[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 32 (Thursday, February 18, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8038-8043]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-3992]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[FRL-6301-7]
RIN 2060-AG12


Protection of Stratospheric Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

[[Page 8039]]

SUMMARY: This action proposes to list as acceptable with restrictions 
two substitutes for ozone depleting substances (ODSs) under the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Significant New Alternatives 
Policy (SNAP) program. SNAP implements section 612 of the amended Clean 
Air Act of 1990, which requires EPA to evaluate substitutes for the 
ODSs to reduce overall risk to human health and the environment. 
Through these evaluations, SNAP generates lists of acceptable and 
unacceptable substitutes for each of the major industrial use sectors. 
The intended effect of the SNAP program is to expedite movement away 
from ozone depleting compounds while avoiding a shift into substitutes 
posing other environmental problems.
    On March 18, 1994, EPA promulgated a final rulemaking setting forth 
its plan for administering the SNAP program (59 FR 13044), and issued 
decisions on the acceptability and unacceptability of a number of 
substitutes. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), EPA is 
issuing its preliminary decisions on the acceptability of halon 
substitutes in the fire suppression and explosion protection sector 
which have not previously been reviewed by the Agency. To arrive at 
determinations on the acceptability of substitutes, the Agency 
completed a cross-media evaluation of risks to human health and the 
environment by sector end-use.

DATES: Written comments or data provided in response to this document 
must be submitted by April 19, 1999. A public hearing will be held if 
requested in writing. If a public hearing is requested, EPA will 
provide notice of the date, time and location of the hearing in a 
subsequent Federal Register notice. For further information, please 
contact the SNAP Coordinator at the address listed below under For 
Further Information.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and data should be sent to Docket A-91-42, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAR Docket and Information 
Center, Room M-1500, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460. The 
docket may be inspected between 8 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. on weekdays. 
Telephone (202) 260-7548; fax (202) 260-4400. As provided in 40 CFR, 
Part 2, a reasonable fee may be charged for photocopying. To expedite 
review, a second copy of the comments should be sent to Kelly Davis at 
the address listed below under For Further Information. Information 
designated as Confidential Business Information (CBI) under 40 CFR, 
Part 2, Subpart B, must be sent directly to the contact person for this 
notice. However, the Agency is requesting that all respondents submit a 
non-confidential version of their comments to the docket as well.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Davis at (202) 564-2303 or fax 
(202) 565-2096, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 6205-J, 
401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460. Overnight or courier 
deliveries should be sent to our 501-3rd Street, NW, Washington, DC, 
20001 location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Overview of This Action

    This action is divided into four sections:

I. Section 612 Program
    A. Statutory Requirements
    B. Regulatory History
II. Proposed Listing of Substitutes
III. Administrative Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866
    B. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Paperwork Reduction Act
    E. Applicability of Executive Order 13045: Children's Health 
Protection
    F. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing Intergovernmental 
Partnerships
    G. The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
IV. Additional Information

I. Section 612 Program

A. Statutory Requirements

    Section 612 of the Clean Air Act authorizes EPA to develop a 
program for evaluating alternatives to ozone-depleting substances. EPA 
is referring to this program as the Significant New Alternatives Policy 
(SNAP) program. The major provisions of section 612 are:
    Rulemaking--Section 612(c) requires EPA to promulgate rules making 
it unlawful to replace any class I (chlorofluorocarbon, halon, carbon 
tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, methyl bromide, and 
hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II (hydrochlorofluorocarbon) substance 
with any substitute that the Administrator determines may present 
adverse effects to human health or the environment where the 
Administrator has identified an alternative that (1) reduces the 
overall risk to human health and the environment, and (2) is currently 
or potentially available.
    Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable Substitutes--Section 612(c) also 
requires EPA to publish a list of the substitutes unacceptable for 
specific uses. EPA must publish a corresponding list of acceptable 
alternatives for specific uses.
    Petition Process--Section 612(d) grants the right to any person to 
petition EPA to add a substitute to or delete a substitute from the 
lists published in accordance with section 612(c). The Agency has 90 
days to grant or deny a petition. Where the Agency grants the petition, 
EPA must publish the revised lists within an additional six months.
    90-day Notification--Section 612(e) requires EPA to require any 
person who produces a chemical substitute for a class I substance to 
notify the Agency not less than 90 days before new or existing 
chemicals are introduced into interstate commerce for significant new 
uses as substitutes for a class I substance. The producer must also 
provide the Agency with the producer's unpublished health and safety 
studies on such substitutes.
    Outreach--Section 612(b)(1) states that the Administrator shall 
seek to maximize the use of federal research facilities and resources 
to assist users of class I and II substances in identifying and 
developing alternatives to the use of such substances in key commercial 
applications.
    Clearinghouse--Section 612(b)(4) requires the Agency to set up a 
public clearinghouse of alternative chemicals, product substitutes, and 
alternative manufacturing processes that are available for products and 
manufacturing processes which use class I and II substances.

B. Regulatory History

    On March 18, 1994, EPA published the Final Rulemaking (FRM) (59 FR 
13044) which described the process for administering the SNAP program 
and issued EPA's first acceptability lists for substitutes in the major 
industrial use sectors. These sectors include: refrigeration and air 
conditioning; foam blowing; solvent cleaning; fire suppression and 
explosion protection; sterilants; aerosols; adhesives, coatings and 
inks; and tobacco expansion. These sectors comprise the principal 
industrial sectors that historically consume large volumes of ozone-
depleting compounds.
    The Agency defines a ``substitute'' as any chemical, product 
substitute, or alternative manufacturing process, whether existing or 
new, that could replace a class I or class II substance. Anyone who 
produces a substitute must provide the Agency with health and safety 
studies on the substitute at least 90 days before introducing it into 
interstate commerce for significant new use as an alternative. This 
requirement applies to chemical manufacturers, but may include 
importers, formulators or end-users when they are responsible for 
introducing a substitute into commerce.

[[Page 8040]]

II. Proposed Listing of Substitutes

    To develop the lists of unacceptable and acceptable substitutes, 
EPA conducts screens of health and environmental risks posed by various 
substitutes for ozone-depleting compounds in each use sector. The 
outcome of these risk screens can be found in the public docket, as 
described above in the Addresses portion of this notice.
    Under section 612, the Agency has considerable discretion in the 
risk management decisions it can make in SNAP. The Agency has 
identified five possible decision categories: acceptable; acceptable 
subject to use conditions; acceptable subject to narrowed use limits; 
unacceptable; and pending. Fully acceptable substitutes (i.e., no 
restrictions) can be used for all applications within the relevant 
sector end-use. Conversely, it is illegal to replace an ODS with a 
substitute listed by SNAP as unacceptable. A pending listing represents 
substitutes for which the Agency has not received complete data or has 
not completed its review of the data.
    After reviewing a substitute, the Agency may make a determination 
that a substitute is acceptable only if certain conditions of use are 
met to minimize risks to human health and the environment. Use of such 
substitutes in ways that are inconsistent with such use conditions 
renders these substitutes unacceptable.
    Even though the Agency can restrict the use of a substitute based 
on the potential for adverse effects, it may be necessary to permit a 
narrowed range of use within a sector end-use because of the lack of 
alternatives for specialized applications. Users intending to adopt a 
substitute acceptable within narrowed use limits must ascertain that 
other acceptable alternatives are not technically feasible. Companies 
must document the results of their evaluation, and retain the results 
on file for the purpose of demonstrating compliance. This documentation 
shall include descriptions of substitutes examined and rejected, 
processes or products in which the substitute is needed, reason for 
rejection of other alternatives, e.g., performance, technical or safety 
standards, and the anticipated date other substitutes will be available 
and projected time for switching to other available substitutes. Use of 
such substitutes in applications and end-uses which are not specified 
as acceptable in the narrowed use limit renders these substitutes 
unacceptable.
    In this NPRM, EPA is issuing its preliminary decision on the 
acceptability of certain substitutes not previously reviewed by the 
Agency. As described in the March 1994 rulemaking for the SNAP program 
(59 FR 13044), EPA believes that, as a general matter, notice-and-
comment rulemaking is required to place any alternative on the list of 
prohibited substitutes, to list a substitute as acceptable only under 
certain use conditions or narrowed use limits, or to remove an 
alternative from either the list of prohibited or acceptable 
substitutes.
    EPA does not believe that notice and comment rulemaking procedures 
are required to list alternatives as acceptable with no limitations. 
Such listings do not impose any sanction, nor do they remove any prior 
license to use a substitute. Consequently, EPA adds substitutes to the 
list of acceptable alternatives without first requesting comment on new 
listings. Updates to the acceptable and pending lists are published as 
separate Notices of Acceptability in the Federal Register.
    The sections below present a detailed discussion of the proposed 
substitute listing determinations by major use sector. Tables 
summarizing listing decisions in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking are 
in Appendix G. The comments contained in Appendix G provide additional 
information on a substitute. These comments are not part of the 
regulatory decision, and therefore they are not mandatory for use of a 
substitute. Nor should the comments listed in Appendix G be considered 
comprehensive with respect to other legal obligations pertaining to the 
use of the substitute. However, EPA encourages users to apply all 
comments listed in the application of these substitutes. In many 
instances, the comments simply allude to sound operating practices that 
have already been identified in existing industry and/or building-code 
standards. Thus, many of the comments, if adopted, would not require 
significant changes, if any, in existing operating practices for the 
affected industry.

A. Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection

    EPA is proposing to list IG-100 and HCFC Blend E as acceptable 
halon substitutes subject to certain use conditions. In implementing 
its application of conditions to limit the use of alternatives under 
the SNAP program, EPA has sought to avoid overlap with other existing 
regulatory authorities. EPA believes that section 612 clearly 
authorizes imposition of use conditions to ensure safe use of replacing 
agents. EPA's mandate is to list agents that ``reduce overall risk to 
human health and the environment'' for ``specific uses.'' In light of 
this authorization, EPA only intends to set conditions for the safe use 
of halon substitutes in the workplace until OSHA incorporates specific 
language addressing gaseous agents in OSHA regulation. Under Public Law 
91-596, section 4(b)(1), OSHA is precluded from regulating working 
conditions currently being regulated by another federal agency. EPA is 
specifically deferring to OSHA and has no intention to assume the 
responsibility for regulating workplace safety, especially with respect 
to fire protection. EPA's workplace use conditions will not bar OSHA 
from regulating under its P.L. 91-596 authority.
    Additionally, EPA understands that, under the National Technology 
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995, Section 12(d), Pub. L. 104-113, 
federal agencies are required to use technical standards that are 
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies, using 
such technical standards as a means to carry out policy objectives or 
activities. EPA will consider adopting such technical standards as they 
become available.
1. Proposed Acceptable Subject to Use Conditions
    Total Flooding Agents. IG-100 is proposed acceptable as a Halon 
1301 substitute for total flooding applications. IG-100, which is 
composed of 100% nitrogen, is designed to lower the oxygen level in a 
protected area to a level that does not support combustion. The 
toxicological issues of concern with inert gas systems differ from 
those of halocarbon agent systems, since the endpoint for hypoxic (low 
oxygen) atmospheres associated with inert gas systems is asphyxiation, 
while the endpoint for halocarbon agents is cardiosensitization leading 
to cardiac arrhythmia. Peer reviews by medical specialists considering 
specific questions regarding exposure of a typical working population 
to inert gas fire suppression systems have provided sufficient 
information to support use conditions previously listed for IG-541, IG-
55, and IG-01; EPA has determined these use conditions are appropriate 
for IG-100 as well.
    Specifically, because the terms No Observed Adverse Effect Level 
(NOAEL) and Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) are not 
appropriate when considering the continuum of health effects associated 
with hypoxic atmospheres, EPA proposes a ``no effect level'' for inert 
gas systems at 12% oxygen, and a ``lowest effect level'' at 10% oxygen. 
Thus, consistent with the

[[Page 8041]]

OSHA conditions used by EPA for all total flooding agents, EPA proposes 
that an IG-100 system could be designed to an oxygen level of 10% if 
employees can egress the area within one minute, but may be designed 
only to the 12% level if it takes longer than one minute to egress the 
area. If the possibility exists for the oxygen to drop below 10%, 
employees must be evacuated prior to such oxygen depletion. A design 
concentration of less than 10% oxygen may only be used in normally 
unoccupied areas, provided that any employee who could possibly be 
exposed can egress within 30 seconds.
    EPA does not encourage any employee to intentionally remain in an 
area following discharge of IG-100 (or any other total flooding agent), 
even in the event of accidental discharge. In addition, the system must 
include alarms and warning mechanisms as specified by OSHA.
    EPA intends that all personnel be evacuated from an area prior to, 
or quickly after, discharge. An inert gas system may not be designed 
with the intention of personnel remaining in the area unless 
appropriate protection is provided, such as self-contained breathing 
apparatuses.
2. Proposed Acceptable Subject to Narrowed Use Limits
    Streaming Agents. HCFC Blend E is proposed acceptable as a Halon 
1211 substitute for streaming agent uses in nonresidential 
applications. This agent is a blend of an HCFC, an HFC, and an 
additive. The primary constituent, an HCFC, is currently listed as 
acceptable for use in non-residential streaming applications. The 
secondary constituent, an HFC, is listed acceptable as a flooding agent 
subject to use conditions. Upon combustion, the synergistic effect of 
these two compounds can result in the formulation of hydrochloric and 
other acids at levels potentially harmful to human health. The 
formulation of such byproducts of combustion is similar for many 
halocarbon fire extinguishing agents. The manufacturer claims the 
presence of the additive might help mitigate these potential effects.
    This potential risk of human health effects, although it does not 
outweigh the risks associated with fire, necessitate limiting the use 
of this blend to non-residential applications only. EPA recommends that 
the potential risks associated with the use of this blend, as well as 
handling procedures to reduce such risk, be clearly labeled on each 
extinguisher containing this blend. Additionally, section 610(d) of the 
Clean Air Act and its implementing regulations prohibit the sale and 
distribution of HCFCs in fire extinguishers for residential 
applications. (See 61 FR 69671, December 4, 1996, and 58 FR 69637, 
December 30, 1993.)
    EPA has reviewed the environmental impacts of this blend and has 
concluded that, by comparison to Halon 1211, it reduces overall risk to 
the environment. The ozone-depletion potential of the HCFC is 0.02; no 
other constituent in the blend has ozone-depleting characteristics. 
EPA's review of environmental and human health impacts of this blend is 
contained in the public docket for this rulemaking.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR 51735; October 4, 1993) the 
Agency must determine whether the 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 result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual 
effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a 
material way the economy, 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.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, OMB notified EPA 
that it considers this a ``significant regulatory action'' within the 
meaning of the Executive Order and EPA submitted this action to OMB for 
review. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or recommendations 
have been documented in the public record.

B. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires 
EPA to prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule 
that includes a Federal mandate that may result in expenditure of $100 
million or more in any one year by state, local, and tribal 
governments, in aggregate, or by the private sector. Section 203 
requires the Agency to establish a plan for obtaining input from and 
informing any small governments that may be significantly or uniquely 
affected by the rule. Section 205 requires that regulatory alternatives 
be considered before promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact 
statement is prepared. The Agency must select the least costly, most 
cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the 
rule's objectives, unless there is an explanation why this alternative 
is not selected or this alternative is inconsistent with law.
    Because this proposed rule is estimated to result in the 
expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments or the private 
sector of less than $100 million in any one year, the Agency has not 
prepared a budgetary impact statement or specifically addressed the 
selection of the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome 
alternative. Because small governments will not be significantly or 
uniquely affected by this rule, the Agency is not required to develop a 
plan with regard to small governments. However, this proposed rule has 
the net effect of reducing burden from part 82, Stratospheric 
Protection regulations, on regulated entities.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small 
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental 
jurisdictions. This proposed rule would not have a significant impact 
on a substantial number of small entities because costs of the SNAP 
requirements as a whole are expected to be minor. In fact, this 
proposed rule offers regulatory relief to small businesses by providing 
acceptable alternatives to phased-out ozone-depleting substances. The 
actions proposed herein may well provide benefits for small businesses 
anxious to examine potential substitutes to any ozone-depleting class I 
and class II substances they may be using, by requiring manufacturers 
to make information on such substitutes available. Therefore, I certify 
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

    EPA has determined that this proposed rule contains no information

[[Page 8042]]

requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq., that are not already approved by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB). OMB has reviewed and approved an Information Collection 
Request by EPA described in the March 18, 1994 rulemaking (59 FR 13044, 
at 13121, 13146-13147); its OMB Control Number is 2060-0226.

E. Applicability of Executive Order 13045: Children's Health Protection

    This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045, entitled Protection of 
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, 
April 23, 1997), because it does not involve decisions on environmental 
health risks or safety risks that may disproportionately affect 
children.

F. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing Intergovernmental Partnerships

    Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local 
or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds 
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those 
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by 
consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office 
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior 
consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal 
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written 
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the 
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected 
officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal 
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development 
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.'' 
Today's rule does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal 
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these 
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of Executive 
Order 12875 do not apply to this rule.

G. The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(NTTAA), Section 12(d), Pub. L. 104-113, requires federal agencies and 
departments to use technical standards that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards as 
a means to carry out policy objectives or activities determined by the 
agencies and departments. If use of such technical standards is 
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical, a federal 
agency or department may elect to use technical standards that are not 
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies if the 
head of the agency or department transmits to the Office of Management 
and Budget an explanation of the reasons for using such standards.
    Although this proposed rule includes technical standards for 
exposure limits, there are no applicable voluntary consensus standards 
on this subject. EPA will consider adopting such technical standards as 
they become available.

H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those 
governments. If EPA complies by consulting Executive Order 13084 
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
an effective process permitting elected and other representatives of 
Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in 
the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or 
uniquely affect their communities.'' Today's rule does not 
significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal 
governments, because this regulation applies directly to facilities 
that use these substances and not to governmental entities. 
Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 
do not apply to this rule.

IV. Additional Information

    For copies of the comprehensive SNAP lists or additional 
information on SNAP, contact the Stratospheric Protection Hotline at 1-
800-296-1996, Monday-Friday, between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 
p.m. (EST).
    For more information on the Agency's process for administering the 
SNAP program or criteria for evaluation of substitutes, refer to the 
SNAP final rulemaking published in the Federal Register on March 18, 
1994 (59 FR 13044). Notices and rulemakings under the SNAP program, as 
well as EPA publications on protection of stratospheric ozone, are 
available from EPA's Ozone World Wide Web site at (http://www.epa.gov/
ozone/title6) and from the Stratospheric Protection Hotline, whose 
number is listed above.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
    Dated: February 10, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is proposed 
to be 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. Sec. 7414, 7601, 7671-7671q.

    2. Subpart G is amended by adding the following Appendix G to read 
as follows:

Subpart G--Significant New Alternatives Policy Program

* * * * *

Appendix G to Subpart G--Substitutes Subject to Use Restrictions 
and Unacceptable Substitutes Listed in the [FR publication date] 
final rule, effective [30 days after FR publication date].

Summary of Proposed Decisions

[[Page 8043]]



                         Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection Total Flooding Agents
                               [Substitutes Acceptable Subject to Use Conditions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            End Use                Substitute         Decision            Conditions              Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Halon 1301, Total Flooding      IG-100..........  Acceptable......  Until OSHA             EPA does not
 Agents.                                                             establishes            contemplate
                                                                     applicable workplace   personnel remaining
                                                                     requirements:          in the space after
                                                                                            system discharge
                                                                                            during a fire
                                                                                            without Self-
                                                                                            Contained Breathing
                                                                                            Apparatus (SCBA) as
                                                                                            required by OSHA.
                                                                    IG-100 systems may be  EPA does not
                                                                     designed to an         encourage any
                                                                     oxygen level of 10%    employee to
                                                                     if employees can       intentionally remain
                                                                     egress the area        in the area after
                                                                     within one minute,     system discharge,
                                                                     but may be designed    even in the event of
                                                                     only to the 12%        accidental
                                                                     oxygen level if it     discharge. In
                                                                     takes longer than      addition, the system
                                                                     one minute to egress   must include alarms
                                                                     the area.              and warning
                                                                                            mechanisms as
                                                                                            specified by OSHA.
                                                                    If the possibility     See additional
                                                                     exists for the         comments 1, 2.
                                                                     oxygen level to drop
                                                                     below 10%, employees
                                                                     must be evacuated
                                                                     prior to such oxygen
                                                                     depletion.
                                                                    A design
                                                                     concentration of
                                                                     less than 10% many
                                                                     only be used in
                                                                     normally occupied
                                                                     areas, as long as an
                                                                     employee who could
                                                                     possibly be exposed
                                                                     can egress within 30
                                                                     seconds.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional Comments

    1. Must conform with OSHA 29 CFR 1910, Subpart L, Section 
1910.160.
    2. Per OSHA requirements, protective gear (SCBA) must be 
available in the event personnel must re-enter the area.

                           Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection Streaming Agents
                             [Substitutes Acceptable Subject to Narrowed Use Limits]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             End use                  Substitute           Decision           Limitations          Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Halon 1211, Streaming Agents....  HCFC Blend E......  Acceptable........  Nonresidential
                                                                           uses only.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 99-3992 Filed 2-17-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P