PLACER COUNTY

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT

STAFF REPORT

RULE 238

FACTORY COATING OF FLATWOOD PANELING

PROPOSED RULE AMENDMENTS

October 14, 2010
Staff Report – Proposed Revision to Rule 238

October 14, 2010

Page 2

BACKGROUND

Rule 238, FACTORY COATING OF FLATWOOD PANELING, limits the volatile organic 

compound (VOC) emissions from wood products coating operations in the Placer County Air 

Pollution Control District (District). The rule was last amended by the District on February 18, 

2004.

The District is proposing amendments to Rule 238 to be consistent with U.S. EPA’s “Control 

Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings,” (EPA 453/R-06-004), dated September 

2006, changes being made to Rule 218, ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS and Rule 236, WOOD 

PRODUCTS COATING OPERATIONS, and to meet our requirement for VOC emission 

reductions for attainment of State and Federal ozone standards.

This Staff Report addresses amendments that are proposed to Rule 238.

DISCUSSION

Review of District Rule coating VOC content limits indicates they are consistent and up to date 

with the best available control practices based on review of local, State, and Federal 

requirements.

Proposed amendments to the Rule, in underline/strikeout format, are shown in Attachment #1. 

Specific changes to the Rule include:

Section 100. General

Section 102.1 Applicability, Geographic. Section 102.1 Applicability, Geographic. The 

Rule has been expanded to apply to the entire District, including the Mountain Counties 

and Lake Tahoe Air Basins. The Rule previously was limited to the Sacramento Air Basin.

Section 200. Definitions

New definitions were added for tints and stains.

Section 300. Standards

Section 301.2 The control device efficiency alternative has been changed to from 90% to 

95%.

Section 303 and 304. Work Practices. Work practice provisions have been added based 

on U.S. EPA’s Control Techniques Guidelines.

Section 500. Monitoring and Records

Section 503. Test Methods. Reference was added to additional test methods, and minor 

changes were made to the methods in the current Rule.

ANALYSIS

The following Analysis and the subsequent Findings are intended to address the requirements set 

forth in the Health and Safety Code relating to adoption of a new or amended District Rule, as well as 

other State statutes referenced herein.

1. Cost-Effectiveness of a Control Measure
Staff Report – Proposed Revision to Rule 238

October 14, 2010

Page 3

California Health & Safety Code (H&S) Section 40703 requires a District to consider and 

make public “the cost-effectiveness of a control measure”. The cost effectiveness can not 

be determined since the rule amendments will have no significant cost to comply and no 

significant emission reductions.

2. Socioeconomic Impact

H&S Section 40728, in relevant part, requires the Board to consider the socioeconomic 

impact of any new or amended rule if air quality or emission limits are significantly affected. 

The expected economic impact on the flat wood paneling operations, including two (2) with 

District permits, is expected to be insignificant.

3. Environmental Review and Compliance

California Public Resources Code Section 21159 requires an environmental analysis of 

the reasonably foreseeable methods of compliance should be conducted. Compliance of 

the proposed rule amendment is expected to be achieved by the replacement of current 

coating products with compliant compounds. Application of these compliant compounds 

will generally result in less VOC emissions from the coating activities. Therefore, the 

proposed rule amendment will reduce emissions from sources and will not cause any 

significant adverse effects on the environment. Staff has concluded that no adverse 

environmental impacts will be caused by compliance with the proposed rule amendment.

According to the above conclusion, Staff finds that the proposed rule amendment is 

exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because (1) it can be seen 

with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant 

adverse effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines §15061(b)(3)) and (2) it is as an 

action by a regulatory agency for protection of the environment (Class 8 Categorical 

Exemption, CEQA Guidelines §15308).

FINDINGS

A. Necessity: The adoption of proposed amended Rule 238 satisfies the Districts objective 

to reduce VOCs to achieve attainment with ambient air standards for ozone, and meets 

the District’s requirements to implement “every feasible measure” and “Best Available 

Retrofit Control Technology” as required under California Health and Safety Code 

Sections 40919 and 40914.

B. Authority: California Health and Safety Code, Sections 40000, 40001, 40701, 40702, 

40716, 41010, and 41013, are provisions of law that provide the District with the authority 

to adopt this proposed amended Rule.

C. Clarity: There is no indication, at this time, that the proposed amended Rule is written in 

such a manner that persons affected by the Rule cannot easily understand them.

D. Consistency: The proposed amended Rule is in harmony with, and not in conflict with or 

contradictory to, existing statutes, court decisions, or state or federal regulations.

E. Non-duplication: The proposed amended Rule does not impose the same requirements 

as an existing state or federal regulation.

F. Reference: All statutes, court decisions, and other provisions of law used by the District in 

interpreting this proposed amended Rule is incorporated into this analysis and this finding 

by reference.
Staff Report – Proposed Revision to Rule 238

October 14, 2010

Page 4

SUMMARY

Rule 238, FACTORY COATING OF FLATWOOD PANELING, has been amended to be 

consistent with the U.S. EPA’s Control Techniques Guidelines, other District rules, and to meet 

our requirement to meet ozone ambient air quality standards.

Attachment 1: Proposed Rule 386 Amendments.
ATTACHMENT #1

Amended Rule 238, Flat Wood Paneling