Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Notice 25 for Significant New Alternatives Policy Program, 34017-34040 [2010-14510]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
available to all users on the Internet at
https://pe.usps.com.
POSTAL SERVICE
39 CFR Part 20
International Mail Manual;
Incorporation by Reference
Postal ServiceTM.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Postal Service announces
the issuance of Issue 36 of the Mailing
Standards of the United States Postal
Service, International Mail Manual
(IMM®) and its incorporation by
reference in the Code of Federal
Regulations.
Effective Date: This final rule is
effective on June 16, 2010. The
incorporation by reference of Issue 36 of
the IMM is approved by the Director of
the Federal Register as of June 16, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lizbeth Dobbins, (202) 268–3789.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Issue 36 of
the International Mail Manual was
issued on May 11, 2009. It replaced all
previous editions. Issue 36 of the IMM
continues to serve the objectives of the
Postal Service’s Transformation Plans,
the 2004–2008 Five-Year Strategic Plan,
the Strategic Transformation Plan 2006–
2010, and Vision 2013, Plan for 2009–
2013 to enable the Postal Service to
fulfill its long-standing mission of
providing affordable, universal mail
service. The Plans’ key strategies
include improving operational
efficiency, supporting growth through
added value to customers, and
enhancing the Postal Service’s
performance-based culture.
In addition, Issue 36 sets forth
specific changes such as: new mailing
standards for authorized shipments of
small packets to Cuba to align USPS®
with U.S. Department of Commerce
regulations; to expand the use of
Priority Mail International® Flat Rate
Envelopes and Boxes to Ascension and
the Falkland Islands; reorganization of
sections 260, 290, and 310 to clarify
eligibility for M-bags; and, to codify the
Postal Service Sure Money®
(DineroSeguro®) service as one of its
international money transfer services.
Issue 36 also corrects various printing
and format errors and omissions in the
previous Issue.
The International Mail Manual is
available to the public on a subscription
basis only from: U.S. Government
Printing Office, P.O. Box 979050, St.
Louis, MO 63197–9000. The
subscription price for one issue is
currently $50 to addresses in the United
States, and $70 to all foreign addresses.
The IMM is also published and
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 20
Foreign relations, Incorporation by
reference.
■ In view of the considerations
discussed above, the Postal Service
hereby amends 39 CFR part 20 as
follows:
PART 20—INTERNATIONAL POSTAL
SERVICE
1. The authority citation for part 20 is
revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 13 U.S.C. 301–
307; 18 U.S.C. 1692–1737; 39 U.S.C. 101,
401, 403, 404, 407, 414, 416, 3001–3011,
3201–3219, 3403–3406, 3621, 3622, 3626,
3632, 3633, and 5001.
2. Section 20.1 is revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 20.1 International Mail Manual;
incorporation by reference.
(a) Section 552(a) of Title 5, U.S.C.,
relating to the public information
requirements of the Administrative
Procedure Act, provides in pertinent
part that matter reasonably available to
the class of persons affected thereby is
deemed published in the Federal
Register when incorporated by reference
therein with the approval of the Director
of the Federal Register. In conformity
with that provision, with 39 U.S.C.
410(b)(1), and as provided in this part,
the U.S. Postal Service hereby
incorporates by reference its
International Mail Manual (IMM), Issue
36, dated May 11, 2009. The Director of
the Federal Register approves this
incorporation by reference in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1
CFR part 51.
(b) The current Issue of the IMM is
incorporated by reference in paragraph
(a) of this section. Successive Issues of
the IMM are listed in the following
table:
International mail
manual
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
PO 00000
1 .......................
2 .......................
3 .......................
4 .......................
5 .......................
6 .......................
7 .......................
8 .......................
9 .......................
10 .....................
11 .....................
12 .....................
13 .....................
14 .....................
15 .....................
16 .....................
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Date of issuance
November 13, 1981.
March 1, 1983.
July 4, 1985.
September 18, 1986.
April 21, 1988.
October 5, 1988.
July 20, 1989.
June 28, 1990.
February 3, 1991.
June 25, 1992.
December 24, 1992.
July 8, 1993.
February 3, 1994.
August 4, 1994.
July 9, 1995.
January 4, 1996.
Sfmt 4700
International mail
manual
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
Issue
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
35
36
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
34017
Date of issuance
September 12, 1996.
June 9, 1997.
October 9, 1997.
July 2, 1998.
May 3, 1999.
January 1, 2000.
July 1, 2000.
January 1, 2001.
July 1, 2001.
January 1, 2002.
June 30, 2002.
January 1, 2003.
July 1, 2003.
August 1, 2004.
May 31, 2005.
May 12, 2008.
May 11, 2009.
3. Section 20.2 is revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 20.2 Effective date of the International
Mail Manual.
The provisions of the International
Mail Manual Issue 36, effective May 11,
2009, are applicable with respect to the
international mail services of the Postal
Service.
Neva R. Watson,
Attorney, Legislative.
[FR Doc. 2010–14493 Filed 6–15–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 82
[FRL–9163–5]
RIN 2060–AG12
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone:
Notice 25 for Significant New
Alternatives Policy Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Determination of Acceptability.
SUMMARY: This Determination of
Acceptability expands the list of
acceptable substitutes for ozonedepleting substances under the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency’s
Significant New Alternatives Policy
program. The substitutes are for use in
the following sectors: Refrigeration and
air-conditioning, foam blowing,
aerosols, and sterilants. The majority of
the acceptability decisions find
substitutes acceptable as alternatives to
the class II ozone depleting substances
hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC)–22,
HCFC–142b and blends containing one
or both of these substances. EPA is also
finding one of the alternatives, HFO–
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
34018
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
1234ze, acceptable as a substitute for
CFC–113 in the heat transfer end use
and as a substitute for CFC–11 in the
aerosol propellant end use. The listing
of additional refrigerant alternatives as
acceptable will provide users in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning sector
with more options for replacing HCFC–
22 and HCFC–142b, which, pursuant to
EPA’s phaseout regulations, may
generally be used only as a refrigerant
to service equipment manufactured
before January 1, 2010.
DATES: Effective Date: June 16, 2010.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–0118
(continuation of Air Docket A–91–42).
All electronic documents in the docket
are listed in the index at https://
www.regulations.gov. Although listed in
the index, some information is not
publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Publicly available
docket materials are available either
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Air Docket (No. A–91–42),
EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 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
Docket is (202) 566–1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Melissa Fiffer by telephone at (202)
343–9464, by facsimile at (202) 343–
2338, by e-mail at
fiffer.melissa@epa.gov, or by mail at
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Mail Code 6205J, Washington, DC
20460. Overnight or courier deliveries
should be sent to the office location at
1310 L Street, NW., 10th floor,
Washington, DC 20005.
For more information on the Agency’s
process for administering the Significant
New Alternatives Policy (SNAP)
program or criteria for evaluation of
substitutes, refer to the original SNAP
rulemaking published in the Federal
Register on March 18, 1994 (59 FR
13044). Notices and rulemakings under
the SNAP program, as well as other EPA
publications on protection of
stratospheric ozone, are available from
EPA’s Ozone Depletion Web site at
https://www.epa.gov/ozone/ including
the SNAP portion at https://
www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What acronyms and abbreviations are used
in this document?
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
II. How does the Significant New
Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program
work?
A. What are the statutory requirements and
authority for the SNAP program?
B. What are EPA’s regulations
implementing Section 612?
C. How do the regulations for the SNAP
program work?
III. How does today’s SNAP listing relate to
the HCFC phaseout?
A. Why is EPA issuing a SNAP listing of
alternatives to hydrochlorofluorocarbon
(HCFC)–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof?
B. What happened during the most recent
milestone in the HCFC phaseout?
C. How does today’s SNAP listing affect
alternatives to HCFCs other than HCFC–
22, HCFC–142b, and blends thereof?
D. In servicing existing refrigeration or airconditioning equipment, may I continue
to use refrigerants, previously found
acceptable by SNAP, that contain HCFC–
22, HCFC–142b, and blends thereof?
IV. What are my existing and new options for
alternative refrigerants?
V. What are my existing and new options for
alternative foam blowing agents?
VI. What are my existing and new options for
alternative aerosol propellants?
VII. What are my existing and new options
for alternative sterilants?
I. What acronyms and abbreviations
are used in this document?
Below is a list of acronyms and
abbreviations used in this document.
ACGIH American Conference of
Government Industrial Hygienists
AEGL Acute Exposure Guideline Limit
AEL Acceptable Exposure Limit
AIHA American Industrial Hygiene
Association
ASHRAE American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers
CAA Clean Air Act
CAS ID # Chemical Abstract Service
Registry Number
CFC Chlorofluorocarbon
CBI Confidential Business Information
CEGL Continuous Exposure Guidance Level
EPA United States Environmental
Protection Agency
FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and
Rodenticide Act
GWP Global Warming Potential
HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant
HCFC Hydrochlorofluorocarbon
HFC Hydrofluorocarbon
IDLH Immediately Dangerous to Life and
Health
IPCC International Panel on Climate Change
NIOSH National Institutes for Occupational
Safety and Health
NRC National Research Council
ODP Ozone Depletion Potential
ODS Ozone-Depleting Substance
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
PEL Permissible Exposure Limit
REL Recommended Exposure Limit
PMN Pre-Manufacture Notice
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
SIP State Implementation Plan
SNAP Significant New Alternatives Policy
TLV Threshold Limit Value
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
WEEL Workplace Environmental Exposure
Limit
II. How does the SNAP program work?
A. What are the statutory requirements
and authority for the SNAP program?
Section 612 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) requires EPA to develop a
program for evaluating alternatives to
ozone-depleting substances (ODS). EPA
refers to this program as the SNAP
program. The major provisions of
Section 612 are:
1. Rulemaking
Section 612(c) requires EPA to
promulgate rules making it unlawful to
replace any class I (e.g.,
chlorofluorocarbon, halon, carbon
tetrachloride, methyl chloroform,
methyl bromide, and
hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II
(e.g., 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.
2. Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable
Substitutes
Section 612(c) requires EPA to
publish a list of the substitutes
unacceptable for specific uses and to
publish a corresponding list of
acceptable alternatives for specific uses.
The list of acceptable substitutes is
found at https://www.epa.gov/ozone/
snap/lists/ and the lists of
unacceptable substitutes, substitutes
acceptable subject to use conditions and
substitutes acceptable subject to
narrowed use limits are found at 40 CFR
part 82 subpart G.
3. Petition Process
Section 612(d) grants the right to any
person to petition EPA to add a
substance to, or delete a substance 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.
4. 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
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
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 unpublished health and
safety studies on such substitutes.
5. 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.
6. 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. What are EPA’s regulations
implementing Section 612?
On March 18, 1994, EPA published
the original rule (59 FR 13044)
establishing the process for
administering the SNAP program and
issued EPA’s first lists identifying
acceptable and unacceptable substitutes
in the major industrial use sectors (40
CFR part 82, subpart G). These major
industrial use sectors are: 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 the largest
volumes of ODS.
Section 612 of the CAA requires EPA
to list as acceptable only those
substitutes that do not present a
significantly greater risk to human
health and the environment as
compared with other substitutes that are
currently or potentially available.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
C. How do the regulations for the SNAP
program work?
Under the SNAP regulations, anyone
who plans to market or produce a
substitute to replace a class I or II ODS
in one of the eight major industrial use
sectors must provide notice to the
Agency, including health and safety
information on the substitute, at least 90
days before introducing it into interstate
commerce.1 This requirement applies to
1 As defined at 40 CFR 82.104 ‘‘interstate
commerce’’ means the distribution or transportation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
the person planning to introduce the
substitute into interstate commerce,
typically chemical manufacturers, but
may also include importers,
formulators, equipment manufacturers,
or end-users 2 when they are responsible
for introducing a substitute into
commerce.
The Agency has identified four
possible decision categories for
substitutes: Acceptable; acceptable
subject to use conditions; acceptable
subject to narrowed use limits; and
unacceptable. Use conditions and
narrowed use limits are both considered
‘‘use restrictions’’ and are explained
below. Substitutes that are deemed
acceptable with no use restrictions (no
use conditions or narrowed use limits)
can be used for all applications within
the relevant end-uses within the sector.
Substitutes that are acceptable subject to
use restrictions may be used only in
accordance with those restrictions. It is
a violation of the CAA and EPA’s
regulations to replace an ODS with a
substitute listed as unacceptable, except
for certain exceptions (e.g., test
marketing, research and development)
specified by the regulation.
After reviewing a substitute, the
Agency may determine that a substitute
is acceptable only if certain conditions
in the way that the substitute is used are
met to minimize risks to human health
and the environment. EPA describes
such substitutes as ‘‘acceptable subject
to use conditions.’’ Entities that use
these substitutes without meeting the
associated use conditions are in
violation of section 612 of the CAA and
EPA’s SNAP regulations.
For some substitutes, the Agency may
permit a narrowed range of use within
an end-use or sector. For example, the
Agency may limit the use of a substitute
to certain end-uses or specific
applications within an industry sector.
The Agency requires a user of a
narrowed use substitute to demonstrate
that no other acceptable substitutes are
available for their specific application
by conducting comprehensive studies.
EPA describes these substitutes as
of any product between one State, territory,
possession or the District of Columbia, and another
State, territory, possession or the District of
Columbia, or the sale, use or manufacture of any
product in more than one State, territory,
possession or District of Columbia. The entry points
for which a product is introduced into interstate
commerce are the release of a product from the
facility in which the product was manufactured, the
entry into a warehouse from which the domestic
manufacturer releases the product for sale or
distribution, and at the site of United States
Customs clearance.
2 As defined at 40 CFR 82.17 ‘‘end-use’’ means
processes or classes of specific applications within
major industrial sectors where a substitute is used
to replace an ozone-depleting substance.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34019
‘‘acceptable subject to narrowed use
limits.’’ A person using a substitute that
is acceptable subject to narrowed use
limits in applications and end-uses that
are not consistent with the narrowed
use limit, are using these substitutes in
an unacceptable manner and are in
violation of section 612 of the CAA and
EPA’s SNAP regulations.
The Agency publishes its SNAP
program decisions in the Federal
Register (FR). EPA first proposes
decisions concerning substitutes that are
deemed acceptable subject to use
restrictions (use conditions and/or
narrowed use limits), or for substitutes
deemed unacceptable, to allow the
public opportunity to comment. After
consideration of the public comments,
EPA publishes a final decision.
In contrast, EPA publishes decisions
that substitutes are acceptable with no
restrictions in ‘‘notices of acceptability’’
without first issuing a proposed
decision. As described in the rule
initially implementing the SNAP
program (59 FR 13044), EPA does not
believe that notice-and-comment
rulemaking procedures are necessary to
list alternatives that are acceptable
without restrictions because such
listings neither impose any sanction nor
prevent anyone from using a substitute.
Many SNAP listings include
‘‘comments’’ or ‘‘further information’’ to
provide additional information on
substitutes. Since this additional
information is not part of the regulatory
decision, these statements are not
binding for use of the substitute under
the SNAP program. However, regulatory
requirements so listed are binding under
other regulatory programs. The ‘‘further
information’’ classification does not
necessarily include all other legal
obligations pertaining to the use of the
substitute. While the items listed are not
legally binding under the SNAP
program, EPA encourages users of
substitutes to apply all statements in the
‘‘comments’’ or ‘‘further information’’
column in their use of these substitutes.
In many instances, the information
simply refers to sound operating
practices that have already been
identified in existing industry and/or
building-codes or standards. Thus,
many of the statements, if adopted,
would not require the affected user to
make significant changes in existing
operating practices.
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
34020
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
III. How does today’s SNAP listing
relate to the HCFC phaseout?
A. Why is EPA issuing a SNAP listing
of alternatives to HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof?
To date, EPA has listed many HCFCs
as acceptable substitutes for class I ODS
thus allowing their use as substitutes for
CFCs and for halons under SNAP. As
production and importation of HCFCs
becomes more limited, availability of
these substances for use in current end
uses may be limited.3 In addition, EPA’s
phaseout regulations contain some use
restrictions for specific substances. In
particular, per the most recent milestone
in the HCFC phaseout, as of January 1,
2010, virgin HCFC–22 and HCFC–142b,
and blends containing one or both of
these compounds, may only be used as
refrigerants to service existing
equipment (minor exceptions apply:
Please see details in B, below).
In previous SNAP notices, EPA has
listed a number of acceptable substitutes
for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
containing one or both of these chemical
compounds (‘‘blends thereof’’). In
today’s SNAP listing, EPA is providing
a comprehensive list of acceptable
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof, generally those that
have been previously found acceptable
as substitutes, as well as HFO–1234ze in
several additional end uses. This notice
only addresses the refrigeration and airconditioning, foam blowing, aerosols,
and sterilants sectors. Because HCFC–
22, HCFC–142b, and blends thereof
have not traditionally been used to any
significant extent in the fire suppression
and explosion protection, solvent
cleaning, tobacco expansion, and
adhesives, coatings and inks sectors, we
are not making listing decisions for
substitutes in these sectors in this
notice.
B. What happened during the most
recent milestone in the HCFC phaseout?
Under the Montreal Protocol on
Substances that Deplete the Ozone
Layer (Montreal Protocol) and the CAA,
HCFCs are considered transitional
alternatives in the phaseout of CFCs and
other class I ODS. HCFCs are less potent
ozone depleters than are CFCs and other
class I substances; however, they are
still subject to both a global and
domestic phaseout under the Montreal
Protocol and the CAA. HCFCs will no
longer be produced in or imported into
the United States in accordance with a
tiered phaseout that will culminate in
the United States in 2030. Under CAA
Section 610, the sale and distribution of,
or offer for sale and distribution of
certain uses of HCFCs in foam blowing
and in aerosols or other pressurized
dispensers is prohibited. Further, under
CAA Section 605(a) and EPA’s
implementing regulations, use and
introduction into interstate commerce
(including sale of HCFCs) is or will be
prohibited according to the schedule
available in the rules cited below and at
40 CFR 82.16, with exceptions for: (1)
HCFCs that have been used, recovered,
and recycled; (2) HCFCs completely
used up in a reaction to create other
chemicals; and (3) HCFCs used in
refrigeration equipment manufactured
before specified dates.
In a December 10, 1993, rule (58 FR
65018), EPA established a ‘worst-first’
approach for the HCFC phaseout; thus
the HCFCs with higher ODPs were
scheduled for phaseout earlier than
those with lower ODPs. That rule
announced an accelerated schedule for
the phaseout of HCFC–22 and HCFC–
142b, such that the production and
import of HCFC–22 and HCFC–142b for
use in new equipment would be banned
as of January 1, 2010. Since 2003 (68 FR
2819), producers or importers of HCFC–
22 and HCFC–142b have been required
to hold allowances and importers of
used HCFCs have been required to
obtain prior approval of import on a per
shipment basis. In a December 15, 2009,
rule (74 FR 66412), EPA reduced the
number of HCFC–22 and HCFC–142b
allowances to meet and exceed the 2010
reduction step under the Montreal
Protocol. That rule also clarified the use
ban described in the 1993 rule and
generally limited virgin HCFC–22 and
HCFC–142b to use as refrigerants in the
servicing of existing equipment. It
established an exception for the use of
HCFC–22 as a refrigerant in newly
manufactured equipment where the
components were manufactured prior to
January 1, 2010, and are specified in a
pre-2010 building permit or contract for
use on a particular project, as well as
temporary exceptions for the use of
HCFC–22 in medical equipment and
thermostatic expansion valves. For
additional information on the HCFC
phaseout, please see the rules
promulgated on December 10, 1993 (58
FR 65018), January 21, 2003 (68 FR
2819), and December 15, 2009 (74 FR
66412).
C. How does today’s SNAP listing affect
alternatives to HCFCs other than HCFC–
22, HCFC–142b, and blends thereof?
This notice does not affect previous
SNAP listings of acceptable alternatives
to HCFC–141b, which was phased out of
production in 2003, nor does it list
alternatives to the remainder of HCFCs,
such as HCFC–123, HCFC–124, HCFC–
225ca, and HCFC–225cb, which will be
phased out on a later schedule. EPA
anticipates updating the lists of
acceptable substitutes under SNAP
before the production phaseout of other
HCFCs.
We note that EPA recently received a
petition concerning the listing of HFC–
134a in various end uses.4 We are still
reviewing that petition and nothing in
this notice should be construed as
prejudging EPA’s response to that
petition.
D. In servicing existing refrigeration or
air-conditioning equipment, may I
continue to use refrigerants, previously
found acceptable by SNAP, that contain
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof?
HCFC–22, as well as some refrigerant
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b, have previously been
found acceptable under SNAP for
specified end uses. As noted above,
these refrigerant blends, which appear
in Table 1, below, may continue to be
used in servicing existing equipment,
i.e., equipment manufactured before
January 1, 2010, in those end uses per
the regulations at 40 CFR 82.15(g)(2)(i).
(EPA defines the term ‘‘manufactured’’
for appliances at 40 CFR 82.3.)
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF REFRIGERANTS CONTAINING HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, AND BLENDS THEREOF PREVIOUSLY
DETERMINED ACCEPTABLE UNDER SNAP
Further identification information for blend
(alternative names and composition)
Refrigerant blend
Freeze 12 .................................................................................................
FreeZone ..................................................................................................
3 A SNAP listing is not equivalent to an
allocation, i.e., SNAP acceptability does not equate
to authorization to produce or import ODS. EPA
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
R–134a/142b.
HCFC Blend Delta; RB–276; R–134a/142b/lubricant.
lists companies that have been allocated production
and consumption allowances of HCFCs in 40 CFR
82.17 and 82.19.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4 The petition is available at https://
www.regulations.gov as item EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–
0118–0249.
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
34021
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF REFRIGERANTS CONTAINING HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, AND BLENDS THEREOF PREVIOUSLY
DETERMINED ACCEPTABLE UNDER SNAP—Continued
Further identification information for blend
(alternative names and composition)
Refrigerant blend
GHG–HP ...................................................................................................
GHG–X5 ...................................................................................................
Greencool (Gu) or China Sun G2018C ....................................................
ICOR .........................................................................................................
NARM–502 ...............................................................................................
PFC–330ST, PFC–550HC, PFC–660HC, PFC–1100HC, PFC–1100LT,
PGC–100, PGC–150.
R–401A .....................................................................................................
R–401B .....................................................................................................
R–401C .....................................................................................................
R–402A .....................................................................................................
R–402B .....................................................................................................
R–403B .....................................................................................................
R–406A .....................................................................................................
R–408A .....................................................................................................
R–409A .....................................................................................................
R–411A .....................................................................................................
R–411B .....................................................................................................
R–414A .....................................................................................................
R–414B .....................................................................................................
R–420A .....................................................................................................
THR–04 ....................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
While HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b
may currently continue to be used to
service existing refrigeration and airconditioning equipment, EPA reiterates
that HCFCs and HCFC blends are not
long-term substitutes for ODS. EPA is
considering whether current or potential
substitutes are available that pose lower
risk than these blends.
IV. What are my existing and new
options for alternative refrigerants?
In the refrigeration and airconditioning sector, EPA has previously
found acceptable HCFC–22 and HCFC
blends, including those containing
HCFC–22 and HCFC–142b. To aid end
users in the refrigeration and airconditioning sector as they transition
from use of these refrigerants, this
section lists, by end use: (1) Refrigerants
that EPA previously found acceptable as
substitutes for HCFC–22 and HCFC
blends, including those containing
HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b; and (2)
refrigerants that EPA is newly finding
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. Where possible,
refrigerants listed as acceptable in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
section are identified by their
designation per American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating and AirConditioning Engineers (ASHRAE)
Standard 34.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
HCFC Blend Lambda; R–22/600a/142b.
Autofrost X5; R–22/227ea/600a/142b.
R–1270/22/152a.
R–22/142b.
HCFC Blend Iota; R–23/22/152a.
Compositions are Confidential Business Information (CBI).
SUVA MP 39; R–22/152a/124 (53.0/13.0/34.0).
SUVA MP 66; R–22/152a/124 (61.0/11.0/28.0).
SUVA MP 52; R–22/152a/124 (33.0/15.0/52.0).
SUVA HP80; R–125/290/22 (60.0/2.0/38.0).
SUVA HP81; R–125/290/22 (38.0/2.0/60.0).
ISCEON 69–L; R–290/22/218 (5.0/56.0/39.0).
GHG–12; GHG–X3; McMullen Oil McCool; Monroe Air Tech Autofrost–
X3; R–22/600a/142b (55.0/4.0/41.0).
HCFC Blend Epsilon; FX–10; R–125/143a/22 (7.0/46.0/47.0).
HCFC Blend Gamma; FX–56; R–22/124/142b (60.0/25.0/15.0).
Greencool (Gu) or China Sun G2018A; R–1270/22/152a (1.5/87.5/
11.0).
Greencool (Gu) or China Sun G2018B; R–1270/22/152a (3.0/94.0/3.0).
HCFC Blend Xi; GHG–X4; McMullen Oil Chill-It; McCool Chill-It; Monroe Air Tech Autofrost–X4; R–22/124/600a/142b (51.0/28.5/4.0/16.5).
HCFC Blend Omicron; Hot Shot; Kar Kool; R–22/124/600a/142b (50.0/
39.0/1.5/9.5).
Choice R–420A; R–134a/142b (88.0/12.0).
Composition is CBI.
At the end of the decision for each
end use, there is narrative comparing
environmental, flammability, and
toxicity information of the newly
acceptable alternatives with other
currently or potentially available
alternatives. Flammable refrigerants are
hazardous waste and must be disposed
of consistent with regulations under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA). More environmental and
health information is also available in
the original SNAP rule of March 18,
1994, the notice of acceptability in
which each substitute was first listed, or
the sector table, which provides
identification information,
environmental information,
flammability information, and toxicity
and exposure data for each of the
acceptable alternatives to HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b, in the refrigeration and airconditioning sector. The sector table is
available at https://www.epa.gov/ozone/
snap/refrigerants/.
A. Household and Light Commercial
Air-Conditioning and Heat Pumps
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in household and light
commercial air-conditioning and heat
pumps:
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in household and light
commercial air-conditioning and heat
pumps:
• Ammonia absorption system (new
equipment)
• Desiccant cooling (new equipment)
• Evaporative cooling (new
equipment)
• HFC–134a (new equipment)
• R–125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/
1.9% by weight) (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) 5 (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
5 Throughout the decisions, available trade names
for refrigerants without ASHRAE designations are
provided in parentheses.
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
34022
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–427A (retrofit equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–437A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–44 (2003 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the household and light commercial airconditioning and heat pumps end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section A.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have 100-year integrated
(100-yr) global warming potentials
(GWPs) 6 relative to CO2 ranging from 0
to about 3390, comparable to or lower
than that of other substitutes for HCFC–
22 and blends containing HCFC–22 and/
or HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP
of R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407A is about 2110, the GWP of R–407C
is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A is
about 2090, and the GWP of R–507A is
about 3990. The contribution of these
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as hazardous air pollutants
(HAPs) under the CAA. Some of the
newly listed substitutes contain small
amounts of components that are
considered volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) under CAA regulations (see 40
CFR 51.100(s)) addressing the
development of state implementation
plans (SIPs) to attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standards.
None of the substitutes previously
found acceptable in IV.A.1, above,
contain VOCs. However, emissions of
VOCs from refrigerant blends are
6 These values are based upon mass-weighted
averages of the component chemicals, using the
100-yr GWPs listed in the International Panel on
Climate Change’s [IPCC] Fourth Assessment Report,
Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.
Another available source for GWPs is the IPCC’s
Second Assessment Report, Climate Change 1995:
Working Group I—The Science of Climate Change,
accessible from https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sar/
wg_I/ipcc_sar_wg_I_full_report.pdf.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
expected to be small relative to the total
emissions of VOCs from all sources.7
With the exception of ammonia, none
of the newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b is flammable.
EPA believes that flammability risks
posed by ammonia can be addressed by
existing standards from the
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) and ASHRAE
and other safety precautions common in
the refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b
are low. Most of the blends contain HFC
or hydrocarbon components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8-hours, such
as Workplace Environmental Exposure
Limits (WEELs) from the American
Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA)
or Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) from
the American Conference of
Government Industrial Hygienists
(ACGIH). Ammonia has a Permissible
Exposure Limit (PEL) of 50 ppm over 8
hours from OSHA. EPA anticipates that
users will be able to meet the workplace
exposure limits (WEELs, TLVs, and
PELs) and will address potential health
risks by following requirements and
recommendations in the Material Safety
Data Sheets (MSDSs) and other safety
precautions common in the refrigeration
and air-conditioning industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in IV.A.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the household and light
commercial air-conditioning and heat
pumps end use.
B. Residential Dehumidifiers
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in residential dehumidifiers:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in residential
dehumidifiers:
7 EPA 1994. Significant New Alternatives Policy
Technical Background Document: Risk Screen on
the Use of Substitutes for Class I Ozone-depleting
Substances: Refrigeration and Air Conditioning.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/
1.9% by weight) (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5%by weight) (ICOR AT–
22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–421A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–426A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–437A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–24 (2002 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• RS–44 (2003 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the residential dehumidifiers end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section B.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3390, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407C is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A
is about 2090, and the GWP of R–507A
is about 3990. The contribution of these
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. None of
the substitutes previously found
acceptable in IV.B.1, above, contain
VOCs. However, emissions of VOCs
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
from refrigerant blends are expected to
be small relative to the total emissions
of VOCs from all sources.
With the exception of ammonia, none
of the newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b is flammable.
EPA believes that the flammability risks
posed by ammonia can be addressed by
existing standards from OSHA and
ASHRAE and other safety precautions
common in the refrigeration and airconditioning industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b
are low. Most of the blends contain HFC
or hydrocarbon components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50
ppm over 8 hours from OSHA. EPA
anticipates that users will be able to
meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will
address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in IV.B.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the residential
dehumidifiers end use.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
C. Reciprocating and Screw Chillers
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in reciprocating and screw
chillers:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in reciprocating and screw
chillers:
• Ammonia absorption chillers or
vapor compression with secondary loop
(new equipment)
• Desiccant cooling (new equipment)
• Evaporative cooling (new
equipment)
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• HFC–227ea (new equipment)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
• R–125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/
1.9% by weight) (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–427A (retrofit equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–44 (2003 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• SP34E (new and retrofit equipment)
• Stirling cycle (new equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the reciprocating and screw chillers end
use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section C.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3390, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407C is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A
is about 2090, and the GWP of R–507A
is about 3990. The contribution of these
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. None of
the substitutes previously found
acceptable in IV.C.1, above, contain
VOCs. However, emissions of VOCs
from refrigerant blends are expected to
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34023
be small relative to the total emissions
of VOCs from all sources.
With the exception of ammonia, none
of the newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b is flammable.
EPA believes that the flammability risks
posed by ammonia can be addressed by
existing standards from OSHA and
ASHRAE and other safety precautions
common in the refrigeration and airconditioning industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b
are low. Most of the blends contain HFC
or hydrocarbon components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50
ppm over 8 hours from OSHA. EPA
anticipates that users will be able to
meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will
address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in IV.C.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the reciprocating and screw
chillers end use.
D. Centrifugal Chillers
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in centrifugal chillers:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in centrifugal chillers:
• Ammonia absorption chillers or
vapor compression with secondary loop
(new equipment)
• Desiccant cooling (new equipment)
• Evaporative cooling (new
equipment)
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• HFC–227ea (new equipment)
• HFC–245fa (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/
1.9% by weight) (new and retrofit
equipment)
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
34024
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–423A (ISCEON 39TC) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–44 (2003 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• Stirling cycle (new equipment)
• Water/lithium bromide (new
equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the centrifugal chillers end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section D.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3390, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407C is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A
is about 2090, and the GWP of R–507A
is about 3990. The contribution of these
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. None of
the substitutes previously found
acceptable in IV.D.1, above, contain
VOCs. However, emissions of VOCs
from refrigerant blends are expected to
be small relative to the total emissions
of VOCs from all sources.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
With the exception of ammonia, none
of the newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b is flammable.
EPA believes that the flammability risks
posed by ammonia can be addressed by
existing standards from OSHA and
ASHRAE and other safety precautions
common in the refrigeration and airconditioning industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b
are low. Most of the blends contain HFC
or hydrocarbon components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8-hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50
ppm over 8 hours from OSHA. HFC–
245fa exhibits moderate to low toxicity
and has an 8-hour WEEL of 300 ppm.
Water/lithium bromide absorption
exhibits low toxicity. Lithium bromide
(LiBr) has a 24-hour/day, 90 day
Continuous Exposure Guidance Level
(CEGL) value of 1 mg/m3 from the
National Research Council (NRC). Based
on this CEGL, EPA recommends an 8hour preliminary workplace exposure
limit of 3 mg/m3.8 EPA anticipates that
users will be able to meet the workplace
exposure limits (WEELs, TLVs, PELs
and CEGL) and will address potential
health risks by following requirements
and recommendations in the MSDSs
and other safety precautions common in
the refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry. Therefore, we find the newly
listed substitutes (in IV.D.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a
greater overall risk to human health and
the environment than the other
substitutes available in the centrifugal
chillers end use.
E. Industrial Process Air-Conditioning
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in industrial process airconditioning:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
8 EPA’s analysis of the NRC CEGL and rationale
for preliminary workplace exposure limit are
available at https://www.regulations.gov as item
EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–0118–0243 EPA anticipates
that lithium bromide powder will be used
consistent with the personal protective equipment
recommendations specified by OSHA (https://
www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owastand.display_
standard_group?p_toc_level=1&
p_part_number=1910#1910_Subpart_I).
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in industrial process airconditioning:
• Ammonia vapor compression or
absorption systems (new equipment)
• Desiccant cooling (new equipment)
• Evaporative cooling (new
equipment)
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/
1.9% by weight) (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–423A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–426A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–427A (retrofit equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–24 (2002 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• RS–44 (2003 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the industrial process air-conditioning
end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section E.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3390, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407C is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A
is about 2090, and the GWP of R–507A
is about 3990. The contribution of these
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. None of
the substitutes previously found
acceptable in IV.E.1, above, contain
VOCs. However, emissions of VOCs
from refrigerant blends are expected to
be small relative to the total emissions
of VOCs from all sources.
With the exception of ammonia, none
of the newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b is flammable.
EPA believes that the flammability risks
posed by ammonia can be addressed by
existing standards from OSHA and
ASHRAE and other safety precautions
common in the refrigeration and airconditioning industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b
are low. Most of the blends contain HFC
or hydrocarbon components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8-hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50
ppm over 8 hours from OSHA. EPA
anticipates that users will be able to
meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will
address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in IV.E.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the industrial process airconditioning end use.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
F. Industrial Process Refrigeration
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in industrial process refrigeration:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–422A (ISCEON 79) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in industrial process
refrigeration:
• Ammonia vapor compression or
absorption-systems (new equipment)
• Desiccant cooling (new equipment)
• Evaporative cooling (new
equipment)
• HC Blend A (OZ–12) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• HC Blend B (original formulation of
HC–12a) (new and retrofit equipment)
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• HFC–227ea (new equipment)
• HFE–7000 9 (new and retrofit
equipment)
• HFE–7100 10 and HFE–7200 11 as
secondary heat transfer fluid in not-inkind systems (new equipment)
• Nitrogen direct gas expansion (new
equipment)
• R–125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/
1.9% by weight) (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–290 (Propane) (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407A and R–407B (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A and R–421B (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–423A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–426A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–428A (new equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–600 (Butane) (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–744 (Carbon dioxide, CO2) (new
equipment)
• R–1270 (Propylene) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• RS–24 (2002 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• RS–44 (2003 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• Stirling cycle (new equipment)
9 1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3-methoxypropane;
HFE–347mcc3; CAS ID #375–03–1.
10 Methoxynonafluorobutane, iso and normal;
HFE–449s1; CAS ID #163702–07–6.
11 Ethoxynonafluorobutane, iso and normal; HFE–
569sf2; CAS ID #163702–05–4.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34025
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the industrial process refrigeration end
use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section F.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3610, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. The hydrocarbon
substitutes that we are finding
acceptable are at the low end of this
range. Specifically, R–290, R–600, R–
1270, and HC Blends A and B each have
a GWP of about 5 or less. This in
contrast with the GWPs of the
previously listed substitutes, including
the GWP of R–404A which is about
3920, the GWP of R–407C which is
about 1770, the GWP of R–410A which
is about 2090, the GWP of R–422A
which is about 3140, and the GWP of R–
507A which is about 3990. The
contribution of these refrigerants to
greenhouse gas emissions is limited
given the venting prohibition under
section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and EPA’s
implementing regulations codified at 40
CFR 82.154(a)(1), which limit emissions
of refrigerant substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
The hydrocarbons R–290, R–600, and
R–1270, as well as all components of HC
Blends A and B, are considered VOCs
under CAA regulations (see 40 CFR
51.100(s)) addressing the development
of SIPs to attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standards.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under these
regulations. In comparison, one of the
substitutes previously found acceptable
in IV.F.1, above, (R–422A) contains a
VOC component. Emissions of VOCs
from refrigerant blends are expected to
be small relative to the total emissions
of VOCs from all sources.
Ammonia has an ASHRAE class 2
flammability classification or moderate
flammability risk. EPA believes that the
moderate flammability risks of ammonia
can be addressed by existing standards
from OSHA and ASHRAE and other
safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry. Each of the newly listed
hydrocarbons and hydrocarbon blends
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
34026
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
has an ASHRAE class 3 flammability
classification. As early as the 1994
original SNAP rule, EPA noted that
hydrocarbons were used in industrial
process refrigeration, including
specialized industrial applications such
as oil refineries and chemical plants.
EPA noted that these users were familiar
with hydrocarbons, had safety
procedures in place, and that their
facilities were designed to comply with
the safety standards required for
managing flammable chemicals.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b
are low when used according to
standard practices for industrial
processes and for industrial process
refrigeration. Most of the blends contain
HFC or hydrocarbon components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50
ppm over 8 hours from OSHA. HFE–
7200 has an 8-hour manufacturer
acceptable exposure limit (AEL) of 200
ppm and HFE–7000 has an 8-hour
manufacturer AEL of 75 ppm. Within
the industrial process refrigeration end
use, such as at chemical or other
industrial plants, proper exposure
controls and ventilation are generally
available as well as established
protocols for handling potentially
hazardous materials, and therefore
overall occupational risk is mitigated.
EPA anticipates that users will be able
to meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, PELs, and manufacturer
AELs) and will address potential health
risks by following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in IV.F.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the industrial process
refrigeration end use.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
G. Bus and Passenger Train AirConditioning
The bus and passenger train airconditioning end use previously had
substitutes listed as acceptable for
HCFC–22 itself, but not as substitutes
for blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b; this is reflected in category
(1), below.
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
in bus and passenger train airconditioning:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/
1.9% by weight) (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–422B and R–422D (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–427A (retrofit equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in bus and passenger train
air-conditioning:
• Evaporative cooling (new
equipment)
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/
1.9% by weight) (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–422B and R–422D (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–426A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–427A (retrofit equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–24 (2002 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• SP34E (new and retrofit equipment)
• Stirling cycle (new equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the bus and passenger train airconditioning end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section G.1 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3250, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920 and the GWP of
R–507A is about 3990. The contribution
of these refrigerants to greenhouse gas
emissions is limited given the venting
prohibition under section 608(c)(2) of
the CAA and EPA’s implementing
regulations codified at 40 CFR
82.154(a)(1), which limit emissions of
refrigerant substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. However,
emissions of VOCs from refrigerant
blends are expected to be small relative
to the total emissions of VOCs from all
sources.
None of the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC–22 and blends containing
HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b is
flammable. The toxicity risks of the
newly listed substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b are low. Most of the blends
contain HFC or hydrocarbon
components with workplace exposure
limits of 500 to 1,000 ppm averaged
over 8 hours, such as WEELs from the
AIHA or TLVs from the ACGIH. For
each of these substitutes, EPA
anticipates that users will be able to
meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will
address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in IV.G.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the bus and passenger train
air-conditioning end use.
H. Ice Skating Rinks
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in ice skating rinks:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–422A (ISCEON 79) (new and
retrofit equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in ice skating rinks:
• Ammonia vapor compression or
absorption systems (new equipment)
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–407A and R–407B (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A and R–421B (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–423A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–426A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–428A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–24 (2002 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• RS–44 (2003 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the ice skating rinks end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section H.2 are non-ozone depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3610, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407C is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A
is about 2090, and the GWP of R–422A
is about 3140. The contribution of these
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. In
comparison, one of the substitutes
previously found acceptable in IV.H.1,
above, (R–422A) contains a VOC
component. Emissions of VOCs from
refrigerant blends are expected to be
small relative to the total emissions of
VOCs from all sources.
With the exception of ammonia, none
of the newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b is flammable.
EPA believes that the flammability risks
posed by ammonia can be addressed by
existing standards from OSHA and
ASHRAE and other safety precautions
common in the refrigeration and airconditioning industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b
are low. Most of the blends contain HFC
or hydrocarbon components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50
ppm over 8 hours from OSHA. EPA
anticipates that users will be able to
meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will
address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry. Therefore, we find the newly
listed substitutes (in IV.H.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a
greater overall risk to human health and
the environment than the other
substitutes available in the ice skating
rinks end use.
I. Cold Storage Warehouses
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in cold storage warehouses:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407A and R–407C (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–422A (ISCEON 79) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–428A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–744 (Carbon dioxide, CO2) (new
equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34027
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in cold storage warehouses:
• Ammonia vapor compression or
absorption systems (new equipment)
• Desiccant cooling (new equipment)
• Evaporative cooling (new
equipment)
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• HFC–227ea (new equipment)
• Pressure stepdown (new
equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–407B (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A and R–421B (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–423A (ISCEON 39TC) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–426A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–24 (2002 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• RS–44 (2003 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• Self-chilling cans containing
recycled CO2 (not generating CO2 via
chemical reaction) (new and retrofit
equipment)
• SP34E (new and retrofit equipment)
• Stirling cycle
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the cold storage warehouses end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section I.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3390, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407C is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A
is about 2090, the GWP of R–422A is
about 3140, the GWP of R–428A is about
3610, and the GWP of R–507A is about
3990. The contribution of these
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
34028
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. In
comparison, two of the substitutes
previously found acceptable in IV.I.1,
above, (R–422A and R–428A) contain
some VOC components. However,
emissions of VOCs from refrigerant
blends are expected to be small relative
to the total emissions of VOCs from all
sources.
With the exception of ammonia, none
of the newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b is flammable.
EPA believes that the flammability risks
posed by ammonia can be addressed by
existing standards from OSHA and
ASHRAE and other safety precautions
common in the refrigeration and airconditioning industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b
are low. Most of the blends contain HFC
or hydrocarbon components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50
ppm over 8 hours from OSHA. For each
of these substitutes, EPA anticipates that
users will be able to meet the workplace
exposure limits (WEELs, TLVs, and
PELs) and will address potential health
risks by following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry. Therefore, we find the newly
listed substitutes (in IV.I.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a
greater overall risk to human health and
the environment than the other
substitutes available in the cold storage
warehouse end use.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
J. Refrigerated Transport
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in refrigerated transport:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
• R–407A and R–407C (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–428A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in refrigerated transport:
• Cryogenic system using recaptured
liquid CO2 or liquid nitrogen (new
equipment)
• Direct nitrogen expansion (new
equipment)
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/
1.9% by weight) (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–407B and R–407D (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A and R–421B (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–422A (ISCEON 79) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–426A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–24 (2002 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• RS–44 (2003 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• SP34E (new and retrofit equipment)
• Stirling cycle (new equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the refrigerated transport end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section J.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3390, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407A is about 2110, the GWP of R–407C
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A is
about 2090, the GWP of R–428A is about
3610, and the GWP of R–507A is about
3990. The contribution of these
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. In
comparison, one of the substitutes
previously found acceptable in IV.J.1,
above, (R–428A) contains some VOC
components. However, emissions of
VOCs from refrigerant blends are
expected to be small relative to the total
emissions of VOCs from all sources.
None of the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC–22 and blends containing
HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b is
flammable. The toxicity risks of the
newly listed substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b are low. Most of the blends
contain HFC or hydrocarbon
components with workplace exposure
limits of 500 to 1,000 ppm averaged
over 8 hours, such as WEELs from the
AIHA or TLVs from the ACGIH. For
each of these substitutes, EPA
anticipates that users will be able to
meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will
address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry. Therefore, we find the newly
listed substitutes (in IV.J.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a
greater overall risk to human health and
the environment than the other
substitutes available in the refrigerated
transport end use.
K. Retail Food Refrigeration
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in retail food refrigeration:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–422A (ISCEON 79) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–428A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–744 (Carbon dioxide, CO2) (new
equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in retail food refrigeration:
• Ammonia vapor compression with
a secondary loop (new equipment)
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• HFE–7100 and HFE–7200 as
secondary heat transfer fluid in not-inkind systems (new equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–407B (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A and R–421B (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–426A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–427A (retrofit equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–24 (2002 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• RS–44 (2003 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• SP34E (new and retrofit equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the retail food refrigeration end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section K.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3390, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407C is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A
is about 2090, the GWP of R–422A is
about 3140, the GWP of R–428A is about
3610, and the GWP of R–507A is about
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
3990. The contribution of these
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. In
comparison, two of the substitutes
previously found acceptable in IV.K.1,
above, (R–422A and R–428A) contain
some VOC components. However,
emissions of VOCs from refrigerant
blends are expected to be small relative
to the total emissions of VOCs from all
sources.
With the exception of ammonia, none
of the newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b is flammable.
EPA believes that the flammability risks
posed by ammonia can be addressed by
existing standards from OSHA and
ASHRAE and other safety precautions
common in the refrigeration and airconditioning industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b
are low. Most of the blends contain HFC
or hydrocarbon components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50
ppm over 8 hours from OSHA. HFE–
7200 has an 8-hour manufacturer AEL of
200 ppm. For each of these substitutes,
EPA anticipates that users will be able
to meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, PELs, and manufacturer
AEL) and will address potential health
risks by following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in IV.K.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the retail food refrigeration
end use.
L. Commercial Ice Machines
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34029
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in commercial ice machines:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–428A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in commercial ice
machines:
• Ammonia vapor compression or
absorption-systems (new equipment)
• HFC–134a (new equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–407A and R–407B (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A and R–421B (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–422A (ISCEON 79) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–426A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–24 (2002 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• RS–44 (2003 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• Stirling cycle (new equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the commercial ice machines end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section L.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3390, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407C is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A
is about 2090, the GWP of R–428A is
about 3610, and the GWP of R–507A is
about 3990. The contribution of these
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
34030
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. In
comparison, one of the substitutes
previously found acceptable in IV.L.1,
above, (R–428A) contains some VOC
components. However, emissions of
VOCs from refrigerant blends are
expected to be small relative to the total
emissions of VOCs from all sources.
With the exception of ammonia, none
of the newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b is flammable.
EPA believes that the flammability risks
posed by ammonia can be addressed by
existing standards from OSHA and
ASHRAE and other safety precautions
common in the refrigeration and airconditioning industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b
are low. Most of the blends contain HFC
or hydrocarbon components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50
ppm over 8 hours from OSHA. EPA
anticipates that users will be able to
meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will
address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in IV.L.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the commercial ice
machines end use.
M. Household Refrigerators and
Freezers
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in household refrigerators and
freezers:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–422A (ISCEON 79) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–428A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in household refrigerators
and freezers:
• Ammonia absorption systems (new
equipment)
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A and R–421B (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–424A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–426A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–427A (retrofit equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–24 (2002 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• RS–44 (2003 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the household refrigerators and freezers
end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section M.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3390, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407C is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A
is about 2090, the GWP of R–422A is
about 3140, the GWP of R–428A is about
3610, and the GWP of R–507A is about
3990. The contribution of these
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. In
comparison, two of the substitutes
previously found acceptable in IV.M.1,
above, (R–422A and R–428A) contain
some VOC components. However,
emissions of VOCs from refrigerant
blends are expected to be small relative
to the total emissions of VOCs from all
sources.
With the exception of ammonia, none
of the newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b is flammable.
EPA believes that the flammability risks
posed by ammonia can be addressed by
existing standards from OSHA and
ASHRAE and other safety precautions
common in the refrigeration and airconditioning industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b
are low. Most of the blends contain HFC
or hydrocarbon components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50
ppm over 8 hours from OSHA. EPA
anticipates that users will be able to
meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will
address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in IV.M.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the household refrigerators
and freezers end use.
N. Vending Machines
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in vending machines:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in vending machines:
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–426A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• RS–24 (2002 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• SP34E (new and retrofit equipment)
• Stirling cycle (new equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the vending machines end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section N.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3390, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407C is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A
is about 2090, and the GWP of R–507A
is about 3990. The contribution of these
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. None of
the substitutes previously found
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
acceptable in IV.N.1, above, contain
VOCs. However, emissions of VOCs
from refrigerant blends are expected to
be small relative to the total emissions
of VOCs from all sources.
None of the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC–22 and blends containing
HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b is
flammable. The toxicity risks of the
newly listed substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b are low. Most of the blends
contain HFC or hydrocarbon
components with workplace exposure
limits of 500 to 1,000 ppm averaged
over 8 hours, such as WEELs from the
AIHA or TLVs from the ACGIH. EPA
anticipates that users will be able to
meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will
address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in IV.N.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the vending machines end
use.
O. Water Coolers
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in water coolers:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
• R–507A (new and retrofit
equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in water coolers:
• HFC–134a (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–410B (new equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–421A and R–421B (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–426A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–434A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34031
• RS–24 (2002 formulation) (new and
retrofit equipment)
• SP34E (new and retrofit equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the water coolers end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section O.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3390, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407C is about 1770, the GWP of R–410A
is about 2090, and the GWP of R–507A
is about 3990. The contribution of these
refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions
is limited given the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and
EPA’s implementing regulations
codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which
limit emissions of refrigerant
substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. None of
the substitutes previously found
acceptable in IV.O.1, above, contain
VOCs. However, emissions of VOCs
from refrigerant blends are expected to
be small relative to the total emissions
of VOCs from all sources.
None of the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC–22 and blends containing
HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b is
flammable. The toxicity risks of the
newly listed substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b are low. Most of the blends
contain HFC or hydrocarbon
components with workplace exposure
limits of 500 to 1,000 ppm averaged
over 8 hours, such as WEELs from the
AIHA or TLVs from the ACGIH. EPA
anticipates that users will be able to
meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will
address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
34032
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in IV.O.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the vending machines end
use.
P. Very Low Temperature Refrigeration
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in very low temperature
refrigeration:
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in very low temperature
refrigeration:
• HFE–7100 and HFE–7200 as
secondary heat transfer fluid in not-inkind systems (new equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–422B and R–422C (new and
retrofit equipment)
• R–744 (Carbon dioxide, CO2) (new
equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the very low temperature refrigeration
end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22 and blends containing HCFC–
22 and/or HCFC–142b listed above in
section P.2 are non-ozone-depleting, in
contrast to HCFC–22 or blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22 and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs ranging from 0 to
about 3390, comparable to or lower than
that of other substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP of
R–404A is about 3920, the GWP of R–
407C is about 1770, and the GWP of R–
410A is about 2090. The contribution of
these refrigerants to greenhouse gas
emissions is limited given the venting
prohibition under section 608(c)(2) of
the CAA and EPA’s implementing
regulations codified at 40 CFR
82.154(a)(1), which limit emissions of
refrigerant substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
that are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. None of
the substitutes previously found
acceptable in IV.P.1, above, contain
VOCs. However, emissions of VOCs
from refrigerant blends are expected to
be small relative to the total emissions
of VOCs from all sources.
None of the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC–22 and blends containing
HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b is
flammable. The toxicity risks of the
newly listed substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b are low. Most of the blends
contain HFC or hydrocarbon
components with workplace exposure
limits of 500 to 1,000 ppm averaged
over 8 hours, such as WEELs from the
AIHA or TLVs from the ACGIH. HFE–
7200 has an 8-hour manufacturer AEL of
200 ppm. R–744 has a PEL of 5000 ppm.
EPA anticipates that users will be able
to meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, PELs and AEL) and will
address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in IV.P.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the vending machines end
use.
Q. Non-Mechanical Heat Transfer
Systems
HFO–1234ze,12 which was previously
listed as a substitute for class I and class
II ODS in several foam blowing end uses
(September 30, 2009; 74 FR 50129) is
today being listed as acceptable as a
substitute for CFC–113, HCFC–22, and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b, in the heat transfer end
use. You may find the submission under
Docket items EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–
0118–0222 and EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–
0118–0247 at https://
www.regulations.gov. We note that EPA
is also reviewing this substance through
a Pre-Manufacture Notice (PMN) under
the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) and users will be subject under
TSCA to any requirements established
through the PMN process.
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
12 HFC–1234ze; HFO–1234ze(E); HFC–1234ze(E);
trans-1,3,3-tetrafluoroprop-1-ene; CAS ID #29118–
24–9.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, in non-mechanical heat transfer
systems:
• HFC–4310mee (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–404A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–407C (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–410A (new equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in non-mechanical heat
transfer systems:
• C6-perfluoroketone 13 (NovecTM
649) (new and retrofit equipment)
• HFC–245fa (new and retrofit
equipment)
• HFE–7000 (new and retrofit
equipment)
• HFE–7100 (new and retrofit
equipment)
• HFE–7200 (new and retrofit
equipment)
• HFO–1234ze (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/
1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight) (ICOR
AT–22) (new and retrofit equipment)
• R–417A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–422B, R–422C, and R–422D (new
and retrofit equipment)
• R–438A (new and retrofit
equipment)
• R–744 (Carbon Dioxide, CO2) (new
and retrofit equipment)
• Volatile Methyl Siloxanes 14 (new
and retrofit equipment)
• Water (new and retrofit equipment)
3. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as a substitute for CFC–113
in non-mechanical heat transfer
systems:
• HFO–1234ze (new and retrofit
equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in
the non-mechanical heat transfer
systems end use:
The newly listed substitutes for CFC–
113, HCFC–22, and blends containing
HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b listed
above in section P.2 and 3 are nonozone-depleting, in contrast to CFC–
113, HCFC–22, or blends containing
HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b. They are
comparable to other acceptable
substitutes for CFC–113, HCFC–22, and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. HFO–1234ze has no
13 1,1,1,2,2,4,5,5,5-nonafluoro-4-(trifluoromethyl)3-pentanone or FK–5–1–12mmy2; CAS ID #756–13–
8.
14 Octamethylcyclo-tetrasiloxanes (e.g., D4, CAS
ID #556–67–2) and decamethylcyclo-pentasiloxanes
(e.g., D5, CAS ID #541–02–6).
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
ODP. HFO–1234ze has a GWP of 6 and
an atmospheric lifetime of
approximately 2 weeks (Javadi et al.,
2008). The newly listed substitutes have
GWPs ranging from 0 to about 3390,
comparable to or lower than that of
other substitutes for CFC–113, HCFC–
22, and blends containing HCFC–22
and/or HCFC–142b. For example, the
GWP of HFC–4310mee is about 1640,
the GWP of R–404A is about 3920, the
GWP of R–407C is about 1770, and the
GWP of R–410A is about 2090. The
contribution of these refrigerants to
greenhouse gas emissions is limited
given the venting prohibition under
section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and EPA’s
implementing regulations codified at 40
CFR 82.154(a)(1), which limit emissions
of refrigerant substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA. C6perfluoroketone and HFO–1234ze are
considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. Some of
the newly listed substitutes contain
small amounts of components that are
considered VOCs under those
regulations. In comparison, none of the
substitutes previously found acceptable
in IV.Q.1, above, contain VOCs. EPA has
received a petition to exempt HFO–
1234ze from the definition of VOC for
purposes of SIPs to attain and maintain
the NAAQS on the basis that the
chemical has a low photochemical
reactivity. EPA intends to address the
request through notice-and-comment
rulemaking. Further, emissions of VOCs
from refrigerant blends are expected to
be small relative to the total emissions
of VOCs from all sources.
With the exception of some of the
volatile methyl siloxanes, none of the
newly listed substitutes for CFC–113,
HCFC–22, and blends containing
HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–142b is
flammable. Some volatile methyl
siloxanes have flammability risks, and
EPA believes that these will be
addressed by existing standards from
OSHA, ASHRAE, guidelines in the
MSDSs, and other safety precautions
common in the refrigeration and airconditioning industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for CFC–113, HCFC–22, and
blends containing HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–142b are low. The potential
health effects of HFO–1234ze at lower
concentrations include drowsiness and
dizziness. At sufficiently high
concentrations, it may cause central
nervous system depression or irregular
heartbeat. HFO–1234ze could cause
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
asphyxiation, if air is displaced by
vapor in a confined space. The
substitute may also irritate the lungs,
skin or eyes or cause frostbite. These
potential health effects are common to
many refrigerants. EPA anticipates that
users of non-mechanical heat transfer
systems will take action consistent with
the recommendations specified in the
manufacturers’ MSDSs for HFO–1234ze.
EPA recommends a workplace AEL of
1,000 ppm on an 8-hour time-weighted
average for HFO–1234ze.15 EPA
recommends a preliminary consumer
exposure limit (acute) of 10,000 ppm on
a 30-minute time-weighted average. Our
risk screen found that workplace and
consumer exposure, respectively, are
likely to be well below these levels.16
As for the other newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, most of the blends contain HFC or
hydrocarbon components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
the ACGIH. C6-perfluoroketone has an
8-hour manufacturer AEL of 150 ppm,
HFE–7200 has an 8-hour manufacturer
AEL of 200 ppm, and HFE–7000 has an
8-hour manufacturer AEL of 75 ppm.
EPA anticipates that users will be able
to meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, PELs, manufacturer
AELs and EPA recommendation) and
will address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry. Therefore, we find the newly
listed substitutes (in IV.P.2 and 3,
above) acceptable because they do not
pose a greater overall risk to human
health and the environment than the
other substitutes available in the nonmechanical heat transfer end use.
V. What are my existing and new
options for alternative foam blowing
agents?
Historically, HCFC–22 and HCFC–
142b, along with HCFC–141b, have been
used as substitutes for CFC–11 and
CFC–12 in foam blowing. HCFC–22 and
HCFC–142b were originally found
acceptable as substitutes for CFCs in all
foam blowing end uses under the SNAP
program (March 18, 1994; 59 FR 13084).
15 Due to additional data on toxicity, EPA is able
to use a lower uncertainty factor and recommend
a higher workplace AEL compared to the
preliminary AEL analysis (where an AEL of 375
ppm was recommended).
16 The risk screen as well as derivations of EPA’s
recommended workplace AEL and preliminary
consumer exposure limit (acute) are available at
https://www.regulations.gov as item EPA–HQ–OAR–
2003–0118–0250.
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34033
In 2007, EPA found a number of foam
blowing agents containing HCFCs
unacceptable for use as substitutes for
ODS, because alternatives exist with
zero or lower ODPs. Specifically, EPA
has found HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and
blends thereof unacceptable as
substitutes for CFCs in the following
end uses:
Æ Rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock;
Æ Rigid polyurethane appliance;
Æ Rigid polyurethane spray and
commercial refrigeration, and sandwich
panels;
Æ Rigid polyurethane slabstock and
other foams;
Æ Polystyrene extruded insulation
boardstock and billet;
Æ Phenolic insulation board and
bunstock;
Æ Flexible polyurethane; and
Æ Polystyrene extruded sheet
(40 CFR part 82 appendix Q to
subpart G)
EPA has also found HCFC–22, HCFC–
142b, and blends thereof unacceptable
as substitutes for HCFC–141b in the
following end uses:
Æ Rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock;
Æ Rigid polyurethane appliance;
Æ Rigid polyurethane spray and
commercial refrigeration, and sandwich
panels; and
Æ Rigid polyurethane slabstock and
other foams
(40 CFR part 82 appendix K to subpart
G and 40 CFR part 82 appendix Q to
subpart G)
Existing users of HCFC–22, HCFC–
142b, and blends thereof, as of
November 4, 2005, were allowed a
transition period (which varied in time
by end use and application) to switch to
alternatives, depending on the specific
use. The last of these transition periods
ended January 1, 2010 (40 CFR part 82
appendix Q to subpart G).
Finally, EPA has found that HCFC–
124 is unacceptable as a substitute for
HCFC–123, HCFC–141b, HCFC–142b,
HCFC–22, or blends thereof in all foam
blowing end uses (40 CFR Part 82
Appendix K to Subpart G).
In the original SNAP rulemaking EPA
addressed the use of blends in foam
blowing applications. EPA determined
that notification was not required for
‘‘use of blends or mixtures of substitutes
listed as acceptable under the SNAP
program in open-celled or closed-cell or
semi-rigid end uses’’ but was required in
the following end-uses: polyurethane
and polyisocyanurate rigid laminated
boardstock; polyurethane spray foam;
polystyrene extruded boardstock and
billet foams; phenolic foams; and
polyolefin foams (59 FR 13084, March
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
34034
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
18, 1994). Therefore, blends of
acceptable substitutes are also
acceptable substitutes for the following
foam blowing end uses: rigid
polyurethane, appliance; rigid
polyurethane, commercial (including
commercial foam and sandwich panels,
but excluding spray foam); rigid
polyurethane, slabstock; flexible
polyurethane; polystyrene, extruded
sheet; and integral skin polyurethane.
To aid end users as they transition
from use of HCFC–22 and HCFC–142b,
sections IV.A through K list, by end use:
(1) Foam blowing agents that EPA
previously found acceptable as
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
or all HCFCs; and (2) foam blowing
agents that EPA is newly finding
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, or blends thereof. At the
end of the decision for each end use,
there is narrative comparing
environmental, flammability, and
toxicity information of the newly
acceptable alternatives with other
currently or potentially available
alternatives. Flammable blowing agents
are hazardous waste when disposed and
must be disposed of consistent with
regulations under RCRA. More
environmental information,
flammability information, and toxicity
and exposure data is also available in
the original SNAP rule of March 18,
1994, the notice of acceptability in
which each substitute was first listed, or
the sector table for each of the
acceptable alternatives to HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof, in the
foam blowing sector. The sector table is
available at https://www.epa.gov/ozone/
snap/foams/. The sector table
also includes further identification
information (including composition and
trade names) for each substitute.
Due to the unique flammability
concerns that affect listings in the spray
foam application, for greater clarity this
document separates listings for spray
foam (section V.D) from listings for
commercial refrigeration foam and
sandwich panels (section V.C).
Commercial refrigeration foam, spray
foam, and sandwich panels together
constitute the rigid polyurethane
commercial refrigeration foam, spray
foam, and sandwich panels end use.
However, because of the heightened risk
of using a flammable blowing agent
when blowing spray foam, in most cases
we have not listed flammable
substitutes as acceptable in spray foam
(e.g., methyl formate and C3–C6
saturated light hydrocarbons), although
we have found some acceptable for use
in commercial refrigeration foam and in
sandwich panels (see April 11, 2000; 65
FR 19327, December 18, 2000; 65 FR
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
78977, August 21, 2003; 68 FR 50533,
and September 30, 2009; 74 FR 50129).
In limited circumstances, where the
submitter of a specific substitute has
supplied EPA with a safety training
program for customers to address the
flammability risks unique to spray foam,
we have listed such flammable blowing
agents as acceptable for spray foam
applications (see December 6, 1999; 64
FR 68039 and October 1, 2004; 69 FR
58903).
A. Rigid Polyurethane &
Polyisocyanurate Laminated Boardstock
HFO–1234ze,17 which was previously
listed as a substitute for class I and class
II ODS in several foam blowing end uses
(September 30, 2009; 74 FR 50129) is
today being listed as a substitute for
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof in five other foam blowing end
uses. You may find the submission
under Docket items EPA–HQ–OAR–
2003–0118–0222 and EPA–HQ–OAR–
2003–0118–0246 at https://
www.regulations.gov.
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, blends thereof, or for all
HCFCs in rigid polyurethane &
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock:
• Carbon dioxide, CO2
• 2-chloropropane
• EcomateTM
• Formacel® TI
• Formic acid
• HFC–134a
• HFC–152a
• HFC–245fa
• Methyl formate
• TranscendTM Technologies, as an
additive to SNAP-approved blowing
agents in blends making up to 5% by
weight of the total foam formulation.
• Water
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in rigid
polyurethane & polyisocyanurate
laminated boardstock:
• Electroset technology
• Exxsol blowing agents
• HFC–365mfc
• HFO–1234ze
• Saturated light hydrocarbons C3–C6
(e.g., propane, butane, isobutane,
pentane, cyclopentane, hexane,
cyclohexane)
Comparison to other foam blowing
agents in the rigid polyurethane &
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock
end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof listed above in section A.2 are
17 HFO–1234ze(E); HFC–1234ze(E); trans-1,3,3tetrafluoroprop-1-ene; CAS ID #29118–24–9.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
non-ozone-depleting, in contrast to
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, or blends
thereof. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in their
lack of risk for ozone depletion. The
newly listed substitutes have GWPs
ranging from 0 to 794, comparable to or
lower than that of other substitutes for
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof. For example, the GWP of HFC–
134a is about 1430 and the GWP of
HFC–245fa is about 1030.
None of the newly listed refrigerant
substitutes contain any components that
are defined as HAPs under the CAA.
C3–C6 saturated hydrocarbons, HFO–
1234ze, and some components of Exxsol
blowing agents are considered VOCs
under CAA regulations (see 40 CFR
51.100(s)) addressing the development
of SIPs to attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standards.
EPA has received a petition to exempt
HFO–1234ze from the definition of VOC
for purposes of SIPs to attain and
maintain the NAAQS on the basis that
the chemical has a low photochemical
reactivity. EPA intends to address the
request through notice-and-comment
rulemaking. Of the substitutes
previously found acceptable in V.A.1,
above, 2-chloropropane and formic acid
are VOCs.
Among the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, or blends
thereof, Exxol Blowing Agents, HFC–
365mfc, and C3–C6 saturated
hydrocarbons are flammable. Examples
of other flammable foam blowing agents
that we previously found acceptable in
this end use include 2-chloropropane,
EcomateTM, formic acid, HFC–152a, and
methyl formate. EPA believes that the
flammability risks can be addressed by
existing standards from OSHA,
guidelines from the manufacturer, and
other safety precautions common in the
foam blowing industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof are low. The
potential health effects of HFO–1234ze
at lower concentrations include
drowsiness and dizziness. The
substitute may also irritate the lungs,
skin or eyes or cause frostbite. At
sufficiently high concentrations, it may
cause central nervous system depression
or irregular heart beat. HFO–1234ze
could cause asphyxiation, if air is
displaced by vapor in a confined space.
These potential health effects are
common to many foam blowing agents.
EPA anticipates that users in foam
blowing end uses will take action
consistent with the recommendations
specified in the manufacturers’ MSDSs
for HFO–1234ze. EPA recommends a
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
workplace AEL of 1,000 ppm on an 8hour time-weighted average for HFO–
1234ze, which is updated from our
preliminary recommendation that
accompanied the acceptability listing
for HFO–1234ze in several other foam
blowing end uses (74 FR 50129;
September 30, 2009).18 Our risk screen
found that workplace exposure is likely
to be well below that level.19
As for the other newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, HFC–365mfc, C3–C6 saturated
light hydrocarbons, and Exxsol blowing
agents contain components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
ACGIH. EPA anticipates that users will
be able to meet the workplace exposure
limits (WEELs, TLVs, PELs and EPA
recommendation) and will address
potential health risks by following
requirements and recommendations in
the MSDSs and other safety precautions
common in the foam blowing industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in V.A.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the rigid polyurethane &
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock
end use.
B. Rigid Polyurethane Appliance Foam
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, blends thereof, or for all
HCFCs in rigid polyurethane appliance
foam:
• Carbon dioxide, CO2
• EcomateTM
• Formacel® TI
• Formic acid
• HFC–134a
• HFC–152a
• HFC–245fa
• HFO–1234ze
• Methyl formate
• TranscendTM Technologies, as an
additive to SNAP-approved blowing
agents in blends making up to 5% by
weight of the total foam formulation.
• Water
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in rigid
polyurethane appliance foam:
• Electroset technology
18 Due to additional data on toxicity, EPA is able
to use a lower uncertainty factor and recommend
a higher workplace AEL compared to the
preliminary AEL analysis (where an AEL of 375
ppm was recommended).
19 The risk screen is available at https://
www.regulations.gov as item EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–
0118–0250.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
• Exxsol blowing agents
• HFC–365mfc
• Saturated light hydrocarbons C3–C6
(e.g., propane, butane, isobutane,
pentane, cyclopentane, hexane,
cyclohexane)
• Vacuum panels
Comparison to other foam blowing
agents in the rigid polyurethane
appliance foam end use:
We are finding all of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof listed above in
section V.B.2, with the exception of
vaccum panels, to also be acceptable in
the rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock
end use. Vacuum panels have an ODP
and GWP of 0, are not VOCs or HAPs,
are non-flammable, and do not present
toxicity concerns. Please see section
V.A.2 for further information on the
environmental and safety impacts of the
newly listed alternatives compared to
other available alternatives. For the
reasons discussed above in this section
and in section V.A.2, we find that the
newly listed substitutes (in V.B.2,
above) are acceptable because they do
not pose a greater overall risk to human
health and the environment than the
other substitutes available in the rigid
polyurethane appliance foam end use.
C. Rigid Polyurethane Commercial
Refrigeration Foam and Sandwich
Panels
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, blends thereof, or for all
HCFCs in rigid polyurethane
commercial refrigeration foam and
sandwich panels:
• Carbon dioxide, CO2
• EcomateTM
• Formacel® TI
• Formic acid
• HFC–134a
• HFC–152a
• HFC–245fa
• HFO–1234ze
• Methyl formate
• TranscendTM Technologies, as an
additive to SNAP-approved blowing
agents in blends making up to 5% by
weight of the total foam formulation.
• Water
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in rigid
polyurethane commercial refrigeration
foam and sandwich panels:
• Electroset technology
• Exxsol blowing agents
• HFC–365mfc
• HFC–365mfc/HFC–245fa blends
containing at least 5% HFC–245fa
• Saturated light hydrocarbons C3–C6
(e.g., propane, butane, isobutane,
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34035
pentane, cyclopentane, hexane,
cyclohexane)
Comparison to other foam blowing
agents in the rigid polyurethane
commercial refrigeration foam and
sandwich panels end use:
We are finding all of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof listed above in
section V.C.2, with the exception of
HFC–365mfc/HFC–245fa blends
containing at least 5% HFC–245fa, to
also be acceptable in the rigid
polyurethane and polyisocyanurate
laminated boardstock end use. Blends of
HFC–365mfc/HFC–245fa containing at
least 5% HFC–245fa are comparable to
other acceptable substitutes for HCFC–
22, HCFC–142b, or blends thereof in the
rigid polyurethane commercial
refrigeration foam and sandwich panels
end use in their lack of risk for ozone
depletion. In addition, these blends
have average GWPs ranging from 870 to
960, comparable to or lower than other
substitutes (e.g., the GWP of HFC–134a
is about 1430 and the GWP of HFC–
245fa is about 1030). HFC–365mfc and
HFC–245fa are exempt from the
definition of VOCs under CAA
regulations addressing the development
of SIPs to attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standards.
HFC–365mfc is flammable. Examples of
other flammable foam blowing agents
that we previously found acceptable in
this end use include EcomateTM, formic
acid, HFC–152a, and methyl formate.
EPA believes the flammability risks can
be addressed by existing standards from
OSHA, guidelines from the
manufacturer, and other safety
precautions common in the foam
blowing industry. With regard to
toxicity, HFC–245fa has an 8-hour
WEEL of 300 ppm. EPA anticipates that
users will be able to meet the WEEL and
will address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDS and
other safety precautions common in the
foam blowing industry. Please see
section V.A.2 for further information on
the environmental and safety impacts of
the other newly listed alternatives
compared to available alternatives.
For the reasons discussed above in
this section and in section V.A.2, we
find the newly listed substitutes (in
V.C.2, above) acceptable because they
do not pose a greater overall risk to
human health and the environment than
the other substitutes available in the
rigid polyurethane commercial
refrigeration foam and sandwich panels
end use.
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
34036
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
D. Rigid Polyurethane Spray Foam
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, blends thereof, or for all
HCFCs in rigid polyurethane spray
foam:
• Carbon dioxide, CO2
• EcomateTM
• Formacel® TI
• Formic acid
• HFC–134a
• HFC–152a
• HFC–245fa
• HFO–1234ze
• Water
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in rigid
polyurethane spray foam:
• Electroset technology
• Exxsol blowing agents
• HFC–365mfc/HFC–245fa blends
containing at least 5% HFC–245fa
Comparison to other foam blowing
agents in the rigid polyurethane spray
foam end use:
We are finding all of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof listed above in
section V.D.2 to also be acceptable in
the rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock
end use. Please see section V.A.2 for
further information on the
environmental and safety impacts of the
newly listed alternatives compared to
available alternatives. For the reasons
above in this section and in section
V.A.2, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in V.D.2, above) acceptable
because they do not pose a greater
overall risk to human health and the
environment than the other substitutes
available in the rigid polyurethane spray
foam end use.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
E. Rigid Polyurethane Slabstock and
Other
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, blends thereof, or for all
HCFCs in rigid polyurethane slabstock
and other foams:
• Carbon dioxide, CO2
• EcomateTM
• Formacel® TI
• Formic acid
• HFC–134a
• HFC–152a
• HFC–245fa
• Methyl formate
• TranscendTM Technologies, as an
additive to SNAP-approved blowing
agents in blends making up to 5% by
weight of the total foam formulation.
• Water
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in rigid
polyurethane slabstock and other foams:
• Electroset technology
• Exxsol blowing agents
• HFC–365mfc
• HFO–1234ze
• Saturated light hydrocarbons C3–C6
(e.g., propane, butane, isobutane,
pentane, cyclopentane, hexane,
cyclohexane)
Comparison to other foam blowing
agents in the rigid polyurethane
slabstock and other foams end use:
We are finding all of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof listed above in
section V.E.2 to also be acceptable in the
rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock
end use. Please see section V.A.2 for
further information on the
environmental and safety impacts of the
newly listed alternatives compared to
available alternatives. For the reasons
above and in V.A.2, we find the newly
listed substitutes (in V.E.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a
greater overall risk to human health and
the environment than the other
substitutes available in the rigid
polyurethane, slabstock and other foam
end use.
F. Polystyrene Extruded Boardstock and
Billet
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, blends thereof, or for all
HCFCs in polystyrene extruded
boardstock and billet:
• Carbon dioxide, CO2
• EcomateTM
• Formacel® B
• Formacel® TI
• HFC–134a
• HFC–152a
• HFC–245fa
• HFO–1234ze
• Water
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in
polystyrene extruded boardstock and
billet:
• Electroset technology
• Exxsol blowing agents
• HFC–365mfc
• Saturated light hydrocarbons C3–C6
(e.g., propane, butane, isobutane,
pentane, cyclopentane, hexane,
cyclohexane)
Comparison to other foam blowing
agents in the polystyrene extruded
boardstock and billet end use:
We are finding all of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof listed above in
section V.F.2 to also be acceptable in the
rigid polyurethane and
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock
end use. Please see section V.A.2 for
further information on the
environmental and safety impacts of the
newly listed alternatives compared to
available alternatives. For the reasons
above and in section V.A.2, we find the
newly listed substitutes (in V.F.2,
above) acceptable because they do not
pose a greater overall risk to human
health and the environment than the
other substitutes available in the
polystyrene, extruded boardstock and
billet end use.
G. Phenolic Insulation Board and
Bunstock
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, blends thereof, or for all
HCFCs in phenolic insulation board and
bunstock:
• Carbon dioxide, CO2
• EcomateTM
• HFC–134a
• HFC–152a
• HFC–245fa
• Water
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in
phenolic insulation board and bunstock:
• 2-chloropropane
• Electroset technology
• Exxsol blowing agents
• HFC–365mfc
• HFO–1234ze
• Saturated light hydrocarbons C3–C6
(e.g., propane, butane, isobutane,
pentane, cyclopentane, hexane,
cyclohexane)
Comparison to other foam blowing
agents in the phenolic insulation board
and bunstock end use:
We are finding all of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof listed above in
section V.G.2, with the exception of 2chloropropane, to also be acceptable in
the rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock
end use. 2-chloropropane is comparable
to other acceptable substitutes for
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof in the phenolic insulation board
and bunstock end use in its lack of risk
for ozone depletion. Additionally, we
estimate it has a GWP of 5 or less,
comparable to or lower than that of
other substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–
142b, and blends thereof (e.g., the GWP
of HFC–134a is about 1430, the GWP of
HFC–245fa is about 1030, and the GWP
of carbon dioxide is 1). 2-chloropropane
is considered a VOC under CAA
regulations addressing the development
of SIPs to attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standards.
2-chloropropane is flammable, like the
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
newly listed substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, or blends thereof, Exxol
Blowing Agents, HFC–365mfc, and C3–
C6 saturated hydrocarbons. Examples of
other flammable foam blowing agents
that we previously found acceptable in
this end use include EcomateTM, HFC–
152a, and methyl formate. EPA believes
the flammability risks can be addressed
by existing standards from OSHA,
guidelines from the manufacturer, and
other safety precautions common in the
foam blowing industry. With regard to
toxicity, EPA recommends a workplace
exposure limit of 350 ppm on an 8-hour
time-weighted average for 2chloropropane (65 FR 37900, June 19,
2000). EPA anticipates users will be able
to meet the recommended workplace
exposure limit and will address
potential health risks by following
requirements and recommendations in
the MSDS and other safety precautions
common in the foam blowing industry.
Please see section V.A.2 for further
information on the environmental and
safety impacts of the other newly listed
alternatives compared to available
alternatives. For the reasons above and
in section V.A.2, we find the newly
listed substitutes (in V.G.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a
greater overall risk to human health and
the environment than the other
substitutes available in the phenolic
insulation board & bunstock end use.
H. Polystyrene, Extruded Sheet
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, blends thereof, or for all
HCFCs in polystyrene, extruded sheet:
• Carbon dioxide, CO2
• EcomateTM
• Formacel® TI
• HFC–134a
• HFC–152a
• HFC–245fa
• Water
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in
polystyrene, extruded sheet:
• Electroset technology
• Exxsol blowing agents
• HFC–365mfc
• Saturated light hydrocarbons C3–C6
(e.g., propane, butane, isobutane,
pentane, cyclopentane, hexane,
cyclohexane)
Comparison to other foam blowing
agents in the polystyrene, extruded
sheet end use:
We are finding all of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof listed above in
section V.H.2 to also be acceptable in
the rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
end use. Please see section V.A.2 for
further information on the
environmental and safety impacts of the
newly listed alternatives compared to
available alternatives. For the reasons
above and in section V.A.2, we find the
newly listed substitutes (in V.H.2,
above) acceptable because they do not
pose a greater overall risk to human
health and the environment than the
other substitutes available in the
polystyrene, extruded sheet end use.
I. Flexible Polyurethane
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, blends thereof, or for all
HCFCs in flexible polyurethane:
• Carbon dioxide, CO2
• EcomateTM
• HFC–134a
• HFC–152a
• HFC–245fa
• Water
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in
flexible polyurethane:
• Acetone
• Electroset technology
• Exxsol blowing agents
• HFC–365mfc
• Saturated light hydrocarbons C3–C6
(e.g., propane, butane, isobutane,
pentane, cyclopentane, hexane,
cyclohexane)
Comparison to other foam blowing
agents in the flexible polyurethane end
use:
We are finding all of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof listed above in
section V.I.2, with the exception of
acetone, to also be acceptable in the
rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock
end use. Acetone is comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in its
lack of risk for ozone depletion. Acetone
has a GWP of 0.5, comparable to or
lower than that of other substitutes for
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof (e.g., the GWP of HFC–134a is
about 1430, the GWP of HFC–245fa is
about 1030, and the GWP of carbon
dioxide is 1). Acetone is exempt from
the definition of VOC under CAA
regulations addressing the development
of SIPs to attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standards.
Acetone is flammable, along with other
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
or blends thereof, including Exxol
Blowing Agents, HFC–365mfc, and C3–
C6 saturated hydrocarbons. Examples of
other flammable foam blowing agents
that we previously found acceptable in
this end use include EcomateTM and
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34037
HFC–152a. EPA believes that the
flammability risks can be addressed by
existing standards from OSHA,
guidelines from the manufacturer, and
other safety precautions common in the
foam blowing industry. With regard to
toxicity, acetone has an 8-hour ACGIH
TLV of 500 ppm. EPA anticipates that
users will be able to meet the TLV and
will address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDS and
other safety precautions common in the
foam blowing industry. Please see
section V.A.2 for further information on
the environmental and safety impacts of
the other newly listed alternatives
compared to available alternatives. For
the reasons above and in section V.A.2,
we find the newly listed substitutes (in
V.I.2, above) acceptable because they do
not pose a greater overall risk to human
health and the environment than the
other substitutes available in the flexible
polyurethane end use.
J. Polyolefin
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, blends thereof, or for all
HCFCs in polyolefin:
• Carbon dioxide, CO2
• EcomateTM
• Formacel® TI
• HFC–134a
• HFC–152a
• HFC–245fa
• Water
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in
polyolefin:
• Blends of HFC–152a and saturated
light hydrocarbons (C3–C6)
• Chemical Blend A 20
• Electroset technology
• Exxsol blowing agents
• HFC–365mfc
• HFO–1234ze
• Saturated light hydrocarbons C3–C6
(e.g., propane, butane, isobutane,
pentane, cyclopentane, hexane,
cyclohexane)
Comparison to other foam blowing
agents in the polyolefin end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof listed above in section V.J.2 are
non-ozone-depleting, in contrast to
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, or blends
thereof. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in their
lack of risk for ozone depletion. The
newly listed substitutes have GWPs
ranging from 0 to 790, comparable to or
20 Composition is claimed as CBI by the
submitter.
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
34038
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
lower than that of other substitutes for
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof. For example, the GWP of HFC–
134a is about 1430 and the GWP of
HFC–245fa is about 1030.
HFO–1234ze is currently considered a
VOC, and Exxsol blowing agents and
C3–C6 saturated hydrocarbons contain
compounds that are considered VOCs
under CAA regulations (see 40 CFR
51.100(s)) addressing the development
of SIPs to attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standards.
EPA has received a petition to exempt
HFO–1234ze from the definition of VOC
for purposes of SIPs to attain and
maintain the NAAQS on the basis that
the chemical has a low photochemical
reactivity. EPA intends to address the
request through notice-and-comment
rulemaking. None of the acceptable
substitutes previously listed in this end
use are VOCs. However, HFO–1234ze,
Exxsol blowing agents, and C3–C6
saturated hydrocarbons have lower
overall environmental and health risk
compared to other substitutes.
Among the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, or blends
thereof, Exxol Blowing Agents, HFC–
365mfc, and C3–C6 saturated
hydrocarbons are flammable. Examples
of other flammable foam blowing agents
that we previously found acceptable in
this end use include Ecomate TM and
HFC–152a. EPA believes the
flammability risks can be addressed by
following existing standards from
OSHA, guidelines from the
manufacturer, and other safety
precautions common in the foam
blowing industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof are low. The
potential health effects of HFO–1234ze
at lower concentrations include
drowsiness and dizziness. The
substitute may also irritate the skin or
eyes or cause frostbite. At sufficiently
high concentrations, it may cause
central nervous system depression or
irregular heart beat. HFO–1234ze could
cause asphyxiation, if air is displaced by
vapor in a confined space. The
substitute may also irritate the lungs,
skin or eyes or cause frostbite. These
potential health effects are common to
many foam blowing agents. EPA
anticipates that users in foam blowing
end uses will take action consistent
with the recommendations specified in
the manufacturers’ MSDSs for HFO–
1234ze. EPA recommends a workplace
AEL of 1,000 ppm on an 8-hour timeweighted average for HFO–1234ze,
which is updated from our preliminary
recommendation that accompanied the
acceptability listing for HFO–1234ze in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
several other foam blowing end uses (74
FR 50129; September 30, 2009). Our risk
screen found that workplace exposure is
likely to be well below that level.21
As for the other newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 and blends
containing HCFC–22 and/or HCFC–
142b, HFC–365mfc, C3–C6 saturated
light hydrocarbons and Exxsol blowing
agents contain components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from
the ACGIH. EPA anticipates that users
will be able to meet the workplace
exposure limits (WEELs, TLVs, PELs,
manufacturer’s recommendation, and
EPA recommendation) and will address
potential health risks by following
requirements and recommendations in
the MSDSs and other safety precautions
common in the foam blowing industry.
For the above reasons, we find the
newly listed substitutes (in V.J.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a
greater overall risk to human health and
the environment than the other
substitutes available in the polyolefin
end use.
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, blends thereof, or for all
HCFCs in integral skin polyurethane:
• Carbon dioxide, CO2
• EcomateTM
• Formacel® TI
• Formic acid
• HFC–134a
• HFC–152a
• HFC–245fa
• Methyl formate
• Water
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in
integral skin polyurethane:
• Acetone
• Electroset technology
• Exxsol blowing agents
• HFC–365mfc
• HFO–1234ze
• Saturated light hydrocarbons C3–C6
(e.g., propane, butane, isobutane,
pentane, cyclopentane, hexane,
cyclohexane)
Comparison to other foam blowing
agents in the integral skin polyurethane
end use:
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof listed above in section V.K.2 are
non-ozone-depleting, in contrast to
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, or blends
thereof. They are comparable to other
acceptable substitutes for HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof in their
lack of risk for ozone depletion. The
newly listed substitutes have GWPs
ranging from 0 to 794, comparable to or
lower than that of other substitutes for
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof. For example, the GWP of HFC–
134a is about 1430 and the GWP of
HFC–245fa is about 1030.
HFO–1234ze is currently considered a
VOC, and Exxsol blowing agents and
C3–C6 saturated hydrocarbons contain
compounds that are considered VOCs
under CAA regulations (see 40 CFR
51.100(s)) addressing the development
of SIPs to attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standards.
EPA has received a petition to exempt
HFO–1234ze from the definition of VOC
for purposes of SIPs to attain and
maintain the NAAQS on the basis that
the chemical has a low photochemical
reactivity. EPA intends to address the
request through notice-and-comment
rulemaking. An acceptable substitute
previously listed in this end use that is
a VOC is formic acid.
Among the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, or blends
thereof, acetone, Exxol Blowing Agents,
HFC–365mfc, and C3–C6 saturated
hydrocarbons are flammable. Examples
of other flammable foam blowing agents
that we previously found acceptable in
this end use include EcomateTM, formic
acid, and HFC–152a. EPA believes that
the flammability risks can be addressed
by existing standards from the OSHA,
guidelines from the manufacturer, and
other safety precautions common in the
foam blowing industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22, HCFC–142b,
and blends thereof are low. HFC–
365mfc, C3–C6 saturated light
hydrocarbons and Exxsol blowing
agents contain components with
workplace exposure limits of 500 to
1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such
as WEELs from the AIHA or threshold
limit values (TLVs) from the ACGIH.
EPA recommends a workplace AEL of
1000 22 ppm on an 8-hour timeweighted average for HFO–1234ze,
which is updated from our preliminary
recommendation that accompanied the
acceptability listing for HFO–1234ze in
several other foam blowing end uses (74
FR 50129, September 30, 2009). EPA
anticipates that users will be able to
meet the workplace exposure limits
(WEELs, TLVs, PELs and EPA
recommendation) and will address
21 The risk screen is available at https://
www.regulations.gov as item EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–
0118–0250.
22 The derivation of EPA’s recommended AEL is
available at https://www.regulations.gov as item
EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–0118–0250.
K. Integral Skin Polyurethane
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
potential health risks by following
requirements and recommendations in
the MSDSs and other safety precautions
common in the foam blowing industry.
For the above reasons, we find the
newly listed substitutes (in V.K.2,
above) acceptable because they do not
pose a greater overall risk to human
health and the environment than the
other substitutes available in the
integral skin polyurethane end use.
VI. What are my existing and new
options for alternative aerosols?
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
A. Propellants
We previously found HCFC–22 and
HCFC–142b acceptable as substitutes for
CFC–11 in the aerosol propellant end
use. In the aerosol propellants end use,
the two HCFCs typically have not been
blended.
Under the Nonessential Products Ban
in Section 610 of the CAA, and EPA’s
regulations implementing that provision
at 40 CFR subpart C, the sale and
distribution or offer for sale and
distribution of HCFCs in pressurized
containers is banned. However, EPA
regulations at 40 CFR 82.70 provide
exceptions for a limited number of
specific uses. For aerosol propellants,
these include:
• Medical devices listed in 21 CFR
2.125(e);
• Mold release agents that contain
HCFC–22 as a propellant where
evidence of good faith efforts to secure
alternatives indicates that, other than a
class I substance, there are no suitable
alternatives;
• Spinnerette lubricants/cleaning
sprays used in the production of
synthetic fibers, which contain class II
substances for solvent purposes and/or
contain class II substances for
propellant purposes;
• Document preservation sprays
which contain HCFC–22 as a propellant,
but which contain no other class II
substance and which are used solely on
thick books, books with coated, dense or
paper and tightly bound documents;
• Aerosol or pressurized dispenser
cleaning fluid for electronic and
photographic equipment which contains
a class II substance that is sold or
distributed to a commercial purchaser.
To aid end users in the aerosol
propellants end use as they transition
from use of HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and
blends thereof, this section lists: 1)
Propellants that EPA previously found
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC–142b; and 2) a propellant
that EPA is newly finding acceptable as
a substitute for CFC–11, HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof. At the
end of the decision for the end use,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
there is narrative comparing
environmental, flammability, and
toxicity information of the newly
acceptable alternative with other
currently or potentially available
alternatives. More environmental and
health information is also available in
the original SNAP rule of March 18,
1994, the notice of acceptability in
which each substitute was first listed, or
the sector table for each of the
acceptable alternatives to HCFC–22,
HCFC–142b, and blends thereof, in the
aerosol propellants end use. The sector
table is available at https://www.epa.gov/
ozone/snap/aerosol/. The
sector table also includes further
identification information (including
composition and trade names) for each
substitute.
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for HCFC–22
and HCFC–142b in aerosol propellants:
• Alternative processes (pumps,
mechanical pressure dispensers, nonspray dispensers)
• Compressed gases (e.g., carbon
dioxide, air, nitrogen, and nitrous oxide)
• Dimethyl ether
• HFC–125
• HFC–134a
• HFC–152a
• HFC–227ea
• Saturated light hydrocarbons, C3–
C6 (e.g., propane, isobutane, n-butane)
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as a substitute for CFC–11,
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof as an aerosol propellant:
• HFO–1234ze 23
HFO–1234ze is non-ozone-depleting
in contrast to the ozone depleting
substances which it replaces. In its lack
of risk for ozone depletion, HFO–1234ze
is comparable to other substitutes for
HCFC–22 and HCFC–142b such as
HFC–134a, HFC–152a, and compressed
CO2. HFO–1234ze’s 100-year GWP is 6,
comparable to or lower than that of
other substitutes for CFC–11, HCFC–22
and HCFC–142b. For example, the GWP
of HFC–134a is about 1430, the GWP of
HFC–152a is about 124, and the GWP of
compressed CO2 is 1.
Neither HFO–1234ze nor any of the
previously acceptable substitutes in the
propellant end use are HAPs. HFO–
1234ze is currently considered a VOC
under CAA regulations (see 40 CFR
51.100(s)) addressing the development
of SIPs to attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standards.
Other acceptable substitutes in the
propellant end use that are VOCs are
dimethyl ether and the saturated light
hydrocarbons (C3–C6). EPA has
23 HFO–1234ze(E); HFC–1234ze(E); trans-1,3,3tetrafluoroprop-1-ene; CAS ID #29118–24–9.
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
34039
received a petition to exempt HFO–
1234ze from the definition of VOC for
purposes of SIPs to attain and maintain
the NAAQS on the basis that the
chemical has a low photochemical
reactivity. EPA intends to address the
request through notice-and-comment
rulemaking.
HFO–1234ze is not flammable. The
toxicity risks of HFO–1234ze are low.
The potential health effects of HFO–
1234ze at lower concentrations include
drowsiness and dizziness. At
sufficiently high concentrations, it may
cause central nervous system depression
or irregular heart beat. HFO–1234ze
could cause asphyxiation, if air is
displaced by vapor in a confined space.
The substitute may also irritate the
lungs, skin or eyes or cause frostbite.
These potential health effects are
common to many propellants. EPA
anticipates that users in the propellant
end use will take action consistent with
the recommendations specified in the
manufacturers’ MSDSs for HFO–1234ze.
EPA recommends a workplace exposure
limit of 1,000 ppm on an 8-hour timeweighted average for HFO–1234ze. EPA
recommends a preliminary consumer
exposure limit (intermittent) of 420
ppm. Our risk screen found that
workplace and consumer exposure,
respectively, are likely to be well below
these levels.24 EPA anticipates that
users will be able to meet the
recommended workplace and consumer
exposure limits and will address
potential health risks by following
requirements and recommendations in
the MSDSs and labels and other safety
precautions common in the aerosol
industry. For the above reasons, we find
HFO–1234ze acceptable because it does
not pose a greater overall risk to human
health and the environment than the
other substitutes acceptable in the
aerosol propellants end use.
VII. What are my existing and new
options for alternative sterilants?
A. Sterilants
Sterilants are chemicals, blends, or
devices used to sterilize medical
equipment. Many sterilants contain
ethylene oxide (EtO) as a component. In
this sector, EPA has previously found
acceptable ethylene oxide blends
containing a blend of HCFC–22 and/or
HCFC–124. HCFC–142b has not been
used in this sector.
To aid end users in the sterilant end
use as they transition from use of
24 The derivation of EPA’s recommended AEL,
preliminary consumer exposure limit (intermittent),
and risk screen are available at https://
www.regulations.gov as item EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–
0118–0250.
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
34040
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 115 / Wednesday, June 16, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
ethylene oxide blends containing
HCFC–22, this section lists: (1)
Sterilants that EPA previously found
acceptable as substitutes for ethylene
oxide blends containing HCFC–22; and
(2) sterilants that EPA is newly finding
acceptable as substitutes for ethylene
oxide blends containing HCFC–22.
At the end of the decision for the end
use, there is narrative comparing
environmental, flammability, and
toxicity information of the newly
acceptable alternative with other
currently or potentially available
alternatives. Flammable and highly
reactive sterilants are hazardous waste
when disposed. Sterilants must be
registered by EPA under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA) prior to use. Also,
requirements of the Food and Drug
Administration for medical devices
apply to equipment using sterilants.
More environmental and health
information is also available in the
original SNAP rule of March 18, 1994,
the notice of acceptability in which each
substitute was first listed, or the sector
table for each of the acceptable
alternatives to ethylene oxide blends
containing HCFC–22, in the sterilant
end use. The sector table is available at
https://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/
sterilants/. The sector table
also includes further identification
information (including composition and
trade names) for each substitute.
1. EPA previously found the following
acceptable as substitutes for ethylene
oxide blends containing HCFC–22 as
sterilants:
• IoGasTM Sterilant Blends 1, 3, and
6 (blends of CF3I/CO2/EtO)
• Mini-Max® Cleaner
2. EPA is newly finding the following
acceptable as substitutes for ethylene
oxide blends containing HCFC–22 as
sterilants:
• CO2/EtO
• Hydrogen peroxide gas plasma
systems
• Peroxyacetic acid/hydrogen
peroxide gas plasma systems
• Pure EtO
• Steam
The newly listed substitutes for
HCFC–22, HCFC–142b, and blends
thereof listed above in section VII.A.2.
are non-ozone-depleting, in contrast to
HCFC–22 blends. They are comparable
to other acceptable substitutes for
HCFC–22 blends in their lack of risk for
ozone depletion. The newly listed
substitutes have GWPs of one or less,
comparable to or lower than that of
other substitutes for HCFC–22 blends.
For example, the GWP of the IoGas
blends is less than one.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:21 Jun 15, 2010
Jkt 220001
Peroxyacetic acid and ethylene oxide
are considered VOCs under CAA
regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to
attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. Ethylene
oxide is a hazardous air pollutant under
EPA regulations. EPA’s National
Emission Standards for Hospital
Ethylene Oxide Sterilizers apply to this
substance and blends that contain it (see
subpart WWWWW of 40 CFR part 63).
EPA has previously found other blends
containing ethylene oxide to be
acceptable as sterilants. Further, blends
that do not contain ethylene oxide are
often still reactive.
Among the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC–22 blends, pure ethylene
oxide and peroxyacetic acid, a
component in a peroxyacetic acid/
hydrogen peroxide gas plasma system,
are flammable. Hydrogen peroxide is
not flammable per se, but is highly
reactive and must be handled cautiously
at the concentrations required for use in
sterilization equipment. These sterilants
should be used in equipment designed
to reduce the risks of flammable or
highly reactive chemicals. EPA believes
that the flammability and reactivity
risks can be addressed by existing
standards from OSHA, NIOSH, and
EPA, and/or by guidelines from the
manufacturer, and other safety
precautions common during
sterilization.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed
substitutes for HCFC–22 blends are
comparable to the risks of the IoGas
blends that EPA previously found
acceptable as substitutes for blends of
ethylene oxide and HCFCs. Ethylene
oxide has an OSHA PEL of 1 ppm on an
8-hour time-weighted average and a
NIOSH IDLH of 800 ppm (30-minute).
This compound may be carcinogenic.
Hydrogen peroxide, used in gas plasma
systems, has an OSHA PEL of 1 ppm (8hr TWA) and a NIOSH IDLH value of 75
ppm (30 min). Peroxyacetic acid, used
together with hydrogen peroxide in gas
plasma systems, has an AEGL–1 of 0.17
ppm from 10 min to 8 hours to avoid
irritation and an AEGL–2 of 0.5 ppm
from 10 min to 8 hours to avoid
‘‘irreversible or other serious, longlasting adverse health effects * * *.’’
(Acute Exposure Guideline Levels for
Selected Airborne Chemicals,
Committee on Acute Exposure
Guideline Levels, National Research
Council of the National Academies,
2009). EPA anticipates that users will be
able to meet the workplace exposure
limits (PELs, IDLHs, and AEGLs) and
will address potential health risks by
following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
other safety precautions common when
working with sterilants. For the above
reasons, we find the newly listed
substitutes (in VII.A.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a
greater overall risk to human health and
the environment than the other
substitutes available in the end use.
You can find a complete chronology
of SNAP decisions and the appropriate
Federal Register citations from the
SNAP section of EPA’s Ozone Depletion
Web site at https://www.epa.gov/ozone/
snap/chron.html. This information is
also available from the Air Docket (see
ADDRESSES section above for contact
information).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 10, 2010.
Brian J. McLean,
Director, Office of Atmospheric Programs,
Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2010–14510 Filed 6–15–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 174
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2009–0609; FRL–8829–9]
Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab Protein
in Corn; Temporary Exemption from
the Requirement of a Tolerance
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a
temporary exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues
of Bacillus thuringiensis eCry3.1Ab
protein in corn in or on the food and
feed commodities of corn; corn, field;
corn, sweet; and corn, pop, when used
as a plant-incorporated protectant in
accordance with the terms of
Experimental Use Permit 67979-EUP-8.
Syngenta Seeds, Incorporated submitted
a petition to EPA under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
requesting a temporary exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance. This
regulation eliminates the need to
establish a maximum permissible level
for residues of Bacillus thuringiensis
eCry3.1Ab protein in corn under the
FFDCA. The temporary tolerance
exemption expires on June 1, 2012.
DATES: This regulation is effective June
16, 2010. Objections and requests for
E:\FR\FM\16JNR1.SGM
16JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 115 (Wednesday, June 16, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34017-34040]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-14510]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 82
[FRL-9163-5]
RIN 2060-AG12
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Notice 25 for Significant New
Alternatives Policy Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Determination of Acceptability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Determination of Acceptability expands the list of
acceptable substitutes for ozone-depleting substances under the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's Significant New Alternatives Policy
program. The substitutes are for use in the following sectors:
Refrigeration and air-conditioning, foam blowing, aerosols, and
sterilants. The majority of the acceptability decisions find
substitutes acceptable as alternatives to the class II ozone depleting
substances hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC)-22, HCFC-142b and blends
containing one or both of these substances. EPA is also finding one of
the alternatives, HFO-
[[Page 34018]]
1234ze, acceptable as a substitute for CFC-113 in the heat transfer end
use and as a substitute for CFC-11 in the aerosol propellant end use.
The listing of additional refrigerant alternatives as acceptable will
provide users in the refrigeration and air-conditioning sector with
more options for replacing HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b, which, pursuant to
EPA's phaseout regulations, may generally be used only as a refrigerant
to service equipment manufactured before January 1, 2010.
DATES: Effective Date: June 16, 2010.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0118 (continuation of Air Docket A-91-42). All
electronic documents in the docket are listed in the index at https://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
at https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Air Docket
(No. A-91-42), EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 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 Docket is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Fiffer by telephone at (202)
343-9464, by facsimile at (202) 343-2338, by e-mail at
fiffer.melissa@epa.gov, or by mail at U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Mail Code 6205J, Washington, DC 20460. Overnight or courier
deliveries should be sent to the office location at 1310 L Street, NW.,
10th floor, Washington, DC 20005.
For more information on the Agency's process for administering the
Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program or criteria for
evaluation of substitutes, refer to the original SNAP rulemaking
published in the Federal Register on March 18, 1994 (59 FR 13044).
Notices and rulemakings under the SNAP program, as well as other EPA
publications on protection of stratospheric ozone, are available from
EPA's Ozone Depletion Web site at https://www.epa.gov/ozone/ including
the SNAP portion at https://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What acronyms and abbreviations are used in this document?
II. How does the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program
work?
A. What are the statutory requirements and authority for the
SNAP program?
B. What are EPA's regulations implementing Section 612?
C. How do the regulations for the SNAP program work?
III. How does today's SNAP listing relate to the HCFC phaseout?
A. Why is EPA issuing a SNAP listing of alternatives to
hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC)-22, HCFC-142b, and blends thereof?
B. What happened during the most recent milestone in the HCFC
phaseout?
C. How does today's SNAP listing affect alternatives to HCFCs
other than HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and blends thereof?
D. In servicing existing refrigeration or air-conditioning
equipment, may I continue to use refrigerants, previously found
acceptable by SNAP, that contain HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and blends
thereof?
IV. What are my existing and new options for alternative
refrigerants?
V. What are my existing and new options for alternative foam blowing
agents?
VI. What are my existing and new options for alternative aerosol
propellants?
VII. What are my existing and new options for alternative
sterilants?
I. What acronyms and abbreviations are used in this document?
Below is a list of acronyms and abbreviations used in this
document.
ACGIH American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists
AEGL Acute Exposure Guideline Limit
AEL Acceptable Exposure Limit
AIHA American Industrial Hygiene Association
ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers
CAA Clean Air Act
CAS ID Chemical Abstract Service Registry Number
CFC Chlorofluorocarbon
CBI Confidential Business Information
CEGL Continuous Exposure Guidance Level
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
GWP Global Warming Potential
HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant
HCFC Hydrochlorofluorocarbon
HFC Hydrofluorocarbon
IDLH Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health
IPCC International Panel on Climate Change
NIOSH National Institutes for Occupational Safety and Health
NRC National Research Council
ODP Ozone Depletion Potential
ODS Ozone-Depleting Substance
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PEL Permissible Exposure Limit
REL Recommended Exposure Limit
PMN Pre-Manufacture Notice
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SIP State Implementation Plan
SNAP Significant New Alternatives Policy
TLV Threshold Limit Value
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
WEEL Workplace Environmental Exposure Limit
II. How does the SNAP program work?
A. What are the statutory requirements and authority for the SNAP
program?
Section 612 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires EPA to develop a
program for evaluating alternatives to ozone-depleting substances
(ODS). EPA refers to this program as the SNAP program. The major
provisions of Section 612 are:
1. Rulemaking
Section 612(c) requires EPA to promulgate rules making it unlawful
to replace any class I (e.g., chlorofluorocarbon, halon, carbon
tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, methyl bromide, and
hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II (e.g., 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.
2. Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable Substitutes
Section 612(c) requires EPA to publish a list of the substitutes
unacceptable for specific uses and to publish a corresponding list of
acceptable alternatives for specific uses. The list of acceptable
substitutes is found at https://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/lists/
and the lists of unacceptable substitutes, substitutes acceptable
subject to use conditions and substitutes acceptable subject to
narrowed use limits are found at 40 CFR part 82 subpart G.
3. Petition Process
Section 612(d) grants the right to any person to petition EPA to
add a substance to, or delete a substance 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.
4. 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
[[Page 34019]]
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 unpublished health and safety studies on such substitutes.
5. 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.
6. 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. What are EPA's regulations implementing Section 612?
On March 18, 1994, EPA published the original rule (59 FR 13044)
establishing the process for administering the SNAP program and issued
EPA's first lists identifying acceptable and unacceptable substitutes
in the major industrial use sectors (40 CFR part 82, subpart G). These
major industrial use sectors are: 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 the largest volumes of ODS.
Section 612 of the CAA requires EPA to list as acceptable only
those substitutes that do not present a significantly greater risk to
human health and the environment as compared with other substitutes
that are currently or potentially available.
C. How do the regulations for the SNAP program work?
Under the SNAP regulations, anyone who plans to market or produce a
substitute to replace a class I or II ODS in one of the eight major
industrial use sectors must provide notice to the Agency, including
health and safety information on the substitute, at least 90 days
before introducing it into interstate commerce.\1\ This requirement
applies to the person planning to introduce the substitute into
interstate commerce, typically chemical manufacturers, but may also
include importers, formulators, equipment manufacturers, or end-users
\2\ when they are responsible for introducing a substitute into
commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As defined at 40 CFR 82.104 ``interstate commerce'' means
the distribution or transportation of any product between one State,
territory, possession or the District of Columbia, and another
State, territory, possession or the District of Columbia, or the
sale, use or manufacture of any product in more than one State,
territory, possession or District of Columbia. The entry points for
which a product is introduced into interstate commerce are the
release of a product from the facility in which the product was
manufactured, the entry into a warehouse from which the domestic
manufacturer releases the product for sale or distribution, and at
the site of United States Customs clearance.
\2\ As defined at 40 CFR 82.17 ``end-use'' means processes or
classes of specific applications within major industrial sectors
where a substitute is used to replace an ozone-depleting substance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Agency has identified four possible decision categories for
substitutes: Acceptable; acceptable subject to use conditions;
acceptable subject to narrowed use limits; and unacceptable. Use
conditions and narrowed use limits are both considered ``use
restrictions'' and are explained below. Substitutes that are deemed
acceptable with no use restrictions (no use conditions or narrowed use
limits) can be used for all applications within the relevant end-uses
within the sector. Substitutes that are acceptable subject to use
restrictions may be used only in accordance with those restrictions. It
is a violation of the CAA and EPA's regulations to replace an ODS with
a substitute listed as unacceptable, except for certain exceptions
(e.g., test marketing, research and development) specified by the
regulation.
After reviewing a substitute, the Agency may determine that a
substitute is acceptable only if certain conditions in the way that the
substitute is used are met to minimize risks to human health and the
environment. EPA describes such substitutes as ``acceptable subject to
use conditions.'' Entities that use these substitutes without meeting
the associated use conditions are in violation of section 612 of the
CAA and EPA's SNAP regulations.
For some substitutes, the Agency may permit a narrowed range of use
within an end-use or sector. For example, the Agency may limit the use
of a substitute to certain end-uses or specific applications within an
industry sector. The Agency requires a user of a narrowed use
substitute to demonstrate that no other acceptable substitutes are
available for their specific application by conducting comprehensive
studies. EPA describes these substitutes as ``acceptable subject to
narrowed use limits.'' A person using a substitute that is acceptable
subject to narrowed use limits in applications and end-uses that are
not consistent with the narrowed use limit, are using these substitutes
in an unacceptable manner and are in violation of section 612 of the
CAA and EPA's SNAP regulations.
The Agency publishes its SNAP program decisions in the Federal
Register (FR). EPA first proposes decisions concerning substitutes that
are deemed acceptable subject to use restrictions (use conditions and/
or narrowed use limits), or for substitutes deemed unacceptable, to
allow the public opportunity to comment. After consideration of the
public comments, EPA publishes a final decision.
In contrast, EPA publishes decisions that substitutes are
acceptable with no restrictions in ``notices of acceptability'' without
first issuing a proposed decision. As described in the rule initially
implementing the SNAP program (59 FR 13044), EPA does not believe that
notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures are necessary to list
alternatives that are acceptable without restrictions because such
listings neither impose any sanction nor prevent anyone from using a
substitute.
Many SNAP listings include ``comments'' or ``further information''
to provide additional information on substitutes. Since this additional
information is not part of the regulatory decision, these statements
are not binding for use of the substitute under the SNAP program.
However, regulatory requirements so listed are binding under other
regulatory programs. The ``further information'' classification does
not necessarily include all other legal obligations pertaining to the
use of the substitute. While the items listed are not legally binding
under the SNAP program, EPA encourages users of substitutes to apply
all statements in the ``comments'' or ``further information'' column in
their use of these substitutes. In many instances, the information
simply refers to sound operating practices that have already been
identified in existing industry and/or building-codes or standards.
Thus, many of the statements, if adopted, would not require the
affected user to make significant changes in existing operating
practices.
[[Page 34020]]
III. How does today's SNAP listing relate to the HCFC phaseout?
A. Why is EPA issuing a SNAP listing of alternatives to HCFC-22, HCFC-
142b, and blends thereof?
To date, EPA has listed many HCFCs as acceptable substitutes for
class I ODS thus allowing their use as substitutes for CFCs and for
halons under SNAP. As production and importation of HCFCs becomes more
limited, availability of these substances for use in current end uses
may be limited.\3\ In addition, EPA's phaseout regulations contain some
use restrictions for specific substances. In particular, per the most
recent milestone in the HCFC phaseout, as of January 1, 2010, virgin
HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b, and blends containing one or both of these
compounds, may only be used as refrigerants to service existing
equipment (minor exceptions apply: Please see details in B, below).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ A SNAP listing is not equivalent to an allocation, i.e.,
SNAP acceptability does not equate to authorization to produce or
import ODS. EPA lists companies that have been allocated production
and consumption allowances of HCFCs in 40 CFR 82.17 and 82.19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In previous SNAP notices, EPA has listed a number of acceptable
substitutes for HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and blends containing one or both
of these chemical compounds (``blends thereof''). In today's SNAP
listing, EPA is providing a comprehensive list of acceptable
substitutes for HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and blends thereof, generally those
that have been previously found acceptable as substitutes, as well as
HFO-1234ze in several additional end uses. This notice only addresses
the refrigeration and air-conditioning, foam blowing, aerosols, and
sterilants sectors. Because HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and blends thereof have
not traditionally been used to any significant extent in the fire
suppression and explosion protection, solvent cleaning, tobacco
expansion, and adhesives, coatings and inks sectors, we are not making
listing decisions for substitutes in these sectors in this notice.
B. What happened during the most recent milestone in the HCFC phaseout?
Under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone
Layer (Montreal Protocol) and the CAA, HCFCs are considered
transitional alternatives in the phaseout of CFCs and other class I
ODS. HCFCs are less potent ozone depleters than are CFCs and other
class I substances; however, they are still subject to both a global
and domestic phaseout under the Montreal Protocol and the CAA. HCFCs
will no longer be produced in or imported into the United States in
accordance with a tiered phaseout that will culminate in the United
States in 2030. Under CAA Section 610, the sale and distribution of, or
offer for sale and distribution of certain uses of HCFCs in foam
blowing and in aerosols or other pressurized dispensers is prohibited.
Further, under CAA Section 605(a) and EPA's implementing regulations,
use and introduction into interstate commerce (including sale of HCFCs)
is or will be prohibited according to the schedule available in the
rules cited below and at 40 CFR 82.16, with exceptions for: (1) HCFCs
that have been used, recovered, and recycled; (2) HCFCs completely used
up in a reaction to create other chemicals; and (3) HCFCs used in
refrigeration equipment manufactured before specified dates.
In a December 10, 1993, rule (58 FR 65018), EPA established a
`worst-first' approach for the HCFC phaseout; thus the HCFCs with
higher ODPs were scheduled for phaseout earlier than those with lower
ODPs. That rule announced an accelerated schedule for the phaseout of
HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b, such that the production and import of HCFC-22
and HCFC-142b for use in new equipment would be banned as of January 1,
2010. Since 2003 (68 FR 2819), producers or importers of HCFC-22 and
HCFC-142b have been required to hold allowances and importers of used
HCFCs have been required to obtain prior approval of import on a per
shipment basis. In a December 15, 2009, rule (74 FR 66412), EPA reduced
the number of HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b allowances to meet and exceed the
2010 reduction step under the Montreal Protocol. That rule also
clarified the use ban described in the 1993 rule and generally limited
virgin HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b to use as refrigerants in the servicing of
existing equipment. It established an exception for the use of HCFC-22
as a refrigerant in newly manufactured equipment where the components
were manufactured prior to January 1, 2010, and are specified in a pre-
2010 building permit or contract for use on a particular project, as
well as temporary exceptions for the use of HCFC-22 in medical
equipment and thermostatic expansion valves. For additional information
on the HCFC phaseout, please see the rules promulgated on December 10,
1993 (58 FR 65018), January 21, 2003 (68 FR 2819), and December 15,
2009 (74 FR 66412).
C. How does today's SNAP listing affect alternatives to HCFCs other
than HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and blends thereof?
This notice does not affect previous SNAP listings of acceptable
alternatives to HCFC-141b, which was phased out of production in 2003,
nor does it list alternatives to the remainder of HCFCs, such as HCFC-
123, HCFC-124, HCFC-225ca, and HCFC-225cb, which will be phased out on
a later schedule. EPA anticipates updating the lists of acceptable
substitutes under SNAP before the production phaseout of other HCFCs.
We note that EPA recently received a petition concerning the
listing of HFC-134a in various end uses.\4\ We are still reviewing that
petition and nothing in this notice should be construed as prejudging
EPA's response to that petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The petition is available at https://www.regulations.gov as
item EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0118-0249.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. In servicing existing refrigeration or air-conditioning equipment,
may I continue to use refrigerants, previously found acceptable by
SNAP, that contain HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and blends thereof?
HCFC-22, as well as some refrigerant blends containing HCFC-22 and/
or HCFC-142b, have previously been found acceptable under SNAP for
specified end uses. As noted above, these refrigerant blends, which
appear in Table 1, below, may continue to be used in servicing existing
equipment, i.e., equipment manufactured before January 1, 2010, in
those end uses per the regulations at 40 CFR 82.15(g)(2)(i). (EPA
defines the term ``manufactured'' for appliances at 40 CFR 82.3.)
Table 1--Summary of Refrigerants Containing HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and
Blends Thereof Previously Determined Acceptable Under SNAP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further identification
information for blend
Refrigerant blend (alternative names and
composition)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freeze 12.............................. R-134a/142b.
FreeZone............................... HCFC Blend Delta; RB-276; R-
134a/142b/lubricant.
[[Page 34021]]
GHG-HP................................. HCFC Blend Lambda; R-22/600a/
142b.
GHG-X5................................. Autofrost X5; R-22/227ea/600a/
142b.
Greencool (Gu) or China Sun G2018C..... R-1270/22/152a.
ICOR................................... R-22/142b.
NARM-502............................... HCFC Blend Iota; R-23/22/152a.
PFC-330ST, PFC-550HC, PFC-660HC, PFC- Compositions are Confidential
1100HC, PFC-1100LT, PGC-100, PGC-150. Business Information (CBI).
R-401A................................. SUVA MP 39; R-22/152a/124 (53.0/
13.0/34.0).
R-401B................................. SUVA MP 66; R-22/152a/124 (61.0/
11.0/28.0).
R-401C................................. SUVA MP 52; R-22/152a/124 (33.0/
15.0/52.0).
R-402A................................. SUVA HP80; R-125/290/22 (60.0/
2.0/38.0).
R-402B................................. SUVA HP81; R-125/290/22 (38.0/
2.0/60.0).
R-403B................................. ISCEON 69-L; R-290/22/218 (5.0/
56.0/39.0).
R-406A................................. GHG-12; GHG-X3; McMullen Oil
McCool; Monroe Air Tech
Autofrost-X3; R-22/600a/142b
(55.0/4.0/41.0).
R-408A................................. HCFC Blend Epsilon; FX-10; R-
125/143a/22 (7.0/46.0/47.0).
R-409A................................. HCFC Blend Gamma; FX-56; R-22/
124/142b (60.0/25.0/15.0).
R-411A................................. Greencool (Gu) or China Sun
G2018A; R-1270/22/152a (1.5/
87.5/11.0).
R-411B................................. Greencool (Gu) or China Sun
G2018B; R-1270/22/152a (3.0/
94.0/3.0).
R-414A................................. HCFC Blend Xi; GHG-X4; McMullen
Oil Chill-It; McCool Chill-It;
Monroe Air Tech Autofrost-X4;
R-22/124/600a/142b (51.0/28.5/
4.0/16.5).
R-414B................................. HCFC Blend Omicron; Hot Shot;
Kar Kool; R-22/124/600a/142b
(50.0/39.0/1.5/9.5).
R-420A................................. Choice R-420A; R-134a/142b
(88.0/12.0).
THR-04................................. Composition is CBI.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
While HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b may
currently continue to be used to service existing refrigeration and
air-conditioning equipment, EPA reiterates that HCFCs and HCFC blends
are not long-term substitutes for ODS. EPA is considering whether
current or potential substitutes are available that pose lower risk
than these blends.
IV. What are my existing and new options for alternative refrigerants?
In the refrigeration and air-conditioning sector, EPA has
previously found acceptable HCFC-22 and HCFC blends, including those
containing HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b. To aid end users in the refrigeration
and air-conditioning sector as they transition from use of these
refrigerants, this section lists, by end use: (1) Refrigerants that EPA
previously found acceptable as substitutes for HCFC-22 and HCFC blends,
including those containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b; and (2)
refrigerants that EPA is newly finding acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b. Where possible,
refrigerants listed as acceptable in the refrigeration and air-
conditioning section are identified by their designation per American
Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers
(ASHRAE) Standard 34.
At the end of the decision for each end use, there is narrative
comparing environmental, flammability, and toxicity information of the
newly acceptable alternatives with other currently or potentially
available alternatives. Flammable refrigerants are hazardous waste and
must be disposed of consistent with regulations under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). More environmental and health
information is also available in the original SNAP rule of March 18,
1994, the notice of acceptability in which each substitute was first
listed, or the sector table, which provides identification information,
environmental information, flammability information, and toxicity and
exposure data for each of the acceptable alternatives to HCFC-22 and
blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b, in the refrigeration and
air-conditioning sector. The sector table is available at https://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/refrigerants/.
A. Household and Light Commercial Air-Conditioning and Heat Pumps
1. EPA previously found the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and HCFC blends, including those containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b, in household and light commercial air-conditioning and heat
pumps:
R-404A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-407A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-407C (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410A (new equipment)
R-507A (new and retrofit equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in household and
light commercial air-conditioning and heat pumps:
Ammonia absorption system (new equipment)
Desiccant cooling (new equipment)
Evaporative cooling (new equipment)
HFC-134a (new equipment)
R-125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/1.9% by weight) (new and
retrofit equipment)
R-125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight)
(ICOR AT-22) \5\ (new and retrofit equipment)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Throughout the decisions, available trade names for
refrigerants without ASHRAE designations are provided in
parentheses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
R-410B (new equipment)
R-417A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-421A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-422B, R-422C, and R-422D (new and retrofit equipment)
[[Page 34022]]
R-424A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-427A (retrofit equipment)
R-434A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-437A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-438A (new and retrofit equipment)
RS-44 (2003 formulation) (new and retrofit equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in the household and light
commercial air-conditioning and heat pumps end use:
The newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing
HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b listed above in section A.2 are non-ozone-
depleting, in contrast to HCFC-22 or blends containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b. They are comparable to other acceptable substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in their lack of
risk for ozone depletion. The newly listed substitutes have 100-year
integrated (100-yr) global warming potentials (GWPs) \6\ relative to
CO2 ranging from 0 to about 3390, comparable to or lower
than that of other substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-
22 and/or HCFC-142b. For example, the GWP of R-404A is about 3920, the
GWP of R-407A is about 2110, the GWP of R-407C is about 1770, the GWP
of R-410A is about 2090, and the GWP of R-507A is about 3990. The
contribution of these refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions is
limited given the venting prohibition under section 608(c)(2) of the
CAA and EPA's implementing regulations codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1),
which limit emissions of refrigerant substitutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ These values are based upon mass-weighted averages of the
component chemicals, using the 100-yr GWPs listed in the
International Panel on Climate Change's [IPCC] Fourth Assessment
Report, Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Another
available source for GWPs is the IPCC's Second Assessment Report,
Climate Change 1995: Working Group I--The Science of Climate Change,
accessible from https://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sar/wg_I/ipcc_sar_wg_I_full_report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
None of the newly listed refrigerant substitutes contain any
components that are defined as hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) under
the CAA. Some of the newly listed substitutes contain small amounts of
components that are considered volatile organic compounds (VOCs) under
CAA regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s)) addressing the development of
state implementation plans (SIPs) to attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. None of the substitutes previously found
acceptable in IV.A.1, above, contain VOCs. However, emissions of VOCs
from refrigerant blends are expected to be small relative to the total
emissions of VOCs from all sources.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ EPA 1994. Significant New Alternatives Policy Technical
Background Document: Risk Screen on the Use of Substitutes for Class
I Ozone-depleting Substances: Refrigeration and Air Conditioning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the exception of ammonia, none of the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b is
flammable. EPA believes that flammability risks posed by ammonia can be
addressed by existing standards from the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) and ASHRAE and other safety precautions common in
the refrigeration and air-conditioning industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and
blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b are low. Most of the blends
contain HFC or hydrocarbon components with workplace exposure limits of
500 to 1,000 ppm averaged over 8-hours, such as Workplace Environmental
Exposure Limits (WEELs) from the American Industrial Hygiene
Association (AIHA) or Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) from the American
Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). Ammonia has a
Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 50 ppm over 8 hours from OSHA. EPA
anticipates that users will be able to meet the workplace exposure
limits (WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will address potential health risks
by following requirements and recommendations in the Material Safety
Data Sheets (MSDSs) and other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed substitutes (in IV.A.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a greater overall risk to human
health and the environment than the other substitutes available in the
household and light commercial air-conditioning and heat pumps end use.
B. Residential Dehumidifiers
1. EPA previously found the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and HCFC blends, including those containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b, in residential dehumidifiers:
R-404A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-407C (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410A (new equipment)
R-507A (new and retrofit equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in residential
dehumidifiers:
HFC-134a (new and retrofit equipment)
R-125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/1.9% by weight) (new and
retrofit equipment)
R-125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/1.0%/42.5%/1.5%by weight) (ICOR
AT-22) (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410B (new equipment)
R-421A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-422B, R-422C, and R-422D (new and retrofit equipment)
R-424A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-426A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-434A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-437A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-438A (new and retrofit equipment)
RS-24 (2002 formulation) (new and retrofit equipment)
RS-44 (2003 formulation) (new and retrofit equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in the residential dehumidifiers
end use:
The newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing
HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b listed above in section B.2 are non-ozone-
depleting, in contrast to HCFC-22 or blends containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b. They are comparable to other acceptable substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in their lack of
risk for ozone depletion. The newly listed substitutes have GWPs
ranging from 0 to about 3390, comparable to or lower than that of other
substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b.
For example, the GWP of R-404A is about 3920, the GWP of R-407C is
about 1770, the GWP of R-410A is about 2090, and the GWP of R-507A is
about 3990. The contribution of these refrigerants to greenhouse gas
emissions is limited given the venting prohibition under section
608(c)(2) of the CAA and EPA's implementing regulations codified at 40
CFR 82.154(a)(1), which limit emissions of refrigerant substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant substitutes contain any
components that are defined as HAPs under the CAA. Some of the newly
listed substitutes contain small amounts of components that are
considered VOCs under CAA regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s)) addressing
the development of SIPs to attain and maintain the national ambient air
quality standards. None of the substitutes previously found acceptable
in IV.B.1, above, contain VOCs. However, emissions of VOCs
[[Page 34023]]
from refrigerant blends are expected to be small relative to the total
emissions of VOCs from all sources.
With the exception of ammonia, none of the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b is
flammable. EPA believes that the flammability risks posed by ammonia
can be addressed by existing standards from OSHA and ASHRAE and other
safety precautions common in the refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and
blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b are low. Most of the blends
contain HFC or hydrocarbon components with workplace exposure limits of
500 to 1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such as WEELs from the AIHA or
TLVs from the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50 ppm over 8 hours from
OSHA. EPA anticipates that users will be able to meet the workplace
exposure limits (WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will address potential
health risks by following requirements and recommendations in the MSDSs
and other safety precautions common in the refrigeration and air-
conditioning industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed substitutes (in IV.B.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a greater overall risk to human
health and the environment than the other substitutes available in the
residential dehumidifiers end use.
C. Reciprocating and Screw Chillers
1. EPA previously found the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and HCFC blends, including those containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b, in reciprocating and screw chillers:
R-404A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-407C (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410A (new equipment)
R-507A (new and retrofit equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in reciprocating
and screw chillers:
Ammonia absorption chillers or vapor compression with
secondary loop (new equipment)
Desiccant cooling (new equipment)
Evaporative cooling (new equipment)
HFC-134a (new and retrofit equipment)
HFC-227ea (new equipment)
R-125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/1.9% by weight) (new and
retrofit equipment)
R-125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight)
(ICOR AT-22) (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410B (new equipment)
R-417A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-421A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-422B, R-422C, and R-422D (new and retrofit equipment)
R-424A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-427A (retrofit equipment)
R-434A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-438A (new and retrofit equipment)
RS-44 (2003 formulation) (new and retrofit equipment)
SP34E (new and retrofit equipment)
Stirling cycle (new equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in the reciprocating and screw
chillers end use:
The newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing
HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b listed above in section C.2 are non-ozone-
depleting, in contrast to HCFC-22 or blends containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b. They are comparable to other acceptable substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in their lack of
risk for ozone depletion. The newly listed substitutes have GWPs
ranging from 0 to about 3390, comparable to or lower than that of other
substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b.
For example, the GWP of R-404A is about 3920, the GWP of R-407C is
about 1770, the GWP of R-410A is about 2090, and the GWP of R-507A is
about 3990. The contribution of these refrigerants to greenhouse gas
emissions is limited given the venting prohibition under section
608(c)(2) of the CAA and EPA's implementing regulations codified at 40
CFR 82.154(a)(1), which limit emissions of refrigerant substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant substitutes contain any
components that are defined as HAPs under the CAA. Some of the newly
listed substitutes contain small amounts of components that are
considered VOCs under CAA regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s)) addressing
the development of SIPs to attain and maintain the national ambient air
quality standards. None of the substitutes previously found acceptable
in IV.C.1, above, contain VOCs. However, emissions of VOCs from
refrigerant blends are expected to be small relative to the total
emissions of VOCs from all sources.
With the exception of ammonia, none of the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b is
flammable. EPA believes that the flammability risks posed by ammonia
can be addressed by existing standards from OSHA and ASHRAE and other
safety precautions common in the refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and
blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b are low. Most of the blends
contain HFC or hydrocarbon components with workplace exposure limits of
500 to 1,000 ppm averaged over 8 hours, such as WEELs from the AIHA or
TLVs from the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50 ppm over 8 hours from
OSHA. EPA anticipates that users will be able to meet the workplace
exposure limits (WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will address potential
health risks by following requirements and recommendations in the MSDSs
and other safety precautions common in the refrigeration and air-
conditioning industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed substitutes (in IV.C.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a greater overall risk to human
health and the environment than the other substitutes available in the
reciprocating and screw chillers end use.
D. Centrifugal Chillers
1. EPA previously found the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and HCFC blends, including those containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b, in centrifugal chillers:
R-404A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-407C (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410A (new equipment)
R-507A (new and retrofit equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in centrifugal
chillers:
Ammonia absorption chillers or vapor compression with
secondary loop (new equipment)
Desiccant cooling (new equipment)
Evaporative cooling (new equipment)
HFC-134a (new and retrofit equipment)
HFC-227ea (new equipment)
HFC-245fa (new and retrofit equipment)
R-125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/1.9% by weight) (new and
retrofit equipment)
[[Page 34024]]
R-125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight)
(ICOR AT-22) (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410B (new equipment)
R-417A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-421A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-422B, R-422C, and R-422D (new and retrofit equipment)
R-423A (ISCEON 39TC) (new and retrofit equipment)
R-424A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-434A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-438A (new and retrofit equipment)
RS-44 (2003 formulation) (new and retrofit equipment)
Stirling cycle (new equipment)
Water/lithium bromide (new equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in the centrifugal chillers end
use:
The newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing
HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b listed above in section D.2 are non-ozone-
depleting, in contrast to HCFC-22 or blends containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b. They are comparable to other acceptable substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in their lack of
risk for ozone depletion. The newly listed substitutes have GWPs
ranging from 0 to about 3390, comparable to or lower than that of other
substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b.
For example, the GWP of R-404A is about 3920, the GWP of R-407C is
about 1770, the GWP of R-410A is about 2090, and the GWP of R-507A is
about 3990. The contribution of these refrigerants to greenhouse gas
emissions is limited given the venting prohibition under section
608(c)(2) of the CAA and EPA's implementing regulations codified at 40
CFR 82.154(a)(1), which limit emissions of refrigerant substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant substitutes contain any
components that are defined as HAPs under the CAA. Some of the newly
listed substitutes contain small amounts of components that are
considered VOCs under CAA regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s)) addressing
the development of SIPs to attain and maintain the national ambient air
quality standards. None of the substitutes previously found acceptable
in IV.D.1, above, contain VOCs. However, emissions of VOCs from
refrigerant blends are expected to be small relative to the total
emissions of VOCs from all sources.
With the exception of ammonia, none of the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b is
flammable. EPA believes that the flammability risks posed by ammonia
can be addressed by existing standards from OSHA and ASHRAE and other
safety precautions common in the refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and
blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b are low. Most of the blends
contain HFC or hydrocarbon components with workplace exposure limits of
500 to 1,000 ppm averaged over 8-hours, such as WEELs from the AIHA or
TLVs from the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50 ppm over 8 hours from
OSHA. HFC-245fa exhibits moderate to low toxicity and has an 8-hour
WEEL of 300 ppm. Water/lithium bromide absorption exhibits low
toxicity. Lithium bromide (LiBr) has a 24-hour/day, 90 day Continuous
Exposure Guidance Level (CEGL) value of 1 mg/m\3\ from the National
Research Council (NRC). Based on this CEGL, EPA recommends an 8-hour
preliminary workplace exposure limit of 3 mg/m\3\.\8\ EPA anticipates
that users will be able to meet the workplace exposure limits (WEELs,
TLVs, PELs and CEGL) and will address potential health risks by
following requirements and recommendations in the MSDSs and other
safety precautions common in the refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry. Therefore, we find the newly listed substitutes (in IV.D.2,
above) acceptable because they do not pose a greater overall risk to
human health and the environment than the other substitutes available
in the centrifugal chillers end use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ EPA's analysis of the NRC CEGL and rationale for preliminary
workplace exposure limit are available at https://www.regulations.gov
as item EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0118-0243 EPA anticipates that lithium
bromide powder will be used consistent with the personal protective
equipment recommendations specified by OSHA (https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owastand.display_standard_group?p_toc_level=1&p_part_number=1910#1910_Subpart_I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Industrial Process Air-Conditioning
1. EPA previously found the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and HCFC blends, including those containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b, in industrial process air-conditioning:
R-404A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-407C (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410A (new equipment)
R-507A (new and retrofit equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in industrial
process air-conditioning:
Ammonia vapor compression or absorption systems (new
equipment)
Desiccant cooling (new equipment)
Evaporative cooling (new equipment)
HFC-134a (new and retrofit equipment)
R-125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/1.9% by weight) (new and
retrofit equipment)
R-125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight)
(ICOR AT-22) (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410B (new equipment)
R-417A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-421A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-422B, R-422C, and R-422D (new and retrofit equipment)
R-423A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-424A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-426A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-427A (retrofit equipment)
R-434A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-438A (new and retrofit equipment)
RS-24 (2002 formulation) (new and retrofit equipment)
RS-44 (2003 formulation) (new and retrofit equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in the industrial process air-
conditioning end use:
The newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing
HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b listed above in section E.2 are non-ozone-
depleting, in contrast to HCFC-22 or blends containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b. They are comparable to other acceptable substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in their lack of
risk for ozone depletion. The newly listed substitutes have GWPs
ranging from 0 to about 3390, comparable to or lower than that of other
substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b.
For example, the GWP of R-404A is about 3920, the GWP of R-407C is
about 1770, the GWP of R-410A is about 2090, and the GWP of R-507A is
about 3990. The contribution of these refrigerants to greenhouse gas
emissions is limited given the venting prohibition under section
608(c)(2) of the CAA and EPA's implementing regulations codified at 40
CFR 82.154(a)(1), which limit emissions of refrigerant substitutes.
[[Page 34025]]
None of the newly listed refrigerant substitutes contain any
components that are defined as HAPs under the CAA. Some of the newly
listed substitutes contain small amounts of components that are
considered VOCs under CAA regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s)) addressing
the development of SIPs to attain and maintain the national ambient air
quality standards. None of the substitutes previously found acceptable
in IV.E.1, above, contain VOCs. However, emissions of VOCs from
refrigerant blends are expected to be small relative to the total
emissions of VOCs from all sources.
With the exception of ammonia, none of the newly listed substitutes
for HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b is
flammable. EPA believes that the flammability risks posed by ammonia
can be addressed by existing standards from OSHA and ASHRAE and other
safety precautions common in the refrigeration and air-conditioning
industry.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and
blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b are low. Most of the blends
contain HFC or hydrocarbon components with workplace exposure limits of
500 to 1,000 ppm averaged over 8-hours, such as WEELs from the AIHA or
TLVs from the ACGIH. Ammonia has a PEL of 50 ppm over 8 hours from
OSHA. EPA anticipates that users will be able to meet the workplace
exposure limits (WEELs, TLVs, and PELs) and will address potential
health risks by following requirements and recommendations in the MSDSs
and other safety precautions common in the refrigeration and air-
conditioning industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed substitutes (in IV.E.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a greater overall risk to human
health and the environment than the other substitutes available in the
industrial process air-conditioning end use.
F. Industrial Process Refrigeration
1. EPA previously found the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and HCFC blends, including those containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b, in industrial process refrigeration:
R-404A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-407C (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410A (new equipment)
R-422A (ISCEON 79) (new and retrofit equipment)
R-507A (new and retrofit equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in industrial
process refrigeration:
Ammonia vapor compression or absorption-systems (new
equipment)
Desiccant cooling (new equipment)
Evaporative cooling (new equipment)
HC Blend A (OZ-12) (new and retrofit equipment)
HC Blend B (original formulation of HC-12a) (new and
retrofit equipment)
HFC-134a (new and retrofit equipment)
HFC-227ea (new equipment)
HFE-7000 \9\ (new and retrofit equipment)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3-methoxypropane; HFE-347mcc3; CAS
ID 375-03-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
HFE-7100 \10\ and HFE-7200 \11\ as secondary heat transfer
fluid in not-in-kind systems (new equipment)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Methoxynonafluorobutane, iso and normal; HFE-449s1; CAS ID
163702-07-6.
\11\ Ethoxynonafluorobutane, iso and normal; HFE-569sf2; CAS ID
163702-05-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitrogen direct gas expansion (new equipment)
R-125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/1.9% by weight) (new and
retrofit equipment)
R-125/290/134a/600a (55.0%/1.0%/42.5%/1.5% by weight)
(ICOR AT-22) (new and retrofit equipment)
R-290 (Propane) (new and retrofit equipment)
R-407A and R-407B (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410B (new equipment)
R-417A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-421A and R-421B (new and retrofit equipment)
R-422B, R-422C, and R-422D (new and retrofit equipment)
R-423A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-424A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-426A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-428A (new equipment)
R-434A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-438A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-600 (Butane) (new and retrofit equipment)
R-744 (Carbon dioxide, CO2) (new equipment)
R-1270 (Propylene) (new and retrofit equipment)
RS-24 (2002 formulation) (new and retrofit equipment)
RS-44 (2003 formulation) (new and retrofit equipment)
Stirling cycle (new equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in the industrial process
refrigeration end use:
The newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing
HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b listed above in section F.2 are non-ozone-
depleting, in contrast to HCFC-22 or blends containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b. They are comparable to other acceptable substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in their lack of
risk for ozone depletion. The newly listed substitutes have GWPs
ranging from 0 to about 3610, comparable to or lower than that of other
substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b.
The hydrocarbon substitutes that we are finding acceptable are at the
low end of this range. Specifically, R-290, R-600, R-1270, and HC
Blends A and B each have a GWP of about 5 or less. This in contrast
with the GWPs of the previously listed substitutes, including the GWP
of R-404A which is about 3920, the GWP of R-407C which is about 1770,
the GWP of R-410A which is about 2090, the GWP of R-422A which is about
3140, and the GWP of R-507A which is about 3990. The contribution of
these refrigerants to greenhouse gas emissions is limited given the
venting prohibition under section 608(c)(2) of the CAA and EPA's
implementing regulations codified at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), which limit
emissions of refrigerant substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant substitutes contain any
components that are defined as HAPs under the CAA. The hydrocarbons R-
290, R-600, and R-1270, as well as all components of HC Blends A and B,
are considered VOCs under CAA regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s))
addressing the development of SIPs to attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards. Some of the newly listed substitutes
contain small amounts of components that are considered VOCs under
these regulations. In comparison, one of the substitutes previously
found acceptable in IV.F.1, above, (R-422A) contains a VOC component.
Emissions of VOCs from refrigerant blends are expected to be small
relative to the total emissions of VOCs from all sources.
Ammonia has an ASHRAE class 2 flammability classification or
moderate flammability risk. EPA believes that the moderate flammability
risks of ammonia can be addressed by existing standards from OSHA and
ASHRAE and other safety precautions common in the refrigeration and
air-conditioning industry. Each of the newly listed hydrocarbons and
hydrocarbon blends
[[Page 34026]]
has an ASHRAE class 3 flammability classification. As early as the 1994
original SNAP rule, EPA noted that hydrocarbons were used in industrial
process refrigeration, including specialized industrial applications
such as oil refineries and chemical plants. EPA noted that these users
were familiar with hydrocarbons, had safety procedures in place, and
that their facilities were designed to comply with the safety standards
required for managing flammable chemicals.
The toxicity risks of the newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and
blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b are low when used according
to standard practices for industrial processes and for industrial
process refrigeration. Most of the blends contain HFC or hydrocarbon
components with workplace exposure limits of 500 to 1,000 ppm averaged
over 8 hours, such as WEELs from the AIHA or TLVs from the ACGIH.
Ammonia has a PEL of 50 ppm over 8 hours from OSHA. HFE-7200 has an 8-
hour manufacturer acceptable exposure limit (AEL) of 200 ppm and HFE-
7000 has an 8-hour manufacturer AEL of 75 ppm. Within the industrial
process refrigeration end use, such as at chemical or other industrial
plants, proper exposure controls and ventilation are generally
available as well as established protocols for handling potentially
hazardous materials, and therefore overall occupational risk is
mitigated. EPA anticipates that users will be able to meet the
workplace exposure limits (WEELs, TLVs, PELs, and manufacturer AELs)
and will address potential health risks by following requirements and
recommendations in the MSDSs and other safety precautions common in the
refrigeration and air-conditioning industry.
Therefore, we find the newly listed substitutes (in IV.F.2, above)
acceptable because they do not pose a greater overall risk to human
health and the environment than the other substitutes available in the
industrial process refrigeration end use.
G. Bus and Passenger Train Air-Conditioning
The bus and passenger train air-conditioning end use previously had
substitutes listed as acceptable for HCFC-22 itself, but not as
substitutes for blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b; this is
reflected in category (1), below.
1. EPA previously found the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 in bus and passenger train air-conditioning:
HFC-134a (new and retrofit equipment)
R-125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/1.9% by weight) (new and
retrofit equipment)
R-407C (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410A (new equipment)
R-417A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-422B and R-422D (new and retrofit equipment)
R-424A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-427A (retrofit equipment)
R-434A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-438A (new and retrofit equipment)
2. EPA is newly finding the following acceptable as substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in bus and
passenger train air-conditioning:
Evaporative cooling (new equipment)
HFC-134a (new and retrofit equipment)
R-125/134a/600a (28.1%/70.0%/1.9% by weight) (new and
retrofit equipment)
R-407C (new and retrofit equipment)
R-410A (new equipment)
R-417A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-422B and R-422D (new and retrofit equipment)
R-424A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-426A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-427A (retrofit equipment)
R-434A (new and retrofit equipment)
R-438A (new and retrofit equipment)
RS-24 (2002 formulation) (new and retrofit equipment)
SP34E (new and retrofit equipment)
Stirling cycle (new equipment)
Comparison to other refrigerants in the bus and passenger train
air-conditioning end use:
The newly listed substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing
HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b listed above in section G.1 are non-ozone-
depleting, in contrast to HCFC-22 or blends containing HCFC-22 and/or
HCFC-142b. They are comparable to other acceptable substitutes for
HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b in their lack of
risk for ozone depletion. The newly listed substitutes have GWPs
ranging from 0 to about 3250, comparable to or lower than that of other
substitutes for HCFC-22 and blends containing HCFC-22 and/or HCFC-142b.
For example, the GWP of R-404A is about 3920 and the GWP of R-507A is
about 3990. The contribution of these refrigerants to greenhouse gas
emissions is limited given the venting prohibition under section
608(c)(2) of the CAA and EPA's implementing regulations codified at 40
CFR 82.154(a)(1), which limit emissions of refrigerant substitutes.
None of the newly listed refrigerant substitutes contain any
components that are defined as HAPs under the CAA. Some of the newly
listed substitutes contain small amounts of components that are
considered VOCs under CAA regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s)) addressing
the development of SIPs to attain and maintain the national ambient air
qu