1 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION IX AIR DIVISION

Technical Support Document

For

EPA’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the

California State Implementation Plan

South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1113,

Architectural Coatings

Prepared by Sona Chilingaryan and Nicole Law

September 20102

Agency: South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)

SIP Approved Rule : Rule 1113, Architectural Coatings, adopted November 8, 1996, submitted November 27, 1996, EPA approved June 21, 1999 (64 FR 33018)

Superseded Submittals : Four different submittals adopted December 6, 2002, December 5, 2003, July 9, 2004, and June 9, 20 06, all submitted on December 29, 2006

Subject of this TSD: Rule 1113, Architectural Coatings, amended July 12 , 2007, submitted March 7, 2008

Rule Summary SCAQMD Rule 1113 controls volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from architectural coatings by establishing VOC limits on manufacture, distribution and use of various coatings. SCAQMD first adopted it in September 1977 and has amended it several times since initial adoption.

Changes from the SIP Approved Rule Changes to the SIP approved version of Rule 1113 include the following:

Definitions were added for aluminum roof coatings, bituminous roof primers, clear brushing lacquers, floor coatings, formulation data, high temperature industrial maintenance coatings, industrial maintenance coatings, interior stains, nonflat coatings, nonflat high gloss coatings, post

- consumer coatings, product line, recycled coatings, rust preventative coati ngs, secondary (rework) coatings, specialty primers, waterproofing concrete/masonry sealers, and zinc

- rich industrial maintenance primers. (Section ( b ) )

The definition s for concrete curing compounds, fire retardant coatings

, metallic pigmented coatings , qu ick dry enamels, roof coatings, shellac, volatile organic compounds, and waterproofing sealers were amended, and the definition for industrial maintenance primers and topcoats was removed. (Section ( b ) )

T he following categories have more stringent limits (Section (c)(2) ) :

o varnishes (275 vs. 350 g/L),

o sanding sealers (275 vs. 350 g/L),

o concrete

- curing compounds (100 vs 350 g/L),

o dry

- fog coatings ( 150 vs. 400 g/L) ,

o pre

- treatment wash primer s (420 vs. 780 g/L),

o primers, sealers, and undercoaters (100 vs. 350 g/L),

o quick

- dry enamels (50 vs. 400 g/L),

o roof coatings (100 vs. 350 g/L),

o stains (100 g/L for stains and 250 g/L for interior stains vs. 300 g/L for stains),

o swimming pool coatings

- repair (340 vs. 650 g/L),

o traffic coatings (100 vs. 250 g/L), and3 o waterproofing sealers (100 vs. 400 g/L). The following categories were added to the Table of Standards (Section (c)(2)) :

o Clear brushing lacquer (275 g/L; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 275 g/L Clear Wood Finishes Lacquer category in the SIP approved rule),

o concrete

- curing compounds for roadways and bridges (350 g/L limit ; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 350g/L

concrete

- curing compounds category in the SIP approved rule),

o industrial maint enance coatings (100 g/L limit; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 420 g/L industrial maintenance category in the SIP approved rule),

o high temperature industrial maintenance coatings ( 420 g/L limit; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 420 g/L industrial maintenance category in the SIP approved rule),

o zinc

- rich industrial maintenance primers (100 g/L limit; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 42 0 g/L industrial maintenance category in the SIP approved rule),

o nonflat coatings (50 g/L limit; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 250 g/L limit in paragraph (c)(1) in the SIP approved rule),

o nonflat high gloss (50 g/L limit; coat ings in this category were required to comply with the 250 g/L limit in paragraph (c)(1) in the SIP approved rule),

o quick dry primers, sealers, and undercoaters (100 g/L limit; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 350 g/L primers, se alers, and undercoaters category in the SIP approved rule),

o recycled coatings (250 g/L limit; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 250 g/L limit in paragraph (c)(1) in the SIP approved rule),

o roof coatings

- aluminum (100 g/L limit; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 300 g/L roof coatings category in the SIP approved rule),

o roof primers

- bituminous (350 g/L limit; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 420 g/L bituminous coatings materials category in the SIP approved rule),

o rust preventative coatings (100 g/L limit; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 420 g/L industrial maintenance coating category in the SIP approved rule, the 400 g/L quick dry enamel category

in th e SIP approved rule, or the 350 g/L primer, sealer, and undercoater category in the SIP approved rule),

o specialty primers (100 g/L limit; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 350 g/L primers, sealers, and undercoaters category in

SIP approved rule),

o stains

- interior (250 g/L limit; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 350 g/L stains category in SIP approved rule), and4 o waterproofing concrete/masonry sealers (100 g/L limit; coatings in this category were required to comply with the 400g/L waterproofing sealers category in SIP approved rule). The following industrial maintenance sub

- categories were removed from the Table of Standards: alkyds, catalyzed epoxy, bituminous coating materials, inorganic polymers, vinyl chloride polymers, chlorinated rubber, acrylic polymers, urethane polymers, silicones, and unique vehicles. (Section (c)(2))

A sell

- through provision was added that allows coatings that were manufactured prior to the effective date of the applicable limi t that have a VOC content that’s above the limit in the Table of Standards (but is not above the limit in effect on the date of manufacture), to be sold, supplied, offered for sale, or applied for up to three years after the specified effective date. (Sect ion (c)(4)) The averaging compliance option (ACO) was expanded to include the following coating categories: floor coatings, primers, sealers and undercoaters, quick

- dry primers, sealers and undercoaters, quick

- dry enamels, rust preventative coatings,

roof coatings, specialty primers, stains, waterproofing sealers, industrial maintenance coatings, flats and nonflats (excluding recycled coatings), bituminous roof primers, fire

- retardant coatings, high

- gloss nonflats, metallic pigmented coatings, zinc

- rich ind ustrial maintenance primers, interior stains, waterproofing concrete/masonry sealers, varnishes, and sand sealers. (Section (c)(6)(A) and (B))

A n added requirement for manufacture r s to not include in an ACO program any coating with a VOC content in excess of the maximum VOC content in effect immediately prior to July 1, 2001 or the VOC content limits specified in the National VOC Emission standard, whichever is less. (Appendix A: (A)) An added requirement that for every single compliance period of the ACO program, the manufacturer submit to the Executive Officer a mid

- term report listing all coatings subject to averaging during the first half of the compliance period, detailed analysis of the actual and allowable emissions at the end of th e mi d

- term, and if actual emissions exceed allowable emissions an explanation as to

how the manufa cturer intend s to achieve compliance by the end of the compliance period. (Appendix A: (D)1.) A provision that allows an affected manufacturer to base its av eraging on prior limits on a coating until the end of the compliance period immediately following the date of adoption if the VOC limits of a coating listed in the ACO Program are amended such that its effective date is less than one year from the date of adoption. (Appendix A: (H)) An added requirement for each container of any coating in an ACO Prog ram that exceeds the applicable VOC limits in the Table of Standards to be label ed with “This product is subject to the averaging provisions of SCAQMD Rule 1 113 ” or a substitute symbol specified by the Executive Officer. (Appendix A: (I))

An added clarification that the exceedance of the allowable emissions at the end of any ACO Program compliance period shall constitute a separate violation for each coating product line that is over the VOC limit specified in the Table of Standards for each day of the compliance period. (Appendix A: (J))5 An added sell through provision for coatings included in an approved ACO Program that do not comply with specified limits i n the Table of Standards. Such coatings can be sold, supplied, offered for sale, or applied for up to three years after the end of the compliance period if the coating container displays the statement “This product is subject to architectural coatings aver aging pro visions of the SCAQMD Rule 1113 ” or a substitute symbol specified by the Executive

Officer. (Appendix A: (K))

EPA Evaluation The following criteria were used to evaluate the submitted rule.

1. Enforceability

- The Bluebook (Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations, EPA, May 25, 1988) and the Little Bluebook (Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies, EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001) were used to help evaluate compliance with the

CAA § 110(a)(2)(A) requirement for enforceability.

2. Rule stringency

– EPA’s National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standard for Architectural Coatings (40 CFR Part 59 Subpart D), CARB’s Suggested Control Measures for Architectural Coatings (October 26, 2007), and other state and local rules for this category were used t o help evaluate the rule stringency

.

3. SIP Relaxation

- Where previous versions of rules have been SIP approved, new submittals must comply with CAA Section 110(l) and Section 193 regarding SIP

relaxations.

4. Economic Incentive Program

- Because Rul e 11 1 3 includes an averaging provision, EPA considers this program an economic incentive program. EPA’s guidance contained in the document entitled, “Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs,” EPA

- 452/R

- 01

- 001, January 2001, ( http://www.epa.gov/ttncaaa1/t1/meta/m1201.html ), frequently referred to as the

EIP Guidance , was used to evaluate the economic incentive program

.

The submitted rule has VOC limits more stringent than EPA’s rul e for architectural coatings, CARB’s suggested control measure, and other California District rules for this category. As a result, we have determined that this rule is sufficiently stringent. The labeling , recordkeeping and other requirements generally ensure that the submitted rule can be enforced. Lastly, the submitted rule is more stringent than the version previously approved into the SIP, so the submitted rule does not relax the SIP and complies with Section 110(l) a nd Section 193.

Rule Evaluation Discussion Several specific issues are discussed below.6

Rule 1113 section (b)(59), the definition for volatile organic compound, exempts tertiary butyl acetate (TBAc) as a VOC in the architectural coating category of ind ustrial maintenance coatings . EPA’s definition of a VOC requires TBAc be regarded as a VOC for the purposes of recordkeeping, emissions reporting, photochemical dispersion modeling and inventory requirements. (see 40 CFR 51.100(s)(5)) Generally, EPA has not required recordkeeping and reporting on exempt compounds, but did require it for TBAc to better determine if potential widespread usage of "negligibly reactive" compounds may contribute significantly to ozone formation, and to continue efforts to

asse ss long

- term potential health risks. (See 69 FR 69298).

A ccording to SCAQMD emissions data from 2008 and CARB’s architectural coatings survey from 2005, the industrial maintenance coatings make up only 2% of the total architectural coatings. Conversat ions with CARB staff revealed that the S tate reports inventory and emissions from the category of architectural coatings

. Therefore, it appears that the State is prepared to fulfill the obligations set forth in 40 CFR 51.100 (s) (5 ) and this provision does not need to be in a district rule. Because TBAc is not considered a VOC for the purpose of NAAQS attainment demonstrations, because industrial maintenance coatings make up a very small percentage of the overall architectural coatings category, and be cause emissions and inventory reporting requirements are performed by the S tate, we do not believe this exemption of TBAc justifies a disapproval of SCAQMD Rule 1113 at this time.

Section 4.3 of the EIP guidance requires that EIPs such as the emissions av eraging option in section (c)(6) demonstrate environmental benefit. F or example, averaging provisions

can discount emission reductions by at least 10%. Section (c)(6) requires that actual emissions from averaged coatings be less than or equal to the allowable emissions. Therefore, Rule 1113 does not explicitly require a 10% discount of emissions reductions. EPA believes, however, that Rule 1113 Section (c)(6) still fulfills the EIP’s

environmental benefit b ecause the averaging provision was important in enabling SCAQMD to adopt VOC limit s for 10 categories which are lower than the national and existing local architectural coating regulations

. SCAQMD emissions data from 2008 and CARB’s architectural coatings survey from 2005 indicate that one of those low

- VOC categories , nonflat coatings, accounts for approximately 30% of all architectural coatings

sold in the SCAQMD and California. Nonetheless, we recommend that SCAQMD discount emission reductions by at least 10%

.

In addition, Section 16.13 of the EIP guidance generally limits averaging periods to no more than 30 days. In contrast , Rule 1113 allows averaging period s between 6 months and one year. SCAQMD should revise Rule 1113 to restrict averaging to no more than 30 days.

Additional Recommendations for the Next Rule Revision The following revisions are not currently the basis for rule disapproval, but are

recommended for the next time the rul e is amended.7

1. Although tertiary butyl acetate (TBAc) is exempt as a VOC in industrial maintenance coatings, include a recordkeeping requirement for materials containing TBAc pursuant with 40 CFR 51.100(s)(5).

2. Include a 10% environmental benefit into the averaging compliance option as recommended in the EIP guidance.

3. Reduce the averaging period to 30 days or less as recommended in the EIP guidance

.

EPA Action EPA staff recommends full approval of Rule 1113 pursuant to §110( k)(3) of the CAA, and its inclusion in the California SIP for the South Coast Air Quality Management

District.

A ttachments

1. SCAQMD Rule 11 13

, Architectural Coatings

, as submitted on March 7, 2008

. 2. SCAQMD Rule 11 13

, Architectural Coatings

, changed copy, as submitted on

M arch 7, 20 0 8

. 3

. SCAQMD Rule 11 13

, Architectural Coatings , as approved into the SIP on June 21, 1999

.

Additional References

- 1. “Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,” (a.k.a., Bluebook) EPA OAQPS, May 25, 1988.

2. “Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,” (a.k.a., Little Bluebook), EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001.

3. “Suggested Control Measure for Architectural Coatings,” CARB, October 2007

. http://www.arb.ca.gov/coatings/arch/Approved_2007_SCM.pdf

4. “Improving Air Quality with Economic Incentive Programs,” EPA

- 452/R

- 01

- 001, January 2001, ( http://www.epa.gov/ttncaaa1/t1/meta/m1201.htm l ).

5. “2005 Architectural Coatings Survey Final,” CARB, December 2007

. 6. “South Coast Architectural coatings sales data.” E

- mail from Heather Farr (SCAQMD) to Nicole Law (USEPA). July 15, 2010.