Hon. Lisa P. Jackson and Hon. Cass R. Sunstein 

June 2, 2011 

Page 2 

June 2, 2011 

Hon. Lisa P. Jackson, Administrator 

Environmental Protection Agency 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

Hon. Cass R. Sunstein, Administrator 

Office of Regulatory and Information Affairs 

Office of Management and Budget 

725 17th Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20503 

Re: 2011 Production and Consumption Allocation Rules for 

HCFC-22

Dear Administrator Jackson and Administrator Sunstein: 

One of the Environmental Protection Agency’s greatest achievements under the Clean Air Act has been 

putting the earth’s protective ozone layer on a path to recovery through the phase-out of ozone-depleting 

chemicals. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is proud of its role over the past quarter 

century in working with EPA and with other stakeholders for protection of the ozone layer. 

While the stratospheric ozone protection program has generally worked smoothly and successfully, I 

write today to express concerns about EPA’s possible responses to a recent court decision, Arkema v. 

EPA, 618 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2010), concerning the allocation of allowances for production and 

consumption of one particular chemical, HCFC-22. The purpose of this letter is to express NRDC’s 

support for responses to the court’s decision that would preserve protection of the ozone layer, and to 

oppose any response that would allow more HCFC-22 production. 

The court’s decision concerns certain allocations and transfers carried out by two HCFC producers, 

Arkema and Solvay. The court’s decision requires EPA to reconsider certain of the allocation rules for 

2011 through 2015. I understand that an interim final rule is being considered for 2011, without 

allowing the ordinary opportunity for notice and comment. It is my understanding that a draft of this

rule may now be under review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Since such a rule 

would become effective without prior notice and opportunity to comment, and since the opportunity to 

file post-hoc comments may be of limited effectiveness, I want to communicate NRDC’s interest and 

views on this question before a decision is made. 
Hon. Lisa P. Jackson and Hon. Cass R. Sunstein 

June 2, 2011 

Page 2 

Without going into detail, EPA has several options on how to reallocate the previously issued 2011 

allowances among the existing holders. In conversations with EPA staff and with various stakeholders,

however, I have been unable to get confirmation this is the extent of the options under consideration. In 

other words, NRDC has become concerned that EPA may be considering increasing the number of 

HCFC-22 production and consumption allowances. 

I would like to make clear that NRDC opposes any option that would increase the number of HCFC 

allowances issued for 2011 or subsequent years. That would increase the burden of ozone-depleting 

HCFC-22 in the atmosphere, and increase the risk of fatal and non-fatal skin cancers, cataracts, 

immunological disorders for all Americans and for billions of other people. EPA needs to find a 

solution to the allocation problem before the agency that does not place any additional burden on the 

stratosphere, on public health, or on the natural environment. 

Sincerely, 

David D. Doniger 

Climate Center Policy Director