[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 11, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-25066]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: October 11, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60

[AD-FRL-5087-5]
RIN 2060-AF14

 

Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources: Automobile 
and Light-Duty Truck Surface Coating Operations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On July 29, 1982, a revision to the new source performance 
standard (NSPS) for automobile and light-duty truck prime coat 
operations was proposed. Analysis of data submitted after this proposal 
showed that the best demonstrated prime coating system and prime coat 
materials could not consistently meet the proposed revised standard. 
This revised final NSPS is consistent with the performance of the best 
demonstrated prime coating system and prime coat materials. This 
revision of the standard does not reflect a change in the basis of the 
standard, but reflects a better understanding of the performance of the 
prime coating system and prime coat materials upon which the standard 
was originally based. The intended effect of this NSPS is to require 
all new, modified, and reconstructed prime coat operations at 
automobile and light-duty truck assembly plants to use the best 
demonstrated system of continuous emission reduction considering costs, 
nonair quality health, and environmental and energy impacts.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 11, 1994.
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (Act), judicial review 
of this revision of a NSPS is available only by filing a petition for 
review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
Circuit within 60 days of today's publication of this rule. Under 
section 307(b)(2) of the ACT, the requirements that are the subject of 
today's rule may not be challenged later in civil or criminal 
proceedings to enforce these requirements.

ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket number A-82-10, containing supporting 
information used in developing the revised standard, is available for 
public inspection and copying between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, at EPA's Central Docket Section, West Tower Lobby, Gallery 1, 
Waterside Mall, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. A reasonable 
fee may be charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Salman, Chemicals and 
Petroleum Branch, Emission Standards and Engineering Division (MD-13), 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North 
Carolina 27711, telephone (919) 541-0859.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Revised Standard

    The revised standard limits emissions from electrodeposition (EDP) 
prime coat operations as follows:
    1. For RT greater than or equal to 0.160, the emission limit 
is 0.17 kg VOC per liter of applied coating solids.
    2. For RT greater than or equal to 0.040 and less than 0.160, 
the emission limit is 0.17  x  350 (0.l60-RT) kg of VOC 
per liter of applied coating solids.
    3. For RT less than 0.040, no emission limit applies. RT 
is the solids turnover ratio. This is the ratio of the volume of 
coating solids added to an EDP system during a calendar month divided 
by the total volume capacity of the EDP system.
    Prime coat systems other than EDP systems would be required to 
comply with a single numerical emission limit of 0.17 kg VOC per liter 
of applied coating solids.
    This revision is not a relaxation of the original prime coat 
standard since it does not reflect a change in the technological basis 
upon which the original standard was based. It does reflect a better 
understanding of the operation and performance of this technology based 
on an analysis of additional data which were not available at the time 
the standard was originally developed. Consequently, this revision does 
not result in any environmental, energy, cost, or economic impacts.
    Information collection requirements contained in this regulation 
(60.393) have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and have been assigned OMB control number 2060-
0034.

I. Background

    On October 5, 1979, pursuant to Section 111 of the Act, standards 
of performance to limit emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) 
from new, modified, and reconstructed automobile and light-duty truck 
surface coating operations were proposed (44 FR 57792). Final standards 
limiting VOC emissions from prime coat operations to 0.16 kg VOC per 
liter of applied coating solids were promulgated in the Federal 
Register on December 24, 1980 (45 FR 85410).
    On February 19, 1981, General Motors Corporation (GM) petitioned 
the Administrator to convene a proceeding under section 307(d)(7)(B) of 
the Act to reconsider the prime coat standard. The basis for the 
petition was new data, which had become available following 
promulgation of the standard, on the performance of the technology 
which served as the basis for this standard. The basis for the standard 
promulgated on December 24, 1980, was cathodic EDP prime coat systems 
which use low-VOC content waterborne materials. An EDP system consists 
of a large tank filled with coating material. Metal parts are submerged 
in the tank and a voltage is applied to help deposit the coating solids 
onto the parts. The low-VOC content cathodic EDP technology was quite 
new at the time of promulgation; and data on only one system, which had 
operated for less than 1 year, were available. Following receipt of 
GM's petition for reconsideration, data and information on the 
performance of this technology were solicited from GM, Ford Motor 
Company (FMC), American Motors Corporation (AMC), Volkswagen 
Corporation (VW), Chrysler Corporation, Nissan, Honda, Inmont, and 
Pittsburgh Plate Glass Corporation (PPG). Analysis of the additional 
data received confirmed that the promulgated standard did not 
accurately reflect the performance of cathodic EDP prime coat systems. 
Consequently, a revised standard of 0.17 kg VOC per liter of applied 
coating solids (6-month average using the best 6 months out of a 7-
month period) was proposed on July 29, 1982.
    A public hearing was not requested. The official public comment 
period closed on September 27, 1982.

II. Comments and Changes to the Standard

    Six comments were received on the proposed revised standard. Three 
were from automobile manufacturers, one from a coating manufacturer, 
one from an industry trade association, and one from a State regional 
control agency. A significant amount of additional data on the 
performance of EDP prime coating systems was included with these 
comments. These data covered the performance of 37 cathodic EDP prime 
coating systems using 10 different low-VOC content prime coating 
materials over approximately 3,000 weeks of operation.
    Several commenters stated that the additional data included with 
their comments demonstrated that cathodic EDP prime coating systems 
could not continuously meet the proposed revised emission limit. In 
addition, several commenters suggested that flow control additive (FCA) 
added to the EDP prime coat system to maintain good flow 
characteristics during periods when the system is not coating vehicles 
should be excluded from the emission calculations. The commenters felt 
that the addition of FCA during production downtime was not 
representative of normal operation and, if not accommodated in some 
manner, would cause unavoidable violations of the emission limit. The 
commenters argued that since the standard is expressed in terms of kg 
of VOC per liter of applied coating solids, at times of near-zero use 
(i.e., essentially no solids applied), even small evaporative losses 
result in the standard being exceeded by a wide margin.
    All of the data and information that were available, including the 
new data and information received during the comment period, were 
reanalyzed. The cathodic EDP prime coat materials used by FMC, GM, AMC, 
and VW were very similar. The sole suppliers were PPG, Inmont 
Corporation, and FMC. The coating materials consist of three 
components: resin, pigment, and FCA. Table 1 presents the solids, 
solvent, and water composition of these three components for a 
representative coating. 

          Table 1.--Representative Coating Material Formulation         
                           [Percent by volume]                          
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Solids                    Water   
           Formulation               content    VOC content    content  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resin............................         32.4          2.9         64.7
Pigment..........................         33.0         13.3         53.7
Flow control additive............          4.3         95.4          0.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Each of these components may be added separately to the EDP prime 
coating tank. The solvent contained in these components leaves the EDP 
tank either by transport on the surface of the automobile body or by 
evaporation from the liquid surface of the tank. Upon leaving the EDP 
tank, the solvent clinging to the automobile body evaporates. All of 
the solvent added to the EDP tank is ultimately released to the 
atmosphere. The VOC emissions released to the atmosphere per unit of 
solids applied to the automobile body may, therefore, be determined 
directly by measuring the amount of VOC and solids added to the EDP 
tank because additions are made to the tank to keep the coating 
material in a near steady-state condition.
    The ratio of resin to pigment added to the EDP tank is recommended 
by the coating manufacturers and can vary with RT. The FCA is 
added as needed to provide the desired coating properties and finish 
quality and to maintain the coating material in a near steady-state 
condition. Because of the high-solvent content of the FCA (95 percent 
by volume) and the variable ratio (compared to resin and pigment) with 
which it is added to the EDP system, this component is of overriding 
importance in determining emissions from the EDP system.
    All of the data were verified as being representative of good 
operation. Two potential sources of variation were differences in the 
operation and maintenance of EDP tanks from plant to plant and 
differences among prime coat materials. Variations in performance due 
to these two factors were analyzed and were not found to be 
statistically significant. Based on this analysis, the coating 
material, coating equipment, and operation and maintenance for all of 
the data obtained were determined to represent best demonstrated 
technology. Therefore, all of the data were used in establishing the 
revised emission limit.
    All companies submitting data were able to provide data on a weekly 
basis. Averaging periods of 4 weeks, 8 weeks. 12 weeks, 24 weeks, and 
the best 24 out of 28 weeks (6 out of 7 months) were employed to 
examine the performance of EDP systems including and excluding periods 
when the paint line was shut down, i.e., downtime. This analysis 
revealed that the exclusion of periods of downtime slightly reduced the 
variability in VOC emissions. Even with downtime excluded, however, the 
proposed revised standard was not met consistently.
    In addition to periods of downtime, periods of low production also 
appeared to adversely affect performance. The relative usage of an EDP 
system over any time period can be measured by either comparing the 
amount of new coating material or new coating solids added to the total 
capacity of the system. The volume of coating solids added gives a 
better indication of usage because it is a measure of production. i.e., 
the number of vehicles coated. This is because, regardless of the 
coating material used, the same volume of coating solids must be 
deposited to coat a particular part to a specified film thickness. The 
other major constituents of the EDP, coating material, VOC and water, 
do not become part of the final dry coating and can evaporate from the 
tank during periods of downtime. Therefore, using the volume of new 
coating material added would not give a consistent measure of usage for 
systems that use coating materials which contain varying amounts of 
solids, VOC, and water.
    The total volume of coating solids added to the EDP tank divided by 
the total volume of the entire EDP system was found to correlate well 
with VOC emissions. This ratio has been termed the solids turnover 
ratio (RT). The relationship between RT and VOC emissions for 
4-week periods is shown in Table 2.
    As seen in Table 2, VOC emissions, in terms of kilograms per liter 
of solids deposited, decrease as RT increases. At RT's above 
0.160, emissions are below 0.17 kg of VOC per liter of applied coating 
solids. Sources which operate at RT's of less than 0.160, however, 
cannot consistently meet an emission limit of 0.17 kg of VOC per liter 
of applied coating solids. Further analysis of the data used to 
generate Table 2 indicates that for RT between 0.040 and 0.160, 
VOC emissions are related to RT by the following equation: 0.17 
x  350(0.l60-RT) kg of VOC per liter of applied coating 
solids. 

Table 2.--Solids Turnover Ratio Versus EDP Prime Coat System Performance
                           For 4-Week Periods                           
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Cumulative
    Solids turnover ratio (RT)          VOC       Number of   percent of
                                    emissions1  observations     data   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RT<0.040..........................  [0.17-19.0                          
                                             ]          796           40
0.040RT<0.060..........        0.33          496           49
0.060RT<0.080..........        0.29          334           62
0.080RT<0.100..........        0.23          360           76
0.100RT<0.120..........        0.23          305           88
0.120RT<0.140..........        0.19          175           95
0.140RT<0.160..........        0.19           64           97
0.160RT................        0.17           70          100
      Totals......................  ..........        2,602   ..........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1VOC emission level in kilograms of VOC per liter of coating solids     
  deposited which was exceeded by no more than 1 percent of the data at 
  each turnover level.                                                  

    The RT's of less than 0.040 represent periods of zero or 
abnormally low production. These low-operating levels occurred more 
frequently than normal during the period in which the data in Table 2 
were generated because of the depressed operating level of the industry 
at that time. Operation at RT's below 0.040 results in widely 
varying VOC emissions in terms of kg VOC per liter of applied coating 
solids. Under these low-operating conditions, emissions expressed in 
units of the standard range from 0.17 kg of VOC per liter of applied 
coating solids to over 19 kg of VOC per liter of applied coating 
solids. Since operation with RT's below 0.040 result in widely 
varying emissions even when EDP prime coat systems are operated and 
maintained properly, it is infeasible to establish a standard for these 
low-operating levels that distinguishes between proper and improper 
operation regarding emissions of VOC. In addition, since the number of 
vehicles produced during 4-week periods with RT's less than 0.040 
is small, the total VOC emissions from the EDP tank during such periods 
of operation are only a fraction of the emissions emitted when the EDP 
tank is operating properly at full production. Consequently, the 
revised standard includes no emission limit for operation at RT's 
of 0.040 or less.
    The emission limits discussed above, therefore, were selected for 
the final revised standard. If there is little or no production, almost 
no solids would be added to the EDP system, the RT would always be 
below 0.040, and the owner would not have to comply with an emission 
limit. Prime coat systems other than EDP would be required to comply 
with a single numerical emission limit of 0.17 kg of VOC per liter of 
applied coating solids.
    One commenter suggested that the revised prime coat emission limit 
be based on the performance of the single EDP system with the best 
observed performance. As mentioned earlier, however, the statistical 
analysis performed on 37 EDP prime coating systems showed that there 
was no statistically significant difference in the observed performance 
of any of the EDP systems. Consequently, all of the data on all of the 
EDP systems were used to develop the final revised emission limits.
    One commenter suggested that the units of the prime coat standard 
be changed from kilograms of VOC per liter of applied coating solids to 
kilograms of VOC per liter of coating minus water. The commenter 
indicated that this change would make the prime coat standard units 
consistent with most State emission limits for existing facilities. 
Such a change would have the effect of deleting the requirement that a 
transfer efficiency be used in determining compliance with the emission 
limit. For an EDP system, the system upon which the standard is based, 
the transfer efficiency that is allowed to be used for determining 
compliance is 100 percent. Therefore, for an EDP system, such a change 
would have little effect on the allowable or actual emissions. However, 
if prime coat application systems other than EDP which have transfer 
efficiencies of less than 100 percent are used, then the suggested 
changes in the units of the standard could result in allowing increased 
actual VOC emissions while still apparently meeting the emission limit. 
Since there is a possibility that systems other than EDP will be used 
in the future and a format of kg of VOC per liter of applied coating 
solids is most consistent with the use of the solids turnover ratio, 
the units of the standard were not changed.
    The Administrator certifies that a regulatory flexibility analysis 
under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), is not required for this rulemaking because the 
rulemaking would not have a significant impact on a substantial number 
of small entities. The rulemaking would not impose any new 
requirements; therefore, no additional costs would be imposed.
    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)), the 
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the 
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as 
one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    1. Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities;
    2. Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    3. Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations or recipients 
thereof; or
    4. Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the president's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that this rule is a ``significant regulatory action'' within 
the meaning of the Executive Order. For this reason, this action was 
submitted to OMB for review. Changes made in response to OMB 
suggestions or recommendations will be documented in the public record.
    Information collection requirements contained in this regulation 
(60.393) have been approved by OMB under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and have been 
assigned OMB control number 2060-0034.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Motor vehicles, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: September 30, 1994.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
    40 CFR part 60 is amended as follows:

PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES

    1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:


    Authority: Sections 101, 111, 114, 116, and 301 of the Clean Air 
Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7414, 7416, 7601).

    2. Section 60.391 is amended by adding definitions in alphabetical 
order to paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:


Sec. 60.391  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    Solids Turnover Ratio (RT) means the ratio of total volume of 
coating solids that is added to the EDP system in a calendar month 
divided by the total volume design capacity of the EDP system.
* * * * *
    Volume Design Capacity of EDP System (LE) means the total liquid 
volume that is contained in the EDP system (tank, pumps, recirculating 
lines, filters, etc.) at its designed liquid operating level.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *

LE = the total volume of the EDP system (liters),

* * * * *
    3. Section 60.392 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 60.392  Standards for volatile organic compounds.

* * * * *
    (a) Prime Coat Operation
    (1) For each EDP prime coat operation:
    (i) 0.17 kilogram of VOC per liter of applied coating solids when 
RT is 0.16 or greater.
    (ii) 0.17 x 350 (0.160-RT) kg of VOC per liter of applied 
coating solids when RT is greater than or equal to 0.040 and less 
than 0.160.
    (iii) When RT is less than 0.040, there is no emission limit.
    (2) For each nonelectrodeposition prime coat operation: 0.17 
kilogram of VOC per liter of applied coating solids.
* * * * *
    4. Section 60.393 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(l)(i)(E) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 60.393  Performance test and compliance provisions.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (E) For each EDP prime coat operation, calculate the turnover ratio 
(RT) by the following equation:

TR11OC94.000

Then calculate or select the appropriate limit according to 
Sec. 60.392(a).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 94-25066 Filed 10-7-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P