(c) CEN materials. Copies of these
materials are not directly available from
the European Committee for
Standardization, but from one of CEN’s
National Members, Affiliates, or Partner
Standardization Bodies. To purchase a
standard, go to CEN’s Web site, https://
www.cen.eu, and select ‘‘Products’’ for
more detailed information.
(1) BS EN 120:1992, Wood based
panels—Determination of formaldehyde
content—Extraction method called the
perforator method, incorporating
Amendment No. 1, English Version,
copyright BSI 1997, IBR approved for
§ 770.20(b).
(2) BS EN 717–2:1995, Wood-based
panels—Determination of formaldehyde
release—Part 2: Formaldehyde release
by the gas analysis method,
incorporating Corrigendum No. 1,
English Version, copyright BSI 9
December 2002, IBR approved for
§ 770.20(b).
(d) Georgia Pacific material. Copies of
this material may be obtained from
Georgia-Pacific Chemicals LLC, 133
Peachtree Street, Atlanta, GA 30303, or
by calling (877) 377–2737, or at https://
www.gp-dmc.com/default.aspx.
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(1) The Dynamic Microchamber
computer integrated formaldehyde test
system, User Manual, revised March
2007 (DMC 2007 User’s Manual) IBR
approved for § 770.20(b).
(2) The GP Dynamic Microchamber
Computer-integrated formaldehyde test
system, User Manual, copyright 2012
(DMC 2012 GP User’s Manual), IBR
approved for § 770.20(b).
(e) ISO material. Copies of these
materials may be obtained from the
International Organization for
Standardization, 1, ch. de la VoieCreuse, CP 56, CH–1211, Geneve 20,
Switzerland, or by calling +41–22–749–
01–11, or at https://www.iso.org.
(1) ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E),
Conformity assessments—General
requirements for accreditation bodies
accrediting conformity assessments
bodies, First edition, Corrected version,
2005–02–15, IBR approved for §§ 770.3
and 770.7(a) through (b).
(2) ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E),
Conformity assessment–Requirements
for the operation of various bodies
performing inspection, Second edition,
2012–03–01 IBR approved for §§ 770.3
and 770.7(a) through (c).
(3) ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), General
requirements for the competence of
testing and calibration laboratories,
Second edition, 2005–05–15, IBR
approved for §§ 770.3 and 770.7(a)
through (c).
(4) ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E),
Conformity assessment—Requirements
for bodies certifying products, processes
and services, First edition, 2012–09–15,
IBR approved for §§ 770.3 and 770.7(a)
and (c).
(f) Japanese Standards Association.
Copies of this material may be obtained
from Japanese Industrial Standards, 1–
24, Akasaka 4, Minatoku, Tokyo 107–
8440, Japan, or by calling +81–3–3583–
8000, or at https://www.jsa.or.jp/.
(1) JIS A 1460:2001(E), Building
boards Determination of formaldehyde
emission—Desiccator method, First
English edition, published 2003–07 IBR
approved for § 770.20(b).
(2) [Reserved]
(g) NIST material. Copies of these
materials may be obtained from the
National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) by calling (800) 553–
6847 or from the U.S. Government
Printing Office (GPO). To purchase a
NIST publication you must have the
order number. Order numbers may be
obtained from the Public Inquiries Unit
at (301) 975–NIST. Mailing address:
Public Inquiries Unit, NIST, 100 Bureau
Dr., Stop 1070, Gaithersburg, MD
20899–1070. If you have a GPO stock
number, you can purchase printed
copies of NIST publications from GPO.
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3
GPO orders may be mailed to: U.S.
Government Printing Office, P.O. Box
979050, St. Louis, MO 63197–9000,
placed by telephone at (866) 512–1800
(DC Area only: (202) 512–1800), or
faxed to (202) 512–2104. Additional
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:06 Dec 09, 2016
Jkt 241001
information is available online at:
https://www.nist.gov.
(1) PS 1–07, Structural Plywood, May
2007, IBR approved for §§ 770.1(c) and
770.3.
(2) PS 2–04, Performance Standard for
Wood-Based Structural-Use Panels,
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
89743
December 2004, IBR approved for
§§ 770.1(c) and 770.3.
Editorial note: This document was
received for publication by the Office of the
Federal Register on November 16, 2016.
[FR Doc. 2016–27987 Filed 12–9–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\12DER3.SGM
12DER3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 238 (Monday, December 12, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 89674-89743]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27987]
[[Page 89673]]
Vol. 81
Monday,
No. 238
December 12, 2016
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 770
Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 238 / Monday, December 12, 2016 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 89674]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 770
[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0461; FRL-9949-90]
RIN 2070-AJ44
Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is issuing a final rule to implement the Formaldehyde
Standards for Composite Wood Products Act, which added Title VI to the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The purpose of TSCA Title VI is to
reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products, which will
reduce exposures to formaldehyde and result in benefits from avoided
adverse health effects. This final rule includes formaldehyde emission
standards applicable to hardwood plywood, medium-density fiberboard,
and particleboard, and finished goods containing these products, that
are sold, supplied, offered for sale, or manufactured (including
imported) in the United States. This final rule includes provisions
relating to, among other things, laminated products, products made with
no-added formaldehyde resins or ultra low-emitting formaldehyde resins,
testing requirements, product labeling, chain of custody documentation
and other recordkeeping requirements, enforcement, import
certification, and product inventory sell-through provisions, including
a product stockpiling prohibition. This final rule also establishes a
third-party certification program for hardwood plywood, medium-density
fiberboard, and particleboard and includes procedures for the
accreditation of third-party certifiers and general requirements for
accreditation bodies and third-party certifiers.
DATES: This final rule is effective February 10, 2017. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the
regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of
February 10, 2017.
ADDRESSES: The dockets for this action, identified by docket
identification (ID) numbers EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-0380, EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-
0018, and EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0461 are available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center
(EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. 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)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202) 566-
0280. Please review the visitor instructions and additional information
about the docket available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For technical information contact: Erik Winchester, National
Program Chemicals Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 564-6450; email
address: winchester.erik@epa.gov.
For general information contact: The TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill,
422 South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202)
554-1404; email address: TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Executive Summary
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by this action if you manufacture
(including import), sell, supply, or offer for sale hardwood plywood,
medium-density fiberboard, particleboard, and/or products containing
these composite wood materials in the United States. The following list
of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not
intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
Veneer, plywood, and engineered wood product manufacturing
(NAICS code 3212).
Manufactured home (mobile home) manufacturing (NAICS code
321991).
Prefabricated wood building manufacturing (NAICS code
321992).
Furniture and related product manufacturing (NAICS code
337).
Furniture merchant wholesalers (NAICS code 42321).
Lumber, plywood, millwork, and wood panel merchant
wholesalers (NAICS code 42331).
Other construction material merchant wholesalers (NAICS
code 423390), e.g., merchant wholesale distributors of manufactured
homes (i.e., mobile homes) and/or prefabricated buildings.
Furniture stores (NAICS code 4421).
Building material and supplies dealers (NAICS code 4441).
Manufactured (mobile) home dealers (NAICS code 45393).
Motor home manufacturing (NAICS code 336213).
Travel trailer and camper manufacturing (NAICS code
336214).
Recreational vehicle (RV) dealers (NAICS code 441210).
Recreational vehicle merchant wholesalers (NAICS code
423110).
Engineering services (NAICS code 541330).
Testing laboratories (NAICS code 541380).
Administrative management and general management
consulting services (NAICS code 541611).
All other professional, scientific, and technical services
(NAICS code 541990).
All other support services (NAICS code 561990).
Business associations (NAICS code 813910).
Professional organizations (NAICS code 813920).
If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
action, please consult the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
B. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?
This final rule is being issued under the authority of section 601
of TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2697. EPA has also been mindful of environmental,
economic, and social impacts consistent with section 2(c) of TSCA, 15
U.S.C. 2601.
C. What action is the agency taking?
EPA is issuing a final rule that implements TSCA Title VI. The
final rule includes provisions on labeling; chain of custody
requirements; sell-through provisions; ultra low-emitting formaldehyde
resins (ULEF); no-added formaldehyde-based resins (NAF); finished
goods; third-party testing and certification; auditing and reporting of
third-party certifiers (TPCs); recordkeeping; enforcement; laminated
products; and exceptions from regulatory requirements for products and
components containing de minimis amounts of composite wood products.
The final rule incorporates the emission standards established by TSCA
Title VI for hardwood plywood, medium-density fiberboard (MDF) and
particleboard, and products containing these composite wood materials,
that are sold, supplied, offered for sale, or manufactured (defined by
statute to include import) in the United States.
The emission standards established by TSCA Title VI are not altered
in this
[[Page 89675]]
final rule. The requirements in this final rule are consistent, to the
extent EPA deemed appropriate and practical considering TSCA Title VI,
with the requirements currently in effect in California under the
California Air Resources Board's (CARB) Air Toxics Control Measure to
Reduce Formaldehyde Emissions from Composite Wood Products (ATCM) (Ref.
1).
Under this final rule, the definition of hardwood plywood exempts
laminated products made by attaching a wood or woody grass veneer to a
compliant core or platform with a phenol-formaldehyde resin or a resin
formulated with no added formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-
linking structure. To be eligible for the exemption, laminated product
producers must maintain records demonstrating eligibility for the
exemption.
This final rule establishes the manufactured-by date for composite
wood products at December 12, 2017. After this date, hardwood plywood
made with either a combination core or a veneer core, particleboard,
and MDF must be manufactured (including imported) in compliance with
the provisions of this final rule. This final rule establishes the
manufactured-by date for laminated products at December 12, 2023.
Before that date, laminated product producers must use compliant
composite wood product platforms and comply with the recordkeeping and
labeling requirements for fabricators. After that date, laminated
products that are exempt from the definition of hardwood plywood must
also keep, as a condition of the exemption, records demonstrating
eligibility for the exemption. Other laminated products will have to be
made in compliance with the testing and TPC certification requirements
for hardwood plywood.
Table 1 is a summary of the regulatory requirements by regulated
entity. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list of requirements, nor
is it intended to replace the provisions of the regulatory text. For
specific information on any of these requirements, interested persons
should consult the referenced regulatory provisions. Entities who fit
into more than one category must comply with the requirements for all
applicable categories. For example, an importer of composite wood
product panels who also fabricates finished goods must comply with the
requirements for importers and the requirements for fabricators.
Table 1--Summary of Provisions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement Compliance date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Composite Wood Product Producers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Products must comply with emission
standards:
Hardwood plywood (made with a veneer December 12, 2017.
core or a composite core) = 0.05 ppm.
Particleboard = 0.09 ppm
MDF = 0.11 ppm
Thin MDF = 0.13 ppm
(40 CFR 770.10)
Products must be certified by an EPA TSCA December 12, 2017.
Title VI TPC unless they are eligible for
a limited exemption for products made with
NAF-based or ULEF resins.
(40 CFR 770.15, 770. 17, 770.18)
Products must undergo quarterly testing and December 12, 2017.
routine quality control testing using
specified methods.
(40 CFR 770.20)
Panels must be labeled with the producer's December 12, 2017.
name (or other identification), lot
number, TPC number, and a statement of
compliance with TSCA Title VI.
(40 CFR 770.45)
Records, including testing, production, December 12, 2017.
purchaser, transporter, and non-complying
lot information, must be kept for 3 years.
Records demonstrating initial eligibility
for reduced testing or a limited third-
party certification exemption for products
made with NAF-based or ULEF resins must be
kept for as long as exemption eligibility
is claimed.
(40 CFR 770.40)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Producers of Laminated Products That Are Not Exempt From the Definition
of Hardwood Plywood
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bills of lading, invoices, or comparable December 12, 2017.
documents must be obtained and maintained
for 3 years.
(40 CFR 770.30, 770.40)
Finished goods must be labeled with the December 12, 2017.
producer's name, the date the good was
produced, and a statement of TSCA Title VI
compliance.
(40 CFR 770.45)
Laminated products must comply with the December 12, 2023.
hardwood plywood emission standard of 0.05
ppm, and the testing, certification, and
recordkeeping requirements for composite
wood products.
(40 CFR 770.10, 770.15, 770.20, 770.40)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Producers of Laminated Products That Are Exempt From the Definition of
Hardwood Plywood
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Records demonstrating purchase/use of December 12, 2023.
compliant platforms and NAF or PF resins
and bills of lading, invoices, or
comparable documents must be obtained and
maintained for 3 years.
(40 CFR 770.40)
Bills of lading, invoices, or comparable December 12, 2017.
documents must be obtained and maintained
for 3 years.
(40 CFR 770.30, 770.40)
Finished goods must be labeled with the December 12, 2017.
producer's name, the date the good was
produced, and a statement of TSCA Title VI
compliance.
(40 CFR 770.45)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fabricators (Other Than Laminated Product Producers)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bills of lading, invoices, or comparable December 12, 2017
documents must be obtained and maintained
for 3 years..
[[Page 89676]]
(40 CFR 770.30, 770.40)
Finished goods must be labeled with the December 12, 2017.
producer's name, the date the good was
produced, and a statement of TSCA Title VI
compliance.
(40 CFR 770.45)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Importers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bills of lading, invoices, or comparable December 12, 2017.
documents bearing a statement of TSCA
Title VI compliance must be obtained and
maintained for 3 years. In addition, must
have the ability to make records
identifying the panel producer, the date
the products were produced, the supplier
(if different) and the date the products
were purchased available to EPA within 30
calendar days of request.
(40 CFR 770.30, 770.40)
Import certification under TSCA section 13 December 12, 2018.
is required.
(40 CFR 770.30, 770.40)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distributors and Retailers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bills of lading, invoices, or comparable December 12, 2017
documents must be obtained and maintained
for 3 years..
(40 CFR 770.30, 770.40)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This final rule also establishes an EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program to ensure that composite wood panel producers
comply with the statutory formaldehyde emission limits. Under the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program, TPCs will regularly
inspect composite wood panel producers, and conduct, oversee, and
verify formaldehyde emissions tests. TPCs who wish to participate in
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program must apply to
EPA for approval and receive recognition from EPA before certifying
products under this rule. The requirements for TPCs to receive EPA
recognition include being accredited by EPA-recognized accreditation
bodies (ABs) to specific voluntary consensus standards and to the
regulatory requirements in this rule. In addition, TPCs approved by
CARB are eligible for EPA TSCA Title VI recognition through
reciprocity, provided that they meet all applicable requirements.
Existing CARB TPCs and TPCs approved by CARB during the two-year
transition period that are recognized by EPA may certify composite wood
products under TSCA Title VI until December 12, 2018. After that time,
EPA will only recognize TPCs, including CARB-approved TPCs, who are
accredited by EPA-recognized ABs.
Under this final rule, composite wood products must be certified by
an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC. To obtain and maintain certification, panel
producers must establish quality assurance/quality control programs,
conduct regular quality control testing of product emissions, and have
an EPA-recognized TPC conduct or oversee quarterly formaldehyde
emissions testing. Composite wood products made with NAF-based or ULEF
resins may be eligible for reduced testing and/or a limited exemption
from TPC oversight after an initial testing period of three months, for
NAF, or six months, for ULEF.
This action includes labeling requirements for composite wood
products and finished goods as well as ``chain of custody'' and
recordkeeping requirements with a three year record retention period.
Products that contain de minimis amounts of composite wood products,
defined as products containing 144 square inches or less of regulated
composite wood products, are exempt from the labeling requirements, but
not the recordkeeping requirements or other provisions. TSCA section 13
import certification for composite wood products that are articles is
also required.
Notable changes from EPA's proposed regulations include the
clarification of certain terms under TSCA Title VI to exclude
renovation and construction activities, applicability of the hardwood
plywood emission standard limited to hardwood plywood made with either
a composite or a veneer core, an expanded exemption for laminated
products to products laminated with phenol-formaldehyde resins in
addition to those laminated with resins formulated with no added
formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-linking structure, a
manufactured-by date for non-exempt laminated products that is seven
years after publication of this final rule, the addition of a petition
process through which any person can petition the Agency to expand the
exemption for laminated products from the definition of the term
``hardwood plywood'', elimination of the requirement to hold lots
selected for testing until test results are received, specific
notification requirements for non-complying lots, reduced recordkeeping
for non-laminating fabricators, and allowing two years after date of
final publication of the rule, instead of one year, for importers to
certify that imports are in compliance with TSCA Title VI pursuant to
TSCA section 13.
D. Why is the Agency taking this action?
EPA is promulgating this final rule to reduce formaldehyde
emissions from composite wood products, and thereby reduce exposures to
formaldehyde and avoid adverse health effects. TSCA Title VI directs
EPA to promulgate regulations that include provisions on labeling;
chain of custody requirements; sell-through provisions; ULEF and NAF
resins; finished goods; third-party testing and certification; auditing
and reporting of TPCs; recordkeeping; enforcement; laminated products;
and exceptions from regulatory requirements for products and components
containing de minimis amounts of composite wood products.
E. What are the estimated impacts of this action?
EPA's analysis of the potential costs, benefits, and impacts
associated with this rulemaking is summarized in Table 2, and
additional detail is provided in Unit VI.A. The quantified costs of the
rule may exceed the quantified benefits under certain conditions. There
are additional unquantified benefits due to other avoided health
effects. There is not sufficient information at this time on the
relationship between
[[Page 89677]]
formaldehyde exposure and myeloid leukemia, respiratory related
effects, or reduced fertility to include a valuation estimate in the
overall benefits analysis. Although uncertainty remains regarding how
best to quantify the effect of formaldehyde exposure on these health
endpoints, reducing these effects is an important non-monetized impact
that contributes to the overall benefits of the rule.
After assessing both the costs and the benefits of the rule,
including the unquantified benefits, EPA has made a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the rule justify its costs.
Table 2--Summary of Costs and Benefits of Rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits......................................................... This rule will reduce exposures to
formaldehyde, resulting in benefits from
avoided adverse health effects. For the
subset of health effects where the results
were quantified, the estimated annualized
benefits (due to avoided incidence of eye
irritation and nasopharyngeal cancer) are
$64 million to $186 million per year using a
3% discount rate, and $26 million to $79
million per year using a 7% discount rate.
There are additional unquantified benefits
due to other avoided health effects.
Costs............................................................ The annualized costs of this rule are
estimated at $38 million to $83 million per
year using a 3% discount rate, and $43
million to $78 million per year using a 7%
discount rate.
Effects on State, Local, and Tribal Governments.................. Government entities are not expected to be
subject to the rule's requirements, which
apply to entities that accredit TPCs,
certify panel producers, or manufacture,
fabricate, distribute, or sell composite
wood products. The rule does not have a
significant intergovernmental mandate,
significant or unique effect on small
governments, or have Federalism
implications.
Small Entity Impacts............................................. This rule would impact approximately 922,000
small businesses: almost 910,000 have costs
impacts less than 1% of revenues, over 6,000
have impacts between 1% and 3%, and over
5,000 have impacts greater than 3% of
revenues. Approximately 99% of firms with
impacts over 1% have annualized costs of
less than $250 per year.
Environmental Justice and Protection of Children................. This rule 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 population or children.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Children's Environmental Health
Consistent with the Agency's Policy on Evaluating Health Risks to
Children (Ref. 2), EPA has evaluated the environmental health effects
of formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products on children. The
results of this evaluation are described in Chapter 7.7 of the economic
analysis (Ref. 3). The economic analysis only monetizes the potential
benefits associated with avoided cases of nasopharyngeal cancer and eye
irritation, some of which clearly would accrue to children. However,
some studies have reported associations between elevated levels of
formaldehyde and other health endpoints, such as respiratory symptoms.
The World Health Organization (WHO) (Ref. 4) and the Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) (Ref. 5) have raised questions
about the potential role of formaldehyde in increasing risk of asthma
or allergic conditions, particularly among children. In addition to a
study observing an association with increased chronic respiratory
symptoms and decreased pulmonary function among children (Ref. 6), 96%
of whom lived in households with formaldehyde levels below 0.075
milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m\3\), more recent studies since the WHO
and ATSDR reviews observed increased risks of allergic conditions among
adults and children, and increased severity of asthma symptoms among
children with ``wheeze'' in the previous year (Refs. 7-10). To the
extent that the reductions reported in this rule would lead to reduced
respiratory symptoms in children, the monetized estimate for cancer and
eye irritation alone is likely an underestimate. The analysis shows
that children aged zero through one represent three percent of the
individuals affected by the rule and are estimated to accrue 2% to 10%
of the rule's total quantified benefits. Children aged two through
fifteen represent twenty percent of the individuals affected by the
rule and are estimated to accrue 15% to 21% of the rule's total
quantified benefits. Exposure to formaldehyde may cause
disproportionate effects on children compared to adults. The emission
standards and other requirements of this rule will reduce emissions of
formaldehyde from composite wood products for individuals of all ages
that are exposed and children may accrue higher benefits from the
exposure reductions compared to adults.
II. Background
A. Formaldehyde Sources and Health Effects
Formaldehyde is a colorless, flammable gas at room temperature and
has a strong odor. It is found in certain resins used in the
manufacture of composite wood products (i.e., hardwood plywood,
particleboard and MDF). It is also found in certain household products
such as glues, permanent press fabrics, carpets, antiseptics,
medicines, cosmetics, dishwashing liquids, fabric softeners, shoe care
agents, lacquers, plastics and paper product coatings. It is a by-
product of combustion and certain other natural processes. Examples of
sources of formaldehyde gas inside homes include cigarette smoke,
unvented, fuel-burning appliances (e.g., gas stoves, kerosene space
heaters), and composite wood products made using formaldehyde-based
resins (Ref. 5). In addition, formaldehyde is a by-product of human
metabolism, and thus endogenous levels are present in the body.
Formaldehyde is an irritant and the National Toxicology Program
(NTP) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) have
classified it as a known human carcinogen based on sufficient evidence
in humans that formaldehyde causes nasopharyngeal cancer and leukemia
(Refs. 11-12), a classification supported by the National Research
Council of the National Academy of Sciences (NRC) in their 2014 review
of the NTP assessment (Ref. 13). Depending on concentration,
formaldehyde can cause eye, nose, and throat irritation, even when
exposure is of relatively short duration. In the indoor environment,
sensory reactions and various symptoms as a result of mucous membrane
irritation are
[[Page 89678]]
potential effects, including respiratory symptoms as previously
discussed. Formaldehyde is also listed under section 112(b)(1) of the
Clean Air Act as a hazardous air pollutant (Ref. 14).
In 1991, EPA classified formaldehyde as a probable human
carcinogen, ``based on limited evidence in humans, and sufficient
evidence in animals,'' and derived an inhalation unit risk factor for
assessing formaldehyde cancer risk. The risk factor and supporting
documentation is included in EPA's Integrated Risk Information System
(IRIS) database (https://www.epa.gov/iris/) (Ref. 15). The IRIS program
in EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) completed a draft
assessment of the potential cancer and non-cancer health effects that
may result from chronic exposure to formaldehyde by inhalation (Ref.
16). This draft IRIS assessment was peer reviewed by the NRC in 2011.
The draft formaldehyde IRIS assessment is being revised in response to
the NRC peer review and public comments, and the final assessment will
be posted on the IRIS database. In the interim, this final rule
estimates benefits using the 1991 IRIS inhalation unit risk value of
1.3 x 10-\5\ per [micro]g/m\3\ (Ref. 15).
In addition, EPA used concentration-response functions to estimate
the impact of exposure to formaldehyde on eye irritation for use in the
non-cancer benefits assessment to support this rule, as discussed in
the proposal. The derivation of these concentration-response functions,
uncertainties, and EPA's proposed approach for using the concentration-
response functions in the benefits assessment were externally peer
reviewed (Ref. 17). While the economic analysis of cancer benefits is
based on the unit risk, which is a reasonable upper bound on the
central estimate of risk, the non-cancer benefits were evaluated using
the estimated concentration-response functions which reflect the
central effect estimates rather than upper bounds.
B. History of This Rulemaking
1. The CARB ATCM. In 2007, CARB issued an ATCM to reduce
formaldehyde emissions from hardwood plywood with a composite or veneer
core, MDF, and particleboard, products referred to collectively as
composite wood products. The CARB ATCM was approved on April 18, 2008,
by the California Office of Administrative Law and the first emission
standards took effect on January 1, 2009 (Ref. 1). Additional emission
standards followed through 2012. The CARB ATCM requires manufacturers
to meet formaldehyde emission standards for the regulated composite
wood products that are sold, offered for sale, supplied, imported or
manufactured for use in California. The CARB ATCM also requires that
compliant composite wood products be used in finished goods sold,
offered for sale, supplied, imported or manufactured for sale in
California. The CARB ATCM does not apply to hardwood plywood and
particleboard materials when installed in manufactured homes subject to
regulations promulgated by the United States Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD).
On March 24, 2008, 25 organizations and approximately 5,000
individuals petitioned EPA under section 21 of TSCA to use its
authority under section 6 of TSCA to adopt the CARB ATCM nationally. On
June 27, 2008, EPA denied the petitioners' request to immediately
pursue a TSCA section 6 rulemaking, stating that the available
information at the time was insufficient to support an evaluation of
whether formaldehyde emitted from hardwood plywood, particleboard, and
medium-density fiberboard presents or will present an unreasonable risk
to human health (including cancer and non-cancer endpoints) under TSCA
section 6 (Ref. 18). On December 3, 2008, EPA issued an Advance Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) that announced EPA's intention to
investigate whether and what regulatory or other action might be
appropriate to protect against risks posed by formaldehyde emitted from
the products covered by the CARB ATCM as well as other pressed wood
products. (Ref. 19)
2. The Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products Act. The
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products Act, or Title VI of
TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2697, was enacted on July 7, 2010 (Ref. 20). The
statute establishes formaldehyde emission standards that are identical
to the CARB ATCM Phase 2 standards for hardwood plywood with a
composite or veneer core, MDF, and particleboard sold, supplied,
offered for sale, or manufactured in the United States. Pursuant to
TSCA section 3(7), the definition of the term ``manufacture'' includes
import. The statute directs EPA to issue final implementing regulations
by January 1, 2013. The Act specifically covers composite wood products
used in manufactured housing and directs HUD to update its regulation
to ensure that it reflects the emission standards in the Act. TSCA
Title VI does not give EPA the authority to raise or lower the
established emission standards, and EPA must generally promulgate the
implementing regulations in a manner that ensures compliance with the
standards. Congress directed EPA to consider a number of elements for
inclusion in the implementing regulations, many of which are aspects of
the CARB program.
3. EPA's proposed rules. On June 10, 2013, EPA issued two Notices
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRMs) containing proposed requirements to
implement TSCA Title VI. The first NPRM (the TPC proposal) included a
proposed framework for a TSCA Title VI TPC Program (Ref. 21), while the
second NPRM included the remainder of the proposed implementing
regulations for TSCA Title VI (Ref. 22).
The initial comment period on the TPC proposal was scheduled to end
on August 9, 2013, but was extended twice, ultimately closing on
September 25, 2013. Information pertaining specifically to the TPC
proposal, including the comments received, can be found at https://www.regulations.gov under docket number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-0380.
The initial comment period on the implementation proposal was
scheduled to end on August 9, 2013, but was also extended twice,
ultimately closing on October 9, 2013. The comment period was
specifically reopened for additional comments on the laminated products
issue from April 8, 2014 to May 26, 2014, including one extension. EPA
also held a public meeting on laminated products on April 28, 2014.
Information pertaining specifically to the implementation proposal,
including the comments received during both comment periods, can be
found at https://www.regulations.gov under docket number EPA-HQ-OPPT-
2012-0018.
EPA is finalizing both proposed rules in a single final rule under
RIN 2070-AJ44. Although this final rule document and supporting
information will appear in docket EPA-HQ-OPPT-2016-0461, both dockets
for the proposed rules (EPA-HQ-OPPT-2011-0380 and EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-
0018) contain supporting information with respect to this rule and
should be considered merged for the purpose of this final rule.
III. Provisions of This Final Rule
A. Scope and Applicability
1. Composite wood product. The final rule defines the term
``composite wood product'' as including only those products subject to
a formaldehyde emission standard, i.e., hardwood plywood with a
composite or veneer core, MDF, and particleboard. EPA has also
clarified throughout the regulatory text whether particular provisions
apply
[[Page 89679]]
to panels, component parts, or finished goods, or all three.
2. Finished good. EPA's proposed rule included a definition of the
term ``finished good'' that was virtually identical to the definition
in TSCA Title VI. Although EPA did not receive any comments directly
addressing the proposed definition, other comments on the scope and
applicability of the regulation have caused EPA to clarify what is
meant by the term ``finished good.'' Specifically, EPA has determined
that Congressional intent with respect to the regulation of finished
goods under TSCA Title VI was to regulate goods that move freely
through commerce and that are produced through a manufacturing process
at a manufacturing facility, not objects like buildings or other
structures that are constructed on site and become a permanent addition
to real property Thus, the production of manufactured housing or
prefabricated buildings at a factory is covered by this final rule,
while the construction of housing or other real property on site, or
the assembly and placement of prefabricated buildings or manufactured
housing at a site, is not. The NAICS, used by Federal statistical
agencies to classify business establishments for data analysis
purposes, recognizes the significant differences between these
activities by including the production of manufactured housing or
prefabricated buildings in the Manufacturing economic sector rather
than the Construction economic sector. More specifically, the
production of both manufactured housing and prefabricated buildings is
included in the Wood Product Manufacturing subsector, along with the
production of composite wood product panels. Therefore, to ensure that
this distinction is clear, the definition of ``finished good''
incorporated into this final rule specifically excludes buildings and
similar structures that are constructed on-site.
3. Hardwood plywood. a. General definition. As proposed, EPA is
incorporating the basic statutory definition of hardwood plywood and
the statutory exclusions into the regulation with the addition of
veneer core to the list of cores in the statutory definition. As TSCA
section 601(b)(2)(A) establishes a formaldehyde emission standard for
hardwood plywood with a veneer core, EPA is including the phrase
``veneer core'' in the regulatory definition of hardwood plywood to
avoid any potential confusion over whether hardwood plywood made with a
veneer core is covered by the regulations. In addition, as discussed in
the next section, the regulatory definition specifically includes
laminated products, except for those laminated products made by
attaching a wood or woody grass veneer with a phenol-formaldehyde resin
or a resin formulated with no added formaldehyde as part of the resin
cross-linking structure to a compliant core or platform. The Agency has
also included a petition process through which any person can petition
the Agency to expand the exemption for laminated products from the
definition of the term ``hardwood plywood.''
The statutory definition of hardwood plywood only includes products
that are panels and that are intended for interior use. As part of this
rulemaking, EPA convened a Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel
(Ref. 23). More information on the Panel process can be found in the
preamble to the proposed rule (Ref. 22). Among the recommendations made
by the SBAR Panel was a recommendation that EPA, to reduce uncertainty
in the regulated community as to which products are covered, include
definitions of the term ``panel'' and the phrase ``intended for
interior use'' (Ref. 23). Accordingly, EPA is defining the term
``panel'' as a thin (usually less than two inches thick), flat, usually
rectangular piece of particleboard, medium density fiberboard or
hardwood plywood. Embossing or imparting of an irregular surface on the
composite wood products by the original panel producer during pressing
does not remove the product from this definition. EPA has determined,
based on the comments received, this definition is consistent with both
the CARB ATCM and common industry usage. EPA has added the
parenthetical indicating that panels are usually less than two inches
thick to provide some additional guidance on panel thinness (Ref. 24).
The definition of panel also includes a sentence added because EPA
agrees with those commenters who stated that the purpose of the CARB
ATCM and of TSCA Title VI is to regulate composite wood products as
they come out of the press. Finally, EPA also added a sentence to
clarify the term ``panel'' does not include items made for the purpose
of research and development.
EPA is also promulgating a definition of the phrase ``intended for
interior use.'' Recognizing that the primary purpose of TSCA Title VI
is to reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products inside
buildings and similar living areas in recreational vehicles, EPA's
definition includes products intended for use or storage inside a
building or recreational vehicle, or constructed in such a way that
they are not suitable for long term use in a location exposed to the
elements. EPA received very few comments on this definition, and is
finalizing the definition as proposed. The purpose of this definition
is to help explain coverage of miscellaneous finished goods, such as
sporting goods, that are made of at least some hardwood plywood and
that may be used indoors or outdoors. This definition does not exclude
windows and exterior doors, including garage doors, which are clearly
intended to be covered by TSCA Title VI. The statute contains specific
exemptions for windows that contain less than five percent by volume of
composite wood products, exterior doors and garage doors that contain
less than three percent by volume of composite wood products, and
exterior and garage doors that are made with NAF-based or ULEF resins.
TSCA Title VI also directs EPA to determine whether the definition
of hardwood plywood should exempt engineered veneer. Engineered veneer
is a type of veneer that is created by dyeing and gluing together
veneer leaves in a mold to produce a block. The block is then sliced
into leaves of veneer with a designed appearance that is highly
repeatable. EPA did not propose to exempt any engineered veneer because
EPA did not have any information to support such an exemption. One
commenter, the Hardwood Plywood and Veneer Association (HPVA),
clarified that it did not consider the production of engineered veneer,
or the resulting engineered veneer product, to be hardwood plywood
(Ref. 25). HPVA noted that engineered veneer, once manufactured, could
be used as a component in the production of hardwood plywood. EPA
agrees that engineered veneer, by itself, is not hardwood plywood
because it is not an assembly of veneer plies joined by adhesive to a
core. EPA interprets TSCA Title VI and its implementing regulations to
apply to hardwood plywood that incorporates engineered veneer, but not
to the production of engineered veneer itself.
b. Laminated products. As discussed in more detail in this Unit,
the definition of ``hardwood plywood'' exempts laminated products made
by attaching a wood or woody grass veneer to a compliant core or
platform with either a phenol-formaldehyde resin or a resin formulated
with no added formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-linking
structure. Additionally, the Agency has included a petition process
through which any person can petition
[[Page 89680]]
the Agency to expand the exemption for laminated products from the
definition of the term ``hardwood plywood''. Further, this final rule
establishes the manufactured-by date for laminated products as December
12, 2023. After that date, producers of laminated products that are
exempt from the definition of ``hardwood plywood'' must maintain
records that demonstrate eligibility for the exemption in order to
claim the exemption. Also after that date, other laminated products
will have to be produced in compliance with the testing and
certification requirements applicable to hardwood plywood. EPA is also
promulgating a definition of laminated product that limits
applicability of the term to products made with composite wood product
platforms. As is the case with any component part, composite wood
products used to make laminated products must be either certified
pursuant to this regulation or compliant with the provisions for
composite wood products made with NAF-based or ULEF resins. Also, as
discussed in this Unit, the term ``laminated product'' is further
limited to those products that are produced by fabricators of the
component parts or finished goods in which the laminated products are
incorporated. Regardless of whether laminated product producers are
producing exempt or non-exempt laminated products, they are fabricators
and must also comply with the fabricator recordkeeping requirements as
of the manufactured-by date for composite wood products, which is
December 12, 2017.
i. Background. TSCA Title VI defines laminated product as a product
made by affixing a wood veneer to a particleboard, MDF, or veneer-core
platform. The statutory definition further provides that laminated
products are component parts used in the construction or assembly of a
finished good, and that a laminated product is produced by the
manufacturer or fabricator of the finished good in which the product is
incorporated. Congress granted EPA the authority to promulgate a
modified definition of laminated product through rulemaking. The
statute also directs EPA to conduct a rulemaking process pursuant to
TSCA section 601(d) that uses all available and relevant information
from State authorities, industry, and other available sources of such
information, and analyzes that information to determine, at the
discretion of the Administrator, whether the definition of the term
``hardwood plywood'' should exempt any laminated product. Section
601(d) of TSCA states, among other things, that EPA must promulgate
implementing regulations in a manner that ensures compliance with the
statutory emission standards.
The CARB ATCM defines laminated product as a finished good or
component part of a finished good made by a fabricator in which a
laminate or laminates are affixed to a platform. Under this definition,
if the platform consists of a composite wood product, the platform must
comply with the applicable emission standards. The CARB ATCM defines
fabricator as any person who uses composite wood products to make
finished goods, including producers of laminated products. Laminate is
defined under the CARB ATCM as a veneer or other material affixed as a
decorative surface to a platform. Under the CARB ATCM, fabricators or
laminated product manufacturers have different requirements compared
with requirements for manufacturers of composite wood products. In
particular, fabricators do not need to conduct formaldehyde emissions
testing or comply with third-party certification requirements; instead,
fabricators need to ensure that they are using compliant composite wood
products and they have recordkeeping and labeling obligations.
CARB is currently considering changes to its ATCM. At a workshop in
March 2014, CARB presented a discussion draft of a proposal to set a
formaldehyde emission standard of 0.13 parts per million (ppm) for
unfinished laminated products made with wood veneers, but not require
testing or certification. If the platform is a composite wood product,
the platform would have to be certified (Ref. 26).
Given the importance of the laminated products issue to so many
commenters, the potential impacts on the large number of laminated
product producers, and the fact that CARB was presenting new ideas
regarding laminated products, EPA decided to reopen the comment period
on this issue and specifically solicit public comment on the approach
in the March 2014 CARB proposal, as well as suggestions in the comments
received during EPA's 2013 public comment period on the TSCA Title VI
formaldehyde regulations.
ii. Final rule provisions. As directed by Congress, EPA has
evaluated available and relevant information from State authorities,
industry, and other sources to determine whether the definition of the
term ``hardwood plywood'' should exempt engineered veneer or any
laminated product. For the reasons described in this Unit, EPA has
decided to exempt those laminated products made by attaching a wood or
woody grass veneer to a core or platform consisting of compliant MDF,
compliant particleboard, or compliant veneer, with either a phenol-
formaldehyde resin or a resin formulated with no added formaldehyde as
part of the resin cross-linking structure. EPA considers these
provisions for laminated products made with phenol-formaldehyde resins
and laminated products made with resins formulated with no added
formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-linking structure to be
mutually complementary but independent provisions, such that either one
could be implemented even in the absence of the other. Additionally,
the Agency has included a petition process through which any person can
petition the Agency to expand the exemption for laminated products from
the definition of the term ``hardwood plywood''.
1. Information reviewed by EPA. EPA reviewed a wide variety of
available information on resins, the chemistry of formaldehyde-based
resins, and formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products. Urea-
formaldehyde resins have been around since the 1920s and they have been
the most common resins used in the manufacture of hardwood plywood,
particleboard, and MDF. Urea-formaldehyde resins have several
advantages, including low cost, a rapid cure rate, and a light color.
These resins are generally used for interior applications because they
are not water-resistant. As described by CARB, ``[t]he reactions that
occur during UF resin synthesis are reversible. During the forward
reaction, water is eliminated. However, if moisture interacts with the
UF resin, depolymerization may occur, leading to hydrolysis or the
release of formaldehyde'' (Ref. 27). This characteristic of
reversibility, in addition to the presence of small amounts of free
formaldehyde in the resins, leads to continuing formaldehyde emissions
from composite wood products made with urea-formaldehyde resins,
sometimes for years, although the emission potential decreases with
increasing age (Ref. 28).
The available emissions data from composite wood products made with
urea-formaldehyde resins bears this out--composite wood products made
with urea-formaldehyde resins can have high formaldehyde emissions. For
example, in a study of the formaldehyde emission rates of products
likely to be found or used in California homes, the results of 19
samples of unfinished wood products made with urea-formaldehyde resins
ranged from 8.6 to
[[Page 89681]]
1580 [micro]g/m\2\/h (Ref. 29). Using the conversion used by CARB (Ref.
30), the highest emissions translate to 1.09 ppm. Although the median
was 164 [micro]g/m\2\/h, which translates to 0.11 ppm, the study
results demonstrate that wood products made with urea-formaldehyde
resins are as likely to have high formaldehyde emissions as not (Refs.
28-29). Further, the results of a 2003 survey of wood product
manufacturers conducted by CARB in support of their rulemaking
indicated that the highest formaldehyde-emitting composite wood
products were hardwood plywood, particleboard, and medium-density
fiberboard for interior applications (Ref. 27). CARB further determined
that the majority of these products are made with urea-formaldehyde
resins, which emit more formaldehyde than products made with other
resins (Ref. 27). Finally, the results of CARB's testing of
particleboard and MDF laminated using urea-formaldehyde resins confirms
that products laminated with urea-formaldehyde resins can have high
formaldehyde emissions (Ref. 31). Although the median of the samples
tested in either a finished or an unfinished state was 0.09 ppm (Ref.
30), many samples were well above that, two of them were over 1.25 ppm.
As mentioned by commenters, advancements in resin technology, which
have accelerated due to the CARB ATCM, have made it possible to make
composite wood products that have very low formaldehyde emissions, even
if urea-formaldehyde resins are used (Refs. 32-33). CARB described
strategies for reducing formaldehyde emissions from composite wood
products made with urea formaldehyde resins (Ref. 27). These include
modifications to the resins themselves, such as reductions in the mole
ratio of formaldehyde to urea or the addition of scavengers such as
hexamine or melamine, and changes in the production process, such as
reduced press times or temperatures. Some commenters noted the
difficulty in meeting the CARB ATCM emission standard for hardwood
plywood, even with advanced urea formaldehyde resin technology (Refs.
34-35).
EPA determined that there are several other formaldehyde-based
resins that are used in the production of composite wood products.
Phenol-formaldehyde resins, also developed in the early 20th century,
have ``outstanding durability and high polymer strength due to good
adhesion to wood surfaces.'' (Ref. 27). Composite wood products made
with phenol formaldehyde resins are typically used for exterior
applications because of their high water resistance (Ref. 27). However,
phenol formaldehyde resins are dark in color, making them unsuitable
for some decorative applications, and they require longer press times
and higher press temperatures (Ref. 27). In contrast to the synthesis
of urea-formaldehyde resins, the reactions involved in phenol
formaldehyde resin synthesis are more stable, resulting in composite
wood products with comparatively low formaldehyde emission potentials
(Ref. 28). The data reviewed by EPA support this conclusion. In
particular, the California homes study (Ref. 29), the Riedlinger study
(Ref. 36), discussed in Unit III.F. of the preamble to the proposed
Implementation Rule (Ref. 22), and test data from a hardboard
manufacturer (Ref. 37) provide evidence that products made with phenol-
formaldehyde resins have lower formaldehyde emissions than products
made with urea-formaldehyde resins. In the California homes study, the
results from four samples of unfinished wood products made with phenol-
formaldehyde resins ranged from 4.1 to 9.2 [micro]g/m\2\/h or, using
CARB's conversion, 0.0028 ppm to 0.0063 ppm. These results are markedly
lower than the results from the urea-formaldehyde products in the same
study (Ref. 29). As discussed in the proposed rule, the Riedlinger
study was designed to evaluate the effects of higher temperatures and
humidities on formaldehyde emissions from wood products made with
different resin systems (Ref. 36). The study involved testing
particleboard panels constructed in the laboratory using resin recipes
that, according to the study designers, are a close approximation to
recipes used in the particleboard industry. The particleboard panels
constructed from urea-formaldehyde resins were the highest-emitting
panels, at 0.063 ppm after 7 days of conditioning when tested at
standard temperature and humidity for the ASTM D-6007 method. The
formaldehyde emission rate for the melamine-urea-formaldehyde panels
with the same conditions was a close second at 0.057 ppm. The
formaldehyde emission rate for the panels made with phenol-formaldehyde
resins was much lower, at 0.011 ppm. Finally, a hardboard manufacturer
submitted test data on hardboard produced with a phenol-formaldehyde
resin (Ref. 37). As described by the submitter, the test data show
results well below ``any emission threshold defined in the
legislation.''
Melamine-formaldehyde resins are also available. Being resistant to
moist conditions, they are most commonly used for exterior and semi-
exterior applications, but they are also used for decorative laminates,
paper treating, and paper coating (Ref. 27). The synthesis of melamine-
formaldehyde resins is similar to that of urea-formaldehyde resins,
except that melamine is a stronger nucleophile than urea, resulting in
a faster and more complete reaction between melamine and formaldehyde
than between urea and formaldehyde (Ref. 27). Melamine-formaldehyde
resins are lighter in color than phenol-formaldehyde resins, but the
cost of melamine makes these resins relatively expensive. The cost of
melamine contributed to the development of melamine-urea-formaldehyde
resins, which are also water resistant at a lower cost. However, these
resins may not provide the low formaldehyde emission potential that
would be expected from a melamine-formaldehyde resin without urea (Ref.
38), a concern that is supported by the limited results of the
Riedlinger study (Ref. 36).
There are limited formaldehyde emissions data available on
melamine-formaldehyde resins without added urea. CARB described a study
of formaldehyde emissions from MDF made with melamine-formaldehyde
resins and a study of particleboard made with two different melamine-
formaldehyde resin formulations (Ref. 27). Formaldehyde emissions from
these two studies were measured by test methods that are not directly
comparable to the TSCA Title VI emission standards, which are presented
in terms of the ASTM E-1333-96 (2002) method (Ref. 39). Using
comparisons developed by CARB (Ref. 40), it appears that the results
from both studies are within the range of the formaldehyde emission
standards established by TSCA Title VI. However, in light of the
limited amount of data, and the uncertainties involved in comparing
results from different test methods, EPA is unable to determine that
this is the case.
EPA also reviewed the documents available from CARB's rulemaking
process for the ATCM. In developing the CARB ATCM, CARB did a
significant amount of research into available resins and their relative
formaldehyde emissions potentials. CARB commissioned a study on
formaldehyde and toluene diisocyanate emissions from interior
residential sources (Ref. 29). In 2003, CARB also surveyed composite
wood product manufacturers across the U.S., asking them for a variety
of information including formaldehyde emissions data from products.
This research led CARB to conclude that formaldehyde emission control
[[Page 89682]]
measures for hardwood plywood, medium-density fiberboard, and
particleboard were warranted, because these three products were
primarily being made with urea-formaldehyde resins that ``have the
highest formaldehyde emission rates.'' (Ref. 27). According to CARB,
formaldehyde emission rates from other composite wood products,
products used primarily in exterior applications, such as oriented
strand board, hardboard, and peg board, were about 90% lower and
contributed far less to formaldehyde concentrations in California. CARB
went on to note that the primary composite wood products using phenol-
formaldehyde resins were oriented strand board and softwood, or
structural plywood, which were mainly used for exterior sidings. Thus,
many of the products excluded from the CARB ATCM, and later from TSCA
title VI, such as hardboard, oriented strand board, structural plywood,
structural panels, and structural composite lumber, were so excluded
because CARB determined that they were already being made with resins
with limited formaldehyde emissions potential. Based on the available
information that EPA has reviewed as part of this rulemaking, EPA
agrees with CARB's determination that composite wood products made with
phenol-formaldehyde resins are much less likely to emit formaldehyde
than products made with urea-formaldehyde resins.
EPA also observes that, as noted by a commenter (Ref. 25), the
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) 2009 green
building certification program allowed a low-emitting materials credit
for the use of composite wood products made with no added urea-
formaldehyde resins. This credit was available without formaldehyde
emissions testing. A 2013 interpretation of the requirements allowed
composite wood products that met the CARB ATCM standard for a ULEF
exemption to obtain the credit, but only with the CARB-required testing
to confirm low formaldehyde emissions. This credit has been expanded in
LEED v4, the most recent LEED standard, to encompass materials that,
with testing, meet the CARB ATCM standard for either a NAF or ULEF
exemption.
EPA carefully considered all of the public comments, as well as
information that EPA compiled on the wood products industry in order to
develop this rule and analyze its economic impacts. Based on the
information provided by commenters on the differences between hardwood
plywood production and laminated product production, EPA agrees with
the numerous commenters who asserted that laminated product producers
are truly different from composite wood product mills. It is EPA's
understanding that laminated product producers are generally smaller
businesses that make fewer individual items per product type than mills
do, although EPA recognizes that this is not universally true. There
are also many more laminated product producers (an estimated 7,000 to
14,000) than composite wood product mills (an estimated 90, operated by
54 firms) (Ref. 3). Laminated product producers are often small custom
shops who laminate on a per order basis. While each laminated product
would not have to be tested, as some commenters asserted, the product
grouping conventions used by TPCs and mills to reduce the number and
frequency of required tests could still result in significantly more
tests for a given production volume for a custom shop as compared to a
hardwood plywood mill. In addition, because composite wood product
mills typically make many more individual items of each product type
than most laminated product producers, mills can amortize the fixed
costs of testing over a larger volume of production, resulting in only
a small cost increase per unit.
EPA considered the costs that laminated product producers would
bear under a variety of options to address formaldehyde emissions from
laminated products, including options involving an emission standard
but no testing and reduced testing without certification, as well as
the option chosen for this final rule. As more fully described in
Chapter 2 of the economic analysis (Ref. 3), EPA estimated the size of
the laminated product producer universe, how many of them used urea-
formaldehyde resins, and how much it would cost for testing,
certification, and switching from a urea-formaldehyde resin to a
phenol-formaldehyde resin or a resin formulated with no added
formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-linking structure. EPA assumed
that laminated product producers would switch from a urea-formaldehyde
resin to a qualified resin, or purchase already-veneered panels from a
hardwood plywood panel producer or another laminated product producer,
if it made economic sense for them to do so. Taking all of this into
account, EPA estimated that the aggregate annualized costs for
laminated product producers would be $26 million to $72 million using a
three percent discount rate, and $26 million to $62 million using a
seven percent discount rate.
Also as described in the economic analysis (Ref. 3), EPA estimated
the human health benefits that would result from reductions in
formaldehyde exposure attributable to this final rule. Because most
domestic composite wood product panel producers are producing only CARB
compliant products, exposure reductions due to this rule are expected
to come primarily from two sources: Laminated products and imported
composite wood products. EPA was able to quantify the benefits
attributable to avoided eye irritation and nasopharyngeal cancer, but
there are additional unquantified benefits due to other avoided health
effects. There is not sufficient information at this time on the
relationship between formaldehyde exposure and myeloid leukemia,
respiratory related effects, or reduced fertility to include a
valuation estimate in the overall benefits analysis. The quantified
benefits attributable to reductions in laminated product emissions are
$35 million to $104 million using a three percent discount rate, and
$13 million to $42 million using a seven percent discount rate. These
benefits represent approximately half of all quantified benefits
attributable to the final rule.
2. Rationale for exemption. EPA based its proposed exemption for
laminated products made with NAF-based resins on a reading of the
statute that requires any exemption for laminated products to be
promulgated in accordance with TSCA section 601(d)(1), in a manner that
ensures compliance with the statutory emission standards. EPA's
rationale was that, if the platform complied with the applicable
emission standards for the platform, the addition of a veneer with a
NAF-based resin was unlikely to cause the resulting laminated product
to exceed the applicable emission standard for the platform. Although
some commenters supported the proposed exemption, others thought it
wasn't broad enough, and still others noted that laminated products
were covered by TSCA Title VI as hardwood plywood, and should,
therefore, be required to meet the hardwood plywood emission standard.
Although EPA referred to the laminated products exemption in the
proposed rule as a NAF exemption, this terminology likely causes
confusion between the exemption for laminated products and the limited
testing and certification exemptions discussed in Unit III.G. that are
available to panel producers who use NAF-based or ULEF resins. EPA is
therefore avoiding the use of the term ``NAF-based'' in connection with
the laminated products exemption in this final rule.
Upon further reflection, and consideration of public comments, EPA
[[Page 89683]]
has concluded that the better reading of the statute is that EPA need
not make a finding that exempt laminated products will meet the
statutory emission standards, whether for hardwood plywood or for the
underlying platform. Rather, EPA must make a reasoned determination,
based upon a review of all of the available and relevant information,
that some or all laminated products should be exempt. This provides EPA
with the discretion to consider a wide variety of factors, including
formaldehyde emission potential, business demographics, and resin
chemistry, as well as costs and benefits. EPA views the formaldehyde
emission potential and the benefits of reductions in emissions as the
most important considerations. The purpose of TSCA Title VI is to
reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products in order to
protect human health. The central feature of Title VI is the range of
formaldehyde emissions that Congress established considering all of the
factors then known. And Congress chose to include laminated products
within the definition of hardwood plywood unless EPA exempts them.
Consequently, although EPA has concluded that Title VI does not require
strict compliance with the standards as the test for EPA's exemption
decision, EPA continues to believe that consideration of the
formaldehyde emission potential of laminated products and the estimated
health benefits from reductions in such emissions are the most
important considerations, and the statutory emission standards provide
the best baseline for evaluating these considerations.
That having been said, Congress most likely treated laminated
products differently from other covered products because of the real
differences between laminated product producers and composite wood
product mills (see earlier discussion). Notably, laminated product
producers are generally of a smaller size and more numerous as compared
to mills. Thus, EPA has carefully considered the costs and benefits in
deciding whether to exempt laminated products, including the costs and
benefits of testing and certification and of allowing time for the
demonstration and development of lower-emitting resin substitutions. In
this regard, an integral part of this determination is the decision to
establish the manufactured-by date for laminated products at December
12, 2023, as discussed later in this Unit. EPA's decision to retain
coverage of laminated products other than products made by using,
during the lamination step, either a phenol-formaldehyde resin or a
resin formulated with no added formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-
linking structure hinges in part upon laminated product producers
having the ability to fully evaluate options for compliance.
Congress also clearly modeled portions of TSCA Title VI on the CARB
ATCM. For laminated products, Congress expressly included information
from State authorities among the things that EPA must consider in
deciding whether to exempt any laminated products. At that time, CARB's
regulations did not regulate laminated products as hardwood plywood.
However, Congress clearly did not direct EPA to mimic CARB exactly. EPA
therefore has considered not only what CARB's regulations were at that
time but also the current concerns and direction of their program.
Some commenters supported an exemption for laminated products that
are made without urea-formaldehyde resins. In fact, one observed that
CARB, in a presentation at an August 2013 stakeholder meeting on the
differences between the ATCM and the EPA proposal, suggested an
alternative approach to laminated products that would not require
testing or certification unless the producer uses urea-formaldehyde
resins (Ref. 41). As previously discussed, EPA knows of two other
formaldehyde-based resins that would fit within the suggested category
of no-added urea-formaldehyde resins, i.e., phenol-formaldehyde resin
and melamine-formaldehyde resin. At the present time, EPA has
determined that the available data supports an exemption for laminated
products made with phenol-formaldehyde resins, but not an exemption for
products made with melamine-formaldehyde resins.
Many more commenters supported other options, such as an exemption
for all laminated products or the CARB discussion proposal of March
2014. EPA is not promulgating an exemption for all laminated products
because the available information indicates that laminated products
made with urea-formaldehyde resins can have high formaldehyde emissions
and laminated product producers have several alternatives to choose
from in determining how best to comply with this final rule. Many
laminated product producers are already using resins formulated with
no-added formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-linking structure
(Ref. 3) and more are likely to switch to that type of resin or a
phenol-formaldehyde resin in order to avoid having to comply with the
testing and certification requirements. Laminated product producers can
choose to purchase already-veneered panels if that is more cost-
effective. Laminated product producers can also choose to consult with
an EPA TSC Title VI TPC to design a workable testing and certification
program.
With respect to the CARB discussion proposal, it is a significant
improvement over a complete exemption. However, EPA is concerned that,
without either a requirement to use phenol-formaldehyde resins or
resins formulated with no-added formaldehyde as part of the resin
cross-linking structure or a requirement for some testing, there is no
assurance that the products will meet CARB's suggested emission
standard of 0.13 ppm. The record, especially the CARB/AHFA data set,
demonstrates that some laminated products have high formaldehyde
emissions, so a requirement that the platform be compliant does not
ensure that the laminated product will also be compliant, particularly
if urea-formaldehyde resins are used.
This final rule also does not include an exemption for laminated
products made with compliant platforms and ULEF resins that contain
urea-formaldehyde. The resins eligible for this exemption can be
defined by their composition. For the purpose of this exemption,
because specific resin formulation information was not available for
the formaldehyde emissions data that EPA reviewed on phenol-
formaldehyde resins, EPA has defined phenol-formaldehyde resin to be a
resin that is primarily composed of phenol and formaldehyde, with no
added urea. Similarly, the other resins eligible for the laminated
products exemption do not contain added formaldehyde as part of the
resin cross-linking structure by definition. However, the available
information reviewed by EPA in this rulemaking indicates that the only
way to determine whether urea-formaldehyde resins are also ULEF resins
is through emissions testing. Indeed, in responding to another
commenter's suggestion that EPA approve resin systems that demonstrate
consistent compliance with emission limits when properly used, one
commenter stated that ULEF is not a resin type (Ref. 42). According to
this commenter, the term describes an emission result when measured in
a variety of different tests over different time frames and a resin
that meets the ULEF limits in one product setting and application may
not in another. This commenter noted that application rates, laminate
and substrate porosity and
[[Page 89684]]
other factors affect emissions from products made with ULEF resins. EPA
agrees that there are a number of factors that affect the formaldehyde
emission rates of products made with ULEF resins and that, in order to
exempt laminated products made with ULEF resins, EPA would have to
require upfront testing to demonstrate that product emissions are in
the range of the statutory emission limits. There would be no
meaningful difference between the testing EPA would require of
laminated product producers to demonstrate low emissions and the
testing that will be required of mills who are applying for the limited
exemption from testing and TPC oversight for products made with ULEF
resins. Laminated product producers are free to take advantage of the
third-party certification exemption or reduced testing provisions under
Sec. 770.18.
In deciding on the scope and structure of the laminated products
exemption, EPA was mindful of the scope of the CARB regulations and the
consideration being given by CARB to amendment of those regulations,
and EPA consulted extensively with CARB. It would not be appropriate
for EPA to mirror the current CARB regulations and simply exempt
laminated products, for the reasons stated above, and also because CARB
is considering amendment to its regulations to cover laminated
products. EPA cannot speculate whether or how CARB will amend its
regulations, but the approach taken in today's rule is consistent
overall with the concept of CARB's March 2014 discussion proposal, in
that it uses the upper bound of the Title VI emission standards as the
most important guide in determining whether laminated products should
be exempted. While CARB's proposal would not have required testing and
certification, for the reasons stated above, EPA is concerned that a
program without testing or certification would not be effective in
achieving the objective to keep emissions below the target level. Thus,
EPA has determined today's rule properly accounts both for CARB's
regulatory direction and for the numerous additional considerations
appropriate under Title VI, as discussed herein.
3. Manufactured-by date for laminated products. EPA has determined
that testing and certification is necessary for laminated products
unless they are made by attaching a wood or woody grass veneer to a
compliant platform with either a phenol-formaldehyde resin or a resin
formulated with no-added formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-
linking structure. However, EPA agrees with the numerous commenters who
argued that EPA could not realistically expect those laminated product
producers that are currently regulated under CARB only as fabricators
to attain compliance with this rule's testing and certification
requirements within a year. As a result of EPA's consideration of the
public comments and EPA's review of the available and relevant
information on laminated products as directed by the statute, EPA is
establishing the manufactured-by date for laminated products at
December 12, 2023. After the manufactured-by date for composite wood
products, which is December 12, 2017, all laminated product producers
must comply with the general requirements for fabricators, i.e., they
must use compliant cores or platforms, they must keep fabricator
records, and they must follow the labeling requirements for
fabricators. After the manufactured-by date for laminated products,
laminated product producers making exempt laminated products also must,
as a condition of the exemption, maintain records demonstrating that
exempt products made after the manufactured-by date for laminated
products are eligible for the exemption. Also after the manufactured-by
date for laminated products, producers of non-exempt laminated products
must comply with the testing, certification, and recordkeeping
requirements for hardwood plywood in addition to the requirements for
fabricators.
EPA recognizes the significant challenges described by many
commenters in switching from urea-formaldehyde resins to other resin
technologies and EPA realizes that it will take considerable time in
some instances to successfully do so. Not only must fabricators find a
way to make their products with new resin technology, they must also
have time to observe how these products perform in use. Several
commenters mentioned the difficulty of evaluating new resin
technologies for products that have 25-year warranties. In addition,
because the formaldehyde emission standard for hardwood plywood is
lower than the standards for particleboard and MDF, even those
laminated product producers that choose not to switch to an exemption-
eligible resin technology may have to change resin formulations or
purchase lower-emitting platforms in order to meet the hardwood plywood
emission standard. These laminated product producers will also need
time to evaluate strategies for compliance that may involve different
production processes and different supply chains.
Another consideration is TPC capacity. EPA shares the concerns of
those commenters who thought that the addition of large numbers of
laminated product producers to the pool of businesses needing testing
and TPC certification services might overwhelm available TPC capacity,
at least at first. Although there is some uncertainty as to exactly how
many laminated product producers will be able to switch to either
phenol-formaldehyde resins or resins formulated with no-added
formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-linking structure and thereby
avoid testing and certification requirements, EPA anticipates that a
significant number of them will do so. Currently, there are about 40
CARB-approved TPCs, with 11 of them located in the United States and
EPA expects them to participate in the TSCA Title VI program. It would
not take many of the estimated 7,000 to 14,000 laminated product
producers, currently not regulated by CARB as hardwood plywood
producers, to overwhelm this capacity.
Some commenters asked for additional time to conduct studies in
order to demonstrate that other laminated products should be exempt
from the testing and certification requirements. These commenters cited
products with thicker veneers as an example of laminated products that
would likely be able to demonstrate consistently low emissions. EPA
agrees that this approach has merit, in that it could potentially
enable EPA to make a finding that exemptions for other laminated
products are also warranted. For example, although the limited data
available meant that EPA was unable to determine that an exemption for
laminated products made with melamine-formaldehyde resins was
warranted, it is entirely possible that additional data would confirm
that products made with melamine-formaldehyde resins have consistently
low formaldehyde emissions. It is also possible that studies could
demonstrate that certain combinations of resin formulation and
manufacturing processes consistently result in products with low
formaldehyde emissions, as suggested by another commenter. In order for
EPA to base findings for additional exemptions on product studies, such
studies should be performed in accordance with accepted scientific
principles. Studies offered in support of a potential exemption that
include, for example, a representative sampling of products belonging
to the product category suggested for exemption, especially with
[[Page 89685]]
formaldehyde emission results from testing performed in accordance with
ASTM E1333-10 or ASTM D6007-02 (Refs. 43-44), are likely to facilitate
a preliminary EPA determination on the merits of the suggested
exemption. However, other types of studies could also be used to
support an exemption. In general, EPA intends to evaluate any data
submitted in support of an exemption using the factors outlined in the
July 2003 document entitled ``A Summary of General Assessment Factors
for Evaluating the Quality of Scientific and Technical Information''
(Ref. 45). Persons interested in demonstrating that additional
exemptions are warranted are encouraged to contact the technical person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATON CONTACT. The process from study
initiation to final EPA rulemaking, if warranted, would be a multi-year
effort. It is likely that designing and conducting a robust study in
support of an exemption for other laminated products would take a
couple of years. Upon study completion, it would take EPA some time to
review the study and determine whether to undertake rulemaking to
exempt additional laminated products. Once a decision to undertake
rulemaking had been made, EPA's rulemaking process would take several
more years.
There may also be other opportunities to reduce the burdens
associated with the testing and certification requirements for
laminated product producers. For example, there may be other test
methods or testing protocols that, when applied to laminated product
production, may ensure that laminated product emissions are
consistently within the range of emissions permitted for laminated
product platforms. EPA encourages laminated product producers to think
creatively about how to approach the problem of demonstrating
consistently low formaldehyde emissions, whether by the type of resin
used or the manufacturing process, or by using alternatives to existing
test methods and testing protocols. Some commenters suggested
alternative testing protocols for laminated products, such as testing a
worst-case scenario for that producer once a quarter. There may also be
alternative methods for testing laminated products that would be less
burdensome than either using ASTM E1333-10 or ASTM D6007-02 or a
correlated quality control method. In order for EPA to incorporate any
such alternatives, EPA would have to have data upon which to determine
that the alternative does in fact provide accurate and repeatable
results that demonstrate consistently low formaldehyde emissions.
To this end and consistent with 5 U.S.C. 553(e), EPA has
established a process at Sec. 770.4 through which any person may
petition the Agency to initiate a rulemaking to expand the exemption
for laminated products from the definition of the term ``hardwood
plywood''. EPA considers establishment of the petition process at Sec.
770.4 to be a rule of Agency procedure, and it is therefore not subject
to prior notice and comment. Petitioners should include with their
petitions all available and relevant data to support the requested
exemption(s) and enable EPA to make a reasoned determination that the
petition should be granted. This provides EPA with the discretion to
consider a wide variety of factors, including formaldehyde emission
potential, business demographics, and resin chemistry, as well as costs
and benefits. EPA views the formaldehyde emission potential and the
benefits of reductions in emissions as the most important
considerations.
EPA's goal will be to promptly review the petition and supporting
data. The Agency's review will be hastened to the extent that the
petition fully addresses the factors EPA would take into account. EPA
will acknowledge receipt of the petition within 15 calendar days by
sending a letter to the petitioner and subsequently communicate in
another letter to the petitioner the Agency's decision to initiate
rulemaking or deny the petition. The petition and any accompanying
data, together with the letters acknowledging EPA's receipt of the
petition and communicating EPA's subsequent decision in response to the
petition will be placed in a public docket.
Following a decision to initiate rulemaking based on a petition,
EPA will publish in the Federal Register a proposed rule that would
expand the laminated products exemption based on the petition, and
provide a 30-day public comment period. Based on the petition and any
public comments, EPA would take final action on the proposal. If EPA
expands the exemption for laminated products to include additional
resin formulations, laminated product producers using those additional
resin formulations will be subject to the same recordkeeping
requirements as those laminated product producers who use NAF and
phenol-formaldehyde resins; that is, they must maintain records
demonstrating eligibility for the exemption.
EPA agrees with the commenters who suggested that additional time
should be given to laminated product producers before they are required
to comply with the testing and certification provisions of this final
rule. In fact, considering in part all of the comments advocating for a
permanent exemption, EPA has determined that the three years suggested
by several commenters is not likely to be sufficient for some laminated
product producers to fully evaluate different resin technologies to
determine whether they can qualify for the exemption and to either
successfully implement an alternative resin in their production process
or turn to evaluating strategies for achieving compliance with the
hardwood plywood emission standard and the testing and certification
provisions. Neither would it be sufficient to design and conduct
studies and allow EPA to conduct rulemaking to provide additional
exemptions if warranted.
In EPA's view, seven years is a more realistic timeframe for acting
on any additional warranted exemptions, and should also provide
sufficient time for laminated product producers to either switch to a
resin that renders them eligible for the exemption or figure out how to
implement a testing and certification program for their laminated
products. EPA based the seven year timeframe on the Agency's best
professional judgment of the estimated time it likely takes to conduct
product testing, especially to prove that a particular technology
sufficiently reduces emissions in a broad array of applications and for
EPA to evaluate and act upon a petition to expand the exemption for
laminated products from the definition of the term ``hardwood
plywood.'' EPA assumed that it would take at least a year to design a
study that would result in the generation of data to support an
exemption for a category of products, and another year to acquire the
products and actually perform the product testing. The amount of time
needed for EPA's review of the data could vary substantially, depending
on the amount, robustness, and sufficiency of provided supporting
information. Finally, EPA wanted to ensure that there would be enough
time for laminated product producers to develop data to support any
petitions and submit them to EPA for evaluation before the testing and
certification requirements take effect for laminated products without
feeling compelled to expend resources for the otherwise-required
testing and certification to avoid potential noncompliance.
EPA considered establishing a shorter sell-through period, which
would have
[[Page 89686]]
required producers of laminated products to incur the cost of complying
with the testing and certification requirements while also making
financial investments in determining whether they are able to switch to
a qualified resin or conducting a robust study to justify a subsequent
exemption. However, EPA does not think this approach is justified for
several reasons, and as indicated above, EPA's decision not to exempt
laminated products other than products made by using, during the
lamination step, either a phenol-formaldehyde resin or a resin
formulated with no added formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-
linking structures is premised in part of the decision to establish the
seven-year sell-through period. Even aside from efforts to develop
alternatives to compliance with today's standards, laminated product
producers could not realistically be expected to be in full compliance
with this regulation in one year in view of the considerations
discussed herein (such as TPC capacity and process changes the
producers may need to make). In addition, because of the large number
of laminated product producers that are subject to this rule, the fact
that many of them are very small businesses that laminate on a per-
order basis, and the significant upfront costs involved in designing
and implementing a testing and certification program, it does not make
sense, in EPA's view, to require producers to simultaneously incur
compliance costs while investigating whether they are able to switch to
a qualified resin or while conducting a robust study to justify a
subsequent exemption or the effectiveness of alternative test methods
or protocols. EPA wants to encourage these investigations, which may
well reveal approaches that are as or more reliable in ensuring low
emissions at a lower cost, and EPA is concerned that requiring the
investment and process changes needed to comply with the rule
certification and testing requirements on a shorter timeframe might
reduce the incentive for the development of alternative approaches. EPA
also does not think it makes sense to stimulate a large expansion of
TPC capacity in the short term that may be unnecessary and/or may
result in excess capacity over time.
Overall, EPA has exercised its discretion in making its
determination so as to fulfill the primary purpose of TSCA Title VI
without impeding unduly or creating unnecessary economic barriers to
technological innovation. See 15 U.S.C. 2601(b)(3). In fact, EPA
encourages laminated product producers and the wood products industry
to explore all avenues for reducing formaldehyde emissions from
composite wood products. In addition to established resins, such as
soy-based resins or phenol formaldehyde resins, new resin technologies
may be developed that provide adequate performance while contributing
minimal formaldehyde emissions. Similarly, while there are established
alternatives to regulated composite wood products, e.g., lumber or
solid wood, it is likely that new alternatives will be developed. For
example, in 2014, EPA awarded a grant through EPA's Small Business
Innovation Research program competition to Ecovative Design, LLC.
Ecovative makes packaging, building materials (furniture and panels)
and automotive products by growing them from agricultural byproducts
and mycelium, a fungal network of threadlike cells that are like the
roots of mushrooms. These materials are not hardwood plywood,
particleboard, or MDF, and thus are not subject to this final
regulation. EPA encourages laminated product producers to consider all
aspects of their production processes when deciding how best to lower
formaldehyde emissions from laminated products and achieve compliance
with this regulation.
4. Definitions associated with laminated products. EPA is
promulgating the definitions associated with laminated products
essentially as proposed, except that the term ``laminated product'' is
limited to those products that are produced either by the fabricator of
the finished good in which the product is incorporated or by a
fabricator who uses the laminated product in the further construction
or assembly of a component part. EPA's proposed definition did not
include any provisions restricting applicability of the term to certain
entities because of concerns over potentially inequitable results. EPA
did not intend for the term ``laminated product'' to be expanded to the
extent that virtually all hardwood plywood panels could be considered
laminated products. Rather, EPA's intention was to allow fabricators of
component parts, e.g., cabinet door fabricators, to be afforded similar
treatment under the TSCA Title VI regulations as fabricators of
finished goods, e.g., entire cabinets. The laminated product definition
in this final rule addresses EPA's concerns without being overly broad.
EPA's proposed definition of laminated product also expanded upon
the statutory definition to include products made by attaching woody-
grass veneers to particleboard, MDF, or veneer-core platforms. In
addition, EPA proposed related definitions for the terms ``veneer'' and
``woody-grass.'' While some commenters objected to the expansion of the
definition of laminated products to include woody-grass veneers, CARB
and another commenter supported including woody-grass veneers, and the
February 2014 draft amendments to the CARB ATCM include woody grass in
the definition of veneer. Therefore, for the reasons stated in the
proposal, that woody-grass veneers can be porous and therefore not
effective barriers to formaldehyde emissions, that woody grass veneers
can be affixed to cores and platforms using urea-formaldehyde resins,
and that including woody grass veneers is consistent with the
definition of hardwood plywood in the ANSI/HPVA HP-1 standard (Ref.
46), the definition of laminated product in the final rule includes
woody grass as well as wood veneers. EPA notes that the term
``laminated product'' does not include those products made by attaching
something other than a wood or woody grass veneer (e.g., plastic,
vinyl, or film) to a core or platform.
In addition, because the term ``core'' and the term ``platform''
can both be used to describe the wood product to which a wood or woody
grass veneer is affixed, the final rule's laminated product definition
includes both terms.
EPA is promulgating the definition of the term ``veneer'' as
proposed, with the addition of a maximum thickness limit of 6.4
millimeters (\1/4\ inch, the thickest veneer allowed under the ANSI/
HPVA HP-1 standard) to distinguish it from lumber or sawn veneer, a
specialty product typically used in the restoration of antique
furniture.
EPA also proposed to define component part as a part that contains
one or more composite wood products and is used in the assembly of
finished goods. EPA is promulgating the definition of component part as
proposed, except that EPA has added the unintentionally-omitted phrase
``construction or'' to the definition, as well as a clarification
regarding parts sold individually to end users. Such items are not
component parts but are more properly classified as finished goods
because their commercial assembly process is complete. This
clarification is consistent with CARB's proposal to modify their
definition of the term ``finished good'' so that it means any good or
product, other than a panel, containing hardwood plywood,
particleboard, or MDF.
4. Particleboard and medium-density fiberboard. As proposed, EPA is
[[Page 89687]]
incorporating the statutory definitions of the terms ``particleboard''
and ``medium-density fiberboard'' into the regulations without change.
In addition, EPA is finalizing the proposed definition for the term
``thin medium-density fiberboard'' that incorporates a maximum
thickness of 8 millimeters or 0.315 inches and is consistent with both
CARB and the voluntary consensus standard for medium-density fiberboard
(Ref. 47). EPA is aware that some products are marketed as ``high-
density fiberboard.'' If these products meet the definition of medium-
density fiberboard, they are regulated as medium-density fiberboard. If
they meet the definition of ``hardboard'' they are exempt as hardboard.
5. Exemptions. a. Statutory exemptions. TSCA section 601(c) exempts
a number of products from the formaldehyde emission standards for
composite wood products. These exemptions include, but are not limited
to: Hardboard, structural plywood, structural panels, oriented
strandboard, glued laminated lumber, prefabricated wood I-joists,
finger-jointed lumber, wood packaging, composite wood products used
inside new vehicles other than recreational vehicles, windows that
contain less than five percent by volume of composite wood products,
exterior doors and garage doors that contain less than three percent by
volume of composite wood products, and exterior and garage doors that
are made with NAF-based or ULEF resins. EPA is incorporating these
exemptions into the implementing regulations. Composite wood products,
component parts, and finished goods that qualify for these exemptions
are exempt from all of the provisions of the implementing regulations.
However, component parts and finished goods made of a mixture of exempt
products and regulated products are not exempt. For example, a cabinet
made up of structural plywood and hardwood plywood would be subject to
the labeling and recordkeeping requirements of this final rule. The
hardwood plywood in the cabinet would also be subject to the emission
standard for hardwood plywood as well as the testing and certification
provisions of this rule.
The statute exempts any finished good that has previously been sold
or supplied to an individual or entity that purchased or acquired the
finished good in good faith for purposes other than resale. The statute
provides two examples: Antiques and secondhand furniture. Thus, dealers
in secondhand furniture do not have any obligations under this
regulation solely due to the fact that some of the furniture may
contain composite wood products. Similarly, refurbishment of antique
furniture and in-house repairs of previously sold finished goods, such
as cabinetry and furniture, are not covered by this regulation.
However, there is no exemption for panel producers, importers, and
fabricators of composite wood products and component parts that are
intended to be used in repairs. Unless another exemption is applicable,
these entities may only make compliant products available in the market
place, including to end users and other parties that intend to use
these products in repairs.
With respect to exterior and garage doors made with NAF-based or
ULEF resins, these resin types are defined elsewhere in the statute,
with reference to both the composition of the resin and the
formaldehyde emissions of composite wood products made with the resin.
EPA is promulgating these exemptions as proposed and will interpret the
statutory language to mean that, in order to be eligible for this
exemption, the composite wood products used to make exterior and garage
doors must comply with the emission standards contained in the
statutory definitions of NAF-based resins and ULEF resins, as measured
by the testing described in the statutory definitions of these resin
types. However, manufacturers, fabricators, distributors, or retailers
of these doors are not required to comply with the third-party
certification, recordkeeping, or labeling provisions of this final
rule.
b. Hardboard. TSCA Title VI exempts hardboard, but directs EPA to
define it. EPA proposed to define hardboard with reference to, and
consistent with, three relevant ANSI standards: ANSI A135.4 (Basic
Hardboard), ANSI A135.5 (Prefinished Hardboard Paneling), or ANSI
A135.6 (Hardboard Siding) (Refs. 48-50). EPA is concerned that, because
hardboard and thin MDF share similar appearances and end uses, a broad
definition of hardboard could lead to thin MDF being erroneously
categorized as hardboard and exempted from the emission standards.
Subsequent to EPA's proposal, CARB issued proposed amendments to its
ATCM that would limit the hardboard exemption to hardboard that emits
less than 0.06 ppm formaldehyde (Ref. 51).
The definition of hardboard in the final rule references the latest
ANSI standards, as suggested in comments from the Composite Panel
Association, the accredited developer for these standards. As noted in
the standard itself, the name of the standard pertaining to siding was
changed from ``Hardboard Siding'' to ``Engineered Wood Siding'' in
order to more accurately describe the product (Ref. 52). The definition
in the final rule also references the standard for engineered wood trim
because the Composite Panel Association indicated that products
conforming to this standard were also considered hardboard (Ref. 53).
Although specific ANSI standards are referenced in the definition,
minor unintentional deviations from the cited ANSI standards do not
necessarily mean that a product is medium-density fiberboard and not
hardboard. EPA has also added a rebuttable presumption that products
emitting more than 0.06 ppm formaldehyde are not hardboard. Based on
assertions from CARB and the Composite Panel Association, EPA has
determined that products made according to the ANSI standards for
hardboard are not likely to emit above 0.06 ppm formaldehyde (Ref. 54).
This presumption is designed to ensure that MDF is not sold as
hardboard. Some commenters suggested that EPA address this concern by
excluding ``dry process'' hardboard from the definition of hardboard
and treating it as MDF, while others thought this was unnecessary,
because ``dry process'' hardboard is typically made with a small amount
of phenol formaldehyde resins and has low formaldehyde emissions. The
0.06 ppm presumption is more enforceable than a process-based
exclusion, and is in keeping with industry expectations of hardboard.
c. Other requested exemptions. Several commenters suggested that
EPA adopt other, non-statutory, exemptions. As a general matter, EPA
has determined that it can best ensure compliance with the emission
standards by applying the regulatory requirements uniformly to all
composite wood products sold, supplied, offered for sale, or
manufactured in the United States. If EPA were to promulgate exemptions
at the manufacturing level, exempt composite wood products could later
be incorporated into finished goods, possibly with non-exempt composite
wood products. This could make it difficult for downstream purchasers,
EPA, and end consumers to assess whether finished goods are made from
compliant composite wood products. It would also complicate the
labeling and recordkeeping requirements, because without records passed
down through the supply chain, it would be difficult to ascertain
whether finished goods were made from compliant panels, exempt panels,
regulated panels that were manufactured in violation of the
regulations, or some combination thereof. Exemptions tied to the
ultimate
[[Page 89688]]
end use of the product, if applied at the manufacturing level, would
make it difficult to ensure that none of the composite wood products
are diverted to other end uses, either intentionally or accidentally.
Such exemptions would require labeling, recordkeeping, and chain-of-
custody systems specific to the ultimate uses of the products. EPA
notes, however, that military-specified plywood is excluded from the
definition of the term ``hardwood plywood'' and thus military-specified
plywood to be used in new vehicles, rail cars, boats, aerospace craft,
and aircraft is not subject to these regulations.
Commenters suggested that EPA promulgate exemptions for products
made by educational institutions, for products manufactured for export,
and for products intended for exempt uses (e.g., inside new vehicles).
Because the statute provides that the emission standards apply to
composite wood products sold, supplied, offered for sale, or
manufactured in the United States, EPA does not believe it is
appropriate to provide such exemptions, except to the extent an entity
can demonstrate they meet the criteria for the exemption at TSCA
section 12(a)(1). With respect to composite wood products and finished
goods produced and labeled solely for export, an entity would bear the
burden of demonstrating the applicability of TSCA section 12(a)(1). EPA
further notes the regulations allow for the transportation and
importation of panels for testing purposes, provided they are
appropriately marked. In response to requests for a research and
development exemption, EPA notes that the final definition of the term
``panel'' does not include items produced for the purpose of research
and development, provided those items are not sold, supplied or offered
for sale. Thus, those items are not subject to the panel certification
requirements.
6. Other definitions. EPA is defining a number of other terms to
ensure that the meaning and applicability of the regulatory
requirements are clear. EPA is using the term ``panel producer'' to
refer to those facilities that actually make composite wood products,
including laminated products that are not exempt from the definition of
hardwood plywood, but excluding importers that do not also make the
products. As discussed in the preamble of the proposed rule, because
TSCA section 3 defines the term ``manufacture'' to include import, EPA
is using another term to clarify the regulation by referring to
facilities that actually make the products regulated under TSCA Title
VI for the purposes of the testing, certification, and recordkeeping
requirements. The term ``panel producer'' applies separately to each
specific facility because facilities under a common entity often
operate under separate quality management systems and procedures and
therefore have their own quality control program specific to their
staff and operational capabilities. Other terms associated with the
testing requirements are discussed in Unit III.E., while terms
associated with the third-party certification program are discussed in
Unit III.B.
Other terms for which EPA proposed definitions include
``importer,'' ``fabricator,'' ``retailer,'' ``distributor,'' and
``purchaser.'' EPA is finalizing the term ``importer'' as proposed
because it is consistent with the definition of the term
``manufacturer'' in TSCA section 3 and the definition of the term
``importer'' in 40 CFR 710.3. An importer is an entity that imports
composite wood products, component parts, or finished goods into the
customs territory of the United States and the term includes the entity
primarily liable for the payment of any duties on the products, or an
authorized agent acting on the entity's behalf.
EPA proposed to define the term ``fabricator'' as an entity that
incorporates composite wood products into component parts or into
finished goods and ``retailer'' as an entity that generally sells
smaller quantities of composite wood products directly to consumers. In
considering comments received from the renovation industry on whether
renovators should be considered fabricators or retailers, EPA reviewed
the language of TSCA Title VI as well as the guidance available on
CARB's Web site. EPA has determined that the activities of renovators
are not the kinds of activities that Congress intended to regulate
under TSCA Title VI. Renovators are neither fabricating finished goods
to be sold in the marketplace nor are they actually retailing finished
goods. Renovators perform their work on real property on behalf of, and
at the direction of, the building owner or lessee and, as such, are
neither selling nor supplying composite wood products to the building
owner or lessee. EPA has added an express exception for renovators to
both the definition of the term ``fabricator'' and the term
``retailer,'' to ensure that it is clear that they are not intended to
be covered by the definitions.
The renovator exception from the term ``retailer'' does not
encompass retailers who sell building materials and finished goods such
as cabinets, and also offer installation services to consumers. For
these retailers, the sale of composite wood products to consumers as
part of a contract to perform renovation services would be covered by
these regulations and the retailer would be required to maintain
records of the transaction. The activities of the subcontractor who
installs the composite wood products under contract to the retailer
would not be covered.
EPA did not receive any other comments specifically on the language
of the proposed definition of ``fabricator.'' EPA is adding the phrase
``or entity'' to the definitions of distributor, fabricator, importer,
and retailer to ensure that it is clear that both natural persons and
corporate entities have obligations under these regulations. EPA is
also adding the term ``component part'' to the definition of retailer
to make it clear that persons who sell parts that contain composite
wood products directly to consumers are retailers because these parts
have completed their commercial assembly and are more appropriately
classified as finished goods. Finally, in response to those commenters
who thought that the proposed definition was unclear, EPA is
promulgating a definition of the term ``purchaser'' that clearly states
that panel producers, importers, fabricators, distributors, and
retailers are included, while excluding the end user.
EPA proposed to define the term ``panel'' as ``a flat or raised
piece of composite wood product.'' In the final regulation EPA is
defining the term panel as ``a thin (usually less than two inches
thick), flat, usually rectangular piece of particleboard, medium-
density fiberboard or hardwood plywood. Embossing or imparting of an
irregular surface on the composite wood products by the original panel
producer during pressing does not remove the product from this
definition. Cutting a panel into smaller pieces, without additional
fabrication, does not make the panel into a component part or finished
good. This does not include items made for the purpose of research and
development, provided such items are not sold, supplied, or offered for
sale.'' In this definition, EPA is clarifying that items produced
solely for the purpose of research and development are not ``panels''
within the intended meaning of TSCA Title VI and do not require
certification unless they are sold, supplied, or offered for sale.
B. EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program
1. Overview. The basic framework of EPA's TPC proposal was that ABs
interested in participating in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification
[[Page 89689]]
Program would apply to EPA, and if deemed qualified, would enter into a
recognition agreement with EPA. After being recognized by EPA, ABs
would accredit TPCs based on the TPC requirements established in Sec.
770.7 of the proposed rule. The EPA-recognized ABs would then approve
or deny TPC applications for acceptance into the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program. Under the proposal, TSCA Title VI
TPCs would certify panel producers' composite wood products as meeting
all necessary requirements under TSCA Title VI.
EPA received several comments, discussed in more detail in Unit
III.B.2.f., expressing concern over the proposed requirement that EPA-
recognized ABs review and approve or deny TPC applications to
participate in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program.
Based on these comments, this final rule requires candidate TPCs to
seek approval and recognition directly from EPA after being accredited
by EPA-recognized ABs to the necessary standards developed by the
International Organization for Standards (ISO) and the International
Electrochemical Commission (IEC) and the TSCA Title VI regulatory
requirements in 40 CFR part 770. In addition, TPCs approved by CARB
under the formaldehyde ATCM will also be eligible for recognition under
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program through
reciprocity with CARB assuming they meet all applicable requirements of
this final rule. The requirements for a TPC to obtain EPA recognition
through reciprocity are discussed in Unit III.B.5.b.
In this final rule, EPA is retaining the proposed requirement that
ABs interested in participating in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program must apply to EPA and enter into a recognition
agreement with the Agency to become an EPA TSCA Title VI AB. Following
the two-year transitional period for CARB TPCs discussed in Unit
III.B.5.a., EPA will only recognize TPCs, including CARB-approved TPCs,
who are accredited by EPA-recognized ABs. The Agency will, as proposed,
require that TPCs under TSCA Title VI certify a composite wood panel
producer's products by verifying the accuracy of formaldehyde emissions
testing of composite wood products by the panel producer, monitoring
panel producer quality assurance programs for composite wood products,
and by conducting inspections of panel producers' activities and
products, discussed in more detail in Unit III.B.3.c. Illustration 1
shown below provides an overview of the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program.
EPA aligned, to the extent practicable, the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
requirements with those in the CARB ATCM to avoid placing differing or
duplicative regulatory requirements on the regulated community.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[[Page 89690]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12DE16.000
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program formerly
called the TSCA Title VI Proposed Third-Party Certification
Framework in the proposed rule.
\2\ ABs recognized by EPA pursuant to 40 CFR part 770 are termed
EPA TSCA Title VI ABs in this final rule.
\3\ The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and
the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) develop and
publish consensus-based International Standards utilized by
accreditation organizations IAF and ILAC.
\4\ ISO/IEC 17011--General requirements for accreditation bodies
accrediting conformity assessment bodies.
\5\ MLA--IAF's Multilateral Recognition Arrangement requires AB
signatories to demonstrate they are capable of accrediting product
certification bodies to ISO/IEC 17065--Requirements for bodies
certifying products, processes or services.
\6\ MRA--ILAC's Mutual Recognition Arrangement requires AB
signatories to demonstrate they are capable of accrediting testing
laboratories to ISO/IEC 17025--General requirements for the
competence of testing and calibration laboratories and ISO/IEC
17020--General criteria for the operation of various types of bodies
performing inspection.
\7\ TPCs recognized by EPA pursuant to 40 CFR part 770 are
termed ``EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs'' in this final rule.
\8\ TPCs may include contracted independent testing labs and
inspection bodies that are accredited by EPA TSCA Title VI ABs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
a. Terminology. EPA is finalizing most of the definitions
associated with the TPC program as proposed. However, as a result of
public comment, and in some cases to improve clarity or to be
consistent with terms used in the referenced international consensus
standards, in this final rule EPA has made some minor changes to
terminology used in the proposed rule. Based on the comments received
on a number of the AB and TPC provisions, EPA realizes that, where the
proposal used the term ``accreditation,'' the term ``recognition''
would have been a more accurate description of the activities EPA
intends to take with respect to ABs and TPCs. In this final rule, the
term ``recognition'' is used instead of the term ``accreditation'' to
refer to EPA's recognition of ABs or TPCs, including when discussing
EPA's proposal. The term ``accreditation'' is retained in the final
rule to refer to an activity that ABs perform as part of evaluating the
competency of TPCs. Additionally, in this final rule, ABs recognized by
EPA under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program are
more specifically termed EPA TSCA Title VI Product ABs or EPA TSCA
Title VI
[[Page 89691]]
Laboratory ABs (both are also referred to as EPA-recognized ABs). TPCs
approved to certify products under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program are termed EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs (also referred
to as EPA-recognized TPCs). A TPC laboratory means a laboratory or
contract laboratory of an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC that is accredited by
an EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB.
EPA proposed that EPA-recognized Product and Laboratory ABs perform
in-depth system audits on each candidate TPC as part of the
accreditation process. This requirement is still maintained; however,
in this final rule the term ``on-site assessment'' is used instead of
the term ``in-depth systems audit.'' The standard ISO/IEC
17011:2004(E), entitled ``Conformity assessment--General requirements
for accreditation bodies accrediting conformity assessment bodies,''
uses the terms ``assessment,'' ``reassessment,'' and ``surveillance on-
site assessment'' (Ref. 55). EPA uses these terms to describe the
activities EPA-recognized ABs are required to perform to evaluate the
competency of TPCs to conduct the TSCA Title VI implementing
regulations. The terms ``assessment,'' ``reassessment,'' and
``surveillance on-site assessment'' are defined in Sec. 770.3. EPA has
also incorporated comments on the proposed regulation related to ISO/
IEC 17020:2012(E), entitled ``Conformity assessment--Requirements for
the operation of various bodies performing inspection,'' so that the
term ``audit'' is replaced with the term ``inspection'' as it relates
to a TPC's evaluation of a panel producer in this final rule (Ref. 56).
EPA is finalizing as proposed that EPA-recognized ABs may suspend,
modify or revoke a TPC's accreditation, as necessary. However, in this
final rule, the terms ``modify'' and ``revoke'' have been replaced by
the terms ``reduce'' and ``withdraw'' to make the terminology
consistent with the terms used in ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E). The terms
``reduce'' and ``withdraw'' are more familiar to the ABs that will be
performing TPC accreditation activities under the rule. However, this
final rule continues to use the terms ``suspend,'' ``modify,'' and
``revoke'' to describe potential EPA actions with respect to EPA
recognition of ABs and TPCs under TSCA Title VI because they more
accurately describe the types of actions that EPA may need to take
under this final rule.
b. ISO/IEC Standard Revisions. Since publication of the proposed
rule, two of the ISO/IEC standards have been updated and this final
rule incorporates the most current versions of those standards. EPA
agrees with those commenters that thought that the final rule should
incorporate the updated version of the standards because ABs will not
be able to accredit to the previous versions once the transition period
expires.
EPA proposed that TPCs be accredited to ISO/IEC Guide 65:1996(E)
(Ref. 57), which was subsequently revised to be ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E),
entitled ``Conformity assessment--Requirements for bodies certifying
products, processes or services'' (Ref. 58). In this final rule, EPA is
incorporating by reference ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E). This requirement
reflects the change required by International Accreditation Forum (IAF)
that Multilateral Recognition Arrangement (MLA) signatories transition
their accreditation of TPCs to ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) no later than
September 14, 2015. In this final rule, EPA is also incorporating by
reference ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E), which is an updated version of ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E) referenced in the proposed rule (Ref. 59).
2. Requirements for Accreditation Bodies. There are two primary
types of ABs that will be involved in the implementation of the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program: Product ABs and
Laboratory ABs. EPA recognizes it is also possible that a single AB may
be qualified to perform the roles of both types of ABs, and accredit a
TPC for both its product certification capabilities and formaldehyde
emissions laboratory testing capabilities. This scenario is shown as
``AB Type #3'' in Illustration 1 (see Unit III.B.1.). In such a case,
only a single AB would need to be involved in implementing the two AB
roles under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program.
a. Necessary qualifications of Product ABs. EPA proposed that to be
an EPA-recognized Product AB, among other requirements, Product ABs
must be signatories to the IAF MLA, or a member of an equivalent
oversight body. As noted by commenters, in the proposal, EPA
incorrectly stated that the IAF MLA level three endorsement ensures
that the AB has demonstrated basic competence to perform accreditation
activities for ISO/IEC17020:1998(E). The endorsement to accredit TPCs
to ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E), now ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E), instead falls
under the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC)
Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA), which is discussed later in this
final rule. The requirements in this final rule pertaining to ISO/IEC
17020:2012(E) are discussed in Unit III.B.3.a.i.
In this final rule, EPA retains the requirement that Product ABs be
signatories to the IAF MLA and be endorsed by IAF through level three,
the ``main scope'' of the IAF MLA, which ensures that the AB has
policies and procedures in place in its operations and management plans
to accredit a TPC for product certification to ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E).
EPA will also recognize members of IAF regional bodies, as suggested by
public comments. The four regional cooperations that are currently
recognized by both IAF and ILAC as equivalent are the Asia Pacific
Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (APLAC), the European
Accreditation Cooperation (EA), the Inter-American Accreditation
Cooperation (IAAC), and the Pacific Accreditation Cooperation (PAC).
However, EPA disagrees with a comment to remove the phrase ``or
equivalent oversight body'' and, as proposed, EPA will still consider
accepting into the program ABs that are members of organizations that
EPA has determined to be equivalent. If any other oversight bodies
exist in the future, ABs that are members of those oversight bodies
should have the opportunity to be recognized under the EPA program, if
EPA determines that membership in the new oversight body is equivalent
to being an ILAC or IAF signatory.
b. Required qualifications of Laboratory ABs. A Laboratory AB is
responsible for accrediting the TPC formaldehyde emissions testing
laboratory. EPA proposed that Laboratory ABs be signatories to the ILAC
MRA or a member of an equivalent organization.
As discussed for Product ABs in Unit III.B.2.a., EPA received
similar comments that Laboratory ABs who are members of ILAC-recognized
Regional Cooperations provide accreditation services that are
equivalent to those provided by ILAC MRA signatories. EPA agrees and,
as for Product ABs, in this final rule EPA will consider a Laboratory
AB's membership in a regional ILAC cooperation as being equivalent to
being a signatory to the ILAC MRA for the purposes of eligibility in
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program. The four
regional cooperations that are currently recognized by both IAF and
ILAC as equivalent are the APLAC, the EA, the IAAC, and the PAC. EPA
will also consider accepting into the program Laboratory ABs that are
members of organizations equivalent to ILAC, as determined by EPA.
[[Page 89692]]
c. Recognition agreement between EPA and ABs. EPA proposed that
Product ABs and Laboratory ABs interested in participating in the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program would be required to
submit an application to EPA to be formally recognized by EPA. Once EPA
reviewed the AB's credentials and deemed that the AB was qualified, EPA
proposed that it would enter into a recognition agreement with each
Product and Laboratory AB to formally recognize each type of AB (or a
single AB performing both AB roles) as qualified to implement their
respective roles under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program. The proposed recognition agreement was proposed to be a signed
agreement between EPA and each Product AB or Laboratory AB to abide by
the proposed regulatory requirements.
EPA received several comments about the proposed requirement that
each AB enter into a recognition agreement with EPA. These commenters
opposed or questioned requiring ABs to enter into a recognition
agreement with EPA, stating that an AB's status as a signatory to the
IAF MLA and/or ILAC MRA should be sufficient without any further review
by EPA.
Because many ABs and the TPCs that they accredit are not located in
the United States, it is necessary for ABs to enter into a recognition
agreement with EPA to establish a closer relationship between EPA and
the ABs for the proper EPA oversight of its regulatory program.
Furthermore, this requirement is not without precedent, as there are
several third-party certification programs where ABs must enter into
such agreements with government agencies to provide accreditation
services to third-party certifiers, such as the EPA WaterSense Program
and the EPA Energy Star Program. EPA also believes that requiring ABs
through recognition agreements to meet with EPA in person, via
teleconference, or other virtual methods on some regular or as-needed
basis to discuss the implementation of the accreditation program
strengthens the ongoing relationship between EPA and participating ABs,
which in turn improves the overall implementation of the EPA TSCA Title
VI Third-Party Certification Program. For these reasons, EPA in this
final rule is retaining the requirement for ABs to apply to EPA and
enter into a recognition agreement in order to become an EPA TSCA Title
VI AB.
EPA also received comment that EPA should lengthen the recognition
agreement with ABs from three years as proposed to four years to
reflect the length of time between normal AB peer evaluations under the
ILAC and IAF programs. Because the timing of the EPA recognition
agreement with the ABs is unlikely to match the individual AB peer
review cycles, matching up the two periods would not have any impact on
the responsibilities of the ABs under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program. For these reasons, EPA will retain the provision
for three-year recognition agreement cycles in the final rule.
d. Agent for service requirement for EPA TSCA Title VI ABs. In the
event that legal notices would need to be served to an EPA-recognized
AB, or should the need for administrative and judicial proceedings
occur with an EPA-recognized AB, EPA proposed requiring ABs to
designate an agent for service in the United States in their
applications. The agent would need to be capable of accepting service
of notices and processes made in administrative and judicial
proceedings. Any information provided by EPA to the designated agent
for service would be equivalent to providing that information directly
to the EPA-recognized AB. Requiring a designated agent for service in
the United States will help to facilitate communication between EPA and
ABs and ensure compliance with the formaldehyde emission standards by
facilitating the ability of EPA to enforce TSCA Title VI and its
implementing regulations, which in turn encourages the regulated
entities to fulfill their obligations under the statute and
regulations.
EPA received several comments regarding the agent for service
requirement for ABs. Some commenters misinterpreted this requirement to
mean that an AB employee is expected to physically work or have an
office in the United States, which it does not. Additionally,
commenters expressed concern that ABs who function as part of foreign
governments may have difficulty designating an agent for service.
EPA determined that an agent for service is necessary for legal
matters, and is available at a relatively low cost from private firms
that specialize in this role. Therefore, the Agency is retaining this
requirement in this final rule. In response to public comments, EPA
clarifies that the requirement permits EPA TSCA Title VI ABs and TPCs
to share an agent for service. EPA TSCA Title VI ABs that are part of a
foreign government or act on behalf of a foreign government may
designate their U.S. embassy or a U.S. consulate as their agent for
service.
e. EPA Recognition Agreement Implementation Officer. As discussed
in the proposal and retained in this final rule, the EPA Recognition
Agreement Implementation Officer is the EPA point of contact for ABs to
consult with on the implementation of the recognition agreement with
EPA and matters pertaining to the EPA-recognized AB's responsibilities
under the recognition agreement. The EPA-recognized AB will also have
an Implementation Officer that will serve as the point of contact for
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program. The respective
EPA and EPA-recognized AB Implementation Officers are identified in
each recognition agreement between EPA and the EPA-recognized Product
and/or Laboratory AB.
f. Requirements for EPA TSCA Title VI ABs. EPA proposed that once
EPA had entered into a recognition agreement with an AB, that AB would
become recognized by EPA as an EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB, Laboratory
AB, or both. This section discusses the proposed EPA-recognized AB
responsibilities and the public comments, as well as the AB
responsibilities established in this final rule.
i. Responsibilities of EPA TSCA Title VI Product ABs in the TPC
application process. EPA proposed that EPA-recognized Product AB
responsibilities would include receiving and acting on applications
from TPCs seeking to participate in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program. EPA also proposed that the EPA-recognized
Product ABs send TPC applications and required supporting documentation
to EPA and assign the TPC a unique number once the TPC became an EPA
TSCA Title VI Accredited TPC.
EPA received several comments expressing concern with these
responsibilities. Some commenters felt that the proposed approach would
provide an increased burden on EPA-recognized ABs beyond normal
industry accreditation practice, leading to increased costs passed on
to TPCs. Based on these comments, EPA will not require Product ABs to
review and approve or deny TPC applications from candidate TPCs that
want to participate in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program. Instead, under this final rule, EPA will approve TPC
applications directly or will recognize CARB-approved TPCs under the
EPA TSCA Title VI Third-party Certification Program through the EPA/
CARB memorandum of agreement (see Unit III.B.5.b.).
ii. Responsibilities of ABs after TPC recognition into the EPA TSCA
Title VI
[[Page 89693]]
Third-Party Certification Program. Under the proposal, EPA-recognized
Product ABs, when accrediting a TPC, would be responsible for ensuring
that the TPC has a process in place to verify the accuracy of the
formaldehyde quarterly and quality control tests. EPA TSCA Title VI
Product ABs would also ensure the TPC has a process in place to monitor
panel producer quality assurance programs, and conduct independent
audits and inspections of panel producers, their quality control
testing facilities and their laboratories. EPA also proposed that
Product ABs keep certain records including checklists and other records
documenting TPC compliance with the accreditation requirements and
provide them to EPA within 30 calendar days upon request.
Several commenters thought the proposed requirement for ABs to make
available to EPA on request, certain accreditation information such as
checklists and other records documenting adherence to specific
requirements under the ISO standards, such as inspections and on-site
assessments, would present issues with the confidentiality agreements
between ABs and TPCs and would violate the ISO/IEC17011:2004(E)
confidentiality requirements (Ref. 55). EPA also was informed that it
could obtain such information through the TPCs rather than the ABs.
Based on these comments, in this final rule, EPA is requiring
information pertaining to assessment results of a TPC from the TPC
instead of the AB.
Under this final rule, as proposed, EPA-recognized Product ABs will
retain the responsibility to accredit TPCs (if the TPC is found to be
eligible) seeking recognition under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program by performing an initial assessment of each TPC.
Once EPA recognizes the accredited TPC, EPA-recognized ABs must perform
a reassessment or surveillance on-site assessment (as defined in
section 770.3) of EPA-recognized TPCs in accordance with ISO/IEC
17011:2004(E) at least every two years.
Commenters also suggested that EPA require that TPCs have this
final rule's requirements listed within their scope of accreditation
for both ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) and ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E) (Refs. 58,
60). They indicated that this would help to provide enough specificity
in the certification scheme to ensure consistent performance by all the
ABs, TPCs and panel producers in this program.
Because of this information, EPA is clarifying in this final rule
that EPA-recognized Product ABs (and Laboratory ABs as discussed later
in this unit) are required to include, as part of their initial ISO
accreditation related assessment, reassessment and surveillance on-site
assessment of a TPC, a review of the TPC's competence to perform its
responsibilities under this rule pursuant to ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E).
Additionally, a TPC's certificate of accreditation issued by the EPA-
recognized Product AB must specifically include a written reference
that the TPC scope of accreditation includes ``40 CFR part 770--
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products.''
EPA proposed that EPA-recognized Laboratory ABs would be
responsible for verifying initially, and on an ongoing basis, that the
TPC laboratory is experienced and capable of conducting formaldehyde
emissions tests according to the requirements of TSCA Title VI and its
implementing regulations.
In this final rule, the EPA-recognized Laboratory AB
responsibilities remain largely unchanged from the proposal. EPA-
recognized Laboratory ABs, like Product ABs, are required as part of
their initial assessment, reassessment, and surveillance on-site
assessment of a TPC, to conduct a review of the TPC's competence to
perform its laboratory related responsibilities under this rule
pursuant to ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E). The TPC's accreditation certificate
issued by the EPA-recognized Laboratory AB must specifically include a
written reference that the TPC's scope of accreditation includes ``40
CFR part 770--Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products'' and
the formaldehyde test methods ASTM E1333-10 and ASTM D6007-02, if used.
EPA proposed that, upon request, EPA-recognized Laboratory ABs
would allow EPA representatives to accompany their assessors during on-
site assessments to observe the audit of a TPC. EPA received comments
from ABs opposing this requirement. In response to these comments in
this final rule, EPA will instead require that TPCs, upon request by
EPA, allow EPA to attend their assessment, reassessment or surveillance
on-site assessments conducted by their EPA-recognized AB.
g. Revocation of EPA's recognition of an AB. EPA proposed that it
may suspend, revoke, or modify the recognition of an EPA-recognized AB,
if the AB is not complying with the requirements promulgated for ABs
under TSCA Title VI. As proposed, if an EPA-recognized AB is removed or
withdraws from the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program,
that AB would be responsible for promptly notifying EPA and all EPA-
recognized TPCs that receive its accreditation services. EPA proposed
to allow the TPCs that were accredited by that EPA-recognized AB to
have 365 calendar days, or 180 calendar days, if less than 365 calendar
days were left on their three-year recognition period, to be accredited
and recognized again as an EPA-recognized TPC by another EPA-recognized
AB. EPA proposed that this grace period would not be afforded to TPCs
if their EPA recognized-AB is removed or withdraws from the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification Program for fraud or providing false
or misleading statements related to a particular EPA-recognized TPC or
TPCs, or any reason that implicates a particular TPC or TPCs in a
violation of TSCA Title VI or its implementing regulations. While
seeking accreditation from an alternate EPA-recognized AB, EPA proposed
that an EPA-recognized TPC would need to continue to comply with all
other aspects of TSCA Title VI and its implementing regulations, and
the TPC could continue to certify composite wood products.
Based on comments received, under this final rule, EPA is retaining
the authority to suspend, revoke or modify the recognition of an EPA-
recognized AB, if the AB is not complying with the requirements
promulgated for ABs under TSCA Title VI. If an EPA-recognized AB is
removed or voluntarily withdraws from the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program, that AB is responsible for promptly notifying
all EPA-recognized TPCs that receive its accreditation services and
EPA, in the case of a withdrawal. The regulations allow the TPCs that
were accredited by that EPA-recognized AB to have 180 calendar days to
be accredited by another EPA-recognized AB. This 180 day grace period
would not be afforded to TPCs if their EPA-recognized AB is removed or
withdraws from the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program
for fraud or providing false or misleading statements related to a
particular EPA-recognized TPC or TPCs, or any reason that implicates a
particular TPC or TPCs in a violation of TSCA Title VI or its
implementing regulations. During the 180-day period TPCs may continue
to certify products under TSCA Title VI. EPA agrees with those
commenters who thought that portions of the EPA-recognized TPC's
previous assessments could be considered by the new EPA-recognized AB
in its reaccreditation of the TPC and therefore would not require the
[[Page 89694]]
proposed 365 calendar days. In this final rule, as proposed, if an EPA-
recognized AB is removed from the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program due to fraud for providing false or misleading
statements with respect to a particular TPC, or for any other reason
that implicates a particular TPC in a violation of TSCA Title VI or
this final rule, that TPC may not provide any TSCA Title VI
certification services until it has been accredited by another EPA-
recognized AB. Should this situation occur, EPA will provide
notifications to the affected EPA-recognized TPCs at the time it
commences formal action (i.e. an action to suspend, modify or revoke a
recognition under the procedures established in 40 CFR 770.7(e))
against the AB. Also under this final rule, and as proposed, any action
EPA takes against an AB would not preclude an enforcement action
against a TPC.
3. Requirements for third-party certifiers of composite wood
products. a. Requirements to apply for participation in the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification Program. EPA proposed that TPCs meet
several qualifications to demonstrate experience and competency in
certain areas that EPA believed were important to ensure a TPC's
ability to conduct audits, inspections, testing, and certification of
composite wood products. The basic requirements for candidate TPCs to
qualify to participate in the TSCA Title VI program remain largely the
same in this final rule except as noted in the following discussions.
EPA had proposed that the TPC must apply to an EPA-recognized
Product AB to certify composite wood products pursuant to TSCA Title
VI. As discussed in Unit III.B.2.f.i., EPA will instead require in this
final rule that TPCs apply directly to EPA for recognition or for CARB-
approved TPCs to provide EPA with documentation from CARB that
specifies a TPC's eligibility for reciprocity as discussed in Unit
III.B.5.b. TPCs must apply for EPA TSCA Title VI recognition
electronically through the EPA CDX via https://cdx.epa.gov (discussed in
more detail in Unit III.B.6.) or, if notified by EPA that the CDX
portal is not available, via an online application on the EPA Web site
found at: https://www.epa.gov/formaldehyde/.
i. TPC accreditation requirements. As discussed in Unit
III.B.2.f.ii., candidate TPCs must be accredited to ISO/IEC 17065:2012
(E), and the accreditation must include a scope of accreditation to 40
CFR part 770--Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products.
EPA proposed that TPCs have experience in conducting inspections of
panel producers pursuant to ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E). Some commenters
noted that the proposal was unclear on whether TPCs needed to be
accredited to ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E) or be in conformance with ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E). Other commenters stated that accreditation to ISO/IEC
17020:2012(E) is duplicative because inspection qualifications and
responsibilities for TPCs and their sub-contractors are already
incorporated into the required ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) accreditation.
Based on these comments, EPA is requiring in this final rule that EPA
TSCA Title VI TPCs be in conformance with (but not necessarily
accredited to) ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E), as is required under ISO/IEC
17065:2012(E) section 6.2.1. EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs must also be able
to conduct inspections of panel producers and their products and
properly train and supervise inspectors to inspect in conformance with
ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E).
EPA also proposed that TPCs have experience operating or using
laboratories that are accredited to ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E). EPA did not
receive comments on this point and is therefore finalizing this
requirement as proposed. Also, as previously noted, the TPCs' scope of
accreditation to ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E) must include 40 CFR part 770--
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products and the formaldehyde
test methods ASTM E1333-10 and ASTM D6007-02, if used.
ii. TPC recognition periods. EPA proposed that TPCs would be
required to renew their application to EPA-recognized ABs every three
years. EPA requested and received comments on the costs and benefits of
a three-year renewal period for recognition under the TSCA Title VI
Program as compared to a two-year renewal period (as under the CARB
ATCM). EPA also requested and received comments on whether the proposed
requirement for EPA TSCA Title VI ABs to audit TPCs and their
laboratories every two years should be extended to every three years to
align with the proposed three-year TPC recognition period.
Many commenters supported the proposed renewal periods of three
years for TPCs. Other commenters also stated that the renewal periods
should be in line with intervals of assessments as required by the ISO
standards. The two-year renewal period is consistent with the maximum
amount of time allowed between on-site assessments under ISO/IEC
17011:2004(E) and is also is consistent with ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E). In
an effort to harmonize this final rule with the existing CARB
regulations and better align with the on-site assessment requirements
of the ISO standards highlighted above, EPA is requiring that all EPA
TSCA Title VI TPCs submit a renewal application to EPA, or
documentation to renew their eligibility for reciprocity every two
years for EPA recognition and to have a reassessment or surveillance
on-site assessment conducted by their EPA TSCA Title VI AB every two
years to maintain their accreditation.
iii. Experience in composite wood products. EPA proposed that TPCs
must have experience in the composite wood products industry because
understanding the processes used by panel producers to produce
composite wood products is crucial for the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC to
adequately inspect panel producers. EPA requested comment on whether
EPA should require that a TPC have experience with the specific type of
composite wood product that it would certify or if experience with one
type of product is sufficient to certify all types of composite wood
product.
Several commenters stated that experience with one product type is
sufficient to certify all composite wood products because the TPC's
objectives to certify compliance with emission standards and
correlation to quality control test methods are independent of product
type. EPA agrees with the commenters, and will require in this final
rule that TPCs have experience with at least one type of composite wood
product. EPA is also requiring each TPC applicant to state its
experience in the composite wood products industry and include the
specific type of composite wood product(s) that it intends to certify.
iv. Agent for service requirement for EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs. In
order to facilitate communication between EPA and TPCs, EPA proposed to
require TPCs to designate an agent for service in the United States in
their applications. EPA received several comments regarding the agent
for service requirement for TPCs. As discussed in Unit III.B.2.d., for
EPA-recognized ABs, an agent for service is necessary for legal matters
and is available at a relatively low cost from private firms that
specialize in this role. Therefore, the Agency is retaining this
requirement in this final rule. However, in response to public
comments, EPA clarifies that the requirement permits EPA TSCA Title VI
ABs and TPCs to share an agent for service.
v. Experience in formaldehyde testing. The proposed TPC
qualification
[[Page 89695]]
requiring TPC laboratories to have experience in performing or
verifying formaldehyde emissions testing on composite wood products has
been retained in this final rule. The proposed requirement for TPC
laboratories to have experience with test method ASTM E1333-10 and
experience evaluating correlation between test methods has been
modified in the final rule. Based on public comment, candidate TPCs may
provide a description of experience with test method ASTM E1333-10 and/
or ASTM D6007-02, if used, and experience evaluating correlation
between test methods when applying for EPA recognition into the TSCA
Title VI program. Note, in a situation where a TPC is only providing a
description of experience with ASTM D6007-02, the TPC must be
contracting testing with a lab that has a large chamber and experience
with ASTM E1333-10.
b. Denied TPC applicants. Under this final rule, if EPA denies a
TPC's application for recognition in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program for failure to submit a complete application or
for being unqualified, EPA will notify the TPC of the legal and factual
basis for the denial, and actions, if any, which the affected TPC may
take to receive recognition in the future.
EPA maintains the authority to deny recognition of CARB-approved
TPCs who apply to be recognized through reciprocity (as discussed in
more detail in Unit III.B.5.b.) in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program if the Agency believes the TPC is not qualified
according to this rule.
c. Responsibilities once a TPC is recognized into the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification Program. EPA proposed that once an
applicant is recognized as a TPC under the TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program, the EPA-recognized TPC would then certify panel
producers' composite wood products under the requirements of TSCA Title
VI and its implementing regulations.
In the proposed rule, EPA also required that EPA-recognized TPCs
review and approve, when appropriate, applications from panel producers
for reduced testing or exemption from third-party certification
requirements for products made with ULEF or NAF-based resins. Under the
CARB ATCM, CARB, not the TPCs, reviews and approves these applications.
Several commenters opposed TPCs reviewing and approving applications
for NAF and ULEF approvals. Their concerns include potential conflicts
of interest, potential for inconsistency among TPC reviews, and the
potential for inadvertent misuse of confidential business information.
One commenter suggested that EPA conduct reviews and issue approvals,
accept all current CARB approvals, and work with CARB as an alternate
approval authority going forward. CARB requested reciprocity in its
comments. Another commenter said that EPA may want to grandfather
existing resin approvals made by CARB and continue to coordinate
decisions with CARB.
To address these concerns, in this final rule, under the terms of
reciprocity with CARB, EPA will accept CARB's NAF and ULEF approvals,
as long as CARB's requirements for products made with NAF-based and
ULEF resins are at least as stringent as EPA's requirements, which EPA
affirms is currently true. Should EPA determine that CARB's
requirements are no longer at least as stringent was EPA's
requirements, then EPA will publish a notice in the Federal Register
announcing EPA's determination.
Alternatively, panel producers can apply to an EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC for NAF and ULEF approvals. EPA also notes that the provisions
requiring TPC impartiality are applicable to TPCs reviewing and
approving NAF/ULEF applications (see Unit III.B.7.). EPA believes the
ability to apply to CARB for NAF and ULEF approvals, the dynamic market
amongst TPCs, and the impartiality requirements for TPCs, mitigate any
concerns about potential TPC conflicts of interest. As proposed, EPA is
also separately requiring EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs to review and approve
or deny applications from panel producers for reduced quality control
testing for particleboard and medium-density fiberboard under the
provisions discussed in Unit G.
EPA proposed to require that EPA-recognized TPCs inspect and
provide an on-site audit of panel producers and their records at least
quarterly and conform to ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E) (subsequently updated to
ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E)) when conducting their inspections. EPA requested
comment on whether enhanced testing or inspection requirements should
be required where a TPC finds that a panel producer has failed quality
control or quarterly tests at a certain frequency, or upon other
circumstances. Considering comments received on this issue, in this
final rule, EPA will not require additional enhanced testing. Instead,
it would be most appropriate for each EPA TSCA Title VI TPC to
establish its own process for determining the conditions that warrant
enhanced testing and/or inspections as needed for panel producers with
failed quality control or quarterly tests. However, this final rule
requires that EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs notify panel producers and EPA
within 72 hours of a failed quarterly test result. An EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC must also notify EPA within 72 hours of becoming aware that a panel
producer has exceeded its established quality control limit (QCL) for
two or more consecutive quality control tests. EPA is not requiring
TPCs to notify EPA each time a QCL is exceeded because isolated QCL
exceedances, where potentially non-complying products have not left the
panel producer, can be addressed by the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC and the
panel producer without EPA intervention. Additionally, the panel
producer will have to comply with the non-complying lot provisions of
40 CFR 770.22 with respect to any lot represented by a sample result
that exceeds the applicable formaldehyde emission standard or indicates
that the lot may exceed the applicable standard. Where multiple
products are grouped in a single product type for testing, this
includes all products in the group represented by the sample.
In the proposed rule, an EPA-recognized Product AB would supply the
TPC with a unique TPC identification number once it has been accredited
for TSCA Title VI purposes. Under this final rule, EPA TSCA Title VI
TPCs will be supplied with a TPC identification number by EPA unless
the TPC is CARB-approved and received EPA TSCA Title VI recognition
through reciprocity. In this case, CARB-approved TPCs will use their
CARB-issued TPC identification numbers. EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs must
provide their identification numbers to panel producers so that the
panel producers can include the TPC number on the label of their
certified products and in their records.
EPA proposed to require EPA-recognized TPCs to maintain various
records in electronic form for three years. EPA received several
comments pertaining to the proposed three-year recordkeeping
requirement. Two commenters contended that EPA should maintain CARB's
two-year recordkeeping period for TPCs, one commenter supported
recordkeeping beyond three years, and another commenter was supportive
of EPA's proposed three-year record retention period for TPCs.
Under this final rule, EPA is maintaining its requirement that
records be held in electronic form for three years. EPA has determined
that certain records will assist EPA in monitoring compliance with the
emission standards and other provisions. The records required are
largely the same as proposed, but have been modified to
[[Page 89696]]
better align with the CARB ATCM and are listed in Sec.
770.7(c)(4)(vii) of this rule.
EPA proposed to require EPA-recognized TPCs to submit an annual
report to EPA and the EPA-recognized AB that accredits the TPC. Under
this final rule, EPA will not require that this report be provided to
the TPC's AB but will still require the EPA-recognized TPCs to submit
these reports to EPA through the EPA CDX database. (Ref. 61). If the
CDX database becomes unavailable for any reason, EPA will provide an
alternate electronic reporting method and notify the EPA-recognized
TPCs of how to access the alternate method. In addition, the
requirements of this report have been, for the most part, modified to
align with CARB's annual report requirements for consistency between
the two programs and to respond to public comments. Aligning with
CARB's annual report requirements expands the number of data elements
beyond what EPA specifically proposed. However, adding these data
elements will streamline annual reporting requirements for EPA-
recognized and CARB-approved TPCs by allowing the acceptance of a
single annual report by both regulatory programs. Under this final
rule, EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs must electronically submit an annual
report on or before March 1st of each year for TPC services performed
during the previous calendar year. The required reporting elements of
the annual report are listed at Sec. 770.7(c)(4)(viii) of this rule.
d. TPC Interlaboratory Comparison. EPA proposed to require EPA-
recognized TPCs to participate annually in an EPA-recognized
interlaboratory comparison program or, if developed, a proficiency
testing program. EPA requested comment on: Ways it might integrate with
CARB's interlaboratory comparison program; the frequency of
interlaboratory comparisons; what criteria should be used to determine
the adequacy of performance; how and whether participating Laboratory
ABs could administer an interlaboratory comparison or proficiency
testing program for the TPCs that it accredits; and the cost of such a
program.
Commenters supported either CARB or EPA conducting an
interlaboratory comparison program for TPCs in both the state and
federal programs. One commenter also provided suggestions on how to
strengthen the existing CARB interlaboratory comparison program. In
addition, EPA received several comments regarding the frequency of
interlaboratory comparisons and/or proficiency testing. Most commenters
felt that an annual interlaboratory comparison was sufficient to meet
EPA and CARB's goal that laboratories regularly demonstrate their
proficiency at testing formaldehyde emissions of composite wood
products. Three commenters also supported the use of a standard
reference material as a possible alternative material for using in
interlaboratory comparison or similar testing.
Based on comments received, in this final rule, EPA is requiring
all EPA TSCA Title VI TPC laboratories, of both CARB TPCs and non-CARB
TPCs, to participate in the CARB interlaboratory comparison for
formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products when offered. CARB
intends to conduct the interlaboratory comparisons no less frequently
than every two years. EPA has determined that requiring participation
in the CARB interlaboratory comparison on a regular basis is necessary
to verify that TPC laboratories under TSCA Title VI are able to
properly measure formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products.
EPA's decision to utilize the pre-existing CARB interlaboratory
comparison program under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program is supported by public comments and will allow
for one consolidated interlaboratory comparison program and further
establish consistency between the CARB and federal regulatory programs.
EPA will consult on a regular basis with CARB regarding the EPA TSCA
Title VI TPCs' interlaboratory results, any other testing-related
information, and the ongoing operation of the CARB interlaboratory
comparison testing program. EPA will also require TPCs to submit to EPA
the results compared with the mean of any interlaboratory comparison
for formaldehyde emissions in which the TPC laboratory participates
other than the CARB interlaboratory comparison or, if available, the
TPC laboratory results from an EPA-recognized proficiency testing
program. EPA retains the authority to make its own independent decision
on the performance of an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC under the CARB
interlaboratory comparison or any other future EPA-recognized
interlaboratory comparison or proficiency testing program. EPA also
retains the authority to derecognize the CARB interlaboratory
comparison or any other future EPA-recognized interlaboratory
comparison or proficiency testing program if it no longer meets the
needs of the EPA TSCA Title VI Program.
Currently no reference material for formaldehyde emission is
available. If a reference material for formaldehyde is developed and
then approved by EPA, EPA will consider incorporating the use of that
reference material into an EPA-recognized interlaboratory or
proficiency testing program. As supported by public comment, if such an
EPA-recognized interlaboratory or proficiency testing program by means
of a reference material becomes available, EPA would also consider
initiating a rulemaking to require any EPA-recognized third-party
proficiency testing provider to be accredited to ISO/IEC 17043:2010(E).
e. Removal, reaccreditation and reapplication process for third-
party certifiers. As proposed, if an EPA-recognized TPC loses its
accreditation or discontinues participation in the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program for any reason, it would be
responsible for promptly notifying EPA and all panel producers to which
it provides TSCA Title VI certification services. EPA proposed that
panel producers that used the TPC to certify their products would need
to enlist another EPA-recognized TPC to certify their products within
90 calendar days. This 90 day grace period would not be afforded if
their EPA-recognized TPC loses its accreditation or discontinues
participation in the program for fraud or providing false or misleading
statements, or any reason that implicates a particular panel producer
in a violation of TSCA Title VI or its implementing regulations.
EPA requested comment on whether it provided adequate time in the
proposal for a panel producer to seek an alternate certification should
their TPC lose its EPA recognition under TSCA Title VI. Based on the
public comments, this final rule allows panel producers 90 calendar
days to obtain a new EPA TSCA Title VI TPC in the event that their
previous TPC loses its accreditation or recognition in the TSCA Title
VI Program as long as they remain in compliance with all other relevant
aspects of the rule. Panel producers who are not able to obtain a new
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC within 90 calendar days may request from EPA a 90
calendar day extension, for good cause. If the panel producer does not
obtain a new TPC within 90 calendar days, or if granted an extension by
EPA, 180 calendar days, composite wood products produced thereafter are
not certified and may not be sold, supplied or offered for sale.
4. Enforcement, suspension and revocation. a. Enforcement under
TSCA sections 15-17. EPA proposed to conduct inspections of
participating TPCs and ABs and issue subpoenas according to the
requirements for recognition and/or pursuant to the
[[Page 89697]]
provisions of TSCA section 11 (15 U.S.C. 2610) to ensure compliance
with TSCA Title VI and the regulations promulgated thereunder. EPA
proposed to exercise the authority to withdraw from a recognition
agreement with an EPA-recognized AB and pursue penalties under TSCA
section 15 (15 U.S.C. 2614) for any violation of TSCA Title VI or the
regulations promulgated thereunder. In addition to an administrative or
judicial finding of violation, EPA proposed the grounds for withdrawing
from a recognition agreement and/or pursuing an enforcement action
against an EPA-recognized AB would include submitting false information
to EPA, falsifying records, or failing to comply with program
requirements. EPA is finalizing these enforcement provisions as
proposed.
b. Suspension, revocation and modification of TPC and AB
recognition. EPA proposed to exercise the authority to suspend, revoke,
or modify a TPC's TSCA Title VI recognition, with or without the
participation of the EPA-recognized AB that provided the accreditation,
if the EPA-recognized TPC fails to comply with TSCA Title VI or the
regulations promulgated thereunder. EPA proposed that any violation of
TSCA Title VI or the regulations promulgated thereunder would also be a
prohibited act under TSCA section 15. Proposed grounds for suspending,
modifying, or revoking an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC's recognition included
submitting false information to EPA or an AB, falsifying records, or
failing to comply with program requirements.
EPA proposed that should an EPA-recognized AB identify a non-
conformity or discrepancy with the EPA-recognized TPC's implementation
of one of the ISO standards via an internal audit or other means, that
TPC must take remedial action within the timeframe specified by the AB
or the time specified in the TPC's quality management plan. Timely
remedial action would not preclude enforcement actions by EPA for non-
conformities or discrepancies that constitute violations of TSCA Title
VI or these implementing regulations. Prior to withdrawal from a
recognition agreement with an EPA-recognized AB, or the suspension,
revocation, or modification of an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC's recognition,
EPA proposed to provide notification to the affected AB or TPC of the
action.
EPA proposed that an individual or organization may request a
hearing prior to the final action. EPA would appoint an impartial
official of EPA as Presiding Officer to conduct a hearing within 90
calendar days of the request. The Presiding Officer would consider all
relevant evidence, explanations, comments, and arguments submitted and
notify the affected entity in writing within 90 calendar days of
completion of the hearing of his or her decision and order. EPA
clarifies that, depending on the circumstances, a hearing need not
involve real-time exchanges and may be conducted through written
correspondence, for example.
EPA proposed that if it determines that the public health,
interest, or welfare warrants immediate action to suspend the
recognition of an AB or a TPC prior to the opportunity for a hearing,
it would notify the affected AB or TPC of its right to request a
hearing on the immediate suspension within 15 calendar days of the
suspension taking place and the procedures for the conduct of such a
hearing.
EPA proposed that any notice, decision, or order issued by EPA in
response to a hearing, any transcript or other verbatim record of oral
testimony, and any documents filed in response to a hearing will be
available to the public, except as otherwise provided by TSCA section
14. Any such hearing at which oral testimony is presented will be open
to the public, except that the Presiding Officer may exclude the public
to the extent necessary to allow presentation of information which may
be entitled to confidential treatment under TSCA section 14.
Commenters pointed out that EPA cannot revoke a TPC's accreditation
but rather its recognition in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program. As discussed in Unit III.B.1.a, EPA agrees that
recognition is the correct term. In this final rule EPA may revoke a
TPC's recognition in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-party Certification
Program for the conditions mentioned previously. EPA is otherwise
finalizing these provisions for suspension, modification and revocation
as proposed.
5. CARB-approved TPC transitional period and reciprocity. EPA
proposed that CARB-approved TPCs have one year after the promulgation
of the TSCA Title VI implementing regulations to become accredited by
an AB that has entered into a recognition agreement with EPA. The
Agency also proposed that for one year after promulgation of the final
rule CARB-approved TPCs would be allowed to carry out certification
activities under TSCA Title VI provided that they were compliant with
all other aspects of TSCA Title VI and the regulations promulgated
thereunder. EPA requested comment on ways to better synchronize the
timing for the TSCA Title VI recognition period for existing CARB-
approved TPCs. EPA also asked whether the TPCs should be required to
obtain accreditation from an EPA-recognized AB no later than one-year
after the first EPA-recognized AB enters into a recognition agreement
with the EPA under the TSCA Title VI.
EPA agrees with comments received that it could take longer than
one year for CARB TPCs to align with the EPA requirements including
being accredited by an AB that has entered into a recognition agreement
with EPA. EPA will therefore allow for a two-year transition period in
this final rule.
a. Transitional Period for CARB-Approved TPCs. Under this final
rule, a TPC approved by CARB may certify composite wood products under
TSCA Title VI for a two-year transitional period that begins February
10, 2017 so long as the TPC remains approved by CARB and complies with
all aspects of the final rule other than the accreditation requirements
under this rule.
Existing CARB TPCs and CARB TPCs approved during the transition
period must provide panel producers with their TPC number issued by
CARB. The annual report must be provided to CARB and EPA during the
two-year transitional period. Notifications to EPA must also be
provided during the two-year transition period.
After the two-year transition period, CARB-approved TPCs may
continue to certify composite wood products under TSCA Title VI
provided the TPC maintains its CARB approval, follows all the
requirements under this part (including the accreditation
requirements), submits to EPA documentation from CARB supporting their
eligibility for reciprocity and has received EPA recognition as an EPA-
recognized TPC.
b. Reciprocity for CARB TPCs. EPA received several comments that
asked EPA to align with the CARB program and accept CARB-approved TPCs
into the EPA program. CARB suggested that EPA enter into a mutual
recognition agreement with them to accept CARB TPC approvals through
reciprocity such that CARB TPC approvals would be accepted by the EPA
without need for further review.
EPA has worked closely with CARB to establish a means for
reciprocity and will enter into a memorandum of agreement that recites
the requirements in this rule for CARB-approved TPCs to receive EPA
recognition through reciprocity and the process that EPA and CARB will
use to implement reciprocity. To be eligible to obtain EPA recognition
through reciprocity, CARB-
[[Page 89698]]
approved TPCs must meet all of the TPC qualifications discussed in Unit
III.B.3.a. and provide EPA with documentation from CARB that specifies
their eligibility for reciprocity via the EPA CDX at https://cdx.epa.gov. In the event that CDX becomes unavailable, EPA will
provide an alternate electronic submission method and inform TPCs how
to access the alternate method at https://www.epa.gov/formaldehyde. EPA
maintains the authority to deny recognition of CARB-approved TPCs who
apply to be recognized through reciprocity in the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program if the Agency believes the TPC is not
qualified under this rule. An overview of the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-
Party Certification Program and CARB TPC reciprocity is shown in
Illustration 2.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12DE16.001
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
6. Electronic reporting. The Government Paperwork Elimination Act
(GPEA), 44 U.S.C. 3504 note, provides that, when practicable, Federal
organizations use electronic forms, electronic filings, and electronic
signatures to conduct official business with the public. EPA's Cross-
Media Electronic Reporting Regulation (CROMERR) (40 CFR part 3) (Ref.
62), provides that any requirement in title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) to submit a report directly to EPA can be satisfied
with an electronic submission that meets certain conditions once the
Agency publishes a regulation that an electronic document submission
process is available for that requirement. In addition, the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA) requires Federal agencies to manage information
resources to reduce information collection burdens on the public;
[[Page 89699]]
increase program efficiency and effectiveness; and improve the
integrity, quality, and utility of information to all users within and
outside an agency, including capabilities for ensuring dissemination of
public information, public access to Federal Government information,
and protections for privacy and security (44 U.S.C. 3506). Section 2 of
TSCA expresses the intent of Congress that EPA carry out TSCA in a
reasonable and prudent manner, and in consideration of the impacts that
any action taken under TSCA may have on the environment, the economy,
and society (15 U.S.C. 2601). Electronic reporting was not available
when TSCA was enacted nor when several underlying reporting
requirements were subsequently promulgated by EPA. EPA believes that it
is now reasonable and prudent to manage and leverage its information
resources, including information technology (IT), to require the use of
electronic reporting in the implementation of certain TSCA provisions.
Electronic reporting can reduce burden and costs for the regulated
entities by eliminating the costs associated with printing and mailing
this information to EPA, while at the same time improving EPA's
efficiency in reviewing submitted information and making decisions.
EPA proposed requiring that information reported to EPA from TPCs
and ABs be reported electronically through EPA's CDX. EPA requested
comment on whether it should require mandatory electronic reporting.
Most commenters were not opposed to electronic reporting and some
commenters were amenable to electronic reporting but did not want it
required. One commenter also contended that, no matter what form of
reporting is eventually utilized, all proprietary business information
should be kept confidential by the EPA.
In this final rule, EPA will require TPCs and ABs to report
electronically because such a requirement streamlines the reporting
process and reduces the administrative costs associated with
information submission and recordkeeping. In light of the limited
number of reporting entities (TPCs and ABs) participating in the TSCA
Title VI program, the most cost-effective and efficient solution for
all concerned is a single database developed by EPA.
Most of the information requested in the reporting requirements of
these collections is not of a confidential nature. Nonetheless, the
application is designed to support acceptance of TSCA confidential
business information (CBI) by providing a secure environment that meets
Federal standards.
While information collected under TSCA may be entitled to
confidential treatment if it meets the standard for Exemption 4 in the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4), TSCA section 14
provides that health and safety studies and data derived from health
and safety studies, are not entitled to confidential treatment,
irrespective of the Exemption 4 standard, unless the release of data
derived from such studies would disclose processes used in the
manufacturing or processing of a chemical substance or mixture or, in
the case of a mixture, would disclose the portion of the mixture
comprised by any of its chemical substances. EPA has determined that
certain information that is submitted by TPCs in their annual reports
and notifications is not eligible for treatment as CBI, irrespective of
the Exemption 4 standard, because that information is health and safety
studies and data derived from health and safety studies. This includes
information pertaining to the compliance status of a particular lot,
batch, or shipment of composite wood. Quarterly test results, the test
date, the panel producer and product tested, test method and test
results cannot be claimed CBI. The ``product tested'' can be a general
product description such as particle board of a certain thickness.
TPCs and ABs will be able to submit CBI claims on behalf of
themselves or their clients for the other information reported to EPA.
CBI claims for information that is generally already publicly available
(status of a TPC or AB's participation in the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-
Party Certification program, and the basic credentials and contact
information for those entities) may be substantiated contemporaneously.
This type of information is expected to typically be publicly available
(e.g., on an entity's own Web site or marketing material), but in case
there are exceptions EPA is allowing the opportunity to claim this
information as CBI with contemporaneous substantiation. EPA notes that
ABs and TPCs may use a business email and phone number, and write the
descriptions of their credentials broadly so that it excludes
information the entity considers to be confidential.
The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act
(Pub. L. 114-182) was signed into law on June 22, 2016, and became
immediately effective. Section 14(c) now requires a supporting
statement and certification for confidentiality claims asserted after
June 22, 2016. The final rule contains one minor change to reflect the
new statutory requirements for asserting confidentiality claims. EPA is
requiring a statement and certification consistent with the section
14(c)(1)(B) statement (and with a related certification requirement in
section 14(c)(5) of the revised statute) to meet the new statutory
requirements. While this change was not discussed in the proposed rule,
EPA finds there is good cause to make this change without notice and
comment. Notice and comment are unnecessary because the new statement
is required by statute, and EPA anticipates no significant effect of
the change on companies reporting under the rule or on the public in
general.
To submit information via the CDX, each AB and TPC must designate
an individual representative (registrant) who will then register with
the CDX system at https://cdx.epa.gov. The registration process includes
completing an electronic signature agreement, preparing a data file for
submission, agreeing to the Terms and Conditions of CDX, providing
information about the submitter and organization, selecting a user name
and password, and following the procedures outlined in the guidance
document for CDX available at: https://cdx.epa.gov/Content/Documents/CDX_Quick_User_Guide.pdf. (Ref. 63). The registrant must select a role
and complete an electronic signature agreement either through
electronic validation or through wet ink signature.
To streamline reporting, CARB may, at a future date, offer their
approved TPCs the choice of submitting the CARB annual report and other
ongoing reporting obligations through the CDX electronic reporting
database.
7. Impartiality provisions for TPCs and ABs. EPA received comments
from CARB that EPA should specifically state that a panel producer
cannot be a TPC under the EPA program. EPA has determined that such a
prohibition would be a useful clarification of the impartiality
provisions of the ISO/IEC standards that EPA proposed to incorporate
and is incorporating into this rule. Therefore, this final rule
expressly prohibits a panel producer from also being a TPC.
Additionally, as a result of a review of the impartiality provisions of
the ISO/IEC standards in response to CARB's comment, EPA is specifying
other impartiality requirements to highlight key portions of the ISO/
IEC standards that are incorporated by reference in the proposed and
final regulations. In addition to requiring that a TPC not be a panel
producer, a TPC is not allowed to be a laminated product producer,
designer, distributor or retailer of
[[Page 89700]]
composite wood products, or have a financial interest in any of these
entities. EPA is also requiring that employees and management personnel
of a TPC involved in the panel producer review and product
certification decision-making process cannot be involved in advocacy or
consulting activities on behalf of the composite wood industry. To
further document impartiality, EPA-recognized TPC and EPA-recognized AB
management personnel and personnel involved in certifying products are
required to commit in writing that they will receive no financial
benefit from the outcome of certification testing. Finally, EPA is
requiring that an EPA-recognized AB ensure that an accreditation
decision regarding a TPC is made by persons different from those who
conducted the assessment of the TPC. All of these points reflect
provisions in the ISO/IEC standards that EPA believes are worth
underscoring.
C. Formaldehyde Emission Standards
TSCA Title VI establishes formaldehyde emission standards for
composite wood products (hardwood plywood, particleboard, and medium-
density fiberboard) so that when they take effect on December 12, 2017,
as discussed in Unit III.C., the standards are identical to the CARB
ATCM Phase 2 emission levels. The emission standards will be 0.05 ppm
formaldehyde for hardwood plywood, 0.09 ppm formaldehyde for
particleboard, 0.11 ppm formaldehyde for medium-density fiberboard, and
0.13 ppm formaldehyde for thin medium-density fiberboard. The statute
does not give EPA authority to modify these emission standards.
TSCA Title VI describes two emission standards for hardwood
plywood, one for that made with a veneer core and the other for that
made with a composite core. In the preamble to the proposed
regulations, EPA argued that, because the two standards are the same,
0.05 ppm formaldehyde, for implementing regulations taking effect after
July 1, 2012, the 0.05 ppm limit should be applied to all composite
wood products that meet the definition of hardwood plywood, regardless
of the core type. Many commenters opposed this interpretation and urged
EPA to be consistent with the CARB ATCM in this area. The CARB ATCM has
a similar definition of hardwood plywood. It includes a variety of core
types, but the CARB ATCM emission standards apply only to hardwood
plywood made with a veneer core or a composite core. Thus, for example,
hardwood plywood made with a lumber core or a hardboard core is not
required to comply with the emission standards or the testing and
certification requirements of the ATCM. EPA agrees with those
commenters that recommended consistency with the CARB ATCM. In EPA's
view, the better reading of TSCA Title VI is that it only imposes the
hardwood plywood formaldehyde emission standard on hardwood plywood
made with a veneer or a composite core. Therefore, EPA is promulgating
a hardwood plywood emission standard that specifically applies only to
hardwood plywood with either a veneer core or a composite core.
D. Product Certification in General
Under this final rule, composite wood products that are sold,
supplied, offered for sale, or manufactured (including imported) within
the United States must be certified, unless they are specifically
exempted by TSCA or excluded by this final rule. In general, this means
that the formaldehyde emission levels from the composite wood products
would have been demonstrated to be below the emission standards in TSCA
Title VI. This demonstration would be through a combination of testing
performed by an accredited TPC laboratory, and repeated on a quarterly
basis, and more frequent quality control testing performed by the Panel
Producer of the composite wood product, an accredited TPC laboratory,
or a contract laboratory. Specific requirements for this testing are
discussed in Unit III.E.
EPA is requiring panel producers of composite wood products to
apply to an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC for product certification, and to
design and establish a quality control program, including testing, that
is both approved by the TPC and specific to the panel producer. EPA has
slightly different requirements for certification, depending on whether
the panel producer has other product types that are already certified
under the CARB ATCM or TSCA Title VI. For a panel producer that does
not have any certifications from a CARB-approved TPC or an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC, or that is switching to a new TPC, the panel producer
must provide to the TPC the panel producer's contact information, a
copy of its quality control manual, contact information for its quality
control manager, an identification of the specific products for which
certification is requested and the resin system used, results from at
least five quarterly and five quality control tests, a linear
regression equation and correlation data, and results of an initial,
on-site inspection by a TPC. For panel producers applying for
certification of a new product type but that have previous product
certifications from a CARB-approved TPC or an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC,
the application must contain the panel producer's contact information,
an identification of the specific products for which certification is
requested and the resin system used, at least five quarterly and five
quality control tests, a linear regression equation and correlation
data, and a description of any changes in the panel producer's quality
control manual and a copy of those changes. Regardless of whether panel
producers are applying for certification of a new product type, the
test results must demonstrate an adequate correlation between the
quality control test results and the TPC's quarterly test results as
described in Unit III.E. Test results must also indicate that the
formaldehyde emissions of the products are below the emission standards
established by TSCA Title VI as discussed in greater detail in Unit
III.C. The initial on-site inspection must demonstrate that the panel
producer has the required quality control and quality assurance
procedures in place to ensure that the products will continue to meet
the emission standards. Multiple products can be grouped into a single
product type for certification; however, formaldehyde emissions test
results must demonstrate that grouped products have similar
formaldehyde emission characteristics and that their emissions fit the
same correlation curve or linear regression. Uncertified product
produced after the manufactured-by date cannot be sold, supplied, or
offered for sale in the United States.
EPA had proposed to require three months of quality control testing
prior to certification but received numerous comments stating that this
requirement was unnecessary, would create an undue delay in bringing
new products to the market, and is not required by CARB. Commenters
recommended that EPA's requirements for certification be consistent
with the requirements in the CARB ATCM. EPA has decided to harmonize
with the CARB ATCM by requiring correlation data and an initial on-site
inspection conducted by the TPC, but not the proposed three months of
testing. This is consistent with how products are being certified under
the CARB ATCM and is sufficient to demonstrate that the panel producer
is manufacturing products that meet the emission standard and has
quality control procedures in place to ensure that the product will
continue to meet the standards. Under this final rule, products
currently certified by CARB-approved TPCs will be considered
[[Page 89701]]
certified for purposes of TSCA Title VI. However, as described in Unit
III.B., EPA is allowing CARB-approved TPCs two years to become
recognized by EPA under TSCA Title VI. Therefore, a panel producer
whose TPC does not become recognized under TSCA Title VI in a timely
manner would have to apply to an EPA-Recognized TPC to continue to make
certified products after the manufactured-by date.
E. Formaldehyde Emissions Testing Requirements
TSCA Title VI requires that composite wood products be measured for
compliance with the statutory emission standards by quarterly tests
pursuant to test methods ASTM E1333-96 (2002) or ASTM D6007-02 (Refs.
39, 64). TSCA Title VI also requires that quality control tests be
conducted pursuant to ASTM D6007-02, ASTM D-5582 (Ref. 65), or such
other test methods as may be established by EPA through rulemaking.
Under the statute, test results conducted using any test method other
than ASTM E1333-96 (2002) must include a showing of equivalence by
means that EPA must establish through rulemaking. Under TSCA Title VI,
EPA must also establish, through rulemaking, the number and frequency
of tests required to demonstrate compliance with the emission
standards. This unit of the preamble discusses EPA's rulemaking on each
of these statutory elements.
1. General testing requirements. EPA is finalizing the testing
requirements as proposed with a few minor changes to definitions and
terms used in the requirements based on public comments.
EPA received numerous comments on the proposed definitions of the
terms ``product type,'' ``production line,'' ``lot,'' and the lack of
definitions for the terms ``production run'' and ``batch.'' Many
commenters were concerned that as proposed, every single batch or lot
of product would need to be tested, and commenters stated that under
the proposed definitions, producers of low volume specialty products
would need to test more often than large volume producers. Therefore,
EPA has made some changes to these definitions and to the terms used in
the testing requirements to clarify that products with similar
formaldehyde emissions can be grouped for testing purposes (both
quality control testing and quarterly testing). EPA is adding a
definition of the term ``resin system''. EPA is changing the definition
of ``lot'' to be consistent with the definition in the CARB ATCM. In
addition, EPA is no longer using the term ``batch'' as it was redundant
with use of the term ``lot'' in the proposed rule and was confusing.
EPA is modifying the definition of the term ``production line''
slightly to be consistent with use of the term not only in the
particleboard and medium density fiberboard industry, but also the
hardwood plywood industry. In addition, EPA is no longer using the term
``production run.''
EPA is finalizing as proposed the requirement that entities
conducting formaldehyde testing must use the procedures, such as
testing conditions and loading ratios, specified in the method being
used. EPA is also finalizing the requirement that all equipment used in
formaldehyde testing be calibrated and otherwise maintained and used in
accordance with the equipment manufacturer's instructions. EPA received
numerous public comments supporting these requirements. EPA is also
finalizing the requirement that all panels be tested in an unfinished
condition, prior to the application of a finishing or topcoat.
a. Quarterly testing requirements. EPA proposed to require that
accredited TPCs conduct the quarterly tests required by TSCA Title VI.
EPA is finalizing this requirement essentially as proposed except to
clarify that the quarterly testing must be overseen by an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC but that the testing can be conducted by an accredited
laboratory, owned or operated by a TPC or an accredited contract
laboratory, which this final rule will refer to as a ``TPC
laboratory.'' The statute requires these tests to be performed using
ASTM E1333-96 (2002) or, upon a showing of equivalence as discussed in
this Unit, ASTM D6007-02 (Refs. 39, 64). Under the authority provided
by TSCA section 601(d)(5), EPA is incorporating ASTM E1333-10 into the
final rule's testing requirements, rather than the 2002 version (Ref.
43). EPA is aware that these test methods and several other standards
referenced in this final rule have been updated and plans to substitute
successor standards after public notice and opportunity for comment, as
appropriate.
Under the final rule, TPC laboratories must test randomly chosen
samples from a single lot that is ready for shipment by the panel
producer. Neither the top nor bottom composite wood product of a bundle
can be selected because the emissions from these products may not be
representative of the bundle. For particleboard and medium-density
fiberboard, quarterly tests must be conducted on randomly selected
samples of each product type (unless they qualify for reduced testing
based on ULEF or NAF-based resin). For hardwood plywood, in
consideration of a comment from HPVA that hardwood plywood producers
may not be producing all of their product types when the TPC selects
samples for testing, EPA is removing the requirement that samples be
selected from the hardwood plywood product with the highest potential
to emit formaldehyde and, instead, is requiring TPCs to randomly select
samples for testing that are representative of the range of products
produced by the panel producer.
As discussed previously, EPA is allowing products to be grouped for
quarterly and quality control testing. EPA is allowing EPA TSCA Title
VI TPCs to approve the grouping of products with similar formaldehyde
emission characteristics, based on correlation data as described in
Unit III.E.
EPA is finalizing the quarterly sample handling requirements as
proposed, except for minor changes in use of the terms ``lot'' and
``product type,'' and in the requirements for product grouping as
discussed in this Unit. Samples must be closely stacked or air tight
wrapped between the time of sample selection and the start of test
conditioning. Samples will also have to be labeled as such, signed by
the TPC, protected by cover sheets, and promptly shipped to the
laboratory testing facility. EPA is finalizing the requirement that
conditioning begin as soon as possible, but no more than 30 calendar
days after production.
b. Quality control test methods. With a showing of adequate
correlation, EPA is allowing use of the following methods: ASTM D6007-
02, ASTM D5582, EN 717-2 (Gas Analysis Method) (Ref. 66), DMC (Dynamic
Microchamber) (Refs. 67-68), EN 120 (Perforator Method) (Ref. 69), and
JIS A 1460 (24-hr Desiccator Method) (Ref. 70). EPA has determined that
these are appropriate methods for quality control testing based on
public comments, CARB's evaluation and approval of these methods as
alternative small scale test methods, and because test results using
these methods have been demonstrated to have adequate correlations with
test results using ASTM E1333-10. EPA is establishing these methods
pursuant to section 601(b)(3)(A)(ii) for quality control testing. EPA
does not endorse any particular method over others.
Few comments were received in support of the addition of any other
method, and the supporting commenters did not provide data or
information
[[Page 89702]]
demonstrating equivalence or adequate correlation with ASTM E1333 that
would justify their inclusion with the established methods. However, if
EPA receives additional information and chooses to pursue adding
another method, EPA will provide notice in the Federal Register and an
opportunity for public comment as required by TSCA Title VI. EPA
received several comments indicating that both the 2012 and 2007 user's
manuals should be allowed for the Dynamic Microchamber Method;
therefore, EPA is incorporating by reference both versions of the
user's manuals.
For each quality control test method that will be used to perform
quality control testing for a particular panel producer, the EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC must establish, in consultation with the panel producer, a
QCL. The QCL is the quality control test value that is the correlative
equivalent to the emission standard based on the ASTM E1333-10 method.
The QCL is established by using a simple linear regression where the
dependent variables (Y-axis) are the quality control test results and
the independent variables (X-axis) are the ASTM E1333-10 test results.
c. Quality control testing frequency for particleboard and medium-
density fiberboard that do not qualify for reduced testing based on
ULEF or NAF-based resins. EPA is finalizing the quality control testing
frequency for particleboard and medium-density fiberboard as proposed.
Quality control tests will be required at least once per shift for each
production line for each product type. Quality control tests must also
be conducted whenever a product type production ends, whenever there is
a significant change to resin formulation or use, when a decrease in
press time of more than 20 percent occurs, and any time quality control
employees have reason to believe that the panel being produced may not
meet the requirements of the applicable standards.
EPA is finalizing reduced quality control testing requirements as
proposed for particleboard and medium-density fiberboard when the panel
producer demonstrates consistent operations and low variability of test
values. The panel producer must request approval from an EPA TSCA Title
VI TPC. If approved, quality control testing will still have to occur
at least once per 48-hour production period. As proposed, a 30 panel
running average, consisting of the average of the results of the 30
most recently sampled panels, must be maintained, and depending on
whether the average remains two or three standard deviations below the
designated QCL for the previous 60 consecutive days or more, testing
frequency may be reduced to one test per 24-hour or 48-hour production
period, respectively. An EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must approve a request
for reduced quality control testing as long as the data submitted by
the panel producer demonstrate compliance with the criteria and the TPC
does not otherwise have reason to believe that the data are inaccurate
or that the panel producer's production processes are inadequate to
ensure continued compliance with the emission standards. Based on
comments received, EPA is clarifying in this final rule that reduced
testing privileges will continue unless revoked by a TPC as a result of
an emission test exceedance or if testing indicates the panel producer
no longer meets the eligibility requirements.
d. Proposed quality control testing frequency for hardwood plywood
that does not qualify for reduced testing based on ULEF or NAF-based
resins. EPA is finalizing the frequency of quality control testing for
hardwood plywood essentially as proposed. EPA is removing the proposed
requirement to test per production line based on comments indicating
that a hardwood plywood panel producer's production line can consist of
several multiple-opening hot presses and glue spreaders that are often
used to produce any and all of the panel producer's certified product
types. EPA's quality control testing frequency requirements for
hardwood plywood are generally similar to CARB's requirements and are
likewise based on production volume. Hardwood plywood panel producers
must generally test each product type weekly, with one to four tests
being required based on total weekly hardwood plywood production by the
panel producer. For some small specialty panel producers, even one
quality control test per week per product type would be excessive. In
order to address the inequity of requiring small manufacturers to
conduct many more tests than required of large manufacturers for the
same production volume, if weekly production of hardwood plywood at the
panel producer is less than 100,000 square feet, but more than 100,000
square feet is produced per month, EPA is requiring one quality control
test per 100,000 square feet of each product type produced. If the
panel producer produces less than 100,000 square feet of a particular
product type per month, EPA is requiring only one quality control test
of that product type per month when the product type is produced. For
low volume producers, EPA had proposed to require testing per
production run and per lot; however, numerous commenters pointed out
that with the proposed definition of lot, this requirement could lead
to low volume producers testing at a higher frequency than some high
volume producers. By removing the requirement to test per production
run and per lot, EPA is ensuring that the testing requirement will not
be too burdensome for panel producers that manufacture low volumes of
hardwood plywood. EPA is including the requirement of periodic testing
to ensure that if a product type is produced several times per year, at
less than 100,000 square feet, several quality control tests will be
conducted. EPA is concerned that one test would not be sufficient to
ensure compliance if there is a gap in production of more than one
month. In addition, EPA is clarifying that product types not being
manufactured during a particular week do not need to be manufactured
just so that they can be tested.
Based on supporting comments, EPA is also including a requirement
for hardwood plywood panel producers to conduct quality control testing
when certain changes are made to resin formulation or use, press time
is reduced by more than 20%, or quality control employees have reason
to believe that the panel being produced may not meet the requirements
of the applicable standard. CARB included these requirements in the
March 2014 mark-up of the ATCM (Ref. 51).
EPA is not promulgating a reduced quality control testing provision
for hardwood plywood similar to the provision for particle board and
medium-density fiberboard because HPVA's comments indicated that such a
provision is not necessary and because no commenters suggested criteria
for qualification.
2. Means of showing test method equivalence. EPA is finalizing the
means of showing test method equivalence essentially as proposed. EPA
proposed to require that equivalence between ASTM E1333-10 and any
other test method used be demonstrated by the TPC for each laboratory
used by the TPC or panel producer that is using the alternative method
at least once each year or whenever there is a significant change in
equipment, procedures, or the qualifications of testing personnel. In
this final rule, EPA is clarifying that TPCs are responsible for
demonstrating equivalence between ASTM E1333-10 and ASTM D6007-02 if
the TPC laboratory uses ASTM D6007-02 for
[[Page 89703]]
quarterly or verification testing. In this final rule, EPA is allowing
demonstration of equivalence to be reduced to at least once every two
years once it has been established every year for three consecutive
years. EPA is making this change to match CARB amendments to the ATCM
currently under consideration by CARB (Ref. 51) and because CARB
recommended this in submitted comments. In EPA's view, after a TPC has
consistently demonstrated equivalence over a three year period, it is
not necessary to require the TPC to continue to demonstrate equivalence
every year.
Many commenters indicated that EPA used the term ``equivalence''
incorrectly in the proposed rule when referring to comparison of ASTM
E1333-10 and quality control test methods. EPA used the term
``equivalence'' because it is the term used in TSCA Title VI. However,
in this final rule, EPA will use the term ``correlation'' for the
comparison of ASTM E1333-10 and quality control methods to meet the
TSCA Title VI requirement of demonstrating equivalence. EPA is also
clarifying in this final rule that the panel producer is responsible
for ensuring that an adequate correlation has been demonstrated between
the quality control methods that are used for testing its products
annually or at least once every two years once it has been established
for three consecutive years. Panel producers must also establish a new
correlation whenever there is a significant change in equipment,
procedures, or the qualifications of testing personnel. EPA is
requiring that a new correlation needs to be established whenever a
TPC's quarterly test results compared with the panel producer's quality
control test results do not fit the previously established correlation.
In addition, if a panel producer fails two quarterly tests in a row, a
new correlation curve needs to be established. EPA did not receive any
adverse comments regarding these requirements. The panel producer may
use its own laboratory, a TPC laboratory, or any other laboratory for
testing, but it is the panel producer's responsibility to ensure that
this requirement is met. The panel producer's TPC (or the TPC's
laboratory) will evaluate the quality control data and compare it with
the quarterly test data to establish a linear regression equation and
determine whether the correlation is adequate as described later in
this Unit.
One commenter stated that EPA should clarify that the equivalence
is specific not only to the test methods, but also the equipment. EPA
agrees and is therefore clarifying in this final rule that equivalence
or correlation must be demonstrated for each testing apparatus. Several
commenters indicated that EPA should not require the equivalence
protocol when ASTM D6007-02 is used as a quality control method and
that the equivalence protocol should only be required for TPCs or their
contract laboratories using ASTM D6007-02 for quarterly testing.
Therefore, EPA is clarifying in this final rule that when ASTM D6007-02
is used for quality control testing, only a demonstration of
correlation between ASTM D6007-02 and ASTM E1333-10 is required.
EPA is requiring that equivalence be demonstrated in the ranges of
formaldehyde concentrations that are representative of the emissions of
the products that the TPC certifies. EPA is requiring a minimum of five
comparison sample sets. In addition, EPA is allowing for flexibility in
sampling and not requiring testing of nine specimens representing
evenly distributed portions of an entire panel for demonstrating
equivalence between ASTM D6007-02 and ASTM E1333-10 as is required in
the CARB ATCM. Most commenters support this flexibility. For some types
of panels, within panel variability is such that fewer specimens can be
tested, but for other panels, testing of at least nine specimens will
be needed. TPCs and panel producers are best able to determine the
sampling and testing needed to account for within panel variability for
a specific product type, and EPA is therefore allowing for flexibility
in the distribution and number of specimens to require for the small
chamber test comparison sample set. If laboratories have difficulty
meeting the equivalence or correlation requirements, they may need to
increase the number of samples. Specifics on how the equivalence
demonstration must be performed can be found in 40 CFR 770.20(d)(1).
For the purposes of meeting the TSCA Title VI requirement of
demonstrating equivalence between ASTM E1333-10 and any quality control
test method used for measuring formaldehyde emissions, EPA is requiring
a demonstration of correlation. A linear regression with an acceptable
correlation must be established, as defined by the correlation
coefficient, or ``r'' value. As discussed in the preamble of the
proposed rule, although correlation does not show that the test methods
give equal results, it demonstrates whether a quality control test
method can be used to adequately estimate the corresponding ASTM E1333-
10 test result. Therefore, if there is an acceptable correlation, the
quality control test method can be used to estimate whether the product
meets the emission standards. The correlation will be based on a
minimum sample size of five data pairs and a simple linear regression
where the dependent variable (Y-axis) is the quality control test value
and the independent variable (X-axis) is the ASTM E1333-10 test value.
EPA is finalizing the minimum acceptable correlation coefficients
(``r'' values) for the correlation as proposed; they can be found at
Sec. 770.20(d)(2) of this rule. The number of data pairs is
represented by the letter ``n'' in the regulatory text. For example,
correlations based on five data pairs have 3-degrees of freedom, and
the correlation coefficient needs to be 0.878 or greater. As discussed
in the proposed rule, because of the low emissions required for
composite wood products, it may be necessary to include more than five
data pairs and/or a range of products (with a suitable range in
emissions, e.g., 0-0.1 ppm) in the testing to achieve acceptable
correlation coefficients.
3. Non-complying lots. EPA received many comments on the proposed
provisions for non-complying lots. Nearly all commenters objected to
EPA's proposed requirement that a panel producer retain product
belonging to lots selected for sampling until the panel producer
receives the test result. Commenters also made suggestions with regard
to the definition of non-complying lot.
EPA agrees with the commenter who noted that quality control tests
are often not directly comparable to the emission standard and has
modified the proposed definition so that the term ``non-complying lot''
means any lot of composite wood product represented by a quarterly test
value or quality control test result that indicates that the lot
exceeds the applicable standard for the particular composite wood
product in Sec. 770.10(b). EPA is also clarifying in the definition
that a quality control test result that exceeds the QCL is considered a
test result that indicates that the lot from which the sample was taken
exceeds the applicable standard. As proposed, the definition in the
final rule also states that, in the case of a quarterly test value,
only the particular lot from which the sample was taken would be
considered a non-complying lot; lots produced after the previous
quarterly test but before the lot from which the sample was taken would
still be considered certified product. The final rule definition
further states that future production of product type(s) represented by
a failed quarterly test would not be considered certified and would
have to be treated as a non-complying lot until the product type(s)
[[Page 89704]]
are re-qualified through a successful quarterly test.
Most commenters did not support EPA's proposed requirement that
panel producers retain product belonging to lots selected for sampling
until the test results are received by the panel producer. EPA proposed
this requirement to ensure that non-complying products do not end up in
the stream of commerce. However, commenters thought that this would
disrupt supply chains and be very costly for panel producers,
particularly in the case of quarterly tests, because of the time
involved in shipping and testing product. Commenters were concerned
that panel producers would not have sufficient warehouse capacity to
store lots associated with quarterly test samples until the test
results are received. On the other hand, a trade association
representing fabricators supported EPA's proposed requirement, stating
that fabricators have been in the position of receiving non-complying
product from panel producers but not being informed of the product's
non-complying status until after the product had moved into downstream
production. In EPA's view, holding lots until test results are received
is the best way to ensure that non-complying product is not distributed
in commerce, but EPA is also concerned about the impacts on industry
supply chains from holding product, particularly product belonging to
lots selected for quarterly testing. Most commenters supported a
requirement to notify customers that had received products belonging to
a non-complying lot. Many automatically assumed that panel producers
would support their customers and address non-complying product that
had been distributed before the test results were received, whether by
recalling the product, by retesting samples retained by the panel
producer, or by working with the customer to age or otherwise treat the
product. The panel producer is responsible for non-complying product
that it has inadvertently distributed, but EPA also understands the
importance of allowing panel producers flexibility in managing their
responsibility. Therefore, the final rule requires panel producers to
notify, within 72 hours of receiving notice of a failing test result,
any fabricators, distributors, or retailers that received non-complying
product. The notification must inform the customer of the type of test
failed and include a description of the composite wood product
belonging to the non-complying lot, a statement that the non-complying
product must be isolated from other composite wood products and must
not be further distributed in commerce, and a description of the steps
the panel producer intends to take with respect to the product. The
rule further requires panel producers to either treat, retest, and
certify the non-complying product while it remains in the possession of
the customer or recall the non-complying product and dispose of it or
treat, retest and certify it.
EPA is generally finalizing the rest of the provisions relating to
the handling of non-complying lots as proposed, except that several
commenter suggestions for clarification were incorporated. Under this
final rule, panel producers must segregate the non-complying lot from
other product and products in non-complying lots must only be sold,
supplied, or offered for sale in the United States if a test value that
meets the applicable standard is obtained after the products are
treated with scavengers to absorb excess formaldehyde, or treated
through another process that reduces formaldehyde emissions, e.g.
aging. Retesting must include at least one test panel selected from
each of three separate bundles, with the selected panels being
representative of the entire non-complying lot and not from the top or
bottom of a bundle. The test panels may be selected from properly
stored samples set aside by the panel producer for retest in the event
of a failure. In order to recertify the lot, the average of all of the
samples must test below the applicable standard. EPA also proposed to
require panel producers to keep records of the disposition of non-
complying lots, including the specific treatment used and the
subsequent test results demonstrating compliance. As pointed out by
commenters, quality control test results are not always directly
comparable with the emission standards, so the test result language in
this section clarifies that results of a retest of a failed quarterly
test must demonstrate compliance with the applicable emission standard,
while results of a retest of a failed quality control test must be at
or below the level that indicates that the product is in compliance
with the emission standards. Finally, in response to commenter
suggestions, EPA is promulgating a definition of the term ``scavenger''
that more precisely describes the role of scavengers in the context of
this regulation.
F. Quality Assurance and Quality Control Requirements for Composite
Wood Product Panel Producers
Panel producers are responsible for ensuring that their products
meet the emission standards of TSCA Title VI. Quality assurance and
quality control requirements for panel producers are necessary to
ensure that all of their products comply with the applicable standards,
including those that are not actually tested. EPA proposed quality
assurance and quality control requirements that would be virtually
identical to the requirements of the CARB ATCM and that would help
ensure proper handling of test samples, test equipment, and quality
control testing. EPA is generally finalizing these provisions as
proposed, with some clarifications and additions suggested by
commenters that address important aspects of producing and supplying a
product that meets TSCA Title VI requirements.
The final rule requires each panel producer to have a written
quality control manual at each location that produces composite wood
products. The manual must include a description of the organization of
the quality control department, sampling procedures and sample
handling, quality control testing frequency, procedures to identify
production changes that may result in changes in formaldehyde
emissions, recordkeeping and labeling procedures, description of
product type, and resin percentage and press time for each product
type, and procedures for handling non-complying lots, including a
description of how the panel producer will ensure compliance with the
notification requirements. The manual must be reviewed and approved by
an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC to ensure that the manual is complete and that
the panel producer's procedures are adequate to ensure that the TSCA
Title VI emission standards are being met on an ongoing basis. The
requirement for a quality control manual is consistent with CARB.
Each panel producer must designate a quality control facility for
conducting quality control formaldehyde testing of their product. The
quality control facility must be a laboratory owned and operated by the
panel producer, a TPC, or a contract laboratory.
Each panel producer must also designate a person as quality control
manager with adequate experience and/or training to be responsible for
formaldehyde emissions quality control. The quality control manager
must have the authority to take actions necessary to ensure that
applicable emission standards are being met. The panel producer must
identify the quality control manager and his or her qualifications in
writing to the TPC and must notify the TPC in writing within ten
calendar days of any change in the identity of the quality control
manager
[[Page 89705]]
and provide the TPC with the new quality control manager's
qualifications. The quality control manager must review and approve all
reports of quality control testing conducted on the production of the
panel producer. The quality control manager is also responsible for
ensuring that the samples are collected, packaged, and shipped
according to the procedures specified in the quality control manual.
The panel producer quality control manager must monitor the testing
facility's results, and immediately inform the TPC in writing of any
significant changes in production that could affect formaldehyde
emission rates.
Each quality control facility must have quality control employees
with adequate experience and/or training to conduct accurate and
precise chemical quantitative analytical tests. The quality control
manager must identify each person conducting formaldehyde quality
control testing in the quality control manual.
EPA requested comment on whether the regulation should include
minimum qualifications for quality control managers and quality control
staff, such as education, experience, or training requirements.
Commenters did not favor minimum qualifications, preferring instead to
allow panel producers, with TPC input, more flexibility in choosing
quality control managers and employees that are capable of performing
the required duties. EPA agrees with these commenters and is not
incorporating minimum education, experience, or training requirements
into the regulation.
Panel producers are required to submit monthly product data reports
for each panel producer, production line and product type, to their
TPC. The content requirements for the product data reports are
virtually identical to the CARB requirements and include a data sheet
for each specific product type with test and production information, a
quality control graph containing the established QCL and shipping QCL
(if applicable) the results of quality control tests, and retest
values. As discussed in more detail in Unit III.F., these quality
assurance and quality control requirements do not apply to any product
type made with a NAF-based resin or ULEF resin for which the panel
producer is eligible for an exemption from the third-party
certification requirements, except for the purpose of applying for re-
approval for the exemption.
G. NAF-Based and ULEF Resins
TSCA Title VI section 601(d)(2)(D) and (E) directs EPA to include,
in its implementing regulations, provisions related to products made
with NAF-based and ULEF resins. The statute also defines, under section
601(a)(7) and (10) respectively, what constitutes NAF-based and ULEF
resins, in terms of the composition of the resin system and maximum
formaldehyde emissions for composite wood products made with these
resin systems. In general, a NAF composite wood product cannot
incorporate a resin formulated with formaldehyde as part of the
crosslinking structure. A ULEF composite wood product is one made from
resins that may contain formaldehyde, but emit it at particularly low
levels. The statutory maximum emissions for products made with NAF-
based or ULEF resins are identical to those in the CARB ATCM.
EPA is finalizing NAF and ULEF provisions essentially as proposed.
If certain emission thresholds are met, EPA is providing producers of
panels made with NAF-based resins or ULEF resins with an exemption from
TPC oversight and formaldehyde emissions testing after an initial
testing period of three months for each product type made with NAF-
based resins or six months for each product type made with ULEF resins.
These specific initial testing periods are required by the statute and
are designed to ensure that the products meet the TSCA section 601(a)
formaldehyde emission standards for products made with NAF-based or
ULEF resins. Because EPA is only requiring quality control testing when
products are actually produced and is including provisions for reduced
testing for hardwood plywood panel producers that manufacture low
volumes of products, EPA is adding the clarification that the three or
six months of quality control testing must include at least 5 quality
control tests for NAF approvals and at least 10 quality control tests
for ULEF approvals. This requirement is meant to preclude the
possibility of panel producers manufacturing low volumes or
infrequently just to qualify for NAF or ULEF reduced testing or
exemption from certification, and because fewer quality control tests
would be insufficient to judge whether a product should qualify for
reduced testing or exemption from certification. EPA chose a minimum of
five tests for NAF approval because this is the minimum needed for
demonstrating correlation. EPA is requiring at least 10 quality control
tests for ULEF approvals because the statutory testing requirements for
ULEF qualification under TSCA Title VI are double those for NAF
qualification.
Whether using a NAF-based or ULEF resin to qualify for the
exemption from TPC oversight and formaldehyde emissions testing for a
particular product type, there can be no test result indicating
emissions higher than 0.05 ppm of formaldehyde for hardwood plywood and
0.06 ppm for particleboard, medium-density fiberboard, and thin medium-
density fiberboard during the initial testing period. In addition, test
results for 90 percent of the required quality control testing must
indicate emissions of no higher than 0.04 ppm of formaldehyde.
If less stringent emission standards than these are met, producers
of panels made with ULEF resins may still qualify for reduced
formaldehyde emissions testing--but not the third-party certification
exemption or the exemption from emissions testing after the initial six
months. To qualify for this reduced testing provision for products made
with ULEF resins, there can be no test result indicating emissions
higher than 0.05 ppm of formaldehyde for hardwood plywood, 0.08 ppm for
particleboard, 0.09 ppm for medium-density fiberboard, and 0.11 ppm for
thin medium-density fiberboard during the initial six month testing
period. In addition, test results for 90 percent of the required
quality control testing must indicate emissions of no higher than 0.05
ppm of formaldehyde for particleboard, 0.06 ppm for medium-density
fiberboard, and 0.08 ppm for thin medium-density fiberboard. Under this
reduced testing provision, qualifying panels would only need to be
quality control tested at least once per week per product type, except
that hardwood plywood panel producers who qualify for less frequent
quality control testing may continue to perform the lesser amount of
testing. For these panels, what would otherwise be quarterly testing by
an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC would instead only be required every six
months.
An EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must oversee the testing during the
initial testing period, which must include at least one test result for
the NAF exemption or two test results for either ULEF provision under
ASTM E1333-10 or, upon a showing of equivalence as discussed in this
Unit, ASTM D6007-02 (Refs. 43-44). To receive a third-party
certification exemption or reduced testing under this NAF/ULEF
provision, the panel producer will be required to apply to an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC or CARB for approval for reduced testing or a third-party
certification exemption based on the regulatory requirements.
[[Page 89706]]
EPA had proposed to have TPCs review all of the applications; however,
several commenters expressed concern about this. Their concerns include
potential conflicts of interest, and potential for inconsistency among
TPC reviews. Therefore, EPA is also allowing CARB to review
applications for NAF and ULEF under the TSCA Title VI program, as long
as CARB continues to have requirements that are at least as stringent
as EPA's requirements, which EPA affirms is currently true. Should EPA
determine that CARB's requirements are no longer at least as stringent
was EPA's requirements, then EPA will publish a notice in the Federal
Register announcing EPA's determination.
As noted, panel producers can also apply to their EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC for NAF and ULEF approvals. EPA has determined that allowing TPCs
to approve applications for NAF/ULEF reduced testing and/or a limited
exemption from TPC oversight does not inherently present a conflict of
interest and the provisions of this final rule that require TPC
impartiality are applicable to TPCs reviewing and approving NAF/ULEF
applications (see Unit III.B.7.). The specific testing requirements and
eligibility criteria applicable to NAF/ULEF exemptions will greatly
reduce the likelihood of inconsistency in TPC reviews.
To maintain eligibility for a third-party certification exemption,
at least once every two years after the conclusion of the initial
testing period, the panel producer must reapply for exemption to an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC or CARB. Because the CARB ATCM requires applications
and reapplications for these third-party certification exemptions to be
submitted to CARB, EPA will accept CARB approvals and re-approvals for
as long as CARB's exemption criteria remain at least as stringent as
EPA's. This will avoid duplicate applications for those panel producers
that operate in California. Re-applicants to the EPA program must
include one test result for NAF renewal and two test results for ULEF
renewal under ASTM E1333-10 or, upon a showing of equivalence as
discussed in this Unit, ASTM D6007-02, that demonstrate continued
compliance with the reduced formaldehyde emission standards for each
product type (Refs. 43-44). The test(s) must be based on products
randomly selected and tested by a TPC laboratory. In the case of
approval for ULEF reduced testing, no periodic reapplication to a TPC
is necessary because the panel producer must have ongoing TPC
oversight. However, if CARB approves reduced testing for ULEF, CARB may
require periodic reapplications. The current CARB regulations require
panel producers eligible for reduced testing to reapply to CARB every
two years.
In general, testing records and other records demonstrating
eligibility for a third-party certification exemption or reduced
testing, such as records showing the resin used to manufacture the
eligible products, must be maintained for a minimum of three years from
the date that the record was created. Commenters generally indicated
that initial testing records should be kept for as long as a panel
producer claims exemption or reduced testing. EPA agrees with these
commenters. In addition, EPA agrees that a review of the initial
testing period documentation may be useful in the event that a product
made under a NAF or ULEF exemption is determined to exceed the
applicable standard. Therefore, the final rule requires records of the
initial testing period be kept for as long as a panel producer is
producing composite wood products under an exemption.
Numerous commenters indicated that EPA should minimize the amount
of potentially confidential information (e.g., resin formulation) that
TPCs are required to maintain. To address the comments on CBI concerns,
EPA is removing the requirement included in the proposal that specific
resin formulation information be included with applications for NAF and
ULEF approvals and instead only requiring identification of the resin
system. The resin system is meant to be a generalized description of
the type of resin used. This is unlikely to be CBI, but an entity that
believes the resin system is CBI can have their TPC submit a claim for
this information on their behalf.
EPA proposed that any change in the resin formulation, the core
material, or any other part of the manufacturing process that may
affect formaldehyde emission rates would render the product ineligible
for the reduced testing approval or third-party certification exemption
and requested comment on whether other events, such as failed quarterly
or routine quality control tests, should invalidate a reduced testing
approval. Commenters provided suggestions for how EPA should handle
changes in manufacture or emission test result failures for products
that have received NAF or ULEF approvals. Taking these comments into
consideration, EPA is requiring at least one quality control test and
one quarterly test for NAF products, or five quality control tests and
one quarterly test for ULEF products, every time there is an
operational or process change that may affect formaldehyde emissions,
such as a change in resin formulation, press cycle duration,
temperature, or amount of resin used per panel. EPA has concluded that
a change in resin system and addition of products requires a new NAF or
ULEF application for third-party certification exemption or reduced
testing since these are major changes, which could require designation
as a new product type, rather than operational or process changes. In
addition, EPA is including in this final rule that a failed TPC
quarterly test or quality control test invalidates an approval for a
third-party certification exemption or reduced testing, and EPA is
requiring that a panel producer reapply with a complete new application
if its approval is invalidated because of a failed test result. A
failed test is a serious concern and therefore, a panel producer needs
to be able to demonstrate that its product can meet the NAF or ULEF
requirements by requalifying with the full testing requirements.
EPA proposed a ULEF reduced testing provision and requested comment
on the utility of this option. Very few manufacturers have sought the
ULEF reduced testing provision under the CARB ATCM in lieu of the total
exemption from TPC oversight and formaldehyde emissions testing
requirements after the initial testing period. As such, EPA anticipates
that the vast majority of ULEF resin-based composite wood product
manufacturers will apply for the full exemption from TPC oversight and
formaldehyde emissions testing after the initial testing period.
However, commenters indicated that they support the reduced testing
provision; therefore, EPA is including this provision in this final
rule.
EPA also requested comments, information, and data on the broader
question of giving composite wood products made with ULEF resins
preferential treatment under TSCA. EPA discussed some concerns about
products made with urea-formaldehyde-based resins. In EPA's view, it is
more difficult to ensure that formaldehyde emissions from products made
with these resins remain low over time, irrespective of environmental
conditions. It is well known that urea-formaldehyde resins can release
formaldehyde when exposed to heat and humidity because of the chemistry
of the resin, and EPA discussed some studies in the proposed rule on
formaldehyde emissions under conditions of high heat and humidity.
Several commenters expressed concern
[[Page 89707]]
about these studies, indicating that TSCA Title VI cites test methods
that specify temperature and humidity; these commenters argue that the
studies are therefore inappropriate and irrelevant.
EPA specifically requested comment on whether the ULEF provisions
should be limited to products made with a subset of ULEF resins that do
not contain urea-formaldehyde polymer--in other words, limited to no-
added urea formaldehyde-based (NAUF) resins. Most commenters were
opposed to this idea and instead support having both NAF and ULEF
provisions that are identical to the provisions in the CARB ATCM. In
contrast, one commenter only supports NAF and NAUF exemptions from TPC
oversight, not ULEF. This commenter stated that ``UF resin, with its
propensity to emit formaldehyde continuously upon aging, makes it
distinct from all other formaldehyde-based resin systems'' (Ref. 71).
EPA recognizes that the chemistry of urea-formaldehyde resins presents
challenges for controlling formaldehyde emissions from the resulting
composite wood products. However, EPA is finalizing the NAF and ULEF
provisions as proposed. In making this decision, EPA considered the
fact that TSCA Title VI requires upfront testing to confirm that panels
made with ULEF resins (as well as panels made with NAF-based resins)
meet statutory emission limits that are lower than the basic emission
standards for composite wood products. EPA also considered
Congressional intent and the interest in harmonization with the CARB
ATCM.
H. De Minimis Exception
Section 601(d)(2)(L) of TSCA allows EPA to promulgate, for products
and components containing de minimis amounts of composite wood
products, an exception to all of the requirements of the implementing
regulations other than the formaldehyde emission standards. While EPA
did not propose an exception from any of the regulatory requirements
for products containing de minimis amounts of composite wood products,
commenters overwhelmingly favored a de minimis exception.
After considering the comments, EPA is promulgating a de minimis
exception from the labeling requirements for finished goods and
component parts sold separately to end users that contain no more than
144 square inches of composite wood products, based on the surface area
of its largest face. For example, a frame for an eight-inch by ten-inch
picture is made up of two-inch wide and one-inch thick composite wood
product strips. The outer dimensions of the frame would be 14 inches by
12 inches and the inner dimensions would be 10 inches by 8 inches. This
frame contains 88 square inches of composite wood product and would
qualify for the de minimis exception ([12 x 14]-[10 x 8]). This de
minimis level, suggested by a commenter, is appropriate because it
would eliminate the labeling requirements for very small products. It
would also eliminate the labeling requirements for finished goods made
of non-regulated material, such as solid wood, that contain small
amounts of composite wood, such as hardwood plywood joining biscuits. A
labeling requirement for such products could create confusion amongst
consumers as to whether or not the product is solid wood. Finally, in
this context, EPA has determined that 144 square inches of composite
wood product in a finished good actually represents a trivial amount of
composite wood product, as opposed to the much larger thresholds
suggested by some commenters.
The exception does not apply to finished goods (and component parts
sold separately to end users) which are used in combination or in
multiples in order to create larger surfaces in the final use, such as
flooring or ceiling tiles. Products that are sold separately to
consumers and not intended to be used in multiples would be eligible
for this exception (e.g., a plywood rack designed to be attached to a
bicycle). Component parts that are sold to fabricators of finished
goods would not be eligible for this exception.
EPA notes that this exception is for the labeling requirements
alone. EPA does not believe it can ensure compliance with the emission
standards if it finalizes a de minimis exception to the recordkeeping
requirements. EPA notes that its authority to establish a de minimis
exception applies only to the regulatory requirements, not the
statutory emission standards. Thus, even products containing a de
minimis amount of composite wood must be made from panels that are
compliant with the regulatory requirements and emission standards.
Without records, there would be no way for the Agency, or a downstream
purchaser, to determine whether these products were made from compliant
composite wood panels.
I. Chain-of-Custody, Recordkeeping, and Labeling Requirements
Section 601(d)(2) of TSCA Title VI also directs EPA to consider
chain of custody, recordkeeping, and labeling requirements. EPA
proposed chain of custody, recordkeeping, and labeling requirements
that were similar to those under the CARB ATCM, reasoning that these
requirements also support compliance with TSCA Title VI without undue
burden. EPA's proposal departed from the CARB ATCM approach by
including a three-year recordkeeping period, instead of CARB's two
years, and by reducing recordkeeping for distributors and retailers.
EPA also proposed to require that panel producers make quarterly and
quality control testing records available to their customers upon
request. All of these elements are discussed in more detail in this
Unit.
1. Chain of custody and recordkeeping requirements. Most records
required to be retained under this regulation must be kept for a period
of three years from the date that they are generated. Many commenters
supported a two-year recordkeeping requirement, citing consistency with
the CARB ATCM, while others supported longer periods. The three-year
recordkeeping period is reasonable, given that EPA must monitor TSCA
Title VI compliance on the part of hundreds of thousands of entities
nationwide. In addition, required records would have to be provided to
EPA upon request to facilitate compliance monitoring activities.
As proposed, producers of hardwood plywood, particleboard, and
medium-density fiberboard panels must maintain records of quarterly
emissions testing and records of quality control testing. These records
must identify the TPC conducting or overseeing the testing, and must
include the date, the product type tested, the lot number that the
tested material represents, and the test results. In addition, panel
producers must maintain production records, purchaser and transporter
information, and information on the disposition of non-complying lots.
After December 12, 2023, laminated product producers whose products
are exempt from the definition of hardwood plywood will have to
maintain records demonstrating use of compliant cores or platforms and
phenol-formaldehyde resins or resins formulated with no added
formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-linking structure, including
platform production or purchase records, the resin trade name, resin
manufacturer contact information, and resin supplier contact
information, or, if the resin is made in-house, records sufficient to
demonstrate that the resin qualifies for the exemption.
In order to assist customers such as fabricators, distributors,
importers, and retailers in determining whether they are purchasing
compliant composite wood products, EPA is requiring that
[[Page 89708]]
panel producers make available to their direct customers, upon request,
the results of quarterly emissions test results for the product types
purchased. While information collected under TSCA may be entitled to
confidential treatment if it meets the standard for Exemption 4 in the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4), TSCA section 14
provides that health and safety studies and data derived from health
and safety studies, are not entitled to confidential treatment,
irrespective of the Exemption 4 standard, unless the release of data
derived from such studies would disclose confidential processes used in
the manufacturing or processing of a chemical substance or mixture or,
in the case of a mixture, disclose the confidential portion of the
mixture comprised by any of its chemical substances. For the reasons
discussed in the proposal, EPA has determined that quarterly test
results are not entitled to treatment as CBI. In order to minimize
paperwork and preserve the confidentiality of the supply chain, EPA is
limiting the disclosure requirement to direct purchasers (i.e., those
purchasing directly from mills). Thus the quarterly test results and
associated information (date of test, test method, panel producer name
and produce description) do not need to be carried with the product
through the supply chain.
Because of the volume and complexity of quality control test
results, EPA is not requiring panel producers to release this quality
control information to direct purchasers. However, EPA considers
quality control test results and the fact that a mill has had failed
quality control tests to be health and safety studies and data derived
from health and safety studies. Also as proposed, producers of hardwood
plywood, particleboard and medium-density fiberboard panels using NAF-
based resins or ULEF resins who qualify for the reduced testing and/or
third-party certification exemption discussed in Unit III.G. must
maintain records demonstrating initial and continued eligibility for
the reduced testing or third-party certification exemption. In
addition, the panel producer must keep production records and
information on resin trade name, resin manufacturer and supplier
contact information, and resin use.
Under the proposal, importers, fabricators, distributors, and
retailers would be required to take steps to ensure that they are
purchasing composite wood products or component parts that comply with
the emission standards and to document these steps. As proposed, in
order to document compliance, the importer or fabricator would have to
obtain from the supplier records identifying the panel producer(s) that
produced the composite wood products and the dates that the composite
wood products were manufactured and purchased from the panel
producer(s), as well as bills of lading or invoices that include a
written affirmation from the supplier that the composite wood products,
whether in the form of panels or incorporated into component parts or
finished goods, are compliant with this subpart.
The proposed requirement to take steps to ensure that compliant
products are being purchased would also have applied to distributors
and retailers. Rather than include specific required documentation for
these entities, the proposal requested comment on the documentation
that should be required. The only specific records the proposal would
have required distributors and retailers to keep were invoices and
bills of lading, and compliance statements on these documents would not
have been mandatory. EPA reasoned in the proposal that this would be
sufficient because these records would enable EPA to identify the
producer or importer of composite wood panels, component parts, or
finished goods being sold by distributors and retailers. EPA also
stated that, for finished goods, these records would also permit the
identification of the producer of the composite wood panels that make
up the finished goods. EPA concluded that, without imposing additional
recordkeeping burdens on most distributors and retailers, these records
would allow EPA to effectively monitor compliance with TSCA Title VI.
EPA received a number of comments on these requirements, some
specific to importer responsibilities. Commenters argued that, in many
cases, the importer is two or more steps in the supply chain removed
from the panel producer and would not be able to obtain this
information, particularly for imported finished goods. Some commenters
were concerned about supply chain confidentiality and objected to a
requirement that distributors disclose their suppliers to their
customers. EPA understands the concerns expressed by these commenters.
However, in order to be able to ensure that imported composite wood
products, component parts, and finished goods were produced in
compliance with TSCA Title VI, EPA needs to know the mill and the date
that the composite wood products were produced. For composite wood
products made by overseas mills, EPA must look to the importer for this
information. Without mill and production date information, EPA will not
be able to check with the appropriate TPC to determine whether the
product was certified. For these reasons, EPA is finalizing a
requirement that the importer be able to provide these records to EPA
within 30 calendar days of request. Because of the supplier chain
issues raised by commenters, EPA is not requiring importers to obtain
these records directly from suppliers. Importers may arrange, by
contact or some other means, to have their suppliers provide these
records directly to EPA within 30 calendar days of request. Importers
must keep the compliance statements located on invoices, bills of
lading, or other comparable documents. EPA notes that the recordkeeping
requirements for imported products will be equivalent to the aggregate
recordkeeping requirements for domestically produced products. The only
distinction would be that the responsibility for ensuring pre-
importation supply chain records are maintained would fall on the
importer instead of being spread out amongst different entities in the
supply chain.
For the reason stated in the proposal, that invoices and bills of
lading will permit EPA to identify the sources of composite wood
products, component parts, or finished goods for a particular
distributor or retailer, EPA is also finalizing the recordkeeping
requirements for distributors and retailers as proposed. In addition,
because invoices and bills of lading will allow EPA to identify a
fabricator's sources of composite wood products or component parts,
just as such records facilitate the identification of distributor's or
retailer's sources, EPA will only require fabricators to keep invoices
and bills of lading. Fabricators who are also laminators must keep
these records as well as the records required for laminated product
producers.
EPA specifically asked for comment on whether distributors and
retailers should be required to obtain and retain bills of lading or
invoices with a written affirmation from the supplier, and whether
other recordkeeping requirements would be appropriate. While CARB's
comments indicated that these statements were required under CARB and
recommended that EPA require the same, other commenters believed that
the requirement was unnecessary. EPA has determined that requiring a
compliance statement is minimally burdensome, that many are already
complying with the CARB requirement, and that obtaining these
statements will enlist fabricators, distributors, and retailers in
helping to
[[Page 89709]]
ensure compliance with TSCA Title VI by requiring them to ask questions
of their suppliers if they do not see the compliance statement on their
purchase documentation. The compliance statement refers to the
compliance of the products as of the date of manufacture. So, for
example, non-exempt laminated products made after December 12, 2023
would need to be compliant with the requirements for hardwood plywood
in order to affirm compliance with TSCA Title VI. Obtaining and
maintaining these bills of lading and invoices, or comparable
documents, with a written statement from the supplier are reasonable
precautions taken to purchase compliant products for fabricators,
distributors, and retailers.
Entities that fit within two or more of these recordkeeping
categories, such as a distributor that buys finished goods from both
foreign and domestic companies for resale, must keep only the records
for each product that correspond to the activities the entity undertook
with respect to that product. For example, a distributor who purchases
both foreign and domestic finished goods for resale must keep the
following records:
For foreign finished goods that the distributor imports,
records identifying the panel producer(s) that produced the composite
wood products incorporated into the finished goods and the dates that
the products were produced or the ability to produce this information
within 30 days, records identifying the supplier and the date of
purchase, and bills of lading or invoices that include a written
statement from the supplier that the composite wood products, whether
in the form of panels or incorporated into component parts or finished
goods, are either compliant with this subpart or were manufactured
before the manufactured-by date.
For domestic finished goods, only bills of lading or
invoices would need to be kept.
In the case of imported finished goods, only the importer would be
responsible for ensuring that the records identifying the panel
producer and the date that the composite wood products were
manufactured are accessible to EPA upon request. For example, if the
importer sells the goods to a domestic distributor, who then sells them
to a domestic retailer, only the importer would have to ensure the
additional records are kept. The domestic distributor and retailer
would only be required to keep invoices and bills of lading.
2. Labeling. EPA is finalizing the labeling provisions as proposed,
with several minor modifications. Panels or bundles of panels that are
sold, supplied, or offered for sale in the United States must be
labeled with the name of the panel producer, the lot number, the number
of the accredited TPC, and markings indicating that the product
complies with the TSCA Title VI emission standards. Fabricators of
finished goods containing composite wood products must label every
finished good they produce, or every box containing finished goods.
These labels must contain the fabricator's name, the date the finished
good was produced, and a statement that the finished goods are TSCA
Title VI compliant. Panels may be shipped into, out of, and around the
United States for quality control or quarterly tests provided that they
are labeled ``For TSCA Title VI testing only, not for sale in the
United States.'' The information required on the labels must be legible
and in English, but it need not all be on a single label. Also,
entities are free to combine the TSCA Title VI labels with CARB labels
so long as all the required information is present, legible, in English
and accurate. EPA notes that the phrase ``the date the finished good
was produced'' means the actual date of production in ``Month/Year''
format, not the date the product was imported.
EPA does agree that in certain situations, this information has the
potential to confuse consumers and may take up additional space on
labels. For example, where a finished good is composed of multiple
composite wood products, some of which are not produced under the NAF
or ULEF provisions, and some of which are, it may be difficult for
fabricators to design a label that efficiently describes the product.
Thus, in the final regulations, labeling indicating that the composite
wood products are NAF or ULEF is voluntary and at the discretion of the
panel producer or fabricator. For finished goods that are partially
made with panels produced under the NAF or ULEF exemptions, they may,
at the discretion of the fabricator, be labeled with phrases such as
``product contains TSCA Title VI products and NAF/ULEF products,''
``product contains TSCA Title VI products and NAF products,'' or
``product contains TSCA Title VI products and ULEF products,'' if is
this is accurate. EPA disagrees with those commenters who thought that
the labeling of products as NAF or ULEF creates an inappropriate market
bias. TSCA Title VI explicitly allows EPA to provide an exemption from
third-party certification and testing for these products, so the
statute itself confers the opportunity for special treatment on these
products. Far from creating an inappropriate market bias, labeling a
product as NAF and ULEF provides valuable information to consumers
(e.g., some panels may not have a TPC because they are exempt from
third-party certification), and allows consumers to know that these
products meet the emission standards described in Unit III.C. EPA also
notes that the CARB ATCM has NAF/ULEF labeling requirements.
The final rule allows panel producers to use a panel producer
number or other identifier to protect supply chain confidentiality, as
long as EPA is ultimately able to use the label information along with
the records required by this rule to identify the panel producer. The
expectation is that EPA will be able to trace back through the supply
chain, using records identifying each entity's supplier, to eventually
arrive at the panel producer, or an importer for composite wood
products not produced domestically. For finished goods, EPA is
requiring either the fabricator's name on the label or the name of a
responsible downstream entity (e.g., an importer, wholesaler,
distributor, or retailer). Where a non-fabricator's name appears on the
label, that entity is responsible for identifying the fabricator, and
is responsible for the compliance of the labeled products, as if they
were the fabricator. Fabricators may not put a downstream entity's name
on the labels unless they have written consent from that entity to do
so.
Although EPA proposed to allow labels to be in barcode format, the
Agency agrees with commenters who thought that a barcode, as the sole
form of label, would inhibit transparency. Even if the barcode was a
universal open system, all entities along the supply chain may not have
access to smartphones or barcode readers. This would create a
technology barrier to accessing this information, and could prevent
retailers that wish to check the information on labels to ensure it
conforms to the information provided to them by their supplier. Thus,
the final rule prohibits the use of barcodes, or non-text labels, as
the sole label. Entities that wish to use barcodes or other non-text
labels may do so but must also have the encoded TSCA Title VI
information printed on the label in English text.
The final rule allows composite wood products and finished goods to
be labeled by bundle or box, as opposed to being labeled individually.
EPA generally agrees with those commenters who cited cost and
feasibility concerns with an individual product labeling requirement.
In addition, as noted by
[[Page 89710]]
some commenters, EPA agrees that an individual labeling requirement
provides minimal benefit when applied to composite wood products
supplied to fabricators who then incorporate them into finished goods.
In lieu of labeling of individual products, EPA is requiring entities
that divide and repackage bundles of regulated composite wood products
or purchase these products for resale to have a system sufficient to
identify the supplier of the panel and link the information on the
label to the products. This information must be made available to
potential customers upon request. Similarly, entities importing,
selling, offering for sale or supplying finished goods that are not
individually labeled must retain a copy of the label and make it
available to potential customers upon request.
J. Sell-Through Provisions and Stockpiling
TSCA Title VI directs EPA to establish sell-through provisions for
composite wood products, and finished goods containing regulated
composite wood products, based on a designated date of manufacture, or
``manufactured-by'' date. Under the statute, composite wood products or
finished goods manufactured before the specified manufactured-by date
are not subject to statutory emission standards or testing
requirements. TSCA Title VI requires that the manufactured-by date be
no earlier than 180 calendar days after promulgation of the final
implementing regulations.
TSCA Title VI also directs EPA to prohibit the sale of inventory
that was stockpiled, which is defined in the statute as manufacturing
or purchasing composite wood products between the date the statute was
enacted and the date 180 calendar days following the promulgation of
these regulations at a rate significantly greater than the rate during
a particular base period. EPA is directed to define what constitutes
``a rate significantly greater'' and to establish the base period.
Under the statute, the base period must end before July 7, 2010, the
date that the Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products Act
was enacted.
As proposed, EPA is finalizing the manufactured-by date at December
12, 2017, except that, as discussed in Unit III.A., the manufactured-by
date for laminated products is December 12, 2023. EPA has determined
that, for panel producers other than laminated product producers, this
year will be sufficient to get all of the infrastructure in place.
The manufactured-by dates apply to regulated composite wood
products, including laminated products, as well as finished goods
containing such products. Composite wood products manufactured before
the applicable manufactured-by date are not subject to the emission
standards, nor are they required to be labeled or tested for emissions.
Laminated products manufactured before the manufactured-by date for
laminated products are not subject to the emission standards, but,
after the manufactured-by date for composite wood products other than
laminated products, they must be made with compliant composite wood
product platforms and must be labeled in accordance with the fabricator
labeling requirements. Composite wood products and laminated products
manufactured before the applicable manufactured-by date can be
incorporated into finished goods at any time. Retailers, fabricators,
and distributors are permitted to continue to buy and sell these
composite wood products and laminated products, as well as finished
goods that incorporate these products, because they would be considered
compliant with TSCA Title VI and its implementing regulations, assuming
the absence of stockpiling as discussed later. Under TSCA, the term
``manufacture'' includes import, so the ``manufactured-by'' date would
effectively be an ``imported-by'' date for imported goods.
In order to establish that a regulated composite wood product was
made before the manufactured-by date, the panel producer or importer
and any subsequent distributor, retailer or fabricator must document
when the product was manufactured or that the panel was in their
inventory on or before the date 180 calendar days after promulgation of
these regulations. In the case of a finished good, any subsequent
distributor, retailer or fabricator must document that the composite
wood products making up the finished good were either manufactured
before the manufactured-by date or were manufactured in accordance with
TSCA Title VI. Documentation that the finished goods were in their
inventory on or before that date 180 calendar days after promulgation
of these regulations would be sufficient for these purposes. In order
to reduce consumer confusion, products that are entirely made before
the manufactured-by date may not be labeled as compliant with TSCA
Title VI.
Selling stockpiled regulated composite wood panels and finished
goods containing regulated composite wood products is prohibited. EPA
proposed to define stockpiling as manufacturing or purchasing composite
wood products between July 7, 2010, the date that the Formaldehyde
Standards for Composite Wood Products Act was signed into law by the
President, and 180 calendar days after promulgation of these
regulations, for the purpose of circumventing the TSCA Title VI
emission standards, at an average annual rate 20 percent greater than
the amount manufactured or purchased during the 2009 calendar year. EPA
is finalizing the provisions substantially as proposed, but clarifying
that the Agency has the burden of showing that an increase in
production or purchasing was for the purpose of circumventing the
emission standards. Entities that have a greater than 20 percent
increase in purchasing or production of regulated composite wood panels
for some reason other than circumventing the emission standards will
not be deemed to be stockpiling. Other reasons may include an immediate
increase in customer demand or sales, or a planned business expansion.
The stockpiling provisions do not apply to entities that were not in
existence at the beginning of calendar year 2009 because a pre-TSCA
Title VI baseline of production does not exist for these companies.
K. Import Certification
TSCA Title VI directs EPA, in coordination with U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) and other appropriate Federal departments and
agencies, to revise regulations promulgated pursuant to TSCA section 13
as necessary to ensure compliance. The TSCA section 13 regulations,
promulgated by CBP, require importers to certify that shipments of
chemical substances and mixtures are either in compliance with TSCA or
not subject to TSCA. Most, if not all, products subject to TSCA Title
VI would be considered articles. Articles, defined in 19 CFR 12.120(a),
are generally formed to specific shapes or designs during manufacture
and have end use functions related to their shape or design. Articles
are generally exempt from the TSCA section 13 certification
requirements, but the regulations at 19 CFR 12.121(b) recognize that
EPA has the authority to, by regulation or order, make the requirements
applicable to articles.
As proposed, no changes are being made to the regulations
promulgated pursuant to TSCA section 13, but this final rule requires
TSCA section 13 import certification for composite wood products that
are articles. This does not represent a statement on the relative
toxicity of formaldehyde, or of composite wood products; rather, it is
a certification of compliance with TSCA.
[[Page 89711]]
Although this requirement is being finalized as proposed, EPA is
delaying the compliance date for the import certification requirements
until two years after the date of the publication of this rule to
provide additional time for the supply chain to become familiar with
the requirements and make any necessary adjustments to existing
business processes. The Agency is committed to conducting outreach with
regulated parties and working with industry associations to help
educate producers and importers of composite wood products about the
requirements of this final rule, including the TSCA section 13 import
certification requirements. Beginning shortly after publication of the
final rule, EPA will conduct outreach to the importer community which
will entail providing training on the importer provisions and how to
comply with the certification requirement. The outreach will include
webinars, attending industry conferences, and meeting with interested
groups. In addition, EPA is developing guidance for importers with
additional information about how to comply with the certification
requirement. The guidance will be in the form of documents that can be
downloaded from EPA's Web site at: https://www.epa.gov/formaldehyde.
To comply with the import certification requirements, importers (or
their agents) will be required to provide the following certification
statement with other paperwork accompanying the imported shipment:
I certify that all chemical substances in this shipment comply
with all applicable rules or orders under TSCA and that I am not
offering a chemical substance for entry in violation of TSCA or any
applicable rule or order thereunder.
The documentation required by this final rule will generally be a
sufficient basis for the import certification to the extent that such
documentation demonstrates compliance. TSCA certification statements
provided in paper have commonly been included on or attached to bills
of lading, commercial invoices, or comparable documents. In order to
submit a TSCA certification statement electronically, importers or
their agents would need to submit it with their Customs entry filings
for shipments in the Automated Commercial Environment (i.e., CBP's
primary automated and electronic system for commercial trade
processing.) or any other CBP-authorized electronic data interchange
system.
L. Enforcement
The failure to comply with any provision of TSCA Title VI, or the
regulations implementing TSCA Title VI, is a prohibited act under TSCA
section 15. Any person who commits a prohibited act under TSCA section
15 can be held liable for civil and criminal penalties, as appropriate.
M. HUD's Manufactured Housing Program
Under the authority of the National Manufactured Housing
Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.,
HUD regulates the construction of all manufactured homes built in the
United States. The HUD standards established pursuant to the 1974 Act
cover many aspects of manufactured home construction, including body
and frame requirements, thermal protection, plumbing, electrical, and
fire safety. (See 24 CFR parts 3280 and 3282). HUD oversees the
enforcement of the construction standards through third party
inspection agencies and State governments.
EPA and HUD are working together to ensure the appropriate
application and implementation of requirements under the Formaldehyde
Standards for Composite Wood Products Act of 2010. The HUD standards
for manufactured housing include specific formaldehyde emission limits
for plywood and particleboard materials installed in manufactured
housing. In contrast, TSCA Title VI covers only hardwood plywood, a
subset of plywood. In addition, TSCA Title VI also covers medium-
density fiberboard, which is not covered by the current HUD standards.
The HUD emission limits apply to any plywood or particleboard bonded
with a resin system and to any plywood or particleboard coated with a
surface finish containing formaldehyde. HUD's current formaldehyde
emission limits are 0.2 ppm for plywood and 0.3 ppm for particleboard,
as measured by ASTM E1333-96. These emission limits are higher than
those established by the 2010 Act, but section 4 of the 2010 Act
directs HUD to update its regulations to ensure that the regulations
reflect the standards established by section 601 of TSCA.
In addition, the 2010 Act established a definition of
``recreational vehicle'' that is based on the definition established by
HUD that is in effect at 24 CFR 3282.8 on the date of promulgation of
regulations pursuant to TSCA Title VI. EPA acknowledges that HUD issued
a proposed rule (81 FR 6806, February 9, 2016) that would, among other
things, remove the current definition of ``recreational vehicle'' from
24 CFR 3282.8 and add an amended version of this definition in a
proposed new CFR section. EPA and HUD believe that it was the intent of
Congress that same definition of ``recreational vehicle'' be used in
both this final rule and HUD's manufactured housing regulations.
Therefore, EPA and HUD will continue working together to ensure that
the regulatory definition is appropriately harmonized.
In the proposal, EPA requested comment on how best to harmonize
EPA's regulatory program under TSCA Title VI with HUD's manufactured
homes program. EPA received a handful of comments on this aspect of the
proposal. Two commenters recommended a general consistency between the
EPA and HUD regulations, although they did not offer specifics. At the
suggestion of one of the commenters, EPA has added a sentence to the
applicability provisions of the final rule to make it clear that the
requirements apply to composite wood products used in manufactured
housing.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
This final rule incorporates a variety of voluntary consensus
standards by reference. In many cases, the consensus standards are used
because TSCA Title VI directs that they be used. TSCA Title VI provides
for quarterly and quality control testing for hardwood plywood,
particleboard, and MDF using specified methods developed by ASTM
International. TSCA Title VI also refers freely to voluntary consensus
standards to assist in defining the composite wood products that are
subject to the statute, such as hardwood plywood (ANSI/HPVA HP-1-2009),
particleboard (ANSI A208.1-2009), and medium-density fiberboard (ANSI
A208.2-2009) (Refs. 26, 47, and 72). Other voluntary consensus
standards are being incorporated by reference into this final rule to
provide flexibility to panel producers by permitting them to use
additional quality control test methods already allowed by CARB under
their ATCM. Finally, EPA is relying on voluntary consensus standards
developed by ISO/IEC and already in use in the conformity assessment
sector to establish a third-party certification program that is as
robust as possible. Most of the entities that would have to comply with
one of these standards, or at least have a good understanding of the
contents of one of these standards, already own a copy. It would be
difficult to be in business as a hardwood plywood mill, for example, if
you were not familiar with the industry consensus on what is hardwood
plywood. The
[[Page 89712]]
standards are all readily available electronically or in print, and are
relatively inexpensive (less than $150 a copy).
The voluntary consensus standards being incorporated by reference
into this final rule are summarized in this unit, along with contact
information for purchasing a copy of each standard. Each of these
standards is available for inspection at the OPPT Docket in the EPA
Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA, West Bldg., 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room hours of
operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public Reading room
is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is
(202) 566-0280.
(a) AITC, CPA, and HPVA standards. Copies of these standards may be
obtained from the specific publisher, as noted below, or from the
American National Standards Institute, 1899 L Street NW., 11th Floor,
Washington, DC 20036, or by calling (202) 293-8020, or at https://ansi.org/. Note that ANSI/AITC A190.1-2002 is published by the American
Institute of Timber Construction. ANSI A135.4-2012, ANSI A135.5-2012,
ANSI A135.6-2012, ANSI A135.7-2012, ANSI A208.1-2009, and ANSI A208.2-
2009 are published by the Composite Panel Association. And ANSI ANSI/
HPVA-HP-1-2009 is published by the Hardwood Plywood Veneer Association.
1. ANSI A135.4-2012, American National Standard, Basic Hardboard.
This standard defines hardboard and describes requirements and test
methods for water absorption, thickness swelling, modulus of rupture,
tensile strength, surface finish, dimensions, squareness, moisture
content, and edge straightness of five classes of basic hardboard,
along with methods of identifying products conforming to the standard.
2. ANSI A135.5-2012, American National Standard, Prefinished
Hardboard Paneling. This standard describes requirements and methods of
testing for the dimensions, squareness, edge straightness, and moisture
content of prefinished hardboard paneling and for the finish of the
paneling, along with methods of identifying products conforming to the
standard.
3. ANSI A135.6-2012, American National Standard, Engineered Wood
Siding. This standard describes requirements and methods of testing for
the dimensions, straightness, squareness, physical properties, and
surface characteristics of engineered wood siding. This standard also
defines trade terms used and describes methods of identifying products
conforming to the standard.
4. ANSI A135.7-2012, American National Standard, Engineered Wood
Trim. This standard describes requirements and methods of testing for
the properties of engineered wood trim intended to be used as
architectural trim. While primarily for exterior applications, these
products can also be used indoors. Trim is the woodwork in the finish
of a building, especially around openings and at corners, that is
intended to be decorative and/or provide protection for joints covered
by the product. Typical exterior trim includes corner boards, fascia,
brick mold and window trim. Because engineered wood trim is not
intended to be used as a structural material, it has no structural
load-bearing performance requirements.
5. ANSI A208.1-2009, American National Standard, Particleboard.
This standard describes the requirements and test methods for
dimensional tolerances, physical and mechanical properties and
formaldehyde emissions for particleboard, along with methods of
identifying products conforming to the standard.
6. ANSI A208.2-2009, American National Standard, Medium Density
Fiberboard (MDF) for Interior Applications. This standard describes the
requirements and test methods for dimensional tolerances, physical and
mechanical properties and formaldehyde emissions for MDF, along with
methods of identifying products conforming to the standard.
7. ANSI/AITC A190.1-2002, American National Standard for Wood
Products, Structural Glued Laminated Timber. This standard describes
minimum requirements for the manufacture and production of structural
glued laminated timber, including size tolerances, grade combinations,
lumber, adhesives, and appearance grades.
8. ANSI/HPVA HP-1-2009, American National Standard for Hardwood and
Decorative Plywood. This standard details the specific requirements for
all face, back, and inner ply grades of hardwood plywood as well as
formaldehyde emission limits, moisture content, tolerances, sanding,
and grade marking.
(b) ASTM material. Copies of these materials may be obtained from
ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Dr., P.O. Box C700, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, or by calling (877) 909-ASTM, or at https://www.astm.org.
1. ASTM D5055-05, Standard Specification for Establishing and
Monitoring Structural Capacities of Prefabricated Wood I-Joists. This
specification gives procedures for establishing, monitoring, and
reevaluating structural capacities of prefabricated wood I-joists, such
as shear, moment, and stiffness. The specification also provides
procedures for establishing common details and itemizes certain design
considerations specific to wood I-joists.
2. ASTM D5456-06, Standard Specification for Evaluation of
Structural Composite Lumber Products. This specification describes
initial qualification sampling, mechanical and physical tests,
analysis, and design value assignments. Requirements for a quality-
control program and cumulative evaluations are included to ensure
maintenance of allowable design values for the product.
3. ASTM D5582-00 (Reapproved 2006), Standard Test Method for
Determining Formaldehyde Levels from Wood Products Using a Desiccator.
This test method describes a small scale procedure for measuring
formaldehyde emissions potential from wood products. The formaldehyde
level is determined by collecting airborne formaldehyde in a small
distilled water reservoir within a closed desiccator. The quantity of
formaldehyde is determined by a chromotropic acid test procedure.
4. ASTM D6007-02, Standard Test Method for Determining Formaldehyde
Concentrations in Air from Wood Products Using a Small-Scale Chamber.
This test method measures the formaldehyde concentrations in air from
wood products under defined test conditions of temperature and relative
humidity. Results obtained from this small-scale chamber test method
are intended to be comparable to results obtained testing larger
product samples by the large chamber test method for wood products,
Test Method E 1333.
5. ASTM E1333-10, Standard Test Method for Determining Formaldehyde
Concentrations in Air and Emission Rates from Wood Products Using a
Large Chamber. This test method measures the formaldehyde concentration
in air and emission rate from wood products containing formaldehyde
under conditions designed to simulate product use. The concentration in
air and emission rate is determined in a large chamber under specific
test conditions of temperature and relative humidity. The general
procedures are also intended for testing product combinations at
product-loading ratios and at air-exchange rates typical of the indoor
environment.
[[Page 89713]]
(c) CEN materials. Copies of these materials are not directly
available from the European Committee for Standardization, but from one
of CEN's National Members, Affiliates, or Partner Standardization
Bodies. To purchase a standard, go to CEN's Web site, https://www.cen.eu, and select ``Products'' for more detailed information.
1. BS EN 120:1992, Wood based panels. Determination of formaldehyde
content- Extraction method called the perforator method, English
Version. This European standard describes an extraction method, known
as the perforator method, for determining the formaldehyde content of
unlaminated and uncoated wood-based panels.
2. BS EN 717-2:1995, Wood-based panels--Determination of
formaldehyde release--Part 2: Formaldehyde release by the gas analysis
method, English Version. This European standard describes a procedure
for determination of accelerated formaldehyde release from wood-based
panels.
(d) Georgia Pacific material. Copies of this material may be
obtained from Georgia-Pacific Chemicals LLC, 133 Peachtree Street,
Atlanta, GA 30303, or by calling (877) 377-2737, or at https://www.gp-dmc.com/default.aspx.
1. The GP Dynamic Microchamber computer-integrated formaldehyde
test system, User Manual. Copyright 2012. The Dynamic Micro Chamber is
a patented process for testing formaldehyde emissions (U.S. Patent #
5,286,363). The DMC provides a means of obtaining accurate formaldehyde
emissions information from pressed panel products. This Manual
describes the process for using the DMC.
2. The Dynamic Microchamber computer integrated formaldehyde test
system, User Manual, Copyright 2007. This is the older version of the
DMC Manual, which may also be followed when using the DMC to conduct
formaldehyde emissions testing.
(e) ISO material. Copies of these materials may be obtained from
the International Organization for Standardization, 1, ch. de la Voie-
Creuse, CP 56, CH-1211, Geneve 20, Switzerland, or by calling +41-22-
749-01-11, or at https://www.iso.org.
1. ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E), Conformity assessments--General
requirements for accreditation bodies accrediting conformity assessment
bodies (First edition), September 1, 2004. This standard specifies
general requirements for accreditation bodies assessing and accrediting
conformity assessment bodies. For the purposes of this standard,
conformity assessment bodies are organizations providing the following
conformity assessment services: Testing, inspection, management system
certification, personnel certification, product certification and, in
the context of this standard, calibration.
2. ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E), General criteria for the operation of
various types of bodies performing inspections (Second Edition) March
1, 2012. This standard covers the activities of inspection bodies whose
work can include the examination of materials, products, installations,
plants, processes, work procedures or services, and the determination
of their conformity with requirements and the subsequent reporting of
results of these activities.
3. ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), General requirements for the competence
of testing and calibration laboratories (Second Edition), May 15, 2005.
This standard specifies the general requirements for the competence to
carry out tests or calibrations, including sampling. It covers testing
and calibration performed using standard methods, non-standard methods,
and laboratory-developed methods.
4. ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E), Conformity assessment--Requirements for
bodies certifying products, processes and services (First Edition),
September 15, 2012. This standard specifies requirements that are
intended to ensure that certification bodies operate certification
schemes in a competent, consistent and impartial manner. This standard
can be used as a criteria document for accreditation or peer assessment
or designation by governmental authorities, scheme owners and others.
(f) Copies of JIS A 1460:2001 Building boards-Determination of
formaldehyde emission-Desiccator method, English Version, may be
obtained from Japanese Industrial Standards, 1-24, Akasaka 4, Minatoku,
Tokyo 107-8440, Japan, or by calling +81-3-3583-8000, or at https://www.jsa.or.jp/. This method describes a method for testing formaldehyde
emissions from construction boards by measuring the concentration of
formaldehyde absorbed in distilled or deionized water from samples of a
specified surface area placed in a glass desiccator for 24 hours.
(g) NIST material. Copies of these materials may be obtained from
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) by calling
(800) 553-6847 or from the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO). To
purchase a NIST publication you must have the order number. Order
numbers may be obtained from the Public Inquiries Unit at (301) 975-
NIST. Mailing address: Public Inquiries Unit, NIST, 100 Bureau Dr.,
Stop 1070, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1070. If you have a GPO stock number,
you can purchase printed copies of NIST publications from GPO. GPO
orders may be mailed to: U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box
979050, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000, placed by telephone at (866) 512-1800
(DC Area only: (202) 512-1800), or faxed to (202) 512-2104. Additional
information is available online at: https://www.nist.gov.
1. Voluntary Product Standard PS 1-07 (2007), Structural Plywood.
This standard describes the principal types and grades of structural
plywood, covering the wood species, veneer grading, adhesive bonds,
panel construction and workmanship, dimensions and tolerances, marking,
moisture content and packaging of structural plywood intended for
construction and industrial uses. Test methods to determine compliance
and a glossary of trade terms and definitions are included, as is a
quality certification program involving inspection, sampling, and
testing of products identified as complying with this standard by
qualified testing agencies.
2. Voluntary Product Standard PS 2-04 (2004), Performance Standard
for Wood-Based Structural-Use Panels. This standard covers performance
requirements, adhesive bond performance, panel construction and
workmanship, dimensions and tolerances, marking, and moisture content
of structural-use panels, such as plywood, waferboard, oriented strand
board (OSB), structural particle board, and composite panels. The
standard includes test methods, a glossary of trade terms and
definitions, and a quality certification program involving inspection,
sampling, and testing of products for qualification under the standard.
V. References
The following is a listing of the documents that are specifically
referenced in this document. The docket includes these documents and
other information considered by EPA, including documents that are
referenced within the documents that are included in the docket, even
if the referenced document is not physically located in the docket. For
assistance in locating these other documents, please consult the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
1. California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board
(CARB). Airborne Toxic Control Measure to Reduce Formaldehyde
Emissions from Composite Wood Products. Final Regulation Order.
April 2008. https://
[[Page 89714]]
www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/compwood07/compwood07.htm.
2. USEPA. Policy on Evaluating Health Risks to Children. 1995.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-5/documents/1995_childrens_health_policy_statement.pdf.
3. USEPA, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
(OCSPP). Economic Analysis of the Formaldehyde Standards for
Composite Wood Products Act Final Rule (Economic Analysis). December
2015.
4. World Health Organization. Concise International Chemical
Assessment Document 40: Formaldehyde. Published under the joint
sponsorship of the United Nations Environment Programme, the
International Labour Organization, and the World Health
Organization, and produced within the framework of the Inter-
Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals.
Geneva. 2002.
5. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological
Profile for Formaldehyde and 2010 Addendum to the Profile. Atlanta,
GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health
Service. 1999. https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp111.html.
6. Krzyzanowski M, Quackenboss JJ, Lebowitz MD. Chronic respiratory
effects of indoor formaldehyde exposure. Environ Res 52(2):117-125.
1990.
7. Matsunaga, I, Miyake, Y, et al. Ambient formaldehyde levels and
allergic disorders among Japanese pregnant women: baseline data from
the Osaka maternal and child health study. Annals of Epidemiology
18(1): 78-84. (2008).
8. Annesi-Maesano I, Huilin M, Lavaud F, Raherison C, Kopferschmitt
C, de Blay F, Andre Charpin D, Denis C. Poor air quality in
classrooms related to asthma and rhinitis in primary schoolchildren
in the French 6 Cities Study. Thorax 67:682-688. 2012.
9. Venn AJ, Cooper M, Antoniak M, Laughlin C, Britton, Lewis SA.
Effects of volatile organic compounds, damp, and other environmental
exposures in the home on wheezing illness in children. Thorax
58:955-960. 2003.
10. Dannemiller, KC; Murphy, JS; Dixon, SL; Pennell, KG; Suuberg,
EM; Jacobs, DE; Sandel, M. Formaldehyde concentrations in household
air of asthma patients determined using colorimetric detector tubes.
Indoor Air 23: 285-294. 2013.
11. National Toxicology Program. Report on carcinogens. Thirteenth
edition. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, Public Health Service. 2014. https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/pubhealth/roc/roc13/.
12. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Formaldehyde [IARC
Monograph]. In A review of human carcinogens: Chemical agents and
related occupations (pp. 401-435). Lyon, France. 2012. https://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol100F/index.php.
13. National Research Council (NRC). Review of the Formaldehyde
Assessment in the National Toxicology Program 12th Report on
Carcinogens. Washington DC: National Academies Press (US). 2014.
14. USEPA, Office of Air and Radiation. National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products;
List of Hazardous Air Pollutants, Lesser Quantity Designations,
Source Category List; Final Rule. Federal Register (71 FR 8341,
February 16, 2006) (FRL-8028-9). https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/plypart/fr16fe06.pdf.
15. USEPA, Office of Research and Development. Formaldehyde.
Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS). 1991. https://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0419.htm.
16. USEPA, ORD. IRIS Toxicological Review of Formaldehyde-Inhalation
Assessment (2010 External Review Draft). https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/iris_drafts/recordisplay.cfm?deid=223614.
17. USEPA. Approach to Assessing Non-cancer Health Effects from
Formaldehyde and Benefits from Reducing Non-cancer Health Effects as
a Result of Implementing Formaldehyde Emission Limits for Composite
Wood Products. 2013.
18. USEPA. Formaldehyde Emissions from Composite Wood Products;
Disposition of TSCA Section 21 Petition; Notice. Federal Register
(73 FR 36504, June 27, 2008).
19. USEPA. Formaldehyde Emissions from Composite Wood Products;
Advanced notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of public
meetings. Federal Register. (73 FR 73620, December 3, 2008) (FRL-
8386-3).
20. Public Law 111-199, Title VI-- Formaldehyde Standards for
Composite Wood Products Act, enacted July 7, 2010. (TSCA section
601(d), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.).
21. USEPA. Formaldehyde; Third-Party Certification Framework for the
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products; Formaldehyde
Emissions Standards for Composite Wood Products; Proposed Rule.
Federal Register (78 FR 34796, June 10, 2013) (FRL-9342-4).
22. USEPA. Formaldehyde Emissions Standards for Composite Wood
Products; Proposed Rule. Federal Register (78 FR 34820, June 10,
2013) (FRL-9342-3).
23. USEPA. Report of the Small Business Advocacy Review Panel on
EPA's Planned Proposed Rule Implementing the Formaldehyde Standards
for Composite Wood Products Act (TSCA Title VI). April 4, 2011.
24. Composite Panel Association. 2015 Surface and Panel Buyers
Guide: A Guide to Sourcing and Specifying Composite Panels and
Decorative Surfaces. https://www.compositepanel.org/education-resources/buyers-guide.html.
25. HPVA. Comments to EPA on Laminated Products & Formaldehyde
Regulation. May 23, 2014. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0018-0615.
26. CARB. Staff Proposal: Alternate Regulatory Approach for
Laminated Products Made with Wood Veneer. March 13, 2014.
27. CARB. Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed
Rulemaking. March 9, 2007.
28. Salthammer, T., Mentese, S., Marutzky, R. Formaldehyde in the
Indoor Environment. Chem. Rev., 110 (4), pp 2536-2572. 2010.
29. Kelly, T.I., D.L. Smith, J. Satola. Emission Rates of
Formaldehyde from Materials and Consumer Products Found in
California Homes. Environmental Science & Technology Vol. 33: 81-88.
1999.
30. CARB. Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed
Rulemaking, Appendix D. March 9, 2007.
31. CARB. Summary of ARB Testing of Laminated Products. August 19,
2013.
32. Comment submitted by Jackson Morrill, Director, and Laura Brust,
Assistant General Counsel, American Chemistry Council Formaldehyde
Panel. October 9, 2013. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0018-0581.
33. Comment submitted by Bill Perdue, Vice President, Regulatory
Affairs, American Home Furnishings Alliance. October 2013. EPA-HQ-
OPPT-2012-0018-0562.
34. Remarks by Kelly Shotbolt, President, Flakeboard. Transcript of
the April 28, 2014 Public Meeting. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0018-0631, pp.
47-55.
35. Comment submitted by Gail Overgard, Advisor to the Board, Timber
Products Company. April 2014. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0018-0601.
36. Riedlinger, D., Martin, P., and Holloway, T. Particleboard
Formaldehyde Emissions and Decay under Elevated Temperature and
Humidity Conditions, study conducted for Arclin. March 28, 2012.
37. Georgia Pacific. Letter to Lynn Vendinello. August, 15, 2011.
38. Chimar-Hellas. Update on the Formaldehyde Release from Wood-
Based Panels. Undated.
39. ASTM E1333-96 (Reapproved 2002). Standard Test Method for
Determining Formaldehyde Concentrations in Air and Emission Rates
from Wood Products Using a Large Chamber.
40. CARB. Staff Report: Initial Statement of Reasons for Proposed
Rulemaking, Appendix H. March 9, 2007.
41. Comment submitted by Winslow Sargeant, Ph.D., Chief Counsel for
Advocacy and David Rostker, Assistant Chief Counsel Office of
Advocacy, U. S. Small Business Administration's Office of Advocacy.
May 20, 2014. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0018-0529.
42. Comment submitted by the Federal Wood Industries Coalition. May
8, 2014. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2012-0018-0623
43. ASTM International. ASTM E-1333-10, Standard Test Method for
Determining Formaldehyde Concentrations in Air and Emission Rates
from Wood Products Using a Large Chamber.
44. ASTM International. ASTM D-6007-02 (2008), Standard Test Method
for Determining Formaldehyde Concentrations in Air from Wood
Products Using a Small Scale Chamber.
[[Page 89715]]
45. USEPA, Science Policy Council. A Summary of General Assessment
Factors for Evaluating the Quality of Scientific and Technical
Information. June 2003. EPA 100/B-03/001. https://www.epa.gov/risk/summary-general-assessment-factors-evaluating-quality-scientific-and-technical-information.
46. American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/Hardwood Plywood
and Veneer Association (HPVA). American National Standard for
Hardwood and Decorative Plywood, ANSI/HPVA HP-1-2009.
47. ANSI. American National Standard for Medium Density Fiberboard
(MDF) for Interior Applications, ANSI A208.2 2009.
48. ANSI. American National Standard, Basic Hardboard, ANSI A135.4
2004.
49. ANSI. American National Standard, Prefinished Hardboard
Paneling, ANSI A135.5 2004.
50. ANSI. American National Standard, Hardboard Siding, ANSI A135.6
2006.
51. CARB. Workshop Discussion Draft, Amended Regulation Order. March
18, 2014. https://www.arb.ca.gov/toxics/compwood/amended0318.pdf.
52. ANSI. American National Standard, Engineered Wood Siding, ANSI
A135.6-2012.
53. ANSI. American National Standard, Engineered Wood Trim. ANSI
A135.7-2012.
54. Comments from the Federal Wood Industries Coalition (``FWIC'')
on the March 18, 2014 Preliminary Draft Amendments to the Air Toxic
Control Measure to Reduce Formaldehyde Emissions from Composite Wood
Products. April 22, 2014.
55. ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E), Conformity assessments--General
requirements for accreditation bodies accrediting conformity
assessments bodies (First Edition). 2004.
56. ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E), Conformity assessment--Requirements for
the operation of various bodies performing inspection (Second
Edition). 2012.
57. ISO/IEC Guide 65:1996(E), General requirements for bodies
operating product certification systems (First Edition). 1996.
58. ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E), Conformity assessment--Requirements for
bodies certifying products, processes and services (First Edition).
2012.
59. ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E), General criteria for the operation of
various types of bodies performing inspections (First Edition).
1998.
60. ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), General requirements for the competence
of testing and calibration laboratories (Second Edition). May 15,
2005.
61. USEPA. Central Data Exchange. https://cdx.epa.gov/.
62. USEPA. Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation (CROMERR) (40
CFR part 3), Federal Register. October 13, 2005 (70 FR 59848) (FRL-
7977-1).
63. USEPA. Central Data Exchange (CDX). Registration User Guide.
https://cdx.epa.gov/Content/Documents/CDX_Quick_User_Guide.pdf.
64. ASTM D6007-02 (Reapproved 2008), October 1, 2008. Standard Test
Method for Determining Formaldehyde Concentrations in Air from Wood
Products Using a Small-Scale Chamber.
65. ASTM D5582-00 (Reapproved 2006). Standard Test Method for
Determining Formaldehyde Levels from Wood Products Using a
Desiccator.
66. EN 717-2:1995, Wood-based panels. Determination of formaldehyde
release--Formaldehyde release by the gas analysis method.
67. Georgia Pacific. DMC (Dynamic Micro Chamber) Manual, 2012
Edition.
68. Georgia Pacific. DMC (Dynamic Micro Chamber) Manual, 2007
Edition.
69. EN 120:1992, Wood based panels. Determination of formaldehyde
content- Extraction method called the perforator method, English
Version.
70. JIS A 1460:2001 Building boards Determination of formaldehyde
emission--Desiccator method, English Version.
71. Comments from Ashland Water Technologies, September 9, 2013.
EPA-HQ-OPPT-0018-0521.
72. ANSI A208.1-2009, American National Standard, Particleboard.
73. NRC. Review of the Environmental Protection Agency's Draft IRIS
Assessment of Formaldehyde: National Academies Press (US). 2011.
74. USEPA. Information Collection Request (ICR) for the Formaldehyde
Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products Act Final
Regulations. EPA ICR No. 2446.02 and OMB No. 2070-0185.
75. USEPA. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for Formaldehyde
Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products. December 2015.
76. USEPA. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Statement. Formaldehyde
Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products; Final. December
2015.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is an economically significant regulatory action that
was submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review
under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
Executive Order 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). Any changes made
in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket.
EPA prepared an analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated
with this action. This analysis, ``Economic Analysis of the
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products Act Final Rule''
(Economic Analysis, Ref. 3) is available in the docket and is
summarized here.
1. Entities subject to the rule. EPA analyzed the effect of this
rule on accreditation bodies, TPCs, panel producers, fabricators,
wholesalers (i.e., distributors and importers), and retailers. Due to
the similarities between this rule and the CARB ATCM, the incremental
costs and benefits of this rule are determined in part by the degree to
which firms are already complying with the ATCM. Table 3 summarizes the
estimated number of entities subject to the TSCA Title VI rule and
their baseline compliance with the CARB ATCM.
Table 3--Number of Entities in the United States Subject to the Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline condition
Type TSCA universe (CARB ATCM universe)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accreditation bodies.......... 4 firms.......... All 4 ABs currently
accredit TPCs
participating in the
CARB ATCM program.
Third-party certifiers........ 11 firms......... All 11 TPCs currently
certify stock panels
mills under the CARB
ATCM.
Stock panel producers (i.e., 90 mills operated 79 mills have been
manufacturers). by 54 firms. certified by CARB
for at least one
product, but 16
mills make at least
one product that is
not CARB certified.
Depending on the
product type, 98% to
100% of U.S.
production volume is
CARB certified.
Laminated product producers 7,000 to 14,000 Laminators are
(i.e., laminators). firms. considered
Fabricators................... ................. fabricators under
66,000 to 73,000 the CARB ATCM.
firms. Nationally, 32,000
of the combined
group are subject to
CARB ATCM
requirements.
[[Page 89716]]
Wholesalers (i.e., 86,000 firms, of 32,000 are subject to
distributors). which 24,000 are CARB ATCM
importers. requirements, of
which 9,000 are
importers.
Retailers..................... 759,000 firms.... 195,000 are subject
to CARB ATCM
requirements.
-------------------
Total..................... 925,000 firms.... .....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Options evaluated. Congress directed EPA to consider a number of
elements for inclusion in the implementing regulations, and EPA
considered various options for addressing these elements. For many of
the provisions, such as the product-inventory sell-through provision
and the stockpiling prohibition, EPA did not have the data needed to
make quantitative estimates of the effects of different options. EPA
did have sufficient information to analyze options for how the
definition of hardwood plywood addresses laminated products, the
recordkeeping required by the rule, and the frequency of quality
control testing for small production volumes of hardwood plywood. The
options EPA analyzed are displayed in Table 4.
Table 4--Options Analyzed in the Economic Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1: Laminates included Laminated products made with resins
in hardwood plywood (HWPW) formulated with no-added formaldehyde as
definition with NAF part of the resin cross-linking
exemption. structure are exempt from the definition
of hardwood plywood. Otherwise,
laminated product producers must be
certified by a TPC, and have products
tested to demonstrate that they meet a
0.05 ppm emission standard beginning 1
year after promulgation of the final
rule. This option is equivalent to EPA's
proposed rule from June 2013. Reduced
recordkeeping for wholesalers and
retailers that do not import. Reduced
quality control (QC) testing for small
hardwood plywood production.
Option 2 (Final Rule): Laminated products made with phenol-
Laminates included in HWPW formaldehyde (PF) resins or resins
definition with NAF and PF formulated with no-added formaldehyde as
exemption. part of the resin cross-linking
structure are exempt from the definition
of hardwood plywood. Otherwise,
laminated product producers have 7 years
after promulgation of the rule to be
certified by a TPC, and have products
tested to demonstrate that they meet a
0.05 ppm emission standard. Construction
firms are not considered fabricators or
retailers. Reduced recordkeeping for
fabricators, wholesalers and retailers
that do not import. Reduced QC testing
for small hardwood plywood production.
Option 3: Platform-specific Laminated products made with phenol-
emissions limits for formaldehyde resins or resins formulated
laminates with reduced with no-added formaldehyde as part of
testing with NAF and PF the resin cross-linking structure are
exemption. exempt from the definition of hardwood
plywood. Otherwise, laminated products
must have an annual small chamber test
demonstrating that they meet the
emission standards of the platform used
(0.05, 0.09, 0.11, or 0.13 ppm)
beginning 2 years after promulgation,
but certification is not required.
Reduced recordkeeping for wholesalers
and retailers that do not import.
Reduced QC testing for small hardwood
plywood production.
Option 4: Laminate emissions Laminated products must meet an emissions
standard consistent with standard of 0.13 ppm beginning 3 years
CARB discussion draft. after promulgation, but no testing or
certification is required for laminated
product producers. (The laminated
product requirements are consistent with
the CARB discussion proposal for
laminated products from March 2014.)
Reduced recordkeeping for wholesalers
and retailers that do not import.
Reduced QC testing for small hardwood
plywood production. Supplier
notification required.
Option 5: All laminates No emission standards apply to laminated
exempt from HWPW definition. products, and there are no testing or
certification requirements for laminated
product producers. Reduced recordkeeping
for wholesalers and retailers that do
not import. Reduced QC testing for small
hardwood plywood production. Supplier
notification required.
Option 6: Fully consistent No emissions standard and no testing or
with current CARB ATCM. certification required for laminated
products. This option does not include
the reductions in recordkeeping
requirements or the reductions in QC
testing for small volume hardwood
plywood production that are included in
the other options. Supplier notification
required.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Benefits. Reductions in formaldehyde emissions from composite
wood products benefits individuals who reside, work, or otherwise spend
a substantial amount of time where new composite wood products are
introduced to an indoor space. The Economic Analysis (Ref. 3) estimates
the benefits of lowering formaldehyde emissions from composite wood
products.
Formaldehyde is classified as a known human carcinogen by the
National Toxicology Program, based on evidence in humans and animals
(Ref. 3). EPA's quantified benefits estimates include the avoided cases
of nasopharyngeal cancer (representing upper respiratory tract cancers
caused by exposure to formaldehyde). The National Toxicology Program
(NTP) has identified formaldehyde as causing myeloid leukemia, and the
NRC review of the formaldehyde assessment in NTP's 12th Report on
Carcinogens (Ref. 13) concluded that there is a causal association
between formaldehyde exposure and myeloid leukemia. The International
Agency for Research on Cancer Monograph 100F concluded that
formaldehyde causes leukemia with a majority of the Working Group
viewing the evidence as sufficient. EPA did not
[[Page 89717]]
have sufficient information to derive a concentration-response function
for myeloid leukemia and thus could not estimate the number of cases
that would be avoided by reducing formaldehyde exposure.
In addition to cancer, the 2010 draft IRIS assessment identified
seven categories of non-cancer health effects from formaldehyde
exposure (sensory irritation, upper respiratory tract pathology,
pulmonary function effects, asthma and allergic sensitization, immune
function effects, neurological and behavioral toxicity, and
developmental and reproductive toxicity) and it proposed reference
concentrations (RfCs) based on four effects: sensory irritation,
pulmonary function effects, asthma and allergic sensitization (atopy),
and reproductive toxicity. The NRC review of the draft IRIS assessment
was released in April 2011 (Ref. 73), and EPA is currently revising the
draft in response.
Overall, EPA concluded that, at this time, it only has sufficient
information on the relationship between formaldehyde exposure and
sensory irritation (i.e., irritation of the eye, nose, and throat) to
include a valuation estimate in the overall benefits analysis. However,
the valuation studies that were the basis of EPA's benefits estimate
only reflected the willingness to pay to avoid eye irritation or
itching eyes. EPA's quantified benefits calculation may be
underestimating the benefits of avoided exposures, because individuals
are likely to have a higher willingness to pay to avoid the additional
symptoms of nose and throat irritation.
Formaldehyde exposure is associated with a range of respiratory
related effects. Effects from repeated exposure in humans include
irritation of the upper respiratory tract, decrements in pulmonary
function, and nasal epithelial lesions such as metaplasia and loss of
cilia. Animal studies suggest that formaldehyde may also cause airway
inflammation. The potential effects of occupational and residential
formaldehyde exposure on asthma have been investigated in a number of
studies. Although findings are mixed, formaldehyde appears to trigger
asthma attacks or related respiratory symptoms (such as wheezing or
decreased pulmonary function) in those occupationally exposed and/or
sensitized. A number of studies have found no association between
formaldehyde exposure and the prevalence of asthma symptoms at low
exposure levels; other studies, however, observed increased risks of
other allergic conditions or increased severity of asthma symptoms
among children with wheeze in the previous year. There are several
studies that suggest that formaldehyde may increase the risk of asthma,
particularly in the young, including a study that provided suggestive
evidence that children are more sensitive than adults to exposure to
formaldehyde in relation to chronic respiratory symptoms and pulmonary
function. Formaldehyde exposure has been associated with immune system
perturbations, suggesting that potential effects of formaldehyde
exposure on the immune system may be an important part of biological
pathways for triggering asthmatic responses or the severity of asthma
symptoms. EPA does not feel that it has sufficient information at this
time on the relationship between formaldehyde exposure and respiratory
outcomes to include a valuation estimate in the overall benefits
analysis.
Epidemiologic studies suggest an association between occupational
exposure to formaldehyde and adverse reproductive outcomes in women,
including reduced fertility. EPA does not feel that it has sufficient
information at this time on the relationship between formaldehyde
exposure and reduced fertility to include a valuation estimate in the
overall benefits analysis.
EPA concluded that, at this time, it only has sufficient
information about the relationship of formaldehyde exposure and the
number of cases of nasopharyngeal cancer and eye irritation to include
valuation estimates of the endpoints in the quantified benefits
analysis. Although uncertainty remains regarding how best to quantify
formaldehyde exposure's effect on other health outcomes, EPA considers
these effects to be important unquantified impacts that contribute to
the overall benefits of this rule, as indicated by the ``+B'' in the
various tables summarizing benefits.
Table 5 shows the number of cases avoided for an average year of
regulation. The avoided cancer cases occur over the lifetimes of the
individuals with exposure reductions.
Table 5--Number of Cases Avoided for an Average Year of Regulation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer Eye irritation
---------------------------------------------------
Option Lower Higher Lower Higher
estimate estimate estimate estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1: Laminates Included in HWPW Definition with NAF 30 74 101,840 686,754
Exemption..................................................
Option 2: Final Rule--Laminates Included in HWPW Definition 26 65 92,218 604,155
after 7 Years with NAF and PF Exemption....................
Option 3: Platform-Specific Emissions Limits for Laminates 28 69 98,279 642,120
with Reduced Testing.......................................
Option 4: Laminate Emissions Standard Consistent with CARB 19 64 79,190 600,072
Discussion Draft...........................................
Option 5: Exempt All Laminates from HWPW Definition......... 11 27 53,730 273,758
Option 6: Fully Consistent with Current CARB ATCM........... 11 27 53,730 273,758
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6 displays the benefits for the options. The total quantified
benefits of the rule are between $64 million and $186 million per year
(in 2013 dollars) using a 3% discount rate for annualization, and
between $26 million and $79 million per year using a 7% discount rate.
The majority of the quantified benefits are attributable to reductions
in cancer risk.
[[Page 89718]]
Table 6--Benefits of the Options
[Millions 2013$]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3% Discount rate 7% Discount rate
Option -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lower estimate Higher estimate Lower estimate Higher estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1: Laminates included in $77 + B $226 + B $34 + B $105 + B
HWPW Definition with NAF
Exemption.
Option 2: Final Rule--Laminates 64 + B 186 + B 26 + B 79 + B
included in HWPW definition
after 7 Years with NAF and PF
Exemption.
Option 3: Platform-Specific 71 + B 207 + B 30 + B 95 + B
Emissions Limits for Laminates
with Reduced Testing.
Option 4: Laminate Emissions 48 + B 189 + B 21 + B 86 + B
Standard Consistent with CARB
Discussion Draft.
Option 5: All Laminates Exempt 29 + B 82 + B 13 + B 37 + B
from HWPW Definition.
Option 6: Fully Consistent with 29 + B 82 + B 13 + B 37 + B
Current CARB ATCM.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
``B'' represents the unquantified health benefits
There are various reasons why the total quantified benefits may be
underestimated. For example, there are a number of potential health
effects that are not included in this analysis, which are represented
in the table using the indicator ``+B''. Monetization of any health
endpoint identified requires an estimated concentration-response
function that can be appropriately linked for use in the economic
analyses. At this time, EPA only has sufficient data to quantify the
benefits of avoided cases of cancer and sensory irritation, and the
benefits estimates for these two endpoints are incomplete. The
estimated cancer benefits do not include avoided cases of myeloid
leukemia. The estimated benefits for sensory irritation are only based
on eye irritation, and do not reflect the benefits of avoiding nose and
throat irritation.
4. Costs. The Economic Analysis estimates the incremental cost to
firms located in the U.S. of complying with the requirements of the
rule compared to the activities that firms are already undertaking,
often in response to the CARB ATCM. The total costs by option are
displayed in Table 7. Annualized costs of the rule are $38 million to
$83 million per year using a 3% discount rate and $43 million to $78
million per year using a 7% discount rate. Annualized costs for the
other options ranged from $87 million to $297 million per year using a
3% discount rate, and $105 million to $301 million per year using a 7%
discount rate.
Table 7--Total Costs by Option
[Millions 2013$]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized (3%) Annualized (7%)
Option ---------------------------------------------------
Low High Low High
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1: Laminates included in hardwood plywood (HWPW) $155 $297 $167 $301
definition with NAF exemption..............................
Option 2: Final Rule--Laminates included in HWPW definition 38 83 43 78
with NAF and PF exemption..................................
Option 3: Platform-specific emissions limits for laminates 97 102 114 119
with reduced testing.......................................
Option 4: Laminate emissions standard consistent with CARB 88 88 105 105
discussion draft...........................................
Option 5: All laminates exempt from HWPW definition......... 87 87 105 105
Option 6: Fully consistent with current CARB ATCM........... 124 124 142 142
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 8 indicates the cost of the final rule (Option 2) by industry
type.
Table 8--Costs of Final Rule by Industry Type
[Millions 2013$]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized (3%) Annualized (7%)
Industry type ---------------------------------------------------
Low High Low High
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accreditation Bodies........................................ $0.01 $0.01 $0.01 $0.01
Third-Party Certifiers...................................... 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Stock panel producers....................................... 2 2 2 2
Laminators.................................................. 26 72 26 62
Fabricators (excluding laminators).......................... 6 5 9 8
Wholesalers................................................. 1 1 2 2
Retailers................................................... 3 3 5 5
---------------------------------------------------
Total................................................... 38 83 43 78
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 89719]]
The cost estimates for Options 1 and 2 may be overestimates, in
that they underestimate the savings that may accrue to laminated
product producers that switch to phenol-formaldehyde resins or resins
formulated with no-added formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-
linking structure in order to avoid the costs of TPC certification and
product testing. EPA's calculations assumed that producers switching to
qualified resins may incur capital costs for new equipment in order to
use qualified resins, and ongoing costs (such as decreases in
productivity, or increases in resin costs and product rejection rates)
such that the total cost of switching resins would be equivalent to the
cost of certification and testing. In reality, EPA believes that Option
1's NAF exemption and Option 2's NAF and PF exemption would result in
significant cost savings for some producers. However, EPA lacked
sufficient information to estimate the magnitude of such cost savings.
Furthermore, EPA may be overestimating the cost for Option 2
because the analysis does not account for potential long-term savings
that may accrue as a result of setting the manufactured-by date for
laminated products 7 years from the promulgation of the rule. EPA
believes that the 7 year period will reduce costs because laminated
product producers will be able to more efficiently evaluate different
resin technologies and, where they choose to switch to a phenol-
formaldehyde resin or a resin formulated with no-added formaldehyde as
part of the resin cross-linking structure, to successfully implement a
new resin in their production process. There may also be technological
innovation during this 7 year period that will reduce the cost or
remove some of the technical barriers to using qualified resins in some
applications. However, EPA did not have sufficient information to
estimate the savings to due efficiencies or innovation. Furthermore,
the industry may be able to develop and conduct studies that support
additional exemptions or changes to the rule during this 7 year period,
or after that period, and apply to the Agency for an exemption of their
laminated product from the definition of hardwood plywood. Again, EPA
was unable to predict the cost savings that may result from such
activities.
5. Net benefits. Net benefits are the difference between benefits
and costs. The net benefits for the options are displayed in Table 9.
The rule is estimated to result in quantified net benefits of -$19
million to $148 million per year using a 3% discount rate, and -$53
million to $36 million per year using a 7% discount rate. Quantified
net benefits for the other options range from -$220 million to $109
million per year using a 3% discount rate and -$268 million to -$20
million per year using a 7% discount rate. There are additional
unquantified benefits due to other avoided health effects. EPA
considers health benefits from avoided health effects to be potentially
important non-monetized impacts that contribute to the overall net
benefits of this rule, and has represented their inclusion in Table 9
using the letter ``B''.
Table 9--Net Benefits of the Options
[Millions 2013$]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3% Discount rate 7% Discount rate
Option -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lower estimate Higher estimate Lower estimate Higher estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1: Laminates included in ($220) + B $71 + B ($268) + B ($62) + B
HWPW Definition with NAF
Exemption.
Option 2: Final Rule--Laminates ($19) + B $148 + B ($53) + B $36 + B
included in HWPW definition
after 7 Years with NAF and PF
Exemption.
Option 3: Platform-Specific ($31) + B $109 + B ($88) + B ($20) + B
Emissions Limits for Laminates
with Reduced Testing.
Option 4: Laminate Emissions ($40) + B $101 + B ($85) + B ($20) + B
Standard Consistent with CARB
Discussion Draft.
Option 5: All Laminates Exempt ($58) + B ($6) + B ($92) + B ($67) + B
from HWPW Definition.
Option 6: Fully Consistent with ($95) + B ($43) + B ($130) + B ($105) + B
Current CARB ATCM.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
``B'' represents the unquantified health benefits.
The final rule (Option 2) has higher estimated net benefits than
the other options. The lower estimate of quantified net benefits for
the final rule are negative, but EPA believes these quantified
estimates overstate costs and significantly undercount the benefits.
After assessing both the costs and the benefits of the rule, and
considering the unquantified cost savings and benefits, EPA has made a
reasoned determination that the benefits of the rule justify its costs.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection requirements in this rule have been
submitted to OMB for review and approval under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq. The Information Collection Request (ICR) document prepared by
EPA has been assigned EPA ICR number 2446.02, and the OMB Control No.
2070-0185 (Ref. 74). You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for
this rule, and it is briefly summarized here. The information
collection requirements are not enforceable until OMB approves them.
The new information collection activities contained in this rule
are designed to assist the Agency in meeting the requirement in section
601(d) of TSCA that EPA promulgate implementing regulations in a manner
that ensures compliance with the TSCA Title VI emission standards. The
new information collection requirements affect firms that sell, supply,
offer for sale, or manufacture (including import) hardwood plywood,
particleboard, MDF, or finished goods containing these materials in the
United States, as well as firms that provide testing and third-party
certification or oversight services. Although firms have the option of
choosing to engage in the covered activities, once a firm chooses to do
so, the information collection activities contained in this rule become
mandatory for that firm.
Respondents/affected entities: Panel producers, fabricators,
distributors, retailers, TPCs, and ABs.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (15 U.S.C. 2697 et
seq.).
Estimated number of respondents: 990,000 firms, including 66,000
foreign firms.
Frequency of response: On occasion.
Total estimated burden: 1.5 million hours per year when excluding
burden for activities performed in the baseline; 1.7 million hours per
year when including burden for activities
[[Page 89720]]
performed in the baseline. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: $105 million per year when excluding cost for
activities performed in the baseline; $138 million per year when
including cost for activities performed in the baseline; with no
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs. 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. When OMB approves this ICR, the Agency
will announce that approval in the Federal Register and publish a
technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to display the OMB control number
for the approved information collection activities contained in this
final rule.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
Pursuant to sections 603 and 609(b) of the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq., EPA prepared an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA)
for the proposed rule and convened a Small Business Advocacy Review
(SBAR) Panel to obtain advice and recommendations from small entity
representatives that potentially would be subject to the rule's
requirements. Summaries of the IRFA and Panel recommendations are
presented in the proposed rule at 78 FR 34820.
As required by section 604 of the RFA, the EPA prepared a final
regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) for this action (Ref. 75). The
complete FRFA is available in the docket and is summarized here.
1. Need For and Objectives of the Rule. TSCA section 601(d) directs
EPA to promulgate regulations to implement the formaldehyde standards
for composite wood products described in TSCA section 601(b)(2). EPA is
issuing this rule under TSCA Title VI to implement the statutory
formaldehyde emission standards for hardwood plywood, medium-density
fiberboard, and particleboard sold, supplied, offered for sale, or
manufactured (including imported) in the United States. As directed by
the statute, this rule includes provisions relating to, among other
things, laminated products, products made with ultra-low emitting
formaldehyde or no-added formaldehyde resins, third-party testing and
certification requirements, product labeling, chain of custody
documentation and other recordkeeping requirements, and product
inventory sell-through provisions, including a product stockpiling
prohibition.
The legal basis for the rule is TSCA section 601(d), which provides
authority for the Administrator to ``promulgate regulations to
implement the standards required under subsection (b) in a manner that
ensures compliance with the emission standards described in subsection
(b)(2).'' Therefore, the central objective of this rule is to ensure
compliance with the TSCA Title VI formaldehyde emission standards.
2. Description and Number of Small Entities to Which the Rule Will
Apply. The rule potentially affects small ABs and TPCs, as well as
manufacturers (including importers), fabricators, distributors, and
retailers of composite wood products. For purposes of assessing the
impacts of the 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. EPA
estimates that the rule will affect approximately 922,000 small
entities.
3. Projected Compliance Requirements. As directed by the statute,
this rule includes provisions relating to, among other things,
laminated products, products made with no-added formaldehyde resins or
ultra-low emitting formaldehyde resins, third-party testing and
certification requirements, product labeling, chain of custody
documentation and other recordkeeping requirements, and product
inventory sell-through provisions, including a product stockpiling
prohibition. This rule establishes requirements for ABs, TPCs,
manufacturers (including importers), fabricators, distributors, and
retailers of composite wood products.
The regulatory provisions in this rule are designed to ensure
compliance with the TSCA Title VI formaldehyde emission standards while
aligning, where practical, with the regulatory requirements under the
CARB ATCM to reduce formaldehyde emissions from composite wood
products. By aligning itself with the existing CARB requirements where
practical, EPA seeks to avoid differing or duplicative regulatory
requirements that would result in an increased burden on the regulated
community. However, EPA deviated from the CARB ATCM where doing so
would reduce burden while still ensuring compliance with the TSCA Title
VI emission standards. The rule has annualized costs that are $41
million to $99 million per year less than an alternative that is fully
consistent with the CARB ATCM, and benefits that are $13 million to
$104 million per year higher.
4. Classes of Small Entities Subject to the Compliance
Requirements. Small entities include small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. The small
businesses that are potentially directly regulated by this rule are
ABs, TPCs, manufacturers (including importers), fabricators,
distributors, or retailers of composite wood products. The small
organizations that are potentially directly regulated by the rule are
small ABs and TPCs. No small governments are expected to be directly
regulated by the rule.
5. Professional Skills Needed to Comply. ABs must assess TPCs to
determine whether they are eligible for accreditation. Product ABs are
responsible for ensuring that a TPC has a process in place to verify
the accuracy of the formaldehyde quarterly and quality control tests,
and that the TPC has a process in place to monitor panel producer
quality assurance programs, and conduct independent inspections of
panel producers, their quality control testing facilities and their
laboratories. Laboratory ABs are responsible for verifying that the TPC
laboratory is experienced and capable of conducting formaldehyde
emissions tests. These activities are the part of the basic function of
ABs, so qualified ABs should already have the skills needed to conduct
them. ABs must also submit an application to EPA and enter into a
recognition agreement, keep records, and submit notifications and an
annual report, but these activities do not require any special skills.
TPCs must conduct inspections of composite wood products and
properly train and supervise inspectors to inspect composite wood
products, and have demonstrated experience in performing or verifying
formaldehyde emissions testing on composite wood products. TPCs must
also verify that each panel producer has adequate quality assurance and
quality control procedures and inspect each panel producer, its
products, and its records at least quarterly. These activities are the
part of the basic function of TPCs, so qualified TPCs should already
have the skills needed to conduct them. TPCs must also submit an
application to EPA, keep records, and submit notifications and an
annual report, but these activities do not require any special skills.
Each panel producer must designate a person as quality control
manager with adequate experience and/or training to
[[Page 89721]]
be responsible for formaldehyde emission quality control. EPA has not
incorporated minimum education, experience, or training requirements
for this position, but experience in the wood products industry or a
degree in chemistry or a related field might provide the skills needed
to comply with the requirements.
A panel producer must be able to follow sampling and handling
procedures for the material that is to be tested. However, those
procedures must be described in the facility's quality control manual,
and specified skills should not be needed to follow the written
procedures.
Each panel producer must also designate a quality control facility
for conducting quality control formaldehyde testing, and the quality
control facility must have quality control employees with adequate
experience and/or training to conduct accurate chemical quantitative
analytical tests. But instead of performing these functions themselves,
panel producers have the option of hiring an accredited TPC or a
contract laboratory to fulfill these requirements.
To obtain product certification, a panel producer must apply to an
accredited TPC, and must provide information and notifications to the
TPC. Finally, manufacturers, fabricators, distributors, or retailers of
composite wood products must maintain records. None of these activities
requires any special skills.
6. Other Federal Rules that may Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict
with the Rule. HUD has regulations governing formaldehyde emission
levels from plywood and particleboard materials installed in
manufactured homes. (See 24 CFR 3280.308.) However, TSCA Title VI
establishes specific formaldehyde emission standards for hardwood
plywood, particleboard, and medium-density fiberboard and does not
provide EPA with the authority to modify these standards. Furthermore,
the Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products Act, which
includes TSCA Title VI, directs HUD to revise their regulations to
ensure that they reflect the emission standards in TSCA Title VI. And
the HUD regulations do not deal with the other elements addressed in
these implementing regulations (where EPA does have the authority to
make determinations) such as laminated products, products made with no-
added formaldehyde resins or ultra-low emitting formaldehyde resins,
testing requirements, chain of custody documentation, and product
inventory sell-through provisions. Therefore, the regulatory provisions
for which EPA has flexibility in implementing the statute do not
duplicate, overlap, or conflict with any other Federal rules.
7. Potential Economic Impacts on Small Entities. Of the
approximately 922,000 small entities affected by the rule, almost
910,000 (about 99 percent) are expected to have costs impacts that are
less than one percent of their revenues, nearly 7,000 entities (less
than 1 percent) are expected to experience impacts at levels between
one and three percent of their revenue, and 5,000 entities (less than 1
percent) are expected to incur costs exceeding three percent of their
revenues.
Many of the entities with cost impacts above 1 percent of their
revenues are fabricators, wholesalers, and retailers with annualized
costs less than $250 (i.e., they are firms with annual revenues below
$25,000). These entities account for 98 percent of those with cost
impacts that are between 1 and 3 percent and 100 percent of those with
cost impacts that exceed 3 percent.
8. Small Business Advocacy Review Panel. As required by section
609(b) of the RFA, as amended by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), EPA conducted outreach to small
entities and convened a Small Business Advocacy Review Panel to obtain
advice and recommendations of representatives of the small entities
that potentially would be subject to the rule's requirements. The Panel
solicited input on all aspects of the rule. Consistent with the RFA/
SBREFA requirements, the Panel evaluated the assembled materials and
small-entity comments on issues related to elements of the FRFA. It is
important to note that the Panel's findings and discussion were based
on the information available at the time the final report was prepared
(Ref. 23). EPA has continued to conduct analyses relevant to the rule.
The Panel's most significant findings and recommendations on the TSCA
Title VI implementing regulations are discussed in the preamble to the
proposed rule and in the FRFA for this action.
9. Alternatives incorporated into the rule. Over the course of this
rulemaking, EPA considered alternatives for various provisions of the
rule. EPA made a concerted effort to keep the costs and burdens
associated with this rule as low as possible while still ensuring
compliance with the TSCA Title VI emission standards. In developing the
rule, EPA considered the statutory requirements and the benefits from
protection of human health and the environment, as well as the
compliance costs imposed by the rule, both in general and on small
entities. EPA took a number of steps to reduce the economic impact that
might be imposed by this rule, on both small and large entities, where
doing so was consistent with the statutory mandate. For example, EPA
established a different compliance schedule for laminated product
producers by setting the manufactured-by date for laminated products at
7 years after promulgation. As another example, EPA has simplified
compliance requirements by allowing laminated product producers,
wholesalers, and retailers that do not import products to use invoices,
bills of lading, or comparable documents to fulfil their recordkeeping
and chain-of-custody obligations. The emission standards are
performance standards rather than design standards. And the rule does
not regulate construction firms that are renovating, remodeling, or
selling buildings from the definitions of fabricator and retailer.
These provisions are not limited to small entities but, given the
number of small entities in the affected industries, they will benefit
many small entities.
EPA's Economic Analysis analyzed options with different provisions
for the definition of hardwood plywood; the emission standards for
laminated products; the testing and certification requirements for
laminated products; the implementation dates for laminated product
emissions, testing and certification requirements; and the chain of
custody and recordkeeping requirements. Although EPA did not have
sufficient information to analyze and quantify the cost and burden
reductions resulting from many of the provisions it adopted, they still
reduce the impacts of the rule. Some of the steps that EPA took include
the following, which are described in more detail in the FRFA for this
action. These steps include:
Aligning with the CARB ATCM where practical.
Defining hardwood plywood to exempt laminated products
made with phenol-formaldehyde resins or resins formulated with no-added
formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-linking structure and compliant
platforms, and allowing laminated products made into component parts to
take advantage of the exemption.
Establishing the manufactured-by date for laminated
products at 7 years after promulgation.
Reducing recordkeeping for non-manufacturers.
Reducing testing for NAF and ULEF products.
Not requiring retailers to relabel products that they
divide or repackage.
[[Page 89722]]
Reducing quality control testing for small hardwood
plywood production. Reducing quality control testing for
certain panel producers with consistent operations.
Allowing grouping of products and product types for
testing.
Defining hardboard based on industry standards.
Extending the manufactured-by date for the sell-through
provisions.
Allowing alternate test methods for quality control
testing.
Not requiring recordkeeping for most exempt products.
Allowing TPCs approved by CARB to certify products under
TSCA Title VI for two years after the publication of the final rule.
Allowing reciprocity for CARB-approved TPCs.
Allowing representative emission levels to be used to
demonstrate test method equivalence.
Creating a de minimis exception.
Not requiring retention of tested lots while awaiting the
test results.
10. Alternatives considered but not incorporated into the rule. EPA
also considered and rejected several alternatives for the regulation of
laminated products, which could have reduced the economic impacts of
the rule on small entities. For the reasons described below, these
alternatives are not consistent with the statutory objectives and thus
are not incorporated in the final rule. Additional information on the
alternatives that EPA considered is presented elsewhere in this notice.
a. Complete exemption of laminated products from the definition of
hardwood plywood. This alternative is consistent with the current CARB
ATCM. However, the rulemaking record contains ample evidence that some
laminated products can have high formaldehyde emissions. CARB provided
data on laminated product testing conducted in cooperation with the
American Home Furnishings Alliance (AHFA). CARB tested 16 different
sets of samples, each consisting of the same type of MDF or
particleboard panel in three different states: Raw; with a veneer
attached with a urea-formaldehyde resin; and with a stain or finish
applied to the veneer. In most cases, the laminated products emitted
more formaldehyde than was emitted by the platforms, likely due to the
resin used to affix the veneer. In several cases, the formaldehyde
emissions from the laminated product were considerably higher than the
emissions from the platform.
Considering the laminated products in the CARB/AHFA data set
without stain or finish (which is how the TSCA Title VI emission
standards are applied), only one of the 16 samples had emissions below
0.05 ppm, the standard for hardwood plywood. For 13 of 16 samples, the
emissions from the veneered product were higher than from the
corresponding raw platform, with increases ranging from 0.04 ppm to
1.17 ppm. Laminated product often had emissions that were an order of
magnitude higher than the particleboard or MDF platforms that they were
made from. Eleven of the 16 samples had emissions above the standard
for their platform type. Five of the eight samples made with MDF
exceeded the 0.11 ppm Phase II standard for MDF, with emissions ranging
from 0.17 ppm to 1.35 ppm. Six of the eight samples made with
particleboard exceeded the 0.09 ppm Phase II standard for
particleboard, with emissions ranging from 0.13 to 1.29 ppm.
EPA reads TSCA Title VI to include laminated products as hardwood
plywood unless EPA can make the case, based on available and relevant
information, that they should be excluded. EPA finds that the CARB/AHFA
data set provides ample evidence that the process of lamination with
urea-formaldehyde resins generally increases formaldehyde emissions
from composite wood products. Therefore, completely exempting laminated
products from the definition of hardwood plywood would not be
consistent with the statutory objectives.
b. Emission standard of 0.13 ppm for laminated products with no
testing or certification. This alternative is consistent with CARB's
March 2014 discussion draft. The record, especially the CARB/AHFA data
set, demonstrates that some laminated products have high formaldehyde
emissions, so a requirement that the platform be compliant does not
ensure that a laminated product made with urea-formaldehyde resin will
also be compliant with a 0.13 ppm standard. While thirteen of the raw
platforms in the CARB/AHFA data set complied with the relevant Phase II
emissions standard, only 5 of the 16 veneered samples without stain or
finish met the 0.13 ppm level. Nine of the 16 samples had emissions
ranging from 0.17 to 1.35 ppm. For 13 of 16 samples, the emissions from
the veneered product were higher than from the raw platform. These
increases ranged from 0.04 ppm to 1.17 ppm, and represented an increase
of 57 percent to 2,533 percent compared to the platform emissions.
Given the CARB/AHFA data set, with formaldehyde emissions from most
veneered samples exceeding 0.13 ppm, EPA is unable to find that this
approach is consistent with the statutory objectives. To the contrary,
this data set provides evidence that without some sort of active effort
to control formaldehyde emissions, whether through the use of phenol-
formaldehyde resins or resins formulated with no-added formaldehyde as
part of the resin cross-linking structure or some emissions testing, it
is likely that many laminated products will exceed a 0.13 ppm emission
standard. Therefore, a 0.13 ppm emission standard for laminated
products with no testing or certification would not be consistent with
the statutory objectives.
c. Platform-specific emission standards, annual testing, no
certification. Under this alternative, unfinished laminated products
would have to meet the emissions limit for the type of platform they
are made with (0.05 ppm for veneer core, 0.09 ppm for particleboard,
0.11 ppm for MDF, and 0.13 ppm for thin MDF). An annual emissions test
would be required, but TPC certification would not be required.
The record, especially the CARB/AHFA data set, demonstrates that
some laminated products have high formaldehyde emissions, so a
requirement that the platform be compliant does not, by itself, ensure
that a laminated product made with urea-formaldehyde resin will also be
compliant with the platform emission standard. While 13 of the 16
platforms met the Phase II emission standards, only 5 of 16 of the
veneered products without stain or finish met the emission standard for
their platform.
Furthermore, an annual emission test may not be sufficient to
ensure compliance for products, particularly those made with urea-
formaldehyde resin. Several public commenters were concerned about the
effect of reduced testing requirements for laminated products. One
questioned whether an annual test could account for variation in
production processes and seasonal variations. Another claimed that it
is inconceivable that an effective and reliable enforcement scheme
could be developed that hinged on a single yearly test. Yet another
stated that annual testing could be misleading, because the testing may
not be accurate or representative of average emissions. EPA agrees that
more than one test per year is important to ensure that laminated
products that are not made with phenol-formaldehyde resins or resins
formulated with no-added formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-
linking structure comply with the emission standard.
EPA also believes that TPCs have an important role to play in
ensuring
[[Page 89723]]
compliance. Various factors (such as resin system, core type, core
resin type, veneer type, and number of plies) could influence
formaldehyde emissions from hardwood plywood, including laminated
products. EPA is allowing TPCs to approve the grouping of products with
similar formaldehyde emission characteristics for quarterly and quality
control testing. EPA believes that the TPC, working in conjunction with
the platform producer, is in the best position to select the product(s)
to be tested in order to determine whether production at the facility
is in compliance with the emission standards.
Therefore, a platform-specific emission standard for laminated
products with annual testing but no certification would not be
consistent with the statutory objectives.
d. Conclusion. On the basis of information currently available to
the Agency, EPA has concluded that these alternative options are not
consistent with TSCA Title VI's statutory objective to reduce
formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products.
In addition, EPA is preparing a Small Entity Compliance Guide to
help small entities comply with this rule. The guide or guides will
have information to assist small TPCs, ABs, fabricators, panel
producers, importers, distributors, and retailers. After the date that
this rule's requirements take effect the guide or guides will be
available on EPA's Web site https://www.epa.gov/formaldehyde.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action contains a Federal mandate under UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-
1538, that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. Accordingly, EPA has prepared a written
statement required under section 202 of UMRA (Ref. 76). The statement
is included in the docket for this action and briefly summarized here.
1. Authorizing legislation. This rule is issued under the authority
of section 601 of TSCA, 15 U.S.C. 2697.
2. Cost-benefit analysis. The Economic Analysis (Ref. 3) presents
the costs of the rule as well as various regulatory options and is
summarized in Unit VI.A. The rule is calculated to result in a total
cost of $253 million to $359 million in the first year, although this
is likely an overestimate. (The rule allows laminators 7 years before
they must begin using NAF or PF resins and compliant platforms, or have
their products tested and certified. EPA's analysis assumes that
laminated product producers that decide to switch to qualified resins
would incur all the transition costs in the first year, while in
reality those costs are likely to be spread over the 6 year period.)
The subsequent year costs are lower, so that the total annualized cost
of this rule is $38 million to $83 million per year when using a 3
percent discount rate and $43 million to $78 million per year using a 7
percent discount rate. When adjusted for inflation, the $100 million
UMRA threshold is equivalent to approximately $153 million in 2013
dollars. Thus, the first cost of the rule to the private sector and
State, local, and Tribal governments in the aggregate may exceed the
inflation-adjusted UMRA threshold.
This rule will reduce exposures to formaldehyde, resulting in
benefits from avoided adverse health effects. For the subset of health
effects where the results were quantified, the estimated annualized
benefits (due to avoided incidence of nasopharyngeal cancer and eye
irritation) are $64 million to $186 million per year using a 3%
discount rate, and $26 million to $79 million per year using a 7%
discount rate. There are additional unquantified benefits due to other
avoided health effects.
Net benefits are the difference between benefits and costs. The
rule is estimated to result in quantified net benefits of -$19 million
to $148 million per year using a 3% discount rate, and -$53 million to
$36 million per year using a 7% discount rate. EPA considers
unquantified cost savings for laminated product producers (from the NAF
and PF exemption and the 7 year period to meet the emission standards)
as well as the additional unquantified health benefits to be
potentially important non-monetized impacts that contribute to the
overall net benefits of this rule.
3. State, local, and Tribal government input. Consistent with the
intergovernmental consultation provisions of section 204 of the UMRA
EPA has consulted with governmental entities affected by this rule.
With the assistance of the National Conference of State Legislatures,
EPA consulted with state environmental health directors, who were
generally supportive of EPA's efforts. And EPA has met with officials
from the state of California on numerous occasions to discuss aspects
of the CARB ATCM and its implementation. California is very supportive
of EPA's efforts to promulgate regulations to implement national
composite wood product formaldehyde emission standards that are modeled
on the CARB ATCM.
4. Least burdensome option. Consistent with section 205, EPA has
identified and considered a reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives. TSCA Title VI establishes specific formaldehyde emission
standards for hardwood plywood, particleboard, and medium-density
fiberboard and does not provide EPA with the authority to modify these
standards. The statute further directs EPA to promulgate implementing
regulations that address elements such as laminated products, products
made with ultra low-emitting formaldehyde resins, products made with
no-added formaldehyde resins, testing requirements, product labeling,
chain of custody documentation and other recordkeeping requirements,
and product inventory sell-through provisions. EPA has considered a
number of regulatory alternatives for regulating laminated products, as
described in Unit III and elsewhere in this Unit, as well as in the
Economic Analysis (Ref. 3). The final rule has the lowest cost of the
alternatives that EPA considered. Furthermore, the available
information indicates that laminated products made with urea-
formaldehyde resins can have high formaldehyde emissions. Therefore, on
the basis of information currently available to the Agency, EPA has
concluded that the alternative options for laminated products would not
be consistent with the statutory objective to reduce formaldehyde
emissions from composite wood products. After assessing both the costs
and the benefits of the rule (both quantified and unquantified), EPA
has determined that the rule is the least burdensome option that is
consistent with TSCA Title VI's objective.
This action is not subject to the requirements of section 203 of
UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). It will 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.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The rule would
not regulate tribal governments directly, it would regulate
[[Page 89724]]
entities that accredit TPCs, certify panel producers, or manufacture
(including import), fabricate, distribute, or sell composite wood
products. Governments do not typically engage in these activities.
Tribal governments do not typically engage in these activities. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is an
economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive
Order 12866, and the EPA believes that the environmental health or
safety risk addressed by this action may have a disproportionate effect
on children. Accordingly, we have evaluated the environmental health or
safety effects on children. This action's health and risk assessments
are described in Units I.F. and II.A. and contained in the economic
analysis (Ref. 3). As described therein, exposure to formaldehyde may
cause disproportionate effects on children compared to adults both in
terms of cancer risk, and respiratory effects. The rule itself will not
have disproportionally high and adverse effects on children. Rather,
these standards would reduce emissions of formaldehyde from composite
wood products for individuals of all ages that are exposed and children
may accrue higher benefits from the exposure reductions compared to
adults.
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 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not
likely to have any adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. Further, this rule is not likely to have any adverse energy
effects because it regulates formaldehyde emissions from composite wood
products and does not require any action related to the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This action involves technical standards, many of which EPA is
directed to use by TSCA Title VI. Technical standards identified in the
statute include the two quarterly test methods, ASTM E1333-96 and ASTM
D6007-02, a quality control test method, ASTM D5582-00, and various
standards that define specific composite wood products, such as ASTM D-
5456-06 (Structural Composite Lumber Products), ASTM D-5055-05
(Prefabricated Wood I-Joists), ANSI/AITC A190.1 (Structural Glued
Laminated Timber), ANSI/HPVA HP-1-2009 (Hardwood and Decorative
Plywood), ANSI A208.2-2009 (Medium Density Fiberboard), ANSI A208.1-
2009 (Particleboard), PS 1-07 (Structural Plywood), and PS 2-04 (Wood-
Based Structural-Use Panels).
In addition, EPA has identified other voluntary consensus standards
and incorporated them into this action. These include standards for
accreditation and certification (ISO/IEC 17011, ISO/IEC 17020, ISO/IEC
17025, and ISO/IEC 17065), as well as the revised quarterly test
method, ASTM E1333-10, and standards that define hardboard, ANSI
A135.4, ANSI A135.5, ANSI A135.6, and ANSI 135.7. EPA is allowing
certain alternative quality control test methods that are incorporated
in voluntary consensus standards, EN 717-2 (gas analysis), EN 120
(perforator), and JIS A 1460 (24-hour desiccator).
EPA is using voluntary consensus standards issued by the
International Organization for Standardization, ASTM International, the
American National Standards Institute, the National Institute of
Standards and Technology, the European Committee for Standardization,
Georgia Pacific Chemicals LLC, and the Japanese Standards Association.
Copies of the standards referenced in the regulatory text have been
placed in the docket for this rule. See Unit IV for information on how
to obtain copies of these standards from other sources.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
EPA has determined that the human health or environmental risk
addressed by this action will not have potential disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority,
low-income or indigenous populations, as specified in Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The results of this evaluation
are contained in the Economic Analysis (Ref. 3).
The Economic Analysis, described in Unit VI.A, monetizes the
benefits from reducing the number of cases of nasopharyngeal cancer and
sensory irritation and includes an environmental justice analysis that
expands on the primary benefits analysis by analyzing the monetized
impacts specifically for minority and low-income populations. Results
indicate that disaggregation of total benefits by population groups
leads to variation in the range of individual benefits, by minority
population. The affected Non-Hispanic White population accounts for 63%
of the total affected population, and accrues 59% of the quantified
benefits. In comparison, for minority populations the quantified
benefits equal or exceed their share of the total population. Minority
populations represent about 37% of the individuals affected by the rule
and are estimated to accrue about 41% of the rule's quantified
benefits. The affected Non-Hispanic Black population account for 11% of
the total affected population, accrue 12% of the quantified benefits.
The affected Hispanic population account for 17% of the total affected
population, and accrue 19% of the quantified benefits. The affected
Non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native population account for
0.7% of the total affected population, accrue 0.7% of the quantified
benefits. The affected low-income population account for 15% of the
total affected population and accrue 18% of the quantified benefits.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., and EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 770
Environmental protection, Formaldehyde, Incorporation by reference,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Third-party certification,
Toxic substances, Wood.
Dated: July 27, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I, subchapter R, is amended by adding
part 770 to read as follows:
PART 770--FORMALDEHYDE STANDARDS FOR COMPOSITE WOOD PRODUCTS
Subpart A--General Provisions
Sec.
770.1 Scope and applicability.
770.2 Effective dates.
770.3 Definitions.
770.4 Exemption from the hardwood plywood definition for certain
laminated products.
770.5 Prohibited acts.
[[Page 89725]]
Subpart B--EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program
770.7 Third-party certification.
770.8 Applications, notifications, and reports.
Subpart C--Composite Wood Products
770.10 Formaldehyde emission standards.
770.12 Stockpiling.
770.15 Composite wood product certification.
770.17 No-added formaldehyde-based resins.
770.18 Ultra low-emitting formaldehyde resins.
770.20 Testing requirements.
770.21 Quality control manual, facilities, and personnel.
770.22 Non-complying lots.
770.24 Samples for testing.
770.30 Importers, fabricators, distributors, and retailers.
770.40 Reporting and recordkeeping.
770.45 Labeling.
Subpart D--Incorporation by Reference
770.99 Incorporation by reference.
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2697(d).
Subpart A--General Provisions
Sec. 770.1 Scope and applicability.
(a) This part contains formaldehyde emission standards, testing and
certification provisions, and other requirements for the manufacture
(including import), distribution, and sale of composite wood products,
component parts that contain composite wood products, and finished
goods that contain composite wood products.
(b) This part applies to:
(1) Laboratory Accreditation Bodies (ABs) and Product ABs that are
accrediting third-party certifiers (TPCs) for TSCA Title VI (15 U.S.C.
2697(d)) purposes and those that wish to commence accrediting TPCs for
TSCA Title VI purposes.
(2) TPCs that are certifying composite wood products for TSCA Title
VI compliance and those that wish to commence certifying composite wood
products for TSCA Title VI compliance.
(3) Any composite wood products, and component parts or finished
goods containing these materials, that are sold, supplied, offered for
sale, or manufactured (including imported) in the United States,
including composite wood products used or installed in manufactured
housing.
(c) Subparts B, C, and D of this part do not apply to the
following:
(1) Any finished good that has previously been sold or supplied to
an end user, an individual or entity that purchased or acquired the
finished good in good faith for purposes other than resale. For
example, subparts B, C, and D of this part do not apply to antiques or
secondhand furniture.
(2) Hardboard.
(3) Structural plywood, as specified in PS 1-07, Voluntary Product
Standard--Structural Plywood (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
770.99).
(4) Structural panels, as specified in PS 2-04, Voluntary Product
Standard--Performance Standard for Wood-Based Structural-Use Panels
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
(5) Structural composite lumber, as specified in ASTM D5456-06,
Standard Specification for Evaluation of Structural Composite Lumber
Products (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
(6) Oriented strand board.
(7) Glued laminated lumber, as specified in ANSI/AITC A190.1-2002,
Structural Glued Laminated Timber (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
770.99).
(8) Prefabricated wood I-joists, as specified in ASTM D5055-05,
Standard Specification for Establishing and Monitoring Structural
Capacities of Prefabricated Wood I-Joists (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 770.99).
(9) Finger-jointed lumber.
(10) Wood packaging, including pallets, crates, spools, and
dunnage.
(11) Composite wood products used inside the following:
(i) New vehicles (other than recreational vehicles) that are
constructed entirely from new parts and that have never been the
subject of a retail sale or registered with the applicable State or
other governmental agency.
(ii) New rail cars.
(iii) New boats.
(iv) New aerospace craft.
(v) New aircraft.
(d) The emission standards in Sec. 770.10 do not apply to windows
that contain composite wood products, if the windows contain less than
five percent by volume of composite wood products, combined, in
relation to the total volume of the finished window.
(e) The emission standards in Sec. 770.10 do not apply to exterior
doors and garage doors that contain composite wood products, if:
(1) The doors are made from composite wood products manufactured
with no-added formaldehyde-based resins or ultra low-emitting
formaldehyde resins; or
(2) The doors contain less than three percent by volume of
composite wood products, combined, in relation to the total volume of
the finished exterior door or garage door.
Sec. 770.2 Effective dates.
(a) This rule is effective February 10, 2017.
(b) Laboratory and Product ABs that wish to accredit TPCs for TSCA
Title VI purposes may apply to EPA beginning February 10, 2017 to
become recognized. Laboratory and Product ABs must be recognized by EPA
before they begin to provide and at all times while providing TSCA
Title VI accreditation services.
(c) TPCs that are not approved by the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) that wish to provide TSCA Title VI certification services
may apply to EPA beginning February 10, 2017 to become recognized. TPCs
must be recognized by EPA and comply with all of the applicable
requirements of this part before they begin to provide and at all times
while providing TSCA Title VI certification services.
(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of this part, TPCs that are
approved by CARB to certify composite wood products have until December
12, 2018 to become accredited by an EPA TSCA Title VI AB(s) pursuant to
the requirements of this part. During this two-year transition period,
existing CARB-approved TPCs and CARB TPCs approved during this
transition period may carry out certification activities under TSCA
Title VI, provided that they remain approved by CARB and comply with
all aspects of this part other than the requirements of Sec.
770.7(c)(1)(i) and (ii) and (c)(2)(iii) and (iv). After the two-year
transition period, CARB-approved TPCs may continue to certify composite
wood products under TSCA Title VI provided the TPC maintains its CARB
approval, follows the requirements under this part, submits to EPA
documentation from CARB supporting their eligibility for reciprocity
and has received EPA recognition as an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC. All TPCs
that are certifying products as compliant with TSCA Title VI, both
during and after the transition period, are subject to enforcement
actions for any violations of TSCA Title VI or these regulations.
(e) After December 12, 2017, all manufacturers (including
importers), fabricators, suppliers, distributors, and retailers of
composite wood products, and component parts or finished goods
containing these materials, must comply with this part, subject to the
following:
(1) After December 12, 2017, laminated product producers must
comply with the requirements of this part that are applicable to
fabricators.
(2) After December 12, 2023, producers of laminated products must
comply with the requirements of this part that are applicable to
hardwood
[[Page 89726]]
plywood panel producers (in addition to the requirements of this part
that are applicable to fabricators) except as provided at Sec. 770.4.
(3) After December 12, 2023, producers of laminated products that,
as provided at Sec. 770.4, are exempt from the definition of
``hardwood plywood'' must comply with the recordkeeping requirements in
Sec. 770.40(c) and (d) (in addition to the requirements of this part
that are applicable to fabricators).
(4) Composite wood products manufactured (including imported)
before December 12, 2017 may be sold, supplied, offered for sale, or
used to fabricate component parts or finished goods at any time.
Sec. 770.3 Definitions.
For the purposes of this part, the following definitions apply:
Accreditation Body or AB means an organization that provides an
impartial verification of the competency of conformity assessment
bodies or TPCs.
Agent for Service means an entity designated by a TPC or AB to
receive legal documents on their behalf.
Article means a manufactured item which:
(1) Is formed to a specific shape or design during manufacture;
(2) Has end use functions dependent in whole or in part upon its
shape or design during the end use; and
(3) Has either no change of chemical composition during its end use
or only those changes of composition which have no commercial purpose
separate from that of the article and that may occur as described in 19
CFR 12.120(a)(2), except that fluids and particles are not considered
articles regardless of shape or design.
Assessment means a process to include an on-site review undertaken
by an AB to assess the competence of all operations of a conformity
assessment body and TPC, based on particular standard(s) and/or other
normative documents for a defined scope of accreditation, as defined in
ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
Bundle means more than one composite wood product, component part,
or finished good fastened together for transportation or sale.
Combination core means a platform for making hardwood plywood or
laminated products that consists of a combination of layers of veneer
and particleboard or medium density fiberboard.
Component part means an object other than a panel that contains one
or more composite wood products and is used in the construction or
assembly of finished goods. Component parts that are sold directly to
consumers are considered finished goods.
Composite core means a platform for making hardwood plywood or
laminated products that consists of particleboard and/or medium density
fiberboard, or combination core.
Composite wood product means hardwood plywood made with a veneer or
composite core, medium-density fiberboard, and particleboard.
Distributor means any person or entity to whom a composite wood
product, component part, or finished good is sold or supplied for the
purposes of resale or distribution in commerce, except that
manufacturers and retailers are not distributors.
Engineered veneer means a type of veneer that is created by dyeing
and gluing together leaves of veneer in a mold to produce a block. The
block is then sliced into leaves of veneer with a designed appearance
that is highly repeatable.
EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory Accreditation Body or EPA TSCA Title
VI Laboratory AB means an AB that has a recognition agreement with EPA
under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program,
accredits a TPC's testing laboratory or contract testing laboratory to
ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99)
with a scope of accreditation to include this part and the formaldehyde
test methods used to comply with this part, and assesses the testing
laboratory's conformance to ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 770.99) in order to perform laboratory testing
services.
EPA TSCA Title VI Product Accreditation Body or EPA TSCA Title VI
Product AB means an AB that has a recognition agreement with EPA under
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program, accredits a
TPC to ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
770.99) with a scope of accreditation to include composite wood
products and this part, and assesses the TPC's conformance to ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) in order to
perform product certification.
EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certifier or EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
means a conformity assessment body that provides both product
certification services and laboratory testing services (either directly
or through contracted services), is accredited by an EPA TSCA Title VI
Product AB and an EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB (unless the
laboratory testing services are contracted to a laboratory accredited
by an EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB), and is recognized by EPA
pursuant to Sec. 770.7(c).
Fabricator means a person or entity who incorporates composite wood
products into component parts or into finished goods. This includes
laminated product producers, but persons or entities in the
construction trades are not fabricators by renovating or remodeling
buildings.
Finished good means any good or product, other than a panel, that
contains hardwood plywood (with a veneer or composite core),
particleboard, or medium-density fiberboard and that is not a component
part or other part used in the assembly of a finished good. Site-built
buildings or other site-built real property improvements are not
considered finished goods.
Hardboard means a composite panel composed of cellulosic fibers,
consolidated under heat and pressure in a hot press by: A wet process;
or a dry process that uses a phenolic resin, or a resin system in which
there is no formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-linking structure;
or a wet formed/dry pressed process; and that is commonly or
commercially known, or sold, as hardboard, including any product
conforming to one of the following ANSI standards: Basic Hardboard
(ANSI A135.4-2012) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99),
Prefinished Hardboard Paneling (ANSI A135.5-2012) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 770.99), Engineered Wood Siding (ANSI A135.6-2012)
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99), or Engineered Wood Trim
(ANSI A135.7-2012) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99). There
is a rebuttable presumption that products emitting more than 0.06 ppm
formaldehyde as measured by ASTM E1333-10 (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 770.99) or ASTM D6007-02 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 770.99) are not hardboard.
Hardwood plywood means a hardwood or decorative panel that is
intended for interior use and composed of (as determined under ANSI/
HPVA HP-1-2009 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99)) an
assembly of layers or plies of veneer, joined by an adhesive with a
lumber core, a particleboard core, a medium-density fiberboard core, a
hardboard core, a veneer core, or any other special core or special
back material. Hardwood plywood does not include military-specified
plywood, curved plywood, or any plywood specified in PS 1-07, Voluntary
Product Standard--Structural Plywood (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 770.99), or PS 2-04, Voluntary Product
[[Page 89727]]
Standard--Performance Standard for Wood-Based Structural-Use Panels
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99). In addition, hardwood
plywood includes laminated products except as provided at Sec. 770.4.
Importer means any person or entity who imports composite wood
products, component parts, or finished goods into the customs territory
of the United States (as defined in general note 2 of the Harmonized
Tariff Schedules of the United States pursuant to 15 U.S.C.
2612(a)(1)). Importer includes:
(1) The entity primarily liable for the payment of any duties on
the products; or
(2) An authorized agent acting on the entity's behalf.
Intended for interior use means intended for use or storage inside
a building or recreational vehicle, or constructed in such a way that
it is not suitable for long-term use in a location exposed to the
elements. Windows, doors, and garage doors with at least one interior-
facing side are intended for interior use.
Laboratory Accreditation Body or Laboratory AB means an AB that
accredits conformity assessment body testing laboratories.
Laminated product means a product in which a wood or woody grass
veneer is affixed to a particleboard core or platform, a medium-density
fiberboard core or platform, or a veneer core or platform. A laminated
product is a component part used in the construction or assembly of a
finished good. In addition, a laminated product is produced by either
the fabricator of the finished good in which the product is
incorporated or a fabricator who uses the laminated product in the
further construction or assembly of a component part.
Laminated product producer means a manufacturing plant or other
facility that manufactures (excluding facilities that solely import
products) laminated products on the premises. Laminated product
producers are fabricators and, after December 12, 2023, laminated
product producers are also hardwood plywood panel producers except as
provided at Sec. 770.4.
Lot means the panels produced from the beginning of production of a
product type until the first quality control test; between one quality
control test and the next; or from the last quality control test to the
end of production for a particular product type.
Medium-density fiberboard means a panel composed of cellulosic
fibers made by dry forming and pressing a resinated fiber mat (as
determined under ANSI A208.2-2009 (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
770.99)).
No-added formaldehyde-based resin means a resin formulated with no
added formaldehyde as part of the resin crosslinking structure in a
composite wood product that meets the emission standards in Sec.
770.17(c).
Non-complying lot means any lot of composite wood product
represented by a quarterly test value or quality control test result
that indicates that the lot exceeds the applicable standard for the
particular composite wood product in Sec. 770.10(b). A quality control
test result that exceeds the QCL is considered a test result that
indicates that the lot exceeds the applicable standard. Future
production of the product type(s) represented by a failed quarterly
test are not considered certified and must be treated as a non-
complying lot until the product type(s) are re-qualified through a
successful quarterly test.
Panel means a thin (usually less than two inches thick), flat,
usually rectangular piece of particleboard, medium-density fiberboard
or hardwood plywood. Embossing or imparting of an irregular surface on
the composite wood products by the original panel producer during
pressing does not remove the product from this definition. Cutting a
panel into smaller pieces, without additional fabrication, does not
make the panel into a component part or finished good. This does not
include items made for the purpose of research and development,
provided such items are not sold, supplied, or offered for sale.
Panel producer means a manufacturing plant or other facility that
manufactures (excluding facilities that solely import products)
composite wood products on the premises.
Phenol-formaldehyde resin means a resin that consists primarily of
phenol and formaldehyde and does not contain urea-formaldehyde.
Particleboard means a panel composed of cellulosic material in the
form of discrete particles (as distinguished from fibers, flakes, or
strands) that are pressed together with resin (as determined under ANSI
A208.1-2009 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99)).
Particleboard does not include any product specified in PS 2-04,
Performance Standard for Wood-Based Structural-Use Panels (incorporated
by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
Product Accreditation Body or Product AB means an AB that accredits
conformity assessment bodies who perform product certification.
Product type means a type of composite wood product, or group of
composite wood products, made by the same panel producer with the same
resin system that differs from another product type based on panel
composition and formaldehyde emission characteristics. Grouped products
must have similar formaldehyde emission characteristics and their
emissions must fit the same correlation curve or linear regression.
Production line means a set of operations and physical industrial
or mechanical equipment used to produce a composite wood product in one
facility utilizing the same or similar equipment and quality assurance
and quality control procedures.
Purchaser means any panel producer, importer, fabricator,
distributor, or retailer that acquires composite wood products,
component parts, or finished goods for purposes of resale in exchange
for money or its equivalent.
Quality control limit or QCL means the value from the quality
control method test that is the correlative equivalent to the
applicable emission standard based on the ASTM E1333-10 method
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
Reassessment means an assessment, as described in sections 7.5 to
7.11 of ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
770.99), except that experience gained during previous assessments
shall be taken into account.
Recreational vehicle means a vehicle which is:
(1) Built on a single chassis;
(2) Four hundred square feet or less when measured at the largest
horizontal projections;
(3) Self-propelled or permanently towable by a light duty truck;
and
(4) Designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as
temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or
seasonal use.
Retailer means any person or entity that sells, offers for sale, or
supplies directly to consumers composite wood products, component parts
or finished goods that contain composite wood products, except that
persons or entities in the construction trades are not considered
retailers by selling, renovating, or remodeling buildings.
Resin system means type of resin used, including but not limited to
urea-formaldehyde, soy, phenol-formaldehyde, or melamine-urea-
formaldehyde.
Scavenger means a chemical or chemicals that can be applied to
resins or composite wood products either during or after manufacture
and that react with residual or excess formaldehyde to reduce the
amount of
[[Page 89728]]
formaldehyde that can be emitted from composite wood products.
Shipping quality control limit means a quality control limit that
is developed in conjunction with an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC that is based
on panels prior to shipment rather than immediately after
manufacturing.
Stockpiling means manufacturing or purchasing composite wood
products, whether in the form of panels or incorporated into component
parts or finished goods, between July 7, 2010 and June 12, 2017 at an
average rate at least 20% greater than the average rate of manufacture
or purchase during the 2009 calendar year for the purpose of
circumventing the emission standards and other requirements of this
subpart.
Thin medium-density fiberboard means medium-density fiberboard that
has a thickness less than or equal to 8 millimeters or 0.315 inches.
Third-party certifier or TPC means a conformity assessment body
that provides both product certification services and laboratory
testing services (either directly or through contracted services).
TPC laboratory means a laboratory or contract laboratory of an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC that is accredited by an EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory
AB to ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
770.99), and whose inspection activities are in conformance with ISO/
IEC 17020:1998(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
Surveillance On-Site Assessment means a set of on-site activities
that are less comprehensive than reassessment, to monitor the continued
fulfilment by accredited conformance assessment bodies of requirements
for accreditation, as described in sections 7.5 to 7.11 of ISO/IEC
17011:2004(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
Ultra low-emitting formaldehyde resin means a resin in a composite
wood product that meets the emission standards in Sec. 770.18(c).
Veneer means a sheet of wood or woody grass with a maximum
thickness of 6.4 millimeters (\1/4\ inch) that is rotary cut, sliced,
or sawed from a log, bolt, flitch, block, or culm; including engineered
veneer.
Veneer core means a platform for making hardwood plywood or
laminated products that consists of veneer.
Woody grass means a plant of the family Poaceae (formerly
Gramineae) with hard lignified tissues or woody parts.
Sec. 770.4 Exemption from the hardwood plywood definition for
certain laminated products.
(a) Current exemptions. The definition of the term ``hardwood
plywood'' in Sec. 770.3 does not include:
(1) Laminated products made by attaching a wood or woody grass
veneer with a phenol-formaldehyde resin to a platform that has been
manufactured in compliance with this part (including either certified
in accordance with Sec. 770.15, manufactured with no-added
formaldehyde-based resins under Sec. 770.17, or manufactured with
ultra low-emitting formaldehyde-based resins under Sec. 770.18).
(2) Laminated products made by attaching a wood or woody grass
veneer with a resin formulated with no-added formaldehyde as part of
the resin cross-linking structure to a platform that has been
manufactured in compliance with this part (including either certified
in accordance with Sec. 770.15, manufactured with no-added
formaldehyde-based resins under Sec. 770.17, or manufactured with
ultra low-emitting formaldehyde-based resins under Sec. 770.18).
(b) Rulemaking petitions for exemption. (1) Any person may petition
the Agency to initiate a rulemaking for additional exemptions for
laminated products from the definition of the term ``hardwood
plywood,'' pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 2697(a)(3)(C)(i)(I).
(2) Each petition should provide all available and relevant
information, including studies conducted and formaldehyde emissions
data, and should be submitted to: Director, National Program Chemicals
Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (MC 7404T), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW., Washington,
DC 20460-001.
(3) EPA will promptly review each submitted petition and, where
appropriate, publish a proposed rule in the Federal Register based on
the petition and provide a public comment period of generally 30 days
before taking a final action.
Sec. 770.5 Prohibited acts.
(a) Failure or refusal to comply with any requirement of TSCA
section 601 (15 U.S.C. 2697) or this part is a violation of TSCA
section 15 (15 U.S.C. 2614).
(b) Failure or refusal to establish and maintain records or to make
available or permit access to or copying of records, as required by
this part, is a violation of TSCA section 15 (15 U.S.C. 2614).
(c) Making false or misleading statements in any statement,
certification, or record required by this part is a violation of TSCA
section 15 (15 U.S.C. 2614).
(d) Violators may be subject to civil and criminal sanctions
pursuant to TSCA section 16 (15 U.S.C. 2615) for each violation.
Subpart B--EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program
Sec. 770.7 Third-party certification.
(a) EPA TSCA Title VI Product ABs. To participate in the EPA TSCA
Title VI Third-Party Certification Program as an EPA TSCA Title VI
Product AB, a Product AB must have the qualifications described in this
section, submit an application and enter into a recognition agreement
with EPA as described in this section, and, upon recognition from EPA,
impartially perform the responsibilities described in this section.
(1) Qualifications. To qualify for recognition by EPA in the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program as an EPA TSCA Title VI
Product AB, an applicant Product AB must:
(i) Be a signatory to the International Accreditation Forum, Inc.'s
(IAF) Multilateral Recognition Arrangement (MLA) through level three,
or have membership in one of the IAF recognized regional accreditation
cooperations, or an equivalent organization as determined by EPA;
(ii) Be in conformance with ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 770.99); and
(iii) Be competent to perform accreditation activities for product
certification according to ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 770.99).
(2) Application. To be recognized by EPA under the EPA TSCA Title
VI Third-Party Certification Program, a Product AB must submit an
application to EPA in accordance with Sec. 770.8 that contains the
following:
(i) Name, address, telephone number, and email address of the
organization or primary contact;
(ii) Documentation of IAF MLA signatory status, membership in one
of the IAF recognized regional accreditation cooperations, or an
equivalent organization as determined by EPA;
(iii) Description of any other qualifications related to the
Product AB's experience in performing product accreditation of TPCs for
manufactured products including an affirmation that assessors will be
technically competent to assess a TPC's ability to perform their
activities under paragraph (c)(4) of this section; and
[[Page 89729]]
(iv) If not a domestic entity, name and address of an agent for
service located in the United States. Service on this agent constitutes
service on the AB or any of its officers or employees for any action by
EPA or otherwise by the United States related to the requirements of
this part. ABs may share an agent for service.
(3) Recognition agreement. To be recognized by EPA under the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program, a Product AB must
enter into a recognition agreement with EPA that describes the EPA TSCA
Title VI Product AB's responsibilities under this subpart.
(i) Each recognition agreement will be valid for three years.
(ii) Each recognition agreement will identify an EPA Recognition
Agreement Implementation Officer and an EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB
Implementation Officer that will serve as the point of contact for the
EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program.
(iii) To renew a recognition agreement for an additional three-year
period, the EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB must submit an application for
renewal in accordance with Sec. 770.8 before the three-year period of
the recognition agreement lapses. The application must indicate any
changes from the EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB's initial application or
most recent renewal application.
(iv) If an EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB fails to submit an
application for renewal prior to the expiration of the previous
recognition agreement, its recognition will lapse and the EPA TSCA
Title VI Product AB may not provide accreditation services under TSCA
Title VI.
(v) If an EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB does submit an application
for renewal prior to the expiration of the previous recognition
agreement, it may continue to provide TSCA Title VI accreditation
services under the terms of its previous recognition agreement until
EPA has taken action on its application for renewal of the recognition
agreement.
(4) Impartiality. EPA TSCA Title VI Product ABs must act
impartially when performing activities under the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program. To demonstrate impartiality, Product
ABs must:
(i) Ensure that an accreditation decision regarding a TPC is made
by persons different from those who conducted the assessment of the
TPC; and
(ii) Ensure that the AB's personnel who assess TPCs or make
decisions regarding accreditation do not receive financial benefit from
the outcome of an accreditation decision.
(5) Responsibilities. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB has the
following responsibilities under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program:
(i) Accreditation. EPA TSCA Title VI Product ABs must determine the
accreditation eligibility, and accredit if appropriate, each TPC
seeking recognition under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program by performing an assessment of each TPC as
described in this section. The assessment must include all of the
following components:
(A) An on-site assessment by the EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB to
determine whether the TPC meets the requirements of ISO/IEC
17065:2012(E), is in conformance with ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E) as required
under ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) section 6.2.1 (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 770.99) and the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC requirements under this
part. In performing the on-site assessment, the EPA TSCA Title VI
Product AB must:
(1) Develop a checklist of the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC requirements
under paragraph (c)(4) of this section and the key accreditation
elements of ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
770.99); and
(2) Use the checklist for each on-site assessment.
(B) A review of the approach that the TPC will use to verify the
accuracy of the formaldehyde emissions tests conducted by the TPC
laboratory and the formaldehyde quality control tests conducted by or
for the panel producers producing composite wood products that are
subject to the requirements of TSCA Title VI.
(C) A review of the approach that the TPC will use for evaluating a
panel producer's quality assurance and quality control processes, the
proficiency of the panel producer's quality assurance and quality
control personnel, the required elements of a panel producer's quality
assurance and quality control manual, and sufficiency of on-site
testing facilities as applicable.
(D) A review of the approach that the TPC laboratory will use for
establishing correlation or equivalence between ASTM E1333-10 and ASTM
D6007-02, if used, (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) or
allowable formaldehyde test methods listed under Sec. 770.20.
(E) A review of the approach that the TPC will use for evaluating
the process for sample selection, handling, and shipping procedures
that the panel producer will use for quality control testing as
applicable.
(F) A review of the accreditation credentials of the TPC
laboratory, including a verification that the laboratory has been
accredited to ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 770.99) with a scope of accreditation to include this part--
Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products and the formaldehyde
test methods ASTM E1333-10 and ASTM D6007-02, if used, by an EPA TSCA
Title VI Laboratory AB (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
(ii) Reassessment. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB must, in
accordance with ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E) section 7.11 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 770.99), conduct an on-site reassessment or
surveillance on-site assessment at least every two years of each EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC that the AB has accredited.
(iii) Suspension, reduction, withdrawal. Each EPA TSCA Title VI
Product AB must suspend, reduce, or withdraw the accreditation of an
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC that the AB has accredited when circumstances
warrant.
(iv) Notifications. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB must provide,
in accordance with Sec. 770.8, the following notifications to EPA, as
applicable:
(A) Notification of the loss of its status as a signatory to the
IAF MLA, or loss of membership in one of the IAF recognized regional
accreditation cooperations, or an equivalent organization as determined
by EPA must be provided within five calendar days of the date that the
body receives notification of the loss of its signatory or membership
status.
(B) Notification that an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC has failed to comply
with any provision of this part must be provided within 72 hours of the
time the Product AB identifies the deficiency. The notice must include
a description of the steps taken to address the deficiency.
(C) Notification of suspension, reduction or withdrawal of an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC's accreditation must be provided within 72 hours of
the time that the suspension, reduction or withdrawal takes effect.
(D) Notification of a change in a non-domestic Product AB's agent
for service must be provided within five calendar days.
(v) Records. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB must maintain, in
electronic form, the checklists and other records documenting
compliance with the requirements for assessment, reassessment, and
surveillance on-site
[[Page 89730]]
assessments of EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs for three years.
(vi) Annual report. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB must provide,
in accordance with Sec. 770.8, an annual report on or before March 1st
of each year for the AB services performed during the previous calendar
year including the number and locations of assessment, reassessment,
and surveillance on-site assessments performed for each EPA TSCA Title
VI TPC.
(vii) EPA meetings. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB must meet
with EPA at least once every two years in person, via teleconference,
or through other virtual methods to discuss the implementation of the
EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program.
(viii) Inspections. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB must allow
inspections of the AB's facilities by EPA, at reasonable times, within
reasonable limits, and in a reasonable manner, upon the presentation of
appropriate credentials and a written notification to the AB.
(b) EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory ABs. To participate in the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program as an EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB, a Laboratory AB must have the qualifications described
in this section, submit an application and enter into a recognition
agreement with EPA as described in this section, and, upon recognition
from EPA, impartially perform the responsibilities described in this
section.
(1) Qualifications. To qualify for recognition by EPA under the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program as an EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB, an applicant Laboratory AB must:
(i) Be a signatory to the International Laboratory Accreditation
Cooperation (ILAC) Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA), or have
membership in one of the ILAC recognized regional accreditation
cooperations, or an equivalent organization as determined by EPA;
(ii) Be in conformance with ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 770.99);
(iii) Be competent to perform accreditation activities for
laboratory accreditation according to ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E)
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99); and
(iv) Be competent to ensure EPA TSCA Title VI TPC inspection
activities are in conformance with ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E) (incorporated
by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
(2) Application. To be recognized by EPA under the EPA TSCA Title
VI Third-Party Certification Program, a Laboratory AB must submit an
application to EPA, which may be submitted in conjunction with a
Product AB application. For recognition, a Laboratory AB must submit an
application in accordance with Sec. 770.8 that contains the following:
(i) Name, address, telephone number, and email address of the
organization or primary contact;
(ii) Documentation of ILAC MRA signatory status, membership in one
of the ILAC recognized regional accreditation cooperations, or an
equivalent organization as determined by EPA;
(iii) Description of any other qualifications related to the
Laboratory AB's experience in performing laboratory accreditation and
inspection certification of TPCs including an affirmation that
assessors will be technically competent to assess TPCs ability to
perform their activities under paragraph (c)(4) of this section; and
(iv) If not a domestic entity, name and address of an agent for
service located in the United States. Service on this agent constitutes
service on the AB or any of its officers or employees for any action by
EPA or otherwise by the United States related to the requirements of
this part. ABs may share an agent for service.
(3) Recognition agreement. To be recognized by EPA under the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program, a Laboratory AB must
enter into a recognition agreement with EPA that describes the EPA TSCA
Title VI Laboratory AB's responsibilities under this subpart.
(i) Each recognition agreement will be valid for three years.
(ii) Each recognition agreement will identify an EPA Recognition
Agreement Implementation Officer and an EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB
Implementation Officer that will serve as the point of contact for the
EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program.
(iii) To renew a recognition agreement for an additional three-year
period, the EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB must submit an application
for renewal in accordance with Sec. 770.8 before the three-year period
of the recognition agreement lapses. The application must indicate any
changes from the EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB's initial application
or most recent renewal application.
(iv) If an EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB fails to submit an
application for renewal prior to the expiration of the previous
recognition agreement, its recognition will lapse and the EPA TSCA
Title VI Laboratory AB may not provide accreditation services under
TSCA Title VI.
(v) If an EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB does submit an
application for renewal prior to the expiration of the previous
recognition agreement, it may continue to provide TSCA Title VI
accreditation services under the terms of its previous recognition
agreement until EPA has taken action on its application for renewal of
the recognition agreement.
(4) Impartiality. EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory ABs must act
impartially when performing activities under the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program. To demonstrate impartiality,
Laboratory ABs must:
(i) Ensure that an accreditation decision regarding a TPC is made
by persons different from those who conducted the assessment of the
TPC; and
(ii) Ensure that the AB's personnel who assess TPCs or make
decisions regarding accreditation do not receive financial benefit from
the outcome of an accreditation decision.
(5) Responsibilities. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB has the
following responsibilities under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program:
(i) Accreditation. EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory ABs must determine
the accreditation eligibility, and accredit if appropriate, each TPC
seeking recognition under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program by performing an assessment of each TPC. The
assessment must include an on-site assessment by the EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB to determine whether the laboratory meets the
requirements of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 770.99), is in conformance with ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E)
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) and the EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC requirements under this part including the formaldehyde test
methods ASTM E1333-10 and ASTM D6007-02 (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 770.99), if used. In performing the on-site assessment, the EPA
TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB must:
(A) Develop a checklist of the TPC requirements under paragraph
(c)(4) of this section and the key conformity elements of ISO/IEC
17025:2005(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99); and
(B) Use the checklist for each on-site assessment.
(ii) Reassessment. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB must, in
accordance with ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E) section 7.11 (incorporated by
reference,
[[Page 89731]]
see Sec. 770.99), conduct a follow-up reassessment or surveillance on-
site assessment of each TPC laboratory that the AB has accredited.
(iii) Proficiency. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB must verify
the accuracy of the formaldehyde emissions tests conducted by the TPC
laboratory by ensuring the TPC laboratory participates in the CARB
interlaboratory comparison for formaldehyde emissions when offered. In
lieu of participation in the CARB interlaboratory comparison ensure
that the TPC laboratory participates in an EPA-recognized proficiency
testing program, if available.
(iv) Suspension, reduction, withdrawal. Each EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB must suspend, reduce, or withdraw the accreditation of a
TPC laboratory that the AB has accredited when circumstances warrant.
(v) Notifications. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB must
provide, in accordance with Sec. 770.8, the following notifications to
EPA as applicable:
(A) Notification of the loss of its status as a signatory to the
ILAC MRA, or loss of membership in one of the ILAC recognized regional
accreditation cooperations, or an equivalent organization as determined
by EPA, within five calendar days of the date that the body receives
notice of the loss of its signatory or membership status.
(B) Notification that a TPC laboratory has failed to comply with
any provision of this part within 72 hours of the time the Laboratory
AB identifies the deficiency. The notice must include a description of
the steps taken to address the deficiency.
(C) Notification of suspension, reduction or withdrawal of a TPC
laboratory's accreditation within 72 hours of the time that the
suspension, reduction or withdrawal takes effect.
(D) Notification of a change in a non-domestic Laboratory AB's
agent for service within five calendar days.
(vi) Records. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB must maintain,
in electronic form, the checklists and other records documenting
compliance with the requirements for assessment, reassessment, and
surveillance on-site assessments of TPC laboratories for three years.
(vii) Annual report. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB must
provide, in accordance with Sec. 770.8, an annual report to EPA on or
before March 1st of each year for AB services performed during the
previous calendar year including the number and locations of
assessment, reassessment, and surveillance on-site assessments
performed for each TPC laboratory.
(viii) EPA meetings. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB must meet
with EPA at least once every two years in person, via teleconference,
or through other virtual methods to discuss the implementation of the
EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program.
(ix) Inspections. Each EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB must allow
inspections of the AB's facilities by EPA, at reasonable times, within
reasonable limits, and in a reasonable manner, upon the presentation of
appropriate credentials and a written notification to the AB.
(c) EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certifiers. To participate in the
EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program as an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC, a TPC must be accredited by an EPA TSCA Title VI Product
AB, use a laboratory that is accredited by an EPA TSCA Title VI
Laboratory AB, have the other qualifications described in this
subsection, submit an application and be recognized by EPA, and, upon
recognition from EPA, impartially perform the responsibilities
described in this section. Alternatively, CARB-approved TPCs must meet
the criteria for reciprocity in paragraph (d) of this section and
comply with the requirements of this part in order to be recognized by
EPA as an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC.
(1) Qualifications. To qualify for recognition by EPA in the EPA
TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program as an EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC, an applicant TPC must:
(i) Be accredited by an EPA TSCA Title VI Product AB to ISO/IEC
17065:2012(E) (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99), with a
scope of accreditation that includes include composite wood products
and this part--Formaldehyde Standards for Composite Wood Products;
(ii) Be, or have a contract with a laboratory that is, accredited
by an EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB to ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E)
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) with a scope of
accreditation to include this part--Formaldehyde Standards for
Composite Wood Products and the formaldehyde test methods ASTM E1333-10
and ASTM D6007-02, if used (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
770.99);
(iii) Have the ability to conduct inspections of composite wood
products and properly train and supervise inspectors to inspect
composite wood products in conformance with ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E) as
required under ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) section 6.2.1 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 770.99);
(iv) Have demonstrated experience in the composite wood product
industry with at least one type of composite wood product and indicated
the specific product(s) the applicant intends to certify; and
(v) Have demonstrated experience in performing or verifying
formaldehyde emissions testing on composite wood products, including
experience with test method ASTM E1333-10 and ASTM D6007-02, if used,
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99), and experience
evaluating correlation between test methods. Applicant TPCs that have
demonstrated experience with test method ASTM D6007-02 only, must be
contracting testing with a laboratory that has a large chamber and
demonstrate its experience with ASTM E1333-10.
(2) Application. Before certifying any products under this part, a
TPC must be recognized by EPA under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program. To be recognized by EPA, a TPC must submit an
application in accordance with Sec. 770.8 and renew that application
every two years. The application must contain the following:
(i) Email address of the organization or primary contact,
organization name, organization telephone number, and organization
address;
(ii) Type of composite wood products that the applicant intends to
certify;
(iii) A copy of the TPC's certificate of accreditation from an EPA
TSCA Title VI Product AB to ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 770.99) with a scope of accreditation that
includes composite wood products and this part--Formaldehyde Standards
for Composite Wood Products;
(iv) A copy of the TPC laboratory's certificate of accreditation
from an EPA TSCA Title VI Laboratory AB to ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E)
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) with a scope of
accreditation to include this part--Formaldehyde Standards for
Composite Wood Products and the formaldehyde test methods ASTM E1333-10
and ASTM D6007-02 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99), if
used;
(v) An affirmation of the TPC's ability to conduct inspections of
composite wood products and properly train and supervise inspectors to
inspect composite wood products in conformance with ISO/IEC
17020:1998(E) as required under ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) section 6.2.1
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99);
(vi) A description of the TPC's experience in the composite wood
product industry with at least one type of composite wood product and
indicate
[[Page 89732]]
the specific product(s) the applicant intends to certify;
(vii) A description of the TPC's experience in performing or
verifying formaldehyde emissions testing on composite wood products;
(viii) A description of the TPC's experience with test method ASTM
E1333-10 and/or ASTM D6007-02, if used, (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 770.99), and experience evaluating correlation between test
methods. Applicant TPCs that have experience with test method ASTM
D6007-02 only, must be contracting testing with a laboratory that has a
large chamber and describe its experience with ASTM E1333-10; and
(ix) If not a domestic entity, the name and address of an agent for
service located in the United States. Service on this agent constitutes
service on the TPC or any of its officers or employees for any action
by EPA or otherwise by the United States related to the requirements of
this part. TPCs may share an agent for service.
(3) Impartiality. EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs must act impartially in
accordance with their accreditation when performing activities under
the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program. To demonstrate
impartiality, TPCs must:
(i) Not also be, or have a financial interest in a panel producer,
fabricator, laminated product producer, importer, designer, distributor
or retailer of composite wood products;
(ii) Ensure that TPC management personnel and TPC personnel
involved in the review and certification decision-making process for
composite wood products are not involved in activities within the same
or separate legal entity that may compromise the impartiality of its
certification decision-making process, such as advocacy or consulting
activities;
(iii) Ensure that TPC management personnel and TPC personnel of the
same or separate legal entity involved in activities such as advocacy
or consulting are not involved in the management of the certification
body, the review, or the certification decisions; and
(iv) Ensure that TPC management personnel and TPC personnel
certifying composite wood products sign a conflict of interest
statement attesting that they will receive no financial benefit from
the outcome of certification.
(4) Responsibilities. Each EPA TSCA Title VI TPC has the following
responsibilities under the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification
Program:
(i) Certification. EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs certify composite wood
products that are produced in accordance with this part and that comply
with the emission standards of TSCA Title VI and this part, in
accordance with ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 770.99). For each panel producer making composite wood products
certified by the TPC, the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must:
(A) Verify that each panel producer has adequate quality assurance
and quality control procedures and is complying with the applicable
quality assurance and quality control requirements of this part;
(B) Verify each panel producer's quality control test results
compared with test results from ASTM E1333-10 and ASTM D6007-02, if
used, (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) by having the TPC
laboratory conduct quarterly tests and evaluate test method equivalence
and correlation as required under Sec. 770.20;
(C) In consultation with the panel producer, establish quality
control limits (QCLs) for formaldehyde emissions, and, if applicable,
shipping quality control limits or other formaldehyde emission limits,
for each panel producer and product type;
(D) Establish, for each panel producer, the process that will be
used to determine if products are exceeding the applicable QCL;
(E) Provide its CARB or EPA TPC number to each panel producer for
labeling and recordkeeping; and
(F) Inspect each panel producer, its products, and its records at
least quarterly in conformance with ISO/IEC 17020:1998(E) as required
under ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E) section 6.2.1 (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 770.99).
(ii) Laboratories. For quarterly testing, each EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC must use only laboratories that have been accredited by an EPA TSCA
Title VI Laboratory AB and that either participate in the CARB
interlaboratory comparison for formaldehyde emissions when offered or
in an EPA-recognized proficiency or interlaboratory program, if
available.
(iii) NAF and ULEF. For panel producers that do not receive
approval for NAF or ULEF third-party certification exemptions or ULEF
reduced testing from CARB, EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs must review
applications for NAF or ULEF third-party certification exemptions or
ULEF reduced testing. Each EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must approve these
applications within 90 calendar days of receipt if the panel producer
demonstrates that the requirements for third-party certification
exemption under Sec. 770.17 or Sec. 770.18 or reduced testing under
Sec. 770.18 are met.
(iv) Reduced testing for medium-density fiberboard or fiberboard.
EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs must review applications from panel producers to
reduce the number of quality control tests for particleboard and
medium-density fiberboard, and approve these applications within 90
calendar days of receipt if the panel producer demonstrates that the
requirements for reduced testing under Sec. 770.20(b)(2)(ii) are met.
(v) Notifications to EPA. Each EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must provide,
in accordance with Sec. 770.8, the following notifications to EPA, as
applicable:
(A) Notification of an approved or rejected application, including
a renewal application, for a NAF or ULEF third-party certification
exemption or ULEF reduced testing within five calendar days of the
approval or rejection with copies of all approved applications
forwarded to EPA within 30 calendar days of approval.
(B) Notification of an approved or rejected application, including
a renewal application, for reduced testing for medium-density
fiberboard or particleboard within five calendar days of the approval
or rejection with copies of all approved applications forwarded to EPA
within 30 calendar days of approval.
(C) Notification of a panel producer exceeding its established QCL
for more than two consecutive quality control tests within 72 hours of
the time that the TPC becomes aware of the second exceedance. The
notice must include the product type, dates of the quality control
tests that exceeded the QCL, quality control test results, ASTM E1333-
10 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) correlative equivalent
values, the established QCL value(s) and the quality control method
used.
(D) Notification of each failed quarterly test, that is any sample
that exceeds the applicable formaldehyde emission standard in Sec.
770.10, within 72 hours. Information in this notification is not
eligible for treatment as confidential business information.
(E) Notification of a change in a non-domestic TPC's agent for
service within five calendar days.
(F) Notification of a loss of accreditation or notification that
the TPC has discontinued its participation in the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program must be provided within 72 hours.
[[Page 89733]]
(vi) Other notifications. Each EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must provide
the following notifications, if applicable:
(A) Notification of each failed quarterly test, that is any sample
that exceeds the applicable formaldehyde emission standard in Sec.
770.10, to the panel producer in writing within 72 hours. Information
in this notification is not eligible for treatment as confidential
business information.
(B) Notification of a loss of accreditation or notification that
the TPC has discontinued its participation in the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program within 72 hours to all panel
producers for which it provides EPA TSCA Title VI certification
services.
(C) Notification of any changes in personnel qualifications,
procedures, or laboratories used, to the TPC's EPA TSCA Title VI ABs
within 30 calendar days.
(vii) Records. Each EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must maintain, in
electronic form, the following records for three years from the date
the record is created, and provide them to EPA within 30 calendar days
of a request from EPA:
(A) A list of panel producers and their respective products and
product types, including type of resin systems used, that the EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC has certified;
(B) Results of inspections and formaldehyde emissions tests
conducted for and linked to each panel producer and product type;
(C) A list of laboratories used by the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC, as
well as all test methods used, including test conditions and
conditioning time, and quarterly test results;
(D) Methods and results for establishing test method correlations
and equivalence;
(E) Documentation for NAF or ULEF third-party certification
exemptions or ULEF reduced testing approvals, including the name of the
panel producer, facility, products approved, type of resin systems used
and dates of approval;
(F) Documentation of reduced testing approval for panel producers
of medium-density fiberboard or particleboard, including the name of
the panel producer, products approved and dates of approval; and
(G) A copy of the most recent assessment, reassessment, and/or
surveillance on-site assessment report provided by its EPA TSCA Title
VI ABs.
(viii) Annual report. Each EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must provide, in
accordance with Sec. 770.8, an annual report on or before March 1st of
each year for the TPC services performed during the previous calendar
year. Quarterly test results, the test method, date of test, and
product tested (including the product name or description and panel
producer name) are not eligible for treatment as confidential business
information. The report must contain all of the following elements, as
applicable:
(A) The following information for each panel producer making
composite wood products certified by the TPC, the EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC:
(1) Composite wood products that the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC has
certified during the previous calendar year;
(2) Types of resin systems used for the composite wood products
certified;
(3) Dates of quarterly inspections;
(4) For each quarterly test, the date, result, test method, and
whether a contract laboratory was used;
(5) For each failed quarterly test, the product type, the volume of
product affected, the results of recertification testing, and a
description of the final disposition of the affected product, including
how the non-complying lot was addressed;
(6) For each non-complying lot resulting from a failed quality
control test, the test date, method, product type, volume of product
affected, lot numbers, the results of retesting, and a description of
the final disposition of the affected product, including how the non-
complying lot was addressed; and
(7) Any corrective actions that resulted from quarterly tests and
inspections.
(B) A list of laboratories and test methods used by the TPC, number
and volume (cubic meters) of large and small chambers, date of
equivalence determination and equivalence data.
(C) Any non-conformities identified by its EPA TSCA Title VI AB(s)
and how they were addressed.
(D) The results compared with the mean of the interlaboratory
comparison for all formaldehyde emissions interlaboratory comparison
tests other than the CARB interlaboratory comparison or, if available,
the results of an EPA-recognized proficiency testing program.
(ix) Assessments and inspections. Upon request, each EPA TSCA Title
VI TPC must allow EPA representatives to:
(A) Accompany the TPC's staff during an assessment, reassessment or
surveillance on-site assessment of the TPC by its AB(s); and
(B) Inspect the TPC's facilities, at reasonable times, within
reasonable limits, and in a reasonable manner, upon the presentation of
appropriate credentials and a written notification to the TPC.
(d) Reciprocity for third-party certifiers approved by the
California Air Resources Board (CARB)--(1) During transitional period.
The transitional period is defined as the two-year period beginning on
December 12, 2016 and ending on December 12, 2018. TPCs already
approved by CARB and TPCs subsequently approved by CARB during the
transition period must apply for EPA recognition in accordance with
Sec. 770.8 before they can certify any products under this part. Once
recognized by EPA, CARB-approved TPCs become EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs and
may certify composite wood products under TSCA Title VI until December
12, 2018 as long as they:
(i) Remain approved by CARB; and
(ii) Comply with all aspects of this part other than the
requirements of paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii) and (c)(2)(iii) and (iv)
of this section. This includes:
(A) Provide panel producers with the TPC number issued by CARB; and
(B) Provide the annual report required by paragraph (c)(4)(viii) of
this section to CARB and EPA during the two-year transitional period.
(C) Provide notifications required by paragraph (c)(4)(v) to EPA.
(2) After transition period. (i) TPCs approved by CARB may continue
to certify composite wood products under TSCA Title VI after the two-
year transitional period if the TPC:
(A) Maintains its CARB approval;
(B) Complies with the requirements of this part;
(C) Submits to EPA, in accordance with Sec. 770.8:
(1) Documentation from CARB that specifies eligibility for
reciprocity; and
(2) A copy of the application submitted to CARB to be recognized as
a TPC under the CARB ATCM.
(D) Receives EPA recognition as an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC.
(ii) EPA retains the authority to deny recognition of CARB-approved
TPCs who seek recognition through reciprocity in the EPA TSCA Title VI
Third-Party Certification Program if EPA has information indicating
that the TPC is not qualified.
(e) Suspension, revocation or modification of recognition--(1)
Third-party certifiers. EPA may suspend, revoke or modify the
recognition of a TPC, if the TPC:
(i) Fails to comply with any requirement of TSCA Title VI or this
part;
(ii) Makes any false or misleading statements on its application,
records, or reports; or
(iii) Makes substantial changes to personnel qualifications,
procedures, or laboratories that make the TPC or TPC
[[Page 89734]]
laboratory unable to comply with any applicable requirements of this
part.
(2) ABs. EPA may suspend, revoke or modify the recognition of an AB
if the AB:
(i) No longer maintains signatory status to the IAF MLA or ILAC
MRA, membership in one of the IAF/ILAC recognized regional
accreditation cooperations, or an equivalent organization as determined
by EPA;
(ii) Fails to comply with any requirement of TSCA Title VI or this
part;
(iii) Makes any false or misleading statements on its application,
records, or reports; or
(iv) Makes substantial changes to personnel qualifications or
procedures that make the AB, TPC and/or TPC laboratory unable to comply
with any applicable requirements of this part.
(3) Process for suspending, revoking or modifying recognition. (i)
Prior to taking action to suspend, revoke or modify recognition, EPA
will notify the participant AB or the participant TPC in writing of the
following:
(A) The legal and factual basis for the proposed suspension,
revocation or modification;
(B) The anticipated commencement date and duration of the
suspension, revocation or modification;
(C) Actions, if any, which the affected AB or TPC may take to avoid
suspension, revocation or modification, or to receive recognition in
the future; and
(D) The opportunity and method for requesting a hearing with EPA
prior to final suspension, revocation or modification.
(ii) If the affected AB or TPC requests a hearing in writing to EPA
within 30 calendar days of receipt of the notification, EPA will:
(A) Provide the affected AB or TPC an opportunity to offer written
statements in response to EPA's assertions of the legal and factual
basis for the proposed action; and
(B) Appoint an impartial EPA official as Presiding Officer to
conduct the hearing. The Presiding Officer will:
(1) Conduct a fair, orderly, and impartial hearing within 90
calendar days of the request for a hearing;
(2) Consider all relevant evidence, explanations, comments, and
arguments submitted; and
(3) Notify the affected AB or TPC in writing within calendar 90
days of completion of the hearing of his or her decision and order.
Such an order is a final EPA action which may be subject to judicial
review. The order must contain the basis, commencement date, and
duration of the suspension, revocation or modification.
(iii) If EPA determines that the public health, interest, or
welfare warrants immediate action to revoke the recognition of an AB or
TPC prior to the opportunity for a hearing, it will notify the affected
AB or TPC of its right to request a hearing on the immediate revocation
within 15 calendar days of the revocation taking place and the
procedures for the conduct of such a hearing.
(iv) Any notification, decision, or order issued by EPA under this
section, any transcript or other verbatim record of oral testimony, and
any documents filed by a certified individual or firm in a hearing
under this section will be available to the public, except as otherwise
provided by TSCA section 14. Any such hearing at which oral testimony
is presented will be open to the public, except that the Presiding
Officer may exclude the public to the extent necessary to allow
presentation of information which may be entitled to confidential
treatment under TSCA section 14.
(v) EPA will maintain a publicly available list of ABs on its Web
site whose recognition has been suspended, revoked or modified, or
reinstated and a publicly available list of TPCs whose recognition has
been suspended, revoked, modified, or reinstated.
(vi) Unless the decision and order issued under paragraph (e)(3) of
this section specify otherwise, an AB or a TPC whose recognition has
been revoked must reapply for recognition in order to become recognized
under this part again.
(vii) Unless the decision and order issued under paragraph (e)(3)
of this section specify otherwise, an AB whose recognition has been
revoked or a TPC whose recognition has been revoked, must immediately
notify all TPCs or panel producers to which it provides TSCA Title VI
accreditation or certification services of the revocation.
(f) Effect of the loss of recognition or accreditation. (1) If an
AB is removed or withdraws from the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party
Certification Program:
(i) For reasons other than fraud or providing false or misleading
statements, and other than a reason that implicates a particular TPC in
a violation of TSCA Title VI, TPCs accredited by that AB can continue
to certify products under TSCA Title VI for 180 calendar days, after
which the TPCs must be accredited again by another EPA TSCA Title VI AB
and re-recognized by EPA.
(ii) Due to fraud or providing false or misleading statements with
respect to a particular TPC, or for any other reason that implicates a
particular TPC in a violation of TSCA Title VI, that TPC may not
provide any TSCA Title VI certification services until it has been
accredited again by another EPA TSCA Title VI AB and re-recognized by
EPA.
(2) If a TPC loses its accreditation, or if TPC is removed or
withdraws from the EPA TSCA Title VI Third-Party Certification Program:
(i) For reasons other than fraud or providing false or misleading
statements, and other than a reason that implicates a particular panel
producer in a violation of TSCA Title VI, the panel producers that used
the TPC to certify their products must enlist another EPA TSCA Title VI
TPC to certify their products within 90 calendar days. If the panel
producer is not able to obtain the services of another EPA TSCA Title
VI TPC within 90 days, the panel producer may request from EPA a 90
calendar day extension. During the time a panel producer is seeking a
new TPC, it must continue to comply with all other requirements of TSCA
Title VI, including quality control testing.
(ii) Due to fraud or providing false or misleading statements with
respect to a particular panel producer, or for any other reason that
implicates a particular panel producer in a violation of TSCA Title VI,
that panel producer may not sell, supply, offer for sale, or
manufacture composite wood products for sale in the United States until
its composite wood products have been recertified by another EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC.
(g) Process for denying EPA TSCA Title VI recognition. (1) Upon EPA
denying a request for recognition of an AB or TPC, EPA will notify the
AB or TPC in writing of the following:
(i) The legal and factual basis for the denial; and
(ii) Actions, if any, which the affected AB or TPC may take to
receive recognition in the future.
(2) [Reserved]
Sec. 770.8 Applications, notifications, and reports.
(a) All applications, notifications, and reports that are required
to be submitted to EPA under this subpart must be submitted via the EPA
Central Data Exchange (CDX) found at https://cdx.epa.gov.
(b) If the EPA CDX is unavailable, EPA will so inform EPA TSCA
Title VI ABs and TPCs and will make electronic applications and
reporting forms available online at https://www.epa.gov/formaldehyde.
(c)(1) Persons submitting a notice under this rule are subject to
EPA confidentiality regulations at 40 CFR part 2, subpart B, except
that the
[[Page 89735]]
certification in paragraph (c)(2) of this section must also be provided
when asserting a claim of confidentiality.
(2) In submitting a claim of confidentiality, a person must certify
the truth of the following four statements concerning all information
which is claimed as confidential:
(i) My company has taken measures to protect the confidentiality of
the information.
(ii) I have determined that the information is not required to be
disclosed or otherwise made available to the public under any other
Federal law.
(iii) I have a reasonable basis to conclude that disclosure of the
information is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive
position of the person.
(iv) I have a reasonable basis to believe that the information is
not readily discoverable through reverse engineering.
Subpart C--Composite Wood Products
Sec. 770.10 Formaldehyde emission standards.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this part, the emission
standards in this section apply to composite wood products sold,
supplied, offered for sale, or manufactured (including imported) on or
after December 12, 2017 in the United States. These emission standards
apply regardless of whether the composite wood product is in the form
of a panel, a component part, or incorporated into a finished good.
(b) The emission standards are based on test method ASTM E1333-10
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99), and are as follows:
(1) For hardwood plywood made with a veneer core or a composite
core, 0.05 parts per million (ppm) of formaldehyde.
(2) For medium-density fiberboard, 0.11 ppm of formaldehyde.
(3) For thin medium-density fiberboard, 0.13 ppm of formaldehyde.
(4) For particleboard, 0.09 ppm of formaldehyde.
Sec. 770.12 Stockpiling.
(a) The sale of stockpiled inventory of composite wood products,
whether in the form of panels or incorporated into component parts or
finished goods, is prohibited after December 12, 2017.
(b) To determine whether stockpiling has occurred, the rate of
manufacture or purchase is measured as follows:
(1) For composite wood products in the form of panels, the rate is
measured in terms of square footage of panels produced.
(2) For composite wood products incorporated into component parts
or finished goods, the rate is measured in terms of the square footage
of composite wood product panels purchased for the purpose of
incorporating them into component parts or finished goods.
(c) Manufacturers or purchasers who have, in an annual year, a
greater than 20% increase in manufacturing or purchasing composite wood
products relative to annual year 2009 for some reason other than
circumventing the emission standards would not be in violation of this
section. Such reasons may include, but are not limited to:
(1) A quantifiable immediate increase in customer demand or sales.
(2) A documented and planned business expansion.
(3) The manufacturer or purchaser was not in business at the
beginning of calendar year 2009.
(4) An increase in production to meet increased demand resulting
from an emergency event or natural disaster.
(d) In order to be found to be stockpiling an entity must be
increasing the rate of manufacturing or purchasing for the purpose of
circumventing the emission standards.
Sec. 770.15 Composite wood product certification.
(a) After December 12, 2017, only certified composite wood
products, whether in the form of panels or incorporated into component
parts or finished goods, are permitted to be sold, supplied, offered
for sale, or manufactured (including imported) in the United States,
unless the product is specifically exempted by this part.
(b) Certified composite wood products are those that are produced
or fabricated in accordance with all of the provisions of this part.
(c) To obtain product certification, a panel producer must apply to
an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC.
(1) For panel producers that do not have any previous product
certifications from a CARB-approved TPC or an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC,
the application must contain the following:
(i) The panel producer's name, address, telephone number, and other
contact information;
(ii) A copy of the panel producer's quality control manual as
required by Sec. 770.21(a);
(iii) Name and contact information for the panel producer's quality
control manager;
(iv) An identification of the specific products for which
certification is requested, and the resin system used in panel
production;
(v) At least five tests conducted under the supervision of an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC pursuant to test method ASTM E1333-10 or ASTM D6007-
02 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99). Test results obtained
by ASTM D6007-02 must include a showing of equivalence in accordance
with Sec. 770.20(d)(1);
(vi) At least five quality control tests conducted in accordance
with Sec. 770.20(b)(1);
(vii) Linear regression equation and correlation data; and
(viii) Results of an initial, on-site inspection by the TPC of the
panel producer.
(2) For panel producers applying for certification of a new product
type but that have previous product certifications from a CARB-approved
TPC or an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC, the application must contain the
following:
(i) The panel producer's name, address, and telephone number;
(ii) An identification of the specific products for which
certification is requested, and the resin system used in panel
production;
(iii) At least five tests conducted under the supervision of an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC pursuant to test method ASTM E1333-10 or ASTM D6007-
02 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99). Test results obtained
by ASTM D6007- 02 must include a showing of equivalence in accordance
with Sec. 770.20(d)(1);
(iv) At least five quality control tests conducted in accordance
with Sec. 770.20(b)(1);
(v) Linear regression equation and correlation data; and
(vi) Description of any changes in the panel producer's quality
control manual and a copy of those changes.
(d) The EPA TSCA Title VI TPC must act on a panel producer's
complete application within 90 calendar days of receipt by reviewing
all of the components of the application.
(1) If the application indicates that the candidate product
achieves the applicable emission standards described in Sec. 770.10,
adequate correlation as described in Sec. 770.20(d)(2), and that the
panel producer is meeting the requirements in Sec. 770.21, the EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC will approve the application.
(2) If the application is from a panel producer that did not
previously have products certified by a CARB-approved TPC or an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC, the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC will review the quality
control manual and results of the on-site initial inspection and
approve or disapprove the quality control manual.
(3) If the application does not demonstrate that the candidate
product achieves the applicable emission
[[Page 89736]]
standards described in Sec. 770.10, the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC will
disapprove the application. A new application may be submitted for the
candidate product at any time.
(e) If a product is certified by a CARB-approved TPC, it will also
be considered certified under TSCA Title VI until December 12, 2018
after which the TPC needs to receive recognition as an EPA TSCA Title
VI TPC under Sec. 770.7(d) in order for the product to remain
certified.
(f) To maintain certification, the panel producer making the
certified product must get inspected by its EPA TSCA Title VI TPC
quarterly as well as meet the testing requirements under Sec. 770.20.
(g) If the certified product fails a quarterly test, certification
for any product types represented by the sample is suspended until a
compliant quarterly test result is obtained in accordance with Sec.
770.22.
Sec. 770.17 No-added formaldehyde-based resins.
(a) Producers of composite wood product panels made with no-added
formaldehyde-based resins may apply to an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC or to
CARB for a two-year exemption from the testing requirements in Sec.
770.20 and certification requirements in Sec. Sec. 770.15 and
770.40(b). The application must contain the following:
(1) The panel producer's name, address, and telephone number;
(2) An identification of the specific product and the resin system;
(3) At least one test conducted under the supervision of an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC pursuant to test method ASTM E1333-10 or ASTM D6007-
02 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99). Test results obtained
by ASTM D6007-02 must include a showing of equivalence in accordance
with Sec. 770.20(d)(1); and
(4) Three months of routine quality control tests under Sec.
770.20, including a showing of correlation in accordance with Sec.
770.20(d)(2), totaling not less than five quality control tests.
(b) The EPA TSCA Title VI TPC will approve a panel producer's
application within 90 calendar days of receipt if the application is
complete and demonstrates that the candidate product achieves the
emission standards described in paragraph (c) of this section.
(c) As measured according to paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) of this
section, the emission standards for composite wood products made with
no-added formaldehyde-based resins are as follows:
(1) No test result higher than 0.05 parts per million (ppm) of
formaldehyde for hardwood plywood and 0.06 ppm for particleboard,
medium-density fiberboard, and thin medium-density fiberboard.
(2) No higher than 0.04 ppm of formaldehyde for 90% of the three
months of routine quality control testing data required under paragraph
(a)(4) of this section.
(d) Products that meet the requirements specified under Sec.
770.17(c)(1) and (2) and have obtained exemption from the California
Air Resources Board will also be exempt from the requirements in
Sec. Sec. 770.15, 770.20, and 770.40(b), as long as the requirements
of the California Air Resources Board remain as stringent as EPA's
requirements.
(e) After the two-year period of the initial exemption, and every
two years thereafter, in order to continue to qualify for the exemption
from the testing and certification requirements, the panel producer
must reapply to an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC or to CARB and obtain at least
one test result in accordance with paragraph (a)(3) of this section
that complies with the emission standards in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section.
(f) Any time there is an operational or process change that is
likely to affect formaldehyde emissions, such as a change in resin
formulation, press cycle duration, temperature, or amount of resin used
per panel, at least one quality control test under Sec. 770.20 and at
least one test result in accordance with paragraph (a)(3) of this
section that indicate compliance with the emission standards in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section are required.
(g) A change in the resin system invalidates the exemption for any
product produced with the different resin after such a change.
Sec. 770.18 Ultra low-emitting formaldehyde resins.
(a) Producers of composite wood product panels made with ultra low-
emitting formaldehyde resins may apply to an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC or
CARB for approval either to conduct less frequent testing than is
specified in Sec. 770.20 or approval for a two-year exemption from the
testing requirements in Sec. 770.20 and certification requirements in
Sec. Sec. 770.15 and 770.40(b). The application must contain the
following:
(1) The panel producer's name, address, and telephone number;
(2) An identification of the specific product type, including resin
system;
(3) At least two tests conducted under the supervision of an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC pursuant to test method ASTM E1333-10 or ASTM D6007-
02 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99). Test results obtained
by ASTM D6007-02 must include a showing of equivalence in accordance
with Sec. 770.20(d)(1); and
(4) Six months of routine quality control tests under Sec. 770.20,
including a showing of correlation in accordance with Sec.
770.20(d)(2), totaling not less than ten quality control tests.
(b) The EPA TSCA Title VI TPC will approve a panel producer's
application within 90 calendar days of receipt if the application is
complete and demonstrates that the candidate product achieves the
emission standards required for reduced testing as described in
paragraph (c) of this section or the emission standards required for a
two-year exemption as described in paragraph (d) of this section.
(c) As measured according to paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) of this
section, the emission standards for reduced testing for composite wood
products made with ultra low-emitting formaldehyde resins are as
follows:
(1) No test result higher than 0.05 parts per million (ppm) of
formaldehyde for hardwood plywood, 0.08 ppm for particleboard, 0.09 ppm
for medium-density fiberboard, and 0.11 ppm for thin medium-density
fiberboard.
(2) For 90% of the six months of routine quality control testing
data required under paragraph (a)(4) of this section, no higher than
0.05 ppm of formaldehyde for particleboard, no higher than 0.06 ppm of
formaldehyde for medium-density fiberboard, and no higher than 0.08 ppm
of formaldehyde for thin medium-density fiberboard.
(d) As measured according to paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) of this
section, the emission standards for an exemption from the testing and
certification requirements of Sec. 770.20 for composite wood products
made with ultra low-emitting formaldehyde resins are as follows:
(1) No test result higher than 0.05 ppm of formaldehyde for
hardwood plywood or 0.06 ppm of formaldehyde for particleboard, medium-
density fiberboard, and thin medium-density fiberboard.
(2) For 90% of the six months of routine quality control testing
data required under paragraph (a)(4) of this section, no higher than
0.04 parts per million of formaldehyde.
(e) Products that have obtained an exemption from the California
Air Resources Board will also be exempt from the requirements in
Sec. Sec. 770.15, 770.20, and 770.40(b) if they meet the requirements
under Sec. 770.18(d) and the
[[Page 89737]]
requirements of the California Air Resources Board remain as stringent
as EPA's requirements. Products that have obtained approval for reduced
testing from the California Air Resources Board will be granted
approval to conduct less frequent testing than is specified in Sec.
770.20 if they meet the requirements under Sec. 770.18(c) and the
requirements of the California Air Resources Board remain as stringent
as EPA's requirements.
(f) Products that are represented by a quarterly test result that
exceeds the applicable emission standard in this section or a quality
control test that indicates that the product exceeds the applicable
emission standard in this section lose their reduced testing approval
and must reapply as specified under Sec. 770.18(a).
(g) After the two-year period of the initial exemption, and every
two years thereafter, in order to continue to qualify for the exemption
from the testing and certification requirements, the panel producer
must reapply to an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC or CARB and obtain at least
two test results in accordance with paragraph (a)(3) of this section
that comply with the emission standards in paragraph (d)(1) of this
section.
(h) Any time there is an operational or process change such as a
change in resin formulation, press cycle duration, temperature, or
amount of resin used per panel, at least five quality control tests
under Sec. 770.20 and at least one test result in accordance with
paragraph (a)(3) of this section that indicate compliance with the
emission standards in paragraph (d)(1) of this section are required.
(i) A change in the resin system invalidates the exemption or
reduced testing approval for any product type produced after such a
change.
Sec. 770.20 Testing requirements.
(a) General requirements. (1) All panels must be tested in an
unfinished condition, prior to the application of a finishing or
topcoat, as soon as possible after their production but no later than
30 calendar days after production.
(2) Facilities that conduct the formaldehyde testing required by
this section must follow the procedures and specifications, such as
testing conditions and loading ratios, of the test method being used.
(3) All equipment used in the formaldehyde testing required by this
section must be calibrated and otherwise maintained and used in
accordance with the equipment manufacturer's instructions.
(b) Quality control testing--(1) Allowable methods. Quality control
testing must be performed using any of the following methods, with a
showing of correlation for each method pursuant to paragraph (d) of
this section:
(i) ASTM D6007-02 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
(ii) ASTM D5582-00 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
(iii) BS EN 717-2:1995 (Gas Analysis Method) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 770.99).
(iv) DMC 2007 User's Manual (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
770.99).
(v) DMC 2012 GP User's Manual (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
770.99).
(vi) BS EN 120:1992 (Perforator Method) (incorporated by reference,
see Sec. 770.99).
(vii) JIS A 1460:2001(E) (24-hr Desiccator Method) (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 770.99).
(2) Frequency of testing. (i) Particleboard and medium-density
fiberboard must be tested at least once per shift (eight or twelve
hours, plus or minus one hour of production) for each production line
for each product type. Quality control tests must also be conducted
whenever:
(A) A product type production ends, even if eight hours of
production has not been reached;
(B) The resin formulation is changed so that the formaldehyde to
urea ratio is increased;
(C) There is an increase by more than ten percent in the amount of
formaldehyde resin used, by square foot or by panel;
(D) There is a decrease in the designated press time by more than
20%; or
(E) The quality control manager or quality control employee has
reason to believe that the panel being produced may not meet the
requirements of the applicable standards.
(ii) Particleboard and medium-density fiberboard panel producers
are eligible for reduced quality control testing if they demonstrate
consistent operations and low variability of test values.
(A) To qualify, panel producers must:
(1) Apply in writing to an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC; and
(2) Maintain a 30 panel running average.
(B) With respect to reduced quality control testing, EPA TSCA Title
VI TPCs:
(1) May approve a reduction to one quality control test per 24-hour
production period if the 30 panel running average remains two standard
deviations below the designated QCL for the previous 60 consecutive
calendar days or more;
(2) May approve a reduction to one quality control test per 48-hour
production period if the 30 panel running average remains three
standard deviations below the designated QCL for the previous 60
consecutive calendar days or more;
(3) Will approve a request for reduced quality control testing as
long as the data submitted by the panel producer demonstrate compliance
with the criteria and the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC does not otherwise have
reason to believe that the data are inaccurate or the panel producer's
production processes are inadequate to ensure continued compliance with
the emission standards; and
(4) Will revoke approval for reduced quality control testing if
testing or inspections indicate a panel producer no longer demonstrates
consistent operations and low variability of test values.
(iii) Hardwood plywood must be tested as follows:
(A) At least one test per week per product type if the weekly
hardwood plywood production at the panel producer is more than 100,000
but less than 200,000 square feet.
(B) At least two tests per week per product type if the weekly
hardwood plywood production at the panel producer is 200,000 square
feet or more, but less than 400,000 square feet.
(C) At least four tests per week per product type if the weekly
hardwood plywood production at the panel producer is 400,000 square
feet or more.
(D) If weekly production of hardwood plywood at the panel producer
is 100,000 square feet or less, at least one test per 100,000 square
feet for each product type produced; or, if less than 100,000 square
feet of a particular product type is produced, one quality control test
of that product type every month that it is produced.
(E) Quality control tests must also be conducted whenever:
(1) The resin formulation is changed so that the formaldehyde to
urea ratio is increased;
(2) There is an increase by more than ten percent in the amount of
formaldehyde resin used, by square foot or by panel;
(3) There is an increase by more than 20% in the adhesive
application rate;
(4) There is a decrease in the designated press time by more than
20%; or
(5) The quality control manager or quality control employee has
reason to believe that the panel being produced
[[Page 89738]]
may not meet the requirements of the applicable standard.
(iv) Composite wood products that have been approved by an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC or CARB for reduced testing under Sec. 770.18(b) through
(c) must be tested at least once per week per product type and, for
particle board and medium-density fiberboard, per production line, for
products produced that week, except that hardwood plywood panel
producers who qualify for less frequent testing under paragraph
(b)(2)(iii)(D) of this section may continue to perform quality control
testing under that provision.
(3) Results. Any test result that exceeds the QCL established
pursuant to Sec. 770.7(c)(4)(i)(C) must be reported to the EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC in writing within 72 hours. The panel producer must comply
with Sec. 770.22 with respect to any lot represented by a quality
control sample that exceeds the QCL. Where multiple products are
grouped in a single product type for testing, this includes all
products in the group represented by the sample.
(c) Quarterly testing. Quarterly testing must be supervised by EPA
TSCA Title VI TPCs and performed by TPC laboratories.
(1) Allowable methods. Quarterly testing must be performed using
ASTM E1333-10 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) or, with a
showing of equivalence pursuant to paragraph (d) of this section, ASTM
D6007-02 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
(2) Sample selection. (i) Samples must be randomly chosen by an EPA
TSCA Title VI TPC.
(ii) Samples must be selected from each certified product type for
quarterly testing purposes. For hardwood plywood samples, the samples
must be randomly selected from products that represent the range of
formaldehyde emissions of products produced by the panel producer.
(iii) Samples must not include the top or the bottom composite wood
product of a bundle.
(3) Sample handling. Samples must be closely stacked or air-tight
wrapped between the time of sample selection and the start of test
conditioning. Samples must be labeled as such, signed by the EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC, bundled air-tight, wrapped in polyethylene, protected by
cover sheets, and promptly shipped to the TPC laboratory. Conditioning
must begin as soon as possible, but no later than 30 calendar days
after the samples were produced.
(4) Results. Any sample that exceeds the applicable formaldehyde
emission standard in Sec. 770.10 must be reported by the EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC to the panel producer in writing and to EPA, in accordance
with Sec. 770.8, within 72 hours. The panel producer must comply with
Sec. 770.22 with respect to any lot represented by a sample result
that exceeds the applicable formaldehyde emission standard. Where
multiple products are grouped in a single product type for testing,
this includes all products in the group represented by the sample.
(5) Reduced testing frequency. Composite wood products that have
been approved by an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC or CARB for reduced testing
under Sec. 770.18(c) need only undergo quarterly testing every six
months.
(d) Equivalence or correlation. Equivalence or correlation between
ASTM E1333-10 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) and any
other test method used for quarterly or quality control testing must be
demonstrated by EPA TSCA Title VI TPCs or panel producers,
respectively, at least once each year for each testing apparatus or
whenever there is a significant change in equipment, procedure, or the
qualifications of testing personnel. Once equivalence or correlation
have been established for three consecutive years, equivalence or
correlation must be demonstrated every two years or whenever there is a
significant change in equipment, procedure, or the qualifications of
testing personnel.
(1) Equivalence between ASTM E1333-10 and ASTM D6007-02 when used
by the TPC for quarterly testing. Equivalence must be demonstrated for
at least five comparison sample sets, which compare the results of the
two methods. Equivalence must be demonstrated for each small chamber
used and for the ranges of emissions of composite wood products tested
by the TPC.
(i) Samples. (A) For the ASTM E1333-10 method (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 770.99), each comparison sample must consist of
the result of testing panels, using the applicable loading ratios
specified in the ASTM E1333-10 method (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 770.99), from similar panels of the same product type tested by
the ASTM D6007-02 method (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
(B) For the ASTM D6007-02 method (incorporated by reference, see
Sec. 770.99), each comparison sample shall consist of testing
specimens representing portions of panels similar to the panels tested
in the ASTM E1333-10 method (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
770.99) and matched to their respective ASTM E1333-10 method
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) comparison sample result.
The ratio of air flow to sample surface area specified in ASTM D6007-02
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) must be used.
(C) The five comparison sample--must consist of testing a minimum
of five sample sets as measured by the ASTM E1333-10 method
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99).
(ii) Average and standard deviation. The arithmetic mean, x, and
standard deviation, S, of the difference of all comparison sets must be
calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12DE16.002
Where x = arithmetic mean; S = standard deviation; n = number of
sets; Di = difference between the ASTM E1333-10 and ASTM
D6007-02 method (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) values
for the ith set; and i ranges from 1 to n.
(iii) Equivalence determination. The ASTM D6007-02 method
(incorporated by reference, see Sec. 770.99) is considered equivalent
to the ASTM E1333-10 method (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
770.99) if the following condition is met:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12DE16.003
Where C is equal to 0.026.
(2) Correlation between ASTM E1333-10 and any quality control test
method. Correlation must be demonstrated by
[[Page 89739]]
establishing an acceptable correlation coefficient (``r'' value).
(i) Correlation. The correlation must be based on a minimum sample
size of five data pairs and a simple linear regression where the
dependent variable (Y-axis) is the quality control test value and the
independent variable (X-axis) is the ASTM E1333-10 (incorporated by
reference, see Sec. 770.99) test value. Either composite wood products
or formaldehyde emissions reference materials can be used to establish
the correlation.
(ii) Minimum acceptable correlation coefficients (``r'' values).
The minimum acceptable correlation coefficients are as follows, where
``n'' is equal to the number of data pairs, and ``r'' is the
correlation coefficient:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Degrees of freedom (n-2) ``r'' value
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3....................................................... 0.878
4....................................................... 0.811
5....................................................... 0.754
6....................................................... 0.707
7....................................................... 0.666
8....................................................... 0.632
9....................................................... 0.602
10 or more.............................................. 0.576
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Variation from previous results. If data from an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC's quarterly test results and a panel producer's quality
control test results do not fit the previously established correlation,
the panel producer must have its TPC establish a new correlation and
new QCLs.
(iv) Failed quarterly tests. If a panel producer fails two
quarterly tests in a row for the same product type, the panel producer
must have its TPC establish a new correlation curve.
(e) Quality assurance and quality control requirements for panel
producers. Panel producers are responsible for product compliance with
the applicable emission standards.
Sec. 770.21 Quality control manual, facilities, and personnel.
(a) Quality control manual. (1) Each panel producer must have a
written quality control manual. The manual must contain, at a minimum,
the following:
(i) A description of the organizational structure of the quality
control department, including the names of the quality control manager
and quality control employees;
(ii) A description of the sampling procedures to be followed;
(iii) A description of the method of handling samples, including a
specific maximum time period for analyzing quality control samples;
(iv) A description of the frequency of quality control testing;
(v) A description of the procedures used to identify changes in
formaldehyde emissions resulting from production changes (e.g.,
increase in the percentage of resin, increase in formaldehyde/urea
molar ratio in the resin, or decrease in press time);
(vi) A description of provisions for additional testing;
(vii) A description of recordkeeping procedures;
(viii) A description of labeling procedures;
(ix) The average percentage of resin and press time for each
product type;
(x) A description of product types, and if applicable, a
description of product variables covered under each product type;
(xi) Procedures for reduced quality control testing, if applicable;
and
(xii) Procedures for handling non-complying lots, including a
description of how the panel producer will ensure compliance with the
notification requirements of Sec. 770.22(d)(1).
(2) The quality control manual must be approved by an EPA TSCA
Title VI TPC.
(b) Quality control facilities. Each panel producer must designate
a quality control facility for conducting quality control formaldehyde
testing.
(1) The quality control facility must be an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC,
a contract laboratory, or a laboratory owned and operated by the panel
producer.
(2) Each quality control facility must have quality control
employees with adequate experience and/or training to conduct accurate
chemical quantitative analytical tests. The quality control manager
must identify each person conducting formaldehyde quality control
testing to the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC.
(c) Quality control manager. Each panel producer must designate a
person as quality control manager with adequate experience and/or
training to be responsible for formaldehyde emissions quality control.
The quality control manager must:
(1) Have the authority to take actions necessary to ensure that
applicable formaldehyde emission standards are being met on an ongoing
basis;
(2) Be identified to the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC that will be
overseeing the quality control testing. The panel producer must notify
the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC in writing within ten calendar days of any
change in the identity of the quality control manager and provide the
EPA TSCA Title VI TPC with the new quality control manager's
qualifications;
(3) Review and approve all reports of quality control testing
conducted on the production of the panel producer;
(4) Ensure that the samples are collected, packaged, and shipped
according to the procedures specified in the quality control manual;
and
(5) Inform the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC in writing of any significant
changes in production that could affect formaldehyde emissions within
72 hours of making those changes.
Sec. 770.22 Non-complying lots.
(a) Non-complying lots are not certified composite wood products
and they may not be sold, supplied or offered for sale in the United
States except in accordance with this section.
(b) Non-complying lots must be isolated from certified lots.
(c) Non-complying lots must either be disposed of or retested and
certified using the same test method, if each panel is treated with a
scavenger or handled by other means of reducing formaldehyde emissions,
such as aging. Tests must be performed as follows:
(1) Quality control tests. (i) At least one test panel must be
selected from each of three separate bundles. The panels must be
selected so that they are representative of the entire non-complying
lot and they are not the top or bottom panel of a bundle. The panels
may be selected from properly stored samples set aside by the panel
producer for retest in the event of a failure.
(ii) All samples must test at or below the level that indicates
that the product is in compliance with the applicable emission
standards in Sec. 770.10.
(2) Quarterly tests. (i) At least one test panel must be randomly
selected so that it is representative of the entire non-complying lot
and is not the top or bottom panel of a bundle. The panel may be
selected from properly stored samples set aside by the panel producer
for retest in the event of a failure.
(ii) The sample must test at or below the applicable emission
standards in Sec. 770.10.
(d) If composite wood products belonging to a non-complying lot
have been shipped to a fabricator, importer, distributor, or retailer
before the test results are received, the panel producer must:
(1) Ensure that the composite wood products are not distributed
further by notifying, within 72 hours of the time that the panel
producer is made aware of the failing test result, the fabricators,
importers, distributors, and retailers that received the composite wood
products.
[[Page 89740]]
The notification must include the following:
(i) Panel producer name, contact information, and date of notice;
(ii) A description of the composite wood products that belong to
the non-complying lot that is sufficient to allow the fabricator,
importer, distributor, or retailer to identify the products;
(iii) Whether the failed test result was of a quarterly test, a
quality control test, or a retest of composite wood products belonging
to a non-complying lot;
(iv) A statement that composite wood products belonging to the non-
complying lot must be isolated from other composite wood products and
cannot be further distributed in commerce; and
(v) A description of the steps the panel producer intends to take
to either recall the composite wood products belonging to the non-
complying lot or to treat and retest the products and certify the lot.
(2) Do one of the following:
(i) Recall the composite wood products belonging to the non-
complying lot and either treat and retest products belonging to the
non-complying lot or dispose of them; or
(ii) Treat and retest composite wood products belonging to the non-
complying lot while they remain in possession of a fabricator,
importer, distributor, or retailer.
(e) Information on the disposition of non-complying lots, including
product type and amount of composite wood products affected, lot
numbers, mitigation measures used, results of retesting, and final
disposition, must be provided to the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC within seven
calendar days of final disposition.
(f) Fabricators, importers, distributors, or retailers who are
notified that they have received composite wood products belonging to a
non-complying lot and who have further distributed the composite wood
products are responsible for notifying the purchasers of the composite
wood products in accordance with paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
Sec. 770.24 Samples for testing.
(a) Composite wood products may be shipped into and transported
across the United States for quality control or quarterly tests. TPCs
that ship composite panels into or across the United States solely for
quality control or quarterly tests are not considered importers or
distributors or importers for the purposes of Sec. 770.7(c)(3)(i).
(1) Such panels must not be sold, offered for sale or supplied to
any entity other than a TPC laboratory before testing in accordance
with Sec. 770.17, Sec. 770.18, or Sec. 770.20.
(2) If test results for such products demonstrate compliance with
the emission standards in this subpart, the panels may be relabeled in
accordance with Sec. 770.45 and sold, offered for sale, or supplied.
(b) [Reserved]
Sec. 770.30 Importers, fabricators, distributors, and retailers.
(a) Importers, fabricators, distributors, and retailers must take
reasonable precautions to ensure that the composite wood products they
sell, supply, offer for sale, or hold for sale, whether in the form of
panels, component parts, or finished goods, comply with the emission
standards and other requirements of this subpart.
(b) Importers must demonstrate that they have taken reasonable
precautions by maintaining, for three years, bills of lading, invoices,
or comparable documents that include a written statement from the
supplier that the composite wood products, component parts, or finished
goods are TSCA Title VI compliant or were produced before December 12,
2017 and by ensuring the following records are made available to EPA
within 30 calendar days of request:
(1) Records identifying the panel producer and the date the
composite wood products were produced; and
(2) Records identifying the supplier, if different, and the date
the composite wood products, component parts, or finished goods were
purchased.
(c) Fabricators, distributors, and retailers must demonstrate that
they have taken reasonable precautions by obtaining bills of lading,
invoices, or comparable documents that include a written statement from
the supplier that the composite wood products, component parts, or
finished goods are TSCA Title VI compliant or that the composite wood
products were produced before December 12, 2017.
(d) On and after December 12, 2018, importers of articles that are
regulated composite wood products, or articles that contain regulated
composite wood products, must comply with the import certification
regulations for ``Chemical Substances in Bulk and As Part of Mixtures
and Articles,'' as found at 19 CFR 12.118 through 12.127.
(e) Records required by this section must be maintained in
accordance with Sec. 770.40(d).
Sec. 770.40 Reporting and recordkeeping.
(a) Panel producers must maintain the following records for a
period of three years, except that records demonstrating initial
eligibility for reduced testing or third-party certification exemption
under Sec. 770.17 or Sec. 770.18 must be kept for as long as the
panel producer is producing composite wood products with reduced
testing or under a third-party certification exemption. The following
records must also be made available to the panel producers' EPA TSCA
Title VI TPCs. Panel producers must make the records described in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section available to direct purchasers of
their composite wood products. This information may not be withheld
from direct purchasers as confidential business information.
(1) Records of all quarterly emissions testing. These records must
identify the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC conducting or overseeing the
testing. These records must also include the date, the product type
tested, the lot number that the tested material represents, the test
method used, and the test results.
(2) Records of all ongoing quality control testing. These records
must identify the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC conducting or overseeing the
testing and the facility actually performing the testing. These records
must also include the date, the product type tested, the lot number
that the tested material represents, the test method used, and the test
results.
(3) Production records, including a description of the composite
wood product(s), the date of manufacture, lot numbers, and tracking
information allowing each product to be traced to a specific lot
produced.
(4) Records of changes in production, including changes of more
than ten percent in the resin use percentage, changes in resin
composition that result in a higher ratio of formaldehyde to other
resin components, and changes in the process, such as changes in press
time by more than 20%.
(5) Records demonstrating initial and continued eligibility for the
reduced testing provisions in Sec. Sec. 770.17 and 770.18, if
applicable. These records must include:
(i) Approval for reduced testing from an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC or
CARB;
(ii) Amount of resin use reported by volume and weight;
(iii) Production volume reported as square feet per product type;
(iv) Resin trade name, resin manufacturer contact information
(name, address, phone number, and email), and resin supplier contact
information (name, address, phone number, and email); and
(v) Any changes in the formulation of the resin.
(6) Purchaser information for each composite wood product, if
applicable, including the name, contact person if
[[Page 89741]]
available, address, telephone number, email address if available,
purchase order or invoice number, and amount purchased.
(7) Transporter information for each composite wood product, if
applicable, including name, contact person, address, telephone number,
email address if available, and shipping invoice number.
(8) Information on the disposition of non-complying lots, including
product type and amount of composite wood products affected, lot
numbers, purchasers who received product belonging to non-complying
lots (if any), copies of purchaser notifications used (if any),
mitigation measures used, results of retesting, and final disposition.
(9) Representative copies of labels used.
(b) Panel producers must provide their EPA TSCA Title VI TPC with
monthly product data reports for each production facility, production
line, and product type, maintain copies of the reports for a minimum of
three years from the date that they are produced. Monthly product data
reports must contain a data sheet for each specific product type with
test and production information, and a quality control graph containing
the following:
(1) QCL;
(2) Shipping QCL (if applicable);
(3) Results of quality control tests; and
(4) Retest values.
(c) Laminated product producers whose products are exempt from the
definition of hardwood plywood must keep records demonstrating
eligibility for the exemption. These records must be kept for a minimum
of three years from the date they are produced and must include:
(1) Resin trade name, resin manufacturer contact information (name,
address, phone number, and email), resin supplier contact information
(name, address, phone number, and email), and resin purchase records;
(2) Panel producer contact information and panel purchase records;
(3) For panels produced in-house, records demonstrating that the
panels have been certified by an EPA TSCA Title VI TPC; and
(4) For resins produced in-house, records demonstrating the
production of phenol-formaldehyde resins or resins formulated with no
added formaldehyde as part of the resin cross-linking structure.
(d) Importers, fabricators, distributors, and retailers must
maintain the records described in Sec. 770.30 for a minimum of three
years from the import date or the date of the purchases or shipments
described therein.
Sec. 770.45 Labeling.
(a) Panels or bundles of panels that are sold, supplied, or offered
for sale in the United States must be labeled with the panel producer's
name, the lot number, the number of the EPA TSCA Title VI TPC, and a
statement that the products are TSCA Title VI certified. If a composite
wood panel is not individually labeled, the panel producer, importer,
distributor, fabricator, or retailer must have a method (e.g., color-
coded edge marking) sufficient to identify the supplier of the panel
and linking the information on the label to the products. This
information must be made available to potential customers upon request.
The label may be applied as a stamp, tag, or sticker.
(1) A panel producer number may be used instead of a name to
protect identity, so long as the identity of the panel producer can be
determined at the request of EPA.
(2) Only panels or bundles of panels manufactured in accordance
with Sec. 770.17 may also be labeled that they were made with no-added
formaldehyde-based resins in addition to the other information required
by this section.
(3) Only panels or bundles of panels manufactured in accordance
with Sec. 770.18 may also be labeled that they were made with ultra
low-emitting formaldehyde resins in addition to the other information
required by this section.
(b) Panels imported into or transported across the United States
for quarterly or quality control testing purposes in accordance with
Sec. 770.20 must be labeled ``For TSCA Title VI testing only, not for
sale in the United States.'' The panels may be re-labeled if test
results are below the applicable emission standards in this subpart.
(c) Fabricators of finished goods containing composite wood
products must label every finished good they produce or every box or
bundle containing finished goods. If a finished good (including
component parts sold separately to end users) is not individually
labeled, the importer, distributor, or retailer must retain a copy of
the label, be able to identify the products associated with that label,
and make the label information available to potential customers upon
request.
(1) The label may be applied as a stamp, tag, or sticker.
(2) The label must include, at a minimum, in legible English text,
the fabricator's name, the date the finished good was produced (in
month/year format), and a statement that the finished goods are TSCA
Title VI compliant.
(3) Finished goods made from panels manufactured in accordance with
Sec. 770.17 and/or Sec. 770.18 may also be labeled that they were
made with no-added formaldehyde-based resins, or ultra low-emitting
formaldehyde resins in addition to the other information required by
this section. They may be labeled as being made with a combination of
compliant composite wood, no-added formaldehyde-based resins, and ultra
low-emitting formaldehyde resins, if this is accurate.
(4) Fabricators may substitute the name of a responsible downstream
fabricator, importer, distributor, or retailer for their name on the
label if they obtain and maintain written consent from the downstream
entity.
(d) Importers, distributors, and retailers must leave intact labels
on finished goods, including component parts sold separately to end
users.
(e) Finished goods, including component parts sold separately to
end users, containing only a de minimis amount of regulated composite
wood product are excepted from the labeling requirements. A finished
good, including component parts sold directly to consumers, contains a
de minimis amount of regulated composite wood product if its regulated
composite wood product content does not exceed 144 square inches, based
on the surface area of its largest face. The exception does not apply
to finished goods or component parts that are designed to be used in
combination or in multiples to create larger surfaces, finished goods,
or component parts.
(f) Composite wood products and finished goods made entirely of
composite wood products manufactured before the manufactured-by date
must not be labeled as TSCA Title VI compliant.
Subpart D--Incorporation by Reference
Sec. 770.99 Incorporation by reference.
The materials listed in this section are incorporated by reference
into this part with the approval of the Director of the Federal
Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any
edition other than that specified in this section, a document must be
published in the Federal Register and the material must be available to
the public. All approved materials are available for inspection at the
OPPT Docket in the Environmental Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), West William
[[Page 89742]]
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room hours of operation are
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public Reading room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket is (202)
566-0280. In addition, these materials are also available for
inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call
(202) 741-6030 or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html. These materials may
also be obtained from the sources listed in this section.
(a) CPA, AITC, and HPVA material. Copies of these materials may be
obtained from the specific publisher, as noted below, or from the
American National Standards Institute, 1899 L Street NW., 11th Floor,
Washington, DC 20036, or by calling (202) 293-8020, or at https://ansi.org/. Note that ANSI/AITC A190.1-2002 is published by the American
Institute of Timber Construction; ANSI A135.4-2012, ANSI A135.5-2012,
ANSI A135.6-2012, ANSI A135.7-2012, ANSI A208.1-2009, and ANSI A208.2-
2009 are published by the Composite Panel Association; and ANSI ANSI/
HPVA-HP-1-2009 is published by the Hardwood Plywood Veneer Association.
(1) ANSI A135.4-2012, Basic Hardboard, Approved June 8, 2012, IBR
approved for Sec. 770.3.
(2) ANSI A135.5-2012, Prefinished Hardboard Paneling, Approved
March 29, 2012, IBR approved for Sec. 770.3.
(3) ANSI A135.6-2012, Engineered Wood Siding, Approved June 5,
2012, IBR approved for Sec. 770.3.
(4) ANSI A135.7-2012, Engineered Wood Trim, Approved July 17, 2012,
IBR approved for Sec. 770.3.
(5) ANSI A208.1-2009, Particleboard, Approved February 2, 2009, IBR
approved for Sec. 770.3.
(6) ANSI A208.2-2009, Medium Density Fiberboard (MDF) for Interior
Applications, Approved February 2, 2009, IBR approved for Sec. 770.3.
(7) ANSI/AITC A190.1-2002, American National Standard for Wood
Products--Structural Glued Laminated Timber, Approved October 10, 2002,
IBR approved for Sec. 770.1(c).
(8) ANSI/HPVA HP-1-2009, American National Standard for Hardwood
and Decorative Plywood, Approved January 26, 2010, IBR approved for
Sec. 770.3.
(b) ASTM material. Copies of these materials may be obtained from
ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Dr., P.O. Box C700, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, or by calling (877) 909-ASTM, or at https://www.astm.org.
(1) ASTM D5055-05, Standard Specification for Establishing and
Monitoring Structural Capacities of Prefabricated Wood I-Joists,
Approved October 1, 2005, IBR approved for Sec. 770.1(c).
(2) ASTM D5456-06, Standard Specification for Evaluation of
Structural Composite Lumber Products, Approved March 1, 2006, IBR
approved for Sec. 770.1(c).
(3) ASTM D5582-00 (Reapproved 2006), Standard Test Method for
Determining Formaldehyde Levels from Wood Products Using a Desiccator,
October 1, 2006, IBR approved for Sec. 770.20(b).
(4) ASTM D6007-02, Standard Test Method for Determining
Formaldehyde Concentrations in Air from Wood Products Using a Small
Scale Chamber, Approved April 10, 2002, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
770.3, 770.7(a) through (c), 770.15(c), 770.17(a), 770.18(a) and
770.20(b) through (d).
(5) ASTM E1333-10, Standard Test Method for Determining
Formaldehyde Concentrations in Air and Emission Rates from Wood
Products Using a Large Chamber, Approved May 1, 2010, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec. 770.3, 770.7(a) through (c), 770.10(b), 770.15(c),
770.17(a), 770.18(a) and 770.20(c) through (d).
(c) CEN materials. Copies of these materials are not directly
available from the European Committee for Standardization, but from one
of CEN's National Members, Affiliates, or Partner Standardization
Bodies. To purchase a standard, go to CEN's Web site, https://www.cen.eu, and select ``Products'' for more detailed information.
(1) BS EN 120:1992, Wood based panels--Determination of
formaldehyde content--Extraction method called the perforator method,
incorporating Amendment No. 1, English Version, copyright BSI 1997, IBR
approved for Sec. 770.20(b).
(2) BS EN 717-2:1995, Wood-based panels--Determination of
formaldehyde release--Part 2: Formaldehyde release by the gas analysis
method, incorporating Corrigendum No. 1, English Version, copyright BSI
9 December 2002, IBR approved for Sec. 770.20(b).
(d) Georgia Pacific material. Copies of this material may be
obtained from Georgia-Pacific Chemicals LLC, 133 Peachtree Street,
Atlanta, GA 30303, or by calling (877) 377-2737, or at https://www.gp-dmc.com/default.aspx.
(1) The Dynamic Microchamber computer integrated formaldehyde test
system, User Manual, revised March 2007 (DMC 2007 User's Manual) IBR
approved for Sec. 770.20(b).
(2) The GP Dynamic Microchamber Computer-integrated formaldehyde
test system, User Manual, copyright 2012 (DMC 2012 GP User's Manual),
IBR approved for Sec. 770.20(b).
(e) ISO material. Copies of these materials may be obtained from
the International Organization for Standardization, 1, ch. de la Voie-
Creuse, CP 56, CH-1211, Geneve 20, Switzerland, or by calling +41-22-
749-01-11, or at https://www.iso.org.
(1) ISO/IEC 17011:2004(E), Conformity assessments--General
requirements for accreditation bodies accrediting conformity
assessments bodies, First edition, Corrected version, 2005-02-15, IBR
approved for Sec. Sec. 770.3 and 770.7(a) through (b).
(2) ISO/IEC 17020:2012(E), Conformity assessment-Requirements for
the operation of various bodies performing inspection, Second edition,
2012-03-01 IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 770.3 and 770.7(a) through (c).
(3) ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), General requirements for the competence
of testing and calibration laboratories, Second edition, 2005-05-15,
IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 770.3 and 770.7(a) through (c).
(4) ISO/IEC 17065:2012(E), Conformity assessment--Requirements for
bodies certifying products, processes and services, First edition,
2012-09-15, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 770.3 and 770.7(a) and (c).
(f) Japanese Standards Association. Copies of this material may be
obtained from Japanese Industrial Standards, 1-24, Akasaka 4, Minatoku,
Tokyo 107- 8440, Japan, or by calling +81-3-3583-8000, or at https://www.jsa.or.jp/.
(1) JIS A 1460:2001(E), Building boards Determination of
formaldehyde emission--Desiccator method, First English edition,
published 2003-07 IBR approved for Sec. 770.20(b).
(2) [Reserved]
(g) NIST material. Copies of these materials may be obtained from
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) by calling
(800) 553-6847 or from the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO). To
purchase a NIST publication you must have the order number. Order
numbers may be obtained from the Public Inquiries Unit at (301) 975-
NIST. Mailing address: Public Inquiries Unit, NIST, 100 Bureau Dr.,
Stop 1070, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1070. If you have a GPO stock number,
you can purchase printed copies of NIST publications from GPO.
[[Page 89743]]
GPO orders may be mailed to: U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box
979050, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000, placed by telephone at (866) 512-1800
(DC Area only: (202) 512-1800), or faxed to (202) 512-2104. Additional
information is available online at: https://www.nist.gov.
(1) PS 1-07, Structural Plywood, May 2007, IBR approved for
Sec. Sec. 770.1(c) and 770.3.
(2) PS 2-04, Performance Standard for Wood-Based Structural-Use
Panels, December 2004, IBR approved for Sec. Sec. 770.1(c) and 770.3.
Editorial note: This document was received for publication by
the Office of the Federal Register on November 16, 2016.
[FR Doc. 2016-27987 Filed 12-9-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P