REPORT
FACTORS THAT MOTIVATE
OWNERS OF AUTO REFINISH SHOPS TO
IMPLEMENT CHANGES
Submitted to:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
Submitted by:
Eastern Research Group
14555 Avion Parkway, Suite 200
Chantilly, VA 20151-1102
April 8,1999
EPA Contract No. 68-D4-0092
-------
REPORT
Factors That Motivate Owners of Auto
Refinish Shops to Implement Changes
This report summarizes safe work practices implemented by auto refmish shops participating in the
Design for the Environment program Auto Refinish Pilot Project (DfE ARPP), as well as the factors that
motivated shop owners to make these changes. The information in this report is based entirely on ERG's
recent site visits to nine auto refimsh shops in the Philadelphia area and to one shop in the Minneapolis
area. Table 1, which starts on the following page, lists a series of safe work practices and other
improvements implemented by these ten shops. For each improvement, the table indicates the primary
factors that motivated shop owners to implement the change, as well as the obstacles that seem to prevent
other shops from making similar changes. These factors, or "change mechanisms," and obstacles were
communicated to ERG during site visits and subsequent follow-up conversations with shop owners.
Table 1 is organized into the following three sections: the first section addresses shop improvements
involving changes to equipment, such as Sanders, spray guns, and spray booths; the second section
addresses changes to personal protective equipment; and the third section addresses all other changes.
As Table 1 shows, improved work practices in auto refimsh shops result from many different factors.
However, the following factors appeared to play some role in most changes implemented at the selected
auto refmish shops: regulatory requirements, production, cost effectiveness, worker safety, and the
quality of completed paint jobs. As a result, ongoing efforts to encourage changes and improvements at
auto refmish shops should consider at least these factors.
-------
Table 1
Factors Motivating Shop Owners to Implement Safe Work Practices
Shop Improvement
Motivating Factors for Implementing the Change
Obstacles for Implementing Change
Changes to equipment in the auto refimsh shop:
Using vacuum
Sanders instead of
pneumatic sanders
or manual sanding
The primary factor that motivated shop owners to purchase
vacuum sanders is the perceived benefits associated with
the reduced dust levels. These benefits include reduced
worker exposures to dusts, reduced time spent sweeping
dusts from shop floors, reduced time spent cleaning cars,
and minimized chances that dust particles might settle on
freshly painted cars. One owner indicated that his shop
spent less money on sand paper since the painters began
using vacuum sanders, but this finding could not be
substantiated. Note, city of Philadelphia regulations require
the use of wet sanding methods or vacuum sanders.
Several shop owners indicated that they would not purchase
vacuum sanders until they were convinced that this tool was
effective. Painters and shop owners that ERG interviewed
mentioned that vacuum sanders tend to take longer to operate
than other sanding techniques, that workers would rather not
use a device with an extra hose attachment, and that vacuum
systems at some shops have frequently malfunctioned.
Using high-
volume, low-
pressure (HVLP)
spray guns instead
of conventional
spray guns
Several different factors appeared to motivate shop owners
to purchase HVLP spray guns and painters to use them.
These factors include regulatory requirements (for shops in
Philadelphia), perceived cost savings associated with higher
transfer efficiencies, reports that performance of HVLP
guns is comparable to that of conventional guns, and
reduced worker exposures to paint overspray. Since many
shops use HVLP guns in areas where their use is not legally
required, it seems that regulatory requirements alone are not
a critical factor for implementing this change. Further,
other motivating factors might include the use of HVLP
guns becoming more widespread and accepted by the
industry and paint distributors often recommending their
use to painters, but shop owners did not cite these
additional factors during ERG's site visits.
Though many of the painters that ERG interviewed own
HVLP spray guns, not all of these painters use them,
particularly for spraying clearcoats. Several painters
indicated that HVLP spray guns were incapable of atomizing
the more viscous clearcoat formulations to their satisfaction.
Thus, the primary obstacle in getting shops to use HVLP
spray guns seems to be a misconception that the guns cannot
produce the type of quality clearcoat finish demanded by
customers. Another obstacle may be that painters are
unaware of how to adjust settings on HVLP spray guns to
optimize their performance.
-------
Table 1 (Continued)
Factors Motivating Shop Owners to Implement Safe Work Practices
Shop Improvement | Motivating Factors for Implementing the Change
Obstacles for Implementing Change
Installing spray
booths for painting
operations
Owners of the auto refinish shops that ERG has visited to
date almost unanimously indicated that they installed spray
booths due to the recent shift from lacquer-based paints to
polyurethane-based paints: (1) curing cycles in spray
booths now allow shops to refinish many cars in one day;
and (2) the quality of finishes is now reportedly better when
paints are sprayed in booths with controlled air flow
patterns that help prevent dust from settling on freshly
coated surfaces. It is interesting to note that the shops
visited to date all installed their spray booths before the city
of Philadelphia required this equipment.
Although ERG has yet to visit a shop that does not have a
spray booth, feedback from shop owners suggests that the
high cost of purchasing and installing spray booths is
probably the primary obstacle for making this improvement.
This obstacle is greatest for the smaller auto refinish shops,
which may not have the income to finance such an
improvement or the incentive to do so, given their lower
production levels.
Installing prep
stations for
painting operations
Two of the shops that ERG has visited to date had prep
stations with downdraft ventilation systems, in which
painters performed some sanding operations and applied
primers and basecoats. The owners of these shops decided
to install the prep stations primarily because shops could
not maintain production demands if they performed priming
and basecoat applications only in spray booths. A related
factor that likely affected this change is the city of
Philadelphia's regulations, which prohibit painters from
spraying cars in the open shop space.
Painters at many of the shops that ERG has visited spray
primers and basecoats in the open shop space. When asked
if they would consider installing prep stations to reduce
worker exposures, shop owners generally indicated that such
improvements are expensive without an associated cost
benefit. Some shop owners also indicated that they did not
have enough shop space to accommodate a spray station.
Designing effective
ventilation systems
for paint mixing
rooms
The primary factor motivating shop owners to install
ventilation systems in paint mixing rooms is that the
enhanced air flow minimizes the amount of solvent vapors
in the mixing rooms, thereby reducing worker exposures.
The main obstacle to installing ventilation systems in paint
mixing rooms is cost. Most shop owners seem to be aware
that additional ventilation would improve working
conditions in their paint mixing rooms, but they either
cannot afford the expense or they believe the potential
benefits do not justify the expense.
-------
Table 1 (Continued)
Factors Motivating Shop Owners to Implement Safe Work Practices
Shop Improvement
Motivating Factors for Implementing the Change
Obstacles for Implementing Change
Purchasing and
using automated
gun cleaners or
parts washing sinks
The primary motivation for purchasing gun cleaning
systems for shops in the Philadelphia area is that the city
requires that shops have automated, enclosed gun cleaning
systems that recycle the cleaning solvents. Every shop that
ERG has visited to date had either an automated gun
cleaner or a parts washing sink. Thus, some sort of gun
cleaning equipment appeared to be standard among auto
refmish shops. Consistent use of this equipment, however,
varied among the shops. (See the "obstacles" for more
discussion on this topic.)
At many shops, painters clean their spray guns manually,
instead of using a gun cleaning device. The primary obstacle
to using gun cleaners is the painters' perception that manual
cleaning is most effective at removing potentially-damaging
paint particles from spray guns. Several high production
shops noted that the solvent reservoirs in gun cleaning
systems quickly become too contaminated with impurities to
effectively clean spray guns. These shops indicated that
residual impurities in the spray guns can rum both paint
finishes and the guns themselves.
Implementing
onsite solvent
recycling
Two of the shops that ERG has visited had distillation units
that painters used to recycle solvents. The primary
motivating factor for installing these units was cost: at both
shops, the owners thought cost savings associated with
reusing spent solvents outweighed the original investment
of purchasing the distillation units and the ongoing costs of
operating them.
Shop owners generally cited one of two obstacles for why
they did not recycle solvents. First, owners of smaller shops
did not think they would be able to recycle and reuse enough
solvent to recover the costs of the initial purchase and the
ongoing operation and maintenance of the stills. Second,
owners of some larger shops indicated that their previous
attempts at recycling solvents were largely unsuccessful, due
to malfunctioning equipment.
Changes to personal protective equipment (PPE):
Having workers
use supplied-air
respirators when
spraying paints
The primary factor that seems to motivate shop owners and
painters to use supplied-air respirators is that they offer
much better respiratory protection than air-purifying
respirators. In fact, paint manufacturers recommend and
OSHA, in some cases, requires that painters use supplied-
air systems. It should be noted that one of the shops where
painters use supplied-air respirators indicated that this form
of protection may cost less than air-purifying respirators,
because supplied-air respirators eliminate the need to
purchase replacement filters.
The primary obstacle to this improvement is that painters
tend to find using supplied-air respirators inconvenient and
uncomfortable: they do not like carrying the supplied-air
hose with them during paint jobs, they find it cumbersome to
don and doff the supplied-air equipment every time they
enter the spray booth, they do not like facepieces that restrict
their peripheral visions, and they do not like hoses hanging
from the front of their facepiece. Another obstacle is that
some shop owners do not attempt to challenge the painters'
perception of inconvenience by testing different forms of
respiratory protection.
-------
Table 1 (Continued)
Factors Motivating Shop Owners to Implement Safe Work Practices
Shop Improvement
Motivating Factors for Implementing the Change
Obstacles for Implementing Change
Ensuring that
workers
consistently wear
their respirators, as
needed
Some auto refmish shops placed a greater emphasis on their
painters' consistent use of respiratory protection than
others. The primary factor motivating shop owners to
encourage their workers to use PPE appeared to be both a
genuine concern for the health of the painters and a fear of
fines that might result from an inspection by OSHA. (The
two shops with the most comprehensive respiratory
protection programs were the only shops that ERG visited
that had been inspected by OSHA.)
The main obstacles associated with consistent use of
respiratory protection are primarily a lack of dedication from
management to enforce shop policies on PPE and a lack of
motivation among painters to wear appropriate PPE while
working with paints. Note, several shop owners indicated
that good painters are hard to come by, thus, shop owners are
often reluctant to force painters to wear PPE because they do
not want the painters to quit.
Other changes and improvements:
Implementing
effective health and
safety management
practices (e.g.,
training,
conducting routine
inspections,
following hazard
communication
procedures, and so
on)
Of the shops that ERG visited, owners cited several
different factors that motivated them to implement effective
health and safety management practices, such as employee
training, conducting routine shop inspections, and hiring
consulting services to develop respiratory protection and
hazard communication programs. These factors include,
but are not limited to, a genuine concern for the health and
safety of painters, the potential costs associated with
workers who get sick on the job, fear of fines that may
result from OSHA inspections, compensation provided by
insurance carriers for implementing effective safety and
health programs, and the desire to retain good painters by
providing a clean and safe work environment.
ERG noted two major obstacles that auto refmish shops face
in implementing effective health and safety procedures. The
first obstacle is cost: shop owners indicated that they would
need to designate a full-time employee to effectively manage
environmental and safety and health issues; however, most
shops cannot afford to have such specialized staff. The
second obstacle is a concern about production levels: some
shop owners feel that health and safety practices slow
workers down, thus, limiting their productivity.
------- |