PROPOSAL:
Amend Rule 1113 - Architectural Coatings
SYNOPSIS:
The proposed amendment addresses SIP approvability issues identified by the U.S. EPA relative to the alternative compliance option of the rule, the Averaging Compliance Option.
COMMITTEE:
Stationary Source, May 28, 2004, Reviewed
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt the attached resolution amending Rule 1113 – Architectural Coatings.
Barry R. Wallerstein, D.Env.
Executive Officer
Background Architectural coatings are one of the largest non-mobile sources of VOC emissions in the South Coast air district (AQMD). Rule 1113 is applicable to manufacturers, distributors, and end-users of architectural coatings. These coatings are used to enhance the appearance of and to protect homes, office buildings, factories and other structures, and their appurtenances on a variety of substrates. The coatings are applied by homeowners, painting contractors, or maintenance personnel primarily by brush, roller, or spray guns. Rule 1113 was first adopted in 1977, and has undergone numerous amendments since then. Proposed Amended Rule 1113 – Architectural Coatings has been developed primarily to implement changes relative to the alternative compliance provision of the rule (the Averaging Compliance Option) recommended by the U.S. EPA for State Implementation Plan (SIP) approvability. Rule 1113 was last amended on December 5, 2003, for clear wood finishes, roof coatings, stains, and waterproofing sealers including concrete and masonry sealers through the lowering of those VOC limits and the elimination of the clear wood finish small container exemption. Proposal The proposed amendments will require specific records to be kept by manufacturers choosing to use the Averaging Compliance Option (ACO) to comply with VOC limits, establish additional criteria for violations of the ACO Program and make other changes to the rule to enhance clarity and enforceability. In addition, the AQMD will periodically evaluate the ACO Program to determine if emission reductions are met as specified in the SIP. Emission Inventory and Emission Reduction There is no change in emission inventory or emission reduction associated with the proposed changes. Cost-Effectiveness There will be no additional compliance cost associated with the proposed changes; therefore, a cost-effectiveness and an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis are not applicable. Issues The specific issues have been addressed in the Final Staff Report, which include U.S. EPA issues with the alternative compliance option of the rule. The main issues are evaluation, reconciliation of emission shortfalls, recordkeeping, and violations of the ACO Program as well as rule clarification language. CEQA The AQMD has reviewed the proposed project pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines §15002 (k)(1). Since the proposed amendments to Rule 1113 only address clarity and enforceability and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the project is exempt from the requirements of CEQA, pursuant to state CEQA Guidelines §15061(b)(3). A Notice of Exemption has been prepared in accordance with state CEQA Guidelines §15062 for the proposed project and will be filed with the county clerks immediately following the adoption of the proposed amendments to the rule. Socioeconomic Analysis Since the proposed amendments do not affect air quality or emissions, no new significant cost burden is expected above and beyond what is currently required. Therefore, a socioeconomic assessment is not necessary or required. Additional recordkeeping proposed for those manufacturers selecting to comply with the rule by using the ACO is not substantial and the associated costs are expected to be minimal. AQMP and Legal Mandates As stated above, architectural coatings are one of the largest non-mobile sources of VOC emissions in the AQMD and the proposed changes are necessary for Rule 1113 to be included into the SIP. Implementations and Resources Existing AQMD resources will be sufficient to implement the proposed changes to this rule with minimal impact on the budget. Attachments
- Summary of Proposed Amendment
- Rule Development Process Flow Chart
- Key Contacts
- Key Issues and Responses
- Resolution
- Rule Language
- Staff Report
- CEQA – Notice of Exemption
ATTACHMENT A
|
Summary of Proposed Amendments to Rule 1113 – Architectural Coatings |
|
Staff proposes amending Rule 1113 as follows:
- Modify the definitions of "formulation data" and "varnish."
- Add a definition for "product line."
- Amend the sell-through provision to require manufacturers to maintain sales and distribution records for a coating product line for both the coatings included in the ACO Program and the coatings not included in the ACO.
- Amend rule language to include that if a manufacturer uses formulation data to calculate VOC content for coatings, that the calculations account for cure volatiles and variations in the VOC content among production batches.
- Amend Attachment A – Averaging Provision, to include that a manufacturer shall not supply, sell, offer for sale, manufacture, blend, or repackage coatings that exceed ceiling limits established prior to July 1, 2001.
- Amend Attachment A to require the specific records to be kept and maintained by the manufacturers for their Averaging Compliance Option Program. The records will be from production formulation, production, distribution, and sales.
- Add language that allows the Executive Officer to request additional records as a condition of approving an ACO Program or to verify compliance.
- Modify the violation language such that an exceedance of the allowable emissions is now a separate violation for each coating product line that is over the VOC limit listed in the Table of Standards for each day of the compliance period.
- Additional clarification language that references the ACO throughout the document and clarifies that report submittals are to the Executive Officer.
|
ATTACHMENT B RULE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS PROPOSED AMENDED RULE 1113 - Architectural Coatings
ATTACHMENT C
|
KEY CONTACTS LIST |
|
Barry |
Barman |
CSI Services |
|
Dan |
Belik |
BAAQMD |
|
Howard |
Berman |
Environmental Mediation, Inc. |
|
Paul |
Cort |
U.S. EPA |
|
John |
Crary |
DeGussa Construction Chemicals |
|
Yvonne |
Fong |
U.S. EPA |
|
Barbara |
Fry |
CARB |
|
Madelyn |
Harding |
Sherwin-Williams Company |
|
Robert |
Henderson |
EPMAR |
|
Gerry |
Hume |
EVR-Gard |
|
Christian |
Hurley |
CARB |
|
Mike |
Jaczola |
CARB |
|
Barry |
Jenkin |
Benjamin Moore Paints |
|
Darrin |
Jorgensen |
Jorgensen Environmental |
|
Jim |
Kantola |
ICI Dulux Sinclair |
|
John |
Long |
Vista Paint Corporation |
|
Mike |
Murphy |
Rust-Oleum Corporation |
|
Stephen |
Murphy |
Murphy Industrial Coatings |
|
Jerry |
Mulnix |
Cal Western Paints, Inc. |
|
Bob |
Nelson |
National Paint & Coatings Association |
|
Jim |
Nyarady |
CARB |
|
Shil |
Park |
Tibbetts Paint |
|
Raymond |
Russell |
Smiland Paint Company |
|
Jim |
Sell |
NPCA |
|
Tushar |
Shah |
Frazee Industries |
|
Andy |
Steckel |
U.S. EPA |
|
Robert |
Wendoll |
Dunn-Edwards Paints |
|
Ron |
Widner |
Benjamin Moore Paints |
|
Kevin |
Worrall |
Texture Coatings of America, Inc. |
ATTACHMENT D
|
KEY ISSUES AND RESPONSES Rule 1113
|
|
Issue |
Response |
|
AQMD should evaluate the ACO Program at least once every three years and commit to develop and implement reconciliation procedures if the evaluation shows that there are problems with the Program or that the predicted emission reduction goals are not being met. |
The Board Resolution accompanying the proposed amendments commits the AQMD to evaluate the ACO Program once every three years and to reconcile any shortfall of emission reductions to the SIP. |
|
The averaging provision is not specific enough to establish what types of records are suitable for verifying compliance and represents Executive Officer discretion. The rule also needs to specifically require that these records be made available to the Executive Officer upon request. |
PAR 1113 requires manufacturers to maintain all records associated with the ACO Program and to make these records available to the Executive Officer upon request. The specific records are product formulation records, production records, distribution records and sales records. |
|
Rule language should be revised to specify that "an exceedance of the allowable emissions or ceiling limits specified in Section A of Appendix A for each coating that is over the limit for any compliance period shall constitute a separate violation for each day of the compliance period." |
PAR 1113 specifies that an exceedance of the ACO Program allowable emissions constitutes a separate violation for each day of the compliance period for each coating product line over the VOC limit specified in the Table of Standards, as determined at the end of the specified compliance period. |
|
Emissions from coatings sold under the sell-through provision after a lower VOC limit has gone into effect cannot be distinguished based on the information explicitly required to be maintained under the rule from emissions from coatings sold under an averaging program. The enforceability of the rule may be compromised by manufacturers claiming that a certain portion of emissions from coatings sold under the sell-through provision should be excluded from averaged emissions. |
PAR 1113 specifies that the manufacturer shall maintain sales and distribution records, as applicable, for any coating manufactured prior to the effective date if that coating volume is not included in an approved ACO Program that includes the same coating manufactured on or after the effective date. The records are to indicate the date of manufacture and volume of coating sold or distributed. The records are to be made available to the Executive Officer upon request and maintained for three years. |
|
The definition for formulation data could be more specific. The following language should be added: "Formulation data must have a consistent and quantitatively known relationship to the VOC content in a product as determined by 40 CFR 60 Appendix Method 24. Formulation data shall account for cure volatiles and variations between quality control approved production batches. Material Safety Data Sheets are not considered formulation data." |
Amend the definition for Formulation Data to state that Material Safety Data Sheets are not considered formulation data. Amend the rule to state that VOC content calculated from formulation data shall be adjusted by the manufacturer to account for cure volatiles (if any) and maximum VOC content within production batches. |
|
The definition of varnish limits this category to resin technologies that dry by chemical reaction on exposure to air. Two-component post-catalyzed coatings that rely on chemical reaction to cure with no need of exposure to air to set the reaction into play should also be included. |
The definition for varnish was derived to distinguish between specialty coating categories with different VOC limits, not to exclude different resin technologies from being included in the clear wood finish category. PAR 1113 language deletes "on exposure to air" from the definition of varnish. |
/ / /
|
