SURFACE COATING TECHNOLOGY AIR EMISSIONS - OVERVIEW
![]() |
|
Overview: |
The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) to establish standards that limit hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from various sources. There are 188 CAA-regulated HAPs, which include many of the solvents commonly used in surface coating. Many of these solvents are VOCs. EPA is currently engaged in the development of regulations for a number of categories of industrial surface coating operations and composite operations. Collectively known as the Coatings and Composites Coordinated Rule (CCCR), the regulations under development are national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAPs) under Section 112 of the CAA and for some of the categories, national VOC rules or control technique guidelines (CTG) under Section 183(e) of the Act. The Agency has already promulgated regulations covering the surface coating activities of aerospace facilities and shipbuilding operations. EPA is expected to issue final NESHAPs or Section 183(e) rules for the remaining categories included in the CCCR by May 2002. Examples of remaining categories include automobiles and light-duty trucks, plastic parts, and miscellaneous metal parts. These new standards will apply to facilities engaged in the surface coating of synthetic polymer components; facilities engaged in the coating of a wide range of metal products that vary in size, shape, application method, and use; and vehicle assembly operations that apply primers, guide coat/primer surfacers, top coats, and other related coatings. New surface coating technologies have lower VOCs and HAPs content than the conventional coating systems because of the reduced solvent concentration in the formulation, and due to improved coating chemistries. Six of the technologies are briefly described below, including reference to a Joint Service Pollution Prevention Technical Library data sheet, if applicable. Powder Coating: Joint Service Pollution Prevention Technical Library Data sheet: Section 4-5, Powder Coating Painting System. High-Solids Coatings: Waterborne Coatings UNICOAT Radiation Curable Coatings Supercritical Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Spraying |
||||||||
Compliance Benefit: | Use of alternative surface
coating technologies can help facilities comply with EPA's NESHAP for Shipbuilding
and Ship Repair - Shipbuilding and Ship Repair (40 CFR 63, Subpart II)
and for Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Facilities (40 CFR 63,
Subpart GG). Additionally, these alternative technologies may help facilities
comply with the upcoming surface coating regulations. For other specific
compliance benefits see referenced Joint Service Pollution Prevention Technical
Library data sheets.
The compliance benefits listed here are only meant to be used as a general guideline and are not meant to be strictly interpreted. Actual compliance benefits will vary depending on the factors involved, e.g. the amount of workload involved.
|
||||||||
Materials Compatibility: | Materials compatibility depends on the alternative surface coating methods implemented. Considerations can include (1) working on pieces that can be oven-heated and (2) damages to the work pieces from alcohol, ketones, and ethers. Testing will reveal damage. Consult the appropriate Joint Services Pollution Prevention Technical Library data sheet or point of contact for more information.
|
||||||||
Safety and Health: | Health and safety concerns may significantly
be reduced by using these new technologies. Consult the material safety
data sheets (MSDS) of the particular paint to ensure proper use and that
all necessary safety requirements (e.g., personal protective equipment,
increased ventilation, fire fighting equipment) can be met. Consult your
local industrial health specialist and your local health and safety personnel
prior to implementing this technology.
|
||||||||
Benefits: | Reduces the amounts of VOCs
and HAPs emitted into the
environment and improves the ability of installations to comply with EPA's
current and future emission standards for surface coating. |
||||||||
Disadvantages: | Whenever a new procedure is
implemented, there will be a certain amount of "down time" while
the technicians learn the new process to achieve the desired finish quality.
However, this is to be expected in any process improvement.
|
||||||||
Economic Analysis: | Cost will vary depending on the specific
application or coating method used. The economic feasibility of implementing
an alternative technology should be evaluated for each application prior
to conversion. Consult the appropriate Joint Service Pollution Prevention
Technical Library data sheets or point of contact for more information.
|
||||||||
NSN/MSDS: |
|
||||||||
Approval Authority: | Approval is controlled locally and should
be implemented only after engineering approval has been granted. Major claimant
approval is not required.
|
||||||||
Points of Contact : | Mr. Michael J. Docherty Concurrent Technologies Corporation 100 CTC Drive Johnstown, PA 15904 Phone: (814) 269-6462 Fax: (814) 269-2798 docherty@ndcee.ctc.com Navy: Dr. Kevin Kovaleski Air Force: |
||||||||
Vendors: |
This list is not meant complete, other suppliers of this type of equipment may be available. Cardinal Industrial Finishes |
||||||||
Sources: | Dr. Kevin Kovaleski,
Naval Air Warfare Center, Patuxent River, November 1999. Mr. Michael Docherty, Concurrent Technologies Corporation, November 1999. Air Quality Management Using Pollution Prevention: A Joint Service Approach, March 1998. |
[Back]