Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0271-0095
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Adjustments to the Allowance System for Controlling Hydrochlorofluorocarbon Production and Import, 2020-2029; and Other Updates
Posted Date: 2020-03-17T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 52 (Tuesday, March 17, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15258-15301]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-28020]

[[Page 15257]]

Vol. 85

Tuesday,

No. 52

March 17, 2020

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

40 CFR Part 82

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Adjustments to the Allowance System 
for Controlling HCFC Production and Import, 2020-2029; and Other 
Updates; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 85 , No. 52 / Tuesday, March 17, 2020 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 15258]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0271; FRL-10003-80-OAR]
RIN 2060-AU26

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Adjustments to the Allowance 
System for Controlling HCFC Production and Import, 2020-2029; and Other 
Updates

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is allocating 
production and consumption allowances for specific 
hydrochlorofluorocarbons, a type of ozone-depleting substance, for the 
years 2020 through 2029. These hydrochlorofluorocarbons may be used to 
service certain equipment manufactured before 2020. The EPA is also 
updating other requirements under the program for controlling 
production and consumption of ozone-depleting substances, as well as 
making edits to the regulatory text for improved readability and 
clarity. These updates include revising the labeling requirements for 
containers of specific hydrochlorofluorocarbons; prohibiting the 
transfer of hydrochlorofluorocarbon allowances allocated through this 
rulemaking into allowances for hydrochlorofluorocarbons that have 
already been phased out; requiring the use of an electronic reporting 
system for producers, importers, exporters, transformers, and 
destroyers of controlled ozone-depleting substances; revising and 
removing recordkeeping and reporting requirements; improving the 
process for petitioning to import used ozone-depleting substances for 
reuse, including by creating more flexibility for imports of used halon 
from certain halon banks and exempting imports of aircraft bottles 
containing halon 1211 for hydrostatic testing from the petition 
process; creating a certification process for importing both used and 
virgin ozone-depleting substances for destruction; and restricting the 
sale of known illegally imported substances. This rule includes 
clarifications to the certification requirements for methyl bromide 
quarantine and preshipment uses. The EPA is also adding polyurethane 
foam systems containing ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons to the list 
of nonessential products. Lastly, the Agency is updating the definition 
of ``destruction'' as used in the context of the production and 
consumption phaseout and removing obsolete provisions.

DATES: 
    Effective Dates: Amendatory instructions 9 and 11 are effective on 
March 17, 2020. Amendatory instructions 2 through 8, 10 and 12 through 
20 are effective April 16, 2020.
    Operational Dates: For operational purposes under the Clean Air 
Act, the amendments to 40 CFR 82.15(g)(5) through (7) and 82.16 are 
effective as of December 19, 2019 and the amendments to 40 CFR 82.3, 
82.4, 82.9, 82.10, 82.12, 82.13, 82.14, 82.15(b), 82.15(g)(8), 82.23, 
82.24, appendix K to subpart A of part 82, 82.62, 82.64, 82.66, 82.104, 
82.106, and 82.270 are effective as of April 16, 2020.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0271. All documents in the docket are 
listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the 
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential 
business information 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. All other publicly available docket materials 
are available electronically through www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine Sleasman, Stratospheric 
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Mail Code 6205T, 
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number 
(202) 564-7716; email address sleasman.katherine@epa.gov. You may also 
visit the Ozone Protection website of the EPA's Stratospheric 
Protection Division at https://www.epa.gov/ods-phaseout for further 
information about reporting and recordkeeping, other Stratospheric 
Ozone Protection regulations, the science of ozone layer depletion, and 
related topics.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Effective Dates. Portions of this rule are effective less than 30 
days from publication in the Federal Register. Section 553(d) of the 
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. chapter 5, generally 
provides that rules may not take effect earlier than 30 days after they 
are published in the Federal Register. This rule constitutes ``the 
promulgation or revision of regulations under subchapter VI of [the 
CAA] (relating to stratosphere and ozone protection)'' and as such it 
is covered by the rulemaking procedures in section 307(d) of the Clean 
Air Act (CAA). See CAA section 307(d)(1)(I). Section 307(d)(1) of the 
CAA states that: ``The provisions of section 553 through 557 . . . of 
Title 5 shall not, except as expressly provided in this section, apply 
to actions to which this subsection applies.'' Thus, section 553(d) of 
the APA does not apply to this rule. The EPA is nevertheless acting 
consistently with the policies underlying APA section 553(d) in making 
a portion of the revisions finalized in this rule effective 
immediately, while the remainder of the rule will be effective 30 days 
after publication. APA section 553(d) allows an effective date less 
than 30 days after publication for any rule that ``grants or recognizes 
an exemption or relieves a restriction'' (see 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1)). The 
purpose of the general rule in Section 553(d) of the CAA that 30 days 
must be provided between publication and the effective date is to 
``give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior 
before the final rule takes effect.'' Omnipoint Corp. v. Fed. Commc'n 
Comm'n, 78 F.3d 620, 630 (D.C. Cir. 1996); see also United States v. 
Gavrilovic, 551 F.2d 1099, 1104 (8th Cir. 1977) (quoting legislative 
history). However, when the Agency grants or recognizes an exemption or 
relieves a restriction, affected parties do not need a reasonable time 
to adjust because the effect is not adverse.
    The EPA has determined that portions of this rule that are 
effective fewer than 30 days from publication in the Federal Register 
relieve a restriction because those revisions allocate allowances for 
the production and consumption of HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 for the years 
2020 through 2029, giving affected entities greater flexibility to 
produce and consume these HCFCs, and, because the allowances being 
allocated include allowances for calendar year 2020, ensure the 
allowances will be available to producers and consumers of these HCFCs 
to allow for continued production and import of these HCFCs in 2020.
    The EPA has also determined that certain other portions of this 
rule that are effective fewer than 30 days from publication in the 
Federal Register grant or recognize an exemption or relieve a 
restriction because these revisions would allow for the import and use 
of HCFC-123 for servicing fire suppression equipment manufactured 
before January 1, 2020, as well as allow the use of HCFC-123 as a 
refrigerant in equipment manufactured on or after January 1, 2020 but 
before January 1, 2021 under certain conditions. These revisions also 
remove an obsolete requirement and thus relieve the

[[Page 15259]]

restrictions associated with that requirement.
    Accordingly, it is in keeping with the policy underlying the APA 
for the regulatory amendments to 40 CFR 82.15(g)(5) through (7) and 
82.16 to take effect immediately. Finally, this CAA section 307(d) rule 
is promulgated upon signature and widespread dissemination. For 
operational purposes under the CAA, the EPA is making the amendments to 
40 CFR 82.15(g)(5) through (7) and 82.16 and the corresponding portions 
of the preamble effective as of December 19, 2019 which is the date of 
signature.
    Acronyms and Abbreviations. The following acronyms and 
abbreviations are used in this document.

ACE/ITDS--Automated Commercial Environment/International Trade Data 
System
ARFF--Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting
CAA--Clean Air Act
CBP--Customs and Border Protection
CDC--Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
CDX--Central Data Exchange
CFC--Chlorofluorocarbon
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
CROMERR--Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Regulation
DOT--Department of Transportation
EIA--Environmental Investigation Agency
EPA--Environmental Protection Agency
FAA--Federal Aviation Administration
FR--Federal Register
GPEA--Government Paperwork Elimination Act
HARC--Halon Alternatives Research Corporation
HCFC--Hydrochlorofluorocarbon
HRC--Halon Recycling Corporation
HTSA--Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated
Montreal Protocol--Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the 
Ozone Layer
MOP--Meeting of the Parties
MT--Metric Ton
NFPA--National Fire Protection Association
ODP--Ozone Depletion Potential
ODS--Ozone-Depleting Substance
Parties to the Montreal Protocol, or Party--Nations and regional 
economic integration organizations that have consented to be bound 
by the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer
QPS--Quarantine and Preshipment
RACA--Request for Additional Consumption Allowances
SNAP--Significant New Alternatives Policy
TEAP--Technology and Economic Assessment Panel
UNEP--United Nations Environment Programme

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. What action is the Agency finalizing?
    C. What is the Agency's authority for this action?
    D. What are the incremental costs and benefits of this action?
II. Background
III. Final Rule and Response to Comments
    A. Allocation of HCFC Allowances for the Years 2020 Through 2029
    B. Allocation of HCFC-123 Consumption Allowances
    C. De minimis Exemption for the Use of HCFC-123 in Chillers
    D. Addition of Fire Suppression Servicing Uses to the HCFC 
Phaseout Schedule
    E. Revisions to Labeling Requirements
    F. Allocation of HCFC-124 Production and Consumption Allowances
    G. Changes To Transfer of Allowance Provisions in 40 CFR 82.23
    H. Changes To Import Requirements
    I. Electronic Reporting and Updates to Other Provisions of the 
Production and Consumption Control Program
    J. Addition of Polyurethane Foam Systems Containing CFCs to the 
Nonessential Products Ban
    K. Updates to 40 CFR 82.3, 82.104, and 82.270 Related to 
Destruction
    L. Removal of Obsolete Provisions in 40 CFR 82.3, 82.4, 82.9, 
82.10, 82.12, 82.13, 82.16, and 82.24
    M. Other Comments Not Related to the Proposal
IV. Economic Analysis
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs
    C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    L. Congressional Review Act

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this final action if you 
manufacture, process, import, or distribute into commerce certain 
ozone-depleting substances (ODS) and mixtures. The North American 
Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to 
assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to 
certain entities. Potentially affected entities may include but are not 
limited to:

 Air-Conditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment and 
Commercial and Industrial Refrigeration Equipment Manufacturing 
(NAICS 333415)
 Air-Conditioning Equipment and Supplies Merchant 
Wholesalers (NAICS 423620)
 Basic Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS 3251)
 Chlorofluorocarbon Gas Manufacturing and Import (NAICS 
325120)
 Farm Product Warehousing and Storage (NAICS 493130)
 Farm Supplies and Merchant Wholesalers (NAICS 424910)
 Flour Milling (NAICS 311211)
 Fire Extinguisher Chemical Preparations Manufacturing 
(NAICS 325998)
 Fruit and Nut Tree Farming (NAICS 1113)
 General Warehousing and Storage (NAICS 493130)
 Greenhouse, Nursery, and Floriculture Production (NAICS 
1114)
 Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal, Cement 
Manufacturing, Clinker (NAICS 327310)
 Hazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal, Incinerator, 
Hazardous Waste (NAICS 562211)
 Industrial Gas Manufacturing (NAICS 325120)
 Materials Recovery Facilities (NAICS 562920)
 Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing 
(NAICS 336413)
 Other Chemical and Allied Production Merchant Wholesalers 
(NAICS 424690)
 Other Crop Farming (NAICS 1119)
 Pesticide and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing 
(NAICS 325320)
 Plumbing, Heating, and Air-Conditioning Contractors (NAICS 
238220)
 Portable Fire Extinguishers Manufacturing (NAICS 339999)
 Postharvest Crop Activities (except Cotton Ginning) (NAICS 
115114)
 Research and Development in Physical, Engineering, and Life 
Sciences (NAICS 541710)
 Rice Milling (NAICS 311212)
 Soil Preparation, Planting, and Cultivating (NAICS 115112)
 Vegetable and Melon Farming (NAICS 1112)

    This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this 
action. Other types of entities not listed in this section could also 
be affected. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of 
this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What action is the Agency finalizing?

    The EPA is finalizing a number of revisions to the production and 
consumption control program for ODS \1\

[[Page 15260]]

in 40 CFR part 82, subpart A, which are divided into ``class I'' and 
``class II'' substances. The EPA is finalizing, as proposed (see 84 FR 
41510, August 14, 2019), the allocations of annual allowances for 
hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC)-123 and HCFC-124 for the years 2020 
through 2029 to be used for servicing certain equipment manufactured 
before January 1, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Generally speaking, when the EPA refers to ODS in this 
preamble, it is referring to class I and/or class II controlled 
substances. The terms ``controlled substance'' and ``ODS'' are used 
interchangeably, as are the terms ``HCFC'' and ``class II 
substance.'' Section 602 of the CAA contains initial lists of class 
I and class II substances and addresses additions to those lists. 
The current lists appear in appendices A and B in subpart A. The EPA 
did not propose, nor is it finalizing, any changes to these lists in 
this rulemaking. The list of class I substances includes 
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halons, carbon tetrachloride, methyl 
chloroform, and methyl bromide. The list of class II substances 
consists entirely of HCFCs.

                                      Table 1--Final HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 Allowance Allocation, 2020 through 2030
                                                                          [MT]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         2020     2021     2022     2023     2024     2025     2026     2027     2028     2029     2030
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HCFC-123..................  Consumption..............      650      650      650      570      490      410      330      250      170       90        0
                            Production...............        0        0        0        0        0        0        0        0        0        0        0
HCFC-124..................  Consumption..............      200      200      200      175      150      125      100       75       50       25        0
                            Production...............      200      200      200      175      150      125      100       75       50       25        0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 allowances, the EPA identified a total 
number of allowances to be allocated and then determined calendar-year 
allowances equal to a percentage of each company's baseline.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The percentage of baseline allowances to be allocated for 
each HCFC is determined as follows: All the company-specific 
consumption baselines (listed in the table at 40 CFR 82.19) are 
added to determine the aggregate amount of consumption baseline. The 
total number of consumption allowances to be allocated in a given 
year are then divided by the aggregate amount of baseline 
consumption allowances. The same process is followed to determine 
the percentage for production allowances using the company-specific 
baselines listed in the table at 40 CFR 82.17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is revising subpart A, as proposed, to add servicing of 
existing ``fire suppression equipment'' to the authorized uses of newly 
produced or imported (i.e., virgin) quantities of HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 
during the years 2020 through 2029. To facilitate compliance, the EPA 
is finalizing, with minor modifications from the proposal, the labeling 
requirements for containers of fire suppression agent containing HCFC-
123 in subpart E. To align with existing regulations \3\ that prohibit 
the production and import of phased-out HCFCs, in particular HCFC-22, 
the Agency is finalizing its proposal to modify the inter-pollutant 
allowance transfer provisions authorized by section 607 of the CAA to 
prohibit transfers into ODS that are already phased out. The Agency is 
also finalizing as proposed the de minimis exemption from the use 
prohibition in section 605(a) of the CAA to allow virgin HCFC-123 to be 
used for the manufacture, through December 31, 2020, of chillers that 
meet specific criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The EPA is using the term ``existing regulations'' to 
describe those regulations that were in place prior to this final 
rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For changes to the import of ODS, the EPA is finalizing changes to 
the process for petitions to import used ODS for reuse that will meet 
the Agency's goals of reducing the burden on importers while ensuring 
the Agency has adequate information to verify that the material being 
imported is used, as well as making other modifications to this process 
as proposed. Such changes require collection of additional information 
when the EPA needs additional verification to make a determination 
whether the material has been previously used in considering petitions 
to import used ODS for reuse. Other changes remove data elements that 
are no longer necessary. Of particular note, the Agency is: (1) 
Reducing the information requirements when importing halon from a 
``halon bank'' so long as the EPA receives an official letter from the 
appropriate government agency in the country where the material is 
stored that indicates that the halon is used and that the halon bank is 
authorized to collect used halon; (2) allowing submission of an 
application for an export license or an official government 
communication from the appropriate government agency in the country of 
export in lieu of the license itself; (3) clarifying that the Agency 
will request additional information when additional verification is 
needed before issuing a non-objection notice, and (4) providing 
flexibility for the timing of import.
    The Agency is also finalizing changes, with limited modification 
from the proposal, to establish a new certification process for the 
import of ODS (used and virgin) for destruction in the United States. 
This new process requires importers of ODS to provide less information 
on the source of the material than when petitioning to import for 
reuse, but requires more information on the chain of custody and 
submission of verification that the imported material is destroyed 
after destruction has occurred.
    The EPA is exempting imports of aircraft bottles containing halon 
1211, a potent ODS used as a fire suppression streaming agent, for 
hydrostatic testing from the import petition process to make it easier 
for companies to service fire suppression equipment, which promotes 
proper maintenance of these bottles and prevents the emission of halon 
1211.
    The Agency is prohibiting the sale or offer for sale or 
distribution of any ODS that the seller knows, or has reason to know, 
has been imported into the United States without consumption allowances 
or is otherwise not subject to an exemption.
    The EPA is also finalizing as proposed other updates to the 
production and consumption control program, including requiring the use 
of an electronic reporting system for producers, importers, exporters, 
transformers, and destroyers of ODS in 40 CFR 82.3, 82.13, 82.14, 
82.23, and 82.24 and clarifying the certification requirements for 
methyl bromide quarantine and Preshipment (QPS) uses in 40 CFR 82.4 and 
82.13. The EPA is also finalizing the addition of polyurethane foam 
systems containing chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) to the list of 
nonessential products. This rule also updates provisions in 40 CFR 
82.3, 82.104, and 82.270 related to destruction technologies and the 
definition of ``destruction'' as used in the context of the production 
and consumption phaseout. Lastly, the EPA is removing outdated and 
obsolete provisions related to the allocation and transfer of class I 
ODS credits and allowances, and the associated recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements, that are no longer in use in subpart A.

[[Page 15261]]

C. What is the Agency's authority for this action?

    Several sections of the CAA \4\ provide authority for the actions 
finalized by the EPA in this rulemaking. Section 603 provides authority 
to establish monitoring and reporting requirements for ODS. Sections 
604 and 605 provide authority to phase out production and consumption 
of class I and class II substances, respectively, and to restrict the 
use of class II ODS. Section 606 provides the EPA authority to 
establish a more stringent phaseout schedule \5\ than that set out in 
sections 604 and 605 based on (1) current scientific information that a 
more stringent schedule may be necessary to protect human health and 
the environment, (2) the availability of substitutes, or (3) to conform 
to any acceleration under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that 
Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal Protocol). Section 607 provides the 
EPA with authority to issue production and consumption allowances and 
to authorize allowance transfers, including inter-pollutant and inter-
company transfers. Section 610 directs the EPA to issue regulations 
that identify nonessential products that release class I substances 
into the environment (including any release during manufacture, use, 
storage, or disposal) and prohibit any person from selling or 
distributing any such product, or offering any such products for sale 
or distribution, in interstate commerce. Section 611 requires the EPA 
to establish and implement labeling requirements for containers of, and 
products containing or manufactured with, class I or class II ODS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Clean Air Act provisions addressing stratospheric ozone 
protection are codified at 42 U.S.C. 7671-7671q.
    \5\ The following documents are available in the docket: ``EPA. 
1999. The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act: 1990 to 2010,'' 
and ``EPA. 2018. Overview of CFC and HCFC Phaseout.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's authority for this rulemaking is supplemented by section 
114, which authorizes the EPA Administrator to require recordkeeping 
and reporting in carrying out any provision of the CAA (with certain 
exceptions that do not apply here). Section 301 further provides 
authority for the EPA to ``prescribe such regulations as are necessary 
to carry out [the EPA Administrator's] functions'' under the CAA. 
Additional authority for electronic reporting comes from the Government 
Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA) (44 U.S.C. 3504), which provides: 
``(1) for the option of the electronic maintenance, submission, or 
disclosure of information, when practicable as a substitute for paper; 
and (2) for the use and acceptance of electronic signatures, when 
practicable.''
    Additional information on the EPA's authority to establish and 
manage an allocation system for the phaseout of class I and class II 
substances is provided in prior EPA actions (see 58 FR 65018, December 
10, 1993 and 68 FR 2820, January 21, 2003).

D. What are the incremental costs and benefits of this action?

    The EPA considered the incremental costs and benefits associated 
with this rulemaking, which primarily stem from changes to reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements. This action requires electronic 
submissions through the Agency's Central Data Exchange (CDX), creates a 
streamlined Certification of Intent to Import ODS for Destruction, 
exempts halon 1211 in aircraft bottles from the import petitions 
process, and adds a recordkeeping requirement for certain distributors 
of methyl bromide for QPS applications. The EPA estimates the overall 
annual cost savings to reporters as a result of reductions in reporting 
elements, streamlining forms, and added efficiencies to be 
approximately $13,000 per year. The EPA also estimates a one-time cost 
of approximately $4,000 to redesign labels on containers of fire 
suppression agents. In addition, the EPA performed a screening analysis 
of the impact on small businesses and found that there will be no 
additional costs imposed on them. See the docket for the screening 
analysis on small business. A more detailed discussion is included in 
Section IV.

II. Background

    The United States was one of the original signatories to the 
Montreal Protocol and ratified it on April 12, 1988. After 
ratification, Congress enacted, and President George H.W. Bush signed 
into law, the CAA Amendments of 1990, which included Title VI on 
Stratospheric Ozone Protection, codified as 42 U.S.C. Chapter 85, 
Subchapter VI, to ensure that the United States could satisfy its 
obligations under the Montreal Protocol, in addition to establishing 
complementary measures such as the national recycling and emission 
reduction programs under section 608 and the labeling requirements 
under section 611, among others.
    The 1992 Copenhagen Amendment \6\ to the Montreal Protocol created 
the stepwise reduction schedule, subsequently revised, and the eventual 
phaseout of HCFC consumption.\7\ The next milestone is a commitment to 
reduce HCFC consumption by 99.5 percent below the baseline by January 
1, 2020, with consumption for the years 2020 through 2029 restricted to 
the servicing of refrigeration, air-conditioning, and fire suppression 
equipment existing on January 1, 2020.\8\ This is referred to as the 
``servicing tail.'' In November 2018, the Parties to the Montreal 
Protocol agreed to add fire suppression equipment existing on January 
1, 2020 to the list of permissible servicing tail uses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Further information on the Copenhagen Amendment is available 
at https://ozone.unep.org/treaties/montreal-protocol/amendments/copenhagen-amendment-1992-amendment-montreal-protocol-agreed.
    \7\ Consumption is defined in 40 CFR 82.3 as production plus 
imports minus exports of a controlled substance (other than 
transshipments or used controlled substances). Production is defined 
in 40 CFR 82.3 as the manufacture of a controlled substance from any 
raw material or feedstock chemical, but does not include: (1) The 
manufacture of a controlled substance that is subsequently 
transformed; (2) the reuse or recycling of a controlled substance; 
(3) amounts that are destroyed by the approved technologies; or (4) 
amounts that are spilled or vented unintentionally.
    \8\ See Montreal Protocol Article 2F, paragraph 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The United States has chosen to implement the Montreal Protocol 
phaseout schedule of HCFCs on a chemical-by-chemical basis that employs 
a ``worst-first'' approach focusing on the earlier phaseout of certain 
chemicals with higher ozone depletion potential (ODP). In 1993, the EPA 
established a phaseout schedule to eliminate HCFC-141b first, to 
greatly restrict HCFC-142b and HCFC-22 next, and to subsequently place 
restrictions on all other HCFCs ultimately leading to a complete 
phaseout of all HCFCs by 2030 (see 58 FR 15014, March 18, 1993 and 58 
FR 65018, December 10, 1993).
    The EPA designed the allowance program to implement the production 
and consumption controls of the CAA and to facilitate an orderly 
phaseout. To control production, the EPA allocated production 
allowances to producers of specific ODS. To control consumption,\9\ the 
EPA allocated consumption allowances to producers and importers of 
specific ODS. In the allowance program, the EPA allocates ``calendar-
year'' or ``annual'' allowances to companies who expend them when they 
produce or import ODS. The allowances can be traded among companies 
both domestically and internationally (between countries that are 
Parties to the Protocol), with certain restrictions. Allocation of 
production and consumption allowances for most class

[[Page 15262]]

I substances (CFCs, methyl chloroform, carbon tetrachloride, and 
halons) ended by 1996, and in 2005 for methyl bromide. Production and 
consumption allowances for class II substances (HCFCs) will be reduced 
to zero in 2030.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See CAA section 601(6), 42 U.S.C. 7671(6); 40 CFR 82.3.
    \10\ See CAA section 605(b)(2), 42 U.S.C. 7671(d)(b)(2), and 
Montreal Protocol Article 2F, paragraph 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the EPA is implementing the HCFC phaseout on a chemical-by-
chemical basis, it allocates and tracks production and consumption 
allowances on an absolute kilogram basis for each chemical. An 
allowance is the unit of measure that controls production and 
consumption of ODS. The EPA allocates allowances for specific years; 
they are valid between January 1 and December 31 of a given control 
period (i.e., calendar year). In previous rulemakings, the EPA has 
allocated calendar-year allowances equal to a percentage of the 
baseline for the controlled substance for a given control period. A 
calendar-year allowance represents the privilege granted to a company 
to produce or import one kilogram (not ODP-weighted) of the specific 
controlled substance. The EPA allocates two types of calendar-year 
allowances--production allowances and consumption allowances. To 
produce an HCFC, an allowance holder must expend both production and 
consumption allowances. To import an HCFC, an allowance holder must 
expend only consumption allowances. An allowance holder exporting HCFCs 
for which it has expended consumption allowances may obtain a refund of 
those consumption allowances upon submittal of proper documentation to 
the EPA. Production and import of virgin HCFCs without allowances are 
prohibited except for transformation, destruction, transshipments, or 
heels (40 CFR 82.15(a) and (b)).
    Under the chemical-by-chemical phaseout schedule for HCFCs 
established by EPA regulations, as discussed above, the EPA stopped 
allocating production and consumption allowances for HCFC-141b as of 
2003; for HCFC-225ca/cb as of 2015; and for HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b as of 
2020. The Montreal Protocol, the CAA, and the EPA regulations under 40 
CFR part 82, subpart A, limit the permissible uses of newly produced or 
imported quantities of the remaining HCFCs (HCFC-123 and HCFC-124). 
Section 605(a) of the CAA makes it unlawful, starting January 1, 2015 
to introduce into interstate commerce or use any virgin HCFCs unless 
they are used as a refrigerant in appliances manufactured prior to 
January 1, 2020, or are listed as acceptable for use as a fire 
suppression agent for nonresidential applications in accordance with 
section 612 of the CAA. In addition, prior to November 2018, Article 2F 
of the Montreal Protocol provided that the only permissible uses of 
HCFCs after January 1, 2020 were for the servicing of refrigeration and 
air-conditioning equipment existing on January 1, 2020. In a November 
2018 adjustment to Article 2F, servicing of fire suppression and fire 
protection equipment existing on January 1, 2020 was added as an 
additional permissible use. Section 614(b) of the CAA also provides 
that in the case of a conflict between any provision of the CAA and any 
provision of the Montreal Protocol, the more stringent provision shall 
govern. In sum, the combination of the CAA and the Montreal Protocol 
establish that the permissible uses of HCFCs after January 1, 2020 will 
be limited to servicing refrigeration, air-conditioning, and fire 
suppression equipment existing on January 1, 2020.
    The EPA notes that absent specific use restrictions, HCFCs can 
continue to be used after their production and import has ceased, for 
example, to service existing equipment such as refrigeration and air-
conditioning systems. The EPA's intent has always been to facilitate a 
smooth transition to alternatives, which means avoiding stranding 
equipment that has not yet reached the end of its useful life. For 
example, used HCFC-22 that is recovered and reclaimed, or virgin 
material produced before the 2020 phaseout may continue to be used for 
as long as it is available to service existing HCFC-22 systems.
    The Title VI phaseout regulations that reduce the number of 
allowances allocated over time is a central component of the United 
States' approach for protecting stratospheric ozone. The EPA limits how 
much ODS enters the market to meet the CAA and Montreal Protocol 
phaseout milestones. To smooth the phaseout steps, the EPA also takes 
complementary actions that reduce the demand for ODS, encourage 
recovery and recycling or reclamation of used ODS, allow for continued 
servicing to avoid stranding existing equipment, and encourage 
transition to alternatives that ``reduce overall risks to human health 
and the environment.'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ CAA section 612, 42 U.S.C. 7671(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's most recent action related to the phaseout of HCFCs was a 
2014 rule that allocated production and consumption allowances for 
HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, HCFC-123, and HCFC-124 for 2015-2019 (see 79 FR 
64254, October 28, 2014). In that action, the EPA further implemented 
the provisions in section 605(a) of the CAA that limit production and 
consumption to servicing refrigeration and air-conditioning appliances 
and for use in fire suppression applications. That document provides 
additional discussion of the history of the phaseout of HCFCs.

III. Final Rule and Response to Comments

    This section describes the rationale for the final actions taken in 
this rulemaking, summarizes and responds to the comments received on 
the proposal, and explains differences between the proposed rule and 
this final action.

A. Allocation of HCFC Allowances for the Years 2020 Through 2029

    This section describes the factors that the EPA considered in 
developing its approach for issuing HCFC allowances for the next 
regulatory period that extends from 2020 through 2029. Additional 
relevant discussion is included in other portions of section III. 
Specifically, section III.B. provides more information on allowance 
allocations for HCFC-123 and section III.C. provides more information 
on allowance allocations for HCFC-124. As explained below, the EPA's 
allocation methodologies are consistent with the CAA, EPA regulations, 
and the obligations of the United States under the Montreal Protocol, 
and were supported by most commenters.
    HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 are the two HCFCs not already slated for 
phaseout in the United States by 2020 under the ``worst-first 
approach'' described in the previous section. These HCFCs are currently 
used in the refrigeration, air-conditioning, and fire suppression 
sectors. The use of newly produced or imported quantities of these 
HCFCs is limited under the Montreal Protocol, the CAA, and the EPA's 
regulations. The EPA is relying on its authority under section 605(c) 
of the CAA to promulgate regulations phasing out the production and 
restricting the use of class II substances, subject to previous 
accelerations under section 606 (see 58 FR 65018, December 19, 1993 and 
74 FR 66411, December 15, 2009). The EPA is making limited changes to 
the provisions on production, consumption, and use of class II ODS to 
provide flexibility for the years 2020 through 2029 consistent with the 
requirements of section 605 of the CAA and

[[Page 15263]]

obligations of the United States under the Montreal Protocol.
    As stated in the proposal, the EPA considered a number of factors 
when developing an approach to allocating allowances for HCFC-123 and 
HCFC-124 for the years 2020 through 2029 including existing company-
specific production and consumption baselines listed in 40 CFR 82.17 
and 82.19; the Agency's worst-first approach; the remaining permissible 
uses of HCFCs under section 605(a) of the CAA and the availability of 
alternatives for those uses; the quantity needed to meet the estimated 
servicing demand for each permissible use; the estimated quantity of 
HCFCs that will be available from recycling, reclamation, and potential 
stockpiling in advance of the 2020 phaseout step; \12\ and the 
transition that must occur by 2030 when HCFC production and consumption 
will be phased out completely. Further, the Agency has considered 
public comments on prior drafts of the report in the docket titled The 
U.S. Phaseout of HCFCs: Projected Servicing Demand in the U.S. Air 
Conditioning, Refrigeration, and Fire Suppression Sectors (2020-2030), 
December 2019, hereafter referred to as the 2019 Final Servicing Tail 
Report, and on the proposed allocation amounts and approaches, as 
discussed below and in other parts of section III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ EPA. 2019. The U.S. Phaseout of HCFCs: Projected Servicing 
Demand in the U.S. Air Conditioning, Refrigeration, and Fire 
Suppression Sectors (2020-2030).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 allowances, the EPA identified a total 
number of allowances to be allocated. These amounts are presented in 
Table 1 in Section I.B. above and match the proposed allowance 
allocations. Each company's calendar-year allowances are then 
calculated as a percentage of each company's baseline. Tables 
identifying the percentage of baseline production and consumption 
allowances allocated appear in 40 CFR 82.16(a). As noted, the EPA 
considered several factors when developing an approach to allocating 
allowances for HCFC-123 and HCFC-124. The first factor the EPA 
considered was the existing limitation on permissible uses of HCFCs and 
the availability of alternatives for those uses. Section 605(a) of the 
CAA limited the use of HCFCs beginning January 1, 2015. The statute 
provides that starting on that date, it shall be unlawful for any 
person to introduce into interstate commerce or use any class II 
substance unless such substance: (1) Has been used, recovered, and 
recycled; (2) is used and entirely consumed (except for trace 
quantities) in the production of other chemicals; (3) is used as a 
refrigerant in appliances manufactured before January 1, 2020; or (4) 
is listed as acceptable under the Significant New Alternatives Policy 
(SNAP) program for use as a fire suppression agent for nonresidential 
applications. As detailed in the 2019 Final Servicing Tail Report, the 
EPA considered the estimated quantity of HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 that 
will be available from recycling, reclamation, and potential 
stockpiling in advance of the 2020 phaseout step. The EPA also 
considered the availability of alternatives with the understanding that 
it is typically best to service equipment with the same refrigerant or 
fire suppression agent it was designed to use.
    The SNAP program continues to review and list alternatives for 
applications that use HCFCs, including refrigeration and air-
conditioning and fire suppression applications that use HCFC-123. 
Substitutes are listed under that regulatory program as acceptable, 
unacceptable, or acceptable subject to use restrictions for specific 
uses. Any future use of substitutes listed as acceptable subject to use 
restrictions must comport with any conditions of the SNAP program, if 
applicable. Currently, the SNAP program lists a number of acceptable 
substitutes for HCFCs for use as a fire suppression agent for 
nonresidential applications as well as in the refrigeration and air-
conditioning sector, making a variety of allocation options practicable 
for the years 2020 through 2029.
    As noted previously, in addition to the statutory provisions in 
section 605 of the CAA, the EPA established a ``worst-first approach'' 
in 1993 which addressed which HCFCs may be produced and consumed and 
prioritized the phaseout of HCFCs based on their ODPs. These 
regulations can be found in 40 CFR 82.16. Consistent with that 
approach, the EPA is issuing allowances for production and consumption 
of only HCFC-123 and HCFC-124, as these are the remaining HCFCs that 
have not been phased out domestically.
    In 2020, the consumption cap of the United States for all HCFCs is 
0.5 percent of the U.S. baseline, which equates to 76.2 ODP-weighted 
metric tons that could be available for servicing.\13\ Under section 
605(c) of the CAA, the consumption of HCFCs by any person is also to be 
limited to the quantity consumed by that person during the baseline 
year. The EPA has implemented this requirement by limiting the number 
of annual allowances allocated for each chemical in 40 CFR 82.16. The 
consumption baseline is 2,014 MT (40 ODP-weighted MT) of HCFC-123 and 
2,396 MT (53 ODP-weighted MT) of HCFC-124. Section 605(c) of the CAA 
thus prohibits the EPA from allocating allowances above that amount for 
each chemical. Consumption allowances are allocated to the entities 
listed in 40 CFR 82.19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 76.2 ODP-weighted metric tons is the equivalent of 3,810 MT 
of HCFC-123, if completely allocated to HCFC-123, and 3,464 MT of 
HCFC-124, if completely allocated to HCFC-124.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In finalizing this action, the EPA considered the quantities of 
HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 needed to service equipment manufactured before 
2020. These estimates are discussed in the 2019 Final Servicing Tail 
Report, which is available in the docket. The final report and 
allocations are based on demand projections contained in the EPA's 
Vintaging Model,\14\ recent market research, discussions with industry 
on current HCFC uses and trends, the expected availability of 
recovered, recycled/reclaimed, and reused material, and consideration 
of comments offered on the report during the public comment period on 
this rulemaking, as described below. The Agency made the April 2018 
draft report available on its website and in the docket along with a 
Notice of Data Availability (see 83 FR 19757, May 4, 2018) and 
requested comment on the data and assumptions in the report. The EPA 
did not receive any comments on the draft report. As a result of the 
adjustment to Article 2F of the Montreal Protocol, the EPA revised the 
2018 Draft Servicing Tail Report to reflect the demand for servicing 
fire suppression equipment manufactured before January 1, 2020 and 
disaggregated estimated demand for fire suppression to show estimated 
demand for servicing compared to demand for new equipment. The EPA 
consulted with industry on the estimate of future market demand for 
HCFC[hyphen]123 fire suppression applications. At the time the 2019 
Draft Servicing Tail Report was published in August 2019, total demand 
(the manufacture of new equipment and the servicing of existing 
equipment)

[[Page 15264]]

over the past several years had varied, but the average was 
approximately 260 MT per year. The EPA expected the demand for fire 
suppression servicing to be 35 to 90 MT per year based on projections 
\15\ from the Vintaging Model and feedback from industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The EPA's Vintaging Model estimates the annual chemical 
emissions from industry sectors that historically used ODS, 
including refrigeration and air-conditioning and fire suppression. 
The model uses information on the market size and growth for each 
end-use, as well as a history and projections of the market 
transition from ODS to alternatives. The model tracks emissions of 
annual ``vintages'' of new equipment that enter into operation by 
incorporating information on estimates of the quantity of equipment 
or products sold, serviced, and retired or converted each year, and 
the quantity of the compound required to manufacture, charge, and/or 
maintain the equipment.
    \15\ EPA. 2019. The U.S. Phaseout of HCFCs: Projected Servicing 
Demand in the U.S. Air Conditioning, Refrigeration, and Fire 
Suppression Sectors (2020-2030), Table 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the notice of proposed rulemaking for this action, the EPA 
sought comment on all aspects of the 2019 Draft Servicing Tail Report, 
including the projections for the fire suppression sector. The Agency 
received comments on the total demand for fire suppression during the 
comment period and has updated the report accordingly. The Agency also 
updated the reclamation and consumption values in the report to reflect 
the data reported for 2018.
    The last factor the EPA considered is the statutory 2030 phaseout 
date for production and import of HCFCs, with limited exceptions, under 
section 605(b)(2) and (c) of the CAA. In 2030, HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 
must be phased out completely. As in prior phaseout steps for other 
HCFCs, the Agency's intent is to accomplish the statutory 2030 phaseout 
in a manner that achieves a safe and smooth transition to alternatives 
without stranding equipment. The EPA's goal is to allow equipment 
owners to continue servicing their HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 equipment 
throughout its expected lifetime. Experience with the HCFC-22 phaseout 
indicates that gradually decreasing allocation levels is a better 
approach than an abrupt cessation of allowances at the phaseout date, 
as it provides time and the right market signals for equipment owners 
to plan investments and transition to alternatives while also fostering 
recovery, recycling, and reclamation of HCFCs.

B. Allocation of HCFC-123 Consumption Allowances

    This section describes the EPA's proposal for annual HCFC-123 
allocations, comments received on the proposal, the Agency's responses 
to those comments, and the final allocations for HCFC-123 in 2020 
through 2029.
    The Agency proposed to issue consumption allowances for HCFC-123 
for years 2020 through 2022 equal to the estimated 2020 demand for 
servicing existing refrigeration and air-conditioning and fire 
suppression equipment. The EPA proposed to then decrease the number of 
allowances issued in each subsequent year by an equal amount such that 
there would be zero allowances in 2030. The EPA explained that this 
allocation approach would meet the full estimated servicing demand in 
2020 with newly imported HCFC-123 and the full estimated servicing 
demand in 2030 with reclaimed HCFC-123. The EPA also explained that 
allocating at the full estimated level of servicing demand in 2020 (650 
MT \16\) for the years 2020 through 2022 would allow time for the 
reclamation market to increase sales to the fire suppression sector. 
Currently, the reclamation market primarily services the refrigeration 
and air conditioning sector. Allocating above estimated demand for the 
years 2021 and 2022 (see the demand estimates in the 2019 Final 
Servicing Tail Report) will ensure supply for servicing existing 
refrigeration and air-conditioning, and fire suppression equipment 
while that transition occurs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Equivalent to 13 ODP-weighted MT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA also sought comment on two alternative approaches for 
determining how many HCFC-123 consumption allowances to issue. The 
first alternative approach would have issued allowances equal to the 
total modeled demand each year from 2020 through 2029 (which includes 
servicing of existing equipment and the manufacture of new equipment 
using reclaimed HCFC-123) minus the low end of the projection for 
reclamation each year from 2020 through 2029. This contrasts with the 
proposed allocation amounts which, as explained above, were not 
directly based on demand for the manufacture of new equipment using 
reclaimed HCFC-123 or the availability of reclaimed HCFC-123 and did 
not subtract allocations based on projections for reclamation as was 
proposed in Alternative 1. The Agency determined that reclaimed HCFC-
123 could meet the demand for new fire suppression equipment, while 
also eventually providing HCFC-123 for servicing existing equipment. 
See Table 8 of the 2019 Draft Servicing Tail Report for more discussion 
of estimated reclamation.
    The EPA also sought comment on a second alternative approach under 
which the EPA would issue 2,014 MT of HCFC-123 consumption allowances 
for each of the years 2020 through 2029. This is equal to 100 percent 
of the aggregate consumption baseline for HCFC-123 and is the maximum 
allocation allowed under section 605(c) of the CAA. This approach would 
allocate approximately half of the annual U.S. consumption cap allowed 
under the Montreal Protocol for HCFC-123 (40.3 ODP-weighted MT per year 
compared to 76.2 ODP-weighted MT).
    The EPA also proposed to issue zero production allowances for the 
years 2020 through 2029 because no companies produced HCFC-123 
production in the baseline years of 2005 through 2007 (see 74 FR 66431, 
December 15, 2009). Under section 605(b)(1) of the CAA, it is unlawful 
for any person to produce any class II substance in an annual quantity 
greater than the quantity of such substance produced by such person 
during the baseline year.
(1) Summary of and Response to Comments on the HCFC-123 Allocation
    The EPA received supportive comments on the proposed allocation 
amount from Ingersoll Rand, a stationary air-conditioning manufacturer; 
National Refrigerants, a refrigerant distributor; Halon Alternatives 
Research Corporation (HARC), a non-profit trade association; and an 
anonymous commenter. Several commenters state that the proposal 
accurately reflects the amount of HCFC-123 needed for servicing 
refrigeration and air-conditioning and fire suppression equipment, the 
availability of reclaimed HCFC-123, and the amount of market demand. 
Hudson suggests that the Agency should reduce the allocation below the 
amounts in Alternative 1 and decrease each year as opposed to staying 
static in the first three years. The Environmental Investigation Agency 
(EIA), an environmental non-profit, also supports an allocation below 
Alternative 1, and another comment from a private citizen does not 
support an allocation for any HCFC production or consumption. American 
Pacific, the manufacturer of Halotron[supreg] I, a fire suppression 
agent blend containing HCFC-123, is supportive of allocating the 
maximum amount allowable under the CAA, consistent with Alternative 2 
in the proposal. These comments and the Agency's responses are 
described in detail below.
(2) Comments in Support of a Lower Allocation
    The EPA received comments that were supportive of a lower 
allocation. Hudson and EIA note that allocation levels could be lower 
considering the supply of reclaimed material. Hudson specifically notes 
that based on the 2019 Draft Servicing Tail Report, total demand for 
HCFC-123 could be met with Alternative 1. These commenters suggest the 
EPA should adopt a schedule that is more aggressive than

[[Page 15265]]

Alternative 1 because the reclamation industry can provide 300 MT of 
HCFC-123 annually. They note that the reclamation industry has supplied 
nearly 85 percent of the estimated 300 MT volume over the past two 
years. Furthermore, Hudson states that the reclamation industry does 
not need any transition time to enter the fire suppression market 
because the industry is already servicing that market, and an 
accelerated schedule will spur the growth of reclamation and ensure 
more than adequate supply of HCFC-123 for both the refrigeration and 
air-conditioning and fire suppression markets. EIA also supports a 
lower allocation, noting that the supply of reclaimed HCFC-123 ranging 
from 180 to 270 MT annually over the past several years could allow the 
EPA to reduce allocations by 200 MT below expected demand to 450 MT, 
and then reduce by 45 MT annually until reaching zero in 2030. Both 
commenters note an allocation at or below Alternative 1 would be 
beneficial to the reclamation industry and the environment.
    The EPA disagrees with commenters that the Agency should finalize a 
lower allocation than proposed. Starting the allocation levels below 
the estimated level of demand for servicing both fire suppression and 
refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment could strand serviceable 
fire suppression equipment or hinder the manufacture of new fire 
suppression equipment in the near term. Even though reclaimed and 
stockpiled HCFC-123 will be available in 2020, the primary concern is 
whether there is enough HCFC-123 for both near and longer term fire 
suppression and refrigeration and air-conditioning needs. Historically, 
the refrigeration and air-conditioning sector utilized the majority of 
that material as the historic practice of reclaimers and importers is 
to sell the ODS to refrigerant distributors. Based on their comment, we 
understand that Hudson may sell some reclaimed material to the fire 
suppression sector. However, that does not appear to be the norm among 
reclaimers. The Agency is concerned that decreasing the allocation too 
soon might not provide time for a broader fire suppression sector 
transition to reclaimed material for new systems as well as servicing. 
This could lead to shortages of HCFC-123 for fire suppression uses 
because, as discussed above, after January 1, 2020, recovered and 
recycled or reclaimed HCFC-123, as well as material stockpiled prior to 
2020, is the only material that can be used to meet demand for new fire 
suppression equipment. Starting with allocation levels at the estimated 
level of demand for servicing both fire suppression and refrigeration 
and air-conditioning equipment means that imported HCFC-123 can be used 
to satisfy the servicing needs for existing equipment, making it more 
likely that reclaimed and stockpiled HCFC-123 will be available for the 
manufacture of new fire suppression equipment.
    The EPA anticipates that the market for reclaimers and others 
involved in recovering used ODS for fire suppression purposes will 
change in the near future and may resemble the market for used halons 
to some extent given both halons and the blend of HCFC-123 are used in 
the fire suppression sector. While halon production and consumption 
were phased out in the United States in 1994 and globally in 2010, 
halon is still available for new equipment (e.g., for new aircraft and 
Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) vehicles). Eventually, 
domestic recovery and reclamation of HCFC-123 combined with imports of 
used and/or recycled HCFC-123 should meet demand potentially similar to 
how the demand for halon in the United States is met through transition 
to alternatives, successful management of halon banks, and imports 
under the petition process for used ODS (see 40 CFR 82.13(g)(2) and 
82.24(c)(3)). Ultimately, the EPA anticipates that like other ODS 
sectors, alternatives will be available for all applications that 
currently use halons and HCFCs. However, the fire suppression sector 
will benefit from the proposed level of allocation which recognizes the 
near-term changes to the market will be underway in 2020-2022. 
Therefore, it would not be prudent to base the allocation on the 
maximum amount of estimated reclamation in the early years or to 
decrease the allocation to zero too quickly. The fact the 2018 reclaim 
amount (240 MT) was lower than the 2017 reclaim amount (270 MT) further 
supports the Agency's determination that it is appropriate to provide 
the proposed level of allocation which is higher than Alternative 1 for 
the years 2020 through 2022. The EPA recognizes the necessity of 
reclaimed HCFCs to meet demand entirely after 2030 and therefore the 
final allocation level for HCFC-123 is less than the estimated level of 
servicing demand starting in 2023. In the longer term, this allocation 
sends appropriate market signals for a smooth and orderly transition by 
reducing the allocation after 2022 and completely phasing out the 
import of virgin HCFC-123 in 2030.
(3) Comments in Support of a Higher Allocation and Other Comments on 
the Proposed Allocation
    American Pacific supports a higher initial allocation of allowances 
and no decrease in allocation level. The commenter asks that the Agency 
consider the total demand for Halotron[supreg] I and notes their 
concern that the proposed allocation is too low and could strand 
existing equipment. American Pacific suggests that the EPA allocate the 
maximum allowable number of consumption allowances for HCFC-123--an 
approach presented as Alternative 2 in the proposal. American Pacific 
asserts that the allocation of 2,014 MT per year during the period 2020 
through 2029 is warranted because Halotron[supreg] I has gained more 
acceptance as a lower ODP replacement to halon 1211 in fire suppression 
equipment, particularly in wheeled units. American Pacific states that 
it will continue to manufacture new fire suppression equipment with 
reclaimed and stockpiled material, and asserts that the estimated total 
demand for fire suppression as represented in the 2019 Draft Servicing 
Tail Report, at 260 MT is an underestimate. The commenter states that 
the total demand was over 300 MT in 2018 and that they expect demand in 
2019 to be an additional 10 percent higher. American Pacific also 
asserts that the EPA's estimate of 90 MT of fire suppression servicing 
demand is low. For these reasons, they argue that annual allocation 
levels should start at 2,014 MT and be kept constant from 2020 through 
2029.
    The EPA disagrees with the comment that an allocation higher than 
what the Agency proposed is warranted. First, the EPA responds that the 
increase in demand in 2018 and 2019 does not merit allocating at the 
level the commenter requests. Read together, CAA sections 605 and 614 
and Article 2F of the Montreal Protocol limit the permissible uses of 
newly-produced and newly-imported HCFCs to servicing of refrigeration 
and air-conditioning equipment existing on January 1, 2020, and to 
servicing of fire suppression and fire protection equipment existing on 
January 1, 2020, and listed as acceptable for use as a fire suppression 
agent for nonresidential applications in accordance with section 612 of 
the CAA. Thus, when determining allocations for HCFC-123 and HCFC-124, 
the EPA focused on the amount of demand for these specific uses. Since 
virgin material cannot be used to manufacture new fire suppression 
equipment, it would not be reasonable for the EPA to base allocation 
amounts

[[Page 15266]]

on demand for new equipment even if, as the commenter asserts, demand 
for their product is higher than historic levels. Nonetheless, based on 
the new information provided for 2018 sales, the EPA is revising the 
total demand estimate in the 2019 Final Servicing Tail Report issued 
with this rule. With 2018 demand being 300 MT, the five-year average 
reflected in the 2019 Final Servicing Tail Report increases to about 
270 MT. A further 10 percent increase in demand in 2019 would result in 
a five-year average of approximately 280 MT. Furthermore, even if the 
EPA did consider demand for manufacturing new fire suppression 
equipment in addition to servicing demand, these figures, when added to 
servicing demand for refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment (560 
MT in 2020), would remain below an allocation of 2,014 MT per year. 
Moreover, and as noted elsewhere in this section, consistently 
allocating allowances above total servicing demand would not support a 
smooth and orderly transition to alternatives, nor would it foster 
recovery, recycling and reclamation, which is needed as of January 1, 
2020 for manufacturing new fire suppression equipment and in the longer 
term as HCFC-123 is phased out.
    The EPA also disagrees with the commenter's assertion that the 
Agency's servicing demand estimates are too low. As part of the 
development of the Servicing Tail Report, the Agency sought and 
received input from a variety of key industry stakeholders. The EPA has 
estimated total demand for HCFC-123 for fire suppression at 260 MT per 
year in the two previous drafts of the Servicing Tail Report based on 
average reported consumption of HCFC-123 for this use over the last 
several years. In the last version of the report issued in August 2019, 
the Agency included a servicing demand of 35 to 90 MT per year for fire 
suppression. These estimates were based on the best available 
information and during public review of those drafts, interested 
stakeholders did not provide any evidence to contradict the Agency's 
estimates of servicing demand. Recognizing the needs for fire 
suppression servicing and American Pacific's comment, the Agency's 
allocation for HCFC-123 is based on the high end of the range for 
servicing demand for Halotron[supreg] I fire extinguishers manufactured 
prior to 2020. The Agency's review of the data supported a number 
within the 35 to 90 MT range, but generally closer to the bottom half 
of that range. The commenter, however, provided no additional data to 
support increasing the estimate for servicing demand. For all of these 
reasons, the Agency concludes that it is appropriate to base the final 
allocation on the servicing demand estimate from the Servicing Tail 
Report as proposed.
    The commenter states that, based on their observations of the fire 
suppression industry, if EPA issues allowances at 2,014 MT, it is not 
likely that fire suppression equipment manufacturers and distributors 
would wait until 2029 to transition or be unprepared for the 2030 
phaseout. Similarly, the commenter states that it is not necessary to 
provide a gradual decrease over time to guard against consumption 
levels that are higher than demand. They assert that consumption will 
always closely track demand given the sourcing of this material outside 
of the United States and that there is no reason to create excess 
inventory. American Pacific also comments that while there are multiple 
unknowns, in discussion with the industry, the use of newly-imported 
HCFC-123 should be less expensive than reclaimed HCFC-123. The EPA 
responds that one of the Agency's goals when setting the allocation 
level is to reach the 2030 phaseout step in a manner that achieves a 
safe and smooth transition to alternatives while allowing equipment 
owners to continue servicing their equipment within its expected 
lifetime. Issuing allowances significantly above demand would likely 
suppress the reclamation market and thus increase the likelihood of 
stranding equipment in 2030 and beyond. In the near term, this would 
adversely affect the availability of reclaimed HCFC-123 for the fire 
suppression sector because reclamation will be the only source of HCFC-
123 for the manufacture of new fire suppression equipment once 
stockpiles of material imported prior to 2020 are exhausted. In the 
longer term, if the reclaim market is suppressed through 2029, there 
will be less ability to respond to the 2030 phaseout when the primary 
supply of HCFC-123 will be from the reclaim market. Ultimately this 
could result in stranded equipment after 2029. Experience with prior 
HCFC phaseout steps indicates that gradually decreasing allocation 
levels is better than an abrupt increase or decrease to foster 
recovery, recycling, and reclamation of HCFCs and an orderly transition 
to alternatives. Gradually reducing HCFC allowances fosters a safe and 
smooth transition and recycling/reclamation and is consistent with the 
EPA's approach in previous HCFC allocation rules (see 74 FR 66412, 
December 15, 2009; 76 FR 47451, August 5, 2011; 78 FR 20004, April 3, 
2013; and 79 FR 64254, October 28, 2014).
    Additionally, the commenter focuses on the fire suppression market 
exclusively and does not take into account the broader market for HCFC-
123, including needs for servicing refrigeration and air-conditioning 
equipment, which will have servicing needs well beyond 2029. While the 
commenter asserts that it is not likely that the fire suppression 
industry would be unprepared for the 2030 phaseout if the EPA issues 
allowances at 2,014 MT, the commenter does not address the broader 
servicing market for HCFC-123, where refrigeration and air-conditioning 
account for significantly more demand. Based on other comments, the 
refrigeration and air-conditioning industry is supportive of a gradual 
reduction in allowances starting from 2020 estimated servicing demand 
for all allowed uses.
    In response to the comment about costs, the Agency has found that 
the price of HCFCs is not directly correlated to the amount of 
allowances allocated. For example, experience with the phaseout of 
HCFC-22 indicates that there can be temporary price changes but the 
wholesale price has fallen as the allocation gradually decreased over 
the past five years. The phaseout of HCFC-22 may not be identical to 
the remaining phaseout step for HCFC-123 given the addition of the fire 
suppression sector. The price to import and/or produce material does 
not necessarily match the wholesale price for various HCFCs, so there 
is no guarantee of a lower price from imported product versus reclaimed 
product. Supporting this point, the EPA understands from its 
interactions with reclaimers that they tend to sell their reclaimed 
product at or near the market price for virgin HCFCs. The Agency cannot 
conclude, based on the comments received, whether there is a difference 
in the price of HCFC-123 when sold for fire suppression compared to 
when it is sold as a refrigerant. The EPA agrees with the commenter 
that if the Agency allocated allowances well below estimated servicing 
demand, it is possible that prices would increase in the near term. 
However, that is not what the Agency is finalizing in this rule. 
Instead, this rule issues allowances above estimated demand for three 
years specifically to allow reclaimers time to shift their market to 
the fire suppression sector before reducing the number of allowances.
    The commenter further states that the proposed allocation would 
strand existing fire extinguishers including

[[Page 15267]]

wheeled units costing between $125 to $4,000 for the telecommunications 
industry and for military applications. The EPA responds that the 
proposed allocation being finalized in this action accounts for the 
servicing of existing fire extinguishers. As discussed earlier in this 
section, the Agency estimated the demand for servicing Halotron[supreg] 
I fire extinguishers manufactured prior to 2020 to be between 35 to 90 
MT per year. This estimate is based on industry feedback on the two 
draft Servicing Tail Reports that the Agency made available for public 
comment. The final allocation includes 90 MT based on the servicing 
demand for servicing fire suppression equipment and the commenter 
provided no data to support increasing the Agency's estimate for 
servicing demand or that the proposed allocation amount would strand 
existing inventory. As described in the 2019 Final Servicing Tail 
Report accompanying this action, the Agency estimates that the 
allocation finalized in this rule combined with reclaimed and recycled 
HCFC-123 will provide sufficient HCFC-123 to allow for servicing of 
refrigeration, air-conditioning, and fire suppression equipment, as 
well as the manufacture of new fire suppression equipment. The EPA 
finds no support for the assertion that the proposed allocation would 
strand any existing fire extinguishers.
    The EPA further notes that the fire suppression sector has a long 
history of using recovered and recycled/reclaimed ODS for both 
servicing and new equipment. There has been continuing demand for 
halons in newly-manufactured fire suppression equipment since halons 
were phased out in the United States in 1994. This demand for halons 
has been satisfied with recycled/reclaimed halons, ensuring equipment 
can be serviced and investments are not stranded.
    Lastly, American Pacific asks the EPA to consider an updated ODP of 
0.0098 for the purposes of analysis of environmental impact and 
comparison with alternatives to HCFC-123 in the fire suppression sector 
such as halon 1211, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and fluoroketone based 
agents. The EPA responds that the Agency did not propose and is not 
finalizing any changes to the listed ODP for HCFC-123. The ODP for 
HCFC-123 as listed in Annex C to the Montreal Protocol and in appendix 
A to 40 CFR part 82, subpart A is 0.02.

C. De Minimis Exemption for the Use of HCFC-123 in Chillers

    The EPA proposed to create a de minimis exemption from the use 
prohibition in section 605(a) of the CAA to allow virgin HCFC-123 to be 
used for the manufacture of chillers that meet specific criteria 
through December 31, 2020. The EPA received two comments on this 
proposal, from Ingersoll Rand and The Alliance, an industry coalition 
of fluorocarbon producers and users, both in support of the de minimis 
exemption. For the reasons cited in the proposal and reiterated in this 
document, the Agency is finalizing the de minimis exemption from the 
use prohibition in section 605(a). This exemption aims to address a 
unique situation that has arisen because certain construction projects 
that ordered HCFC-123 chillers for installation in 2019 are behind 
schedule and the chillers may not be installed by the end of 2019. The 
EPA understands that many of the chillers and the virgin HCFC-123 to 
charge them are already on site at these construction projects and that 
companies purchased virgin HCFC-123 for charging these chillers with 
the expectation that they would be installed in 2019. Due to 
construction delays, the final steps in the manufacture of these 
chillers (including charging with refrigerant) may not occur until 
after January 1, 2020. Section 605(a) prohibits the introduction into 
interstate commerce or use of any class II substance with limited 
exemptions. Use of a virgin class II substance ``as a refrigerant'' is 
allowed only ``in appliances manufactured prior to January 1, 2020.'' 
The EPA is creating a de minimis exemption from this prohibition to 
allow virgin HCFC-123 to be used for the manufacture of chillers that 
meet specific criteria through December 31, 2020. This exemption will 
only apply if the HCFC-123 chiller unit and other components were ready 
for shipment to a construction location and the components were 
specified for installation under a building permit or contract dated on 
or before the date of signature of the proposed rule (July 24, 2019), 
the HCFC-123 was imported prior to 2020 and is in the possession of the 
entity that will complete the manufacture of the appliance, and all 
refrigerant added to that appliance after December 31, 2020 is used, 
recovered, or recycled/reclaimed.
(1) Background
    As described in Section II of this document, the CAA restricts 
introduction into interstate commerce and use of HCFCs over time with 
limited exceptions. The CAA prohibits the use of HCFCs to manufacture 
new appliances effective January 1, 2020, unless the HCFCs are used, 
recovered, and recycled. The CAA also phases out production and 
consumption of HCFCs, with an interim milestone in 2015 and the full 
phaseout in 2030. Additionally, the Montreal Protocol phases out the 
production and consumption of HCFCs as of January 1, 2020, while 
allowing a limited amount of new production and consumption for 
servicing existing refrigeration and air-conditioning appliances, 
servicing existing fire suppression and fire protection equipment, and 
other uses not relevant for the U.S. market. The EPA codified the CAA 
use and interstate commerce restrictions related to refrigeration and 
air-conditioning appliances at 40 CFR part 82, subpart A, in prior 
rulemakings.
    As defined in the regulations, the term manufactured \17\ ``for an 
appliance, means the date upon which the appliance's refrigerant 
circuit is complete, the appliance can function, the appliance holds a 
full refrigerant charge, and the appliance is ready for use for its 
intended purposes[.]'' Appliances used in commercial refrigeration, 
such as large chillers, and industrial process refrigeration typically 
involve more complex installation processes, which may require custom-
built parts, and typically are manufactured on-site. Appliances, such 
as these, that are field charged or have the refrigerant circuit 
completed on-site, regardless of whether additional refrigerant is 
added or not, are manufactured at the point when installation of all 
the components and other parts are completed, and the appliance is 
fully charged with refrigerant and able to operate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ The definition of ``manufactured'' can be found at 40 CFR 
82.3. See also 74 FR 66439.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA learned that a limited number of HCFC-123 chillers 
specified for installation in 2019 may not be fully manufactured prior 
to January 1, 2020. The key uncharged components, in particular the 
chiller units themselves, were ready for shipment to the construction 
location in the first half of 2019. However, for some delayed projects, 
even though the units and refrigerant may already be on-site, the final 
steps to manufacture the appliance, in particular charging the chiller 
with refrigerant, may not occur until 2020. Thus, if no regulatory 
relief is provided, the virgin HCFC-123 could not be used to charge 
these chillers even if it has already been purchased and is on site.
(2) De Minimis Exemption
    To provide flexibility to complete the manufacture of HCFC-123 
chillers from components that are ready for shipment to a construction 
location, the EPA is creating a limited de minimis exemption

[[Page 15268]]

to the use prohibition in 605(a). This exemption allows HCFC-123 to be 
used for the initial charging of certain chillers manufactured between 
January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020 provided they meet specific 
conditions. The exemption will only apply if the HCFC-123 chiller unit 
and components are ready for shipment to a construction location and 
the components were specified for installation under a building permit 
or contract dated on or before the date of signature of the proposed 
rule (July 24, 2019), the HCFC-123 was imported prior to 2020 and is in 
the possession of an entity involved in the manufacture of the 
appliance, and all refrigerant added to that appliance after December 
31, 2020 is used, recovered, or recycled/reclaimed.
    The EPA has implied authority to establish a de minimis exemption 
from the section 605(a) use restriction. The United States Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has recognized that 
``[u]nless Congress has been extraordinarily rigid, there is likely a 
basis for an implication of de minimis authority to provide exemption 
when the burdens of regulation yield a gain of trivial or no value.'' 
Alabama Power Co. v. Costle, 636 F.2d 323, 360-61 (D.C. Cir. 1980). 
Further discussion of this authority can be found in the preamble to 
the proposed rule.
    The EPA concludes that it has authority to provide flexibility by 
creating a de minimis exemption to the 605(a) use prohibition. Section 
605(a) is not extraordinarily rigid and is ambiguous as it does not 
speak directly to the circumstance presented here. In addition, 
providing flexibility is consistent with the statutory intent.
    The EPA does not view section 605(a) as ``extraordinarily rigid.'' 
Title VI of the CAA can generally be summarized into three principal 
areas: the phaseout of the production and import of ODS (sections 602-
607); the reduction of emissions of ODS via various means such as 
required servicing practices, restrictions on sale and distribution of 
products, and consumer education (sections 608-611); and the transition 
to alternatives that reduce overall risk to human health and the 
environment (section 612). Section 605 specifically addresses the 
phase-out of production and consumption of class II substances. For 
class II substances, section 605 established specific restrictions 
beginning in 2015 on use, introduction into interstate commerce and 
production, while establishing a complete phaseout of HCFCs in 2030. 
Congress' overall approach to the class II phaseout was generally less 
rigid than its approach to the class I phaseout, given the longer 
timeframes and the presence of only one intermediate reduction step 
(see section 605(b)). Given this context, the EPA does not view section 
605(a) as ``extraordinarily rigid.''
    The EPA finds that section 605(a) is ambiguous as it does not speak 
directly to the circumstance presented for the situation described 
above. Section 605(a) does not explicitly address whether virgin HCFC-
123 may be used in a chiller where all the chiller components were 
ready for shipment to a construction site before January 1, 2020 but 
where the initial charge is not completed until after January 1, 2020. 
Because the statute does not specify when manufacture is complete, it 
does not unambiguously prohibit the use of virgin HCFC-123 for the 
initial charge of chillers where all the chiller components were ready 
for shipment before January 1. 2020. Thus, the EPA has authority to 
resolve the ambiguity through regulation and determine whether the use 
prohibition should apply in this circumstance.
    The EPA views the de minimis exemption as consistent with statutory 
intent. The flexibility from the exemption will ensure the orderly 
phaseout of ODS and will be consistent with the past practice of 
preventing the stranding of existing appliances without being counter 
to the three principal areas of Title VI described previously. First, 
it will not contribute to additional production and consumption of 
HCFCs and thus will not inhibit the United States from reaching the CAA 
phaseout date of 2030 or complying with the Montreal Protocol. Second, 
these chillers will continue to be subject to the servicing practices 
and labeling requirements applicable to all ODS appliances. Third, it 
will not slow the transition to alternatives. As discussed below, the 
components to assemble these chillers have already been made ready for 
shipment and they have been purchased for installation. While these 
chillers may one day be retrofitted to an alternative, such as R-514A, 
Title VI does not require the retrofitting of existing equipment.
    In addition, rigid application of section 605(a) of the CAA in the 
unique circumstances presented here would ``yield a gain of trivial or 
no value.'' Envtl. Def. Fund Inc. v. EPA, 82 F.3d 451, 455 (D.C. Cir. 
1996) (internal quotation marks omitted). The EPA concludes that there 
will be no environmental benefit associated with rigidly applying 
605(a). First, because the HCFC-123 used to initially charge these 
chillers must have been imported prior to 2020, existing allowances 
will not be expended. There will therefore not be any increase in U.S. 
consumption compared with the current allowed level of consumption for 
2019. Second, this exemption will not encourage the manufacture of 
additional HCFC-123 chiller units because factory operations for making 
them have already ceased and the exemption will not permit such 
operations for additional units.
    The number of chillers eligible for this exemption is also 
anticipated to be small. Based on consultations with industry, the EPA 
understands that the manufacture of up to five percent of the chillers 
expected to be installed in 2019 could be delayed beyond January 1, 
2020. The EPA expects the number of HCFC-123 chillers to be affected is 
33. As detailed in the 2019 Final Servicing Tail Report, the EPA 
assumes an average charge size for an HCFC-123 commercial chiller is 
approximately 445 kg. Thus, the EPA estimates about 15 MT of HCFC-123 
could be needed to complete the manufacture of chillers in 2020. This 
will equate to about 0.4 percent of all HCFCs allocated in 2019.
    Beyond the HCFC-123 needed for the initial charge, the EPA has 
analyzed whether the exemption could increase the servicing demand for 
HCFC-123 in the years 2020 through 2029 compared with not providing 
this flexibility. As an initial matter, the modeled servicing demand 
described in the 2019 Final Servicing Tail Report includes the demand 
from the appliances affected by this exemption. The report assumes that 
chillers expected to be manufactured in 2019 are manufactured in that 
year. Because the chillers that will be affected by this exemption were 
anticipated to be manufactured in 2019, they will not increase expected 
demand. This exemption will not alter the requirement that used, 
recovered, or recycled/reclaimed HCFC-123 be used for all subsequent 
servicing events on these chillers. Further, HCFC-123 chillers have 
very low leak rates, and thus the amount of replacement refrigerant 
will be low. Therefore, the EPA does not anticipate that future 
servicing demand will affect the market for reclaimed HCFC-123 in a 
manner that the EPA has not already considered when issuing allowance 
allocation amounts for 2020 through 2029.
    The exemption also contains numerous constraints that limit its 
potential impact. The exemption from the prohibition in section 605(a) 
of the CAA on use in appliances manufactured before January 1, 2020 
will apply only for one year and only in a limited set of 
circumstances. It will apply only if the refrigerant used to 
manufacture the

[[Page 15269]]

appliance was in the possession of an entity involved in the 
manufacture of the appliance and imported prior to January 1, 2020. In 
addition, any servicing of the equipment after December 31, 2020 will 
need to be done with HCFC-123 that is used, recovered, or recycled/
reclaimed. Further, the exemption will not allow for the manufacture of 
additional chillers beyond those for which the components had already 
been made ready for shipment to a construction location and the 
components were specified for installation under a building permit or 
contract dated on or before July 24, 2019, the date of signature of the 
proposed rule.
    The de minimis exemption is consistent with past EPA practice in 
this program. The EPA, on past occasions, has provided limited 
flexibility in applying use restrictions and phaseout dates. The Agency 
has typically aimed to prevent the stranding of appliances and past 
investments while phasing out controlled substances. For example, a 
concern similar to the one at issue here came to the EPA's attention in 
2009 when commenters requested a limited waiver from a regulatory 
prohibition on manufacturing HCFC-22 appliances that was to begin in 
2010 (see 74 FR 66412, 66440-41, December 15, 2009). Commenters 
identified scenarios in which HCFC-22 appliances had been scheduled for 
use in projects, such as construction projects, prior to January 1, 
2010, but in which, for a variety of reasons, their manufacture could 
not be completed prior to January 1, 2010. The EPA agreed to grant 
flexibility by providing an exemption from the regulatory deadline to 
allow HCFC-22 to be used as refrigerant in appliances manufactured 
between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2011, if their components were 
manufactured prior to January 1, 2010, and were specified in a building 
permit or contract dated before January 1, 2010, for use on a project. 
The EPA explained that providing flexibility would not result in 
additional consumption of HCFCs because companies had previously 
produced or imported the HCFCs for use in the manufacture of 
appliances, and that providing flexibility did not affect long-term 
projections of servicing needs because this equipment was already 
planned to be installed in the previous year (see 74 FR 66441, December 
15, 2009).
    The EPA also previously created a de minimis exemption from the 
statutory prohibition on the use of previously-imported virgin HCFCs. 
In a 2014 rule, the EPA created an exemption from the use prohibition 
in section 605(a) of the CAA to provide limited flexibility regarding 
the use of HCFCs for sectors other than refrigeration and air-
conditioning and fire suppression. For example, the EPA allowed 
continued use of a small amount of material that was previously 
produced and/or imported using the appropriate allowances and in 
inventory prior to the CAA's 2015 use restriction for solvents. The EPA 
determined that the continued use of previously produced/imported 
material was consistent with past practices, that production and 
consumption would not be higher than that already allowed for, and that 
the environmental effect would be limited (see 79 FR 64254, October 28, 
2014).
    The EPA also recognizes that for these specific circumstances, 
there could be negative impacts if the Agency does not provide 
flexibility. Without the flexibility, chiller manufacturers would not 
be able to use virgin HCFC-123 to initially charge and install new 
equipment even though that virgin HCFC-123 is already on-site. Granting 
flexibility allows the installation to continue using the HCFC-123 
available and prevents further delay of the installation.
    For the reasons described above, the EPA is finalizing the proposal 
to establish a de minimis exemption to the use restriction in section 
605(a) of the CAA and to revise 40 CFR 82.15(g)(5)(iii) to allow virgin 
HCFC-123 to be used for the initial charging of certain chillers 
manufactured between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2020 provided 
they meet the conditions specified previously.

D. Addition of Fire Suppression Servicing Uses to the HCFC Phaseout 
Schedule

    The EPA is finalizing the proposal to allow for the continued 
production, consumption, introduction into interstate commerce, and use 
of HCFCs for servicing fire suppression equipment manufactured before 
January 1, 2020 consistent with section 605 of the CAA and the November 
2018 adjustment to Article 2F of the Montreal Protocol. Specifically, 
the EPA is modifying 40 CFR 82.15(g) and 82.16(e) to allow for HCFC-123 
to be produced and imported, as well as introduced into interstate 
commerce and used, during the years 2020 through 2029, to service fire 
suppression equipment existing on January 1, 2020,\18\ so long as it is 
being used as a streaming agent listed as acceptable for use or 
acceptable subject to narrowed use limits for nonresidential 
applications in accordance with the section 612 SNAP regulations. The 
EPA received four comments from American Pacific, HARC, Hudson, and The 
Alliance, which were all supportive of this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ This will expand the permitted uses under 40 CFR 82.15 and 
82.16, which also allow for use and introduction into interstate 
commerce, as well as production and consumption, of HCFCs for use as 
a refrigerant in equipment manufactured before January 1, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Montreal Protocol, the United States has committed to 
phase out HCFC production and consumption by January 1, 2020, other 
than production and consumption for certain narrowly defined uses in an 
amount up to 0.5 percent of baseline annually.\19\ Servicing 
refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment existing on January 1, 
2020 had been the only recognized use under the Montreal Protocol. In 
2018, the United States proposed adjusting the Montreal Protocol to add 
servicing of fire suppression equipment existing on January 1, 2020, as 
another allowed use. That proposal was based on extensive stakeholder 
consultation on HCFC needs during the years 2020 through 2029 and the 
EPA's analysis of available information, including the 2018 Draft 
Servicing Tail Report. In November 2018, the Parties to the Montreal 
Protocol decided to adopt an adjustment that, among other things,\20\ 
added to Article 2F ``the servicing of fire suppression and fire 
protection equipment'' existing on January 1, 2020, as a permissible 
use for newly produced or imported HCFCs.\21\ While the term ``fire 
protection'' can be understood in some contexts to refer broadly to all 
measures taken to protect persons or property from harm, the terms 
``fire protection'' and ``fire suppression'' have been used 
interchangeably in the Montreal Protocol context to refer to 
suppressing or putting out fires through the use of chemical 
substances. Section 605(a) of the CAA uses the term ``fire 
suppression.'' In addition, the EPA views ``fire suppression'' as the 
more precise term in the context of regulating ODS. The adjustment 
adopted in

[[Page 15270]]

November 2018 entered into force on June 21, 2019.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ As noted previously, the term production does not include 
the manufacture of a controlled substance that is subsequently 
transformed (i.e., feedstock material) and as such the production 
phaseout is not applicable to ODS manufactured for that purpose.
    \20\ The adjustment adopted at the Meeting of the Parties in 
November 2018 included an essential use provision as well as the 
addition of two niche applications under the 0.5 percent cap. In 
this action, the EPA is making revisions to its regulations to 
address the addition of fire suppression. This rule does not take 
any action with regard to the other elements of the adjustment.
    \21\ Decision XXX/2 and Annex I of the ``Compilation of 
decisions adopted by the parties,'' adjust Article 2F of the 
Montreal Protocol.
    \22\ The final meeting report from the 30th Meeting of the 
Parties and Decision XXX/2 adopting the adjustment are included in 
the docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is modifying 40 CFR 82.16(e)(2) to permit the import of 
HCFC-123 for servicing fire suppression equipment manufactured before 
January 1, 2020. While the modified 40 CFR 82.16(e)(2) identifies the 
permissible uses for which HCFC-123 may be imported, this regulatory 
provision does not govern the allocation of production allowances for 
HCFC-123. Section 82.16(e), which establishes limits on the production 
and import of HCFC-123 starting on January 1, 2020, provides that HCFC-
123 may not be produced or imported for any purposes other than the 
listed permissible uses. The revision adds ``use as a fire suppression 
streaming agent in equipment manufactured before January 1, 2020 and 
listed as acceptable for use or acceptable subject to narrowed use 
limits for nonresidential applications'' to the list of permissible 
uses. This revision allows for this additional use in the years 2020 
through 2029.
    The EPA is also adding a new paragraph after 40 CFR 82.15(g)(4) to 
ensure consistency with the change to 40 CFR 82.16(e)(2). Section 
82.15(g) establishes limits on the introduction into interstate 
commerce and use of certain HCFCs at certain dates in accordance with 
the worst-first approach discussed previously. Section 82.15(g)(4)(i) 
establishes limits that apply to many HCFCs including HCFC-123 and 
HCFC-124, effective January 1, 2015.\23\ The EPA is adding a new 
paragraph after 40 CFR 82.15(g)(4) that repeats the limits in 40 CFR 
82.15(g)(4)(i) to clarify the permissible uses of HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 
produced or imported after January 1, 2020. Consistent with the 
restrictions on production and import in the Montreal Protocol (as 
modified through the adjustment adopted in 2018) and 40 CFR 82.16, with 
regard to fire suppression, HCFC-123 produced or imported after January 
1, 2020, may only be used for servicing fire suppression equipment 
manufactured before January 1, 2020. Existing inventories of HCFC-123 
produced or imported prior to January 1, 2020, may continue to be used 
to manufacture and service new fire suppression equipment after January 
1, 2020. This change ensures that the regulations are clear and 
consistent between 40 CFR 82.15 and 82.16, and, as a practical matter, 
adds no additional limitations to those in 40 CFR 82.16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Section 82.15(g)(4)(i) applies to all HCFCs not governed by 
40 CFR 82.15(g)(1) through (3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the reasons described above, the Agency is taking final action 
to allow HCFC-123 to be used during the years 2020 through 2029 for 
servicing existing fire suppression equipment.

E. Revisions to Labeling Requirements

    To support compliance with the finalized regulations at 40 CFR 
82.16(e)(2), the EPA is revising the existing labeling requirements in 
40 CFR part 82, subpart E, to reflect the limited ability to use virgin 
HCFC-123 for fire suppression servicing. Labeling containers of fire 
suppression agent containing HCFC-123 should increase awareness among 
individuals servicing fire suppression equipment about the restriction 
on the use of virgin HCFC-123 use and support compliance. The EPA is 
finalizing two different labels--one for fire suppression agent 
composed of newly-imported HCFC-123, and one for fire suppression agent 
composed of reclaimed material or material imported prior to 2020. 
Together, these labels will ensure that users have enough information 
to determine which containers of fire suppression agent may be used in 
which equipment in order to comply with the revisions to the HCFC 
phaseout regulations. In response to comments from American Pacific, 
HARC, and The Alliance, the EPA is making minor modifications to the 
proposed labels.
(1) Background
    As discussed previously in this section, starting January 1, 2020, 
virgin HCFCs may be used only for limited purposes. With respect to 
fire suppression equipment, HCFCs imported or produced on or after 
January 1, 2020, can be used only to service fire suppression equipment 
manufactured before January 1, 2020. HCFCs imported on or after January 
1, 2020, cannot be used to manufacture new equipment or to service 
equipment manufactured after January 1, 2020. Only HCFCs that are 
reclaimed or were imported prior to 2020 may be used for those 
purposes.
    The only HCFC used in a fire suppression agent is HCFC-123, sold as 
part of a blend under the name Halotron[supreg] I. Clean agents like 
Halotron[supreg] I do not leave a residue, and are used in applications 
such as data centers, clean rooms, and aircraft where it will not 
damage high-value or life-saving equipment, thereby minimizing economic 
damages from a fire (e.g., shorter equipment downtime or lower costs to 
repair). There are three main fire suppression streaming end uses for 
which clean agents are used in the United States: (1) Hand-held 
portables; (2) 150-pound wheeled units; and (3) Aircraft Rescue and 
Fire Fighting (ARFF) vehicles.
    As per the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and 
Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations at 49 CFR 180.250, all 
portable fire extinguishers must be maintained in a fully charged 
operable condition and undergo hydrostatic testing. NFPA is a codes and 
standards organization, accredited by the American National Standards 
Institute, that was established to minimize the risk and effects of 
fire by establishing criteria for building, processing, design, 
service, and installation around the world. According to NFPA criteria, 
fire extinguishers, which include portable hand-held devices and 
wheeled units, are recommended to undergo maintenance to ensure that an 
extinguisher will operate effectively and safely in the event of 
fire.\24\ Equipment should be recharged after being used to extinguish 
a fire, so that it may be usable again. Technicians who conduct 
hydrostatic testing, perform inspections, or recharge fire suppression 
equipment after a discharge may need additional information to aid in 
distinguishing between the permissible uses of specific containers of 
Halotron[supreg] I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ National Fire Protection Association. (2018) ``Standards 
for Portable Fire Extinguishers'' available at: https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given that section 611 of the CAA already requires the labeling of 
containers of ODS, including Halotron[supreg] I, the Agency proposed 
modifying the label to support compliance with the section 605 
requirement. Congress recognized that labeling requirements may be 
needed to effectively implement the phaseout of ODS. In 1993, the EPA 
established the labeling requirements for both class I and class II 
substances in 40 CFR part 82, subpart E (see 58 FR 8136, February 11, 
1993). Containers in which ODS are stored or transported must bear a 
clearly legible and conspicuous warning label that can be read by 
consumers before they can be introduced into interstate commerce. 
Section 611 of the CAA provides specific language for the label: 
``Warning: Contains [insert name of substance], a substance that harms 
public health and environment by destroying ozone in the upper 
atmosphere.'' This is reflected in the implementing regulations at 40 
CFR 82.106. According to section 611, the label must be ``clearly 
legible and conspicuous.'' Labels generally should

[[Page 15271]]

be within the principal display panel, the warning statement should be 
in sharp contrast to any background upon which it appears, and if there 
is any outer package for the container (e.g., cylinder, ISO tank, or 
other container), labels should be on the outside packaging. Specific 
requirements on the size, text, and location of the label are provided 
in 40 CFR 82.106 through 82.110. Labeling of products manufactured with 
or containing HCFCs has been required under section 611 since 2015, and 
the EPA has not seen a movement away from these fire suppression agents 
due to that labeling requirements. Based on this experience, the EPA 
does not expect additional text being added to the label to cause a 
movement away from HCFC-123 based fire suppression agents.
    In revising the labeling requirements, the EPA is relying on 
authority under section 605(c) of the CAA to issue regulations phasing 
out the production and consumption and restricting the use of class II 
substances that may be needed for compliance. Since HCFC-123 may be 
used both to manufacture new fire suppression equipment, which can only 
be done with HCFC-123 imported prior to January 1, 2020 or reclaimed/
recycled material, and to service existing equipment, the EPA 
identified modified labeling as the lowest cost option to ensure that 
newly-produced HCFC-123 only be used to service existing equipment.
    Specifically, the EPA proposed to require the following text be 
added to the label for containers of fire suppression agent containing 
HCFC-123 imported on or after January 1, 2020: ``Do not use to service 
equipment manufactured on or after January 1, 2020.'' The Agency also 
took comment on whether to modify the label on material containing 
HCFC-123 imported prior to January 1, 2020, or that is recycled/
reclaimed to clarify for individuals servicing fire suppression 
equipment that all uses are allowed. Specifically, the EPA proposed the 
following second sentence could be added to the existing label for 
containers of Halotron[supreg] I made with recycled/reclaimed HCFC-123 
or HCFC-123 imported before 2020 that reads ``Not restricted to use in 
servicing pre-2020 equipment.''
    In addition to knowing whether containers contain recycled/
reclaimed HCFC-123 or HCFC-123 imported before 2020 versus virgin HCFC-
123, users will need to be able to know the date of manufacture of fire 
suppression equipment. They will need to be able to distinguish fire 
suppression agents that may be used only for servicing equipment 
manufactured before January 1, 2020 from fire suppression agents that 
may be used for manufacturing new equipment or servicing equipment 
regardless of the date of manufacture. The Agency sought comment on 
these points and others.
(2) Summary of and Response to Comments
    American Pacific, HARC, and The Alliance support labels on all 
containers of Halotron[supreg] I. Both American Pacific and HARC 
suggest the language on the label for virgin or newly imported HCFC-123 
containers should be more positive than the proposed language. American 
Pacific suggests the label read ``Use only for recharge of equipment 
manufactured before January 1, 2020.'' American Pacific and HARC are 
also supportive of an additional label for reclaimed products and 
American Pacific suggests the additional label should read ``Can be 
used for all Halotron[supreg] I new production and all recharge 
activities.'' Commenters confirmed that users should be able to 
identify the date of equipment manufacture using existing methods as is 
the case with refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment. However, 
without additional labeling of containers of fire suppression agents 
that contain HCFC-123, it may not be possible for users to distinguish 
containers that may only be used to service fire suppression equipment 
manufactured before January 1, 2020, from other containers.
    In response to the comments received, the EPA concludes that 
modifications to the existing label language are necessary to ensure 
that users have enough information to determine which containers of 
fire suppression agent may be used in which equipment, in order to 
comply with the regulatory revisions described in this rule. Therefore, 
the EPA is finalizing labeling requirements for containers of fire 
suppression agent containing HCFC-123 with modifications to the 
language proposed. For containers with virgin HCFC-123 imported on or 
after January 1, 2020, the Agency is requiring the following label: 
``WARNING: Contains [insert name of substance], a substance which harms 
public health and environment by destroying ozone in the upper 
atmosphere. Use only for recharge of equipment manufactured before 
January 1, 2020.''
    For fire suppression agents that are recycled/reclaimed or imported 
prior to January 1, 2020, the Agency is finalizing the following label: 
``WARNING: Contains [insert name of substance], a substance which harms 
public health and environment by destroying ozone in the upper 
atmosphere. For use in any equipment.'' The statement, ``For use in any 
equipment'' conveys the same meaning as the text provided by American 
Pacific (``Can be used for all Halotron[supreg] I new production and 
all recharge activities'') but is simpler, avoids mentioning a patented 
product, and is analogous to the label for newly-imported material. It 
clarifies for the user that HCFC-123 that was imported prior to January 
1, 2020, or that is recycled/reclaimed can be used for either the 
manufacture of new equipment or for servicing existing and new 
equipment. The Agency is modifying the required label at 40 CFR 82.106 
accordingly.
    The EPA also took comment on whether the manufacturer of 
Halotron[supreg] I can designate specific containers for servicing 
existing equipment, whether multiple containers would create a burden 
for industry, and whether technicians would be able to locate 
manufacture dates on fire suppression equipment. American Pacific 
states it will establish a second product identification for the 
Halotron[supreg] I that is manufactured with newly-imported HCFC-123 
imported after January 1, 2020. The name of this product will be 
``Halotron[supreg] I Recharge Only for Equipment Made Before 1-1-20.'' 
American Pacific states that the Halotron[supreg] I container will be 
labeled prominently with multiple distinctive large yellow or 
equivalent striping that is in contrast to the current standard 
Halotron[supreg] I container, which has two green stripes. American 
Pacific notes the standard bulk container will continue to be 
manufactured using newly-imported HCFC-123 imported before January 1, 
2020, or with recycled/reclaimed HCFC-123. Both American Pacific and 
HARC assert that the maintenance of two differently labeled containers 
will not result in a burden on the industry. The EPA appreciates the 
steps American Pacific intends to take to ensure the proper use of 
HCFC-123.
    American Pacific and HARC provided comments on the EPA's intended 
approach to assist technicians with identifying which container to use 
for servicing fire suppression equipment and outreach. For servicing 
ARFF vehicles, the EPA explained how to identify that information in 
the proposal for this rulemaking and recommends that technicians 
inspect the manufactured date on the vehicle. American Pacific states 
that the methods for identifying the year of manufacture of ARFF 
vehicles is accurate and notes that manufacturers report the year of 
manufacture as a ten-

[[Page 15272]]

digit VIN on the Information Data plates, which are typically located 
on the floor, dashboard, or door jamb on the driver's side in ARFF 
vehicles. American Pacific states that they plan to highlight the 
distinction between the two products in updated filling/maintenance 
guidance manuals that provide sales materials for ARFF Vehicle original 
equipment manufacturers and airports users.
    For fire extinguishers, American Pacific states the EPA accurately 
described the method for identifying the date of manufacture in the 
proposal for this rulemaking. American Pacific notes that historically, 
however, some of the UL listed fire extinguishers were not approved by 
the DOT, which was referred to as ``309 exempt,'' but all extinguisher 
labels as per the UL follow-up listing requirements will show a year of 
manufacture. HARC also supports the EPA's intention to develop outreach 
material with the final rule and is interested in working with the EPA 
to help develop and distribute such material. The EPA is appreciative 
of the outreach efforts American Pacific intends to pursue and is 
appreciative of the clarification for ARFF vehicles and fire 
extinguisher date of manufacture. The EPA intends to work with 
stakeholders to develop educational materials and conduct outreach to 
technicians, distributors, and service providers.

F. Allocation of HCFC-124 Production and Consumption Allowances

    The Agency received two supportive comments and one comment opposed 
to allocations for HCFCs generally. Based on comments received on the 
proposed allocation amount for HCFC-124 and the Agency's analysis, the 
EPA is finalizing HCFC-124 production and consumption allowances in the 
years 2020 through 2029 as proposed.
    As noted in the 2019 Final Servicing Tail Report, HCFC-124 
consumption was approximately 250 MT per year between 2012 and 2017 and 
reclamation was minimal. More recent sales data from the California Air 
Resources Board, discussions with industry, and annual consumption and 
production data indicate that demand for HCFC-124 is between 100 and 
200 MT. As explained in the previous discussion about HCFC-123 
allowance allocations, providing HCFC-124 allowances significantly in 
excess of demand would not foster a smooth and orderly transition. 
Thus, the EPA proposed to allocate 200 MT for the first three years and 
then gradually decrease the allocation over the next seven years by an 
equal amount each year.
    National Refrigerants and an anonymous commenter support the 
proposed allocation of HCFC-124. The anonymous commenter states that 
Alternative 2 in the proposal is inconsistent with the gradual decrease 
in volume over the phase out period and may prevent the establishment 
of sufficient volume of reclaimed material to serve remaining servicing 
needs post-2030, as described in the 2019 Draft Servicing Tail Report.
    The EPA responds that it agrees that reducing the allocation 
gradually is the appropriate choice so that equipment owners have time 
to transition to alternatives and/or develop relationships to rely on 
recycled and/or reclaimed HCFC-124.The EPA is finalizing the allocation 
for consumption and production of HCFC-124 at 40 CFR 82.16(a) as 
proposed. As stated previously, the Agency's goal is to ensure that 
servicing needs can be met, while also encouraging recovery and reuse 
and transition to alternatives. Providing consistent allocations for 
the first three years will assist in establishing an inventory of HCFC-
124 to be used for servicing throughout the allocation period and past 
the phaseout date for the expected lifetimes of all existing equipment. 
The EPA does not want to strand existing equipment because of an 
inadequate supply of HCFC-124. This allocation supports this goal 
because it accounts for allowed end uses of HCFC-124 that may not be 
captured by the Vintaging Model (e.g. use of niche refrigerant blends 
containing HCFC-124 to service equipment manufactured before 2020). 
Regarding the comment that allowances are not needed, the Agency 
references the previous discussion in this section under the HCFC-123 
allocation, as similar considerations apply for HCFC-124. In addition, 
an HCFC-124 allocation is necessary because there is minimal 
reclamation of HCFC-124. This allocation level is within the limit 
established by the CAA and Montreal Protocol and will decrease over 
time to foster transition to alternatives prior to the January 1, 2030 
phaseout date.

G. Changes to Transfers of Allowance Provisions in 40 CFR 82.23

    The EPA is explicitly prohibiting calendar-year inter-pollutant 
transfers of HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 to phased-out HCFCs. The Alliance 
comment is supportive of limiting inter-pollutant transfers, and the 
EPA is finalizing the provision as proposed.
    Under section 607 of the CAA, the EPA has issued regulations at 40 
CFR 82.23 which provide for both inter-pollutant and inter-company 
transfers of allowances for class II ODS under certain conditions. In 
an inter-pollutant transfer, an allowance holder converts allowances 
for one class II ODS into allowances for another class II ODS (40 CFR 
82.23(b)). The EPA is finalizing changes in 40 CFR 82.23(b) to ensure 
clarity for the regulated community. The change is intended to minimize 
confusion and reduce the likelihood that an allowance holder will 
mistakenly seek an inter-pollutant transfer of HCFC-123 or HCFC-124 
allowances to phased-out HCFCs such as HCFC-22. This change does not 
have a practical effect on the ability of allowance holders to legally 
produce or import phased-out ODS given the prohibition in 40 CFR 82.16. 
Inter-pollutant transfers between HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 also may 
continue so long as the newly produced or imported HCFC-123 and HCFC-
124 are for an allowed use, such as for servicing refrigeration and 
air-conditioning appliances manufactured before January 1, 2020.
    The Alliance commented that they support the EPA's proposal to 
explicitly prohibit transfers into ODS that are already phased out. 
Given the comment and the fact that the EPA received several inquiries 
prior to this rulemaking about whether inter-pollutant transfers from 
HCFC-123 or HCFC-124 to HCFC-22 will be allowed after the phaseout of 
HCFC-22, the EPA is finalizing the proposed change to make clear that 
calendar-year inter-pollutant transfers of HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 to 
phased-out HCFCs are prohibited.

H. Changes to Import Requirements

    Under sections 604, 605, and 606 of the CAA, the EPA restricts the 
import of ODS consistent with both the CAA and the Montreal Protocol. 
As discussed previously in Section II of this document, importing 
virgin ODS requires the importer to expend consumption allowances. By 
controlling the number of allowances and knowing who holds those 
allowances, the EPA ensures that the United States meets its phaseout 
obligations. Used ODS \25\ can be imported without consumption 
allowances, and generally without use restrictions, if certain 
conditions are satisfied. Imports of used ODS are regulated under 40 
CFR 82.13(g)(2) and (3) (for imports of used class I substances) and 40 
CFR 82.24(c)(3) and

[[Page 15273]]

(4) (for imports of used class II substances).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Used ODS have been recovered from their intended use 
systems (e.g., refrigeration and AC equipment) and may include 
controlled substances that have been, or may be subsequently, 
recycled or reclaimed. See 40 CFR 82.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA proposed and is finalizing a number of changes to update 
the data collection requirements related to the import of ODS, as 
described in further detail below. Such changes require collection of 
additional information when the EPA considers petitions to import used 
ODS to verify whether the material has been previously used. Other 
changes remove data elements that the EPA no longer needs. The EPA is 
also finalizing a procedure for imports of both used and virgin ODS 
when they are imported for destruction, exempting aircraft bottles 
containing halon 1211 imported for hydrostatic testing from the 
petition process, and finalizing as proposed the prohibition on the 
sale of illegally imported ODS.
    Because some of these regulatory revisions relate to the petitions 
process for imports of used ODS, some background on the petitions 
process under the regulations that were in place prior to this 
rulemaking may provide useful context. Under that process, anyone 
wanting to import used ODS must submit a petition to the Agency, and 
the EPA must provide a ``non-objection notice'' approving the import 
for it to proceed. The petition to import a used ODS must contain 
certain information, which the EPA uses to verify whether the ODS is 
used. Required information includes: A description of the previous use 
of the substance; the identity of source facilities from which the 
material was recovered; a contact person at each source facility; the 
name, make, and model number of the equipment from which the material 
was recovered at each source facility; a best estimate of when the 
material was removed; and an export license from the appropriate 
government agency from the country of export (see 40 CFR 82.13(g)(2) 
and 82.24(c)(3)). After review, the EPA responds to the petition by 
issuing either a ``non-objection notice,'' which allows the import to 
proceed, or an ``objection notice,'' which has the effect of 
prohibiting the import because a non-objection notice is required for 
the lawful import of such material.
    The EPA established the petition process to import used class I ODS 
(under sections 603 and 604 of the CAA) in 1998 (see 63 FR 41626, 
August 4, 1998) and in 2003 (see 68 FR 2819, January 21, 2003) for 
class II ODS (under sections 603 and 605 of the CAA) given concern that 
some importers were circumventing the production and import controls by 
importing virgin class I and class II substances that had been 
intentionally mislabeled as used. Sections 604, 605, and 606 of the CAA 
provide statutory authority for controlling the import of ODS, 
including the petition process. Section 603 of the CAA requires 
reporting of the amount of ODS imported on a quarterly basis or on a 
basis determined by the Administrator. To the extent that these 
regulatory revisions finalized in this action involve recordkeeping and 
reporting of information, the EPA also relies upon its authority under 
section 114 of the CAA, which authorizes the EPA to require 
recordkeeping and reporting in carrying out any provision of the CAA 
(with certain exceptions that do not apply here).
    The petition process has generally been effective at providing 
information that allows the EPA to verify that ODS are used before they 
are imported, and accordingly, for many aspects of the existing 
process, the Agency did not propose and is not finalizing any changes 
in this rulemaking. However, over years of implementation, the EPA has 
identified potential areas for improvement. These include the fact that 
the existing requirements for detailed source information are often 
difficult to satisfy if the imported material comes from a halon bank, 
i.e., a physical facility where halon recovered from different sources 
is aggregated. Much of this halon was sent to the banks with limited or 
no records of its origins or use. Additionally, current regulations 
exempted only halon 1301 aircraft bottles from the petition process for 
hydrostatic testing, yet aircraft bottles containing halon 1211 are 
also imported for such testing and importers must petition the Agency 
and receive a non-objection notice for those bottles under the existing 
process. The petition process also did not distinguish imports of used 
ODS that are intended to be destroyed from imports that are intended to 
be reclaimed for continued use, even though the Agency recognizes that 
the verification requirements do not need to be as rigorous when the 
ODS are to be destroyed. Further, the existing regulations did not 
provide a specific mechanism to pre-approve the import of virgin 
material for destruction, resulting in delays at the port of entry 
while the EPA verified the shipment. In addition, the EPA remains 
concerned about the potential for illegal import of ODS and wanted to 
take steps to strengthen the Agency's ability to enforce the phaseout 
of ODS. To address these and other issues, the EPA proposed and is now 
finalizing revisions to the regulations for imports, as described in 
the following sections.
i. Changes to the Petition Process To Import Used ODS for Reuse in 40 
CFR 82.13 and 82.24
    The EPA proposed changes to the petition process that would 
generally reduce burden on importers while still allowing the Agency to 
verify that only used material is being imported. Of particular note, 
the Agency proposed to: (1) Reduce the information requirements when 
importing class I ODS \26\ from a ``bank'' so long as an official 
letter is provided from the appropriate government agency in that 
country where the material is stored that attests that a class I 
substance is ``used''; (2) allow submission of an application for an 
export license in lieu of the license itself; (3) authorize the Agency 
to request additional information when additional verification is 
needed before issuing a non-objection notice, and (4) provide 
flexibility for the timing of import.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ The EPA did not propose similar changes for class II ODS 
given the production phaseout for these substances is still 
underway.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In soliciting comments on the proposal, the Agency was particularly 
interested in whether streamlining the petition process, including to 
facilitate imports of material from banks for class I ODS, in 
particular halon, would affect compliance with the prohibition on 
import of virgin ODS. The EPA welcomed suggestions from stakeholders on 
how the petition process could be streamlined while ensuring 
compliance. The Agency received comments on the definition of ``banks'' 
and whether the proposed flexibilities should be restricted to halon, 
the requirement to provide an export license, extending the reduced 
information requirements to class II substances, the possibility that 
the EPA might request purity information in considering a petition, the 
import of used HFCs containing trace quantities of ODS, and the timing 
of imports after a non-objection notice has been issued.
    Taking into account the comments received, the EPA is finalizing 
changes to the petition process that will meet the Agency's goals of 
reducing the burden on importers while continuing to provide mechanisms 
to verify that the material being imported is used. As described in 
greater detail below and based on the comments received, the EPA is 
finalizing two changes to what it proposed. First, the Agency is 
narrowing the definition of ``bank'' which as proposed encompassed all 
ODS, though only used in reference to class I ODS, to ``halon bank.'' 
Second, the Agency is allowing not only an application for an export 
license in lieu

[[Page 15274]]

of the license itself, as was proposed, but also an official 
communication from the appropriate government agency in the country of 
export. For the following changes, the EPA received no adverse comments 
and is finalizing the proposed revisions because the Agency concludes 
that the revisions are warranted based on the rationale articulated in 
the proposal and in this document: (1) Requiring that petitions include 
email addresses in contact information (while removing the requirement 
to provide fax numbers) and commodity codes for the material, and (2) 
providing one year from the date stamped on a non-objection notice for 
import to occur. In general, the EPA anticipates these changes will 
increase the availability of used ODS in the United States and thus 
help to provide a greater supply of used material for servicing 
existing equipment, which might otherwise be retired before the end of 
its useful life.
    With respect to the proposal to remove the requirement for some 
source information for class I substances stored in either a national 
government bank or a privately-operated bank authorized by a national 
government with the submission of an official letter from the 
appropriate government agency verifying that the class I substances are 
in fact used, the EPA received comments from Hudson and National 
Refrigerants in support of the proposal. In contrast, the Halon 
Recovery Corporation (HRC), a non-profit trade association for halon 
users, and an anonymous commenter suggest narrowing the exemption to 
only halon banks rather than all class I ODS. HRC notes that the import 
petition process has been structured around the refrigeration and air-
conditioning sector, and as such, these requirements have been 
difficult for halon recyclers to meet. Banks do not typically have the 
complete information required by the EPA's petition process, especially 
since the material may have been recovered decades ago, when records of 
source and use were not kept. HRC states that, unlike CFCs, there is a 
large installed base of fire suppression equipment that requires future 
servicing and retrofitting that equipment to use alternatives may not 
always be feasible. HRC also notes that it is aware of only a few 
enforcement actions taken by the Agency for the illegal importation of 
halons. The anonymous commenter states their concern for reducing 
information requirements in a petition to import used class I 
substances is due to the potential for misuse, which would be contrary 
to the Agency's effort to prohibit sale of illegally imported 
controlled substances. The commenter suggests a change may be needed 
for halon, as there is a large installed base that may require future 
servicing, and since retrofitting that equipment for the use of 
alternative substances may not be feasible, but there is not the same 
need or demand for other class I substances. The commenter advises that 
changes should be specific to halon, and the Agency should maintain the 
existing requirements for other class I substances.
    While a couple of commenters were supportive of finalizing the 
revisions as proposed, due to concerns other commenters raised about 
the potential for illegal imports of class I ODS, the EPA is finalizing 
provisions that are more limited than those proposed by finalizing the 
definition of ``halon bank'' in 40 CFR 82.3 (rather than ``bank'') and 
restricting the provisions in 40 CFR 82.13(g)(2)(iii) and (xv) to 
material from a ``halon bank.'' In light of the recently discovered 
unexpected emissions of CFC-11 measured in the atmosphere \27\ and 
concern from commenters regarding potential for misuse of the petition 
process, the Agency is finalizing revisions that are narrower than the 
proposal and is only providing this flexibility for halon banks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ For more information, see the discussion in section III.J.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's decision is based in part on the need for used halons 
exceeding the need for other used class I ODS. The Montreal Protocol's 
Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) issued a report in 
September 2018, available in the docket, noting continued demand for 
halons, in particular for servicing fire suppression equipment for 
civilian aviation.\28\ Civil aircraft will continue to need halon to 
meet fire protection requirements for lavatory bottles, handheld 
extinguishers, engine nacelles, auxiliary power units, and cargo 
compartments \29\ until there is a transition to alternatives for all 
applications on new aircraft as well as to service the civil aircraft 
fleet. The EPA agrees with the comment that there is a large installed 
base of fire suppression equipment that requires future servicing and 
retrofitting that equipment to use alternatives may not always be 
feasible, and this point supports its decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ UNEP. (2018) Montreal Protocol on Substances on Substances 
that Deplete the Ozone Layer. Report of the Technology and Economic 
Assessment Panel. September 2018 Volume 2 Decision XXIX/8 on the 
Future Availability of Halons and their Alternatives; pg. 1-32. 
Available at: https://ozone.unep.org/index.php.
    \29\ FAA (2004). ``FAA Halon ARC Final Report Findings & 
Recommendations'' Halon Replacement Aviation Rulemaking Committee; 
pg. 1-49. Available at: https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/documents/index.cfm/committee/browse/committeeID/397.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since production and consumption of halons were phased out in the 
United States and other non-Article 5 countries in 1994, many 
countries, organizations, and private sector companies established 
halon banks, which are physical locations where previously-used and 
recovered halons are aggregated from different sources and stored.\30\ 
The EPA agrees with the comment that banks do not typically have the 
complete information required by the EPA's petition process. When a 
used ODS is imported for reuse under the existing process, the import 
petition must contain information about the used ODS including contact 
information from each source facility from which the material was 
recovered and the name, make, and model number of the equipment from 
which the material was recovered. Petitioners sourcing used ODS from 
banks, therefore, rarely have enough records to provide all the 
information required in the petition process, and as a result the 
petitions are subject to denial. In considering these comments, the 
Agency recognizes that providing increased flexibility for halons, 
while still allowing the Agency to verify that only used material is 
being imported, allows for halon to be more easily sourced from 
overseas banks, increasing halon available to service aircraft, oil and 
gas facilities, and other fire suppression applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Halons were phased out in Article 5 countries in 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To provide further response to the comment expressing concern that 
reducing the requirements for import petitions for used ODS could lead 
to potential misuse of the petition process, the Agency notes that it 
will continue to be able to request additional information from 
petitioners sourcing halon from banks. For instance, the Agency may 
request additional information on whether the country where the halon 
bank is located has production of halon for feedstock use or stockpiles 
of virgin halon. If petitioners fail to respond to requests from the 
Agency for additional information, the EPA may issue an objection 
notice on that basis, as clarified in revisions to 40 CFR 
82.13(g)(3)(i)(A) finalized in this rulemaking.
    HRC also commented that restricting this relief to government banks 
or banks authorized by a national government unnecessarily limits its 
effectiveness. HRC states that national government ODS banks are not 
usually a source for

[[Page 15275]]

halons for civilian uses because they are designated for military use, 
and many national governments do not ``authorize'' privately-operated 
banks or reclamation facilities. HRC suggests the EPA define bank as 
``a facility run by a national government or privately run that 
collects and stores previously-recovered ozone-depleting substances for 
reuse at a later date.''
    The EPA disagrees with the comment that the Agency amend the 
definition of ``halon bank'' to include privately-run banks regardless 
of whether they are government authorized. While the EPA supports the 
notion of providing more flexibility for imports of used halon to meet 
ongoing demand for halon, the Agency does not have sufficient 
information about the nature of such banks to determine whether or not 
such an expansion is appropriate at this time. In particular, the 
Agency would need to further consider whether it is possible to provide 
such flexibility while ensuring that doing so does not create an avenue 
for illegal imports of virgin halon into the United States. This is 
particularly important given the existence of stockpiles of virgin 
halon, for example halon 1211,\31\ and the ongoing production of halon 
for use as a feedstock.\32\ The Agency may consider if there are ways 
to establish such flexibility while ensuring compliance with the CAA 
and Montreal Protocol and may decide that it is appropriate to propose 
additional changes in a future rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ UNEP (2014). TEAP Report of the Halons Technical Options 
Committee Vol. 3 2014 Supplementary Report #2 Global Halon 1211, 
1301, and 2402 Banking. Available at https://ozone.unep.org/sites/default/files/2019-05/HTOC%202014%20Supplementary%20Report2%20-%20Global%20Halon%201211%201301%20and%202402%20Banking.pdf.
    \32\ UNEP (2018). TEAP 2018 Assessment Report. Available at 
http://conf.montreal-protocol.org/meeting/oewg/oewg-41/presession/Background-Documents/TEAP_2018_Assessment_Report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is thus revising the regulations at 40 CFR 82.3 to add a 
definition for ``halon bank'' to mean a facility run by a national 
government or privately run and authorized by a national government 
that collects and stores previously-recovered halon for reuse at a 
later date. As described in 40 CFR 82.13(g)(2)(iii) and (xv), if used 
halon is stored in a halon bank, the petitioner need not provide 
certain source information, though the petitioner should provide it if 
available so as to better allow the EPA to verify that the halon is 
used. The petitioner must indicate that the halon is from a halon bank 
by providing an official letter from the appropriate government agency 
in the country where the material is stored indicating that the halon 
is used and that the halon bank is authorized to collect used halon. 
The letter may also provide any additional information available to 
help demonstrate that the halon is used. Providing this official 
letter, does not mean that the EPA will automatically approve the 
petition as the EPA retains the right to request additional information 
and/or issue an objection notice if the information is insufficient.
    With regards to the petition process for used ODS more generally 
(including petitions for used halons from halon banks), the EPA is 
finalizing as proposed a provision stating that the Agency may request 
other information to verify substances are used before issuing a non-
objection notice. This information could include, but is not limited 
to: Photos of each unit that contained the used ODS, with serial 
numbers visible; photos of a representative sample of the cylinders, 
with serial numbers visible; a description of the facility from which 
the used ODS originates, including information regarding what is 
produced at the facility, the location of the facility, and how long 
the facility has been in the location; a description of each unit from 
which the used ODS originates; links to websites showing brochures, 
photographs, and/or descriptions of each different unit from which the 
used ODS originates; copies of the original, signed work orders 
authorizing collecting of the used ODS; copies of the paperwork showing 
that the company completed the work; copies of payment to the company 
that collected the used ODS for their services, with redactions for 
confidential or sensitive information such as bank account numbers; 
copies of business licenses from the government authorizing collection 
companies to do this type of work; and information on how transport 
will occur within the exporting country and to the United States. For 
used ODS from Europe, the EPA could request a screenshot of the 
European Commission export license; the name and contact information 
for the European Commission official who signed the Export License; and 
copies of all paperwork required for movement within the European 
Union, such as the ``Notification document for transboundary movement/
shipments of waste.''
    The EPA is not collecting all such information for each petition 
and thus is not revising the regulatory text to require that it be 
provided in every petition. However, the Agency does wish to provide 
notice to petitioners that it may request additional information to 
confirm that the ODS is used and, as proposed, is amending the 
regulations in this rulemaking at 40 CFR 82.13(g)(3)(i)(A) to make 
clear that failure to provide such information when requested would be 
grounds for issuing an objection notice.
    In response to a statement in the proposal that purity sampling 
might be among the information the Agency might request in considering 
a petition to import used ODS, the Agency received comments from HRC 
requesting that the EPA not request purity sampling of used ODS for 
import as a method of determining whether an ODS is new or used. The 
commenter states that requesting this information for halons would be 
ineffective and in the case of used system cylinders possibly 
dangerous. HRC describes how used halons are often imported in the 
original system cylinders (some of which can be 20 to 40 years old). 
These cylinders may have actuation methods that are explosive in nature 
as they are intended to release the contents of the cylinder in ten 
seconds or less. They also have pressures as high as 600 pounds per 
square inch and if actuated accidentally can be extremely dangerous. 
HRC states that there is no safe way to sample these cylinders for 
purity testing without completely emptying the contents of the 
cylinder. HRC acknowledges that halon stored in bulk tanks can be 
sampled and purity information could be provided but asserts that this 
would not be an effective method to distinguish between new and used 
halons because in some cases used halons are imported in bulk after 
being reclaimed to industry specifications, and purity sampling could 
result in these halons being deemed to be new when they are actually 
used.
    The Agency has considered the comments from HRC and agrees that 
requiring halon purity testing in some cases could unintentionally 
cause the inadvertent release of halons. As a result of the comments, 
the Agency now understands that purity sampling of halon held in bulk 
containers is almost always available and could be useful in limited 
situations in combination with other information to help verify the 
material is used. Therefore, the EPA intends to limit any purity 
testing requests to halon that is in bulk containers or in other 
situations where the purity testing should not result in unintended 
releases of halons.
    HRC also commented on the Agency's proposal to allow for an 
application for an export license in lieu of an actual

[[Page 15276]]

export license. The commenter states that some national governments do 
not provide such licenses and requests that the EPA remove the 
provision in 40 CFR 82.13(g)(2)(xii). For example, as noted in the 
proposal Canada, the largest exporter of used ODS to the United States, 
requires the EPA to approve the export before they issue an export 
license. As such, petitioners are only able to provide the submitted 
application for an export license with their petition. Considering 
this, as noted in the proposal, the Agency has worked with Canada to 
accept the submitted application in lieu of the export license. 
However, as HRC notes, there may be other countries that also require 
approval prior to export from the importing country such as a non-
objection notice.
    The EPA recognizes that some countries, including the United 
States, do not require or provide export licenses. However, most 
governments do provide some form of acknowledgement, such as a letter 
from a national ozone unit noting the ability to export or even an 
email acknowledgement. The Agency does not find it appropriate to 
remove all forms of acknowledgement from the exporting government in 
the petition process and disagrees with the suggestion to remove 40 CFR 
82.13(g)(2)(xii). An official communication from the government 
acknowledging the export helps ensure the petitioned amount is equal to 
or less than the amount that arrives at the United States port of 
entry. This process also allows for the government of the exporting 
country to evaluate the effects of the export on their own fire 
suppression sector and hold consultations ahead of concurring with the 
export. Therefore, the Agency is amending 40 CFR 82.13(g)(2) and 
82.24(c)(3) to allow importers of used class I and class II substances, 
respectively, to provide in lieu of an export license, as is required 
under the existing regulations, either an application for an export 
license or an official communication from the appropriate government 
agency. The option of providing an official communication is a change 
from the proposal, resulting from the information provided by the 
commenter highlighting for the EPA that some governments do not require 
or provide export licenses. As proposed, the EPA is also finalizing a 
requirement for an English translation of the export license 
application, export license, or official communication to facilitate 
the Agency's review.
    The Agency also received a comment from American Pacific, which 
states they could better meet the servicing demand for the HCFC-123-
based fire suppression agent Halotron[supreg] I if the Agency 
establishes a streamlined petition process for importing recycled HCFC-
123. American Pacific asserts that source requirements for class II 
substances in 40 CFR 82.24(c)(3)(iv) are disproportionally burdensome 
and hinder any recycled HCFC-123 import opportunity. Based on American 
Pacific's consultations with major recyclers and reclaimers of HCFC-
123, the commenter states that many reclaimers find the source 
information requirements to be extremely burdensome. In response to 
comments supporting waiving source information for class II substances, 
the EPA notes that it did not propose to relax the import petition 
requirements for class II ODS. The Agency concludes that it would not 
be appropriate to extend this exemption to class II substances at this 
time because of continued global production of these substances and 
thus the greater likelihood that virgin material may be illegally 
imported into the United States under the guise of being used. Source 
information requirements help to ensure that the imported substance is 
used by documenting for example the name, make, and model numbers of 
refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment from which the class II 
substance was removed. The Agency has consistently taken measures to 
avoid illegal imports of virgin ODS and has typically only considered 
relaxing any import requirements for used material after production and 
consumption phaseouts. The EPA may consider proposing to extend 
exemptions for source requirements in 40 CFR 82.24(c)(3)(iii) through 
(vi) for class II substances or otherwise providing flexibility for 
these requirements to make the process less burdensome in a subsequent 
rulemaking potentially closer to the global production and consumption 
phaseout for HCFCs.
    National Refrigerants suggests that the EPA include a provision to 
facilitate the import and reclamation of used HFCs that contain a trace 
amount of class I ODS. The EPA responds that establishing a process for 
importing used HFCs for reclamation is not necessary as no allowances 
are needed to import HFCs.\33\ In this circumstance, the importer would 
need to petition for the used ODS portion of the mixture. The EPA did 
not propose to establish a separate process for importing mixed gases 
that contain ODS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Reporting of HFC imports is required under other EPA 
regulatory requirements, see https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For other aspects of the proposed changes to the import petition 
process for used ODS, the EPA did not receive adverse comment. The EPA 
is finalizing those proposed changes to the petition process to ensure 
accuracy, speed review, and facilitate the import of used ODS, while 
maintaining requirements that help assure that the material being 
imported is used. In particular, the EPA is updating the requested 
contact information by requiring email addresses and removing fax 
numbers. The EPA is also requiring that petitioners provide the 
commodity code associated with the ODS to be imported. The commodity 
codes are classifications for goods and services traded among 
countries. This will match the Agency's other import and export 
requirements in 40 CFR 82.13(g) and (h) and 82.24(c) and (d) and help 
to ensure that the data are correctly entered in Customs and Border 
Protection's Automated Commercial Environment and International Trade 
Data System (ACE/ITDS).
    As proposed, the EPA is also updating the commodity codes for HCFC-
123 and HCFC-124 in appendix K. The U.S. International Trade Commission 
is responsible for periodically updating the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
of the United States Annotated (HTSA). The HTSA provides the applicable 
tariff rates and statistical categories for all merchandise imported 
into the United States. It is based on the international Harmonized 
System, the global system of nomenclature that is used to describe most 
world trade in goods. This action conforms the commodity codes for 
HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 in the appendix with those currently in effect 
and in use by the U.S. International Trade Commission.
    The existing regulations for petitions for imports of used material 
also require that if the imported substance is intended to be sold as a 
refrigerant, the petition must include contact information for the U.S. 
reclaimer who will bring the material to the standard required under 
section 608 of the CAA and 40 CFR part 82, subpart F,\34\ if it is not 
already reclaimed to those specifications. The EPA is finalizing its 
proposal to add ``EPA-certified'' to the description of reclamation 
facilities in the provisions containing this requirement, 40 CFR 
82.13(g)(2)(xiii) and 82.24(c)(3)(xiii). This will highlight

[[Page 15277]]

the existing expectation for petitions to import used material to be 
sold as a refrigerant that the reclamation facility that will receive 
the material in the United States must be EPA-certified.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ Clarifications to subpart F are being finalized in 40 CFR 
82.13(g)(2)(xiii) to match 40 CFR 82.24(b)(2)(xiii). This was not 
addressed in the proposal.
    \35\ The EPA's reclamation program is described at https://www.epa.gov/section608/stationary-refrigeration-refrigerant-reclamation-requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, the Agency is allowing flexibility for the timing of the 
import, which is particularly useful when the Agency issues non-
objection notices towards the end of the year. The EPA previously 
required the import to occur in the same control period (i.e., calendar 
year) that the non-objection notice was issued. However, this can 
result in petitioners postponing their requests until the start of the 
next year. To avoid that unnecessary delay, the EPA proposed to provide 
importers one year from the date stamped on the non-objection notice to 
import that shipment. The EPA received one comment, from HRC, in 
support of providing flexibility on the timing of imports. The 
commenter states that the requirement that the import occur in the same 
calendar year can cause logistical challenges. To avoid such delays and 
logistical problems, the EPA is finalizing this change as proposed.
ii. Changes to the Exemption for the Import Petitions Process for 
Hydrostatic Testing
    As noted above, the EPA proposed to exempt aircraft halon bottles 
containing halon 1211 from the import petitions process when being 
imported for hydrostatic testing. The proposal would allow the same 
exemption for aircraft halon bottles containing halon 1211 as already 
exists for halon 1301 aircraft halon bottles. The EPA received 
supportive comments on this proposal from The Alliance and HRC and no 
adverse comments; it also received comments suggesting that the 
exemption be extended to aircraft halon bottles imported for other 
purposes. For the reasons discussed below, the Agency is finalizing the 
changes as proposed.
    The existing regulations at 40 CFR 82.3 defined ``aircraft halon 
bottle'' \36\ as a vessel used as a component of an aircraft fire 
suppression system containing halon 1301. To facilitate the import and 
testing of more types of aircraft halon bottles for hydrostatic 
testing, the EPA is extending the definition of ``aircraft halon 
bottle'' in 40 CFR 82.3 to also include vessels containing halon 1211, 
as proposed. Because the existing regulations in 40 CFR 82.13(g)(2) 
exempt aircraft halon bottles that are imported for hydrostatic testing 
from the import petition process, revising this definition would extend 
this exemption to such vessels containing halon 1211. This exemption 
facilitates proper maintenance of bottles containing halon 1211 and 
allows transit and testing to occur more quickly for such bottles. 
Promoting proper maintenance of these additional fire suppression 
devices helps ensure the bottles operate correctly to extinguish fires 
on aircraft. Proper maintenance of the storage vessels also prevents 
the accidental emission of this high-ODP compound. The EPA notes that 
the exemption of imports of aircraft halon bottles containing halon 
1211 for hydrostatic testing only exempts them from the petition 
process. Recordkeeping and reporting are currently required, and will 
continue to be required, for the import and export of aircraft halon 
bottles. Importers of such bottles also still need to maintain import 
records, as set forth in 40 CFR 82.13(g)(1) and submit quarterly 
reports within 30 days of the end of the applicable quarter in 
accordance with 40 CFR 82.13(g)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ An aircraft halon bottle is considered a ``used controlled 
substance'' as defined in 40 CFR 82.3, which is a controlled 
substance that has been recovered from its intended use system (and 
may include controlled substances that have been, or may be 
subsequently, recycled or reclaimed). Halon is placed into aircraft 
halon bottles and the bottles are then inserted into a fire 
suppression system. When the system is dismantled or the bottles are 
removed from the system, the halon contained in the bottles is 
considered used since it was removed from the system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HRC comments that halon bottles supplied by aerospace original 
equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to service global aircraft fleets are 
sometimes imported into the United States for purposes other than 
hydrostatic testing (e.g., spares restocking, customer returns, etc.). 
HRC states that such additional purposes tend to be intermittent, 
involve limited quantities, and in most cases involve equipment that 
was originally exported from the United States by the aerospace OEM. As 
such, HRC states they should not be subject to the same level of 
scrutiny as other used ODS imports.
    The EPA is not making the revisions suggested in this comment as it 
is beyond the scope of this rulemaking and the EPA does not have enough 
information about restocking or customer returns of aircraft halon 
bottles to support such a change. For example, the EPA currently lacks 
information on what type of containers would be imported for restocking 
or customer returns. Controlled products as defined in 40 CFR 82.3, 
which include fire extinguishers, are exempt from the petitions process 
because they are not controlled substances, as defined in 40 CFR 82.3. 
Aircraft halon bottles are not considered controlled products because 
they do not function unless connected to the onboard fire suppression 
system. Rather they are components of larger fire suppression systems 
used on aircraft (see 74 FR 10185, March 10, 2009). The EPA also lacks 
information on how these vessels are currently being imported, such as 
whether the imports have historically been approved through the import 
petition process, what the quantity of aircraft halon bottles imported 
for this purpose might be, and the frequency of petitions by the 
aviation industry to determine the burden reduction opportunity. The 
EPA also lacks a description of restocking and customer returns and how 
this contributes to safety and maintenance of these aircraft halon 
bottles. All of this information would be useful in considering whether 
to consider proposing a change to the exemption for aircraft halon 
bottles in a future rulemaking.
iii. Imports for Destruction
    This portion of the document discusses two sets of changes to the 
import process for ODS specifically imported for destruction, which 
were proposed and are being finalized.\37\ First, the EPA is 
establishing a streamlined approach for importing used ODS for 
destruction called the Certification of Intent to Import ODS for 
Destruction. Second, the EPA is extending that approach to virgin ODS, 
as there was no existing mechanism defined in the regulations for the 
EPA to pre-approve import of virgin ODS for destruction. The EPA 
received three comments on its proposal to create this process for both 
used and virgin ODS. The Agency received supportive comments on a 
streamlined approach and extending the approach to virgin material, but 
one commenter expresses concern about the potential for illegal 
imports. After considering the comments, the Agency is finalizing many 
of these provisions as proposed and is also adding requirements to 
obtain more information on the chain of custody after ODS is imported 
under this process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ The EPA refers to the import of ODS intended to be 
destroyed in the United States throughout this document as ``imports 
for destruction.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ODS from decommissioned equipment, unwanted stockpiles, and 
mixtures that are contaminated and cannot be reclaimed are often 
imported into the United States for destruction. Facilitating the 
destruction of ODS is beneficial to the environment since it averts ODS 
emissions into the

[[Page 15278]]

atmosphere and thus supports the overarching goal of Title VI to 
protect stratospheric ozone. The Montreal Protocol's Scientific 
Assessment Panel estimated that capture and destruction of CFC, halon, 
and HCFC banks \38\ in 2015 could avoid 1.8 million ODP-weighted metric 
tons of future emissions through 2050 and return stratospheric chlorine 
levels at mid-latitudes to 1980 levels more than six years sooner than 
in the baseline scenario.\39\ The EPA recognizes that there is ongoing 
commercial demand for certain substances, as discussed earlier in this 
document with respect to halons and other ODS. Some ODS may, however, 
be unwanted and thus susceptible to release; this risk may be higher 
when they are stored in countries that do not have adequate capability 
to properly reclaim or destroy them. A process for the import of ODS 
for destruction helps facilitate the destruction of such ODS and 
reduces the risk of such releases. Destruction of unwanted ODS in the 
United States supports the ongoing availability of destruction options 
of ODS worldwide and may also generate revenue for domestic destruction 
facilities.\40\ More information on the destruction facilities that 
destroy ODS and their technologies is available in the report in the 
docket titled ``U.S. Destruction in the United States and Abroad.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ As used here, ``banks'' refers to the total ODS that have 
already been manufactured but not yet released to the atmosphere. 
This can include ODS contained within closed cell foams, installed 
in appliances, held in original containers, etc. This definition is 
broader than the definition of the term ``halon bank'' being 
finalized in this action.
    \39\ UNEP. (2014) Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2014 
World Meteorological Organization Global Ozone Research and 
Monitoring Project--Report No. 55 pg. 1-416. Available at: https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/assessments/ozone/2014/report.html.
    \40\ EPA. (2018) ``U.S. Destruction in the United States and 
Abroad'' pg. 1-63. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-03/documents/ods-destruction-in-the-us-and-abroad_feb2018.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the EPA's petition process for the import of 
used ODS is designed to allow the Agency to verify prior use of the 
material so that virgin ODS are not entering the United States under 
the pretense of being ``used.'' Under the existing regulations at 40 
CFR 82.13(g)(2) and 82.24(c)(4), anyone wishing to import used class I 
or class II ODS, respectively, for destruction must submit a petition 
providing the same information as for any other petition to import used 
ODS. It is then the obligation of the second-party destruction facility 
to provide a verification report to the importer or producer that the 
material was destroyed (40 CFR 82.13(k) and 82.24(e)). Importers are 
required to keep records on imports for destruction of ODS under 40 CFR 
82.13(g)(1) and 82.24(c)(2) and to submit quarterly reports, in 
accordance with 40 CFR 82.13(g)(4) and 82.24(c)(1). The regulations 
contain an exception to the prohibition on import of virgin ODS without 
consumption allowances in the case of imports for destruction but do 
not provide a specific process for such imports.
    To facilitate the importation of used ODS for destruction, the EPA 
proposed to create a new petition process for the import of used and 
virgin ODS for destruction, called a Certification of Intent to Import 
ODS for Destruction, in 40 CFR 82.13(g)(5) and 82.24(c)(6). Under this 
proposed process, the importer would submit the petition at least 30 
working days before the shipment's departure from the foreign port. 
After review, the EPA would send either a non-objection notice or an 
objection notice. The proposed period was shorter than the 
corresponding period for the import petition process, which is 40 
working days from departure, because the petition would contain less 
information for the EPA to review and verify. The proposal was based on 
the expectation that 30 working days is enough for the EPA to review 
the petition and that this timeframe will not impede the import. The 
Agency proposed to use the same objection notice conditions as in the 
existing petition process for importing used ODS for reuse, such as if 
the petition provides insufficient information or if it contains false 
or misleading information. The EPA also proposed to require that the 
petitioner submit a destruction verification 30 days after destruction 
under 40 CFR 82.13(g)(6) and 82.24(c)(7). The Agency is finalizing the 
supporting prohibitions in 40 CFR 82.4(j)(2) and 82.15(b)(3) to 
prohibit the import of ODS for destruction without having received a 
non-objection notice consistent with the new Certification of Intent to 
Import ODS for Destruction.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ The proposed regulatory text for 40 CFR 82.4(j)(2) and 
82.15(b)(3) included different proposed effective dates. The EPA is 
finalizing both changes effective 30 days after publication of the 
rule to harmonize these requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After considering the public comments received, as described below, 
the EPA is finalizing this process largely as proposed. The Agency is 
also making some changes to what was proposed based on its 
consideration of public comments. In general terms, this new process 
omits collecting the detailed source information that is required in 
import petitions, as that information is not necessary if the ODS is to 
be destroyed. Instead, it is more important for the EPA to collect 
information from the petitioner about the destruction. In particular, 
the Certification of Intent to Import ODS for Destruction finalized in 
this rulemaking does not include the following elements (which are 
included in the existing import petition process): information about 
all previous source facilities from which the ODS was recovered; a 
detailed description of the previous use at each source facility and a 
best estimate or documents indicating when the specific controlled 
substance was put into the equipment at each source facility; a list of 
the name, make and model number of the equipment from which the 
material was recovered at each source facility; contact information of 
all persons to whom the material was transferred or sold after it was 
recovered from the source facility; or a description of the intended 
use of the ODS.
    The EPA is omitting these information elements because they are 
collected for import petitions to verify that the material is used, and 
the Agency concludes it is not necessary to verify that ODS is used if 
it is being imported for destruction. Simplifying the information 
requirements decreases the regulatory burden on existing importers who 
followed the import petition process to import used ODS for 
destruction. In addition, the information requirements for petitions to 
import used ODS had the potential to hinder imports for destruction if 
petitioners were unable to provide all the necessary information. 
Certain elements, such as information about each piece of equipment or 
each source facility from which the controlled substance was removed, 
might have been particularly difficult for petitioners to provide 
because used controlled substances intended for disposal are often part 
of a mixture of chemical waste recovered from a variety of systems and 
detailed information pertaining to each system may not be available. 
Although the Certification of Intent to Import ODS for Destruction 
relaxes the information requirements for importing used ODS for 
destruction compared to the existing import petition process, the EPA 
concludes that this relaxation benefits the environment because 
companies wishing to import used ODS into the United States for 
destruction will be able to do so more easily, and therefore more used 
ODS may be destroyed. This is consistent with the overarching goal of 
Title VI to protect stratospheric ozone.

[[Page 15279]]

    To better ensure that the ODS is destroyed, the EPA is adding 
provisions 40 CFR 82.13(g)(9) and (10) and 82.24(c)(10) and (11) to 
require importers and intermediaries that aggregate ODS for destruction 
\42\ to keep certain records about the destruction of the ODS. In 
particular, the EPA is requiring that importers of ODS for destruction 
maintain: A copy of the certificate of intent to import for 
destruction; a copy of the non-objection notice; a copy of the export 
license, export license application, or official communication from the 
appropriate government agency; Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 
entry documents for the import that must include the commodity codes; 
records of that date, amount, and type of controlled substance sent for 
destruction per shipment; an invoice from the destruction facility 
verifying shipment was received; and a copy of the destruction 
verification. The EPA is requiring that intermediaries maintain: 
transactional records that include the name and address of the entity 
from whom they received the ODS and to whom they sent the ODS; records 
that include the date and quantity of controlled substances received 
and sent for destruction; and a copy of the destruction verification if 
they are the final aggregator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ The discussion of the requirements for intermediaries is 
included in the response to the comment received from ClimeCo which 
is discussed further below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is also extending the Certification of Intent to Import ODS 
for Destruction to imports of virgin ODS for destruction. While modeled 
in large part on the petition to import used ODS, there are also 
benefits to facilitating the import of virgin ODS for destruction. 
Virgin ODS that are to be destroyed may be imported without consumption 
allowances (see 40 CFR 82.4(d) and 82.15(b)). However, under existing 
regulations there was no established regulatory mechanism for the EPA 
to review and pre-approve those imports. As such, shipments may have 
been held at the port while the EPA determined whether the import is in 
fact bound for destruction. In some instances, proactive importers have 
petitioned the Agency to import virgin ODS for destruction and the EPA 
has allowed these imports on a case-by-case basis. However, the absence 
of an established regulatory mechanism for such approvals has created 
some uncertainty for these imports. Moreover, establishing regulatory 
requirements for such imports creates a mechanism to ensure that 
imports of virgin ODS for destruction are destroyed.
    Providing an established mechanism to import virgin ODS for 
destruction is beneficial to importers and the EPA. Having a 
transparent process that allows approval to occur before the shipment 
reaches the port facilitates such imports and reduces potential delays 
and costs associated with the prior approach to imports of virgin ODS 
for destruction, as well as providing more certainty as to which 
imports can proceed. In turn, this encourages imports of unwanted 
virgin ODS for destruction, potentially avoiding the emission of such 
ODS. As noted above, this is consistent with an overarching goal of 
Title VI, to protect stratospheric ozone. The extension also closes a 
gap in regulatory provisions for the import of virgin material for 
destruction. As discussed previously in this document, the EPA 
originally established the import petition process for used ODS to 
verify that virgin ODS was not being imported under the pretext of 
being used to circumvent the regulatory requirements for expending 
consumption allowances. In the same way, the EPA concludes that a 
mechanism is needed to verify that virgin ODS imported for destruction 
are destroyed and that claims of importing for destruction are not used 
to circumvent the requirement to expend consumption allowances. In 
addition, the EPA has historically used the petition process as a 
mechanism to approve imports of used material for destruction and has 
applied an analogous but simpler process to imports of virgin material 
for destruction on a case-by-case basis. Based on this experience and 
these common goals for imports of used and virgin ODS for destruction, 
the EPA concludes that having the same process for imports for 
destruction of both used and virgin ODS is both feasible and 
appropriate. Furthermore, establishing a consistent regulatory process 
for used and virgin ODS simplifies the administration of this approach 
because the same requirements generally apply regardless of the type of 
ODS to be imported for destruction. Thus, the EPA is finalizing the 
proposal to have the same requirements for both used and virgin ODS in 
this new process.
    The EPA is also revising the definitions of ``individual shipment'' 
and ``non-objection notice'' at 40 CFR 82.3, both of which previously 
referred only to the import of used material. As proposed, the EPA is 
amending these definitions by removing references to ``used'' 
controlled substances, so that ``individual shipment'' and a ``non-
objection notice'' may apply to shipments of virgin ODS imported for 
destruction under a Certification of Intent to Import for Destruction, 
as well as to shipments of used ODS.
    As for the import petitions process, the Agency is finalizing 
revisions that provide for flexibility for the timing of imports for 
destruction. In the previous petitions process, the EPA required the 
import to occur in the same control period (i.e., calendar year) that 
the non-objection notice was issued. The EPA is finalizing a provision 
that non-objection notices issued for the Certification of Intent to 
Import for Destruction allow a year from the date of the notice to 
import the material. Therefore, once a non-objection notice is issued, 
the person receiving the non-objection notice is permitted to import 
the individual shipment within a year of the date stamped on the non-
objection notice. For instance, if a non-objection letter is date-
stamped October 1, the import of that material could occur up to and 
including September 30 of the following year but not thereafter. This 
provides flexibility to imports for destruction that may not operate on 
a calendar year basis.
    As noted above, the EPA received three supportive comments for the 
portions of the proposed rule addressing the Certification of Intent to 
Import for Destruction. The Agency also received one comment suggesting 
changes to the proposed provisions. The first commenter suggesting 
changes to the proposal requests that the Agency require imports for 
destruction be sent directly to the destruction facility, instead of 
allowing for it to be sent to intermediaries. Specifically, ClimeCo, a 
company that assists in projects that destroy class I substances, 
states that several destruction facilities and offset project 
developers have imported ODS into the United States for destruction but 
have not shipped it directly to the destruction facility. They state 
that the ODS was shipped to intermediate facilities before being 
``bulked up,'' in other words aggregated with other ODS, and sent to a 
destruction facility. The commenter states this could create 
opportunities for bad actors to manipulate, re-direct, or re-sell the 
imported ODS. ClimeCo suggests that the EPA require the ODS entering 
the United States be shipped directly to a destruction facility without 
any intermediate handling, processing, or other activities.
    The EPA agrees that it is important to minimize the possibility 
that an ODS imported for destruction is diverted and sold illegally 
rather than being destroyed. The EPA notes that the importer has an 
obligation to ensure that

[[Page 15280]]

it identifies a destruction facility for all ODS imported for 
destruction, obtains a destruction verification once the destruction is 
complete, and submits that verification to the EPA. It is ultimately 
the importer's responsibility to ensure the imported ODS is destroyed 
in the required time frame, regardless of whether they engage an 
intermediate aggregator to facilitate the destruction. In light of 
these responsibilities, the EPA disagrees that it is necessary to 
prohibit intermediaries from aggregating ODS in a manner that 
facilitates destruction. However, after considering this comment, the 
EPA concludes that additional provisions are appropriate to address the 
concerns about the potential for material being diverted during the 
aggregation process. As discussed previously in this document and in 
the proposal, a mechanism is needed to verify that virgin ODS imported 
for destruction are destroyed and that claims of importing for 
destruction are not used to circumvent the requirement to expend 
consumption allowances and it also discussed the benefits of 
establishing the same process for imports of used and virgin ODS for 
destruction. (See 84 FR 41533, August 14, 2019). EPA is therefore 
requiring importers to provide in the Certification of Intent to Import 
ODS for Destruction the contact information of all persons who will 
aggregate ODS prior to it being sent to the destruction facility. Thus, 
the entire chain of custody from import to destruction must be known by 
the importer and the EPA prior to the EPA authorizing the import. 
Providing this information to the EPA helps the Agency track the chain 
of custody of imported ODS for destruction and ensure that it is 
destroyed. Providing this information is less burdensome to an importer 
than not allowing aggregation of imported ODS for destruction, as the 
commenter suggests. Thus, the EPA is finalizing provisions at 40 CFR 
82.13(g)(5) and (10) and 82.24(c)(6) and (11).
    To ensure accountability and allow for the Agency to verify, as 
needed, the material that intermediaries receive is transferred for 
destruction, the EPA is finalizing additional requirements in 40 CFR 
82.13(g)(10) and 82.24(c)(11). Intermediaries aggregating ODS after it 
is imported, but prior to destruction, must keep records of the name, 
address, date, and amount of imported ODS bound for destruction that 
they receive from another entity and transfer to another entity. These 
records could include sales or other transactional records already 
generated during the normal course of business, so long as they include 
the required information. Additionally, the intermediary must maintain 
a record of the destruction verification if they are the final 
intermediary to receive the ODS prior to destruction. These additional 
provisions are intended to address the concern raised in comments on 
the proposal about the potential for material being diverted during the 
aggregation process. Further, establishing mechanisms to ensure that 
key information from both importers and intermediaries is available to 
the EPA helps meet the Agency's ability to fully track the chain of 
custody of imported ODS for destruction and ensure that it is 
destroyed, consistent with the goals described in the proposal. The EPA 
concludes that these provisions combined will allow for the EPA to 
check compliance and determine whether ODS imported for destruction is 
actually destroyed, even if it is aggregated prior to destruction.
iv. Prohibiting the Sale of Illegal Imports
    The EPA proposed to prohibit the sale of illegal imports. The 
Agency received supportive comments on this proposal and no adverse 
comments. However, one commenter requested that the EPA prohibit the 
sale of disposable cylinders. For the reasons described in below, the 
Agency is finalizing the prohibition as proposed.
    Based on the EPA's experience with the CFC phaseout, the incentive 
to illegally import class II substances will continue to increase after 
the allocation for HCFC-22 reaches zero in 2020. HCFC-22 is the most 
widely used HCFC in the United States and the EPA anticipates continued 
demand for HCFC-22 beyond 2020. In addition, there continues to be risk 
of illegal imports of class I substances. To allow for better 
enforcement of these requirements, the EPA proposed to add to 40 CFR 
82.4(s) and 82.15(g)(8) an express prohibition against the sale or 
distribution, or offer for sale or distribution, of any class I or 
class II substance, respectively, that the seller knows, or has reason 
to know, was illegally imported into the United States.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ The EPA has previously issued restrictions on sale as a 
means for implementing restrictions on consumption. See, e.g., 40 
CFR 82.4(h) (``No person may sell in the U.S. any Class I controlled 
substance produced explicitly for export to an Article 5 country''); 
82.4(n)(2) (``Any person selling unused class I controlled 
substances produced or imported under authority of essential-use 
allowances or the essential-use exemption for uses other than an 
essential-use is in violation of this subpart.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In finalizing this proposal, the EPA is relying primarily on its 
authority under sections 604(c) and 605(c) of the CAA. Section 604(c) 
directs the Administrator to promulgate regulations to ``insure that 
the consumption of class I substances in the United States is phased 
out and terminated'' in accordance with the applicable schedules for 
the phaseout and termination of production of class I substances under 
the CAA. Similarly, section 605(c) directs the Administrator to 
promulgate regulations to ``insure that the consumption of class II 
substances in the United States is phased out and terminated'' in 
accordance with the applicable schedules for the phaseout and 
termination of production of class II substances under the CAA. 
``Consumption'' is defined in section 601 of the CAA as the amount of a 
substance produced in the United States, plus the amount of that 
substance imported, minus the amount exported.
    The EPA remains concerned about the potential for illegal import of 
ODS. This concern is based largely on the risk that such illegal 
imports would interfere with the already-completed phaseout of 
consumption of class I substances and the ongoing phaseout of 
consumption of class II substances. ODS that is imported without 
allowances generally counts toward the United States' consumption cap 
unless additional action is taken to remove the ODS from the U.S. 
market (e.g., the illegally imported ODS is destroyed or re-exported in 
the same year). There are no allowances for class I ODS as they have 
all been phased out. Furthermore, following the 2020 stepdown, there is 
a greater risk that illegal imports of HCFC-22 not destroyed or re-
exported could cause an exceedance of the cap set forth under the 
Montreal Protocol and CAA.
    To address this concern, as proposed, the EPA is strengthening its 
ability to enforce the phaseout of ODS by adding at 40 CFR 82.4(s) and 
82.15(g)(8) an express prohibition against the sale or distribution, or 
offer for sale or distribution, of any class I or class II substance, 
respectively, that the seller knows, or has reason to know, was 
imported into the United States in violation of the import 
regulations.\44\ These revisions to the regulations clarify that it is 
illegal to sell or distribute any material that the seller knows or had 
reason to know was imported into the United States without expending 
the appropriate consumption allowances or otherwise qualifying for an 
exemption

[[Page 15281]]

provided for in the regulations (e.g., for transformation or 
destruction, or for used ODS). The revisions also explicitly state that 
every kilogram of illegally imported material sold or distributed, or 
offered for sale or distribution, constitutes a separate violation. 
They also include an exception for actions that are needed to re-export 
the controlled substance in such a situation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ The proposed regulatory text for 40 CFR 82.4(s) and 
82.15(g)(8) included different proposed effective dates. The EPA is 
finalizing both changes effective 30 days after publication of the 
rule to harmonize these requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The intent of this change is to strengthen the EPA's ability to 
enforce against illegal trade, which in turn helps ensure that 
consumption remains under the Montreal Protocol and CAA caps.\45\ This 
change also increases the EPA's compliance and enforcement options 
where the Agency is not able to identify the importer. For example, 
these provisions facilitate the EPA's ability to pursue investigations 
where distributors or other sellers of CFCs attempt to sell virgin CFCs 
in the domestic market knowing that they were imported into the United 
States after the phaseout of CFCs, which occurred in 1996, without 
qualifying for any exemption from the consumption phaseout. Actions 
taken against such distributors not only address their violations but 
could also allow the Agency to gather the necessary information to 
identify the smuggler who illegally imported the material in the first 
place and to pursue compliance and enforcement action against them 
under existing authorities in 40 CFR 82.4 and 82.15, which will help 
deter illegal imports. Avoiding illegal imports helps to maintain the 
complete phaseout of class I ODS and achieve the phaseout of class II 
ODS, which is consistent with sections 604(c) and 605(c) of the CAA, as 
well as with the overarching goals of Title VI of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ The addition of these prohibitions to the regulatory text 
does not change any regulated entity's obligations under the 
existing statutory and regulatory provisions, nor does it limit the 
Agency's ability to enforce, or to take measures to assure 
compliance with, the existing provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This change also encourages distributors to be more cautious when 
purchasing ODS that seem suspiciously priced or packaged. Since the 
phaseout of class I ODS, the EPA has warned distributors of the risk of 
purchasing black market ODS and provided information on ways to 
identify illegally-imported material. While the incentive to circumvent 
the import controls will always exist, the EPA intends for these 
provisions to reduce the market for smuggled ODS, which will reduce 
illegal imports.
    The Agency received supportive comments from The Alliance and 
National Refrigerants. EIA submitted supportive comments also 
requesting that the EPA prohibit the sale of disposable cylinders. EIA 
states that the majority of known ODS smuggling cases are facilitated 
by the use of disposable cylinders, also referred to as ``non-
refillable containers.'' Disposable cylinders are containers charged 
with refrigerant, sold, used for servicing or commissioning equipment, 
and then discarded. The Agency responds that EIA's suggestion is beyond 
the scope of this rulemaking because it was not included in the 
proposed rule and that the Agency does not believe it prudent at this 
time to act on the suggestion without soliciting input from refrigerant 
distributors and other affected stakeholders. The Agency may consider 
in the future whether a ban on disposable cylinders could guard against 
illegal import of refrigerants and may consider proposing such a 
prohibition in a future rulemaking.
    EIA also commented that the EPA should work more closely with other 
agencies to help prevent illegal imports. The EPA responds that the 
Agency has worked closely with other agencies and in particular with 
CBP to ensure compliance with the phaseout of ODS under sections 604, 
605, and 606 of the CAA. Historically, the Agency has participated on 
interagency tasks forces to address potential illegal imports of ODS. 
Recent illegal imports have demonstrated to the Agency that additional 
regulatory clarity is needed to address the potential for domestic 
distribution of illegally imported material, as such material would 
generally be considered consumption. After considering all the comments 
on this issue, the Agency is finalizing its proposal to prohibit the 
sale or distribution or offer for sale or distribution of illegally 
imported ODS in 40 CFR 82.4(s) and 82.15(g)(8), for the reasons 
discussed above.

I. Electronic Reporting and Updates to Other Provisions of the 
Production and Consumption Control Program

    The EPA proposed to require the use of an electronic reporting 
system for producers, importers, exporters, transformers, and 
destroyers of ODS in 40 CFR 82.3, 82.13, 82.14, 82.23, and 82.24 and to 
clarify the certification requirements for methyl bromide quarantine 
and preshipment uses in 40 CFR 82.4 and 82.13. The EPA did not receive 
any adverse comments on these proposals. For the reasons discussed 
below, the EPA is finalizing these provisions as proposed.
i. Electronic Reporting and Changes to Reporting Requirements in 40 CFR 
82.3, 82.13, 82.14, 82.23, and 82.24
    The EPA proposed to require that reports, petitions, and related 
reports be submitted through Central Data Exchange (CDX), and the 
Agency proposed to consolidate and harmonize requirements for class I 
and II substances for ease or reporting. The Agency received supportive 
comments on this proposal and no adverse comments. For the reasons 
described below, the Agency is finalizing these requirements as 
proposed.
    The EPA is finalizing as proposed the requirements for the use of 
the Agency's CDX to submit reports electronically. The compliance date 
for this requirement is 30 days after the publication of the final rule 
in the Federal Register, in part to ensure that stakeholders have 
adequate time to register in CDX. To achieve this, the EPA is updating 
the definition of ``Administrator'' in 40 CFR 82.3, defining ``Central 
Data Exchange'' in Sec.  82.3, adding a new section at Sec.  82.14 with 
instructions on the process for electronic reporting, and revising 
provisions at Sec. Sec.  82.13(c) and 82.24(a)(1) to indicate that 
reporters must comply with the requirement to report electronically 
through CDX. Thus, the EPA is amending the definition of 
``Administrator'' to note that electronic reporting is required for the 
reports and petitions that are available in CDX, which includes the 
majority of reports under subpart A, as well as the import petitions 
and the Certification of Intent to Import ODS for Destruction. The EPA 
is also adding the definition of ``Central Data Exchange'' in Sec.  
82.3 and providing instructions on how to register in CDX and submit 
information electronically in Sec.  82.14.
    The Agency has provided the option of electronic reporting for most 
submissions since 2008, and many stakeholders have transitioned to an 
electronic reporting system. The regulatory changes reflect the current 
practices of the vast majority of reporting entities. Electronic 
reporting allows for faster review and transmission of submissions to 
the EPA. Additionally, all information submitted electronically is 
linked in an improved tracking system, which facilitates document 
management and allows companies to more easily manage past and future 
submissions.
    The EPA monitors company compliance, in part, through the 
recordkeeping and reporting regulations at 40 CFR 82.13 and 82.24. The 
regulatory changes in this final rule will

[[Page 15282]]

ease the reporting burden. For example, the EPA is removing reporting 
elements in 40 CFR 82.23(a)(i)(F) and 82.24(b)(1)(iv) and (c)(1)(vi) 
that require the reporter to calculate values from data already 
provided. Requiring this is unnecessary because the requirement to 
report electronically through CDX means these values can automatically 
be calculated and populated. This will save reporting entities time in 
reporting and reduce errors in submissions. The EPA is also finalizing 
a change in 40 CFR 82.13(h)(1)(iii) and 82.24(d)(1)(iii) \46\ to report 
the quantity (rather than the percentage) of used, recycled, or 
reclaimed class I and class II substances. This change improves 
consistency with the importer reporting requirements and corresponds 
with the way companies report their annual data. It also streamlines 
the exporter reporting forms by eliminating the need for an entity to 
calculate a percentage. The EPA is also removing references to expended 
and unexpended production and consumption allowances at 40 CFR 
82.13(f)(3)(iv) and (g)(4)(vii), as they can be calculated 
automatically with the use of electronic reporting forms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ The preamble to the proposed rule discussed the EPA's 
intent to make this change at both 40 CFR 82.13(h) and 82.24(d), 
though the regulatory text accompanying the proposal contained text 
for only 40 CFR 82.13(h)(1)(iii). In order to ensure that the 
regulatory revisions fully implement the objective described in the 
preamble to the proposal, the EPA is revising 40 CFR 
82.24(d)(1)(iii) in this final action to include the prohibition 
described above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other regulatory changes to the recordkeeping and reporting 
provisions harmonize the requirements for class I and class II 
substances. For example, under the existing regulations, the timeframe 
that submitters have to make revisions to forms for class I and class 
II substances is not the same. The EPA is adding a provision for 
reports for class I substances under 40 CFR 82.13 that revisions can be 
made within 180 days of the end of the applicable reporting period. 
This change is consistent with the previously established regulations 
in 40 CFR 82.24 for revisions to reports for class II substances. 
Likewise, the EPA is revising 40 CFR 82.13 and 82.24 to clarify that 
forms for both class I and class II ODS must be submitted 
electronically through CDX within 45 days of the end of the control 
period to harmonize the reporting timeframes for the two classes of 
ODS.
    The EPA is amending 40 CFR 82.24(d)(1) to clarify that exporters 
who submit a Request for Additional Consumption Allowances (RACA) must 
still include that export on their quarterly exporter report. Under 40 
CFR 82.20, companies may submit a request for additional consumption 
allowances if they export class II substances that were previously 
produced in or imported into the United States using consumption 
allowances. The existing regulatory text at 40 CFR 82.24(d)(1) excluded 
quarterly reporting for those RACAs even though exporters do typically 
include those exports in their quarterly reporting. Thus, for ease of 
review by the EPA, and for consistency of reporting by exporters, the 
Agency is finalizing a requirement that all exports be included in the 
quarterly export report even if the EPA had issued additional 
consumption allowances to the exporter for that export. The EPA is also 
amending the reporting requirements at 40 CFR 82.13(v) to add the 
contact information for the source company from which the material was 
purchased and the laboratories to whom the material is sold. Lastly, 
the EPA is revising class I reporting requirements for exporters by 
replacing the term ``Employee Identification Number'' with the correct 
term ``Employer Identification Number'' in 40 CFR 82.13(h).
ii. Changes to Methyl Bromide Provisions in 40 CFR 82.4 and 82.13
    As discussed in more detail in the preamble to the proposed rule, 
the EPA proposed several changes to the QPS provisions under section 
604(d)(5) of the CAA. In part, these changes were proposed in response 
to the misuse of QPS methyl bromide by applicators and distributors in 
the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, which led to human exposures 
and life-altering illnesses for some of the people exposed. Methyl 
bromide is highly toxic. Studies in humans indicate that the lung may 
be severely injured by the acute (short-term) inhalation of methyl 
bromide. Acute and chronic (long-term) inhalation of methyl bromide can 
lead to neurological effects in humans. To help prevent future 
exposures stemming from misuse of QPS methyl bromide and protect human 
health, the EPA is finalizing revisions to the QPS provisions to: (1) 
Clarify that it is a violation to sell or use methyl bromide produced 
under the QPS exemption for any uses other than QPS applications; (2) 
extend the existing certification requirement to all purchasers of QPS 
methyl bromide; and (3) make non-substantive changes to 40 CFR 82.4 and 
82.13 to improve readability. The Agency did not receive any comments 
on these proposed provisions. For the reasons discussed below, the 
Agency is finalizing these revisions as proposed.
    The EPA's regulations implementing section 604(h) of the CAA set 
January 1, 2005 as the production and import phaseout date for methyl 
bromide (40 CFR 82.4(b), (d)). Certain exceptions apply, including an 
exemption for methyl bromide produced or imported for quarantine and 
preshipment applications. Quarantine applications and preshipment 
applications are both defined at 40 CFR 82.3. Quarantine applications 
are treatments to prevent the introduction, establishment, and/or 
spread of quarantine pests (including diseases), or to ensure their 
official control. These can include commodities entering or leaving the 
United States or any State (or political subdivision thereof). 
Preshipment applications are those non-quarantine applications applied 
within 21 days before export to meet the official requirements of the 
importing country or existing official requirements of the exporting 
country. The recordkeeping and reporting regulations relating to QPS 
methyl bromide appear at 40 CFR 82.13 and establish specific 
requirements for producers, importers, distributors, and applicators, 
including in some instances a written certification that the methyl 
bromide will be used only for QPS applications in accordance with the 
definitions in 40 CFR 82.3.
    First, the Agency is adding an express statement at 40 CFR 82.4(r) 
that no person may sell or use QPS methyl bromide for any purpose other 
than QPS applications. The existing regulations at 40 CFR 82.13(y)(1) 
and (z)(2) require certification statements from distributors, 
applicators, commodity owners, shippers or their agents that methyl 
bromide ``will be used only for quarantine and preshipment 
applications.'' Similarly, 40 CFR 82.13(f)(2)(xviii) and (xix) describe 
the exempted quantities of methyl bromide as ``produced solely for 
quarantine and preshipment applications.'' The EPA interprets this 
existing text as already prohibiting the use of methyl bromide produced 
or imported under the QPS exemption for any uses other than QPS 
applications. However, the EPA is adding an express statement of the 
prohibition at 40 CFR 82.4(r) to provide clarity to this prohibition; 
this revision does not change the existing requirements. The revisions 
at 40 CFR 82.4(r) also explicitly state that every kilogram of methyl 
bromide produced or imported under the authority of the QPS exemption 
and sold or used for a use other than QPS is a separate violation.
    Second, the EPA is finalizing as proposed the extension of the 
existing certification requirement to all

[[Page 15283]]

purchasers of QPS methyl bromide, including purchasers who purchase for 
further distribution. Under the existing recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements at 40 CFR 82.13(f)(2)(xviii), producers of methyl bromide 
must maintain certifications that methyl bromide produced for QPS 
applications has been purchased by distributors or applicators to be 
used only for QPS applications. Under 40 CFR 82.13(y), distributors of 
QPS methyl bromide must certify when they purchase or receive QPS 
material from producers and importers that the controlled substances 
will be used only for QPS applications. Applicators of QPS methyl 
bromide must also certify to distributors that the controlled substance 
will only be used for QPS applications under the existing regulation at 
40 CFR 82.13(z).
    The purpose of this certification requirement when established was 
to ensure that anyone selling or purchasing QPS methyl bromide verified 
that they will comply with requirements under Title VI of the CAA (see 
66 FR 37760, July 19, 2001). However, the EPA identified a gap in this 
certification chain when the material is sold through multiple 
distributors before reaching the applicator. When one distributor sells 
to a second distributor, neither distributor was required to certify or 
maintain a certification that the material will be used only for a QPS 
application. The sales and misapplications of QPS methyl bromide in 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands demonstrate that distributors 
may not have been aware of, or may have ignored, the limitations on the 
use of this material. The EPA is extending the certification 
requirement to all purchasers of QPS methyl bromide. This is meant to 
help ensure that distributors are knowledgeable about the requirements 
for the sale of QPS methyl bromide. Distributors are more likely to 
make themselves aware of those requirements, and to be mindful of the 
fact that QPS methyl bromide can be used only for QPS applications, if 
they are required to sign a certification addressing these requirements 
and to provide it before each purchase. This will fill the gap in the 
distribution chain and ensure the original intent of the regulation is 
implemented.
    More specifically, the EPA is extending the existing requirement in 
40 CFR 82.13(y) that every distributor of QPS methyl bromide certify to 
the producer or importer from whom the distributor purchased or 
received the material that quantities purchased or received will be 
sold only for quarantine applications or preshipment applications. The 
EPA is extending this requirement to also require such a certification 
when the material is purchased or received from a distributor. 
Likewise, the EPA is extending the existing requirement that such 
distributors receive from any applicator, to whom they sold or 
delivered the methyl bromide, a certification, prior to delivery of the 
quantity, stating that the quantity will be used or sold solely for 
quarantine or preshipment applications in accordance with definitions 
in subpart A. The EPA is extending this requirement to sales and 
deliveries to any exporter or distributor. The Agency is not making 
parallel revisions for exporters because the invoice or sales agreement 
required in 40 CFR 82.13(h)(2)(viii) is adequate for this purpose.
    The EPA is also finalizing a revision that the distributor certify 
that the distributor is selling the material for a QPS application 
rather than certify that it will be used for a QPS application, as is 
required in the existing regulations. This will better align the rule 
text with the distributor's role. The proper sale of the material is 
within the distributor's control whereas the use may not be, given that 
the material may be resold by another distributor and applied by an end 
user or third-party applicator.
    Third, the EPA is finalizing as proposed non-substantive changes to 
40 CFR 82.4 and 82.13 that improve readability and clarity. The EPA is 
editing 40 CFR 82.13(h)(2), which contains the recordkeeping 
requirements for exporters of certain ``types'' of methyl bromide by 
companies that did not produce the material. The EPA is making edits to 
clarify what is meant by ``type'' of methyl bromide. The final rule 
more clearly states that the provision requires reporting of the 
quantity of methyl bromide exported for transformation, destruction, 
critical use, and QPS uses. These are the only exempted uses of methyl 
bromide, and this statement matches the information requested in the 
existing reporting forms. The EPA is removing the requirement in the 
existing provision that exporters state how much of the exports are of 
``used, recycled or reclaimed material.'' Unlike other ODS, methyl 
bromide is a product that is registered and controlled under the 
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and thus is 
not sold ``used'' or ``recycled'' or ``reclaimed.'' Therefore, these 
adjectives are not applicable to methyl bromide and this phrase is not 
needed.
    Lastly, the EPA is replacing references to ``class I, Group VI 
controlled substances'' with ``methyl bromide'' where appropriate for 
readability throughout 40 CFR 82.4 and 82.13. ``Class I, Group VI 
controlled substances'' is how methyl bromide is classified under the 
EPA's regulations in appendix A to subpart A, but methyl bromide is the 
only compound within this category. Using the common name will improve 
the readability of the QPS regulations.

J. Addition of Polyurethane Foam Systems Containing CFCs to the 
Nonessential Products Ban

    The EPA proposed to add polyurethane foam systems containing CFCs 
to the list of nonessential products at 40 CFR part 82, subpart C. The 
Agency received supportive comments from The Alliance and EIA and is 
finalizing as proposed for the reasons discussed below. This provision 
has the effect of prohibiting the sale or distribution, or offer for 
sale or distribution, of any polyurethane foam system containing CFCs 
in interstate commerce.
    Historically, CFC-11, CFC-12, and CFC-114 were used as foam blowing 
agents, but CFC production has been globally phased out since 2010. 
Nevertheless, an unexpected increase of CFC-11 emissions has been 
detected in the atmosphere. Recent reports indicate that this is the 
result of new production of CFC-11 in China likely for use in 
foams.\47\ \48\ \49\ \50\ \51\ Except for feedstock applications, 
production and import of CFCs has been prohibited in the United States 
and many other countries since 1996 \52\ and globally production and 
consumption of CFCs have been phased out since 2010 under the Montreal

[[Page 15284]]

Protocol. The nonessential products ban implemented under section 610 
of the CAA already prohibits sale or distribution, and the offer for 
sale or distribution, of certain products manufactured with or 
containing CFCs, including most plastic foam products. After reviewing 
the EPA's import restrictions and the nonessential product ban, the 
Agency identified the potential for sale or distribution, or offer for 
sale or distribution, of imported polyurethane foam systems \53\ 
containing illegally-produced CFCs. The EPA is not currently aware of 
any imports of CFC-11 polyurethane systems into the United States, but 
the Agency is finalizing revisions to amend the list of nonessential 
products in 40 CFR 82.66 to address this gap and to ensure that the 
United States does not inadvertently contribute to demand for CFCs and 
prevent CFC emissions in the United States. The EPA is also adding a 
definition of ``polyurethane foam systems'' in 40 CFR 82.62 to 
correspond with the amendment to the list of nonessential products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ Montzka, S.A., Geoff S. Dutton, G.S., Yu, P., Ray, E., 
Portmann, R.W., Daniel, J.S., Kuijpers, L., Hall1, B.D., Mondeel, 
D., Siso, C., Nance, J.D., Rigby, M., Manning, A.J., Hu, L., Moore, 
F., Miller, B.R., and Elkins, J.W. ``An unexpected and persistent 
increase in global emissions of ozone-depleting CFC-11'' Nature 557; 
(2018): 413-429.
    \48\ WMO. (2018) Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2014 
World Meteorological Organization Global Ozone Research and 
Monitoring Project--Report No. 55 pg. 1-416. Available at: https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/assessments/ozone/2014/report.html.
    \49\ Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA). (2018) Blowing 
It: Illegal Production and Use of Banned CFC-11 in China's Foam 
Blowing Industry. Available at: https://eia-global.org/reports/20180709-blowing-it-illegal-production-and-use-of-banned-cfc-11-in-chinas-foam-blowing-industry.
    \50\ Rigby, M. et al. ``Increase in CFC-11 emissions from 
eastern China based on atmospheric observations.'' Nature 569.7757 
(2019): 546-550.
    \51\ UNEP. (2019) Decision XXX/3 TEAP Task Force Report on 
Unexpected Emissions of Trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11). Available 
at http://conf.montreal-protocol.org/meeting/mop/mop-31/presession/Background%20Documents/TEAP-TF-DecXXX-3-unexpected_CFC11_emissions-september2019.pdf.
    \52\ Historically, limited amounts of CFC production and 
consumption were authorized after the phaseout for essential uses.
    \53\ These systems are also referred to as polyols, which are 
defined in Montreal Protocol reports as pre-blended foam chemicals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is also adding in 40 CFR 82.64(h) a prohibition on the sale 
or distribution, or offer for sale or distribution, of the products 
identified as being nonessential in Sec.  82.66(f). While the EPA did 
not include specific text for the prohibition at 40 CFR 82.64(h) in the 
proposal, the Agency discussed in the proposal that the proposed 
changes would prohibit the sale or distribution, or offer for sale or 
distribution, of polyurethane foam systems containing CFCs (see, e.g., 
84 FR 41535, August 14, 2019). In order to ensure that the regulatory 
revisions fully implement the objective described in the preamble to 
the proposal, the EPA is revising 40 CFR 82.64(h) in this final action 
to include the prohibition described above. This revision is wholly 
consistent with the description of the EPA's intent for this regulation 
as set forth in the preamble to the proposal.
    With respect to the added definition, the EPA is defining 
``polyurethane foam systems'' in 40 CFR 82.62 as an item consisting of 
two transfer pumps that deliver ingredients (polyisocyanate or 
isocyanate from one side and a mixture including the blowing agent, 
catalysts, flame retardants, and/or stabilizers from the other side) to 
a metering/mixing device which allows the components to be delivered in 
the appropriate proportions. In such systems, the components are sent 
to a mixing gun and dispensed as foam directly to a surface such as a 
roof or tank, usually to provide thermal insulation. These polyurethane 
foam systems are packaged and sold as complete systems, containing all 
the ingredients including the polyisocyanate and the blowing agent.
    A polyurethane foam system is not a bulk ODS because the ODS is 
contained in a system and packaged as a product. Under the regulations 
in subpart A, bulk CFCs are a ``controlled substance'' and thus are 
subject to import controls such as the consumption allowance regime 
under 40 CFR 82.4. However, the definition of ``controlled substance'' 
in 40 CFR 82.3 excludes ``any such substance or mixture that is in a 
manufactured product other than a container used for the transportation 
or storage of the substance or mixture.'' Because the CFCs in a 
polyurethane foam system are contained in a system that is sold as a 
product, they are not subject to the same import controls as bulk CFCs. 
If polyurethane foam systems are imported and sold through distribution 
chains in the United States, they could result in emissions of CFCs 
during their use. These foam systems are also distinct from a plastic 
foam product in that the foam product has already been blown. Plastic 
foam products manufactured with or containing a CFC are already listed 
as a nonessential product at 40 CFR 82.66(c) and are banned from sale 
or distribution, and from being offered for sale or distribution, in 
interstate commerce at 40 CFR 82.64(c).
    The revisions to the nonessential product ban in this rulemaking 
are made under section 610 of the CAA, titled ``Nonessential products 
containing chlorofluorocarbons.'' That statutory section directs the 
EPA to issue regulations identifying nonessential products that 
``release class I substances into the environment (including any 
release occurring during manufacture, use, storage, or disposal)'' and 
``prohibit[ing] any person from selling or distributing any such 
product, or offering any such product for sale or distribution, in 
interstate commerce.'' Section 610(b)(1) and (2) specify that this 
prohibition shall apply to ``chlorofluorocarbon-propelled plastic party 
streamers and noise horns'' and ``chlorofluorocarbon-containing 
cleaning fluids for noncommercial electronic and photographic 
equipment.'' Section 610(b)(3) provides that the prohibition shall 
apply to other consumer products determined by the EPA to release class 
I substances into the environment (including releases during 
manufacture, use, storage, or disposal) and to be nonessential.
    Section 610 further states that in determining whether a product is 
nonessential, the EPA shall consider the following criteria: ``the 
purpose or intended use of the product, the technological availability 
of substitutes for such product and for such class I substance, safety, 
health, and other relevant factors.'' The CAA requires the EPA to 
consider each criterion listed in section 610 but does not establish 
either a ranking or a methodology for comparing their relative 
importance, nor does it require that any minimum standard within each 
criterion be met. Thus, section 610 provides the EPA discretion in 
determining how to consider the listed criteria and the relative weight 
to give to each. In addition, section 610 gives the EPA latitude to 
consider ``other relevant factors'' beyond the specific criteria set 
forth in the statute.
    As indicated above, polyurethane foam systems are products that 
release blowing agent to the environment during use. If CFCs are used 
as the blowing agent, they would be emitted during the use of such 
systems. In taking this final action to add polyurethane foam systems 
containing CFCs as a nonessential product, the EPA considered the 
purpose or intended use of these systems, the technological 
availability of substitutes, and safety and health considerations. The 
first criterion, the purpose or intended use, relates to the importance 
of the product, in terms of benefits to society, specifically whether 
the product is sufficiently important that the benefits of its 
continued production outweigh the associated danger from the continued 
use of a class I ODS in it, or alternatively, whether the product has 
little benefit, such that even a lack of available substitutes might 
not prevent the product from being considered nonessential. While foam 
products, particularly closed-cell rigid polyurethane foams, have 
provided benefits to society, for more than two decades U.S. 
manufacturers have replaced the use of CFCs in foam production without 
compromising these benefits.
    The intended use of polyurethane foam systems is often for 
insulation in buildings and residences. While insulation has benefits, 
such as reducing energy use and costs associated with heating and 
cooling, in previous rulemakings the EPA's consideration of this 
criterion has also been informed by consideration of whether use of the 
class I substance in the product is nonessential (see 58 FR 4474, 
January 15, 1993 and 66 FR 57514, January 14, 2002). For example, use 
of a class I

[[Page 15285]]

substance in a product may be considered nonessential where substitutes 
are readily available, even if the product itself is important (see 58 
FR 4474, January 15, 1993, and 66 FR 57514, January 14, 2002). This is 
reasonable because if the social benefits from a product can be 
provided by a similar product without use of the class I substance, 
that tends to support the conclusion that the product using the class I 
substance is nonessential. U.S. manufacturers successfully transitioned 
from using class I substances for foam products more than two decades 
ago, meaning that they were able to also replace the use of class I 
substances in foam blowing systems. Moreover, the same U.S. industry 
also replaced the use of class II substances in these plastic foam 
products. There are alternative foam blowing agents that can be used in 
foam systems as well as alternative methods and products for insulating 
buildings and residences that do not use class I substances. For 
instance, there are a variety of insulation types that can be applied 
throughout the building envelope to save energy and reduce leaks in 
buildings and homes with a similar R-value as a polyurethane foam 
system intended for use in insulation. The R-value refers to an 
insulating material's resistance to conductive heat flow and is 
measured or rated in terms of its thermal resistance. Alternative non-
polyurethane foam insulation products with similar R-values include 
fiberglass, cellulose, and rigid foam boards.
    For the criterion of technological availability of substitutes, the 
EPA considers the existence and accessibility of alternative products 
or alternative chemicals for use in, or in place of, products releasing 
class I substances. As first explained in 1993, the EPA interprets this 
criterion to include both currently available substitutes and 
potentially available substitutes (see 58 FR 4474, January 15, 1993). 
There are numerous substitutes for CFCs in polyurethane foam systems 
that are listed as acceptable under the SNAP program and have been 
widely used by the foam industry since the mid-1990s.\54\ As the EPA 
stated in the initial class I nonessential products rule, in sectors 
where the great majority of manufacturers have already shifted to 
substitutes, the use of a class I substance in that product may very 
well be nonessential (see 58 FR 4474, January 15, 1993). As in previous 
considerations of this criterion, in this rulemaking the EPA is 
examining sectors where the market has previously switched to 
substitutes. The class I nonessential products ban that included 
plastic foam products was promulgated more than two decades ago and 
there were also subsequent restrictions on the use of class II 
substances for polyurethane foam systems. All U.S. manufacturers have 
therefore switched from CFCs to non-ODS alternatives such as 
hydrofluorocarbons, hydrofluoroolefins, hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide, 
water, and other compounds listed as acceptable substitutes under SNAP 
in foam blowing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ The current list of SNAP-approved substitutes for foam 
blowing is available here: https://www.epa.gov/snap/substitutes-foam-blowing-agents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the criteria of safety and health, as in prior rules related to 
the nonessential product ban (see 66 FR 57514, January 14, 2002), the 
EPA interprets these criteria to mean the effects on human health and 
the environment of products releasing CFCs or their substitutes. As in 
past rules, in evaluating these criteria, the EPA considered the direct 
and indirect effects of product use, and the direct and indirect 
effects of alternatives, such as ODP, flammability, toxicity, 
corrosiveness, energy efficiency, ground-level air hazards, and other 
environmental factors (see 66 FR 57514, January 14, 2002). The ODPs of 
CFC-11, CFC-12, and CFC-114 are 1. For the purposes of evaluating other 
direct and indirect effects for foam systems, there is not a 
substantive difference between foam systems and plastic foam products, 
given that the former is a precursor for the latter. In developing the 
initial class I nonessential products ban, the Agency provided 
information in the docket concerning the known alternatives at that 
time. Subsequently, alternatives that were already in use, as well as 
additional alternatives for foam-blowing, have been evaluated and 
listed as acceptable under the SNAP program, such as 
hydrofluorocarbons, hydrofluoroolefins, hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide, 
and water. The current SNAP list of acceptable substitutes is more 
expansive than what was considered in the initial class I nonessential 
products ban. The range of alternatives includes those that have ODPs 
ranging from zero to between 0.00024 and 0.00034, significantly lower 
than the ODPs of CFC-11, CFC-12, and CFC-114, all of which are 1. The 
Montreal Protocol's TEAP also provides a quadrennial global assessment 
of alternatives for foam blowing, including information concerning many 
of the direct and indirect factors identified above.\55\ The EPA 
considered all these sources of information when deciding whether to 
add to the list of banned products foam systems that contain phased-out 
CFCs and considered that U.S. industry has already successfully 
transitioned away from using CFCs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ UNEP. 2018 TEAP Report Available at http://conf.montreal-protocol.org/meeting/oewg/oewg-41/presession/Background-Documents/TEAP_2018_Assessment_Report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Considering all these factors together, the EPA concludes that 
polyurethane foam systems containing CFCs meet the criteria in section 
610 of the CAA for listing as a nonessential product and is adding them 
to the list of nonessential products in 40 CFR 82.66(f) and prohibiting 
their sale in 40 CFR 82.64(h).

K. Updates to 40 CFR 82.3, 82.104, and 82.270 Related to Destruction

    The EPA proposed to update and harmonize definitions related to ODS 
destruction in 40 CFR 82.3, 82.104, and 82.270, by adding to the list 
of destruction technologies and amending the definition of 
``destruction'' to allow inclusion of destruction technologies that 
incidentally result in commercially useful end products. The EPA 
received supportive comments from The Alliance on the proposal to 
update the list of destruction technologies consistent with the 
Montreal Protocol, and no adverse comments on this aspect of the 
proposal. For the reasons discussed below, the EPA is finalizing these 
revisions as proposed.
    The EPA added a definition of the term ``destruction'' to 40 CFR 
82.3 in 1993 (see 58 FR 65047-65048, December 10, 1993). The existing 
regulatory definition of ``destruction'' includes a limited list of 
technologies that may be used for destruction. When the EPA established 
the initial list of destruction technologies, the Agency also noted 
that it intended to propose authorizing use of additional destruction 
technologies through future rulemakings, as such technologies are 
approved by the Parties (see 58 FR 65049, December 10, 1993). Revising 
the definition of destruction to include these technologies will not 
affect the applicability of other regulatory requirements relating to 
use of these technologies.
    In the revisions finalized in this rulemaking, the Agency is 
updating the definition of ``destruction'' in 40 CFR 82.3, as proposed, 
to add destruction technologies that have been approved by the Parties 
to the Montreal Protocol since the issuance of the 1993 rule. The 
Agency is adding these destruction

[[Page 15286]]

technologies so that industry in the United States has a greater 
variety of technology options for the destruction of ODS. All of these 
technologies are capable of destroying ODS or converting them into 
byproducts and can be grouped into three broad categories: 
Incineration, plasma, and other non-incineration technologies. The EPA 
is adding the following incineration technology: Porous thermal 
reactor. Porous thermal reactors are high-temperature systems with a 
porous layer that facilitates the decomposition of ODS and other 
industrial waste gases. Destruction takes place in an oxidizing 
atmosphere with a continuous supply of an auxiliary gas. For plasma, 
the EPA is adding nitrogen plasma arc, portable plasma arc, argon 
plasma arc, microwave plasma, and inductively coupled radio frequency 
plasma to allow for greater industry flexibility for using plasma 
destruction technologies. Although they reach higher temperatures than 
incineration technologies, plasma technologies are considered to be 
non-incineration technologies because they involve the thermo-chemical 
decomposition of organic material in a limited oxygen environment. 
Lastly, the EPA is also adding four non-incineration technologies: 
Chemical reaction with hydrogen and carbon dioxide, gas phase catalytic 
de-halogenation, superheated steam reactor, and thermal reaction with 
methane.
    The EPA is also amending the definition of ``destruction'' to 
modify the statement that the process must not result in a commercially 
useful end product. The EPA is finalizing revisions to harmonize the 
definitions of the term ``destruction'' at 40 CFR 82.3, 82.104, and 
82.270. These two existing definitions are intended to convey the same 
meaning but are slightly different. For instance, the definition in 40 
CFR 82.104 refers to a code of good housekeeping contained in a United 
Nations Environment Programme report while the definition in 40 CFR 
82.3 does not. In addition, both provide a list of destruction 
technologies approved under decisions of the Parties to the Montreal 
Protocol. The list at 40 CFR 82.3 contains seven technologies while the 
list at 40 CFR 82.104 contains five.\56\ Both lists are out of date in 
that they fail to include certain technologies that can destroy ODS or 
convert them into byproducts and have been approved under more recent 
decisions of the Parties. Similarly, the existing prohibition on 
disposing of halons in 40 CFR 82.270 includes an exception for 
destruction that also provides an outdated list of destruction 
technologies. The EPA is therefore harmonizing these three definitions 
of destruction and updating the list of destruction technologies to 
allow the use of more destruction technologies in the United States. An 
explanation of these technologies appears in the EPA's report on 
destruction ``ODS Destruction in the United States and Abroad,'' which 
is available in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ Similarly, the definition of ``completely destroy'' at 40 
CFR 82.104 refers to using ``one of the five'' destruction processes 
approved by the Parties. The EPA is also removing this outdated 
language.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA is also revising the definition of ``destruction'' in 40 
CFR 82.104 and the prohibition in 40 CFR Sec.  82.270 by removing the 
outdated lists found in those provisions and adding a cross reference 
to the list of destruction technologies in 40 CFR 82.3. This conforms 
the list of destruction technologies that can be used across subparts 
A, E, and H of 40 CFR part 82. The destruction technologies finalized 
through this action in Sec.  82.3 are also applicable to these other 
subparts, although the EPA notes that the listing of municipal waste 
incinerators in the existing regulations at 40 CFR 82.3 is limited to 
the destruction of foams, and thus the added cross reference to 40 CFR 
82.3 in Sec.  82.270 does not make that technology available for the 
exception for the destruction of halons at 40 CFR 82.270.
    As noted above, the EPA is also amending the definitions of 
``destruction'' at 40 CFR 82.3 and 82.104 to modify language regarding 
commercially useful end products. The EPA is also editing provisions in 
40 CFR 82.104 (subpart E, ``The Labeling of Products Using Ozone-
Depleting Substances'') and 40 CFR 82.270 (subpart H, ``Halon Emissions 
Reduction'') to conform with the changes in this definition. The 
previously existing definition contained a restriction that a 
destruction technology cannot result in a commercially useful product. 
The EPA is revising that restriction in part because one of the 
destruction technologies that this action adds to the definition of 
destruction breaks down ODS into substances that have commercial 
viability. The process ``Chemical Reaction with hydrogen and carbon 
dioxide'' converts fluorinated compounds to hydrofluoric acid, 
hydrochloric acid, carbon dioxide, chlorine, and water. The reaction 
technology separates and collects the byproducts at a high purity 
allowing for them to be sold, potentially improving the economics of 
using this technology. Because the EPA has concluded that a process 
that would otherwise qualify as ``destruction'' should not fail to 
qualify simply because one of the outputs is a commercially useful end 
product, it is revising the definition of ``destruction'' so that the 
mere existence of such an end product does not bar the technology from 
being used. The revisions further clarify that for destruction 
processes, the commercial usefulness of the end product is secondary to 
the act of the ODS destruction. Thus, the changes to the definition of 
destruction recognize that while production of a commercially useful 
end product is not the primary purpose of a destruction process, the 
destruction process may nevertheless result in a commercially useful 
product.
    The clarification that the usefulness of an end product should be 
secondary to ODS destruction is intended to maintain a distinction 
between the terms ``destruction'' and ``transformation.'' The EPA 
established the definitions of ``destruction,'' ``production,'' and 
``transformation'' in the 1993 rule (see 58 FR 65048-65049, December 
10, 1993). Among other things, the Agency excluded from the definition 
of ``production'': (1) Amounts of controlled substances that are 
destroyed using approved destruction technologies and (2) the 
manufacture of a controlled substance that is subsequently transformed. 
Similarly, the regulatory import prohibitions excluded both amounts 
destroyed, and amounts transformed. The definition of ``destruction'' 
noted that it does not result in a commercially useful end product 
whereas the definition of ``transformation'' noted that it occurs in a 
process specifically for the manufacture of other chemicals for 
commercial purposes. Thus, the original distinction in the definitions 
of these two terms related to whether the process was undertaken to 
intentionally result in a commercially useful end product or not. The 
distinction mattered (and is still relevant) because as explained in 
the 1993 rule, if a portion of the ODS remained after destruction, the 
destroyed portion could be excluded from production under the 
destruction exclusion, but the material had to be entirely consumed in 
the process (except for trace quantities) to qualify for the 
transformation exclusion (see 58 FR 65048, December 10, 1993).
    Intent has been an important aspect of the distinction between 
``destruction'' and ``transformation'' since the EPA first promulgated 
these definitions. For example, in the 1993 rule establishing the 
definition of ``destruction,'' in a discussion of whether heat or 
energy are commercially useful end products, the

[[Page 15287]]

Agency said ``[t]he intent of the destruction process is to destroy the 
substance, for which a byproduct in the way of heat or energy may be 
produced, rather than production of an end product being the goal of 
the destruction activity.'' (See 58 FR 65049, December 10, 1993). This 
discussion recognizes that something useful may incidentally result 
from destruction. Similarly, the 1993 rule recognized the possibility 
of a destruction technology converting ODS into other useful 
substances. In explaining the inclusion of reactor cracking as a 
destruction technology, the EPA stated ``[s]ince 1983, this process has 
treated waste gases resulting from the production of CFCs. The gases 
are converted to hydrofluoric acid, hydrochloric acid, carbon dioxide, 
chlorine, and water. The two acids are usable in-house and/or 
marketable, and the chlorine is scrubbed, leaving only water vapor, 
oxygen, and carbon dioxide as waste gases.'' (See 58 FR 65047, December 
10, 1993).
    Consistent with that recognition and with the inclusion of a new 
destruction technology with commercially useful end products, the EPA 
concludes that the creation of a commercially useful end product should 
not in itself preclude a technology from being listed in the definition 
of ``destruction.'' The creation of such an end product does not change 
whether chemical decomposition occurs. Many destruction processes 
incinerate the chemicals, but other technologies break down the 
controlled substance. In breaking down the chemical, it is possible 
that the result includes a commercially valuable end product that is 
not a controlled substance. ``Transformation,'' on the other hand, 
means to use and entirely consume a controlled substance in the 
manufacture of other chemicals for commercial purposes. Thus, the 
purpose is to create new compounds using the ODS as a feedstock rather 
than the decomposition of ODS as a waste.
    Accordingly, to update the regulatory text but preserve a 
distinction between transformation and destruction, the EPA is amending 
the definitions of ``destruction'' at 40 CFR 82.3 and 82.104 by 
removing the previously existing restriction that a destruction 
technology cannot result in a commercially useful product and by also 
adding a clarification that, while destruction might result in a 
commercially useful end product, such usefulness would be secondary to 
the act of destruction.

L. Removal of Obsolete Provisions in 40 CFR 82.3, 82.4, 82.9, 82.10, 
82.12, 82.13, 82.16, and 82.24

    The EPA proposed to remove obsolete provisions from several 
sections of part 82. The Agency received supportive comments from The 
Alliance on this proposal and no adverse comments. For the reasons 
described below, the EPA is finalizing the removal of outdated 
provisions for class I ODS related to Article 5 allowances, 
transformation and destruction credits, and transfers of allowances 
issued prior to the phaseout as proposed for ease of reading and to 
reduce confusion. The EPA is also removing definitions and reporting 
provisions for HCFC-141b exemption allowances and export production 
allowances.
i. Class I Article 5 Allowances
    Before the global phaseout of CFCs and other class I ODS, the EPA 
historically had provided additional production allowances, known as 
``Article 5 allowances,'' for production of certain class I ODS for 
export to and use by Article 5 countries consistent with the Montreal 
Protocol.\57\ These are countries that were subject to a later 
production and consumption phaseout schedule than non-Article 5 
countries such as the United States. Section 82.9(a) of the existing 
regulations granted Article 5 allowances until 2010, when the phaseout 
of these substances was completed in Article 5 countries. Because these 
provisions no longer have any purpose or effect, the EPA is removing 
the schedule for issuing Article 5 allowances found at 40 CFR 82.9(a) 
and the corresponding recordkeeping and reporting requirements in 40 
CFR 82.13(f)(2)(v) and (f)(3)(ix). Section 82.9(b) of the existing 
regulations provides that holders of Article 5 allowances may produce 
class I controlled substances for export to Article 5 countries and 
transfer Article 5 allowances. Because there are no more holders of 
Article 5 allowances, the EPA is removing these provisions as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ For the purposes of the Montreal Protocol, this is called 
production for basic domestic need.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ii. Class I Allowances and Credits Related to Transformation and 
Destruction
    Before the domestic phaseout of class I ODS, the EPA historically 
had provided additional production allowances in cases where class I 
ODS were destroyed or transformed. Because these provisions no longer 
have any purpose or effect, the EPA is removing these provisions and 
removing references to these obsolete allowances in certain other 
provisions.
    Section 82.9(e) of the existing rules contains the provisions 
related to such allowances, including detailing the information needed 
in a request for allowances based on having destroyed or transformed a 
specified quantity of class I ODS. The EPA stopped issuing such 
allowances in 1996 for all class I controlled substances (except methyl 
bromide) and in 2005 for methyl bromide. The EPA is removing 40 CFR 
82.9(e) and related obsolete reporting and recordkeeping requirements 
in 40 CFR 82.13(f)(2)(iv), (g)(1)(xv), and (g)(4)(xi) and (i).
    Section 82.9(f) authorized persons who were nominated for an 
essential use exemption to obtain destruction and transformation 
credits between 1996 and 2000. The EPA established these provisions 
because of the difference between the phaseout date for class I 
substances under the CAA and the phaseout date for the same substances 
under the Montreal Protocol. These provisions include a description of 
the information needed and the grounds for which the EPA can disallow 
the request. Section 82.4(f) addresses production and import with 
destruction and transformation credits. The EPA stopped issuing such 
credits in 2000. Because these provisions no longer have any purpose or 
effect, the EPA is removing 40 CFR 82.4(f) and 82.9(f).
iii. Class I Consumption Allowances
    Before the phaseout of class I ODS, the EPA historically had 
provided additional consumption allowances where class I ODS were 
exported, transformed or destroyed, or where an amount of production 
was transferred from another Party to the Montreal Protocol. Section 
82.10 contains provisions related to these additional consumption 
allowances, including detailing the information needed in a request for 
them. The EPA stopped issuing those allowances in 1996 for all class I 
controlled substances (except methyl bromide) and in 2005 for methyl 
bromide. Because these provisions no longer have any purpose or effect, 
the EPA is removing 40 CFR 82.10 in its entirety. The EPA is also 
finalizing the removal of references to 40 CFR 82.10 from the 
definition of ``consumption allowance'' in 40 CFR 82.3, as well as from 
the provisions in 40 CFR 82.9(c) and 82.13(h)(1) and (2) as those 
references are no longer applicable. As discussed earlier in this 
document, the EPA is entirely removing 40 CFR 82.9(e) and (f) in this 
action, and it is also removing Sec.  82.13(i), as its provisions are 
no longer needed. Accordingly, the

[[Page 15288]]

references to Sec.  82.10 in those provisions will also be removed.
iv. Transfer of Class I Allowances
    The EPA historically had allowed for the transfer of production and 
consumption allowances for class I substances in various ways. Under 
section 607 of the CAA, the EPA was required to issue regulations 
providing for inter-pollutant allowance transfers and allowance 
transfers between companies. For class I substances, those regulations 
appear at 40 CFR 82.12. Due to the class I phaseout, the EPA no longer 
allocates production or consumption allowances for class I substances. 
Because these provisions no longer have any purpose or effect, the EPA 
is removing provisions related to pre-1996 allowance transfers for 
class I ODS (and pre-2005 for methyl bromide) found at 40 CFR 82.12, by 
revising paragraph (a)(1) and removing paragraph (b)(1), as any such 
transfers occurred years ago and these provisions no longer have any 
purpose or effect.
    As discussed earlier in this section, the EPA is removing certain 
provisions governing class I Article 5 allowances and destruction and 
transformation credits. The EPA is therefore also removing provisions 
allowing for the transfer of class I Article 5 allowances and 
destruction and transformation credits found at 40 CFR 82.12(a)(2), 
(b)(2) through (5), and (c) as those provisions are longer needed.
v. HCFC-141b Allowances
    In 2003, the EPA issued regulations (see 68 FR 2820, January 21, 
2003) to ensure compliance with the first reduction milestone in the 
HCFC phaseout. In that rule, the EPA established chemical-specific 
consumption and production baselines for HCFC-141b, HCFC-22, and HCFC-
142b for the initial regulatory period ending December 31, 2009. The 
rule phased out the production and import of HCFC-141b effective 
January 1, 2003 (see 40 CFR 82.16(b)). The EPA created a petition 
process at 40 CFR 82.16(h) to allow applicants to request ``HCFC-141b 
exemption allowances'' to produce or import small amounts of HCFC-141b 
beyond the phaseout. The Agency removed 40 CFR 82.16(h) from the 
regulations and terminated the HCFC-141b exemption allowance program, 
effective January 1, 2015 (79 FR 64267, October 28, 2014). At that 
time, the EPA did not remove definitions and reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements that pertain only to HCFC-141b exemption 
allowances. In the current rulemaking, the EPA proposed to remove those 
provisions, and is now finalizing those revisions as proposed, as 
described in the following paragraphs.
    In this action, the EPA is removing the definitions in 40 CFR 82.3 
specific to HCFC-141b production or import after the 2003 phaseout, in 
particular, the definitions of ``Formulator,'' ``HCFC-141b exemption 
allowances,'' and ``Unexpended HCFC-141b exemption allowances.'' The 
definitions for HCFC-141b exemption allowances are no longer relevant 
since the EPA has removed the substantive regulations that these 
definitions support. For the same reasons, the EPA is removing 
references to HCFC-141b in the definition of ``Confer,'' but is 
retaining the remainder of that definition. The EPA is also removing 
references and recordkeeping and reporting requirements specifically 
relating to HCFC-141b exemption allowances. These edits are made by 
removing 40 CFR 82.24(b)(1)(ix) and (xi), (b)(2)(xiv), (c)(1)(xi), 
(c)(2)(xvi),and (g).
    The EPA also created provisions at 40 CFR 82.18(b) to allow 
producers to use ``export production allowances'' to produce HCFC-141b 
for export beyond the phaseout. These allowances ended in 2010 and 
therefore these provisions have no further purpose or effect. The EPA 
is retaining the definition of export production allowances and certain 
references where appropriate to provide context to the reader but is 
removing the recordkeeping and reporting provisions. These edits are 
made in 40 CFR 82.16(e)(1) and (2) and 82.24(b)(2)(iv), and by removing 
Sec.  82.24(b)(1)(iv) and (ix), (b)(2)(xii), and (d)(2).

M. Other Comments Not Related to the Proposal

    The EPA received a comment that is unrelated to the proposed rule 
on the management and destruction of ODS held in banks in relation to 
the venting prohibition in section 608 of the CAA. In this comment, EIA 
notes that a substantial bank of ODS persists in the United States, 
including of CFC-11 contained in foams as well as other class I and 
class II ODS substances contained in existing refrigeration and air-
conditioning equipment or stockpiles. They state that despite a growing 
bank of ODS found to be available for recovery from retired equipment, 
the rate of proper disposal of these substances through either 
reclamation or destruction has declined. The commenter suggests that 
the low rates of reclamation and destruction in the United States, 
particularly of class II ODS, indicates that significant quantities of 
these substances are likely being vented in violation of section 608 of 
the CAA. They argue that in order to enforce the venting prohibition 
and encourage responsible management and disposal of the remaining bank 
of ODS, the EPA should propose additional measures on lifecycle ODS 
management. The EPA notes that this comment pertains to section 608 of 
the CAA and the regulations under 40 CFR part 82, subpart F, and is 
beyond the scope of this rulemaking, which did not propose and is not 
finalizing any changes to the subpart F requirements. As the comment is 
not relevant to this final action, no response is required.

IV. Economic Analysis

    The EPA considered the incremental costs and benefits associated 
with this rulemaking, which primarily stem from changes to reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements. In total, the EPA estimates that the 
quantified costs and benefits of this rule results in a net savings of 
$13,000 per year. The Agency analyzed the quantitative costs and 
benefits associated with transitioning to electronic reporting, the 
streamlined import petition process for used halons, exempting halon 
1211 in aircraft bottles from the import petitions process, 
establishing the Certification of Intent to Import ODS for Destruction, 
adding a recordkeeping requirement for certain distributors of methyl 
bromide QPS applications, and labeling containers of Halotron[supreg] 
I. The quantifiable costs and benefits of this rule primarily result 
from the revisions to the reporting and recordkeeping requirements and 
the requirement to use electronic reporting. For the phaseout of ODS, 
the EPA previously considered the domestic costs and benefits of the 
United States' phaseout.\58\ Many of the regulatory revisions finalized 
in this action, such as the removal of obsolete requirements, will not 
result in any new costs or benefits. The EPA has provided in the docket 
technical support documents that consider the costs and the benefits 
commensurate with changes to the ODS phaseout regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ The following documents are available in the docket: ``EPA. 
1999. The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act: 1990 to 2010;'' 
``EPA. 1992. Regulatory Impact Analysis: Compliance with Section 604 
of the Clean Air Act for the Phaseout of Ozone Depleting 
Chemicals;'' and ``EPA. 1993. Addendum to the 1992 Phaseout 
Regulatory Impact Analysis: Accelerating the Phaseout of CFCs, 
Halons, Methyl Chloroform, Carbon Tetrachloride, and HCFCs.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Electronic reporting allows for faster review and transmission of 
submissions to the EPA. Additionally, all information submitted 
electronically is linked in an improved tracking system, which 
facilitates document management and allows companies to more easily

[[Page 15289]]

manage past and future submissions. The estimated burden hours and 
labor costs will decrease as a result of the complete transition from 
paper to electronic reporting, including removing unnecessary data 
elements and auto-populating others. Similarly, the estimated Agency 
burden hours and labor costs decreases. The streamlined petitions 
process for importing used halons and the new Certification of Intent 
to Import ODS for Destruction both decrease the estimated respondent 
burden. Specifically, the number of reporting elements for importers 
for destruction is reduced from 13 to 9, reducing burden hours per 
response by four hours. The EPA also estimates that exempting halon 
1211 used in aircraft bottles from the petition process reduces the 
number of responses per respondent by one. These changes are detailed 
in the supporting statement for the Information Collection Request 
available in the docket to this rule.
    The EPA estimates that redesigning the existing labels on 
containers of Halotron[supreg] I will result in a one-time cost of 
approximately $4,000. Administrative and graphic design labor costs are 
estimated based on the total amount of hours required to redesign 
existing labels as well as hourly labor costs. Hourly costs include 
wages, overhead rates, and fringe rates. Additional information on this 
analysis is available in the docket titled ``Estimated costs of 
Regulatory Changes to Labeling of Containers of HCFC Fire Suppression 
Agent, 2020-2029.''
    There are also unquantifiable effects of this rule. Prohibiting 
both the sale of QPS methyl bromide for non-QPS purposes and the sale 
of illegally imported ODS is designed to improve compliance with the 
existing provisions. These costs are unquantifiable as the scale of 
these sales is not known but are anticipated to be small due to the 
illegality of such sales. The prohibition on sales and distribution of 
polyurethane foam systems containing CFCs will have no cost because 
there is no evidence to suggest this practice is occurring in the 
United States. Updating the definition of destruction allows for the 
use of new destruction technologies that are currently not in use in 
the United States but can now be employed with the additional 
technologies. Additional destruction of unwanted ODS in the United 
States may generate revenue for domestic destruction facilities. 
Lastly, the removal of obsolete provisions is not anticipated to have 
any material cost or benefit.
    Previous analyses provide information on the costs and benefits of 
the United States' ODS phaseout, and specifically the phaseout of all 
HCFCs through 2030, but do not quantify the costs and benefits of each 
individual phaseout step for each individual chemical. A memorandum 
summarizing these analyses, including the original regulatory impact 
analysis for the full phaseout of ODS, is available in the docket.\59\ 
This rule allows for the production and consumption of HCFC-123 and 
HCFC-124 that will otherwise not be allowed in the absence of this 
rulemaking. These HCFCs will then be used to service existing fire 
suppression, refrigeration, and air-conditioning equipment, as modeled 
in the 2019 Final Servicing Tail Report. This rule relieves a 
regulatory prohibition on production and consumption of HCFC-123 and 
HCFC-124 and results in greater benefits than taking no action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ EPA 2008, ``HCFC Cost Analysis'' and EPA 2018, ``Overview 
of CFC and HCFC Phaseout.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In finalizing the level of allocation for HCFC-123, the EPA 
considered the quantities needed to satisfy estimated demand for HCFC-
123 to service equipment manufactured before 2020 and the amount of 
HCFC-123 that will likely be reclaimed annually, and thus be available 
to meet part of the demand for HCFC-123. The Agency is issuing 
consumption allowances equal to the 2020 estimated HCFC-123 demand for 
servicing existing refrigeration and air-conditioning and fire 
suppression equipment for years 2020 through 2022 and then decreasing 
the number of allowances issued in each subsequent year by an equal 
amount each year such that there are zero allowances issued in 2030. 
This allocation will avoid stranding existing equipment due to an 
inadequate supply of HCFCs while achieving a complete phaseout of 
production and consumption by 2030. As discussed in Section III of this 
document, a viable reclamation market is a necessary element in 
achieving those two goals. Issuing allowances in excess of demand would 
suppress the reclamation market and result in less supply to service 
equipment after the 2030 phaseout. In the near term, the final 
allocation provides sufficient allowances to meet the near-term needs 
of the market while also fostering reclamation and transition. A final 
allocation that is significantly too high or too low could adversely 
affect the availability of reclaimed HCFC-123 for the fire suppression 
sector because reclamation is the only source of HCFC-123 for the 
manufacture of new fire suppression equipment once stockpiles of 
previously-imported material is exhausted. Thus, if the reclaim market 
is suppressed from 2020 through 2029, there will be less supply and 
higher costs for HCFC-123 for the manufacture of new fire suppression 
equipment and less supply and higher costs as the phaseout progresses 
since the supply of HCFC-123 will eventually only be from the recycling 
or reclamation market.
    The EPA finds there is no significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities (SISNOSE). The EPA performed a sales test to 
assess the economic impact of a regulatory option on small businesses 
and compared the results of the sales test. This analysis is available 
in the docket. Based on the screening analysis of allowance holders of 
HCFC-123 and HCFC-124, this rulemaking has no SISNOSE because it is 
expected to result in a small net benefit to small businesses through 
the ability to continue producing, importing and/or selling HCFC-123 
and HCFC-124. The EPA notes that there are only eight companies total 
that hold consumption allowances for HCFC-123 and HCFC-124, only three 
of which are small businesses.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is a significant regulatory action that was submitted 
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Any changes 
made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the 
docket.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13771, because this 
final rule is expected to result in no more than de minimis costs.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    The information collection activities in this rule have been 
submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA. The Information Collection 
Request (ICR) document that the EPA prepared has been assigned the EPA 
ICR number 1432.34. You can find a copy of the ICR and supporting 
statement in the docket for this rule, and it is briefly summarized 
here. The information collection requirements are not enforceable until 
OMB approves them.
    This ICR covers provisions under the Montreal Protocol and Title VI 
of the CAA that establish limits on total U.S. production, import, and 
export of ODS. The EPA monitors compliance with the

[[Page 15290]]

CAA and commitments under the Montreal Protocol through the 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements established in the regulations 
at 40 CFR part 82, subpart A. The EPA informs the respondents that they 
may assert claims of business confidentiality for any of the 
information they submit. Information claimed as confidential will be 
treated in accordance with the procedures for handling information 
claimed as confidential under 40 CFR part 2, subpart B, and will be 
disclosed to the extent, and by means of procedures, set forth in 
subpart B. If no claim of confidentiality is asserted when the 
information is received by the EPA, it may be made available to the 
public without further notice to the respondents (40 CFR 2.203).
    Respondents/affected entities: Producers, importers, exporters, and 
certain users of ozone depleting substances; methyl bromide 
applicators, distributors, and end users including commodity storage 
and quarantine users.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory--Sections 603(b) and 
114 of the CAA.
    Estimated number of respondents: 98.
    Frequency of response: Quarterly, annually, and as needed.
    Total estimated burden: 2,940 hours (per year). Burden is defined 
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $363,683, includes $7,400 annualized capital 
or operation & maintenance costs.
    The ICR addresses changes to the existing reporting and 
recordkeeping programs that are approved under OMB control number 2060-
0170.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the 
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB 
approves this ICR, the Agency will announce that approval in the 
Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to 
display the OMB control number for the approved information collection 
activities contained in this final rule.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. The 
small entities potentially subject to increased costs from this action 
include allowance holders, distributors, applicators, and end users of 
methyl bromide and importers of ODS. The EPA estimates that the total 
incremental savings associated with this final rule is $13,000 per year 
in 2019 dollars.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in 
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, 
local or tribal governments or the private sector.

F. 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.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. 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. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to 
this action.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to E.O. 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 
1997) because it is not economically significant as defined in E.O. 
12866. The Agency nonetheless has reason to believe that the 
environmental health or safety risk addressed by this action may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. Depletion of stratospheric ozone 
results in greater transmission of the sun's ultraviolet (UV) radiation 
to the earth's surface. The following studies describe the effects of 
excessive exposure to UV radiation on children: (1) Westerdahl J, 
Olsson H, Ingvar C. ``At what age do sunburn episodes play a crucial 
role for the development of malignant melanoma,'' Eur J Cancer 1994: 
30A: 1647-54; (2) Elwood JM Japson J. ``Melanoma and sun exposure: an 
overview of published studies,'' Int J Cancer 1997; 73:198-203; (3) 
Armstrong BK, ``Melanoma: childhood or lifelong sun exposure,'' In: 
Grobb JJ, Stern RS Mackie RM, Weinstock WA, eds. ``Epidemiology, causes 
and prevention of skin diseases,'' 1st ed. London, England: Blackwell 
Science, 1997: 63-6; (4) Whiteman D., Green A. ``Melanoma and 
Sunburn,'' Cancer Causes Control, 1994: 5:564-72; (5) Heenan, PJ. 
``Does intermittent sun exposure cause basal cell carcinoma? A case 
control study in Western Australia,'' Int J Cancer 1995; 60: 489-94; 
(6) Gallagher, RP, Hill, GB, Bajdik, CD, et al. ``Sunlight exposure, 
pigmentary factors, and risk of nonmelanocytic skin cancer I, Basal 
cell carcinoma,'' Arch Dermatol 1995; 131: 157-63; (7) Armstrong, DK. 
``How sun exposure causes skin cancer: an epidemiological 
perspective,'' Prevention of Skin Cancer. 2004. 89-116.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is 
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that it is not feasible to quantify any 
disproportionately high and adverse effects from this action on 
minority populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, 
as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule 
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of 
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Chemicals, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: December 19, 2019.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR 
part 82 as follows:

PART 82--PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE

0
1. The authority citation for part 82 continues to read as follows:

[[Page 15291]]

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671-767q.

0
2. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.3 by:
0
a. Revising the definitions for ``Administrator'' and ``Aircraft halon 
bottle;''
0
b. Adding a definition in alphabetical order for ``Central Data 
Exchange;''
0
c. Revising the definitions for ``Confer,'' ``Consumption allowances,'' 
and ``Destruction;''
0
d. Removing the definition for ``Formulator;''
0
e. Adding a definition in alphabetical order for ``Halon bank;''
0
f. Removing the definition for ``HCFC-141b exemption allowances;''
0
g. Revising the definitions for ``Individual shipment,'' ``Non-
Objection notice,'' and ``Production;'' and
0
h. Removing the definition for ``Unexpended HCFC-141b exemption 
allowances.''
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  82.3   Definitions for class I and class II controlled 
substances.

* * * * *
    Administrator means the Administrator of the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency or his or her authorized 
representative. Starting May 18, 2020, reports and petitions that are 
available to be submitted through the Central Data Exchange, as well as 
any related supporting documents, must be submitted through that tool. 
Any other reports and communications shall be submitted to 
Stratospheric Protection Manager, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Mail Code: 
6205T, Washington, DC 20460.
    Aircraft halon bottle means a vessel used as a component of an 
aircraft fire suppression system containing halon-1301 or halon-1211 
approved under FAA rules for installation in a certificated aircraft.
* * * * *
    Central Data Exchange means EPA's centralized electronic document 
receiving system, or its successors.
* * * * *
    Confer means to shift the essential-use allowances obtained under 
Sec.  82.8 from the holder of the unexpended essential-use allowances 
to a person for the production of a specified controlled substance.
* * * * *
    Consumption allowances means the privileges granted by this subpart 
to produce and import controlled substances; however, consumption 
allowances may be used to produce controlled substances only in 
conjunction with production allowances. A person's consumption 
allowances for class I substances are the total of the allowances 
obtained under Sec. Sec.  82.6 and 82.7 as may be modified under Sec.  
82.12 (transfer of allowances). A person's consumption allowances for 
class II controlled substances are the total of the allowances obtained 
under Sec. Sec.  82.19 and 82.20, as may be modified under Sec.  82.23.
* * * * *
    Destruction means the expiration of a controlled substance to the 
destruction and removal efficiency actually achieved, unless considered 
completely destroyed as defined in this section. Such destruction might 
result in a commercially useful end product, but such usefulness would 
be secondary to the act of destruction. Destruction must be achieved 
using one of the following controlled processes approved by the Parties 
to the Protocol:
    (1) Liquid injection incineration;
    (2) Reactor cracking;
    (3) Gaseous/fume oxidation;
    (4) Rotary kiln incineration;
    (5) Cement kiln;
    (6) Radio frequency plasma;
    (7) Municipal waste incinerators (only for the destruction of 
foams);
    (8) Nitrogen plasma arc;
    (9) Portable plasma arc;
    (10) Argon plasma arc;
    (11) Chemical reaction with hydrogen and carbon dioxide;
    (12) Inductively coupled radio frequency plasma;
    (13) Microwave plasma;
    (14) Porous thermal reactor;
    (15) Gas phase catalytic de-halogenation;
    (16) Superheated steam reactor; or
    (17) Thermal reaction with methane.
* * * * *
    Halon bank means a facility run by a national government or 
privately run and authorized by a national government that collects and 
stores previously-recovered halon for reuse at a later date.
* * * * *
    Individual shipment means the kilograms of a controlled substance 
for which a person may make one (1) U.S. Customs entry, as identified 
in the non-objection letter from the Administrator under Sec. Sec.  
82.13(g) and 82.24(c).
* * * * *
    Non-Objection notice means the privilege granted by the 
Administrator to import a specific individual shipment of a controlled 
substance in accordance with Sec. Sec.  82.13(g)(2), (3), and (5) and 
82.24(c)(3), (4), and (6).
* * * * *
    Production means the manufacture of a controlled substance from any 
raw material or feedstock chemical, but does not include:
    (1) The manufacture of a controlled substance that is subsequently 
transformed;
    (2) The reuse or recycling of a controlled substance;
    (3) Amounts that are destroyed by approved destruction 
technologies; or
    (4) Amounts that are spilled or vented unintentionally.
* * * * *

0
3. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.4 by:
0
a. Removing and reserving paragraph (f);
0
b. Revising paragraph (j); and
0
c. Adding paragraphs (r) and (s).
    The revision and additions read as follows:

Sec.  82.4   Prohibitions for class I controlled substances.

* * * * *
    (j)(1) Effective January 1, 1995, no person may import, at any time 
in any control period, a used class I controlled substance, except for 
Group II used controlled substances shipped in aircraft halon bottles 
for hydrostatic testing, without having received a non-objection notice 
from the Administrator in accordance with Sec.  82.13(g)(2) and (3). A 
person who receives a non-objection notice for the import of an 
individual shipment of used controlled substances may not transfer or 
confer the right to import and may not import any more than the exact 
quantity, in kilograms, of the used controlled substance cited in the 
non-objection notice. Every kilogram of importation of used controlled 
substance in excess of the quantity cited in the non-objection notice 
issued by the Administrator in accordance with Sec.  82.13(g)(2) and 
(3) constitutes a separate violation.
    (2) No person may import for purposes of destruction, at any time 
in any control period, a class I controlled substance for which EPA has 
apportioned baseline production and consumption allowances, without 
having submitted a certification of intent to import for destruction to 
the Administrator and received a non-objection notice in accordance 
with Sec.  82.13(g)(5). A person issued a non-objection notice for the 
import of an individual shipment of class I controlled substances for 
destruction may not transfer or confer the right to import and may not 
import any more than the exact quantity (in kilograms) of the class I 
controlled substance stated in the non-objection notice. For imports 
intended to be destroyed in the United

[[Page 15292]]

States, a person issued a non-objection notice must destroy the 
controlled substance within one year of the date stamped on the non-
objection letter, may not transfer or confer the right to import, and 
may not import any more than the exact quantity (in kilograms) of the 
class I controlled substance stated in the non-objection notice. Every 
kilogram of import of class I controlled substance in excess of the 
quantity stated in the non-objection notice issued by the Administrator 
in accordance with Sec.  82.13(g)(5) constitutes a separate violation 
of this subpart.
* * * * *
    (r) No person may sell or use methyl bromide produced or imported 
under the quarantine and preshipment exemption for any purpose other 
than for quarantine applications or preshipment applications as defined 
in Sec.  82.3. Each kilogram of methyl bromide produced or imported 
under the authority of the quarantine and preshipment exemption and 
sold or used for a use other than quarantine or preshipment is a 
separate violation of this subpart.
    (s) No person may sell or distribute, or offer for sale or 
distribution, any class I substance that they know, or have reason to 
know, was imported in violation of this section, except for such 
actions needed to re-export the controlled substance. Every kilogram of 
a controlled substance imported in contravention of this paragraph (s) 
that is sold or distributed, or offered for sale or distribution, 
constitutes a separate violation of this subpart.

0
4. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.9 by:
0
a. Removing and reserving paragraphs (a) and (b);
0
b. Revising paragraph (c) introductory text; and
0
c. Removing and reserving paragraphs (e) and (f).
    The revision reads as follows:

Sec.  82.9   Availability of production allowances in addition to 
baseline production allowances for class I controlled substances.

* * * * *
    (c) A company may increase or decrease its production allowances, 
including its Article 5 allowances, by trading with another Party to 
the Protocol according to the provision under this paragraph (c). A 
company may increase or decrease its essential-use allowances for CFCs 
for use in essential MDIs according to the provisions under this 
paragraph (c). A nation listed in appendix C to this subpart (Parties 
to the Montreal Protocol) must agree either to transfer to the person 
for the current control period some amount of production or import that 
the nation is permitted under the Montreal Protocol or to receive from 
the person for the current control period some amount of production or 
import that the person is permitted under this subpart. If the 
controlled substance is produced under the authority of production 
allowances and is to be sold in the United States or to another Party 
(not the Party from whom the allowances are received), the U.S. company 
must expend its consumption allowances allocated under Sec. Sec.  82.6 
and 82.7 in order to produce with the additional production allowances.
* * * * *

Sec.  82.10  [Removed and Reserved]

0
5. Effective April 16, 2020, remove and reserve Sec.  82.10.

0
6. April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.12 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(1) introductory text; and
0
b. Removing and reserving paragraphs (a)(2), (b), and (c).
    The revision reads as follows:

Sec.  82.12  Transfers of allowances for class I controlled substances.

    (a) * * *
    (1) After January 1, 2002, any essential-use allowance holder 
(including those persons that hold essential-use allowances issued by a 
Party other than the United States) (``transferor'') may transfer 
essential-use allowances for CFCs to a metered dose inhaler company 
solely for the manufacture of essential MDIs. After January 1, 2005, 
any critical use allowance holder (``transferor'') may transfer 
critical use allowances to any other person (``transferee'').
* * * * *

0
7. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.13 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a) and (c);
0
b. Adding headings for paragraphs (f) and (f)(2);
0
c. Removing and reserving paragraphs (f)(2)(iv) and (v);
0
d. In paragraphs (f)(2)(xiv) and (xv), removing the periods at the ends 
of the paragraphs and adding semicolons in their places;
0
e. Removing and reserving paragraph (f)(2)(xvi);
0
f. Revising paragraphs (f)(2)(xvii) through (xxii);
0
g. Removing ``Reporting Requirements--Producers'' in paragraph (f)(3) 
introductory text and adding in its place ``Reporting requirements--
producers'';
0
h. Removing and reserving paragraphs (f)(3)(iv) and (ix);
0
i. Revising paragraphs (f)(3)(xiii) through (xvii) and (g)(1)(xi), 
(xv), and (xvii) through (xxi);
0
j. Adding a heading for paragraph (g);
0
k. Removing ``Recordkeeping--Importers'' in paragraph (g)(1) 
introductory text and adding in its place ``Recordkeeping--importers'';
0
l. Revising paragraphs (g)(2) introductory text and (g)(2)(i) through 
(iii), (vi), and (viii) through (xiii);
0
m. Removing and reserving paragraph (g)(2)(xiv);
0
n. Adding paragraph (g)(2)(xv) and a heading for paragraph (g)(3);
0
o. Revising paragraphs (g)(3)(i)(A) and (g)(3)(vii);
0
p. Adding a heading for paragraph (g)(4);
0
q. Removing and reserving paragraphs (g)(4)(vii) and (xi);
0
r. Revising paragraphs (g)(4)(xv) through (xviii);
0
s. Adding paragraphs (g)(5) through (10);
0
t. Revising paragraphs (h) heading, (h)(1) introductory text, 
(h)(1)(ii) and (iii), (h)(2) introductory text, and (h)(2)(ii) through 
(v) and (viii);
0
u. Removing and reserving paragraph (i);
0
v. Revising paragraph (v);
0
w. Adding a heading for paragraph (w); and
0
x. Revising paragraphs (w)(2), (y), (z), and (aa).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  82.13  Recordkeeping and reporting requirements for class I 
controlled substances.

    (a) Effective dates. Unless otherwise specified, the recordkeeping 
and reporting requirements set forth in this section take effect on 
January 1, 1995. For class I, Group VIII controlled substances, the 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements set forth in this section take 
effect on August 18, 2003. For critical use methyl bromide, the 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements set forth in this section take 
effect January 1, 2005.
* * * * *
    (c) Timing of reports. Unless otherwise specified, reports required 
by this section must be submitted to the Administrator within 45 days 
of the end of the applicable reporting period. Revisions of reports 
that are required by this section must be submitted to the 
Administrator within 180 days of the end of the applicable reporting 
period, unless otherwise specified. Starting May 18, 2020, reports that 
are available for submission through the Central Data Exchange must be 
submitted electronically through that tool.
* * * * *

[[Page 15293]]

    (f) Producers. * * *
    (2) Recordkeeping requirements--producers. * * *
    (xvii) For methyl bromide, dated records of the quantity of 
controlled substances produced for quarantine and preshipment 
applications and quantity sold for quarantine and preshipment 
applications;
    (xviii) Written certifications that quantities of methyl bromide 
produced solely for quarantine and preshipment applications were 
purchased by distributors or applicators to be used only for quarantine 
applications and preshipment applications in accordance with the 
definitions in this subpart; and
    (xix) Written verifications from a U.S. purchaser that methyl 
bromide produced solely for quarantine and preshipment applications, if 
exported, will be exported solely for quarantine applications and 
preshipment applications upon receipt of a certification in accordance 
with the definitions of this subpart and requirements in paragraph (h) 
of this section.
    (xx) For methyl bromide, dated records such as invoices and order 
forms, and a log of the quantity of controlled substances produced for 
critical use, specifying quantities dedicated for pre-plant use and 
quantities dedicated for post-harvest use, and the quantity sold for 
critical use, specifying quantities dedicated for pre-plant use and 
quantities dedicated for post-harvest use;
    (xxi) Written certifications that quantities of methyl bromide 
produced for critical use were purchased by distributors, applicators, 
or approved critical users to be used or sold only for critical use in 
accordance with the definitions and prohibitions in this subpart. 
Certifications must be maintained by the producer for a minimum of 
three years; and
    (xxii) For methyl bromide, dated records such as invoices and order 
forms, and a log of the quantity of controlled substances produced 
solely for export to satisfy critical uses authorized by the Parties 
for that control period, and the quantity sold solely for export to 
satisfy critical uses authorized by the Parties for that control 
period.
    (3) * * *
    (xiii) The amount of methyl bromide sold or transferred during the 
quarter to a person other than the producer solely for quarantine and 
preshipment applications;
    (xiv) A list of the quantities of methyl bromide produced by the 
producer and exported by the producer and/or by other U.S. companies, 
to a Party to the Protocol that will be used solely for quarantine and 
preshipment applications and therefore were not produced expending 
production or consumption allowances; and
    (xv) For quarantine and preshipment applications of methyl bromide 
in the United States or by a person of another Party, one copy of a 
certification that the material will be used only for quarantine and 
preshipment applications in accordance with the definitions in this 
subpart from each recipient of the material and a list of additional 
quantities shipped to that same person for the quarter.
    (xvi) For critical uses of methyl bromide, producers shall report 
annually the amount of critical use methyl bromide owned by the 
reporting entity, specifying quantities dedicated for pre-plant use and 
quantities dedicated for post-harvest use, as well as quantities held 
by the reporting entity on behalf of another entity, specifying 
quantities dedicated for pre-plant use and quantities dedicated for 
post-harvest use along with the name of the entity on whose behalf the 
material is held; and
    (xvii) A list of the quantities of methyl bromide produced by the 
producer and exported by the producer and/or by other U.S. companies in 
that control period, solely to satisfy the critical uses authorized by 
the Parties for that control period; and
* * * * *
    (g) Importers. * * *
    (1) * * *
    (xi) The quantity of imports of used, recycled, or reclaimed class 
I controlled substances;
* * * * *
    (xv) Dated records of the quantity of controlled substances 
imported for an essential use; and
* * * * *
    (xvii) Dated records of the quantity of methyl bromide imported for 
quarantine and preshipment applications and quantity sold for 
quarantine and preshipment applications;
    (xviii) Written certifications that quantities of methyl bromide 
imported solely for quarantine and preshipment applications were 
purchased by distributors or applicators to be used only for quarantine 
and preshipment applications in accordance with the definitions in this 
subpart; and
    (xix) Written verifications from a U.S. purchaser that methyl 
bromide imported solely for quarantine and preshipment applications, if 
exported, will be exported solely for quarantine and preshipment 
applications upon receipt of a certification in accordance with the 
definitions of this subpart and requirements in paragraph (h) of this 
section.
    (xx) For methyl bromide, dated records such as invoices and order 
forms, of the quantity of controlled substances imported for critical 
use, specifying quantities dedicated for pre-plant use and quantities 
dedicated for post-harvest use, and the quantity sold for critical use, 
specifying quantities dedicated for pre-plant use and quantities 
dedicated for post-harvest use; and
    (xxi) Written certifications that quantities of methyl bromide 
imported for critical use were purchased by distributors, applicators, 
or approved critical users to be used or sold only for critical use in 
accordance with the definitions and prohibitions in this subpart. 
Certifications must be maintained by an importer for a minimum of three 
years.
    (2) Petitioning--importers of used, recycled, or reclaimed 
controlled substances. For each individual shipment over 5 pounds of a 
used controlled substance as defined in Sec.  82.3, except for Group II 
used controlled substances shipped in aircraft halon bottles for 
hydrostatic testing and imports intended for destruction, an importer 
must submit directly to the Administrator, at least 40 working days 
before the shipment is to leave the foreign port of export, the 
following information in a petition:
    (i) Name, commodity code, and quantity in kilograms of the used 
controlled substance to be imported;
    (ii) Name and address of the importer, the importer ID number, and 
the contact person's name, email address, and phone number;
    (iii) Name, address, contact person, email address, and phone 
number of all previous source facilities from which the used controlled 
substance was recovered or the halon bank storing the controlled 
substance;
* * * * *
    (vi) Name, address, contact person, email address, and phone number 
of the exporter and of all persons to whom the material was transferred 
or sold after it was recovered from the source facility;
* * * * *
    (viii) A description of the intended use of the used controlled 
substance, and, when possible, the name, address, contact person, email 
address, and phone number of the ultimate purchaser in the United 
States;
    (ix) Name, address, contact person, email address, and phone number 
of the U.S. reclamation facility, where applicable;
    (x) If someone at the source facility recovered the controlled 
substance from

[[Page 15294]]

the equipment, the name, email address, and phone number of that 
person;
    (xi) If the imported controlled substance was reclaimed in a 
foreign Party, the name, address, contact person, email address, and 
phone number of any or all foreign reclamation facility(ies) 
responsible for reclaiming the cited shipment;
    (xii) The export license, application for an export license, or 
official communication acknowledging the export from the appropriate 
government agency in the country of export and, if recovered in another 
country, the export license or official communication from the 
appropriate government agency in that country, and quantity authorized 
for export in kilograms on the export license, and an English 
translation of these documents;
    (xiii) If the imported used controlled substance is intended to be 
sold as a refrigerant in the United States, the name, address, and 
email address of the EPA-certified U.S. reclaimer who will bring the 
material to the standard required under subpart F of this part if not 
already reclaimed to those specifications; and
* * * * *
    (xv) If the used controlled substance is stored in a halon bank, in 
lieu of the information required in paragraphs (g)(2)(iv) through (vi) 
of this section, the petitioner may provide an official letter from the 
appropriate government agency in the country where the material is 
stored indicating that the halon is used and that the halon bank is 
authorized to collect used halon. If source information in paragraphs 
(g)(2)(iv) through (vi) is available, it should also be provided in 
addition to the letter.
    (3) Review of petition to import a used substance. * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) If the Administrator determines that the information is 
insufficient, that is, if the petition lacks or appears to lack any of 
the information required under paragraph (g)(2) of this section or 
other information that may be requested during the review of the 
petition necessary to verify that the controlled substance is used;
* * * * *
    (vii) A person receiving the non-objection notice is permitted to 
import the individual shipment only within one year of the date stamped 
on the non-objection notice.
* * * * *
    (4) Reporting requirements--importers. * * *
    (xv) The amount of methyl bromide sold or transferred during the 
quarter to a person other than the importer solely for quarantine and 
preshipment applications;
    (xvi) A list of the quantities of methyl bromide exported by the 
importer and or by other U.S. companies, to a Party to the Protocol 
that will be used solely for quarantine and preshipment applications 
and therefore were not imported expending consumption allowances; and
    (xvii) For quarantine and preshipment applications of methyl 
bromide in the United States or by a person of another Party, one copy 
of a certification that the material will be used only for quarantine 
and preshipment applications in accordance with the definitions in this 
subpart from each recipient of the material and a list of additional 
quantities shipped to that same person for the quarter.
    (xviii) For critical uses of methyl bromide, importers shall report 
annually the amount of critical use methyl bromide owned by the 
reporting entity, specifying quantities dedicated for pre-plant use and 
quantities dedicated for post-harvest use, as well as quantities held 
by the reporting entity on behalf of another entity, specifying 
quantities dedicated for pre-plant use and quantities dedicated for 
post-harvest use along with the name of the entity on whose behalf the 
material is held.
* * * * *
    (5) Certification of intent to import for destruction. For each 
individual shipment of a class I controlled substance imported with the 
intent to destroy that substance, an importer must submit 
electronically to the Administrator, at least 30 working days before 
the shipment is to leave the foreign port of export, the following 
information:
    (i) Name, commodity code, and quantity in kilograms of each 
controlled substance to be imported;
    (ii) Name and address of the importer, the importer ID number, and 
the contact person's name, email address, and phone number;
    (iii) Name and address of any intermediary who will aggregate 
controlled substances imported for destruction, and the contact 
person's name, email address, and phone number;
    (iv) The U.S. port of entry for the import, the expected date of 
shipment and the vessel transporting the material. If at the time of 
submitting the certification of intent to import for destruction the 
importer does not know the U.S. port of entry, the expected date of 
shipment and the vessel transporting the material, and the importer 
receives a non-objection notice for the individual shipment in the 
petition, the importer is required to notify the Administrator of this 
information prior to the entry of the individual shipment into the 
United States;
    (v) Name, address, contact person, email address, and phone number 
of the responsible party at the destruction facility;
    (vi) The export license, application for an export license, or 
official communication acknowledging the export from the appropriate 
government agency in the country of export and, if recovered in another 
country, the export license or official communication from the 
appropriate government agency in that country, and quantity authorized 
for export in kilograms on the export license, and an English 
translation of these documents; and
    (vii) A certification of accuracy of the information submitted in 
the certification.
    (6) Destruction verification. For each individual shipment of a 
class I controlled substance imported with the intent to destroy that 
substance, an importer must submit to the Administrator a copy of the 
destruction verification within 30 days after destruction of the 
controlled substance(s).
    (7) Review of certification of intent to import for destruction. 
(i) Starting on the first working day following receipt by the 
Administrator of a certification of intent to import a class I 
controlled substance for destruction, the Administrator will initiate a 
review of the information submitted under paragraph (g)(5) of this 
section and take action within 30 working days to issue either an 
objection notice or a non-objection notice for the individual shipment 
to the person who submitted the certification of intent to import the 
class I controlled substance for destruction.
    (ii) The Administrator may issue an objection notice if the 
petition lacks or appears to lack any of the information required under 
paragraph (g)(5) of this section or for the reasons listed in 
paragraphs (g)(3)(i)(B) through (F) of this section.
    (iii) In cases where the Administrator does not object to the 
petition, the Administrator will issue a non-objection notice.
    (iv) To pass the approved class I controlled substances through 
U.S. Customs, the non-objection notice issued by EPA must accompany the 
shipment through U.S. Customs.
    (v) If for some reason, following EPA's issuance of a non-objection 
notice, new information is brought to EPA's

[[Page 15295]]

attention which shows that the non-objection notice was issued based on 
false information, then EPA has the right to:
    (A) Revoke the non-objection notice;
    (B) Pursue all means to ensure that the class I controlled 
substance is not imported into the United States; and
    (C) Take appropriate enforcement actions.
    (8) Timing of import. A person receiving the non-objection notice 
is permitted to import the individual shipment only within one year of 
the date stamped on the non-objection notice.
    (9) Additional recordkeeping requirements--importers of used, 
recycled, or reclaimed controlled substances. A person receiving a non-
objection notice from the Administrator for a certification of intent 
to import class I controlled substances for destruction must maintain 
the following records:
    (i) A copy of the certificate of intent to import for destruction;
    (ii) The EPA non-objection notice;
    (iii) A copy of the export license, export license application, or 
official communication from the appropriate government agency in the 
country of export;
    (iv) U.S. Customs entry documents for the import that must include 
one of the commodity codes from appendix K to this subpart;
    (v) The date, amount, and type of controlled substance sent for 
destruction, per shipment;
    (vi) An invoice from the destruction facility verifying the 
shipment was received;
    (vii) A copy of the destruction verification from the destruction 
facility; and
    (viii) An English translation of the document in paragraph 
(g)(9)(iii) of this section.
    (10) Recordkeeping requirements-aggregators. A person identified in 
paragraph (g)(5)(iii) of this section as aggregating a controlled 
substance prior to destruction must:
    (i) Maintain transactional records that include the name and 
address of the entity from whom they received the controlled substance 
imported for destruction;
    (ii) Maintain transactional records that include the name and 
address of the entity to whom they sent the controlled substance 
imported for destruction;
    (iii) Maintain records that include the date and quantity of the 
imported controlled substance received for destruction;
    (iv) Maintain records that include the date and quantity of the 
imported controlled substance sent for destruction; and
    (v) If the person is the final aggregator of such a controlled 
substance before the material is destroyed, maintain a copy of the 
destruction verification.
    (h) Reporting requirements--exporters. (1) For any exports of class 
I controlled substances (except methyl bromide) not reported under 
paragraph (f)(3) of this section (reporting for producers of controlled 
substances), the exporter who exported a class I controlled substance 
(except methyl bromide) must submit to the Administrator the following 
information within 45 days after the end of the control period in which 
the unreported exports left the United States:
* * * * *
    (ii) The exporter's Employer Identification Number;
    (iii) The type and quantity of each controlled substance exported 
including the quantity of controlled substance that is used, recycled, 
or reclaimed;
* * * * *
    (2) For any exports of methyl bromide not reported under paragraph 
(f)(3) of this section (reporting for producers of controlled 
substances), the exporter who exported methyl bromide must submit to 
the Administrator the following information within 45 days after the 
end of each quarter in which the unreported exports left the United 
States:
* * * * *
    (ii) The exporter's Employer Identification Number;
    (iii) The quantity of methyl bromide exported by use 
(transformation, destruction, critical use, or quarantine and 
preshipment);
    (iv) The date on which, and the port from which, the methyl bromide 
was exported from the United States or its territories;
    (v) The country to which the methyl bromide was exported;
* * * * *
    (viii) The invoice or sales agreement containing language similar 
to the Internal Revenue Service Certificate that the purchaser or 
recipient of imported methyl bromide intends to transform those 
substances, the destruction verifications (as in paragraph (k) of this 
section) showing that the purchaser or recipient intends to destroy the 
controlled substances, or the certification that the purchaser or 
recipient and the eventual applicator will only use the material for 
quarantine and preshipment applications in accordance with the 
definitions in this subpart.
* * * * *
    (v) Laboratory use exemption distributors. Any distributor of 
laboratory supplies who purchased controlled substances under the 
global essential laboratory and analytical use exemption must submit 
quarterly (except distributors following procedures in paragraph (x) of 
this section) the quantity of each controlled substance purchased by 
each laboratory customer or distributor whose certification was 
previously provided to the distributor pursuant to paragraph (w) of 
this section, the contact information for the source company from which 
material was purchased, and the laboratories to whom the material is 
sold.
    (w) Laboratory use exemption customers. * * *
    (2) The name, email address, and phone number of a contact person 
for the laboratory customer;
* * * * *
    (y) Quarantine and preshipment methyl bromide distributors. Every 
distributor of methyl bromide who purchases or receives a quantity 
produced or imported for quarantine or preshipment applications under 
the exemptions in this subpart must comply with the following 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements:
    (1) Every distributor of quarantine and preshipment methyl bromide 
must certify to the producer, importer, or distributor from whom they 
purchased or received the controlled substance that quantities 
purchased or received will be sold only for quarantine applications or 
preshipment applications in accordance with the definitions in this 
subpart.
    (2) Every distributor of quarantine and preshipment methyl bromide 
must receive from an applicator, exporter, or distributor to whom they 
sell or deliver the controlled substance a certification, prior to 
delivery, stating that the quantity will be used or sold solely for 
quarantine applications or preshipment applications in accordance with 
definitions in this subpart.
    (3) Every distributor of quarantine and preshipment methyl bromide 
must maintain the certifications as records for 3 years.
    (4) Every distributor of quarantine and preshipment methyl bromide 
must report to the Administrator within 45 days after the end of each 
quarter, the total quantity delivered to applicators or end users for 
quarantine applications and preshipment applications in accordance with 
definitions in this subpart.
    (z) Quarantine and preshipment methyl bromide applicators. Every 
applicator of methyl bromide who

[[Page 15296]]

purchases or receives a quantity produced or imported solely for 
quarantine or preshipment applications under the exemptions in this 
subpart must comply with the following recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements:
    (1) Recordkeeping. Every applicator of methyl bromide produced or 
imported for quarantine and preshipment applications under the 
exemptions of this subpart must maintain, for every application, a 
document from the commodity owner, shipper, or their agent requesting 
the use of methyl bromide citing the requirement that justifies its use 
in accordance with definitions in this subpart. These documents shall 
be retained for 3 years.
    (2) Reporting. Every applicator who purchases or receives methyl 
bromide that was produced or imported for quarantine and preshipment 
applications under the exemptions in this subpart shall provide the 
distributor of the methyl bromide, prior to shipment, with a 
certification that the methyl bromide will be used only for quarantine 
applications or preshipment applications as defined in this subpart.
    (aa) Quarantine and preshipment methyl bromide end user 
certification. Every commodity owner, shipper or their agent requesting 
an applicator to use methyl bromide that was produced or imported 
solely for quarantine and preshipment applications under the exemptions 
of this subpart must maintain a record for 3 years, for each request, 
certifying knowledge of the requirements associated with the exemption 
for quarantine and preshipment applications in this subpart and citing 
the requirement that justifies its use. The record must include the 
following statement: ``I certify knowledge of the requirements 
associated with the exempted quarantine and preshipment applications 
published in 40 CFR part 82, including the requirement that this letter 
cite the treatments or official controls for quarantine applications or 
the official requirements for preshipment requirements.''
* * * * *

0
8. Effective April 16, 2020, add Sec.  82.14 to read as follows:

Sec.  82.14  Process for electronic reporting.

    (a) Starting May 18, 2020, reports and petitions that are available 
to be submitted through the Central Data Exchange, as well as any 
related supporting documents, must be submitted through that tool.
    (b) Entities can register and access the Central Data Exchange as 
follows:
    (1) Go to EPA's Central Data Exchange website at https://cdx.epa.gov and follow the links for the submission of ozone-depleting 
substances.
    (2) Call EPA's Central Data Exchange Help Desk at 1-888-890-1995.
    (3) Email the EPA's Central Data Exchange Help Desk at 
HelpDesk@epacdx.net.

0
9. Amend Sec.  82.15 by:
0
a. Redesignating paragraphs (g)(5) and (6) as (g)(6) and (7), 
respectively; and
0
b. Adding new paragraph (g)(5).
    The addition reads as follows:

Sec.  82.15  Prohibitions for class II controlled substances.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (5)(i) Effective January 1, 2020, no person may introduce into 
interstate commerce or use HCFC-123 or HCFC-124 (unless used, recovered 
and recycled) for any purpose other than for use in a process resulting 
in its transformation or its destruction; for use as a refrigerant in 
equipment manufactured before January 1, 2020; for use as a fire 
suppression streaming agent listed as acceptable for use or acceptable 
subject to narrowed use limits for nonresidential applications in 
accordance with the regulations at subpart G of this part and only to 
the extent permitted under paragraph (g)(5)(ii) of this section; for 
export to Article 5 Parties under Sec.  82.18(a); as a transhipment or 
heel; or for exemptions permitted under paragraph (f) of this section.
    (ii) HCFC-123 that was produced or imported on or after January 1, 
2020 may be used as a fire suppression streaming agent only to service 
equipment manufactured before January 1, 2020. HCFC-123 that was 
produced or imported prior to January 1, 2020 (or used, recovered and 
recycled) may be used as a fire suppression streaming agent in 
equipment manufactured before, on, or after January 1, 2020.
    (iii) Notwithstanding the prohibition on use in paragraph (g)(5)(i) 
of this section, the use of HCFC-123 as a refrigerant in equipment 
manufactured on or after January 1, 2020 but before January 1, 2021 is 
permitted if the conditions of this paragraph (g)(5)(iii) are met. The 
HCFC-123 must be in the possession of an entity that will complete the 
manufacture of the appliance and imported prior to January 1, 2020. The 
appliance components must be ready for shipment to a construction 
location prior to July 24, 2019 and be specified in a building permit 
or a contract dated before July 24, 2019 for use on a particular 
project. All HCFC-123 used to service such appliances on or after 
January 1, 2021 must be used, recovered, or recycled.
* * * * *

0
10. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.15 by adding paragraphs 
(b)(3) and (g)(8) to read as follows:

Sec.  82.15  Prohibitions for class II controlled substances.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) No person may import for purposes of destruction, at any time 
in any control period, a class II controlled substance for which EPA 
has apportioned baseline production and consumption allowances, without 
having submitted a certification of intent to import for destruction to 
the Administrator and received a non-objection notice in accordance 
with Sec.  82.24(c)(6). A person issued a non-objection notice for the 
import of an individual shipment of class II controlled substances for 
destruction may not transfer or confer the right to import and may not 
import any more than the exact quantity (in kilograms) of the class II 
controlled substance stated in the non-objection notice. For imports 
intended to be destroyed in the United States, a person issued a non-
objection notice must destroy the controlled substance within one year 
of the date stamped on the non-objection letter, may not transfer or 
confer the right to import, and may not import any more than the exact 
quantity (in kilograms) of the class II controlled substance stated in 
the non-objection notice. Every kilogram of import of class II 
controlled substance in excess of the quantity stated in the non-
objection notice issued by the Administrator in accordance with Sec.  
82.24(c)(6) constitutes a separate violation of this subpart.
* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (8) No person may sell or distribute, or offer for sale or 
distribution, any class II substance that they know, or have reason to 
know, was imported in violation of this section, except for such 
actions needed to re-export the controlled substance. Every kilogram of 
a controlled substance imported in contravention of this paragraph 
(g)(8) that is sold or distributed, or offered for sale or 
distribution, constitutes a separate violation of this subpart.

0
11. Amend Sec.  82.16 by removing the heading from paragraph (a) and 
revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  82.16  Phaseout schedule of class II controlled substances.

    (a)(1) Calendar-year allowances. In each control period as 
indicated in the

[[Page 15297]]

following tables, each person is granted the specified percentage of 
baseline production allowances and baseline consumption allowances for 
the specified class II controlled substances apportioned under 
Sec. Sec.  82.17 and 82.19:

                                           Table 1 to Paragraph (a)--Calendar-Year HCFC Production Allowances
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Percent of      Percent of      Percent of      Percent of      Percent of      Percent of      Percent of
             Control period                  HCFC-141b        HCFC-22        HCFC-142b       HCFC-123        HCFC-124       HCFC-225ca      HCFC-225cb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2004....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2005....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2006....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2007....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2008....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2009....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2010....................................               0            41.9            0.47               0             125             125             125
2011....................................               0              32             4.9               0             125             125             125
2012....................................               0            17.7             4.9               0             125             125             125
2013....................................               0            30.1             4.9               0             125             125             125
2014....................................               0            26.1             4.9               0             125             125             125
2015....................................               0            21.7            0.37               0               5               0               0
2016....................................               0            21.7            0.32               0               5               0               0
2017....................................               0            21.7            0.26               0               5               0               0
2018....................................               0            21.7            0.21               0               5               0               0
2019....................................               0            21.7            0.16               0               5               0               0
2020....................................               0               0               0               0             5.0               0               0
2021....................................               0               0               0               0             5.0               0               0
2022....................................               0               0               0               0             5.0               0               0
2023....................................               0               0               0               0             4.4               0               0
2024....................................               0               0               0               0             3.8               0               0
2025....................................               0               0               0               0             3.2               0               0
2026....................................               0               0               0               0             2.5               0               0
2027....................................               0               0               0               0             1.9               0               0
2028....................................               0               0               0               0             1.3               0               0
2029....................................               0               0               0               0             0.7               0               0
2030....................................               0               0               0               0               0               0               0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                           Table 2 to Paragraph (a)--Calendar-Year HCFC Consumption Allowances
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Percent of      Percent of      Percent of      Percent of      Percent of      Percent of      Percent of
             Control period                  HCFC-141b        HCFC-22        HCFC-142b       HCFC-123        HCFC-124       HCFC-225ca      HCFC-225cb
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2004....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2005....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2006....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2007....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2008....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2009....................................               0             100             100  ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
2010....................................               0            41.9            0.47             125             125             125             125
2011....................................               0              32             4.9             125             125             125             125
2012....................................               0            17.7             4.9             125             125             125             125
2013....................................               0              18             4.9             125             125             125             125
2014....................................               0            14.2             4.9             125             125             125             125
2015....................................               0               7             1.7             100             8.3               0               0
2016....................................               0             5.6             1.5             100             8.3               0               0
2017....................................               0             4.2             1.2             100             8.3               0               0
2018....................................               0             2.8               1             100             8.3               0               0
2019....................................               0             1.4             0.7             100             8.3               0               0
2020....................................               0               0               0            32.3             8.3               0               0
2021....................................               0               0               0            32.3             8.3               0               0
2022....................................               0               0               0            32.3             8.3               0               0
2023....................................               0               0               0            28.4             7.3               0               0
2024....................................               0               0               0            24.4             6.3               0               0
2025....................................               0               0               0            20.4             5.3               0               0
2026....................................               0               0               0            16.4             4.2               0               0
2027....................................               0               0               0            12.5             3.2               0               0
2028....................................               0               0               0             8.5             2.2               0               0
2029....................................               0               0               0             4.5             1.1               0               0
2030....................................               0               0               0               0               0               0               0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (e)(1) Effective January 1, 2020, no person may produce HCFC-22 or 
HCFC-142b for any purpose other than for use in a process resulting in 
their

[[Page 15298]]

transformation or their destruction, for export under Sec.  82.18(a) 
using unexpended Article 5 allowances, or for exemptions permitted in 
Sec.  82.15(f). Effective January 1, 2020, no person may import HCFC-22 
or HCFC-142b for any purpose other than for use in a process resulting 
in their transformation or their destruction or for exemptions 
permitted in Sec.  82.15(f).
    (2) Effective January 1, 2020, no person may produce HCFC-123 for 
any purpose other than for use in a process resulting in its 
transformation or its destruction, for use as a refrigerant in 
equipment manufactured before January 1, 2020, for export under Sec.  
82.18(a) using unexpended Article 5 allowances, or for exemptions 
permitted in Sec.  82.15(f). Effective January 1, 2020, no person may 
import HCFC-123 for any purpose other than for use in a process 
resulting in its transformation or its destruction, for use as a 
refrigerant in equipment manufactured before January 1, 2020, for use 
as a fire suppression streaming agent in equipment manufactured before 
January 1, 2020 and listed as acceptable for use or acceptable subject 
to narrowed use limits for nonresidential applications, or for 
exemptions permitted in Sec.  82.15(f).
* * * * *

0
12. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.23 by:
0
a. Removing and reserving paragraph (a)(i)(F); and
0
b. Adding paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (ii).
    The additions read as follows:

Sec.  82.23  Transfers of allowances of class II controlled substances.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) A person (transferor) may only convert allowances for one class 
II controlled substance for which EPA has issued allowances under Sec.  
82.16 to another class II controlled substance for which EPA has issued 
allowances under Sec.  82.16.
    (ii) [Reserved]
* * * * *

0
13. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.24 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(1);
0
b. Removing and reserving paragraph (b)(1)(iv);
0
c. In paragraph (b)(1)(viii), adding ``and'' at the end of the 
paragraph;
0
d. Removing and reserving paragraph (b)(1)(ix);
0
e. In paragraph (b)(1)(x), removing ``; and'' and adding a period in 
its place;
0
f. Removing paragraph (b)(1)(xi);
0
g. Revising paragraph (b)(2)(iv);
0
h. In paragraph (b)(2)(xi), adding ``and'' at the end of the paragraph;
0
i. Removing and reserving paragraph (b)(2)(xii);
0
j. In paragraph (b)(2)(xiii), removing the semicolon and adding a 
period in its place;
0
k. Removing paragraph (b)(2)(xiv);
0
l. Removing and reserving paragraph (c)(1)(vi);
0
m. Removing paragraphs (c)(1)(x) and (xi);
0
n. In paragraph (c)(2)(xiv), add ``and'' at the end of the paragraph;
0
o. Removing paragraph (c)(2)(xvi);
0
p. Revising paragraphs (c)(3)(i) through (iii), (vi), and (viii) 
through (xiii), (c)(4)(i)(A), and (c)(4)(vii);
0
q. Adding paragraphs (c)(6) through (11);
0
r. Revising paragraphs (d)(1) introductory text and (d)(1)(iii);
0
s. Removing and reserving paragraph (d)(2); and
0
t. Removing paragraph (g).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  82.24   Recordkeeping and reporting requirements for class II 
controlled substances.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Reports required by this section must be submitted to the 
Administrator within 45 days of the end of the applicable reporting 
period, unless otherwise specified. Starting May 18, 2020, reports that 
are available for submission through the Central Data Exchange must be 
submitted electronically through that tool.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iv) Dated records of the quantity (in kilograms) of class II 
controlled substances produced with Article 5 allowances;
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) The name, commodity code and quantity (in kilograms) of the 
used class II controlled substance to be imported;
    (ii) The name and address of the importer, the importer ID number, 
the contact person, email address, and phone number;
    (iii) Name, address, contact person, email address, and phone 
number of all previous source facilities from which the used class II 
controlled substance was recovered;
* * * * *
    (vi) Name, address, contact person, email address, and phone number 
of the exporter and of all persons to whom the material was transferred 
or sold after it was recovered from the source facility;
* * * * *
    (viii) A description of the intended use of the used class II 
controlled substance, and, when possible, the name, address, contact 
person, email address, and phone number of the ultimate purchaser in 
the United States;
    (ix) The name, address, contact person, email address, and phone 
number of the U.S. reclamation facility, where applicable;
    (x) If someone at the source facility recovered the class II 
controlled substance from the equipment, the name, email address, and 
phone number of that person;
    (xi) If the imported class II controlled substance was reclaimed in 
a foreign Party, the name, address, contact person, email address, and 
phone number of any or all foreign reclamation facility(ies) 
responsible for reclaiming the cited shipment;
    (xii) The export license, application for an export license, or 
official communication acknowledging the export from the appropriate 
government agency in the country of export and, if recovered in another 
country, the export license or official communication from the 
appropriate government agency in that country, and quantity authorized 
for export in kilograms on the export license, and an English 
translation of these documents;
    (xiii) If the imported used class II controlled substance is 
intended to be sold as a refrigerant in the United States, the name, 
address, and email address of the EPA-certified U.S. reclaimer who will 
bring the material to the standard required under subpart F of this 
part, if not already reclaimed to those specifications; and
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) If the Administrator determines that the information is 
insufficient, that is, if the petition lacks or appears to lack any of 
the information required under paragraph (c)(3) of this section or 
other information that may be requested during the review of the 
petition necessary to verify that the controlled substance is used;
* * * * *
    (vii) A person receiving the non-objection notice is permitted to 
import the individual shipment only within one year of the date stamped 
on the non-objection notice.
* * * * *
    (6) Certification of intent to import for destruction. For each 
individual shipment of a class II controlled substance imported with 
the intent to destroy that substance, an importer must submit 
electronically to the

[[Page 15299]]

Administrator, at least 30 working days before the shipment is to leave 
the foreign port of export, the following information:
    (i) Name, commodity code, and quantity in kilograms of each 
controlled substance to be imported;
    (ii) Name and address of the importer, the importer ID number, and 
the contact person's name, email address, and phone number;
    (iii) Name and address of any intermediary who aggregates 
controlled substances imported for destruction, and the contact 
person's name, email address, and phone number;
    (iv) The U.S. port of entry for the import, the expected date of 
shipment and the vessel transporting the material. If at the time of 
submitting the certification of intent to import for destruction the 
importer does not know the U.S. port of entry, the expected date of 
shipment and the vessel transporting the material, and the importer 
receives a non-objection notice for the individual shipment in the 
petition, the importer is required to notify the Administrator of this 
information prior to the entry of the individual shipment into the 
United States;
    (v) Name, address, contact person, email address, and phone number 
of the responsible party at the destruction facility;
    (vi) The export license, application for an export license, or 
official communication acknowledging the export from the appropriate 
government agency in the country of export and, if recovered in another 
country, the export license or official communication from the 
appropriate government agency in that country, and quantity authorized 
for export in kilograms on the export license, and an English 
translation of these documents; and
    (vii) A certification of accuracy of the information submitted in 
the certification.
    (7) Destruction verification. For each individual shipment of a 
class II controlled substance imported with the intent to destroy that 
substance, an importer must submit to the Administrator a copy of the 
destruction verification within 30 days after destruction of the 
controlled substance(s).
    (8) Review of certification of intent to import for destruction. 
(i) Starting on the first working day following receipt by the 
Administrator of a certification of intent to import a class II 
controlled substance for destruction, the Administrator will initiate a 
review of the information submitted under paragraph (c)(6) of this 
section and take action within 30 working days to issue either an 
objection notice or a non-objection notice for the individual shipment 
to the person who submitted the certification of intent to import the 
class II controlled substance for destruction.
    (ii) The Administrator may issue an objection notice if the 
petition lacks or appears to lack any of the information required under 
paragraph (c)(6) of this section or for the reasons listed in 
paragraphs (c)(4)(i)(B) through (E) of this section.
    (iii) In cases where the Administrator does not object to the 
petition, the Administrator will issue a non-objection notice.
    (iv) To pass the approved class II controlled substances through 
U.S. Customs, the non-objection notice issued by EPA must accompany the 
shipment through U.S. Customs.
    (v) If for some reason, following EPA's issuance of a non-objection 
notice, new information is brought to EPA's attention which shows that 
the non-objection notice was issued based on false information, then 
EPA has the right to:
    (A) Revoke the non-objection notice;
    (B) Pursue all means to ensure that the class II controlled 
substance is not imported into the United States; and
    (C) Take appropriate enforcement actions.
    (9) Timing of import. A person receiving the non-objection notice 
is permitted to import the individual shipment only within one year of 
the date stamped on the non-objection notice.
    (10) Additional recordkeeping requirements--importers of used, 
recycled, or reclaimed controlled substances. A person receiving a non-
objection notice from the Administrator for a certification of intent 
to import class II controlled substances for destruction must maintain 
the following records:
    (i) A copy of the certificate of intent to import for destruction;
    (ii) The EPA non-objection notice;
    (iii) A copy of the export license, export license application, or 
official communication from the appropriate government agency in the 
country of export;
    (iv) U.S. Customs entry documents for the import that must include 
one of the commodity codes from appendix K to this subpart;
    (v) The date, amount, and type of controlled substance sent for 
destruction, per shipment;
    (vi) An invoice from the destruction facility verifying the 
shipment was received;
    (vii) A copy of the destruction verification from the destruction 
facility; and
    (viii) An English translation of the document in paragraph 
(c)(10)(iii) of this section.
    (11) Recordkeeping requirements-aggregators. A person identified in 
paragraph (c)(6)(iii) of this section as aggregating a controlled 
substance prior to destruction must:
    (i) Maintain transactional records that include the name and 
address of the entity from whom they received the controlled substance 
imported for destruction;
    (ii) Maintain transactional records that include the name and 
address of the entity to whom they sent the controlled substance 
imported for destruction;
    (iii) Maintain records that include the date and quantity of the 
imported controlled substance received for destruction;
    (iv) Maintain records that include the date and quantity of the 
imported controlled substance sent for destruction; and
    (v) If the person is the final aggregator of such a controlled 
substance before the material is destroyed, maintain a copy of the 
destruction verification.
    (d) * * *
    (1) Reporting requirements--exporters. For any exports of class II 
controlled substances not reported under paragraph (b)(2) of this 
section (reporting for producers of class II controlled substances), 
each exporter who exported a class II controlled substance must submit 
to the Administrator the following information within 30 days after the 
end of each quarter in which the unreported exports left the United 
States:
* * * * *
    (iii) The type and quantity of each class II controlled substance 
exported, including the quantity of controlled substance that is used, 
reclaimed, or recycled;
* * * * *

0
14. Effective April 16, 2020, revise appendix K to subpart A to read as 
follows:

[[Page 15300]]

 Appendix K to Subpart A of Part 82--Commodity Codes From the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule for Controlled Substances and Used Controlled Substances
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Commodity code
        Description of commodity or chemical            from harmonized
                                                        tariff schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class II:
    HCFC-22 (Chlorodifluoromethane).................        2903.71.0000
    HCFC-123 (Dichlorotrifluoroethane)..............        2903.72.0020
    HCFC-124 (Monochlorotetrafluoroethane)..........        2903.79.1000
    HCFC-141b (Dichlorofluoroethane)................        2903.73.0000
    HCFC-142b (Chlorodifluoroethane)................        2903.74.0000
    HCFC-225ca, HCFC-225cb                                  2903.75.0000
     (Dichloropentafluoropropanes)..................
    HCFC-21, HCFC-31, HCFC-133, and other HCFCs.....        2903.79.9070
    HCFC Mixtures (R-401A, R-402A, etc.)............        3824.74.0000
Class I:
    CFC-11 (Trichlorofluoromethane).................        2903.77.0010
    CFC-12 (Dichlorodifluoromethane)................        2903.77.0050
    CFC-113 (Trichlorotrifluoroethane)..............        2903.77.0020
    CFC-114 (Dichlorotetrafluoroethane).............        2903.77.0030
    CFC-115 (Monochloropentafluoroethane)...........        2903.77.0040
    CFC-13, CFC-111, CFC-112, CFC-211, CFC-212, CFC-        2903.77.0080
     213, CFC-214, CFC-215, CFC-216, CFC-217, and
     other CFCs.....................................
    CFC Mixtures (R-500, R-502, etc.)...............        3824.71.0100
    Carbon Tetrachloride............................        2903.14.0000
    Halon 1301 (Bromotrifluoromethane)..............        2903.76.0010
    Halon, other....................................        2903.76.0050
    Methyl Bromide..................................        2903.39.1520
    Methyl Chloroform...............................        2903.19.6010
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
15. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.62 by adding, in 
alphabetical order, the definition for ``Polyurethane Foam System'' to 
read as follows:

Sec.  82.62   Definitions.

* * * * *
    Polyurethane Foam System means an item consisting of two transfer 
pumps that deliver ingredients (polyisocyanate or isocyanate from one 
side and a mixture including the blowing agent, catalysts, flame 
retardants, and/or stabilizers from the other side) to a metering/
mixing device which allows the components to be delivered in the 
appropriate proportions.
* * * * *

0
16. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.64 by adding paragraph (h) 
to read as follows:

Sec.  82.64  Prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (h) No person may sell or distribute, or offer to sell or 
distribute, in interstate commerce any of the products identified as 
being nonessential in Sec.  82.66(f).

0
17. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.66 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (d)(2)(vi) and (e); and
0
b. Adding paragraph (f).
    The revisions and addition read as follows:

Sec.  82.66  Nonessential Class I products and exceptions.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (vi) Document preservation sprays which contain CFC-113 as a 
solvent, but which contain no other CFCs, and/or document preservation 
sprays which contain CFC-12 as a propellant, but which contain no other 
CFCs, and which are used solely on thick books, books with coated or 
dense paper and tightly bound documents;
    (e) Any air-conditioning or refrigeration appliance as defined in 
the Clean Air Act (CAA) 601(1) that contains a Class I substance used 
as a refrigerant; and
    (f) Any polyurethane foam system that contains any CFC.

0
18. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.104 by revising paragraphs 
(c) and (h) to read as follows:

Sec.  82.104  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (c) Completely destroy means to cause the destruction of a 
controlled substance by one of the destruction processes approved by 
the Parties and listed in Sec.  82.3 at a demonstrable destruction 
efficiency of 98 percent or more or a greater destruction efficiency if 
required under other applicable Federal regulations.
* * * * *
    (h) Destruction means the expiration of a controlled substance to 
the destruction efficiency actually achieved, unless considered 
completely destroyed as defined in this section. Such destruction might 
result in a commercially useful end product but such usefulness would 
be secondary to the act of destruction. Destruction must be achieved 
using one of the controlled processes approved by the Parties and 
listed in the definition of destruction in Sec.  82.3.
* * * * *

0
19. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.106 by revising paragraph 
(a) to read as follows:

Sec.  82.106   Warning statement requirements.

    (a) Required warning statements. (1) Unless otherwise exempted by 
this subpart, each container or product identified in Sec.  82.102(a) 
or (b) shall bear the following warning statement, meeting the 
requirements of this subpart for placement and form:
    WARNING: Contains [or Manufactured with, if applicable] [insert 
name of substance], a substance which harms public health and 
environment by destroying ozone in the upper atmosphere.
    (2) Each container of fire suppression agent containing HCFC-123 
produced or imported on or after January 1, 2020 shall bear the 
following warning statement, meeting the requirements of this subpart 
for placement and form:
    WARNING: Contains [insert name of substance], a substance which 
harms public health and environment by destroying ozone in the upper 
atmosphere. Use Only for Recharge of

[[Page 15301]]

Equipment Manufactured before January 1, 2020.
    (3) Each container of fire suppression agent containing reclaimed 
HCFC-123 or HCFC-123 that was imported prior to January 1, 2020, shall 
bear the following warning statement, meeting the requirements of this 
subpart for placement and form:
    WARNING: Contains [insert name of substance], a substance which 
harms public health and environment by destroying ozone in the upper 
atmosphere. For use in any equipment.
* * * * *

0
20. Effective April 16, 2020, amend Sec.  82.270 by revising paragraph 
(e) to read as follows:

Sec.  82.270  Prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (e) No person shall dispose of halon except by sending it for 
recycling to a recycler operating in accordance with NFPA 10 and NFPA 
12A standards, or by arranging for its destruction using one of the 
controlled processes approved by the Parties and listed in the 
definition of destruction in Sec.  82.3.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-28020 Filed 3-16-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P