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 R adiation 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 Enforceme nt 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 cal endar-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 s ervice their existing appliances because without a final Allocation Rule, production and consumption o f this substance will be prohibited after December 31, 2011. The first quarter of the calendar year i s paramount to the refrigerant industry since this is the time that HCFC-22 inventory is built to meet the pe ak cooling demand months of spring and summer. If DuPont is barred from building its inventory dur ing this period, it will have a hard time meeting i ts customers’ 2012 demands. As other producers and im porters 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 agenc y finalize the 2012 Allocation Rule as expeditiously as possible. The industry needs cert ainty 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 yea r’s end since EPA has not yet published a proposedThe Honorable Gina McCarthy

The Honorable Cynthia Giles December 8, 2011 Page 2

rule. Thus, to fill the regulatory gap and avoid t he blanket prohibition that will otherwise occur, DuPont respectfully requests that EPA use its enfor cement discretion to issue by the end of this year No Action Assurance Letters to HCFC-22 producers an d importers covering the period from January 1, 2012 until EPA publishes the final Allocation Ru le.

As DuPont recently communicated to Drusilla Huffor d, Director, Stratospheric Protection Division, available data suggest that the current s upply 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 allo wances by 20% from the total allocated under the 2009 Final Rule. Such a reduction would accele rate the health benefits associated with the HCFC phase-out and smooth the transition to the 2015 ste pdown. We consider a 20% reduction the appropriate balance of avoiding near term market di sruption and moving the market to where it must be to meet the next HCFC reduction in 2015 as requi red by the Montreal Protocol.

Although DuPont supports a reduction in consumption allowances, it does not support a commensurate reduction in 2012 production allowance s. 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 produ cers in both the domestic and Article 5 markets. EPA has the legal authority to allocate different p ercentages for production and consumption purposes and should do so in the upcoming Allocation Rule.

Finally, we urge EPA to condition its No Action Ass urance 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 secu re the associated environmental benefits. Were EPA not to adopt such a restriction in the No Actio n 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 ha ve.

Regards,

Mack McFarland Global Environmental Manager DuPont Fluorochemicals

cc: Drusilla Hufford