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 17 th Street, NW Washington, DC 20503

Re: 2011 Production and Consumption Allocation Rul es for

HCFC-22

Dear Administrator Jackson and Administrator Sunste in:

One of the Environmental Protection Agency’s greate st achievements under the Clean Air Act has been putting the earth’s protective ozone layer on a pat h to recovery through the phase-out of ozone-deplet ing chemicals. The Natural Resources Defense Council ( NRDC) is proud of its role over the past quarter century in working with EPA and with other stakehol ders for protection of the ozone layer.

While the stratospheric ozone protection program ha s generally worked smoothly and successfully, I write today to express concerns about EPA’s possibl e responses to a recent court decision, Arkema v.

EPA , 618 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2010), concerning the alloc ation of allowances for production and consumption of one particular chemical, HCFC-22. T he 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 t o oppose any response that would allow more HCFC-22 p roduction.

The court’s decision concerns certain allocations a nd transfers carried out by two HCFC producers, Arkema and Solvay. The court’s decision requires E PA to reconsider certain of the allocation rules fo r 2011 through 2015. I understand that an interim fi nal rule is being considered for 2011, without allowing the ordinary opportunity for notice and co mment. It is my understanding that a draft of this rule may now be under review by the Office of Infor mation and Regulatory Affairs. Since such a rule would become effective without prior notice and opp ortunity to comment, and since the opportunity to file post-hoc comments may be of limited effectiven ess, 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 conversa tions with EPA staff and with various stakeholders, however, I have been unable to get confirmation thi s 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 op tion that would increase the number of HCFC allowances issued for 2011 or subsequent years. Th at 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 b illions of other people. EPA needs to find a solution to the allocation problem before the agenc y that does not place any additional burden on the stratosphere, on public health, or on the natural e nvironment.

Sincerely,

David D. Doniger Climate Center Policy Director