Final

— July 2, 2015 1 

## Significant New Alternatives Policy Program

Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Sector

Risk Screen on Substitute s in Retail Food Refrigeration , Vending Machines, and Commercial Ice Machines

Substitute: R

- 513A (Opteon® XP10)

This risk screen does not contain Clean Air Act (CAA) Confidential Business Information (CBI) and, therefore, may be disclosed to the public.



### 1. INTRODUCTION

Ozone

- depleting substances (ODS) are being phased out of production in response to a series of diplomatic and legislative efforts that have taken place over the past two decades, including the Montreal Protocol and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA). The U.S. Environmental Prote ction Agency (EPA), as authorized by Section 612 of the CAAA, administers the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program, which identifies acceptable and unacceptable substitutes for ODS in specific end

- uses based on assessment of their health and environmental impacts. EPA’s decision on the acceptability of a substitute is based on the findings of a screening assessment of potential human health and environmental risks posed by the substitute in specific applications. EPA has already screened a large number of substitutes in many end

- use applications within all of the major ODS

using sectors including: refrigeration and air conditioning, solvent cleaning, foam blowing, aerosols, fire suppression, adhesives, coatings and inks, and sterilization. T he results of these risk screens are presented in a series of Background Documents that are available in EPA's docket. The purpose of this risk screen is to supplement EPA’s Background Document on the refrigeration and air conditioning sector (EPA 1994) (h ereinafter referred to as the Background Document). This risk screen evaluates the potential use of R

- 513A (also known as Opteon® XP10) as a substitute in the retail food refrigeration (specifically, convenience stores, direct racks, indirect racks, remote condensing units, and stand

- alone display cases) , vending machines, and commercial ice machines end

- uses. Table 1 presents the composition of the proposed substitute.

Table 1

. Composition of R

- 513A and Potential Impurities

Constituent Chemical Formula CAS Number Concentration (Weight Percent) 2,3,3,3

- Tetrafluoropropene (HFO

- 1234yf) CH 2 CFCF 3 754

- 12

- 1 ≤ 56 %
1,1,1,2

- Tetrafluoroethane (HFC

- 134a) CF 3 CH 2 F 811

- 97

- 2 ≤ 44 % Potential Impurities

Section 2 summarizes the results of the risk screen for the proposed substitute blend listed in Table 1 . The remainder of the risk screen is organized into the following sections:

• Section 3 : Atmospheric Assessment

• Section 4 : Volatile Organic Compound Assessment

• Section 5 : Discussion of End

- Use Scenario Modeled

• Section 6 : Potential Health Effects

• Section 7 : Flammability Assessment

• Section 8 : Asphyxiation AssessmentFinal

— July 2, 2015 2 • Section 9 : End

- Use Exposure Assessment

• Section 10 : Occupational Exposure Assessment

• Section 11 : General Population Exposure Assessment

• Section 12 : References



### 2. SUMMARY OF RESULTS

R

- 513A is recommended for SNAP approval for the retail food refrigeration
, vending machines, and commercial ice machine end

- uses. EPA's risk screen indicates that the use of the proposed substitute will be less harmful to the atmosphere than the continued use of ODS and other commonly used refri gerants, as it is less harmful to the ozone layer, has lower climate impact, and a shorter atmospheric lifetime. The components of R

- 513A are not subject to volatile organic compound (VOC) regulations under the CAA (40 CFR 51.100(s)), so environmental impact from the release of these substances is not a concern. In addition, because R

- 513A is considered to be nonflammable , the proposed substitute is not expected to present a flammability concern. It is expected that the manufacturer’s safety data sheet ( SDS) for R

- 513A and good manufacturin g practices will be adhered to during handling or use of R

- 513 A. Additionally, it is expected that the appropria te safety and personal protective equipment (PPE) (e.g., protective gloves, tightly sealed goggles, protective work clothing, and suitable respiratory protection in case of leakage or insufficient ventilation) consistent with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidelines will be used during manufacture, installation and servicing, and disposal of retail food refrigeration systems, vending machines, and commercial ice machines using R

- 513A . Because retail food refrigeration systems, vending machines, and commercial ice machines are to be installed in locations with adequate space and/or ventilation in accordance with EPA recommendations and the equipment maintenance manuals for R

- 513A in each end

- use, significant toxicity risk to consumers i s also unlikely. Additional safeguards, including specified refrigerant concentration limits (RCL) of R

- 513A components, are also provided by adherence to industry standards including American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air

- Conditioning Enginee rs (ASHRAE) Standards 15, 1 34, 2 and 62. 3



### 3. ATMOSPHERIC ASSESSMENT This section presents an assessment of the potential risks to atmospheric integrity posed by the use of R

513A in retail food refrigeration
, vending machines, and commercial ice machines. The ozone depletion potential (ODP), global warming potential (GWP), and atmospheric lifetime (ALT) of the proposed substitute are presented in Table 2

. The proposed substitute is substantially less harmful to the ozone layer, has lower climate impact, and a shorter ALT when compared to CFC

- 12, R

- 502, and HCFC

- 22. In addition, R

- 513A also has lower climate impact and a shorter ALT than those predicted for other substitutes examined in the Background Document as well as commonly utilized refrigerants in commercial refrigeration , HFC

- 134a, R

- 404A, R

507A, and R

- 407C. Thus, EPA believes that the use of R

- 513A would result in substantially less harm to the clim ate and ozone layer than the continued use of ODS and other commonly used refrigerant

.

1 Safety Standard for Refrigeration Systems ASHRAE Standard 15 establishes safeguards for life, limb, health, and property and prescribes safety requirements.
2 Designation and Safety Classification of Refrigerants ASHRAE Standard 34 establishes a uniform system for assigning reference numbers, safety classifications, and refrigerant concentration limits to refrigerants. Safety classifications based on toxicity and flammability data are included.
3 Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality ASHRAE Standard 62 establishes minimum ventilation rates and other measures intended to provide indoor air quality that is acceptable to human occupants and that minimizes adverse health effects.Final

— July 2, 2015 3 Table 2 . Atmospheric Impacts of R

- 513A Components Compared to Other Refrigerants Used in Commercial Refrigeration
Refrigerant Ozone Depleting Potential (ODP) a Global Warming Potential (GWP) b Atmospheric Lifetime in Years (ALT)
R

- 513A 0 631 NA c Individual Components HFC

- 134a 0 1,430 14 b HFO

- 1234yf 0 4 d 11 days d CFC

- 12 0.82 10,900 100 b R

- 502 e 0.2 4,650 NA f HCFC

- 22 0.13 1,810 12 a R

- 404A g 0 3,922 NA h R

- 507A i 0 3,985 NA j R

- 407C k 0 1,774 NA l

a WMO 2010 Scientific Assessment Report (2011)
b IPCC 4 th Assessment Report (Forster et al. 2007)

c Atmospheric lifetimes are not given for blends, because the components separate in the atmosphere. The ALT for the individual components are listed in the table.
d Papadimitriou et al. ( 2007 )

e R

- 502 is a blend consisting of HCFC

- 22 (49%) and CFC

- 115 (51%).
f Atmospheric lifetimes are not given for blends, because the components separate in the atmosphere. The ALT for HCFC

- 22 is 12 years and the ALT for CFC

- 115 is 1,700 years (IPCC 4 th Assessmen t Report [Forster et al. 2007]).

g R

- 404A is a blend consisting of HFC

- 143a (52%), HFC

- 125 (44%) and HFC

- 134a (4%).

h Atmospheric lifetimes are not given for blends, because the components separate in the atmosphere. The ALT for HFC

- 143a is 52 years, the ALT for HFC

- 125 is 29 years, and the ALT for HFC

- 134a is 14 years (IPCC 4 th Assessment Report [Forster et al. 2007]).
i R

- 507A is a blend consisting of HFC

- 125 (50%) and HFC

- 143a (50%). j Atmospheric lifetimes are not given for blends, because the componen ts separate in the atmosphere. The ALT for HFC

- 125 is 29 years and ALT for HFC

- 143a is 52 years (IPCC 4 th Assessment Report [Forster et al. 2007]).
k R

- 407C is a blend consisting of HFC

- 32 (29%), HFC

- 125 (25%) and HFC

- 134a (52%).
l Atmospheric lifetimes ar e not given for blends, because the components separate in the atmosphere. The ALT for HFC

- 32 is 4.9 years, the ALT for HFC

- 125 is 29 years, and the ALT for HFC

- 134a is 14 years (IPCC 4 th Assessment Report [Forster et al. 2007]).



### 4. VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOU ND ASSESSMENT The components of R

- 513A, HFC

- 134a and HFO

- 1234yf, are exempt from the definition of VOCs under CAA regulations (40 CFR 51.100(s)). Therefore, VOC impacts from the release of R

- 513A are not a

concern.



### 5. DISCUSSION OF END

- USE SCENARIOS MODELED

R

- 513A has been proposed for use in retail food refrigeration, vending machines, and commercial ice machines

. As provided by the submitter, retail food refrigeration equipment will have charge sizes ranging from 0.3 kg for a typical stand

- alone, se lf

- contained display case to a maximum charge size of 800 kg for a direct rack system. Vending machines are expected to have a typical charge size of 0.3 kg and a maximum charge size of 0.6 kg. Commercial ice machines are anticipated to have a typical char ge size of 3 kg and a maximum charge size of 3 0 kg. The intended maximum and typical charge sizes for R

- 513A in all of the proposed appli cations are listed in Table 3.Final

— July 2, 2015 4 Table 3 . Typical and Maximum Charge Sizes for Various R

- 5 13A End

- Uses and Applications

End

- Use Application Typical Charge Size (kg) Maximum Charge Size (kg)

Retail food refrigeration Direct rack 400 8 00 Condensing unit 4 25 Stand

- alone

, self

- contained display case 0.3 1.5 Vending machines Vending machines 0.3 0.6

Commercial ice machines Commercial ice machines 3 30
Bolded applications and charge sizes represent those modeled in this risk screen. Condensing units were not modeled in this risk screen because this application is assumed to fall within the range of the charge sizes and room sizes identified for direct rack systems and stand

- alone units. To represent a reasonable worst

- case scenario for the retail food refrigeration end

- use, it is assumed that a catastrophic leak of refrigerant occurs at the end

- use for a direct rack system (i.e., grocery supermarket) and a stand

- alone beverage cooler (i.e., convenience store)

. The analysis considers the maximum charge size provided by the submitter for each scenario. Because retail refrigeration equipm ent can be installed in a wide range of locations with varying room volumes, the analysis in this risk screen conservatively assumes that the direct rack system is located in a grocery supermarket and the beverage cooler is located in a convenience store

. The grocery supermarket is assumed to have an effective volume of 24,200 m 3 (855,000 ft 3 ) with an effective floor area of 4,400 m 2 (i.e., excluding the space filled by the rack system, shelving, display cases, etc.) and a height of 5.5 meters (Armines 2008 ). Based on minimum convenience store size s located in California (Armines 2008), t he convenience store is assumed to have an effective volume of 244 m 3 (8,620 ft 3 ) with an effective floor area of 10 0 m 2 (i.e., excluding the space filled by the beverage co oler, shelving, display cases, etc.) and a height of 2.4 4 meters. For the vending machine end

- use, it is assumed that the vending machine is located in the minimum room size, an enclosed alcove of a commercial building that can be isolated by a door. The alcove is assumed to have an effective floor area of 6.15 m 2 (i.e., excluding the space filled by the vending machine, furniture, boxes, etc.) and a height of 2.4 4 meters, equivalent to a volume of 15 m 3 (530 ft 3 ).
For the commercial ice machine end

- use, it is assumed that the ice machine is located in a seafood processing facility with an assumed effective volume of 5,700 m 3 ( 201,300 ft 3 ), with an effective floor area of 1,040 m 2 (i.e., excluding the space filled by the ice machine , shelving, processing equipment , etc.) and a height of 5.5 meters.
Under these worst

- case scenarios, the full charge of each unit is assumed to be emitted into the grocery supermarket, convenience store, enclosed alcove, or seafood process ing facility with 8, 1, 0.5
, and 15 air changes per hour (ACH), 4
, 5 respectively over the course of two time durations: 1) one minute, which represents a catastrophic release of refrigerant due to a puncture or other major damage to the refrigeration system, and 2) fifteen minutes, which represents the accidental release of refrigerant due to a non

catastrophic leak in the system (e.g., valve failure). The one

- minute time duration is most appropriate for flammable refrigerants and presents a less relev ant scenario for R

- 513A , which is nonflammable. Therefore, while both scenarios are evaluated in this risk screen for consistency purposes, the scenario which analyzes a release of refrigerant over a 15

- minute time duration more accurately represents a

4 The air exchange rate s for a grocery supermarket, convenience store, and enclosed alcove are derived from the requirements in ANSI/AS HRAE Standard 62.1

- 2007, Table 6.1 (ANSI/ASHRAE 2007). Ventilation requirements (presented as cubic feet per minute per square foot of ventilated space in the standard) were converted to air exchanges per hour using the assumed room s ize for the scenario.
5 The air exchange rates for a seafood processing facility are derived from the suggested sufficient air changes per hour in en closed processing and food handling areas of between 5 and 25 air changes per hour (Lelieveld, H.L.M. 2014).Final

— July 2, 2015 5 rea sonable worst

- case scenario for R

- 513A in retail food refrigeration, vending machines, and commercial ice machines. A vertical concentration gradient is also assumed since R

- 513A is denser than air (the specific gravities of both HFC

- 134a and HFO

- 1234 yf a re greater than 1) and will settle in higher concentrations closer to the ground. In order to simulate the vertical concentration gradient, it is assumed that 95 percent of the leaked refrigerant mixes evenly into the bottom 0.4 meter s of the room, and th e rest of the refrigerant mixes evenly in the remaining volume (Kataoka 2000). Table 4 details the end

- use modeling assumptions used throughout the risk screen (i.e., in Sections 8 and 9 ).
Table 4. End

- Use Scenario Model Assumptions

Parameter Assumptions Large Retail Food Small Retail Food Vending Machine Ice Machine Refrigeration Unit Direct Rack System Stand

- Alone Beverage

Cooler Vending Machine Commercial Ice Machine

Room Grocery Supermarket Convenience Store Enclosed Alcove Seafood Processing Facility Maximum Charge Size (kg) 800 1.5 0.6 3 0 Length of Release (minutes) 1 ; 15 1; 15 1; 15 1; 15 Room Size (volume

- m 3 ) 24,200 a 244 b 15 5,700 c Room Ventilation (air changes per hour) 8 1 0.5 15
Vertical Concentration Gradient Yes Yes Yes Yes

a The average grocery supermarket sales area size found during a California survey (Armines 2008)

– 4,400 m 2

– was used for this scenario and a 5.5 m (18

- foot) ceiling was assumed.
b Specific information was not available regarding which types of stores woul d utilize beverage cases or commercial ice machines, so a small store (i.e., a convenience store) was used in the model. The minimum convenience store size found during a California survey (Armines 2008)

– 100 m 2 (1,076 ft 2 )

– wa s used for this scenario a nd a 2.4 4

- meter (8 ft ) ceiling was assumed.

c The average size of the seafood processing facility is assumed to be consistent with typical factory size used in occupationa l exposure modeling.

EPA recognizes that direct rack systems, beverage coolers, other r etail food refrigeration units , vending machines, and commercial ice machines may be placed in a variety of locations, including retail stores, manufacturing establishments, and other spaces with differing sizes and ventilation rates. When units are installed in smaller, enclosed spaces, there is a higher risk for asphyxiation or exposure concerns. To address this variability in room volumes and charge sizes for installed retail food equipment , vending machines, and commercial ice machines, this risk screen incorporates threshold analyses in addition to the
worst

- case scenario modeling. The threshold analyses are performed in order to determine the room size and charge size requirements that ensure that the use of R

- 513A in retail food refrigeration
, vending machines, and commercial ice machines does not present risk to end

- users or servicing technicians.



### 6. POTENTIAL HEALTH EFFECTS To assess potential health risks from exposure to the proposed substitute in retail food refrigeration and commercial ice machines, EPA identified the relevant toxicity threshold values for comparison to modeled exposure concentrations for different scenarios

. According to ASHRAE Standard 34

- 2013, R

- 513A is listed under safety group A1 with a RCL of 72,000 ppm (ASHRAE 2015) . ASHRAE 34 RCLs are intended to reduce the risks of acute toxicity, asphyxiation, and flammability hazards in normally occupied, enclosed spaces during refrigerant use and protect end

- users from the potential dangers of a catastrophic leak from a refriger ation unit (ASHRAE 2010b). ASHRAE Standard 15 implements the aforementioned standard, requiring that “the concentration of refrigerant in an enclosed space following a complete discharge of a high

- probability system shall not exceed the RCL” (ASHRAE 2010a) . As such, this risk screen references the proposed RCL for R

- 513A in addition to the hypoxia no observed adverseFinal

— July 2, 2015 6 effect level (NOAEL) and exposure limits, as an additional, conservative limit to ensure that significant asphyxiation and end

- use exposure ri sk s, respectively, do not occur. For the occupational exposure analysis, potential risks from chronic and acute worker exposure were evaluated by comparing exposure concentrations to available occupational exposure limits. Potential risks of chronic worke r exposure were evaluated using workplace guidance levels (WGLs) , such as Workplace Environmental Exposure Levels (WEELs)

. Risks from potential short

- term consumer exposures were evaluated by comparing exposure concentrations to emergency guidance levels ( EGLs). In the absence of an established short

- term exposure limit (STEL), acute exposure guideline level (AEGL), or emergency response planning guideline (ERPG) for R

- 513A , potential short

- term, end

- use exposures were evaluated on a component basis (i.e., HFC

- 134a and HFO

- 1234yf). Table 5 lists the relevant toxicity limits for R

513A and its components and is followed by Table 6, which provides an explanation of each toxicity limit. EPA’s approach for identifying or developing these values is discussed in C hapter 3 of the Background Document.

Table 5. Exposure Limits of R

- 513A Components

R

- 513A Component WGL (Long

- term Exposure)

ppm EGL (Short

- term Exposure) ppm Refrigerant Concentration Limit (RCL) ppm
R

- 513A 653 (8

- hour AEL) 1,960 (15

- min STEL) a 72,000 Individual Components

HFC

- 134a 1,000 (8

- hour WEEL) 8,000 (10

- min AEGL

- 1) 8,000 (30

- min AEGL

- 1) 50,000

HFO

- 1234yf 5 00 (8

- hour WEEL) 1,500 (15

- min STEL) b 100,000 c

a Neither the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists ( ACGIH ) nor the American Industrial Hygiene Association ( AIHA ) recommend ceiling or short term exposure limits for the blend R

- 513A . A STEL for R

- 513A of 1,960 ppm was developed by EPA based on the 653 ppm AEL value. The STEL was estimated as three to five times the AEL, which is an established method of estimating a short

- term exposure limit by ACGIH . [STEL] = [AEL] x 3 = 653 ppm x 3 ≈ 1

, 960 ppm b Neither ACGIH nor AIHA recommend ceiling or short term exposure limits for HFO

- 1234 yf

. A STEL for HFO

- 1234 yf of 1,5 00 ppm was developed by EPA based on the 5 00 ppm WEEL value. The STEL was estimated as three to five times the AEL, which is an established method of estimating a short

- term exposure limit by ACGIH . [STEL] = [AEL] x 3 = 5 00 ppm x 3 ≈ 1,500 ppm

c Although a RCL has not been proposed for HFO

- 1234yf, t he recommended ATEL for HFO

- 1234yf is 101,000 ppm ( DuPont Fluoroproducts 2014 ). Table 6. Explanation of Exposure Limit

- Related Terminology a Organization Definition OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health ACGIH American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists AIHA American Industrial Hygiene Association OARS Occupational Alliance for Risk Science Exposure Limit Definition Explanation Short

- Term Exposure RCL Refrigerant Concentration Limit The RCL for a refrigerant is intended to reduce the risks of acute toxicity, asphyxiation, and flammability hazards in normally occupied, enclosed spaces. The RCL for each refrigerant is the lowest of the Acute

- Toxicity Exposure Limit (ATEL), Oxygen Deprivation Limit (ODL), and Flammable Concentration Limit (FCL). Determination assumes full vaporization with no removal by ventilation, dissolution, reaction, or decomposition and complete mixing of refrigerant in the space to which it is released. ATEL Acute Toxicity Exposure Limit The ATEL is t he refrigerant concentration limit intended to r educe the risks of acute toxicity hazards in normally occupied, enclosed spaces according to ASHRAE Standard 34. The ATEL includes consideration of mortality, cardiac sensitization, anesthetic or central nervous systemFinal

— July 2, 2015 7 effects and other escape i mpairing effects and permanent injury. The ATEL is s imilar to the Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health (IDLH) concentrations set by NIOSH

. STEL Short

- Term Exposure Limit A 15

- minute time

- weighted average (TWA) exposure that should not be exceeded during a workday, even if the 8

- hour TWA is within the threshold limit value

- time weighted average ( TLV

– TWA ) , set by ACGIH.

AEGL b,c Acute Exposure Guideline Level 1 AEGL

- 1 is the airborne concentration (expressed as ppm or mg/m 3 ) of a substance above which it is predicted that the general population, includi ng susceptible individuals, could experience notable discomfort, irritation, or certain asymptomatic nonsensory effects. However, the effects are not disabling and are transient and reversible upon cessation of exposure. Acute Exposure Guideline Level 2 AEGL

- 2 is the airborne concentration (expressed as ppm or mg/m 3 ) of a substance above which it is predicted that the general population, including susceptible individuals, could experience irreversible or other serious, long

- lasting adverse health effects or an impaired ability to escape. Acute Exposure Guideline Level 3 AEGL

- 3 is the airborne concentration (expressed as ppm or mg/m 3 ) of a substance above which it is predicted that the general population, including susceptible individuals, could experience life

- threatening health effects or death. Long

- Term Exposure PEL Permissible Exposure Limit This is an 8

- hour TWA exposure limit set by OSHA. AEL Acceptable Exposure Limit The maximum 8

- hour TWA at which a worker can be exposed regularly without adverse effects. WEEL Workplace Environmental Exposure Level Developed by OARS for to protect healthy workers against acute and chronic health effects, this limit is based on repeated daily exposures over a working lifetime and averaged over an 8

- hour workday. TLV

- TWA Threshold Limit Value

– Time

Weighted Average The TWA concentration for a conventional 8

- hour workday and a 40

- hour workweek, to which it is believed that nearly all workers may be repeatedly exposed, day after day, for a working lifetime without adverse effect according to ACGIH.

a All information in this table taken from EPA (1994) except where otherwise noted.
b EPA (2012)

c A pplicable to emergency exposure periods ranging from 10 minutes to 8 hours.
According to the SDS, exposure to R

- 513A may be hazardous if inhalation, skin contact, or eye con tact with the proposed substitute occurs. The most likely pathway of exposure is through inhalation. R

- 513A can cause symptoms of asphyxiation when present in concentrations high enough to significantly lower oxygen concentrations below 19.5 percent by vol ume, such as headaches, ringing in ears, dizziness, drowsiness, nausea, vomiting, depression of all senses, and also unconsciousness. Under some circumstances of over

- exposure (i.e., oxygen levels fall below 6 percent by volume), death may occur.

If inhal ed, R

- 513A can cause symptoms such as light

- headedness, dizziness, confusion, incoordination, drowsiness, unconsciousness, and anesthetic effects. Excessive inhalation of R

- 513A may also result in an irregular heartbeat or death, due to cardiac effects. Fu rthermore, R

- 513A vapors are denser than air and can cause asphyxiation if the oxygen concentration in a room is significantly reduced.

If R

- 513 A is inhaled, person(s) should be immediately removed from the contaminated space and exposed to fre sh air. In accordance with the SDS, EPA further recommends that if breathing is difficult or irregular
, person(s) should be given oxygen, provided a qualified operator is present, a nd medical attention be sought. Exposures of R

- 513 A to the skin may cause frostbite. In th e case of dermal exposure, the SDS for R

- 513 A recommends that person(s) immediately wash the affected area with water and remove all contaminated clothing; if frostbite occurs, bathe (not rub) the affected area with lukewarm, not hot, water. If water is not available, cover the affecte d area with a clean, soft cloth , and seek medical attentio nFinal

— July 2, 2015 8 immediately. Exposures of R

- 513 A to the eyes could cause eye irritation. I n case of ocular exposure, the SDS for R

- 513A recommends that person(s) immediately flu sh the eyes, including under the eyelids, with copious amounts of water for 15 minutes. EPA’s review of the human health impacts of this proposed substitute is contained in the public docket for this decision. These risks and procedures after exposure are similar for other common refrigerants. The potential health effects of R

- 513A can be minimized by following the exposure guidelines and ventilation and PPE r ecommendations outlined in the SDS for R

- 513A and this risk screen

.


### 7. FLAMMABILITY ASSESSMENT

R

- 513A is classified as an A1 refrigerant by ASHRAE, and is considered to be nonflammable (DuPont Fluoroproducts 2014; ASHRAE 2015). Based on this classification, manufacture, servicing, and use of R

513A is not expected to present a flammability risk in t he retail food refrigeration , vending machines, or commercial ice machine end

- uses.



### 8. ASPHYXIATION ASSESSMENT The risk of asphyxiation for the reasonable worst

- case scenario described in Section 5 was investigated for R

- 513A . In this section, risk of asp hyxiation is assessed in three ways: 1) modeling the oxygen concentration under the charge size and room size specified in the worst

- case scenario, 2) performing a threshold analysis of minimum charge size at which an asphyxiation risk could occur in the room size specified in the worst

- case scenario (i.e., charge sizes greater than this are expected to cause an asphyxiation risk), and 3) performing a threshold analysis of the maximum room size at which an asphyxiation risk could occur with the charge size specified in the worst

- case scenario (i.e., room sizes smaller than this are expected to cause an asphyxiation risk). This analysis does not consider ventilation or conditions that are likely to occur that would increase oxygen levels to which individuals would be exposed, such as open doors or windows, fans operating, conditioned airflow (either heated or cooled), or even openings at the bottom of doors that allow air to flow in and out. As specified in Section 5, the reasonable worst

- case scenario assume s a vertical concentration gradient. If the proposed substitute passes the screening analysis with these restrictive assumptions in place, it can be reasonably assumed that no risks of asphyxiation will be present under real

- world conditions. The results o f the asphyxiation assessment are summarized in Table 7 below. Table 7. Asphyxiation Assessment a,b

Equipment Scenario Charge Size (kg) Effective Room Size (m 3 ) Percent Oxygen Concentration in Lower 0.4 Meters Direct Rack System Reasonable Worst

- Case 1 800 24,200 (855,000 ft 3 ) 19 % Beverage Cooler Reasonable Worst

- Case 2 1.5 244 (8,620 ft 3 ) 21% Vending Machine Reasonable Worst

- Case 3 0.6 15 (530 ft 3 ) 20% Ice Machine Reasonable Worst

- Case 4 30 5,700 ( 201,300 ft 3 ) 21 %
Direct Rack System Threshold Analysis 1a: Charge Size 3,360 24,200 (855,000 ft 3 ) 12% Threshold Analysis 1b: Room Size 800 5,760 ( 203 ,000 ft 3 ) 12%
Beverage Cooler Threshold Analysis 2a: Charge Size 76 244 (8,620 ft 3 ) 12% Threshold Analysis 2b: Room Size 1.5 5 (169 ft 3 ) 12%
Vending Machine Threshold Analysis 3 a: Charge Size 4.7 15 (530 ft 3 ) 12% Threshold Analysis 3 b: Room Size 0.6 2 (67.8 ft 3 ) 12%

Ice Machine Threshold Analysis 4 a: Charge Size 790 5,700 ( 201,300 ft 3 ) 12% Threshold Analysis 4 b: Room Size 30 220 ( 7,620 ft 3 ) 12%
Bold font indicates modeling results.Final

— July 2, 2015 9 a Cells highlighted in green are the scenarios in which the charge and room sizes evaluated in this risk screen are acceptable according to the threshold analysis or the scenarios with ac ceptable oxygen concentrations, given various modeling assumption options.
b The typical concentration of oxygen in air is considered to be 21 percent (Mackenzie & Mackenzie 1995).

Based on the worst

- case scenario modeling assumptions, R

- 513A in retail food refrigeration , vending machines, and commercial ice machines does not present a significant risk of asphyxiation. In Reasonable Worst

- Case Scenario 1 for direct rack systems, the percent oxygen concentration in the lower 0.4 meters of the room was modeled to be approxi mately 19%, which is lower than 19.5% and therefore may pose a risk of experiencing symptoms of asphyxiation as discussed in Section 6. However, this risk is not likely as the model does not take into account the presence of ventilation. Furthermore, the n ormal concentration of oxygen in air (21 percent) in the lower 0.4 meters of the room must be reduced more significantly
, to 12 percent , in order for a n actual risk of asphyxiation to occur

. 6 Based on the reasonable worst

- case scenario modeling assumptions , use of R

- 513A in retail food refrigeration equipment , vending machines, and commercial ice machines does not present a s ignificant risk of asphyxiation.

• As shown in Threshold Analysis 1a for direct rack systems, the minimum charge size of R

- 513A

necessar y to reduce the oxygen levels to 12 percent in air in the lower 0.4 meters of a room of volume 24,200 m 3 (855,000 ft 3 ) was calculated to be 3,360 kg assuming that 1) nitrogen and oxygen retain the same relative volumes in the rooms with the balance composed entirely of R

513A , and 2) the pressure of the room does not increase significantly with the addition of the refrigerant. Th is amount represent s more than eight times the typical charge of approxim ately 400 kg (or more than four ti mes the maximum charge size of 8 00 kg) for a direct rack R

- 513A system.

• Under Threshold Analysis 2a for beverage coolers, the minimum charge of R

- 513A necessary to red uce the oxygen levels to 12 percent in air in the lower 0.4 meters of a room of volume 244 m 3 (8,620 ft 3 ) was calculated to be 76 kg, which rep resents approximately 250 times the typical charge of 0.3 kg for a single R

- 513A beverage cooler (or more than 50 times the max imum intended charge size of 1.5 kg).

• For vending machines , Threshold Analysis 3 a shows that the minimum charge of R

- 513A necessary to reduce oxygen levels to 12 percent in air in the lower 0.4 meters of a room of volume 5,700 m 3 ( 201,300 ft 3 ) was calculated to be 4.7 kg, more than 15 times the ty pical charge of 0.3 kg for a vending machine (or more than 7 tim es the maximum charge size of 0.6 kg).

• For commercial ice machines, Threshold Analysis 4 a shows that the minimum charge of R

- 513A necessary to reduce oxygen levels to 12 percent in air in the lower 0.4 meters of a room of volume 5,700 m 3 ( 201,300 ft 3 ) was calculated to be 792 kg, more than 264 times the ty pical charge of 3 kg for a commercial ice machine (or more than 26 ti mes the m aximum charge size of 3 0 kg). Because this threshold modeling does not take into account any ventilation which is likely to occur, such as conditioned airflow, open doors, or even openings at the bottom of doors that allow air to flow in and out, as ment ioned above, the actual asphyxiation risk to consumers is likely to be lower than modeled.

For the room size t hreshold s cenarios, the room size at which an asphyxiation concern would exist (i.e., when the oxygen concentration in the lower 0.4 meters of th e room is 12 percent) using the typical equipment charge sizes provided by the submitter were also determined:

• For direct rack systems, in order for asphyxiation to be of concern with a charge size of 8 00 kg, the system would have to be installed in a sto re with an effective volume of 5,760 m 3 (203 ,000 ft 3 ) (see Threshold Analysis 1b in Table 7).

• For beverage coolers, in order for asphyxiation to be of concern wit h the maximum charge size of 1.5 kg, the volume of the convenience store would have to be about 5 m 3 (169 ft 3 ) (see Threshold Analysis 2b in Table 7).

5 Twelve percent oxy gen in air is the NOAEL for hypoxia (ICF 1997).Final

— July 2, 2015 10 • For vending machines, Threshold Analysis 3b indicates that the volume of the enclosed alcove would have to be about 2 m 3 (67.8 ft 3 ) with the maximum charge size of 0.6 kg in o rder for asphyxiation to be of concern.

• For commercial ice machines, Threshold Analysis 4 b indicates that the volume of the sea food processing facility would have to be about 216 m 3 (7,620 ft 3 ) with the maximum ch arge size of 30 kg in order for asphyxiation to be of concern.
Based on the worst

- case modeling results and threshold analysis, EPA does not believe that the use of R

513A in retail food refrigeration , vending machines, and commercial ice machines poses a significant ri sk of asphyxiation or impaired coordination to personnel, provided systems are installed in appropriate spaces according to guidelines from the manufacturer and the SDS for R

- 513A

.


### 9. END

- USE EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT This section presents estimates of potentia l end

- user exposures to R

- 513A and each of its components in the event of a catastrophic release from the proposed substitute’s use in retail food refrigeration , vending machines, and commercial ice machines. An end

- use exposure analysis was performed to e xamine potential catastrophic releases of R

- 513A under the reason able worst

- case scenarios outlined in Section 5.

For the end

- use exposure assessment scenario, 15

- minute TWA exposures for the proposed substitute were calculated using the box model describe d in the Background Document, which was adapted to estimate concentrations on a minute

- by

- minute basis. Estimates for acute/short

- term end

- use exposures resulting from catastrophic leakage of refrigerant from retail food refrigeration , vending machines, an d commercial ice machines were examined. As discussed in Section 5, the full charge of the unit is assumed to be emitted over the course of 1 minute and 15 minutes, where the latter scenario more accurately represents a reasonable worst

- case scenario for R

- 513A in retail food refrigeration , vending machines, and commercial ice machines because R

- 513A is nonflammable. The analysis was undertaken to determine the 15

- minute exposures for R

- 513A , which were then compared to the standard toxicity limits presented in Table 5 to assess the risk to end

- users. The estimated TWA values are fairly conservative as the analysis does not consider opened windows, fans operating, conditioned airflow (either heated or cooled) and other variables that would reduce the levels to which individuals would be exposed. Because HFO

- 1234yf is present in larger concentrations and because it has a lower exposure limit than HFC

- 134a, Table 8 only display s exposures for HF O

- 1234yf, the component with greater potential concerns

. Table 8. End

- Use Exposure Assessment for HFO

- 1234yf Component a

Equipment R

- 513A Component Charge Size (kg) Room Size (m 3 ) 15

- minute TWA Occupational Exposure (ppm) 15

- min Short Term Exposure

Limits (ppm) Acute Toxicity Exposure Limit (ATEL) ( ppm ) 1

- minute release 15

- minute release Direct Rack System

HFO

- 1234yf 800 24,400 22,400 15,700
1,500 101,000 b Beverage Cooler 1.5 244 3,740 2,070 Vending Machines 0.6 15 25,800 14,000 Ice Machine 30 5,700 2,130 1,730 Bold font indicates modeling results.

a Cells highlighted in green are the scenarios with acceptable exposure levels given various modeling assumption options.
b ATEL for HFO

- 1234yf is 101,000 ppm; see Table 4 for more information.

Under the reasonable worst

- case scenarios described in Section 5 for direct rack systems
, beverage coolers
, vending machines, and ice machines
, catastrophic releases of the maximum charge sizes of R

- 513A were modeled. The modeling scenarios evaluate two refrigerant release time durations (i.e., 1 minute a nd 15 minutes). The anticipated 15

- minute TWA exposures for the HFO

- 1234yf component of R

- 513A are likelyFinal

— July 2, 2015 11 to exce ed their respective STEL s for direct rack systems and v ending machines , assuming both 1

- minute and 15

- minute releases.

Although the exposure estimates for the reasonable worst

- case scenario for a direct rack system and vending machines exceed the respective STELs for the HFO

- 1234yf component ( see Table 8), t he STEL is a conservatively

- derived exposure limit that is intended to protect workers in an occupational setting in which they are exposed to these chemicals on a daily basis

. The STEL values do not represent limits for a single exposure in a lifetime . T h ese modeled exposures are one

- time exposures so exceedances of the STEL values do not necessarily indicate a significant risk of harm to consumers. The effect of a one

- time exposure can be more accurately evaluated by comparing the modeled exposure concent ration s to the ATEL for HFO

- 1234yf
, which is a limit intended to reduce the risks of acute toxicity hazards in normally occupied, enclosed spaces according to ASHRAE Standard 34 (see Table 4)

. All of these exposure estimates are significantly lower than the ATEL of 101,000 ppm for HFO

- 1234yf

. Furthermore, the estimated exposures for R

- 513A in each of these scenarios are also significantly lower than the RCL for R

513A (i.e., 72,000 ppm).

In ad dition, t hese exposure estimates were derived using fairly conservative assumptions (e.g., minimum room volume for the modeled maximum charge size , low ventil ation rate , maximum charge size ) that do not necessarily reflect the actual room attributes where R

- 513A retail food refrigeration equipment
, vending machines, and commercial ice machines will be installed. Finally, these exposures represent concentrations of leaked refrigerant in the bottom 0.4 meter s (1.3 feet) of the room , accounting for 95 percent of the refrigerant charge in this lower compartment of the room. The probability that an individual would be present in this lower compartment (e.g., prone or supine on the floor) in the event of the catastrophic release of refrigerant is low. Furthermore, a lthough children may be at increased risk because of their short stature when the proposed substitute is found at higher concentrations in the lower compartment of the room, the probability that they are present in the location in which a catastrophic release of the entire charge of the commercial refrigeration system is low

. To prevent exposure and potential serious side effects during larger releases, EPA recommends that the proposed RCL for R

- 513A (i.e., 72,000 ppm or 320 g/m 3 ) is not e xceeded in any location where an R

513A system is installed, unless proper leak protection devices are in place in order to prevent exposures of R

- 513A beyond the recommended limits. Proper leak protection devices , engineering control requ irements, and adh erence to the SDS will further ensure that exposure limits are maintained below those described in Table 8.



### 10. OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT This section assesses potential exposures to workers during manufacture, charging and servicing, and disposal of R

- 513A retail food refrigeration equipment , vending machines, and commercial ice machines. To ensure that use of the proposed substitute in retail food refrigeration , vending machines, and commercial ice machines does not pose an unacceptable risk to workers during servicing and disposal, occupational exposure modeling was perfor med using a box

- model approach. For a detailed description of
t he methodology used for this screening assessment, the reader is referred to the occupational exposure and hazard analysis described in Chapter 5 of the Background Document. Estimates of refrigerant release per event for various release scenarios were obtained from the Vintaging Model. 7 To determine the estimated level of occupational exposure for a constituent in a blend, the total anticipated release rate of the refrigerant is multiplied by the weight percent compositio n of each

7 ICF International maintains the Vintaging Model for EPA in order to simulate the aggregate impacts of the ODS phaseout on the use and emissions of various ODS and their substitutes over a period of several years across 60 different end

- uses. The model tracks the use and emissions of various compounds for the annual vintages of new equipment that enter service in each end

- use. The vintage of each type of equipment determines such factors as leak rate, charge size, number of units in operation, and th e initial ODS substance that the equipment contained.Final

— July 2, 2015 12 compound in the blend

. For charging, servicing, and disp osal activities, the release rate per event was multiplied by the number of events estimated to occur over a workday. During charging and servicing of the retail food refrigeration
, vending machine , and commercial ice machine end

- uses, the release per even t was conservatively assumed to range between 0.25 percent and 5 percent of the equipment charge
, respectively. For equipment charging and servicing, the number of events per workday was assumed to equal the maximum number of units anticipated to be servic ed in one day ( i.e., eight units divided by eight hours per workday for beverage cooler s, vending machines, and commercial ice machines, and one unit divided by eight hours per workday for direct rack systems ) (see Section 10.2)

. For disposal of direct ra ck systems , i t was conservatively assumed that one unit is disposed of during an 8

- hour work day. For smaller equipment (i.e., beverage coolers, vending machines, and commercial ice machines), the release per event was conservatively assumed to be 100 perc ent of the equipment charge (representing a catastrophic release). It was assumed that 10 units are disposed during an 8

- hour work day ; however, it was assumed that of the 10 units, only the last unit per workday would experience the catastrophic release ( i.e., 100 percent). The remaining 9 units were assumed to release an incidental amount of refrigerant (i.e., 1 percent per unit) from the connecting and disconnecting of lines, as it is likely that if a worker was exposed to the entire charge of a system d uring disposal activities, they would immediately stop working, clear the area until all refrigerant has been removed from the space (e.g., through ventilation), and adhere to the exposure procedures recommended in the SDS for the proposed substitute (see Section 10.3). The modeled exposure concentrations were compared to STELs at charging and servicing and long

- term exposure limits at disposal.

10.1 Occupational Exposure at Manufacture

During manufacture of the components and blending of R

- 513A , the SDS for both HFC

- 134a and HFO

1234yf should be referenced and proper engineering controls and PPE used. Refrigerant quality control testing may also result in release of de minimus quantities of refrigerant, which would typically be to exhaust ducts or fume hoods. To prevent significant exposure if such leaks occur, e ngineering controls should be used, includ ing normal and local ventilation (e.g., chemical hoods) and vapor

- in

- air detection systems for standard manufacturing procedures so workers can avoid ph ysical contact with the refrigerant and to achieve emission control. In general, use of PPE consistent with OSHA guidelines is recommended, such as respiratory protection (including a self

- contained breathing apparatus [SCBA] in case of insufficient ventil ation), tightly sealed goggles, and protective gloves (OSHA 1994). In addition, as for other halogenated refrigerants, there is a risk of generation of toxic degradation products such as hydrogen fluoride and hydrogen chloride if HFC

- 134a or HFO

- 1234 yf ar e exposed to high temperatures or fire. Other reaction products such as carbon dioxide might also be present. Containers should be stored in cool, dry conditions (maximum storage temperature should be 40 ° C) in well

- sealed receptacles and should not be allo wed to contact open flames, glowing metal surfaces, or electrical heating elements. EPA believes that when proper handling and disposal guidelines are followed
, in accordance with both good industrial hygiene and manufa cturing practices and the SDS for R

- 5 13A and its components, there is no significant risk to workers during the manufacture of R

- 513A

. 10.2 Occupational Exposure at Charging and Servicing

L arge commercial refrigeration equipment (e.g., direct rack systems) is typically field

- erected and there fore
, equipment is charged in the field. Charging for s maller retail refrigeration e quipment (e.g

. , beverage coolers and commercial ice machines ) would be conducted by the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM). For both OEM system manufacture (i.e., charging at OEM location) and field charging (i.e., charging at the end

- use location), points of release for charging and servicing these leak

-Final

— July 2, 2015 13 tight systems would be from connection/disconnection of temporary lines for charging and recovery equipment. Charging occurs within an enclosed area equipped with automatic ventilation, refrigerant detectors, and alarm systems. Release points during charging would be connection/dis connection of temporary lines from charging equipment. Charging and servicing activities for retail refrigeration equipment , vending machines
, and commercial ice machines are not expected to result in significant worker exposure when certified technicians follow the procedures outlined in the R

- 513A SDS and maintenance manual, undergo proper training, and wear appropriate PPE (e.g., gloves and safety glasses). Nevertheless, the potential occupational exposure during servicing was analyzed. The maximum 15

- m inute TWA exposures for each R

- 513A constituent were estimated for the charging and servicing exposure scenario s and compared to their respective STELs (see Table 9). Because HFO

- 1234yf is present in larger concentrations and because it has a lower exposure limit than HFC

- 134a, Table 9 only presents exposures for HFO

- 1234yf, the component with greater potential concerns. Table 9. Occupational Risk Assessment at Charging and Servicing for HFO

- 1234yf Component a

Equipment R

- 513A Component Charging Servicing 15

- min Short Term Exposure Limits (ppm) c Release

Rate b 15

- minute TWA (ppm) Release Rate b 15

- minute TWA (ppm) Direct Rack System d

HFO

- 1234yf 2% 2,440 5% 5,610
1,500 Beverage Cooler 1% 1 6 0.25% 1 7 Vending Machine 1% 6.4 0.25% 6.7 Ice Machine 1% 320 3% 4,030 Bold font indicates modeling results.

a Cells highlighted in green are the scenarios that are deemed to be acceptable given various modeling assumption options.
b Release rates are consistent with IPCC (2006)

, CARB (2013) , and EPA’s Vintaging Model.

c See Table 5 for more information

. d One installation or servicing event per day was modeled for direct rack systems.
The 15

- min ute STEL for the HFO

- 1234yf component of R

- 513A is not exceeded in the charging exposure scenarios for beverage coolers, vending machines, or ice machines. However, the 15

- minute estimated exposures for charging the direct rack system exceeded the STEL for HFO

- 1234yf. The 15

- minute STEL for the HFO

- 1234yf component i s not exceeded in the servicing scenario for beverage coolers and vending machines . However, t he 15

- min ute estimated servicing exposures for HFO

- 1234yf in direct rack systems and ice machines exceeded the STEL for HFO

- 1234yf. Although the m odeling indicates that the worst

case charging s cenario for direct rack systems and the worst

- case servicing sce nario for direct rack systems and ice machines could exceed the STEL for HFO

- 1234yf, t he estimated exposures were derived using conservative assumptions, and do not take into account the use o f ventilation or PPE. Additionally, all of these exposure estimates are significantly lower than the ATEL of 101,000 ppm for HFO

- 1234yf, which is

a limit intended to reduce the risks of acute toxicity hazards in normally occupied, enclosed spaces according to ASHRAE Standard 34

. Furthermore, t hese types of systems are typically serviced by Section 608

- certified personnel using proper industrial hygiene techniques and using proper engineering controls (e.g., local ventilation, refrigerant detectors, and alar m systems). Thus, EPA does not believe that charging, installation, or servicing of retail food refrigeration units , vending machines, and commercial ice machines containing R

- 513A presents a significant concern to workers.

10.3 Occupational Exposure at Disposal Disposal of R

- 513A retail food refrigeration equipment is expected to occur with limited frequency (up to approximately ten disposal events per day for smaller equipment such as beverage coolers and commercial ice machines and one disposal event p er day for direct rack systems) at disposal facilities or, for larger equipment (e.g., direct rack systems) at the end

- use and with limited duration of exposure to the installed refrigerant. Typically, potential exposures to the refrigerant during recovery and disposal are expected toFinal

— July 2, 2015 14 occur during activities related to decommissioning refrigeration systems (e.g., attaching of hoses associated with draining or otherwise discharging of refrigerant from the refrigeration units into cylinders) and would be simi lar to those during servicing, because similar refrigerant charging and/or recovery equipment would be used (see Section 10.2 and Table 9 for information and modeling results related to exposure during servicing activities).
As shown in Table 9 in Section 10.2, exposures during servicing (and therefore during typical disposal activities) are not anticipated to present a significant concern for workers. To model a worst

- case scenario during disposal for direct rack systems
, it was conservatively assumed tha t 14 percent of the equipment charge would be released per disposal event. For smaller equipment (i.e., beverage coolers, vending machines, and commercial ice machines), it was assumed that of the 10 disposal events, 9 units are properly disposed of with o nly incidental releases of refrigerant (i.e., 1 percent per unit) followed by the disposal of one unit that results in a catastrophic release of refrigerant (i.e., 100 percent of the equipment charge). Because HFO

- 1234yf is present in larger concentrations and because it has a lower exposure limit than HFC

- 134a, Table 1 0 only presents the maximum estimated 8

- hour TWA occupational exposure levels at disposal for HFO

- 1234yf, the component with greater potential concerns.

Table 1 0 . Occupational Risk Assessme nt at Disposal for HFO

- 1234yf Component a

Equipment R

- 513A Component 8

- Hour TWA Occupational Exposure (ppm) 8

- Hour Long Term Exposure Limits b (ppm) Direct Rack System

HFO

- 1234yf 2,280

5 00 Beverage Cooler 120 Vending Machine 120 Ice Machine 2,500 Bold font indicates modeling results.

a Cells highlighted in green are the scenarios with exposure levels deemed to be acceptable given various modeling assumption o ptions.
b WEEL OEL

The results in Table 1 0 indicate that long

- term (8

- hour) worker exposure concentration of the HFO

- 1234yf component of R

- 513A is not likely to exceed its WEEL (i.e., 500 ppm) for the beverage cooler or vending machine scenario s while the reasonable worst

- case disposal sce nario for direct rack systems and commercial ice machines could exceed the WEEL for HFO

- 1234yf. However, t he estimated exposures were derived using conservative assumptions (e.g., no mechanical or local exhaust ventilation) , and represent a worst

- case scenario w ith a low probability of occurrence (e.g., for smaller commercial refrigeration equipment, it is highly unlikely that a worker would be exposed to the maximum release rate at disposal for every unit decommissioned in a day). These types of systems are also typically disposed of by Section 608

- certified personnel using proper industrial hygiene techniques to maximize recover y efficiency and limit releases. The average recovery efficiencies and maximum disposal release rates (see Table 10) are also representa tive of release rates for currently used refrigerants in commercial refrigeration equipment (e.g., R

- 404A , R

- 507A, R

- 407C ), and there are already established standards of practice and training requirements that apply to fluorinated refrigerants to reduce e xposures (and would therefore extend to R

- 513A systems ).
It is also unlikely that workers would be exposed to the unrecoverable portion of refrigerant during the recovery process , and therefore anticipated exposures would be approximately 10 percent lower . For example, some of the refrigerant would likely be dissolved in the refrigerant oil (which would be drawn out and separated from the recovered refrigerant) or trapped within deeper parts of the refrigeration circuit (e.g., the accumulator or receiver) and wouldn’t be released until the system is actually dismantled later on in the disposal process (Oko

- Recherche 2003). Because anticipated occupational exposures could be above the exposure limits for HFC

- 134a and HFO

1234yf for the direct rack system , b everage cooler, and commercial ice machine disposal release scenarios,Final

— July 2, 2015 15 the recommendations for proper engin eering controls and PPE in the SDS for R

- 513A should be followed. Adequate ventilation should always be established during any use, handling, or stor age of R

- 513A

. If recovery and disposal is taking place in an enclosed space without any mechanical ventilation, facilities should be cleared of non

- essential personnel and technicians should wear a SCBA and other appropriate protective equipment

. Engineering controls should include vapor

- in air detection systems and local exhaust ventilation during use of R

- 513A to prevent dispersion throughout the workplace. In addition, an eye wash and safety shower should be near the manufacturing facility and l ocations where R

- 513A is stored and ready for use. In general, use of PPE is recommended, such as splash goggles, mechanical

- resistance gloves (e.g., oil

repellent or thermal resistant gloves) when handling cylinders and chemically

- resistant gloves when ha ndling the gas mixture (e.g., butyl rubber, chlorinated polyethylene, or neoprene). For larger retail food refrigeration ( e.g. , rack systems) and commercial ice machine (e.g., remote systems) systems, toxicity risks could be further minimized through t he i nstallation of signage which warns room occupants to remain standing (as higher concentrations are likely to accumulate near the floor)
, not to enter recessed parts of the facility (e.g., maintenance crawl spaces and below grade service areas)
, and exit th e facility immediately should they hear the refrigerant detector alarm and/or smell the leaked refrigerant. EPA believes that if proper handling and disposal guidelines are followed
, in accordance with good industrial hygiene and

m anufacturing practices an d the SDS for R

- 513A , there is no significant risk to workers during the manufacturing, installation, servicing, and disposal of R

- 513A in retail food refrigeration units , vending machines, and commercial ice machines.



### 11. GENERAL POPULATION EXPOSURE ASSES SMENT

R

- 513A is not expected to cause a significant risk to human health in the general population when manufactured for use and used as a refrigerant in retail food refrigeration , vending machines, and commercial ice machines. The proposed substitute will be manufactured in a closed process and is proposed for use in closed systems; thus, significant releases are not anticipated. At room temperature, R

513A is a gas and, therefore, releases to groun d or surface water are not anticipated, as R

- 513A is anticipated to dissipate into the atmosphere upon release to outside air (i.e., because natural ventilation rates would be higher and there is no enclosed space to maintain a high concentration of R

- 513A ). Should air releases during manufacturing operations occur, engineering controls should be used (e.g., carbon absorption scrubbers) to collect R

- 513A and prevent the release of R

- 513A to the atmosphere. EPA believes that by using proper engineering contr ols and by following disposal and containment recommendations outline d in the proposed substitute’s SDS and this risk screen , exposure to R

- 513A is not expected to pose a significant toxicity risk to the general population.Final

— July 2, 2015 16 

### 12. REFERENCES

Armines . 2008. Inventory of Direct and Indirect GHG Emissions from Stationary Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Sources, with Special Emphasis on Retail Food Refrigeration and Unitary Air Conditioning. CARB Agreement No. 06

- 325. Available at: http://www.arb.ca.g ov/cc/commref/armines_report_03_625.pdf

. ACGIH. 2012. Guide to Occupational Exposure Values. American Conference of Gove rnmental Industrial Hygienists.

ANSI/ASHRAE. 2015

. 2015 Supplement to Standard 34: Designation and Safety Classification of Refrigerant s. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air

- Cond itioning Engineers, Inc.

ANSI/ASHRAE. 2013a. Standard 62: Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air

- Conditioning Engineers, Inc.

ANSI/ASHRAE. 2010a. Standard 15: Safety Standard for Refrigeration Systems. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and A ir

- Conditioning Engineers, Inc.

ANSI/ASHRAE. 2010b. Standard 34: Designation and Safety Classification of Refrigerants. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air

- Conditioning Engineers, Inc.

CARB. Gallagher, Glenn, Tao Zhan, Ying

- Kuang Hsu, et. al. 2013. “High

- global Warming Po tential F

gas Emissions in California: Comparison of Ambient

- based versus Inventory

- based Emission Estimates, and Implications of Refined Estimates.” Environ. Sci. Technol., 2014, 48 (2), pp 1084

– 1093. DOI: 10.1021/es403447v. Publication Date (Web): Decemb er 13, 2013. Copyright © 2013 American Chemical Society. Available at http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es403447v

DuPont Fluoroproducts. 2014. Opteon® XP 1 0 for Use as a Refrigerant. Significant New Alternatives Policy Program Submission to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. August 2014.

Forster, P., V. Ramaswamy, P. Artaxo, T. Berntsen, R. Betts, D.W. Fahey, J. Haywood, J. Lean, D.C. Lowe, G. Myhre, J. Nganga, R. Prinn, G. Raga, M. Schulz and R. Van Dorland. 2007. Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing. In: Climate Change 2007:The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of t he Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
Hodnebrog, Ø., Etminan, M., Fugl estvedt, J. S., Marston, G., Myhre, G., Nielsen, C. J., Shine, K. P., Wallington, T. J. 2013. Global Warming Potentials and Radiative Efficiencies of Halocarbons and Related Compounds: A Comprehensive Review, Reviews of Geophysics, 51 , 300

- 378, doi: 10.100 2/rog.20013

. ICF. 1997. Physiological Effects of Alternative Fire Protection Agents

- Hypoxic Atmospheres Conference. Stephanie Skaggs prepared the proceedings of the conference held May 22, 1997 in New London, CT.

IPCC. 20 13. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.

- K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. X ia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 pp.Final

— July 2, 2015 17 IPCC. 2006

. IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use, Chapter 7: Emiss ions of Fluorinated Substitutes for Ozone Depleting Substances.” November 2008. Available at: http://www.ipcc

nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/pdf/3_Volume3/V3_7_Ch7_ODS_Substitutes.pdf.

Kataoka, O., M. Yoshizawa, & T. Hirakawa. 2000. “Allowable Charge Lim it of Flammable Refrigerants and Ventilation Requirements.” Daikin Industries. International Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Conference. Paper 506. Available online at: http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/iracc/506

. Lelieveld, H.L.M., J. Holah, D. Napper. 2014. Hygiene in food processing: Principles and practice. Second Edition. Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition.

Mackenzie, F.T. and J.A. Mackenzie. 1995. Our changing planet. Prentice

- Hall.

Oko

- Recherche GmbH. 2003. Final Repor t on Establishing the Leakage Rates of Mobile Air Conditioners. Prepared for the European Commission. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/eccp/docs/leakage_rates_final_report_en.pdf

. OSHA. 2004. “Safety and Health Topics: Isobutane.” Februa ry 2004. Available online at: <http://www.osha.gov/dts/chemicalsampling/data/CH_247840.html>.
UL. 2010. UL 471: Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers. Underwriters Laboratory.

Papadimitriou, V., R.K. Talukdar, R.W. Portmann, A.R. Ravishankara, and J.B. Burkholder. 2007. CF3CF=CH2 and (Z)

- CF3CF=CHF: Temperature dependent OH rate coefficients and global warming potentials. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics. 9: 1

- 13.
UK Department of Energy & Climate Change (DECC). 2011. “Development of the GHG Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Model.” Prepared by ICF International. November 2011. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/48250/3844

- greenhouse

gas

- inventory

- improvement

- project

- deve.PDF

. U.S. EPA. 2012. Acute Exposure Guidelines (AEGLs) Definitions. Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/aegl/pubs/define.htm

.
U.S. EPA

. 1994. Significant New Alternatives Policy Technical Background Document: R isk Screen on the Use of Substitutes for Class I Ozone

- depleting Substances: Refrigeration and Air Conditioning. Stratospheric Protection Division. March, 199 4.

WMO (Wor ld Meteorological Organization). 2011. Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2010
, Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project

- Report No. 52, 516 pp., Geneva, Switzerland.