Protection of Stratospheric Ozone
Federal RegisterDec 30, 1997
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
SUMMARY: On July 14, 1992, EPA published a final rule in the Federal
Register, pursuant to section 609 of the Clean Air Act, as amended (the
Act), establishing standards and requirements regarding the servicing
of motor vehicle air conditioners (MVACs) that use chlorofluorocarbon-
12 (CFC-12), a class I refrigerant, and establishing restrictions on
the sale of small containers of class I or class II refrigerants.
Pursuant to section 609(b)(1), today's final rule establishes
standards and requirements for the servicing of MVACs that use any
refrigerant other than CFC-12. Today's rule also pro-vides that
refrigerant (whether CFC-12 or a substitute) recovered from motor
vehicles located at motor vehicle disposal facilities may be re-used in
the MVAC service sector only if it has been properly recovered and
reclaimed, or if it has been properly recovered by persons who are
either employees, owners or operators of the facilities, or technicians
certified under section 609 of the Act, using approved equipment, and
subsequently recycled using approved refrigerant recycling equipment
prior to use in recharging an MVAC or MVAC-like appliance. The rule
also establishes conditions under which owners and operators of motor
vehicle disposal facilities may sell refrigerant recovered from such
vehicles to technicians certified under section 609 of the act.
Finally, the rule establishes standards for mobile recovery and
recycling service of MVACs. The rule also clarifies certain provisions
in the existing regulatory text.
Today's rule increases industry flexibility in selecting and
purchasing proper recovery and recycling equipment by establishing
standards for equipment that recovers and/or recycles refrigerants
other than CFC-12, and by approving independent testing organizations
that certify such equipment.
This final action facilitates compliance with section 608(c)(2) of
the Act, which prohibits venting refrigerants to the atmosphere. By
promoting the recycling or reclamation of all refrigerants from MVACs
and MVAC-like appliances, this rule will help to lower the risk of
depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer and the possibility of
global climate change, thus diminishing potentially harmful effects to
human health and the environment, including increased incidences of
certain skin cancers and cataracts.
DATES: This final rule is effective January 29, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Comments and materials supporting this rulemaking are
contained in Public Docket No. A-95-34 in room M-1500, Waterside Mall
(Ground Floor), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20460. The docket may be inspected from 8:30 a.m.
until 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. A reasonable fee may be charged
for copying docket materials.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christine Dibble, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Office of Air and
Radiation (6205-J), 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460. (202) 564-
9147 or electronically at [email protected]. The Ozone
Information Hotline at 1-800-296-1996 can also be contacted for further
information.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The contents of today's preamble are listed
in the following outline:
I. Background
A. Statutory Authority; July 14, 1992 Final Rule and May 2, 1995
Supplemental Final Rule
B. Venting Prohibition; Application of Rules to Replacement
Refrigerants
II. Summary of Public Participation
III. Summary of Major Public Comments
IV. Today's Final Rule
A. Service Practices
1. Handling Refrigerant Recovered from Vehicles Bound for
Disposal and Located at Motor Vehicle Disposal Facilities
2. Mobile Recovery and Recycling
3. Topping Off
4. Recharging Refrigerant Into the Same Vehicle From Which the
Refrigerant was Extracted
B. Equipment Standards
1. Standard for HFC-134a Recover/Recycle Equipment
2. Standard for HFC-134a Recover-only Equipment
3. Standard for Automotive Refrigerant Recycling Equipment
Intended for Use With Both CFC-12 and HFC-134a
4. Standard for Recover-only Equipment That Extracts a Single,
Specific Refrigerant other Than CFC-12 or HFC-134a
C. Substantially Identical Equipment
D. Approved Independent Standards Testing Organizations
E. Technician Training and Certification
F. Sales Restriction
V. Summary of Supporting Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866
B. Regulatory Flexibility/Fairness to Small Entities
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Entities potentially regulated by this action are those that
service or dispose of motor vehicle air conditioners. Regulated
categories and entities include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated
Category entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.................................. Independent repair shops.
Service stations.
Truck fleet shops.
Collision repair shops.
Franchised repair shops.
New car and truck dealers.
Car and truck rental shops.
Radiator repair shops.
Vocational technical
schools.
Farm equipment dealers.
Automobile rental and
leasing facilities.
Federal Government........................ Military repair shops.
Fleet repair shops.
State/Tribal/Local Government............. Fleet repair shops.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities
not listed in the table could also be regu-lated. To determine whether
your facility, company, business, organization, etc. is regulated by
this action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria in
section 609 of the Clean Air Act and in the regulations promulgated
thereunder at 40 CFR 82.30 et seq. If you have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
I. Background
A. Statutory Authority; July 14, 1992 Final Rule and May 2, 1995
Supplemental Final Rule
Title VI of the Act is designed to protect the stratospheric ozone
layer. Section 609 of the Act requires the Administrator to promulgate
regulations establishing standards and requirements
[[Page 68027]]
regarding the servicing of motor vehicle air conditioners (MVACs). On
July 14, 1992, the Agency published a final rule initially implementing
section 609. In that rule, the Agency prohibited the repair or
servicing of any MVAC for consideration if such repair or servicing
involved the air conditioner refrigerant, unless performed by a trained
and certified technician who properly uses approved refrigerant
recycling equipment. The Agency also prohibited the sale or
distribution of any class I or class II substance (i.e., CFC or HCFC)
suitable for use in an MVAC that is in a container of less than 20
pounds, to anyone other than a properly trained and certified section
609 technician.
The July 14, 1992 final rule defined ``approved refrigerant
recycling equipment'' as equipment that recovers and recycles CFC-12
refrigerant and purifies the refrigerant on-site, and that is certified
by the Administrator or by an independent standards testing
organization approved by the Agency as meeting the standards set forth
in appendix A in the rule.
The regulatory equipment standards are based on those developed by
the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and cover service procedures
for recovering CFC-12 (SAE J1989, issued in October 1989), test
procedures to evaluate CFC-12 recover/recycle equipment (SAE J1990,
issued in October 1989 and revised in 1991) and a purity standard for
recycled CFC-12 refrigerant (SAE J1991, issued in October 1989). CFC-12
recycling equipment was also considered approved if it was purchased
before September 4, 1991 (the date on which the July 14, 1992 rule was
proposed), and is substantially identical to the certified equipment.
Only equipment certified to meet the standards set forth in appendix A,
or to meet the criteria for substantially identical equipment, was
approved under section 609 of the Act for use in the servicing of motor
vehicle air conditioners.
The July 14, 1992 rule also established standards by which (i) an
independent standards testing organization may apply to the Agency for
approval to test and approve refrigerant recycling equipment, and (ii)
a training and certification program may apply to the Agency for
approval to train and certify technicians in the proper use of
refrigerant recycling equipment for MVACs. Underwriters Laboratories
(UL) and ETL Testing Laboratories (ETL) are the approved independent
standards testing organizations that currently certify equipment using
the standards that appear in appendix A of the rule. Finally, the rule
established various recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
As stated above, section 609 prohibits the sale or distribution of
any class I or class II substance suitable for use in an MVAC that is
in a container of less than 20 pounds to anyone other than a properly
trained and certified section 609 technician. It should be noted,
however, that EPA expanded this prohibition in the regulations
published on May 14, 1993 at 58 FR 28712 under section 608 of the Act
(40 CFR 82.154(n)), which prohibits the sale as of November 14, 1994 of
any size container of a class I or class II substance, including
refrigerant blends that include class I or class II substances, to
other than technicians certified under section 608 or section 609 of
the Act.
The July 14, 1992 rule reserved standards for equipment that
extracts but does not recycle CFC-12 refrigerant (recover-only
equipment) in Appendix B to the rule. On May 2, 1995, EPA published a
final rule establishing regulatory standards, again based on standards
developed by SAE, which apply to certification of CFC-12 recover-only
equipment. Specifically, for recover-only equipment, the Agency adopted
(i) the recommended service procedure for the containment of CFC-12
(SAE J1989, issued in October 1989 and set forth in appendix A), and
(ii) test procedures to evaluate recover-only equipment (SAE J2209,
issued in June 1992). The definition of ``approved refrigerant
recycling equipment'' was also expanded to include this recover-only
equipment. UL and ETL were also approved to certify recover-only
equipment. Finally, service technicians previously certified to handle
recover/recycle equipment were grandfathered so that they would not
have to be recertified to handle recover-only equipment.
B. Venting Prohibition; Application of Rules to Replacement
Refrigerants
Many replacement refrigerants for CFC-12 in automotive applications
are blends of chemicals that include HCFCs, which are class II
substances. As class II blends, these refrigerants have been subject
since the inception of the Title VI requirements to all of the same
rules and restrictions that apply to CFC-12: they may not be vented
into the atmosphere; they may only be purchased by certified
technicians, and in small cans only by section 609 certified
technicians; and they must be recovered by section 609 certified
technicians and either recycled on-site or reclaimed off-site prior to
reuse. Today's rule establishes a standard for equipment that extracts
such blends but does not recycle them. EPA is currently working with
the industry to determine what standard is appropriate for equipment
that can safely recycle these blend refrigerants.
Because HFC-134a is a non-ozone-depleting chemical, and is
therefore not classified as a class I or class II substance, the
regulations set forth under Title VI of the Act governing its use are
somewhat different. Section 609 of the Act defines ``refrigerant'' so
that, beginning on November 15, 1995, the term includes any substance
that substitutes for a class I or II substance used in an MVAC. Section
608 of the Act provides that, beginning on November 15, 1995, any
substance substituting for a class I or class II substance may not be
vented into the atmosphere. Therefore, on that date, it became illegal
to vent HFC-134a, even though it does not contribute to ozone
depletion. (Venting of CFC-12 substitutes that contain class II
substances was already prohibited.) Because venting was prohibited,
recovery of HFC-134a has been de facto required since November 15,
1995. Recycling HFC-134a in approved equipment, however, has not been
required. The publication today of standards for equipment that
recovers and recycles HFC-134a initiates a requirement to recycle HFC-
134a, beginning on the effective date of this rule. A summary of
today's rule is set forth in section IV below.
II. Summary of Public Participation
During the public comment period, the Agency received 27 sets of
comments that are addressed in this action. In addition, EPA received
and considered additional comments submitted to the Agency after the
thirty-day comment period ended. All comments considered in this final
action are contained in the Air Docket. No commenter requested a public
hearing.
III. Summary of Major Public Comments
This rule was originally proposed for public comment in the March
6, 1996 Federal Register (61 FR 9014). Comments to this rule were
submitted between March 6, 1996 and April 5, 1996. The vast majority of
comments discussed the proposed clarification of required service
practices for motor vehicle disposal facilities. The remainder of
comments addressed the proposed service practices for mobile recovery
and recycling; the standards for recovery and recycling equipment
[[Page 68028]]
designed for use with HFC-134a or other replacement refrigerants;
training and certification of technicians; and potential future
restrictions on the sale of HFC-134a.
Several commenters disagreed with certain minor technical
provisions contained in the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)
standards that are being adopted in this rule. Some of these comments
will be addressed in more detail below. None of these comments is being
incorporated by the Agency in today's rule, however, because in all
instances, the Agency believes that the value of EPA legally mandating
exactly the same standards previously adopted on a wide scale by the
automotive service industry outweighs any benefit brought by
incorporating the minor changes suggested. A legally mandated standard
adopted by EPA that is different from a widely used voluntary industry
standard would cause significant confusion within the affected
industry.
For example, one commenter requested that labels for recovery/
recycling equipment state ``Caution--Should Be Operated by Qualified
Personnel'' rather than ``Caution--Should Be Operated by Certified
Personnel.'' The commenter correctly pointed out that owners and
operators of salvage yards and other automotive recycling facilities
are qualified under Title VI to handle recovery/recycling equipment,
but are not certified technicians. If EPA adopted this provision into
its standard, however, then equipment labels would have to contain both
statements, if the labels were to meet both the voluntary industry
standard set forth by SAE, and the mandated standard promulgated by
EPA. The resulting label would only serve to confuse anyone reading it.
The Agency believes that the benefit of making the label slightly more
accurate is outweighed by the advantages brought by consistency between
industry and government standards.
Commenters generally supported the proposed standards for recovery
and recycling equipment, and for the training and certification of
technicians, and very strongly supported EPA's proposal to explicitly
permit the use of mobile recovery and recycling equipment to service
MVACs.
Commenters extensively discussed the proposed clarification of EPA
regulations governing who may recover refrigerant from motor vehicles
bound for disposal, who may purchase such refrigerant, and under what
conditions such refrigerant may be re-used. In general, the commenters
either supported the proposed standards that would allow owners,
operators, and employees of motor vehicle disposal facilities to
recover and sell to section 609 technicians refrigerants recovered from
motor vehicles destined for disposal, or claimed that the proposed
standards, as written, would not serve to protect the national
refrigerant supply or the environment because they would allow
untrained technicians to service and sell refrigerants in the
marketplace.
Those supporting the proposed changes/clarification claimed that
both motor vehicle disposal facilities and service technicians who
install refrigerants in MVAC systems have an economic stake in ensuring
that refrigerants are properly identified, recovered, handled, recycled
or reclaimed, and installed. The supporters also suggested that the
rule would increase the value of the refrigerant to motor vehicle
disposal facilities by decreasing shipping costs and increasing the
number of buyers for recovered refrigerant. Those commenters who did
not fully support the proposed rule asserted that training,
certification, and refrigerant identification requirements, as well as
specific sales prohibitions, should be incorporated into the rule to
better protect the refrigerant supply and the environment. They felt
that untrained operators would be more likely to vent refrigerants and
cause contamination problems, and that the minimal training expense, in
combination with the increasing need to become informed regarding
recently commercialized substitute refrigerants, warrant a training
requirement for individuals involved with refrigerant recovery and
subsequent sales. As a consequence, a large number of commenters urged
EPA to require owners, operators and employees of motor vehicle
disposal facilities to become certified technicians under section 609
of the Act in order to recover refrigerant from MVAC systems. Several
commenters also requested that the Agency require that any refrigerant
recovered from MVACs at motor vehicle disposal facilities be sent
directly to a reclaimer, as is currently required for refrigerant
recovered from stationary equipment such as household refrigerators and
air conditioners, when that equipment is to be dismantled and salvaged.
The major comments to the proposal will be discussed in further detail
below.
EPA's responses to specific comments are set forth in section IV,
Today's Final Rule, below.
IV. Today's Final Rule
Today's rule further implements sections 608 and 609 of the Act.
This section of the preamble reviews the elements of the rule and
addresses the major comments to those elements. Specifically, the
regulations:
(i) Explicitly permit, under specified conditions, technicians
certified under section 609 of the Act who recover refrigerant (whether
CFC-12 or a replacement) from motor vehicles located at disposal
facilities and bound for disposal and who recycle that refrigerant to
use the refrigerant to charge or recharge an MVAC or MVAC-like
appliance. It also explicitly permits, under specified conditions,
owners or operators of motor vehicle disposal and recycling facilities,
salvage yards, scrap recyclers, landfills or other motor vehicle
disposal facilities where such vehicles may be located, to sell
refrigerant recovered from such vehicles (whether CFC-12 or a
replacement) to section 609 certified technicians without recycling the
recovered refrigerant. These conditions are as follows:
(a) Any refrigerant that is extracted from an MVAC or an MVAC-like
appliance bound for disposal and located at a motor vehicle disposal
facility may not be subsequently used to charge or recharge an MVAC or
MVAC-like appliance, unless, prior to such charging or recharging, the
refrigerant is either (1) recovered and reclaimed in accordance with
the regulations promulgated in subpart F (the section 608 regulations),
or (2) recovered using approved refrigerant recycling equipment
dedicated for use with MVACs and MVAC-like appliances, either by a
technician certified under section 609, or by an employee, owner, or
operator of the disposal facility, and subsequently recycled by the
facility that charges or recharges the refrigerant into an MVAC or
MVAC-like appliance, using approved refrigerant recycling equipment in
accordance with any applicable recommended service procedures.
(b) Any class I or class II substance extracted from an MVAC or an
MVAC-like appliance bound for disposal and located at a motor vehicle
disposal facility, which is not recovered and reclaimed in accordance
with the section 608 regulations, may be sold prior to its subsequent
re-use only to a section 609 certified technician.
(c) Any section 609 certified technician who obtains such a class I
or class II substance may subsequently re-use such refrigerant only in
an MVAC or MVAC-like appliance, and only if it has been reclaimed or
properly recycled.
(ii) Revise the definition of ``properly using'' to explicitly
permit and establish
[[Page 68029]]
standards for mobile recovery and recycling service of MVACs;
(iii) Clarify that the definition of ``service involving
refrigerant'' includes service performed by facilities that charge
refrigerant into vehicles but do not perform any other kind of
refrigerant servicing or repair (i.e., facilities that ``top off''
only);
(iv) Further clarify that ``properly using'' recover/recycling
equipment entails recycling refrigerant prior to recharging it into a
vehicle, even if the vehicle is the same vehicle from which the
refrigerant was extracted;
(v) Establish a standard for recover/recycle equipment that
extracts and recycles HFC-134a from MVACs;
(vi) Establish a standard for recover-only equipment that extracts
HFC-134a from MVACs;
(vii) Establish a standard for recover-only equipment designed to
extract a single, specific refrigerant other than CFC-12 and HFC-134a;
(viii) Establish a standard for recover-recycle equipment that
extracts and recycles both CFC-12 and HFC-134a using a common
refrigerant circuit;
(ix) Revise the requirements for Agency approval of independent
standards testing organizations to include certification of recover/
recycle and recover-only equipment designed to service MVAC systems
that use refrigerants other than CFC-12; and
(x) Revise the criteria for approval of technician training and
certification programs to reflect the use of recover/recycle and
recover-only equipment designed to service MVAC systems that use
refrigerants other than CFC-12.
In addition, in this notice EPA describes its intention to
grandfather technicians currently certified under section 609, so that
they will not need to be recertified to operate recover/recycle and
recover-only equipment designed to service MVAC systems that use
refrigerants other than CFC-12.
A. Service Practices
Today's rule clarifies the Agency's position on four types of
refrigerant service that have not previously been explicitly addressed
in the section 609 regulations: (i) The recovery of refrigerant from
motor vehicles located at a motor vehicle disposal facility and bound
for disposal, and the subsequent purchase and re-use of such
refrigerant; (ii) mobile recovery and recycling service, i.e., service
in which approved recover-only or recover/recycle equipment is
transported to the location of an MVAC for servicing by a certified
technician; (iii) service performed by facilities that charge
refrigerant into vehicles but do not perform any other kind of
refrigerant servicing or repair (i.e., facilities that ``top off''
only); and (iv) service that involves recharging refrigerant into the
same vehicle from which that refrigerant was extracted.
The service practice regulations being promulgated today for MVACs
also apply to MVAC-like appliances (such as air-conditioning systems in
off-road equipment such as tractors and other farm equipment,
construction equipment, and mining and quarry equipment, that meet the
definition of MVAC-like appliances set forth in 40 CFR 82.152). MVAC-
like appliances have traditionally been governed under section 608 of
the Act rather than under section 609. However, the section 608
regulations contained in subpart F that apply to MVAC-like appliances
generally refer back to the section 609 standards contained in subpart
B. For example, Sec. 82.156(a)(5) states that persons opening MVAC-like
appliances for maintenance, service or repair may do so only when
properly using equipment pursuant to Sec. 82.32(e), and Sec. 82.158 (a)
and (f) state that manufacturers of recycling equipment used to service
or repair MVAC-like appliances must have the equipment certified
pursuant to Sec. 82.36(a).
Because MVAC-like appliances have been ostensibly governed under
section 608, EPA stated in the proposal to this rule that service
practice regulations governing MVAC-like appliances, similar to those
in today's rule that govern MVACs, would be proposed and finalized in a
separate rulemaking that amends section 608. Since the publication of
the proposal to today's rule, however, EPA has determined that those
service practice regulations that apply to MVAC-like appliances should
be contained in today's final rule, rather than in the section 608
rule. The Agency is making this change for a number of reasons.
Practically speaking, EPA's changes to the regulations will have
the same actual effect on the servicing of MVAC-like appliances, no
matter whether the changes are made under the section 609 regulations
or the section 608 regulations. At the time of the publication of the
proposal to today's rule, EPA believed that the proposal and final rule
in this separate section 608 rulemaking would be published at about the
same time as this section 609 rule. The changes to the section 608
regulations that include the new service practice regulations governing
MVAC-like appliances would therefore take effect on or about the
effective date of the changes to the section 609 regulations that
include new service practice regulations governing MVACs. The intended
schedule for the section 608 rulemaking has been delayed, however, so
that today's final rule under section 609 will most likely be published
before the proposal for the section 608 rule is published. EPA's
publication of the service practice regulations that govern MVAC-like
appliances under subpart F would create a disparity when identical
changes in the service practice regulations would affect MVACs and
MVAC-like appliances; regulations that affect MVACs on the effective
date of today's rule would most likely not affect MVAC-like appliances
for a year or more.
EPA believes that such a delay would create confusion within the
motor vehicle service industry, a large segment of which services both
MVACs and MVAC-like appliances. Some automotive recyclers may also
receive both MVACs and MVAC-like appliances on their lots and may
therefore be recovering refrigerant from both MVACs and MVAC-like
appliances before they are dismantled, crushed or otherwise disposed
of. Having different rules in place for MVACs and MVAC-like appliances
complicates efforts by these persons to comply with EPA regulations.
In addition, EPA believes that a delay in implementing these rules,
as they apply to MVAC-like appliances, will be viewed with concern by
servicers of MVAC-like appliances found in non-road motor vehicles,
such as those appliances in farm and heavy-duty equipment. The farm
equipment and heavy-duty equipment industries have long expressed to
EPA their frustration at understanding how MVAC-like appliances are
governed under Title VI of the Act. EPA believes that publishing the
service practice regulations under subpart F, thereby incurring a delay
of a year or more in their implementation, would not serve the interest
of these industries, and that the service practice regulations
promulgated today should clarify to these affected sectors how MVAC-
like appliances are regulated under Title VI.
Finally, EPA believes that it makes more sense to state in the
subpart B regulations than in the subpart F regulations how these
service practice regulations apply to MVAC-like appliances, because in
most practical respects, EPA regulations treat MVAC-like appliances
more like MVACs than like refrigerators, freezers, chillers and other
stationary/commercial appliances. EPA established the links between the
provisions governing MVACs and those governing MVAC-like appliances
because EPA believed that the
[[Page 68030]]
similarities in design and servicing patterns between MVACs and MVAC-
like appliances argue for parallel requirements for both sets of
appliances. The argument for parallel coverage of MVACs and MVAC-like
appliances was discussed at length in the May 14, 1993 section 608 rule
at 58 FR 28686. EPA continues to believe this, and specifically
believes that the rationale for clarifying and changing the
requirements under the section 609 regulations as they apply to MVACs
also holds for MVAC-like appliances.
Interested parties should note that the section 608 regulations
currently define ``appliances,'' including ``MVAC-like appliances,'' to
include only devices that contain and use class I or class II
substances, so that as of today, MVAC-like appliances by definition do
not include any air-conditioning systems in off-road equipment if those
systems use HFC-134a or other non-ozone-depleting substances. Off-road
vehicles that contain MVAC-like appliances that use non-ozone-depleting
refrigerants are today subject only to the section 608 venting
prohibition; other Title VI regulations will only apply to these
vehicles when the definition of ``appliance'' is expanded to include
devices that use non-ozone-depleting substances as refrigerants. EPA is
currently undertaking a rulemaking to expand the scope of the 608
regulation to include substitutes for class I and class II substances,
but this rulemaking has not yet been proposed. This rulemaking would
amend the definition of ``appliance,'' so that the term includes non-
ozone-depleting refrigerants. If and when that expanded definition
becomes effective, MVAC-like appliances that contain non-ozone-
depleting refrigerants would be subject to the service practice
regulations promulgated today.
1. Handling Refrigerant Recovered From Vehicles Bound for Disposal and
Located at Motor Vehicle Disposal Facilities
Since the publication of the July 14, 1992 section 609 final rule,
EPA has received an increasing number of questions concerning the
handling of refrigerants from MVACs and MVAC-like appliances bound for
disposal and located at motor vehicle disposal facilities. Many owners
of motor vehicle disposal facilities have assumed that recovered
refrigerant must be sent off-site for reclamation, while others have
assumed that they may sell the refrigerant to any interested purchaser.
In response to the increasing cost of CFC-12, some automotive service
technicians have begun to recover refrigerant from motor vehicle
disposal facilities for use in their own service facilities. In
addition, owners and operators of motor vehicle disposal facilities
have been recovering refrigerant from automobiles and selling it to
automotive service technicians. The rule promulgated today clarifies
that the Agency permits the return of refrigerant to the MVAC service
sector without prior reclamation, as long as certain requirements are
met during their performance.
Sections 608 and 609 of the Clean Air Act and the regulations
adopted by EPA prior to today at 40 CFR part 82, Subparts B and F
(i.e., the section 609 and 608 regulations) have addressed to some
degree activities involving recovery and sale of refrigerant from MVACs
and MVAC-like appliances at motor vehicle disposal facilities.
Regulations promulgated under Section 608 of the Clean Air Act, which
has as one of its goals ensuring the purity of refrigerant that flows
back into the stationary/commercial sector, require the recovery of all
refrigerant located in appliances destined for disposal. Section 608
regulations also require that unless refrigerant is recovered from an
MVAC and reused in the MVAC service sector, it must be reclaimed.
However, if refrigerant has been recovered from an MVAC destined for
disposal, and if the refrigerant is then reused in the MVAC service
sector, the regulations promulgated under section 608 are silent with
respect to how that refrigerant must be handled prior to such reuse.
Section 82.154(f) of the regulations requires that persons who take
the final step in the disposal process must recover any remaining
refrigerant in accordance with applicable requirements and requires
that persons who recover refrigerant from MVACs and MVAC-like
appliances for purposes of disposal must certify to the Administrator
that they have acquired equipment that meets such standards. Section
82.156(g) requires that all persons recovering refrigerant from MVACs
and MVAC-like appliances for purposes of disposal must reduce the
pressure of the system to or below 102 mm (four inches) of mercury
vacuum, using equipment that meets the requirements of Sec. 82.158(l).
In addition, Sec. 82.154 (g) and (h) require that persons cannot sell
used class I or class II refrigerant unless it has first been reclaimed
by a certified reclaimer, or unless the refrigerant was used only in an
MVAC or MVAC-like appliance and will be used only in an MVAC or MVAC-
like appliance.\1\ Section 82.154(m) prohibits persons from selling or
distributing any class I or class II substance for use as a refrigerant
unless the purchaser is a technician certified under section 608 or
609. (Although there are exceptions to this sales restriction, the
exceptions do not apply to sales of refrigerant from motor vehicle
disposal facilities.) These provisions were adopted pursuant to section
608 of the Act. Any servicing of an MVAC or MVAC-like appliance with
refrigerant recovered from a motor vehicle disposal facility would also
be subject to the various equipment standards and use restrictions set
forth in 40 CFR part 82, subparts B and F.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sections 82.154 (g) and (h) also permit a third option for
used class I and class II refrigerants: They may be sold in an
appliance without prior reclamation. Interested parties should note
that although Sec. 82.154 (g) and (h) were formerly effective only
until December 31, 1996, a final rule published in the Federal
Register on December 27, 1996 at 61 FR 68506 extends these
provisions indefinitely.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neither the subpart F regulations nor the subpart B regulations,
however, explicitly and specifically address, in a single, central
location, who may recover refrigerant from motor vehicles bound for
disposal, who may purchase such refrigerant, and under what conditions
such refrigerant may be re-used. Today's rule is intended to supplement
the existing piecemeal requirements so that automotive recyclers and
dismantlers, and automotive service technicians, will be able to follow
a clear and complete set of EPA regulations concerning the recovery and
re-use of refrigerants from MVACs and MVAC-like appliances located at
motor vehicle disposal facilities. At the same time, the provisions
contained in today's rule should minimize the discharge of ozone-
depleting refrigerants into the atmosphere and provide for the proper
recycling or reclamation of the refrigerants prior to their use in
servicing MVACs or MVAC-like appliances. EPA intends to propose similar
regulations under section 608 of the Act to provide an incentive for
the recovery and re-use of non-ozone-depleting refrigerants from MVAC-
like appliances located at motor vehicle disposal facilities, so that
these refrigerants are properly recycled or reclaimed prior to their
use in servicing MVACs or MVAC-like appliances.
The Agency believes that recovery and recycling of refrigerant from
MVACs bound for disposal and located at disposal facilities will be
more economically attractive to the automotive service technician and
the motor vehicle disposal facility operator
[[Page 68031]]
if the sale or re-use of unreclaimed refrigerant is explicitly
permitted. The service technician may be able to purchase refrigerant
for a lower price from a motor vehicle disposal facility than from
other suppliers of reclaimed refrigerant. Because of this economic
incentive, technicians will seek salvaged MVACs. In addition, motor
vehicle disposal facility owners and operators may profit by selling
refrigerant directly to technicians, or by charging technicians fees
for the opportunity to recover refrigerant at the facility, creating
other economic incentives in the refrigerant recycling chain. The
Agency believes that encouraging these activities will increase the
value of refrigerant to the person recovering it, thereby reducing the
amount of refrigerant that either leaks out of MVACs while they await
disposal or is purposely vented during the process of disposal.
Today's rule adds a definition of ``motor vehicle disposal
facility'' at Sec. 82.32(i) and adds a new Sec. 82.34(d). The effect of
these changes is that if refrigerant from MVACs bound for dis-posal and
located at disposal facilities is destined for re-use in the MVAC
service sector without prior reclamation, it must be recovered by a
certified technician or by a motor vehicle disposal facility owner,
operator, or employee. Such persons will be able to transfer the
refrigerant off-site for recycling and charging into an MVAC or MVAC-
like appliance, in accordance with the conditions described in this
rule. Section (a) discusses the definition of motor vehicle disposal
facility, section (b) discusses who may recover refrigerant from such a
facility, and section (c) discusses what kind of equipment must be used
to recover refrigerant at such a facility. Section (d) discusses who
may purchase refrigerant recovered from a motor vehicle disposal
facility, section (e) discusses subsequent use of refrigerant after it
has left the facility, and section (f) discusses recordkeeping and
reporting requirements.
After publishing the proposal to today's rule, and reviewing the
comments on that proposal, the Agency considered at length where the
proposed regulations most sensibly belong: Under subpart F (the
regulations previously promulgated under section 608 of the Act), which
governs the safe disposal of refrigerants and includes regulations that
mandate what type of equipment must be used to recover refrigerant at
motor vehicle disposal facilities, or under subpart B (the regulations
previously promulgated under section 609 of the Act), which governs the
servicing of motor vehicle air conditioning and includes regulations
that mandate what type of equipment must be used to recycle refrigerant
prior to re-use in a motor vehicle.
EPA believes that if the refrigerant recovered at a motor vehicle
disposal facility is destined for re-use in the MVAC service sector
without prior reclamation, then the regulations governing the recovery
and re-use of that refrigerant should be located in subpart B. With the
regulations adopted today, the regulations in subpart B are based in
large part on section 609, but contain a few provisions based on
section 608. If, on the other hand, the refrigerant recovered at a
motor vehicle disposal facility is sold or otherwise transferred to a
reclaimer and subsequently re-used in any refrigeration and air-
conditioning sector, then the regulations governing the recovery and
re-use of that refrigerant are found in subpart F. This regulatory
framework will effectively preclude storing refrigerant bound for re-
use in the MVAC service sector without prior reclamation together in
the same container with refrigerant destined for a reclaimer prior to
re-use.
With some exceptions described below (notably recordkeeping
requirements), the recovery of refrigerant destined for re-use in the
MVAC service sector without prior reclamation is governed by the
regulations described in today's rule. All of the regulations that
govern the recovery of class I and class II refrigerants bound directly
for a reclaimer are already in place, in the current subpart F
regulations, and the subpart F regulations will in the future
incorporate rules that govern the recovery of non-ozone-depleting
refrigerants bound for reclamation. Within each section below, the
discussion will be framed around whether the refrigerant is bound for
direct re-use in the MVAC service sector, or whether it is bound for
reclamation. Each section below will explain which regulatory text
under subpart F and/or subpart B applies in each situation.
a. Definition of motor vehicle disposal facility: The proposed rule
added a new term, ``motor vehicle disposal facility,'' defined in
Sec. 82.32(i). The proposed definition stated that motor vehicle
disposal facility means ``any commercial facility that engages in motor
vehicle disposal, dismantling or recycling, including but not limited
to scrap yards, landfills, and salvage yards engaged in such
operations. Motor vehicle repair facilities, including collision repair
facilities, are not considered motor vehicle disposal facilities.'' Few
commenters suggested changes to the definition. One commenter requested
that EPA include in the definition mobile car crushers, vehicle
dismantlers, certified scrap processors, and itinerant vehicle
collectors, which are businesses separately categorized and registered
in New York State. EPA believes that the existing definition is
sufficiently broad to encompass these kinds of businesses, and that the
types of businesses explicitly listed in the definition need not be
exhaustive. A second commenter suggested replacing the term ``salvage
yards'' with ``automotive recycling facilities,'' since the commenter
believed that ``salvage yard'' does not properly identify the
automotive recycling industry. EPA in response has added the term
``automotive recycling facilities,'' but has not deleted the term
``salvage yards,'' since facilities that characterize themselves as
salvage yards but not necessarily as automotive recycling facilities
may engage in refrigerant recovery.
EPA has also changed the definition to make more clear that
facilities that dismantle or dispose of both MVACs and MVAC-like
appliances are covered under the definition. It should be noted,
however, that the regulations set forth in today's rule concerning
handling refrigerant recovered from vehicles bound for disposal do not
apply to recovery of refrigerant from an MVAC or MVAC-like appliance
that is performed outside of a motor vehicle disposal facility. So, for
example, if a piece of heavy-duty equipment such as mining equipment
that is at the end of its useful life is dismantled at the mine site,
then the mine site is not considered a motor vehicle disposal facility.
b. Persons who may recover refrigerant from MVACs at motor vehicle
disposal facilities: Neither the subpart F regulations nor the current
subpart B regulations restrict who may recover refrigerant from an MVAC
or MVAC-like appliance before it is disposed of or dismantled. This
continues to be the case for refrigerant recovered from an MVAC or
MVAC-like appliance if the refrigerant is then sold or otherwise
transferred to a reclaimer.
If, on the other hand, the refrigerant is bound for re-use in the
MVAC (or MVAC-like appliance) service sector without being reclaimed
first, then today's rule applies. Specifically, the rule adds a new
requirement, set forth in Sec. 82.34(d), that if any refrigerant
recovered from an MVAC or MVAC-like appliance at a motor vehicle
disposal facility is to be returned to the MVAC
[[Page 68032]]
service sector for re-use without prior reclamation, then the person
recovering it must be either an owner, operator or employee of the
facility (or a contractor to the facility), or a section 609 certified
technician.
With respect to class I and class II substances bound for direct
re-use in the MVAC or MVAC-like appliance service sector, sections 608
(a) and (b) authorize the restriction on who may recover refrigerant.
Under section 608, the Administrator may prescribe standards and
equipment regarding the use and disposal of MVACs and MVAC-like
appliances containing class I or II substances, in order to reduce the
use and emissions of these substances to the lowest achievable level,
and to maximize the recapture and recycling of these substances. The
Administrator also may establish standards and requirements regarding
the safe disposal of these substances.
Although sections 608 (a) and (b) authorize the restriction on who
may recover refrigerant from a motor vehicle disposal facility with
respect to class I or II substances, these sections do not directly
require regulation of the use of non-ozone-depleting substitute
refrigerants. Section 608(c)(2), however, does prohibit intentional
venting or release of such substitutes during the maintenance, repair,
service or disposal of an appliance where the refrigerant may enter the
environment, unless the Administrator has determined that such venting,
release, or disposal does not pose a threat to the environment. This
venting prohibition is self-effectuating, and went into effect on
November 15, 1995 with respect to substitutes for class I or class II
substances. De minimis releases associated with any good faith efforts
to recapture and recycle or safely dispose of the refrigerant are not
subject to this prohibition as long as those efforts are performed by
persons who are authorized under the regulations to recover
refrigerant. Releases associated with recovery that does not comply
with the regulations, such as releases by persons who are not
authorized under the regulations to perform refrigerant recovery, are
not considered de minimis or accidental but rather intentional and
knowing.
In today's rulemaking, EPA is defining the kind of recovery and
recycling practices that must be followed in order to avoid violating
the section 608 prohibition on knowingly venting substitutes for class
I or class II refrigerants. The requirement that only a section 609
certified technician or an owner, operator, or employee of a motor
vehicle disposal facility may extract the substitute refrigerant from
an MVAC or an MVAC-like appliance at a motor vehicle disposal facility,
if the refrigerant is not reclaimed prior to re-use, is a reasonable
exercise of this authority. By permitting only these persons to recover
non-ozone-depleting refrigerants, EPA is reducing the possibility that
these refrigerants will be knowingly vented. Persons who have not been
trained in the proper methods of recovering refrigerant from an MVAC or
MVAC-like appliance system are more likely to vent refrigerant in the
process of extracting it, and are less likely to know how to protect
the purity of the refrigerant. Allowing these persons to recover class
I and class II refrigerants at motor vehicle disposal facilities would
not be consistent with the Agency's mandate to establish requirements
that maximize the recapture and recycling of class I and class II
refrigerants. Allowing them to recover substitute refrigerants would
not be consistent with the section 608(c) venting prohibition.
The Act currently permits owners, operators and employees of motor
vehicle disposal facilities to recover refrigerants from MVACs and
MVAC-like appliances, even though they may not be certified and
therefore trained in the proper handling of the refrigerants. The
Agency intends to continue to permit this activity. In reaching this
decision, the Agency considered reasons to require these individuals to
become certified at this time. EPA believes that requiring owners,
operators and employees of motor vehicle disposal facilities to become
certified would result in a certain percentage of these persons better
understanding the proper means of recovering refrigerant, and that
consequently, accidental venting of refrigerant by these persons during
the recovery process might decrease. In addition, if EPA required
owners, operators and employees of motor vehicle disposal facilities
who wish to sell refrigerant directly back into the MVAC service sector
without prior reclamation to become certified, individuals who do not
wish to become certified would still be able to recover refrigerant as
long as it was then sold to a reclaimer.
EPA balanced these arguments against reasons not to require motor
vehicle disposal facility owners, operators or employees to become
certified at this time. In the past, the Agency has not required these
persons to be certified. As stated in the preamble to the May 14, 1993
final rule implementing section 608, ``[b]y not requiring technician
certification, the Agency did not intend to imply that anyone could
perform these activities without training. Instead, the proposal
reflected the fact that recovery of refrigerant is a simpler task than
the combination of recovering refrigerant and returning refrigerant (at
the appropriate purity level) to equipment. The disposal sector is
distinct from the servicing sectors of both section 608 and section 609
in that refrigerant is not returned to equipment. . . . Purchasing
refrigerant is also not necessary in the disposal sector, but
technician certification is linked to the ability to continue to
purchase new refrigerant needed for servicing equipment'' (58 FR
28705).
In addition, EPA does not believe that requiring certification of
these individuals at this time will result in a reduction in accidental
or intentional venting of refrigerant, or in a reduction in refrigerant
contamination rates, significant enough to warrant this new
restriction. Motor vehicle disposal facility owners, operators and
employees have been required for several years either to verify that
refrigerant has been previously recovered from a vehicle entering the
facility, or to recover any refrigerant that remains in the vehicle.
Many of these individuals have acquired substantial experience
recovering refrigerant from vehicles, and some percentage of them have
long been using their recovery equipment properly. For these
individuals, becoming certified may not affect their refrigerant
handling procedure.
Motor vehicle disposal facility owners, operators and employees
also have an economic motivation in the absence of a certification
requirement to recover CFC-12 refrigerant properly. No matter whether
they sell recovered CFC-12 to an MVAC service facility or to a
reclaimer, CFC-12 has become increasingly more valuable, and purchasers
should be paying increasingly higher prices for uncontaminated CFC-12.
EPA believes that this motivation should drive motor vehicle disposal
facility owners, operators and employees to use care when recovering
refrigerant.
In addition, some owners, operators and employees of motor vehicle
disposal facilities have already invested in equipment that they use to
recover refrigerant, and may currently have in place contracts to sell
the refrigerant extracted from MVACs and/or MVAC-like appliances at the
facilities. If the Agency had decided instead to begin to prohibit
owners, operators and employees of motor vehicle disposal facilities
from recovering refrigerant (so that only certified technicians could
recover refrigerant), these persons might be unable to use any
equipment they
[[Page 68033]]
had already purchased, and might therefore be violating contracts
previously entered into.
One commenter stated that requiring owners, operators and employees
of motor vehicle disposal facilities to become certified under section
609 would reduce the likelihood of frost forming in equipment in
outdoor cold weather recovery operations, freezing the equipment
refrigerant lines and inhibiting the recovery of all refrigerant
remaining in a vehicle. EPA disagrees. Training specified under section
609 does not require instruction in how to recover refrigerant in cold
weather conditions, and requiring motor vehicle disposal facility
owners, operators and employees to become certified is no guarantee
that better refrigerant recovery in these conditions will ensue.
Many commenters felt that EPA should require owners, operators and
employees of motor vehicle disposal facilities to become certified
under section 609 to handle refrigerant in order to ``level the playing
field'' between the regulatory requirements applicable to them and
those applicable to automotive service technicians. As noted before,
EPA has never required owners, operators and employees of motor vehicle
disposal facilities to be certified. They are not in a position to re-
use recovered refrigerant, as are technicians. EPA believes that
requiring owners, operators and employees of motor vehicle disposal
facilities to become certified would be appropriate where needed, to
avoid contamination of the nation's refrigerant supply by refrigerant
recovered from motor vehicle disposal facilities. In order to assure
that motor vehicle disposal facility owners and operators maximize the
recapture of class I and class II refrigerants as required by section
608(a) of the Act, and refrain from venting substitute refrigerants as
required by section 608(c) of the Act, the Agency has traditionally
relied on a combination of providing the motor vehicle disposal
industry with informational guidance and requiring the industry to meet
regulatory mandates. Rather than requiring at this time that owners and
operators of motor vehicle disposal facilities become certified
technicians, the Agency proposes to continue to rely on guidance
alerting the industry of the environmental consequences of releasing
refrigerant, refrigerant salvage techniques, the importance of not
mixing different refrigerants, and the business opportunities related
to selling refrigerants to certified reclaimers or section 609
technicians. This, in combination with the other factors de-scribed
above, is a reasonable approach to controlling such contamination.
It is inevitable that as the proliferation of replacement
refrigerants for CFC-12 continues to expand in the marketplace, the
refrigerant in some vehicles will be contaminated. Indeed,
contamination has always been endemic to MVACs; even when all motor
vehicle a/c systems ran on CFC-12, contamination of that refrigerant by
air, hydrocarbons, or HCFC-22 occurred. Within the next few years, as
the number of refrigerants on the market grows, contamination rates may
stay the same, or, as is more likely the case, they may increase. In
the future, should increasing contamination rates in MVACs or MVAC-like
appliances be traced to refrigerant that has been recovered from motor
vehicle disposal facilities and re-used in vehicles without prior
reclamation, then EPA will reconsider its reliance on providing
informational guidance to motor vehicle disposal facilities, and will
consider requiring the industry to meet certification and/or other
regulatory requirements. One of the regulatory solutions EPA would
consider in that event is to require owners, operators and employees of
motor vehicle disposal facilities who wish to continue recovering
refrigerant for sale to the MVAC service sector to become certified
under section 609 of the Act. The Agency would also consider requiring
motor vehicle disposal facilities to send all recovered refrigerant to
reclaimers, thereby disallowing any sales directly back into the MVAC/
MVAC-like appliance service sector.
One commenter suggested that as drafted, the proposed new language
of section 82.34(d) might not permit persons who contract with state-
or county-owned landfills to recover refrigerant from MVACs at those
facilities and subsequently sell them to section 609 technicians.
Excluding contractors from this activity was not the intention of the
proposal and the Agency has consequently modified the regulatory text
to include contractors. EPA considers contractors who generally manage
the operations of a government-owned landfill to be operators of that
facility; persons who enter the landfill solely to recover refrigerant
are not considered operators or other agents of the facility owner and
must therefore be certified under section 609 of the Act if they then
choose to return the refrigerant to the MVAC/MVAC-like appliance
service sector without prior reclamation.
The proposed rule would have permitted technicians certified under
section 608 of the Act to recover refrigerant at a motor vehicle
disposal facility and resell it into the MVAC/MVAC-like appliance
service sector for re-use without prior reclamation. This final rule
prohibits this activity by section 608 technicians, so that only
section 609 technicians, and owners, operators, and employees of these
facilities may recover refrigerant from MVACs or from MVAC-like
appliances at disposal facilities, if that refrigerant is re-used
without being reclaimed. Generally, technicians certified only under
section 608 are prohibited from servicing MVAC systems because MVAC
systems are designed differently than stationary and commercial a/c
systems. As stated earlier, persons who have not been trained in the
proper methods of recovering refrigerant from an MVAC system, even if
they are section 608 technicians, are more likely to vent refrigerant
in the process of extracting it, and are less likely to know how to
protect the purity of the refrigerant. Allowing these persons to
recover class I and class II refrigerants at motor vehicle disposal
facilities would therefore not be consistent with the Agency's mandate
to establish requirements that maximize the recapture and recycling of
class I and class II refrigerants, and allowing them to recover
substitute refrigerants would not be consistent with the section 608(c)
venting prohibition.
Although EPA recognizes that persons certified under section 608 as
Type II technicians may handle MVAC-like appliances, today's rule does
not permit Type II technicians to recover refrigerant from MVAC-like
appliances at motor vehicle disposal facilities. Type II technicians
service many types of high pressure and very high pressure appliances
used in the stationary/commercial sector. The Agency believes that
allowing Type II technicians to recover refrigerant from MVAC-like
appliances will increase the possibility that high- and very high-
pressure appliances in this sector may be recharged with used,
unreclaimed refrigerant recovered from motor vehicle disposal
facilities. These appliances, like all appliances in the stationary/
commercial sector, are specifically designed to handle only virgin or
reclaimed refrigerant. Use of unreclaimed refrigerant from motor
vehicle disposal facilities that may contain high levels of oil, air
and moisture may result in system deficiencies or failures.
c. Equipment that may be used to recover refrigerant from MVACs at
motor vehicle disposal facilities: Section 82.158(l) of the subpart F
regulations states that equipment used to evacuate
[[Page 68034]]
refrigerant from an MVAC or MVAC-like appliance prior to its disposal
must be capable of reducing the system pressure to 102 mm (4 inches) of
mercury vacuum. If the refrigerant is transferred to a reclaimer after
recovery, this remains the only restriction on what kind of equipment
may be used to recover refrigerant from an MVAC or MVAC-like appliance.
If, on the other hand, the recovered refrigerant is bound for re-
use in the MVAC or MVAC-like appliance service sector without being
reclaimed first, then the provisions set forth in today's rule apply.
Specifically, the rule adds a new requirement, set forth in section
82.34(d), that any refrigerant extracted from an MVAC or an MVAC-like
appliance located at a motor vehicle disposal facility and that is
bound for re-use in the MVAC/MVAC-like appliance service sector without
first undergoing reclamation must be recovered using approved
refrigerant recycling equipment (i.e., section 609 equipment) dedicated
for use with MVACs and MVAC-like appliances.
This requirement departs from the proposed regulatory text, which
would have permitted persons recovering refrigerant at motor vehicle
disposal facilities for re-use in the MVAC/MVAC-like appliance service
sector to continue to use not only equipment approved under section
609, but also any other equipment capable of reducing system pressure
to or below 102 mm of mercury vacuum. EPA is promulgating this change
to the proposed regulation because it will serve to reduce the risk of
disposal facilities serving as the source of contaminated refrigerant
supplies, because of the high level of support among the commenters for
this change in the regulations, and because this new requirement will
not create economic hardships for motor vehicle disposal facilities.
The Agency believes that without this more stringent equipment
standard, persons recovering refrigerant at facilities who dismantle
both refrigerators, residential air conditioners and other section 608
appliances, and motor vehicles, may engage in the practice of using the
same equipment to recover refrigerant from a motor vehicle bound for
disposal and to recover from section 608 appliances refrigerant that is
high in acid levels due to compressor burn-out (and perhaps mixing that
refrigerant with refrigerant recovered from MVACs and MVAC-like
appliances). Sources such as residential air conditioners and
refrigerators are much more likely to have ceased operation because of
compressor burn-out. The refrigerant might then be sold to a section
609 certified technician for use in an MVAC or MVAC-like appli-ance.
Any efforts by the technician to identify the refrigerant would not
show that the refrigerant was contaminated by these acids. Recycling
equipment available to motor vehicle service establishments removes
only moisture, oil and noncondensable gas (air) from the refrigerant,
and is not capable of removing acids.
EPA believes that allowing motor vehicle disposal facilities to use
equipment approved under section 608 will not provide adequate
safeguards against the risk of contaminated refrigerant. Section 608
equipment is specifically designed for use with refrigerant that later
gets reclaimed, rather than merely recycled and then re-used. Some
section 608 equipment is designed to be used to recover multiple
refrigerants using common circuitry. Residues from recovering one
refrigerant may contaminate a second recovered refrigerant; but again,
such contamination is of little consequence because the refrigerant
mixture is then reclaimed. However, if section 608 equipment were to be
used to recover refrigerant that is then sold to an automotive facility
for use in the MVAC/MVAC-like appliance service sector without prior
reclamation, it is likely that automotive air-conditioning systems
would become contaminated with refrigerant that, although it has been
recycled by the facility using approved section 609 equipment, contains
residues of acids and/or other refrigerants. In EPA's view, this
possibility poses an unacceptable risk of contamination, both to the
automotive facility's recycling equipment and to the MVAC systems in
its customers' vehicles.
In the proposed rule, EPA requested comment as to whether the
existing requirement of allowing refrigerant recovery using any
equipment that can achieve a 102 mm mercury vacuum should be modified.
EPA specifically requested comment on whether EPA should require that
persons recovering refrigerant must instead use only equipment that
meets the definition of ``approved refrigerant recycling equipment''
set forth in Sec. 82.32(b) (i.e., equipment approved under section
609). Many commenters to the rule supported this change. No commenters
opposed this specific change, although one commenter stated that ``EPA
should protect the investment [that] companies made in equipment that
met appropriate standards when purchased, or that cannot be deemed
``substantially identical'' under current standards.'' The Agency
believes that this change does not affect that investment, because
owners of equipment that is not approved under section 609 but can
achieve a 102 mm mercury vacuum may still use their equipment to
recover refrigerant, which is then sent to a reclaimer.
One commenter noted that given that the purpose of section 609 of
the Act is to prevent refrigerant venting, encourage the proper
recovery and recycling of refrigerants, and maintain the purity of the
existing refrigerant supply, the Agency is obligated to establish a
level playing field between motor vehicle disposal facilities and
automotive service facilities by requiring that refrigerant handlers in
disposal facilities meet similar standards to refrigerant handlers in
service facilities. EPA does not believe that motor vehicle disposal
facilities handling refrigerant and automotive service facilities
handling refrigerant should necessarily be subject to the same
regulatory requirements because the circumstances are not the same.
However, EPA believes that the requirement to use section 609 equipment
to recover any refrigerant that has been extracted from an MVAC or an
MVAC-like appliance located at a motor vehicle disposal facility, and
is bound for re-use in the MVAC/MVAC-like appliance service sector
without prior reclamation, properly reflects similar treatment for
similar circumstances, without creating economic hardships for motor
vehicle disposal facilities.
Under this regulatory framework, motor vehicle disposal facilities
do not necessarily have to purchase section 609 approved refrigerant
recycling equipment. If they choose to use equipment that does not meet
the requirements of section 609 (but is still capable of achieving a
102 mm vacuum, as the section 608 regulations require) to recover
refrigerant, they may then transport the refrigerant to a reclaimer.
Alternatively, they may bring a technician certified under section 609,
who operates approved refrigerant recycling equipment, on-site to
recover the refrigerant before it gets recycled and re-used in the
MVAC/MVAC-like appliance service sector.
Within the next few years, more and more vehicles will enter
disposal facilities with some HFC-134a left in the system. In addition,
as the nation's supplies of CFC-12 diminish, increasing numbers of
owners of older vehicles will replace the CFC-12 in their vehicles with
HFC-134a or with blend refrigerants that enter the marketplace. If
disposal facilities wish to sell the refrigerant to an MVAC service
facility
[[Page 68035]]
without prior reclamation, then refrigerant must be recovered into
section 609-approved equipment designed for use with that particular
refrigerant. Facilities daunted at the thought of purchasing multiple
pieces of equipment may of course contract with a technician certified
under section 609 to bring his pieces of equipment to the facility, or
they may recover multiple refrigerants into one piece of equipment
designed under the section 608 program for such use (taking care to
recover the refrigerants into separate containers), and send the
refrigerant to a reclaimer.
d. Persons who may purchase refrigerant recovered from a motor
vehicle disposal facility:. Today's rule places certain restrictions on
who may purchase refrigerant recovered from a motor vehicle disposal
facility if that refrigerant is bound for re-use in the MVAC/MVAC-like
appliance service sector without prior reclamation. Specifically,
section 82.34(d) states that any sale of a class I or class II
substance extracted from an MVAC or an MVAC-like appliance at a motor
vehicle disposal facility that is not reclaimed, must be to a
technician certified under section 609.
For class I and II substances recovered from MVACs and MVAC-like
appliances, sections 608 and 609 authorize the sales restriction. While
section 609 is limited to restricting the sale of class I or II
substances in small containers for use in MVACs, section 608 authorizes
a broader sales restriction. The sales restriction provision
promulgated today for inclusion in 82.34(d) basically repeats the sales
restrictions previously promulgated at 82.34(b) and 82.154(m). Today's
rule makes clear that the restriction applies with respect to class I
or II substances recovered from MVACs or from MVAC-like appliances
during the disposal process.
The current sales restriction in section 609(e) does not extend to
non-ozone-depleting substitute refrigerants at this time. EPA is
currently developing a proposal addressing the use of substitutes under
section 608, and is considering extending the sales restriction to such
substitutes. EPA will address the sale of such substitutes recovered
from MVACs and MVAC-like appliances during the disposal process in that
proposed rulemaking.
Several commenters urged EPA to require that all refrigerant
recovered at motor vehicle disposal facilities be sent directly to a
reclaimer. These commenters believe that the current use and future
proliferation of refrigerants already has and will inevitably result in
much contamination. EPA recognizes that although motor vehicle air
conditioning has long been dominated by CFC-12, automotive
manufacturers now install HFC-134a in new car systems, while some
refrigerant manufacturers are attempting to establish large markets for
other CFC-12 substitutes in vehicles. This proliferation of
refrigerants in the section 609 sector increases the chances of
contamination in individual systems. Contaminated refrigerant supplies
may create MVAC system failures as well as failures of refrigerant
recover/recycle equipment, leading to emissions of refrigerants and to
increased costs for both service facilities and motor vehicle owners.
In addition, contaminated refrigerant may be extremely difficult to
recycle, reclaim, or dispose of, so that it is likely to be vented into
the atmosphere. As noted above, in the future, should increased
contamination rates in MVACs or MVAC-like appliances be traced to
refrigerant recovered from motor vehicle disposal facilities and re-
used in vehicles without prior reclamation, EPA may revise its
regulations pertaining to motor vehicle disposal facilities and require
that all refrigerant recovered from such facilities be sent to
reclaimers. For now, however, instituting such a requirement would
defeat a major purpose of today's rule: To increase the value of
refrigerant recovered from motor vehicle disposal facilities, thereby
reducing the amount of refrigerant that either leaks out of MVACs while
they await disposal or is purposely vented during the process of
disposal.
Commenters cited several other related reasons to require that all
refrigerant recovered at motor vehicle disposal facilities be sent
directly to a reclaimer. One commenter suggested that any sales of
refrigerant should be allowed only when the seller can demonstrate that
the refrigerant meets new product standards. This requirement would
limit refrigerant sales to wholesalers and retailers who own stocks of
virgin refrigerant, and to reclaimers, who have reclaimed the
refrigerant to ARI 700 standards (i.e., new product standards). Again,
this requirement would defeat the intent of today's rule to encourage
new markets for valuable refrigerants.
Another commenter noted (and EPA agrees) that any refrigerant that
is not reclaimed must be recycled in accordance with EPA standards,
which are in turn based on SAE standards. The commenter went on to
state that the SAE standards govern refrigerant that has been directly
removed from, and will be directly re-used in, MVACs only, and that
equipment that meets the SAE standards was not designed for use with
refrigerants contaminated with each other. EPA agrees with the
commenter that recovery/recycling equipment was generally designed for
use with single, specific refrigerants, and that running highly
contaminated refrigerant through such equipment not only may damage the
equipment but will certainly not clean the refrigerant of any
impurities other than oil, air and moisture.
EPA recognizes that even the use of proper recovery procedures at a
motor vehicle disposal facility does not guarantee refrigerant purity.
Certain vehicles will enter the disposal facility with ``mystery''
refrigerants in their a/c systems, or with identifiable, but highly
contaminated, refrigerants. These incidences are most likely to
increase in the future. As one commenter stated: ``Soon, owners of
older vehicles with CFC-12 systems requiring major repair will elect to
retrofit their systems to other refrigerants. When CFC-12 is no longer
available, the consumer with a CFC-12 system will be forced to retrofit
to an alternative refrigerant, buy a new car or give up the comfort of
an air conditioned car. As more alternate refrigerants come to market
and time passes, the grave-yards for older vehicles will be littered
with vehicles having a wide variety of refrigerants in their A/C
systems. Some of these systems will contain contaminated refrigerant.''
Regulations promulgated under section 612 of the Act require that
MVACs and MVAC-like appliances using any replacement refrigerants for
CFC-12 are required by EPA to have unique fittings and a label stating
the type of refrigerant used in the air-conditioning system. This
regulatory requirement should serve to deter increases in the rate at
which systems become contaminated, before they reach motor vehicle
disposal facilities. At this time, EPA does not possess significant
data that describe rates of contamination in vehicles, sources of
contamination, and kinds of contaminants. If the Agency obtains this
type of data in the future, it may consider taking additional steps to
minimize contamination.
Recovering the refrigerant himself is one way a section 609
certified technician can guarantee that the refrigerant at the disposal
facility has been properly recovered. He may purchase the refrigerant
from a motor vehicle disposal facility that he knows uses proper
refrigerant recovery procedures. Neither of these actions, however,
protects him against purchasing or using refrigerant that becomes
contaminated before it arrives at the motor vehicle disposal facility.
In
[[Page 68036]]
order to guard against that event, he may also enter into a written
contract with the disposal facility in which the facility agrees to
sell him only refrigerant that meets certain purity requirements.
Similarly, neither requiring motor vehicle disposal facilities to
use equipment approved under section 609 of the Act, nor requiring
purchasers of refrigerant recovered from those facilities to recycle
the refrigerant prior to charging it into another vehicle, will
absolutely protect the vehicle owner from having contaminated
refrigerant charged into his car. To ensure the purity of the
refrigerant, the technician may run it through a refrigerant identifier
prior to purchasing the refrigerant (as was strongly recommended in the
preamble to the proposed rule). In addition, motor vehicle disposal
facilities may wish to purchase these identifiers as a way to check the
purity of the refrigerant sold to automotive service technicians, in
order to better ensure their customers' satisfaction. However, not all
portable refrigerant identifier equipment is currently sophisticated
enough to identify all of the refrigerants in commerce today, including
blend refrigerants, and all potential contaminants. A requirement to
purchase any identifier on the market will therefore not ensure the
ultimate protection of the vehicle owner from having contaminated
refrigerant charged into his car.
In the July 14, 1992 final rule, EPA stated in the preamble
language that ``it is unlikely that persons in the business to service
motor vehicle air conditioners would knowingly use contaminated
refrigerant since they have an interest in satisfying customers and not
injuring the customer's air conditioner'' (57 FR 31248). While the
Agency is fully aware that some automotive service technicians may
knowingly charge their customers' vehicles with refrigerant that they
know to be contaminated, EPA is not convinced, as it was not in 1992,
that a majority, or even a large number, of service technicians will
choose to engage in such unscrupulous behavior. Knowingly charging
vehicles with contaminated refrigerant jeopardizes the performance of
both a technician's charging equipment and his customer's vehicle's a/c
system. Should the system fail due to the contamination (knowing or
unknowing), the customer may return, unhappy, perceiving that the
technician has failed to fix the initial system problem, or that the
technician has worsened the initial problem.
EPA believes that if automotive service technicians have any doubt
or question about the purity of refrigerant they have purchased from a
motor vehicle disposal facility, they will test the refrigerant using
refrigerant identifier equipment prior to recycling it in their
refrigerant recycling equipment or prior to installing it in a
customer's vehicle. If a section 609 technician is unsure about the
purity of the refrigerant he may obtain from a local disposal facility,
and is fearful about damaging both his recover/recycle equipment and
his reputation with his customers, he always has another solution: he
may forego purchasing from the facility, and instead purchase virgin
refrigerant from his parts supplier, or reclaimed refrigerant from a
reclaimer. As one commenter, a trade association representing
automotive service facilities, stated, ``it is precisely the mixing of
different refrigerants and the possibility of contamination which would
preclude many of our members from considering disposal facilities as a
source for recovered refrigerant.''
e. Subsequent use of recovered refrigerant. Today's rule also
places certain restrictions on the use and handling of refrigerant
recovered from a motor vehicle disposal facility if that refrigerant is
not transferred to a reclaimer after recovery, but instead is bound for
re-use in the MVAC/MVAC-like appliance service sector without prior
reclamation. Specifically, section 82.34(d) requires that certified
technicians process refrigerant recovered from a motor vehicle disposal
facility through section 609 approved refrigerant recycling equipment
before it may be used to charge or recharge another MVAC or MVAC-like
appliance. Section 609 authorizes this restriction with respect to
MVACs, both for class I and class II substances as well as substitutes.
Refrigerant recovery at motor vehicle disposal facilities occurs in an
environment where moisture and air easily get into hoses and cylinders.
Requiring recycling of the refrigerant prior to charging it into
another vehicle will ensure than any excess moisture or air in the
refrigerant is reduced to acceptably low levels. Section 608(a)
authorizes this restriction with respect to MVAC-like appliances.
A certified technician purchasing or accepting refrigerant from
MVACs or MVAC-like appliances bound for disposal and located at a motor
vehicle disposal facility is responsible to assure that the refrigerant
is recycled properly prior to being charged into another MVAC or MVAC-
like appliance and assurances from the disposal facility regarding
recycling do not remove this responsibility.
Today's rule also provides that if refrigerant recovered from a
motor vehicle disposal facility is to be recycled in section 609
approved refrigerant recycling equipment rather than reclaimed prior to
re-use, the refrigerant may subsequently be charged only into an MVAC
or an MVAC-like appliance. Several commenters expressed concern that
once a technician certified under section 609 had purchased refrigerant
from a motor vehicle disposal facility, he could then sell it to a
technician certified under section 608 for use in the stationary/
commercial sector, or, if the section 609 technician were also
certified under section 608, he himself could use the refrigerant in
the stationary/commercial sector. Sections 82.154 (g) and (h) prohibit
the re-use of refrigerant recovered from an MVAC or MVAC-like appliance
without prior reclamation unless it is returned to an MVAC or MVAC-like
appliance. However, some commenters believe that this prohibition,
contained as it is in subpart F, the section 608 regulations, will not
give automotive service technicians sufficient notice that the sale of
refrigerant by a section 609 technician to a section 608 technician is
prohibited. EPA is therefore amending the proposed language under
Sec. 82.34(d) to add a sentence that states that technicians certified
under section 609 who purchase a class I or class II substance
recovered at such facilities must subsequently re-use the refrigerant
in an MVAC or MVAC-like appliance. This new provision, essentially a
reiteration of the current requirements set forth in Sec. 82.154 (g)
and (h), implements EPA's mandate under section 608 to prescribe
standards and equipment regarding the use and disposal of class I or II
substances, in order to reduce the use and emissions of these
substances to the lowest achievable level, and to maximize the
recapture and recycling of these substances. Specifically, section
608(a) requires EPA to promulgate regulations regarding use and
disposal of class I and II substances that ``reduce the use and
emission of such substances to the lowest achievable level'' and
``maximize the recapture and recycling of such substances.'' Section
608(a) further provides that ``[s]uch regulations may include
requirements to use alternative substances (including substances which
are not class I or class II substances) * * * or to promote the use of
safe alternatives pursuant to section 612 or any combination of the
foregoing.'' Improper handling of substitute substances is likely to
produce contamination (and therefore reduction
[[Page 68037]]
in recycling) and release of class I and class II substances.
f. Recordkeeping and reporting: Today's rule does not require any
additional recordkeeping relating to refrigerant recovered from MVACs
or MVAC-like appliances prior to disposal. Requiring disposal
facilities to track refrigerant, and to demonstrate how the refrigerant
in each MVAC or MVAC-like appliance was handled prior to the disposal
of the vehicle, would inhibit the activity EPA is encouraging in
today's rule. Further, a recordkeeping requirement would add an undue
administrative burden to industry because of the large number of
vehicles disposed of annually, and would provide little measurable
benefit to the environment.
Persons who recover refrigerant at motor vehicle disposal
facilities for re-use in the MVAC/MVAC-like appliance service sector
without prior reclamation are not exempted from any applicable
recordkeeping and reporting requirements set forth under the section
608 regulations. Section 82.166(a) requires all persons who sell or
distribute any class I or class II substance for use as a refrigerant
to retain invoices that indicate the name of the purchaser, the date of
sale, and the quantity of refrigerant purchased. Section 82.166(i)
requires all persons disposing of MVACs and MVAC-like appliances to
maintain copies of signed statements obtained under Sec. 82.156(f)(2),
which in turn requires persons who take the final step in the disposal
process of MVACs or MVAC-like appliances, if they have not recovered
any remaining refrigerant themselves, to verify that the refrigerant
has been evacuated previously. This verification must include a signed
statement from the person from whom the MVAC or MVAC-like appliance is
obtained that all refrigerant that had not leaked previously has been
recovered in accordance with EPA regulations. The statement must
include either the name of the person who recovered the refrigerant and
the date that the refrigerant was recovered, or a copy of an ongoing
contract that requires that the refrigerant deliverer ensure that the
refrigerant is removed prior to delivery.
Comments on the recordkeeping/reporting requirements generally
urged enforcement of the existing requirements, or suggested that EPA
require the type of recordkeeping already required under Sec. 82.166(a)
(evidently some commenters were not aware of this requirement).
2. Mobile Recovery and Recycling
Today's rulemaking explicitly permits the mobile servicing of MVACs
and MVAC-like appliances. Allowing mobile service performed by
certified technicians using approved equipment encourages proper use of
the equipment and discourages venting of refrigerant. This policy also
increases the flexibility of industry to choose the mode of compliance
by allowing businesses that do not specialize in MVAC/MVAC-like
appliance service to contract their MVAC/MVAC-like appliance services
that involve refrigerant to a section 609 certified technician. The
definition of ``properly using'' set forth in 40 CFR 82.32(e) is
consequently amended to explicitly permit this activity. An MVAC
service facility engaging or contracting with a technician providing
the mobile service (or with the facility employing him) is responsible
to ensure that the technician actually performing the service is
properly certified. This provision applies to servicing both CFC-12
systems and systems that use any substitutes for CFC-12, in both MVACs
and MVAC-like appliances.
Comments to the proposal to explicitly permit mobile recovery and
recycling were strongly supportive. One typical commenter remarked that
``we are in favor of this proposed change, as many of our customers * *
* are unable to transport their equipment to a servicing location due
to the size and D.O.T. transport weight limitations. Also, very few of
these companies perform their own air-conditioning service due to
economic cost involved in this service.'' The commenter concluded that
this change in the regulations would enhance its relationships with its
customers, since the commenter could service air-conditioning systems
at its customers' job sites.
The Agency requested, but did not receive, comments with respect to
whether an MVAC service facility, engaging or contracting with a
technician who offers mobile service (or with the facility employing
him), should be responsible to ensure that the technician is using
section 609 approved refrigerant recycling equipment. EPA believes that
using the proper equipment should be the responsibility of the
technician offering the mobile service (and the facility employing
him), rather than of the facility engaging his services.
The amendatory language does not permit the mobile recovery of
refrigerant from appliances governed under section 608 of the Act, such
as home refrigerators and air conditioners. Contaminants such as acid
that are not found in MVACs or MVAC-like appliances are commonly found
in these appliances, and any recover/recycle equipment designed for
automotive use exposed to refrigerant contaminated with acid could be
severely damaged. Regulations promulgated under section 608 of the Act
address required practices for recovering refrigerant from stationary
equipment.
These changes to the subpart B regulations implementing section 609
will also affect MVAC-like appliances. Section 82.156(a)(5) requires
that persons opening MVAC-like appliances for service or repair may do
so only while properly using, as defined in Sec. 82.32(e), recovery or
recycling equipment. Since the Agency is today amending section
82.32(e), those changes will automatically apply to MVAC-like
appliances.
One commenter stated that EPA should consider adding a
recordkeeping requirement to document the relationship between the
facility that owns the equipment used in the mobile recovery and
recycling service and the facility receiving the service. The commenter
suggested that this requirement would help inspectors verify the
recycling of refrigerant. The Agency is not requiring that such
recordkeeping be performed, due to the additional burden it would place
on small entities. However, EPA expects that any facilities that
receive mobile recovery/recycling service should be able to inform the
Agency, when requested, who they have engaged or contracted to perform
the mobile service. If they cannot so inform the Agency, and if they do
not possess any recovery or recycling equipment, the Agency will
presume that those facilities have vented refrigerant from any air-
conditioning systems they have serviced.
3. Topping Off
The subpart B regulations implementing section 609 state that any
facility performing service involving refrigerant must purchase
approved refrigerant recycling equipment. ``Service involving
refrigerant'' is defined as ``any service during which discharge or
release of refrigerant from the motor vehicle air conditioner to the
atmosphere can reasonably be expected to occur'' (40 CFR 82.32(h)). The
preamble to the final 1992 section 609 rule stated that MVAC servicing
includes ``repairs, leak testing, and ``topping off'' of air-
conditioning systems low on refrigerant, as well as any other repair
which requires some dismantling of the air conditioner. Each
[[Page 68038]]
of these operations involves a reasonable risk of releasing refrigerant
to the atmosphere'' (57 FR 31246). Despite the clarity of this
statement, some affected stakeholders remain unsure whether quick-lubes
and other facilities which may perform top-offs but no other service
involving refrigerant are required to purchase recovery/recycling
equipment approved under section 609. One commenter to the proposal for
today's rule asked that the regulations governing these facilities be
made more clear. Consequently, the definitions of ``properly using''
and ``service involving refrigerant'' are being expanded today to
further clarify that ``service involving refrigerant'' includes topping
off, and that facilities that perform top-offs but no other refrigerant
servicing or repair are still considered to be engaged in ``service
involving refrigerant'' and must purchase approved recovery/recycling
equipment.
These changes to the section 609 rule will not affect MVAC-like
appliances. Although Sec. 82.156(a)(5) requires that persons opening
MVAC-like appliances for service or repair may do so only while
properly using, as defined in section 82.32(e), recovery or recycling
equipment, under the subpart F regulations, connecting and
disconnecting hoses to an appliance to add refrigerant is not
considered ``opening'' the appliance.
4. Recharging Refrigerant Into the Same Vehicle From Which the
Refrigerant Was Extracted
The subpart B regulations implementing section 609 state that any
facility performing service involving refrigerant must properly use
approved refrigerant recycling equipment. The current definition of
``properly using'' states in part that ``[f]or equipment that extracts
and recycles refrigerant, properly using also means to recycle
refrigerant before it is returned to a motor vehicle air conditioner''
(40 CFR 82.32(e)(1)).2 Despite the clarity of this
statement, some affected stakeholders remain unsure whether refrigerant
must be recycled prior to being returned to the same vehicle from which
it has been extracted. One commenter to the proposal for today's rule
asked that the regulations governing service practices involving
refrigerant that is returned to the same vehicle it came from be made
more clear. Consequently, this sentence in the definition of ``properly
using'' is being expanded today to further clarify that when any
automotive refrigerant--whether CFC-12, HFC-134a, or a blend listed as
acceptable under EPA's SNAP program--is recovered from an MVAC, it must
be recycled in accordance with EPA standards prior to being returned to
that MVAC. This change to the section 609 rule will also affect MVAC-
like appliances. Section 82.156(a)(5) requires that persons opening
MVAC-like appliances for service or repair may do so only while
properly using, as defined in Sec. 82.32(e), recovery or recycling
equipment. Since the Agency is today amending Sec. 82.32(e), this
change will automatically apply to MVAC-like appliances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Interested parties should note that the May 2, 1995 Federal
Register (60 FR 21682) inadvertently omitted this sentence, as well
as certain other language contained in Sec. 82.32(e). This mistake
was carried over into the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) revised
as of July 1, 1995, as well as into the July 1, 1996 revision of the
CFR. A correction notice was not issued until January 16, 1997 at 62
FR 2310. These omissions have created significant confusion among
affected stakeholders as to the exact text of Sec. 82.32(e), the
definition of properly using. The July 1, 1997 version of the CFR
should include the corrections, but will not include the revisions
promulgated today. With these revisions, the full text of
Sec. 82.32(e) should appear in the July 1, 1998 version of the CFR
as follows (new text is marked in italics):
(e) Properly using. (1) Properly using means using equipment in
conformity with the regulations set forth in this subpart, including
but not limited to the prohibitions and required practices set forth
in Sec. 82.34, and the recommended service procedures and practices
for the containment of refrigerant set forth in appendices A, B, C,
D, E, and F of this subpart, as applicable. In addition, this term
includes operating the equipment in accordance with the
manufacturer's guide to operation and maintenance and using the
equipment only for the controlled substance for which the machine is
designed. For equipment that extracts and recycles refrigerant,
properly using also means to recycle refrigerant before it is
returned to a motor vehicle air conditioner or MVAC-like appliance,
including to the motor vehicle air conditioner or MVAC-like
appliance from which the refrigerant was extracted. For equipment
that only recovers refrigerant, properly using includes the
requirement to recycle the refrigerant on-site or send the
refrigerant off-site for reclamation.
(2) Refrigerant from reclamation facilities that is used for the
purpose of recharging motor vehicle air conditioners must be at or
above the standard of purity developed by the Air-Conditioning and
Refrigeration Institute (ARI 700-93) (which is codified at 40 CFR
part 82, subpart F, appendix A, and is available at 4301 North
Fairfax Drive, Suite 425, Arlington, Virginia 22203). Refrigerant
may be recycled off-site only if the refrigerant is extracted using
recover-only equipment, and is subsequently recycled off-site by
equipment owned by the person that owns both the recover-only
equipment and owns or operates the establishment at which the
refrigerant was extracted. In any event, approved equipment must be
used to extract refrigerant prior to performing any service during
which discharge of refrigerant from the motor vehicle air
conditioner can reasonably be expected. Intentionally venting or
disposing of refrigerant to the atmosphere is an improper use of
equipment.
(3) Notwithstanding any other terms of this paragraph (e),
approved refrigerant recycling equipment may be transported off-site
and used to perform service involving refrigerant at other locations
where such servicing occurs. Any such servicing involving
refrigerant must meet all of the requirements of this subpart B that
would apply if the servicing occurred on-site.
(4) Facilities that charge MVACs or MVAC-like appliances with
refrigerant but do not perform any other service involving
refrigerant (i.e., perform ``top-offs'' only) are considered to be
engaged in ``service involving refrigerant'' and are subject to any
and all requirements of this subsection that apply to facilities
that perform a wider range of refrigerant servicing. For facilities
that charge MVACs, this includes the requirement to purchase
approved refrigerant recycling equipment. For facilities that only
charge MVAC-like appliances, this does not include the requirement
to purchase approved refrigerant recycling equipment, but does
include the requirement to be properly trained and certified by a
technician certification program approved by the Administrator
pursuant to either Sec. 82.40 or Sec. 82.161(a)(5).
(5)All persons opening (as that term is defined in Sec. 82.152)
MVAC-like appliances must have at least one piece of approved
recovery or recycling equipment available at their place of
business.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Equipment Standards.
Section 609(b)(1) of the Act states that effective November 15,
1995, the term ``refrigerant,'' as defined in section 609, shall also
include any substance that substitutes for a class I or class II
refrigerant used in an MVAC. Section 609(b)(2)(A) specifies that the
Administrator shall establish standards for approved refrigerant
recycling equipment. Section 82.36(a) of the regulations specifies that
equipment that recovers and recycles CFC-12 refrigerant must meet the
standards set forth in appendix A to the section 609 regulations, and
that equipment that recovers but does not recycle CFC-12 refrigerant
must meet the standards set forth in appendix B to the regulations.
Today's rulemaking provides that equipment that recovers and recycles
HFC-134a must meet the standards set forth in appendix C, that
equipment that recovers but does not recycle HFC-134a must meet the
standards set forth in appendix D, that equipment that recycles both
CFC-12 and HFC-134a using common circuitry must meet the standards set
forth in appendix E, and that equipment that recovers but does not
recycle a single, specific replacement refrigerant other than HFC-134a
must meet the standards set forth in appendix F.
These new equipment standards also apply to the servicing of MVAC-
like appliances. Section 82.156(a)(5) requires that persons opening
MVAC-like appliances for service or repair may do so only while
properly using, as defined in Sec. 82.32(e), recovery or recycling
equipment. Since the Agency is today amending Sec. 82.32(e), the
definition of ``properly using,'' to reference the equipment standards
set forth in today's rule, the equipment standards will apply to MVAC-
like appliances.
All of the standards are appropriate for recovery and recycling
because they achieve environmental protection through efficient
recovery and recycling
[[Page 68039]]
of refrigerant, and protect automobile equipment through minimum
refrigerant purity standards and service procedure standards. The
appendix C standards are based on SAE J2099 (Standard of Purity for
Recycled HFC-134a), SAE J2211 (Recommended Service Procedure for the
Containment of HFC-134a), and SAE J2210 (Standard for HFC-134a
Recycling Equipment); the appendix D standards are based on SAE J2211
(set forth in appendix C) and SAE J1732 (HFC-134a Extraction Equipment
for Mobile Air Conditioning Systems); and the appendix E standards are
based on SAE J2211 (set forth in appendix C), SAE J1989 (set forth in
appendix A), and SAE J1770 (Standard for Recycling Equipment Intended
for Use with Both CFC-12 and HFC-134a). The standards adopted today as
appendices C, D and E represent a consensus of the Interior Climate
Control Committee of SAE. This committee is made up of automotive
industry experts, equipment and supply manufacturers, and chemical
producers. SAE prepared the standards for the recycling of CFC-12 (SAE
J1989, 1990, and J1991) later adopted by EPA in appendix A, and for the
recovery of CFC-12 (SAE J1989 and J2209) later adopted by the Agency in
appendix B, and the Agency believes that the standards set forth for
the recovery and recycling of HFC-134a in today's rulemaking as
appendices C, D and E are consistent with the specifications required
in those standards for CFC-12.
Appendix F, Standard for Recover-Only Equipment that Extracts a
Single, Specific Refrigerant other than CFC-12 or HFC-134a, is based on
SAE J1732 (HFC-134a Extraction Equipment for Mobile Air Conditioning
Systems, contained in appendix D). Since SAE has not developed formal
standards for the recovery of most refrigerants listed as acceptable
under EPA's Significant New Alternative Policy (SNAP) program other
than HFC-134a and is not likely to do so in the future, the Agency
developed in cooperation with SAE and other industry representatives a
standard for recover-only equipment designed to extract these new
refrigerants. The Agency also believes that the standard adopted today
as appendix F for the recovery of replacement refrigerants other than
HFC-134a, is consistent with the specifications required in those
standards for CFC-12.
The standards adopted today contain specifications for labeling
equipment once it is certified; safety requirements; requirements that
the equipment manufacturer must provide operating instructions; and
functional descriptions of the equipment, including hose and fitting
specifications, overfill protection requirements and additional storage
tank requirements. The standards require that the container for used
refrigerant be gray with a yellow top and be marked in black print
``DIRTY REFRIGERANT--DO NOT USE, MUST BE REPROCESSED.'' The standards
state that the equipment must be able to separate lubricant from
recovered refrigerant and to indicate accurately the amount removed
from the air-conditioning system in order to assure that the proper
amount of lubricant can be returned to the system.
The Act states that standards developed by the Administrator shall,
at a minimum, be as stringent as SAE J1989 in effect as of the date of
November 15, 1990. The standards proposed today are equally as
stringent as SAE J1989 regarding the procedure for extracting
refrigerant and separating lubricant from refrigerant. They offer
further specifications on extraction efficiency (referring to 102 mm of
mercury versus the more general statement regarding removal ``to a
vacuum''). Procedures and requirements regarding unintentional releases
of refrigerant during the extraction process are equivalent to SAE
J1989.
Comments to the adoption of the standards set forth in appendices
C, D, E and F were generally minimal and supported the establishment of
the standards. One commenter noted that the proposed standard in
appendix F for equipment designed to recover, but not recycle,
replacement refrigerants other than HFC-134a does not provide for
sufficient identification of the refrigerant in the test sample to be
processed. In order to ensure that the ``dirty cocktail'' of
contaminated refrigerant provides an accurate test of the equipment's
ability to recover used refrigerant, the standard set forth in appendix
F now specifies in 6.2.1 that ``refrigerant shall be identified prior
to the recovery process to within 2% of the original
manufacturer's formulation which was submitted to, and accepted by, EPA
under its Significant New Alternatives Policy program.''
One other change was made in order to ensure that the ``dirty
cocktail'' provides an accurate test of the equipment's ability. The
proposed appendix F provided that the sample should contain a
combination of mineral oil and POE oil in the ``dirty cocktail.''
Because replacement refrigerants other than HFC-134a are likely to be
contaminated with a combination of mineral, PAG and POE oils, however,
the ``dirty cocktail'' sample set forth in appendix F has been revised
so that the oil in the sample shall be one-third mineral oil 525
suspension nominal, one-third PAG with 100 cSt viscosity at 40 deg. C
or equivalent, and one-third POE with 100 cSt viscosity at 40 deg. C or
equivalent. This specification should approximate more realistically
the type of contaminants in used refrigerant that such equipment is
likely to handle.
With respect to the new standard set forth in appendix F for
recover-only equipment designed to service replacement refrigerants
other than HFC-134a, one commenter asked whether service facilities
must purchase a recover-only or recover/recycle unit for every new
replacement refrigerant on the market. In order to respond to the
commenter's question, and to provide information to the public that
addresses several related questions that the Agency has recently
received about replacement refrigerants other than HFC-134a, it is
worth repeating here the contents of a letter sent to manufacturers of
replacement refrigerants by EPA on October 16, 1996. The letter stated
in part that ``under section 608 of the CAA, it is illegal to vent any
MVAC refrigerant. Therefore, even in the absence of EPA regulations,
technicians must, at a minimum, recover refrigerant and not release it
to the atmosphere. In accordance with the use conditions required under
the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program, the recovery
equipment must be dedicated to a specific refrigerant by permanently
applying the fittings unique to that refrigerant. Thus, by applying the
fittings, it is legal to convert a recovery machine to be used with an
MVAC refrigerant other than the refrigerant the machine was originally
intended to recover.
``Even though recovering a given refrigerant using permanently
converted equipment is legal, it may not be technically desirable.
Recovery machines are designed to be compatible with specific
refrigerants, and incompatible materials may cause short circuits,
damage to seals, and compressor failure. Technicians should check with
the recovery equipment manufacturer for recommendations about the
recovery of refrigerants other than the refrigerant the equipment was
originally intended to recover. Conversion of recovery equipment for
use with other refrigerants may invalidate any warranties offered by
the equipment manufacturer.''
The October 16, 1996 letter continues: ``[s]ervice shops may either
recover HFC-134a or recycle it using special
[[Page 68040]]
recycling equipment in the shop. Currently, however, it is not legal to
recycle any other alternative MVAC refrigerant. EPA's policy is that
until a standard for equipment designed to recycle a particular
refrigerant is published and available (by EPA or an industry
organization like SAE or UL), then it is illegal to recycle that
refrigerant. * * * No EPA or established industry recycling standard
exists today for any alternative refrigerant other than HFC-134a.
Therefore, using a recycling machine to recycle these alternatives is
not allowed.
``For cars that use HFC-134a, the service technician will usually
recycle the refrigerant using equipment that meets the SAE standard,
although recovery followed by off-site reclamation is also an option.
For cars that use a blend, however, recovery using dedicated equipment
and reclamation is currently the only option. No standard exists today
to provide for the recycling of blends. * * * Unless EPA issues
recycling standards for refrigerants other than CFC-12 and HFC-134a, it
will remain illegal to recycle them.''
All of the replacement refrigerants on the market today other than
HFC-134a are class II blend refrigerants rather than single chemical
refrigerants. Within the upcoming months, EPA intends to develop
regulations setting forth, to the extent applicable, standards for the
following types of recovery and recycling equipment designed to service
MVAC refrigerants other than CFC-12 and HFC-134a:
1. Recover-only Equipment
a. New equipment designed to service multiple blend refrigerants.
b. Existing equipment retrofitted for permanent servicing of a
single blend refrigerant.
c. Existing equipment retrofitted for permanent servicing of
multiple blend refrigerants.
2. Recover/Recycling Equipment
a. New equipment designed to service a single blend refrigerant.
b. New equipment designed to service multiple blend refrigerants.
c. Existing equipment retrofitted for permanent servicing of a
single blend refrigerant.
d. Existing equipment retrofitted for permanent servicing of
multiple blend refrigerants.
The standards that EPA intends to propose will provide that
existing recover-only and recover/recycle equipment, once permanently
converted for use with another refrigerant, will have to meet the same
standards that apply to new equipment that recovers, or recovers and
recycles, that refrigerant. For example, R-12 or R-134a recover-only
equipment converted for permanent use with a single, specific blend
replacement refrigerant would have to meet standards set forth in
appendix F. R-12 recover-only equipment converted for permanent use
with R-134a would have to meet the standards in appendix D, and R-12
recover/recycle equipment converted for permanent use with R-134a would
have to meet the standards in appendix C. Similarly, R-12 recover/
recycle equipment converted for permanent use with a single, specific
blend refrigerant would have to meet the standard that governs new
recover/recycling equipment designed to service a single blend
refrigerant (if such a standard is ever developed; if not, EPA will
continue to prohibit the conversion of CFC-12 or HFC-134a recycling
equipment for use with other refrigerants). The standards for converted
equipment would not only cross-reference the appropriate standard that
must be met, but are likely also to specify that the conversion must be
performed by the equipment manufacturer's service representative rather
than the automotive service technician, that a unit may only be
converted if retrofit procedures for that model have been certified by
an independent testing laboratory, and that an appropriate label,
indicating conformance to the appropriate standards, is affixed to the
unit.
EPA is at this time uncertain as to whether equipment converted for
use to one or more refrigerants other than the original refrigerant for
which it was intended will be considered substantially identical to
certified equipment. Section 609 provides that equipment purchased
after the proposal of regulations shall be certified by an independent
standards testing organization as meeting the applicable standard set
forth in the regulations, while equipment purchased prior to the
proposal of regulations shall be considered certified if it is
substantially identical to equipment certified under the section 609
regulations. The standards that EPA intends to propose within the next
year may specify that if equipment converted for use to one or more
refrigerants other than the original refrigerant for which it was
intended is converted prior to the date of the proposed rule, the
Agency would consider the converted equipment to be substantially
identical to new certified equipment, where the individual unit has
been converted substantially according to the provisions set forth in
the conversion standard, and if the equipment is converted after the
date of the proposal, the equipment would have to be converted
according to the specific provisions set forth in the conversion
standard in order to be considered approved.
The Agency intends to work with industry groups, including
refrigerant manufacturers and recovery/recycling equipment
manufacturers, and with independent standards testing organizations, to
develop proposed standards for the equipment listed above. These
proposed standards will be published in the Federal Register and
subject to public review and comment prior to promulgation of a final
rule.
1. Standards for HFC-134a Recover/Recycle Equipment
Today's rule adopts a standard, set forth in appendix C, for HFC-
134a recycling equipment for mobile air-conditioning. This standard
establishes specific minimum equipment requirements for the recycling
of HFC-134a that has been directly removed from, and is intended for
reuse in, mobile air-conditioning systems. The standard contains
specifications for labeling the equipment once it is certified, safety
requirements, operating instructions and a functional description of
the equipment, including hose and fitting specification, overfill
protection requirements and storage tank requirements. The standard
provides a procedure to test the equipment to verify that it meets the
specifications of the standard.
Today's rule adds a standard of purity for recycled HFC-134a that
establishes the minimum level of purity required for recycled HFC-134a
removed from, and intended for reuse in, mobile air-conditioning
systems. The standard, set forth in appendix C to this rule, sets
purity specifications for levels of moisture, lubricants and
noncondensable gases. Today's rule also establishes a standard
recommended service procedure for containment of HFC-134a, set forth in
appendix C, that provides guidelines for the technicians that service
MVACs and MVAC-like appliances and operate refrigerant recycling
equipment designed for HFC-134a. The standard provides specific
procedures to recover the refrigerant by reducing system pressure to at
least 102 mm of mercury vacuum. The standard contains requirements for
stored refrigerant containers and disposal of empty containers.
The standards set forth in appendix C, which apply to HFC-134a, are
nearly identical to SAE J2099, J2211 and J2210, standards previously
adopted by the
[[Page 68041]]
Agency for similar equipment designed to service CFC-12. The
differences between the SAE J standards and those set forth in appendix
C are incidental, such as grammatical corrections and spelling, and do
not affect the requirements of the standards.
2. Standards for HFC-134a Recover-Only Equipment
Today's rule adds standards for equipment that recovers but does
not recycle HFC-134a refrigerant. Refrigerant recovered by this type of
equipment must be properly recycled on-site or reclaimed off-site
before it can be reused in an MVAC or MVAC-like appliance. The rule
requires that equipment meets the standards set forth in appendix D.
The standard requires that the container for used refrigerant be marked
in black print ``Dirty Refrigerant--Do Not Use Without Recycling.'' The
standard states that the recovery equipment be able to separate the
refrigerant from the recovered refrigerant and indicate the amount of
lubricant removed so that the technician can return the proper amount
of lubricant to the system. Today's rule also establishes a standard
recommended service procedure for containment of HFC-134a, set forth in
appendix C, and referenced in appendix D, that provides guidelines for
the technicians that service MVACs and operate refrigerant recycling
equipment designed for HFC-134a. The standard provides specific
procedures to recover the refrigerant by reducing system pressure to at
least 102 mm of mercury vacuum. The standard contains requirements for
stored refrigerant containers and disposal of empty containers.
The standards set forth in appendix D, which apply to HFC-134a, are
nearly identical to SAE J1989 and J1732, standards previously adopted
by the Agency for similar equipment designed to service CFC-12. The
differences between the SAE J standards and those set forth in appendix
D are incidental, such as grammatical and spelling corrections, and do
not affect the requirements of the standard.
3. The Standard for Automotive Refrigerant Recycling Equipment Intended
for Use With Both CFC-12 and HFC-134a
Today's rule adopts a standard that establishes specific minimum
equipment requirements for automotive refrigerant recycling equipment
intended for use with both CFC-12 and HFC-134a using a common
refrigerant recycling circuit. The rule requires that equipment meet
the standards set forth in appendix E. These standards require labeling
of the equipment after certification, and include requirements to
prevent cross contamination before operations involving a different
refrigerant can begin, such as a seat leakage test, the installation of
electrical interlocks, and visual indications to prevent cross
contamination. The standards contain requirements to purify the
refrigerant, safety requirements and functional description of the
equipment, requirements for labeling of the storage tanks to identify
CFC-12 and HFC-134a, and hose and connection requirements. Appendix E
also provides guidelines for testing the equipment to verify that
particular models meet the requirements of the standards. Appendix E
cross-references SAE J1989, which is set forth in appendix A, and SAE
J2211, which is set forth in appendix C.
The standards set forth in appendix E are nearly identical to SAE
J1770. The differences between the SAE J standards and those set forth
in appendix E are incidental, such as grammatical and spelling
corrections, and do not affect the requirements of the standards.
4. Standard for Recover-only Equipment That Extracts a Single, Specific
Refrigerant Other Than CFC-12 or HFC-134a
Today's rule adds a standard for equipment that recovers but does
not recycle any single, specific refrigerant other than CFC-12 and HFC-
134a, including but not limited to specific marketed blend
refrigerants. Refrigerant that is recovered by this type of equipment
must be properly reclaimed before it can be reused in an MVAC or MVAC-
like appliance. The rule requires that this equipment meet the
standards set forth in appendix F. Appendix F is based on, but not
identical to, the recover-only standard for HFC-134a set forth in
appendix D. The standard states that the recovery equipment be able to
separate the lubricant from the recovered refrigerant and indicate the
amount of lubricant removed so that the technician can return the
proper amount of lubricant to the system. The primary substantive
differences between appendix D and appendix F are located in section
6.2.1, the description of the ``dirty cocktail'' of standard
contaminated refrigerant which is run through the equipment in order to
test its efficacy. First, in order to ensure that the ``dirty
cocktail'' of contaminated refrigerant provides an accurate test of the
equipment's ability to recover used refrigerant, the standard set forth
in appendix F specifies in 6.2.1 that ``refrigerant shall be identified
prior to the recovery process to within 2% of the original
manufacturer's formulation which was submitted to, and accepted by, EPA
under its Significant New Alternatives Policy program.'' That
requirement is not contained in appendix D. Second, the ``dirty
cocktail'' for testing HFC-134a equipment contains only PAG oil, while
the ``dirty cocktail'' for testing other replacement refrigerants
contains equal parts of PAG, POE and mineral oils. This specification
should approximate more realistically the type of contaminants in used
refrigerant that such equipment is likely to handle.
C. Substantially Identical Equipment
Section 609 of the Act provides that equipment purchased before the
proposal of standards shall be considered certified if it is
substantially identical to equipment certified by the EPA or by an
independent standards testing organization approved by EPA. Section
82.36(b) of the regulations states that recover/recycle equipment
designed for use with CFC-12 and purchased before the proposal of the
standards for refrigerant recycling equipment in appendix A (i.e.,
before September 4, 1991), and recover-only equipment designed for use
with CFC-12 and purchased before the proposal of the standards for such
equipment in appendix B (i.e., before April 22, 1992), shall be
considered certified if it is ``substantially identical'' to equipment
approved under Sec. 82.36(a).
Today's rule applies the Act's ``substantially identical''
provision to recover/recycle and recover-only equipment that services
HFC-134a MVACs, recover/recycle equipment intended for use with both
CFC-12 and HFC-134a MVACs, and equipment that recovers but does not
recycle single, specific replacement refrigerants other than HFC-134a.
These types of equipment will be considered approved if they are
substantially identical to equipment approved under Sec. 82.36(a) and
if they were purchased prior to March 6, 1996, the date on which
today's rule was proposed. A manufacturer or owner may request a
determination from EPA on whether a particular unit or model is
substantially identical. Equipment used with MVAC-like appliances is
not covered under the ``substantially identical'' provision in
Sec. 82.36(b); rather, Secs. 82.156(a)(5) and 82.158 (f) and (g) of the
subpart F regulations establish grandfathering criteria for equipment
used with MVAC-like appliances.
EPA considers equipment to be substantially identical if it
performs equivalently to the equipment that is
[[Page 68042]]
certified to meet all the approved equipment standards but was
purchased prior to the date of publication of the appropriate EPA
proposed standard. In general, EPA proposes to follow the same strict
approach in implementing the substantially identical provision for the
equipment subject to the standards promulgated today as for recover/
recycle and recover-only equipment that services CFC-12 MVACs and MVAC-
like appliances. In situations where the models sold were not the same
as the approved model, EPA will consult with approved independent
standards testing organizations to evaluate the previously sold
equipment. EPA will use these organizations' test data and any
additional information submitted by the manufacturer, such as process
diagrams and lists of components, in the evaluation. EPA will maintain
a list of equipment determined to be substantially identical. An
essential criterion for evaluation is that equipment removes
refrigerant as efficiently as the applicable EPA standard and separates
lubricant from refrigerant. The Agency is also interested in ensuring
safety in operation of the equipment. Should manufacturers consider the
possibility of retrofit kits to bring the pre-certification models up
to the performance standard of certified models, EPA would require that
the retrofit kits be certified by an approved independent standards
testing organization and that equipment owners indicate in their
certification to the Agency that they have retrofitted equipment.
The Agency is aware that some HFC-134a recover-only equipment has
been sold prior to SAE's issuance in December, 1994 of the J1732
standard for HFC-134a recover-only equipment and that some dual
refrigerant recycling equipment has been sold prior to SAE's issuance
in December, 1995 of the J1770 standard for equipment that recovers
both CFC-12 and HFC-134a. Because no SAE standard was in place at the
time of sale, the equipment could not be certified by UL or ETL for EPA
approval. In such an event, i.e., where units are sold prior to the
publication of the appropriate SAE standard, so that there is no
sticker or plate on the unit showing that the model has been tested by
UL or ETL to meet the appropriate SAE standard, and later, after
publication of the SAE standard, units of the same model are certified
by UL or ETL, the Agency considers the units sold prior to the
publication of the standard to be substantially identical. The Agency
reserves the right, however, to terminate such consideration of earlier
units in the event the Agency receives evidence that some earlier units
of that model (e.g., prior to serial number xxxxx) were not able to
achieve one or more of the provisions of the appropriate SAE standard.
In that instance, the manufacturer will have to demonstrate to EPA that
the units in question are substantially identical before EPA would make
a determination to that effect. The Agency recognizes that
manufacturers of units sold prior to the publication of the appropriate
SAE standard may consider developing retrofit kits to bring pre-
certification units up to the performance standard of certified units.
It should be noted that some dual refrigerant recycling equipment
sold prior to SAE's issuance in December, 1995 of the J1770 standard
for equipment that recovers both CFC-12 and HFC-134a, may be labeled
with a UL or ETL sticker that indicates that the unit meets SAE J1990
and J2210. The Agency believes that these units do not necessarily meet
the J1770 standard, and therefore the EPA standard set forth in
appendix E. In the event that later versions of the same model of
equipment become certified by UL or ETL to meet the J1770 standard,
then the Agency will consider the units sold prior to the publication
of the standard to be substantially identical, although EPA reserves
the right to terminate such consideration, as noted above.
Several commenters stated that a simpler and more sensible approach
to identifying substantially identical equipment would turn on whether
the equipment was manufactured after a specific date, rather than
purchased after the date upon which the applicable regulations were
proposed. The statute itself, however, is explicit in its
categorization of which equipment may qualify as substantially
identical. Although it may be that pinpointing a manufacture date for a
specific unit is generally easier than pinpointing a purchase date, the
statute requires in section 609(b)(2)(B) that only equipment
``purchased before the proposal of regulations'' can be certified as
being substantially identical. One commenter suggested that the resale
of equipment by service facilities no longer in business to other
facilities may cause confusion about how a purchase date is defined.
Consequently, every reference set forth in the proposed text of 40 CFR
82.36(b)(1) to ``purchased before [date of applicable proposal]'' has
been changed to ``initially purchased before [date of applicable
proposal].''
D. Approved Independent Standards Testing Organizations
Section 82.38 establishes the criteria for approval of testing
laboratories or organizations to certify whether equipment governed by
the regulations meets the standards set forth in the regulations. Under
the July 14, 1992 final rule and the May 2, 1995 supplemental final
rule, approved organizations determine whether CFC-12 recover/recycle
and recover-only equipment meets the standards set forth in the
appendices A and B to the rule, which are based on SAE standards.
Today's rule expands that provision so that these approved
organizations may determine whether the equipment subject to today's
rule meets the standards set forth in the appropriate appendices.
Because the application materials received by the Agency from UL on
October 21, 1991, and from ETL on November 27, 1991 demonstrate that
both organizations have met the criteria set forth in 40 CFR 82.38(b)
with respect to all equipment subject to today's rule, and because the
Agency has received from both UL and ETL written requests stating that
all the application criteria are still being met, and requesting that
they be approved to certify the equipment subject to today's rule, the
Agency today approves UL and ETL to certify this equipment. The Agency
also hereby approves any equipment certifications performed by either
of these organizations which demonstrate that particular equipment
models meet SAE standards upon which any of the appendices listed in
this rule is based.
No commenters to the proposal made any statements concerning the
approval by EPA of independent standards testing organizations.
E. Technician Training and Certification
Section 82.40 establishes the standards for the approval of
programs to train and certify technicians. The standards cover
training, the subject material that must be covered by each program,
and minimum test administration procedures. Summaries of reviews of
programs must be submitted every two years and programs must offer
technicians proof of certification upon successful completion of the
test.
The Agency wishes to note that the technician training and
certification requirements set forth in today's rule amending
Sec. 82.40 apply to technicians who work on MVAC-like appliances as
well as to those who work on MVACs. Section 82.161(a)(5) requires that
technicians who service or repair
[[Page 68043]]
MVAC-like appliances either must be properly certified as Type II
technicians in accordance with the subpart B regulations or must
complete the training and certification test offered by a training and
certification program approved under Sec. 82.40. Any technicians who
wish to service MVAC-like appliances and who in the future become
certified under Sec. 82.40 rather than as Type II technicians must
therefore receive training in the equipment standards attached as
appendices to today's rule.
At this time, 27 organizations have been approved by EPA to train
and certify technicians in the use of CFC-12 recover-only and recover/
recycle equipment. Ten of these organizations train and certify their
employees, while the remaining train members of the general public.
While EPA's approval of these organizations has been limited to CFC-12
equipment, the Agency believes that for purposes of training and
certification conducted prior to January 29, 1998, these organizations
should also be considered as approved for purposes of HFC-134a
equipment, equipment that recycles both CFC-12 and HFC-134a using
common circuitry, and equipment that extracts, but does not recycle,
replacement refrigerants other than HFC-134a. As discussed below, the
equipment governed by the standards in today's rule and CFC-12
equipment are very similar, the procedures for extracting refrigerant
are very similar for all types of equipment, and the procedures for
recycling refrigerant are very similar for all types of recycling
equipment. Retraining and recertifying of technicians already certified
to use CFC-12 equipment would therefore produce only a limited
environmental benefit. In addition, such retraining and recertification
would impose a large burden on the technicians and the organizations
that certify them. For these reasons, EPA is today approving the 27
organizations noted above for training and certification of technicians
in the use of equipment that is governed by the standards in today's
rule, conducted prior to January 29, 1998.
EPA will also approve organizations for future training and
certification of technicians for the use of HFC-134a equipment,
equipment that recycles both CFC-12 and HFC-134a using common
circuitry, and equipment that extracts, but does not recycle,
replacement refrigerants other than HFC-134a, on the condition that
each organization certify in writing to the Agency that its training
materials discuss the standards set forth in Appendices C, D, E and F,
and that its testing materials include questions concerning those
standard. Each organization that submits such a certification shall be
approved upon the date which is the later of (i) the effective date of
this rule (i.e., January 29, 1998), or (ii) the receipt by the Agency
of such a certification. Organizations that do not submit such a
certification will not be approved to train and certify future
technicians for the use of the equipment governed by the standards in
today's rule. The Agency reserves the right, pursuant to Sec. 82.40(c),
to request that when an organization submits its certification to EPA,
it also provides the Agency with a summary of its review of its test
subject material and any changes made.
As noted above, the prior training and testing of previously
approved technicians for equipment governed by the standards in today's
rule, adequately and sufficiently covers the standards set forth in
appendices C, D, E and F because of the large overlap between the text
of the standards contained in appendices A and B, and the text of the
standards contained in appendices C, D, E and F. In appendices A and B,
and in appendices C, D, E and F, the following provisions are identical
or nearly identical: safety requirements; requirements that the
manufacturer must provide operating instructions; requirements that the
equipment must ensure the refrigerant recovery by reducing system
pressure below atmospheric to a minimum of 102 mm of mercury; the
preconditioning of the equipment with a contaminated sample; the
composition of that contaminated sample; the requirements that the
equipment must be certified by UL or an equivalent certifying
laboratory; the requirements that the label on the equipment must state
that it has been design certified to meet applicable SAE standards; and
the additional storage tank requirements.
Where the SAE J1990-based standards in appendix A differ from the
SAE J1732-based standards in appendices D and F, they differ largely
because appendix A contains many provisions that relate to the recycle
portion of the equipment operation and which are thus not applicable to
appendices D and F. For example, appendix A describes requirements for
the recycling test cycle and for the quantitative determination of
moisture, lubricant, and noncondensable gas in that cycle.
Where the HFC-134a standards in appendices C and D differ from the
SAE J1990- and J2209-based standards in appendices A and B, they differ
largely because of the different chemical properties of the HFC-134a
molecule. For example, the levels of contaminants in the CFC-12 ``dirty
cocktail'' in J1990 are different than those in the HFC-134a ``dirty
cocktail'' described in J2210, and the maximum acceptable levels of
contamination by air, oil and moisture are different for CFC-12, as
described in J1989, than for HFC-134a, as described in J2211.
Appendix E is similar to the other standards for recycling CFC-12
refrigerant set forth in appendix A and for recycling HFC-134a
refrigerant set forth in appendix B, but also contains requirements
designed to demonstrate that the equipment is capable of preventing
cross-contamination of refrigerants, including a seat leakage test and
the installation of electrical interlock devices and filters. In
addition, the standard requires the performance of a testing sequence
which puts the equipment through a CFC-12 recycling sequence, followed
by an HFC-134a recycling sequence. The ``dirty cocktails'' used in such
testing, however, are identical to the ``dirty cocktails'' used in
appendices A and C for testing the efficacy of cleaning single
refrigerants.
A review of SAE J1732 indicates that it contains two provisions
that relate to the recovery of refrigerant for which there are no
equivalent provisions in SAE J1990. First, section 6.3.2 of SAE J1732
requires that the equipment discharge or transfer fitting shall be \1/
2\'' ACME thread. SAE did not consider this requirement until after the
publication of the final version of J1990. This requirement to include
a unique fitting guards against the mixing of different refrigerants.
Second, section 6.1 of SAE J1732 requires that the unit must have a
device that assures that refrigerant has been recovered so that
outgassing is prevented. Although there is no equivalent to this
provision in SAE J1990, J1989 requires safeguards to prevent
outgassing.
No commenters to the proposed rule suggested any revisions to the
technician training and certification provisions outlined in the
proposal.
F. Sales Restriction
Section 609 made it unlawful, effective November 15, 1992, for any
person to sell or distribute, or offer for sale or distribution, except
to section 609 certified technicians, any class I or class II substance
suitable for use as refrigerant in a motor vehicle air-conditioning
system and that is in a container with less than 20 pounds of
refrigerant. Consequently, sales of small cans of CFC-12, as well as
small cans of any HCFC blend which EPA's Significant New Alternatives
Policy
[[Page 68044]]
(SNAP) program may determine to be acceptable as a substitute for CFC-
12 in MVACs and MVAC-like appliances, are limited to section 609
certified technicians. In addition, section 608 regulations that became
effective November 14, 1994 (58 FR 28714) restrict the sales of all
containers (regardless of size) of any class I or II refrigerant to
technicians certified under either section 608 or section 609 of the
Act.
EPA is preparing to propose in a separate rule several changes to
the regulations promulgated under section 608 of the Act. The proposed
changes to the section 608 regulations, pursuant to the mandate of
section 608(c)(2), would establish standards and requirements for the
servicing of appliances and industrial process refrigeration systems
that use refrigerants that substitute for the currently-regulated class
I or class II substances. In addition, in that proposal, the Agency may
include a provision proposing to restrict the sale of all containers
(regardless of size) of non-ozone-depleting substitute refrigerants,
including HFC-134a, to technicians certified under either section 608
or section 609 of the Act. Should the Agency determine to propose such
a sales restriction, the proposed changes to the regulatory text and
explanatory discussion in the preamble would be entirely contained in
the section 608 proposed rule, even though the changes would also
affect industries governed under section 609--automotive refrigerant
distributors, automobile manufacturers, and the automotive service
industry. All parties interested in whether EPA decides to institute a
sales restriction are therefore urged to review the language contained
in any future section 608 proposal.
V. Summary of Supporting Analyses
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether this regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant'' regulatory action as
one that is likely to lead to a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely and materially affect a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined that this rule is a ``significant regulatory
action'' within the meaning of the Executive Order. EPA has submitted
this action to OMB for review. Changes made in response to OMB
suggestions or recommendations will be documented in the public record.
The Agency prepared an analysis to assess the impact of this regulation
(see Regulatory Assessment for EPA's Proposed Rule on Standards and
Requirements for Servicing of Motor Vehicle Air Conditioners that use
Refrigerants other than Class I or Class II Substances, U.S. EPA
Stratospheric Protection Division, November, 1995) which covers both
recover/recycle equipment and recover-only equipment, and is available
for review in the public docket for this rulemaking. The analysis
indicates that total annualized costs to affected industrial sectors
will range from $4.9 million to $14.3 million, depending on what type
of recovery/recycling equipment automotive service facilities choose to
purchase.
B. Regulatory Flexibility/Fairness to Small Entities
1. Regulatory Flexibility Act
a. Purpose: EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with this final rule.
In addition, the Agency has performed an initial screening analysis and
determined that this regulation does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small businesses. The screening
analysis is found in Appendix A in the Regulatory Assessment for EPA's
Proposed Rule on Standards and Requirements for Servicing of Motor
Vehicle Air Conditioners that use Refrigerants other than Class I or
Class II Substances (U.S. EPA Stratospheric Protection Division,
October, 1995) (Regulatory Assessment) and is available for review in
the docket. A summary of the methodology and results of the analysis
are presented below.
b. Screening Analysis Methodology and Results: EPA first
characterized the regulated community by identifying the SIC codes that
would be involved in the servicing and repair of motor vehicle air
conditioners. EPA considered how the regulated community would be
affected by the main provisions of the rule: the equipment standards,
the technician certification regulations, and the regulations governing
service facility practices. After looking at typical costs to each
service facility, the analysis reviewed total costs to the regulated
community as a whole.
The equipment standards and technician certification provisions
contained in the rule impose costs on the regulated community. With
respect to equipment standards, EPA assumed that each service
establishment would purchase a single piece of equipment in order to
comply with the regulation. The analysis took into account the life of
the equipment (in terms of number of jobs performed), the incremental
labor time to recover, or to recover and recycle, refrigerant, the
current labor rate, and general operation and maintenance costs. EPA's
analysis also considered the cost savings realized by service
establishments for the recovery and reuse of substitute refrigerants
and through the salvage value of equipment. The analysis then outlined
two different private cost scenarios. The less expensive cost (lower-
bound) scenario assumed that a facility would choose to purchase single
refrigerant recover/recycle equipment, while the more expensive (upper-
bound) option assumed that a facility would choose to purchase dual
refrigerant recover/recycle equipment. In estimating the costs of
complying with the technician certification requirements, the screening
analysis took into account the number of service technicians employed
by small and large facilities, employment turnover rates for those
employees, and the cost to certify a single technician.
The screening analysis also estimated some of the benefits of the
rule, distinguishing between those that are readily quantifiable and
those that are not. Specifically, the analysis described the marginal
social benefits associated with each kilogram of greenhouse gas
emission reduction resulting from the imposition of the rule and then
estimated the total social benefits associated with all emissions
reductions resulting from the imposition of the rule. The benefits
discussion also estimated the potential cost savings to members of the
regulated community, including motor vehicle disposal facilities, that
might take advantage of mobile recovery service, which today's rule
explicitly permits. Finally, the analysis briefly discussed non-
quantifiable benefits of the rule such as increased efficiencies and
equity in the marketplace resulting from the imposition of the rule.
[[Page 68045]]
In order to determine whether the rule will have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the Agency
determined from financial data what portion of the regulated community
falls within the definition of ``small entity,'' and performed tests
using sales, profits and cash flow measures in order to determine the
nature of adverse impacts, if any. The number of small entities
servicing MVACs was estimated, using Small Business Administration
guidelines, at 160,366. Using the sales test, EPA's preferred criterion
for gauging the economic impact of a regulation on small businesses,
the Agency determined that after the imposition of the 1992 section 609
regulations (the baseline), 3.6% of these facilities were significantly
affected. With respect to the regulations being promulgated today, the
screening analysis determined that an additional 1.8% of these
facilities will be significantly impacted by today's rule, based on the
estimated annualized cost of $100 for each small facility to comply.
For more details concerning the results of the analysis, copies of the
Regulatory Assessment are available for review in the docket.
2. Note on Recordkeeping and Reporting
This rule will not impose any new recordkeeping or reporting
requirements on any small entity or other member of the regulated
community.
3. Steps EPA Has Taken to Minimize Economic Impacts on Small Entities
The portions of today's regulation that impose costs on the
regulated community implement specific requirements of section 609 of
the Act, without the exercise of discretion by EPA. Section 609
explicitly requires the Administrator to promulgate regulations
establishing standards for motor vehicle refrigerant recycling
equipment. Regulations already in place have established standards for
equipment that recovers and recycles CFC-12; the equipment standards
set forth in today's rule fulfill the statutory obligation of the
Administrator to establish standards for equipment that recovers and
recycles HFC-134a and other substitute refrigerants. Section 609 also
requires that automotive service technicians who service MVAC systems
be trained and certified in the proper use of EPA-approved refrigerant
recycling equipment. The technician certification requirements
contained in today's rule fulfill the statutory mandate to establish
such requirements for becoming certified to handle substitute
refrigerants.
In order to minimize the economic impact on small entities created
by the Agency's fulfilling its statutory mandate, EPA determined that
the equipment standards promulgated today should resemble as closely as
possible voluntary industry standards set by the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE). Virtually all equipment marketed today that recovers,
or recovers and recycles, substitute refrigerants already meets these
voluntary industry standards. Installers have been purchasing the
equipment at least since November 15, 1995, when a self-effectuating
provision in section 608 of the Act prohibited venting substitute
refrigerants into the atmosphere. Meeting the voluntary standards is a
common indication of the quality of the equipment. When purchasing
equipment, installers look not only to see that it meets the
appropriate SAE standard, but also to determine that the equipment has
been tested against that standard by an independent testing laboratory
such as UL. In developing federally mandated equipment standards for
refrigerant recycling equipment, section 609 required EPA to ensure
that Agency standards were at least as stringent as the voluntary SAE
standards. EPA has done so, but has also decided against issuing
standards that were more stringent than the voluntary industry
standards, not only in part because the Agency believes that the
voluntary standards are protective of human health and the environment,
but also because small businesses and other stakeholders are already
familiar with the equipment that meets the voluntary standards and thus
will also be familiar with the equipment that meets the EPA standards.
EPA has also engaged in extensive outreach to the affected
community, and in particular to small entities within that community,
in order to minimize any economic impacts this rule may have on them.
To respond to questions, the Agency has long maintained a toll-free
hotline (800/296-1996) and an award-winning web site that contains
copies of any EPA fact sheets and regulations that relate to section
609. In addition, Agency staff have spoken, and/or sponsored trade
booths, at conventions and conferences sponsored by industry trade
associations such as the Mobile Air Conditioning Society, the
International Mobile Air Conditioning Association, ASIA/APAA, and the
National Tire Dealers and Retreaders Association. The Agency has also
worked extensively on articles in automotive service journals such as
Motor and Motor Age, and with other partners such as the National
Institute for Automotive Service Excellence (ASE), which has tested
over 150,000 technicians nationwide in motor vehicle heating and air-
conditioning servicing. Using all of these methods, EPA has attempted
to alert small entities to when and how the section 609 regulations
would expand to apply to refrigerants that substitute for CFC-12 in
MVACs, and to technicians who service vehicles that use substitute
refrigerants. In conjunction with the publication of today's rule, EPA
is issuing a short, plain-English fact sheet for automotive service
facilities that summarizes the rule and responds to these questions.
EPA has also engaged in outreach activities to inform motor vehicle
disposal facilities about the provisions of this rule that affect them.
The recovery of refrigerant is a critical element in the motor vehicle
disposal process, and yet calls to the hotline and to EPA staff had
long indicated that automotive recyclers did not understand how to
comply with Title VI regulations. EPA responded by promulgating today's
rule. In conjunction with the publication of the rule, EPA is issuing a
short, plain-English fact sheet specifically to assist the automotive
recycling industry in its efforts to comply with the requirements of
Title VI. It explains not only what requirements governing refrigerant
recovery and re-use apply, but also where in the regulations each
requirement is located.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not add any new requirements or increases burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously approved
the information collection requirements contained in the final rule,
promulgated on July 14, 1992, which established standards and
requirements regarding the servicing of MVACs and has assigned OMB
control number 2060-0247 (EPA ICR No. 1617.02).
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able
[[Page 68046]]
to respond to a collection of information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or
otherwise disclose the information.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule.
EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector, in any one year. The majority of the regulations promulgated
today implement requirements specifically set forth by Congress in
section 609 of the Clean Air Act without the exercise of any discretion
by EPA. The remainder merely serve to clarify existing regulatory text
and therefore impose no new additional enforceable duties on
governmental entities or the private sector. Thus, today's rule is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. EPA
has also determined that this rule contains no regulatory requirements
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
E. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's
Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82
Environmental protection, Motor vehicle air-conditioning, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Recover-only equipment, Recover/recycle
equipment, Reporting and certification requirements, Stratospheric
ozone layer.
Dated: December 17, 1997.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR Part 82 is amended
as follows:
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.
2. Section 82.30 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 82.30 Purpose and scope.
(a) The purpose of the regulations in this subpart B is to
implement section 609 of the Clean Air Act, as amended (Act) regarding
the servicing of motor vehicle air conditioners (MVACs), and to
implement section 608 of the Act regarding certain servicing,
maintenance, repair and disposal of air conditioners in MVACs and MVAC-
like appliances (as that term is defined in 40 CFR 82.152).
* * * * *
3. Section 82.32 is amended by adding a heading to paragraph (e),
by revising paragraph (e)(1), by adding paragraphs (e)(3), (e)(4), and
(e)(5), by revising paragraph (h), and by adding paragraph (i), to read
as follows:
Sec. 82.32 Definitions.
* * * * *
(e) Properly using. (1) Properly using means using equipment in
conformity with the regulations set forth in this subpart, including
but not limited to the prohibitions and required practices set forth in
Sec. 82.34, and the recommended service procedures and practices for
the containment of refrigerant set forth in appendices A, B, C, D, E,
and F of this subpart, as applicable. In addition, this term includes
operating the equipment in accordance with the manufacturer's guide to
operation and maintenance and using the equipment only for the
controlled substance for which the machine is designed. For equipment
that extracts and recycles refrigerant, properly using also means to
recycle refrigerant before it is returned to a motor vehicle air
conditioner or MVAC-like appliance, including to the motor vehicle air
conditioner or MVAC-like appliance from which the refrigerant was
extracted. For equipment that only recovers refrigerant, properly using
includes the requirement to recycle the refrigerant on-site or send the
refrigerant off-site for reclamation.
* * * * *
(3) Notwithstanding any other terms of this paragraph (e), approved
refrigerant recycling equipment may be transported off-site and used to
perform service involving refrigerant at other locations where such
servicing occurs. Any such servicing involving refrigerant must meet
all of the requirements of this subpart B that would apply if the
servicing occurred on-site.
(4) Facilities that charge MVACs or MVAC-like appliances with
refrigerant but do not perform any other service involving refrigerant
(i.e., perform ``top-offs'' only) are considered to be engaged in
``service involving refrigerant'' and are therefore subject to any and
all requirements of this subsection that apply to facilities that
perform a wider range of refrigerant servicing. For facilities that
charge MVACs, this includes the requirement to purchase approved
refrigerant recycling equipment. For facilities that only charge MVAC-
like appliances, this does not include the requirement to purchase
approved refrigerant recycling equipment, but does include the
requirement to be properly trained and certified by a technician
certification program approved by the Administrator pursuant to either
Sec. 82.40 or Sec. 82.161(a)(5).
(5)All persons opening (as that term is defined in Sec. 82.152)
MVAC-like appliances must have at least one piece of approved recovery
or recycling equipment available at their place of business.
* * * * *
(h) Service involving refrigerant means any service during which
discharge or release of refrigerant from the MVAC or MVAC-like
appliance to the atmosphere can reasonably be expected to occur.
Service involving refrigerant includes any service in which an MVAC or
MVAC-like appliance is charged with refrigerant but no other service
involving refrigerant is performed (i.e., a ``top-off'').
(i) Motor vehicle disposal facility means any commercial facility
that engages in the disposal (which includes
[[Page 68047]]
dismantling, crushing or recycling) of MVACs or MVAC-like appliances,
including but not limited to automotive recycling facilities, scrap
yards, landfills and salvage yards engaged in such operations. Motor
vehicle repair and/or servicing facilities, including collision repair
facilities, are not considered motor vehicle disposal facilities.
4. Section 82.34 is amended by revising the section heading and by
revising paragraph (a), revising the reference ``Sec. 82.42(b)(4)'' to
read ``Sec. 82.42(b)(3)'' in paragraph (b), and by adding paragraph (d)
to read as follows:
Sec. 82.34 Prohibitions and required practices.
(a) No person repairing or servicing MVACs for consideration, and
no person repairing or servicing MVAC-like appliances, may perform any
service involving the refrigerant for such MVAC or MVAC-like appliance:
(1) Without properly using equipment approved pursuant to
Sec. 82.36;
(2) Unless any such person repairing or servicing a
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.