squirepattonboggs.com 

 As noted in June 2014 meeting, proposed amendments to t

Montreal Protocol would include HFCs within its scope and global phase-down.

 EPA should not exceed its statutory authority by effectively 

down 134a under SNAP before the Protocol is amended anCongress expressly authorizes regulation of greenhouse ga

Introduction and Overview
squirepattonboggs.com 

 CAA § 612(c) speaks to alternatives “that reduce[] the overall risk 

human health and the environment; and [are] currently or potentia

available.”

 No evidence so far that EPA has conducted the required analysis 

“overall risk to human health and the environment.” GWP alone is 

metric for environmental impact and is one of many factors in asseoverall risk. 

 Operational efficiency should be a key driver in assessing impact 

low-GWP refrigerant that increases energy use may harm the environment more than a high-GWP refrigerant).

 It is critical that alternative technology be proven at appropriate sc

and existing product/equipment lifetimes be recognized.

 In assessing alternatives, availability is key consideration. Supply 

situation for alternatives is discussed in next two slides. 

Introduction and Overview
squirepattonboggs.com 

 If MVAC uses of 134a are delisted too soon, US automakers’ refrigera

could be limited to 1234yf from a single world supplier (a joint venture Honeywell and Chemours, formerly DuPont) with a single facility in Ch

 The China plant has production capacity around 3000 tons/year, and 

next three years it may be the sole source for all 1234yf. Given expecEuropean demand, there would likely be a shortage of 1234yf supply required US automakers to switch to 1234yf during this period. New pannounced by the joint venture are not expected to be operational beftime in 2016 at the earliest. 

 Current suppliers of 134a could also make 1234yf and provide automa

much-needed competition, but Honeywell’s conduct in filing sham patdenying licenses to other producers has excluded competition from th

market. Last year, the European Commission informed Honeywell and of its preliminary view that their cooperation on 1234yf may have limite

availability and technical development in breach of EU antitrust rules. is currently investigating Honeywell’s monopolistic conduct and agree

 The Patent & Trademark Office has rejected eight of Honeywell’s 123

upon re-examination. 

Patent and Competition Issues around R-1234yf/MVAC
squirepattonboggs.com 

 The absence of competition:

reduces the sole manufacturer’s incentive to expand 12

capacity in response to demand in a timely manner; 

results in much higher monopoly prices ($75 for 1234yf 

for 134a); and

has led to demands for long-term exclusive contracts u

the automotive industry. 

 SNAP delisting increases risk that remedies pursued by t

be inadequate. De-listing 134a also makes problem worautomakers because it takes away their ability to determi

transition schedule based on market considerations.

Patent and Competition Issues
squirepattonboggs.com 

 Because of unavailability of alternatives, implementation of 

European MAC directive had to be delayed by one year.

 EPA should not take 134a away from US automakers until 

1234yf is manufactured domestically in sufficient quantities at affordable, competitive prices, or other alternatives are available. 

MVAC Conclusion
squirepattonboggs.com 

 Using GWP as single criterion for alternative foam blowing a

lead to selection of alternatives that provide a reduced R-vaover time result in more greenhouse gas emissions than woemitted from the foam insulation itself.

 Delisting proposed for 134a and blends thereof:

 Even a non-flammable blend of say 40% 134a with 60% 1

would not be allowed despite a 60% reduction in GWP ov134a.

 No account taken of the benefits that such blends could b

overall safety, health and environment.

Foam Sector
squirepattonboggs.com 

 Some overlap in applications but in general:

 134a will be replaced by 1234ze (Honeywell) Hydrocarbons and ethers also possible in some sectors b

significant re-engineering costs to deal with flammability. additional cost may be required for 1234ze (flammability i

 245fa replaced by 1233zd (Honeywell, Arkema) Non-flammable but some concerns about chemical stabili

foam formulations

 Hydrocarbons and ethers as above 1336mzz (DuPont) non-flammable and better stability but 

expensive than 1233zd

Foam Sector Alternatives
squirepattonboggs.com 

 In polyurethane formulation, chemical reactivity is an issue:

 Particularly for 1233zd but also potentially 1234ze

• Catalyst chemistry is complex• Interaction with (brominated) flame retardants comple

- Requirement for flame retardant and quantity dep

flammability of the blowing agent (1234ze flammaand 1233zd non-flammable)

- Presence of flame retardant may alter foam prope

 Takes several years to conduct foam precursor and finish

stability testing

• Shelf-life• Degradation of finished foam in-service

- Mechanical and thermal performance degradation

• Any issues identified may require reformulation and re

Issues with Foam Sector Alternatives
squirepattonboggs.com 

 Thermal insulation performance may be inferior:

 Significant foam reformulation may be required to restore 

performance levels (each reformulation takes time)

• Thickness increases also possible with associated inc

costs and reduction in utility

• Loss of blowing agent (and insulation factor) over time 

several years for long-term results

• Cost of new blowing agents may require use of inferio

agents (CO2, HCs) at the expense of insulation factor

- Foam insulation is a cost-sensitive market- But increasing demand for better foam insulation 

performance means greater efforts required to opproducts – time required

Issues with Foam Sector Alternatives
squirepattonboggs.com 

 DOE’s next efficiency standard for refrigerators expected in  Most recent standard only effective September 2014 Extensive product testing and certification required to qualif

new standards

 Manufacturers align product research and development cyc

around DOE schedule

 2017 deadline limits choice of alternatives Early transition would require:

 Major capital investments ahead of schedule Massive coordination effort with suppliers Recertification of all models to September 2014 standard

Foams/Refrigeration
squirepattonboggs.com 

 Industry used non-flammable propellants in the past

 22, 134a

 Industry used flammable propellants in the past

 As alternatives to 22 under Montreal Protocol Hydrocarbons, DME

 Proven safety issue with flammable propellants

 Several significant liability rulings by US courts (FixAFlat) Manufacturers have reverted to using 134a on the ground

proven safety in use

Emergency Tire Inflator
squirepattonboggs.com 

 Safety/flammability

 DME was marketed as “non-explosive”

• Use of an aerosol industry test (flame extension) wher

acceptable was not found to result in a safe product

• 1234ze is non-flammable for MSDS purposes but clas

flammable (2L) by ASHRAE:

- Non-flammable at 23°C (73°F) but flammable at 3

(86°F)

- Tire is a pressurized mixture with air 

 Flammable propellants have been tried and shown to be 

unacceptable

 134a is a proven, safe product for this application

Emergency Tire Inflator
squirepattonboggs.com 

 Reformulation required if propellant changed

 Studies on propellant/sealant combinations required

• Chemical reactivity• Storage stability• Performance in puncture repair• Physical and chemical properties of the mixture

 Tire inflators should be added to list of 134a aerosol prope

acceptable subject to use conditions in Table 2

Emergency Tire Inflator