[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 49 (Friday, March 12, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11946-11988]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-3817]



[[Page 11945]]

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

Part II





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Part 82



Protection of Stratospheric Ozone; Refrigerant Recycling; Substitute 
Refrigerants; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 49 / Friday, March 12, 2004 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 11946]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[FRL-7625-6]
RIN 2060-AF37


Protection of Stratospheric Ozone; Refrigerant Recycling; 
Substitute Refrigerants

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending the rule 
on refrigerant recycling, promulgated under section 608 of the Clean 
Air Act (CAA or Act), to clarify how the requirements of section 608 
apply to refrigerants that are used as substitutes for 
chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) and hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC) 
refrigerants.
    This rule explicates the self-effectuating statutory prohibition on 
venting substitute refrigerants to the atmosphere that became effective 
on November 15, 1995. The rule also exempts certain substitute 
refrigerants from the venting prohibition on the basis of current 
evidence that their release does not pose a threat to the environment.
    In addition, EPA is amending the current refrigerant recovery and 
recycling requirements for chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) and 
hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC) refrigerants to accommodate the 
proliferation of new refrigerants on the market, and to clarify that 
the venting prohibition applies to all refrigerants for which EPA has 
not made a determination that their release ``does not pose a threat to 
the environment,'' namely hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) and perfluorocarbon 
(PFC) refrigerants. With the exception of the venting prohibition, this 
rule will not further regulate the use or sale of substitute 
refrigerants that do not contribute to the depletion of the 
stratospheric ozone layer, such as HFC and perfluorocarbon PFC 
refrigerants. In addition, today's action will not address leak repair 
requirements for appliances containing substitutes for ozone-depleting 
substance (ODS) refrigerants nor will it address certification 
requirements for refrigerant recovery or recycling equipment intended 
for use with substitute refrigerants.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 11, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Materials relevant to the rulemaking are contained in Air 
Docket No. A-92-01 located at U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. The Docket may be 
inspected from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. A reasonable 
fee may be charged for copying docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information concerning this rulemaking 
should be forwarded to Julius Banks; U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Global Programs Division-Stratospheric Program Implementation 
Branch, Mail Code 6205-J, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 
20460. The Stratospheric Ozone Information Hotline (800-296-1996) and 
the Ozone Web page www.epa.gov/ozone can also be contacted for further 
information.

I. Regulated Entities
II. Overview
    A. Section 608 of the Clean Air Act
    B. Factors Considered in the Development of This Rule
    C. Public Participation
    D. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) Regarding Recycling of 
Substitute Refrigerants
III. Scope of Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
    A. EPA's Statutory Authority
    B. Determination of Whether Release Poses a Threat to the 
Environment
    1. HFC and PFC Refrigerants
    2. Chemically Active Common Gases
    3. Hydrocarbons
    4. Inert Atmospheric Constituents
IV. The Final Rule
    A. Overview
    B. Application of the Venting Prohibition and Required Practices 
to Substitute Refrigerants
    1. HFC and PFC Refrigerants
    2. Chemically Active Common Gases
    3. Hydrocarbons
    C. Definitions
    1. Appliance
    a. One-Time Expansion Devices, Including Self-Chilling Cans
    b. Secondary Loops
    2. Full Charge
    3. High-Pressure Appliance (proposed as higher-pressure 
appliance)
    4. Leak Rate
    5. Low-Pressure Appliance
    6. Opening
    7. Reclaim
    8. Refrigerant
    9. Substitute
    10. Technician
    11. Very High-Pressure Appliance
    D. Required Practices
    1. Evacuation of Appliances
    a. Evacuation Requirements for Appliances Other than Small 
Appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like Appliances
    i. Low-Pressure Appliance Category
    ii. Medium-Pressure and High-Pressure (proposed as high- and 
higher-pressure) Appliance Categories
    iii. Very High-Pressure Appliance Category
    b. Evacuation Levels for Small Appliances
    c. Evacuation Levels for Disposal of MVACs, MVAC-like 
Appliances, and Small Appliances
    d. Request for Comment on Establishing Special Evacuation 
Requirements for Heat Transfer Appliances
    e. Clarifications of Evacuation Requirements
    2. Extension of the Refrigerant Standard to Substitute 
Refrigerants
    a. Updates to the Refrigerant Standard
    b. Generic Specification Standards for Refrigerants
    c. Application of the Refrigerant Standard to Virgin and Used 
Refrigerants
    d. Possession and Transfer of Used Refrigerant
    3. Leak Repair
    4. Servicing MVAC and MVAC-like Appliances Containing Substitute 
Refrigerants
    a. Background
    b. Amendments to Subpart B
    c. Amendments Concerning MVAC and MVAC-like Appliances 
Containing Substitute Refrigerants
    d. Clarification of Applicability-Servicing of Buses Using HCFC-
22
    E. Refrigerant Recovery/Recycling Equipment Certification
    F. Technician Certification
    G. Refrigerant Sales Restriction
    1. Background
    2. Extension of the Refrigerant Sales Restriction to Substitute 
Refrigerants
    3. Consideration of Alternative Methods of Emissions Reduction
    a. Unique Fittings
    b. Limited Sales Restriction
    c. MVAC Retrofit Kits
    H. Safe Disposal of Small Appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like 
Appliances
    1. Coverage of HFCs and PFCs
    2. Transfer of Substitute Refrigerants During the Safe Disposal 
of MVAC and MVAC-like Appliances
    3. Clarification of Requirements for Persons Disposing of 
Appliances
    4. Stickers as a Form of Verification
    I. Certification by Owners of Recycling or Recovery Equipment
    J. Servicing Apertures and Process Stubs
    K. Prohibition on the Manufacture or Import of One-Time 
Expansion Devices that Contain Other than Exempted Refrigerants
    L. Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements
    1. Persons Who Sell or Distribute Refrigerant
    2. Technicians
    3. Appliance Owners and Operators
    4. Refrigerant Reclaimers
    5. Recovery and Recycling Equipment Testing Organizations
    6. Disposers
    7. Programs Certifying Technicians
    M. Economic Analysis
    1. Baseline
    2. Costs
    3. Benefits
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

[[Page 11947]]

    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health & Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
    J. The Congressional Review Act

I. Regulated Entities

    Entities potentially regulated by this action include those that 
manufacture, own, maintain, service, repair, or dispose of all types of 
air-conditioning and refrigeration appliances, including motor vehicle 
air-conditioners; those that sell or reclaim refrigerants; those that 
certify technicians; and manufacturers and certifiers of refrigerant 
recycling and recovery equipment. This listing is not intended to be 
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities 
likely to be regulated by this action. To determine whether your 
company is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the 
applicability criteria contained in section 608 of the CAA Amendments 
of 1990. The applicability criteria are discussed below and in 
regulations published on December 30, 1993 (58 FR 69638). 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.

II. Overview

    Effective November 15, 1995, section 608(c)(2) of the Act prohibits 
the knowing venting, release, or disposal of any substitute for CFC and 
HCFC refrigerants by any person maintaining, servicing, repairing, or 
disposing of air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment. This 
prohibition applies unless EPA determines that such venting, releasing, 
or disposing does not pose a threat to the environment.
    Today's final rule clarifies how the venting prohibition of section 
608(c)(2) applies to substitute refrigerants for which EPA is not 
determining that their release does not pose a threat to the 
environment, namely, HFC and PFC refrigerants. In addition to 
establishing that the venting prohibition will remain in effect for HFC 
and PFC substitute refrigerants, this rule will clarify that EPA 
regulations affecting the handling and sales of ozone-depleting 
refrigerants are applicable to substitute refrigerants, primarily HFC 
refrigerant blends, that contain an ozone-depleting substance (ODS). 
Today's rule does not extend the refrigerant sales restriction to pure 
HFC and PFC refrigerants. This rule does exempt from the venting 
prohibition certain refrigerant substitutes for which EPA has 
determined that their release does not pose a threat to the 
environment.

A. Section 608 of the Clean Air Act

    Section 608 of the CAA requires EPA to establish a comprehensive 
program to limit emissions of ozone-depleting refrigerants. Section 608 
also prohibits the release or disposal of ozone-depleting refrigerants 
and their substitutes during the maintenance, service, repair, or 
disposal of air-conditioning and refrigeration appliances.
    Section 608 is divided into three subsections. In brief, section 
608(a) requires EPA to develop regulations and standards to reduce the 
use and emission of class I substances (e.g., CFCs, halons, carbon 
tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform) and class II substances (e.g., 
HCFCs) to the lowest achievable level, and to maximize the recapture 
and recycling of such substances. Section 608(b) requires that the 
regulations promulgated pursuant to subsection (a) contain standards 
and requirements concerning the safe disposal of class I and class II 
substances. Finally, section 608(c) establishes a self-effectuating 
prohibition on the venting into the environment of class I or class II 
substances and their substitutes during servicing and disposal of air-
conditioning or refrigeration equipment.
    Section 608(a) provides EPA authority to promulgate many of the 
requirements in today's rule. 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 ``such 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.'' EPA's authority to promulgate 
regulations regarding use of class I and II substances (including 
requirements to use alternatives) is sufficiently broad to include 
requirements on how to use alternatives, where regulations are required 
to reduce emissions and maximize recycling of class I and II ODSs.
    Section 608(c) provides EPA authority to promulgate regulations to 
interpret, implement and enforce the venting prohibition. Subsection 
608(c) provides in paragraph (1) that, effective July 1, 1992, it is 
unlawful for any person, in the course of maintaining, servicing, 
repairing, or disposing of an appliance or industrial process 
refrigeration, to knowingly vent or otherwise knowingly release or 
dispose of any class I or class II substance used as a refrigerant in 
such appliance (or industrial process refrigeration) in a manner which 
permits such substance to enter the environment.
    The statute exempts from this self-effectuating prohibition ``[d]e 
minimis releases associated with good faith attempts to recapture and 
recycle or safely dispose'' of a substance. EPA considers releases to 
meet the criteria for exempted de minimis releases when they occur 
while the recycling and recovery requirements of the section 608 and 
609 regulations are followed (Sec.  82.154(a)).
    Section 608(c)(2) extends the prohibition on venting to substances 
that are substitutes for class I and class II refrigerants, effective 
November 15, 1995, unless the Administrator determines that such 
venting or release ``does not pose a threat to the environment.'' While 
section 608(c) is self-effectuating, EPA regulations are necessary to 
define ``[d]e minimis releases associated with good faith attempts to 
recapture and recycle or safely dispose'' of such substances, and to 
effectively implement and enforce the venting prohibition.
    EPA is today promulgating regulations to implement and clarify the 
requirements of section 608(c)(2), which extends the prohibition on 
venting to substitutes for CFC and HCFC refrigerants. These regulations 
are also vital to the Agency's efforts to continue to carry out its 
mandate under section 608(a) to minimize emissions of ozone-depleting 
substances.

B. Factors Considered in the Development of this Rule

    In developing this rulemaking, EPA has considered a number of 
factors in determining whether the release of a substitute refrigerant 
poses a threat to the environment. First, EPA has considered which 
refrigerants should be classified as ``substitute'' refrigerants. EPA 
is adopting a definition of substitute that is similar to that adopted 
by EPA in its Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program, 
except the definition omits the proviso of the SNAP definition that a 
substitute be ``intended for use as a replacement for a class I or 
class II ozone-depleting substance.''

[[Page 11948]]

    As the second factor in this remaking, EPA has made a determination 
regarding whether or not the release of a substitute refrigerant during 
the maintenance, service, repair or disposal of an appliance poses a 
threat to the environment. This determination consists of two findings. 
First, EPA determined whether the release of a substitute refrigerant 
could pose a threat to the environment due to the toxicity or other 
inherent characteristic of the refrigerant. Second, EPA determined 
whether and to what extent such releases or disposal actually takes 
place during the servicing and disposal of appliances, and to what 
extent these releases are controlled by other authorities or 
regulations. The release of many substitute refrigerants is limited 
and/or controlled by other entities, such as Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration (OSHA) regulations or EPA regulations under other 
authorities. To the extent that releases during the maintenance, 
service, repair, or disposal of appliances are adequately controlled by 
other authorities, EPA defers to these authorities rather than set up a 
second duplicative regulatory regime.
    As the third factor in this rulemaking, EPA has considered the 
availability of technology to control releases, the environmental 
benefits of controlling releases, and the costs of controlling releases 
for each class of substitutes.
    EPA has identified five classes of substitute refrigerants in the 
sectors covered under SNAP: HFCs, PFCs, hydrocarbons, chemically active 
common gases (including ammonia and chlorine), and inert atmospheric 
constituents (including carbon dioxide (CO2) and water). EPA 
has divided substitutes into these classes on the basis of the varying 
environmental impacts of each class and the varying regulatory 
structures already in place for each class.

C. Public Participation

    In developing this rule, EPA has considered comments received in 
response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) as well as those 
comments stated during meetings with industry, government, and 
environmental representatives. During meetings with industry and 
government representatives, EPA has gained a better understanding of 
current industry practices and how existing regulatory authorities 
serve to control emissions of substitute refrigerants. All data and 
information received from industry and government representatives that 
EPA has relied on in developing this final rule was placed in the 
docket and made available to the public. EPA refers readers to Docket 
No. A-92-01, Categories VI-B8, VIII-H, VIII-H1, and VIII-H6 for all 
factual materials. In addition, EPA has consulted the air-conditioning 
and refrigeration industry's primary standards-setting organizations, 
the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI) and the American 
Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. 
(ASHRAE), in developing this rule. As required by statute, EPA has, 
where appropriate, incorporated in this rule voluntary consensus 
standards and guidelines developed by these organizations.

D. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) Regarding Recycling of 
Substitute Refrigerants

    On June 11, 1998, EPA published an NPRM (63 FR 32044) outlining 
requirements for substitute refrigerants. In that notice, EPA proposed 
regulations under section 608 of the Act to amend 40 CFR part 82 by 
proposing regulations nearly identical to those dealing with the use 
and handling of class I and class II ODS refrigerants. In the NPRM, EPA 
proposed to extend the regulatory framework for CFC and HCFC 
refrigerants to HFC and PFC refrigerants, making appropriate 
adjustments for the varying physical properties and environmental 
impacts of these refrigerants. The following requirements were included 
in the NPRM:
     Appliances containing HFC or PFC refrigerants 
would have to be evacuated to established levels;
     Refrigerant recycling and recovery equipment 
used with HFCs or PFCs would have to be certified;
     Technicians servicing, maintaining, or repairing 
appliances containing HFC or PFC refrigerants would have to be 
certified;
     Sales of HFC and PFC refrigerants would be 
restricted to certified technicians;
     Used HFC and PFC refrigerants sold to a new 
owner would have to be reclaimed by an EPA-certified refrigerant 
reclaimer and tested to verify that they meet industry refrigerant 
standards, including purity standards;
     Refrigerant reclaimers who reclaim HFC or PFC 
refrigerants would have to be certified;
     Owners of HFC and PFC appliances with 
refrigerant charges greater than 50 lbs. would have to repair leaks 
when the applicable leak repair trigger rate was exceeded over a 12-
month period;
     Final disposers of small appliances and motor 
vehicle air conditioners (MVACs) containing HFCs or PFCs would have to 
ensure that refrigerant was recovered from this equipment before it was 
disposed of; and
     Manufacturers of HFC and PFC appliances would 
have to provide a servicing aperture or a ``process stub'' on their 
equipment in order to facilitate recovery of the refrigerant.
    The NPRM also proposed clarifications to the requirements of 
section 608 as they would apply to substitutes for CFC and HCFC 
refrigerants, and proposed to exempt certain substitute refrigerants 
from the statutory venting prohibition on the basis of evidence that 
their releases do not pose a threat to the environment. In addition, 
EPA proposed to amend the requirements for CFC and HCFC refrigerants to 
accommodate the proliferation of new refrigerants on the market and to 
strengthen and clarify the leak repair requirements.
    The NPRM asked for public comment on the Agency's proposed findings 
and on the rationale behind them. The Agency received 167 public 
comment letters (comments/commenters) in response to the NPRM. In 
general, most commenters recognized the need for mandatory refrigerant 
recovery in order to help protect the ozone layer and to provide a 
source of refrigerant to service existing capital equipment after the 
phaseout of CFC and HCFC refrigerant production is complete. The 
majority of commenters believed that the proposed amendments were 
necessary to clarify and improve regulations, but many expressed 
concerns over the regulation of refrigerants that do not deplete the 
ozone layer. EPA received mixed comments concerning the proposed HFC 
refrigerant sales restriction. Representatives of the MVAC service 
sector were in favor of the restriction, while representatives of the 
after market automotive parts sector opposed any refrigerant sales 
restriction.
    Today's action addresses the public comments received in response 
to the proposed rule as they relate to the components of the NPRM that 
EPA is finalizing in today's action. Comments concerning leak repair 
requirements and certification of refrigerant recovery/recycling 
equipment will be addressed in separate rulemakings. Relevant comments 
that are not directly addressed in today's action are addressed in the 
accompanying ``Response to Comments'' document, which is available in 
Air Docket No. A-92-01.

[[Page 11949]]

III. Scope of Statutory and Regulatory Requirements

A. EPA's Statutory Authority

    Pursuant to section 608(a) of the Clean Air Act, EPA is broadly 
authorized to promulgate regulations establishing standards and 
requirements regarding the use and disposal of class I and class II 
substances during service, repair, or disposal of appliances and 
industrial process refrigeration (42 U.S.C. 7671g(a)). Section 608(b) 
authorizes EPA to promulgate regulations establishing standards and 
requirements assuring the safe disposal of class I and class II 
substances (42 U.S.C. 7671g(b)). Section 608(c)(1) provides that it is 
unlawful for any person, while in the course of maintaining, servicing, 
repairing, or disposing of an appliance or of industrial process 
refrigeration, to knowingly vent, release, or dispose of any class I or 
class II substance used as a refrigerant in a manner that permits such 
substance to enter the environment (42 U.S.C. 7671g(c)(1)). Section 
608(c)(2) provides that the section 608(c)(1) knowing venting, release, 
or disposal prohibition also applies to the venting, release, or 
disposal of any substitute substance for a class I or class II 
substance by any person maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing 
of any appliance or industrial process refrigeration that contains and 
uses such substitute substance as a refrigerant--unless EPA determines 
that venting, releasing, or disposing of such substitute substance does 
not pose a threat to the environment (42 U.S.C. 7671g(c)(2)).
    With today's action, EPA is amending the current refrigerant 
recovery and recycling requirements for chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) and 
hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC) refrigerants to accommodate the 
proliferation of new refrigerants on the market, and to clarify that 
the Section 608(c) venting prohibition applies to all refrigerants 
consisting in whole or in part of a class I or class II ozone-depleting 
substance (ODS). This rule also explicates the self-effectuating 
statutory prohibition on venting substitute refrigerants to the 
atmosphere that became effective on November 15, 1995. In addition, the 
rule exempts certain substitute refrigerants from the venting 
prohibition on the basis of current evidence that their release does 
not pose a threat to the environment.
    Public comments questioned the need for regulations for a self-
effectuating venting prohibition. Section 608(c)(2) establishes a self-
effectuating prohibition on venting of any refrigerants that are 
substitutes for CFCs and HCFCs. Thus, venting of all substitute 
refrigerants, including HFC and PFC refrigerants (and blends thereof) 
is prohibited under section 608(c), with the exception of de minimis 
releases associated with good faith attempts to recapture and recycle. 
The de minimis releases exception, however, is not self-effectuating, 
nor is it self-explanatory.
    EPA believes that regulatory clarification is necessary to define 
such ``[d]e minimis releases'' and ``good faith attempts to recapture 
and recycle or safely dispose of any such substance'' and safely 
dispose of appliances to effectively implement and enforce the venting 
prohibition. Section 608(c)(1) in conjunction with 608(c)(2) of the Act 
allow for an exemption for de minimis releases associated with good 
faith attempts to recapture and recycle or safely dispose of 
substitutes for class I and class II ODSs used as refrigerants. A 
regulation reflecting the statutory requirement for recovery of 
substitute refrigerants is an essential part of a regulatory framework 
within which de minimis releases and good faith attempts to recapture 
and recycle or safely dispose of substitute refrigerants can be 
defined.

B. Determination of Whether Release Poses a Threat to the Environment

    Section 608(c)(2) extends the prohibition on venting to substances 
that are substitutes for class I and class II refrigerants, effective 
November 15, 1995, unless the Administrator determines that such 
venting or release does not pose a threat to the environment. In 
determining whether the release of a substitute refrigerant during the 
maintenance, servicing, repair, or disposal of appliances poses a 
threat to the environment, EPA has examined the potential effects of 
the refrigerant from the moment of release to its breakdown in the 
environment, considering possible impacts on workers, building 
occupants, and the environment. These effects vary among the different 
classes of refrigerants.
    EPA has also examined the extent to which the release of a 
substitute refrigerant is already controlled by other authorities (such 
as state and local regulations, building codes, and other Federal 
regulations). In some cases, such authorities tightly limit the 
quantity of the substitute emitted or disposed; in others, they ensure 
that the substitute is disposed of in a way that will limit its impact 
on human health and the environment. In other cases, existing 
authorities address some threats (e.g., occupational exposures), but 
not others (e.g., long-term environmental impacts).
    The discussion that follows details the potential environmental 
impacts of and existing controls on each class of refrigerant addressed 
in today's action.
1. HFC and PFC Refrigerants
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed not to find that the release of HFC and 
PFC refrigerants does not pose a threat to the environment. HFC and PFC 
refrigerants have been classified as A1 refrigerants under American 
Society of Heating Refrigeration and Air-conditioning Engineers 
(ASHRAE) Standard 34,\1\ indicating that they have low toxicity and no 
ability to propagate flame under the test conditions of the Standard. 
The exception is HFC-152a, which has been classified as an A2 
refrigerant. This indicates that HFC 152a may propagate flame under the 
test conditions, but only at relatively high concentrations and with 
relatively low heat of combustion. However, like CFC and HCFC 
refrigerants, HFCs can have central nervous system depressant and 
cardio-toxic effects at high concentrations (several thousand parts-
per-million (ppm)), and can displace oxygen at very high 
concentrations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ASHRAE 34, ``Number Designatiojn and Safety Classification 
of Refrigerants,'' establishes a uniform system of assigning the 
proper reference number classification to refrigerants, and includes 
safety classifications based on toxicity and flammability data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, once released into the atmosphere, HFCs and PFCs have the 
ability to trap heat that would otherwise be radiated from the Earth 
back to space. This ability, along with the relatively long atmospheric 
lifetime of these gases (particularly the PFCs), gives both HFCs and 
PFCs relatively high global warming potentials (GWPs). The 100-year 
GWPs of HFCs under consideration for use as refrigerants range from 140 
(for HFC-152a) to 11,700 (for HFC-23), and the GWPs of PFCs under 
consideration for use as refrigerants range from 8,700 (for 
perfluorocyclobutane) to 9,200 (for perfluoroethane). HFC-134a, the 
most common individual HFC used in air-conditioning and refrigeration 
equipment, has a GWP of 1,300. Thus, the global warming impact of 
releasing a kilogram of an HFC or PFC ranges from 140 to 11,700 times 
the impact of releasing a kilogram of CO2 \2\ (factoring in 
the 35% uncertainty associated with individual GWPs, this range becomes 
90 to 15,800.) Therefore, EPA is not

[[Page 11950]]

determining that HFC and PFC substitute refrigerants do not pose a 
threat to the environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The CFCs and HCFCs being replaced by the HFCs are also 
greenhouse gases, though their direct warming effect is counteracted 
somewhat by the indirect cooling effect caused by their destruction 
of stratospheric ozone, which is itself a greenhouse gas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under SNAP, HFC refrigerants (either pure or in blends) have been 
approved for use in almost every major air-conditioning and 
refrigeration end-use, including household refrigerators, motor vehicle 
air conditioners, retail food refrigeration, comfort cooling chillers, 
industrial process refrigeration, and refrigerated transport. HFC-134a 
in particular has claimed a large share of the market for non-ozone-
depleting substitutes in these applications. Given this range of 
applications, HFCs have the potential to come into contact with 
consumers, workers, the general population, and the environment.
    Under SNAP, EPA has approved PFCs for use in relatively few end-
uses because of their large GWPs and long atmospheric lifetimes. These 
end-uses include uranium isotope separation, for which no other 
substitute refrigerant has been found, and some heat-transfer 
applications. In these applications, PFCs may come into contact with 
workers, the general population, and the environment.
    Analyses performed for both this rule and the SNAP rule (59 FR 
13049) indicate that existing regulatory requirements and industry 
practices are likely to keep the exposure of consumers, workers, and 
the general population to HFCs and PFCs below levels of concern 
(although recycling requirements would reduce still further the 
probability of significant exposure).\3\ However, these requirements 
and practices do not address releases of HFCs or PFCs to the wider 
environment. For example, ASHRAE Standard 15 \4\ requirements, for 
equipment with large charge sizes, are likely to limit the exposure of 
building occupants and workers to HFC and PFC refrigerants, but will 
not necessarily reduce releases to the atmosphere. In accordance with 
ASHRAE 15, equipment containing large charges of HFCs or PFCs (or HCFCs 
or CFCs) must be located in a machinery room that meets certain 
requirements for tight fitting or outward-opening doors, refrigerant 
detectors that activate alarms when refrigerant levels rise above 
recommended long-term exposure levels, and mechanical ventilation that 
discharges released refrigerant to the outdoors. However, ASHRAE 15 
does not include requirements for refrigerant recovery or recycling.\5\ 
In general, ASHRAE 15 addresses design specifications rather than 
service and disposal practices, and ASHRAE 15 requirements are codified 
and enforced by state or local building codes rather than by contractor 
licensing boards or Federal agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ U.S. EPA. 1994. Risk Screen on the Use of Substitutes for 
Class I Ozone-Depleting Substances: Refrigeration and Air-
Conditioning. Office of Air and Radiation, March 15, 1994. 
Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Substitutes Recycling Rule, 
Office of Air and Radiation, 1998).
    \4\ ASHRAE 15, Safety Code for Mechanical Refrigeration, is an 
industry standard developed by the American Society of Heating, 
Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). ASHRAE 15 
forms the basis for state and local building codes throughout the 
U.S.
    \5\ ASHRAE Guideline 3 recommends recycling of all fluorocarbon 
refrigerants, but is not codified or enforced by any Federal agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, the American Industrial Hygiene Association has 
developed exposure limits for HFCs. These may be referenced by OSHA 
under its general duty clause to compel employers to protect employees 
from identified health hazards. However, local exhaust ventilation 
rather than recycling may be used to minimize exposures during service 
and disposal operations that involve significant releases of 
refrigerant. This will reduce worker exposure to the refrigerant, but 
will not reduce the exposure of the general environment.
    Finally, many of the statutory and regulatory mechanisms that limit 
release of other substitutes do not apply to HFCs or PFCs. HFCs and 
PFCs are not listed chemicals for the purposes of the Superfund 
Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title III or the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 
(CERCLA) reporting requirements; nor are they listed as EPA section 
112(r) hazardous air pollutants.
    Several commenters advised EPA to take a balanced view of HFC 
refrigerants' threat to the environment by including discussions on the 
associated benefits of their use. Commenters stated that HFCs 
contribute considerably less to greenhouse gas emissions than their 
precursors in many applications, promote energy efficiency, and in many 
instances are cost-effective alternatives to ozone-depleting 
refrigerants.
    The Act prohibits the release of a substitute for a class I or 
class II ODS refrigerant unless EPA determines that such a release 
``does not pose a threat to the environment.'' The commenters make 
valid points that in some circumstances HFC refrigerants may contribute 
less to greenhouse gas emissions than their precursors in some 
applications; promote energy efficiency; and in many instances are 
cost-effective alternatives to ozone-depleting refrigerants. 
Nonetheless, for the reasons discussed above, EPA concludes that HFC 
and PFC refrigerants have adverse environmental effects. For this 
reason, and because of a lack of regulation governing the release of 
such substitute refrigerants, EPA is not making a determination that 
the release of HFC or PFC refrigerants ``do not pose a threat to the 
environment.'' Hence, the statutory venting prohibition remains in 
effect for these refrigerants, and the knowing venting of HFC and PFC 
refrigerants during the maintenance, service, repair and disposal of 
appliances remains illegal.
2. Chemically Active Common Gases
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to find that the release of either of the 
two SNAP-approved chemically active common gases used as refrigerants 
(i.e., ammonia and chlorine) during the service, maintenance, repair, 
and disposal of appliances does not pose a threat to the environment 
under section 608.
    EPA received comments supporting the exemptions for ammonia and 
chlorine, as long as the exemptions are restricted to their use in 
industrial process applications, because it accurately asserts that the 
release of ammonia and chlorine refrigerants is properly safeguarded 
and controlled by other authorities. Commenters supported EPA's 
proposed determination that the release of ammonia and chlorine 
refrigerants used during the servicing, maintenance, repair, and 
disposal of appliances does not pose a threat to the environment under 
section 608(c)(2).
    Occupational exposure to ammonia is primarily controlled by OSHA 
requirements and national and local building and fire codes. OSHA sets 
permissible exposure limits (PELs) to protect workers against the 
health effects of exposure to hazardous substances. PELs are regulatory 
limits on the amount or concentration of a substance in the air, based 
on an 8-hour time weighted average (TWA) exposure. PELs are enforceable 
by OSHA. OSHA has established a PEL for ammonia of 50 ppm. This is an 
enforceable standard that can be met through containment, safe 
disposal, ventilation, and/or use of personal protective equipment. 
OSHA also has requirements in place to prevent catastrophic releases, 
including the Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response 
Standard (HAZWOPER), the Hazard Communication Standard, and Process 
Safety Management (PSM) regulations that cover systems containing more 
than 10,000 pounds of ammonia. These standards require employee 
training,

[[Page 11951]]

emergency response plans, and written standard operating procedures.
    State and local codes, based upon ASHRAE 15, impose strict quantity 
limits for direct-type ammonia refrigeration systems (which possess no 
secondary heat transfer fluid), and generally prohibit the use of 
ammonia in direct-type comfort cooling systems. In accordance with the 
standard, indirect type ammonia refrigeration and air-conditioning 
systems (which possess a secondary heat transfer fluid) must be housed 
in a separate mechanical equipment room. This equipment room must meet 
the requirements listed above for HFC equipment rooms and must also 
meet several fireproofing requirements.
    Releases of ammonia to the wider environment are addressed by 
several authorities. CERCLA and SARA require reporting of accidental 
and intentional releases of ammonia to the atmosphere. Under CERCLA 
section 103 and SARA Title III section 304, releases of more than 100 
pounds of ammonia must be reported immediately, unless they are 
``federally permitted'' such as through the National Pollutant 
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), State Implementation Plans 
(SIPs), etc. In such cases, releases are controlled under the 
permitting authority.
    The more common release of ammonia is due to disposal. Disposal is 
generally performed by mixing the ammonia with water, which lowers or 
neutralizes the pH of the ammonia, and then disposing of the water/
ammonia solution. Releases of ammonia to surface waters are governed by 
permits issued by states (or, in some cases, by EPA Regional Offices) 
to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) under NPDES. NPDES permits 
must include conditions necessary to meet applicable technology-based 
standards and water quality standards. Water quality standards 
established by states consist of a designated use for the waters in 
question, water quality criteria specifying the amount of various 
pollutants that may be present in those waters and still allow the 
waters to meet the designated use, and anti-degradation policies.
    Entities that discharge to a POTW (usually through a municipally-
owned sewer system) must themselves comply with Clean Water Act 
pretreatment requirements, which may include categorical pretreatment 
standards on an industry-by-industry basis as well as local limits 
designed to prevent interference with the biological processes of the 
treatment plant (or pass through of pollutants). Notification and 
approval requirements enable POTWs to manage the treatment process, 
avoid ammonia overloading, and protect the treatment processes, 
collection systems, and facility workers. The POTW typically considers 
a number of factors before granting discharge approval for ammonia, 
including the POTW plant's treatment capacity, existing industry 
discharge patterns, the impact on the POTW's biological treatment 
processes, the effect on the sewage collection systems (i.e., sewer 
lines), and the possible hazards to workers at the plant or in the 
field. The POTW also considers the possibility that ammonia disposed 
from refrigeration systems may largely be converted to other forms of 
nitrogen (e.g., nitrates) before arriving at the POTW facility.
    Ammonia is also listed as a regulated substance for accidental 
release prevention in the List of Substances and Thresholds rule (59 FR 
4478; January 31, 1994) promulgated under section 112(r) of the Clean 
Air Act. This rule states that if a stationary source handles more than 
10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia (or 20,000 pounds of 20% or greater 
aqueous ammonia) in a process, it is subject to chemical accident 
prevention regulations promulgated under section 112(r). These 
regulations, which were published on June 20, 1996 (61 FR 31668), 
require stationary sources to develop and implement a risk management 
program that includes a hazard assessment, an accident prevention 
program (including training and the development of standard operating 
procedures), and an emergency response program. In addition, section 
112(r)(1) states that companies have a general duty to prevent 
accidental releases of extremely hazardous substances, including 
ammonia and chlorine.
    Chlorine has not been submitted or approved under SNAP, for use as 
a class I or class II ODS refrigerant substitute, except in industrial 
process refrigeration. In this application, chlorine could come into 
contact with workers, the general population, and the environment. 
Regulatory impact and risk screen analyses performed for both this rule 
and the SNAP rule indicate that regulatory requirements and industry 
practices are likely to keep the exposure of workers, the general 
population, and the environment to ammonia and chlorine below levels of 
concern. Exposures to chlorine are controlled through many of the same 
regulatory mechanisms that control exposures to ammonia, except 
enforceable concentration and release limits are lower for chlorine 
than for ammonia. For instance, the OSHA PEL for chlorine is one ppm 
compared to 50 ppm for ammonia. Similarly, the reporting threshold 
under CERCLA section 103 and SARA Title III for chlorine releases is 10 
pounds compared to 100 pounds for ammonia, and the quantity of chlorine 
that triggers requirements under section 112(r) is 2,500 pounds per 
process. In addition to these requirements, chlorine is subject to 
restrictions under sections 112(b) and 113 of the Act. Chlorine is 
listed as a Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) under section 112(b) of the 
Act, and under section 113 of the Act criminal penalties can be 
assessed for negligently releasing HAPs into the atmosphere.
    In the proposal, EPA requested comment on whether there are 
chlorine sources that are ``major sources'' under CAA section 112(a). 
Section 112 defines ``major source'' as any stationary source or group 
of stationary sources located within a contiguous area and under common 
control that emits or has the potential to emit considering controls, 
in the aggregate, 10 tons per year or more of any hazardous air 
pollutant or 25 tons per year or more of any combination of HAPs. Such 
sources could be restricted, controlled, and/or phased-out of 
production. The Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards 
under Section 112 of the Act, classify chlorine as a controllable HAP.
    EPA received comment stating that chlorine manufacturing plants 
could be considered as ``major sources'' under section 112 of the Act, 
because the Act defines a major source to include all actual and 
potential emissions of all hazardous air pollutants from all facilities 
and processes at one site. The potential emissions due to chlorine's 
use as a refrigerant may be small, but the potential emissions are 
large enough to make the site ``major.''
    Current industry practices and engineering controls in chlorine 
manufacture are applied to the use of chlorine as a refrigerant, 
minimizing potential releases and exposures. These practices and 
controls include use of system alarms that activate at chlorine 
concentrations of one ppm, use of self-contained breathing apparatus 
during servicing, isolation of liquid chlorine in receivers during 
servicing, and use of caustic scrubbers to neutralize gaseous chlorine 
during servicing. Such monitoring efforts are included in ASHRAE 15 and 
ASHRAE Guideline 3--``Reducing Emission of Halogenated Refrigerants in 
Refrigeration in Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Equipment and 
Systems,'' these standards are typically adopted into service standard 
operating procedures and local building codes. The charge sizes in the 
refrigeration system are

[[Page 11952]]

several times smaller than the quantity of chlorine in the process 
stream and bulk storage, and chlorine emissions from the refrigeration 
system are likely to be significantly smaller than those emanating from 
the process and storage systems, which are already well controlled for 
safety and health reasons.
    Because releases of ammonia and chlorine from their currently 
approved air-conditioning and refrigeration applications are adequately 
addressed by other authorities, EPA is making the determination that 
the release of ammonia and chlorine refrigerants during the service, 
maintenance, repair, and disposal of appliances does not pose a threat 
to the environment under section 608(c)(2). This determination does not 
endorse the venting of ammonia and chlorine refrigerants. The Agency 
supports responsible handling of these refrigerants during the service, 
maintenance, repair, and disposal of appliances. However, EPA believes 
that regulating these substances under section 608, and in particular 
requiring that the practices currently in place for class I and class 
II refrigerants be applied to these substances, would not provide 
additional substantial public health or environmental protection, since 
the use and release of these compounds are adequately addressed by 
other authorities.
3. Hydrocarbons
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to find that the release of hydrocarbon 
(HC) refrigerants during the servicing and disposal of such systems 
does not pose a threat to the environment under section 608, because 
the use of HC refrigerants as substitutes for class I or class II ODS 
refrigerants is limited and the releases are adequately controlled by 
other authorities. EPA requested comment on this proposed finding and 
on the rationale behind it.
    Commenters expressed concern that the NPRM was deficient, in that 
it did not include a mechanism to address alternative or future 
applications for hydrocarbons (e.g., hydrocarbon technology in 
household refrigeration).
    Under SNAP, EPA has approved hydrocarbon refrigerants as 
substitutes for class I or class II ODS refrigerants only for use in 
industrial process refrigeration systems.\6\ Therefore, it is illegal 
to use a hydrocarbon refrigerant as a substitute for a class I or class 
II ODS refrigerant for any end use other than industrial process 
refrigeration systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Under SNAP, EPA restricts the use of hydrocarbon 
refrigerants as substitutes for ozone-depleting refrigerants to 
industrial process refrigeration systems and recommends (but does 
not require) that hydrocarbon refrigerants only be used at 
industrial facilities which manufacture or use hydrocarbons in the 
process stream (March 18, 1994, 59 FR 13076).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commenters generally supported EPA's determination that the release 
of hydrocarbon refrigerants during the servicing, maintenance, repair, 
and disposal of appliances does not pose a threat to the environment 
under section 608(c)(2). Commenters noted that hydrocarbon refrigerants 
are regulated appropriately as criteria pollutants and/or hazardous air 
pollutants.
    Hydrocarbons are volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that degrade in 
the lower atmosphere, contributing to ground-level (or tropospheric) 
ozone, also referred to as smog. Unlike stratospheric ozone, which 
forms naturally in the upper atmosphere and protects us from the sun's 
harmful ultraviolet rays, ground-level ozone is created through the 
interactions of man-made (and natural) emissions of VOCs and nitrogen 
oxides in the presence of heat and sunlight. Ground-level ozone does 
not deplete the stratospheric ozone layer; but when inhaled (even at 
very low levels), ozone can cause acute respiratory problems; aggravate 
asthma; cause significant temporary decreases in lung capacity in some 
healthy adults; cause inflammation of lung tissue; and impair the 
body's immune system defenses, making people more susceptible to 
respiratory illnesses, including bronchitis and pneumonia; and reduce 
agricultural yields for many economically important crops (e.g., 
soybeans, kidney beans, wheat, cotton). The scientific support papers 
referenced in the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for 
Ozone (62 FR 38856) describe numerous documents that identify and 
discuss the adverse environmental and health effects of ground-level 
ozone.
    Propane, ethane, propylene, and to some extent butane are used as 
refrigerants in specialized industrial applications, primarily in oil 
refineries and chemical plants. In these applications they are 
frequently available as part of the process stream, and their use 
contributes only a slight additional increment to the overall risk of 
fire or explosion. Such systems are generally designed to comply with 
the safety standards required for managing flammable chemicals. In this 
application, hydrocarbons have the potential to come into contact with 
workers, the general population, and the environment.
    Occupational exposures to hydrocarbons are primarily controlled by 
OSHA requirements and national and local building and fire codes. As 
noted above, OSHA has established a PEL for propane of 1,000 ppm, and 
NIOSH has established an Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health 
(IDLH) limit of 20,000 ppm and 50,000 ppm for propane and butane 
respectively. The PEL is an enforceable standard, and the IDLHs trigger 
OSHA personal protective equipment requirements. OSHA's Process Safety 
Management, confined space entry, and HAZWOPER requirements apply to 
all hydrocarbon refrigerants. These requirements include employee 
training, emergency response plans, air monitoring, and written 
standard operating procedures.
    Certain hydrocarbons (including butane, cyclopropane, ethane, 
isobutane, methane, and propane) are listed as regulated substances for 
accidental release prevention under regulations promulgated under 
section 112(r) of the Act. In addition, hydrocarbons are considered 
VOCs, and are therefore subject to State VOC regulations implemented in 
accordance with the Act.
    ASHRAE 15 prohibits the use of hydrocarbon refrigerants except in 
laboratory and industrial process refrigeration applications. 
Refrigeration machinery must be contained in a separate mechanical 
equipment room that complies with the requirements for HFC equipment 
rooms and also complies with several fireproofing requirements.
    According to industry and OSHA representatives, current industry 
service practices for hydrocarbon refrigeration equipment include 
monitoring efforts, engineering controls, and operating procedures. 
System alarms, flame detectors, and fire sprinklers are used to protect 
process and storage areas. Fugitive emissions monitoring is routinely 
conducted, and leak repairs are attempted within five days. If initial 
repair attempts are unsuccessful, the system is shut down, unless 
releases from a shutdown are predicted to be greater than allowing a 
continued leak. During servicing, OSHA confined space requirements are 
followed, including continuous monitoring of explosive gas 
concentrations and oxygen levels.
    Hydrocarbon refrigerants may be returned to the product stream or 
can be released through a flare during servicing. Due to fire and 
explosion risks and the economic value of the hydrocarbon, direct 
venting is not a widely used procedure. In general, hydrocarbon 
emissions from refrigeration systems are likely to be significantly 
smaller than those emanating from the process and storage systems, 
which are already well-controlled for safety reasons.

[[Page 11953]]

    Because the release of hydrocarbons from industrial process 
refrigeration systems is adequately addressed by other authorities, EPA 
determines that the release of hydrocarbon refrigerants during the 
servicing and disposal of such systems does not pose a threat to the 
environment under section 608(c)(2) of the Act. Today's determination 
does not endorse the venting of hydrocarbon refrigerants. The Agency 
supports responsible handling of these refrigerants during the service, 
maintenance, repair, and disposal of appliances. However, EPA believes 
that regulating these substances under section 608, and in particular 
requiring that the practices currently in place for class I and class 
II refrigerants be applied to these substances, would not provide 
additional substantial public health or environmental protection, since 
the use and release of these compounds are adequately addressed by 
other authorities.
    The determination that the release of hydrocarbon refrigerants does 
not pose a threat to the environment only applies to the end-use sector 
for which hydrocarbon refrigerant substitutes are approved, namely 
industrial process refrigeration. Therefore the venting prohibition 
does not apply for hydrocarbon substitutes in non-approved applications 
(e.g., comfort cooling or motor vehicle air-conditioning), since their 
use as a substitute in other end-use sectors is illegal.
4. Inert Atmospheric Constituents
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to find that the release or disposal of 
CO2 refrigerant during the servicing and disposal of 
appliances does not pose a threat to the environment under section 608. 
EPA also requested comment on the factual basis for this proposal.
    Under SNAP, EPA has approved CO2 as a replacement for 
CFC-13, R-13b1 and R-503 in very low temperature and industrial process 
refrigeration applications. EPA has also approved CO2 as a 
substitute for R-113, R-114, and R-115 in non-mechanical heat transfer 
applications. Carbon dioxide is a well-known, nontoxic, nonflammable 
gas. Its GWP is defined as one, and all other GWPs are indexed to it. 
EPA's understanding is that CO2 is readily available as a 
waste gas, and therefore no additional quantity of CO2 needs 
to be produced for refrigeration applications. Thus, the use and 
release of such commercially available CO2 as a refrigerant 
would have no net contribution to global warming.
    EPA has approved direct nitrogen expansion as an alternative 
technology for many CFC and HCFC refrigerants used in vapor compression 
systems. Nitrogen is a well-known, nontoxic, nonflammable gas that 
makes up 78 percent of the Earth's atmosphere. Nitrogen contributes 
neither to global warming nor to ozone-depletion.
    EPA has approved evaporative cooling as an alternative technology 
for MVACs using CFC-12 as a refrigerant. Evaporative cooling operates 
simply through the evaporation of water to the atmosphere. Water 
released from evaporative cooling is nontoxic and contributes neither 
to ozone-depletion nor to global warming. Furthermore, EPA has 
determined that the use of water or air as a coolant is not included 
under the definition of ``refrigerant.''
    EPA received no comments in opposition to the proposal to exempt 
inert atmospheric constituents from the venting prohibition. Therefore, 
EPA determines that the release of CO2 refrigerant, 
elemental nitrogen, or water during the maintenance, service, repair, 
and disposal of appliances does not pose a threat to the environment 
under section 608, and therefore their uses as substitute refrigerants 
are exempt from the venting prohibition. The finding for the use of 
CO2 only applies to the SNAP-approved end-uses for 
CO2, namely very low temperature and industrial process 
refrigeration applications.

IV. The Final Rule

A. Overview

    EPA is promulgating regulations that identify substitute 
refrigerants that are exempt from the section 608 venting prohibition, 
because the Agency finds that their release does not pose a threat to 
the environment. For all substitute refrigerants other than those 
specifically identified as not posing a threat to the environment, it 
remains unlawful pursuant to section 608(c)(2) to knowingly vent, 
release, or dispose of such substance in a manner that permits it to 
enter the environment.
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed, and in today's action has made changes 
to a number of the regulations covering CFC and HCFC refrigerants. 
Several of these changes are intended to accommodate the growing number 
of refrigerants, including newer blended HFC/HCFC substitutes, that are 
subject to the regulations because they consist of a class II ODS. For 
refrigerant substitutes consisting of a class I or class II ODS, EPA is 
mandating identical required practices and clarifying the prohibitions 
promulgated at 40 CFR part 82, subpart F. Such changes include the 
adoption of evacuation requirements based solely on the saturation 
pressures of refrigerants, the requirement for service apertures on 
appliances, mandatory certification of service technicians, and the 
restriction on the sales of such blended refrigerants.
    EPA is not, however, finalizing the proposal to extend all of the 
regulations concerning emissions reduction of CFC and HCFC 
refrigerants, found at 40 CFR part 82, subpart F, to HFC and PFC 
refrigerants. Therefore, today's rule does not mandate any of the 
following proposed requirements for HFC or PFC refrigerants that do not 
consist of a class I or class II ODS (i.e., pure HFC or PFC 
refrigerants): A sales restriction on HFC or PFC refrigerants; specific 
evacuation levels for servicing HFC or PFC appliances; certification of 
HFC or PFC recycling and recovery equipment; certification of 
technicians who work with HFC or PFC appliances; reclamation 
requirements for used HFC and PFC refrigerants; certification of 
refrigerant reclaimers who reclaim only HFCs or PFCs; or leak repair 
requirements for HFC and PFC appliances.
    EPA intends to address in future rulemakings other components of 
the NPRM, such as the use of representative refrigerants from 
saturation pressure categories for certifying recycling and recovery 
equipment and adoption (with modification) of the ARI 740 industry 
recovery/recycling equipment standard, which includes a number of 
refrigerants that were omitted from its predecessors.
    EPA also proposed to reduce the maximum allowable leak rates for 
appliances containing more than 50 pounds of an ODS refrigerant; 
changes to the leak repair requirements promulgated at Sec.  82.156(i), 
the associated recordkeeping provisions at Sec.  82.166(n) and (o), and 
the definition of ``full charge'' at Sec.  82.152; and a proposed 
definition for ``leak rate'' under Sec.  82.152 for the purposes of 
Sec.  82.156(i). The leak repair provisions will also be finalized in a 
separate rulemaking. EPA believes that addressing these components in 
separate rulemakings will simplify today's action, by focusing on the 
determination of which refrigerant substitutes pose a threat to the 
environment.

B. Application of the Venting Prohibition and Required Practices to 
Substitute Refrigerants

1. HFC and PFC Refrigerants
    While EPA is not finalizing the proposal to extend the full 
regulatory framework for CFC and HCFC refrigerants to HFC and PFC 
refrigerants,

[[Page 11954]]

the Agency emphasizes that since no determination has been made that 
their release does not pose a threat to the environment, the statutory 
venting prohibition applies to these refrigerants.
2. Chemically Active Common Gases
    EPA determines that for the purposes of section 608, the release of 
chlorine and ammonia refrigerants does not pose a threat to the 
environment, because the release of these refrigerants during the 
maintenance, service, repair, and disposal of appliances is adequately 
controlled by other authorities in the air-conditioning and 
refrigeration applications where they are currently used. Therefore, 
the venting prohibition does not apply to these substances in those 
applications, and the Agency is not adopting recycling requirements for 
these refrigerants at this time. EPA's findings apply to current SNAP-
identified end uses only (www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/index.html). If 
ammonia and chlorine refrigerants are granted approval under SNAP for 
use in other applications, EPA will evaluate whether regulations 
governing their use under section 608 should apply in those 
applications.
3. Hydrocarbons
    EPA determines that for the purposes of section 608, the release of 
hydrocarbons during the maintenance, repair, service and disposal of 
appliances does not pose a threat to the environment, because such 
releases are adequately controlled by other authorities. Therefore, the 
venting prohibition does not apply to these substances and the Agency 
is not adopting recycling requirements for these refrigerants at this 
time. EPA's findings apply to current SNAP-identified end uses only 
(www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/index.html). If hydrocarbon refrigerants are 
granted approval under SNAP for applications other than industrial 
process refrigeration, EPA will evaluate whether regulations governing 
their use under section 608 should apply in those applications.

C. Definitions

1. Appliance
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to amend the definition of ``appliance'' 
to include air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment that contain 
class I and class II ODSs and their substitutes. The proposed amendment 
to the definition of appliance did not have an effect on its 
applicability to all air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment 
except for those designed and used exclusively for military 
applications; hence, the definition includes: household refrigerators 
and freezers, commercial refrigeration appliances, other refrigeration 
appliances (such as refrigerated cargo compartments of trucks), 
residential and light commercial air-conditioning, motor vehicle air 
conditioners, comfort cooling in vehicles not covered under section 
609, and industrial process refrigeration.
    EPA received comment stating that the Act defines the term 
``appliance,'' and for the purposes of the 608 refrigerant recycling 
rule. The commenter requested that the Agency either eliminate or 
revise its proposed definition of ``appliance'' to match the statute. 
The commenter feared that the Agency might include as an appliance 
equipment that doesn't use a refrigerant, as specified in section 608 
of the Act, and noted that this is an important clarification because 
some substances have many different refrigerant and non-refrigerant 
uses.
    EPA also received comments opposed to the inclusion of motor 
vehicle air conditioners (MVACs) in the definition of appliance. The 
commenters stated that there is no evidence that Congress intended to 
include MVACs as ``appliances'' to be regulated under sections 601(1) 
or 608(c)(2). A commenter argued that only section 609, which 
specifically authorizes regulation of MVACs, authorizes regulation of 
MVACs. The commenter emphasizes that neither section 601(1) or 
608(c)(2) includes motor vehicle air-conditioners as an example of an 
``appliance.'' Therefore, the commenter argued that EPA does not have 
authority to regulate MVACs as an appliance under section 608.
    In the 1993 final rulemaking (58 FR 28660), ``appliance'' was 
defined at Sec.  82.152, as ``any device which contains and uses a 
class I or class II substance as a refrigerant and which is used for 
household or commercial purposes, including any air conditioner, 
refrigerator, chiller, or freezer.'' The preamble discussion in section 
III.E. concerning the definition of ``appliance'' (May 14, 1993, 58 FR 
28660) discussed in detail the Agency's rationale for inclusion of MVAC 
in the definition of ``appliance.'' While the preamble language 
discussed the inclusion of MVAC, the final definition did not 
explicitly include MVAC. Since 1993, EPA has consistently interpreted 
MVAC to be included under the definition of appliance.
    The preamble to the proposed rule states: ``EPA is proposing to 
amend the current definition of `appliance' to include air-conditioning 
and refrigeration equipment that contains substitutes for class I and 
class II substances, as well as equipment that contains class I and 
class II substances.'' (emphasis added) (63 FR 32053). EPA proposed to 
continue to interpret ``appliance'' to include all air-conditioning and 
refrigeration equipment except that is designed and used exclusively 
for military applications. Thus, the term ``appliance'' includes 
household refrigerators and freezers (which may be used outside the 
home), other refrigeration appliances, residential and light commercial 
air-conditioning, motor vehicle air-conditioners, comfort cooling in 
vehicles not covered under section 609, and industrial process 
refrigeration (63 FR 32053).
    EPA proposed to delete the phrase ``a class I or class II substance 
as'' leaving simply the reference to ``refrigerant,'' which would have 
encompassed both class I and class II substances and substitutes for 
such substances. EPA proposed no other amendments to the definition of 
``appliance.'' EPA refers readers to the May 14, 1993, rulemaking 1993 
(58 FR 28660) for detailed discussion of the inclusion of MVAC in the 
Agency's interpretation of the definition of appliance.
    EPA is amending the definition of ``appliance'' to include air-
conditioning and refrigeration equipment that contain substitute 
refrigerants consisting of a class I or class II substance. The amended 
definition now reads, ``Appliance means any device which contains and 
uses a refrigerant and which is used for household or commercial 
purposes, including any air conditioner, refrigerator, chiller, or 
freezer.'' EPA will continue to interpret ``appliance'' to include all 
air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment, except that designed and 
used exclusively for military applications. Thus, the term 
``appliance'' includes household refrigerators and freezers (which may 
be used outside the home), other refrigeration appliances, residential 
and light commercial air-conditioning, motor vehicle air conditioners 
(MVACs), comfort cooling in vehicles not covered under section 609 
(such as buses using R-22), electrical transformers, secondary 
refrigeration loops, and industrial process refrigeration equipment.
a. One-Time Expansion Devices, Including Self-Chilling Cans
    While EPA proposed to exempt some substitute refrigerants in one-
time expansion applications from the section 608 requirements, because 
their release does not pose a threat to the

[[Page 11955]]

environment (see the discussion of CO2 above), EPA did not 
propose and cannot make this finding for the HFC refrigerants that have 
been suggested for use in one-time expansion devices.
    One-time expansion devices are appliances, and the release of 
substitute refrigerants from such appliances is prohibited by section 
608(c)(2), unless EPA finds that the release of these refrigerants does 
not pose a threat to the environment. One-time expansion devices, which 
include ``self-chilling cans,'' rely on the release and associated 
expansion of a compressed refrigerant to cool the contents (e.g., a 
beverage) of a container. EPA considers refrigerant releases from such 
devices to be prohibited by section 608(c). First, the refrigerant in 
these devices acts as a not-in-kind substitute for CFCs and HCFCs in 
household and commercial refrigerators. Although the refrigerant in a 
one-time expansion device is not being used in the same system as CFC-
12 in a household or commercial refrigerator, it is providing the same 
effect of cooling the container. EPA has previously considered not-in-
kind technologies, such as evaporative cooling, to be substitutes under 
SNAP. The SNAP regulation defines ``substitute or alternative'' as 
``any chemical, product substitute, or alternative manufacturing 
process, whether existing or new, intended for use as a replacement for 
a class I or II compound.''
    This approach is consistent with the language of section 612 of the 
Act, in which Congress repeatedly identified ``product substitutes'' as 
substitutes for class I and class II substances. Section 612(a) states 
the policy of the section: ``To the maximum extent practicable, class I 
and class II substances shall be replaced by chemicals, product 
substitutes, or alternative manufacturing processes that reduce overall 
risks to human health and the environment.'' \7\ As stated in the SNAP 
regulation, EPA has interpreted the phrase ``substitute substances'' in 
612(c) to incorporate the general definition of substitute in 612(a) 
and 612(b)(3) and (4) (59 FR 13050). As noted above, the definition of 
``substitute'' in today's action is very similar to that in the SNAP 
regulations, except the definition omits the proviso that the 
substitute be intended for use as a replacement for a class I or class 
II substance. Thus, under the definition in today's action and 
consistent with the definition in the SNAP regulations and section 612 
of the Act, EPA considers the refrigerant in a one-time expansion 
device to be a ``substitute substance'' under section 608(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Section 612(b)(3) directs EPA to ``specify initiatives * * * 
to promote the development and use of safe substitutes for class I 
and class II substances, including alternative chemicals, product 
substitutes, and alternative manufacturing processes'' (emphasis 
added). Similarly, Sec.  612(b)(4) requires EPA to ``maintain a 
public clearinghouse of alternative chemicals, product substitutes, 
and alternative manufacturing processes.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Secondly, one-time expansion devices, which rely on the release of 
compressed gases to cool the contents of containers, are encompassed by 
the term ``appliance.'' A one-time expansion device is a device that 
holds and uses a substitute substance to make the contents of the 
container cool for individual consumption. Thus, it is a ``device which 
contains or uses'' a ``refrigerant'' ``for household or commercial 
purposes.'' The operating principle of a one-time expansion device is 
the same as that of a traditional refrigerator, that is vapor 
compression and expansion. The difference between a one-time expansion 
device and a traditional refrigerator is that, with a one-time 
expansion device, the compression part of the vapor-compression/
expansion cycle takes place at the factory, and the refrigerant escapes 
during expansion instead of being cycled back to a compressor to be 
recompressed.
    Thirdly, EPA believes that the act of opening a one-time expansion 
device constitutes disposal of the device. This interpretation is 
consistent with the definition of ``disposal'' included in the 
recycling and emissions reduction regulations at Sec.  82.152. 
``Disposal'' is ``the process leading to and including:
     The discharge, deposit, dumping or placing of 
any discarded appliance into or on any land or water;
     The disassembly of any appliance for discharge, 
deposit, dumping or placing of its discarded component parts into or on 
any land or water; or
     The disassembly of any appliance for reuse of 
its component parts.''
    Opening the device irreversibly discharges the refrigerant and 
thereby ends the useful life of the cooling device. Cooling the 
container is a one-time action that occurs immediately prior to 
consuming or using its contents, after which the remaining component 
parts of the appliance will be discarded. In addition, with the 
irreversible discharge of the critical portion of the cooling device, 
the appliance has been partially disassembled and one of its component 
parts has been discharged. Thus, the act of opening the device and 
cooling the container is a process that leads quickly and inevitably to 
the final disposal of the appliance, and the act itself includes the 
permanent disassembly of the appliance and discharge of one of the 
component parts. Finally, the act of opening the device is a 
``knowing'' release of refrigerant, as a person opening the device 
could not fail to be aware that his or her action is causing release of 
a gas to the atmosphere. Thus, the release occurs in the course of 
``maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of an appliance'' and 
is subject to the venting prohibition.
    One commenter believed that the Agency's interpretation of one-time 
expansion device is flawed, because it is so broad that it would 
include equipment that the Agency would not want to regulate, such as 
fire extinguishers. The commenter requested EPA to state specifically 
that EPA intends to ban self-chilling beverage cans.
    For purposes of clarity, the Agency has determined that one-time 
expansion devices, which include ``self-chilling cans,'' that rely on 
the release and associated expansion of a compressed refrigerant to 
cool the contents (e.g., a beverage) of a container, are considered 
appliances. Any one-time expansion device that does not rely on the 
release and expansion of a refrigerant for cooling purposes would not 
fall under the definition of appliance. In addition, EPA reminds 
readers that the final rule published on March 5, 1998 (63 FR 11084), 
prohibits the intentional release of any class I ODS (i.e., Halon 1211, 
Halon 1301, and Halon 2402) during the testing, repairing, maintenance, 
servicing, or disposal of halon-containing equipment. The rule became 
effective April 6, 1998.
b. Secondary Loops
    Rather than cooling things or people directly, many refrigeration 
and air-conditioning systems operate by cooling an intermediate fluid, 
which is then circulated to the things or people to be cooled. This 
intermediate fluid (and the structure for transporting it) is referred 
to as a secondary loop. Secondary loops are commonly used in comfort 
cooling chillers, industrial process refrigeration equipment, and some 
specialty and commercial refrigeration systems.
    The definition of ``appliance'' with respect to secondary loops is 
somewhat ambiguous under the Act. Given this ambiguity, EPA proposed to 
interpret as part of an ``appliance,'' refrigerant loops that (1) are 
primary or (2) move heat from cooler to warmer areas or (3) involve a 
change of state of the fluid. In the proposal, EPA requested comment on 
its interpretation of ``appliance'' as it applies to secondary loops. 
Specifically, EPA requested comment on whether there are human health 
or environmental risks that could be

[[Page 11956]]

significantly reduced by subjecting to the venting prohibition 
secondary loops that transport heat from warmer to cooler areas without 
a change of state. EPA also requested comment on the extent to which 
ozone depleting substances, such as HCFC-123, are used in secondary 
loops that transport heat from warmer to cooler areas.
    The majority of comments received in response to EPA's requests, 
recommended that secondary loops containing a regulated refrigerant be 
covered under the provisions of the section 608 recycling regulations. 
The majority of commenters agreed with the Agency's decision to 
include, under the definition of appliance, refrigerant loops that are 
primary to the system or secondary involving a change of state of 
refrigerant, while excluding secondary loops that do not involve a 
change of state.
    EPA received no comments in response to the proposal's request for 
information concerning the extent to which ozone depleting substances, 
such as HCFC-123, are used in secondary loops that transport heat from 
warmer to cooler areas or the need to require recovery of such 
substances used in secondary loops. The Agency believes that it is not 
necessary to specify secondary loops using regulated refrigerants as 
part of an appliance, since they are already subject to the section 
608(c) venting prohibition. Therefore, EPA is interpreting 
``appliance'' consistent with the language and purpose of section 608, 
and that it is reasonable to interpret as part of an ``appliance'' 
refrigerant loops that (1) are primary or (2) involve heat transfer 
with a change of state. Such systems may include cascade systems, 
electric transformers, or any secondary loop containing a regulated 
refrigerant. Under this interpretation, secondary loops that use 
substances not covered under the definition of refrigerant (as defined 
at Sec.  82.152) such as water, brine, and glycol solutions thereof 
will not be considered to be part of an ``appliance.''
    EPA believes that this interpretation covers those secondary loops, 
using a class I or class II ODS as a refrigerant, that have 
traditionally been considered to be part of the air conditioner or 
refrigerator, while excluding those that are not. Furthermore, this 
interpretation excludes for the definition of appliance air-
conditioning and refrigerating components that do not use an ODS. Thus, 
EPA believes that this interpretation is consistent with Congress' 
intent regarding the scope of EPA's regulatory authority over 
``appliances.''
    This interpretation is also consistent with EPA's decision not to 
list secondary fluids under SNAP. In that decision, published in SNAP 
Notice 6 (62 FR 10700, March 10, 1997), EPA expressed concern that due 
to the large number of secondary fluids, any listing of secondary 
fluids could discourage their use and could be very burdensome to the 
Agency and the regulated community. In addition, the Agency noted that 
there was little information or data suggesting that the use of these 
fluids in secondary loops posed an environmental or safety risk.
2. Full Charge
    While EPA had proposed changes to the definition of full charge as 
it relates to the leak repair required practices found at Sec.  82.156, 
the Agency has decided to address this definition, including public 
comments concerning the definition in a separate rulemaking dedicated 
to finalizing the leak repair components of the NPRM. Based on the 
comments received, EPA believes that this issue will be more 
appropriately addressed separately.
3. High-Pressure Appliance (Proposed as Higher-Pressure Appliance)
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to create a new category of ``higher-
pressure appliance'' whose refrigerants have saturation pressures 
between 220 psia and 305 psia at 104 [deg]F. Appliances in this 
category would be subject to the original evacuation requirements for 
HCFC-22 appliances.
    While EPA received supporting comments concerning the proposed 
definition of the higher-pressure appliance category, the Agency 
received a request to change the category name to ``high-pressure 
appliance.'' The commenter stated that this change reflects common 
field nomenclature and would avoid confusion.
    EPA agrees with the commenter and today is finalizing a new 
category of ``high-pressure appliance.'' These appliances contain 
refrigerants with saturation pressures between 170 psia and 355 psia at 
104 [deg]F. This category was proposed as the ``higher-pressure 
appliance'' category, but the category name was changed to reflect 
common field nomenclature and to remain as close as possible to the ARI 
groupings for the ARI Standard 740 for refrigerant recovery and 
recycling equipment. The Agency has changed the dividing lines to 170 
psia and 355 psia in an effort to retain consistency between the 
previous evacuation requirements and the procedures used for 
certification of recovery equipment used to obtain the evacuation 
levels. As discussed in greater detail below, EPA has altered the 
classification scheme by eliminating the special evacuation category 
for R-22 and replacing it with a new saturation pressure category that 
includes the ``high-pressure'' refrigerants with saturation pressures 
between 170 psia and 355 psia at 104 [deg]F. This change enables EPA to 
tailor requirements to refrigerants with relatively high saturation 
pressures, while retaining the long standing evacuation requirements 
for appliances using R-22 refrigerant.
    Appliances in this category are subject to the same requirements 
previously reserved for HCFC-22 appliances. This action's definition of 
``refrigerant'' limits the applicability of the high-pressure appliance 
definition to appliances that use a CFC or HCFC refrigerant, or a blend 
containing a CFC or HCFC refrigerant, with a liquid phase saturation 
pressure between 170 psia and 355 psia at 104 [deg]F. The definition of 
``high-pressure appliances'' reads as follows: High-pressure appliance 
means an appliance that uses a refrigerant with a liquid phase 
saturation pressure between 170 psia and 355 psia at 104 [deg]F. This 
definition includes but is not limited to appliances using R-401A, R-
409A, R-401B, R-411A, R-22, R-411B, R-502, R-402B, R-408A, and R-402A.
4. Leak Rate
    While EPA had proposed to officially define ``leak rate'' in the 
NPRM for purposes of clarity when applying the leak repair requirements 
contained in Sec.  82.156(i), the Agency has decided to address this 
definition, including public comments concerning the definition in a 
separate rulemaking dedicated to finalizing the leak repair components 
of the NPRM. Based on the comments received, EPA believes that this 
issue will be more appropriately addressed separately.
5. Low-Pressure Appliance
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to revise the definition of ``low-
pressure appliance'' to refer to saturation pressures at 104 [deg]F 
rather than boiling points. This proposal to define low-pressure 
appliances according to saturation pressure was intended in part to 
make it easier for technicians to remember and implement when compared 
to standards that varied both by saturation pressure and type of 
refrigerant. Without such a change, the number of new evacuation 
categories could conceivably have been doubled by the influx of new 
substitute refrigerants.
    The Agency received no comments concerning the proposed revision. 
Therefore, EPA has revised the

[[Page 11957]]

definition of ``low-pressure appliance'' to refer to saturation 
pressures at 104 [deg]F rather than boiling points. The revised 
definition reads: Low-pressure appliance means an appliance that uses a 
refrigerant with a liquid phase saturation pressure below 45 psia at 
104 [deg]F. This definition includes but is not limited to appliances 
using R-11, R-123, and R-113.
6. Opening
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to amend the definition of ``opening'' to 
include service, maintenance, or repair of an appliance that would 
release class I, class II, or substitute refrigerants unless the 
refrigerant were recovered previously from the appliance. EPA also 
requested comment on adding disposal to the definition of ``opening.''
    EPA received one comment representing the scrap and recycling 
industry in opposition to adding the term ``or disposal'' to the 
definition of ``opening.'' The commenter was opposed on the grounds 
that the NPRM did not distinguish between recycling and disposal.
    Sections 608 (b)(1) and 608(c)(2) of the Act require that class I, 
class II, and their substitute refrigerants contained in bulk in 
appliances be removed from the appliance prior to disposal or their 
delivery for recycling. The Agency does not interpret this statutory 
language to mean that scrap recyclers who choose to dispose of 
appliances or choose to accept appliances (or their parts) with 
refrigerant charges intact are exempt from the Required Practices 
codified at Sec.  82.156 (including the acquisition of recovery 
equipment that meets the standards set forth in Sec.  82.158). EPA 
refers readers to the May 14, 1993, rulemaking 1993 (58 FR 28660) for 
detailed discussion of the Agency's long standing interpretation of 
scrap metal recycling's inclusion in the term ``final disposal.''
    Therefore, EPA has amended the definition of ``opening'' to include 
any service, maintenance, repair, or disposal of an appliance that 
would release refrigerant from the appliance to the atmosphere unless 
the refrigerant was recovered previously from the appliance. Connecting 
and disconnecting hoses and gauges to and from the appliance to measure 
pressures within the appliance and to add refrigerant to or recover 
refrigerant from the appliance shall not be considered ``opening.''
7. Reclaim
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to amend the definition of ``reclaim'' to 
reflect the update of the refrigerant standards at Appendix A from 
standards based on ARI Standard 700-1993 to standards based on ARI 
Standard 700-1995. In addition, EPA proposed to amend the definition of 
``reclaim'' to remove the reference to a ``purity'' standard and 
thereby make the definition more consistent with the full range of 
requirements provided in Appendix A. EPA amended the definition of 
``reclaim'' in the related Industrial Recycling Guide (IRG)-2 final 
rule (68 FR 43786), by adopting the 1995 version of the ARI Standard 
700. Today's action makes no further amendment to the definition of 
``reclaim.''
8. Refrigerant
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to add a definition of ``refrigerant'' 
that would include any class I or class II substance used for heat 
transfer purposes or any substance used as a substitute for such a 
class I or class II substance by any user in a given end-use, except: 
Ammonia in commercial or industrial process refrigeration or in 
absorption units; hydrocarbons in industrial process refrigeration 
(processing of hydrocarbons); chlorine in industrial process 
refrigeration (processing of chlorine and chlorine compounds); carbon 
dioxide in any application; nitrogen in any application; or water in 
any application. As discussed above, EPA proposed to interpret 
``appliance'' to exclude secondary loops that move heat from warmer to 
cooler areas using a fluid that does not change state. EPA also 
requested comment on the Agency's proposal to add a restriction to the 
definition of ``refrigerant'' to the same effect, ensuring consistency 
between the interpretation of ``appliance'' and the definition of 
``refrigerant.''
    Several commenters stated that the proposed definition of 
refrigerant was too broad. Commenters stated that the definition should 
not encompass substances that are not actually used as refrigerants, 
such as air, water or brine used in secondary loops. One commenter 
suggested that the Agency revise the definition of refrigerant to 
clarify that the recycling rule does not apply to systems that provide 
heat. The commenter expressed concern that the definition of 
refrigerant contained the phrase ``for heat transfer purposes,'' and 
stated that although heat transfer can cool a system, it can also warm 
a system and provide heating, and in these cases the substance is not 
being used as a refrigerant. The commenter noted that in the CAA, 
Congress always used words related to cooling when referring to 
refrigeration and never intended to regulate heating. Similarly, a 
number of commenters supported defining refrigerant in terms of phase 
change and to exclude secondary loops that do not involve change of 
state in order to ensure that substances that are not actually used as 
refrigerants are not encompassed in the definition.
    With today's rule EPA is defining ``refrigerant'' as follows: 
``Refrigerant means, for purposes of this Subpart, any substance 
consisting in part or whole of a class I or class II ozone-depleting 
substance that is used for heat transfer purposes and provides a 
cooling effect, or any substance used as a substitute for such a class 
I or class II substance by any user in a given end-use, except for the 
following substitutes in the following end-uses: (1) Ammonia in 
commercial or industrial process refrigeration or in absorption units; 
(2) Hydrocarbons in industrial process refrigeration (processing of 
hydrocarbons); (3) Chlorine in industrial process refrigeration 
(processing of chlorine and chlorine compounds); (4) Carbon dioxide in 
any application; (5) Nitrogen in any application; or (6) Water in any 
application.'' This definition also excludes air from the definition of 
refrigerant.
    EPA has defined ``refrigerant'' to simplify the text of the 
regulations. The definition permits EPA to refer to covered class I, 
class II, and substitute refrigerants without having to reiterate a 
list of either included or excepted refrigerants each time. EPA 
believes that this definition appropriately defines ``refrigerant'' for 
purposes of section 608, and has revised the proposed definition of 
``refrigerant'' by adding the phrase ``that provide a cooling effect'' 
to make certain that the definition does not capture substances that 
provide for heat transfer but do not provide a cooling effect. This 
definition removes any ambiguity for substances that may provide a 
cooling effect but are not considered refrigerants under section 608. 
The Agency does not intend the definition to either expand or diminish 
the scope of the section 608 requirements, and believes that the 
definition is consistent with EPA's past interpretations of the term 
``refrigerant.''
    In the past, EPA has interpreted ``refrigerants'' to include the 
class I and class II fluids in traditional vapor-compression systems, 
such as refrigerators, air-conditioners, and heat pumps, as well as the 
class I and class II fluids in heat transfer systems that lack 
compressors, such as electrical transformers. At the same time, the 
Agency has not considered substances whose use as refrigerants have 
been denied under SNAP (such as hydrocarbons outside of industrial

[[Page 11958]]

process refrigeration), to fall under the definition of 
``refrigerant.'' EPA has adopted this interpretation based on both 
technical and common definitions of ``refrigerant.'' The Agency 
believes that the definition addresses the ODSs and substitutes covered 
by the technical and common definitions of refrigerant. Therefore, the 
Agency has not added the phrase ``including a change of state'' to the 
definition of refrigerant.
9. Substitute
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to define ``substitute'' as any chemical 
or product substitute, whether existing or new, that is used by any 
person as a replacement for a class I or II ODS in a given end-use. 
Several commenters objected to classifying a substance as a substitute 
refrigerant, when in a specific refrigeration system the substance has 
not replaced any class I or class II ODS refrigerant as a second 
generation substitute.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ By second generation substitute the Agency means a substance 
being used as a replacement refrigerant for a substitute 
refrigerant, where the substitute refrigerant was an original SNAP-
approved replacement for a class I or II refrigerant (i.e., a first 
generation substitute).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the Agency were to take this approach, a substitute would be 
regulated only if the equipment owner/operator previously used the 
substance as a direct replacement for a class I or class II substance 
(for example, during the retrofit of an appliance from HCFC to an HFC 
blend), and an identical substitute refrigerant used by a different 
entity would not be regulated if it were a replacement for a non-ODS 
refrigerant (regardless of the generation of the substitute). EPA 
believes that a lack of regulatory conformity among substitute 
refrigerants, regardless of generation class, would not reduce 
emissions of substitute refrigerants, would lead to confusion within 
the regulated community, and would make enforcement difficult. For the 
purposes of section 608, EPA considers a refrigerant a substitute in a 
certain end-use, if the substance has SNAP approval as a substitute for 
CFC or HCFC refrigerants in that end-use by any user. This holds even 
if the SNAP-approved substitute is being used in a new appliance, and 
previously has never been used by the owner/operator of the appliance. 
Under section 608, EPA considers a SNAP-approved refrigerant a 
``substitute'' for CFC or HCFC refrigerants under section 608 if any of 
the following is the case: (1) The substitute refrigerant immediately 
replaced a CFC or HCFC in a specific instance, (2) the substitute 
refrigerant replaced another substitute that replaced a CFC or HCFC in 
a specific instance (i.e., it was a second-or later-generation 
substitute), or (3) the substitute refrigerant has always been used in 
a particular instance, but other users in that end-use have used it to 
replace a CFC or HCFC.
    EPA does not believe that it is appropriate under section 608 to 
consider the intent or history of an individual user in determining 
whether a refrigerant is a ``substitute'' for CFC or HCFC refrigerants 
in a given instance. First, it is reasonable to interpret 
``substitute'' to include first, second-or later generation substitutes 
for CFCs and HCFCs. One of the goals of this rulemaking is to minimize 
any environmental harm that might be associated with the transition 
away from CFC and HCFC refrigerants. In many cases, the transition away 
from CFCs and HCFCs is a multi-step process, with substitutes 
supplanting each other as they are tested and developed. Thus, even if 
a substance is not being used as a direct or first generation 
substitute for CFC or HCFC refrigerants in a particular instance, its 
use is the result of the transition away from CFCs and HCFCs and the 
substance serves as a substitute for these substances.
    Second, it is also reasonable to interpret ``substitute'' to mean a 
refrigerant that is occasionally used as a substitute for CFC or HCFC 
refrigerants in a given end-use, even if the refrigerant has a history 
of use by a particular user or in a particular end-use. EPA's authority 
to promulgate enforceable regulations would be impeded if the Agency 
had to attempt to trace the individual histories of specific appliances 
in implementing and enforcing the section 608 regulations.
    Several commenters expressed concern that a refrigerant could 
become a substitute without notice or rulemaking. One scenario was 
described as a first-generation refrigerant used in an industrial 
process by one user becoming a regulated substitute by its use as a 
replacement for a class I or class II refrigerant by another unrelated 
user.
    This scenario is covered by the third leak repair scenario 
discussed in the NPRM (63 FR 32070) by which EPA would consider a 
refrigerant a ``substitute'' for CFCs or HCFCs under section 608. A 
legally used first-generation refrigerant used as a substitute by any 
end-user is already authorized under section 612 of the Act. 
Appropriate notice via rulemaking under SNAP would have taken place 
prior to the substitute's use in the specific end-use sector. On March 
18, 1994, EPA published a final rule (59 FR 13044), that described the 
process for administering SNAP and issued EPA's first acceptability 
lists for substitutes in the major industrial use sectors, including 
refrigeration and air-conditioning. Anyone who produces a substitute 
must notify the Agency at least 90 days before introducing it into 
interstate commerce for 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. Therefore, in the commenter's scenario proper notice would 
have been granted for any approved substitute. Formulators or end-users 
concerned about the status of their refrigerant need to verify the 
refrigerant's acceptability under SNAP. Such verification can be made 
by checking the EPA Web page (www.epa.gov/ozone) or contacting the 
Ozone Hotline (800-296-1996) for a complete listing of SNAP 
determinations.
    One commenter believed that the proposed rule contradicts the 
Agency's final rule addressing the reporting requirements for 
substitutes under the SNAP (March 18, 1994, 59 FR 13044). In that rule, 
the Agency determined that second-generation replacements, if they are 
non-ozone depleting and are replacing non-ozone-depleting first-
generation alternatives, are exempt from reporting requirements under 
section 612 of the Act.
    The SNAP final rule does not grant an exemption from the venting 
prohibition established under 608(c) of the Act, and section 612 does 
not impose any reporting or recordkeeping requirements associated with 
the venting prohibition. Section 612 of the Act authorizes EPA to 
develop a program (i.e., SNAP) for evaluating alternatives to ODSs, 
whereas section 608 of the Act authorizes EPA to write regulations 
reducing emissions of class I and class II refrigerants and their 
substitutes to the lowest achievable level during the service, 
maintenance, repair, and disposal of appliances.
    EPA is defining ``substitute'' as any chemical or product, whether 
existing or new, that is used by any person as an EPA-approved 
replacement for a class I or II ozone-depleting substance in a given 
refrigeration or air-conditioning end-use. As discussed above, this 
definition is similar to the definition of ``substitute'' used in the 
SNAP rule, but it omits the proviso that a substitute be ``intended for 
use as a replacement for a class I or class II substance.'' Thus, it 
includes substances that may not have been used to replace class I or 
class II substances in a given instance, but are

[[Page 11959]]

used to replace class I or class II substances in other instances of 
that end-use. This definition of substitute differs from the proposed 
definition (63 FR 32059) in that the word ``compound'' has been 
replaced with ``substance'' in order to bring the definition of 
substitute into conformity with the original intent of the proposed 
rule.
10. Technician
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to amend the definition of ``technician'' 
to include persons who perform maintenance, service, repair, or 
disposal that could be reasonably expected to release class I, class 
II, or substitute refrigerants from appliances into the atmosphere. One 
commenter opposed expanding the definition of technician to include 
those disposing of appliances, unless the Agency properly distinguishes 
between recycling and disposal.
    EPA did not intend for the proposed definition of technician to 
alter the exclusion of those disposing of MVACs or small appliances 
from the definition of technician. However, EPA believes that persons 
disposing of appliances that have not been evacuated, in accordance 
with Sec.  82.156, pose a reasonable risk of releasing refrigerant. The 
Agency has determined (May 14, 1993, 58 FR 28660) that for purposes of 
subpart F, disposal means the process leading to and including: (1) The 
discharge, deposit, dumping or placing of any discarded appliance into 
or on any land or water; (2) the disassembly of any appliance for 
discharge, deposit, dumping or placing of its discarded component parts 
into or on any land or water; or (3) the disassembly of any appliance 
for reuse of its component parts. Therefore, any person who performs 
any of these activities (whether they consider themselves a recycler, 
scrap dealer, or disposer, etc.) is not exempt from the required 
practices codified at Sec.  82.156.
    Two commenters asked that the Agency clarify its definition of 
technician with respect to ``do-it-yourselfers'' (DIYers), and clarify 
that process operators in industrial settings are not considered 
technicians.
    EPA's amended definition of ``technician'' includes any person 
(including DIYers or process operators) who performs maintenance, 
service, or repair, that could be reasonably expected to release 
refrigerants from appliances into the atmosphere. Technician also means 
any person who performs disposal of appliances--except for small 
appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like appliances--that could be reasonably 
expected to release refrigerants from the appliances into the 
atmosphere. Performing maintenance, service, repair, or disposal could 
be reasonably expected to release refrigerants only if the activity is 
reasonably expected to violate the integrity of the refrigerant 
circuit. Activities reasonably expected to violate the integrity of the 
refrigerant circuit include, but are not limited to, activities such 
as: Pressure checks by attaching and detaching gauges to and from the 
appliance, attaching or detaching hoses, or adding refrigerant to and 
removing refrigerant from the appliance. Activities such as painting 
the appliance, rewiring an external electrical circuit, replacing 
insulation on a length of pipe, or tightening nuts and bolts on the 
appliance are not reasonably expected to violate the integrity of the 
refrigerant circuit. Performing maintenance, service, repair, or 
disposal of appliances that have been evacuated in accordance with 
Sec.  82.156 could not be reasonably expected to release refrigerants 
from the appliance unless the maintenance, service, or repair consists 
of adding refrigerant to the appliance. Technician includes but is not 
limited to installers, contractor employees, in-house service 
personnel, and in some cases owners and/or operators.
11. Very High-Pressure Appliance
    EPA did not receive any negative comments concerning the proposed 
definition of ``very high-pressure appliance'' to refer to saturation 
pressures at 104 [deg]F rather than boiling points.
    Since 104 [deg]F is above the critical temperatures \9\ of many 
very high-pressure refrigerants (meaning that there is no ``saturation 
pressure'' in the usual sense for those refrigerants at that 
temperature), EPA is also adding the phrase ``or with a critical 
temperature below 104 degrees Fahrenheit'' to the definition. The final 
definition reads as follows: ``Very high-pressure appliance means an 
appliance that uses a refrigerant with a critical temperature below 104 
[deg]F or with a liquid phase saturation pressure above 355 psia at 104 
[deg]F. This definition includes but is not limited to appliances using 
R-13 and R-503.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Critical temperature is the temperature above which a gas 
cannot be liquefied by an increase of pressure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Required Practices

    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to require persons servicing or disposing 
of air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment that contain HFC or PFC 
refrigerants to observe certain service practices that minimize 
emissions of these refrigerants that are very similar to those required 
for the servicing or disposal of CFC and HCFC equipment. The most 
fundamental of these practices is the requirement to recover HFC and 
PFC refrigerants rather than vent them to the atmosphere. As noted 
above, the knowing venting of substitutes for class I and class II 
refrigerants (except those exempted by the Administrator) during 
maintenance, service, repair or disposal is expressly prohibited by 
section 608(c)(1) and (2) of the Act, as of November 15, 1995. In order 
to implement section 608(c)(2) more effectively, EPA proposed not only 
to define ``good faith attempts to recapture and recycle or safely 
dispose,'' but also more directly to require compliance with the 
proposed provisions for substitute refrigerants regarding evacuation of 
equipment, use of certified equipment, and technician certification in 
any instance where a person is opening or disposing of an appliance, as 
defined in Sec.  82.152.
    EPA is not finalizing the proposed required practices for the 
handling and use of pure HFC and PFC refrigerant substitutes. However, 
since EPA is not determining that the release of HFC or PFC 
refrigerants does not pose a threat to the environment, it remains 
illegal to knowingly vent these substitutes during the maintenance, 
service, repair, or disposal of appliances. This finding means that 
efforts to prevent venting such as the proper use of refrigerant 
recovery equipment are necessary when maintaining, servicing, 
repairing, or disposing of appliances.
1. Evacuation of Appliances
    EPA is not finalizing the proposed evacuation requirements for HFC 
and PFC appliances that are opened for maintenance, service, repair, or 
disposal to established levels that are the same as those for CFCs and 
HCFCs with similar saturation pressures. This action is consistent with 
EPA's decision to not regulate, under section 608, refrigerants that do 
not contain a class I or class II ODS. Similarly, EPA is not finalizing 
the option that would have permitted technicians to recover HFC or PFC 
refrigerants using equipment certified for use with multiple CFC or 
HCFC refrigerants of similar saturation pressures. EPA defers 
discussion of the certification of refrigerant recovery equipment to a 
future rulemaking.
    In today's action, EPA is clarifying that evacuation requirements 
are applicable to substitute refrigerants that consist, in whole or in 
part, of a class I or class II ODS. Additionally, evacuation 
requirements are not

[[Page 11960]]

applicable to substitutes that have been exempted by today's action 
namely, ammonia in commercial or industrial process refrigeration or in 
absorption units; hydrocarbons in industrial process refrigeration; 
chlorine in industrial process refrigeration; carbon dioxide in any 
application; nitrogen in any application; water in any application; or 
air in any application.
    EPA is classifying refrigerants according to their saturation 
pressures at 104 [deg]F, because many of the refrigerants that have 
entered the market over the past few years pose two difficulties for 
the existing system based on boiling points. First, many of the new 
HFC/HCFC blends do not have precise boiling points. Instead, these 
refrigerants exhibit ``glide,'' (i.e., boiling and condensing over a 
range of temperatures at a given pressure). Second, refrigerants' 
boiling points have served as a surrogate for their saturation 
pressures at higher temperatures, but the relationship between boiling 
point and saturation pressure is not as consistent for the new 
refrigerants as it is for traditional CFCs and HCFCs. For instance, a 
lower boiling point has generally indicated a higher saturation 
pressure at a given temperature, but that is not consistently the case 
with many substitute refrigerants. The new approach avoids these 
difficulties, because it links evacuation requirements directly to the 
refrigerant saturation pressure at a temperature similar to that at 
which recovery typically takes place.
a. Evacuation Requirements for Appliances Other Than Small Appliances, 
MVACs, and MVAC-like Appliances
    EPA is not finalizing the proposed extension of the evacuation 
requirements for appliances (other than small appliances, MVACs, and 
MVAC-like appliances) containing HFC or PFC refrigerants. However, EPA 
is amending the system for classifying appliances and clarifying how 
the evacuation requirements apply to appliances containing substitute 
refrigerants that consist, in whole or in part, of a class I or class 
II ODS.
    Table I lists the required levels of evacuation for air-
conditioning and refrigeration equipment, other than small appliances, 
MVACs, and MVAC-like appliances. EPA is clarifying that the required 
evacuation levels apply to refrigerant substitutes that have a class I 
or class II ODS component (for example, HFC refrigerant blends that 
contain an HCFC). EPA has amended the table to reflect definition 
changes for medium-pressure and high-pressure appliances, formerly 
referred to as high-pressure and higher-pressure appliances 
respectively. The proposed changes concerning evacuation requirements 
for appliances containing substitutes with ODS components are captured 
and finalized by inclusion of the new definitions for medium-, high-, 
and very high-pressure appliances in Table 1, which were previously 
classified according to their boiling points at atmospheric pressure.

                             Table 1.--Required Levels of Evacuation for Appliances
                         [Except for small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like appliances]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Inches of Hg vacuum  (relative to standard
                                                                        atmospheric pressure of 29.9 inches Hg)
                                                                     -------------------------------------------
                                                                        Using recovery or     Using recovery or
                          Type of appliance                            recycling equipment   recycling equipment
                                                                         manufactured or       manufactured or
                                                                         imported before    imported on or after
                                                                        November 15, 1993     November 15, 1993
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very high-pressure appliance........................................                     0                     0
High-pressure appliance, or isolated component of such appliance,                        0                     0
 normally containing less than 200 pounds of refrigerant............
High-pressure appliance, or isolated component of such appliance,                        4                    10
 normally containing 200 pounds or more of refrigerant..............
Medium-pressure appliance, or isolated component of such appliance,                      4                    10
 normally containing less than 200 pounds of refrigerant............
Medium-pressure appliance, or isolated component of such appliance,                      4                    15
 normally containing 200 pounds or more of refrigerant..............
Low-pressure appliance..............................................                    25     25 mm Hg absolute
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The evacuation requirements in Table 1 are very similar to those 
that have been in place for appliances containing single component CFC 
and HCFC refrigerants. The evacuation requirements for CFC and HCFC 
appliances were based largely, but not entirely, on their saturation 
pressures. Appliances were classified according to their refrigerant's 
boiling point at atmospheric pressure, which is generally inversely 
related to its saturation pressures at higher temperatures. 
Successively deeper vacuums have been required for lower pressure 
appliances.
    EPA has adopted this approach because the saturation pressure of a 
refrigerant is directly related both to the percentage of refrigerant 
that is recovered at a given vacuum level and to the compression ratio 
that is necessary to achieve that vacuum.\10\ A comparison between R-
502, which has a saturation pressure of 245 psia at 104 [deg]F, and R-
11, which has a saturation pressure of 25.3 psia at 104 [deg]F, makes 
this clear. At an evacuation level of 10 inches of mercury vacuum and 
an ambient temperature of 104[deg]F, 96 percent of R-502 refrigerant 
vapor has been recovered, but only 61 percent of R-11 refrigerant vapor 
has been recovered. For R-502, the compression ratio necessary to 
achieve this vacuum is about 25 to 1, but for R-11 the compression 
ratio necessary is only about one tenth of that, 2.6 to 1. Most 
recovery compressors have a compression ratio limit of between 20 and 
30 to 1, meaning that it is difficult to achieve an evacuation level 
much lower than 10 inches of vacuum for R-502, but that it is easy to 
achieve a lower evacuation level for R-11. Thus, a refrigerant's 
saturation pressure directly

[[Page 11961]]

affects both the technical feasibility and the environmental impact of 
a given evacuation level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The saturation pressure of a refrigerant is the same as its 
vapor pressure, that is, the characteristic pressure of the vapor in 
a vapor/liquid mixture of that refrigerant at equilibrium at a given 
temperature. A compression ratio is the ratio of the pressures of a 
gas on the discharge and suction sides of the compressor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

i. Low-Pressure Appliance Category
    EPA is finalizing the proposal to define low-pressure appliances as 
those using refrigerants with a liquid phase saturation pressure below 
45 psia at 104 [deg]F. Evacuation requirements for the low-pressure 
category apply to these appliances. This category includes but is not 
limited to appliances using R-113, R-123, and R-11.
ii. Medium-Pressure and High-Pressure (Proposed as High- and Higher-
Pressure) Appliance Categories
    In the NPRM, EPA sought comment on the proposal to use a saturation 
pressure of 45 psia as the lower-bound saturation pressure for high-
pressure appliances. EPA also sought comment on the proposal to 
eliminate the special category for R-22 and to replace it with a new 
saturation pressure category that includes the ``high-pressure'' 
refrigerants with the highest saturation pressures (those with boiling 
points approximately between -40 and -50 [deg]C and saturation 
pressures between 220 psia and 305 psia at 104 [deg]F). EPA proposed to 
designate this as the ``higher-pressure appliances.'' EPA also sought 
comment on the establishment of the ``higher-pressure appliance'' 
saturation pressure category. EPA specifically sought comment on the 
proposed use of 305 psia as the upper bound saturation pressure for 
this new category, and whether R-502 was appropriate for this category.
    EPA received supportive comments on the establishment of the upper 
bound saturation pressure for the ``high-pressure'' saturation pressure 
category. The pressures to which R-22 appliances must be evacuated (and 
therefore to which ``high-pressure'' appliances would have to be 
evacuated) are 0 inches of vacuum (atmospheric pressure) for appliances 
containing less than 200 pounds of refrigerant, and 10 inches of vacuum 
(9.8 psia) for appliances containing more than 200 pounds of 
refrigerant.
    EPA received one comment supporting the inclusion of R-502 (which 
has a relatively low discharge temperature) in the higher pressure 
category. The commenter stated that the real-world compression ratio 
would be lower than the theoretical 30:1 ratio, because the actual 
condensing conditions during recovery should typically be lower than 
104 [deg]F.
    EPA has attempted to select bracketing saturation pressures for 
appliance categories so as to maintain as much consistency as possible 
with the previous categories based on boiling points. For instance, 
since the current definition of ``medium-pressure appliances'' 
(previously referred to as high-pressure appliances) includes R-114 
appliances at the low-pressure end, and the saturation pressure of R-
114 at 104 [deg]F is slightly above 45 psia, EPA is implementing a 
saturation pressure of 45 psia as the lower-bound saturation pressure 
for medium-pressure appliances.
    EPA has altered the classification scheme by eliminating the 
special category for R-22 and replacing it with a new saturation 
pressure category that includes the ``high-pressure'' refrigerants with 
saturation pressures between 170 psia and 355 psia at 104 [deg]F). EPA 
designates this as the ``high-pressure'' refrigerants category. This 
change enables EPA to tailor requirements to refrigerants with 
relatively high saturation pressures, while retaining the previous 
evacuation requirements for appliances using R-22 refrigerant, as 
stated in Table 1. The new category includes but is not limited to 
appliances using R-401A, R-409A, R-401B, R-411A, R-22, R-411B, R-502, 
R-402B, R-408A, R-402A. For several of these refrigerants, the 
combination of a relatively high saturation pressure and high discharge 
temperature makes recovery into a deep vacuum difficult. On the other 
hand, these refrigerants have significantly lower saturation pressures 
than still higher pressure refrigerants, such as R-13 and R-503 (whose 
critical temperatures fall below 104 [deg]F).
iii. Very High-Pressure Appliance Category
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to modify the definition of very high-
pressure appliances to add the phrase ``or whose critical temperatures 
fall below 104 [deg]F. EPA also sought comment on the proposal to 
classify refrigerants based upon saturation pressures at 104 [deg]F 
rather than boiling points
    As proposed, EPA has modified the definition of very high-pressure 
appliances to add the phrase ``or whose critical temperatures fall 
below 104 [deg]F.'' This modification has been made to address the 
classification of appliances using very high-pressure refrigerants such 
as R-13, R-23, and R-503. These refrigerants do not have a saturation 
pressure in the traditional sense at 104 [deg]F because this 
temperature is above their critical temperatures. As noted above, the 
saturation pressure of a refrigerant is the pressure of the vapor in a 
vapor/liquid mixture, but refrigerants above their critical 
temperatures cannot exist in a liquid state regardless of the pressure.
b. Evacuation Levels for Small Appliances
    EPA is not finalizing the proposal to establish the same evacuation 
requirements for servicing small appliances charged with HFC and PFC 
refrigerants as it has for small appliances charged with CFC and HCFC 
refrigerants. However, EPA is finalizing these evacuation requirements 
for SNAP-approved substitute refrigerants that contain a class I or 
class II ODS.
    Technicians opening small appliances for service, maintenance, or 
repair are required to use equipment certified either under Appendices 
B or B1, or under Appendix C, Method for Testing Recovery Devices for 
Use with Small Appliances, to recover the refrigerant, and must pull a 
four-inch vacuum on the small appliance being evacuated.
    Equipment certified under Appendix C must capture 90 percent of the 
refrigerant in the appliance if the compressor is operating, and 80 
percent of the refrigerant if the compressor is not operating. Because 
the percentage of refrigerant mass recovered is very difficult to 
measure on any given job, technicians must adhere to the servicing 
procedure certified for that recovery system, under Appendix C, to 
ensure that they achieve the required recovery efficiencies.
c. Evacuation Levels for Disposal of MVACs, MVAC-like Appliances, and 
Small Appliances
    EPA had proposed to establish the same evacuation requirements for 
disposal of small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like appliances that are 
charged with HFC refrigerants as it has for these types of appliances 
charged with CFC and HCFC refrigerants.
    EPA received comments generally supporting the evacuation 
requirements for disposal of small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like 
appliances, but one commenter argued that the responsibility for 
removing remaining refrigerants from appliances destined for disposal 
or for recycling should be placed on the person disposing of the 
appliance or delivering the appliance for recycling as opposed to the 
person recycling the obsolete appliance.
    Sections 608(b)(1) and 608(c)(2) require that class I and class II 
refrigerants or their substitute refrigerants, that are contained in 
bulk in appliances be removed from the appliance prior to its disposal 
or delivery for recycling. The Agency does not interpret this statutory 
language to mean that scrap metal recyclers who

[[Page 11962]]

choose to dispose of appliances or choose to accept appliances (or 
their parts) with refrigerant charges intact are exempt from the 
Required Practices codified at Sec.  82.156 (including the acquisition 
of recovery equipment that meets the standards set forth in Sec.  
82.158). Therefore, persons who take the final step in the disposal 
process of small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like appliances must 
either recover any remaining refrigerant in the appliance or verify 
that the refrigerant has previously been recovered from the appliance 
or shipment of appliances.
    EPA is not establishing the same evacuation requirements for 
disposal of small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like appliances that are 
charged with HFC refrigerants as it has for these types of appliances 
charged with CFC or HCFC refrigerants. However, EPA is finalizing these 
evacuation requirements for such appliances that use a substitute 
refrigerant consisting, in part, of a class I or class II substance 
(for example, an HFC refrigerant blend that contains an HCFC). Such 
MVACs and MVAC-like appliances must be evacuated to 102 mm 
(approximately four inches) of mercury vacuum, and 80 or 90 percent of 
the refrigerant in small appliances must be recovered (depending on 
whether or not the compressor is operating) or the small appliance must 
be evacuated to four inches of mercury vacuum. Although EPA is not 
finalizing the proposed evacuation requirements, it remains illegal to 
knowingly vent HFC refrigerants during the service, maintenance, 
repair, or disposal of small, MVAC, and MVAC-like appliances.
d. Request for Comment on Establishing Special Evacuation Requirements 
for Heat Transfer Appliances
    As noted in the NPRM, EPA received comments from a manufacturer of 
PFCs stating that special evacuation requirements may be appropriate 
for certain types of heat transfer appliances containing PFCs, such as 
some types of electrical transformers. The commenter specifically noted 
that evacuating some types of heat transfer systems may result in 
damage to those systems, that in many cases, parts to be repaired may 
be isolated from the refrigerant charge, and that many repairs may be 
performed quickly, releasing little refrigerant even if the system is 
not evacuated.
    EPA received no comments in response to its request for comment on 
the need for special evacuation requirements for heat transfer 
appliances, and EPA is not establishing evacuation requirements for any 
appliance using pure PFCs.
e. Clarifications of Evacuation Requirements
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed two clarifications to the evacuation 
requirements based on a previous request to the Agency. Specifically, 
the first request for clarification concerned whether a part of the 
appliance that is not a separate tank may be considered a ``system 
receiver,'' in which the system charge may be isolated while another 
isolated part of the appliance is opened for repairs. The second 
request for clarification concerned whether an isolated portion of an 
appliance that already meets the required level of evacuation due to 
normal operating characteristics may be opened for repairs without 
further evacuation. In addition to minor changes to the regulatory 
language to respond to the first and second requests, EPA proposed to 
add language to paragraph Sec.  82.156(a) to clarify that, except in 
the case of non-major repairs to low-pressure appliances, liquid 
refrigerant must be removed from appliances (or from the isolated parts 
to be serviced) before they are opened to the atmosphere.
    EPA received one comment suggesting the use of the term ``storage 
vessel'' in situations where the system receiver is used as a storage 
vessel and can be isolated from the rest of the system.
    The required practices at Sec.  82.156 require that all persons 
opening appliances except for MVACs and MVAC-like appliances for 
maintenance, service, or repair evacuate the refrigerant, including all 
the liquid refrigerant in either the entire unit or the part to be 
serviced (if the latter can be isolated) to a system receiver (e.g., 
the remaining portions of the appliance, or a specific vessel within 
the appliance) or a recovery or recycling machine certified pursuant to 
Sec.  82.158. If the system receiver also serves as a storage vessel, 
then the required practice is satisfied.
    As proposed, EPA is today clarifying that for purposes of complying 
with Sec.  82.156(a), EPA interprets the term ``system receiver'' to 
include a part of the appliance that is not a separate tank, if that 
portion of the appliance can be isolated from the portion of the 
appliance that is opened for repairs. From an environmental 
perspective, EPA believes that the critical consideration is whether 
the part of the appliance to be opened to the atmosphere for repair has 
had the refrigerant removed and isolated from it, not the configuration 
of the remaining appliance parts within which the refrigerant is 
isolated. To clarify this point, EPA is amending paragraph Sec.  
82.156(a) by adding the following examples after the term ``system 
receiver'': ``(e.g., the remaining portions of the appliance, or a 
specific vessel within the appliance).''
    In addition to clarifying its interpretation of ``system 
receiver,'' as proposed, EPA is adding language to Sec.  82.156(a) to 
ensure that the regulations clearly preclude a possible 
misinterpretation of these requirements. EPA has always interpreted 
Sec.  82.156(a) to require that, except in the case of non-major 
repairs to low-pressure appliances, liquid refrigerant must be removed 
from appliances (or from the isolated parts to be serviced) before they 
are opened to the atmosphere. Currently, Sec.  82.156(a) reads (in 
part) ``all persons disposing of appliances * * * must evacuate the 
refrigerant in the entire unit to a recovery/recycling machine 
certified pursuant to Sec.  82.158. All persons opening appliances * * 
* must evacuate the refrigerant in either the entire unit or the part 
to be serviced (if the latter can be isolated) to a system receiver or 
a recovery or recycling equipment certified pursuant to Sec.  82.158.'' 
Paragraphs 82.156(a)(1) through (5) specify pressures to which the 
appliances must be evacuated.
    It has come to EPA's attention that it may be possible in some 
cases to briefly attain the required evacuation levels specified in 
paragraphs 82.156(a)(1) through (5) while there is still liquid 
refrigerant in the appliance or in the isolated part to be serviced. In 
general, if vapor is removed from a mixture of liquid and vapor 
refrigerant at equilibrium, thus reducing the vapor pressure, the 
liquid will boil until the equilibrium between the vapor and liquid 
states is restored, returning the vapor pressure to the saturation 
pressure of the refrigerant. However, heat must flow into the system 
from the environment for this to occur, and such heat flow takes time. 
Thus, if an individual quickly recovers vapor from an appliance, 
permitting no time for the liquid to boil to return the vapor pressure 
to the equilibrium value, the pressure specified in Sec.  82.156(a) may 
be attained, albeit only temporarily. If the individual opens the 
appliance at this point, a great deal of refrigerant will be released 
to the environment. This is because the density of liquid refrigerant 
is typically one to two orders of magnitude greater than that of vapor 
refrigerant, meaning that a large mass of refrigerant may be 
concentrated in a relatively small volume of liquid, and the liquid 
will continue to boil off into the atmosphere as long as the appliance 
is opened.

[[Page 11963]]

    EPA believes that the use of the phrase ``evacuate the 
refrigerant'' in Sec.  82.156(a), as well as the language in Sec.  
82.154(a)(the prohibition on venting), already clearly indicates that 
liquid refrigerant must be removed from the appliance or isolated part 
before it is opened for servicing. Otherwise, a significant portion of 
the refrigerant will not be evacuated to a recovery device, a good 
faith effort to recover and recycle refrigerant will not be made, and 
releases to the environment would not be considered a de minimis 
release.
    One commenter stated that it may not be possible to remove all 
liquid refrigerant as a part of the required evacuation prior to 
opening a refrigeration system. The commenter asserted that due to the 
complexity and uniqueness of some large refrigeration systems, it may 
be impossible to determine if all liquid refrigerant has been removed 
from the entire system prior to opening. The commenter added that 
determination may become even more difficult for substitute 
refrigerants that remain in the liquid phase at or near ambient 
temperature and pressure.
    The Agency continues to believe that these clarifications in Sec.  
82.156(a) are appropriate as proposed. The intent of the wording change 
to the required practices is to make certain that refrigerant will be 
evacuated to a recovery device prior to opening an appliance. In order 
to eliminate any possible ambiguity on this point, the Agency is adding 
the phrase, ``including all the liquid refrigerant,'' after the phrase, 
``the refrigerant,'' in both places where it occurs in Sec.  82.156(a). 
To ensure that the modified language does not implicitly override Sec.  
82.156(a)(2)(i)(B), which provides that recovery of liquid is not 
required in cases of non-major repairs to low-pressure appliances, EPA 
is also adding the parenthetical phrase ``(except as provided at Sec.  
82.156(a)(2)(i)(B))'' to the second occurrence of ``including all 
liquid refrigerant.''
    In response to the second request for clarification, EPA believes 
that if a part of an appliance already meets the required level of 
evacuation due to normal operating characteristics, it may be isolated 
and opened for service, maintenance, or repair without further 
evacuation, so long as liquid refrigerant is not present in the 
isolated part. Again, the purpose of the requirement to evacuate under 
Sec.  82.156(a) is to minimize refrigerant emissions from the part. If 
the required level of evacuation has been met, and no liquid is present 
in the isolated part, only de minimis quantities of refrigerant will be 
released when the part is opened to the atmosphere. Therefore, this 
situation meets the requirements to evacuate under Sec.  82.156(a).
    The third point of clarification concerns verification of 
evacuation by certified technicians. EPA received a comment requesting 
clarification concerning verification of evacuation requirements by 
certified technicians. A commenter stated that the reference to 
``technicians'' should be singular not plural. EPA certainly believes 
that verification by a single technician is sufficient. Accordingly, 
section 82.156(a) is modified to state that a certified technician must 
verify that the applicable level of evacuation has been reached in the 
appliance or the part before it is opened.
2. Extension of the Refrigerant Standard to Substitute Refrigerants
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to establish refrigerant standards for 
new and used HFC and PFC refrigerants that were very similar to those 
for CFCs and HCFCs. In addition, the Agency proposed to update its 
requirements for all refrigerants to reflect the ARI Standard 700-1995, 
Specifications for Fluorocarbon and Other Refrigerants, which includes 
standards for a number of refrigerants that were not addressed by the 
previously codified standard, ARI Standard 700-1993. EPA also requested 
comment on adoption of a generic standard for those refrigerants that 
are not covered by ARI Standard 700-1995.
    In a previous rulemaking (July 24, 2003, 68 FR 43786), commonly 
referred to as the IRG-2, EPA adopted, with modification, the ARI 
Standard 700-1995 along with the standard's analytical protocol (i.e., 
Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-1995) into Appendix A of Sec.  82, 
subpart F. While the IRG-2 rulemaking adopted the ARI Standard 700-
1995, it included a modification in that the rule did not adopt 
standards for refrigerants that were not included in the originally 
adopted ARI Standard 700-1993, namely HFC refrigerants and blends 
thereof.
a. Updates to the Refrigerant Standard
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to adopt ARI 700-1995, that includes 
standards for a number of refrigerants that were not addressed by the 
previously codified standard, ARI 700-1993. These refrigerants include 
R-404A, R-405A, R-406A, R-407A, B, and C, R-408A, R-409A, R-410A and B, 
R-411A and B, R-412A, R-507, R-508 and R-509. The proposed changes to 
the standard included: (1) The adoption of a single analysis (for each 
blend) for determining both the composition of each refrigerant blend 
and its level of contamination by organic impurities, and (2) the 
standardization of the wide range of equipment, techniques, and 
calculations used in the methods for determining the composition of 
refrigerant blends.
    The NPRM also proposed changes to the referenced protocol in 
Section 5.1 Referee Test (63 FR 32095), which specifically references 
Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-95-Analytical Procedures for ARI 
Standard 700-95. In addition, the ARI Standard 700's analytical 
protocol was originally included into regulation by reference into 
Appendix A of Sec.  82, subpart F (based on ARI Standard 700-1993), as 
Section 5. Sampling, Summary of Test Methods and Maximum Permissible 
Contaminant Levels (May 14, 1993; 58 FR 28660). The protocol 
established definitive test procedures for determining the quality of 
new, reclaimed and/or repackaged refrigerants for use in new and 
existing refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment. Proposed changes 
to Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-95 included:
     The addition of test methods for determining the 
composition of the zeotropic refrigerant blend families R-404, R-407, 
R-408, R-409, and R-410, and of the azeotropic refrigerant blends R-507 
and R-508--These additions enable laboratories to verify that the 
blends contain the appropriate percentages of their component 
materials.
     The addition of a gravimetric test as an 
alternate method for determining high-boiling residues. This method is 
considered to be more accurate than the previously adopted volumetric 
method. This addition permits laboratories with the appropriate 
facilities and expertise to perform more precise measurements of high-
boiling residues than are permitted by the volumetric method. The 
volumetric method is retained as an alternate in ARI 700-95, because it 
is adequately precise for most applications, and is less expensive to 
perform than the gravimetric method.
     Finally, several typographic and wording changes 
were made to improve the clarity of the standard.
    EPA believes that these changes will make the reclamation 
requirements more enforceable while decreasing the burden of industry 
to prove conformance.
    EPA received several comments concerning the requirements for 
substitute HFC and PFC refrigerants. However, EPA is not finalizing 
refrigerant standards for HFC or PFC refrigerants that do not contain 
an ODS. Refrigerants that were previously adopted into Appendix A, 
based on ARI

[[Page 11964]]

Standard 700-1993 that do not consist in part or whole of a listed 
class I or class II ozone-depleting chemicals will not be included in 
the new appendix, namely R-23; R-32; R-125; R-134a; and R-143a.
    Today's action includes substitute refrigerants consisting of a 
class I or class II ODS into Appendix A (based on the ARI Standard 700-
1995), that were omitted from the IRG-2 rulemaking (July 24, 2003, 68 
FR 43786) because they were either pure HFC refrigerants or blends of 
HFC refrigerants. While ARI Standard 700-1995 includes standards for a 
number of refrigerants that were not addressed by the previously 
codified standard, ARI Standard 700-1993, EPA is only adopting 
refrigerant standards for those substitute refrigerants listed in ARI 
Standard 700-1995 that consist in part or whole of an ODS, namely R-11; 
R-12; R-13; R-22; R-113; R-114; R-123; R-124; R-401A and B; R-402A and 
B; R-405A; R-406A; R-408A; R-409A; R-411A and B; R-412A; R-500; R-502; 
R-503; and R-509.
b. Generic Specification Standards for Refrigerants
    Despite EPA's recent adoption of the ARI Standard 700-1995, the 
Agency's refrigerant standards are likely to be rendered incomplete by 
the rapid development and introduction of new refrigerants into the 
market. Although EPA will consider specification requirements along 
with recycling requirements for each new refrigerant as it undergoes 
SNAP review, there is likely to be a delay between the introduction of 
new refrigerants and SNAP approval of new refrigerants. EPA feels that 
it is premature to adopt specific specification standards for 
refrigerants prior to their acceptance for specific end-uses under 
SNAP. To address this issue, EPA proposed to establish a generic 
refrigerant standard for refrigerant substitutes for which standards 
have not yet been codified into Appendix A of 40 CFR 82, subpart F.
    EPA received comment that the proposed generic specifications 
failed to include a specification for either organic impurities or for 
blend balance. EPA notes that specifications for organic impurities are 
included in the ``Other Impurities Including Refrigerant'' column and 
are limited to 0.50% by weight. EPA is establishing that the allowable 
blend composition of reclaimed refrigerant must be maintained to 2.0% for blend components greater than or equal to 25%; 
1.0% for blend components less than 25% but 
greater than or equal to 10%; 0.50% for blend 
components less than 10%. This means that for refrigerant blends that 
must meet the generic specifications, each blend component must be 
maintained at the aforementioned levels in order to be considered 
reclaimed. For example, assume that the hypothetical azeotropic blend 
R-500x has a nominal composition of a, b, and c at 8%, 13%, and 79% 
respectively, where any component consists of an ODS. The reclaimed 
blend R-500x must have a composition that falls within the following 
ranges: component a: 7.5% to 8.5%; component b: 12% to 14%; and 
component c: 77% to 81%.
    EPA received favorable comments and requests to include the generic 
maximum contaminant level (based on ARI Standard 700-1995) for 
refrigerants that have SNAP approval but have not been included into 
ARI Standard 700. One commenter expressed concern that the ARI Standard 
700 would act as regulation (instead of EPA adopting the standard as 
Appendix A), and possibly allow the use of refrigerants that have not 
been approved for specific end-uses under SNAP.
    EPA is aware that instances may occur where refrigerants have been 
listed as approved for specific end-uses under SNAP, but have not been 
noted in the ARI Standard 700. Conversely, refrigerants may not have 
SNAP approval for a particular refrigeration end-use, but may be 
included in the ARI Standard 700. EPA has made efforts throughout this 
action to clarify that Appendix A to 40 CFR 82 subpart F is the Federal 
regulation that governs specifications for refrigerants. While this 
appendix is based on ARI Standard 700, the ARI standard is not in 
itself a regulation. This point is essential as EPA determines 
specifications for SNAP-approved refrigerants, so that mandatory 
specifications are not created for substitute refrigerants that have 
either been found unacceptable for specific end-uses or have not been 
addressed under SNAP.
    Reclamation requires not only that refrigerant be processed to the 
refrigerant specifications in Appendix A, but also that it be analyzed 
to verify that it meets the specifications. Therefore, a ``generic 
refrigerant specification'' should be matched by a generic analytical 
protocol. General analytical procedures exist to determine the levels 
of acidity, water, high-boiling residue, chloride, and noncondensable 
gases in refrigerants; these procedures are detailed in parts 1 through 
5 of Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-1995. However, individual gas 
chromatography procedures are required for each refrigerant in order to 
determine the overall purity of that refrigerant. This is because each 
refrigerant has its own gas chromatogram (profile) and characteristic 
impurities (other than acid, water, high-boiling residue, chloride, and 
noncondensable gases). EPA understands that the need to develop gas 
chromatography procedures is what frequently slows the adoption of 
reclamation procedures for new refrigerants. Thus, EPA believes that it 
is useful to have generic specifications for new refrigerants and 
analytical protocols for acid, water, high-boiling residues, chloride, 
and noncondensable gases for these refrigerants in the absence of 
specific gas chromatography procedures.
    Thus, the proposed generic specifications are applicable for all 
SNAP-approved refrigerants, consisting in whole or in part of an ODS, 
for which specification standards have not yet been included in 
Appendix A. EPA is establishing and including as Appendix A1 the 
following generic maximum contaminant levels for refrigerants and 
specific composition standards for SNAP-approved refrigerant blends 
awaiting inclusion into Appendix A:

                   Generic Maximum Contaminant Levels
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Contaminant                        Reporting units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air and Other Non-condensables............  1.5% by volume @ 25[deg]C (N/
                                             A for refrigerants used in
                                             low-pressure appliances*).
Water.....................................  10 ppm by weight; 20 ppm by
                                             weight (for refrigerants
                                             used in low-pressure
                                             appliances*).
Other Impurities Including Refrigerant....  0.50% by weight.
High boiling residue......................  0.01% by volume.
Particulates/solids.......................  visually clean to pass.
Acidity...................................  1.0 ppm by weight.
Chlorides (chloride level for pass/fail is  No visible turbidity.
 3 ppm).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Low-pressure appliances means an appliance that uses a refrigerant
  with a liquid phase saturation pressure below 45 psia at 104 [deg]F.


                           Blend Compositions
                           [Where applicable]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Allowable
            Nominal composition  (by weight%)               composition
                                                           (by weight%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component constitutes 25% or more.......................   2.0

[[Page 11965]]

 
Component constitutes less than 25% but greater than 10%   1.0
Component constitutes less than or equal to 10%.........   0.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA also received comment that the process for reclaiming blended 
refrigerant back to original specifications at a reclamation facility 
is a technically simple operation, which is hampered by the refrigerant 
manufacturers' refusal to sell any amount of the individual blend 
components to a reclaimer not affiliated with the manufacturer. The 
manufacturers, however, argued that reclaimers who return fractionated 
refrigerants to specification would be guilty of patent infringement. 
The commenter believed that the patent in this case has already been 
served on the fractionated refrigerant and returning this refrigerant 
to specification constitutes repair of broken material. The commenter 
requested that part of the final rule include a requirement for 
refrigerant manufacturers to make components of refrigerant blends 
available to reclamation facilities at a fair market price.
    EPA declines to address these issues in this final rule. EPA did 
not propose to require refrigerant manufacturers to make components of 
refrigerant blends available to reclamation facilities. Therefore, EPA 
will not now impose such a requirement in this final rule. Moreover, 
EPA views this as, essentially, a commercial dispute that is not 
appropriately addressed in the context of EPA's regulations.
c. Application of the Refrigerant Standard to Virgin and Used 
Refrigerants
    EPA believes that the vast majority of new refrigerant sold meets 
the ARI Standard 700-1995, and that chemical manufacturers have led the 
way in assuring that new refrigerants meet the specifications of the 
Standard. However, the Agency understands that used or contaminated 
refrigerant has been marketed and/or sold as ``new,'' which could 
result in equipment failure and subsequent venting of ozone-depleting 
refrigerants. In order to ensure that the Agency can prevent the sale 
of contaminated refrigerant that is labeled as ``new,'' EPA is 
clarifying that all refrigerants must meet the specifications of 
Appendix A, based on the ARI Standard 700-1995, regardless of how they 
are marketed. EPA received favorable comments on this requirement, 
which cited the need to have all refrigerants meet the refrigerant 
specifications regardless of origin.
    Commenters stated that manufacturers of virgin refrigerants have 
previously established operating procedures to meet the refrigerant 
standard, and have consistently verified the results using the protocol 
established under ARI Standard 700. Therefore, EPA believes that this 
requirement will not place additional burden on the refrigerant 
manufacturing industry, since the industry would have continued to 
follow ARI Standard 700 in the absence of this regulatory 
clarification.
d. Possession and Transfer of Used Refrigerant
    The Agency received a comment from an EPA-certified refrigerant 
reclaimer requesting clarification as to what entities, other than 
reclaimers, can take possession of used product and what reporting is 
required of them once they take possession.
    EPA regulations prohibit the sale of any used refrigerant, with the 
exceptions of refrigerant used and intended for use in MVAC or MVAC-
like appliances, unless it has been reclaimed by an EPA-certified 
reclaimer (Sec.  82.154(g)). Therefore, it would be a violation of this 
prohibition for any person (including wholesalers, service companies, 
and brokers) to sell the material (i.e., used refrigerant) for use as a 
refrigerant to a new owner.
    Since used refrigerant that is sold to an EPA-certified reclaimer 
does not equate to sale of used refrigerant to a new owner, such sale 
is legal. Therefore, EPA finds that persons such as wholesalers, 
service companies, and brokers are allowed to collect used refrigerant 
for the purpose of selling bulk quantities to certified reclaimers. 
This interpretation reduces emissions by granting flexibility to 
appliance owners who cannot afford the burden of storing small 
quantities of used refrigerant, while allowing other entities to 
transfer ownership of the used refrigerant to certified reclaimers. 
Without this flexibility, some appliance owners might have an incentive 
to vent refrigerant instead of bearing the costs of storing used 
refrigerant or shipping small quantities of refrigerant to reclaimers. 
This transfer of ownership is not deemed a violation of Sec.  82.154(g) 
since the material is not intended for use as a refrigerant, but as 
used material for purposes of reclamation. Conversely, it would be a 
violation of this section for any person to sell the material as a 
refrigerant, unless it has first been reclaimed by an EPA-certified 
reclaimer.
3. Leak Repair
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to lower the permissible leak rates for 
some air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment containing more than 
50 pounds of CFC or HCFC refrigerant, and to extend the leak repair 
requirements (as they would be amended) to air-conditioning and 
refrigeration equipment containing more than 50 pounds of HFC or PFC 
refrigerant. Specifically, EPA proposed to lower the permissible annual 
leak rate for new commercial refrigeration equipment from 35 to 10 
percent of the charge per year, the permissible annual leak rate for 
older commercial refrigeration equipment from 35 to 15 percent per 
year; the permissible annual leak rate for some industrial process 
refrigeration equipment from 35 to 20 percent of the charge per year; 
the permissible annual leak rate for other new appliances (e.g., 
comfort cooling chillers) from 15 to 5 percent of the charge per year; 
and the permissible annual leak rate for other existing appliances 
(e.g., comfort cooling chillers) from 15 to 10 percent of the charge 
per year.
    EPA has decided to defer action on the leak repair components of 
the NPRM to a future rulemaking dedicated to finalizing the proposed 
leak repair requirements.
4. Servicing MVAC and MVAC-like Appliances Containing Substitute 
Refrigerants
a. Background
    MVAC-like appliances are open-drive compressor appliances used to 
cool the driver's or passenger's compartment of non-road motor 
vehicles, such as agricultural or construction vehicles. MVAC-like 
appliances are essentially identical to motor vehicle air conditioners, 
which are subject to regulations promulgated under section 609 of the 
Act, but because MVAC-like appliances are contained in non-road 
vehicles, they are subject to regulations promulgated under section 608 
of the Act.
    Due to the similarities between MVACs and MVAC-like appliances in 
design and servicing patterns, EPA has established requirements 
regarding the servicing of MVAC-like appliances that are very similar 
to those for MVACs (58 FR 28686). In fact, many of the section 608 
requirements for MVAC-like appliances that are published at subpart F 
simply refer to the section 609 requirements for MVACs that are

[[Page 11966]]

published at subpart B. For instance, Sec.  82.156(a)(5) states that 
persons who open MVAC-like appliances for maintenance, service, or 
repair may do so only while ``properly using,'' as defined at Sec.  
82.32(e), recycling or recovery equipment certified pursuant to Sec.  
82.158(f) or (g) as applicable. The definition of ``properly using'' 
appears in the regulations published at subpart B, and the reference 
therefore subjects MVAC-like appliances to the evacuation and 
refrigerant standard requirements of subpart B. Similarly, the 
equipment and technician certification provisions applicable to MVAC-
like appliances in subpart F (Sec.  82.158(f) and Sec.  82.161(a)(5)) 
refer to the equipment and technician certification provisions 
applicable to MVACs in subpart B (Sec.  82.36(a) and Sec.  82.40).
    The section 609 and 608 regulations treat MVACs and MVAC-like 
appliances (and persons servicing them) slightly differently in four 
areas. First, persons who service MVACs are subject to the section 609 
equipment and technician certification requirements only if they 
perform ``service for consideration,'' meaning that they are 
financially or otherwise compensated for their services. Persons who 
service MVAC-like appliances are subject to the section 608 equipment 
and technician certification requirements regardless of whether they 
are compensated for their work.\11\ Second, persons who service MVACs 
must have recovery and recycling equipment available at their place of 
business, even if they never open the refrigeration circuit of the 
MVACs. In contrast, persons who service MVAC-like appliances are 
required to have recovery and recycling equipment available at their 
place of business only if they open the appliances (i.e., perform work 
that would release refrigerant to the environment unless the 
refrigerant were recovered previously). Third, recycling and recovery 
equipment that is intended for use with MVACs and that was manufactured 
before the effective date of the section 609 equipment certification 
provisions must be demonstrated to be ``substantially identical'' to 
certified recycling equipment. While refrigerant recycling and recovery 
equipment manufactured before the effective date of the section 608 
equipment and intended for use with MVAC-like appliances must be able 
to pull a 4-inch vacuum. Finally, persons servicing MVAC-like 
appliances have the option of becoming certified as Type II technicians 
under subpart F (i.e., section 608) instead of becoming certified as 
MVAC technicians under subpart B (i.e., section 609). The first three 
differences arise from differences between the statutory requirements 
of sections 608 and 609; the last is intended to give persons who 
service MVAC-like appliances flexibility in choosing the type of 
training and testing most appropriate for their work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Note that persons servicing MVACs are subject to the 
section 608 venting prohibition regardless of whether they are 
compensated for their work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Amendments to Subpart B
    In a final rule published on December 30, 1997 (62 FR 68025), EPA 
made several changes to the provisions governing servicing of MVACs and 
MVAC-like appliances (as they are currently defined) at subpart B. 
First, EPA extended the regulations to MVACs containing substitutes for 
CFC and HCFC refrigerants. Second, EPA explicitly allowed mobile 
servicing of MVACs and MVAC-like appliances. That is, technicians are 
permitted to transport their recovery/recycling equipment from their 
place of business in order to recover refrigerant from an MVAC or MVAC-
like appliance before servicing it. Third, EPA permitted refrigerant 
recovered from disposed MVACs or MVAC-like appliances to be reused in 
MVACs or MVAC-like appliances without reclamation, as long as the 
refrigerant was processed through approved refrigerant recycling 
equipment before being charged into the MVAC to be serviced. Fourth, 
EPA adopted new standards for recycling and recovery equipment intended 
for use with MVACs. These new standards address HFC-134a recovery/
recycling equipment, HFC-134a recover-only equipment, service 
procedures for HFC-134a containment, standards for recycled HFC-134a, 
recovery/recycling equipment intended for use with both CFC-12 and HFC-
134a, and recover-only equipment designed to be used with any motor 
vehicle refrigerants other than CFC-12 and HFC-134a. Please refer to 
the December 30, 1997, final rule for a detailed explanation and 
justification of these changes for MVACs.
    These regulations apply both to MVACs containing all SNAP-approved 
substitutes and to MVAC-like appliances containing class I and class II 
substances. As discussed at length in the final amendment to subpart B, 
EPA believes that it is appropriate to cover both MVACs and MVAC-like 
appliances under the subpart B regulations, although EPA is relying on 
section 608 authority to address refrigerant venting during the 
maintenance, service, repair, and disposal of MVAC-like appliances. In 
brief, the rationale for this approach is that (1) MVACs and MVAC-like 
appliance are very similar, and the requirements for MVAC-like 
appliances under the subpart F regulations have historically referred 
back to the requirements for MVACs under subpart B, and (2) MVACs and 
MVAC-like appliances are often serviced by the same group of people, 
and therefore publishing the requirements for both MVACs and MVAC-like 
appliances in the same place will minimize confusion within this group. 
Under this approach, most of the provisions governing MVAC-like 
appliances have been reproduced in the regulations at subpart B and 
will be removed from the regulations at subpart F; an important 
exception is the definition of MVAC-like appliance, which will remain 
in the regulations at subpart F. Thus, the final subpart B rule covers 
MVAC-like appliances as defined in the subpart F regulations, which at 
the time of the final subpart B rule was promulgated, meant MVAC-like 
appliances containing CFCs or HCFCs. However, the subpart B amendment 
did not affect the four differences between the treatment of MVACs and 
MVAC-like appliances identified above.
c. Amendments Concerning MVAC and MVAC-like Appliances Containing 
Substitute Refrigerants
    As proposed and discussed previously, EPA has changed the 
definitions of ``appliance'' and ``opening'' in subpart F to include 
substitute refrigerants. EPA is also establishing required practices 
for ``MVAC-like appliance'' (which is based on the definition of 
``appliance''). This effectively applies the major requirements of the 
amended subpart B regulations to MVAC-like appliances containing 
substitutes for CFCs and HCFCs that consist of a class I or class II 
ODS. However today's final rule does not affect the section 609 service 
requirements for MVACs using HFC-134a (R-134a). Today's final rule does 
establish that the regulatory structure in place for class I and class 
II ODSs used as refrigerants in MVACs will only apply to substitutes 
consisting of a class I or class II ODS. EPA has also made editorial 
changes to eliminate redundancy between the subpart B and subpart F 
rules in their treatment of MVAC-like appliances.
    EPA believes that in order to implement the venting prohibition, it 
is necessary to apply the major subpart B requirements (including the 
requirements to properly use recycling and recovery equipment and to 
certify recycling and recovery equipment and technicians) to MVAC-like 
appliances

[[Page 11967]]

containing substitute refrigerants. In the case of MVAC-like 
appliances, the similarities in design and servicing patterns between 
MVACs and MVAC-like appliances make it appropriate to subject MVAC-like 
appliances to the required practices and certification programs 
established for MVACs in subpart B rather than to the required 
practices and certification programs established for stationary 
appliances in subpart F. As noted above, the argument for parallel 
coverage of MVACs and MVAC-like appliances was discussed at length in 
the May 14, 1993, rule (58 FR 28686).
d. Clarification of Applicability-Servicing of Buses Using HCFC-22
    EPA has become aware of a growing misinterpretation of how the 
Agency classifies buses using HCFC-22 refrigerant (R-22), and how 
technicians servicing buses using R-22 should be certified. The 
definition of MVAC-like appliance at Sec.  82.152 specifically states 
that appliances using R-22 are not covered under the definition of 
MVAC-like. Similarly, the definition of MVAC at Sec.  82.32 
specifically states that it does not cover air-conditioning systems 
found on passenger buses using HCFC-22 refrigerant.
    Section 82.152 defines high-pressure appliance as an appliance that 
uses a refrigerant with a liquid phase saturation pressure between 170 
psia and 355 psia at 104 [deg]F, including R-22. EPA has established 
under Sec.  82.161(a)(2) that technicians who maintain, service, or 
repair high-pressure appliances must be certified as a section 608 type 
II technician. Hence taking the definition of high-pressure appliance 
into consideration, EPA finds that technicians servicing buses using R-
22 must be certified according to section 608 not 609. EPA inspections 
at transit facilities typically have found that technicians have 
credentials that allow the servicing of buses using R-12, as well as 
buses using R-22 (i.e., that are certified under section 609 and 
section 608 type II, respectively). But, EPA has received an increasing 
number of inquiries concerning this issue. Therefore, EPA is providing 
clarification in this final rule to assist the regulated community.

E. Refrigerant Recovery/Recycling Equipment Certification

    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to require that equipment used to service 
appliances containing HFCs and PFCs be tested by an EPA-approved 
laboratory to the same standards as apply to equipment used to service 
appliances containing class I and class II refrigerants. This proposal 
was based on the more recent ARI Standard 740-1998, which adopts more 
substitute refrigerants into the standard than the 1995 version.
    EPA has decided to address the proposed certification of 
refrigerant recovery/recycling equipment intended for use with 
substitute refrigerants in a future action.

F. Technician Certification

    In the NPRM, EPA proposed to extend the certification requirements 
for technicians who work with CFC and HCFC refrigerants to technicians 
who work with HFCs and PFCs. EPA also proposed to ``grandfather'' 
technicians who have been certified to work with CFCs and HCFCs by not 
requiring them to be retested in order to work with HFC or PFC 
appliances.
    Commenters generally supported EPA's decision to not require 
additional training and testing in order to work with and purchase HFC 
and PFC refrigerants, as opposed to any requirement to once again 
certify credentialed technicians. EPA received numerous comments from 
members of the MVAC service sector expressing the need for fairness and 
consistency in applying rule provisions to all potentially 
environmentally damaging refrigerants. Comments from air-conditioning 
and refrigeration contractors voiced the opinion that the imposition of 
less stringent recovery or certification requirements for HFC 
refrigerants could undermine compliance with recycling requirements for 
both HFC and ozone-depleting refrigerants by confusing technicians and 
encouraging a ``cavalier'' attitude toward refrigerant recovery. The 
majority of commenters believed that failure to impose a technician 
certification requirement on persons working with HFCs and PFCs would 
lead to release and mixture of both ozone-depleting refrigerants and 
their substitutes.
    Commenters contesting the certification requirement stated several 
reasons to justify their opposition. They believe that economics and 
the value of refrigerants promote recovery and recycling, not an EPA 
mandate to certify technicians. They also contested the Agency's belief 
that certification will reduce venting or cross-contamination by 
providing technicians with information about effective and efficient 
recycling. These commenters stated that the technician certification 
requirement does not address the intent of persons, certified or not, 
who are predetermined to knowingly vent refrigerant, because 
technicians have routinely vented R-12 despite being certified, and 
preferred the option of educating technicians at the point of purchase 
via instructions and warnings instead of mandating further 
certification requirements.
    With today's action, EPA is not requiring certification of 
technicians who work exclusively with HFC and PFC refrigerants that do 
not consist of a class I or class II ODS. However the Agency is 
clarifying that certification is required in order to maintain, 
service, or repair appliances, as well as to dispose appliances (other 
than small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like appliances) containing a 
substitute consisting of a class I or class II ODS. As discussed below, 
technician certification will also be required in order to purchase 
substitute refrigerants that contain a class I or class II ODS.
    EPA believes that this action is necessary to effectively implement 
and enforce both section 608(c) and section 608(a)(2) of the Act. As 
discussed above, section 608(c) prohibits the knowing release of 
substitute refrigerants during the service, maintenance, repair or 
disposal of appliances, except for de minimis releases associated with 
``good faith attempts to recapture and recycle or safely dispose'' of 
these refrigerants. It is reasonable to interpret ``good faith attempts 
to recapture and recycle or safely dispose'' as requiring that only 
certified technicians perform service, maintenance, repair, or disposal 
that could release ozone-depleting refrigerants and/or ozone-depleting 
substitute refrigerants. This interpretation is also consistent with 
EPA's interpretation of the same statutory language as it applies to 
ozone-depleting refrigerants.
    It is the Agency's belief that persons who are not certified 
technicians are far more likely to intentionally or inadvertently 
release refrigerant contrary to the venting prohibition, and that 
consistent application of technician certification requirements is 
necessary to implement the section 608(a) directive to reduce releases 
and maximize recapture and recycling of class I and II refrigerants. 
Requiring certification of technicians who work with substitute 
refrigerants that consist of a class I or class II ODS is also 
necessary to comply with the section 608(a) requirements for EPA to 
promulgate regulations that reduce emissions of class I and II 
refrigerants to the lowest achievable levels and maximize recapture and 
recycling of such substances. In fact, due to the absence of a 
certification requirement and their consequent lack of adequate 
training, they might be unaware of the existence or scope of the 
restrictions.

[[Page 11968]]

Thus, they might fail to recover refrigerants properly or may not 
recover them at all. Technician certification requirements for work 
with substitute refrigerants consisting of a class I or class II ODS 
will directly reduce emissions of substitutes containing an ODS and 
protect against refrigerant mixture and cross contamination, which 
otherwise would cause more substantial releases of class I and II 
refrigerants for the following reasons.
    First, technician certification ensures that technicians are 
trained in refrigerant recovery requirements and techniques and are 
knowledgeable of EPA refrigerant handling practices. Before EPA adopted 
the technician certification requirements, technicians in many sectors 
were not recovering refrigerants at all, and technicians who did 
recover were not necessarily minimizing emissions as much as possible. 
Thus, many technicians lacked expertise that they would need to comply 
with the recycling and recovery provisions, and needed training to 
acquire that expertise. While some vocational schools and training 
programs addressed refrigerant recovery, participation in such programs 
was low. Given this situation, EPA was concerned that without a testing 
or training requirement, recovery and recycling would often not occur 
at all or would be performed improperly. This would lead not only to 
refrigerant release, but to refrigerant contamination, safety concerns, 
productivity losses, and equipment damage. EPA discussed at length the 
benefits of training and certification in the final rule published on 
May 14, 1993 (58 FR 28691-94), and in the Regulatory Impact Analysis 
(RIA) performed for that rule (6-34 through 6-39).
    While EPA understands that a person who is unconcerned about the 
venting of refrigerant may illegally do so whether or not they are 
certified, the Agency believes that requiring technicians to 
demonstrate knowledge of standard practices and regulations via a 
technician certification requirement is the most effective means of 
reducing refrigerant emissions. There is a direct correlation between 
information exchange to technicians and the technician certification 
requirement. Agency approved technician certifying programs tend to 
offer training programs, directly linked to the section 608 exam, 
covering proper handling and recovery techniques. Information from the 
EPA Ozone Hotline reflects the fact that technicians seeking 
certification often request information about programs that also offer 
combined course work and study materials. In addition, EPA mandates 
that section 608 certifying programs test technicians' proficiency and 
understanding of the environmental impacts of venting, refrigeration 
regulations, refrigerant leak detection, recovery techniques, safety, 
and safe disposal of refrigerants. Mandatory certification also 
enhances EPA's ability to enforce today's rule by providing another 
tool for use against intentional noncompliance (i.e., the Agency's 
ability to revoke the technician's certification).
    Secondly, in addition to possessing training in refrigerant 
recovery, certified individuals are more likely than uncertified 
individuals to have access to recovery equipment because they will have 
a heightened awareness, as proven by their passing grade for the 
certification exam, of the requirement to recover refrigerant prior to 
opening an appliance. EPA requires that persons maintaining, servicing, 
repairing, or disposing of air-conditioning and refrigeration 
appliances certify to the appropriate EPA Regional Office that they 
have acquired (built, bought, or leased) recovery/recycling equipment.
    While EPA believes that the value of refrigerant independently 
promotes recycling and reclamation, nonetheless, this incentive can be 
and often is overridden by ignorance and/or defiance of regulations via 
a lack of access or use of recycling/recovery equipment. The 
requirement for technician certification will enhance the effect of the 
economic incentive provided by the value of refrigerant by ensuring 
that persons working with refrigerant have the information and 
equipment necessary to reach that economic potential.
    For the reasons cited above, EPA believes that it is necessary to 
clarify and extend the technician certification requirement in order to 
implement section 608(a), and that EPA has authority under this section 
to promulgate a technician certification requirement. Therefore, EPA is 
extending the certification requirements for technicians who work with 
CFC and HCFC appliances to technicians who work with appliances 
containing substitute refrigerants that consist whole or in part of a 
class I or class II ODS.
    EPA is not requiring previously certified technicians who have been 
certified to work with CFC and HCFC appliances to undertake additional 
training or testing in order to service substitutes containing an ODS. 
This decision is based on EPA's understanding that techniques and 
requirements for recycling substitute refrigerants are very similar to 
those for CFCs and HCFCs. Differences, such as compatibility with 
different lubricants, have been highlighted by the recycling/
reclamation equipment certification program, and are being reinforced 
by recycling and recovery equipment manufacturers. EPA believes that 
more recent information on proper handling of substitutes has been and 
will continue to be disseminated to previously certified technicians, 
refrigerant manufacturers and distributors, recovery equipment 
manufacturers, industry associations, and the trade press. Moreover, 
the requirements for handling substitutes adopted in this rule are in 
most cases identical to the requirements for handling CFC and HCFC 
refrigerants.
    In addition to EPA's outreach efforts, the normal chain of 
information dissemination within the refrigeration and air-conditioning 
community should quickly alert certified technicians of EPA's adoption 
of new specific standards for substitute refrigerants. Accordingly, 
technicians that are already certified will be knowledgeable about the 
requirements for recapture and recovery, the potential damages 
associated with improper mixture of refrigerants and the existence of 
comprehensive requirements for refrigerant handling. Thus, the benefits 
of any new certification requirement affecting previously certified 
technicians would probably be small and would likely be outweighed by 
the burden of such certification.
    New technicians entering the field (i.e., technicians certified 
after the effective date of this final rule) will have to become 
certified in order to maintain, service, or repair appliances using 
CFC, HCFC, and substitute refrigerants consisting of a class I or class 
II ODS. As part of its next update of the technician certification 
question bank, EPA will include questions on handling such substitute 
refrigerants and potential environmental damages associated with the 
illegal release of substitute refrigerants.

G. Refrigerant Sales Restriction

1. Background
    In accordance with the regulations promulgated under sections 608 
and 609, only certified technicians may purchase CFC and HCFC 
refrigerants. Effective November 14, 1994, the sales restriction covers 
any class I or class II substance used as a refrigerant. Thus, the 
restriction covers ozone-depleting refrigerants contained in bulk 
containers (cans, cylinders, or drums) and pre-charged parts of split-
systems.\12\ The

[[Page 11969]]

restriction excludes refrigerant contained in appliances, such as 
household refrigerators, window air conditioners, and packaged air 
conditioners. In addition, the restriction does not apply to class I or 
class II substances that are not used as refrigerants in appliances, 
such as those used as solvents or sterilizing agents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Effective January 27, 1995, the restriction on sale of pre-
charged split systems has been stayed while EPA reconsiders this 
provision of the sales restriction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a previous rulemaking (July 24, 2003; 68 FR 43786), EPA amended 
the refrigerant sales restriction by amending Sec.  82.154(m), and 
further restricted the sale or distribution or the offer for sale or 
distribution of class I and class II substances used as refrigerants 
that are suitable for use in MVACs, to technicians certified by a 
program approved under Sec.  82.40 and certified in accordance with 
Sec.  82.34 (i.e., section 609 certified technicians). In accordance 
with Sec.  82.34(b), this modification limits refrigerant purchases, by 
such section 609 technicians, to R-12 and substitute refrigerants 
containing a class I or class II ODS that is listed as acceptable for 
use in MVACs, in accordance with all regulations promulgated under 
section 612 of the Act. Furthermore, only technicians certified under 
section 609 are allowed to purchase such ozone-depleting refrigerants 
in containers containing less than 20 pounds of such refrigerant, in 
accordance with Sec.  82.34(b).
    Employers of certified technicians, or the employers' authorized 
representatives are also allowed to purchase refrigerant without being 
certified themselves. This provision of the sales restriction is 
allowed only if the employer provides the wholesaler with evidence that 
he or she employs at least one certified technician. The term 
``employers'' includes, but is not limited to, appliance owners or 
operators who have a contract with a certified technician or employ 
service personnel to perform installation or service and manufacturers 
of air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment.
2. Extension of the Refrigerant Sales Restriction to Substitute 
Refrigerants
    EPA proposed to extend the refrigerant sales restriction to HFC and 
PFC refrigerants in all size containers for use in all types of 
appliances, including HFC refrigerants suitable for use in MVACs. This 
effort was proposed to address the issue of venting of refrigerants 
from MVACs and more specifically the venting of refrigerants resulting 
from cross contamination as a result of retrofitting MVAC from R-12 to 
R-134a. While R-134a is an HFC refrigerant that does not contribute to 
stratospheric ozone depletion, it dominates the MVAC market for 
original manufactured equipment and retrofitted R-12 motor vehicles.
    EPA received comments both opposed and in favor of such a 
restriction, specifically as it would apply to the sale of R-134a. EPA 
received comments from the aftermarket automotive parts industry 
stating that cross contamination is not a concern for MVACs using R-
134a, and thus a sales restriction would not have an effect on venting 
reduction in the automobile sector. The commenters stated that the 
Agency's assumption that DIYers are likely to damage their MVACs by 
cross-contamination is invalid. The commenters in opposition to the 
sales restriction also described any attempt to reduce cross 
contamination via a sales restriction on R-134a as ``too late,'' since 
the majority of R-12 vehicles have already been retrofitted.
    During the comment period for this rule EPA received approximately 
90 comments from automobile service representatives stating their 
assertion that the unrestricted sale of R-134a contributes to the 
problem of cross contamination of motor vehicle air-conditioning 
refrigeration systems by untrained individuals. The commenters claimed 
that DIYer retrofits of existing R-12 and R-134a systems are often 
conducted improperly, leading to contamination of entire systems which 
causes the repair industry to suffer from this contamination long after 
the repair of the improper retrofit is complete. The commenters also 
stated that the automotive service industry has invested in training 
and equipment to prevent the venting of refrigerant and that those same 
efforts should be undertaken by anyone who handles refrigerant in the 
course of serving or repairing a motor vehicle air conditioner.
    Commenters in opposition to the proposed sales restriction stated 
that the sales restriction provides an unfair economic benefit to the 
automotive refrigerant servicing industry by compelling all MVAC 
service to be performed in automotive repair shops. They noted that all 
persons who might be expected to release refrigerant in the course of 
maintaining, servicing, or disposing of appliances should invest in 
recovery and recycling equipment. Comments from MVAC service 
technicians claimed that many shops repair damage to MVACs caused as a 
result of improper retrofits where class I refrigerants have already 
been vented to the atmosphere. Commenters pointed out that repair shops 
invest in recovery and recycling machines that the general public 
cannot access.
    In today's action, EPA is not finalizing the proposed restriction 
on the sale of HFC or PFC refrigerants to certified technicians. EPA 
believes that an extended sales restriction enforces the technician 
certification requirements of both the refrigerant recycling 
regulations promulgated under section 608 and those promulgated under 
section 609 and ultimately implement the requirements of sections 
608(a) and 608(c)(2). As discussed below, EPA has determined that the 
environmental benefit is not sufficient to mandate such a sales 
restriction for HFC and PFC refrigerants. However, the Agency is 
extending the sales restriction to those substitutes that contain a 
class I or class II substance. This will restrict the sale of most HFC 
refrigerant blends to certified technicians.
    EPA has decided that a more expansive sales restriction on HFC and 
PFC refrigerants would not have the desired impact of reducing class I 
and class II refrigerant emissions for a number of reasons. First, 
appliances used in the stationary sector use an array of class I, class 
II, and substitute refrigerants. Although R-410A appears to be the 
current substitute of choice in the stationary air-conditioning sector, 
HCFC refrigerants currently dominate the stationary market and will 
continue to do so in the foreseeable future. Therefore, the 
overwhelming majority of stationary technicians will not work solely on 
appliances using HFC or PFC refrigerants. Secondly, for the stationary 
sector the sales of class I or II refrigerants are already restricted 
to certified technicians and these technicians must be certified in 
order to work on appliances containing CFC and HCFC refrigerants.
    Similarly, mobile sector technicians certified under section 609 of 
the Act who repair or service MVACs for consideration are already 
required to be certified by an EPA-approved organization (Sec.  
82.34(a)). The sale of class I or II ODS refrigerants suitable for use 
in an MVAC in a container containing less than 20 pounds of refrigerant 
is restricted under section 609 (Sec.  82.34(b)) to 609 certified 
technicians and the sales of class I or II refrigerants in other size 
containers is restricted to section 608 certified technicians (Sec.  
82.154(m)). Therefore, the effect of the technician certification and 
sales restriction on the mobile sector is identical to the effect of 
the proposed certification and extended sales restriction. That effect 
is the achievement of an overall reduction in the emissions of 
refrigerants by ensuring

[[Page 11970]]

that technicians are aware of the environmental consequences of illegal 
venting, refrigeration regulations, and proper use of recovery/
recycling equipment.
    In the absence of a requirement for all persons who open appliances 
to obtain and properly use EPA-certified recovery/recycling equipment, 
there is no means to ensure compliance with the venting prohibition. 
The remaining population affected by this rulemaking consists of the 
MVAC do-it-yourself (DIY) market. This category consists of automobile 
owners who choose to service their own MVACs and are not servicing or 
repairing MVACs for consideration. The sales of class I or II 
refrigerants to this group are limited to those DIYers who have been 
certified under section 609. While an extended sales restriction would 
limit the amount of illegal venting of refrigerants by persons who are 
not maintaining, servicing, or repairing MVACs for compensation (for 
example DIYers) by limiting the number of people legally able to 
purchase refrigerant, it would not address the issue of access to 
certified refrigerant recycle/recovery equipment. Although it is 
illegal to knowingly vent refrigerants, DIYers are the only segment of 
the regulated community for which EPA regulations do not explicitly 
require the proper use of certified recycle/recovery equipment. EPA 
believes that any effort to open an appliance prior to recovering the 
refrigerant would constitute a violation of the venting prohibition, 
and the only means for the DIYer to be in compliance with the venting 
prohibition is by using recovery equipment as a means of preventing 
venting during service, maintenance, and repair.
3. Consideration of Alternative Methods of Emissions Reduction
    As discussed in the proposal, EPA considered and sought public 
comments on a number of alternatives to an extended sales restriction 
on HFC and PFC refrigerants. EPA considered many alternatives to 
address the problem of cross contamination of refrigerants in the 
mobile air-conditioning sector which leads to the venting of class I or 
class II refrigerants. This venting occurs due to appliance or 
recovery/recycling equipment failure that results from contamination 
and refrigerant compatibility conflicts and the financial disincentive 
to destroy severely contaminated refrigerants that have been recovered 
from MVACs. Cross contamination is of particular interest in the MVAC 
service sector where mixtures of R-12 and R-134a, and to a lesser 
degree the illegal use of hydrocarbon refrigerants as a substitute for 
R-12, have become commonplace and the use of refrigerant identifiers 
and recovery equipment specified for use with unknown refrigerants has 
become common.
a. Unique Fittings
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed as one alternative method for preventing 
mixture of ozone-depleting and HFC refrigerants a requirement that both 
HFC containers and HFC appliances be equipped with unique fittings that 
would prevent them from being connected to CFC or HCFC containers and 
appliances. Under SNAP, substitute refrigerant containers sold for use 
in the automotive market are required to be equipped with such 
fittings.
    Several commenters stated that the requirement for unique fittings 
in the automotive sector is sufficient to reduce the emissions of 
ozone-depleting refrigerants. Thus, an extended sales restriction would 
not be necessary. Commenters pointed out that the adoption of unique 
fittings on containers and compressors by industry has greatly reduced 
cross-contamination, and there is no practical reason that precludes 
the design of fitting for refrigerants in the stationary sector.
    EPA has not overlooked the benefits of unique fitting or their 
effectiveness in reducing cross-contamination, but the Agency feels 
that implementing unique fittings into the stationary sector would be 
impractical and would not necessarily reduce the venting of the CFC or 
HCFC to be replaced. EPA believes that introducing a unique fittings 
requirement into the vast array of stationary sector appliances and 
refrigerant containers would be impractical for several reasons. The 
most fundamental reason is that the wide array of substitute 
refrigerants available for stationary equipment makes the development 
of a unique fitting for each one almost impossible. At least 25 
refrigerants are currently being used in the stationary air-
conditioning and refrigeration sectors, and more are being developed. 
Unique fittings are designed by choosing the diameter, turning 
direction, thread pitch (threads/inch) and shape of threads (normal vs. 
square, also known as Acme). However, fittings with the same diameter 
and turning direction can nearly always be connected using a wrench, 
regardless of thread pitch or shape. Therefore, the number of different 
fittings is limited to double the number of different diameters, since 
each diameter yields both a clockwise and a counterclockwise fitting. 
The number of diameters is itself limited because fittings must differ 
by at least 0.063 inches in diameter to ensure they will not cross-
connect, and the range of diameters is limited by valve core and 
surrounding space restrictions.\13\ Thus, the number of unique fittings 
that can be developed is limited.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ In the MVAC market (to date), valve core and surrounding 
space restrictions have resulted in fittings ranging in diameter 
from 0.3 inches to 0.625 inches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, even if unique fittings could be found for each of the 
refrigerants used in the stationary sectors, the logistics of 
implementing them would be formidable. To begin with, a massive program 
would be required to retrofit existing stationary appliances and 
recovery equipment with all of the unique fittings. Retrofits would 
presumably be required not only for all stationary appliances that have 
been retrofitted to substitute refrigerants, but for all of the 
equipment that uses one of the four traditional medium-to high-pressure 
refrigerants (i.e., R-12, R-22, R-502, and R-500). Otherwise, 
technicians who became accustomed to relying on fittings to distinguish 
among refrigerants might cross-contaminate these refrigerants as well.
    In addition, the large number of fittings in the stationary sectors 
would make their use as a control on contamination unwieldy. A single 
piece of recovery equipment intended for use with medium-pressure 
refrigerants might conceivably require more than 20 fittings. Given the 
similar exterior appearances of the fittings, finding the one that 
matched a particular appliance would be difficult. More important, this 
matching of fittings with appliances is not necessary if the recovery 
equipment has been properly cleared before use with a new refrigerant. 
Technicians who work on stationary air-conditioning and refrigeration 
equipment have long worked with multiple refrigerants, and recovery/
recycling equipment that has been designed for use with multiple 
refrigerants. Instead of engineering controls, the stationary sector 
has relied on training in refrigerant charging and recovery to prevent 
cross-contamination. Adopting unique fittings in these sectors would 
represent a fundamental change of approach that would be unwieldy.
b. Limited Sales Restriction
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed a more limited sales restriction as a 
means to address the concerns of illegal venting of ozone-depleting 
refrigerants. The limited sales restriction would restrict

[[Page 11971]]

to certified technicians the sale of containers of substitute 
refrigerants that lack specialized fittings, but would permit the sale 
of containers of substitute refrigerants that contain such fittings to 
the general public. In this manner, DIY consumers and uncertified 
individuals would have unlimited access only to containers with 
fittings, making mixture and cross contamination more difficult.
    EPA did not receive comments on the potential effectiveness and 
enforceability of such a limited sales restriction, but the 
overwhelming majority of commenters representing MVAC service shops 
recognized that a limited sales restriction would reduce the 
occurrences of illegal and uncontrolled venting of regulated 
refrigerants by limiting the supply of the refrigerant. These 
commenters supported the sales restriction and argued that if people do 
not have the proper recovery/recycling equipment, they should not be 
allowed to purchase and use HFC and PFC refrigerants.
    EPA believes that a limited sales restriction reduces the 
opportunity for noncompliance with the venting prohibition. A limited 
sales restriction reduces the quantity of refrigerant available to 
persons who are not performing service or repair on MVACs for 
consideration. However, even a limited sales restriction does not 
address the need for persons opening MVACs to properly use recovery 
equipment. Hence, EPA is not finalizing a limited sales restriction, 
but is emphasizing that the use of refrigerant recovery equipment by 
any person opening an appliance, including DIYers, is a necessity in 
order to prevent venting of refrigerant during service, maintenance, 
repair, and disposal of appliances.
c. MVAC Retrofit Kits
    EPA received comments questioning why the Agency has allowed the 
unrestricted sale of MVAC R-12/R-134a retrofit kits. While the sale of 
R-12 is restricted to certified technicians, retrofit kits allow any 
person certified or not to replace the R-12 in an MVAC with R-134a.
    EPA did not propose any restrictions on the sale of R-12/R-134a 
MVAC retrofit kits. However, EPA believes that retrofit kits could be 
linked to the venting of ozone-depleting refrigerants, particularly 
when any remaining R-12 in the MVAC is not recovered prior to opening 
the appliance. In the absence of the proper use of recovery equipment, 
the user would have no alternative other than to knowingly vent any 
remaining refrigerant charge in violation of section 608(c)(1). It is 
the Agency's interpretation that the use of such kits without properly 
recovering any remaining refrigerant is a violation of the venting 
prohibition. While EPA is not extending the sales restriction to people 
servicing appliances using HFC or PFC refrigerants, at a future date 
the Agency may consider a proposal, amending Sec.  82.34(a), requiring 
all persons repairing or servicing MVACs to use certified recovery 
equipment. Similarly, EPA could propose restrictions on the sale and 
use of R-12 retrofit kits.

H. Safe Disposal of Small Appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like Appliances

1. Coverage of HFCs and PFCs
    In the NPRM, EPA proposed and requested comment on its plan to 
adopt the same approach to the disposal of small appliances, MVACs and 
MVAC-like appliances charged with HFC and PFC refrigerants that it 
adopted for these types of equipment charged with CFC and HCFC 
refrigerants.
    Commenters tended to agree with the Agency's decision to extend the 
safe disposal requirements for small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like 
appliances that contain substitutes for CFC and HCFC refrigerants, 
noting that it is important to reevaluate Sec.  608 requirements in 
connection with new or other alternative uses of refrigerant 
substitutes. When refrigerant is recovered from disposed small 
appliances, MVAC or MVAC-like appliances, and for the case of MVAC and 
MVAC-like appliances is not reused in similar appliances, the safe 
disposal and reclamation requirements set forth in the subpart F 
regulations apply.
    EPA received comment from the Institute of Scrap Recycling 
Industries, Inc. (ISRI) requesting Agency clarification for safe 
disposal of small appliances, MVACs and MVAC-like appliances by 
distinguishing between recycling and disposal. ISRI argued that the 
responsibility for removing remaining refrigerants from appliances 
destined for disposal or for recycling should be placed on the person 
disposing of the appliance or delivering the appliance for recycling 
and not upon the recycler of the obsolete appliance.
    Section 608(b)(1) and 608(c)(2) require that class I, class II, and 
their substitute refrigerants contained in bulk in appliances be 
removed from the appliance prior to the disposal or their delivery for 
recycling. EPA's regulations at Sec.  82.156(f) require that persons 
taking the final step in the disposal process must either (1) recover 
any remaining refrigerant from the appliance, in accordance with 
regulatory requirements, or, (2) verify that the refrigerant has been 
evacuated from the appliance previously. If the final person in the 
disposal chain chooses to verify that the refrigerant has been 
recovered previously, they must retain a signed statement attesting to 
this in accordance with Sec.  82.166(i).
    The rationale for establishing the safe disposal requirements for 
small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like appliances that contain CFCs and 
HCFCs was discussed at length in the May 14, 1993, rule (58 FR 28701). 
These requirements are designed to ensure that refrigerant is recovered 
before the appliance is finally disposed of while granting as much 
flexibility as possible to the disposal facility regarding the manner 
of its recovery. EPA considered such flexibility important for the 
disposal sector, which is highly diverse and decentralized.
    EPA is not extending the established requirements for the safe 
disposal of appliances that enter the waste stream with the charge 
intact, including small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like appliances 
using class I and class II refrigerants to those appliances containing 
pure HFC and PFC refrigerants. However, EPA is extending the safe 
disposal requirements to those substitutes containing an ODS. 
Therefore, persons who take the final step in disposing of small 
appliances, MVAC, and MVAC-like appliances that contain a class I or 
class II substance as a refrigerant must either: (1) Recover any 
remaining refrigerant in the appliance; or (2) verify that the 
refrigerant has previously been recovered from the appliance or 
shipment of appliances, in accordance with the required practices of 
Sec.  82.156(f)(1) and (2). Recovery equipment used during the disposal 
of appliances, except small, MVAC, or MVAC-like appliances, must meet 
the same certification requirements as equipment used in the service, 
repair, and maintenance of appliances in accordance with Sec.  
82.158(b) and (c).\14\ In addition, persons recovering refrigerant 
during disposal of small, MVAC, or MVAC-like appliances need to do so 
in accordance with Sec.  82.156(f)-(h), but they need not be certified 
as section 608 technicians. These exemptions only apply to the disposal 
of small, MVAC, and MVAC-like appliances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Equipment used during the disposal of small, MVAC, or MVAC-
like appliances need not be certified in accordance with Sec.  
82.158(b) or (c).

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

[[Page 11972]]

2. Transfer of Substitute Refrigerants During the Safe Disposal of MVAC 
and MVAC-Like Appliances
    In the December 30, 1997, amendments to the subpart B MVAC 
recycling regulation (62 FR 68025), EPA explicitly permitted 
refrigerant recovered from MVACs and MVAC-like appliances at disposal 
facilities to be reused in MVACs and MVAC-like appliances without being 
reclaimed. The transfer of such used refrigerant is allowed as long as 
certain other requirements are met. These requirements, which now also 
apply to any substitute consisting of a class I or class II ODS, 
including many HFC blends, deemed acceptable as substitutes for MVAC 
and MVAC-like appliances under SNAP, include the following: Only 
section 609-certified technicians or disposal facility owners or 
operators may recover the refrigerant; the refrigerant recovered from 
the MVACs and MVAC-like appliances may not be mixed with refrigerant 
from any other sources; only section 609-certified recovery equipment 
may be used to recover the refrigerant; the refrigerant may be reused 
only in an MVAC or MVAC-like appliance; the refrigerant may be sold 
only to section 609-certified technicians; and section 609-certified 
technicians must recycle the refrigerant in section 609-certified 
recycling equipment before charging it into the MVAC or MVAC-like 
appliance. As discussed in the amendments to the section 609 rule, 
these restrictions are intended to ensure that the exemption from the 
reclamation requirement for refrigerant removed from and charged into 
MVACs and MVAC-like appliances does not compromise the purity of 
refrigerant flowing into the MVAC and MVAC-like appliance service 
sectors.
    Most of these restrictions are authorized by section 609, which 
requires persons servicing motor vehicles for consideration to properly 
use approved refrigerant recycling equipment and to be properly trained 
and certified. The statutory definitions of ``properly use,'' 
``approved equipment,'' and ``properly trained and certified'' all 
reference Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) standards that include 
purity requirements for refrigerant used to service MVACs.
    These requirements for reuse of refrigerant, including substitutes 
consisting of a class I or class II ODS, from MVACs and MVAC-like 
appliances at disposal facilities apply in addition to the basic safe 
disposal requirements of the subpart F regulations under section 608, 
particularly the requirement that disposers recover the refrigerant (or 
ensure that the refrigerant is recovered by others) from the MVAC or 
MVAC-like appliance before the final step in the disposal process. 
Disposal facilities must also continue to observe the requirement that 
they retain signed statements attesting to the removal of the 
refrigerant from the MVAC or MVAC-like appliance, as applicable.
3. Clarification of Requirements for Persons Disposing of Appliances
    In the NPRM, EPA requested comment on two possible textual changes 
to clarify the safe disposal provisions, which are contained in 
paragraph 82.156(f). EPA interprets the safe disposal provisions (as 
stated in Applicability Determination number 59) to apply to ``the 
entity which conducted the process where the refrigerant was released 
if not properly recovered.'' EPA proposed to clarify that 82.156(f) 
applies to any person who performs disposal related activities, such as 
dismantling, recycling, or destroying the appliance, where the 
refrigerant would be released into the atmosphere if not properly 
recovered prior to violating the refrigerant circuit of the appliance.
    The first modification amends the definition of ``opening'' found 
at Sec.  82.152 to include ``the disposal of appliances.'' The first 
sentence of the revised definition of ``opening'' reads, ``Opening an 
appliance means any service, maintenance, repair, or disposal of an 
appliance that would release refrigerant from the appliance to the 
atmosphere unless the refrigerant were recovered previously from the 
appliance.'' The rest of the definition remains unchanged. In the NPRM, 
EPA had proposed a modification that would have added the phrase 
``persons who open the appliances in the course of disposing of them'' 
to the introductory text of paragraph 82.156(f). EPA has opted to not 
add the phrase as proposed but modify Sec.  82.156(f) by providing 
examples of persons who might take the final step in the disposal 
process.
    EPA received one comment opposing the proposed clarifications. The 
commenter expressed concern that the clarifications do not distinguish 
between recycling and disposal of appliances and could lead to 
recyclers facing the same requirements as those disposing of appliances 
or those delivering the appliances for recycling.
    EPA is finalizing the two modifications to clarify that 82.156(f) 
applies to any person who performs disposal related activities, such as 
dismantling, recycling, or destroying the appliance, where the 
refrigerant would be released into the atmosphere if not properly 
recovered prior to violating the refrigerant circuit of the appliance. 
These clarifications do not place additional requirements on scrap 
recyclers. The context of the required practices of Sec.  82.156(f) has 
not been changed, as since promulgation of the section 608 regulations, 
the required practices for safe disposal of appliances have applied to 
persons who take the final step in the disposal process (as disposal is 
defined at Sec.  82.152 \15\). In addition, the Act does not grant 
scrap recyclers an exemption to the venting prohibitions. Sections 608 
(b)(1) and (b)(2) require that class I and class II refrigerants as 
well as their substitutes contained in bulk in appliances be removed 
from the appliance prior to the disposal or their delivery for 
recycling. The Agency does not interpret this statutory language to 
mean that scrap recyclers who choose to dispose of appliances or choose 
to accept appliances (or their parts) with refrigerant charges intact 
are exempt from the required practices codified at Sec.  82.156 
(including the acquisition of recovery equipment that meets the 
standards set forth in Sec.  82.158).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Disposal, as defined in Sec.  82.152, means the process 
leading to and including: (1) The discharge, deposit, dumping or 
placing of any discarded appliance into or on any land or water; (2) 
the disassembly of any appliance for discharge, deposit, dumping or 
placing of its discarded component parts into or on any land or 
water; or (3) the disassembly of any appliance for reuse of its 
component parts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Persons who take the final step in the disposal process (including 
but not limited to scrap recyclers and landfill operators) must recover 
any remaining refrigerant from the appliance or verify that the 
refrigerant has been previously evacuated from the appliance. This 
required practice is applicable to persons preparing to reuse the 
component parts of an appliance, if the preparation could result in the 
release of any refrigerant consisting in whole or in part of a class I 
or class II ODS.
4. Stickers as a Form of Verification
    EPA has become aware that there is confusion in the metal scrap and 
recycling industry concerning the safe disposal requirements. 
Especially as they pertain to the use of stickers as a means of 
verification of refrigerant recovery. Many final disposers will not 
accept small appliances, MVAC, or MVAC-like appliances unless a sticker 
is affixed to each appliance.
    EPA has never mandated such stickers, and the Agency emphasizes 
that they may not satisfy the verification requirements of Sec.  
82.156(f)(2). In order to satisfy the safe disposal requirements, such 
stickers, tags, or other identifying

[[Page 11973]]

marks must include a signed statement from the person from whom the 
appliance is obtained that all refrigerant that had not leaked 
previously has been recovered from the appliance in accordance with 
paragraph Sec.  82.156(g) or (h), as applicable. The signed statement, 
even if presented in the form of a sticker or tag, must include the 
name and address of the person who recovered the refrigerant, and the 
date that the refrigerant was recovered.

I. Certification by Owners of Recycling or Recovery Equipment

    EPA requires persons who maintain, service, repair, or dispose of 
appliances containing a refrigerant consisting of a class I or class II 
ODS to submit a signed statement to the appropriate EPA Regional office 
stating that they possess refrigerant recovery/recycling equipment and 
are complying with the applicable requirements of the rule. In the 
NPRM, EPA proposed to extend these provisions to persons who maintain, 
service, repair, or dispose of appliances containing HFCs or PFCs, by 
revising the regulatory text of Sec.  82.162(a). EPA also proposed that 
persons who had already submitted such a signed statement for work on 
appliances containing CFCs or HCFCs would not need to submit a new 
statement for work on HFCs or PFCs. Therefore, only businesses coming 
into existence 60 days after the date of publication of this action 
would have been affected by the proposed provision.
    EPA received no comments in opposition to the extension of the 
certification requirement to persons who maintain, service, repair, or 
dispose of appliances containing HFCs or PFCs. However, EPA is not 
finalizing the proposal to extend the certification requirement to 
those who maintain, service, repair, or dispose of appliances 
containing HFC or PFC refrigerants. EPA is extending these provisions 
to those who maintain, service, repair, or dispose of appliances 
containing substitutes that contain a class I or class II ODS.
    While EPA is not finalizing certification requirements for 
refrigerant recovery/recycling equipment intended for use with HFC and 
PFC refrigerants, the Agency is aware that industry standards currently 
exist for certification of HFC recovery/recycling equipment. EPA 
supports the industry's efforts to certify and promote the use of 
refrigerant recovery/recycling equipment intended for use with SNAP-
approved substitute refrigerants.

J. Servicing Apertures and Process Stubs

    EPA prohibits the sale or distribution of CFC and HCFC appliances 
that are not equipped either with a process stub (in the case of small 
appliances) or with a servicing aperture (in the case of all other 
appliances) to facilitate refrigerant recovery. In the NPRM, EPA had 
proposed to extend this prohibition to the sale and distribution of 
appliances containing HFCs or PFCs. With today's action, EPA is 
finalizing the proposed requirement and is prohibiting the sale or 
distribution of any appliance containing an HFC, PFC, or substitute 
refrigerant consisting in whole or in part of a class I or class II ODS 
that is not equipped either with a process stub (in the case of small 
appliances) or with a servicing aperture (in the case of all other 
appliances) to facilitate refrigerant recovery.
    EPA received a comment stating that the Act only prohibits 
``knowingly venting'' a substitute refrigerant when servicing, 
maintaining, or disposing of a refrigeration appliance, but does not 
require new appliances to have servicing apertures or similar design 
features.
    The rationale for requiring servicing apertures or process stubs on 
appliances containing a substitute refrigerant is the same as that for 
requiring these design features on CFC and HCFC appliances. 
Specifically, these features permit technicians to comply with the 
venting prohibition by making it much easier for them to attach 
recovery equipment to the refrigerant circuit and thereby recover the 
refrigerant properly. In the absence of an aperture or process stub 
requirement, there would not be a means of recovering refrigerant from 
appliances without suffering large refrigerant losses, and there would 
not be an easy means for those maintaining, servicing, repairing, or 
disposing of appliances to stay in compliance with the venting 
prohibition.
    EPA is finalizing the aperture/process stub requirement for HFC and 
PFC appliances in order to complement industry efforts to properly 
recover them. EPA is aware that such industry standards have existed 
for several years and many manufacturers of recovery/recycling 
equipment have already marketed and distributed equipment certified to 
the industry standard. EPA hopes that such equipment will continue to 
be manufactured and is implementing the aperture requirement to 
facilitate recovery of HFC and PFC refrigerants.

K. Prohibition on the Manufacture or Import of One-Time Expansion 
Devices That Contain Other Than Exempted Refrigerants

    In the NPRM, EPA proposed a prohibition on the manufacture or 
import of one-time expansion devices that contain other refrigerants 
than EPA has exempted from the venting prohibition because their 
release does not pose a threat to the environment.
    On March 3, 1999, EPA published a final rule (64 FR 10373) under 
SNAP finding that self-chilling cans using R-134a or R-152a are 
unacceptable substitutes (new or retrofit) for R-12, R-502, and R-22 in 
the following end-uses: household refrigeration, transport 
refrigeration, vending machines, cold storage warehouses, and retail 
food refrigeration. EPA believes that a prohibition on manufacturing or 
importing one-time expansion devices (which include self-chilling cans) 
is simultaneously the least burdensome and the most effective, 
efficient, and equitable way of carrying out the venting prohibition as 
it applies to them, and has created Sec.  82.154(o) accordingly.
    EPA believes that section 608(c)(2) implicitly provides the Agency 
authority to promulgate regulations as necessary to implement and 
enforce the statutory prohibition, and section 301(a)(1)(a) further 
supplements that authority. EPA believes that a ban on manufacture and 
import of the devices is the only practical way to implement the 
prohibition on venting of section 608(c)(2) of the Act and hence is 
necessary to implement and enforce that prohibition. The following 
provides EPA's rationale.
    First, the prohibition on manufacturing or importing the devices is 
not too burdensome. One-time expansion devices function only by 
venting; hence, one-time expansion devices containing other than 
exempted refrigerants therefore have no legal use, given the self-
effectuating venting prohibition of 608(c)(2). Thus, a prohibition on 
manufacture and import would not interfere with any lawful use of the 
device or can. At the same time, any burden on potential manufacturers 
of the can would not exist, because perfect implementation of the 
venting prohibition would prevent the manufacture of the cans. Thus, 
any burden placed on the manufacturer by a ban on manufacturing should 
be discounted.
    Second, prohibiting the manufacture or import of cans containing 
other than exempted refrigerants is both more effective and more 
efficient than

[[Page 11974]]

attempting to prevent the use of such cans by millions of potential 
consumers. EPA estimates that the total market for canned beverages in 
the U.S. is 100 billion units per year. Thus, if self-chilling cans 
captured even a small percentage of this market, very large numbers of 
cans could be used. For instance, if self-chilling cans captured just 1 
percent of the canned beverage market, one billion self-chilling cans 
per year could be used, potentially violating the venting prohibition 
one billion times. Potential consumers of the can would include 
virtually the entire U.S. population. Without a ban on manufacture, the 
huge number of potential violators and violations would make the 
venting prohibition extremely difficult to enforce. A massive outreach 
campaign would be required to inform the public of the environmental 
and legal implications of using the cans, and such a campaign would 
still miss some fraction of the population. At the same time, 
enforcement would be very difficult due to the large numbers of 
potential violations. In contrast, outreach to and enforcement against 
potential manufacturers of the can would only have to reach a few 
targets, interdicting the cans at the top of the distribution pyramid.
    Thus, a ban on manufacture and import of cans containing other than 
exempted refrigerants is the only practical way to implement the 
venting prohibition as it applies to them. Moreover, there are a number 
of precedents for prohibiting the manufacture, sale, and/or 
distribution of appliances, other equipment, and refrigerants under 
section 608 in order to reduce refrigerant emissions. Sections 
82.154(j) and (k) prohibit the sale or distribution of appliances 
unless they possess servicing apertures or process stubs, and Sec.  
82.154(c) prohibits the manufacture or import of recycling or recovery 
equipment that is not certified. Section 82.154(g) prohibits the sale 
of used ozone-depleting refrigerants that have not been reclaimed (with 
minor exceptions), and Sec.  82.154(m) prohibits the sale of ozone-
depleting refrigerants to uncertified individuals (again with minor 
exceptions). Sales restrictions were more appropriate than 
manufacturing bans in the latter cases because (1) a manufacturing ban 
could not apply to used refrigerants, and (2) purchase and use of 
ozone-depleting refrigerants by some individuals, in this case 
certified technicians, is legal.

L. Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements

    In order to implement the section 608 and 609 requirements, EPA 
requires reporting and recordkeeping, under Sec.  82.166, from a number 
of persons and entities. In the NPRM, EPA proposed to extend all of 
these requirements, as applicable, to persons who sell or distribute 
HFC or PFC refrigerants; to technicians who service HFC or PFC 
appliances; to persons who own HFC or PFC appliances containing more 
than 50 pounds of refrigerant; to reclaimers that reclaim HFC or PFC 
refrigerants; to equipment testing organizations that certify recovery/
recycling equipment for use with HFC or PFC refrigerants; and to 
technician certification programs that certify technicians who 
maintain, service, repair, or dispose of appliances containing HFC or 
PFC refrigerants.
    EPA received comments concerning the recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements associated with the proposed leak repair requirements. EPA 
has decided to defer action on the leak repair components of the NPRM 
to a future rulemaking dedicated to finalizing the proposed leak repair 
requirements. Additional comments that were deemed outside of the scope 
of today's rulemaking are addressed in the ``Response to Comments'' 
document, which is available in Air Docket No. A-92-01.
    EPA is finalizing such recordkeeping and reporting requirements, 
but only as they apply to substitute refrigerants with a class I or 
class II ODS component. The rationale for requiring these records for 
persons who handle substitute refrigerants or equipment is the same as 
that for requiring such records for persons who handle CFC or HCFC 
refrigerants or equipment, as discussed below. In all cases, the 
records are necessary to ensure compliance with the regulatory program 
implementing the section 608(c)(2) prohibition on venting and the 
provisions in this action authorized by section 608(a), and hence are 
necessary to implement and enforce section 608(c)(2) and section 
608(a). These requirements make it possible for EPA to monitor 
compliance and enforce against violators of the Act.
1. Persons Who Sell or Distribute Refrigerant
    Persons who sell or distribute or offer to sell or distribute any 
substitute refrigerant consisting of an ODS must retain invoices that 
indicate the name of the purchaser, the date of sale, and the quantity 
of refrigerant purchased. Distribution or offers to distribute 
refrigerant include persons who give refrigerant to someone else (e.g., 
a technician who recovers refrigerant from appliances that the 
technician services and gives it to another person) or who exchanges 
refrigerant for something else without receiving remuneration or the 
offer of remuneration.
    Persons purchasing any substitute refrigerant consisting of an ODS 
refrigerant who employ certified technicians may provide evidence that 
at least one technician is properly certified to the wholesaler who 
sells them refrigerant. The wholesaler must maintain this information 
and is allowed to sell refrigerant to the purchaser or his authorized 
representative even if the authorized representative is not a properly 
certified technician. The purchaser must notify the wholesaler in the 
event that the purchaser no longer employs at least one properly 
certified technician, at which time the wholesaler is prohibited from 
selling refrigerant to the purchaser until the purchaser once again 
provides evidence that he or she employs at least one certified 
technician.
2. Technicians
    Certified technicians who service, repair, maintain, or dispose of 
appliances must keep a copy of their certificate at their place of 
business where they perform service, maintenance, or repair of 
appliances in accordance with Sec.  82.166(l). It has always been EPA's 
intention that technician certification cards be kept onsite at the 
technician's place of business where they perform maintenance, service, 
or repair. EPA understands that many technicians work onsite at their 
customers' facilities. While technicians certainly may wish to keep a 
copy of their certification on their person, EPA will require that a 
copy be kept at the technician's place of business. EPA intends this to 
mean that technician certification cards are maintained at the 
technician's dispatch facility or home base, and not at a remote 
business site such as a headquarters location which is physically 
removed from the technician's home base.
3. Appliance Owners and Operators
    Owners and operators of appliances containing 50 or more pounds of 
any refrigerant consisting in whole or in part of a class I or class II 
substance must keep service records documenting the date and type of 
service in accordance with Sec.  82.166(k).
4. Refrigerant Reclaimers
    EPA-certified refrigerant reclaimers must certify to EPA that they 
will comply with the rule's requirements and must submit lists of the 
equipment that they use to clean and analyze

[[Page 11975]]

refrigerants. This information enables EPA to verify reclaimers' 
compliance with refrigerant standards and refrigerant emissions limits. 
In addition, refrigerant reclaimers must maintain records of the names 
and addresses of persons sending them material for reclamation and the 
quantity of material sent to them for reclamation (Sec.  82.166(g)). 
This information must be maintained on a transactional basis.
    Within 30 days of the end of the calendar year, reclaimers must 
report to EPA the total quantity of material sent to them that year for 
reclamation, the mass of refrigerant reclaimed that year, and the mass 
of waste products generated that year.
5. Recovery and Recycling Equipment Testing Organizations
    Recovery/recycling equipment testing organizations must apply to 
EPA for approval in order to certify refrigerant recovery/recycling 
equipment intended for use with any substitute refrigerant consisting 
in whole or in part of an ODS. This application process is necessary to 
ensure that all approved testing organizations and their associated 
laboratories have the equipment and expertise to test equipment to the 
applicable standards. Once approved, equipment testing organizations 
must maintain records of the tests performed and their results, and 
must submit a list of all certified equipment to EPA annually. Testing 
organizations must also notify EPA whenever a new model of equipment is 
certified or whenever an existing certified model fails a scheduled 
certification test. This information is required to ensure that 
recycling and recovery equipment meets the performance standards of the 
regulation (Sec.  82.160 and Sec. Sec.  82.166(c), (d), and (e)).
6. Disposers
    Persons who take the final step in the disposal process (including 
but not limited to scrap recyclers and landfill operators) of a small 
appliance, room air conditioner, MVAC, or MVAC-like appliance who do 
not recover the refrigerant themselves must maintain copies of signed 
statements attesting that the refrigerant has been removed prior to 
final disposal of each appliance. These records help EPA verify that 
refrigerant is recovered at some point during the disposal process even 
if the final disposer does not have recovery equipment (Sec.  
82.166(i)). Stickers, tags, or identifying marks on appliances would 
not satisfy this recordkeeping requirement unless all of the 
requirements of Sec.  82.156(f)(2) are followed.
7. Programs Certifying Technicians
    Organizations operating technician certification programs must 
apply to EPA to have their programs approved. The application process 
ensures that the technician certification programs meet minimum 
standards for generating, tracking, and grading tests, and keeping 
records.
    Approved technician certification programs have to maintain records 
including the names of certified technicians and the unique numbers 
assigned to each technician certified through their programs. These 
records allow both the Agency and the certification program to verify 
certification claims and to monitor the certification process.

M. Economic Analysis

    The Agency has performed a cost benefit analysis of this 
regulation, which is available for review in the public docket for this 
rulemaking. This analysis is summarized below.
1. Baseline
    Since these regulations are being promulgated in addition to other 
provisions that affect the use of substitute refrigerants, the baseline 
for this analysis must reflect the state of affairs after the 
implementation of previous provisions of the Clean Air Act, and before 
the implementation of the final rule.
    The provision of the Act that must be considered when defining the 
baseline for these regulations is the prohibition on venting contained 
in section 608(c)(2), which is self-effectuating. This prohibition 
makes it illegal to knowingly vent (during the maintenance, service, 
repair, or disposal of an appliance) any substitute for a class I or 
class II ODS used as a refrigerant. EPA interprets this to mean that 
all HFC and PFC refrigerants, including those consisting of a class I 
or class II ODS, must not be vented to the atmosphere in the course of 
maintaining, repairing, servicing, or disposing of appliances.
2. Costs
    Since the regulatory language of the National Recycling and 
Emission Reduction Program and the statutory language of Section 608 of 
the Clean Air Act largely address the requirements of the Substitutes 
Recycling Rule, it is assumed that compliance with refrigerant 
recovery, technician certification, equipment certification, and leak 
repair requirements is 100 percent in the baseline. Compliance with the 
sales restriction is assumed to be 99 percent in the baseline. As such, 
this rule serves primarily as a clarification, unequivocally extending 
these requirements to all refrigerants containing class I or class II 
ODS, in whole or in part.
    Finally, it is assumed that most members of the regulated community 
are in full compliance with recordkeeping and reporting requirements in 
the baseline, with the exception of 20 percent of refrigerant 
wholesalers and owners of industrial process refrigeration equipment 
that deal with ODS-containing refrigerant blends.
    The costs of the substitutes recycling rule consist of the costs of 
the sales restriction requirements and the reporting and record-keeping 
requirements. The Agency estimates that the cost for this regulatory 
program for the period 2004-2015, is approximately $3.1 million at a 2 
percent discount rate, and $2.6 million at a 7 percent discount rate. 
Annualized costs are estimated to be approximately $269 thousand at a 2 
percent discount rate, and $295 thousand at a 7 percent discount rate.
3. Benefits
    The benefits of the provisions discussed above consist of avoided 
damage to human health and the environment that would occur if, without 
regulation, environmentally harmful refrigerants were released rather 
than recovered.
    The EPA's estimates of human health and environmental benefits were 
developed using a similar methodology as that used in the 1993 RIA. 
Specifically, the amount of avoided refrigerant emissions from the 
equipment certification and sales restriction rule components was 
calculated, and the associated number of avoided health effects (e.g., 
cataract incidence and skin cancer incidence and mortality) was 
estimated. Once the number of avoided health effects was estimated, 
benefits were monetized based on the estimated value of a saved life 
(VSL) and the cost of treating cataracts and non-fatal skin cancers.
    The regulatory impact analysis assumes that the rule increases 
compliance with the sales restriction component of the rule. The 
benefits associated with equipment certification were also assessed in 
this analysis, as they were not quantified in the 1993 RIA. The Agency 
estimates the benefits to be nearly $150,000 at a 2 percent discount 
rate, or approximately $20,000 at a 7 percent discount rate.

[[Page 11976]]

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    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 
entitlements, 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 not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is 
therefore not subject to EO 12866 review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this rule were submitted 
for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An Information 
Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by EPA (ICR 
No.1626.07, and OMB Control number: 2060-0256) and a copy may be 
obtained from Sandy Farmer by mail at OPPE Regulatory Information 
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2137), 401 M St., SW., 
Washington, DC 20460; by e-mail at [email protected]; or by calling 
(202) 260-2740. A copy may also be downloaded off the Internet at 
www.epa.gov/icr.
    OMB has approved the information collection requirements contained 
in this rule under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0256.
    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 to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. EPA does not expect 
this rule to be a burden on time or financial resources.
    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.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis in connection with this final rule. For purposes 
of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small entities, small 
entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined by Small Business 
Administration size standards (see table below); (2) a small 
governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, 
school district or special district with a population of less than 
50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit 
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not 
dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on 
small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
EPA has considered the economic impacts of today's final rule on small 
entities. Specifically, this rule economically impacts small entities 
that manufacture, distribute, or sell ODS-containing refrigerant 
blends, as well as those that maintain and repair equipment containing 
those blends. EPA has determined that today's rulemaking will 
potentially affect approximately 819 small entities. These small 
entities will experience an impact ranging from 0.001 percent to 0.163 
percent, based on their estimated annual sales and revenues. EPA has 
also concluded that no small entities will experience an economic 
impact of greater than 1 percent.
    EPA performed a detailed screening analysis in 1992 of the impact 
of the recycling regulation for ozone-depleting refrigerants on small 
entities. The methodology of this analysis is discussed at length in 
the May 14, 1993, regulation (58 FR 28710), and its associated 
Information Collection Request (ICR) No. 1626.07/OMB No. 2060-0256. In 
addition, EPA has prepared a Small Business Screening Analysis for this 
final rulemaking (Docket Number A-92-01). A summary of the small 
entities and their associated economic impact is summarized below 
according to the following North American Industry Classification 
System (NAICS) codes.
    Although this final rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has 
tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small entities. EPA has 
reconsidered portions of the NPRM in part due to the small business 
concerns raised by the public. Today's action also removes duplicative 
regulation by exempting certain substitute refrigerants from the 
statutory venting prohibition on the basis that their releases are 
covered under other laws, regulations, or statutes.

                    2004 Compliance Costs per Small Company by NAICS Code and Rule Component
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                         Total
               NAICS codes                 NAICS description & number of      Sales     Recordkeeping     cost
                                              affected small companies     restriction                   (2004)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
325120..................................  Industrial Gas Manufacturing...      $1,112            $0       $5,560
                                          Affected Small Companies: 5....
42111...................................  Automobiles & Other Motor                 0           400       35,200
                                           Vehicle Wholesalers.
                                          Affected Small Companies: 88...
42114...................................  Motor Vehicle Supplies & New              0           400       39,600
                                           Parts Wholesalers.
                                          Affected Small Companies: 99...
42193...................................  Recyclable Material Wholesalers           0           105       11,235

[[Page 11977]]

 
                                          Affected Small Companies: 107..
4226901.................................  Industrial Gas Wholesalers.....          30           400        3,910
                                          Affected Small Companies: 37
                                           (sales restriction); 7
                                           (recordkeeping).
441310..................................  Automotive Parts & Accessories           10           400       20,720
                                           Stores.
                                          Affected Small Companies: 232
                                           (sales restriction); 46
                                           (recordkeeping).
541380..................................  Environmental Test Laboratories/          0             0            0
                                           Services.
                                          Affected Small Companies: 1....
81131...................................  Commercial/Industrial Machinery           0         1,250      313,750
                                           & Equipment Repair &
                                           Maintenance.
                                          Affected Small Companies: 251..
                                                                          --------------
    Total Number Affected...............  ...............................         274           598          819
                                                                          ==============
    Total Cost..........................  ...............................       8,990       420,985      429,975
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. 
L. 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. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA a small government Agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling 
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant 
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements.
    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. This rule supplements the statutory self-
effectuating prohibition against venting refrigerants by ensuring that 
certain service practices are conducted that reduce emissions, 
establish equipment and reclamation certification requirements. These 
standards are amendments to the recycling standards under section 608 
of the Clean Air Act. Many of these standards involve reporting 
requirements and are not expected to be a high cost issue. Thus, 
today's rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 
of the UMRA.
    For the reasons outlined above, EPA has also determined that this 
rule contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments. Thus, today's rule is not subject to 
the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not 
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. The regulations promulgated 
under today's action are done so under Title VI of the Act which does 
not grant delegation rights to the States. Thus, Executive Order 13132 
does not apply to this rule.

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

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' This final rule does not have 
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. Today's 
rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of 
Indian tribal governments. This final rule amends the refrigerant 
recycling standards which have been developed to protect the 
stratospheric ozone layer. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply 
to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health & Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health & Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule 
that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined 
under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety 
risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect 
on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency 
must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of

[[Page 11978]]

the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is 
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible 
alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This final rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it 
does not concern an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has 
reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. This 
rule amends the recycling standards for refrigerants to protect the 
stratosphere from ozone depletion, which in turn protects human health 
and the environment from increased amounts of UV radiation.

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

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA 
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides 
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This rulemaking involves technical standards. EPA has decided to 
the ARI Standard 700-1995 into Appendix A of 40 CFR part 82, subpart F. 
The standard was created by one of the refrigeration industry's primary 
standards-setting organization, the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration 
Institute (ARI).
    ARI is a national trade association representing manufacturers of 
more than 90 percent of North American produced central air-
conditioning and commercial refrigeration equipment. ARI develops and 
publishes technical standards for industry products, including 
standards for reclaimed refrigerant. Since many ARI standards are 
accepted as American National Standards, EPA feels that an earnest 
effort has been made to comply with the requirements of of NTTAA.

J. The Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the Agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit 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 United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). It will become effective May 11, 2004.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82

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

    Dated: February 17, 2004.
Michael O. Leavitt,
Administrator.


0
Title 40 chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 82, is 
amended as follows:

PART 82--[AMENDED]

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

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


0
2. Section 82.150 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  82.150  Purpose and scope.

    (a) The purpose of this subpart is to reduce emissions of class I 
and class II refrigerants and their substitutes to the lowest 
achievable level by maximizing the recapture and recycling of such 
refrigerants during the service, maintenance, repair, and disposal of 
appliances and restricting the sale of refrigerants consisting in whole 
or in part of a class I and class II ODS in accordance with Title VI of 
the Clean Air Act.
    (b) This subpart applies to any person servicing, maintaining, or 
repairing appliances. This subpart also applies to persons disposing of 
appliances, including small appliances and motor vehicle air 
conditioners. In addition, this subpart applies to refrigerant 
reclaimers, technician certifying programs, appliance owners and 
operators, manufacturers of appliances, manufacturers of recycling and 
recovery equipment, approved recycling and recovery equipment testing 
organizations, persons selling class I or class II refrigerants or 
offering class I or class II refrigerants for sale, and persons 
purchasing class I or class II refrigerants.
0
3. Section 82.152 is amended by adding, in alphabetical order, 
definitions for ``Medium-pressure appliance,'' ``One-time expansion 
device,'' ``Refrigerant,'' ``Substitute,'' and by revising the 
definitions for ``Appliance,'' ``High-pressure appliance,'' ``Low-
pressure appliance,'' ``Opening,'' ``Technician,'' and ``Very high-
pressure appliance'' to read as follows:


Sec.  82.152  Definitions.

    Appliance means any device which contains and uses a refrigerant 
and which is used for household or commercial purposes, including any 
air conditioner, refrigerator, chiller, or freezer.
* * * * *
    High-pressure appliance means an appliance that uses a refrigerant 
with a liquid phase saturation pressure between 170 psia and 355 psia 
at 104 [deg]F. This definition includes but is not limited to 
appliances using R-401A, R-409A, R-401B, R-411A, R-22, R-411B, R-502, 
R-402B, R-408A, and R-402A.
* * * * *
    Low-pressure appliance means an appliance that uses a refrigerant 
with a liquid phase saturation pressure below 45 psia at 104 [deg]F. 
This definition includes but is not limited to appliances using R-11, 
R-123, and R-113.
* * * * *
    Medium-pressure appliance means an appliance that uses a 
refrigerant with a liquid phase saturation pressure between 45 psia and 
170 psia at 104 [deg]F. This definition includes but is not limited to 
appliances using R-114, R-124, R-12, R-401C, R-406A, and R-500.
* * * * *
    One-time expansion device means an appliance that relies on the 
one-time release of its refrigerant charge to the environment in order 
to provide a cooling effect.
    Opening an appliance means any service, maintenance, repair, or 
disposal of an appliance that would release refrigerant from the 
appliance to the atmosphere unless the refrigerant was recovered 
previously from the appliance. Connecting and disconnecting hoses and 
gauges to and from the appliance to measure pressures within the 
appliance and to add refrigerant to or recover refrigerant from

[[Page 11979]]

the appliance shall not be considered ``opening.''
* * * * *
    Refrigerant means, for purposes of this Subpart, any substance 
consisting in part or whole of a class I or class II ozone-depleting 
substance that is used for heat transfer purposes and provides a 
cooling effect, or any substance used as a substitute for such a class 
I or class II substance by any user in a given end-use, except for the 
following substitutes in the following end-uses:
    (1) Ammonia in commercial or industrial process refrigeration or in 
absorption units;
    (2) Hydrocarbons in industrial process refrigeration (processing of 
hydrocarbons);
    (3) Chlorine in industrial process refrigeration (processing of 
chlorine and chlorine compounds);
    (4) Carbon dioxide in any application;
    (5) Nitrogen in any application; or
    (6) Water in any application.
* * * * *
    Substitute means any chemical or product, whether existing or new, 
that is used by any person as an EPA approved replacement for a class I 
or II ozone-depleting substance in a given refrigeration or air-
conditioning end-use.
* * * * *
    Technician means any person who performs maintenance, service, or 
repair, that could be reasonably expected to release refrigerants from 
appliances, into the atmosphere. Technician also means any person who 
performs disposal of appliances, except for small appliances, MVACs, 
and MVAC-like appliances, that could be reasonably expected to release 
refrigerants from the appliances into the atmosphere. Performing 
maintenance, service, repair, or disposal could be reasonably expected 
to release refrigerants only if the activity is reasonably expected to 
violate the integrity of the refrigerant circuit. Activities reasonably 
expected to violate the integrity of the refrigerant circuit include 
activities such as attaching and detaching hoses and gauges to and from 
the appliance to add or remove refrigerant or to measure pressure and 
adding refrigerant to and removing refrigerant from the appliance. 
Activities such as painting the appliance, rewiring an external 
electrical circuit, replacing insulation on a length of pipe, or 
tightening nuts and bolts on the appliance are not reasonably expected 
to violate the integrity of the refrigerant circuit. Performing 
maintenance, service, repair, or disposal of appliances that have been 
evacuated pursuant to Sec.  82.156 could not be reasonably expected to 
release refrigerants from the appliance unless the maintenance, 
service, or repair consists of adding refrigerant to the appliance. 
Technician includes but is not limited to installers, contractor 
employees, in-house service personnel, and in some cases owners and/or 
operators.
    Very high-pressure appliance means an appliance that uses a 
refrigerant with a critical temperature below 104 [deg]F or with a 
liquid phase saturation pressure above 355 psia at 104 [deg]F. This 
definition includes but is not limited to appliances using R-13 or R-
503.

0
4. Section 82.154 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b) 
introductory text, and (c); by adding new paragraph (p) and removing 
the undesignated text at the end of paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  82.154  Prohibitions.

    (a) Effective May 11, 2004, no person maintaining, servicing, 
repairing, or disposing of appliances may knowingly vent or otherwise 
release into the environment any refrigerant from such appliances. The 
knowing release of refrigerant subsequent to its recovery from an 
appliance shall be considered a violation of this prohibition. De 
minimis releases associated with good faith attempts to recycle or 
recover refrigerants are not subject to this prohibition. Releases 
shall be considered de minimis only if they occur when:
    (1) The required practices set forth in Sec.  82.156 are observed, 
recovery or recycling machines that meet the requirements set forth in 
Sec.  82.158 are used, and the technician certification provisions set 
forth in Sec.  82.161 are observed; or
    (2) The requirements set forth in subpart B of this part are 
observed.
    (b) No person may open appliances except MVACs and MVAC-like 
appliances for maintenance, service, or repair, and no person may 
dispose of appliances except for small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like 
appliances:
* * * * *
    (c) No person may manufacture or import recycling or recovery 
equipment for use during the maintenance, service, or repair of 
appliances except MVACs and MVAC-like appliances, and no person may 
manufacture or import recycling or recovery equipment for use during 
the disposal of appliances except small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-
like appliances, unless the equipment is certified pursuant to Sec.  
82.158 (b) or (d), as applicable.
* * * * *
    (p) No person may manufacture or import one-time expansion devices 
that contain other than exempted refrigerants.

0
5. Section 82.156 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory 
text, Table 1, and paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  82.156  Required practices.

    (a) All persons disposing of appliances, except for small 
appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like appliances must evacuate the 
refrigerant, including all the liquid refrigerant, in the entire unit 
to a recovery or recycling machine certified pursuant to Sec.  82.158. 
All persons opening appliances except for MVACs and MVAC-like 
appliances for maintenance, service, or repair must evacuate the 
refrigerant, including all the liquid refrigerant (except as provided 
in paragraph (a)(2)(i)(B) of this section), in either the entire unit 
or the part to be serviced (if the latter can be isolated) to a system 
receiver (e.g., the remaining portions of the appliance, or a specific 
vessel within the appliance) or a recovery or recycling machine 
certified pursuant to Sec.  82.158. A technician must verify that the 
applicable level of evacuation has been reached in the appliance or the 
part before it is opened.
* * * * *

[[Page 11980]]



         Table 1.--Required Levels of Evacuation for Appliances
     [Except for small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like appliances]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Inches of Hg vacuum  (relative to standard
                                atmospheric pressure of 29.9 inches Hg)
                             -------------------------------------------
                                Using recovery or     Using recovery or
      Type of appliance        recycling equipment   recycling equipment
                                 manufactured or       manufactured or
                                 imported before    imported on or after
                                November 15, 1993     November 15, 1993
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Very high-pressure appliance                     0                     0
High-pressure appliance, or                      0                     0
 isolated component of such
 appliance, normally
 containing less than 200
 pounds of refrigerant......
High-pressure appliance, or                      4                    10
 isolated component of such
 appliance, normally
 containing 200 pounds or
 more of refrigerant........
Medium-pressure appliance,                       4                    10
 or isolated component of
 such appliance, normally
 containing less than 200
 pounds of refrigerant......
Medium-pressure appliance,                       4                    15
 or isolated component of
 such appliance, normally
 containing 200 pounds or
 more of refrigerant........
Low-pressure appliance......                    25     25 mm Hg absolute
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (b) All persons opening appliances except for small appliances, 
MVACs, and MVAC-like appliances for maintenance, service, or repair and 
all persons disposing of appliances except small appliances, MVACs, and 
MVAC-like appliances must have at least one piece of certified, self-
contained recovery or recycling equipment available at their place of 
business. Persons who maintain, service, repair, or dispose of only 
appliances that they own and that contain pump-out units are exempt 
from this requirement. This exemption does not relieve such persons 
from other applicable requirements of this section.
* * * * *

0
6. Section 82.161 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  82.161  Technician certification.

    (a) * * *
    (2) Technicians who maintain, service, or repair medium-, high-, or 
very high-pressure appliances, except small appliances, MVACs, and 
MVAC-like appliances, or dispose of medium-, high-, or very high-
pressure appliances, except small appliances, MVACs, and MVAC-like 
appliances, must be properly certified as Type II technicians.
* * * * *

0
7. Section 82.162 is amended by revising the EPA regional addresses in 
paragraph (a)(5) to read as follows:


Sec.  82.162  Certification by owners of recycling or recovery 
equipment.

    (a) * * *
    (5) * * *
    Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and 
Vermont must send their certifications to: CAA section 608 Enforcement 
Contact; EPA Region I; Mail Code SEA; JFK Federal Building; One 
Congress Street, Suite 1100; Boston, MA 02114-2023.

    Owners or lessees of recycling or recovery equipment having their 
places of business in: New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and Virgin 
Islands must send their certifications to: CAA section 608 Enforcement 
Contact; EPA Region II (2DECA-AC); 290 Broadway, 21st Floor; New York, 
NY 10007-1866.

    Owners or lessees of recycling or recovery equipment having their 
places of business in: Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, 
Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia must send their 
certifications to: CAA section 608 Enforcement Contact; EPA Region 
III--Wheeling Operations Office; Mail Code 3AP12; 303 Methodist 
Building; 11th and Chapline Streets; Wheeling, WV 26003.

    Owners or lessees of recycling or recovery equipment having their 
places of business in: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, 
Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee must send 
their certifications to: CAA section 608 Enforcement Contact; EPA 
Region IV(APT-AE); Atlanta Federal Center; 61 Forsyth Street, SW.; 
Atlanta, GA 30303.
    Owners or lessees of recycling or recovery equipment having their 
places of business in: Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, 
and Wisconsin must send their certifications to: CAA section 608 
Enforcement Contact, EPA Region V (AE17J); 77 West Jackson Blvd.; 
Chicago, IL 60604-3507.

    Owners or lessees of recycling or recovery equipment having their 
places of business in: Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and 
Texas must send their certifications to: CAA section 608 Enforcement 
Contact; EPA Region VI (6EN-AA); 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200; Dallas, 
Texas 75202.

    Owners or lessees of recycling or recovery equipment having their 
places of business in: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska must send 
their certifications to: CAA section 608 Enforcement Contact; EPA 
Region VII; Mail Code APCO/ARTD; 901 North 5th Street; Kansas City, KS; 
66101.

    Owners or lessees of recycling or recovery equipment having their 
places of business in: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, 
Utah, and Wyoming must send their certifications to: CAA section 608 
Enforcement Contact, EPA Region VIII, Mail Code 8ENF-T, 999 18th 
Street, Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202-2466.

    Owners or lessees of recycling or recovery equipment having their 
places of business in: American Samoa, Arizona, California, Guam, 
Hawaii, and Nevada must send their certifications to: CAA section 608 
Enforcement Contact; EPA Region IX; Mail Code AIR-5; 75 Hawthorne 
Street; San Francisco, CA 94105.

    Owners or lessees of recycling or recovery equipment having their 
places of business in: Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington must send 
their certifications to: CAA section 608 Enforcement Contact; EPA 
Region X (OAQ-107); 1200 Sixth Avenue; Seattle, WA 98101.
* * * * *

0
8. Section 82.164 is amended by revising the introductory text and

[[Page 11981]]

paragraphs (a), (b), and (e)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  82.164  Reclaimer certification.

    Effective May 11, 2004, all persons reclaiming used refrigerant for 
sale to a new owner, except for persons who properly certified under 
this section prior to May 11, 2004, must certify to the Administrator 
that such person will:
    (a) Reprocess refrigerant to all of the specifications in Appendix 
A of this subpart (based on ARI Standard 700-1995, Specification for 
Fluorocarbons and Other Refrigerants) that are applicable to that 
refrigerant;
    (b) Verify that the refrigerant meets these specifications using 
the analytical methodology prescribed in Appendix A, which includes the 
primary methodologies included in the appendix to the ARI Standard 700-
1995;
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) The owner or a responsible officer of the reclaimer must sign 
the certification stating that the refrigerant will be reprocessed to 
all of the specifications in Appendix A of this subpart (based on ARI 
Standard 700-1995, Specification for Fluorocarbons and Other 
Refrigerants) that are applicable to that refrigerant, that the 
refrigerant's conformance to these specifications will be verified 
using the analytical methodology prescribed in Appendix A (which 
includes the primary methodologies included in the appendix to the ARI 
Standard 700-1995), that no more than 1.5 percent of the refrigerant 
will be released during the reclamation process, that wastes from the 
reclamation process will be properly disposed of, that the owner or 
responsible officer of the reclaimer will maintain records and submit 
reports in accordance with Sec.  82.166(g) and (h), and that the 
information given is true and correct. The certification should be sent 
to the following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Global 
Programs Division (6205J); 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, 
DC 20460; Attn: Section 608 Recycling Program Manager--Reclaimer 
Certification.
* * * * *

0
9. Section 82.166 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  82.166  Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    (a) All persons who sell or distribute or offer to sell or 
distribute any refrigerant must retain invoices that indicate the name 
of the purchaser, the date of sale, and the quantity of refrigerant 
purchased.
    (b) Purchasers of refrigerant who employ certified technicians may 
provide evidence that at least one technician is properly certified to 
the wholesaler who sells them refrigerant; the wholesaler must then 
keep this information on file and may sell refrigerant to the purchaser 
or his authorized representative even if such purchaser or authorized 
representative is not a properly certified technician. In such cases, 
the purchaser must notify the wholesaler in the event that the 
purchaser no longer employs at least one properly certified technician. 
The wholesaler is then prohibited from selling refrigerants to the 
purchaser until such time as the purchaser employs at least one 
properly certified technician. At that time, the purchaser must provide 
new evidence that at least one technician is properly certified.
* * * * *

0
10. Appendix A to subpart F is revised to read as follows:

APPENDIX A TO SUBPART F OF PART 82--SPECIFICATIONS FOR FLUOROCARBONS 
AND OTHER REFRIGERANTS

    This appendix is based on the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration 
Institute Standard 700-1995.
Section 1. Purpose
    1.1 Purpose. The purpose of this standard is to evaluate and 
accept/reject refrigerants regardless of source (i.e., new, reclaimed 
and/or repackaged) for use in new and existing refrigeration and air-
conditioning products as required under 40 CFR part 82.
    1.1.1 Intent. This standard is intended for the guidance of the 
industry including manufacturers, refrigerant reclaimers, repackagers, 
distributors, installers, servicemen, contractors and for consumers.
    1.1.2 Review and Amendment. This standard is subject to review and 
amendment as the technology advances.
Section 2. Scope
    2.1 Scope. This standard specifies acceptable levels of 
contaminants (purity requirements) for various fluorocarbon and other 
refrigerants regardless of source and lists acceptable test methods. 
These refrigerants are R-113; R-123; R-11; R-114; R-124; R-12; R-401C; 
R-406A; R-500; R-401A; R-409A; R-401B; R-411A; R-22; R-411B; R-502; R-
402B; R-408A; R-402A; R-13; R-503 as referenced in the ANSI/ASHRAE 
Standard 34-1992. (American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
conditioning Engineers, Inc., Standard 34-1992). Copies may be obtained 
from ASHRAE Publications Sales, 1791 Tullie Circle, NE, Atlanta, GA 
30329. Copies may also be inspected at Environmental Protection Agency; 
Office of Air and Radiation Docket; 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Room 
B108; Washington, DC 20460.
Section 3. Definitions
    3.1 ``Shall,'' ``Should,'' ``Recommended,'' or ``It Is 
Recommended.'' ``Shall,'' ``should,'' ``recommended,'' or ``it is 
recommended'' shall be interpreted as follows:
    3.1.1 Shall. Where ``shall'' or ``shall not'' is used for a 
provision specified, that provision is mandatory if compliance with the 
appendix is claimed.
    3.1.2 Should, Recommended, or It is Recommended. ``Should'', 
``recommended'', or ``it is recommended'' is used to indicate 
provisions which are not mandatory but which are desirable as good 
practice.
Section 4. Characterization of Refrigerants and Contaminants
    4.1 Characterization. Characterization of refrigerants and 
contaminants addressed are listed in the following general 
classifications:
    4.1.1 Characterization
    a. Gas Chromatography
    b. Boiling point and boiling point range
    4.1.2 Contaminants
    a. Water
    b. Chloride
    c. Acidity
    d. High boiling residue
    e. Particulates/solids
    f. Non-condensables
    g. Impurities including other refrigerants
Section 5. Sampling, Summary of Test Methods and Maximum Permissible 
Contaminant Levels
    5.1 Referee Test. The referee test methods for the various 
contaminants are summarized in the following paragraphs. Detailed test 
procedures are included in Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-1995: 
Analytical Procedures for ARI Standard 700-1995, 1995, Air-Conditioning 
and Refrigeration Institute. Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-1995 is 
incorporated by reference. [This incorporation by reference was 
approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from the Air-
Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute, 4301 North Fairfax Drive, 
Arlington, Virginia 22203. Copies may also be inspected at Public 
Docket No. A-92-01, Environmental Protection Agency,

[[Page 11982]]

1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC, 20460 or at the Office of 
the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, 
Washington, DC.] If alternative test methods are employed, the user 
must be able to demonstrate that they produce results equivalent to the 
specified referee method.
    5.2 Refrigerant Sampling
    5.2.1 Sampling Precautions. Special precautions should be taken to 
assure that representative samples are obtained for analysis. Sampling 
shall be done by trained laboratory personnel following accepted 
sampling and safety procedures.
    5.2.2 Gas Phase Sample. A gas phase sample shall be obtained for 
determining the non-condensables. Since non-condensable gases, if 
present, will concentrate in the vapor phase of the refrigerant, care 
must be exercised to eliminate introduction of air during the sample 
transfer. Purging is not an acceptable procedure for a gas phase sample 
since it may introduce a foreign product. Since R-11, R-113, and R-123 
have normal boiling points at or above room temperature, non-
condensable determination is not required for these refrigerants.
    5.2.2.1 Connection. The sample cylinder shall be connected to an 
evacuated gas sampling bulb by means of a manifold. The manifold should 
have a valve arrangement that facilitates evacuation of all connecting 
tubing leading to the sampling bulb.
    5.2.2.2 Equalizing Pressures. After the manifold has been 
evacuated, close the valve to the pump and open the valve on the 
system. Allow the pressure to equilibrate and close valves.
    5.2.3 Liquid Phase Sample. A liquid phase sample is required for 
all tests listed in this standard except the test for non-condensables.
    5.2.3.1 Preparation. Place a clean, empty sample cylinder with the 
valve open in an oven at 110[deg]C (230[deg]F) for one hour. Remove it 
from the oven while hot, immediately connect to an evacuation system 
and evacuate to less than 1 mm mercury (1000 microns). Close the valve 
and allow it to cool. Weigh the empty cylinder.
    5.2.3.2 Manifolding. The valve and lines from the unit to be 
sampled shall be clean and dry. The cylinder shall be connected to an 
evacuated gas sampling cylinder by means of a manifold. The manifold 
should have a valve arrangement that facilitates evacuation of all 
connecting tubing leading to the sampling cylinder.
    5.2.3.3 Liquid Sampling. After the manifold has been evacuated, 
close the valve to the pump and open the valve on the system. Take the 
sample as a liquid by chilling the sample cylinder slightly. Accurate 
analysis requires that the sample container be filled to at least 60% 
by volume, however under no circumstances should the cylinder be filled 
to more than 80% by volume. This can be accomplished by weighing the 
empty cylinder and then the cylinder with refrigerant. When the desired 
amount of refrigerant has been collected, close the valve(s) and 
disconnect the sample cylinder immediately.
    5.2.3.4 Record Weight. Check the sample cylinder for leaks and 
record the gross weight.
    5.3 Refrigerant Characterization.
    5.3.1 Primary Method. The primary method shall be gas 
chromatography (GC) as described in Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-
1995. The chromatogram of the sample shall be compared to known 
standards.
    5.3.2 Alternative Method. Determination of the boiling point and 
boiling point range is an acceptable alternative test method which can 
be used to characterize refrigerants. The test method shall be that 
described in the Federal Specification for ``Fluorocarbon 
Refrigerants,'' BB-F-1421 B, dated March 5, 1982, section 4.4.3.
    5.3.3 Required Values. The required values for boiling point and 
boiling point range are given in Table 1A, Physical Properties of 
Single Component Refrigerants; Table 1B, Physical Properties of 
Zeotropic Blends (400 Series Refrigerants); and Table 1C, Physical 
Properties of Azeotropic Blends (500 Series Refrigerants).
    5.4 Water Content.
    5.4.1 Method. The Coulometric Karl Fischer Titration shall be the 
primary test method for determining the water content of refrigerants. 
This method is described in Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-1995. This 
method can be used for refrigerants that are either a liquid or a gas 
at room temperature, including refrigerants 11, 113, and 123. For all 
refrigerants, the sample for water analysis shall be taken from the 
liquid phase of the container to be tested. Proper operation of the 
analytical method requires special equipment and an experienced 
operator. The precision of the results is excellent if proper sampling 
and handling procedures are followed. Refrigerants containing a colored 
dye can be successfully analyzed for water using this method.
    5.4.2 Limits. The value for water content shall be expressed as 
parts per million (ppm) by weight and shall not exceed the maximum 
specified (see Tables 1A, 1B, and 1C).
    5.5 Chloride.
    The refrigerant shall be tested for chloride as an indication of 
the presence of hydrochloric acid and/or metal chlorides. The 
recommended procedure is intended for use with new or reclaimed 
refrigerants. Significant amounts of oil may interfere with the results 
by indicating a failure in the absence of chloride.
    5.5.1 Method. The test method shall be that described in Appendix C 
to ARI Standard 700-1995. The test will show noticeable turbidity at 
chloride levels of about 3 ppm by weight or higher.
    5.5.2 Turbidity. The results of the test shall not exhibit any sign 
of turbidity. Report the results as ``pass'' or ``fail.''
    5.6 Acidity.
    5.6.1 Method. The acidity test uses the titration principle to 
detect any compound that is highly soluble in water and ionizes as an 
acid. The test method shall be that described in Appendix C to ARI 
Standard 700-1995. This test may not be suitable for determination of 
high molecular weight organic acids; however these acids will be found 
in the high boiling residue test outlined in 5.7. The test requires a 
100 to 120 gram sample and has a detection limit of 0.1 ppm by weight 
calculated as HCl.
    5.6.2 Limits. The maximum permissible acidity is 1 ppm by weight as 
HCl.
    5.7 High Boiling Residue.
    5.7.1 Method. High boiling residue shall be determined by measuring 
the residue of a standard volume of refrigerant after evaporation. The 
refrigerant sample shall be evaporated at room temperature or at a 
temperature 45[deg]C (115[deg]F) for all refrigerants, except R-113 
which shall be evaporated at 60[deg]C (140[deg]F), using a Goetz bulb 
as specified in Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-1995. Oils and/or 
organic acids will be captured by this method.
    5.7.2 Limits. The value for high boiling residue shall be expressed 
as a percentage by volume and shall not exceed the maximum percent 
specified (see Tables 1A, 1B, and 1C). An alternative gravimetric 
method is described in Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-1995.
    5.8 Method of Tests for Particulates and Solids.
    5.8.1 Method. A measured amount of sample is evaporated from a 
Goetz bulb under controlled temperature conditions. The particulates/
solids shall be determined by visual examination of the Goetz bulb 
prior to the evaporation of refrigerant. Presence of dirt, rust or 
other particulate contamination is reported as ``fail.'' For details of 
this test

[[Page 11983]]

method, refer to Part 3 of Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-1995.
    5.9 Non-Condensables.
    5.9.1 Sample. A vapor phase sample shall be used for determination 
of non-condensables. Non-condensable gases consist primarily of air 
accumulated in the vapor phase of refrigerants. The solubility of air 
in the refrigerants liquid phase is extremely low and air is not 
significant as a liquid phase contaminant. The presence of non-
condensable gases may reflect poor quality control in transferring 
refrigerants to storage tanks and cylinders.
    5.9.2 Method. The test method shall be gas chromatography with a 
thermal conductivity detector as described in Appendix C to ARI 
Standard 700-1995.
    5.9.3 Limit. The maximum level of non-condensables in the vapor 
phase of a refrigerant in a container shall not exceed 1.5% by volume 
(see Tables 1A, 1B, and 1C).
    5.10 Impurities, including Other Refrigerants.
    5.10.1 Method. The amount of other impurities including other 
refrigerants in the subject refrigerant shall be determined by gas 
chromatography as described in Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-1995.
    5.10.2 Limit. The subject refrigerant shall not contain more than 
0.5% by weight of impurities including other refrigerants (see Tables 
1A, 1B, and 1C).
Section 6. Reporting Procedure
    6.1 Reporting Procedure. The source (manufacturer, reclaimer or 
repackager) of the packaged refrigerant shall be identified. The 
refrigerant shall be identified by its accepted refrigerant number and/
or its chemical name. Maximum permissible levels of contaminants are 
shown in Tables 1A, 1B, and 1C. Test results shall be tabulated in a 
like manner.
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

[[Page 11984]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR04.000


[[Page 11985]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR04.001


[[Page 11986]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR04.002


[[Page 11987]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR12MR04.003

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C?

[[Page 11988]]

Appendix A. References--Normative

    Listed here are all standards, handbooks, and other publications 
essential to the formation and implementation of the standard. All 
references in this appendix are considered as part of this standard.
    ASHRAE Terminology of Heating, Ventilating, Air Conditioning and 
Refrigeration, American Society of Heating Refrigeration and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, 1992, 1791 Tullie Circle NE., Atlanta, GA 
30329-2305; U.S.A.
    ASHRAE Standard 34-1992, Number Designation and Safety 
Classification of Refrigerants, American Society of Heating 
Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers, 1992, 1791 Tullie Circle 
NE., Atlanta, GA 30329-2305; U.S.A.
    Appendix C to ARI Standard 700-1995: Analytical Procedures to ARI 
Standard 700-1995, Specifications for Fluorocarbon and Other 
Refrigerants, Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute, 1995, 4301 
North Fairfax Drive, Suite 425, Arlington, VA 22203; U.S.A.
    Federal Specification for Fluorocarbon Refrigerants, BB-F-1421-B, 
dated March 5, 1992, Office of the Federal Register, National Archives 
and Records Administration, 1992, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., 
Washington, D.C. 20402; U.S.A.
0
11. Appendix A1 to subpart F is added to read as follows:

 Appendix A1 to Subpart F of Part 82--Generic Maximum Contaminant Levels
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Contaminant                        Reporting units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air and Other Non-condensables............  1.5% by volume @ 25[deg]C (N/
                                             A for refrigerants used in
                                             low-pressure appliances
                                             \1\).
Water.....................................  10 ppm by weight 20 ppm by
                                             weight (for refrigerants
                                             used in low-pressure
                                             appliances \1\).
Other Impurities Including Refrigerant....  0.50% by weight.
High boiling residue......................  0.01% by volume.
Particulates/solids.......................  visually clean to pass.
Acidity...................................  1.0 ppm by weight.
Chlorides (chloride level for pass/fail is  No visible turbidity.
 3ppm).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Low-pressure appliances means an appliance that uses a refrigerant
  with a liquid phase saturation pressure below 45 psia at 104 [deg]F.


                  Blend Compositions (Where Applicable)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Allowable
           Nominal  composition  (by weight%)               composition
                                                           (by weight%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component constitutes 25% or more.......................   2.0
Component constitutes less than 25% but greater than 10%   1.0
Component constitutes less than or equal to 10%.........   0.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 04-3817 Filed 3-11-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P