State of California
AIR RESOURCES BOARD
Ambassador Hotel
Ambassador Room
3400 Wilshire Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA
January 26, 1978
10:00 a.m.
AGENDA
Page
78-2-1 Public Hearing to Review and Consider Amendments 1
of New Source Review Rules for Ventura County Air Pollution
Control District, Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control
District, and San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control
District.
78-2-2 Consideration of Proposed Model Rule for the 191
Control of Volatile Organic Compounds from Automobile
Assembly-Line Coating Operations.
78-2-3 Other Business -
a. Executive Session - Personnel & Litigation
b. Research Proposals
78-1-4 Report of Applications for Additional Steam
Generators in Kern County. (this was a last-minute
addition to the agenda)
ITEM NO.: 78-2-2
Proposed Model Rule for the Control of Volatile Organic Compounds
from Automobile Assembly-line Coating Operations.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the model rule and direct the staff to transmit it to the
South Coast Air Quality Management District and the Bay Area Air
Pollution Control District for consideration as an amendment to
their rules and regulations.
SUMMARY
There are five automobile assembly plants in the state, three in
the South Coast Air Quality Management District and two in the
Bay Area Air Pollution Control District. Volatile organic
compound emissions from these plants in 1977 totaled 30 tons per
day in the Bay Area Air Pollution Control District and 15 tons
per day in the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Two
of these plants use waterborne coatings with low organic solvent
contents, and as a result produce very low emissions, averaging
11 pounds per vehicle produced. The plants using solvent-borne
coatings emit an average of 29 pounds of solvent per vehicle
produced.
This report considers the feasibility of using waterborne
coatings in the three plants presently using solvent-borne
coatings. The costs and additional energy consumption necessary
to convert to use of waterborne coatings were estimated by Ford
and General Motors; however, such costs and energy estimates
appear to be exaggerated.
Equipment changes projected by Ford and General Motors to convert
to waterborne coatings at their plants included lengthening of
spray booths and ovens, changes to the vehicle conveyance
systems, and installation of air conditioning for spray booths.
Based on the information provided by Ford and General Motors and
on the staff's own analysis, costs estimated by Ford and General
Motors were reduced. The staff also believes that the lowered
solvent consumption in coatings and the discontinued use of
afterburners at the plants would more than offset the increased
energy consumption estimated by Ford and General Motors.
Emission reductions as a result of the regulations to be adopted
based on the model rule are estimated to be 27 tons per day, 21
in the Bay Area Air Pollution Control District and 6 tons in the
South Coast Air Quality Management District.
An effective date of December 1, 1982 is recommended. This will
allow time for the automobile manufacturers to consider other
alternatives to waterborne coatings and to convert plants to use
of those coatings. In particular, General Motors expects to
decide on the possibility of using high-solids polyurethane
topcoats in mid 1980. The companies estimate that two to three
years are necessary to convert plants to use of alternate coating
systems.
Three other important points should be made. First, General
Motors is building a new plant in Oklahoma City that will use
waterborne coatings. Second, additional work needs to be done to
develop coatings with the 70% equivalent solids called for in the
model rule. If such a coating is not developed by 1982, the
staff feels that the rule should be amended to reflect the
highest solids coating available at that time, but no less than
the 62% presently available. The third important point is that a
new type of spray gun is presently being developed that may
eliminate the need for air conditioning spray booths. If this
hot air spray gun is successful, costs and energy consumption to
use waterborne coatings will be much lower.
ITEM NO.: 78-1-4
Report of Applications for Additional Steam Generators in Kern
County.
SUMMARY
Kern County in the San Joaquin Valley has two large oil field
areas producing highly viscous oil. At present 767 uncontrolled
steam generators and heaters are in operation. In addition, 135
generators or heaters have received authorities to construct, and
another 405 applications have been received.
Emissions from oil field heaters and generators in 1977 totaled
approximately 257 tons/day of SO2. That amounts to 92 percent of
the 279 tons/day total of SO2 emissions. The additional proposed
generators and heaters will increase emissions to approximately
360 tons/day. In Kern County the State air quality standards for
particulate matter, oxidant, sulfate, and SO2 in combination with
particulate matter are exceeded. It also appears that the
federal annual average standard for SO2 will be violated. The
current and proposed tertiary oil recovery operations contribute
to each of these violations.
The Kern County Air Pollution Control district's (KCAPCD's)
current new Source Review rule addresses applicable State and
National Ambient Air Quality Standards with a 15 lb/hr cutoff for
review. Most steam generators emit over 15 lb/hr. The
District's basic policy is to approve projects as proposed if the
results of a simple model do not indicate violations of the
federal Ambient Air Quality Standard for SO2. The modeling
calculations do not consider the effect of oxides of nitrogen
emissions from the steam generators and heaters on oxidant
formation; nor do they include the effect that SO2 and NOx will
have on the TSP standards.