Set Public Hearing August 9, 1996 to Amend Rule 1113 - Architectural Coatings

BOARD MEETING DATE: July 12, 1996

AGENDA NO. 2

PROPOSAL:

Set Public Hearing August 9, 1996 to Amend Rule 1113 - Architectural Coatings

SYNOPSIS:

The proposed amendment will reinstate the small container exemption.

COMMITTEE:

Not applicable.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Set Public Hearing August 9, 1996 to Amend Rule 1113 - Architectural Coatings.

James M. Lents, Ph.D.
Executive Officer

PL:JPB:FL:NB

Background

The rule is applicable to manufacturers, distributors, and end-users of Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) coatings. It was first adopted in 1977, and has undergone numerous amendments. The purpose of the rule is to reduce VOC emissions from the use of

AIM coatings, primarily by placing VOC limits on various coating categories. The small container exemption had been a part of Rule 1113 since the original rule, and remains a part of the architectural coating rules of other California air districts, as well as the proposed national AIM coating rule. Based on the language inserted into the rule during the February 1990 hearing, the small container exemption expired on December 31, 1993.

Over forty coating manufacturers filed and received variances from the AQMD Hearing Board for their non-compliant coatings sold in small containers over the past two and one-half years. In December 1993, the Hearing Board granted a six-month regular variance to a group of manufacturers and distributors to allow them to continue sales of coatings in small containers. In June 1994, the Hearing Board extended the regular variance for another six months. During that period, the AQMD sponsored legislation (Assembly Bill 2680, Bowen) to allow manufacturers to obtain product variances. This modified variance not only provided variance protection for the applicant (typically the manufacturer), but also the end-users. However, the legislation limited this product variance period to only two years.

In December 1994, the Hearing Board granted a product variance, under California Health and Safety Code, Section 42352.5, to manufacturers seeking protection for continuing to sell non-compliant coatings in small containers. In December 1995, the manufacturers received an additional year (and the last) of variance protection under the product variances.

During the public hearing relating to aerosol coatings in March 1996, industry requested the AQMD Governing Board to reinstate the small container exemption. However, the Governing Board was unable to make the requested change at that time due to the lack of a CEQA document to address the potential significant impact resulting from the reinstatement. During that hearing, the Governing Board adopted a resolution to address the small container exemption in the August 1996 public hearing.

Staff had publicly proposed rule amendments to reinstate the small container exemption and to revise VOC limits for other coating categories to be heard in August. Due to a large number of issues raised by industry regarding certain of those proposed amendments to lower VOC limits, staff has decided to continue working with industry and to delay those amendments to the September 13, 1996 Governing Board meeting. As a result, staff is proposing to only address the small container exemption at the August hearing, so the Governing Board may meet its commitment to industry.

Staff's general conclusions and recommendations are as follows:

• The small container exemption is necessary to have available coatings for touch-up and repair work, as well as some specialty coatings. This action would result in a cost saving to industry. This small container exemption should be effective the date of adoption.
• An additional proposal will be presented to the Governing Board in September 1996, which will include mitigations for the emissions increase from this proposal.
  
  

Proposal

The proposed amendment will

• reinstate the small container exemption.
•  
  
  

Industry has not expressed any concerns regarding the proposed amendment. USEPA comments have been received and incorporated into the proposed rule.

Policy Issues

There are no policy issues associated with the proposed amendment.

AQMP and Legal Mandates

On October 14, 1994, the Governing Board adopted a resolution that requires staff to address whether proposed rules being considered for adoption are scheduled such that the most cost-effective proposed rules, as defined in the 1994 AQMP, are submitted to the Governing Board prior to less cost-effective proposals. The proposed amendment was not included in the 1994 AQMP, since it will not achieve additional emission reductions. Rather, it will result in an increase in VOC emissions by 0.5 tons per day over the current rule requirements. However, there will be no change in actual current VOC emissions since the manufacturers have continuously received variances to continue using the small container exemption. This estimate of potential increases in emissions is based on excess emission reports submitted by the manufacturers operating under their variances.

On March 8, 1996, the Governing Board adopted a resolution that required staff to propose the reinstatement of the small container exemption at the August 1996 public hearing. The proposed amendment complies with that resolution.

CEQA

AQMD staff has reviewed the proposed amendment to Rule 1113, and has determined that the reinstatement of the small container exemption will result in an estimated emissions increase of 0.5 tons per day over the current rule requirement. This increase is considered to be significant under CEQA. A Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared and circulated for public review. The comment period will end at noon of July 29, 1996.

Socioeconomic Analysis

Overall, the proposed amendment will allow manufacturers to continue selling their noncompliant coatings in small containers without obtaining a variance from the Hearing Board. This should result in an overall cost saving to these manufacturers.

.

Implementation Plan

A notice will be sent to all AIM coating manufacturers.

Resource Impact

Existing AQMD resources will be sufficient to implement the proposed change to this rule with minimal impact on the budget.

Attachments

Summary of Proposed Amendment

Key Issues and Responses

Rule Development Flow Chart

Staff Report

Draft Environmental Assessment

Rule Language