Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Listing of Substitutes for Ozone-Depleting Substances-Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection, 56359-56369 [E6-15831]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 27, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56359-56369]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-15831]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0087; FRL-8223-4]
RIN-2060-AM24


Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Listing of Substitutes for 
Ozone-Depleting Substances--Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct Final Rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action lists four substitutes for ozone-depleting 
substances (ODSs) in the fire suppression and explosion protection 
sector as acceptable subject to use conditions under the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Significant New Alternatives 
Policy (SNAP) program. SNAP implements section 612 of the Clean Air 
Act, as amended in 1990, which requires EPA to evaluate substitutes for 
ODSs and find them acceptable where they do not pose a greater overall 
risk to human health and the environment than other acceptable 
substitutes.

DATES: This rule is effective on November 27, 2006 without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment or receives a request for a 
public hearing by October 27, 2006. If we receive adverse comment or a 
request for a public hearing, we will publish a timely withdrawal in 
the Federal Register informing the public that all or part of this rule 
will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a public docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0087. All documents in the docket are 
listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the 
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet 
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically through 
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket, 
EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 
DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the 
Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the 
Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bella Maranion, Stratospheric 
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs (6205J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 343-9749; fax number: 
(202) 343-2363; e-mail address: maranion.bella@epa.gov. The published 
versions of notices and rulemakings under the SNAP program are 
available on EPA's Stratospheric Ozone Web site at https://www.epa.gov/
ozone/snap/regs.

[[Page 56360]]


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In this direct final rule, EPA adds four 
fire suppression agents to the list of acceptable substitutes subject 
to use conditions. The regulations implementing the SNAP program are 
codified at 40 CFR part 82, subpart G. The appendices to Subpart G list 
for specific end uses substitutes for ODSs as unacceptable or 
acceptable with certain restrictions imposed on their use. The action 
in this direct final rule will add the four halon substitutes 
acceptable subject to use conditions to the appendices to Subpart G.
    EPA is publishing today's revisions to the SNAP lists without prior 
proposal because the Agency views them as non-controversial and 
anticipates no adverse comment. We are adding four new agents to the 
list of acceptable substitutes subject to use conditions. This action 
does not place any significant burden on the regulated community but 
lists as acceptable, subject to use conditions, new halon substitutes 
while continuing to protect human health and the environment.
    In the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register 
publication, EPA is publishing a companion proposed rule that proposes 
the same actions as in this direct final rule. The direct final rule 
will be effective on November 27, 2006 without further notice unless we 
receive adverse comment (or a request for a public hearing) by October 
27, 2006. If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that all or 
part of this rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public 
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will 
not institute a second public comment period on this action. Any 
parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
    You may claim that information in your comments is confidential 
business information, as allowed by 40 CFR part 2. If you submit 
comments and include information that you claim as confidential 
business information (CBI), we request that you submit them directly to 
Bella Maranion at the address under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in 
two versions: one clearly marked ``Public'' to be filed in the Public 
Docket, and the other marked ``Confidential'' to be reviewed by 
authorized government personnel only. This information will remain 
confidential unless EPA determines, in accordance with 40 CFR part 2, 
subpart B, that the information is not subject to protection as CBI.

Table of Contents

I. Section 612 Program
    A. Statutory Requirements
    B. Regulatory History
II. Listing Decisions: Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection--
Total Flooding
    A. Gelled Halocarbon/Dry Chemical Suspension with sodium 
bicarbonate additive (Envirogel with Sodium Bicarbonate additive)--
Acceptable Subject to Use Conditions
    B. Powdered Aerosol D (Aero-K[supreg], Stat-X[supreg])--
Acceptable Subject to Use Conditions
    C. Powdered Aerosol E (FirePro[supreg])--Acceptable Subject to 
Use Conditions
    D. Phosphorous Tribromide (PBr3)--Acceptable Subject 
to Use Conditions
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Congressional Review Act

I. Section 612 Program

A. Statutory Requirements

    Section 612 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) authorizes EPA to develop a 
program for evaluating alternatives to ozone-depleting substances. EPA 
refers to this program as the Significant New Alternatives Policy 
(SNAP) program. The major provisions of Section 612 are:
     Rulemaking--Section 612(c) requires EPA to promulgate 
rules making it unlawful to replace any class I (chlorofluorocarbon, 
halon, carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and 
hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II (hydrochlorofluorocarbon) substance 
with any substitute that the Administrator determines may present 
adverse effects to human health or the environment where the 
Administrator has identified an alternative that (1) reduces the 
overall risk to human health and the environment, and (2) is currently 
or potentially available.
     Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable Substitutes--Section 
612(c) also requires EPA to publish a list of the substitutes 
unacceptable for specific uses. EPA must publish a corresponding list 
of acceptable alternatives for specific uses.
     Petition Process--Section 612(d) grants the right to any 
person to petition EPA to add a substitute to or delete a substitute 
from the lists published in accordance with Section 612(c). The Agency 
has 90 days to grant or deny a petition. Where the Agency grants the 
petition, EPA must publish the revised lists within an additional six 
months.
     90-day Notification--Section 612(e) directs EPA to require 
any person who produces a chemical substitute for a class I substance 
to notify the Agency not less than 90 days before new or existing 
chemicals are introduced into interstate commerce for significant new 
uses as substitutes for a class I substance. The producer must also 
provide the Agency with the producer's health and safety studies on 
such substitutes.
     Outreach--Section 612(b)(1) states that the Administrator 
shall seek to maximize the use of Federal research facilities and 
resources to assist users of class I and II substances in identifying 
and developing alternatives to the use of such substances in key 
commercial applications.
     Clearinghouse--Section 612(b)(4) requires the Agency to 
set up a public clearinghouse of alternative chemicals, product 
substitutes, and alternative manufacturing processes that are available 
for products and manufacturing processes which use class I and II 
substances.

B. Regulatory History

    On March 18, 1994, EPA issued a rule (69 FR 13044) which described 
the process for administering the SNAP program and published EPA's 
first acceptability lists for substitutes in the major industrial use 
sectors. These sectors include: refrigeration and air-conditioning; 
foam blowing; solvents cleaning; fire suppression and explosion 
protection; sterilants; aerosols; adhesives, coatings and inks; and 
tobacco expansion. These sectors comprise the principal industrial 
sectors that historically consumed large volumes of ozone-depleting 
compounds.
    The Agency defines a ``substitute'' as any chemical, product 
substitute, or alternative manufacturing process, whether existing or 
new, that could replace a class I or class II substance. Anyone who 
produces a substitute must provide the Agency with health and safety 
studies on the substitute at least 90 days before introducing it into 
interstate commerce for significant new use as an alternative. This 
requirement applies to chemical manufacturers, but may include 
importers, formulators, or end-users when they are responsible for 
introducing a substitute into commerce.
    To develop the lists of unacceptable and acceptable substitutes, 
EPA conducts screens of health and environmental risk posed by various 
substitutes for ozone-depleting

[[Page 56361]]

compounds in each use sector. The outcome of these risk screens can be 
found in the public docket, as described above in the ADDRESSES portion 
of this document.
    Under Section 612, the Agency has considerable discretion in the 
risk management decisions it can make in SNAP. The Agency has 
identified four possible decision categories: acceptable; acceptable 
subject to use conditions; acceptable subject to narrowed use limits; 
and unacceptable. Fully acceptable substitutes, i.e., those with no 
restrictions, can be used for all applications within the relevant 
sector end-use. Conversely, it is illegal to replace an ODS with a 
substitute listed by SNAP as unacceptable.
    After reviewing a substitute, the Agency may make a determination 
that a substitute is acceptable only if certain conditions of use are 
met to minimize risk to human health and the environment. Such 
substitutes are described as ``acceptable subject to use conditions''. 
Use of such substitutes without meeting associated use conditions 
renders these substitutes unacceptable and subjects the user to 
enforcement for violation of Section 612 of the Clean Air Act.
    Even though the Agency can restrict the use of a substitute based 
on the potential for adverse effects, it may be necessary to permit a 
narrowed range of use within a sector end-use because of lack of 
alternatives for specialized applications. Users intending to adopt a 
substitute acceptable with narrowed use limits must ascertain that 
other acceptable alternatives are not technically feasible. Companies 
must document the results of their evaluation, and retain the results 
on file for purposes of demonstrating compliance. This documentation 
shall include descriptions of substitutes examined and rejected, 
processes or products in which the substitute is needed, reason for 
rejection of other alternatives, e.g., performance, technical or safety 
standards, and the anticipated date other substitutes will be available 
and projected time for switching to other available substitutes. Use of 
such substitutes in applications and end-uses which are not specified 
as acceptable in the narrowed use limit renders these substitutes 
unacceptable.
    EPA does not believe that notice and comment rulemaking procedures 
are required to list alternatives as acceptable with no restrictions. 
Such listings do not impose any sanction, nor do they remove any prior 
license to use a substitute. Consequently, EPA adds substitutes to the 
list of acceptable alternatives without first requesting comment on new 
listings. Updates to the acceptable lists are published as separate 
Notices of Acceptability in the Federal Register.
    For more information on the Agency's process for administering the 
SNAP program or criteria for evaluation of substitutes, refer to the 
SNAP rule published in the Federal Register on March 18, 1994 (59 FR 
13044), and see also the Code of Federal Regulations at 40 CFR Part 82, 
Subpart G. A complete chronology of SNAP decisions and the appropriate 
Federal Register citations may be found at EPA's Ozone Depletion Web 
site at https://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/chron.html. For a complete 
listing of the Agency's decisions on acceptable and unacceptable 
substitutes, go to https://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/lists/.

II. Listing Decisions: Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection--Total 
Flooding

    In this final rule, EPA is issuing its decision on the 
acceptability of the following substitutes in the fire suppression and 
explosion protection sector: Gelled Halocarbon/Dry Chemical Suspension 
with sodium bicarbonate additive (Envirogel with sodium bicarbonate 
additive), Powdered Aerosol D (Aero-K[supreg], Stat-X[supreg]), 
Powdered Aerosol E (FirePro[supreg]), and Phosphorous Tribromide 
(PBr3).
    The Agency evaluated the criteria set forth at 40 CFR 82.180(a)(7) 
in determining the acceptability of the above substitutes for halon 
1301 total flooding fire suppression systems. The Agency has determined 
that the Clean Air Act does not authorize EPA to regulate for global 
climate change purposes (Fabricant, 2003). The Agency has not yet 
concluded how this determination would affect its consideration of the 
global warming potential of substitutes under the SNAP program. 
Regardless, for the substitutes considered here, the global warming 
potential of the alternatives was not a determinative factor in EPA's 
acceptability determination. The GWP for these substitutes is well 
below that of previously approved substitutes in this sector.
    The section below presents a detailed discussion of the four fire 
suppression and explosion protection substitute listing determinations 
that are finalized in today's direct final rule. Tables summarizing 
these listing decisions are at the end of this document. The statements 
provided in the FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of these tables 
provide additional information, but are not legally binding under 
section 612 of the Clean Air Act. In addition, the FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT may not be a comprehensive list of other legal obligations you 
may need to meet when using the substitute. Although you are not 
required to follow recommendations in the FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
column of the tables to use a substitute, EPA strongly encourages you 
to apply the information when using these substitutes. In many 
instances, the information simply refers to standard operating 
practices in existing industry and/or building-code standards. Thus, 
many of these statements, if adopted, would not require significant 
changes to existing operating practices.

A. Gelled Halocarbon/Dry Chemical Suspension With Sodium Bicarbonate 
Additive (Envirogel With Sodium Bicarbonate Additive)--Acceptable 
Subject to Use Conditions

    Gelled Halocarbon/Dry Chemical Suspension with sodium bicarbonate 
additive (Envirogel with sodium bicarbonate additive) is acceptable, 
subject to use conditions, as a halon 1301 substitute for total 
flooding uses in occupied areas. Envirogel (Gelled Halocarbon/Dry 
Chemical Suspension) is a blend of any of several hydrofluorocarbons 
(HFCs) with an additive. The HFCs used in the Envirogel agent (HFC-125, 
HFC-227ea, or HFC-236fa) have previously been approved as total 
flooding and streaming agents under EPA's SNAP program. The use 
condition requires that use of whichever HFC (HFC-125, HFC-227ea, or 
HFC-236fa) is employed in the Envirogel with sodium bicarbonate 
formulation must be in accordance with all requirements for 
acceptability (i.e., narrowed use limits) of that HFC under EPA's SNAP 
program. In addition, the use of HFCs employed in this agent should be 
in accordance with the latest version of the National Fire Protection 
Association (NFPA) 2001 Standard on Clean Agent Fire Extinguishing 
Systems. The use of aerosol extinguishing agents such as Envirogel with 
sodium bicarbonate should be in accordance with the latest version of 
NFPA 2010 Standard on Aerosol Extinguishing Systems.
    EPA previously listed Envirogel with the ammonium polyphosphate 
additive as acceptable for use as a substitute for halon 1301 in total 
flooding applications in both occupied and unoccupied areas (67 FR 
4195, January 29, 2002). In the same rule, use of Envirogel with any 
additive other than ammonium polyphosphate was restricted to normally 
unoccupied areas. We had no information on the toxicity of Envirogel in 
occupied areas with any

[[Page 56362]]

additive other than ammonium polyphosphate. Subsequently, the submitter 
requested SNAP review of Envirogel with sodium bicarbonate for use in 
occupied areas. We evaluated this agent for use in occupied areas and 
have determined that it is acceptable for such use, subject to use 
conditions.
    EPA is providing additional information regarding use of Envirogel 
with sodium bicarbonate additive. These are as follows and further 
discussed below:
    (1) Sodium bicarbonate release in all settings should be targeted 
so that increased pH level would not adversely affect exposed 
individuals.
    (2) Users should provide special training to individuals required 
to be in environments protected by Envirogel with sodium bicarbonate 
additive extinguishing systems.
    (3) Each extinguisher should be clearly labeled with the potential 
hazards from use and safe handling procedures.
Targeting Release of Sodium Bicarbonate to Prevent Increased Blood pH
    The addition of sodium bicarbonate in the mixture is to minimize 
the formation of toxic hydrofluoric acid (HF) formed by the 
decomposition of HFCs during a fire. Sodium bicarbonate, while low in 
toxicity, also has the ability to affect blood pH level; therefore, its 
release in all settings should be targeted so that increased blood pH 
level would not adversely affect those exposed. Sample calculations and 
assumptions for respirable and released sodium bicarbonate for varied 
enclosure sizes are included in the risk screen conducted for this 
substitute and are available in the electronic docket number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2005-0087 for this rule. The effects from exposure to Envirogel 
with sodium bicarbonate additive are expected to be negligible at the 
charge sizes and concentrations provided by the manufacturer. This is 
because of the body's compensatory mechanisms that restore the pH to 
normal range. EPA recommends the following:
--Avoid or minimize exposure to this fire suppressant in a room with an 
internal volume of 300 ft3.
--Give exposed individuals an electrolyte solution to drink afterwards 
to restore the pH within the appropriate range.
--To reduce occupational exposure to sodium bicarbonate during the 
manufacturing or filling of extinguishers, workers should handle the 
sodium bicarbonate in a hood and follow good manufacturing practices if 
there is a risk of dispersing the dust.
--To protect the skin and eyes, workers should wear safety goggles and 
gloves.
--In the case of an accidental spill, the area should be well-
ventilated, and workers should wear their protective equipment while 
wet-vacuuming the sodium bicarbonate.
Training and Labeling
    To protect personnel who may be present in areas where Envirogel 
with sodium bicarbonate additive is discharged, EPA recommends that 
users should provide special training, including the hazards associated 
with use of the HFC agent and sodium bicarbonate and proper handling 
procedures, for individuals required to be in spaces protected by these 
systems. Extinguisher bottles should be clearly labeled with the 
potential hazards associated with the use of the specified HFC agent 
and sodium bicarbonate, as well as handling procedures to reduce risk 
resulting from these hazards.
Additional Information
    EPA is providing additional information regarding use of Envirogel 
with sodium bicarbonate additive. Use of Envirogel with sodium 
bicarbonate additive should conform to relevant Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration (OSHA) requirements, including 29 CFR 1910, 
Subpart L, sections 1910.160 and 1910.162. Per OSHA requirements, 
protective gear (self-contained breathing apparatus) should be 
available in the event that personnel reenter the area. Discharge 
testing should be strictly limited to that which is essential to meet 
safety or performance requirements. The agent should be recovered from 
the fire protection system in conjunction with testing or servicing, 
and recycled for later use or destroyed.
Updated Tables of Acceptability Listings
    Under the SNAP program, Envirogel with the additive ammonium 
polyphosphate is listed as an acceptable substitute as a total flooding 
agent. See 67 FR 4185, 4195-96. Prior to this rule becoming final, 
Envirogel with any additive other than ammonium polyphosphate was 
listed in Appendix J to part 82, subpart G as acceptable subject to 
narrowed use limits with the condition that it only be used in normally 
unoccupied areas. Id. Because EPA is finding Envirogel with the 
additive sodium bicarbonate acceptable subject to narrowed use 
conditions in normally occupied spaces, we are removing the listing of 
Envirogel from existing Appendix J and we are addressing its use in new 
Appendices O and P. Appendix O addresses the decision in this rule that 
Envirogel with the additive sodium bicarbonate is acceptable subject to 
use conditions in both normally unoccupied and occupied areas. Appendix 
P reflects EPA's prior decision that Envirogel with an additive other 
than ammonium polyphosphate is acceptable for use only in normally 
unoccupied areas but modifies it to reflect the decision in this rule 
that Envirogel with the additive sodium bicarbonate may also now be 
used in occupied areas. Today's action does not modify EPA's prior 
decision that Envirogel with the additive ammonium polyphosphate is 
acceptable for use as a total flooding agent. The removal of Envirogel 
from Appendix J leaves the agent Halotron II, under the generic name 
HFC Blend B, as the only agent in Appendix J that is acceptable subject 
to narrowed use limits.
    Use of Envirogel with sodium bicarbonate additive in occupied 
spaces will be less harmful to the atmosphere than the continued use of 
halon 1301. Additionally, the risk to the general population is 
expected to be below levels of concern. Thus, we find that Envirogel 
with sodium bicarbonate additive is acceptable subject to use 
conditions because in the end uses listed, it does not pose a greater 
overall risk to human health and the environment than other acceptable 
alternatives.

B. Powdered Aerosol D (Aero-K[supreg], Stat-X[supreg])--Acceptable 
Subject to Use Conditions

    Powdered Aerosol D (Aero-K[supreg], Stat-X[supreg]) is acceptable, 
subject to use conditions, as a halon 1301 substitute for total 
flooding uses. As requested by the submitter, the use conditions 
require that Powdered Aerosol D be used only in areas that are not 
normally occupied. In the ``Further Information'' column of the tables 
summarizing today's listing decisions and found at the end of this 
document, we also provide that use of this agent should be in 
accordance with the safety guidelines in the latest edition of the NFPA 
2010 Standard for Aerosol Extinguishing Systems.
    Powdered Aerosol D is a pyrotechnic particulate aerosol and 
explosion suppressant that is supplied to users as a solid housed in a 
double-walled hermetically-sealed steel container. When the unit is 
triggered by heat (300 [deg]C), the product is pyrotechnically 
activated to produce gases and aerosol particles from a mixture of 
chemicals. This pyrotechnic composition passes through a bed of 
catalytically active

[[Page 56363]]

substrate that cools, oxidizes, and filters the particulates of the 
mixture.
    EPA has reviewed the potential environmental impacts of this 
substitute and has concluded that Powdered Aerosol D does not pose 
greater overall risk to human health and the environment than other 
acceptable substitutes. According to the submitter, the active 
ingredients for this technology are solids both before and after use; 
thus, the ozone depletion potential (ODP) and the atmospheric lifetime 
(ALT) are both zero. The concentrations of the gaseous post-activation 
products are not expected to result in significant adverse atmospheric 
impacts. Thus, we find that Powdered Aerosol D is acceptable, subject 
to use conditions, because it does not pose a greater overall risk to 
human health and the environment in the end use listed compared to 
other acceptable substitutes as long as the use conditions are 
observed. EPA's review of environmental and human health impacts of 
this agent is contained in the public docket for this rulemaking.
    EPA is providing additional information regarding use of Powdered 
Aerosol D for total flooding uses in unoccupied spaces. EPA evaluated 
occupational exposure, exposure at end use, and general population 
exposure to ensure that the use of Powdered Aerosol D did not pose 
unacceptable risks to workers or the general public. In the FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT column of the tables summarizing today's listing 
decisions, EPA recommends the following for establishments 
manufacturing Powdered Aerosol D and filling containers to be used in 
total flooding applications:

--Workers should wear safety goggles or shields and appropriate 
protective equipment (e.g., chemical suits, gloves, masks, particulate 
respirators using NIOSH type N95 or better filters).
--A local exhaust system should be installed and operated to provide 
adequate ventilation to reduce airborne exposure of Powdered Aerosol D 
constituents.
--An eye wash fountain and quick drench facility should be close to the 
production area;
--Training for safe handling procedures should be provided to all 
employees that would be likely to handle the containers of the agent or 
extinguishing units filled with the agent.
--Workers should adhere to appropriate occupational safety guidelines.

    Upon activation of the Powdered Aerosol D system, several post-
activation products are expected to form. Workers entering the 
protected space after activation should wear the appropriate protective 
equipment (e.g., gloves, goggles, and a respirator with fine dust 
rating/capability). Workers responsible for clean up of an inadvertent 
release of Powdered Aerosol D should wear chemical suits and self-
contained breathing apparatus during the cleanup and should not come 
into contact with post-discharge solids. The manufacturer should 
provide guidance upon installation of the system regarding the 
appropriate timeframe after which workers may re-enter the area for 
disposal to allow the maximum settling of all the particulates. The 
contents removed from the space should be disposed of according to good 
industrial hygiene practices, and equipment should be thoroughly 
decontaminated after use.
    EPA's review of environmental and human health impacts of this 
agent is contained in the public docket for this rulemaking. We find 
that Powdered Aerosol D is acceptable subject to use conditions (for 
use only in normally unoccupied areas) because it does not pose a 
greater overall risk to public health and the environment than other 
acceptable substitutes in the end use and application listed above.

C. Powdered Aerosol E (FirePro[supreg])--Acceptable Subject to Use 
Conditions

    Powdered Aerosol E (FirePro[supreg]) is acceptable, subject to use 
conditions, as a halon 1301 substitute for total flooding agent uses. 
As requested by the submitter, the use conditions require that Powdered 
Aerosol E be used only in normally unoccupied areas. In the FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT column of the tables summarizing today's listing 
decisions and found at the end of this document, we also provide that 
use of this agent should be in accordance with the safety guidelines in 
the latest edition of the NFPA 2010 Standard for Aerosol Extinguishing 
Systems.
    Powdered Aerosol E is generated in an automated manufacturing 
process during which the chemicals, in powder form, are mixed and then 
supplied to end users as a solid contained within a fire extinguisher. 
In the presence of heat, the solid converts to an aerosol consisting 
mainly of potassium salts.
    EPA has reviewed the potential environmental impacts of this 
substitute and has concluded that Powdered Aerosol E does not pose a 
greater overall risk to human health or the environment than other 
acceptable substitutes. According to the submitter, the active 
ingredients for this technology are solids both before and after use; 
thus, the ODP and the ALT are both zero. The concentrations of the 
gaseous post-activation products are not expected to result in 
significant adverse atmospheric impacts. Thus, we find that 
FirePro[supreg] is acceptable, subject to use conditions, because it 
does not pose a greater overall risk to human health and the 
environment in the end use listed compared to other acceptable 
substitutes. EPA's review of environmental and human health impacts of 
this agent is contained in the public docket for this rulemaking.
    EPA is providing additional information regarding use of Powdered 
Aerosol E for total flooding uses in unoccupied spaces. EPA evaluated 
occupational exposure, exposure at end use, and general population 
exposure to ensure that the use of Powdered Aerosol E did not pose 
unacceptable risks to workers or the general public. In the FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT columns of the tables summarizing today's listing 
decisions, EPA recommends the following for establishments 
manufacturing FirePro[supreg] and filling containers to be used in 
total flooding applications:

--The mixing room should be equipped with a ventilation system.
--Workers should wear gloves and breathing apparatus.
--Appropriate protective clothing (e.g., goggles, particulate removing 
respirators, and gloves) should be worn during the manufacture, clean 
up, and disposal of this product.
--Appropriate protective clothing (e.g., goggles, particulate removing 
respirators, and gloves) should be worn or on site during the 
installation and maintenance of the product.
--Training for safe handling procedures should be provided to all 
employees that would be likely to handle the containers of the agent or 
extinguishing units filled with the agent.

    Workers should adhere to appropriate occupational safety 
guidelines. Upon activation of the FirePro[supreg] system, the levels 
of respirable dust will range from 13.7 to 32.9 g/m3. 
Therefore, if accidentally activated in the presence of workers, the 
level of respirable particles in the air will exceed OSHA's limit of 5 
mg/m3 of respirable particles and will therefore be 
considered a nuisance dust. In addition, bromine and chlorine could be 
present at levels above the Short Term Exposure Limits (STEL) 
designated by the American Conference of Government Industrial 
Hygienists (ACGIH). Because the respirable dust level will be exceeded 
and the STEL of chlorine and bromine could be

[[Page 56364]]

exceeded, Powdered Aerosol E is limited to use in normally unoccupied 
spaces. Because installation and maintenance personnel could be exposed 
when the system is activated, EPA recommends that all personnel wear 
goggles, gloves, and particulate removing respirators while performing 
installations and/or maintenance activities.
    The manufacturer should provide guidance upon installation of the 
system regarding the appropriate timeframe after which workers may re-
enter the area for disposal to allow the maximum settling of all the 
particulates. Clean-up operations are likely to result in re-
circulation of potentially toxic nuisance dust particles. Workers 
entering the protected space after activation should wear the 
appropriate protective equipment (e.g., gloves, goggles, and a 
respirator with fine dust rating/capability). Workers responsible for 
clean up of an inadvertent release of Powdered Aerosol E should wear 
rubber gloves, goggles, and a particulate removing respirator. The 
contents removed from the space should be disposed of according to good 
industrial hygiene practices, and equipment should be thoroughly 
decontaminated after use.
    EPA's review of environmental and human health impacts of this 
agent is contained in the public docket for this rulemaking. We find 
that Powdered Aerosol E is acceptable subject to use conditions (for 
use only in normally unoccupied areas) because it does not pose a 
greater overall risk to human health and the environment than other 
acceptable substitutes in the end use and application listed above.

D. Phosphorous Tribromide (PBr3)--Acceptable Subject to Use 
Conditions

    Phosphorous tribromide (PBr3) is acceptable, subject to 
use conditions, as a halon 1301 substitute for total flooding uses. As 
requested by the submitter, the use conditions require that 
PBr3 be used only in aircraft engine nacelles. These areas 
are unoccupiable, meaning that personnel cannot enter the space due to 
the physical or dimensional constraints of the protected space. 
PBr3 is estimated to have negligibly small ODP and an ALT 
estimated to be less than a few seconds. The use of PBr3 
proposed for use as a total flooding fire suppression agent to protect 
aircraft engine nacelles is not expected to pose a threat to 
atmospheric integrity or to human health. Today, EPA is listing 
PBr3 as acceptable, subject to use conditions, for use as a 
substitute for halon 1301 for total flooding only in aircraft engine 
nacelles.
    EPA has reviewed the potential environmental impacts of this 
substitute and has concluded that PBr3 does not pose a 
greater overall risk to human health and the environment than other 
acceptable substitutes. Because the fire suppressant is proposed for 
use in aircraft engine nacelles, EPA reviewed the potential 
contribution to ozone depletion from its discharge into the 
stratosphere. Given the short atmospheric lifetime of PBr3 
because of rapid hydrolysis and the small amount of bromine used in 
this application, the ODP is expected to be negligibly small 
(approximately 0.01-0.08, as compared to the ODP of halon 1301 of 12). 
Therefore, PBr3 is substantially less harmful to the ozone 
layer than the continued use of halon 1301. EPA's review of 
environmental and human health impacts of this agent is contained in 
the public docket for this rulemaking.
    EPA is providing additional information regarding use of 
PBr3 for total flooding uses in aircraft engine nacelles 
considered to be unoccupiable spaces. EPA evaluated occupational 
exposure, exposure at end use, and general population exposure to 
ensure that the use of PBr3 did not pose unacceptable risks 
to workers or the general public. According to the submitter, workers 
are not expected to have contact with PBr3 in the 
manufacturing setting; however, there is the potential risk of exposure 
in the event of an accidental spill during manufacturing. EPA modelled 
a simulated spill in a room assuming the instantaneous and complete 
hydrolysis of PBr3 to gaseous HBr and solid 
H3PO3. The HBr concentrations resulting from a 
spill during manufacturing are not considered an immediate, significant 
risk to workers' health. A spill in the room modelled would potentially 
produce enough solid H3PO3 to exceed the ACGIH 
limit for nuisance dust of 10 mg/m3. However, because the 
nuisance dust limit is based on an 8-hour time-weighted average for 
continuing, long-term exposure, and the spill would be an isolated 
event, the small exceedance is not considered to be of health concern. 
Since the space considered for use of the agent is an aircraft engine 
nacelle, which is an unoccupiable space, no end use exposure will 
result from the use of PBr3 in this space.
    In the FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT column of the tables summarizing 
today's listing decisions, EPA recommends the following for 
establishments manufacturing, installing, or maintaining the 
PBr3 ampoules for aircraft engine nacelles:

--Adequate ventilation should be in place and/or positive pressure 
self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) should be worn.
--All spills should be cleaned up immediately in accordance with good 
industrial hygiene practices.
--Training for safe handling procedures should be provided to all 
personnel that would be likely to handle PBr3 containers or 
extinguishing units filled with the material.

    EPA's review of environmental and human health impacts of this 
agent is contained in the public docket for this rulemaking. We find 
that PBr3 is acceptable subject to use conditions (for use 
only in aircraft engine nacelles) because it does not pose a greater 
overall risk to human health and the environment than other acceptable 
substitutes in the end use and application listed above.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
Agency must determine whether this regulatory action is significant and 
therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive 
Order. The Order defines significant regulatory action as one that is 
likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, 
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, OMB notified EPA on 
August 23, 2004, that it considers this a ``non-significant regulatory 
action'' within the meaning of the Executive Order and, therefore, did 
not require EPA to submit this action to OMB for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    EPA has determined that this final rule contains no information 
requirements subject to the Paperwork

[[Page 56365]]

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., that are not already approved by 
the OMB. OMB has reviewed and approved two Information Collection 
Requests (ICRs) by EPA which are described in the March 18, 1994 
rulemaking (59 FR 13044, at 13121, 13146-13147) and in the October 16, 
1996 rulemaking (61 FR 54030, at 54038-54039). These ICRs included five 
types of respondent reporting and recordkeeping activities pursuant to 
SNAP regulations: submission of a SNAP petition, filing a SNAP/TSCA 
Addendum, notification for test marketing activity, recordkeeping for 
substitutes acceptable subject to narrowed use limits, and record-
keeping for small volume uses. The OMB Control Numbers are 2060-0226 
and 2060-0350. The EPA ICR Numbers are 1596.06 and 1774.03.
    Copies of the ICR document(s) may be obtained from Susan Auby, by 
mail at the Office of Environmental Information, Collection Strategies 
Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822T); 1200 
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, by e-mail at 
auby.susan@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 566-1672. Include the ICR and/
or OMB number in any correspondence.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources 
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time 
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to 
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice 
and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure 
Act or any other statutes unless the agency certifies that the rule 
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small 
organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impact of today's rule on small 
entities, small entities are defined as (1) A small business as defined 
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of 
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is 
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's direct final rule 
on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
This final rule will not impose any requirements on small entities 
beyond current industry practices. Today's action effectively supports 
the introduction of four new alternatives to the fire protection 
extinguishing systems market thus providing additional options for 
users making the transition away from ozone-depleting halons.
    Use of halon 1301 total flooding systems have historically been in 
specialty fire protection applications including essential electronics, 
civil aviation, military mobile weapon systems, oil and gas and other 
process industries, and merchant shipping with smaller segments of use 
including libraries, museums, and laboratories. The majority of halon 
1301 system owners continue to maintain and refurbish existing systems 
since halon 1301 supplies continue to be available in the U.S. Owners 
of new facilities make up the market for the new alternative agent 
systems and may also consider employing other available fire protection 
options including new, improved technology for early warning and smoke 
detection. Thus, EPA is providing more options to any entity, including 
small entities, by finding these substitutes acceptable for use. The 
use restrictions imposed on the substitutes in today's rule are 
consistent with the applications suggested by the submitters. Thus far, 
these alternatives have not been sold or used in the end uses not found 
acceptable under today's rule. Until a manufacturer or other party 
requests a SNAP review for such end uses, these products may not be 
sold for such end uses. Therefore, we conclude that the rule does not 
impose a new cost on businesses.
    Although this final rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has 
tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small entities. By 
introducing new substitutes, today's rule gives additional flexibility 
to small entities that are concerned with fire suppression. EPA also 
has worked closely together with the National Fire Protection 
Association, which conducts regular outreach with, and involves small 
state, local, and tribal governments in developing and implementing 
relevant fire protection standards and codes.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector.
    Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA generally must prepare a written 
statement, including a cost-benefit analysis, for proposed and final 
rules with ``Federal mandates'' that may result in expenditures by 
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the 
private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Before 
promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, 
section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider 
a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that 
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do 
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Section 204 of the UMRA requires the 
Agency to develop a process to allow elected state, local and tribal 
government officials to provide input in the development of any 
proposal containing a significant Federal intergovernmental mandate.
    Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal 
governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a 
small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying 
potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected 
small governments to have meaningful and

[[Page 56366]]

timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with 
significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, 
educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the 
regulatory requirements.
    Today's rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory 
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local, or tribal 
governments or the private sector. Because this rule imposes no 
enforceable duty on any State, local or tribal government it is not 
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. EPA 
has also determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements 
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments; 
therefore, EPA is not required to develop a plan with regard to small 
governments under section 203. Finally, because this rule does not 
contain a significant intergovernmental mandate, the Agency is not 
required to develop a process to obtain input from elected state, 
local, and tribal officials under section 204.

E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have Federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have Federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This direct final rule does not have Federalism implications. It 
will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. This direct final 
rule will provide additional options for fire protection subject to 
safety guidelines in industry standards. These standards are typically 
already required by state or local fire codes, and this rule does not 
require state, local, or tribal governments to change their 
regulations. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' This direct final rule does 
not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. It 
will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the 
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. 
This direct final rule will provide additional options for fire 
protection subject to safety guidelines in industry standards. These 
standards are typically already required by state or local fire codes, 
and this rule does not require tribal governments to change their 
regulations. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies 
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' 
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may 
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action 
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health 
or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This final rule is not economically significant as defined in 
Executive Order 12866, and the Agency does not have reason to believe 
the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action 
present a disproportionate risk to children. The acceptability listings 
in this final rule primarily apply to the workplace, and thus, do not 
put children at risk disproportionately. This rule is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as 
defined in Executive Order 12866 and because the Agency does not have 
reason to believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by 
this action present a disproportionate risk to children.

H. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)

    This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in 
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 
(May 22, 2001)) because it is not likely to have a significant adverse 
effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The rule allows 
wider use of substitutes, providing greater flexibility for industry 
related to choices of alternative fire suppression systems to support 
the transition away from ozone-depleting substances, but little if any 
impact related to energy. Thus, we have concluded that this rule is not 
likely to have any adverse energy effects.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104-113, Section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 
272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA 
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides 
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. EPA defers to 
existing National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) voluntary 
consensus standards and Occupational Safety and Health Administration 
(OSHA) regulations that relate to the safe use of halon substitutes 
reviewed under SNAP. EPA refers users to the latest edition of NFPA 
2001 Standard on Clean Agent Fire Extinguishing Systems which provides 
for exposure guidelines and safe use of halocarbon and inert gas agents 
used to extinguish fires. EPA also refers to the latest edition of NFPA 
2010 Standard on Aerosol Extinguishing Systems which provides for safe 
use of aerosol extinguishing agents and technologies. Copies of these 
standards may be obtained by calling the NFPA's telephone number for 
ordering publications at 1-800-344-3555. The NFPA 2001 and 2010 
standards meet the objectives of the rule by setting scientifically-
based guidelines for safe exposure to halocarbon and inert gas agents 
and aerosol extinguishing agents,

[[Page 56367]]

respectively. In addition, EPA has worked in consultation with OSHA to 
encourage development of technical standards to be adopted by voluntary 
consensus standards bodies.

J. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act (CRA), 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added 
by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 
generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency 
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy 
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller 
General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this 
rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House 
of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States 
prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule 
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). This rule will be effective on November 27, 2006, unless we 
receive adverse comment or a request for a public hearing prior to 
October 27, 2006.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 21, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is amended as 
follows:

PART 82--PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE

0
1. The authority citation for part 82 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671--7671q.

Subpart G--Significant New Alternatives Policy Program

0
2. Appendix J to Subpart G of part 82 is amended by revising the table 
entitled ``Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection--Total Flooding 
Substitutes--Acceptable Subject to Narrowed Use Limits'' to read as 
follows:

Appendix J to Subpart G of Part 82--Substitutes listed in the January 
29, 2002 Final Rule, effective April 1, 2002.

  Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection Section--Total Flooding Substitutes--Acceptable Subject to Narrowed
                                                   Use Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Further
             End-use                  Substitute           Decision           Conditions          information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total flooding..................  HFC Blend B         Acceptable subject  Acceptable in       See additional
                                   (Halotron           to narrowed use     areas that are      comments 1, 2, 3,
                                   II[reg]).           limits.             not normally        4, 5.
                                                                           occupied only.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional comments:
1--Should conform to relevant OSHA requirements, including 29 CFR 1910, subpart L, Sections 1910.160 and
  1910.162.
2--Per OSHA requirements, protective gear (SCBA) should be available in the event personnel should reenter the
  area.
3--Discharge testing should be strictly limited to that which is essential to meet safety or performance
  requirements.
4--The agent should be recovered from the fire protection system in conjunction with testing or servicing, and
  recycled for later use or destroyed.
5--EPA has no intention of duplicating or displacing OSHA coverage related to the use of personal protective
  equipment (e.g., respiratory protection), fire protection, hazard communication, worker training or any other
  occupational safety and health standard with respect to halon substitutes.


0
3. Subpart G of part 82 is amended by adding Appendix O to read as 
follows:

Appendix O to Subpart G of Part 82--Substitutes listed in the September 
27, 2006 Final Rule, effective November 27, 2006

     Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection Sector--Total Flooding Substitutes--Acceptable Subject to Use
                                                   Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            End-use                  Substitute          Decision          Conditions       Further information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total flooding.................  Gelled Halocarbon/ Acceptable         Use of whichever   Use of this agent
                                  Dry Chemical       subject to use     hydrofluorocarbo   should be in
                                  Suspension         conditions.        n gas (HFC-125,    accordance with the
                                  (Envirogel) with                      HFC-227ea, or      safety guidelines in
                                  sodium                                HFC-236fa) is      the latest edition of
                                  bicarbonate                           employed in the    the NFPA 2001
                                  additive.                             formulation must   Standard for Clean
                                                                        be in accordance   Agent Fire
                                                                        with all           Extinguishing
                                                                        requirements for   Systems, for
                                                                        acceptability      whichever
                                                                        (i.e., narrowed    hydrofluorocarbon gas
                                                                        use limits) of     is employed, and the
                                                                        that HFC under     latest edition of the
                                                                        EPA's SNAP         NFPA 2010 standard
                                                                        program.           for Aerosol
                                                                                           Extinguishing
                                                                                           Systems.
                                                                                          Sodium bicarbonate
                                                                                           release in all
                                                                                           settings should be
                                                                                           targeted so that
                                                                                           increased blood pH
                                                                                           level would not
                                                                                           adversely affect
                                                                                           exposed individuals.
                                                                                          Users should provide
                                                                                           special training,
                                                                                           including the
                                                                                           potential hazards
                                                                                           associated with the
                                                                                           use of the HFC agent
                                                                                           and sodium
                                                                                           bicarbonate, to
                                                                                           individuals required
                                                                                           to be in environments
                                                                                           protected by
                                                                                           Envirogel with sodium
                                                                                           bicarbonate additive
                                                                                           extinguishing
                                                                                           systems.
                                                                                          Each extinguisher
                                                                                           should be clearly
                                                                                           labeled with the
                                                                                           potential hazards