Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Listing of Substitutes for Ozone-Depleting Substances–Hydrocarbon Refrigerants
Federal Information & News Dispatch, Inc. |
Final rule.
CFR Part: "40 CFR Part 82"
RIN Number: "RIN 2060-AP54"
Citation: "76 FR 78832"
Document Number: "EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0286; FRL-9507-7"
"Rules and Regulations"
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the
EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective on
ADDRESSES:
Publicly available docket materials can be found either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. General Information
A. Background
B. Does this action apply to me?
C. Which acronyms and abbreviations are used in the preamble?
II. How does the SNAP program work?
A. What are the statutory requirements and authority for the SNAP program?
B. What are
D. Where can I get additional information about the SNAP program?
III. What did
A. Proposed Rule
IV. What is the basis for
A. Environmental Impacts
B. Flammability
C. Asphyxiation
D. Toxicity
V. What is
A.
B. New Equipment Only; Not Intended for Use as a Retrofit Alternative
C. Compliance With UL Standards
D. Charge Size Limitation (Household Refrigeration)
E. Charge Size Limitation (Retail Food Refrigeration)
F. Labeling
G. Color-Coded Hoses and Piping
H. Unique Fittings
I. Small Containers
J. Use of Hydrocarbon Refrigerants in Other End-Uses
K. Training
L. Other Options Considered
M. Other Comments on Proposed Rule
VI. What other changes is
A. Propane as Substitute for R-502
B. Wording of Use Conditions for Labeling
C. "Further Information" Column in Listing Decisions
<p>VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
K. Congressional Review Act
VIII. References
I. General Information
A. Background
This rule pertains to three hydrocarbon refrigerants: Isobutane, propane, and R-441A. Hydrocarbon refrigerants have been in use for over 15 years in countries such as
The 2010 Report of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)'s
FOOTNOTE 1 RTOC, 2010, pp. 50, 51, 64. END FOOTNOTE
Because hydrocarbon refrigerants have zero ozone depletion potential (ODP) and very low global warming potential (GWP) compared to other refrigerants, many companies are interested in using them in
The submitter of R-441A--
FOOTNOTE 2 The submitter has informed
1. What are isobutane, propane, and R-441A?
Isobutane and propane are hydrocarbons, and R-441A is a blend of hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbons are flammable organic compounds made up of hydrogen and carbon.
Isobutane, also called 2-methylpropane, has four carbon atoms, the chemical formula C4 H10, and a branched structure. It is often written as CH(CH3)2 -CH3 to distinguish it from butane, a straight-chain hydrocarbon with the same chemical formula. Isobutane's Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) Registry Number is 75-28-5. As a refrigerant, isobutane is designated as R-600a by the
Propane has three carbon atoms, the chemical formula C3 H8, and the CAS Number 74-98-6. As a refrigerant, propane has ASHRAE designation R-290. It is also referred to as HC-290 and CH3 CH2 CH3.
R-441A is a blend of four hydrocarbons: Ethane (3.1 percent by mass), propane (54.8 percent by mass), isobutane (6.0 percent by mass), and butane (36.1 percent by mass). This blend was originally submitted to
FOOTNOTE 3 See Addendum g to Standard 34-2010. END FOOTNOTE
ASHRAE Standard 34-2010 categorizes isobutane, propane, and R-441A in the A3 safety group. ASHRAE's safety group classification consists of two alphanumeric characters (e.g., A2 or B1). The capital letter indicates the toxicity, and the numeral denotes the flammability.
Figure 1 illustrates these safety group classifications.
See Illustration in Original Document.
ASHRAE classifies Class A refrigerants as refrigerants for which toxicity has not been identified at concentrations less than 400 ppm by volume, based on data used to determine a workplace exposure limit for long-term exposure, such as a threshold limit value-time-weighted average (TLV-TWA) or consistent indices. Class B refrigerants show evidence of toxicity below 400 ppm on an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA).
Refrigerants also receive one of three possible flammability classifications: 1 (no flame propagation), 2 (lower flammability), or 3 (higher flammability). Class 3 refrigerants exhibit flame propagation at 60 [degrees] C and 101.3 kPa, and have either a lower flammability limit (LFL) of less than or equal to 0.10 kg/m3 or a heat of combustion greater than or equal to 19,000 kJ/kg.
2. Which end-uses are covered in our final decision?
a. Household Refrigerators, Freezers, and Combination Refrigerators and Freezers
This end-use, which we refer to as "household refrigeration" in this preamble, consists of appliances that are intended primarily for residential use, although they may be used outside the home. Household freezers offer storage space only at freezing temperatures. Products with both a refrigerator and freezer in a single unit are most common. This final rule includes a use condition that limits the refrigerant charge in this end-use to 57 grams (2.0 ounces) or less for each sealed refrigeration system (i.e., compressor, condenser, evaporator, and refrigerant piping).
b. Retail Food Refrigerators and Freezers (Stand-Alone Units Only)
This end-use, which we refer to as "retail food refrigeration" in this preamble, includes the refrigeration systems, including cold storage cases, designed to chill food or keep it at a cold temperature for commercial sale. This final rule addresses the use of hydrocarbons in stand-alone units only. A stand-alone appliance is one using a hermetically-sealed compressor and for which all refrigerant-containing components, including but not limited to at least one compressor, condenser, and evaporator, are assembled into a single piece of equipment before delivery to the ultimate consumer or user. Such equipment does not require addition or removal of refrigerant when placed into initial operation. Stand-alone equipment is used to store chilled beverages or frozen products. Examples include reach-in beverage coolers and stand-alone ice cream cabinets. Our acceptability determination does not apply to large refrigeration systems such as walk-in coolers or the direct expansion refrigeration systems typically found in retail food stores. It also does not apply to vending machines.
This final rule includes a use condition that limits the refrigerant charge in this end-use to 150 grams (5.3 ounces) or less.
B. Does this action apply to me?
This final rule lists the use of three alternative refrigerants in two end-uses: Household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrigerators and freezers; and retail food refrigerators and freezers (stand-alone units only). Potentially regulated entities that may use isobutane (R-600a) or R-441A in household refrigeration or propane (R-290) in retail food refrigeration include:
Table 1--Potentially Regulated Entities, byNorth American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) Code or Subsector Category NAICS code Description of regulated or subsector entities Industry 333415 Manufacturers of refrigerators, freezers, and other refrigerating or freezing equipment, electric or other; heat pumps not elsewhere specified or included (NESOI); and parts thereof. Industry 443111 Appliance Stores: Household-type. Industry 445120 Convenience Stores. Industry 445110 Supermarkets and Other Grocery (except Convenience) Stores. Industry 722211 Limited-Service Restaurants. Industry 238220 Plumbing, Heating, and Air Conditioning Contractors. Industry 811412 Appliance Repair and Maintenance. Industry 423620 Electrical and Electronic Appliance, Television, and Radio Set Merchant Wholesalers. Industry 423740 Refrigeration Equipment and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers.
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather functions as a guide regarding entities that are likely to use the substitute whose use is regulated by this action. If you have any questions about whether this action applies to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the preceding section, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
C. Which acronyms and abbreviations are used in the preamble?
Below is a list of acronyms and abbreviations used in the preamble of this rule.
AEGL--Acute Exposure Guideline Level
ASHRAE--
ANSI--
CAA--Clean Air Act
CAS--Chemical Abstracts Service
CBI--confidential business information
CFC--chlorofluorocarbon
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
CO2 --carbon dioxide
EPA--
FR--
FTA--Fault-Tree Analysis
GHG--greenhouse gas
GWP--global warming potential
HC--hydrocarbon
HCFC--hydrochlorofluorocarbon
HFC--hydrofluorocarbon
ICF--
ICR--information collection request
IEC--
kg--kilogram
LFL--lower flammability limit
NAICS--North American Industrial Classification System
NARA--
NOAEL--no observable adverse effect level
NPRM--notice of proposed rulemaking
NTTAA--National
OEM--original equipment manufacturer
ODP--ozone depletion potential
ODS--ozone-depleting substance
OMB--
OSHA--
PMS--Pantone(R) Matching System
ppm--parts per million
RFA--Regulatory Flexibility Act
RfC--reference concentration
RTOC--
SNAP--Significant New Alternatives Policy
TEAP--
TLV--Threshold Limit Value
TSCA--Toxic Substances Control Act
TUV--Technischer Uberwachungs-Verein (
TWA--time-weighted average
UL--
UMRA--Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
UNEP--United Nations Environment Programme
VOC--volatile organic compound
WGL--workplace guidance level
WMO--
II. How does the SNAP program work?
A. What are the statutory requirements and authority for the SNAP program?
Section 612 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires
1. Rulemaking
Section 612(c) requires
2. Listing of unacceptable/acceptable substitutes
Section 612(c) requires
3. Petition Process
Section 612(d) grants the right to any person to petition
4. 90-Day Notification
Section 612(e) directs
5. Outreach
Section 612(b)(1) states that the Administrator shall seek to maximize the use of federal research facilities and resources to assist users of class I and II substances in identifying and developing alternatives to the use of such substances in key commercial applications.
6. Clearinghouse
Section 612(b)(4) requires the Agency to set up a public clearinghouse of alternative chemicals, product substitutes, and alternative manufacturing processes that are available for products and manufacturing processes which use class I and II substances.
B. What are
On
Section 612 of the CAA requires
Under the SNAP regulations, anyone who plans to market or produce a substitute to replace a class I substance or class II substance in one of the eight major industrial use sectors must provide notice to the Agency, including health and safety information on the substitute, at least 90 days before introducing it into interstate commerce for significant new use as an alternative. This requirement applies to the persons planning to introduce the substitute into interstate commerce, /4/ which typically are chemical manufacturers but may include importers, formulators, equipment manufacturers, and end-users. /5/ The regulations identify certain narrow exemptions from the notification requirement, such as research and development and test marketing (40 CFR 82.176(b)(4) and (5), respectively).
FOOTNOTE 4 As defined at 40 CFR 82.104, "interstate commerce" means the distribution or transportation of any product between one state, territory, possession or the
FOOTNOTE 5 As defined at 40 CFR 82.172, "end-use" means processes or classes of specific applications within major industrial sectors where a substitute is used to replace an ODS. END FOOTNOTE
The Agency has identified four possible decision categories for substitutes that are submitted for evaluation: Acceptable; acceptable subject to use conditions; acceptable subject to narrowed use limits; and unacceptable (40 CFR 82.180(b)). Use conditions and narrowed use limits are both considered "use restrictions" and are explained in the paragraphs below. Substitutes that are deemed acceptable with no use restrictions (no use conditions or narrowed use limits) can be used for all applications within the relevant end-uses in the sector.
After reviewing a substitute, the Agency may determine that a substitute is acceptable only if certain conditions in the way that the substitute is used are met to minimize risks to human health and the environment.
For some substitutes, the Agency may permit a narrowed range of use within an end-use or sector. For example, the Agency may limit the use of a substitute to certain end-uses or specific applications within an industry sector.
The Agency publishes its SNAP program decisions in the
In contrast,
Many SNAP listings include "Comments" or "Further Information" to provide additional information on substitutes. Since this additional information is not part of the regulatory decision, these statements are not binding for use of the substitute under the SNAP program. However, regulatory requirements so listed are binding under other regulatory programs (e.g., worker protection regulations promulgated by the
D. Where can I get additional information about the SNAP program?
For copies of the comprehensive SNAP lists of substitutes or additional information on SNAP, refer to
III. What did
A. Proposed Rule
On
FOOTNOTE 6 CFC-12 is also referred to as R-12, CCl2 F2 and dichlorodifluoromethane. HCFC-22 is also referred to as R-22, CHClF2, chlorodifluoromethane, and difluorochloromethane. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 7 HCR-188C and HCR-188C1 submissions included window air conditioners as an end-use.
FOOTNOTE 8 R-502 is a blend of CFC-115 (51.2% by weight) and HCFC-22 (48.8%). CFC-115 is also referred to as R-115, C2 ClF5, chloropentafluoroethane, and pentafluorochloroethane. END FOOTNOTE
For each substitute,
(1) These refrigerants may be used only in new equipment designed specifically and clearly identified for the refrigerant (i.e., none of these substitutes may be used as a conversion or "retrofit" refrigerant for existing equipment).
(2) These refrigerants may be used only in refrigerators or freezers that meet all requirements listed in the 10th edition of
(3) The quantity of the substitute refrigerant (i.e., "charge size") in a refrigerator or freezer shall not exceed 57 grams (2.0 ounces) in the household refrigeration end-use or 150 grams (5.3 ounces) in the retail food refrigeration end-use.
(4) Similar to clauses SA6.1.1 to SA6.1.2 of UL 250 and SB6.1.2 to SB6.1.5 of UL 471, the following markings, or the equivalent, shall be provided and shall be permanent:
(a) "DANGER--Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Do Not Use Mechanical Devices To Defrost Refrigerator. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing."
(b) "DANGER--Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. To Be Repaired Only By Trained Service Personnel. Do Not Use Mechanical Devices. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing."
(c) "CAUTION--Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner's Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Precautions Must be Followed."
(d) "CAUTION--Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properly In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used."
(e) "CAUTION--Risk of Fire or Explosion Due To Puncture Of Refrigerant Tubing; Follow Handling Instructions Carefully. Flammable Refrigerant Used."
The marking described in clause (a) above shall be permanently attached on or near any evaporators that can be contacted by the consumer. The markings described in clauses (b) and (c) above shall be located near the machine compartment. The marking described in clause (d) above shall be permanently attached on the exterior of the refrigerator. The marking described in clause (e) above shall be permanently attached near any and all exposed refrigerant tubing. All of these markings shall be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) high.
(5) The refrigerator or freezer must have red, Pantone(R) Matching System (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, or other devices through which the refrigerant passes, typically known as the service port, to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be applied at all service ports and parts of the unit where service puncturing or otherwise creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected, and must extend a minimum of 1 inch in both directions from such locations.
(6) The refrigerator or freezer must have service aperture fittings that differ from fittings used in equipment or containers using non-flammable refrigerant. "Differ" means that either the diameter must differ by at least 1/16 inch or the thread direction must be reversed. The unique fittings must be permanently affixed to the unit and may not be accessed with an adaptor until the end-of-life of the unit.
(7) These refrigerants may not be sold for use as a refrigerant in containers designed to contain less than 5 pounds (2.3 kg) /9/ of refrigerant.
FOOTNOTE 9 The proposed rule inadvertently represented 5 pounds as 2.8 kilograms instead of 2.3 kg, which is accurate. END FOOTNOTE
The proposed rule also included several recommendations classified as "Further Information." These addressed personal protective equipment, proximity to a Class B dry powder-type fire extinguisher, proper ventilation, use of spark-proof tools, recovery equipment, training, refrigerant storage, and evacuation.
Finally, in the proposed rule,
* The availability of industry-wide training on flammable refrigerants for refrigerant technicians;
* Whether EPA should limit the use of hydrocarbon refrigerants only for use in the original equipment manufacturers' (OEMs') specific appliances, as described in the application;
* Whether the use conditions should require "spark-proof" circuits in the design of equipment using hydrocarbon refrigerants;
* The availability in the U.S. of recovery units that are designed specifically for hydrocarbons;
* Whether EPA should, in a future rulemaking, consider an exemption for hydrocarbon refrigerants from the venting prohibition under section 608 of the Clean Air Act;
* Whether EPA should require only one condition for each refrigerant: to meet the UL 250 or 471 standards; and
* Whether EPA should find hydrocarbon refrigerants unacceptable until an industry-wide standard exists for servicing refrigerators and freezers using hydrocarbon refrigerants.
After considering the comments received on the proposed rule,
For each of the listing decisions finalized in this action, we are establishing the following use conditions after considering comments on the proposed rule:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6) Based on the comments received,
(7) Based on the comments received,
IV. What is the basis for
To determine whether these three substitutes present risks that are lower than or comparable to risks from other substitutes that are currently or potentially available in the end-uses under consideration, we examined the criteria in 40 CFR 82.180(a)(7), focusing in particular on the following areas of concern: Impacts on stratospheric ozone and climate; volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions; flammability; asphyxiation risks for consumers and end-users; and toxicity risks to workers, consumers, and the general population.
In support of the proposed rule, in 2009,
Based on the information provided in the risk screens,
A. Environmental Impacts
A chemical's ODP is the ratio of its impact on stratospheric ozone compared to the impact of an identical mass of CFC-11. /10/ The ODP of CFC-11 is defined as 1.0. Other CFCs and HCFCs have ODPs ranging from 0.01 to 1.0 (WMO, 2011). The ODP of HCFC-22 is 0.055, and the ODP of R-502 is 0.334. The three substitutes discussed in this rule have an ODP of zero, as do other common substitutes in the same end-uses, such as HFC-134a, R-404A, and R-410A.
FOOTNOTE 10 CFC-11, CAS registry No. 75-69-4, is also referred to as R-11, CCl3 F and trichlorofluoromethane. END FOOTNOTE
The GWP of a greenhouse gas (GHG) quantifies its potential integrated climate forcing relative to carbon dioxide (CO2) over a specified time horizon. The 100-year integrated GWPs of isobutane, propane, and R-441A are estimated to be 8 (GE, 2008), 3 (
FOOTNOTE 11 The submission for HCR-188C1, now known as R-441A, reported that the GWP of the substitute is "negligible or essentially zero." Because the main components of R-441A are the same as the main components of the HCR-188C formulation originally submitted, the GWP of R-441A is expected to be similar to that reported for the original formulation by
The overall climate impacts from the use of these refrigerants are also dependent upon the energy use by the appliances in which they are used, because the indirect climate impacts associated with electricity consumption typically exceed those from the refrigerants themselves over the full life cycle of refrigerant-containing products (ORNL, 1997). A hydrocarbon appliance that is more energy-efficient than the appliance it replaces would result in GHG emission reductions beyond those attributable to the substitute refrigerant alone. Conversely, the GHG benefits of a substitute refrigerant in a replacement hydrocarbon appliance would be offset if that appliance had lower energy efficiency than the appliance it replaces.
When GWP of HFC-134a is considered prohibitive in relation to HFC emissions (country regulation or company policy), hydrocarbon refrigerants (isobutane and propane, i.e. HC-600a and HC-290) or CO2 (R-744) are the current alternative solutions, presenting in most of the cases the same technical reliability and energy performance as HFC-134a. [p. 60]
Hydrocarbons are regulated as VOCs under sections of the CAA that address development of State Implementation Plans to attain and maintain National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ground-level ozone, which is a respiratory irritant (see 40 CFR 51.100(s)).
FOOTNOTE 12 As a percent of annual VOC emissions in the U.S., this represents approximately 5 x 10-6 percent (for isobutane in the household food refrigeration end-use) (ICF, 2009a and ICF, 2011a), 5 x 10-6 percent (for propane in the retail food refrigeration end-use) (ICF, 2009b and ICF, 2011b), and 3 x 10-7 percent (for R-441A in the household food refrigeration end-use) (ICF, 2009d and ICF, 2011c). END FOOTNOTE
Therefore, the use of these hydrocarbons in the household refrigeration and retail food refrigeration end-uses is sufficiently small that a switch from an ODS or from an HFC refrigerant would not have a noticeable impact on local air quality. International experts came to a similar conclusion in Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System: Special Report of the
Similarly,
B. Flammability
Because they are flammable, isobutane, propane, and R-441A could pose a significant safety hazard for workers and consumers if handled incorrectly. Isobutane, propane, and R-441A have lower flammability limits (LFLs) /13/ of 18,000 ppm, 21,000 ppm, and 16,000 ppm, respectively. The ODS for which these refrigerants are substitutes--CFC-12, HCFC-22, and R-502--and other substitutes available in this end-use are not flammable. When the concentration of a flammable refrigerant reaches or exceeds its LFL in the presence of an ignition source (e.g., a static electricity spark resulting from closing a door, use of a torch during servicing, or a short circuit in wiring that controls the motor of a compressor), an explosion or fire could occur.
FOOTNOTE 13 LFL is the minimum concentration in air at which flame propagation occurs. END FOOTNOTE
Flammability risks are of particular concern because household refrigeration appliances and retail food refrigeration appliances in
Therefore, in order for these substitutes to be used safely, it is important to minimize the presence of potential ignition sources and to reduce the likelihood that the levels of these refrigerants will reach their LFLs. Production facilities, and other facilities where large quantities of the refrigerant are stored, should have proper safety precautions in place to minimize the risk of explosion.
To determine whether the three hydrocarbon refrigerants would present flammability concerns for service and manufacture personnel or for consumers,
However, since hydrocarbon refrigerants are flammable, and manufacture personnel, service personnel, and consumers in the U.S. may not be widely familiar with refrigeration appliances containing flammable refrigerants, use conditions are necessary to create awareness of the presence of a flammable refrigerant and ensure safe handling. For this reason, this final rule includes use conditions in order to ensure that these substitutes present aggregate risks that are lower than or comparable to those of other substitutes that are currently or potentially available. This final rule also lists recommendations such as proper ventilation and storage practices, and use of appropriate tools and recovery equipment, to mitigate safety risks for manufacture and servicing personnel.
C. Asphyxiation
In evaluating potential human health impacts of isobutane, propane, and R-441A,
D. Toxicity
FOOTNOTE 14 Time-weighted average (TWA) = The average concentration of a specific substance in air over a specified time period-- e.g., during the course of an 8-hour work day. END FOOTNOTE
To assess occupational exposure for the household refrigeration and retail food refrigeration end-uses,
To assess consumer and end-user exposure for the household refrigeration end-use,
To assess consumer and end-user exposure for the retail food refrigeration end-use,
Finally,
FOOTNOTE 15 The RfC is a concentration designed to protect the general population against adverse systemic (i.e., non-cancer) health effects. END FOOTNOTE
V. What is
In this section,
A.
Comment: Ninety-nine commenters expressed unconditional support for
Response: We appreciate the support for our proposed action, and we are taking final action consistent with that proposal.
Comment: One commenter observed that although hydrocarbon refrigerants provide some environmental benefit by reducing GHG emissions, they pose flammability risks that more than offset that benefit. The commenter stated that the global warming impacts of HFC refrigerants are currently small due to their low emissions (except in the case of catastrophic leaks), and practices are in place to recover refrigerant and destroy foam at an appliance's end-of-life. The commenter also observed that hydrocarbon refrigerants could enter the refrigerant recovery/recycle chain during servicing or at the end-of-life, necessitating costly upgrades to recycle/recovery equipment in order to mitigate potential flammability risks.
Response:
With respect to the comment regarding risks during servicing and at end-of-life,
Section V.L (below) also discusses recovery equipment. Based on comments received,
Comment: Another commenter provided detailed comments on
1. A fault-tree analysis calculating the probability of failures that would lead to ignition of the refrigerant;
2. The results of an external leak test in a mockup kitchen to illustrate the consequences of an external leak;
3. The results of an internal leak test and a deflagration/explosion test to illustrate the consequences of an internal leak;
4. An observation about a manufacturer's major recall of certain models of isobutane refrigerators in 2009 as a result of safety incidents in
5. A statement of similar concerns about the use of propane in small commercial refrigeration systems.
This section of the preamble summarizes these comments and
Comment 1: Fault tree analysis.
Comment: The commenter included a fault-tree analysis (FTA) that assessed the probability of household refrigerator ignition events due to the random coincidence of ignition sources and internal refrigerant leaks. An FTA considers how likely different events are and how resistant a system is to various faults. The commenter's FTA analyzed several potential scenarios in which ignition events could take place in household refrigerators. The commenter's FTA calculated that isobutane household refrigerators in the U.S. would experience: (a) 2.9 ignition events per year at full market penetration as a result of independent, random events, and (b) an additional 2.5 ignition events for every 10 million refrigerators that enter the market due to a specific coupled failure in which the malfunction of the defrost heater is both the cause of the leak and the ignition source. The commenter concluded that
(a) Failure scenarios based on independent, random events. The commenter's FTA identified two events that, occurring simultaneously, could potentially lead to an ignition event: (1) An internal isobutane refrigerant leak and (2) the occurrence of an energy source with sufficient energy to cause ignition. The commenter's FTA identified and calculated probabilities for the different ways in which each of these events could happen.
To calculate the probability of an internal leak event, the commenter made assumptions regarding: The number of refrigerator repairs due to joint leakage and evaporator corrosion that might be related to a leak; the number of refrigerator repairs annually (based on the estimated amount of HFC-134a currently sold for use in servicing); and a multiplier accounting for the number of leaking refrigerators that would be thrown away instead of repaired. Based on these assumptions, the commenter estimated that isobutane refrigerators would experience approximately 260,000 internal leak failures per year in the U.S. at full market penetration (which the commenter estimated at approximately 150 million refrigerators).
To calculate the probability of an energy source with sufficient energy to cause ignition, the commenter's FTA estimated the probability of sparks from internal switches and controls, the defrost heater, and static electricity, asserting that any of these sparks would have sufficient energy to ignite a leak. The commenter's FTA calculated the likelihood of an ignition source as 11.2 in 1,000,000.
The commenter's FTA integrated the above assumptions and estimates to calculate an expected 2.9 ignition events per year at U.S. full market penetration.
(b) "Coupled leak failure" scenario. The commenter asserted that in addition to the random, independent events assessed above, the defrost heater presents a risk of a coupled failure because an electric short to the evaporator coil can be the cause of both the refrigerant leak and the ignition event. The commenter took three factors into account to determine the total number of ignition events from this coupled failure: (1) The probability that the defrost heater will short-circuit, (2) the probability that an arc from the defrost heater will cause a refrigerant leak, and (3) the probability that the refrigerant will be present in sufficient quantities to ignite (i.e., whether the concentration will be at the LFL or higher). The commenter estimated that for every 10 million household refrigerators using isobutane that are produced, there would be an estimated 2.5 failure events in which an electrical short to the evaporator coil causes both a refrigerant leak and an ignition over the lifetime of those units. The commenter clarified that this value is in addition to the ignition events calculated in the previous FTA, which would result from the coincidence of independent, random events.
Response: While EPA believes that the commenter has overestimated failure probabilities, we agree with the commenter that the risks associated with the use of isobutane in household refrigerators are greater than zero.
(a) Failure scenarios based on independent, random events. Regarding the failure scenarios based on independent, random events, we note that the commenter's discussion of methodology, the equation used for the calculation, and the calculations in the commenter's FTA were inconsistent with each other, making it difficult to evaluate what had been done. Based on the commenter's discussion of methodology,
As previously mentioned, the A.D. Little report calculated leak rates from historical leak rate data provided by three refrigerator manufacturers. A.D. Little distinguished "catastrophic" leaks (the loss of a significant portion of refrigerant charge over a few minutes) from "slow" leaks, observing that only catastrophic or "fast" leaks would allow refrigerant to accumulate to a level of concern. The report goes on to calculate the "average" risk that a leak is a fast leak as 0.1 percent and the "worst-case" risk that a leak is a fast leak as 1 percent.
Furthermore, today's rule finalizes use conditions that guard against the potential that refrigerant from a "fast" leak will be able to accumulate in amounts that reach the LFL, or that an ignition source would cause an ignition event in the case of a significant leak. The use conditions require any household refrigerator using isobutane to be designed specifically for use with flammable refrigerant in a manner that complies with the UL 250 Standard. UL 250,
(b) "Coupled leak failure" scenario.
Comment 2: External leak test.
The commenter presented results from an experiment that mimicked a leak from an isobutane refrigerator using a bottom-freezer refrigerator located inside a controlled ambient chamber and performed test measurements of isobutane levels in a mockup kitchen. The commenter stated that the experiment followed the leak procedure in the UL 250 standard, including the following setup:
* A kitchen intended to closely resemble a typical U.S. kitchen;
* A bottom-freezer refrigerator located inside a control ambient chamber;
* A 57-gram charge of isobutane; and
* Eight calibrated Henze-Hauck concentration sensors near potential ignition sources.
After running the test, the commenter stated that five sensors showed isobutane concentrations exceeding the LFL for several minutes. The commenter used these results as the basis of an assertion that
Response: To assess the commenter's experiment fully,
We note that the commenter's experiment was meant to simulate a worst-case scenario leak. Based on industry data in the A.D. Little report, the annual probability of a catastrophic leak outside a given refrigerator is typically 3.6 x 10-7, with a worst-case probability of 9.0 x 10-6.
The commenter did not provide the make and model of the refrigerator used, and did not describe whether it was designed specifically to use isobutane as a refrigerant. Since
The commenter's experiment leaked an unrealistically large amount of refrigerant, causing slightly higher measurements for isobutane concentrations than could be expected in the actual event of a leak. As described in Section V.D of this preamble (Charge Size Limitation--Household Refrigeration), the proposed and final rules limit the charge size for each sealed refrigerant system to 57 grams, with a use condition for compliance with the UL 250
The first of the five sensors that showed isobutane concentrations above the LFL registered a maximum level of 1.9% for approximately 0.6 minutes (36 seconds). This was just barely above the LFL of 1.8% and had a duration of less than a minute. The sensor would have measured a concentration at or above the LFL for less than 0.6 minutes, if at all, if the test had leaked a realistic amount of refrigerant based on the use conditions in the proposed and final rules.
The concentrations measured at the four other sensors likely still would have been higher than the LFL, even if a realistic amount of refrigerant had been leaked. However,
FOOTNOTE 16 Under SA5.1 of the Standard, a leakage test is required to ensure that refrigerant concentrations measured near any internal or external electrical component cannot exceed 75% of the LFL at any point in time and, furthermore, cannot exceed 50% of the LFL for more than 5 minutes at a time. (SA5.1.2.7, SA5.1.3.6). For any locations in which the LFL exceeds these amounts, the product would need to pass an ignition test (SA5.2) and a temperature test (SA 5.3) to ensure that electrical and heating components will not ignite the specific flammable refrigerant under consideration in order to comply with UL 250. END FOOTNOTE
In response to the commenter's general observation that
* Leak amounts were increased to 57 grams (representing the entire allowable charge size) rather than 50 grams (for isobutane) and 40 grams (for R-441A), which were the intended charge sizes submitted by the applicants. While a leak amount of 57 grams is greater than that allowed by the UL 250 Standard, this additional analysis conservatively accounts for the possibility of incorrect manufacturer testing of the product. (We note that a refrigerator that leaks more than 50 grams of isobutane or R-441A refrigerant would not be in compliance with UL 250, and therefore would be in violation of the use conditions of this rule.)
* Stratification was more conservatively modeled through the assumption that 95 percent of the leaked refrigerant mixes evenly into the bottom 0.2 meters (9 inches) of the room, rather than the bottom 0.4 meters as assumed in the risk screen. Using these more conservative assumptions,
Depending on the mixing conditions, it is still possible that in certain locations at floor level, or in restricted areas such as the space between a refrigerator and a wall, the concentrations of isobutane or R-441A could reach their LFLs for a few minutes, posing a threat in the presence of a spark. However, in the worst case, the annual probability of a "fast" external leak occurring and an ignition source being present simultaneously is approximately 5.0 x 10-7, or 0.5 in a million) (A.D. Little, 1991).
Comment 3: Internal leak test and explosion/deflagration experiment.
The commenter provided a cursory description of an internal leak test that measured isobutane concentrations inside the freezer compartment. The commenter concluded that refrigerant concentrations inside the freezer compartment reached 3.2 percent, which exceeds the LFL of 1.8 percent.
The commenter also described the results of a test to reproduce the deflagration/explosion when an internal leak is ignited. The commenter stated that it performed a leakage test according to UL 250 on a U.S. market refrigerator with original components, including the defrost heater, in outdoor ambient conditions. The test leaked 57 grams of refrigerant and used an unidentified sparking source to simulate a faulty defrost heater connection in the freezer compartment. The result was a violent explosion that sent heavy objects, such as the freezer door, flying up to 48 feet high. The commenter argued that this demonstrates that 57 grams of isobutane would produce enough energy to result in structural damage.
Response: As was the case for the external leak test, the commenter provided neither the make and model of the refrigerator used, nor a statement regarding whether the refrigerator was designed specifically to use isobutane. Since
Comment 4: Recall of isobutane refrigerators.
The commenter described a major recall of certain models of isobutane refrigerators. In 2009 a major consumer refrigerator manufacturer announced a recall of isobutane refrigerators as a result of safety incidents that occurred in
Response: The recall discussed in this comment occurred in
Comment 5: Use of propane in small commercial refrigeration systems.
The commenter includes a brief observation that the use of propane in small commercial refrigeration systems poses risks similar to use of isobutane in residential refrigerators. The commenter also argues that larger hydrocarbon charges pose a higher risk of ignition events, and that small commercial refrigeration systems are known to have much higher leakage frequencies and failure rates than residential systems.
Response: As discussed above,
The commenter did not provide information to refute
B. New Equipment Only; Not Intended for Use as a Retrofit Alternative
Comment: One commenter requested that retrofitting old household refrigerators and freezers and retail food refrigerators (stand-alone equipment only) be allowed. The commenter suggested that safety concerns could be alleviated by allowing retrofitting only by personnel who are trained to handle flammable refrigerants.
Response: Under the SNAP program, an application for SNAP approval specifies whether the proposed refrigerant use is for new equipment, retrofitted equipment, or both. None of the submissions applied for use in retrofitted equipment. The Agency did not conduct a risk analysis for use of the substitutes in retrofitted equipment, nor did any of the comments provide such an analysis. Therefore,
C. Compliance With UL Standards
FOOTNOTE 17
FOOTNOTE 18
Comment: One commenter recommended that a final rule be contingent upon the existence and acceptance of a comprehensive industry-wide safety standard. The commenter also suggested that
FOOTNOTE 19
FOOTNOTE 20 ASHRAE Standard 15-2010: Safety Standard for Refrigeration Systems. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 21 UL 21: Standard for LP-Gas Hose. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 22 EN 378: Refrigerating systems and heat pumps--Safety and environmental requirements. Prepared by
FOOTNOTE 23
FOOTNOTE 24 IOR (
FOOTNOTE 25 The Joint Australian Standard/New Zealand Standard (AS/NZS) 1677: Addresses safety, design, construction, installation, testing, inspection, operation and maintenance of refrigeration systems. END FOOTNOTE
Response: It is unclear what was intended by either comment. Regarding the first comment,
With respect to the second comment, it is unclear whether the commenter is suggesting that the other standards be imposed as use conditions, whether they should be included in the "Further Information" column of the regulations, or whether they should simply be described in this preamble. The commenter provided no reasoning as to why the listed standards should be included either as use conditions or in the "Further Information" column of the regulation, and we are not aware that these standards provide any additional protections that are not provided by this rule.
D. Charge Size Limitation (Household Refrigeration)
Comment: Five commenters recommended a limit of 150 grams (5.3 ounces) to correspond to standards established by the
One commenter, a manufacturer of household refrigerators and freezers, stated that the 57-gram charge size limit in some cases would reduce the efficiency of the appliance and raise the indirect GHG emissions associated with the product's energy use. Two commenters, a manufacturer of household refrigerators and freezers and an environmental organization, observed that the UL 250 standard could change in the future and recommended that
Three of the commenters supported the 57-gram limitation, including a manufacturer of household refrigerators and freezers that submitted to the SNAP program for hydrocarbon refrigerant in this end use; a manufacturer of commercial refrigerators and freezers that submitted to the SNAP program for hydrocarbon refrigerant in both household and commercial refrigerators and freezers; and a manufacturer of commercial refrigerators and freezers.
Response:
It is true that hundreds of millions of refrigerators and freezers using propane and isobutane refrigerants in other countries are certified to the IEC 60335-2-24 standard, which allows for a charge of hydrocarbon refrigerant up to 150 g. However, available evidence suggests that most of these appliances actually have charges that are closer to 57 g than to 150 g. For comparison, a typical U.S. household refrigerator using HFC-134a has a charge of roughly 140 g, /26/ and a charge of isobutane providing comparable cooling would be 40 to 50% of the charge of HFC-134a, /27/ or 56 to 70 g. It is
FOOTNOTE 26 A. D. Little, 2002. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 27 ACRIB, 2001. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 28
While EPA could assess various charge sizes on a theoretical basis, we do not have the resources to perform product testing and we rely primarily on industry, national safety standard organizations, and non-governmental organizations to conduct tests on appliances. UL has tested household refrigerators, freezers, and combination refrigerators and freezers for safety, especially with respect to flammability concerns, and the U.S. insurance industry and commercial sector rely on the results of those tests. Testing by manufacturers and UL addresses flammability in the manufacturing process as well as how the product functions with different charge sizes. UL developed the 50-gram allowable leak limit as the result of testing during development of the UL 250 standard for household refrigerators and freezers. The 50-gram allowable leak limit for household refrigerators in UL 250 differs from the 150-gram allowable leak limit for commercial refrigerators and freezers in UL 471 due to factors such as the difference in the room sizes modeled for household versus retail appliances. Therefore, building on the UL allowance of a 50-gram allowable leak limit and the tests performed by the submitter, we concluded that the maximum charge size should be 57 grams for the household refrigeration end-use.
We acknowledge that a larger charge size may improve the energy efficiency of an appliance and simplify its construction. However, based on the analyses available at this time, we do not have sufficient information to demonstrate that a larger charge size would not create an unacceptable level of risk as compared to other available substitutes in the household refrigeration end-use. As noted above,
Comment: One commenter requested a more precise definition of "charge," recognizing that the exact value of the charge depends on the accuracy of the charging equipment.
Response:
Comment: One commenter encouraged
Response: Providing such a test procedure is beyond the scope of this final rule. The use conditions reflect the assumption that 7 grams of a 57-gram charge could be solubilized in the refrigerant oil while still allowing compliance with UL 250. The SNAP submittal for isobutane in the household refrigeration end-use contains information on the solubility of isobutane with refrigerant oils (GE, 2008). We typically defer to the technical standard-setting agency on this type of issue unless there is convincing evidence disputing such a calculation. Moreover, we note that manufacturers that choose to use isobutane are not obligated to measure its potential solubility in oil for purposes of complying with the use conditions, since any charge below 50 grams would be in compliance with UL 250 and the charge size limitations of this rule. Thus we see no reason to establish a test procedure for performing such an analysis.
Comment: Two commenters observed that an appliance in the household refrigeration end-use might incorporate more than one sealed system and requested that the charge size limitation apply to each sealed system in an appliance, not to the entire appliance.
Response:
FOOTNOTE 29 A "sealed system" is an independently operated refrigeration system, including a compressor, evaporator, condenser, metering device, and refrigerant not shared for other purposes. For example, a refrigerator-freezer might employ one sealed system to chill food in the refrigerator section and a second sealed system to keep food frozen in the freezer compartment. "Appliance" is defined at 40 CFR 82.152 as "any device which contains and uses a refrigerant and which is used for household or commercial purposes, including any air conditioner, refrigerator, chiller, or freezer." Thus a refrigerator, freezer, or combination refrigerator and freezer, for example, may consist of two appliances provided that the refrigerant in the first appliance (i.e., the first compressor, condenser, evaporator, and metering device) does not mix with the refrigerant in the second appliance (e.g., the second compressor, condenser, evaporator, and metering device). END FOOTNOTE
E. Charge Size Limitation (Retail Food Refrigeration)
Comment: One commenter recommended increasing the limit to 170 grams for three reasons: first, that
Response:
Comment: Two commenters also observed that the IEC standards may be revised upward in the future, and that
Response: The IEC charge size limit has not yet increased and
Comment: Another commenter stated that appliances manufactured for export should be allowed to have a larger charge size corresponding to the charge size requirements that apply at the point of installation. The commenter claims that prohibiting a larger charge size for export would be a disadvantage for U.S. companies selling appliances overseas.
Response: Under section 612 of the Clean Air Act, the SNAP program is applicable to any person introducing a substitute into interstate commerce. Interstate commerce is defined in 40 CFR 82.104(n) as:
The distribution or transportation of any product between one state, territory, possession or the
This definition applies to any appliances produced in the U.S., including appliances that will be exported. Therefore
Comment: One commenter observed that because an appliance might have two or more independent refrigeration systems,
Response:
F. Labeling
Comment: Two commenters stated that
Response:
Regarding the lettering size,
G. Color-Coded Hoses and Piping
Three commenters supported the proposed requirement. One of the supporting commenters stated that
Comment: One commenter stated that mandatory color-coding would impose a burdensome additional cost and is not a requirement under international standards. A second commenter stated that color-coding would be superfluous in light of the proposed labeling requirement. A third commenter stated that leak testing requirements obviate the need for color-coding. A fourth commenter identified several concerns: that hose materials could be potentially incompatible with the paint used, that the marking could be obscured by ice or insulation, and that paint on heat exchange surfaces could change the thermal resistance and water retention properties of the heat exchanger, affecting performance.
Other commenters recommended a more precise interpretation of the requirement to ensure that color-coding need only be provided where beneficial and not in locations where system performance could be hindered. One commenter observed that coloring all tubing would be costly and that locations should be selected that do not present problems for sealing of valves or for operational efficiency. Another commenter suggested that since UL 471 already requires labels near the compressor, coloring would only be necessary at discharge and charge locations. The commenter further stated that self-contained units with one compressor only need markings at two locations--at the filling tube and after the filter dryer (in the flow direction)--because such units only use one refrigerant and present no risk of mixing.
Several commenters observed that an equally effective and less costly option for some manufacturers might be to use a colored sleeve or cap that must be forcibly removed in order to access the service tube. If a manufacturer removed the sleeve or cap during service, a similar replacement would be required.
Response:
Since red coloring is understood to represent "hot," "stop," or "danger," red coloring will provide technicians, consumers, and emergency responders with an unambiguous signal that a potential hazard is present. The labeling requirement discussed in Section V.F will complement the color-coding requirement by providing a more precise warning of the potential hazards and necessary precautions. Further, it is possible that labels, particularly those on the outside of the appliance, may fall off or become illegible over time; adding red coloring on tubing inside the appliance provides additional assurance that technicians will be aware that a flammable refrigerant is present.
In response to concerns about the location of the color-coding,
FOOTNOTE 30 A process tube extends from the compressor and is used to add or remove refrigerant. After refrigerant is added or removed, the process tube is usually pinched to stop refrigerant flow and then could be soldered to provide a long-lasting seal. The tube is used as an access point for service technicians and does not serve any refrigerant-flow or heat transfer purposes. END FOOTNOTE
FOOTNOTE 31 The UL Standards referenced in this rule do not allow the inclusion of service ports in finished products using flammable refrigerants; however, the coloring use condition would still apply if a service port or access valve were added after the product was sold. END FOOTNOTE
To clarify that the red coloring must always be present (not just applied initially at installation), we are providing more specificity in the language of the use condition than proposed. We are changing "must be applied" to "must be present" to correct any misperceptions that once the coloring is initially placed ("applied") at a location, it need not be replaced if damaged or removed. The word "present" conveys that the red coloring must always be at the specified location.
Comment: One commenter supported the proposed color-coding requirement but pointed out that the
Response: The Agency recognizes that there is a color-blind population. This is one reason to use both labeling and coloring to signal that a flammable refrigerant is being used.
H. Unique Fittings
Comments: Twelve commenters opposed the proposed requirement for various combinations of the following reasons: Adding fittings at the time of manufacture is not appropriate for certain appliance types; additional fittings presents an increased leak risk; the requirement could be easily circumvented; the risk of cross-contamination is overstated; international standards do not require unique fittings; and the requirement would be inconsistent with UL standards. One commenter, while neither supporting nor opposing the proposal, stated that if unique fittings are installed they should require the use of special tools to dissuade unauthorized personnel from opening the fittings.
Response:
Comments: Most commenters interpreted the language of the proposed requirement to mean that all appliances subject to this rule must be manufactured with unique fittings, even appliances that would not require servicing and thus would otherwise not need fittings. They observed that household and retail appliances, whether they use hydrocarbons or another type of refrigerant, typically are hermetically sealed and are manufactured without maintenance fittings or service valves. They pointed out that any service port with a mechanical connection (such as a lock ring) presents a leak risk and that requiring additional service ports for the purpose of installing unique fittings would add to that risk. One commenter also observed that equipment is highly sensitive to charge size and any leak could cause malfunction or failure. (The commenter stated that in its past experience, three-fourths of service calls were related to service ports.) One commenter observed that the presence of service ports could create incentives for untrained technicians to attempt servicing. Another commenter pointed out that UL 250 and UL 471 prohibit refrigerators or freezers that use a flammable refrigerant from employing quick-connect fittings, flare fittings, compression fittings, or packed stem valves.
Response:
However, CAA 608(b)(2) requires all small appliances containing ODS refrigerants to be equipped with service ports that allow for the proper recovery of refrigerant during service or disposal of refrigerators and freezers because service ports act as an access point for recovery equipment. Under 40 CFR 82.154(a)(1), no refrigerant or substitute may be knowingly vented unless otherwise exempted. For this reason most hermetically sealed appliances are equipped with process tubes that are used only for end-of-life recovery and which typically do not leak.
One commenter specifically supported a requirement for unique fittings after the equipment is serviced and for the remainder of its life.
Comment: Several commenters observed that cross-contamination was not a significant risk. Two commenters stated that requiring unique fittings would not necessarily protect against cross-contamination. One commenter stated that mixing of hydrocarbons and other refrigerants would not pose a safety concern unless air or oxygen were present. Another commenter asserted that since self-contained refrigerant systems use only one refrigerant, there is no possibility that an appliance would be refilled with an incorrect refrigerant. That commenter also stated that proper refrigerant practices are in place that require separate recovery cylinders for different refrigerants, that technicians need only use one more type of cylinder, and that economic incentives can foster proper recovery practices.
Response: Overall,
Comment: Several commenters observed that technicians could defeat the intent of the requirement by using other kinds of fittings after first service. One commenter stated that service technicians have the tools to bypass unique fittings and would do so rather than purchase additional gauges and line sets to service the small number of hydrocarbon refrigerators. Another stated that most small appliances do not have fittings (unique or otherwise) and that technicians and the public could use line-piercing fittings if needed.
Response:
Comment: Four commenters stated that education is the best tool to prevent refrigerant contamination. One suggested creating a nationwide training program; the other, which specializes in training, observed that training had proven to be an effective option in lieu of a previous proposal to require unique fittings for high-pressure HFC refrigerants.
Response:
I. Small Containers
FOOTNOTE 32 As mentioned previously, the proposed rule inadvertently represented 5 pounds as 2.8 kilograms instead of 2.3 kg, which is accurate. END FOOTNOTE
Comment: Three commenters opposed this requirement, stating that a small-container sales restriction was not the appropriate vehicle to compel proper training. One observed that properly trained technicians know how to handle refrigerants safely; another noted that the proposed rule protections, such as labeling, would help mitigate the potential risk associated with technician error; and the third observed that untrained customers can already buy camping gas, which is a flammable gas like isobutane.
In addition, one of the commenters opposing the requirement stated that it would pose practicality and logistics problems for its service network for household refrigerators. The commenter stated that a five-pound minimum requirement would result in the transport of more combustibles in a service vehicle than needed and that it would be preferable to use "right-sizing" canisters containing the exact charge for the particular appliance to ensure efficient and accurate service, to minimize the load a technician needs to carry, and to prevent under- and over-charging.
Response: After considering the comments received,
As discussed in Section V.K of this preamble,
J. Use of Hydrocarbon Refrigerants in Other End-Uses
Comment: Three commenters requested that isobutane and propane be considered for use in both the household refrigeration and retail food refrigeration end-uses. Six other commenters specifically requested that isobutane be allowed for use in retail food refrigeration. All of these commenters reasoned that both refrigerants have similar physical characteristics (e.g., flammability limits, toxicity profiles, handling practices, safety group classification) and that the UL 250 and UL 471 standards do not distinguish between them.
Response:
The SNAP regulations at 40 CFR part 82, subpart G establish a process for the submission and review of SNAP applications and the finalization of acceptability determinations.
We recognize the stakeholders' interest in using isobutane in the retail food refrigeration end-use and propane in the household refrigeration end-use. Preliminary information supports the observations that the use profiles and handling practices for these chemicals in these end-uses are very similar to the combinations of substitutes and end-uses being finalized today.
Comment: One commenter noted that it did not have sufficient information on HCR-188C and HCR-188C1 (i.e., R-441A) to recommend their approval for the retail food refrigeration end-use. The commenter stated, however, that if ASHRAE Standard 34 were to classify those hydrocarbon blends as A3 refrigerants then the argument could be made that they should be listed in both end-uses.
Response: In
K. Training
Comment: One commenter recommended against a mandatory national training program, observing that in the
Response:
Since the inception of the SNAP program and the section 608 refrigerant management program, we have continued to list a variety of new refrigerants as acceptable.
Although we have determined not to require training as a use condition for these substitutes to ensure that they can be used as safely as other available refrigerants, we recommend that technicians receive training on the safe handling of hydrocarbon refrigerants through avenues such as industry-sponsored national training programs.
L. Other Options Considered
1. Use only in appliances specific to OEMs.
Comment:
Response:
2. Recovery equipment.
Comment: One commenter stated a belief that there are no known manufacturers of recovery equipment for hydrocarbon refrigerants. Another commenter stated that recovery equipment used to recover flammable refrigerants must be compatible with flammable refrigerants, and in the absence of an industry standard, it has developed its own service equipment designed to recapture a flammable refrigerant in accordance with federal and state regulations. A third commenter observed that recovery units are only used in countries like the U.S. where venting is not allowed. Finally, one commenter observed that it uses a recovery device in its U.S. test market that is specifically designed for use with flammable refrigerants.
Response: The availability of recovery equipment is not necessary to ensure that the refrigerant will not pose more risk than other available substitutes in this end-use.
3. Venting prohibition.
Comment: Several commenters expressed varying levels of support for exempting hydrocarbon refrigerants from the venting prohibition. Two commenters expressed unequivocal support, and four stated that they would support such an exemption if
Response:
4. Requiring only one use condition.
Comment:
Response: As described above, and consistent with the proposal,
5. "Unacceptable" finding pending industry-wide servicing standards.
Comment:
Response: As described elsewhere, and consistent with the proposal,
M. Other Comments on Proposed Rule
Comment: In a comment unrelated to the specifics of the proposed rule, one commenter recommended consideration of the type of automated system it uses on its production line. This system sounds a pre-warning alarm when 20 percent of the LFL is reached and shuts down the system if 40 percent of the LFL is reached. The commenter noted that this system conforms to the European standard and is approved by TUV (Technischer ueberwachungs-Verein (
Response:
This final rule includes, in the "Further Information" column of Appendix R, recommendations that OEMs institute safety precautions as needed in their facilities to address potential hazards in the production of appliances using hydrocarbon refrigerants.
Comment: Another commenter recommended that the use conditions in the final rule address the use of an odorant as a warning agent to alert manufacturing personnel or technicians of the presence of a leak. Without recommending how the issue should be addressed in this final rule, the commenter offered the following observations:
* Technicians or manufacturers may use mercaptan as an odor warning agent;
* Mercaptan is corrosive and is removed by filters and driers in refrigeration systems;
* Refrigerant classification standards for
Response:
VI. What other changes is
In addition to changes made in response to comments, as described in Section V above,
A. Propane as Substitute for R-502
B. Wording of Use Conditions for Labeling
The use conditions in the proposed rule included requirements for marking (e.g., labeling) of appliances using isobutane and HCR-188C1 (i.e., R-441A) in the household refrigeration end-use, and propane in the retail food refrigeration end-use.
First, we are restructuring the language for the requirement. The language of the proposed rule first listed the wording required for five different types of labels, and then described where each of the labels was to be placed. For the final rule, we have moved the location requirements, so they are specified immediately before the corresponding label wording.
Second,
"(b) Near the machine compartment: "DANGER--Risk of Fire or Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Do Not Use Mechanical Devices. To Be Repaired Only By Trained Service Personnel. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing."
The phrase "Do Not Use Mechanical Devices" was included erroneously in the proposed requirement.
C. "Further Information" Column in Listing Decisions
The proposed rule contained, under "Further Information," the following recommendations:
* Technicians and equipment manufacturers should wear appropriate personal protective equipment, including chemical goggles and protective gloves when handling isobutane, HCR-188C, and HCR-188C1. Special care should be taken to avoid contact with the skin since isobutane, HCR-188C, and HCR-188C1 like many refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin.
* A class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be kept nearby.
* Proper ventilation should be maintained at all times during the manufacture of appliances containing hydrocarbon refrigerant through adherence to good manufacturing practices as per 29 CFR 1910.110. /33/ If refrigerant levels in the air surrounding the equipment rise above one-fourth of the lower flammability limit, the space should be evacuated, and re-entry should only occur after the space has been properly ventilated.
FOOTNOTE 33
* Technicians should only use spark-proof tools when working refrigerators and freezers with R-600a, HCR-188C, and HCR-188C1.
* Recovery equipment designed for flammable refrigerants should be used.
* Only technicians specifically trained in handling flammable refrigerants should service refrigerators and freezers containing these refrigerants. Technicians should gain an understanding of minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flammable refrigerants safely.
* In production facilities or other facilities where large quantities of the refrigerant would be stored, proper safety precautions should be in place to minimize the risk of explosion. These facilities should be equipped with proper ventilation systems to minimize the risks of explosion and should be properly designed and operated to reduce possible ignition sources.
* Room occupants should evacuate the space immediately following the accidental release of this refrigerant.
The Agency did not receive any comments on these recommendations.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose any new information collection burden. This final rule is an Agency determination. It contains no new requirements for reporting.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined by
After considering the economic impacts of this final rule on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify and address regulatory alternatives "which minimize any significant economic impact of the rule on small entities." 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the rule. The requirements of this final rule affect the manufacturers of household refrigerators and freezers and retail food refrigerators and freezers. Today's action allows users the additional options of using isobutane, propane, and R-441A, but does not mandate such use. Because isobutane, propane, and R-441A refrigeration systems are not yet manufactured in the U.S. (with the exception of limited test-marketing), and because the final rule actually imposes fewer requirements than the proposed rule (i.e., removal of the unique fittings requirement), manufacturers would not be required to change business practices to meet the use conditions and thus the rule would not impose any new costs on small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of Title II of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538 for State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any State, local, or tribal governments or the private sector.
The enforceable requirements of this final rule related to integrating risk mitigation devices, markings, and procedures for maintaining the safety of household refrigerators and freezers and retail food refrigerators and freezers using hydrocarbon refrigerants affect only small number of manufacturers of these appliances and their technicians. This rule provides additional refrigerant options, allowing greater flexibility for industry in designing consumer products. Further, since appliances using hydrocarbon refrigerants are not yet widely produced in the U.S., we do not expect impacts on existing users. Thus this rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This regulation applies directly to facilities that use these substances and not to governmental entities. The finding of "acceptability subject to use conditions" for isobutane, propane, and R-441A does not impact the private sector because manufacturers are not producing systems under the current regulation. This final rule does not mandate a switch to these substitutes; consequently, there is no direct economic impact on entities from this rulemaking.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. This regulation applies directly to facilities that use these substances and not to governmental entities. Thus Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not a "significant energy action" as defined in Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (
I. National
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 ("NTTAA"), Public Law 104-113, (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs
This final rule involves incorporation by reference of technical standards issued by
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 (
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C.
This action is not a "major rule" as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will be effective
VIII. References
This preamble references the following documents, which are also in the Air and Radiation Docket at the address listed in Section I.B.1. Unless specified otherwise, all documents are available electronically through the Federal Docket Management System, Docket # EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0286.
ACRIB, 2001. Guidelines for the Use of Hydrocarbon Refrigerants in Static Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Systems. Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Industry Board. 2001.
A.D. Little, 1991. Risk Assessment of Flammable Refrigerants for Use in Home Appliances (draft report).
A.D. Little, 2002. Global Comparative Analysis of HFC and Alternative Technologies for Refrigeration, Air Conditioning, Foam, Solvent, Aerosol Propellant, and Fire Protection Applications. Final Report to the
AHRI, 2008. Air-Conditioning, Heating, and
ASHRAE, 2010.
GE, 2008.
ICF, 1997.
ICF, 2009a.
ICF, 2009b.
ICF, 2009c.
ICF, 2009d.
ICF, 2011a.
ICF, 2011b.
ICF, 2011c.
ICF, 2011d.
IPCC/TEAP, 2005. Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System: Special Report of the
Murray, D.M. 1997. "Residential House and Zone Volumes in
ORNL, 1997.
RTOC, 2010. The 2010 Report of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)'s
TEAP, 2010. United Nations Environment Programme. Report of the
UL, 2000. UL 250: Household Refrigerators and Freezers. 10th edition.
UL, 2010. UL 471. Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers. 10th edition. Supplement SB: Requirements for Refrigerators and Freezers Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated:
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble,
PART 82--PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE
1. The authority citation for part 82 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7414, 7601, 7671--7671q.
Subpart G--Significant New Alternatives Policy Program
2. Subpart G is amended by adding Appendix R to read as follows:
Appendix R to Subpart G of Part 82--Substitutes Subject to Use Restrictions Listed in the
Substitutes That Are Acceptable Subject to Use Conditions End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information Household Isobutane (R- Acceptable These Applicable OSHA refrigerators, 600a) as a Subject To refrigerants may requirements at freezers, and substitute for Use be used only in 29 CFR part 1910 combination CFC-12 and Conditions new equipment must be refrigerators HCFC-22 designed followed, and freezers R-441A as a specifically and including those (New equipment substitute for clearly at 29 CFR only) CFC-12 and identified for 1910.106 HCFC-22 the refrigerant (flammable and (i.e., none of combustible these liquids), substitutes may 1910.110 be used as a (storage and conversion or handling of "retrofit" liquefied refrigerant for petroleum existing gases), 1910.157 equipment (portable fire designed for a extinguishers), different and 1910.1000 refrigerant) (toxic and These hazardous refrigerants may substances). be used only in Proper a refrigerator ventilation or freezer, or should be combination maintained at refrigerator and all times during freezer, that the manufacture meets all and storage of requirements equipment listed in containing Supplement SA to hydrocarbon the 10th edition refrigerants of the through Underwriters adherence to Laboratories good (UL) Standard manufacturing for Household practices as per Refrigerators 29 CFR 1910.106. and Freezers, UL If refrigerant 250, dated 1993 levels in the updated August air surrounding 2000. In cases the equipment where the final rise above one- rule includes fourth of the requirements lower more stringent flammability than those of limit, the space the 10th edition should be of UL 250, the evacuated and appliance must re-entry should meet the occur only after requirements of the space has the final rule been properly in place of the ventilated. requirements in Technicians and the UL Standard equipment The quantity of manufacturers the substitute should wear refrigerant appropriate (i.e., "charge personal size") shall not protective exceed 57 grams equipment, (2.0 ounces) in including any chemical goggles refrigerator, and protective freezer, or gloves, when combination handling refrigerator and isobutane and R- freezer for each 441A. Special circuit care should be taken to avoid contact with the skin since these refrigerants, like many refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin. A class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be kept nearby. Technicians should only use spark-proof tools when working on refrigerators and freezers with isobutane and R-441A. Recovery equipment designed for flammable refrigerants should be used. Only technicians specifically trained in handling flammable refrigerants should service refrigerators and freezers containing these refrigerants. Technicians should gain an understanding of minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flammable refrigerants safely. Household Isobutane (R- Acceptable As provided in Room occupants refrigerators, 600a) as a Subject To clauses SA6.1.1 should evacuate freezers, and substitute for Use and SA6.1.2 of the space combination CFC-12 and Conditions UL Standard 250, immediately refrigerators HCFC-22 the following following the and freezers R-441A as a markings shall accidental (New equipment substitute for be attached at release of this only) CFC-12 and the locations refrigerant. HCFC-22 provided and If a service shall be port is added permanent: then household (a) On or near refrigerators, any evaporators freezers, and that can be combination contacted by the refrigerator and consumer: freezers using "DANGER-Risk of these Fire or refrigerants Explosion. should have Flammable service aperture Refrigerant fittings that Used. Do Not Use differ from Mechanical fittings used in Devices To equipment or Defrost containers using Refrigerator. Do non-flammable Not Puncture refrigerant. Refrigerant "Differ" means Tubing." that either the (b) Near the diameter differs machine by at least 1/16 compartment: inch or the "DANGER-Risk of thread direction Fire or is reversed Explosion. (i.e., right- Flammable handed vs. left- Refrigerant handed). These Used. To Be different Repaired Only By fittings should Trained Service be permanently Personnel. Do affixed to the Not Puncture unit at the Refrigerant point of service Tubing." and maintained (c) Near the until the end- machine of-life of the compartment: unit, and should "CAUTION--Risk not be accessed of Fire or with an adaptor. Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner's Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Precautions Must be Followed." (d) On the exterior of the refrigerator: "CAUTION--Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properly In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used." (e) Near any and all exposed refrigerant tubing: "CAUTION--Risk of Fire or Explosion Due To Puncture Of Refrigerant Tubing; Follow Handling Instructions Carefully. Flammable Refrigerant Used." All of these markings shall be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) high. The refrigerator, freezer, or combination refrigerator and freezer must have red, Pantone(R) Matching System (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, or other devices through which the refrigerant is serviced (typically known as the service port) to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be present at all service ports and where service puncturing or otherwise creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected (e.g., process tubes). The color mark must extend at least 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) from the compressor and must be replaced if removed. Retail food Propane (R- Acceptable These Applicable OSHA refrigerators 290) as a subject to refrigerants may requirements at and freezers substitute for use be used only in 29 CFR part 1910 (stand-alone CFC-12, HCFC- conditions new equipment must be units only) 22, and R-502 specifically followed, (New equipment designed and including those only) clearly at 29 CFR identified for 1910.94 the refrigerants (ventilation) (i.e., none of and 1910.106 these (flammable and substitutes may combustible be used as a liquids), conversion or 1910.110 "retrofit" (storage and refrigerant for handling of existing liquefied equipment petroleum designed for gases), and other 1910.1000 (toxic refrigerants). and hazardous These substances). substitutes may Proper only be used in ventilation equipment that should be meets all maintained at requirements in all times during Supplement SB to the manufacture the 10th edition and storage of of the equipment Underwriters containing Laboratories hydrocarbon (UL) Standard refrigerants for Commercial through Refrigerators adherence to and Freezers, UL good 471, dated manufacturing November 2010. practices as per In cases where 29 CFR 1910.106. the final rule If refrigerant includes levels in the requirements air surrounding more stringent the equipment than those of rise above one- the 10th edition fourth of the of UL 471, the lower appliance must flammability meet the limit, the space requirements of should be the final rule evacuated and in place of the re-entry should requirements in occur only after the UL Standard. the space has The charge size been properly for the retail ventilated. food Technicians and refrigerator or equipment freezer shall manufacturers not exceed 150 should wear grams (5.3 appropriate ounces) in each personal circuit. protective equipment, including chemical goggles and protective gloves, when handling propane. Special care should be taken to avoid contact with the skin since propane, like many refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin. A class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be kept nearby. Technicians should only use spark-proof tools when working on refrigerators and freezers with propane. Recovery equipment designed for flammable refrigerants should be used. Only technicians specifically trained in handling flammable refrigerants should service refrigerators and freezers containing these refrigerants. Technicians should gain an understanding of minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flammable refrigerants safely. Retail food Propane (R- Acceptable As provided in Room occupants refrigerators 290) as a subject to clauses SB6.1.2 should evacuate and freezers substitute for use to SB6.1.5 of UL the space (stand-alone CFC-12, HCFC- conditions Standard 471, immediately units only) 22, and R-502 the following following the (New equipment markings shall accidental only) be attached at release of this the locations refrigerant. provided and If a service shall be port is added permanent: then household (a) Attach on or refrigerators, near any freezers, and evaporators that combination can be contacted refrigerator and by the consumer: freezers using "DANGER-Risk of these Fire or refrigerants Explosion. should have Flammable service aperture Refrigerant fittings that Used. Do Not Use differ from Mechanical fittings used in Devices To equipment or Defrost containers using Refrigerator. Do non-flammable Not Puncture refrigerant. Refrigerant "Differ" means Tubing." that either the (b) Attach near diameter differs the machine by at least 1/16 compartment: inch or the "DANGER-Risk of thread direction Fire or is reversed Explosion. (i.e., right- Flammable handed vs. left- Refrigerant handed). These Used. To Be different Repaired Only By fittings should Trained Service be permanently Personnel. Do affixed to the Not Puncture unit at the Refrigerant point of service Tubing." and maintained (c) Attach near until the end- the machine of-life of the compartment: unit, and should "CAUTION--Risk not be accessed of Fire or with an adaptor. Explosion. Flammable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair Manual/Owner's Guide Before Attempting To Service This Product. All Safety Precautions Must be Followed." (d) Attach on the exterior of the refrigerator: "CAUTION--Risk of Fire or Explosion. Dispose of Properly In Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant Used." (e) Attach near any and all exposed refrigerant tubing: "CAUTION--Risk of Fire or Explosion Due To Puncture Of Refrigerant Tubing; Follow Handling Instructions Carefully. Flammable Refrigerant Used." All of these markings shall be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1/4 inch) high. The refrigerator or freezer must have red, Pantone(R) Matching System (PMS) #185 marked pipes, hoses, and other devices through which the refrigerant is serviced, typically known as the service port, to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be present at all service ports and where service puncturing or otherwise creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected (e.g., process tubes). The color mark must extend at least 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) from the compressor and must be replaced if removed. Note: In accordance with the limitations provided in section 310(a) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7610(a)), nothing in this table shall affect the Occupational Safety and Health Administrations' authority to promulgate and enforce standards and other requirements under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C.651 et seq.). Note: The use conditions in this appendix contain references to certain standards fromUnderwriters Laboratories Inc. (UL). The standards are incorporated by reference, and the referenced sections are made part of the regulations in part 82: 1. UL 250: Household Refrigerators and Freezers. 10th edition.Supplement SA : Requirements for Refrigerators and Freezers Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System.Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. August 25, 2000 . 2. UL 471. Commercial Refrigerators and Freezers. 10th edition. Supplement SB: Requirements for Refrigerators and Freezers Employing a Flammable Refrigerant in the Refrigerating System.Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. November 24, 2010 . The Director of theFederal Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of UL Standards 250 and 471 may be purchased by mail at: COMM 2000;151 Eastern Avenue ,Bensenville, IL 60106; Email: [email protected]; Telephone: 1 (888) 853-3503 in the U.S. orCanada (other countries dial +1 (415) 352-2168); Internet address: http://ulstandardsinfonet.ul.com/ or www.comm-2000.com. You may inspect a copy atU.S. EPA's Air and Radiation Docket;EPA West Building ,Room 3334 ,1301 Constitution Ave. NW .,Washington DC or at theNational Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For questions regarding access to these standards, the telephone number ofEPA's Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742. For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call (202) 741-6030, or go to:http://www.archives.gov/federal--register/code--of--federal--regulations/ibr--locations.html.
[FR Doc. 2011-32175 Filed 12-19-11;
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Copyright: | (c) 2011 Federal Information & News Dispatch, Inc. |
Wordcount: | 27134 |
Advisor News
Annuity News
Health/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News