Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) of Paint Overspray Arresters
James T. Hanley1, M. Kathleen Owen1, Jack R. Farmer1, and Theodore G. Brna2
1 Research Triangle Institute 2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
P.O. Box 12194 National Risk Management Research
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 Laboratory
Phone: 919-541-5811 Fax: 919-541-6936 Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
email: hanley@rti.org Phone:919-541-2683 Fax:919-541-0290
Web site: http://etv.rti.org/apct Web site: http://www.epa.gov/etv
Abstract
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has created the Environmental Technology
Verification (ETV) Program to accelerate the development and commercialization of improved
environmental technologies through third-party verification and reporting of performance. The
goal of the ETV Program is to verify the performance characteristics of commercial-ready
environmental technologies through the evaluation of objective and quality-assured data so that
potential purchasers and permitters are provided with an independent and credible assessment of
the technology that they are buying or permitting. ETV seeks to achieve this goal by providing
high quality, peer reviewed data on technology performance to those involved in the design,
distribution, financing, permitting, purchase, and use of environmental technologies.
The Air Pollution Control Technology (APCT) Program, one of 12 technology areas under ETV,
is operated by the Research Triangle Institute (RTI). in cooperation with EPA's National Risk
Management Research Laboratory. The APCT Program has recently evaluated the performance
of paint overspray arresters used primarily in the aerospace industry. The performance factor
verified was the particle filtration efficiency as a function of size for particles smaller than 10 u,m
in aerodynamic diameter. The APCT Program developed a generic verification protocol for
testing filtration efficiency that is based on EPA Method 319. The protocol was developed by
RTI, reviewed by a technical panel of experts, and approved by EPA, The protocol addresses
several issues that Method 319 does not cover, including periodic testing, acquisition of arrestors
for testing, and product definition. A Test/Quality Assurance Plan was prepared that addresses
test procedures and quality assurance and quality control requirements for obtaining verification
data of sufficient quantity and quality to satisfy the data quality objectives. Verification testing
of 11 paint overspray arrestors has been completed and their Verification Statements issued
-------
Introduction
Paint overspray arresters are particle collection devices (e.g., filters) used to control particle
emissions from paint spraying operations (Figure 1). Much of the impetus for this verification
program comes from the recently promulgated National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) for Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Facilities'. The NESHAP
establishes filtration efficiency requirements for paint overspray arrestors used in new and
existing aerospace facilities (Table 1) and presents the test method (Method 3192) to be used to
make these filtration efficiency determinations.
ETV works in partnership with recognized testing organizations, stakeholder groups that include
regulators, buyers, and vendor organizations, and with the full participation of individual
technology developers. The program evaluates the performance of technologies by developing
protocols and test plans that address the needs of the stakeholders. All tests are conducted in
accordance with rigorous quality assurance protocols to ensure that data of known and adequate
quality are generated and that the results are defensible.
The objective of the program is to verify paint overspray arrester performance relative to the
Aerospace NESHAP filtration efficiency requirements. The program offers significant benefits
to manufacturers, regulators, and end users including:
* Test results that have been through a stringent EPA quality assurance/quality control
(QA/QC) program,
« Test laboratories that have implemented quality management programs and have been
audited to ensure compliance with test requirements,
• Verification Statement signed by U.S. EPA Laboratory Director,
« Ready acceptance of test reports by state and local regulators due to EPA's instant
name recognition and high data quality standards,
• Valid comparison between products, and
• Reports posted on ETV web sites for ready reference by all interested parties.
Program Organization
The APCT Program is operated by RTI in cooperation with EPA's National Risk Management
Research Laboratory. Paint overspray arrestors are the first technology selected for verification
testing under the APCT Program. Figure 2 illustrates the program structure. The APCT
Program is structured such that testing is performed by the EPA partner (RTI) or other
independent laboratories. General guidance and direction for the APCT Program comes from a
22-member Stakeholder Advisory Committee.
Specific input from those directly involved with the manufacture, regulation, and use of paint
overspray arrestors comes from the Paint Overspray ArrestorTechnical Panel. The purpose of
the Technical Panel is to provide input for the development of the test protocol. For paint
overspray arrestors, a 29-member panel has been assembled consisting of program management
and QA personnel from EPA and RTI5 environmental consultants, manufacturers, regulators,
testing laboratories, and users.
With this structure. EPA establishes and maintains the requisite level of program and QA
oversight necessary to issue Verification Reports and Statements signed by the Director of EPA's
National Risk Management Research Laboratory. The direct involvement of EPA in the
verification process is a key element and prime benefit of the program to vendors and users.
-------
Figure 1. A three-stage paint overspray arrestor system. In this system, the first stage
(foreground) is a coarse prefilter, the second stage is a 4-in. deep pleated filter, and the final stage
is an eight-pocket 15-in. deep bag filter. Systems such as this are used to meet the "new source"
filtration efficiency requirements of the NESHAP. The first two stages, used without the third
stage, are typical of systems meeting "existing source" requirements.
Table 1. NESHAP Filtration Efficiency Requirements
Existing
Sources*
New
Sources*
Filtration efficiency
requirement, %
>90
>50
> 10
>95
>80
>65
Aerodynamic particle diameter range, |u.m
Liquid-phase aerosol
>5.7
>4.1
>2.2
>2.0
> 1.0
>0.42
Solid-phase aerosol
>8.1
>5.0
>2.6
>2.5
> 1.1
>0.70
* A new source is any affected source that commenced construction after
October 29, 1996. An existing source is any affected source that is not new.
-------
Stakeholder
Advisory
Committee
Paint Overspray
Arrester
Technical Panel
EPA
APCT Program
Manager
•
EPA
APCT
Quality Manager
RTI
APCT Program
Manager
RTI
rrogram
Quality Manager
RTI
Paint Overspray
Arrester
Task Manager
RTI
T-aoU
i asK
Quality Manager
RTI
Paint Overspray
Arrester
Data Analyst and
Test Operators
Figure 2. Structure of the ETV paint overspray arrester program. Dashed lines represent
independence of the quality management functions.
-------
Protocol for Testing Paint Overspray Arresters
Testing is performed in accordance with the program's Generic Test Protocol for Verification
Testing of Paint Overspray Arresters3 and the Test/QA Plan4. These documents incorporate all
the requirements of EPA Method 319. While Method 319 adequately specifies the method of
testing, the Generic Test Protocol and Test/QA Plan supplement Method 319 with a broader
QA/QC framework. Items addressed in the protocol that are not covered in Method 319 include
a more comprehensive list of data quality objectives, limitations on testing and reporting,
guidelines for acquisition of paint arresters for testing to ensure that representative arresters are
evaluated, requirements for product labeling, delineation of what defines a product and what
constitutes "a product change, requirements for test laboratories conducting the tests, requirements
for QA project plans, and audit assessments and response.
Description of Test Method
Filtration efficiency is computed from aerosol concentrations measured upstream and
downstream of an arrestor installed in a laboratory test rig (Figure 3). The aerosol concentrations
upstream and downstream of the arrestors are measured with an aerosol optical particle counter
(OPC) that simultaneously counts and sizes the particles in the aerosol stream. The OPC covered
the particle diameter size range from 0.3 to 10 um in a series of 15 contiguous sizing channels.
Each sizing channel covered a narrow range of particle diameters. For example, channel 1
covered from 0.3 to 0.4 urn, channel 2 from 0.4 to 0.5 urn, and channel 15 from 7 to 10 um.
Using the ratio of the downstream to upstream particle counts for each channel, the filtration
efficiency was computed for each of the sizing channels.
The upstream and downstream aerosol measurements are made while injecting a test aerosol into
the air stream upstream of the arrester [ambient aerosol is first removed from the upstream air
with high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters on the inlet of the test rig]. This test aerosol
spans the particle diameter size range from 0.3 to 10 um and provides a sufficient upstream
concentration in each of the sizing channels to allow accurate determination of filtration
efficiencies up to 99%.
The following series of tests are performed:
• Triplicate tests using a liquid-phase aerosol challenge.
• Triplicate tests using a solid-phase aerosol challenge,
• "No-filter" control tests (one performed prior to each arrestor test),
• One HEPA filter control test (performed monthly), and
* One reference filter control test.
Each test is performed at a face velocity of 120 feet per minute (61 cm/s) with the arrestor in its
initial (i.e., clean) condition. These conditions comply with Method 319.
Manufacturer Participation
During 1999, six manufacturers submitted a total of 11 products for verification. The
manufacturers included both established suppliers and newcomers in the aerospace paint
overspray arrestor market. The established suppliers sought verification of the performance of
their existing and/or new products to demonstrate NESHAP compliance. For the newcomers
(manufacturers established in the general filtration market looking to expand into the aerospace
market), verification accelerated their entry into the aerospace market by providing verified test
results showing that their products met the NESHAP requirements. Furthermore, because of
EPA's direct involvement in the verification testing, the aerospace customers have increased
confidence that the test results represent an unbiased high quality assessment of the arrestor.
-------
Room
Air
I
t
Blower
(3000 cfm
at 13 in, H2O)
Exhaust
to
Room
ASME Nozzle
[c=4^][
X
6
Flow Control
Valve
1
—
— ~
>
>
J>
1
1 1
1 <=>:• -
Downstream Mixer ,.
v \
^ r *" ''^
•--5-'."'^~~ °pc 3
* i . .
f T \ Device Backup
/ / \ Section Filter
Jnlet Filter / upstream Mixer .. , H°ld.^!'
Bank / (Used When
1 Dust-loading)
Aerosol
Generator
Overview of Test Duct Configuration (Top View)
Spray Nozzle
Spray Tower \ /
Syringe Pump
Atomizing Air
Air Conlrol Panel
Air Source
Aerosol Generation System
(Side View)
Aerosol Sampling System
(End View)
Figure 3. Facility for paint overspray arrester testing.
-------
Environmental Technology
Verification Report
Paint Overspray Arrester
Manufacturer Name
Arrester Model Number
Pi-pared by
ZED
Research Triangle Institute
Under • Coopntive Agfoemert w*
U.S. Enwonmenlal Protection Agency
TllE ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION
PROGRAM
iTV
/RTI
ETV Joint Verification Statement
TECHNOLOGY TYPE: PAINT OVTRSPRAY ARRESTOR
APPLICATION:
CONTROL OF PARTICLE EMISSIONS FROM
AEROSPACE PAINT SPRAYING FACILITIES
TECHNOLOGY NAME: Model of Punt Ovenpnr Amrtor
COMPANY: M.mj.actnrcT •' vrt««-
WEBSITE:
E-MAJL-
PHONE: (555)555-1211
Ci>y,Srace.ztpc«l< FAX: (555)555-1211
Vendor are* site addreaa
Vendor e-enal adorn
Toe U.S. EavirocrDcnul PromrLion Agency (EPA) tu created Ac Gnviroamaal TodmaloKy
Veri6aflk.ii (ETV) Prograni to Acililoe the deployment of HKKTVBIJ-VC or improved envuoancaLBl
tedinologiex through performance *ai£canoa uid dicsanbulwi] of i&Tannjnaa. The gad of tbc
ETV Program ii U further nvurmmentiJ protection by subsUaiuUy Accelerating Che acceptance aod
UK of tfoproved end cost-effbctivu uxfaaotapa. ETV Ecdu la achieve thu goal by providing tiigb
quality, peer fcviewed «UU oo Icthoology pafotmuce to those iowalved in the *-«!£". diitribuTiao,
fiaatcuig. permJOirift. purchase, tad use of cnvinwmaifal teehooJogica.
ETV voifci in parawnhip with rccogflinaJ nnmiinfa ud fcstiag orguuauau; itakcfaolder groupi
wttkfe coasisi of buyen, vataW ofsuiizxQou, pcrminen, ud odwr interedal p*rti«; with the full
paiticipcaon of individual technology devdopm. Toe pngnm cr«lu*i*3 [he perfarmuce of
buwvitivc techiu4o{ia by devcloennc ten pUiu (h« ire rejpaaaivcuibe aecdiof mkehotden,
conduenaB field or liberaTory tesu (u tppropruie), ceUtcamg aad KamlyziRS dan, md preparing
peer rcviewl repOftj. Al] eviJutioBi nn cooducted in "^™^«~^ with rijorou* quality unnooe
pmocoh to ensure thai dm of known ud adequate quality ur gcoenried a«d tb*l the rejulu uc
defcaable.
Tbe AirPoI]irt)DoConTOlTectooloey(APCT)profij»in.oncof Uwchnology veu under ETV, ii '
opemcd by the Roeanfa Triangle lurinte (RTI). in coopcnfion wih EPA'i N**onal Risk
ManAcemenl RfKarch Ltbortlacy. APCT hai crcemiy cwKutcd die performance of pvm ovenpray
iced primarily in dx ^roioioe industry, This verifier lion lUieCTictn provide a summary of
mute for die (oner manufacnffn'i tame aad tncoar mode] number).
TABLE 1. EXISTING SOUHCES'.-
LIQim>-rl!.7
> 4,1
>2.2
FSmtioo etXeieK;
>M
>M
> 10
Filcratiao cflciese7
•chirred. %
95
II
68
TABLE). EXISTING SOURCES':
SOUD-PKASE CHALLENGE AEROSOL PARTICLES
Aerodynamic pmrtkk
diameter njtce, fat
>KI
>SO
> 2.6
FilmtHe eDicieBey
nqolrctaeal, %
>«
>50
> 10
FiZr.tioo effidewr
Bcbieved, %
91
92
7S
q
TABLE 3. NEW SOURCES':
LIOUID-PIUSE CHALL£MCE AEROSOL PARTICLES
•A
An
Acrodyaaroic partide
dramrter ruge, pm
>3.0
>1.0
>0,42
FOtntio* eflkieocy
nuuij taucot. %
>95
>IO
>6S
FlhTBtMtl efHcieBCy
>eliicTaL*A
66
44
3]
TABLE 4. NEW SOURCES*:
SOLID-PHASE CHALLENGE AEROSOL PARTICLES
Aerodyumk particle
dum«1ef raDge, )ua
>2.S
>l.l
>070
rdtnlieci effideacy
ncjBJreaesit, *A
>«
MS
>75
FOtnCKM cffieieaey
achlend.%
74
16
46
KW source u any iffedcd source llut cocaroeaccd constructjoD after October 29, 1 996.
aioiaa source b any alTecled source Hul b DM new.
Tlii verifH^tioo fulemoil iddrEtses rwo tspectj of paint uiu^jUiiy atreslof pcifofnuace: fillmun
efficiency and pressure drop. Users of '.hii lechoology nuy wish u rorajilrr ocber pofomunce
pajuneicn such as service life and con wfccn selecncg a paim ovcnrny anenor (or tScij uje
Aj ruled ia Sccriaa 1.3 orMet>iod 319. "for a paint arrenar system or subsystem A^tchhas been
lesied by Ihjs meLhod, adding addiuonal lilmdian devices u die system or subsystem slull be
muencd tu resuh in u> cfT^icney oral least thai of (he original lystem vfidiout ajdttiucul lesling,"
E. Tunochy Oppcli Dale
Difecior
National Rist Management Rnccrct]
Laburalufy
Oflice or Kescurch and Developmcnl
United Sues En mronoicnal
Protection Agency
Jack R. Farmer Dale
Program Manager
Air PoUimon Control Technology Program
Research Triangle Institute
NOTICE- ETV vcriftcaunns arc based on an evalmdiod of technology pejTonnance under
specific, predeterotioed cnlcrii and [be appropriate qualify assurance procedures. E?A
ind RTI nuAeno expressed 01 itriplied mrranucsBS to UK performance or the techooLogy
and do not ccrtiry thai a ttchaoloey wtU alwayi operate as venllcd. The cod user U solely
responsible Tor complying with any and all applicable federal, date, and local
rtqutremenu- Mention of commercial product names docs cot imply endm sciucut.
Figure 4. Selected pages from an example Verification Report. Complete reports are available
at http://etv.rti.org/apct and at http://www.epa.gov.etv.
-------
Verification Reports and Statements
During 1999, two rounds of verification testing were performed. In these tests, six paint
overspray arresters were verified as meeting the NESHAP filtration efficiency requirements for
new sources. Eleven arresters, including the six noted, were verified for existing sources.
Results are reported in Verification Reports and Verification Statements, These are available at
RTFs ETV web site (http://etv.rti.org/apct/doeuments.cfm) and on EPA's ETV web site
(http://www.epa.gov/etv/). Figure 4 shows selected pages from an example report (the
manufacturer's name and product name that are normally included have been removed). The
cover of the verification report clearly denotes EPA's involvement with the testing. The report
begins with the Verification Statement which summarizes the performance of the tested arrester.
The final page of the Verification Statement is the signature page for the Director of EPA's
National Risk Management Research Laboratory and the RTI Program Manager. The report also
includes a description of the test method and tabulates all the pertinent test data.
Summary
An ETV Program to verify the performance of paint overspray arresters has been established.
The APCT Program has recently evaluated the performance of 11 paint overspray arresters used
primarily in the aerospace industry. The performance factor verified was the particle filtration
efficiency as a function of size for particles from 0.3 to 10 [im in diameter. The APCT ETV
Program developed a generic verification protocol for testing filtration efficiency that is based on
EPA Method 319. The protocol addresses several issues that Method 319 does not cover,
including periodic testing, acquisition of arresters for testing, and product definition. A Test/QA
Plan was prepared which addresses the test procedure and QA and QC requirements for
obtaining verification data of sufficient quantity and quality to satisfy the data quality objectives.
Additional testing is planned for later this year.
Test results for verified paint overspray arresters and program information are available at RTFs
ETV web site http://etv.rti.org/apct/documents.cfm and on the EPA ETV web site
http://www.epa.gov/etv/. Manufacturers of paint overspray arrestors seeking to have products
verified on this program are encouraged to contact the authors.
Acknowledgment
This work is supported by the U.S. EPA under Cooperative Agreement No. CR 826152-01-2.
EPA's support is gratefully acknowledged.
References
1. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Aerospace Manufacturing
and Rework Facilities. Code of Federal Regulations, Volume 40, Part 63, Subpart GG
(40 CFR 63.741-63.753).
2. Method 319: Determination of Filtration Efficiency for Paint Overspray Arrestors. Code
of Federal Regulations, Volume 40, Part 63, Appendix A.
3. Generic Test Protocol for Verification Testing of Paint Overspray Arrestors., Research
Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC, August 1999. Available at
http://etv.rti.org/apct/documents.cfm.
4. Test/QA Plan for Paint Overspray Arrestors, Research Triangle Institute, Research
Triangle Park, NC, February 1999. Available at http://etv.rti.org/apct/documents.cfni.
-------
NRMRL-RTP-P-471
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing}
i. REPORT NO.
EPA/600/A-00/005
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4, TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) of
Paint Cverspray Arresters
5, REPORT DATE
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7.AUTHOHO) Jg T- Hanley, M. K. Owen, J, R. Farmer (RTI);
and T.G.Brna (EPA)
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Research Triangle Institute
P. O. Box 12194
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11, CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
CR826152-01-2
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
EPA, Office of Research and Development
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Published paper;3-12/99
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/13
IS.SUPPLEMENTARYNOTES £PPCD project officer is Theodore G. Brna, Mail Drop 04, 919/
541-2683'. For Conference on Filtration and Separation Technologies for 2uOQ,
Myrtle Beach, SC, 3/14-17/00.
IB. ABSTRACT
paper discusses the environmental technology verification (ETV) of
paint overspray arresters undertaken as part of a program to accelerate the develop-
ment and commercialization of improved environmental technologies through third-
party verification and reporting of performance. The goal of the program is to verify
the performance characteristics of commercial- ready environmental technologies
through the evaluation of objective and quality- assured data so that potential purcha-
sers and permitters are provided with an independent and credible assessment of the
technology that they are buying or permitting. The program seeks to achieve this
goal by providing high-quality peer- reviewed data on technology performance to those
involved in the design, distribution, financing, permitting, purchase, and use of en-
vironmental technologies. The program recently evaluated the performance of paint
overspray arresters used primarily in the aerospace industry, jlhe performance fac-
tor verified was the particle filtration efficiency as a function 'of size for particles
smaller than 10 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter. The filtration efficiency test
protocol utilized is based on EPA Method 319 and addresses seve'ral issues that Me-
thod 319 does not cover including periodic testing, acquisition of arresters for test-
ing, and product definition. Testing of 11 paint arresters has been completed.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
COSATI Field/Group
Pollution
Spray Painting
Ve rifying
Aerospace Industry
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Paint Overspray Arres-
ters
13B
13H
14 B
05C
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport/
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
8
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 222O-1 (9-73)
------- |