DuPont Chemicals & Fluoroproducts

Chestnut Run Plaza 702 

P.O. Box 80702 

Wilmington, DE 19880-0702 

December 8, 2011 

The Honorable Gina McCarthy 

Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Air and Radiation 

Ariel Rios Building 

Mail Code 6101A 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

The Honorable Cynthia Giles 

Assistant Administrator for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Air and Radiation 

Ariel Rios Building 

Mail Code 2201A 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20460 

RE: 2012 HCFC Allocation Rule

Dear Assistant Administrators McCarthy and Giles: 

 As you know, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) is working on a rule that will 

establish company-by-company baselines and 2012 calendar-year allowances for HCFC-22. This rule 

is critical to E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (“DuPont”), the refrigerant industry generally, and

the millions of consumers that rely on HCFC-22 to service their existing appliances because without a 

final Allocation Rule, production and consumption of this substance will be prohibited after December 

31, 2011. The first quarter of the calendar year is paramount to the refrigerant industry since this is the 

time that HCFC-22 inventory is built to meet the peak cooling demand months of spring and summer. 

If DuPont is barred from building its inventory during this period, it will have a hard time meeting its 

customers’ 2012 demands. As other producers and importers will likely be in the same position, the 

inability to produce or import would likely create supply disruption and the inability to meet demand 

for servicing as the peak cooling season approaches in late spring. 

 For these reasons, it is imperative that the agency finalize the 2012 Allocation Rule as 

expeditiously as possible. The industry needs certainty in the HCFC-22 allowance market to function 

efficiently and effectively, and that cannot happen until EPA promulgates a final rule. We recognize,

however, the impossibility of that happening by year’s end since EPA has not yet published a proposed 
The Honorable Gina McCarthy 

The Honorable Cynthia Giles 

December 8, 2011 

Page 2 

rule. Thus, to fill the regulatory gap and avoid the blanket prohibition that will otherwise occur, 

DuPont respectfully requests that EPA use its enforcement discretion to issue by the end of this year 

No Action Assurance Letters to HCFC-22 producers and importers covering the period from January 

1, 2012 until EPA publishes the final Allocation Rule. 

 As DuPont recently communicated to Drusilla Hufford, Director, Stratospheric Protection 

Division, available data suggest that the current supply of HCFC-22 will exceed the service demand 

for 2012. Thus, DuPont supports the position taken by the Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric 

Policy that EPA should reduce 2012 consumption allowances by 20% from the total allocated under 

the 2009 Final Rule. Such a reduction would accelerate the health benefits associated with the HCFC 

phase-out and smooth the transition to the 2015 stepdown. We consider a 20% reduction the 

appropriate balance of avoiding near term market disruption and moving the market to where it must 

be to meet the next HCFC reduction in 2015 as required by the Montreal Protocol. 

Although DuPont supports a reduction in consumption allowances, it does not support a 

commensurate reduction in 2012 production allowances. Instead, we believe that EPA should not 

reduce the company-specific production allocations adopted in the 2009 Rule. Reducing the allocation 

of company-specific production allowances would not result in any increased environmental benefit, 

and would serve only to disadvantage domestic producers in both the domestic and Article 5 markets. 

EPA has the legal authority to allocate different percentages for production and consumption purposes 

and should do so in the upcoming Allocation Rule. 

Finally, we urge EPA to condition its No Action Assurance Letters on the 20% reduction in 

consumption allowances described above. That way, the agency will preserve its ability to adopt this 

recommendation in the 2012 Allocation Rule and secure the associated environmental benefits. Were 

EPA not to adopt such a restriction in the No Action Assurance Letters, parties could consume their 

full allotment of allowances before EPA promulgates the final rule and thereby nullify a later-adopted

regulatory reduction in consumption allowances. 

Thanks for your leadership on this important issue. We would welcome the opportunity to 

meet with you to discuss any questions you might have. 

Regards, 

Mack McFarland 

Global Environmental Manager 

DuPont Fluorochemicals 

cc: Drusilla Hufford