San Joaquin Valley 

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DlSTRlCT 

GOVERNING BOARD 

Chris Vierra, Chair 

Councilmember. City of Ceres DATE: September 17,2009 

Tony Barba. Vice Chair TO: SJVUAPCD Governing Board Supervisor, Kings County 

David 6. Ayers 

Councllmember. C~ty of Hanford FROM: Seyed Sadredin, Executive ~irect-orlk~0 

Project Coordinator: George Heinen 

Judith G. Case 

Supervisor, Fresno County RE: ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4602 

Ronn Oominici {MOTOR VEHICLE ASSEMBLY COATINGS), RULE 4603 

Superv~sor, Madera County [SURFACE COATING OF METAL PARTS AND 

Henry Jay Forman, ~h.0. PRODUCTS). RULE 4653 (ADHESIVES), AND RULE 

Appo~nted by Governor 4684 (POLYESTER RESIN OPERATIONS) 

Jesus J. Gamboa 

Councilmember. City of Visalia 

Ann Johnston 

RECOMMENDATION: 

Mayor, City of Stockton 

1. Adopt proposed amendments to Rule 4602 (Motor Vehicle 

Randy Miller 

Councilmember. City of Taft Assernbly Coatings), Rule 4603 (Surface Coating of Metal Parts 

and Products), Rule 4653 (Adhesives), and Rule 4684 (Polyester 

Michael C. Nelson Resin Operations). 

Supervisor, Merced County 

William ~'~rien 2. Authorize the Chair to sign the attached Resolution. 

Supervisor, Stanislaus County 

Leroy Ornellas 

Supervisor, San Joaquin County BACKGROUND: 

John G. Telles, M.D. 

Appointed by Governor The Clean Air Act (MA) provides that state implementation plans (SIPS) 

Raymond A. Watson for nonattainment areas must include "reasonably available control 

Supervisor, Kern County meas~~res", including "reasonably available control technology" (RACT), 

J. Steven Worthley 

for sources of emissions. The CAA further provides that for certain 

Supervisor, Tulare County nonattainment areas, States must revise their SIPS to include RACT for 

each category of volatile organic compound (VOC) sources covered by a 

Seyed Sadredin Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) document issued between 

Executive Director 

Air Pollution Control Officer November 15, 1990 and the date of attainment. CTGs identify emission 

limits achievable by the application of RACT. 

Northern Region Office 

4800 Enterprise Way 

Modesto, CA 95356-8718 In September 2008, the United States Environmental Protection Agency 

(2091 5576400 FAX (209) 557-6475 (EPA) promulgated four new CTGs: A~tomobile and Light-Duty Truck 

Central Region Office Assembly Coatings; Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings; 

1990 East Gettysburg Avenue Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives; and Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing 

Fresno. CA 93726-0244 

15591 230.6000 FAX (5591 230-6061 Materials. Implementation of these C--Gs is not expected to have 

significant VOC emission reduction bezause Valley facilities are already 

Southern Region Office using materials that are close to the C iG VOC limits. Nonetheless, CAA 

34946 Flyover Court 

Bakersfield, CA 93308-9725 

(6611 392.5500 FAX (6611 392-5585 
SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4602, RULE 4603, RULE 4653 AND RULE 4684 

September 17, 2009 

section 182(b)(2) requires that each CTG include the date by which states must submit 

SIP revisions in response to the CTG. EPA is providing a one-year period for the 

required submittal. 

DISCUSSION: 

The following are proposed major amendments to Rules 4602, 4603, 4653, and 4684. 

Please refer to the Final Draft Staff Reports for details of the proposed rule 

amendments. 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 4602 (Motor Vehicle Assembly Coatings) 

Rule 4602 would be amended to implement RACT requirements as p'resented in the 

CTG for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings, and motor vehicle 

materials VOC limits recommended in the CTG for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic 

Parts Coatings. Proposed amendments, effective on and after January 1,201 1, would 

make this rule applicable to any person who applies VOC-containing coatings to new 

automobiles, light-duty trucks, or heavier vehicles. VOC limits, work practices, and 

exemptions would be updated to reflect the new rule requirements. 

Issues on Rule 4602 and District Staffs Response 

Requests were made that provisions that were not included in the CTG be removed. 

The District response is that the amendments that are not from the CTG are already inplace in other District's prohibitory rules applying to these businesses. These provisions 

are included to make the rule easier for operators to follow and understand, in that they 

could look at only one rule to determine with which requirements they would need to 

comply. 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 4603 (Surface Coating of Metal Parts and 

Products) 

Rule 4603 would be amended to implement RACT requirements as presented in the 

CTG for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings promulgated by EPA in 

September 2008, as required by the CAA. Proposed amendments, effective on and 

after January 1, 201 I, would be applicable to any facility operator who applies VOCcontaining coatings to miscellaneous metal parts and products, plastic parts and 

products, automotive/transportation and business machine plastic parts and products, 

and pleasure crafts coating operations. The amendments would establish VOC limits 

for several coating categories depending on the type of parts and products being 

coated, provide exemptions for certain types of coatings, specifywork practice 

standards, establish a VOC control device capture and control efficiency, and update 

several definitions of terms used in the rule, which are consistent with the 

recommendations by the CTG. The VOC limits would only apply to operators whose 

total facility VOC emissions from all coating operations and related cleaning, before 
SJVUA PCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4602, RULE 4603, RULE 4653 AND RULE 4684 

September 17, 2009 

consideration of controls, is at least 2.7 tons of VOC per 12-month rolling period. 

Operators whose total VOC emissions are below this emission 'threshold are not 

required to comply with the applicable coatings VOC limits, except for complying with 

certain recordkeeping requirements. 

Issues on Rule 4603 and District Stars Response 

California Air Resources Board (ARB) 

ARB staff suggested lowering the coatings' limits in Rule 4603 for general onecomponent, general two-component, electric dissipating, and shock-free coatings to 

meet the same limits as the South Coast AQMD Rule 1145 (Plastic, Rubber, Leather, 

and Glass Coatings). Also, ARB recommended that storage containers should be made 

"airtight". 

District Stars Response: As stated by District staff in the Final Draft Staff Report, the 

sole purpose of these proposed Rule 4603 amendments is to incorporate the RACT 

requirements established by EPA in the 2008 CTG for miscellaneous metal parts and 

products coatings, plastic parts and products coatings, and pleasure craft coatings. 

Unlike the CTG VOC limits for pleasure craft coatings which is similar to SCAQMD Rule 

1106 (Pleasure Craft Coating Operations), the SCAQMD Rule 1145 VOC limits for 

plastic parts and products coatings are beyond RACT and are not prescribed in the 

CTG. District staff will review the SCAQMD Rule 1145 provisions for potential 

emissions reductions, in the context of future attainment plan control measure. District 

staff incorporated the work practices standards recommended in the CTG. The CTG 

requires the storage containers used for VOC-containing materials to be kept closed at 

all times except when depositing or removing these materials. The CTG does not 

require airtight containers. 

National Paint Coating Association (NPCA) 

NPCA commented that the proposed VOC limits for pleasure craft coatings, especially 

in the cases of high gloss, extreme gloss, and antifouling coatings are too low. NPCA 

member companies have made and will continue to make efforts to develop effective 

lower VOC pleasure craft coatings, but so far have not been able to do so at the CTG 

limits. 

District Staff's Response: The proposed pleasure craft coating limits in Rule 4603 are 

required by the federal CTG. The CTG pleasure craft coatings VOC content limits are 

identical to the limits in SCAQMD Rule 11 06.1 (Pleasure Craft Coating Operations). It 

is important to mention that the SCAQMD Rule 1106.1 limits have been in place since 

January 1, 2001. In a telephone conversation, SCAQMD staff indicated their sources 

are able to comply with Rule 1106.1 limits, and that compliant coatings are 

commercially available. This provision is not expected to impact the single facility in the 

Valley, as ,the operation is currently in compliance with the CTG limit. 
SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4602, RULE 4603, RULE 4653 AND RULE 4684 

September 17, 2009 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 4653 (Adhesives) 

Rule 4653 would be amended to implement RACT requirements as presented in the 

CTG for Miscellaneous industrial Adhesives promulgated by EPA in September of 2008, 

as required by the CAA. Proposed amendments, effective on and after January 1, 

201 1, would include updates to definitions and VOC limits, the addition of new 

adhesives categories, and new work practices. 

Issues on Rule 4653 and District Staff's Responses 

California Air Resources Board (ARB) 

ARB has issued comments requesting the District add requirements for sealants and 

sealant primers to rule language. ARB has also requested the District reduce VOC 

limits for adhesives categories to match those of South Coast AQMD and Ventura 

County APCD. 

District Staffs Response: The sole purpose of this project is to implement standards 

presented in the EPA CTG in order to comply with CAA requirements. However, the 

District 2007 Ozone Plan committed to amend Rule 4653 in the third quarter of 201 0. 

Therefore, staff intends to re-open Rule 4653 to evaluate the technological and 

economic feasibility of the addition of sealants and sealant primers to rule language as 

well as explore the feasibility of lowering VOC limits for certain adhesive categories to 

make this rule better align with other districts' adhesives rules. 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 4684 (Polyester Resin Operations) 

Rule 4684 would be amended to implement RACT requirements as presented in the 

CTG for Fiberglass Boat manufacturing Materials promulgated by EPA in September 

2008. Proposed amendments, effective on and after January 1,201 1, would be 

applicable to any boat manufacturing facilities that manufacture hulls or decks of boats 

from fiberglass, or build molds to make fiberglass boat hulls or decks using an open 

molding process. The amendments would establish VOC limits for resins and gel coats 

used in manufacturing of fiberglass boat hulls and decks, provide an exemption for 

certain production resin for use in military vessels or to meet specific U.S. Coast Guard 

requirements, specify work practice standards, establish a VOC control device capture 

and control efficiency, and update several definitions of terms used in the rule, which 

are consistent with the recommendations by the CTG. The new VOC limits would only 

apply to operators whose total facility VOC emissions from all fiberglass boat 

manufacturing operations and related cleaning is at least 2.7 tons of VOC per 12-month 

rolling period. Operators whose total VOC emissions are below this emission threshold 

are not required to comply with the applicable coatings VOC limits, except for complying 

with certain recordkeeping requirements. 
SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4602, RULE 4603, RULE 4653 AND RULE 4684 

September 17, 2009 

Issues on Rule 4684 and District Staffs Responses 

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

EPA commented that the existing VOC limits, emission control system efficiency, and 

application methods in Rule 4684 for non-fiberglass boat manufacturing facilities are 

less stringent than other air districts' r~~les, and therefore constitute RACT deficiencies 

as cited in EPA's Technical Support Document for proposed limited 

approval/disapproval of Rule 4684 that EPA published in 74 FR 34704. 

District Staff's Response: As stated in the District's RACT SIP Demonstration that was 

submitted to EPA in April 2009, although Rule 4684 limits are not identical to those 

contained within other districts' rules, those are considered beyond RACT. The VOC 

limits and emission control requirements of Rule 4684 are consistent with the standards 

specified in ARB's "Determination of Reasonably Available and Best Available Retrofit 

Control Technology for Polyester Resin Operations", which EPA should consider as the 

basis for RACT since there is no CTG for this source category. District staff researched 

ozone nonattainment areas in other states that are also required by CAA to have RACT 

rules, and found that they have no specific regulations on polyester resin operations 

even though they have sources in their jurisdictions. Staff believes that in the absence 

of a CTG for this source category, RACT is defined by the standards in ARB's RACT 

determination document, which was the basis of Rule 4684. District staff will review the 

benefits and costs of strengthening the rule beyond RACT in the context of an 

attainment plan control measure. 

California Air Resources Board (ARB) 

Rule 4684 does not meet the requirements of the state Health and Safety Code which 

requires districts with serious air pollution to require BARCT and all feasible measures. 

Other air districts rules have more stringent requirements for low-use operations, 

polyester resin monomer contents, and higher capture and control efficiency than Rule 

4684. It is critical for that the District take this opportunity to amend the rule to 

incorporate these more stringent requirements, maximizing the emissions reductions 

from the rule and ensuring Rule 4684 conforms to state law. 

District Staffs Response: As stated by District staff in the Final Draft Staff Report, the 

sole purpose of these proposed Rule 4684 amendments is to incorporate the RACT 

requirements established by EPA in the 2008 CTG for fiberglass boat manufacturing 

materials. The District understands that state law requires ozone nonattainment areas 

to implement BARCT and all feasible measures. During the developn~ent of the Ozone 

Plan, the District did not recommend this source category as a control measure 

because no significant VOC reductions could be achieved by lowering the existing 

monomer VOC limits and increasing the capture and control efficiency. District staff will 

review the other air districts' rule provisions for potential emissions reductions, and 

schedule rulemaking as part of the District's 201 0 mid-course review of the Ozone Plan. 
SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4602, RULE 4603, RULE 4653 AND RULE 4684 

September 17, 2009 

Cost Effectiveness and Socioeconomic Analysis 

Pursuant to California Health & Safety Code Section 40920.6(a), the District is required to 

analyze the cost effectiveness of new rules or rule amendments that implement Best 

Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) or planning requirements to incorporate all 

feasible measures. The draft amendments to Rl~les 4602, 4603,4653 and 4684 would 

only add federal RACT requirements, and are therefore not subject to the cost 

effectiveness analysis mandate. 

Pursuant to California Health & Safety Code Section 40728.5 (a) an assessment of the 

socioeconomic impacts is not required for any rule or regulation that only adopts a 

requirement that is substantially similar to, or is required by state or federal statute, 

regulation, or applicable formal guidance, such as a federal CTG. Since the proposed 

amendments to Rules 4602, 4603,4653 and 4684 would implement the CTG standards 

mandated by the federal Clean Air Act, a socioeconomic impact analysis is not required. 

Rule Consistency Analysis 

As required by California Health & Safety Code Section 40727.2, District staff will 

prepare a rule consistency analysis later in the rule development process that compares 

the elements of amendments with the corresponding elements of other District rules, 

federal regulations and guidelines that apply to the same source category or type of 

equipment. The analysis has indicated that none of the proposed requirements of these 

rules would conflict with federal r~~les, regulations, or policies covering similar stationary 

sources. The rule consistency analyses for the proposed amendments to the rules are 

presented in Appendix B of the respective Final Draft Staff Reports. 

Environmental Impacts 

Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), staff investigated the 

possible environmental impacts of the proposed amendments to Rules 4602,4603, 4653 

and 4684. Based on the lack of evidence to the contrary, District staff has concluded that 

the proposed amendments to the rules will not have any significant adverse effects on the 

environment. Staff recommends filing a Notice of Exemption under the provisions of 

Public Resource Code 1 5061 (b)(3). 

Rule Development Process 

In June 2009, as part of the rule development process, District staff mailed copies of the 

proposed amendments to Rules 4602,4603, 4653 and 4684 to affected sources, 

interested parties, the public, EPA and ARB to solicit their comments. In addition, the 

notice of the proposed amendments to the rules was also published in a general 
SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4602, RULE 4603, RULE 4653 AND RULE 4684 

September 17, 2009 

circulation newspaper in each of the eight San Joaquin Valley counties. The 

commenting deadline ended on July 20, 2009. Comments received during the rule 

development process were incorporated into the rule amendments as appropriate. 

Comments received and District staffs responses are discussed in Appendix A of the 

Final Draft Staff Reports. 

The notice of the public hearing for the proposed rules will be published in a general 

circulation newspaper in each of the eight San Joaquin Valley counties and was mailed 

to affected sources, interested parties, the public, EPA and ARB. The public notice will 

solicit written comments to be submitted by mail, and it also identified the name and 

telephone number of the District staff who can answer questions and respond to 

comments. The Receive and File for these proposed rule amendments occurred on 

August 20, 2009. The public hearing to consider the proposed actions by the District 

Governing Board is scheduled for September 17, 2009. 

FISCAL IMPACT: 

District staff expects no fiscal impact to result from this action. 

Attachments: 

Resolution for Proposed Amendments to Rules 4602, 4603, 4653 and 4684 (5 pages) 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 4602 (30 pages) 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 4603 (32 pages) 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 4653 (28 pages) 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 4684 (22 pages) 

Final Draft Staff Repolf with Appendices for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4602 (34 pages) 

Final Draft Staff Report with Appendices for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4653 (28 pages) 

Final Draft Staff Repolf with Appendices for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4603 and Rule 4684 

(42 pages)