**UNITED STA TES ENVIRONMENTA** **L PROTECTION A GENCY**  **REGION IX A IR DIVISION**  Technical Support Document

for EPA’ s Proposed Rulemaking

for the California State Implementation Plan San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District , Rule 46 1 2 , M otor

Vehicle and Mobi le Equipment Coating Operations

Prepared by: Nicole Law Reviewed by: Andrew Steckel August 2011 2 

**RULE IDENTIFICA**

**TION Ag**  **ency :**  San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJV U APCD ) **SIP A pproved Rule:**  Rule 4612 - Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operations – Phase II Amended – September 20, 2007; Submitted – March 7, 2008 EPA Approved – January 19, 2010 (75 FR 2796) **Subject of this TSD:** Rule 4612 - Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operati ons – Amended – October 21, 2010 ; Submitted – April 5, 2011 **RULE SUMMA RY**  **–**SJV U APCD Rule 4612 , Motor Vehicle and Mobil e Equipment Coating Operations is a rule designed to limit volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions associated with coating of motor veh icles, mobile equipment, and related parts and components. The rule also limits VOC emissions from organic solvent cleaning, storage, and disposal associated with such operations and describes administrative requirements for maintaining records, recordke eping, and test methods . Rule 461 2 has been revised to remove redundant language and clarify the inten t of requirements of the rule. C hanges from the SIP approved Rule 461 2 rule include: 1. Renamed the rule to remove the “Phase II” label, as that termin ology is no longer used. 2. Edited definitions in Section 3. Definition of a n “aerosol coating product” has been reworded and definitions for “operator” and “permanently labeled” have been added. 3. Edited an exemption in section 4.1.4. The exemption now cl arifies that coatings applied to new motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment during manufacture on an assembly line are regulated under District Rule 4602 Motor Vehicle Assembly Coatings. 4. Updated coating limits in Section 5 to remove effective dates and expired limits. Also removed from this section are repetitive references to the VOC emission control system option (former sections 5.3 and 5.4.2). New sections 5.7.3.1 and 5.7.3.2 were added to clarify requirements for High Volume Low- Pressure spray eq uipment. Section 5.7.4 was edited to clarify what is required if a spray gun is used to comply with coating application methods. 5. Small additions were made to Section 6.0, Administrative Requirements. Section 6.4 clarifies that records need to be maintai ned on a daily basis 3  and the quantity of each type of coating used is information that needs to be recorded. **EPA EVA** **LUA**

**TION -**  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) and State Implementation Plans, General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992) were used to help evaluate compliance with the CAA § 110(a)(2)(A) requirement for enforceability. 2. RACT – CARB’s Suggested Control Measure (SCM) titled, “Suggested Control Measure for Automotive Coatings , ” SJV U APCD’s 2009 RACT SIP Demonstration (April 16, 2009) , “Preamble, Final Rule to Implement the 8 - hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard: (70 FR 71612 November 29, 2005), Letter from W illiam T. Hartnett to Regional Air Division Directors, “RACT Qs & As – Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) Questions and Answers” (May 18, 2006), and other state and local rules for this category were used to help evaluate the RACT requirements of CAA § 182(b)(2 ). 3. SIP Relaxation - Wh ere previous versions of rules have been SIP approved, new submittals must comply with CAA § 110(l) and § 193 regarding SIP relaxations. The Staff Report which accompanies SJV U APCD Rule 4612 includes a RACT Analysis. W e concur with SJV U APCD’s conclusion that Rule 4612 implements RACT for reasoning including:

- Rule 4612 closely resembles California Air Resources Board’s Suggested Control Measure for Automotive Coatings. This is a recent guidance document from 2005 and we believe a reliable source for satisfying RACT.

- SJV U APCD, SCAQMD and the other large California nonattainment agencies generally have among the most stringent stationary source requirements nationwide, and we are not aware of other reasonably available technologi cal or operational controls likely to significantly reduce additional emission from this activity. However, we note that we do not agree with the complete analysis . Section VIII. B of the staff report states that two categories (precoat and TopcoatMetall ic/Iridescent) are not as stringent as other district rules and Table 3 of the staff report depicts this also. Webelieve this is an incorrect analysis as discussed4 

in our final rulemaking notice where the approval of the March 7, 2008 submittal was final ized (75 FR 2798 , Response #4 ) on January 19, 2010 . The submitted rule is as stringent as CARB’s 2005 SCM for Automotive Coatings and fulfils RACT requirements . The recordkeeping and other requirements generally ensure that the s ubmitted rule can be en forced. Lastly, the submitted rule revisions clarify and eliminates repetition in the version previously approved into the SIP, so the submitted rule does not relax the SIP and complies with § 110(l) and § 193. **RULE DEFICIENCIES** – Wehave identified no deficiencies with Rule 4612 sufficient for EPA to propose less than full approval . **AD DITIONA** **L RECOMMENDA TIONS FOR THE NEXT RULE REVISION**  – There are no additional recommendations for the next rule revision. **EPA A** **CTION** - The submitted revisions to Rule 461 2 strengthen and clarify the SIP . The rule largely fulfils the relevant CAA § 110 and part D requirements. EPA staff recommends approval of Rule 4612 pursuant to CAA § 110(k)(3) and § 301(a). **REFERENCES -**  1. SJV U APCD Rule 4612 , Motor Vehicle and Mobil e Equipment Coating Operations – Phase II , as approved into the SIP on January 19, 2010 . 2. SJV U APCD Rule 46 1 2 , Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operations, as submitted on April 5, 2011 . 3 . “Suggested Control Measure for Automotive Coatings,” CARB, October 2005. http://www.arb.ca.gov/coatings/autorefin/scm/sreport/appenda.pdf 4 . “Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Demonstration for Ozone State Implementation Plans (SIP)” SJVAPCD, April 16, 2009. 5 . “Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,” (a.k.a., Bluebook) EPA OAQPS, May 25, 1988 (cover only) . 6 . “Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,” (a.k.a., Little Bluebook), EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (cover only) . 7 . Porti ons of the proposed post- 1987 ozone and carbon monoxide policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987. 8 . “ State Implementation Plans, General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Amendments of 1990 ” 57 FR 13498, April 1 6, 1992. 9 . “ Preamble, Final Rule to Implement the 8 - hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard ” 70 FR 71612; Nov. 29, 2005. 10 . Letter from W illiam T. Hartnett to Regional Air Division Directors, “RACT Qs & As – Reasonable Available Control Technolo gy (RACT) Questions and Answers,” May 18, 2006.