Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38811 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Maryland Department of 

the Environment, 1800 Washington 

Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21230. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Emlyn Ve ́lez-Rosa, (215) 814–2038, or 

by email at velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

further information regarding the 

amendments to Maryland’s Low 

Emission Vehicle Program, please see 

the information provided in the direct 

final rulemaking action, with the same 

title, that is located in the ‘‘Rules and 

Regulations’’ section of this Federal 

Register publication. 

Dated: June 13, 2014. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2014–15885 Filed 7–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 82 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0748; FRL–9906–56– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AS04 

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: 

Listing of Substitutes for Refrigeration 

and Air Conditioning and Revision of 

the Venting Prohibition for Certain 

Refrigerant Substitutes 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed 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-uses: 

Household refrigerators and freezers, 

stand-alone commercial refrigerators 

and freezers, very low temperature 

refrigeration, non-mechanical heat 

transfer, 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 hydrocarbon 

refrigerant substitutes that we are 

proposing to list in this action as 

acceptable subject to use conditions in 

specific end-uses. We are proposing this 

exemption on the basis of current 

evidence that their venting, release, or 

disposal would not pose a threat to the 

environment. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 8, 2014. Any party 

requesting a public hearing must notify 

the contact listed below under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT by 5 p.m. 

eastern daylight time on July 24, 2014. 

If a hearing is held, it will take place on 

or about August 8, 2014 in Washington, 

DC and further information will be 

provided on EPA’s Stratospheric Ozone 

Web site 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. 

• Email: A-And-R-Docket@epa.gov. 

• Mail: Air and Radiation Docket, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Mail 

Code 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania 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 

received 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 to be Confidential Business 

Information (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.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available 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. If 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 any 

form of encryption, and should be free 

of any 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 by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 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 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the Air 

and Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Margaret Sheppard, Stratospheric 

Protection Division, Office of 

Atmospheric Programs, Mail Code 

6205J, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC 20460; telephone 

number (202) 343–9163; fax number 

(202) 343–2338, email address: 

sheppard.margaret@epa.gov. Notices 

and rulemakings under EPA’s 

Significant New Alternatives Policy 

(SNAP) program are available on EPA’s 

Stratospheric Ozone Web site at 

www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/regs. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

A. Background 

B. Does this action apply to me? 

C. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for EPA? 

D. What acronyms 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 do I find additional information 

about the SNAP program? 

III. What substitutes in what end-uses are 

considered in this proposed rule? 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38812 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

1Two of these refrigerants are flammable, 

although less flammable than hydrocarbons. Under 

40 CFR part 82, Subpart G, Appendix B, all other 

flammable substitutes remain unacceptable for use 

in MVAC because EPA has not taken action to 

specifically list them as acceptable subject to use 

conditions. 

2Both ethane and HFC–32 are not VOC under the 

definition at 40 CFR 51.100(s). 

A. What listing decisions is EPA proposing 

in this action? 

B. What are ethane, isobutane, propane, 

HFC–32, R–441A, and the ASHRAE 

classifications for refrigerant 

flammability? 

C. What end-uses are included in EPA’s 

proposed decision? 

IV. What criteria did EPA consider in 

determining whether to propose to list 

the substitutes as acceptable and in 

determining appropriate use conditions 

and how does EPA consider those 

criteria? 

A. Effects on the Environment 

B. Flammability and Fire Safety 

C. Toxicity 

V. Why is EPA proposing these specific use 

conditions? 

A. New Equipment Only; 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 refrigerants and refrigerant substitutes 

under section 608 of the Clean Air Act? 

B. What are EPA’s regulations concerning 

venting, releasing or disposing of 

refrigerant substitutes? 

C. What revision to the venting prohibition 

has EPA recently issued? 

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 poses a threat to 

the environment? 

E. What is EPA proposing regarding 

venting, release, 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 Order 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: Consultation 

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 Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

IX. References 

I. General Information 

A. Background 

This rule lists as acceptable subject to 

use conditions a number of flammable 

refrigerant substitutes that EPA believes 

present overall lower risk to human 

health and the environment compared 

to other available or potentially 

available alternatives in the same enduses. The proposed refrigerants include 

one hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) 

refrigerant—HFC–32—and four 

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 

conditions in a number of stationary air 

conditioning (AC) and refrigeration enduses under the SNAP program, 

including: household refrigerators and 

freezers, retail food refrigeration, very 

low temperature refrigeration, nonmechanical heat transfer, vending 

machines, and residential and light 

commercial AC 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 potentially available. 

All of the end-uses proposed in this 

rule are for stationary refrigeration or 

AC; 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 

that 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– 

152a, R–1234yf, and R–744).1

This proposed rule responds to a 

number of SNAP submissions for four 

hydrocarbon refrigerants and HFC–32 

and also lists some of these refrigerants 

as acceptable subject to use conditions 

in the same end-uses. Additionally, this 

action proposes to exempt from Section 

608’s prohibition on venting, release, or 

disposal, the four hydrocarbon 

refrigerant substitutes that we are 

proposing to list as acceptable subject to 

use conditions in specific end-uses, 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 volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) as defined in 

40 CFR 50.100(s), i.e., isobutane, 

propane, and R–441A,2 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 

hydrocarbons or blends consisting 

solely of hydrocarbons. 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 

AC units such as mini-splits and 

portable room air conditioners. 

Because hydrocarbon refrigerants 

have zero ozone depletion potential 

(ODP) and very low GWPs compared to 

most other refrigerants, many 

companies recently have expressed 

interest in using hydrocarbons in the 

United States. Also, some companies 

have reported improved energy 

efficiency with hydrocarbon refrigerants 

(A.S. Trust & Holdings, 2012; A/S 

Vestfrost, 2012; CHEAA, 2013). 

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 refrigerators 

and freezers and found propane 

acceptable subject to use conditions in 

retail food refrigerators and freezers 

(stand-alone units only). In this action, 

EPA is considering isobutane, propane, 

and R–441A for different end-uses. 

There is interest in use of HFC–32 

(difluoromethane, Chemical Abstracts 

Service Registry Number [CAS Reg. No.] 

75–10–5) in residential AC systems and 

heat pumps because it has a GWP of 

675, which is lower than the GWPs of 

hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC)-22 

(1,810) and most other HFC-based 

refrigerants (approximately 1,500 to 

4,000). It also has mild flammability 

compared to hydrocarbon refrigerants. 

Mini-split systems using HFC–32 are 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38813 

3Climate Change and President Obama’s Action 

Plan. June, 2013. Available online at 

www.whitehouse.gov/share/climate-action-plan 

4 GWPs for HFC–134a, HFC–32, the component 

HFCs comprising R–404A and R–410A, propane 

and ethane are listed in IPCC, 2007: 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. 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. 

GWPs for isobutane and R–441A were provided by 

the submitters to EPA and they 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 and 

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. 

5Unless otherwise stated, the ODP 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. 

now being sold in Japan and are being 

introduced in India and Indonesia. 

This action proposes to list one or 

more of these five lower-GWP 

refrigerant substitute options as 

acceptable subject to use conditions in 

the end-uses identified previously. This 

is a regular update to EPA’s lists of 

acceptable substitutes through the 

SNAP program under the authority of 

Section 612 of the Clean Air Act. 

This action also responds 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-friendly 

chemicals’’ (Climate Action Plan, 2013). 

This rule proposes to approve a number 

of climate-friendly alternatives for 

various kinds of refrigeration and AC 

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 climatefriendly 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 reduce climate-damaging 

emissions. Use and emissions of HFCs 

is rapidly increasing because they are 

the primary substitutes for ozonedepleting substances in many of the 

largest end-uses, and because use is 

growing worldwide, mostly as a result 

of increased demand for refrigeration 

and AC, particularly in developing 

countries. Although 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 

CO2 and other GHGs and their 

emissions 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 greenhouse gas 

emissions to 3 percent by 2020 and 

nearly triple by 2030.3

HFCs are rapidly accumulating in the 

atmosphere. For example, the 

atmospheric concentration of HFC– 

134a, the most abundant HFC, has 

increased by about 10% per year from 

2006 to 2012, and concentrations of 

HFC–143a and HFC–125 have risen over 

13% and 16% per year from 2007–2011, 

respectively (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 ozonedepleting substances (ODS) and HFC 

substitute refrigerants currently used in 

those end-uses. For example, this 

action, if finalized, would allow the use 

of isobutane (R–600a) and the 

hydrocarbon blend R–441A in standalone commercial refrigerators. The 

GWPs 4 of these hydrocarbon 

refrigerants are less than 10, while HFCs 

typically used in this end-use—HFC– 

134a and R–404A (a blend of three 

HFCs)—have GWPs of 1,430 and 

approximately 3,920, respectively. 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 typically used in 

such equipment at present in the U.S. 

Finally, this action, if finalized, would 

allow for the use of propane, R–441A, 

and difluoromethane (HFC–32) in standalone 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 approximately 2,090. ODS replaced 

in the end-uses in this rule include 

chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-12 (ODP 5 of 1 

and GWP of 10,900), R–13B1 (also 

known as bromotrifluoromethane or 

halon 1301, with ODP of 10 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 acceptable 

subject to use conditions for use in 

specific end-uses within the 

refrigeration and AC sector: ethane (R– 

170), HFC–32 (R–32), isobutane (R– 

600a), propane (R–290), and the 

hydrocarbon blend R–441A. Types of 

residential and light commercial AC 

equipment addressed in this NPRM 

include window AC units; packaged 

terminal AC units and heat pumps; and 

portable room AC units. Types of 

refrigeration equipment include standalone commercial refrigerators and 

freezers (retail food refrigeration), very 

low temperature freezers, 

thermosiphons (non-mechanical transfer 

equipment), household refrigerators and 

freezers, and vending machines. 

Table 1 identifies the potential 

entities that may wish to use ethane, 

HFC–32, R–441A, isobutane, propane, 

and other flammable refrigerants in 

these end-uses. 

TABLE 1—POTENTIALLY REGULATED ENTITIES BY NORTH AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (NAICS) CODE

OR SUBSECTOR

Category NAICS 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 

Other; Heat Pumps Not Elsewhere Specified or Included (NESOI); and Parts Thereof. 

Industry ............. 443111 Appliance Stores: Household-type. 

Industry ............. 445120 Convenience Stores. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38814 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1—POTENTIALLY REGULATED ENTITIES BY NORTH AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (NAICS) CODE

OR SUBSECTOR—Continued 

Category NAICS code 

or subsector Description of regulated entities 

Industry ............. 445110 Supermarkets and Other Grocery (except Convenience) Stores. 

Industry ............. 722211 Limited-Service Restaurants. 

Industry ............. 238220 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 substitutes 

whose use would be regulated by this 

proposed action. If you have any 

questions about whether this action 

applies to a particular entity, consult the 

person listed in the preceding section, 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

C. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) 

Do not submit confidential 

information to EPA through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 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 electronically 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 

copy 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. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments 

When submitting comments, 

remember to: 

• Identify 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 referencing a 

CFR part or section number. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any 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 clearly 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 this preamble. 

AC—air conditioning 

ACGIH—American Conference of 

Governmental Industrial Hygienists 

ACH—air changes per hour 

AEGL—acute exposure guideline level 

AHRI—Air Conditioning, Heating and 

Refrigeration Institute 

ANSI—American National Standards 

Institute 

ASHRAE—American Society of Heating, 

Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning 

Engineers 

BTU—British thermal unit 

CAA—Clean Air Act 

CAS Reg. No.—Chemical Abstracts Service 

Registry Identification Number 

CBI—Confidential Business Information 

CFC—chlorofluorocarbon 

CFR—Code of Federal Regulations 

CMAQ—Community Multiscale Air Quality 

DOE—the United States Department of 

Energy 

EO—Executive Order 

EPA—the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency 

FR—Federal Register 

GHG—greenhouse gas 

GWP—global warming potential 

HCFC—hydrochlorofluorocarbon 

HFC—hydrofluorocarbon 

ICF—ICF International, Inc. 

ICR—Information Collection Request 

IEC—International Electrotechnical 

Commission 

IPCC—Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

Change 

IPR—industrial process refrigeration 

kJ—kilojoule 

kPa—kilopascal 

lb—pound 

LFL—lower flammability limit 

MSDS—Material Safety Data Sheet 

MVAC—motor vehicle air conditioning 

NAAQS—National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard 

NAICS—North American Industrial 

Classification System 

NIOSH—the United States National Institute 

for Occupational Safety and Health 

NOAEL—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 

OHA—Office of Hearing and Appeals 

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 System 

ppb—parts per billion 

ppm—parts per million 

PRA—Paperwork Reduction Act 

PTAC—packaged terminal air conditioner 

PTHP—packaged terminal heat pump 

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 

TWA—time-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. What are the statutory requirements 

and authority for the SNAP Program? 

Section 612 of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) requires EPA to develop a 

program for evaluating alternatives to 

ODS. EPA refers to this program as the 

Significant 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 

tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and 

hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38815 

6As 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 District 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 facility 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. 

7As defined at 40 CFR 82.172, ‘‘end-use’’ means 

processes or classes of specific applications within 

major industrial sectors where a substitute is used 

to replace an ODS. 

8The SNAP regulations also include ‘‘pending,’’ 

referring to submissions for which EPA has not 

reached a determination under this provision. 

substance (hydrochlorofluorocarbon) 

with any substitute that the 

Administrator determines may present 

adverse effects to human health or the 

environment where the Administrator 

has identified an alternative that (1) 

reduces the overall risk to human health 

and the environment and (2) is currently 

or potentially available. 

2. Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable 

Substitutes 

Section 612(c) requires EPA to 

publish a list of the substitutes 

unacceptable 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 conditions,’’ 

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 add a 

substance to, or delete a substance from, 

the lists published in accordance with 

section 612(c). The Agency has 90 days 

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 days 

before new or existing chemicals are 

introduced into interstate commerce for 

significant 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 I and 

II substances in identifying and 

developing alternatives to the use of 

such substances in key commercial 

applications. 

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 I and II substances. 

B. What 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 expansion—are the principal 

industrial sectors that historically 

consumed the largest volumes of ODS. 

Section 612 of the CAA instructs 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 

currently or potentially available for a 

specific use. 

C. How do the regulations for the SNAP 

program work? 

Under the SNAP regulations, anyone 

who plans to market or produce a 

substitute in one of the eight major 

industrial use sectors where class I or 

class II substances have been used must 

provide notice to the Agency, including 

health and safety information on the 

substitute, at least 90 days 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 into interstate 

commerce,6 who typically are chemical 

manufacturers but may include 

importers, formulators, equipment 

manufacturers, and end users when they 

are responsible for introducing a 

substitute into commerce.7 The CAA 

and the SNAP regulations, 40 CFR 

82.174(a), prohibit use of a substitute 

earlier than 90 days 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 8 (40 CFR 82.180(b)). Use 

conditions and narrowed use limits are 

both considered ‘‘use restrictions’’ and 

are explained below. 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-uses 

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 only 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 

‘‘acceptable subject to use conditions.’’ 

Entities that use these substitutes 

without meeting the associated use 

conditions are in violation of section 

612 of the CAA and EPA’s SNAP 

regulations. 40 CFR 82.174(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-uses or specific 

applications within an industry sector. 

EPA describes these 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-uses that 

are not consistent with the narrowed 

use limit is using the substitute in an 

unacceptable 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 

deemed 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. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38816 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

9Sometimes conversion refrigerant substitutes are 

inaccurately referred to as ‘‘drop in’’ replacements. 

In contrast, EPA 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 implementing 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 

sanction 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 

decision, these statements are not 

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 by 

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 legally 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 many 

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 additional 

information about the SNAP program? 

For copies of the comprehensive 

SNAP lists of substitutes or additional 

information on SNAP, refer to EPA’s 

Ozone Depletion Web site 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 substitutes in what end-uses 

are considered in this proposed rule? 

A. What listing decisions 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-uses. 

1. Retail food refrigeration. EPA 

proposes to list isobutane (also referred 

to as R–600a) and the hydrocarbon 

blend R–441A as acceptable subject to 

use conditions as substitutes in retail 

food refrigeration (new stand-alone 

commercial refrigerators and freezers 

only). EPA proposes the following use 

conditions: 

i. The quantity of the substitute 

refrigerant (i.e., ‘‘charge size’’) must not 

exceed 150 grams (5.29 ounces); 

ii. 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’’ 9 refrigerant for existing 

equipment; 

iii. These refrigerants may be used 

only in stand-alone commercial 

refrigerators and freezers that meet all 

requirements listed in Supplement SB 

to the 10th edition of Underwriters 

Laboratories (UL) Standard 471, dated 

November 24, 2010. 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 the rule, as finalized; 

iv. The refrigerator or freezer must 

have red Pantone Matching System 

(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 system 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. The 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 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 Only By Trained Service 

Personnel. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant 

Tubing.’’ This marking must be located 

near 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 machine compartment. 

(d) ‘‘CAUTION—Risk of Fire or 

Explosion. Dispose of Properly In 

Accordance With Federal Or Local 

Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant 

Used.’’ This marking must be provided 

on the exterior of the refrigeration 

equipment. 

(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 system, such as a red plastic sleeve, 

in Section V.D, ‘‘Color-coded hoses and 

piping.’’ 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 

proposed requirement and clauses 

SB6.1.2 to SB6.1.5 of UL Standard 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 ethane (also referred to 

as R–170), as acceptable, subject to use 

conditions, in very low temperature 

refrigeration equipment and in nonmechanical heat transfer, subject to the 

same use conditions as described above 

for isobutane and R–441A in standalone 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 any household 

refrigerator, freezer, or combination 

refrigerator and freezer for each circuit 

using R–290 must not exceed 57 grams 

(2.01 ounces); 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38817 

10Packaged terminal air conditioners are 

intended for use in a single room and use no ducts 

to carry cooled air and no external refrigerant lines. 

Typical applications include motel or dormitory air 

conditioners. 

ii. This refrigerant may be used only 

in new equipment specifically designed 

and clearly 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 UL Standard 250, dated 

August 25, 2000. (In cases where the 

proposed rule includes requirements 

more stringent than those of the 10th 

edition of UL Standard 250, the 

appliance must meet the requirements 

of the final SNAP listing); 

iv. The refrigerator or freezer must 

have red Pantone Matching System 

(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 equipment, 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 UL 

Standard 250 is that in UL 250, the 

markings are required to be no less than 

3.2 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 use 

conditions described above for standalone 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 Machines,’’ dated 

December 30, 2011 (instead of the 10th 

edition of UL 471). 

Note that in UL 541, the relevant 

references on equipment markings for 

flammable refrigerants in Supplement A 

are sections SA 6.1.2–SA 6.1.5. 

5. Residential and light commercial 

AC and heat pumps. EPA proposes to 

list propane (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 AC 

for self-contained 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.10 EPA 

proposes the following use conditions: 

i. 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; 

ii. These refrigerants may be used 

only in air conditioners that meet all 

requirements listed in Supplement SA 

to the 8th edition, dated August 2, 2012, 

of Underwriters Laboratories (UL) 

Standard 484, ‘‘Room Air 

Conditioners.’’ If this rule is finalized as 

proposed, in cases where the final rule 

would include requirements more 

stringent than those of the 8th edition of 

UL Standard 484, the appliance would 

need to meet the requirements of the 

final rule in place of the requirements 

in the UL Standard; 

iii. UL 484 includes charge limits for 

room air conditioners and adherence to 

those charge limits would normally be 

confirmed by the installer. In addition 

to proposing the charge limits in the UL 

484 standard as a requirement, EPA is 

proposing the following charge size 

limits adherence to which must be 

confirmed by the original equipment 

manufacturer (OEM). In cases 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 for Room Air Conditioners,’’ 

EPA, 2014 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 System (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 

system 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. 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 Repaired Only 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) 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 conditioners, 

packaged terminal air conditioners and 

packaged terminal heat pumps, 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 

evaporator 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 

evaporator must remain no higher than 

1.06 m above the floor. 

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 UL Standard 484 is that in 

UL 484, 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 regulatory 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. We 

note that there may be other legal 

obligations pertaining to the 

manufacture, use, handling, and 

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). 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38818 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

In summary, EPA is proposing to list 

ethane, isobutane, propane, HFC–32, 

and R–441A as acceptable subject to use 

conditions as substitute refrigerants in 

certain refrigeration and AC end-uses. If 

this proposal were to become final, it 

would be legal to use those refrigerants 

in the specified types of equipment 

under the conditions identified above. 

Use 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 manufacturers and the end 

users should be familiar with these 

proposed use conditions and EPA 

would expect them to comply with any 

final use conditions. 

B. What are ethane, isobutane, propane, 

HFC–32, R–441A, and the ASHRAE 

classifications for refrigerant 

flammability? 

Ethane, isobutane, and propane are 

hydrocarbons and R–441A is a 

hydrocarbon blend. Hydrocarbons are 

highly flammable organic compounds 

made up of hydrogen and carbon. 

Ethane has two carbons and a chemical 

formula of C2H6. Propane has three 

carbons and the formula C3H8. Isobutane 

has four carbons and the formula C4H10, 

also written as CH(CH3)2CH3 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, respectively. 

R–441A, also known by the trade 

name ‘‘HCR–188C,’’ is a highly 

flammable hydrocarbon blend 

consisting of 55% propane, 36% nbutane, 6% isobutane, and 3% ethane 

by weight. HFC–32 is a mildly 

flammable organic compound made up 

of hydrogen, carbon, and fluorine with 

the chemical formula CF2H2 (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-timeweighted 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 lower 

flammability limit (LFL) greater than 

0.10 kg/m3. 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 and 

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 or an LFL of 0.10 kg/ 

m3 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). 

Using these safety group 

classifications, ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 

34–2010 categorizes ethane, isobutane, 

propane, and R–441A in the A3 Safety 

Group and categorizes HFC–32 in the 

A2L Safety Group. 

C. What end-uses are included in EPA’s 

proposed decision? 

1. Household Refrigerators, Freezers, 

and Combination 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 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP09JY14.003</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38819 

11EPA 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. 

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—StandAlone Commercial Refrigerators and 

Freezers 

Retail food refrigeration includes the 

refrigeration systems, 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 only in stand-alone 

equipment. A stand-alone 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. Such 

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 coolers, standalone ice cream cabinets, and wine 

coolers in commercial settings). This 

proposed rule does not apply to large 

commercial refrigeration systems such 

as, but not limited to, multiplex direct 

expansion refrigeration systems 

typically found in supermarkets. Such 

equipment typically requires larger 

charge sizes than those considered in 

this proposed rule. This proposal also 

does not apply to walk-in coolers, a type 

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 Appendix R to Subpart G of 

40 CFR part 82. 

3. Very Low Temperature Refrigeration 

and 4. Non-Mechanical Heat Transfer 

Equipment 

Very low temperature refrigeration 

equipment is intended to maintain 

temperatures considerably 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 require 

extremely 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 system with two refrigerant 

loops or with a direct expansion 

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 specifically to very 

low temperature refrigeration or nonmechanical heat transfer. The submitter 

of information for use of ethane in very 

low temperature refrigeration has 

indicated that Underwriters 

Laboratories, Inc. has tested their 

equipment for compliance with the UL 

471 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 systems that 

rely on convection to remove heat from 

an area, rather than mechanical 

refrigeration. A thermosiphon is a type 

of heat transfer system 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, 

provided that they meet the use 

conditions, including the requirements 

of Supplement B to the UL 471 standard 

and a charge limit of 150 g.11

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 system of a 

vending machine is similar to that of a 

self-contained commercial refrigerator 

or freezer. Typically the difference lies 

in how payment for goods is made and 

in the selection mechanisms found in 

vending machines but not in selfcontained commercial refrigeratorfreezers, and possibly the outer casing 

(e.g., glass doors and open, reach-in 

designs are generally used in selfcontained commercial refrigeratorfreezers whereas glass wall and other 

types of casings are used for vending 

machines). The standard UL 541 applies 

to vending machines. It contains a 

Supplement SA specifically addressing 

flammable refrigerants that is very 

similar to the Supplement SB in the UL 

471 standard for commercial 

refrigerators and freezers. 

6. Residential and Light Commercial AC 

and Heat Pumps 

This end-use includes equipment for 

cooling air in individual rooms, in 

single-family homes, and sometimes in 

small commercial buildings. This enduse differs from commercial comfort 

AC, 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 AC and heat pumps 

include: 

• Central air conditioners, also called 

unitary AC or unitary split systems. 

These systems include an outdoor unit 

with a condenser and a compressor, 

refrigerant lines, an indoor unit with an 

evaporator, and ducts to carry cooled air 

throughout a building. Central heat 

pumps are similar but offer the choice 

to either heat or cool the indoor space. 

These systems are not addressed in this 

rule. 

• Multi-split air conditioners. These 

systems include one or more outdoor 

unit(s) with a condenser and a 

compressor and multiple indoor units, 

each of which is connected to the 

outdoor unit by refrigerant lines. These 

systems are not addressed in this rule. 

• Mini-split air conditioners. These 

systems include an outdoor unit with a 

condenser and a compressor and a 

single indoor unit that is connected to 

the outdoor unit by refrigerant lines. 

Cooled air exits directly from the indoor 

unit rather than being carried through 

ducts. These systems are not addressed 

in this rule. 

• Window air conditioners. These are 

self-contained units that fit in a window 

with the condenser extending outside 

the window. These types of units would 

be regulated under this rule if it 

becomes final. 

• Packaged terminal air conditioners 

and packaged terminal heat pumps. 

These are self-contained units that 

consist of a separate, un-encased 

combination of heating and cooling 

assemblies mounted through a wall. 

These types of units would be regulated 

under this rule if it becomes final. 

• Portable room air conditioners. 

These are self-contained units used 

inside rooms that are designed to be 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38820 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

12We assume that substitutes containing no 

chlorine, bromine, or iodine have an ODP of zero. 13Under 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-charged appliances or 

appliance components or to charge new appliances 

assembled onsite. 

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 equipment, window 

air conditioners, packaged terminal air 

conditioners, packaged terminal heat 

pumps, and portable room air 

conditioners are self-contained 

equipment with the condenser, 

compressor, evaporator, and tubing all 

within casing in a single unit. These 

units all fall under the scope of the UL 

484 standard for Room Air 

Conditioners. In contrast, unitary split 

systems, multi-split systems and minisplit systems have an outdoor condenser 

that is separated from an indoor unit. 

Compared to split systems, selfcontained equipment typically has 

smaller charge sizes, has fewer locations 

that are prone to leak, and is less likely 

to require servicing by a technician, 

thereby causing refrigerant releases. A 

lower risk of refrigerant releases and a 

potential for smaller releases and lower 

concentration releases would result in 

lower risk that flammable refrigerant 

could be ignited. Thus, self-contained 

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 substitutes as acceptable and in 

determining the proposed use 

conditions and how does 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 substitutes 

that are currently 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 enduse. The criteria we review 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) ecosystem 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-uses. Based 

on our evaluations, we may reach 

different conclusions on the same 

substitute in different end-uses, because 

of different risk profiles (e.g., different 

exposure levels and usage patterns) and 

different sets of available or potentially 

available substitutes for each end-use. 

As noted previously on May 17, 2013, 

at 78 FR 29035, environmental 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 types of risk, 

either to the environment or to human 

health. EPA recognizes that during the 

nearly two-decade history of the SNAP 

program, new information about 

alternatives already found acceptable 

and new alternatives have emerged. To 

the extent possible, EPA considers 

current information that improves 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 Environment 

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 impacts 

on smog formation from emissions of 

volatile organic compounds (VOC); and 

ecosystem effects, particularly 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 

stratospheric 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-uses addressed in 

this proposal also have an ODP of zero 

(e.g., R–404A, R– 134a, R–410A, and R– 

407C).12 Some less common alternatives 

for these end-uses, such as R–401A, R– 

414A and other blends containing 

HCFC–22 or HCFC–142b,13 have ODPs 

ranging from 0.01 to 0.047. Thus, the 

refrigerant substitutes in this proposal 

have ODPs lower than or identical to the 

ODPs of other available substitutes and 

of the substances they replace. 

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 

relatively low 100-year integrated GWP 

of less than ten. HFC–32 has a GWP of 

675. For comparison, some other 

commonly used, acceptable refrigerants 

in these end-uses are R–134a, R–404A, 

R–407C, and R–410A with GWPs of 

about 1,430, 3,920, 1,770, and 2,090, 

respectively. 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 = 

10,900); 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 significantly lower than 

those of other refrigerants currently 

being used in the residential and light 

commercial AC 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 enduses that have a larger variety of options 

available with lower GWPs. Among the 

acceptable substitutes listed in this enduse, only ammonia absorption and the 

non-vapor compression technologies 

evaporative 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 that 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 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38821 

14For example, Department of Energy (DOE) 

standards apply to portable air conditioners, room 

air conditioners, PTACs and PTHPs, household 

refrigerators and freezers, refrigerated beverage 

vending machines, and commercial refrigeration 

equipment. See https://www1.eere.energy.gov/

buildings/appliance_standards/standards_test_

procedures.html. 

15Refrigeration or air conditioning equipment in 

the applicable covered equipment class would still 

be subject to DOE’s standards, regardless of the 

refrigerant that the equipment uses. If a 

manufacturer believes that its design is subjected to 

undue hardship by DOE’s regulations, the 

manufacturer may petition DOE’s Office of Hearing 

and Appeals (OHA) for exception relief or 

exemption from the standard pursuant to OHA’s 

authority under section 504 of the DOE 

Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7194), as implemented 

at subpart B of 10 CFR part 1003. OHA has the 

authority to grant such relief on a case-by-case basis 

if it determines that a manufacturer has 

demonstrated that meeting the standard would 

cause hardship, inequity, or unfair distribution of 

burdens. 

16The analysis included stand-alone commercial 

refrigerators, freezers, and coolers; vending 

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 nonmechanical heat transfer from commercial 

refrigerators and freezers. 

17Refrigerants in this scenario included propane, 

isobutane, and R–441A in the end-uses where they 

are proposed to be acceptable subject to use 

conditions, 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 expected to result in a slight 

overestimation of impacts, if any. 

appliances, since the ‘‘indirect’’ GHG 

emissions associated with electricity 

consumption typically exceed those 

from refrigerants over the full lifecycle 

of refrigerant-containing products. 

(ORNL, 1997). 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 

we 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 

most of the types of equipment covered 

here, energy efficiency standards 

exist.14 Thus, total energy use with 

alternative refrigerants can be expected 

to be no higher than that required by the 

standards for those classes of 

equipment.15 Further, testing data, peerreviewed journal articles and other 

information provided by 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 uses common ODS 

and HFC refrigerants that are listed as 

acceptable under SNAP. This implies 

that equipment that uses the refrigerants 

proposed 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 definition 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 isobutane, n-butane and 

propane, are VOC. Potential emissions 

of VOC from all substitutes for all enduses in the refrigeration and AC sector 

are addressed by the venting prohibition 

under Section 608 of the CAA. Under 

that 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 substance 

does not pose a threat to the 

environment, as proposed elsewhere in 

this action (see Section 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?’’ below). EPA 

estimates that potential emissions of 

hydrocarbons when used as refrigerant 

substitutes in all end-uses in the 

refrigeration and AC sector have little 

impact on local air quality, with the 

possible exception of unsaturated 

hydrocarbons such as propylene (ICF, 

2014a). 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 analyzed a number of scenarios 

to consider the potential impacts on 

local air quality if hydrocarbon 

refrigerants were used widely. 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 (ICF, 2014a). That 

analysis assumed that the most reactive 

hydrocarbon proposed to be acceptable 

(isobutane) was used in all refrigeration 

and AC 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 AC uses. In that 

extreme scenario, the model predicted 

that the maximum increase in the 8- 

hour average ground-level ozone 

concentration would be 0.72 ppb in Los 

Angeles. Further, in the analysis, the 

additional ground-level ozone did not 

result in exceeding the NAAQS where 

an area was in compliance 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 significantly greater risk to 

the environment than other substitutes 

that are currently or potentially 

available. Further, propane, 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 analyzed the potential 

impacts of the uses of hydrocarbon 

refrigerants proposed to be acceptable 

under this rule. In this less conservative 

analysis, EPA looked at a set of end-uses 

that would be more likely to use 

hydrocarbon refrigerants between now 

and 2030. The analysis assumed use of 

hydrocarbon refrigerants in those uses 

for which UL currently 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.16 In addition, the air quality 

analysis assumed several different 

hydrocarbons 17 would be used based 

upon those under review by the SNAP 

program in the end-uses for which they 

were submitted. For example, we 

assumed use of propane, R–441A, and 

another hydrocarbon refrigerant under 

review in room air conditioners and 

isobutane, propane, and R–441A in 

vending machines, stand-alone retail 

food refrigeration equipment, and 

household refrigerators and freezers, but 

no use of hydrocarbons in chillers used 

for AC of large buildings. (For further 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38822 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

information on the specific 

assumptions, see ICF, 2014a, 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-uses addressed in this 

proposed rule were to be emitted, there 

would be a worst-case impact of 0.15 

ppb ozone in the Los Angeles area, 

which is the area with the highest level 

of ozone pollution in the United States. 

In the other cities examined in the 

analysis, Houston and Atlanta, impacts 

were smaller (no more than 0.03 and 

0.01 ppb, respectively) (ICF, 2014a). 

These impacts did not cause any areas 

to exceed the NAAQS that otherwise 

would have met the NAAQS without 

the additional refrigerant emissions. 

Because of the relatively 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 significantly 

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-uses 

proposed in this rule. 

The substitutes in this proposal are all 

highly volatile. They typically evaporate 

or partition to air, rather than 

contaminating surface waters. Effects on 

aquatic life of the substitutes are 

expected to be small and pose no greater 

risk of aquatic or ecosystem effects than 

those of other available substitutes for 

these uses. 

Based on EPA’s analysis, the overall 

environmental risks, including ODP, 

GWP, local air quality effects and 

ecosystem impacts are lower than or 

comparable to those of other acceptable 

substitutes in the same end-uses. 

B. Flammability and Fire Safety 

The flammability risks of the 

proposed substitutes are of potential 

concern 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 nonflammable 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. In this section, we 

discuss the risks posed by the 

refrigerants 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 by 

these proposed substitutes is not greater 

than the overall risk posed by other 

substitutes in the same end-uses. In 

addition, we discuss why the 

flammability risks have led us to 

propose that these substitutes are only 

acceptable for use in new equipment 

specifically designed for these 

flammable refrigerants. 

Because of 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 

correctly. 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 

flammability limit (LFL). The 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 

safely, it is important to minimize the 

presence of potential ignition sources 

and to reduce the likelihood that the 

levels of ethane, HFC–32, isobutane, 

propane, or R–441A will exceed the 

LFL. Under the proposed listing 

decision, these substitutes would be 

acceptable for use only in new 

equipment (refrigerators, freezers and 

air conditioners) specifically designed 

for the refrigerant. We expect that the 

original equipment manufacturers, who 

would be storing large quantities of the 

refrigerant, are familiar with and use 

proper safety precautions to minimize 

the risk of explosion, because of the 

OSHA and building code requirements 

under which they operate. 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 properly 

designed to reduce possible ignition 

sources. 

To determine whether flammability 

would be a concern for manufacturing 

and service personnel or for consumers, 

EPA analyzed a plausible worst-case 

scenario to model a catastrophic release 

of the proposed refrigerants. The worstcase scenario analysis for each 

refrigerant revealed that even if the 

unit’s full charge is emitted within one 

minute, none 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, 2014b,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 analysis 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 analysis showed no potential for the 

released refrigerant from one piece of 

equipment to reach the LFL, 

manufacturing and service personnel or 

consumers may not be familiar with 

refrigeration or AC equipment 

containing a flammable refrigerant. 

Therefore, use conditions are necessary 

to ensure people handling such 

equipment 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 asphyxiation and of exposure to 

toxic levels of refrigerant for a worstcase 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. We considered a conservatively 

small space appropriate to each end-use, 

such as a small convenience store of 244 

m3 for retail food refrigeration, a small 

galley kitchen of 18 m3 for a household 

refrigerator/freezer, or a small bedroom 

of 41 m3 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 and 30- 

minute TWA exposure, and for an 8- 

hour time weighted average that would 

be more typical of occupational 

exposure for a technician servicing the 

equipment. We compared these shortterm and long-term exposure values to 

relevant industry and government 

workplace exposure limits for ethane, 

HFC–32, isobutane, propane, and 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38823 

18The AEGL limit is an emergency guideline for 

exposures to the general population (including 

susceptible populations) and is not time-weighted. 

It also considers the chemical’s flammability in 

addition to its toxicity. EPA develops a set of AEGL 

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 

toxicological 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/m3) of a substance above which it is 

predicted that the 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. 

19This is intended to mean a completely new 

refrigeration circuit containing 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. 

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 

exposure 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 Health’s (NIOSH) 

recommended exposure 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. In some cases where there was not 

an established short-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).18

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 

• Ethane: 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 ppm NOAEL over 30 

minutes 

• Propane: 1000 ppm PEL on 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 conditioners, EPA 

performed a consumer exposure 

analysis. In this analysis, 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 

typically be used in the workplace, such 

as in laboratories, and not in a home or 

public space. The analysis 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 considered toxicity limits for 

consumer exposure that reflect a shortterm 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 could then 

escape. Specific toxicity limits that we 

used in our analysis of consumer 

exposure include: 

• n-Butane: 6,900 ppm AEGL–1 over 

30 minutes 

• HFC–32: cardiotoxic NOAEL of 

350,000 ppm over 5 minutes 

• Isobutane: 18,000 ppm NOAEL over 

30 minutes 

• Propane: 6,900 ppm AEGL–1 over 

30 minutes 

The analysis of consumer 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 stratum of the room 

when assuming the lower ventilation 

level of 2.5 ACH. Calculating the TWA 

exposure using 2.5 ACH results in a 

higher concentration than calculating 

the TWA exposure using 4.5 ACH. Even 

under 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 any greater than that of 

other acceptable refrigerants in the 

proposed end-uses. 

For further information, including 

EPA’s risk screens and risk assessments 

as well as fault tree analyses from the 

submitters of the substitutes, see docket 

number EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0748 at 

www.regulations.gov. 

V. Why is EPA proposing 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, as 

described above in section III.A., ‘‘What 

listing decisions is EPA proposing in 

this action?.’’ 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. The 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 currently 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 only in new equipment 19 that is 

designed to address concerns unique to 

flammable refrigerants. The 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 equipment 

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, 

if the rule is finalized as proposed, use 

of these refrigerants in existing 

equipment would be in violation of 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38824 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

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 only in equipment 

that meets all requirements in the 

relevant supplements for flammable 

refrigerants in certain applicable UL 

Standards for refrigeration and AC 

equipment. Specifically, the standards 

cited include UL 471 10th edition for 

commercial refrigerators and freezers 

(including stand-alone freezers for very 

low temperature refrigeration), UL 250 

10th edition (for household refrigerators 

and freezers), UL 541 7th edition for 

refrigerated vending machines, and UL 

484 8th edition for room air 

conditioners. 

UL has 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 scratched. These 

standards were developed in an open 

and consensus-based approach, with the 

assistance of experts in the AC 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 Electrotechnical 

Commission (IEC), we are proposing to 

rely on UL standards as those that are 

most applicable and recognized by 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 type 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 

health or the environment that is greater 

than the risk posed by other available 

substitutes. These limits will reduce the 

risk to workers and consumers since 

under worst-case scenario analyses, a 

leak of the proposed charge sizes did 

not result in concentrations of the 

refrigerant that met or exceeded the 

LFL, as explained above in Section IV.B, 

‘‘Flammability and fire safety.’’ 

EPA is proposing limitations on 

refrigerant charge size for household 

and stand-alone commercial 

refrigerators and freezers, vending 

machines, and room AC units that 

reflect the UL 250, UL 471, UL 541 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 consensus 

of experts. EPA is proposing a charge 

size not to exceed 57 grams (2.01 

ounces) for household refrigerators and 

freezers, not to exceed 150 grams (5.29 

ounces) for retail food refrigeration in 

stand-alone units, and not to exceed 150 

grams (5.29 ounces) for vending 

machines. We are proposing a varying 

charge size limit for room AC 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 (1.06 

ounces). 

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 

(2.01 ounces) to allow for up to 7 grams 

(0.25 ounces) of refrigerant that might be 

solubilized in the oil (and assumed not 

to leak or immediately 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–2009–0286–0033 

on www.regulations.gov). 

UL standards 541 (retail food 

refrigeration) and 471 (vending 

machines) limit the amount of 

refrigerant leaked to 150 grams (5.29 

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 (5.29 ounces). 

As noted above, EPA is proposing a 

varying charge size for room AC units. 

We are proposing that the maximum 

charge must be no greater than the 

amount calculated for a given sized 

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: 

Mmax is the maximum charge size allowed for 

the space, in kg, 

LFL is the lower flammability limit of the 

refrigerant in kg/m3, 

h0 is the installation height of the indoor unit 

in m (0.6 m for an AC unit on the floor, 

1.0 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 equipment manufacturer would 

then design AC units to be used in 

rooms with a minimum size and would 

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 listed 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: 

m2 = (26 m3) × LFL 

Where: 

m2 is the maximum charge size allowed, in 

kg, 

26 m3 is a constant, and 

LFL is the lower flammability limit of the 

refrigerant in kg/m3. 

That formula sets maximum limits on 

refrigerant in a room air conditioner, as 

shown in Table 2. With the A3 

refrigerants, the maximum value is 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 20 is . . . 

In % by 

volume In kg/m3

1.7 m × 1.7 

m × 2.5 m 

(7.2 m3) A = 

2.89 m2

6 ft × 8 ft × 

8 ft (384 ft3/

10.9 m3) A 

= 4.46 m2

12 ft × 10 ft 

× 10 ft 

(1200 ft3/

34.0 m3) A 

= 11.15 m2

HFC–32 ................................................................ 14 .4 0.306 7.956 0.971 1.192 1.900 

Propane (R–290) ................................................. 2 .1 0.038 0.986 0.071 0.087 0.139 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP09JY14.004</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38825 

20Although the height of the room does not affect 

the calculation, typical heights are shown here for 

reference. 

TABLE 2—MAXIMUM REFRIGERANT CHARGE SIZES—Continued 

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 20 is . . . 

In % by 

volume In kg/m3

1.7 m × 1.7 

m × 2.5 m 

(7.2 m3) A = 

2.89 m2

6 ft × 8 ft × 

8 ft (384 ft3/

10.9 m3) A 

= 4.46 m2

12 ft × 10 ft 

× 10 ft 

(1200 ft3/

34.0 m3) A 

= 11.15 m2

R–441A ................................................................ 2 .05 0.041 1.000 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 likely that some consumers 

may be unaware of the exact size of the 

room to be cooled and thus may select 

an inappropriately sized AC unit that 

increases the flammability risk. A 

consumer may believe that a larger, 

more powerful AC unit will provide 

better, faster cooling and therefore may 

select an inappropriately sized AC unit 

that increases the flammability risk. To 

address these concerns, EPA proposes to 

supplement the charge size guidelines 

in Appendix F of UL 484 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. 

We believe that these requirements, in 

combination with the other use 

conditions and commonly found 

informational materials, provide 

sufficient safeguards against instances of 

consumers selecting inappropriatelysized equipment. For instance, 

packaging, technical literature and sales 

display 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, 2014). 

The proposed charge limits for each 

refrigerant by equipment type and 

mounting location are as follows: 

TABLE 3—MAXIMUM DESIGN CHARGE SIZES FOR WINDOW AC UNITS * 

Refrigerant 

Maximum design charge size (kg) 

Associated cooling 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 .................................. 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—MAXIMUM DESIGN CHARGE SIZES FOR PACKAGED TERMINAL AC UNITS AND HEAT PUMPS AND PORTABLE AC 

UNITS * 

Refrigerant 

Maximum design charge size (kg) 

Associated cooling 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 .................................. 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. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38826 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 5—MAXIMUM DESIGN CHARGE SIZES FOR WALL-MOUNTED AC UNITS * 

Refrigerant 

Maximum design charge size (kg) 

Associated cooling 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 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 

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 1.00 

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 1.00 

* Assumes the evaporator is at least 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—MAXIMUM DESIGN CHARGE SIZES FOR CEILING-MOUNTED AC UNITS * 

Refrigerant 

Maximum design charge size (kg) 

Associated cooling 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 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 

R–290 ................................ 0.28 0.34 0.44 0.49 0.53 0.56 0.60 0.66 0.74 0.89 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 

R–441A ............................. 0.31 0.38 0.49 0.54 0.58 0.62 0.66 0.73 0.82 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 

* 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. 

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 

roughly 100 square feet or 9.3 m2 and 

it is the lowest value observed at a 

popular retailer’s Web site 

(www.homedepot.com). We request 

comment on 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 cooling 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 

inappropriately 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 identify the 

use of a flammable refrigerant, thereby 

potentially reducing the risk of using 

sparking equipment or otherwise having 

an ignition source nearby. The AC and 

refrigeration industry currently uses 

distinguishing colors as means for 

identifying 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 hybrid 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 Matching System 

(PMS) #185 to match the red band 

displayed on the container of flammable 

refrigerants 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 could 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 particularly 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 adopted 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-uses that are already subject 

to the earlier rule, codified in Appendix 

R to Subpart G of 40 CFR Part 82. 

E. Labeling 

As a use condition, EPA is proposing 

to require labeling of household and 

retail refrigerators and freezers, vending 

machines, 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. Warning label language 

requirements are found in Section 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 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38827 

and freezers in UL 250 in section SA6.1, 

for vending machines in UL 541 in 

section SA6.1, for commercial 

refrigerators and freezers in UL 471 in 

section SB6.1, and for room AC units in 

UL 484 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 

proposing 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 UL is 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 

refrigerator/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. We 

previously considered this 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 types of equipment 

addressed in this rule are self-contained 

pieces of equipment with a hermetically 

sealed refrigerant circuit that is only 

rarely serviced. These are the same as or 

similar to the equipment addressed 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 

concern about mixing of refrigerant 

during servicing of appliances, 

particularly for AC equipment that is 

not self-contained. However, this rule is 

proposing to address only equipment 

that is self-contained. Moreover, we do 

not have new information that would 

lead us to a different decision than in 

the December 20, 2011, final rule for 

hydrocarbon refrigerants in household 

and stand-alone commercial 

refrigerators and freezers. 

We also considered requiring only 

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, particularly the proposed 

charge limit and the type font height for 

labels, into the UL 250 standard for 

household refrigerators and freezers. If 

those provisions were the only 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 through the 

use condition to follow the UL 250 

standard. However, at this time, those 

changes have not been incorporated into 

UL 250. Therefore, EPA is proposing 

those use conditions as well as 

compliance with other aspects of UL 

250. 

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 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 AC 

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 knowingly vent or 

otherwise knowingly release 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 and recovery requirements of 

regulations promulgated under sections 

608 and 609 are followed. 40 CFR 

82.154(a)(2). 

Effective November 15, 1995, section 

608(c)(2) of the Act extends the 

prohibition in section 608(c)(1) to 

knowingly venting or otherwise 

knowingly releasing or disposing of any 

refrigerant substitute for class I or class 

II substances by any person 

maintaining, servicing, repairing, or 

disposing of appliances or IPR. This 

prohibition applies to any substitute 

unless the Administrator determines 

that such venting, releasing, or 

disposing ‘‘does not pose a threat to the 

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. What are EPA’s regulations 

concerning venting, releasing or 

disposing of refrigerant substitutes? 

Regulations promulgated under 

Section 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 AC and 

refrigeration appliances. In the same 

1993 rule, EPA also promulgated 

regulations implementing the section 

608(c) prohibition on knowingly 

venting, releasing, or disposing of class 

I or 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., 

hydrofluorocarbons (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) ‘‘Effective June 13, 2005, no person 

maintaining, servicing, repairing, or 

disposing of appliances may knowingly vent 

or otherwise release into the environment 

any refrigerant or substitute from such 

appliances, with the exception of the 

following substitutes in the following enduses: 

i. Ammonia in commercial refrigeration, or 

in [IPR] or in absorption units; 

ii. Hydrocarbons in [IPR] (processing of 

hydrocarbons); 

iii. Chlorine in [IPR] (processing of 

chlorine and chlorine compounds); 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38828 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

21EPA is describing that final rule in this NPRM 

simply for ease of reference and as a reminder of 

EPA’s most recent rule on this subject; EPA is not 

here changing any aspect of that final rule or 

reopening the opportunity for comments on that 

final rule. 

iv. Carbon dioxide in any application; 

v. Nitrogen in any 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 good 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 substitutes as they pertain to 

good faith attempts to recover and 

recycle or safely dispose of nonexempted substitutes (70 FR 19275; 

April 13, 2005). 

C. What revision to the venting 

prohibition has EPA recently issued? 

On May 23, 2014 at 79 FR 29682, EPA 

revised the venting prohibition for 

refrigerant substitutes.21 Those changes 

exempt from that prohibition three 

hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes 

listed as acceptable subject to use 

conditions in the specified end-uses 

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 was listed as acceptable, 

subject to use conditions, as a 

refrigerant substitute in retail food 

refrigerators and freezers (stand-alone 

units only). That final rule does not 

apply to blends of hydrocarbons with 

other refrigerants or containing any 

amount of any CFC, HCFC, HFC, or PFC. 

EPA determined that for the purposes 

of CAA section 608(c)(2), the venting, 

release or disposal of such hydrocarbon 

refrigerant substitutes in the specified 

end-uses does not pose a threat to the 

environment, considering both the 

inherent characteristics of these 

substances and the limited quantities 

used in the relevant applications. EPA 

additionally concluded that other 

authorities, controls and practices that 

apply to such refrigerants help to 

mitigate environmental risk from the 

release of those 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 

poses 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, 

servicing, 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 because of the 

inherent characteristics of the 

refrigerant, such as global warming 

potential. Second, EPA determines 

whether and to what extent such 

venting, release, or disposal actually 

takes place during the maintenance, 

servicing, 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 adequately 

controlled by 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-uses proposed— 

i.e., ethane in very low temperature 

refrigeration and non-mechanical heat 

transfer; isobutane in retail 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 only), vending 

machines and room AC units. In 

particular, we assessed the potential 

impact of the release of additional 

hydrocarbons on local air quality and 

their ability to decompose in the 

atmosphere, their ODP and their GWPs, 

as well as potential impacts on 

ecosystems (see Section IV above, 

‘‘What criteria did EPA consider in 

determining whether to list the 

substitutes as acceptable and in 

determining appropriate use conditions 

and how does EPA consider those 

factors?’’). As explained in that section, 

the ODP of these 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 

analysis 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-uses—ethane, isobutane, 

propane, and R–441A—are expected to 

have little impact on local air quality. In 

addition, when examining all 

hydrocarbon substitute refrigerants in 

those uses for which UL currently 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, 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 Los 

Angeles area. In light of its evaluation 

of potential environmental impacts, 

EPA concludes that the four 

hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes in 

the end-uses 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, 2014a). 

2. Toxicity and Flammability 

As discussed above in sections IV.B., 

‘‘Flammability and fire safety’’ and 

IV.C., ‘‘Toxicity,’’ EPA’s SNAP program 

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, isobutane and the hydrocarbon 

blend R–441A, are classified as A3 

refrigerants by 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% 

(18,000 ppm to 30,000 ppm). To address 

flammability risks, EPA is issuing 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38829 

recommendations for their safe use (see 

section VII, ‘‘What recommendations 

does EPA have for safe use of the 

proposed flammable substitute 

refrigerants?’’ below) and specified use 

conditions. The SNAP program’s 

analysis suggests that the use conditions 

proposed in this rule mitigate 

flammability risks. 

Like most refrigerants, hydrocarbons 

can displace oxygen at high 

concentrations and cause asphyxiation. 

Various industry and regulatory 

standards exist to address asphyxiation 

and toxicity risks. The SNAP program’s 

analysis of asphyxiation and toxicity 

risks suggests that the use conditions 

proposed in this rule mitigate potential 

asphyxiation 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 authorities, 

controls, and practices would help 

mitigate environmental risk from the 

release of these hydrocarbon 

refrigerants. Analyses 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 adequately 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 

adequately control the release of and 

exposure to the four hydrocarbon 

substitute refrigerants and mitigate risks 

from any possible release. 

This 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, release, or disposal is 

adequately controlled by 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 procedures. 

OSHA requirements that apply during 

servicing include continuous 

monitoring of explosive gas 

concentrations and oxygen levels. In 

general, hydrocarbon emissions from 

refrigeration systems are likely to be 

significantly smaller than those 

emanating from the industrial process 

and storage systems, which are 

controlled for safety reasons. Further, 

the SNAP rule listing hydrocarbons as 

acceptable subject to use conditions for 

use in household and commercial standalone refrigerators and freezers 

(December 20, 2011, at 76 FR 78832), we 

noted that the amount of refrigerant 

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 hydrocarbon emissions from such 

uses are likely to be relatively small. 

Similar charge limits are proposed to 

apply to very low temperature 

refrigeration equipment, nonmechanical heat transfer equipment, 

and vending machines, with larger but 

still limited charges for room air 

conditioners (1000 g for hydrocarbon 

refrigerants). 

Hydrocarbons 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 of 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 disposing 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 practices and controls could help 

mitigate the risk to the environment that 

may be posed by the venting, release or 

disposal of these four hydrocarbon 

refrigerants during the maintaining, 

servicing, repairing, or disposing of 

appliances. This conclusion addresses 

the second factor in the analysis 

described above and is thus part of the 

determination that the venting, release, 

or disposal of these hydrocarbon 

refrigerant substitutes does not pose a 

threat to the environment. 

4. Conclusion 

EPA has reviewed the potential 

environmental impacts of four 

hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes in 

the end-uses 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 

four hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes 

in the proposed end-uses 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 four hydrocarbons in the proposed 

end-uses and subject to the proposed 

use conditions. In light 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 analyses, the venting, 

release or disposal of these four 

hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes in 

the end-uses proposed does not pose a 

threat to the environment. Furthermore, 

EPA is proposing to exempt from the 

venting prohibition at 40 CFR 

82.154(a)(1) these additional uses for 

which hydrocarbons are being proposed 

to be found acceptable subject to use 

conditions under the SNAP program. 

EPA seeks information or data on 

whether there currently is an industry 

standard for recovery units for 

flammable refrigerants and whether 

there are commercially available 

recovery 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 are designed specifically for 

recovering hydrocarbons and which are 

readily 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 than vented as would 

be allowed in the specified end-uses 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 applicable 

safe handling practices. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38830 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

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 

units. All HFCs are currently 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 does 

not extend to blends of hydrocarbons 

and other types of compounds, e.g., 

blends of HFCs and hydrocarbons. Such 

refrigerant substitutes would still be 

subject to the statutory and regulatory 

venting prohibition. 

VII. What recommendations does EPA 

have for safe use of the proposed 

flammable substitute refrigerants? 

EPA recommends that only 

technicians specifically trained in 

handling flammable refrigerant 

substitutes service or dispose of 

refrigeration and AC equipment 

containing these substances. 

Technicians should know how to 

minimize the risk of fire and the 

procedures for using flammable 

refrigerant substitutes safely. Releases of 

large quantities of refrigerant substitutes 

during servicing and manufacturing, 

especially in enclosed, poorly ventilated 

spaces or in areas where large amounts 

of refrigerant are stored, could cause an 

explosion if an ignition source exists 

nearby. For these reasons, it is 

important that only properly 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 

recommends that if hydrocarbon 

refrigerant substitutes were vented, 

released, or disposed of (rather than 

recovered), as would be allowed in the 

specified end-uses 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 

refrigerant substitutes. In addition, EPA 

has reviewed several training programs 

provided as part of SNAP submissions 

from persons interested in flammable 

refrigerant substitutes. EPA intends to 

update the CAA Section 608 technician 

certification test bank provided to 

approved organizations that administer 

the certification exams in accordance 

with 40 CFR 82.161 to specifically 

include questions concerning flammable 

refrigerant substitutes. 

EPA considered proposing a use 

condition requiring training in handling 

flammable refrigerant substitutes for 

technicians who service or dispose of 

refrigeration and AC 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. Some examples of potential core 

elements that EPA might consider 

include: 

• EPA’s relevant use conditions for 

flammable refrigerants; 

• relevant OSHA requirements for 

flammable gases; relevant industry 

standards (e.g., UL, ASHRAE, NFPA); 

• MSDS information, including first 

aid and physical and chemical 

characteristics of flammable refrigerants; 

and 

• requirements and procedures for 

safe storage and handling of flammable 

refrigerants. 

EPA requests comment on whether we 

should establish a use condition 

requiring training in handling 

flammable refrigerant substitutes for 

technicians servicing or disposing of 

equipment containing such substitutes, 

and if so, what should be the mandatory 

elements of such training. 

VIII. 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.’’ It raises novel legal or policy 

issues arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in the Executive Order. 

Accordingly, 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 any changes made in response to 

OMB recommendations have been 

documented in the docket 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 assigned OMB 

control number 2060–0226. This 

Information Collection Request (ICR) 

included five types of respondent 

reporting and recordkeeping activities 

pursuant to SNAP regulations: 

Submission of a SNAP petition, filing a 

SNAP/TSCA Addendum, notification 

for test marketing activity, 

recordkeeping 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. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis 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 rule 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 

entities, 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-forprofit enterprise which is independently 

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. 

In determining whether a rule has a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, the 

impact of concern is any significant 

adverse economic impact on small 

entities, since the primary purpose of 

the regulatory flexibility analyses 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. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38831 

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 

entities subject to the rule. The use 

conditions of this proposed rule, if 

finalized, would apply to manufacturers 

of household and commercial 

refrigerators and freezers, vending 

machines, non-mechanical heat 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 specified 

end-uses but does not mandate such 

use. Because refrigeration and AC 

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 practice 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 by 

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 Mandates 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 

enforceable 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 AC equipment using 

flammable refrigerants affect only a 

small number of manufacturers of 

refrigeration and AC equipment and 

their technicians. Therefore, 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 

regulation applies equipment 

manufacturers and not to governmental 

entities. 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 AC equipment for 

these refrigerants are not manufactured 

yet in the U.S. for the proposed enduses, 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 on entities from this 

rulemaking. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

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 directly 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 officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). It will not have substantial direct 

effects on tribal governments, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

government and Indian tribes, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

government and Indian tribes, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. 

EPA specifically solicits additional 

comment on this proposed action 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 not economically 

significant as defined in E.O. 12866, and 

because the Agency does not believe the 

environmental health or safety risks 

addressed by this action present a 

disproportionate risk to children. This 

proposed rule provides both regulatory 

restrictions 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 substitutes 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 28355 (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 systems may be more energy 

efficient than currently available 

systems in some climates. 

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 activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed 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 

deployment of new substitutes for 

household and commercial refrigerators 

and freezers, vending machines, nonmechanical heat transfer equipment, 

very low temperature refrigeration 

equipment, and room air conditioners. 

EPA welcomes comment on this 

aspect of the proposed rulemaking and, 

specifically invites the public to identify 

potentially applicable voluntary 

consensus standards and to explain why 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38832 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

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 (E.O.) 12898 (59 FR 

7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

Federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted 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 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations 

because it increases the level of human 

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 System, Docket # 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2013–0748. 

Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration 

Institute (AHRI), 2012. AHRI Guideline 

N–2012: Assignment of Refrigerant 

Container Colors. 2012. 

ASHRAE, 2010. American National 

Standards Institute (ANSI)/American 

Society of Heating, Refrigerating and AirConditioning 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 Submission 

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, 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. 

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 

for HFC–32 in residential and light 

commercial air conditioning. 

EPA, 2014. Derivation of Charge Limits for 

Room Air Conditioners. Staff memo to 

Air Docket. 2014. 

ICF, 2014a. Assessment of the Potential 

Impact of Hydrocarbon Refrigerants on 

Ground-Level Ozone Concentrations. 

ICF, 2014b. Risk Screen on Substitutes for 

CFC–12, HCFC–22 and R–502 in Retail 

Food Refrigeration; Substitute: Isobutane 

(R–600a) 

ICF, 2014c. Risk Screen on Substitutes for 

CFC–12, HCFC–22 and R–502 in Retail 

Food Refrigeration; Substitute: R–441A. 

ICF, 2014d. 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). 

ICF, 2014e. Risk Screen on Substitutes for 

CFC–12 and R–502 in Vending 

Machines; Substitute: R–441A. 

ICF, 2014f. Risk Screen on Substitutes for 

CFC–12 and R–502 in Vending 

Machines; Substitute: Isobutane (R– 

600a). 

ICF, 2014g. Risk Screen on Substitutes for 

CFC–12 and R–502 in Vending 

Machines; Substitute: Propane (R–290). 

ICF, 2014h. Risk Screen on Substitutes for 

CFC–12 and HCFC–22 in Household 

Refrigerators and Household Freezers.; 

Substitute: Propane (R–290). 

ICF, 2014i. Risk Screen on Substitutes for 

HCFC–22 in Residential and Light 

Commercial Air Conditioning and Heat 

Pumps; Substitute: Propane (R–290). 

ICF, 2014j. Risk Screen on Substitutes for 

HCFC–22 in Residential and Light 

Commercial Air Conditioning and Heat 

Pumps; Substitute: HFC–32 

(Difluoromethane). 

ICF, 2014k. Risk Screen on Substitutes for 

HCFC–22 in Residential and Light 

Commercial Air Conditioning and Heat 

Pumps; Substitute: R–441A. 

IPCC, 2007. 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. 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/NIST 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 & Development 

Authority, Report 90–11. As cited in ICF, 

2014h, Risk screen for propane in 

household refrigerators and freezers. 

Underwriters Laboratories (UL) 250. UL 250: 

Household Refrigerators and Freezers. 

10th edition. Supplement SA: 

Requirements for Refrigerators and 

Freezers Employing a Flammable 

Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System. 

August 2000. 

UL 471. Commercial Refrigerators and 

Freezers. 10th edition. Supplement SB: 

Requirements for Refrigerators and 

Freezers Employing a Flammable 

Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System. 

November 2010. 

UL 484. Room Air Conditioners. 8th edition. 

Supplement SA: Requirements for 

Refrigerated Venders Employing a 

Flammable Refrigerant in the 

Refrigerating System. August 2012. 

UL 541. Refrigerated Vending Machines. 7th 

edition. Supplement SA: Requirements 

for Room Air Conditioners Employing a 

Flammable Refrigerant in the 

Refrigerating System. December 2011. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Recycling, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Stratospheric ozone layer. 

Dated: June 26, 2014. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is proposed to 

be amended as follows: 

PART 82—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 82 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671– 

7671q. 

■ 2. In § 82.154, add paragraph (a)(1)(iii) 

to read as follows: 

§ 82.154 Prohibitions. 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38833 

(iii) Effective [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER 

DATE OF 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 only); 

propane (R–290) as a substitute in 

household refrigerators, freezers, and 

combination refrigerators and freezers; 

ethane (R–170) as a substitute in very 

low temperature refrigeration 

equipment and equipment for nonmechanical heat transfer; R–441A, 

propane, and isobutane as substitutes in 

vending machines; and propane and R– 

441A in self-contained room air 

conditioners for residential and light 

commercial air conditioning and heat 

pumps. 

* * * * * 

Appendix R to Subpart G of Part 82— 

[Amended] 

■ 3. Revise Appendix R to subpart G of 

part 82 to read as follows: 

Appendix R to Subpart G of Part 82— 

Substitutes Subject to Use Restrictions 

Listed in the December 20, 2011, Final 

Rule, Effective February 21, 2012, and 

in the [DATE OF PUBLICATION OF 

FINAL RULE IN THE FEDERAL 

REGISTER] Final Rule, Effective [DATE 

60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN 

THE FEDERAL REGISTER] 

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS

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.

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 meets all requirements listed in Supplement SA to the 10th 

edition of the Underwriters Laboratories 

(UL) Standard for Household Refrigerators 

and Freezers, UL 250, dated August 25, 

2000. In cases where the final rule includes requirements more stringent than 

those of the 10th 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 

(2.01 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 handling 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 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 reentry 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 should only use spark-proof 

tools when working on refrigerators and 

freezers with these refrigerants. 

Any recovery equipment used should be designed for flammable refrigerants. 

Any refrigerant releases should be in a wellventilated 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 flammable refrigerants safely. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38834 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued 

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, 10th edition, 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 Not 

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.’’.

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., righthanded 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. 

(d) 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) 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 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 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. 

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.

As provided in clauses SB6.1.2 to SB6.1.5 of 

UL Standard 471, 10th edition, 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.’’.

Room occupants should evacuate the space 

immediately following the accidental release of this refrigerant. 

If a service port is added then retail food refrigerators 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., righthanded 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. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38835 

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued 

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information 

(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 refrigerator 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 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. 

Very low temperature refrigeration 

Non-mechanical 

heat transfer 

(New equipment only).

Ethane (R– 

170).

Acceptable 

subject to 

use conditions.

This 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 10th edition of the 

Underwriters Laboratories (UL) Standard 

for Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers, UL 471, dated November 24, 2010. In 

cases where the final rule includes requirements more stringent than those of 

the 10th 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 (5.29 ounces) 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 reentry 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 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 should only use spark-proof 

tools when working on refrigerators and 

freezers with flammable refrigerants. 

Any recovery equipment used should be designed for flammable refrigerants. 

Any refrigerant releases should be in a wellventilated area, such as outside of a building. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38836 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued 

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information 

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. 

Very low temperature refrigeration 

Non-mechanical 

heat transfer 

(New equipment only).

Ethane (R– 

170).

Acceptable 

subject to 

use conditions.

As provided in clauses SB6.1.2 to SB6.1.5 of 

UL Standard 471, 10th edition, 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.’’ 

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 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. 

Example of non-mechanical heat transfer 

using this refrigerant would be use in a 

secondary loop of a thermosiphon. 

(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 

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. 

Vending Machines (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).

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). 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38837 

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued 

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information 

Where it is possible to easily detach and replace the old refrigeration 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.

These substitutes may only be used in 

equipment that meets all requirements in 

Supplement SA to the 7th 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 7th edition of UL 541, 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 must not exceed 150 grams (5.29 

ounces) in each circuit.

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 reentry 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 ethane, 

like many refrigerants, can cause freeze 

burns on the skin. 

Technicians should only use spark-proof 

tools when working on refrigeration equipment with flammable refrigerants. 

Any recovery equipment used should be designed for flammable refrigerants. 

.

Any refrigerant releases should be in a wellventilated 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. 

Vending Machines (New 

equipment 

only).

Isobutane (R– 

600a).

Propane 

(R–290) 

R–441A 

Acceptable 

subject to 

use conditions.

As provided in clauses SA6.1.2 to SA6.1.5 of 

UL Standard 541, 7th edition, 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.’’.

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 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. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38838 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued 

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information 

(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 

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. 

Residential 

and lightcommercial 

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.

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 and Appendixes B through 

F of the 8th edition of the Underwriters 

Laboratories (UL) Standard for Room Air 

Conditioners, UL 484, dated August 3, 

2012. In cases where the final rule includes requirements more stringent than 

those of the 8th edition of UL 484, the appliance must meet the requirements of the 

final rule in place of the requirements in 

the UL Standard.

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 reentry should occur only after the space 

has been properly ventilated. 

The charge size for the entire air conditioner 

must not exceed the maximum refrigerant 

mass determined according to Appendix F 

of UL 484, 8th edition for the room size 

where the air conditioner is used. The 

charge size for these three refrigerants 

must in no case exceed 7960 g (280.8 oz 

or 17.55 lb) of HFC–32; 1000 g (35.3 oz 

or 2.21 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 conditioner 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.

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 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 conditioning 

equipment with flammable refrigerants. 

Any recovery equipment used should be designed for flammable refrigerants. 

Any refrigerant releases should be in a wellventilated 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. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 38839 

SUBSTITUTES THAT ARE ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued 

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information 

Residential 

and lightcommercial 

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 clauses SA6.1.2 to SA6.1.5 of 

UL 484, 8th edition, 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 Only 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) 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.’’ 

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., righthanded 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. 

Air conditioning equipment in this category 

includes: 

Window air conditioning units. 

Portable room air conditioners. 

Packaged terminal air conditioners and 

heat pumps. 

(d) On the outside of each portable air 

conditioner: ‘‘WARNING: Appliance 

shall 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 Appendix F of UL 484, 8th edition. For R–441A, use a lower flammability limit of 0.041 kg/m3 in calculations in Appendix F of UL 484, 8th 

edition.

(e) All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1⁄4 inch) 

high.

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. 

Note: The use conditions in this appendix contain references to certain standards from Underwriters Laboratories Inc. (UL). The standards are 

incorporated 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. 7th edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Room Air Conditioners Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System. December 30, 2011 

4. UL 484. Room Air Conditioners. 8th edition. Supplement SA: Requirements for Refrigerated Venders Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in 

the Refrigerating System and Appendixes B through F. August 3, 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 dial +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. NW., Washington, 

DC or at the National Archives 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. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
38840 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 131 / Wednesday, July 9, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

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 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 18,000 21,000 23,000 

R–32 ................................................. 1.73 2.12 2.74 3.00 3.24 3.47 3.68 4.07 4.59 5.48 6.01 

R–290 ............................................... 0.13 0.16 0.20 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.27 0.30 0.34 0.40 0.44 

R–441A ............................................ 0.14 0.17 0.22 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.30 0.33 0.37 0.44 0.49 

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 linearly 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 design charge size (kg) 

Associated cooling 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 

R–32 ................................................. 1.04 1.27 1.65 1.80 1.95 2.08 2.21 2.44 2.75 3.29 3.60 

R–290 ............................................... 0.08 0.09 0.12 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.24 0.27 

R–441A ............................................ 0.08 0.10 0.13 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.27 0.29 

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. 

TABLE C—MAXIMUM DESIGN CHARGE SIZES FOR WALL-MOUNTED AC UNITS

Refrigerant 

Maximum design charge size (kg) 

Associated cooling 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 

R–32 ................................................. 3.12 3.82 4.94 5.41 5.84 6.24 6.62 7.32 7.96 7.96 7.96 

R–290 ............................................... 0.23 0.28 0.36 0.40 0.43 0.46 0.49 0.54 0.61 0.73 0.80 

R–441A ............................................ 0.25 0.31 0.40 0.44 0.47 0.51 0.54 0.59 0.67 0.80 0.88 

Note: For use with self-contained air conditioners or heat pumps with an evaporator at least 1.0 and no 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 D—MAXIMUM DESIGN CHARGE SIZES FOR CEILING-MOUNTED AC UNITS

Refrigerant 

Maximum design charge size (kg) 

Associated cooling 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 

R–32 ................................................. 3.82 4.67 6.03 6.61 7.14 7.63 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 7.96 

R–290 ............................................... 0.28 0.34 0.44 0.49 0.53 0.56 0.60 0.66 0.74 0.89 0.97 

R–441A ............................................ 0.31 0.38 0.49 0.54 0.58 0.62 0.66 0.73 0.82 0.98 1.00 

Note: For use with self-contained air conditioners or heat pumps with an evaporator 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. 

[FR Doc. 2014–15889 Filed 7–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS