1

June 23, 2004Sacramento

Thermal Spraying Thermal Spraying ATCM ATCM Second Public Second Public

WorkshopWorkshop

2

• Introductions

• Project Description

• Thermal Spraying ATCM Development– 1st Public Workshop Recap

– Background

– Completed & Ongoing Activities

– Draft Regulatory Language

– Emission Estimates

– Schedule

Agenda

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

3

Project Description

• ARB is developing an Airborne Toxic Control Measure (ATCM) for Thermal Spraying

• ATCM would apply to thermal spraying processes that use chromium or nickel

• ATCM would protect public health by specifying control efficiencies, based on emission levels and health risk

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

4

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Why ? • Board request• Potential use as replacement for hard

chromium electroplating• Hexavalent chromium is very toxic • Nickel can cause cancer & other health

effects• Community Health/Environmental Justice

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

5

1st Public Workshop on May 4, 2004

ARB’s Air Toxics Program

Thermal Spraying project background

Key findings from surveys

General regulatory concepts

1st Public Workshop

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

6

Background:What is thermal spraying?

Metals are sprayed onto a surface in a molten (or nearly molten) condition to form a coating.

Includes: - Flame Spraying - Plasma Spraying - Twin-Wire Electric Arc - HVOF - Detonation Gun

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

7

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

Feed Material

Oxygen & Fuel Gas orElectric Arc

Molten Metal

Background:

8

Background:• Materials may contain chromium,

nickel, and other toxic air contaminants

• Can generate air emissions of hexavalent chromium & nickel

• Used in a wide variety of industries, particularly aerospace

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

9

Control Devices:- Dry Filter Cartridge- HEPA Filter - Water Curtain- Wet Scrubber - Baghouse

• Control Efficiency ratings can be assigned, based on standardized tests:

HEPA Filter - 99.97% @ 0.3 umDry Filter - 99.999% @ 0.5 um

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

10

Completed Activities• Two Thermal Spraying Surveys

2003 - Material Manufacturers2004 - Thermal Spraying

Facilities

• Air Dispersion Modeling

• Draft Regulatory Language

• Draft Emissions Methodology

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

11

Key Findings from Surveys:

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

48 Total Active Facilities = 27 Permitted

21 Unpermitted

42 Have Control Devices

56 %

44 %

88 %

16 Have HEPA Filters 33 %

24 Use Products w/Chromium

50 %

12

Ongoing Activities• Statewide Emission Inventory

• Health Risk Assessment

• Cost Analysis

• Initial Statement of Reasons

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

13

Current Requirements• Air Permits

• Toxics New Source Review

• AB 2588 Air Toxics Hot Spots

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

14

Draft Regulatory Language• New and Modified Facilities -

99.97% @ 0.3 um

• Existing Facilities - Control efficiency requirements would vary, depending on health risk & cost

• Permitting & Recordkeeping

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

15

Draft Regulatory LanguageExisting Facilities - POINT Sources:

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

90%> 0.004 and < 0.04

99.999% @ 0.5 um

> 2.4 and < 23.6

Minimum Required

Control Efficiency

Annual Emissions (lbs/yr)*

99.97% @ 0.3 um

Tier1

2

3

Hex. Chrome Nickel

> 0.04 and < 0.4 > 23.6 and < 236

> 0.4 > 236

* These are controlled emissions, if a control device exists.

16

Draft Regulatory LanguageExisting Facilities - VOLUME Sources:

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

90%> 0.001 and < 0.01

99.999% @ 0.5 um

> 0.5 and < 5.1

Minimum Required

Control Efficiency

Annual Emissions (lbs/yr)

99.97% @ 0.3 um

Tier1

2

3

Hex. Chrome Nickel

> 0.01 and < 0.1 > 5.1 and < 51

> 0.1 > 51

* These are controlled emissions, if a control device exists.

17

Draft Regulatory LanguageNew and Modified Facilities:

Installed or Modified after July 1, 2005 Required Control Efficiency: 99.97% @ 0.3 um

All Facilities: Permitting & Recordkeeping Future Compliance Dates

Nickel - Hourly Emissions

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

18

Emission Estimates• Worked with districts to develop

emission estimation methodology

• Based on stack tests, scientific research, and industry data

• Available for public review

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

19

Schedule•August Third Public Workshop

•October 22 Proposed Regulation and

Staff Report Available -

Public has 45 days to comment

•December 9 Tentative Board Hearing Date

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

20

Public Involvement •Website:

http://www.arb.ca.gov/coatings/thermal/thermal.htm

•Sign up for List Server to get updates

•Provide Comments

•Meet with ARB

•Attend Board Hearing (can participate via internet)

ARB’s Thermal Spraying Project

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

21

Monique Spears Davis, P.E.mdavis@arb.ca.gov(916) 324-8182

Jose Gomez, Managerjgomez@arb.ca.gov(916) 324-8033

ARBStationary Source DivisionMeasures Assessment Branch1001 I Street, P.O. Box 2815Sacramento, CA 95812

ARB Points of Contact

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004

22

QUESTIONS?

Thermal Spraying 2nd Public Workshop - June 2004