### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

1 of 98 6560 - 50 - P **EO_12866 SNAP Low GWP Refrigerants 2060 -** **AS04 NPRM 201 40**  **2 2**  **7 .docx**  **ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 82**  **[EPA –** **HQ –**  **OAR**

**– 2013**  **– 0748**  **; FRL -**  **9906 -**  **56 -**  **OAR ]**  **RIN :**  **2060 -** **AS04 Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Listing o**  **f Substitutes for Refrigeration and Air**  **Conditioning and Revision of the Venting Prohibition**  **for Certain Refrigerant Substitutes AGENCY:**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). **ACTION:** Notice of p roposed rulemaking. **SUMMARY:** Pursuant to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ’s Significant New Alternatives Policy

program, this action proposes to list a number of flammable refrigerants as acceptable substitutes, subject to use conditions , for ozone - depleting substances in several end use s: household refrige rators and freezers, stand - alone commercial refrigerators and freezers, very low temperature refrigeration, non - mechanical heat transfe r , vending machines, and room air conditioning units . This action also proposes to exempt from Clean Air Act Section 608’ s prohibition on venting , release , or disposal the h ydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes that we are proposing to list in this action as acceptable subject to use conditions in specific end - use s . We are proposing this exemption on the basis of current eviden ce that their venting , release , or disposal would not pose a threat to the environment. **DATES:** Comments must be received on or before [ **INSERT DATE 60 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION IN FEDERAL REGISTER** **]** . Any party requesting a public hearing must notify the contac t listed below under **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** by 5

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

2 of 98 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on [ **INSERT DATE 15 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION IN FEDERAL REGISTER** **]** . If a hearing is held, it will take place on or about [ **INSERT DATE 30 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION IN FEDERAL REGI**  **STER ]**  in Washington, DC and further information will be provided on EPA’s Stratospheric Ozone Website at www.epa.gov/ozone/snap. **ADDRESSES:** Submit your comments , identified by Docket ID No. EPA

–HQ

–OAR

–2013

– 0748 , by one of the following methods: • www.regulations.gov . Follow the on - line instructions for submitting comments. • E- mail: A -

And -R -Docket@epa.gov. • Mail: Air and Radiation Docket, Environmental Protection Agency , Mail C ode 6102T, 1200 Penns yl vania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA

–HQ

– OAR

–2013

–0748 . • Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID No. EPA

–HQ

–OAR

–2013

– 0748 . Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA

–HQ

–OAR

–2013

–0748 . EPA’s policy

is that all comments re ceived will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed t o be Confidential Business In formation (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.go v or e - mail. The www.regulations.gov Website is an “ anony mous access ” sy stem, which means EPA

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

3 of 98 will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment . If you send an e - mail comment directl y to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov , yo ur e - mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made avai lable on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body

of your comment and with any disk or CD

–ROM you submit. I f EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment . Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters and an y form of encryption, and should be free of an y defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting comments, go to Section I .B. of the **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION**  section of this document . Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index , some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted b y statute. Certain other material, such as cop yri ghted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only

in hard cop y for

m. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronicall y in www.regulations.gov or in hard cop y at the Air and Radiation Docket , EPA/DC, EPA West , Room 3334 , 1301 Constitution Ave., NW. Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday

through Friday , excluding legal holiday s. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566

– 1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 56 6

– 1742. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:** Margaret Sheppard , Stratospheric Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Mail Code 6205J , Environmental Protection Agency,

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

4 of 98 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number (202) 343

– 9 163 ; fax number (202) 343

–2338 , e - mail address: sheppard.margaret@epa.gov . Notices and rulemakings under EPA’s Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program are available on EPA’s Stratospheric Ozone Website at www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/regs. **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents**  I. General Information A. Background B. Does this action appl y to me? C. What should Iconsider as Iprepare m y comments for EPA? D. What acronym s and abbreviations are used in the preamble? II. How does the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program work? A. What are the statutory requirements and authority for the SNAP program? B. What is EPA’s regulation implementing section 612? C. How do the regulations for the SNAP program work? D. Where d o I find additional information about the SNAP program? III. What substitutes in what end - use s are considered in this proposed rule?

A. What listing decisions is EPA proposing in this action? B. What are ethane, isobutane, propane, HFC - 32, R - 441A , and the ASHRAE clas sifications for refrigerant flammability? C. What end - uses are included in EPA’s proposed decision? IV . What criteria did EPA consider in determining whether to list the substitutes as

acceptable and in determining appropriate use conditions and how does EPA cons ider those factors? A. Effects on the environment B. Flammability

and fire safety C. Toxicity V. Why

is EPA proposing these specific use conditions? A. New equipment onl y; not intended for use as a retrofit alternative B. Standards C. Charge size D. Color - coded hoses and piping E. Labeling F. Other options not included VI . How is EPA proposing to address venting, release, or disposal of the refrigerant

substitutes proposed to be listed under section 608 of the Clean Air Act? A. What are the statutory requirements concerning venting , release, or disposal of refrigerant s and refrigerant substitutes under section 608 of the Clean Air Act?

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

5 of 98 B. What are EPA’s regulations concerning venting, releasing or disposing of refrigerant substitutes? C. What revision to the venting prohibition has EPA recentl y prop osed? D. What is EPA’s proposed determination regarding whether venting of hydrocarbons to be listed as acceptable subject to use conditions in the end - use s proposed in this NPRM poses a threat to the environment? E. What is EPA proposing regarding venting, rel ease, or disposal of refrigerant substitutes, other than hydrocarbons, included in our proposed decision? VII. What recommendations does EPA have for safe use of the proposed flammable substitute

refrigerants? VIII. Statutory

and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Ord er 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review B. Paperwork Reduction Act C. Regulatory

Flexibility

Act D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism F. Executive Order 13175: Consult ation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health and Safety Risks H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect Energy

Suppl y, Distribution, or Use I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and L ow - Income Populations IX . References **I. General Information**  A. Background This rule lists as acceptable subject to use condition s a number of flammable refrigerant substitute s that EPA believes present overall lower risk to human health and the environment compared to other available or potentially available alternatives in the same end - use s . T he proposed refrigerants includ e one h ydrofluorocarbon ( HFC ) refrigerant

—HFC - 32

—and f

our hydrocarbon refrigerants

—ethane, isobutane, propane, and R - 441A . This proposed rule, if finalized as proposed, would list one or more of these substitutes as acceptable subject to use

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

6 of 98 conditions in a numbe r of stationary air - conditioning and refrigeration end - use s under the SNAP program, including: household refrigerators and freezers, retail food refrigeration, very low temperature refrigeration, non - mechanical heat transfer, vending machines, and residential and light commercial air conditioning and heat pumps. The use conditions would set requirements to ensure that these substitutes do not present significantly greater risk in the end - use than other substitutes that are currently or potentiall y available . All of the end - uses proposed in this rule are for stationary refrigeration or air conditioning; EPA previously addressed flammable refrigerants in motor vehicle air conditioning (MVAC). On June 13, 1995, at 60 FR 31092, the Agency found all flammable substitutes to be unacceptable for use in MVAC unless specifically listed as acceptable subject to use conditions because of flammability risks and the lack of sufficient risk assessment and sufficient information to demonstrate safe use in th at end - use at that time. 40 CFR Part 82, Subpart G, Appendix B . Some of these risks are unique to motor vehicles . In recent years, EPA has listed three low global warming potential ( GWP ) refrigerants as acceptable subject to use conditions for motor vehicles (i.e., R - 152 a, R - 1234yf, and R - 744). Two of these refrigerants are flammable , although less flammable than hydrocarbons . Under 40 CFR Part 82 , Subpart G, Appendix B , all o ther flammable substitutes remain unacceptable for use in motor vehicle air conditioning because EPA has not taken action to specifically list them as acceptable subject to use conditions . T his proposed rule responds to a number of SNAP submissions for f our hydrocarbon refrigerants and HFC - 32 and also lists some of these refrigerants as acceptable sub ject to use conditions in the same end - use s . Additionally , this action proposes to exempt from Section 608’s prohibition on venting, release, or disposal , the four hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes that we

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

7 of 98 are propos ing to list as acceptable subject to u se conditions in specific end - use s, on the basis of current evidence that their venting , release , or disposal does not pose a threat to the environment . Note that other environmental regulatory requirements still apply . For example, for those refrigerants that are VOC as defined in 40 CFR 50.100(s), a State might adopt additional control strategies if necessary for an ozone nonattainment area to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone . With the exception of HFC - 32, the refrigerants proposed acceptable subject to use conditions in this action are h ydrocarbons or blends consisting solely of h ydrocarbons. Hydrocarbon refrigerants have been in use for over 15 years in countries such as Germany , the United Kingdom, Australia, and Japan in household and commercial refrigerators and freezers. To a lesser extent, hydrocarbon refrigerants have also been used internationally in small air conditioning units such as mini - splits and portable room air conditioners . Because h ydrocarbon refrigerants have zero ozone depletion potential (ODP) and very low GWP s compared to most other refrigerants, many companies recentl y have expressed interest in using hydrocarbons in the United States. Also, some companies have reported improved energy

efficiency

w ith hydrocarbon refrigerants. In a final rule in the Federal Register on December 20, 2011 at 76 FR 78832, EPA’s SNAP program listed isobutane and R - 441A as acceptable subject to use conditions in household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrig erators and freezers and found propane acceptable subject to use conditions in retail food refrigerators and freezers (stand - alone units onl y). T here is interest in use of HFC - 32 (difluoromethane, Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number [CAS Reg. No.] 75 - 10 - 5 ) in residential air conditioning sy stems and heat pumps because it ha s a GWP of 675 , which is lower than the GWPs of hydrochlorofluorocarbon

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

8 of 98 ( HCFC ) - 22 (1,810) and most other HFC - based refrigerants (approximately 1,500 to 4,000 ). It also has mild fl ammability compared to hydrocarbon refrigerants. Mini - split sy stems using HFC 32 are now being sold in Japan and are being introduced in India and Indonesia. This action proposes to list one or more of these five low er - GWP refrigerant substitute options a s acceptable subject to use conditions in the end - use s identified previously . This is a regular update to EPA’s lists of acceptable substitutes under the SNAP program. This action also respon d s to a call in the Climate Action Plan announced June 2013 for EPA to “use its authority through the Significant New Alternatives Policy Program to encourage private sector investment in low - emissions technology by identifying and approving climate friendl y chemicals ” (CAP, 2013). This rule proposes to approve a numb er of climate - friendl y alternatives for various kinds of refrigeration and air conditioning equipment, as discussed below. This is the first listing action EPA has taken since the Climate Action Plan was issued. This action, if finalized, would expand the menu of available climate - friendly alternatives. Many of these alternatives can substitute both for ozone - depleting substances and for high - GWP HFCs. Using low - GWP alternatives instead of high - GWP HFCs would result in reducing the impact of climate - damagin g emissions. Use and emissions of HFCs is rapidly increasing because they

are the primary

substitutes for ozone - depleting substances in many of the largest end - uses , and because worldwide use is growing, mostl y due to increased demand for refrigeration and air conditioning, particularl y in developing countries. Though they represent a small fraction of current total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions , their warming impact is hundreds to thousands of times higher than that of CO 2 and other GHGs and their emissio ns are projected to increase significantly over the next several decades, if left unregulated. In the United States, emissions of HFCs are expected to double from current levels of 1.5 percent of

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

9 of 98 greenhouse gas emissions to 3 percent b y 2020 and nearl y triple b y 2030 ( CAP Website , 2013) . HFCs are rapidl y accumulating in the atmosphere. For example, the atmospheric concentration of HFC - 134a, the most abundant HFC, has increased by about 10% per ye ar from 2006 to 2012, and concentrations of HFC - 143a and HFC - 125 have risen over 13% and 16% per ye ar from 2007 - 2011, respectivel y (Montzka, 2012; NOAA, 2013) . This action proposes to find acceptable, for specific end - uses and subject to use conditions, several alternatives that have GWPs significantly lower than both the ozone depleting substances ( ODS ) and HFC substitute refrigerants currentl y used in those end - uses. For example, this action, if finalized, would allow the use of isobutane (R- 600a) and the h ydrocarbon blend R - 441A in stand - alone commercial refrige rators. The GWPs 1 of these hydrocarbon refrigerants are less than 10, while HFCs ty picall y used in this end - use—HFC - 134a and R - 404A (a blend of three HFCs)

— have GWPs of 1,430 and approximately 3,920, respectivel y. In addition, this action proposes to find propane (R - 290) acceptable for use in household refrigerator - freezers, subject to use conditions. The GWP of R - 290 is 3.3 compared to the GWP of 1430 for HFC - 134a, which is ty picall y used in such equipment at the present time in the U.S . Finally , this acti on, if finalized, would allow for the use of propane, R - 441A, and difluoromethane (HFC - 32) in stand - alone room air conditioners. These alternatives have GWPs of 675 or less and could replace the use of R - 410A (a blend of two HFCs), which has a GWP of

1 GWPs for HFC - 134a, HFC - 32, the component HFCs comprising R - 404A and R - 410A, propane and ethane are listed in IPCC, 200 7: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Mill er (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. This document is accessible at www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html . GWPs for isobutane and R - 441A were provided by the submitters to EPA and the y are consistent with available information for their components and the range of GWPs found for other hydrocarbons in IPCC, 2007. For refrigerant blends, EPA has taken the 100 - year integrated time horizon GWP from IPCC, 2007 for the component compounds an d multiplied them by the weight fraction of each component in the blend to obtain an approximate GWP. Unless otherwise stated, GWPs stated in this document are 100 - year integrated time horizon values taken from IPCC, 2007.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

10 of 98 appro ximately

2,090. ODS replaced in the end - uses in this rule include chlorofluorocarbon ( CFC ) - 12 (ODP 2 of 1 and GWP of 10, 9 0 0 ), R - 13B1 ( also known as bromotrifluoromethane or halon 1301, with ODP of 1 0 and GWP of 7 , 140), CFC - 113 (ODP of 0.8 and GWP of 6 , 130), R 502 (a blend of CFC - 115 and HCFC - 22, with ODP of 0.334 and GWP of 4 , 660 ), and HCFC - 22 (ODP of 0.055 and GWP of 1 , 810). B. Does this action apply to me? This notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) would list the following flammable refrigerants as acceptab le subject to use conditions for use in specific end - use s within the refrigeration and air conditioning sector : ethane (R - 170), HFC - 32 (R - 32), isobutane (R - 600a), propane (R - 290), and the hydrocarbon blend R - 441A . T yp es of residential and light commercial air conditioning equipment addressed in this NPRM include window AC units ; packaged terminal AC units and heat pumps; and portable room AC units . Ty pes of refrigeration equipment include stand - alone commercial refrigerators and freezers (retail food refrig eration) , very low temperature freezers, thermosiphons (non - mechanical transfer equipment), household refrigerators and freezers , and vending machines . Table 1 identifies the p otential entities that may wish to use ethane, HFC - 32, R - 441A, isobutane, propan e, and other flammable refrigerants in these end - use s .

TABLE 1

—POTENTIALLY REGULATED ENTI TI ES BY NORTH AMERI CAN IN DUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (NAI CS) CODE OR SUBSECTOR Category NAI CS code

or subsector Description of regulated entities Industry 325412 Pharmaceutical Preparations (e.g., Capsules, Liniments, Ointments, Tablets) Manufacturing Industry 333415 Manufacturers of Refrigerators, Freezers, and Other Refrigerating or Freezing Equipment, Electric or 2 Unless otherwise stated, the OD P values used in this document are those published in appendices A and B to subpart A of 40 CFR part 82. For refrigerant blends, EPA has taken the ODPs for the component compounds and multiplied them by the weight fraction of each component in the blend to obtain an approximate ODP.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

11 of 98 Other; Heat Pumps Not Elsewhere Specified or In c luded (NESOI); and Parts Thereof Industry 443111 Appliance Stores: Household - ty pe Industry 445120 Convenience Stores Industry 445110 Supermarkets and Other Grocery (except Convenience) Stores Industry 722211 Limited - Service Restaurants Industry 23822 0 Plumbing, Heating, and Air Conditioning Contractors Industry 811412 Appliance Repair and Maintenance Industry 423620 Household Appliances, Electric Housewares, and Consumer Electronics Merchant Wholesalers Industry 423740 Refrigeration Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers This table is not intended to be exhaustive , but rather a guide regarding entities likely to adopt the substitute s whose use would be regulated by this proposed action. If you have an y questions about whether this action app lies to a particular entity , consult the person listed in the preceding section, **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.** C. W hat should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA? 1. Submitting Confidential Business Information ( CBI) Do not submit confidential info rmation to EPA through www.regulations.gov or e - mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD - ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD - ROM as CBI and then identify

el ectronically

within the disk or CD - ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a cop y of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 2.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

12 of 98 2. Tips for preparing your comments When submitting comments, remember to:

 Id entify

the rulemaking by

docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number).

 Follow directions . The agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by

referenci ng a CFR part or section number.

 Explain why

you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for yo ur requested changes.

 Describe an y assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used.

 If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.

 Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives.

 Explain your views as clearl y as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.

 Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. D. What acronyms and abbreviations are used in the preamble? Below is a list of acronyms and abbreviations used in th is preamble . AC

—air conditi oning ACGIH

— American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygi enists ACH

—air changes per hour AEGL

—acute exposure guideline level AHRI

— Air Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

13 of 98 ANSI

— American National Standards Institute ASHRAE

— American Socie ty of Heating, Refrigerating and Air - Conditioning Engineers, Inc. BTU

—British thermal unit CAA

—Clean Air Act CAS Reg. No . —Chemical Abstracts Service Registry I dentification Number CBI

—Confidential Business Information CFC

—chlorofluorocarbon CFR

—Code of Federal Regulations CMAQ

—Community

Multiscale Air Quality EO

—Executive Order EPA

—the United States Environmental Protection Agency FR

—Federal Register GHG

— greenhouse gas GW P

— global warming potential HCFC

— hydrochlorofluorocarbon HFC

— hydrofluorocarbon ICF

—IC F International, Inc. ICR

—In formation Collection Request IE C

—International Electrotechnical Commission IPCC

—Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPR

—industrial process refrigeration kJ

— kilo j oule kPa

— kilopascal

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

14 of 98 lb

— pound LFL

—lower flammability l imit MSDS

—Material Safety Data Sheet MVAC

— motor vehicle air conditioning NAAQS

— National Ambient Air Quality Standard NAICS

— North American Industrial Classification Sy stem NIOSH

—the United S tates National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health NOAE L

— No Observed Adverse Effect Level NPRM

— Notice of Proposed Rulemaking NTTAA

—

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act OEM

—original equipment manufacturer ODP

—ozone depletion potential ODS

—ozone - depleting substance OMB

—the United States Office of Management and Budget OSHA

—the United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration PEL

— permissible exposure limit PFC

— perfluorocarbon PMS

—Pantone Matching S ys tem ppb

— parts per billion ppm — parts per million PRA

—Paperwork Reduction Act PTAC

— pack aged terminal air conditioner PTHP

— packaged terminal heat pump

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

15 of 98 REL

— recommended exposure limit RFA

—Regulatory

Flexibility

Act SBA

—the United States Small Business Administration SNAP

— Significant New Alternatives Policy STEL

— short term exposure limit TLV

—threshold limit value TSCA

—Toxic Substances Control Act TW A

—t ime - weighted average UL

— Underwriters Laboratories Inc. UMRA

— Unfunded Mandates Reform Act VOC

— volatile organic compounds **II. How does the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program work ?**  A. Wh at are the s tatutory requirements and a uthority for the SNAP Program ? Section 612 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires EPA to develop a program for evaluating alternatives to ozone - depleting substances (ODS). EPA refers to this program as the Signifi cant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. The major provisions of section 612 are the following : 1. Rulemaking Section 612(c) requires EPA to promulgate rules making it unlawful to replace any class I substance (chlorofluorocarbon, halon, carbon tetrac hloride, meth ylchloroform, and hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II substance (hydrochlorofluorocarbon) with any substitute that the Administrator determines may present adverse effects to human health or the environment where the Administrator has identif ied an alternative that (1) reduces the overall

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

16 of 98 risk to human health and the environment and (2) is currentl y or potentiall y available. 2. L isting of Unacceptable/Acceptable Substitutes Section 612(c) requires EPA to publish a list of the substitutes unacc eptable for specific uses and to publish a corresponding list of acceptable alternatives for specific uses. The list of acceptable substitutes may be found at www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/lists , and the lists of “unacceptable,” “acceptable subject to use conditi ons,” and “acceptable subject to narrowed use limits” substitutes are found in the appendices to Subpart G of 40 CFR Part 82 as well as at www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/lists . 3. Petition Process Section 612(d) grants the right to any person to petition EPA to a dd a substance to, or delete a substance from, the lists published in accordance with section 612(c). The Agency has 90 day s to grant or deny

a petition. Where the Agency grants the petition, EPA must publish the revised lists within an additional six months. 4. 90 - day Notification Section 612(e) directs EPA to require any person who produces a chemical substitute for a class I substance to notify the Agency

not less than 90 day s before new or existing chemicals are introduced into interstate commerce for s ignificant new uses as substitutes for a class I substance. The producer must also provide the Agency with the producer's unpublished health and safety studies on such substitutes. 5. Outreach Section 612(b)(1) states that the Administrator shall seek to maximize the use of federal research facilities and resources to assist users of class Iand II substances in identifying and developing alternatives to the use of such substances in key commercial applications.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

17 of 98 6. Clearinghouse Section 612(b)(4) requires the Agency to set up a public clearinghouse of alternative chemicals, product substitutes, and alternative manufacturing processes that are available for products and manufacturing processes which use class Iand II substances. B. Wh at is EPA’s regulation implementing section 612? On March 18, 1994, EPA published the original rulemaking (59 FR 13044) which established the process for administering the SNAP program and issued EPA's first lists identifying acceptable and unacceptable substitutes in the major industrial use sectors ( Subpart G of 40 CFR Part 82 ). These eight sectors - refrigeration and air conditioning; foam blowing; cleaning solvents; fire suppression and explosion protection; sterilants; aerosols; adhesives, coatings and inks; and tobacco exp ansion - are the principal industrial sectors that historically consumed the largest volumes of ODS. Section 612 of the CAA instruct s EPA to list as acceptable those substitutes that present a lower overall risk to human health and the environment as compared with other substitutes that are currentl y or potentially available for a specific use . C. How do the regulations for the SNAP p rogram w ork ? Under the SNAP regulations, anyone who plans to market or produce a substitute in one of the eight major indus trial use sectors where class Ior class II substances have been used must provide notice to the Agency , including health and safety information on the substitute, at least 90 day s before introducing it into interstate commerce for significant new use as an alternative. 40 CFR 82.176(a). This requirement applies to the persons planning to introduce the substitute

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

18 of 98 into interstate commerce, 3 wh o ty pically are chemical manufacturers but may include importers, formulators, equipment manufacturers, and end users when they are responsible for introducing a substitute into commerce. 4 The CAA and the SNAP regulations, 40 CFR 82.174(a), prohibit use of a substitute earlier than 90 day s after notice has been provided to the Agency . EPA considers that notice has been received once EPA receives the submission and determines that the submission includes complete and adequate data. 40 CFR 82.180(a). At that point, the SNAP review begins. The Agency

has identified four possible decision categories for substitutes that are submitted for evaluation: acceptable; acceptable subject to use conditions; acceptable subject to narrowed use limits; and unacceptable 5 (40 CFR 82.180(b)). Use conditions and narrowed use limits are both considered “use restrictions” and are explained be low. Substitutes that are deemed acceptable with no use restrictions (no use conditions or narrowed use limits) can be used for all applications in the relevant end - use s within the sector. Substitutes that are acceptable subject to use restrictions may

be used only

in accordance with those restrictions. After reviewing a substitute, the Agency may make a determination that a substitute is acceptable onl y if certain conditions are met in the way that the substitute is used to minimize risks to human health and the environment. EPA describes such substitutes as “ accept able subject to use conditions.” Entities that use these substitutes without meeting the associated use

3 As defined at 40 CFR 82.104, “interstate commerce” means the distribution or transportation of any product between one state, territory, possession or the District of Columbia, and another state, territory, possession or the D istrict of Columbia, or the sale, use or manufacture of any product in more than one state, territory, possession or District of Columbia. The entry points for which a product is introduced into interstate commerce are the release of a product from the fac ility in which the product was manufactured, the entry into a warehouse from which the domestic manufacturer releases the product for sale or distribution, and at the site of United States Customs clearance. 4 As defined at 40 CFR 82.172, “end - use” means p rocesses or classes of specific applications within major industrial sectors where a substitute is used to replace an ODS. 5 The SNAP regulations also include “pending, ” referring to submissions for which EPA has not reached a determination under this pro vision.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

19 of 98 conditions are in violation of section 612 of the CAA and EPA’s SNAP regulations. 40 CFR 8 2.174(c). For some substitutes, the Agency may permit a narrowed range of use within an end - use or sector. For example, the Agency may limit the use of a substitute to certain end - use s or specific applications within an industry sector. EPA describes thes e substitutes as “acceptable subject to narrowed use limits.” A person using a substitute that is acceptable subject to narrowed use limits in applications and end - use s that are not consistent with the narrowed use limit is using the substitute in an unacc eptable manner and is in violation of section 612 of the CAA and EPA’s SNAP regulations. 40 CFR 82.174(c). The Agency

publishes its SNAP program decisions in the Federal Register (FR). EPA publishes proposed decisions concerning substitutes that are deeme d acceptable subject to use restrictions (use conditions and/or narrowed use limits), or substitutes deemed unacceptable, as proposed rulemakings to provide the public providing an opportunity to comment, before publishing final decisions. In contrast, EP A publishes decisions concerning substitutes that are deemed acceptable with no restrictions as “notices of acceptability” or “determinations of acceptability,” rather than as proposed and final rules. As described in the preamble to the rule initially imp lementing the SNAP program in the Federal Register at 59 FR 13044 on March 18, 1994, EPA does not believe that rulemaking procedures are necessary to list alternatives that are acceptable without restrictions because such listings neither impose any sancti on nor prevent anyone from using a substitute. Many SNAP listings include “Comments” or “Further Information” to provide additional information on substitutes. Since this additional information is not part of the regulatory

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

20 of 98 decision, these statements are n ot binding for use of the substitute under the SNAP program. However, regulatory

requirements so listed are binding under other regulatory programs (e.g., worker protection regulations promulgated b y the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) ). The “Further Information” identified in the listing does not necessarily include all other legal obligations pertaining to the use of the substitute. While the items listed are not legall y binding under the SNAP program, EPA encourages users of substitutes to apply all statements in the “Further Information” column in their use of these substitutes. In man y instances, the information simply refers to sound operating practices that have already been identified in existing industry and/or building codes or standards. Thus many of the statements, if adopted, would not require the affected user to make significant changes in existing operating practices. D. Where do I find a dditional information about the SNAP p rogram ? For copies of the comprehensive SNAP lis ts of substitutes or additional information on SNAP, refer to EPA’s Ozone Depletion website at: www.epa.gov/ozone/snap . For more information on the Agency's process for administering the SNAP program or criteria for evaluation of substitutes, refer to the SNAP final rulemaking in the Federal Register at 59 FR 13044 on March 18, 1994, codified at 40 CFR Part 82 , Subpart G. A complete chronology of SNAP decisions and the appropriate citations is found at: www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/chron.html . **III. What substitut es in what**  **end -**  **use s are considered in this**  **proposed rule?**  A. What listing decision s is EPA proposing in this action? In this action, EPA proposes to list the following refrigerants as acceptable substitutes, subject to use conditions, in the identified end - us es. 1. Retail food refrigeration. EPA proposes to list i sobutane ( also referred to as R

– 600a) and

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

21 of 98 the hydrocarbon blend R - 441A as acceptable subject to use conditions as substitutes in retail food refrigeration (new stand - alone commercial refrigerators and fr eezers only). EPA proposes the following use conditions: i. The quantity

of the substitute refrigerant (i.e., “ charge size ” ) must not exceed 150 grams (5.3 ounces); ii. These refrigerants may be used onl y in new equipment designed specifically and clearly identi fied for the refrigerant -- i.e., none of these substitutes may be used as a conversion or

“ retrofit ” 6 refrigerant for existing equipment; iii. These refrigerants may be used onl y in stand - alone commercial refrigerators and freezers that meet all requirements lis ted in Supplement SB to the 10th edition of Underwriters Laboratories (UL) Standard 471. In cases where the proposed rule includes requirements more stringent than those of the 10th edition of UL Standard 471, the appliance must meet the requirements of th e rule, as finalized; iv. The refrigerator or freezer must have red Pantone Matching S ys tem (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, or other devices through which the refrigerant passes , to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be applied at all service ports and other parts of the sy stem where service puncturing or other actions creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected and must extend a minimum of one (1) inch in both directions from such locations; v. Th e following markings, or the equivalent, must be provided and must be permanent: (a) “ DANGER

—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Do Not Use Mechanical Devices To Defrost Refrigerator. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing. ” This

6 Sometimes conversion refrigerant substitutes are inaccurately referred to as “drop in” replacements.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

22 of 98 marking must be provided on or near any evaporators that can be contacted by the consumer. (b) “ DANGER

—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. To Be Repaired Onl y By

Trained Service Personnel. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing. ” This marking must be located n ear the machine compartment. (c) “ CAUTION

—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner’s Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Precautions Must be Followed. ” This marking must be located near the mach ine compartment. (d) “ CAUTION

—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properl y In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used. ” This marking must be provided on the exterior of the refrigerator. (e) “ CAUTION

—Risk of Fire or Explosion Due To Puncture Of Refrigerant Tubing; Follow Handling Instructions Carefully . Flammable Refrigerant Used. ” This marking must be provided near all exposed refrigerant tubing. With regard to the proposed use conditions, we note the following. First, regarding the use of red marking for pipes , hoses and other devices in proposed use condition iv , we discuss and solicit comment on direct color application on the applicable parts of the sy stem, such as a red plastic sleeve, in S ection V.D, “Color - coded hoses and p iping .” Discussion of application of red coloring for equipment utilizing a process tube is also provided there . Second, regarding proposed use condition v., the difference between this prop osed requirement and clauses SB 6.1.2 to SB6.1.5 of UL S tandard 471 is that all of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1 ⁄4 inch) high. In UL 471, the markings are required to be no less than 3.2 mm (1/8 inch) high. 2. Very low temperature refrigeration and non - mechanical heat transfer. EPA proposes to list

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

23 of 98 e thane ( also referred to as R - 170) , as acceptable , subject to use conditions, in very low temperature refrigeration equipment and in non - mechanical heat transfer , subject to the same use conditions as described above for isobutane and R - 441A in stand - alone commercial refrigerators and freezers . 3. Household refrigerators and freezers. EPA proposes to list propane (also referred to as R

– 290), as acceptable subject to use conditions as a substitute in household refrigerators and freezers and combination refrigerator/freezers subject to the following use conditions. i. The charge size for an y household refrigerator , freezer , or combination refrigerator and freezer for each circuit using R

–290 must not exceed 57 grams (2.0 ounces); ii. This refrigerant may be use d only

in new equipment specificall y designed and clearl y identified for the refrigerant -- i.e., none of these substitutes may be used as a conversion or

“ retrofit ” refrigerant for existing equipment; iii. This substitute may be used only

in equipment that meets all requirements in Supplement SA to the 10th edition of ULStandard 250. ( In cases where the proposed rule includes requirements more stringent than those of the 10th edition of ULStandard 250, the appliance must meet the requirements of the final SNAP listing ) ; iv. The refrigerator or freezer must have red Pantone Matching S ys tem (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, and other devices through which the refrigerant passes to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant ; v. Permanent markings must be provided on the e quipment, as described above for stand alone commercial refrigerators and freezers. All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1 ⁄4 inch) high. ( The difference between this requirement and clauses SA6.2.1 to SA6.2.5 of ULStandard 250 is that i n UL250, the markings are required to be no less than 3.2

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

24 of 98 mm [ 1/8 inch ] high instead of 6.4 mm [ 1/4 inch ]) . 4. Vending machines . EPA proposes to list R

–441A, isobutane and propane as acceptable substitutes in vending machines, subject to the same u se conditions described above for stand alone commercial refrigerators and freezers, except that paragraph iii. would read as follows: Equipment must meet all requirements of Supplement SA to the 7th edition of UL Standard 541, “Refrigerated Vending Machin es,” date December 10, 2011 ( instead of the 10th edition of UL471 ) . Note that in UL541, the relevant references on equipment markings for flammable refrigerants i n Supplement A are sections SA 6.1.2 - SA 6.1.5. 5. Residential and light commercial air con ditioning and heat pumps . EPA proposes to list p ropane ( also known as R - 290), difluoromethane (also known as HFC - 32 or R - 32), and R - 441A as acceptable subject to use conditions as substitutes in residential and light commercial air conditioning for self

- co ntained room air conditioners, including packaged terminal air conditioners (PTACs) and packaged terminal heat pumps (PTHPs), window AC units, and portable AC units designed for use in a single room . 7 EPA proposes the following use conditions: i. These refrig erants may be used onl y in new equipment designed specifically and clearly identified for the refrigerant -- i.e., none of these substitutes may be used as a conversion or

“ retrofit ” refrigerant for existing equipment; ii. These refrigerants may be used onl y in air conditioners that meet all requirements listed in Supplement SA to the 8th edition, dated August 2, 2012, of Underwriters L aboratories (UL) Standard 484, “Room Air Conditioners.” In cases where the final rule includes requirements 7 Packaged terminal air conditioners are intended for use in a single room and use no ducts to carry cooled air and no external refrigerant lines . Ty pical applications include motel or dormitory air conditioners.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

25 of 98 more stringent than those of the 8th edition of UL Standard 484, the appliance must meet the requirements of the final rule in place of the requirements in the UL Standard; iii. UL484 includes charge limits for room air conditioners and adherence to those charge limits would normally

be confirmed b y the installer . In addition to proposing the charge limits in the UL484 standard as a requirement , EPA is proposing the following charge size limits adherence to which must be confirmed b y the original equipment manufacturer (OEM). In c ases where the charge size limit listed is different from those determined by UL 484, the smaller of the two charge sizes would apply . For a review of how these charge size limits were derived, see “Derivation of Charge Limits f or Room Air Conditioners,” E PA, 2013 in the docket. The charge size limit must be determined based on the type of equipment, the alternative refrigerant used, and the normal rated capacity of the unit. The proposed limits are presented in Tables 3 through 6 below in section V.C, “Charge size , ” and in Tables A, B, C and D of the regulatory text at the end of this document. iv. The air conditioner must have red Pantone Matching S ys tem (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, or other devices through which the refrigerant passes to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be applied at all service ports and other parts of the sy stem where service puncturing or other actions creat ing an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected and must extend a minimum of one (1) inch in both directions from such locations; v. The following markings, or the equivalent, must be provided and must be permanent: (a) On the outside of the air conditioner: “ DANGER

—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. To Be Repair ed Only By Trained Ser

vi c e Personnel. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing. ”

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

26 of 98 (b) On the outside of the air conditioner: “ CAUTION

—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properl y In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used. ” (c) On the inside of the air conditioner near the compressor: “CAUTION

—Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner’s Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Precautions Must be Followed. ” (d) For portable air con ditioners, packaged terminal air conditioners and packaged terminal heat pumps, on the outside of the product: “WARNI NG: Appliance shall be installed, operated and stored in a room with a floor area larger than “X” m2 (Y ft2 ).” The value “X” must be determ ined using the minimum room size in m2 calculated using Appendix F of UL484. The e vaporator must remain no higher than 0.6 m above the floor. (e) For window air conditioners, on the outside of the product: “WARNING: Appliance shall be installed, operated and stored in a room with a floor area larger than “X” m2 (Y ft2 ).” The value “X” must be determined using the minimum room size in m2 calculated using Appendix F of UL 484. The e vaporator must remain no higher than 1.06 m above the floor. All of these marking s must be in letters n o less than 6.4 mm (1 ⁄4 inch) high. ( The difference between this requirement and clauses SA6.2.1 to SA 6.2.5 of UL Standard 484 is that in UL484, the markings are required to be no less than 3.2 mm [ 1/8 inch ] high instead of 6.4 mm [ 1/4 inch ] ). The regulat ory

text of our proposed decisions appears in tables at the end of this document. If finalized as proposed, this text would be codified at 40 CFR Part 82 Subpart G. The proposed regulatory

text contains listing decisions for the end - uses discussed above. W e note that there may

be other legal obligations pertaining to the manufacture, use, handling, and

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

27 of 98 disposal of hydrocarbons that are not included in the information listed in the tables (e.g., section 608 prohibition on venting, releasing, or disposing of refrigerant substitutes or Department of Transportation requirements for transport of flammable gases). In summary , EPA is proposing to list ethane, isobutane, propane, HFC - 32, and R - 441A as acceptable subject to use conditions as substitute refrigerants i n certain refrigeration and air conditioning end - use s. If this proposal were to become final, it would be legal to use those refrigerants in the specified ty pes of equipment under the conditions identified above. U se in the specified types of equipment that is not consistent with the use conditions , as finalized, would be a violation of CAA section 612 and EPA’s implementing regulations. Both the equipment manufacturer s and the end user s should be familiar with these proposed use conditions and EPA would expect them to comply with an y final use conditions . B. Wh at are ethane, isobutane, propane, HFC - 32, R - 441A, and the ASHRAE classifications for refrigerant flammability? Ethane, isobut ane, and propane are h ydrocarbons and R - 441A is a hydrocarbon blend . Hydro carbons are highl y flammable organic compounds made up of hydrogen and carbon. Ethane has two carbons and a chemical formula of C 2 H 6 . Propane has three carbons and the formula C 3 H 8 . I sobutane has four carbons and the formula C 4 H 10 , also written as CH(CH 3 ) 2 CH 3 to distinguish it from n - butane. The respective Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Numbers (CAS Reg. Nos.) of ethane, propane , and isobutane are 74 - 84 - 0, 74

– 98

– 6 , and 75

–28

– 5. As refrigerants, ethane, propane , and isobutane can be referred to by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers ( ASHRAE ) designations R - 170, R

–290 and R

– 600a, respectivel y. R - 441A, also known b y the trade name “HCR - 188C,” is a highl y flammable hydrocarbon

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

28 of 98 blend consisting of 55% propane, 36% n - butane, 6% isobutane, and 3% ethane b y weight. HFC 32 is a mildly

flammable organic compound made up of hydrogen, carbon, and fluorine with the chemical formula CF 2 H 2 (CAS Reg. No. 75 - 10 - 5). The American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/ASHRAE Standard 34

–2010 assigns a safety group classification for each refrigerant which consists of two alphanumeric characters (e.g., A2 or B1). The capital letter indicates the toxicity and the numeral denotes the flammability . ASHRAE classifies Class A refrigerants as refrigerants for which toxicity has not been identified at concentrations less than or equal to 400 parts per million (ppm) by volume, based on data used to determine threshold limit value - time - weighted average (TLV

–TWA) or consistent indices. Class B signifies refrigerants for which there is evidence of toxicity at concentrations below 400 ppm by volume, based on data used to determine TLV

–TWA or consistent indices. The refrigerants are also assigned a flammability classification of 1, 2, or 3 . Tests are conducted in accordance with ASTM E681 using a spark ignition source at 60 °C and 101.3 kPa (ASHRAE , 2010). Figure 1 in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 15

–2007 uses the same safety group but limits its concentration to 3400 ppm. The flammability

classification “1” is given to refrigerants that, when tested, show no flame propagation. The flammability classification “2” is given to refrigerants that, when tested, exhibit flame propagation , have a heat of combustion less than 19,000 kJ/kg (8,174 BTU/lb) , and have a lowe r flammability limit (LFL) greater than 0.10 kg/m 3 . Refrigerants within flammability classification 2 may

optionally

be designated in the lower flammability subclass “2L” if they have a maximum burning velocity of 10 cm/s or lower when tested at 23.0 °C an d 101.3 kPa. The flammability

classification “3” is given to refrigerants that, when tested, exhibit flame propagation and that either have a heat of combustion of 19,000 kJ/kg (8,174 BTU/lb) or greater

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

29 of 98 or an LFL of 0.10 kg/m 3 or lower. For both toxicity and flammability classifications, refrigerant blends are designated based on the worst case of fractionation determined for the blend (which may be different when evaluating toxicity than when evaluating flammability).

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

30 of 98

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

31 of 98 Figure 1. Refrigerant Safety Group Classification Safety GroupIncreasingFlammability Higher Flammability A3 B3 Lower Flammability A2 B2

A2L B2L No Flame Propagation A1 B1

Lower Toxicity Higher

Toxicity In creasing Toxicity Using these safety group classification s , ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 34

–2010 categorizes ethane, isobutane, propane, and R - 441A in the A3 Safety Group and categorizes HFC - 32 in the A2 L Safety Group. C. W hat end - uses are included in our proposed decision? 1. Household Refrigerators, Freezers, and Comb ination Refrigerator /Freezers Household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrigerator / freezers are intended primarily for residential use, although they may be used outside the home. Household freezers only offer storage space at freezing temperatures, unlike household refrigerators. Products with both a refrigerator and freezer in a single unit are most common. Wine coolers used in residential settings are considered part of this end - use . EPA previously found the flammable hydrocarbon refrigerants isobutane and R - 441A acceptable subject to use conditions in this end - use. December 20, 2011 , at 76 FR 78832 , codified at Appendix R of Subpart G of 40 CFR Part 82 . 2. Retail Food Refrigeration -- Stand - Alone Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers Retail food refrigeration includes the refrigeration sy stems, including cold storage cases, designed to chill food or keep it at a cold temperature for commercial sale. In this proposed rule, we are considering the use of hydrocarbons onl y i n stand - alone equipment. A stand - alone

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

32 of 98 appliance is one utilizing a sealed hermetic compressor and for which all refrigerant - containing components, including but not limited to the compressor, condenser , and evaporator, are assembled into a single piece of equipment before delivery to the ultimate consumer or user . S uch equipment does not require the addition or removal of refrigerant when placed into initial operation. Stand - alone equipment is used to chill or to store chilled beverages or frozen products ( e.g., reach - in beverage c oolers, stand - alone ice cream cabinets , and wine coolers in commercial settings ). This proposed rule does not apply to large commercial refrigeration sy stems such as, but not limited to, direct expansion refrigeration systems typicall y found in supermarket s . This proposal also does not apply to walk - in coolers, a ty

pe of equipment that typically requires larger charges than those considered in this proposed rule. EPA has already listed propane as acceptable subject to use conditions for use in stand - alone commercial refrigerators and freezers. December 20, 2011 , at 76 FR 78832 , codified at Appendi x R to Subpart G of 40 CFR Part 82 . 3. and 4. Very

low temperature refrigeration and non - mechanical heat transfer equipment . Very low temperature refrigeration equipment is intended to maintain temperatures considerabl y lower than for refrigeration of food

— for example, - 80 ° C ( - 170 ° F ) or lower. Examples of very

low temperature refrigeration equipment include medical freezers and freeze dryers, which generally

requ ire extremel y reliable refrigeration cycles to maintain low temperatures and must meet stringent technical standards. In some cases, very low temperature refrigeration equipment may use a refrigeration sy stem with two refrigerant loops or with a direct exp ansion refrigeration loop coupled with an alternative refrigeration technology (e.g., Stirling cycle). This allows a greater range of temperatures and may reduce the overall refrigerant charge. There is no U.S. standard that we are aware of that applies sp ecifically to very low temperature refrigeration or non - mechanical heat transfer. The submitter of information for use

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

33 of 98 of ethane in very

low temperature refrigeration has indicated that Underwriters Laboratories , Inc. will test their equipment for complian ce with the UL471 standard for commercial refrigeration equipment, which addresses stand - alone commercial refrigerators and freezers. We are proposing compliance with the UL 471 standard as one of the conditions for use of ethane in very low temperature refrigeration equipment. This submission also addressed the use of ethane in a type of non - mechanical heat transfer equipment called a thermosiphon. Non - mechanical heat transfer involves cooling s ys tems that rely on convection to remove heat from an area, rather than mechanical refrigeration. A thermosiphon is a ty pe of heat transfer s ys tem that relies on natural convection currents , as opposed to using a mechanical pump . This proposal would allow use of ethane in non - mechanical heat transfer uses, pro vided that they meet the use conditions, including the requirements of Supplement B to the UL471 standard and a charge limit of 150 g. 8 5 . Vending Machines Vending machines are self - contained units for refrigerating beverages or food which dispense goods that must be kept cold or frozen. This end - use differs from other retail food refrigeration because goods are dispensed, rather than allowing the consumer to reach in to grab a beverage or food product . The design of the refrigeration s ys tem of a vending m achine is similar to that of a self

- contained commercial refrigerator or freezer . Ty pically the difference lies in how pay

ment for goods is made and in the selection mechanisms found in vending machine s but not in self

- contained commercial refrigerator - fre ezers , and possibl y the outer casing (e.g., glass doors and open, reach - in designs are generally used in self

- contained commercial refrigerator - freezers whereas glass wall and other ty pes of casings are used for vending

8 EPA expects that equipment designed for cooling the engine compartment of heavy duty vehicles, a potential non mechanical heat transfer application, does not meet the requirements of UL 471 and thus, would not meet the requirements of this rule. Similar issues may exist for some other non - mechanical heat transfer equipment.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

34 of 98 machines) . The standard UL541 appli es to vending machines. It contains a Supplement SA specificall y addressing flammable refrigerants that is very similar to the Supplement SB in the UL471 standard for commercial refrigerators and freezers. 6 . Residential and L ight Commercial Air Condition ing and Heat Pumps This end - use includes equipment for cooling air in individual rooms, in single - famil y homes, and sometimes in small commercial buildings. This end - use differs from commercial comfort air conditioning, which uses chillers that cool water that is then used to cool air throughout a large commercial building, such as an office building or hotel. Examples of equipment for residential and light commercial air conditioning and heat pumps include:

 C entral air conditioners, also called unitary ai r conditioning or unitary split sy stem s. These sy stems include an outdoor unit with a condenser and a compressor , refrigerant lines, an indoor unit w ith an evaporator , and ducts to carry cooled air throughout a building. Central h eat p umps are similar but offer the choice to either heat or cool the indoor space . These sy stems are not addressed in this rule.

 Mu lti - split air conditioners. These s ys tems include one or more outdoor unit (s) with a condenser and a compressor and multiple indoor units, each of whi ch is connected to the outdoor unit by

refrigerant lines. These sy stems are not addressed in this rule.

 Mi ni - split air conditioners. These s ys tems include an outdoor unit with a condenser and a compressor and a single indoor unit that is connected to the o utdoor unit by refrigerant lines. Cooled air exits directly

from the indoor unit rather than being carried through ducts. These sy stems are not addressed in this rule.

 W indow air conditioners. These are self - contained units that fit in a window with the co ndenser extending outside the window . These types of units would be regulated under this

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

35 of 98 rule if it becomes final.

 P ackaged terminal air conditioners and packaged terminal heat pumps. These are selfcontained units that consist of a separate, un - encased co mbination of heating and cooling assemblies mounted through a wall . These typ es of units would be regulated under this rule if it becomes final.

 P ortable room air conditioners. These are self - contained units used inside rooms that are designed to be moved easily from room to room , usually having wheels . They

may contain an exhaust hose that can be placed through a window or door to eject heat to the outside. These types of units would be regulated under this rule if it becomes final. Of these types of equip ment, window air conditioners, packaged terminal air conditioners, packaged terminal heat pumps, and portable room air conditioners are selfcontained equipment with the condenser, compressor, evaporator , and tubing all within casing in a single unit . Thes e units all fall under the scope of the UL484 standard for Room Air Conditioners. In contrast, unitary split sy stems, multi - split systems and mini - split systems have an outdoor condenser that is separated from an indoor unit. Compared to split systems, s e lfcontained equipment typically has smaller charge sizes, has fewer locations that are prone to leak, and is less likely

to require servic ing by

a technician , thereb y causing refrigerant releases . A lower risk of refrigerant releases and a potential for s maller releases and lower concentration releases would result in lower risk that flammable refrigerant could be ignited. Thus, selfcontained air conditioners and heat pumps using a flammable refrigerant have lower risk for fire than split systems using a flammable refrigerant. **IV. What criteria did EPA consider in**  **determining whether to propose to**  **list the sub**  **s titutes as acceptable and in determining**  **the proposed use conditions and how does** 

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

36 of 98 **EPA consider those criteria**  **?** Section 612(c) of the Clean Air Act directs EPA to publish a list of acceptable replacement substances ( “ substitutes ” ) for class I and class II substances for specific uses. EPA compares the risks to human health and the environment of a substitute to the risks associated with other substitut es that are currentl y or potentially available. EPA also considers whether the substitute for class I and class II ODS “ reduces the overall risk to human health and the environment ” compared to the ODS historically used in the end - use. The criteria we revi ew are listed at 40 CFR 82.180(a)(7). These criteria are : (i) atmospheric effects and related health and environmental impacts; (ii) general population risks from ambient exposure to compounds with direct toxicity

and to increased ground - level ozone; (iii) ecosy stem risks; (iv) occupational risks; (v) consumer risks; (vi) flammability ; and (vii) cost and availability of the substitute. EPA evaluated each of the criteria for each substitute in each end - use for which we are proposing action and then for each substitute we considered overall risk to human health and the environment in comparison to other available or potentially available alternatives in the same end - use s. Based on our evaluations, we may reach different conclusions on the same substitute in di fferent end - uses, because of different risk profiles (e.g., different exposure levels and usage patterns) and different set s of available or potentially available substitutes for each end - use. As noted previousl y on May 17, 2013 , at 78 FR 29035, e nvironme ntal and human health exposures can vary

significantly

depending on the particular application of a substitute

– and over time, information available regarding a substitute can change. SNAP’s comparative risk framework does not imply fundamental tradeoffs with respect to different ty pes of risk, either to the environment or to human health. EPA recognizes that during the nearl y two - decade history of the SNAP program, new information about alternatives already found acceptable and new

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

37 of 98 alternatives have emerg ed. To the extent possible, EPA considers current information that improve s our understanding of the risk factors for the environment and human health in the context of the available or potentially available alternatives for a given use. A. Effects on the en vironment The SNAP program considers a number of environmental criteria when evaluating substitutes: ozone depletion potential (ODP); climate effects, primarily based on global warming potential (GWP); local air quality impacts, particularly

potential impa cts on smog formation from emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC); and ecos ys tem effects, particularl y from negative impacts on aquatic life. These and other environmental and health risks are discussed below. The ODP is the ratio of the impact on s tratospheric ozone of a chemical compared to the impact of an identical mass of CFC

– 11. Thus, the ODP of CFC

– 11 is defined to be one (1.0). Other CFCs and HCFCs have ODPs that range from 0.01 to one (1.0). All refrigerant substitutes in this proposal have an ODP of zero, lower than the ODP of the ozone depleting substances that they replace: CFC

– 12 (ODP = 1.0); HCFC

–22 (ODP = 0.055); R - 13B1 (ODP = 10) and R

– 502 (ODP = 0.334). The most commonly used substitutes in the end - use s addressed in this proposal als o have an ODP of zero (e.g. , R

–404A, R

– 134a, R

– 410A, and R

–407C). 9 Some less common alternatives for these end - uses, such as R - 401A, R 414A and other blends containing HCFC - 22 or HCFC - 142b , 10 have ODPs ranging from 0.01 to 0.047 . Thus, the refrigerant sub stitutes in this proposal have ODPs lower than or identical to the ODPs of other available substitutes and of the substances they replace. 9 We assume that substitutes containing no chlorine, bromine, or iodine have an ODP of zero. 10 Under EPA’s phaseout regulations, virgin HCFC - 22, HCFC - 142b, and blends containing HCFC - 22 or HCFC 142b may only be used to service existing appliances . Consequently, virgin HCFC - 22, HCFC - 142b and blends containing HCFC - 22 or HCFC - 142b may not be used to manufacture new pre - c harged appliances or appliance components or to charge new appliances assembled onsite.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

38 of 98 The GWP is a means of quantifying the potential integrated climate forcing of various greenhouse gases relative to carbon dioxide. All of the hydrocarbon refrigerants in this proposal have a relativel y low 100 - ye ar integrated GWP of less than ten . HFC - 32 has a GWP of 67 5 . For comparison, some other commonly used, acceptable refrigerants in these end - use s are R

– 134a, R

–40 4A, R

–407C, and R

–410A with GWPs of about 1 , 430, 3 , 920, 1 , 770, and 2 , 090, respectivel y. In very low temperature refrigeration, a common refrigerant is R - 508B, with a GWP of 13,400. The GWPs of the ozone - depleting substances that they replace are : CFC

– 12 (GWP = 10,9 0 0); HCFC

–22 (GWP = 1,810); R - 13B1/halon 1301 (GWP = 7,140) and R

– 502 (GWP = 4,660) (IPCC, 2007) . The GWPs of the substitutes reviewed in this proposal are significantl y lower than those of other refrigerants currentl y being used in the residential and light commercial air conditioning and heat pump end - use . As stated above, EPA considers overall risk to human health and the environment compared to ODS as well as alternatives that are available and potentially available in a given end - use . Therefore, the GWP of 675 for HFC 32 may not be considered low in other end - use s that have a larger variety of options available with lower GWP s . Among the acceptable substitutes listed in this end - use , only ammonia absorption and the not - in - kind technologies evap orative cooling and desiccant cooling would have lower GWPs. Given technical limits on the effective use of the non - vapor compression technologies in different climates and the higher toxicity of ammonia than of the alternatives proposed here, the proposed substitutes still reduce risk overall compared to the available and potentially

available substitutes in this end - use . The GHG impacts of these refrigerants also depend upon the energy use of appliances, since the “ indirect ” GHG emissions assoc iated with electricity consumption typicall y exceed those from refrigerants over the full lifecycle of refrigerant - containing products. ( ORNL, 1997 ).

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

39 of 98 If appliances using the refrigerants being considered in this proposal are less energy efficient than the appliances they

replace, then it is possible that these appliances would result in higher lifecycle GHG emissions than appliances using a higher GWP refrigerant or refrigerant substitute . Conversely , higher energy efficiency of these appliances would lead to even lower lifecycle GHG emissions. While w e have not undertaken a comprehensive assessment of all sources of GHG emissions associated with substituting ODS and other commonly used refrigerants with the proposed refrigerants , we note that for m ost of th e typ es of equipment covered here, energy

efficiency standards exist . 11 Thus , total energy use with alternative refrigerants can be expected to be no higher than that required b y the standards for those classes of equipment. Further, testing data, peer- re viewed journal articles and other information provided b y the submitters for these substitute refrigerants indicated that equipment using these refrigerants is likely

to have a higher coefficient of performance and use less energy than equipment currently being manufactured that us es common ODS and HFC refrigerants that are listed as acceptable under SNAP . This implies that equipment that uses the refrigerants propos ed to be listed will have the same or lower climate impacts than other available substitutes (Daikin, 2011; A.S. Trust & Holdings , 2012; A.S. Vestfrost, 2012; CHEAA, 2013) . In addition to global impacts on the atmosphere, EPA evaluated potential impacts of the proposed substitutes on local air quality. Ethane and HFC - 32 are exempt from the defini tion of VOC under CAA regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s)) addressing the development of State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to attain and maintain the national ambient air quality standards . The other proposed refrigerants , isobutane, propane, and components of R - 441A , including

11 For example, Department of Energy standards apply to portable air conditioners, room air conditioners, PTACs and PTHPs, household refrigerators and freezers, refriger ated beverage vending machines, and commercial refrigeration equipment . See https://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/standards_test_procedures.html .

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

40 of 98 isobutane, n - butane and propane , are VOC. Potential emissions of VOC from all substitutes for all end - use s in the refrigeration and air conditioning sector are addressed by the venting prohibition under Section 608 of the CAA . Under th at prohibition, refrigerant substitutes (and thus the VOC they

contain) may

only be emitted where EPA issues a final determination exempting a refrigerant substitute from the venting prohibition on the basis that venting, releasing or disposing of such sub stance does not pose a threat to the environment, as proposed elsewhere in this action (see Section V I, “ How is EPA proposing to address venting, release, or disposal of the refrigerant substitutes proposed to be listed under section 608 of the Clean Air A ct? ” below). EPA estimates that p otential emissions of hydrocarbons when used as refrigerant subs t itute s in all end - use s in the refrigeration and air conditioning sector have little impact on local air quality, with the possible exception of unsaturated hydrocarbons such as prop yl ene (I CF, 2013 a ). However, for those refrigerants that are VOC as defined in 40 CFR 50.100(s), a State could adopt additional control strategies if necessary for an ozone nonattainment area to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. EPA anal yz ed a number of scenarios to consider the potential impacts on local air quality if hydrocarbon refrigerants were used widel y. We used EPA’s Vintaging Model to estimate the hydrocarbon emissions from these scenarios and EPA’s Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model to assess their potential incremental contributions to ground - level ozone concentrations (I CF, 2013 a). That anal ys is assumed that the most reactive hydrocarbon proposed to be acceptable (isobutane) w as used in all refrigeration and air conditioning uses , and that all refrigerant used was emitted to the atmosphere even though isobutane is not being proposed as acceptable for use in all refrigeration and air conditioning uses . In that extreme scenario, the model predicted that the maximum increase in the 8 - hour average ground - level ozone

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

41 of 98 concentration would be 0.72 ppb in L os Angeles . Further, in the anal ys is, the addition al ground level ozone did not result in exceeding the NAAQS where an area was in co mpliance without the additional refrigerant emissions . Given the potential sources of uncertainty in the modeling , the conservativeness of the assumptions , and the finding that the incremental VOC emissions from this refrigerant emissions would not cause any area that otherwise would meet the NAAQS to exceed it , we believe that the use of isobutane consistent with the use conditions will not result in significantl y greater risk to the environment than other substitutes that are currentl y or potentially

avai lable. Further, p ropane , ethane , and n - butane, the remaining component of R 441A , are less reactive than isobutane and we reach a similar conclusion for those refrigerants . EPA also anal yz ed the potential impacts of the uses of hydrocarbon refrigerants proposed to be acceptable under this rule. Inthis less conservative anal ys is, EPA looked at a set of end use s that would be more likely to use h ydrocarbon refrigerants between now and 2030 . The anal ys is assum ed use of hydrocarbon refrigerants in those uses for which UL currentl y has standards in place , for which the SNAP program has already listed the uses as acceptable subject to use conditions, or for which the SNAP program is reviewing a submission , including those in this rule . 12 Inaddition, th e air qual ity anal ys is assumed several different hydrocarbons 13 would be used based upon those under review by the SNAP program in the end - use s for which they were submitted . For example, we assum ed use of propane, R - 441A , and another hydrocarbon refrigerant under re view in room air conditioners and isobutane, propane, and R - 441A in 12 The analysis included stand- alone commercial refrigerators, freezers, and coolers; vend ing machines; refrigerated transport; water coolers; commercial ice machines; household refrigerators and freezers; and room air conditioners (window AC, packaged terminal AC and packaged terminal heat pumps). The analysis did not expressly break out very low temperature refrigeration or non- mechanical heat transfer from commercial refrigerators and freezers. 13 Refrigerants in this scenario included propane, isobutane, and R - 441A in the end - uses where they are proposed to be acceptable subject to use condit ions, among others. Ethane was not expressly included, since the type of equipment using ethane is not broken out separately in the analysis. However, ethane is less reactive than the other refrigerants included in the analysis, so this omission is expecte d to result in a slight overestimation of impacts, if any.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

42 of 98 vending machines, stand - alone retail food refrigeration equipment, and household refrigerators and freezers, but no use of hydrocarbons in chillers used for air conditioning of large buildings. (For further information on the spec ific assumptions, see ICF, 2013a , in the docket for this rulemaking.) Based on this still conservative but more probable assessment of refrigerant use , we found that even if all the refrigerant in appliances in end - use s addressed in this proposed rule were to be emitted, there would be a worst - case impact of 0.15 ppb ozone in the Lo s Angeles area, which is the area with the highest level of ozone pollution in the United S tates . In the other cities examined in the an aly sis, Houston and Atlanta, impacts were smaller (no more than 0. 0 3 and 0. 0 1 ppb, respectively) (I CF, 2013a). These impacts did not cause any areas to exceed the NAAQS that otherwise would have met the NAAQS without the additional refrigerant emissions. B ecause of the relativel y low air quality impacts of these refrigerants if they are released to the atmosphere in limited amounts , EPA believes that these refrigerants do not have a significantl y greater impact on human health and the environment based on their effects on local air quality

than other refrigerants listed as acceptable in the end - use s proposed in this rule. The substitutes in this proposal are all highl y volatile. They typically evaporate or partition to air, rather than contaminating surface waters. E ffects on aquatic life of the substitutes are expected to be small and pose no greater risk of aquatic or ecos ys tem effects than those of other available substitutes for these uses. Based on EPA’s anal ys is, the overall environmental risks, includi ng ODP, GWP , local air quality effects and ecos ystem impacts are lower than or comparable to those of other acceptable substitutes in the same end - use s . B. Flammability and fire safety

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

43 of 98 The flammability risks of the proposed substitutes are of potential co ncern because household and retail food refrigerators and freezers and room AC units have traditionally used refrigerants that are not flammable. Without appropriate use conditions, the flammability risk posed by these refrigerants could be higher than non - flammable refrigerants because individuals may not be aware that their actions could potentially cause a fire, and existing equipment has not been designed specifically to minimize flammable risks. Inthis section, we discuss the risks posed by the refrig erants considered in this rule and explain the proposed use conditions we believe are necessary to mitigate risks to ensure that the overall risk to human health and the environment posed b y these proposed substitutes is not greater than the overall risk p osed b y other substitutes in the same end - use s . In addition, we discuss wh y the flammability risks have led us to propose that these substitutes are only acceptable for use in new equipment specificall y designed for these flammable refrigerants. Due to their flammable nature, ethane, isobutane, propane, HFC - 32, and R - 441A could pose a significant safety concern for workers and consumers in the end - uses addressed in this proposal if they are not handled correctl y. In the presence of an ignition source ( e.g ., static electricity spark resulting from closing a door, using a torch during service, or a short circuit in wiring that controls the motor of a compressor), an explosion or a fire could occur when the concentration of refrigerant exceeds its lower flamm ability limit (LFL) . T he LFLs of the proposed substitutes are: ethane

— 30,000 ppm; HFC - 32

— 139,000 ppm; isobutane

— 18,000 ppm; propane—21,000 ppm; and R - 441A

—20,500 ppm. Therefore, to use these substitutes safel y, it is important to minimize the presence of p otential ignition sources and to reduce the likelihood that the levels of ethane, HFC - 32, isobutane, propane, or R - 441A will exceed the LF L. Under the proposed listing decision, these substitutes would be acceptable for use only in

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

44 of 98 new equipment (refrigerators, freezers and air conditioners) specifically designed for the refrigerant. We expect that the original equipment manufacturers, wh o would be storing large quantities of the refrigerant, are familiar with and use proper safety precautions to minimize the risk of explosion , due to OSHA and building code requirements . We are proposing to include in the “Further Information” section of the SNAP listings recommendations that these facilities be equipped with proper ventilation systems and be properl y design ed to reduce possible ignition sources . T o determine whether flammability would be a concern for manufacturing and service personnel or for consumers, EPA anal yz ed a plausible worst - case scenario to model a catastrophic release of the proposed refrigerant s . The worst - case scenario anal ys is for each refrigerant revealed that even if the unit’s full charge is emitted within one minute , n one of these refrigerants reached their respective LFLs of 1. 8 % for isobutane, 2.1% for propane, 2.05% for R 441A, or 3.0% for ethane, provided that the charge sizes were no greater than those specified in the relevant standard from Underwriters Laboratories (ICF, 2013b,c,d,e,f ,g,h, i ,j,k) . Thus, there would not be an excessive risk of fire or explosion, even under those worst - case assumptions, so long as the charge meets the use conditions in this proposed rule. Detailed analy sis of the modeling results are discussed below in the next section regarding “Toxicity . ” EPA also reviewed the submitters’ detailed assessments of the probability of events that might create a fire and engineering risk and approaches to avoid sparking from the refrigeration equipment. Further information on these analyses and EPA’s risk assessments are available in public docket EPA HQ - OAR - 2013 - 0748 at www .regulations.gov . Although the anal ys is showed no potential for the released refrigerant from one piece of equipment to reach the LFL, manufacturing and service personnel or consumers are not familiar with refrigeration or air conditioning equipment contai ning a flammable refrigerant . T herefore, use conditions are necessary to ensure people

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

45 of 98 handling such equipm ent are aware that equipment contains a flammable refrigerant and to ensure safe handling . This allows the flammable refrigerants to be used without increasing overall risk to human health and the environment. C. Toxicity In evaluating potential toxicity impacts of ethane, HFC - 32, isobutane, propane, and R 441A on human health, EPA considered both occupational and consumer risks . EPA investigated the risk of asph yx iation and of exposure to toxic levels of refrigerant for a worst - case scenario and a typical use scenario for each refrigerant. In the worst - case scenario of a catastrophic leak, we modeled release of the unit’s full charge within one minute into a confined space to estimate concentrations that might result. W e considered a conservativel y small space appropriate to each end - use, such as a small convenience store of 244 m 3 for retail food refrigeration, a small galley kitchen of 18 m 3 for a hou sehold refrigerator / freezer, or a small bedroom of 41 m 3 for a room air conditioner. To evaluate toxicity of all five refrigerants , EPA estimated the maximum time - weighted average (TWA) exposure both for a short - term exposure scenario , with a 15 - minute an d 30 - minute TWA exposure, and for an 8 - hour time weighted average that would be more typical of occupation exposure for a technician servicing the equipment. We compared these short - term and long - term exposure value s to relevant industry and government wor

kplace exposure limits for ethane, HFC - 32, isobutane, propane, and components of R - 441A, (including potential impurities in the substitutes). The modeling results indicate that both the short - term (15 - minute and 30 - minute) and long - term (8 - hour) worker exp osure concentrations would be below the relevant workplace exposure limits, such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) , the National Institute for Occupational Safety and

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

46 of 98 Health ’s (N IOSH) recommended e xposure limit (REL) , the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists’ (ACGIH) threshold limit value (TLV), or in the case of HFC - 32, the manufacturer’s recommended workplace exposure limit. Insome cases where there was not an established sho rt - term exposure limit (STEL), we considered information on short term exposure such as the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) from available toxicity studies or the National Research Council’s Acute Emergency Guideline Limits (AEGL) 14

. The respective workplace exposure limits we considered for the various compounds, including components of the refrigerant blend R - 441A, are as follows:

 n - Butane, a component in R - 441A : 800 ppm REL on 10 - hr TWA; 6,900 ppm AEGL 1 over 30 minutes

 E thane: 1000 ppm TLV on 8 - hour TWA

 HFC - 32: 1000 ppm manufacturer’s exposure guideline on 8 - hour TWA; 3000 ppm over 15 minutes

 Isobutane: 800 ppm REL on 10 - hr TWA; 18,000 pp m NOAEL over 30 minutes

 Propane: 1000 ppm PELon 8 - hr TWA; 6,900 ppm AEGL - 1 over 30 minutes For equipment with which consumers might come into contact, such as retail food refrigerators and freezers, vending machines, household refrigerators and freezers, and room air

14 The AEGL limit is an emergency guideline for exposures to the general population (including susceptible populations) and is not time - weighted . I t also considers the chemical’s flammability in add ition to its toxicity. EPA develops a set of AE GL values for a chemical for five exposure periods (10 and 30 minutes, 1 hour, 4 hours and 8 hours). For each exposure period, three different AEGL values are developed to address different levels of toxicolog ical impacts. Of relevance for the modeled scenario is the AEGL

– 1 (10,000 ppm), which is defined as: “ the airborne concentration, expressed as parts per million or milligrams per cubic meter (ppm or mg/m 3 ) of a substance above which it is predicted that th e general population, including 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. ” While permanent toxicological effects are not expected up to the AEGL

– 2 value, this limit is not relevant for this analysis because at that level, flammability would be a greater concern.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

47 of 98 conditioners, EPA performed a consumer exposure anal ys is . In this anal ys is, we examined potential catastrophic release of the entire charge of the substitute in one - minute under a worst case scenario. We did not examine exposure to consumers in very low temperature refrigeration, as equipment for this end - use would ty picall y be use d in the workplace, such as in laboratories, and not in a home or public space. T he anal ys is was undertaken to determine the 15 - minute or 30 - minute TWA exposure levels for the substitute, which were then compared to the toxicity limits to assess the risk to consumers. EPA con sidered toxicity

limits for consumer exposure that reflect a short - term exposure such as might occur at home or in a store or other public setting where a member of the general public could be exposed and then could escape. Specific toxicity limits that we used in our anal ys is of consumer exposure include:

 n - Butane: 6,900 ppm AEGL - 1 over 30 minutes

 HFC - 32: cardiotoxic NOAELof 350,000 ppm over 5 minutes

 Isobutane: 18,000 ppm NOAEL over 30 minutes

 Propane: 6,900 ppm AEGL - 1 over 30 minutes Th e anal ys is of con sumer exposure assumed that 100 percent of the unit’s charge would be released over one minute, at which time the concentration of refrigerant would peak in an enclosed space, and then steadily decline. Refrigerant concentrations were modeled under two air change scenarios, believed to represent the baseline of potential flow rates for a home or other public space , assuming flow rates of 2.5 and 4.5 air changes per hour (ACH) (Sheldon 1989). The highest concentrations of the refrigerant occur in the lower s tratum of the room when assuming the lower ventilation level of 2.5 ACH. Calculating the TWA exposure u sing 2.5 ACH results in a higher concentration than calculating the TWA exposure using 4.5 ACH. Even under

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

48 of 98 the very conservative assumptions used in the consumer exposure modeling, the estimated 15 - minute or 30 - minute consumer exposures to the proposed refrigerants are much lower than the relevant toxicity

limits and thus should not pose a toxicity risk an y greater than that of other acceptable refrigerant s in the proposed end - use s . For further information , including EPA’s risk screens and risk assessments as well as fault tree anal ys es from the submitters of the substitutes, see docket number EPA

–HQ

–OAR

– 2013 - 0 748 at www.regulations.gov . **V. Why is EPA prop osing these specific use conditions?**  EPA is proposing to list ethane, isobutane, propane, HFC - 32, and R - 441A as acceptable subject to use conditions in the specified end - uses . EPA is proposing these uses in new equipment designed and manufactured specifically to use these alternatives . The use conditions include conditions consistent with industry standards, limits on charge size, and requirements for warnings and markings on equipment to inform consumers and technicians of potential flammability

hazards. T he proposed listings with the specific use conditions are intended to allow for the use of these flammable refrigerants in a manner that will ensure they do not pose a greater risk to human health or the environment than other substitutes that are currentl y or potentially

available. We seek comment on the proposed listing as well as the specific use conditions discussed below. A. New equipment only; not intended for use as a retrofit alternative EPA is proposing that the flammable refrigerants considered in this proposal be limited to use only in new equipment that has been designed and manufactured specifically for use with the listed alternative refrigerant. We are proposing that these substitutes may be used onl y in new

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

49 of 98 equipment 15 that is designed to address concerns unique to flammable refrigerants. T he flammable refrigerants were not submitted under the SNAP program to be used in retrofitted equipment, and no information was provided on how to address hazards of flammable refrigerants when used in equipm ent that was designed for non - flammable refrigerants. Introduction into interstate commerce of these refrigerants for use in existing equipment without giving timely

and adequate notice to EPA would be in violation of section 612(e) of the CAA and the SNAP regulations at 40 CFR Part 82 , Subpart G. In addition, i f the rule is finalized as proposed, use of these refrigerants in existing equipment would be in violation of section 612 (c) of the CAA and the corresponding SNAP regulations at 40 CFR Part 82 , Subpart G. B. Standards EPA is proposing that the flammable refrigerants be used onl y in equipment that meets all requirements in the relevant supplements for flammable refrigerants in certain applicable UL Standards for refrigeration and air conditioning equipment. Specifically , the standards cited include UL 471 10 th edition for commercial refrigerators and freezers (including stand - alone freezers for very

low temperature refrigeration), UL 250 10 th edition (for household refrigerators and freezers), UL 541 7 th edition for refrigerated vending machines , and UL 484 8 th edition for room air condi ti on ers . ULhas tested equipment for flammability risk in both household and retail food refrigeration. Further, UL has developed acceptable safety standards including requirements for construction, for markings, and for performance tests concerning refrigerant leakage, ignition of switching components, surface temperature of parts, and component strength after being 15 This is intended to mean a completely new refrigeration circuit contai ning a new evaporator, condenser and refrigerant tubing . We are aware that for some types of equipment, e.g., vending machines, it is possible to detach easily and replace the refrigeration circuit from the outer casing of the equipment. In such a situation, replacing the old refrigeration circuit with a new one within the old casing would be considered “new” equipment and not a retrofit of the old, existing equipment.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

50 of 98 scratched. T hese standards were developed in an open an d consensus - based approach, with the assistance of experts in the air - conditioning and refrigeration industry as well as experts involved in assessing the safety of products . While similar standards exist from other bodies such as the International Electro technical C ommission ( IE C ) , we are propos ing to rel y on ULstandards as those that are most applicable and recognized b y the U.S. market. This proposed approach is the same as that in our previous rule on flammable refrigerants ( December 20, 2011 at 76 FR 78832 ). C. Charge size EPA is proposing use conditions that limit the amount of refrigerant allowed in each ty pe of appliance. As before, we believe it is necessary to set limits on charge size in order for these refrigerants not to pose a risk to human he alth or the environment that is greater than the risk posed by other available substitutes . These limits will limit the risk to workers and consumers since under worst - case scenario analy ses, a leak of the proposed charge sizes did not result in concentrations of the refrigerant that met or exceeded the LFL , a s explained above in Section IV . B , “Flammability and fire safety . ” EPA is proposing limitation s on refrigerant charge size for household and stand - alone commerc ial refrigerators and freezers , vending m achines, and room air conditioning units that reflect the UL 250, UL 471, UL541 and UL 484 standards. As discussed above in paragraph B of this section, we believe UL standards are most applicable to the U.S. market and offer requirements developed by a c onsensus of experts. EPA is proposing a charge size not to exceed 57 grams (2.0 ounces) for household refrigerators and freezers , not to exceed 150 grams (5.3 ounces) for retail food refrigeration in stand - alone units, and not to exceed 150 grams (5.3 ounc es) for vending machines. We are proposing a varying charge size limit for room air

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

51 of 98 conditioning units as discussed below. To place these quantities in a familiar context, EPA estimates the charge size of a disposable lighter is equal to 30 grams (1.1 ounc es). The UL 250 standard for household refrigerators and freezers limits the amount of refrigerant that may leak to 50 grams ( 1. 76 ounces). EPA is proposing a charge size of 57 grams ( 2.0 ounces) to allow for up to 7 grams ( 0.2 ounces) of refrigerant th at might be solubilized in the oil (and assumed not to leak or immediatel y vaporize with the refrigerant in the case of a leak). EPA bases this estimate on information received from a manufacturer of hydrocarbon - based refrigerator - freezers (see EPA - HQ - OAR - 2013 - 0748 on www. regulations.gov). ULstandards 541 (retail food refrigeration) and 471 (vending machines) limit the amount of refrigerant leaked to 150 grams (5.3 ounces). Furthermore, the charge size limit for A3 refrigerants (for retail food refrigeration) is in line with the IEC 60335

–2

– 89 standard for commercial appliances, which has a charge size limit of 150 grams (5.3 ounces). As noted above, EPA is proposing a varying charge size for room air conditioning units . We are proposing that the maximum charge must be no greater than the amount calculated for a given siz ed space according to Appendix F to Supplement SA of UL Standard 484. This section of the UL standard uses a formula for charge of a fixed room air conditioner based upon the size of the space where the refrigerant may escape and the lower flammability limit of the refrigerant. The formula is as follows: Where, M max is the maximum charge size allowed for the space , in kg, LF L is the lower flammability limit of the refrigerant in kg/m 3 , h 0 is the installation height of the indoor unit in m (0.6 m for an AC unit on the floor, 1.0

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

52 of 98 m for an AC unit in a window, 1.8 m for a wall - mounted AC unit , and 2.2 m for a ceiling - mounted AC unit) , and A is the floor area of the room, in m2

. The equipme nt manufacturer would then design AC units to be used in rooms with a minimum size and w ould label the minimum room size on the equipment . Table 2 below gives examples of room sizes and appropriate charge sizes for the three refrigerants proposed to be lis ted for use in room AC units , assuming a typical height of 1.0 m for a window - mounted unit . In addition to the formula mentioned above, UL 484 has a requirement that the maximum charge for a room air conditioner may not exceed the amount calculated using the following formula: Where, m 2 is the maximum charge size allowed, in kg, 26 m 3 is a constant, and LF L is the lower flammability limit of the refrigerant in kg/m 3

. T hat formula sets maximum limits on refrigerant in a room air conditioner , as shown in Table 2 . With the A3 refrigerants, the maximum value is close to 1 kg. Table 2 . Maximum refrigerant charge sizes If you are using this refrigerant

... Then its lower

flammability

limit is... The

maximum allowable charge in kg for room air conditioner is... And the maximum charge, in

kg, to use in a room of this size 16 is... In % b y volume In

kg/m 3 1.7 m x 1.7 m x 2.5 m (7.2 m 3 ) A=2.89 6 ft x 8

ft x 8 ft (384 ft 3 / 10.9 m 3 ) 12 ft x

10 ft x 10 ft (1200 ft 3 / 34.0 m 3 ) 16 Although the height of the room does not affect the calculation, typical heights are s hown here for reference.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

53 of 98 m 2 A=4.46

m 2 A=11.15

m 2 HFC - 32 14.4 0.306 7.979 0 .971 1.192 1.900 Propane (R 290) 2.1 0.038 0.986 0.071 0.087 0.139 R - 441A 2.05 0.041 1.057 0.078 0.095 0.152 Although using a formula to determine the maximum charge size and minimum room size is appropriate from an engineering perspective, it does not ensure that a consumer will select an appropriate AC unit for the size of their room . It is likel y that some consumers may be unaware of the exact size of the room to be cooled and thus may select an inappropriatel y sized AC unit that increases the flamma bility risk . A consumer may

believe that a larger, more powerful AC unit will provide better, faster cooling and therefore may select an inappropriatel y sized AC unit that increases the flammability risk. To address th ese concern s , EPA proposes to suppleme nt the charge size guidelines in Appendix F of UL484 with a use condition that restricts the maximum refrigerant charge of equipment based upon the cooling capacity needed, in British thermal units ( BTU ) per hour. Equipment manufacturers would be responsible for designing equipment below a maximum charge size consistent with the intended cooling capacity . This would allow the manufacturer , who has greater understanding of the issue than a consumer, to address the issue in a manner under the manufacturer ’s control . Placing the burden on the manufacturer also provides a better means for EPA to ensure compliance and thus to ensure that the risk to human health will not be greater than that posed by other available substitutes. W e believe that these requirements , in combination with the other use conditions and commonly found informational materials , provide sufficient safeguards against instances of consumers selecting inappropriatel y- sized equipment . For instance, packaging, technical

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

54 of 98 literature and sales dis play material will often guide a consumer in choosing the correct capacity for a given room size. EPA has based its proposed charge limits upon appropriate capacity needs for an area to be cooled and the requirements for refrigerant charge relative to room size in Appendix F of UL 484, discussed above . A document in the docket describes this relationship in tables in a spreadsheet ( EPA, 2013 ). The proposed charge limits for each refrigerant b y equipment ty pe and mounting location are as follows:

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under	EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to Further	Policy	Review.

55 of 98 Table 3. W indow AC Units*; Maximum Charge Size by Unit Capacity

and Refrigerant Used in Kg Refrigerant Charge Size in Kg (b y associated capacity in BTU/hr)

5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10 , 000 12,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 23,000 24,000 30,000 34,000 R- 32 1.73 2. 12 2.74 3.00 3.24 3.47 3.68 4.07 4.59 5.48 6.01 6.49 6.72 7.76 R- 290 0.13 0.16 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.27 0.30 0.34 0.40 0.44 0.48 0.50 0.57 R- 441A 0.14 0.17 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.33 0.37 0.44 0.49 0.53 0.54 0.63

*Assumes the evaporator is at least 1 m , but not more than 1.8 m, above the floor. Cooling capacities between those in the table are to be linearly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table.

Table 4. Packaged Terminal AC Units and Heat Pumps and Portable AC Units:* Maximum Charge Size by Unit Capacity

and Refrigerant Used in Kg Refrigerant Charge Size in Kg (b y associated capacity in BTU/hr) 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 23,000 24,000 30,000 34,000 R- 32 1.04 1 .27 1.65 1.80 1.95 2.08 2.21 2.44 2.75 3.29 3.60 3.89 4.03 4.65 R- 290 0.08 0.09 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.24 0.27 0.29 0.30 0.34 R- 441A 0.08 0.10 0.13 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.27 0.29 0.32 0.33 0.38

*Assumes the evaporator is at least 0.6 m, but not more than 1.0 m, above the floor. Cooling capacities between those in the table are to be linearly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under	EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to Further	Policy	Review.

56 of 98 Table 5. Wall - Mounted AC Units* with Compressor 1.8 m Ab ove Floor Level: Maximum Charge Size by Unit Capacity

and Refrigerant Used in Kg **Refrigerant Charge Size in Kg (by associated capacity in BTU/hr)** 

5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 23,000 24,000 30,000 34,000 **R -**  **32** 3.12 3. 82 4.94 5.41 5.84 6.24 6.62 7.32 8.26 9.87 10.81 11.68 12.09 13.96 **R -**  **290** 0.23 0.28 0.36 0.40 0.43 0.46 0.49 0.54 0.61 0.73 0.80 0.86 0.89 1.03 **R -**  **441A** 0.25 0.31 0.40 0.44 0.47 0.51 0.54 0.59 0.67 0.80 0.88 0.95 0.98 1.13

*Assumes the evaporator is at lea st 1.8 m, but not more than 2.2 m, above the floor. Cooling capacities between those in the table are to be linearly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table. Table 6. Ceiling - Mounted AC Units*:

Maximum Charge Size by Unit Capacity

and Refrigerant Used in Kg Refrigerant Charge Size in Kg (b y associated capacity in BTU/hr)

5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 23,000 24,000 30,000 34,000 R- 32 3.82 4.67 6.03 6.61 7.14 7.63 8.09 8.95 10.09 12.07 13.22 14.28 14.78 17.06 R- 290 0.28 0.34 0.44 0.49 0.53 0.56 0.60 0.66 0.74 0.89 0.97 1.05 1.09 1.26 R- 441A 0.31 0.38 0.49 0.54 0.58 0.62 0.66 0.73 0.82 0.98 1.07 1.16 1.20 1.38

*Assumes the evaporator is at least 2.2 m above the floor. Cooling capacities between those in the table are to be linearly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

57 of 98 In cases where the rated capacity exceeds the maximum shown on the table, the maximum charge size in the table for that refrigerant applies. In cases where the normal rated capacity lies between two values listed next to each other in the table, the maximum charge size would be determined based on a linear interpolation between the two respective charge sizes. We assume that room air conditioners will be at least 5 ,000 BTU/hr in capacity; this corresponds to cooling a floor area of roughl y 100 square feet or 9.3 m 2 and it is the lowest value observed at a popular retailer’s website ( www.homedepot.com ). We request comment o n whether there should be lower, higher , or additional intermediate capacity values added to these tables. EPA is requesting comment on the approach of adding a requirement for manufacturers to design with a maximum charge size consistent with the design c ooling capacity. We also request comment on other potential methods for supplementing the formulas for calculating charge size in the UL 484 standard in order to reduce potential risks of a consumer using a room air conditioner with an inappropriatel y high charge that could result in a higher risk of fire. D. Color- coded hoses and piping EPA proposes that equipment must have distinguishing color - coded hoses and piping to indicate use of a flammable refrigerant. This will help technicians immediately identif y the use of a flammable refrigerant, thereb y potentially reducing the risk of using sparking equipment or otherwise having an ignition source nearb y. The air conditioning and refrigeration industry currentl y uses distinguishing colors as means for identif yi ng different refrigerants. Likewise, distinguishing coloring has been used elsewhere to indicate an unusual and potentially dangerous situation, for example in the use of orange - insulated wires in hy brid electric vehicles. Currently , no industry

standard exists for color - coded hoses or pipes for ethane, HFC - 32, isobutane, propane, or R - 441A . EPA is proposing that all such refrigerator tubing be colored red Pantone

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

58 of 98 Matching S ys tem (PMS) #185 to match the red band displayed on the container of flammable ref rigerants under the Air Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) Guideline

“N ” 2012, “ 2012 Guideline for Assignment of Refrigerant Container Colors. ” This proposal mirrors the existing requirement for the use of hydrocarbons in residential and commercial refrigerator - freezers (December 20, 2011 , at 76 FR 78832). EPA wants to ensure that there is adequate notice that a flammable refrigerant is being used within a particular piece of equipment or appliance. One mechanism to distinguish hoses and pipes is to add a colored plastic sleeve or cap to the service tube. The colored plastic sleeve or cap would have to be forcibly removed in order to access the service tube. This would signal to the technician that the refrigeration circuit that she/he was about to access contained a flammable refrigerant, even if all warning labels were somehow removed. This sleeve would be of the same red color (PMS #185) and could also be boldly marked with a graphic to indicate the refrigerant was flammable. This cou ld be a cost effective alternative to painting or dying the hose or pipe. EPA is taking comment on this mechanism of distinguishing the pipe and hose by adding a colored plastic sleeve or cap to the pipe or hose. EPA is particularl y concerned with ensuring adequate and proper notification for servicing and disposal of appliances containing flammable refrigerants. EPA believes the use of color - coded hoses, as well as the use of warning labels discussed below, would be reasonable and would be consistent with other general industry practices. This proposed approach is the same as that adop t ed in our previous rule on flammable refrigerants ( December 20, 2011 , at 76 FR 78832 ). EPA is interested in receiving information on how this requirement has been implemented for those end - use s that are already subject to the earlier r ule, codified in Appendix R to Subpart G of 40 CFR P art 82.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

59 of 98 E. Labeling As a use condition, EPA is proposing to require labeling of household and retail refrigerators and freezers , vending machin es, non - mechanical heat transfer equipment, very low temperature refrigeration equipment , and room air conditioners . EPA is proposing the warning labels on the equipment contain letters at least 1 ⁄4 inch high. The label must be permanently affixed to the equipment until its end of life. Warning label language requirements are found in S ection III.A of this proposal, “ What listings is EPA proposing in this action?” The warning label language is similar to or exactly the same as that required in UL standards: for household refrigerators and freezers in UL 250 in section SA6.1 , for vending machines in UL541 in section SA6.1, for commercial refrigerators and freezers in UL 471 in section SB6.1, and for room air conditioning units in UL484 in section SA6.1. EPA believes that it would be difficult to see warning labels with the minimum lettering height requirement of 1

⁄8 inch in these UL standards. Therefore, as in the requirements in our previous hydrocarbon refrigerants rule ( December 20, 2011 , at 76 FR 78832), EPA is p roposing the minimum height for lettering must be 1 ⁄4 inch as opposed to 1⁄8 inch, which will make it easier for technicians, consumers, retail storeowners, and first responders to view the warning labels. We also understand that ULis considering revising its standards to be consistent with this requirement, which already applies to equipment using propane in commercial stand - alone refrigerators and freezers and equipment using isobutane or R - 441A in household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refri gerator/freezers. F. Other options not included EPA considered requiring separate servicing fittings for use with flammable refrigerants to avoid mixing flammable and non - flammable refrigerants. W e previousl y considered this

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

60 of 98 option and proposed this as a use condition in a separate rulemaking in the Federal Register at 75 FR 25799 on May

10, 2010. In the associated final rule at 76 FR 78848 on December 20, 2011, the Agency

did not require separate servicing fittings but did include this option as a recommendation rather than a use condition. The ty pes of equipment addressed in this rule are self - contained pieces of equipment with a hermetically sealed refrigerant circuit that is only rarel y serviced. These are the same as or similar to the equipment address ed in the December 20, 2011 , rule, and thus with regards to separate servicing fittings we are proposing to again list this as a recommendation rather than as a use condition . We have heard some an ec dotal mention of concern about mixing of refrigerant during servicing of appliances , particularly for air conditioning equipment that is not self - contained. However, this rule is propos ing to address only equipment that is self - contained. Moreover, we do not have information that would lead us to a different dec ision than in the December 20, 2011 , final rule for h ydrocarbon refrigerants in household and stand - alone commercial refrigerators and freezers. We also considered r equiring onl y one use condition for each refrigerant and end - use -- to meet the appropriate standard from Underwriters Laboratories. We understand that UL may incorporate certain elements of this proposal, particularl y the proposed charge limit and the type font height for labels, into the UL250 standard for household refrigerators and freezers. If those provisions were the onl y changes incorporated in a revised version of Supplement A of the UL 250 standard, EPA could remove the use conditions for charge size and for labeling requirements, as they

would already be incorporated by reference throu gh the use condition to follow the UL 250 standard. However, at this time, those changes have not been incorporated into UL250. Therefore, EPA is proposing those use conditions as well as compliance with other aspects of UL 250.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

61 of 98 **VI. How is EPA proposing to a**  **ddress venting, release, or disposal of the**  **refrigerant substitutes proposed to be listed under section 608 of the Clean Air Act?** A. What are the statutory requirements concerning venting, release, or disposal of refrigerants and refrigerant substitutes under section 608 of the Clean Air Act? Section 608 of the Act as amended, titled National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program, requires EPA to establish regulations governing the use and disposal of ODS used as refrigerants, such as certain CFCs and HCFCs , during the service, repair, or disposal of appliances and industrial process refrigeration (IPR), including air - conditioning and refrigeration equipment. EPA's authority to propose the actions in this NPRM is based in part on section 608 of the Clean Air Act. Section 608(c)(1) provides that, effective July 1, 1992, it is : unlawful for any person, in the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of an appliance or industrial process refrigeration, to knowingl y vent or otherwise knowingl y re lease or dispose of any

class I or class II substance used as a refrigerant in such appliance (or industrial process refrigeration) in a manner which permits such substance to enter the environment. Section 608(c)(1) further exempts from this self - effectuating prohibition “ [ d] e minimis releases associated with good faith attempts to recapture and recycle or safely dispose ” of such a substance. EPA interprets releases to meet the criteria for exempted de minimis releases if they occur when the recycling an d recovery requirements of regulations promulgated under sections 608 and 609 are followed. 40 CFR 82.154(a)(2). Effective November 15, 1995, s ection 608(c)(2) of the Act extends the prohibition in section 608(c)(1) to knowingl y venting or otherwise knowin gl y releasing or disposing of any refrigerant substitute for class I or class II substances b y an y person maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of appliances or IP R. This prohibition applies to any substitute unless the Administrator determines that such venting, releasing, or disposing “does not pose a threat to the

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

62 of 98 environment.” Thus, section 608(c) provides EPA authority to promulgate regulations to interpret, implement, and enforce this prohibition on venting , releasing, or disposing of class I or class II substances and their refrigerant substitutes , which we refer to as the “venting prohibition ” in this NPRM . B. Wh at are EPA’s regulations concerning venting, releasing or disposing of refrigerant substitutes? R egulations promulgated under S ect ion 608 of the Act, published on May 14, 1993 (58 FR 28660), established a recycling program for ozone - depleting refrigerants recovered during the servicing and maintenance of air - conditioning and refrigeration appliances. In the same 1993 rule, EPA also p romulgated regulations implementing the section 608(c) prohibition on knowingl y venting, releasing , or disposing of class Ior class II controlled substances . These regulations were designed to substantially reduce the use and emissions of ozone - depleting refrigerants. EPA issued a final rule on March 12, 2004 , at 69 FR 11946 and a second rule on April 13, 2005 , at 70 FR 19273 clarifying how the venting prohibition in section 608(c) applies to substitutes for CFC and HCFC refrigerants (e.g., hydrofluorocarb ons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs) in part or whole) during the maintenance, service, repair, or disposal of appliances. These regulations are codified at 40 CFR Part 82 , Subpart F. The regulation at 40 CFR 82.154(a) now states in part that: (1) “ E ffect ive June 13, 2005, no person maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of appliances may knowingl y vent or otherwise release into the environment any refrigerant or substitute from such appliances, with the exception of the following substitutes in the following end - use s: i. Ammonia in commercial refrigeration, or in [IPR] or in absorption units; ii. Hydrocarbons in [IPR] (processing of hydrocarbons);

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

63 of 98 iii. Chlorine in [IPR] (processing of chlorine and chlorine compounds); iv. Carbon dioxide in any application; v. Nitro gen in an y application; or vi. Water in any

application. (2) The knowing release of a refrigerant or non - exempt substitute subsequent to its recovery

from an appliance shall be considered a violation of this prohibition. De minimis releases associated with go od faith attempts to recycle or recover refrigerants or non - exempt substitutes are not subject to this prohibition... . ” As explained in EPA's earlier rulemaking concerning refrigerant substitutes, EPA has not promulgated regulations requiring certification of refrigerant recycling/recovery equipment intended for use with substitutes to date (70 FR 19275; April 13, 2005). However, as EPA noted, the lack of a current regulatory provision should not be considered as an exemption from the venting prohibition for substitutes that are not expressly exempted in Section 82.154(a) . EPA has also noted that, in accordance with section 608(c) of the Act, the regulatory prohibition at Section 82.154(a) reflects the statutory references to de minimis releases of substitute s as they pertain to good faith attempts to recover and recycle or safel y dispose of non - exempted substitutes (70 FR 19275; April 13, 2005) . C. W hat revision to the venting prohibition has EPA recently proposed? On April 12, 2013 , at 78 FR 21871, EPA propo sed to revise the existing venting prohibition for refrigerant substitutes. 17 Th o se proposed changes would exempt from th at prohibition three hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes listed as acceptable subject to use conditions in the specified end - use s under the SNAP program: isobutane (R

– 600a) and R

–441A, which were listed as acceptable, subject to use conditions, as refrigerant substitutes in household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrigerators and freezers, and propane (R

–290), which 17 EPA is describing that proposal in this NPRM simply for ease of reference and as a reminder of EPA’s mo st recent proposal on this subject ; EPA is not here changing any aspect of that proposal or reopening the opportunity for comm ents on that NPRM.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

64 of 98 was listed as acceptable, subject to use conditions, as a refrigerant substitute in retail food refrigerators and freezers (stand - alone units onl y) . That proposal does not apply to blends of hydrocarbons with other refrigerants or containing any amount of any

CFC, HC FC, HFC, or PFC . EPA proposed to determine that for the purposes of CAA section 608(c)(2), the venting, release or disposal of such hydrocarbon refrigerant substitute s in the specified end - use s does not pose a threat to the environment, considering both th e inherent characteristics of these substances and the limited quantities used in the relevant applications . EPA additionally concluded that other authorities, controls and practices that appl y to such refrigerants help to mitigate environmental risk from the release of th o se three hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes . For example, state and local air quality agencies may

include VOC emissions reduction strategies in state implementation plans developed to meet and maintain the NAAQS that would apply to hydrocarbon refrigerants. D. What is EPA’s proposed determination regarding whether venting of hydrocarbons to be listed as acceptable subject to use conditions in the end - uses proposed in this NPRM pose a threat to the environment? For purposes of section 608(c )(2) of the CAA, EPA considers two factors in determining whether or not venting, release, or disposal of a substitute refrigerant during the maintenance, servic ing , repairing , or disposing of appliances poses a threat to the environment. See 69 FR 11948 ( March 12, 2004). First, EPA determines whether venting, release, or disposal of the substitute refrigerant poses a threat to the environment due to inherent characteristics of the refrigerant, such as global warming potential. Second, EPA determines whether and to what extent such venting, release, or disposal actuall y takes place during the maintenance, servicing,

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

65 of 98 repairing, or disposing of appliances, and to what extent such venting, release, or disposal is controlled by

other authorities, regulations, or practices. To the extent that such releases are adequatel y controlled b y other authorities, EPA defers to those authorities. 1. Potential environmental impacts EPA has evaluated the potential environmental impacts of releasing into the environment the hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes that we are proposing to list under the SNAP program as acceptable subject to use conditions in the end - use s proposed -- i.e ., ethane in very low temperature refrigeration and non - mechanical heat transfer ; isobutane in retai l food refrigeration (stand - alone equipment only) and vending machines ; propane in household refrigerators and freezers , vending machines and room AC units ; and R - 441A in retail food refrigeration (stand alone equipment onl y), vending machines and room AC units . Inparticular, we assessed the potential impact of the release of additional hydrocarbons on local air quality and their ability to decompose in the atmosphere , the ir ODP and the ir GWPs, as well as potential impacts on ecos ys tems (see Section IV abo ve , “ What criteria did EPA consider in determining whether to list the sub s titutes as acceptable and in determining appropriate use conditions and how does EPA consider those factors ? ”) . As explained in that section, the ODP of the se hydrocarbons is zero, the GWPs are less than 10, and effects on aquatic life from these hydrocarbons are expected to be small. As to potential effects on local air quality, based on the anal ys is and modeling results described above , EPA concludes that the four saturated hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes proposed to be listed as acceptable subject to use conditions in specific end - use s— ethane, isobutane, propane , and R - 441A

—are expected to have little impact on local air quality. In addition, when examining all hydrocarbon subs titute refrigerants in those uses for which UL currentl y has standards in place, for which the SNAP program has already l isted the uses as

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

66 of 98 acceptable subject to use conditions, or for which the SNAP program is reviewing a submission, including those in thi s rule, we found that even if all the refrigerant in appliances in end - uses addressed in this proposed rule were to be emitted, there would be a worst - case impact of less than 0.2% of the NAAQS for ground - level ozone in the L os Angeles area. In light of it s evaluation of potential environmental impacts, EPA concludes that the f our hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes in the end - use s at issue in this proposal are not expected to pose a threat to the environment on the basis of the limited quantities used in the relevant end - uses and applications and on the basis of the inherent characteristics of these substances (ICF, 2013 a). 2. Toxicity

and Flammability As discussed above in sections IV.B., “Flammability and fire safety” and IV.C., “Toxicity ,” EPA’s SNAP pro gram evaluated the potential for fire risk from flammability and toxicity risks from exposure to the substitute refrigerants in this proposal. EPA is providing some of that information in this section as well. Hydrocarbons, including ethane, propane, isob utane and the h ydrocarbon blend R

–441A, are classified as A3 refrigerants b y ASHRAE Standard 34

–2010, indicating that they have low toxicity and high flammability . Hydrocarbons considered in this proposal have lower flammability

limits (LFLs) ranging from 1. 8 % to 3.0% (1 8 ,000 ppm to 30,000 ppm). To address flammability

risks, EPA is issuing recommendations for their safe use (see section V II, “ What recommendations does EPA have for safe use of the proposed flammable substitute refrigerants? ” below) and spec ified use conditions. The SNAP program’s analy sis suggests that the use conditions proposed in this rule mitigate flammability risks. Like most refrigerants, hydrocarbons can displace oxygen at high concentrations and cause asph yx iation. Various industry and regulatory

standards exist to address asph yx iation and

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

67 of 98 toxicity risks. The SNAP program’s anal ys is of asphy xiation and toxicity

risks suggests that the use conditions proposed in this rule mitigate potential asphy xiation and toxicity

risks. Furthermore, the Agency believes that the flammability risks and occupational exposures to hydrocarbons are adequately regulated by

OSHA, building, and fire codes at a local and national level. 3. Authorities, Controls, and Practices EPA believes that existing authoritie s, controls, and practices would help mitigate environmental risk from the release of these hydrocarbon refrigerants. Analy ses performed for both this proposed rule and the SNAP rules issued in 1994 and 2011 ( March 17, 1994 , at 59 FR 13044 and December 20, 2011 , at 76 FR 38832, respectively) indicate that existing regulatory requirements and industry practices designed to limit and control these substances adequatel y control the emission of the hydrocarbon refrigerants proposed to be listed in this action . As explained below, EPA concludes that the limits and controls under other authorities, regulations or practices adequatel y control the release of and exposure to the four hydrocarbon substitute refrigerants and mitigate risks from any possible release. Th is conclusion is relevant to the second factor mentioned above in the overall determination of whether venting, release, or disposal of a substitute refrigerant poses a threat to the environment

—that is, a consideration of the extent that such venting, rel ease, or disposal is adequatel y controlled b y other authorities, regulations, or practices. As such, this conclusion is another part of the determination that the venting , release , or disposal of these four hydrocarbon refrigerants would not pose a threat to the environment. Industry service practices and OSHA standards and guidelines address hydrocarbon refrigeration equipment, include monitoring efforts, engineering controls, and operating

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

68 of 98 procedures. OSHA requirements that appl y during servicing includ e continuous monitoring of explosive gas concentrations and oxygen levels. In general, hydrocarbon emissions from refrigeration s ys tems are likely to be significantl y smaller than those emanating from the industrial process and storage s ys tems, which are controlled for safety reasons. Further, the SNAP rule listing hydrocarbons as acceptable subject to use conditions for use in household and commercial stand - alone refrigerators and freezers (Dec e mber 20, 2011 , at 76 FR 78832 ) , we noted that the amount of refrig erant from a refrigerant loop is limited (57 g for household refrigerators and freezers , and 150 g for commercial stand - alone refrigerators and freezers), indicating that h ydrocarbon emissions from such uses are likel y to be relatively small. Similar charge limits are proposed to apply to very low temperature refrigeration equipment, non mechanical heat transfer equipment, and vending machines, with larger but still limited charges for room air conditioners (1000 g for h ydrocarbon refrigerants). Hydrocarb ons that are also VOC may be regulated as VOC under sections of the Clean Air Act that address nonattainment, attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ground level ozone, including those sections addressing development o f State Implementation Plans and those addressing permitting of VOC sources. The release and/or disposal of many refrigerant substitutes, including hydrocarbons, are controlled by

other authorities including those established by OSHA and NIOSH guidelines, various standards, and state and local building codes. To the extent that release during maintaining , repairing , servicing or dispos ing of appliances is controlled by regulations and standards of other authorities, EPA believes these practices and controls for the use of hydrocarbons are sufficiently protective. These practice s and controls could help mitigate the risk to the environment that may be posed by

the venting, release or disposal of these f our

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

69 of 98 hydrocarbon refrigerants during the maintaining, serv icing, repairing, or disposing of appliances. This conclusion addresses the second factor in the anal ys is described above and is thus part of the determination that the venting, release , or disposal of these hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes does not pos e a threat to the environment. 4. Conclusion EPA has reviewed the potential environment al impacts of four hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes in the end - use s that we are proposing to list subject to use conditions under SNAP, as well as the authorities, controls and practices in place for those hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes . Specifically , EPA concludes that these f our hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes in the proposed end - use s and subject to the proposed use conditions are not expected to pose a threat to the environment based on the inherent characteristics of these substances and the limited quantities used in the relevant applications. EPA additionally concludes that existing authorities, controls, and practices help mitigate environmental risk from the release of those f our hydrocarbon s in the proposed end - use s and subject to the proposed use conditions . Inlight of these conclusions and those described or identified above in this section , we are proposing to determine, in accordance with 608(c)(2), that based on current evidence and risk anal ys es, the venting, release or disposal of these f our hydrocarbon refrigerant substitute s in the end - use s proposed does not pose a threat to the environment. Furthermore, EPA is propos ing to exempt from the venting prohibition at 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1) these additional uses for which hydrocarbons are be ing proposed to be found acceptable subject to use conditions under the SNAP program. EPA seeks information or data on whether there currentl y is an industry standard f or recovery units for flammable refrigerants and whether there are commercially available recovery

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

70 of 98 units that are specifically designed to be compatible with ethane, isobutane, propane, and R 441A. At this time, EPA is unaware of any recovery units that ar e designed specificall y for recovering hydrocarbons and which are readil y available in the U.S. Further, we are not aware of relevant U . S . standards for such recovery units. However, to the extent that these hydrocarbons are recovered rather th an vented as would be allowed in the specified end - use s if this proposal became final , EPA recommends the use of recovery equipment designed for flammable refrigerants, when such equipment and relevant U . S . standards for it become available, in accordance with applica

ble safe handling practices. E. What is EPA proposing regarding venting, release, or disposal of refrigerant substitutes, other than hydrocarbons, included in our proposed decision? Today ’s proposed rulemaking would regulate the use of HFC - 32 in room AC uni ts. All HFCs are currentl y subject to the venting prohibition. EPA is not proposing to extend the exemption to HFC - 32 or any refrigerant blends that contain HFC - 32 or any other HFC . Further , the exemption to the venting prohibition proposed in this NPRM do es not extend to blends of hydrocarbons and other ty pes of compounds, e.g., blends of HFCs and hydrocarbons. Such refrigerant substitute s would still be subject to the statutory and regulatory venting prohibition . **VII. What recommendations does EPA have for sa**  **fe use of the proposed**  **flammable substitute**  **refrigerant s**  **?** EPA recommend s that only technicians specifically trained in handling flammable refrigerant substitutes service or dispose of refrigerati on and air conditioning equipment containing these substances . Technicians should know how to minimize the risk of fire and the procedures for using flammable refrigerant subs t itute s safely . Releases of large quantities of refrigerant substitutes during servicing and manufacturing, especiall y in enclosed, poorl y

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

71 of 98 ventilated spaces or in areas where large amounts of refrigerant are stored, could cause an explosion if an ignition source exists nearb y. For these reasons, it is important that only properl y trained technicians handle flammable refrigerant substitutes when maintaining, servicing, repairing , or disposing of household and retail food refrigerators and freezers, very low temperature freezers , non - mechanical heat transfer equipment (e.g., thermosiphons), and room air conditioners . In addition, EPA recommend s that if hydrocarbon refrigerant substitute s were vented, released , or disposed of (rather than recovered) , as would be allowed in the specified end - use s if this proposal became final, the release should be in a well - ventilated area, such as outside of a building. We are aware that at least one organization, Refrigeration Service Engineers Society ( RSES ) , has developed a technician training program in collaboration with refrigeration equipment manufacturers and users that addresses safe use of flammable refrige rant substitute s . In addition, EPA has reviewed several training programs provided as part of SNAP submissions from persons interested in flammable refrigerant substitute s. EPA intends to update the CAA S ection 608 technician certification test bank provid ed to approved organizations that administer the certification exams in accordance with 40 CFR 82.161 to specificall y include questions concerning flammable refrigerant substitute s. EPA considered proposing a use condition requiring training in handling f lammable refrigerant substitutes for technicians who service or dispose of refrigeration and air conditioning equipment containing these substitutes. However, we do not have sufficient information on the core elements that should be part of such a training program to ensure that a training requirement would improve safety. EPA requests comment on whether we should establish a use condition requiring training in handling flammable refrigerant substitutes for technicians servicing or

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

72 of 98 disposing of equipment c ontaining such substitutes, and if so, what should be the mandatory elements of such trai ning. **V III**  **. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews**  A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review Under Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a

“ significant regulatory

action. ” Itraises novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President’s priorities, or the principles set forth in the E xecutive Order. Accordingl y, EPA submitted this action to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under EO 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011 ) and an y changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docke t for this action. B. Paperwork Reduction Act This action does not impose any new information collection burden. This proposed rule is an Agency

determination. It contains no new requirements for reporting or recordkeeping . The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously approved the information collection requirements contained in the existing regulations in Subpart G of 40 CFR Part 82 under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has a ssigned OMB control number 2060 - 0226. This In formation Collection Request (I CR) included five types of respondent reporting and recordkeeping activities pursuant to SNAP regulations: s ubmission of a SNAP petition, filing a SNAP/TSCA Addendum, notification for test marketing activity , re cordkeeping for substitutes acceptable subject to use restrictions, and recordkeeping for small volume uses. The OMB control numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.C.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

73 of 98 C. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory

Flexibility Act (RFA) generall y requires an agency to prepare a regulatory

flexibility

analy sis of any

rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the ru le will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small entiti es, small entity

is defined as: (1) a small business as defined by the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not - for - profit enterprise which is independentl y owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. After considering the economic impacts of this proposed rule on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Indetermining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is an y significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility

analy ses is to identify

and address regulatory

alternatives “which minimize any significant economic impact of the rule on small entities.” 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory

burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect on all of the small enti ties subject to the rule. The use conditions of this proposed rule, if finalized, would apply to manufacturers of househo ld and commercial refrigerator s and freezer s, vending machines, non - mechanical heat

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

74 of 98 transfer equipment, very

low temperature refrigeration equipment for laboratories and room air conditioners that choose to use these refrigerants . Today ’s action, if finalized, would allow equipment manufacturers the additional options of using ethane, HFC - 32 , isobutane, propane, and R - 441A in the specifie d end - uses but does not mandate such use. Because refrigeration and air conditioning equipment for these refrigerants are not manufactured yet in the U.S. for the proposed end - uses (with the exception of limited test - marketing) , no change in business pract ice would be required to meet the use conditions , resulting in no adverse impact compared to the absence of this rule . Proposed provisions that would allow venting of hydrocarbon refrigerants in the uses addressed b y this rule would reduce regulatory burden. Thus, the rule would not impose any new costs on small entities if finalized as proposed. EPA continues to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and welcomes comments on issues related to such impacts . D. Unfunded Ma ndates Reform Act This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of Title II of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531

– 1538 for State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. This action imposes no enforcea ble duty on any State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. The enforceable requirements of this proposed rule related to integrating risk mitigation devices, markings, and procedures for maintaining safety of refrigeration and air condition ing equipment using flammable refrigerants affect onl y a small number of manufacturers of refrigeration and air conditioning equipment and their technicians. Th erefore , this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA because it contains no regulatory

requirements that might significantly or uniquely

affect small governments. This

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

75 of 98 regulation applies equipment manufacturers and not to governmental enti ties. Today ’s action, if finalized, would allow equipment manufacturers the additional options of using ethane, HFC - 32 , isobutane, propane, and R - 441A in the specified end - uses. Because refrigeration and air conditioning equipment for these refrigerants ar e not manufactured yet in the U.S. for the proposed end - uses, no change in business practice would be required to meet the use conditions. This proposed rule does not mandate a switch to these substitutes; consequently , there is no direct economic impact o n entities from this rulemaking. E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism This action does not have f ederalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. This regulation applies directl y to facilities that use these substances and not to governmental entities. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action. In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local governments, EPA specifically solicits comments on this proposed action from State and local off icials . F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination W ith Indian Tribal Governments This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Itwill not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal government and In dian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. EPA specificall y solici ts additional comment on this proposed action

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

76 of 98 from tribal officials. G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because it is no t economically significant as defined in EO 12866, and because the Agency does not believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed b y this action present a disproportionate risk to children. This proposed rule provides both regulatory restrictio ns and recommended guidelines based upon risk screens conducted in order to reduce risk of fire and explosion. This proposed rule, if finalized, would provide refrigerant substitutes that have no ODP and lower GWP than other substitutes currently listed as acceptable. The reduction in ODS and GHG emissions would assist in restoring the stratospheric ozone layer and provide climate benefits. The public is invited to submit comments or identify peer - reviewed studies and data that assess effects of early life exposure to the refrigerant substitute s addressed in this action . H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use This action is not a “ significant energy action ” as defined in Executive Order 13211, (66 FR 2835 5 (May

22, 2001)) because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply , distribution, or use of energy . Preliminary information indicates that these new sy stems may be more energy

efficient than currentl y available systems in some cl imates. I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 ( “NTTAA ” ), Public Law 104

– 113, (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory a ctivities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

77 of 98 otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are develop ed or adopted by voluntary

consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This proposed rule involves technical standards. EPA proposes to use current editions of the Underwriters Laboratories (UL) standards 250 , 471 , 541 and 484 , which include requirements for safety and reliability for flammable refrigerants. This proposed rule regulates the safety and deploy ment of new substitutes for household and commercial refrigerators and freezers, vending machines, non - mechanical heat transfer equipment, very low temperature refrigeration equipment, and room air conditioners. EPA welcomes comment on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking and, specificall y invites the public to identify potentiall y applicable voluntary consensus standards and to explain why such standards should be used in this regulation. J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low -Income Populations Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal executive policy on environmental justice. It s main provision directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and per mitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low income populations in the United States. EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have disproportionatel y high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low - income populations because it

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

78 of 98 increases the level of hum an health and environmental protection for all affected populations without having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on any population, including any minority or low - income population. This proposed rule, if finalized, would provide refrigerant substitutes that have no ODP and lower GWP than other substitutes currently

listed as acceptable. The reduction in ODS and GHG emissions would assist in restoring the stratospheric ozone layer and provide climate benefits. **IX. References**  This preamble references the following documents, which are also in the Air Docket at the address listed in Section I .B.1. Unless specified otherwise, all documents are available electronically

through the Federal Docket Management Sy stem, Docke t # EPA - HQ - OAR - 2013 - 0 748 . Air - Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI), 20 12 . AHRI Guideline N 20 12 : Assignment of Refrigerant Container Colors. 20 12 . ASHRAE, 2010. American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air - Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). Standard 34 - 2010 (supersedes ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 34 - 2007): Designation and Safety Classification of Refrigerants. 2010. A.S. Trust & Holdings , 2012 . Significant New Alternatives Policy Program Submiss ion to the United States Environmental Protection Agency for R - 441A in retail food refrigeration. A/S Vestfrost, 2012. Significant New Alternatives Policy Program Submission to the United States Environmental Protection Agency for isobutane in retail food refrigeration. Climate Action Plan (CAP), 2013. The President’s Climate Action Plan. Executive Office of the President. June, 2013. Available online at www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/image/president27sclimateactionplan.pdf. CAP Website, 2013. Climate Change and President Obama’s Action Plan. June, 2013. Available online at www.whitehouse.gov/share/climate - action - plan Chinese Household Electrical Appliance Association (CHEAA), 2013. Significant New Alternatives Policy

Program Submission to the United States Environmental Protection Agency for Propane (R - 290) in residential and light commercial air conditioning and dehumidifiers. Daikin , 2011 . Significant New Alternatives Policy Program Submission to the United States Environmental Protection Agency fo r HFC - 32 in residential and light commercial air conditioning. EPA, 2013. Derivation of Charge Limits for Room Air Conditioners. Staff memo to Air Docket. 2013 . IC F, 2013 a . Assessment of the Potential Impact of Hydrocarbon Refrigerants on Ground -

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

79 of 98 Level Ozo ne Concentrations. IC F, 2013b. Risk Screen on Substitutes for CFC - 12, HCFC - 22 and R - 502 in Retail Food Refrigeration; Substitute: I sobutane (R - 600a) IC F, 2013c. Risk Screen on Substitutes for CFC - 12, HCFC - 22 and R - 502 in Retail Food Refrigeration ; Substitute: R - 441A IC F, 2013 d . Risk Screen on Substitute for CFC - 12, CFC - 13, R - 13B1, and R - 503 in Very Low Temperature Refrigeration and Non - Mechanical Heat Transfer; Substitute: Ethane (R - 170) IC F, 2013 e . Risk Screen on Substitutes for CFC - 12 and R - 502 in Vending Machines; Substitute: R - 441A IC F, 2013 f

. Risk Screen on Substitutes for CFC - 12 and R - 502 in Vending Machines; Substitute: I sobutane (R - 600a) IC F, 2013 g . Risk Screen on Substitutes for CFC - 12 and R - 502 in Vending Machines; Substitute: R - 290 (Propane) IC F, 2013h. Risk Screen on Substitutes for CFC - 12 and HCFC - 22 in Household Refrigerators and Household Freezers.; Substitute: Propane (R - 290). IC F, 2013i. Risk Screen on Substitutes for HCFC - 22 in Residential and L ight Commercial Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps ; Substitute: R - 290 (Propane) IC F, 2013j. Risk Screen on Substitutes for HCFC - 22 in Residential and L ight Commercial Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps **;** Substitute: HFC - 32 **(**Difluoromethane) IC F, 2013k . Risk Screen on Substitutes for HCFC - 22 in Residential and Li ght Commercial Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps **;** Substitute: R - 441A IPCC, 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of W orking Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the 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. This document is accessible at www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html Montzka, S.A. , 2012. HFCs in the Atmosphere: Concentrations, Emissions and Impacts, ASHRAE/NI ST Conference 2012. NOAA, 2013. NOAA emissions data on HFCs. Available online at ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/hats/hfcs/. ORNL , 1997. J. Sand, S. Fischer, and V. Baxter , “Energy and Global Warming Impacts of HFC Refrigerants and Emerging Technologies,” 1997, Oak Ridge National Lab. Sheldon , 1989. Sheldon, L .S., et al. 1989. "An Investigation of Infiltration and Indoor Air Quality ." New York State Energy Research & Deve lopment Authority, Report 90 - 11. As cited in I CF, 2013 h , Risk screen for propane in household refrigerators and freezers. Underwriters Laboratories (UL), 2000. UL 250: Household Refrigerators and Freezers. 10th edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Refrig erators and Freezers Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating S ys tem. August 2000. UL , 2010. UL 471. Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers. 10th edition. Supplement SB: Requirements for Refrigerators and Freezers Employing a Flammable Refri gerant in the Refrigerating S ys tem. November 2010.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

80 of 98 UL , 2011. UL 541. Refrigerated Vending Machines. 7 th Edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Room Air Conditioners Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating S ys tem. December 2011. UL , 2012. U L 484. Room Air Conditioners. 8 th Edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Refrigerated Venders Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating Sy stem. August 2012.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

81 of 98 **Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Listing of Substitutes for Refrigeration and Ai**  **r Conditioning and Revision of the Venting Prohibition for Certain Refrigerant Substitutes**  Proposed Rule Page 76 of 89 **List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82** Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, In corporatio n by

reference, Recycling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements , Stratospheric ozone layer. DATED:

Gina McCarth y , Administrator. For the reasons stated in the preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is proposed to be amended as follows: **PART 82 -**  **PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE**  1. The authority citation for part 82 continues to read as follows: **Authority:** 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671 - 7671q. Subpart G

– Significant New Alternatives Policy Program 2. Subpart G is amended by revising Appendix R to read as follows : Appendix R to subpart G of part 82 - Substitutes Subject to Use Restrictions L isted in the December 20 , 2011 , final rule, Effective February 21 , 2012 , and in the **[ INSERT**  **DATE OF PUBLICATION**  **OF F**  **INAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]**  final rule, Effective

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

82 of 98 **[INS ERT DATE 60 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION**  **OF FINAL RULE IN THE**  **FEDERAL REGISTER]** . SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS End -use Substitute Decision Use Conditions Further Information

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

83 of 98 Household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrig erators and freezers (New equipment only) Isobutane

(R - 600a) Propane (R 290) R - 441A Acceptable

Subject To Use Conditions These refrigerants may be used

only in new equipment designed specifically and clearly identified for the refrigerant (i.e., none of these substitutes may be used as a conversion or “retrofit” refrigerant for existing equipment designed for a different refrigerant). These refrigerants may be used only in a refrigerator or freezer, or combination refrigerator and freezer, that meet s all requirements listed in Supplement SA to the 10 th edition of the Underwriters Laboratories (UL) Standard for Household Refrigerators and Freezers, UL 250, dated 1993 updated August 2000. In cases where the final rule includes requirements more stringe nt than those of the 10 th edition of UL 250, the appliance must meet the requirements of the final rule in place of the requirements in the UL Standard. The quantity of the substitute refrigerant (i.e., “charge size”) must not exceed 57 grams (2.0 ounces) in any refrigerator, freezer, or combination refrigerator and freezer for each circuit. Applicable OSHA requirements at 29 CFR part 1910 must be followed, including those at 29 CFR 1910.106 (flammable and combustible liquids), 1910.110 (storage and hand ling of liquefied petroleum gases), 1910.157 (portable fire extinguishers), and 1910.1000 (toxic and hazardous substances). Proper ventilation should be maintained at all times during the manufacture and storage of equipment containing hydrocarbon refriger ants through adherence to good manufacturing practices as per 29 CFR 1910.106. If refrigerant levels in the air surrounding the equipment rise above one - fourth of the lower flammability limit, the space should be evacuated and re - entry should occur only af ter the space has been properly ventilated. Technicians and equipment manufacturers should wear appropriate personal protective equipment, including chemical goggles and protective gloves, when handling these refrigerants . Special care should be taken to avoid contact with the skin since these refrigerants, like many refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin. A class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be kept nearby. Technicians should only use spark- proof tools when working on refrigerators and freezers with these refrigerants . An y recovery equipment used should be designed for flammable refrigerants. An y refrigerant releases should be in a well ventilated area, such as outside of a building. Only technicians specifically trained in handlin g flammable refrigerants should service refrigerators and freezers containing these refrigerants. Technicians should gain an understanding of minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flammable refrigerants safely.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

84 of 98 End -use Substitute Decision Use Conditions Further Information Household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrigerators and freezers (New equipment only) Isobutane

(R - 600a) Propane (R 290) R - 441A Acceptable

Subject To Use Conditions As provided in clauses SA6.1.1 and SA6.1.2

of UL Standard 250, the following markings must be attached at the locations provided and must be permanent: (a) On or near any evaporators that can be contacted by the consumer: "DANGER - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Do N ot Use Mechanical Devices To Defrost Refrigerator. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing." (b) Near the machine compartment: "DANGER - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. To Be Repaired Only By Trained Service Personnel. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing." (c) Near the machine compartment: “CAUTION - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner's Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Precautions Must Be Followed." (d) On the exterio r of the refrigerator: “CAUTION - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properly In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used." (e) Near any and all exposed refrigerant tubing: “CAUTION - Risk of Fire or Explosion Due To Punc ture Of Refrigerant Tubing; Follow Handling Instructions Carefully. Flammable Refrigerant Used." All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) high. The refrigerator, freezer, or combination refrigerator and freezer must have red , Pantone® Matching System (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, or other devices through which the refrigerant is serviced (typically known as the service port) to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be present at all service ports and where service puncturing or otherwise creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere mi ght be expected (e.g., process tubes). The color mark must extend at least 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) from the compressor and must be replaced if remov ed. Room occupants should evacuate the space immediately following the accidental release of this refrigerant. If a service port is added then household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrigerator and freezers using these refrigerants should have service aperture fittings that differ from fittings used in equipment or containers using non - flammable refrigerant. “Differ” means that either the diameter differs by at least 1/16 inch or the thread direction is reversed (i.e., right - handed vs. left - han ded). These different fittings should be permanently affixed to the unit at the point of service and maintained until the end - of

- life of the unit, and should not be accessed with an adaptor .

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

85 of 98 Retail food refrigerators and freezers (stand - alone units only) (New equipment only) Isobutane

(R - 600a) Propane (R 290) R - 441A Acceptable

subject to use conditions These refrigerants may be used only

in new equipment specifically designed and clearly identified for the refrigerants (i.e., none of these substitutes may be used as a conversion or “retrofit” refrigerant for existing equipment designed for other refrigerants). These substitutes may only be used in equipment that meets all requirements in Supplement SB to the 10 th edition of the Underwriters Laboratories (UL) Standard for Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers, UL 471, dated November 2010. In cases where the final rule includes requirements more stringent than those of the 10 th edition of UL 471, the appliance must meet the requirements of the final rule in place of the requirements in the UL Standard. The charge size for the retail food refrigerator or freezer must not exceed 150 grams (5.3 ounces) in each circuit. Applicable OSHA requirements at 29 CFR part 1910 must be followed, including those at 29 CF R 1910.94 (ventilation) and 1910.106 (flammable and combustible liquids), 1910.110 (storage and handling of liquefied petroleum gases), and 1910.1000 (toxic and hazardous substances). Proper ventilation should be maintained at all times during the manufact ure and storage of equipment containing hydrocarbon refrigerants through adherence to good manufacturing practices as per 29 CFR 1910.106. If refrigerant levels in the air surrounding the equipment rise above one - fourth of the lower flammability limit, the space should be evacuated and re - entry should occur only after the space has been properly ventilated. Technicians and equipment manufacturers should wear appropriate personal protective equipment, including chemical goggles and protective gloves, when handling these refrigerants. Special care should be taken to avoid contact with the skin since these refrigerants, like many refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin. A class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be kept nearby. Technicians sho uld only use spark- proof tools when working on refrigerators and freezers with these refrigerants. An y recovery equipment used should be designed for flammable refrigerants. An y refrigerant releases should be in a well - ventilated area, such as outside of a building. Only technicians specifically trained in handling flammable refrigerants should service refrigerators and freezers containing these refrigerants. Technicians should gain an understanding of minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flamm able refrigerants safely. End -use Substitute Decision Use Conditions Further Information

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

86 of 98 Retail food refrigerators and freezers (stand - alone units only) (New equipment only) Isobutane

(R - 600a) Propane (R 290) R - 441A Acceptable

subject to use conditio ns As provided in clauses SB6.1.2 to SB6.1.5

of UL Standard 471, the following markings must be attached at the locations provided and must be permanent: (a) Attach on or near any evaporators that can be contacted by the consumer: "DANGER - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Do Not Use Mechanical Devices To Defrost Refrigerator. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing." (b) Attach near the machine compartment: "DANGER - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. To Be Repaired Only By

Trained Service Personnel. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing." (c) Attach near the machine compartment: “CAUTION - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner's Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Precautions Must be Followed." (d) Attach on the exterior of the refrigerator: “CAUTION - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properly In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used." (e) Attach near any and all expos ed refrigerant tubing: “CAUTION - Risk of Fire or Explosion Due To Puncture Of Refrigerant Tubing; Follow Handling Instructions Carefully. Flammable Refrigerant Used." All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) high. The refri gerator or freezer must have red, Pantone® Matching System (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, and other devices through which the refrigerant is serviced, typically known as the service port, to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be present at all service ports and where service puncturing or otherwise creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere mi ght be expected (e.g., process tubes). The color mark must extend at least 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) from the compres sor and must be replaced if removed. Room occupants should evacuate the space immediately following the accidental release of this refrigerant. If a service port is added then retail food refrigerator s and freezers using these refrigerants should have serv ice aperture fittings that differ from fittings used in equipment or containers using non - flammable refrigerant. “Differ” means that either the diameter differs by at least 1/16 inch or the thread direction is reversed (i.e., right - handed vs. left - handed). These different fittings should be permanently affixed to the unit at the point of service and maintained until the end - of

- life of the unit, and should not be accessed with an adaptor.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

87 of 98 End -use Substitute Decision Use Conditions Further Information Very low temperature refrigeration Non mechanical heat transfer (New equipment only) Ethane (R 170) Acceptable

subject to use conditions Th is refrigerant may be used only in new

equipment specifically designed and clearly identified for the refrigerant (i.e. , the substitute may not be used as a conversion or “retrofit” refrigerant for existing equipment designed for other refrigerants). These substitutes may only be used in equipment that meets all requirements in Supplement SB to the 10 th edition of the Und erwriters Laboratories (UL) Standard for Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers, UL 471, dated November 2010. In cases where the final rule includes requirements more stringent than those of the 10 th edition of UL 471, the appliance must meet the requirements of the final rule in place of the requirements in the UL Standard. The charge size for the retail food refrigerator or freezer must not exceed 150 grams (5.3 ounces) in each circuit. Applicable OSHA requirements at 29 CFR part 1910 must be followed, i ncluding those at 29 CFR 1910.94 (ventilation) and 1910.106 (flammable and combustible liquids), 1910.110 (storage and handling of liquefied petroleum gases), and 1910.1000 (toxic and hazardous substances). Proper ventilation should be maintained at all times during the manufacture and storage of equipment containing hydrocarbon refrigerants through adherence to good manufacturing practices as per 29 CFR 1910.106. If refrigerant levels in the air surrounding the equipment rise above one - fourth of the lower flammability limit, the space should be evacuated and re entry should occur only after the space has been properly ventilated. Technicians and equipment manufacturers should wear appropriate personal protective equipment, including chemical goggles and p rotective gloves, when handling ethane . Special care should be taken to avoid contact with the skin since ethane , like many refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin. A class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be kept nearby. Technicians sh ould only use spark proof tools when working on refrigerators and freezers with flammable refrigerants . An y recovery equipment used should be designed for flammable refrigerants. An y refrigerant releases should be in a well - ventilated area, such as outsid e of a building. Only technicians specifically trained in handling flammable refrigerants should service refrigerators and freezers containing these refrigerants. Technicians should gain an understanding of minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flammable refrigerants safely.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

88 of 98 End -use Substitute Decision Use Conditions Further Information

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

89 of 98 Very low temperature refrigeration Non mechanical heat transfer (New equipment only) Ethane (R 170) Acceptable

subject to use conditions As provided in clause s SB6.1.2 to SB6.1.5

of UL Standard 471, the following markings must be attached at the locations provided and must be permanent: (a) Attach on or near any evaporators that can be contacted by the consumer: "DANGER - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Ref

rigerant Used. Do Not Use Mechanical Devices To Defrost Refrigerator. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing." (b) Attach near the machine compartment: "DANGER - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. To Be Repaired Only By Trained Service Perso nnel. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing." (c) Attach near the machine compartment: “CAUTION - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner's Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Precautions Must be Followed." (d) Attach on the exterior of the refrigerator: “CAUTION - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properly In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used." (e) Attach near any and all exposed refrigerant tubing: “ CAUTION - Risk of Fire or Explosion Due To Puncture Of Refrigerant Tubing; Follow Handling Instructions Carefully. Flammable Refrigerant Used." All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) high. The refrigeration equipment must have red, Pantone® Matching System (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, and other devices through which the refrigerant is serviced, typically known as the service port, to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be present at all service p orts and where service puncturing or otherwise creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere mi ght be expected (e.g., process tubes). The color mark must extend at least 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) from the compressor and must be replaced if removed. Room occupants should evacuate the space immediately following the accidental release of this refrigerant. If a service port is added then refrigeration equipment using this refrigerant should have service aperture fittings that differ from fi ttings used in equipment or containers using non - flammable refrigerant. “Differ” means that either the diameter differs by at least 1/16 inch or the thread direction is reversed (i.e., right handed vs. left - handed). These different fittings should be permanently affixed to the unit at the point of service and maintained until the end - of

- life of the unit, and should not be accessed with an adaptor. Example of non - mechanical heat transfer using this refrigerant would be use in a secondary loop of a thermosiph on.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

90 of 98 End -use Substitute Decision Use Conditions Further Information

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

91 of 98 Vending Machines (New equipment only) Isobutane (R 600a) Propane (R 290) R - 441A Acceptable

subject to use conditions Th ese refrigerant s may be used only in

new equipment specifically des igned and clearly identified for the refrigerants (i.e., none of these substitutes may be used as a conversion or “retrofit” refrigerant for existing equipment designed for other refrigerants). Where it is possible to easily detach and replace the old ref

rigeration circuit from the outer casing of the equipment. with a new one containing a new evaporator, condenser and refrigerant tubing within the old casing , this is considered “new” equipment and not a retrofit of the old, existing equipment. Th ese subs titute s may only be used in equipment that meets all requirements in Supplement SA to the 7 th edition of the Underwriters Laboratories (UL) Standard for Refrigerated Vending Machines, UL 541, dated December, 2011 . In cases where the final rule includes requirements more stringent than those of the 10 th edition of UL 471, the appliance must meet the requirements of the final rule in place of the requirements in the UL Standard. The charge size for the refrigeration equipment shall not exceed 150 grams (5.3 o unces) in each circuit. Applicable OSHA requirements at 29 CFR part 1910 must be followed, including those at 29 CFR 1910.94 (ventilation) and 1910.106 (flammable and combustible liquids), 1910.110 (storage and handling of liquefied petroleum gases), and 1910.1000 (toxic and hazardous substances). Proper ventilation should be maintained at all times during the manufacture and storage of equipment containing hydrocarbon refrigerants through adherence to good manufacturing practices as per 29 CFR 1910.106. If refrigerant levels in the air surrounding the equipment rise above one - fourth of the lower flammability limit, the space should be evacuated and re entry should occur only after the space has been properly ventilated. Technicians and equipment manufacturers should wear appropriate personal protective equipment, including chemical goggles and protective gloves, when handling propane. Special care should be taken to avoid contact with the skin since eth ane, like many refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin. A class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be kept nearby. Technicians should only use sparkproof tools when working on refrigeration equipment with flammable refrigerants . An y recovery equipment used should be designed for flammable r efrigerants. An y refrigerant releases should be in a well - ventilated area, such as outside of a building. Only technicians specifically trained in handling flammable refrigerants should service refrigeration equipment containing this refrigerant . Technici ans should gain an understanding of minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flammable refrigerants safely.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

92 of 98 End -use Substitute Decision Use Conditions Further Information Residential and light commercial air conditioning and heat pumps— self

c ontained room air conditioners only (New equipment only) HFC - 32

Propane (R 290) R - 441A Acceptable

subject to use conditions These refrigerants may be used

only in new equipment specifically designed and clearly identified for the refrigerants (i.e., none of these substitutes may be used as a conversion or “retrofit” refrigerant for existing equipment designed for other refrigerants). These substitutes may only be used in equipment that meets all requirements in Supplement SA to the 8 th edition of the Underwriters Laboratories (UL) Standard for Room Air Conditioners, UL 484, dated August 2012. In cases where the final rule includes requirements more stringent than those of the 8 th edition of UL 484, the appliance must meet the requirements of the final rule in place of the requirements in the UL Standard. The charge size for the entire air conditioner must not exceed the maximum refrigerant mass determined according to Appendix F of UL 484, 8 th edition for the room size where the air conditioner is used. The charge size for these three refrigerants must in no case exceed 7979 g (281.5 oz or 17.59 lb) of HFC - 32; 986 g (34.8 oz or 2.17 lbs) of propane; or 1000 g (35.3 oz or 2.21 lb) of R - 441A. The manufacturer must design a charge size for the entire air conditi oner that does not exceed the amount specified for the unit’s cooling capacity, as specified in Table A, B, C, or D of this appendix Applicable OSHA requirements at 29 CFR part 1910 must be followed, including those at 29 CFR 1910.94 (ventilation) and 1910 .106 (flammable and combustible liquids), 1910.110 (storage and handling of liquefied petroleum gases), and 1910.1000 (toxic and hazardous substances). Proper ventilation should be maintained at all times during the manufacture and storage of equipment containing hydrocarbon refrigerants through adherence to good manufacturing practices as per 29 CFR 1910.106. If refrigerant levels in the air surrounding the equipment rise above one - fourth of the lower flammability limit, the space should be evacuated and r e - entry should occur only after the space has been properly ventilated. Technicians and equipment manufacturers should wear appropriate personal protective equipment, including chemical goggles and protective gloves, when handling propane. Special care sho uld be taken to avoid contact with the skin since propane, like many refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin. A class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be kept nearby. Technicians should only use spark- proof tools when working on air con ditioning equipment with flammable refrigerants. An y recovery equipment used should be designed for flammable refrigerants. An y refrigerant releases should be in a well - ventilated area, such as outside of a building. Only technicians specifically trained in handling flammable refrigerants should service refrigeration equipment containing this refrigerant. Technicians should gain an understanding of minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flammable refrigerants safely.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

93 of 98 End -use Substitute Decis ion Use Conditions Further Information

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

94 of 98 Residential and light commercial air conditioning and heat pumps— self

contained room air conditioners only (New equipment only) HFC - 32

Propane (R 290) R - 441A Acceptable

subject to use conditions As provided in claus es SA6.1.2 to SA6.1.5

of UL Standard 484, the following markings must be attached at the locations provided and must be permanent: (a) On the outside of the air conditioner: "DANGER - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. To Be Repaired On ly By Trained Service Personnel. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing." (b) On the outside of the air conditioner: “CAUTION - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properly In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used." (c) O n the inside of the air conditioner near the compressor: “CAUTION - Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner's Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Precautions Must be Followed." (d) On the outside of each portable air conditioner: “WARNING: Appliance hall be installed, operated and stored in a room with a floor area larger the “X” m2 (Y ft2 ).” The value “X” on the label must be determined using the minimum room size in m2 calculated using Ap pendix F of UL 484. For R - 441A, use a lower flammability limit of 0.041 kg/m3 and for R - 443A use a lower flammability limit of 0.036 kg/m3 n calculations in Appendix F of UL 484. (e) All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) h igh. The air conditioning equipment must have red, Pantone® Matching System (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, and other devices through which the refrigerant is serviced, typically known as the service port, to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be present at all service ports and where service puncturing or otherwise creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected (e.g., process tubes). The color mark must extend at least 2.5 centimeters (1 inch ) from the compressor and must be replaced if removed. Room occupants should evacuate the space immediately following the accidental release of this refrigerant. If a service port is added then air conditioning equipment using this refrigerant should have service aperture fittings that differ from fittings used in equipment or containers using non - flammable refrigerant. “Differ” means that either the diameter differs by at least 1/16 inch or the thread direction is reversed (i.e., right handed vs. left - han ded). These different fittings should be permanently affixed to the unit at the point of service and maintained until the end - of

- life of the unit, and should not be accessed with an adaptor. Air conditioning equipment in this category includes: Window air conditioning units Portable room air conditioners Packaged terminal air conditioners and heat pumps

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

95 of 98 Note: The use conditions in this appendix contain references to certain standards from Underwriters Laboratories Inc. (UL). The standards are incorpor ated by reference, and the referenced sections are made part of the regulations in part 82: 1. UL 250: Household Refrigerators and Freezers. 10th edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Refrigerators and Freezers Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System. Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. August 25, 2000. 2. UL 471. Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers. 10th edition. Supplement SB: Requirements for Refrigerators and Freezers Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System . Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. November 24, 2010. 3. UL 541. Refrigerated Vending Machines. 7 th Edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Room Air Conditioners Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System. December 2011 4. UL 484. Room Air Con ditioners. 8 th Edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Refrigerated Venders Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System. August 2012. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S .C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of UL Standards 250, 471, 484 and 541 may be purchased by mail at: COMM 2000; 151 Eastern Avenue; Bensenville, IL 60106; Email: orders@comm- 2000.com; Telephone: 1 - 888 - 853 - 3503 in the U.S. or Canada (other countries di al +1 - 415 - 352 - 2168); Internet address: http://

ulstandardsinfonet.ul.com/ or www.comm - 2000.com. You may inspect a copy at U.S. EPA’s Air and Radiation Docket; EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington DC or at the National Arch ives and Records Administration (NARA). For questions regarding access to these standards, the telephone number of EPA’s Air and Radiation Docket is 202 - 566 - 1742. For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202 - 741 - 6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under	EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review. Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

96 of 98 Table A Maximum Design Charge Sizes for Window Air Conditioners Refrigerant **Maximum design charge size (kg)** Associated cooling capacity (BTU/hr) 5 ,000 6 ,000 7 ,00 0 8 ,000 9 ,000 10 , 000 12 ,000 14 ,000 18 ,000 21 ,000 23 ,000 24 ,000 30 ,000 34 ,000 R - 32 1.73 2.12 2.74 3.00 3.24 3.47 3.68 4.07 4.59 5.48 6.01 6.49 6.72 7.76 R - 290 0.13 0.16 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.27 0.30 0.34 0.40 0.44 0.48 0.50 0.57 R - 441A 0.14 0.17 0.22 0.2 4 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.33 0.37 0.44 0.49 0.53 0.54 0.63 Note: For use with self

- contained air conditioning units or heat pumps with an evaporator at least 0.6 and no more than 1.0 m above the floor. Cooling capacities between those in the table are to be line arly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table.

Table B. Maximum Design Charge Sizes for Packaged Terminal Air Conditioners, Packaged Terminal Heat Pumps, and Portable Air Conditioning Units Refrigerant **Maximum desi gn charge size (kg)**  Associated cooling capacity (BTU/hr) 5 ,000 6 ,000 7 ,000 8 ,000 9 ,000 1 0 , 00 0 12 ,000 14 ,000 18 ,000 21 ,000 23 ,000 24 ,000 3 0 , 00 0 34 ,000 R - 32 1.04 1.27 1.65 1.80 1.95 2.08 2.21 2.44 2.75 3.29 3.60 3.89 4.03 4.65 R - 290 0.08 0.09 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.24 0.27 0.29 0.30 0.34 R - 441A 0.08 0.10 0.13 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.27 0.29 0.32 0.33 0.38 Note: For use with self

- contained air conditioning units or heat pumps with an evaporator no more than 0.6 m above the floor. Cooling capacities between those in the table are to be linearly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under	EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review. Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

97 of 98 Table C. Maximum Design Charge Sizes for Wall - Mounted AC Units Refrigerant **Maximum Design Charge Size (k** **g )**  Associated capacity (BTU/hr) 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 23,000 24,000 30 , 000 34,000 R - 32 3.12 3.82 4.94 5.41 5.84 6.24 6.62 7.32 8.26 9.87 10.81 11.68 12.09 13.96 R - 290 0.23 0.28 0.36 0.40 0.43 0.46 0.49 0.54 0.61 0.73 0.80 0.86 0.89 1.03 R - 441A 0.25 0.31 0.40 0.44 0.47 0.51 0.54 0.59 0.67 0.80 0.88 0.95 0.98 1.13 Note: For use with self

- contained air condition er s or heat pumps with an evaporator at least 1.0 and no more than 1.8 m above the floor. Cooling c apacities between those in the table are to be linearly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table . Table D. Maximum Design Charge Sizes for Ceiling - Mounted AC Units: Refrigerant **Maximum Design Charge Size (kg)**  A ssociated capacity (BTU/hr) 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 23,000 24,000 30,000 34,000 R - 32 3.82 4.67 6.03 6.61 7.14 7.63 8.09 8.95 10.09 12.07 13.22 14.28 14.78 17.06 R - 290 0.28 0.34 0.44 0.49 0.53 0.56 0.60 0.66 0.74 0.89 0.97 1.05 1.09 1.26 R - 441A 0.31 0.38 0.49 0.54 0.58 0.62 0.66 0.73 0.82 0.98 1.07 1.16 1.20 1.38 Note: For use with self

- contained air condition ers or heat pumps with an evaporator mo re than 1.8 m above the floor. Cooling capacities between those i n the table are to be linearly interpolated between the next smaller and larger capacities listed in the table.

### Summary	of	Interagency	Working	Comments	on	Draft	Language	under

EO12866 /13563 Interagency	Review.		Subject	to	Further	Policy	Review.

98 of 98 3. Amend Section 82.154 by adding section viii to paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows: **§ 82.154**  **Prohibitions.** (a)(1) * * * (viii ) Effective **[ I**  **NSERT DATE 60**  **DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER** **]** , isobutane (R - 600a) and R - 441A as substitutes in retail food refrigerators and freezers (stand - alone units onl y); propane (R - 290) as a substitute in household refrigerators, freeze rs, and combination refrigerators and freezers; ethane (R - 170) as a substitute in very low temperature refrigeration equipment and equipment for non - mechanical heat transfer; R - 441A , propane and isobutane as substitute s in vending machines; and propane , an d R - 441A in self

- contained room air conditioners for residential and light commercial air conditioning and heat pumps. * * * * *