An Interview With Bryan Leiker, Metal Finishers Association of California

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) will conduct a public hearing January 26 – 27, 2023. On January 27 at 8:30 a.m. PST, the hearing will consider proposed amendments to the Airborne Toxic Control Measure for Chromium Electroplating and Chromic Acid Anodizing Operations.

For this installment of On the Line, Products Finishing sat down with Bryan Leiker, executive director for the Metal Finishers Association of California (MFACA) to get an update on the latest moves to ban hexavalent chromium use for plating and anodizing operations in the state. The purpose of the hearing is to consider the proposed amendments to the Airborne Toxic Control Measure for chromium electroplating and chromic acid anodizing operations. The outcome is critical for the finishing community in California as well as the industry at large.

Bryan, you’ve been working on this issue with CARB for some time. What makes this hearing different than some of the other meetings?

So far, all of our meetings have been virtual because of the pandemic, and they've been with staff only, they’ve been working group meetings. We’ve done tours with the board members and have talked to them on the side. But this will be the first chance that [finishing industry] employees, business owners and interested parties can speak with the board.

Also, this is the first time the association has faced an issue that is not an emissions-based rule. This is a ban on processing in the chrome industry.

Can you talk a little bit about how MFACA has approached these regulatory talks in the past and what you're doing now in response to this proposed ban?

From the very beginning, in this rulemaking process, we’ve invited the CARB board members into the shops to tour and to help them understand the processes — to understand how we do things and why we do things. We’ve been very open andare always willing to engage.

We are asking for a rule comparable to 1469 — the South Coast rule— which CARB sat in and which was decided only a few years back. It seemed like everybody agreed on this South Coast rule, which was an emissions-basedrule, with strict controls on tanks.

That’s the type of rule that the association is trying to negotiate here.

It’s important to note that our industry is still less than 1% of all hex chrome emissions statewide, but we’re the only industry right now that’s facing an actual ban. We all agree that we need to reduce emissions and control emissions — but we don’t believe that regulatory rules should incorporate a ban. They should be emissions-based.

What impacts will such a ban have?

For decorative shops, what we're facing right now is a January 1, 2027, phase-out ban on operations. For aerospace — which is the hard chrome and anodizing processes —  the date is January 1, 2039. One of the other large areas of concern is no further permits for any of these processes will be issued beginning January 1, 2024. So, when that date hits, no existing facility will be able to add an additional tank and no facility will be able to start up a new business. I find that to be very critical for the aerospace industry, because that cuts the supply chain they have to work with — Southern California is a very heavy hub for aerospace production, manufacturing and coatings. It will be very difficult for the supply chain to move forward.

As for our friends in the decorative plating business, they’ll either be forced to transition to a trivalent chromium replacement, or to shut their tanks down on that date.

Where might some of that business go?

The possibilities are outside the state lines — Arizona, Nevada, Texas, and possibly New Mexico. Our concern here is that you’ll get emission leakage in areas where you’re going to have less controls. You’ll get more transportation in and out of the state lines and with that, you increase diesel fuel emissions, truck emissions, traffic emissions and the like.

It makes more sense to control something where it’s at. California has some of the strictest environmental rules and standards in the country. We advocate keeping the industry in California — and we will continue to reduce emissions like we have. We are in favor of supporting strict emission standards and rules. We agree that shops that are not compliant or are unable to comply with these rules should not be in business. We are here to protect the environment.

At the same time, what we do is very crucial to industry. It’s crucial to aircraft, automotive and for the U.S. military. The surface finishing industry touches many aspects of safety that we require in life. Every time somebody steps onto an airplane, a lot of that plane has surface finishing involved in it.

---

Listen to the complete interview with Bryan Leiker in an episode of PF’s On the Line podcast: short.pfonline.com/OTLmfaca0123