[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 11, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-25066]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: October 11, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[AD-FRL-5087-5]
RIN 2060-AF14
Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources: Automobile
and Light-Duty Truck Surface Coating Operations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 29, 1982, a revision to the new source performance
standard (NSPS) for automobile and light-duty truck prime coat
operations was proposed. Analysis of data submitted after this proposal
showed that the best demonstrated prime coating system and prime coat
materials could not consistently meet the proposed revised standard.
This revised final NSPS is consistent with the performance of the best
demonstrated prime coating system and prime coat materials. This
revision of the standard does not reflect a change in the basis of the
standard, but reflects a better understanding of the performance of the
prime coating system and prime coat materials upon which the standard
was originally based. The intended effect of this NSPS is to require
all new, modified, and reconstructed prime coat operations at
automobile and light-duty truck assembly plants to use the best
demonstrated system of continuous emission reduction considering costs,
nonair quality health, and environmental and energy impacts.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 11, 1994.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (Act), judicial review
of this revision of a NSPS is available only by filing a petition for
review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit within 60 days of today's publication of this rule. Under
section 307(b)(2) of the ACT, the requirements that are the subject of
today's rule may not be challenged later in civil or criminal
proceedings to enforce these requirements.
ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket number A-82-10, containing supporting
information used in developing the revised standard, is available for
public inspection and copying between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, at EPA's Central Docket Section, West Tower Lobby, Gallery 1,
Waterside Mall, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. A reasonable
fee may be charged for copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Salman, Chemicals and
Petroleum Branch, Emission Standards and Engineering Division (MD-13),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711, telephone (919) 541-0859.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Revised Standard
The revised standard limits emissions from electrodeposition (EDP)
prime coat operations as follows:
1. For RT greater than or equal to 0.160, the emission limit
is 0.17 kg VOC per liter of applied coating solids.
2. For RT greater than or equal to 0.040 and less than 0.160,
the emission limit is 0.17 x 350 (0.l60-RT) kg of VOC
per liter of applied coating solids.
3. For RT less than 0.040, no emission limit applies. RT
is the solids turnover ratio. This is the ratio of the volume of
coating solids added to an EDP system during a calendar month divided
by the total volume capacity of the EDP system.
Prime coat systems other than EDP systems would be required to
comply with a single numerical emission limit of 0.17 kg VOC per liter
of applied coating solids.
This revision is not a relaxation of the original prime coat
standard since it does not reflect a change in the technological basis
upon which the original standard was based. It does reflect a better
understanding of the operation and performance of this technology based
on an analysis of additional data which were not available at the time
the standard was originally developed. Consequently, this revision does
not result in any environmental, energy, cost, or economic impacts.
Information collection requirements contained in this regulation
(60.393) have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and have been assigned OMB control number 2060-
0034.
I. Background
On October 5, 1979, pursuant to Section 111 of the Act, standards
of performance to limit emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC)
from new, modified, and reconstructed automobile and light-duty truck
surface coating operations were proposed (44 FR 57792). Final standards
limiting VOC emissions from prime coat operations to 0.16 kg VOC per
liter of applied coating solids were promulgated in the Federal
Register on December 24, 1980 (45 FR 85410).
On February 19, 1981, General Motors Corporation (GM) petitioned
the Administrator to convene a proceeding under section 307(d)(7)(B) of
the Act to reconsider the prime coat standard. The basis for the
petition was new data, which had become available following
promulgation of the standard, on the performance of the technology
which served as the basis for this standard. The basis for the standard
promulgated on December 24, 1980, was cathodic EDP prime coat systems
which use low-VOC content waterborne materials. An EDP system consists
of a large tank filled with coating material. Metal parts are submerged
in the tank and a voltage is applied to help deposit the coating solids
onto the parts. The low-VOC content cathodic EDP technology was quite
new at the time of promulgation; and data on only one system, which had
operated for less than 1 year, were available. Following receipt of
GM's petition for reconsideration, data and information on the
performance of this technology were solicited from GM, Ford Motor
Company (FMC), American Motors Corporation (AMC), Volkswagen
Corporation (VW), Chrysler Corporation, Nissan, Honda, Inmont, and
Pittsburgh Plate Glass Corporation (PPG). Analysis of the additional
data received confirmed that the promulgated standard did not
accurately reflect the performance of cathodic EDP prime coat systems.
Consequently, a revised standard of 0.17 kg VOC per liter of applied
coating solids (6-month average using the best 6 months out of a 7-
month period) was proposed on July 29, 1982.
A public hearing was not requested. The official public comment
period closed on September 27, 1982.
II. Comments and Changes to the Standard
Six comments were received on the proposed revised standard. Three
were from automobile manufacturers, one from a coating manufacturer,
one from an industry trade association, and one from a State regional
control agency. A significant amount of additional data on the
performance of EDP prime coating systems was included with these
comments. These data covered the performance of 37 cathodic EDP prime
coating systems using 10 different low-VOC content prime coating
materials over approximately 3,000 weeks of operation.
Several commenters stated that the additional data included with
their comments demonstrated that cathodic EDP prime coating systems
could not continuously meet the proposed revised emission limit. In
addition, several commenters suggested that flow control additive (FCA)
added to the EDP prime coat system to maintain good flow
characteristics during periods when the system is not coating vehicles
should be excluded from the emission calculations. The commenters felt
that the addition of FCA during production downtime was not
representative of normal operation and, if not accommodated in some
manner, would cause unavoidable violations of the emission limit. The
commenters argued that since the standard is expressed in terms of kg
of VOC per liter of applied coating solids, at times of near-zero use
(i.e., essentially no solids applied), even small evaporative losses
result in the standard being exceeded by a wide margin.
All of the data and information that were available, including the
new data and information received during the comment period, were
reanalyzed. The cathodic EDP prime coat materials used by FMC, GM, AMC,
and VW were very similar. The sole suppliers were PPG, Inmont
Corporation, and FMC. The coating materials consist of three
components: resin, pigment, and FCA. Table 1 presents the solids,
solvent, and water composition of these three components for a
representative coating.
Table 1.--Representative Coating Material Formulation
[Percent by volume]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solids Water
Formulation content VOC content content
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resin............................ 32.4 2.9 64.7
Pigment.......................... 33.0 13.3 53.7
Flow control additive............ 4.3 95.4 0.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each of these components may be added separately to the EDP prime
coating tank. The solvent contained in these components leaves the EDP
tank either by transport on the surface of the automobile body or by
evaporation from the liquid surface of the tank. Upon leaving the EDP
tank, the solvent clinging to the automobile body evaporates. All of
the solvent added to the EDP tank is ultimately released to the
atmosphere. The VOC emissions released to the atmosphere per unit of
solids applied to the automobile body may, therefore, be determined
directly by measuring the amount of VOC and solids added to the EDP
tank because additions are made to the tank to keep the coating
material in a near steady-state condition.
The ratio of resin to pigment added to the EDP tank is recommended
by the coating manufacturers and can vary with RT. The FCA is
added as needed to provide the desired coating properties and finish
quality and to maintain the coating material in a near steady-state
condition. Because of the high-solvent content of the FCA (95 percent
by volume) and the variable ratio (compared to resin and pigment) with
which it is added to the EDP system, this component is of overriding
importance in determining emissions from the EDP system.
All of the data were verified as being representative of good
operation. Two potential sources of variation were differences in the
operation and maintenance of EDP tanks from plant to plant and
differences among prime coat materials. Variations in performance due
to these two factors were analyzed and were not found to be
statistically significant. Based on this analysis, the coating
material, coating equipment, and operation and maintenance for all of
the data obtained were determined to represent best demonstrated
technology. Therefore, all of the data were used in establishing the
revised emission limit.
All companies submitting data were able to provide data on a weekly
basis. Averaging periods of 4 weeks, 8 weeks. 12 weeks, 24 weeks, and
the best 24 out of 28 weeks (6 out of 7 months) were employed to
examine the performance of EDP systems including and excluding periods
when the paint line was shut down, i.e., downtime. This analysis
revealed that the exclusion of periods of downtime slightly reduced the
variability in VOC emissions. Even with downtime excluded, however, the
proposed revised standard was not met consistently.
In addition to periods of downtime, periods of low production also
appeared to adversely affect performance. The relative usage of an EDP
system over any time period can be measured by either comparing the
amount of new coating material or new coating solids added to the total
capacity of the system. The volume of coating solids added gives a
better indication of usage because it is a measure of production. i.e.,
the number of vehicles coated. This is because, regardless of the
coating material used, the same volume of coating solids must be
deposited to coat a particular part to a specified film thickness. The
other major constituents of the EDP, coating material, VOC and water,
do not become part of the final dry coating and can evaporate from the
tank during periods of downtime. Therefore, using the volume of new
coating material added would not give a consistent measure of usage for
systems that use coating materials which contain varying amounts of
solids, VOC, and water.
The total volume of coating solids added to the EDP tank divided by
the total volume of the entire EDP system was found to correlate well
with VOC emissions. This ratio has been termed the solids turnover
ratio (RT). The relationship between RT and VOC emissions for
4-week periods is shown in Table 2.
As seen in Table 2, VOC emissions, in terms of kilograms per liter
of solids deposited, decrease as RT increases. At RT's above
0.160, emissions are below 0.17 kg of VOC per liter of applied coating
solids. Sources which operate at RT's of less than 0.160, however,
cannot consistently meet an emission limit of 0.17 kg of VOC per liter
of applied coating solids. Further analysis of the data used to
generate Table 2 indicates that for RT between 0.040 and 0.160,
VOC emissions are related to RT by the following equation: 0.17
x 350(0.l60-RT) kg of VOC per liter of applied coating
solids.
Table 2.--Solids Turnover Ratio Versus EDP Prime Coat System Performance
For 4-Week Periods
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cumulative
Solids turnover ratio (RT) VOC Number of percent of
emissions1 observations data
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RT<0.040.......................... [0.17-19.0="" ]="" 796="" 40="">RT<0.060.......... 0.33="" 496="" 49="">RT<0.080.......... 0.29="" 334="" 62="">RT<0.100.......... 0.23="" 360="" 76="">RT<0.120.......... 0.23="" 305="" 88="">RT<0.140.......... 0.19="" 175="" 95="">RT<0.160.......... 0.19="" 64="" 97="">RT................ 0.17 70 100
Totals...................... .......... 2,602 ..........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1VOC emission level in kilograms of VOC per liter of coating solids
deposited which was exceeded by no more than 1 percent of the data at
each turnover level.
The RT's of less than 0.040 represent periods of zero or
abnormally low production. These low-operating levels occurred more
frequently than normal during the period in which the data in Table 2
were generated because of the depressed operating level of the industry
at that time. Operation at RT's below 0.040 results in widely
varying VOC emissions in terms of kg VOC per liter of applied coating
solids. Under these low-operating conditions, emissions expressed in
units of the standard range from 0.17 kg of VOC per liter of applied
coating solids to over 19 kg of VOC per liter of applied coating
solids. Since operation with RT's below 0.040 result in widely
varying emissions even when EDP prime coat systems are operated and
maintained properly, it is infeasible to establish a standard for these
low-operating levels that distinguishes between proper and improper
operation regarding emissions of VOC. In addition, since the number of
vehicles produced during 4-week periods with RT's less than 0.040
is small, the total VOC emissions from the EDP tank during such periods
of operation are only a fraction of the emissions emitted when the EDP
tank is operating properly at full production. Consequently, the
revised standard includes no emission limit for operation at RT's
of 0.040 or less.
The emission limits discussed above, therefore, were selected for
the final revised standard. If there is little or no production, almost
no solids would be added to the EDP system, the RT would always be
below 0.040, and the owner would not have to comply with an emission
limit. Prime coat systems other than EDP would be required to comply
with a single numerical emission limit of 0.17 kg of VOC per liter of
applied coating solids.
One commenter suggested that the revised prime coat emission limit
be based on the performance of the single EDP system with the best
observed performance. As mentioned earlier, however, the statistical
analysis performed on 37 EDP prime coating systems showed that there
was no statistically significant difference in the observed performance
of any of the EDP systems. Consequently, all of the data on all of the
EDP systems were used to develop the final revised emission limits.
One commenter suggested that the units of the prime coat standard
be changed from kilograms of VOC per liter of applied coating solids to
kilograms of VOC per liter of coating minus water. The commenter
indicated that this change would make the prime coat standard units
consistent with most State emission limits for existing facilities.
Such a change would have the effect of deleting the requirement that a
transfer efficiency be used in determining compliance with the emission
limit. For an EDP system, the system upon which the standard is based,
the transfer efficiency that is allowed to be used for determining
compliance is 100 percent. Therefore, for an EDP system, such a change
would have little effect on the allowable or actual emissions. However,
if prime coat application systems other than EDP which have transfer
efficiencies of less than 100 percent are used, then the suggested
changes in the units of the standard could result in allowing increased
actual VOC emissions while still apparently meeting the emission limit.
Since there is a possibility that systems other than EDP will be used
in the future and a format of kg of VOC per liter of applied coating
solids is most consistent with the use of the solids turnover ratio,
the units of the standard were not changed.
The Administrator certifies that a regulatory flexibility analysis
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), is not required for this rulemaking because the
rulemaking would not have a significant impact on a substantial number
of small entities. The rulemaking would not impose any new
requirements; therefore, no additional costs would be imposed.
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as
one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
1. Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
2. Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
3. Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations or recipients
thereof; or
4. Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the president's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been
determined that this rule is a ``significant regulatory action'' within
the meaning of the Executive Order. For this reason, this action was
submitted to OMB for review. Changes made in response to OMB
suggestions or recommendations will be documented in the public record.
Information collection requirements contained in this regulation
(60.393) have been approved by OMB under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and have been
assigned OMB control number 2060-0034.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Motor vehicles,
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: September 30, 1994.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
40 CFR part 60 is amended as follows:
PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sections 101, 111, 114, 116, and 301 of the Clean Air
Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7414, 7416, 7601).
2. Section 60.391 is amended by adding definitions in alphabetical
order to paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.391 Definitions.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
Solids Turnover Ratio (RT) means the ratio of total volume of
coating solids that is added to the EDP system in a calendar month
divided by the total volume design capacity of the EDP system.
* * * * *
Volume Design Capacity of EDP System (LE) means the total liquid
volume that is contained in the EDP system (tank, pumps, recirculating
lines, filters, etc.) at its designed liquid operating level.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
LE = the total volume of the EDP system (liters),
* * * * *
3. Section 60.392 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 60.392 Standards for volatile organic compounds.
* * * * *
(a) Prime Coat Operation
(1) For each EDP prime coat operation:
(i) 0.17 kilogram of VOC per liter of applied coating solids when
RT is 0.16 or greater.
(ii) 0.17 x 350 (0.160-RT) kg of VOC per liter of applied
coating solids when RT is greater than or equal to 0.040 and less
than 0.160.
(iii) When RT is less than 0.040, there is no emission limit.
(2) For each nonelectrodeposition prime coat operation: 0.17
kilogram of VOC per liter of applied coating solids.
* * * * *
4. Section 60.393 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(l)(i)(E) to
read as follows:
Sec. 60.393 Performance test and compliance provisions.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) * * *
(E) For each EDP prime coat operation, calculate the turnover ratio
(RT) by the following equation:
TR11OC94.000
Then calculate or select the appropriate limit according to
Sec. 60.392(a).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 94-25066 Filed 10-7-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
