San Joaquin Valley 

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT 

GOVERNING BOARD 

Chris Vierra, Chair 

Councilmember, City of Ceres 

Tony Barba, Vice Chair 

Supervisor, Kings County 

David C. Ayers 

Councilmember, City of Hanford 

Judith C. Case 

Supervisor, Fresno County 

Ronn Oominici 

Supervisor, Madera County 

Henry Jay Forman, Ph.0. 

Appointed by Governor 

Ann Johnston 

Mayor. City of Stockton 

Randy Miller 

Councilmember, City of Taft 

Michael C. Nelson 

Supervisor, Merced County 

William O'Brien 

Supervisor, Stanislaus County 

Leroy Ornellas 

Supervisor, San Joaquin County 

John C. Telles. M.D. 

Appointed by Governor 

Raymond A. Watson 

Supervisor, Kern County 

J. Steven Worthley 

Supervisor, Tulare County 

Vacant 

Large City 

Seyed Sadredin 

Executive Director 

Air Pollution Control Officer 

Northern Region Office 

4800 Enterprise Way 

Modesto, CA 95356.8718 

(209) 557-6400 FAX 12091 557-6475 

Central Region Office 

1990 East Gettysburg Avenue 

Fresno, CA 93726-0244 

(559) 230-6000 FAX (559) 230-6061 

Southern Region Office 

34946 Flyover Court 

Bakersfield, CA 93308-9725 

(661) 392-5500 FAX (661) 392-5585 

DATE: Decerr~ber 17,2009 

TO: SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

FROM: Seyed Sadredin, Executive DirectorIAPCO 

Project Coordinator: George Heinen 

RE: ADOPT REVISED PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO 

RULE 4601 (ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS) 

RECOMMENDATION: 

1. Adopt revised proposed amendments to Rule 4601. (Architectural 

Coatings). 

2. Authorize the Chair to sign the attached Resolution. 

BACKGROUND: 

The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin has been designated by the United 

States Environmental Protection Agency as nonattainment for the 

federal ozone standard. The District's 2007 Ozone Plan identified 

architectural coatings as potential sources for reducing emissions of 

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) which will help the District reach 

attainment of the federal air quality standards. In addition, as a 

nonattainment area for the state air quality standards, the revised 

proposed amendments would also fulfill the state law to implement Best 

Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT). 

The San Joaquin Valley Air District is a public health agency whose 

mission is to improve the health and quality of life for all Valley residents 

through efficient, effective, and entrepreneurial air-quality management 

strategies. In fulfillment of this mission, District staff is proposing to 

lower the VOC emission limits in Rule 4601, capitalizing on recent 

advances in low-VOC coating technologies and formulations. 

Amending Rule 4601 will satisfy VOC control measure S-SOL-1 

(Architectural Coatings) in the District's 2007 Ozone Plan. The revised 

proposed amendments would establish more stringent emission limits 
'SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4601 (ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS) 

December 17, 2009 

for volatile organic compounds (VOC). This rule project would also amend Rule 4601 to 

implement the errlission control requirements listed in the California Air Resources 

Board (ARB) Suggested Cor~trol Measure (SCM) for architectural coatings, promulgated 

September 2007. Implementing SCM standards will ensure that Rule 4601 meets 

Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements in accordance with the 

federal Clean Air Act. 

The SIP commitment in the District's 2007 Ozone Plan calls for this rule project to 

reduce 2.0 tons per day (tpd) of VOC, a 21 % reduction from the baseline inventory, 

upon rule implementation in 2012. Revised proposed amendments would reduce VOC 

emissions by 2.8 tpd (28%) upon rule implementation. This reduction exceeds the 

commitment in the 2007 Ozone Plan. 

DISCUSSION: 

District Rule 4601 (Architectural Coatings) is applicable to any person who supplies, 

sells, offers for sale, applies, or solicits the application of any architectural coating, or who 

manufactures, blends, or repackages any architectural coating for use withi.n the District, 

and any associated solvent cleaning operations. 

District Rule 4601 sets limits for VOC contents of architectural coating products and 

associated organic solvent cleaning operations. Rule language specifies the VOC 

content limit for 43 different coating categories, expressed as grams of VOC per liter of 

coating product. 

As a part of the rule-amending process, staff evaluated the possibility of irrlplementing 

the architectural coating limits currently in place in the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (SCAQMD), which has twelve VOC content limits that are lower 

than the SCM. Several factors led staff to recommend the SCM VOC content limits in 

lieu of the SCAQMD VOC content limits. The cost for emission reductions using the 

SCAQMD VOC limits would be an increase of $2.91 per gallon, more than twice that of 

the SCM VOC limits. 

It is also important to note that the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin (SJVAB) is a NOx 

limited ozone area, while the South Coast Air Basin is a VOC limited attainment area. 

Air-quality computer modeling used for the District's 2007 Ozone Plan demonstrated 

that reductions in VOC emissions are relatively weak in affecting 8-hour ozone levels 

compared to the same amount of NOx reductions. 

The SCAQMD, on the other hand, is much more VOC-limited than the SJVAB due to 

topography, meteorology; and the chemical composition of the air pollutants. As stated 

in the 2007 Air Quality'Management Plan (AQMP) for SCAQMD, the pathway to lower 

ozone levels and attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard [for SCAQMD] would be 

more biased towards lowering VOC emissions. 
SJVUA PCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4601 (ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS) 

December 1 7, 2009 

In conclusion, since the SCAQMD VOC content limits would provide very little air quality 

benefit in the Valley but would result in significant additional cost, District staff has chosen 

to recommend the SCM requirements. EPA has submitted written comments supporting 

the adoption of the 2007 ARB SCM VOC limits. 

Summary of Proposed Amendments to Rule 4601 

The following are the proposed amendments to Rule 4601, effective on and after 

January 1,201 1 : 

Numerous definitions would be added, deleted, or modified in order to make this rule 

harmonize with definitions and rule requirements presented in the 2007 ARB SCM. 

A reporting requirement would be added for any architectural coating that is sold in a 

container with a volume of one liter or less. The exemption for architectural coatings 

would be further defined by adding "coatings that are supplied and offered for sale" 

to current language, in order to make this rule consistent with the 2007 ARB SCM. 

VOC content limits would be amended to implement the recommended VOC limits ' 

per the 2007 ARB SCM. 

o 15 coating categories would be deleted effective December 31, 2010. 

o 10 coating categories would be added to rule language effective on and after 

January 1,201 1 and January 1,2012. 

o 19 coating categories would remain unchanged. 

o 10 coating categories would be made more stringent effective on and after 

January 1,201 1 and January 1,2012. 

Labeling requirements would be updated to add new labeling standards consistent 

with new coatings categories per the 2007 ARB SCM. 

A new section would be added to include reporting requirements per the 2007 ARB 

SCM. Including a requirenient to submit sales data, as authorized in the California 

Health and Safety Code. 

New test methods would be added to rule language to account for the new coatings 

categories. 

The amendments are revised proposed because minor changes were made to the 

original proposal, to add references for test methods and labeling in the definitions 

section of the rule. 

Issues and Responses 

EPA supports the District's adoption of the 2007 ARB SCM coating categories and 

corresponding VOC limits over the SCAQMD limits. 

ARB and industry, requested the 2013 effective date be changed to 2012 to align 

with other districts adopting the SCM. District staff has included the requested 

changes, which would accelerate compliance with the new standard. 
'SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4601 (ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS) 

December 17, 2009 

ARB has added several new coating categories to the 2007 SCM for architectural 

coatings that were not in the 2000 SCM. However, in the SCM, four of the new 

coating categories (basement specialty coatings, reactive penetrating sealers, stone 

consolidants, and tub and tile refinishing coatings) were assigned VOC content limits 

that are less stringent than the general VOC content limits in Rule 4601 that would 

apply upon adoption of the rule amendments. Therefore, industry requested a oneyear exemption from the general coating limits. To avoid imposing unintended and 

technologically infeasible VOC limits for the four coating categories, District staff 

would include a special provision in the requirements section of the rule rather than 

an exemption. It is important to note that these coating categories are specialized 

niche categories with small sales volumes and low emissions, and that this 

temporary provision will not increase emissions. 

Cost Effectiveness Analysis 

Pursuant to CH&SC section 40920.6(a), a cost effectiveness analysis is required for rules 

that implement BARCT. The purpose of the cost effectiveness analysis is to evaluate the 

economic reasonableness of the rule or rule amendments. The analysis also serves as a 

guideline for developing the control requirements of the rule. District staff conducted a 

cost effectiveness analysis of the revised proposed amendments based on reports from 

ARB in the SCM as well as the SCAQMD staff report. The overall average costeffectiveness of the revised proposed limits is estimated to be $2,240 per ton of VOC 

reduced. This compares favorably with the cost-effectiveness of similar regulations. 

Please see Appendix C of the Final Draft Staff Report for further details. 

Socioeconomic Impact Analysis 

Pursuant to CH&SC 40728.5, "whenever a district intends to propose the adoption, 

amendment, or repeal of a rule or regulation that will signi.ficalitly affect air quality or 

emissions limitations, that agency shall, to the extent data are available; perform an 

assessment of the socioeconomic impacts of the adoption, amendment, or repeal of the 

rule or regulation." As a part of the District's socioeconomic analysis process, District 

staff convened a Focus Group on March 3,2009. 

The Focus Group consisted of volunteers who assisted by gathering and providing 

information about costs expected to be incurred to corr~ply with the rule and hypothetical 

business responses to those costs. Operators and other interested parties were invited 

to submit their estimate of compliance costs and possible business responses to aid 

District staff in estimating the regulatory compliance costs and business impacts 

resulting from compliance with the rule. This information and supporting data was 

provided to the District's consultant who identified and analyzed the socioeconomic 

impacts of the revised proposed amendments to Rule 4601 on the regional economy. 

Please see Appendix D of the Final Draft Staff Report for further details. 
SJVUAPCD Governing Board 

ADOPT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO RULE 4601 (ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS) 

December 17. 2009 

Rule Consistency Analysis 

Pursuant to CH&SC 40272.2, District staff prepared a rule consistency analysis 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. District staff found that none of the revised proposed 

requirements of these rules would conllict with other District rules, or federal rules, 

regulations, or policies covering similar stationary sources. The rule consistency 

analysis is presented in Appendix E of the Final Draft Staff Report. 

Environmental Impacts 

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

possible environmental irnpacts of the revised proposed amendments to Rule 4601. 

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

revised 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 15061 (b) (3). 

Rule Development Process 

District staff conducted a scoping meeting in November 2008, and two public workshops 

in March and September 2009 as well as a Socioeconomic Focus Group meeting to 

present and discuss proposed amendments to Rule 4601. District staff solicited 

information of control technologies on the technological feasibility and cost information 

used in developing the draft amendments. Staff incorporated comments received 

during the rule development process as appropriate. Revised proposed amendments to 

Rule 4601 and the Draft Staff Report were published and made available to affected 

sources and interested parties for review and comment prior to a public hearing by the 

Governing Board. Comments received during the public comment period were 

evaluated and incorporated into the revised proposed rule language, as appropriate. A 

summary of the comments received and District responses in Appendix A of the Final 

Draft Staff Report. 

FISCAL IMPACT: 

District staff expects no fiscal impact to result fro111 this. action. 

Attachments: 

Resolution for Revised Proposed Amendments to Rule 4601 (5 pages) 

Proposed Amendments to Rule 4601 (40 pages) 

Final Draft Staff Report with Appendices for Proposed Amendments to Rule 4601 (84 pages)