Protection of Stratospheric Ozone

Federal RegisterSep 5, 1996

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

SUMMARY: This notice expands the list of acceptable substitutes for

ozone-depleting substances (ODS) under the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency's (EPA) Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP)

program. In addition, this Notice clarifies information on refrigerant

blends R-410A, R-410B, and R-407C that EPA previously added to the

acceptable substitute list.

ADDRESSES: Information relevant to this notice is contained in Air

Docket A-91-42, Central Docket Section, South Conference Room 4, U.S.

Environmental Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.

Telephone: (202) 260-7548. The docket may be inspected between 8:00

a.m. and 5:30 p.m. weekdays. As provided in 40 CFR part 2, a reasonable

fee may be charged for photocopying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Smagin at (202) 233-9126 or fax

(202) 233-9577, U.S. EPA, Stratospheric Protection Division, 401 M

Street, S.W., Mail Code 6205J, Washington, D.C. 20460; EPA

Stratospheric Ozone Protection Hotline at (800) 296-1996; EPA World

Wide Web Site at http://www.epa.gov/ozone/title6/snap/snap.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Section 612 Program

A. Statutory Requirements

B. Regulatory History

II. Listing of Acceptable Substitutes

A. Refrigeration and Air Conditioning: Substitutes for Class

I Substances

B. Refrigeration and Air Conditioning: Substitutes for Class

II Substances

C. Foam Blowing

D. Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection

E. Solvent Cleaning

F. Aerosols

G. Adhesives, Coatings and Inks

III. Additional Information

Appendix A--Summary of Acceptable and Pending Decisions

I. Section 612 Program

A. Statutory Requirements

Section 612 of the Clean Air Act authorizes EPA to develop a

program for evaluating alternatives to ozone-depleting substances. EPA

refers to this program as the Significant New Alternatives Policy

(SNAP) program. The major provisions of section 612 are:

Rulemaking--Section 612(c) requires EPA to promulgate rules making

it unlawful to replace any class I (chlorofluorocarbon, halon, carbon

tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, methyl bromide, and

hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II (hydrochlorofluorocarbon) substance

with any substitute that the Administrator determines may present

adverse effects to human health or the environment where the

Administrator has identified an alternative that (1) reduces the

overall risk to human health and the environment, and (2) is currently

or potentially available.

Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable Substitutes--Section 612(c) also

requires EPA to publish a list of the substitutes unacceptable for

specific uses. EPA must publish a corresponding list of acceptable

alternatives for specific uses.

Petition Process--Section 612(d) grants the right to any person to

petition EPA to add a substance to or delete a substance from the lists

published in accordance with section 612(c). The Agency has 90 days to

grant or deny a petition. Where the Agency grants the petition, EPA

must publish the revised lists within an additional 6 months.

90-day Notification--Section 612(e) requires EPA to require any

person who produces a chemical substitute for a class I substance to

notify the Agency not less than 90 days before new or existing

chemicals are introduced into interstate commerce for significant new

uses as substitutes for a class I substance. The producer must also

provide the Agency with the producer's unpublished health and safety

studies on such substitutes.

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.

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. Regulatory History

On March 18, 1994, EPA published the Final Rulemaking (FRM) (59 FR

13044) which described the process for administering the SNAP program.

At the same time, EPA also issued EPA's first acceptability lists for

substitutes in the major industrial use sectors. These sectors include:

refrigeration and air conditioning; foam blowing; solvent cleaning;

fire suppression and explosion protection; sterilants; aerosols;

adhesives, coatings and inks; and tobacco expansion. These sectors

compose the principal industrial sectors that historically consumed the

largest volumes of ozone-depleting compounds.

As described in the final rule for the SNAP program (59 FR 13044),

EPA does not believe that rulemaking is required to list alternatives

as acceptable with no limitations. Such listings do not impose any

sanction, nor do they remove any prior license to use a substance.

Consequently, EPA is adding substances to the list of acceptable

alternatives by this notice.

EPA does, however, believe that Notice-and-Comment rulemaking is

required to place any substance on the list of prohibited substitutes,

to list a substance as acceptable only under certain conditions, to

list substances as acceptable only for certain uses, or to remove a

substance from either the list of prohibited or acceptable substitutes.

Updates to these lists are published as separate notices of rulemaking

in the Federal Register.

The Agency defines a ``substitute'' as any chemical, product

substitute, or alternative manufacturing process, whether existing or

new, that could replace a class I or class II substance. Anyone who

produces a substitute must provide the Agency with health and safety

studies on the substitute at least 90 days before introducing it into

interstate commerce for significant new use as an alternative. This

requirement applies to substitute manufacturers, but may include

importers, formulators or end-users, when they are responsible for

introducing a substitute into commerce.

EPA published lists of acceptable alternatives on August 26, 1994

(59 FR 44240), January 13, 1995 (60 FR 3318), July 28, 1995 (60 FR

38729), February 8, 1996 (61 FR 4736) and published Final Rulemakings

restricting the use of certain substitutes on June 13, 1995 (60 FR

31092), and May 22, 1996 (61 FR 25585). EPA also published a Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking restricting the use of certain substitutes on May

22, 1996 (61 FR 25604).

II. Listing of Acceptable Substitutes

This section presents EPA's most recent acceptable listing

decisions for substitutes for class I and class II substances in the

following industrial sectors: refrigeration and air conditioning, foam

blowing, and fire

[[Page 47013]]

suppression and explosion protection. In this Notice, EPA has split the

refrigeration and air conditioning sector into two parts: substitutes

for class I substances and substitutes for class II substances. For

copies of the full list, contact the EPA Stratospheric Protection

Hotline at (800) 296-1996.

Parts A through G below present a detailed discussion of the

substitute listing determinations by major use sector. Tables

summarizing today's listing decisions are in Appendix A. The comments

contained in Appendix A provide additional information on a substitute,

but for listings of acceptable substitutes, they are not legally

binding under section 612 of the Clean Air Act. Thus, adherence to

recommendations in the comments is not mandatory for use as a

substitute. In addition, the comments should not be considered

comprehensive with respect to other legal obligations pertaining to the

use of the substitute. However, EPA encourages users of acceptable

substitutes to apply all comments to their use of these substitutes. In

many instances, the comments simply allude to sound operating practices

that have already been identified in existing industry and/or building-

code standards. Thus, many of the comments, if adopted, would not

require significant changes in existing operating practices for the

affected industry.

A. Refrigeration and Air Conditioning: Class I

1. Secondary Loop Systems

In this Notice, EPA requests information about fluids used in

secondary loop systems. Unlike most other end-uses, secondary loop

systems do not circulate refrigerant through heat exchangers that are

in direct contact with the refrigerated or air conditioned space.

Rather, the primary refrigerant exchanges heat only with a second

fluid, which in turn carries heat away from the cooled space.

A good example of such a system is a large building chiller. The

primary loop chills water, which then circulates throughout the

building, where fans blow air over the cold pipes to air condition

occupied spaces. Another example is an ammonia-based supermarket

refrigeration system. The ammonia-containing primary loop is isolated

from the occupied area of the store, while a secondary loop fluid

carries the chill to the refrigerated cases.

Secondary loop systems are gaining market share in many areas

because they offer potential safety improvements, particularly when the

primary refrigerant is flammable or toxic. The primary system generally

has a relatively small charge, and it can be placed in an external

building, thereby removing the risk to occupants. In addition, a

smaller charge means that less refrigerant can escape during a leak.

Given even the lower ozone depletion potential (ODP) of HCFCs, and

global warming potential (GWP) of some HCFCs and HFCS, this reduced

leakage yields direct benefits to the environment. Because of the

potential environmental and safety benefits of secondary loop systems,

EPA is investigating whether it would be appropriate to list secondary

fluids formally under the SNAP program.

Such systems would use an already EPA-acceptable refrigerant in the

primary loop and a different fluid in the secondary loop. Therefore,

such a system could be listed as a not-in-kind replacement for CFC-

based refrigeration and air conditioning equipment. EPA is aware that

water, ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, ice slurries, CO2, ethyl

alcohol, calcium chloride, Flo-ice, HCFC-123, and certain

hydrofluoroethers are either used today or are being considered for use

as secondary fluids. While studying whether this end-use would be

appropriate for listing, EPA invites companies interested in listing

other secondary loop fluids to contact the SNAP coordinator at 202-233-

9126, fax 202-233-9577.

2. Acceptable Substitutes for Other End-Uses

Note that EPA acceptability does not mean that a given substitute

will work in a specific type of equipment within an end-use.

Engineering expertise must be used to determine the appropriate use of

these and any other substitutes. In addition, although some

alternatives are listed for multiple refrigerants, they may not be

appropriate for use in all equipment or under all conditions.

a. Hot Shot and GHG-X4

Hot Shot and GHG-X4, both of which consist of HCFC-22, HCFC-124,

HCFC-142b, and isobutane, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-12 and

R-500 in the following retrofitted and new end-uses:

Centrifugal and Reciprocating Chillers

Industrial Process Refrigeration

Ice Skating Rinks

Cold Storage Warehouses

Refrigerated Transport

Retail Food Refrigeration

Vending Machines

Water Coolers

Commercial Ice Machines

Household Refrigerators

Household Freezers

Residential Dehumidifiers

Non-Automotive Motor Vehicle Air Conditioners

Because HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b contribute to ozone depletion, they

will be phased out of production. Therefore, these blends will be used

primarily as retrofit refrigerants. However, these blends are

acceptable for use in new systems. Regulations regarding recycling and

reclamation issued under section 608 of the Clean Air Act apply to

these blends. HCFC-142b has one of the highest ODPs among the HCFCs.

The GWPs of HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b are 1700 and 2000, respectively,

which are somewhat high. However, this concern is mitigated by the

scheduled phaseout of these refrigerants. Although HCFC-142b and

isobutane are flammable, these blends are not. In addition, testing on

these blends has shown that they do not become flammable after leaks.

GHG-X4 is being sold under the trade names ``Autofrost'' and ``Chill-

It.''

b. R-401C

R-401C, which consists of HCFC-22, HFC-152a, and HCFC-124, is

acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 in retrofitted and new non-

automotive motor vehicle air conditioners. Because HCFC-22 and HCFC-124

contribute to ozone depletion, they will be phased out of production.

Therefore, these blends will be used primarily as retrofit

refrigerants. However, these blends are acceptable for use in new

systems. Regulations regarding recycling and reclamation issued under

section 608 of the Clean Air Act apply to these blends. HCFC-142b has

one of the highest ODPS among the HCFCs. The GWP of HCFC-22 is 1700,

which is somewhat high. However, this concern is mitigated by the

scheduled phaseout of this refrigerant. Although HCFC-142b and

isobutane are flammable, these blends are not. In addition, testing on

these blends has shown that they do not become flammable after leaks.

GHG-X4 is being sold under the trade names ``Autofrost'' and ``Chill-

It.''

c. NARM-502

NARM-502, which consists of HCFC-22, HFC-23, and HFC-152a, is

acceptable as a substitute for R-503 and CFC-13 in new and retrofitted

very low temperature refrigeration and industrial process

refrigeration. Because HCFC-22 contributes to ozone depletion, it will

be phased out of production. Therefore, this blend will be used

primarily as a retrofit refrigerant. However, NARM-502 is acceptable

for use in new systems. Regulations regarding recycling and reclamation

issued under section 608 of the Clean Air Act apply to this blend. The

GWP of HCFC-22 is 1700,

[[Page 47014]]

which is somewhat high, and the GWP of HFC-23 is 12,100, which is

extremely high. However, other acceptable refrigerants in this end-use

also contain either HFC-23 or perfluorocarbons (PFCs), with higher

GWPs. In addition, the percentage of HFC-23 is quite small, so this

blend poses much lower global warming risk than other substitutes for

this end-use. Although HFC-152a is flammable, NARM-502 as blended is

not, and testing has shown that it does not become flammable after

leaks.

d. Freezone (Formerly Listed as HCFC Blend Delta) and FREEZE 12

Freezone, which consists of HFC-134a, HCFC-142b, and a lubricant,

and FREEZE 12, which consists of HFC-134a and HCFC-142b, are acceptable

as substitutes for CFC-12 in the following retrofitted and new end-

uses:

Centrifugal and Reciprocating Chillers

Industrial Process Refrigeration

Ice Skating Rinks

Cold Storage Warehouses

Refrigerated Transport

Retail Food Refrigeration

Vending Machines

Water Coolers

Commercial Ice Machines

Household Refrigerators

Household Freezers

Residential Dehumidifiers

Non-Automotive Motor Vehicle Air Conditioners

Because HCFC-142b contributes to ozone depletion, it will be phased

out of production. Therefore, these blends will be used primarily as

retrofit refrigerants. However, they are acceptable for use in new

systems. Regulations regarding recycling and reclamation issued under

section 608 of the Clean Air Act apply to these blends. HCFC-142b has

one of the highest ODPs among the HCFCs. In addition, the GWP of HCFC-

142b is 2000, which is somewhat high. However, this concern is

mitigated by the scheduled phaseout of this refrigerant. Although HCFC-

142b is flammable, Freezone and FREEZE 12 as blended are not, and

testing has shown that they do not become flammable after leaks.

e. G2018C

G2018C, which consists of HCFC-22, HFC-152a, and propylene, is

acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 in the following retrofitted and

new end-uses:

Centrifugal and Reciprocating Chillers

Industrial Process Refrigeration

Ice Skating Rinks

Cold Storage Warehouses

Refrigerated Transport

Retail Food Refrigeration

Vending Machines

Water Coolers

Commercial Ice Machines

Because HCFC-22 contributes to ozone depletion, it will be phased

out of production. Therefore, this blend will be used primarily as a

retrofit refrigerant. However, it is acceptable for use in new systems.

Regulations regarding recycling and reclamation issued under section

608 of the Clean Air Act apply to G2018C. The GWP of HCFC-22 is 1700,

which is somewhat high. However, this concern is mitigated by the

scheduled phaseout of this refrigerant. Although HFC-152a is flammable,

G2018C as blended is not, and testing has shown that it does not become

flammable after leaks.

B. Refrigeration and Air Conditioning: Class II

1. Clarification of Previous Notice (61 FR 4736)

Please refer to the March 18, 1994 SNAP rule (59 FR 13044) for

detailed information pertaining to the designation of end-uses,

additional requirements imposed under sections 608 and 609, and other

information related to the use of alternative refrigerants.

This Notice marks the second time EPA has listed acceptable

substitutes for HCFC-22 in the refrigeration and air conditioning

sector. Although the substitutes listed below were intended

specifically to replace HCFC-22, HCFC-22 is itself frequently used as a

substitute for class I refrigerants (e.g, CFC-11 and CFC-12).

Therefore, the listings below also describe these HCFC-22 substitutes

as acceptable alternatives for class I refrigerants in new equipment.

The underlying reasoning is that if, for instance, HCFC-22 poses lower

overall risk than CFC-12, and R-410A poses lower overall risk than

HCFC-22, then R-410A must also pose lower overall risk than CFC-12.

Therefore, even though R-410A is not designed to be a direct

replacement for CFC-12, in new equipment it may be appropriate to

design for R-410A rather than for another CFC-12 substitute. As with

all listings, however, engineering expertise is required to determine

the best match between a given class I refrigerant and an alternative.

The February 8, 1996 Notice of Acceptability (61 FR 4736)

inadvertently described R-410A, R-410B, and R-407C as not containing

any components regulated as volatile organic compounds (VOC) under

Title I of the Clean Air Act . In fact, all three blends contain HFC-

32, which is a VOC-regulated compound.

2. Acceptable Substitutes

a. R-507

R-507, which consists of HFC-143a and HFC-125, is acceptable as a

substitute for HCFC-22, and by extension, class I refrigerants, in

equipment in the following new and retrofit end-uses:

Commercial comfort air conditioning

Industrial process refrigeration systems

Industrial process air conditioning

Refrigerated transport

Retail food refrigeration

Cold storage warehouses

Vending machines

Commercial ice machines

Household and light commercial air conditioning

R-507 contains HFC-125 and HFC-143a. HFC-125 and HFC-143a exhibit a

fairly high global warming potential (3,200 and 4,400 respectively at

100 year integrated time horizon) compared to other HFCs and HCFC-22.

However, their potential for contributing to global warming will be

mitigated in the listed end uses through the implementation of the

venting prohibition under Section 608(c)(2) of the Clean Air Act. Note

that the prohibition on venting, which applies to all substitute

refrigerants, was mandated in section 608(c)(2) and took effect through

regulations on November 15, 1995. While the current rule issued under

section 608 of the CAA (58 FR 28660) does not specify recycling or leak

repair requirements, it is illegal to vent this refrigerant at any

time. In addition, EPA anticipates proposing new recycling regulations

for non-ozone-depleting refrigerants in the near future. A fact sheet

on the proposal is available from the EPA Ozone Hotline at (800) 296-

1996. R-507 does not contain ozone-depleting substances and is low in

toxicity. Although HFC-143a is flammable, the blend is not. It is a

near azeotrope, so it will not fractionate during operation. Leak

testing has demonstrated that its composition never becomes flammable.

b. Ammonia

Ammonia, either in vapor compression or absorption systems, is

acceptable as a substitute for HCFC-22, and by extension, class I

refrigerants, in equipment in the following new end-uses:

Industrial process air conditioning

Industrial process refrigeration

Ice skating rinks

Cold storage warehouses

Commercial ice machines

Commercial comfort air conditioning (absorption chillers or

vapor compression with a secondary loop)

[[Page 47015]]

Retail food refrigeration (with a secondary loop)

Household refrigerators (absorption systems only)

Household and light commercial air conditioning (absorption

systems only)

Ammonia applications that do not fall under any of the above-listed

end uses and for which ammonia has traditionally been used as the

refrigerant fluid, whether in vapor compression or absorption systems,

are not covered under the SNAP program. Therefore, does not require

notification or listing under the SNAP program.

Ammonia has been used as a medium to low temperature refrigerant in

vapor compression cycles for more than 100 years. Ammonia has excellent

refrigerant properties, a characteristic pungent odor, no long-term

atmospheric risks, and low cost. It is, however, moderately flammable

and toxic, although it is not a cumulative poison. Ammonia may be used

safely if existing OSHA and ASHRAE standards are followed. Users should

check local building codes related to the use of ammonia. Ammonia does

not deplete the ozone or contribute to global warming.

c. Alternative Technologies

Several technologies already exist as alternatives to equipment

using class I substances. As a result of the CFC phaseout, they are

gaining prominence in the transition away from CFCs. Examples of these

technologies include evaporative cooling, desiccant cooling, and

absorption refrigeration and air conditioning. In addition, several

technologies are currently under development. Significant progress has

expanded the applicability of these alternatives, and their

environmental benefits generally include zero ODP and low direct GWP.

In addition, evaporative cooling offers significant energy savings,

which results in reduced indirect GWP.

(1) Evaporative Cooling

Evaporative Cooling is acceptable as a substitute for HCFC-22, and

by extension, class I refrigerants, in equipment in the following new

end-uses:

Industrial process air conditioning

Commercial comfort air conditioning

Household and light commercial air conditioning

Evaporative cooling does not contribute to ozone depletion or

global warming and has the potential to be more energy efficient than

current refrigeration and air conditioning systems. Evaporative cooling

uses no chemicals, but relies instead on water evaporation as a means

of cooling. It is in widespread use in office buildings in the western

U.S. Recent design improvements have greatly expanded its applicability

to other regions.

(2) Desiccant Cooling

Desiccant cooling is acceptable as a substitute for HCFC-22, and by

extension, class I refrigerants, in equipment in the following new end-

uses:

Industrial process air conditioning

Commercial comfort air conditioning

Residential air conditioning

Desiccant cooling is an alternate technology to the vapor

compression cycle. Desiccant cooling systems do not contribute to ozone

depletion or global warming. These systems offer potential energy

savings over conventional HCFC-22 vapor compression systems.

(3) Water/Lithium Bromide Absorption

Water/lithium bromide absorption is acceptable as an alternative

technology to centrifugal chillers using HCFC-22. Some absorption

systems use water as the refrigerant and lithium bromide as the

absorber. Lithium bromide has zero ODP and GWP. It is low in toxicity

and is nonflammable.

C. Foam Blowing

1. Acceptable Substitutes

a. Rigid polyurethane and polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock;

Rigid polyurethane appliance; Rigid polyurethane slabstock and other;

and Rigid polyurethane spray and commercial refrigeration, and sandwich

panels.

Proprietary Blowing Agent 1 (PBA 1) is an acceptable substitute for

CFCs and HCFCs in rigid polyurethane and polyisocyanurate laminated

boardstock foam; rigid polyurethane appliance; rigid polyurethane

slabstock and other; and rigid polyurethane spray and commercial

refrigeration, and sandwich panels. This blowing agent was submitted as

a proprietary formulation by a foam system manufacturer. PBA 1 does not

contain ozone depleting chemicals and has very low or zero global

warming potential. This blend is not flammable. No other significant

health or environmental risks are anticipated from the use of this

substitute as long as other existing relevant health, environmental and

safety requirements are met. Exposure assessments indicate worker

exposure is unlikely to exceed the OSHA permissible exposure level.

D. Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection

1. Acceptable Substitutes

a. Total Flooding Agents

(1) Foam A--formerly [Water Mist/Surfactant Blend] A

Foam A is acceptable as a Halon 1301 substitute. This agent was

previously identified as [Water Mist/Surfactant Blend] A in the July

28, 1995 Notice (60 FR 38729), and was listed as acceptable for use in

normally unoccupied areas only. Since that time, the manufacturer has

clarified to EPA that this agent is not a water mist system, nor is it

a wetting agent, but instead is a low density, short duration foam.

This agent is dispensed as bubbles which physically interfere with the

mixture of fuel and air, and provide some cooling of the flame front,

both of which contribute to control of the fire.

In the event that the manufacturer develops a misting system based

on this agent, EPA requires the manufacturer to submit a separate SNAP

application for assessment of exposure to fine water mist particles

containing additives.

E. Solvent Cleaning

1. Acceptable Substitutes

a. Metals Cleaning

Hydrofluoroether (HFE): C4F9OCH3 (methoxynonafluorobutane, iso and

normal) is an acceptable substitute for CFC-113 and methyl chloroform

(MCF) in metals cleaning. This HFE is a new chemical that completed

review in May 1996 under EPA's Premanufacture Notice Program under the

Toxic Substances Control Act. This chemical does not deplete the ozone

layer since it does not contain chlorine or bromine. It has a 4.1-year

atmospheric lifetime and a GWP of 150 over a 500-year time horizon and

480 over a 100-year time horizon.

This HFE exhibits only moderate toxicity in tests reviewed by EPA,

and the 600 ppm 8-hr Time Weighted Average workplace standard set by

the company was deemed sufficiently protective. Based on the

combination of the feasibility of meeting the exposure standard and the

moderate toxicity exhibited by this chemical, EPA is listing this

substance as acceptable without restrictions. As with workplace

exposure standards for other CFC alternatives, this standard for this

substance, too, will be examined by the Workplace Environmental

Exposure Limit subcommittee of the American Industrial Hygiene

Association.

[[Page 47016]]

b. Electronics Cleaning

Hydrofluoroether (HFE): C4F9OCH3 (methoxynonafluorobutane, iso and

normal) is an acceptable substitute for CFC-113 and methyl chloroform

(MCF) in electronics cleaning. This HFE is a new chemical that

completed review in May 1996 under EPA's Premanufacture Notice Program

under the Toxic Substances Control Act. This chemical does not deplete

the ozone layer since it does not contain chlorine or bromine. It has a

atmospheric 4.1-year lifetime and a GWP of 150 over a 500-year time

horizon and 480 over a 100-year time horizon. The GWP and lifetime for

this HFE are both lower than the GWP and lifetime for CFC-113 and for

PFCs.