SNAP Notice 1
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 9 & 82
Protection of Stratosp
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 9 & 82
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency
ACTION: Notice of Acceptability
SUMMARY: This notice expands the list of acceptable substitutes
for ozone depleting substances (ODSs) under the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Significant New
Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. SNAP implements section 612
of the amended Clean Air Act of 1990 whereby EPA is required to
evaluate substitutes for the ODSs, and regulate the use of
substitutes where other alternatives exist that reduce overall
risk to human health and the environment. Through these
evaluations, SNAP generates lists of acceptable and unacceptable
substitutes for each of the major industrial use sectors.
On March 18, 1994, EPA promulgated its plan for
administering the SNAP program, and issued decisions on the
acceptability and unacceptability of a number of substitutes (59
FR 13044). In today's Notice, EPA is issuing decisions on the
acceptability of certain substitutes not previously reviewed by
the Agency. The intended effect of this action is to expedite
movement away from ozone depleting compounds. To arrive at
determinations on the acceptability of substitutes, the Agency
completed a cross-media sector end-use screening assessment of
risks to human health and the environment.
As described in the final rule for the SNAP program (59
FR
13044), EPA does not believe that rulemaking procedures are
required to list alternatives as acceptable with no limitations.
Such listings do not impose any sanction, nor do they remove any
prior license to use a substance. Consequently, EPA is adding
substances to the list of acceptable alternatives without first
requesting comment on new listings.
EPA does, however, believe that notice-and-comment
rulemaking is required to place any substance on the list of
prohibited substitutes, to list a substance as acceptable only
under certain conditions, to list substances as acceptable only
for certain uses, or to remove a substance from either the list
of prohibited or acceptable substitutes. Updates to these lists
are published as separate notices of rulemaking in the Federal
Register.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 26, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Information relevant to this notice is contained in
Air Docket A-91-42, Central Docket Section, South Conference Room
4, U.S. Environmental Agency, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington,
D.C. 20460. Telephone: (202) 260-7549. The docket may be
inspected between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. weekdays. As provided
in 40 CFR part 2, a reasonable fee may be charged for
photocopying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sally Rand at (202) 233-9739 or
fax (202) 233-9577, U.S. EPA, Stratospheric Protection Division,
401 M Street, S.W., 6205-J, Washington, D.C. 20460.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview of This Action
This action is divided into six sections, including this
overview:
I. Overview of This Notice
II. Section 612 Program
A. Statutory Requirements
B. Regulatory History
III. Listing of Acceptable Substitutes
IV. Listing of Substitutes Pending Review
V. Additional Information
Appendix A Summary of Acceptable and Pending Decisions
II. Section 612 Program
A. Statutory Requirements
Section 612 of the Clean Air Act authorizes EPA to
develop a
program for evaluating alternatives to ozone-depleting
substances. EPA is referring to this program as the Significant
New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. The major provisions of
section 612 are:
. Rulemaking--Section 612(c) requires EPA to
promulgate
rules making it unlawful to replace any class
I
(chlorofluorocarbon, halon, carbon
tetrachloride,
methyl chloroform, methyl bromide, and
hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II
(hydrochlorofluorocarbon) substance with any
substitute
that the Administrator determines may present
adverse
effects to human health or the environment
where the
Administrator has identified an alternative
that (1)
reduces the overall risk to human health and
the
environment, and (2) is currently or
potentially
available.
. Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable
Substitutes--Section
612(c) also requires EPA to publish a list of
the
substitutes unacceptable for specific uses.
EPA must
publish a corresponding list of acceptable
alternatives
for specific uses.
. Petition Process--Section 612(d) grants the
right to
any person to petition EPA to add a substance
to or
delete a substance from the lists published in
accordance with section 612(c). The Agency
has 90 days
to grant or deny a petition. Where the Agency
grants
the petition, EPA must publish the revised
lists within
an additional 6 months.
. 90-day Notification--Section 612(e) requires
EPA to
require any person who produces a chemical
substitute
for a class I substance to notify the Agency
not less
than 90 days before new or existing chemicals
are
introduced into interstate commerce for
significant new
uses as substitutes for a class I substance.
The
producer must also provide the Agency with the
producer's unpublished health and safety
studies on
such substitutes.
. Outreach--Section 612(b)(1) states that the
Administrator shall seek to maximize the use
of federal
research facilities and resources to assist
users of
class I and II substances in identifying and
developing
alternatives to the use of such substances in
key
commercial applications.
. Clearinghouse--Section 612(b)(4) requires the
Agency to
set up a public clearinghouse of alternative
chemicals,
product substitutes, and alternative
manufacturing
processes that are available for products and
manufacturing processes which use class I and
II
substances.
B. Regulatory History
On March 18, 1994, EPA published the Final Rulemaking
(FRM)
(59 FR 13044) which described the process for administering the
SNAP program and issued EPA's first acceptability lists for
substitutes in the major industrial use sectors. These sectors
include: refrigeration and air conditioning; foam blowing;
solvent cleaning; fire suppression and explosion protection;
sterilants; aerosols; adhesives, coatings and inks; and tobacco
expansion. These sectors compose the principal industrial
sectors that historically consume the largest volumes of ozone-
depleting compounds.
The Agency defines a "substitute" as any chemical,
product
substitute, or alternative manufacturing process, whether
existing or new, that could replace a class I or class II
substance. Anyone who produces a substitute must provide the
Agency with health and safety studies on the substitute at least
90 days before introducing it into interstate commerce for
significant new use as an alternative. This requirement applies
to substitute manufacturers, but may include importers,
formulators or end-users, when they are responsible for
introducing a substitute into commerce.
III. Listing of Acceptable Substitutes
This section presents EPA's most recent acceptable
listing
decisions for class I substitutes in the following industrial
sectors: refrigerants and air conditioning, foam blowing,
solvent cleaning, fire suppression and explosion protection;
sterilants; aerosols; adhesives, coatings and inks. These
decisions represent substitutes not previously reviewed in the
final rulemaking for SNAP (59 FR 13044; March 18, 1994) and,
consequently, add to the lists of acceptable substitutes under
SNAP. For copies of the full list, contact the EPA Stratospheric
Protection Hotline at the number listed in Section V of this
notice.
Parts A through H below present a detailed discussion of
the
substitute listing determinations by major use sector. Tables
summarizing listing decisions in this notice are in Appendix A.
The comments contained in Appendix A provide additional
information on a substitute, but like the listings themselves,
are not regulatory in nature, and thus they are not mandatory for
use of a substitute. Nor should the comments be considered
comprehensive with respect to other legal obligations pertaining
to the use of the substitute. However, EPA encourages users of
acceptable substitutes to apply all comments to their use of
these substitutes. In many instances, the comments simply allude
to sound operating practices that have already been identified in
existing industry and/or building-code standards. Thus, many of
the comments, if adopted, would not require significant changes
in existing operating practices for the affected industry.
As described in the final rule for the SNAP program, EPA
does not believe that rulemaking procedures are required to list
alternatives as acceptable with no limitations. Such listings do
not impose any sanction, nor do they remove any prior license to
use a substitute. Consequently, EPA is adding substances to the
list of acceptable alternatives without first requesting comment
on new listings.
EPA, however, does believe that notice-and-comment
rulemaking is required to place any alternative on the list of
prohibited substitutes, to list a substitute as acceptable only
under use restrictions, or to remove a substitute from either the
list of prohibited or acceptable substitutes. Updates to these
lists are published as separate notices of rulemaking in the
Federal Register.
D. Refrigeration and Air Conditioning
1. Overview
The refrigeration and air conditioning sector includes
all
uses of class I and class II substances to produce cooling,
including mechanical and non-mechanical refrigeration, air
conditioning, and heat transfer. Please refer to the final SNAP
rule (59 FR 13044) for a more detailed description of this
sector.
The refrigeration and air conditioning sector is divided
into the following end-uses:
þ commercial comfort air conditioning;
þ industrial process refrigeration
systems;
þ industrial process air conditioning;
þ ice skating rinks;
þ uranium isotope separation processing;
þ cold storage warehouses;
þ refrigerated transport;
þ retail food refrigeration;
þ vending machines;
þ water coolers;
þ commercial ice machines;
þ household refrigerators;
þ household freezers;
þ residential dehumidifiers;
þ motor vehicle air conditioning;
þ residential air conditioning and heat
pumps;
þ non-mechanical heat transfer;
and
þ very low temperature refrigeration.
In addition, each end-use is divided into retrofit and new
equipment applications. EPA has not necessarily reviewed
substitutes in every end-use for this Notice.
EPA has modified the list of end-uses for this sector
for
this SNAP update. First, EPA has changed the name of the heat
transfer end-use to non-mechanical heat transfer. This change is
intended to avoid confusion between systems that move heat from a
cool area to a warm one (mechanical refrigeration) and systems
that simply aid the movement of heat away from warm areas (non-
mechanical heat transfer). The second change is that EPA added a
new end-use, very low temperature refrigeration. Substitutes for
this end-use have been reviewed since the final rule, and
therefore have been added for this SNAP update. Finally, EPA has
also reviewed substitutes for CFC-13, R-13B1, and R-503
industrial process refrigeration. Please refer to the final SNAP
rule (59 FR 13044) for a detailed description of end-uses other
than these three. EPA may continue to add other end-uses in
future SNAP updates.
a. Non-mechanical Heat
Transfer
As discussed above, this end-use includes all cooling
systems that rely on a fluid to remove heat from a heat source to
a cooler area, rather than relying on mechanical refrigeration to
move heat from a cool area to a warm one. Generally, there are
two types of systems: systems with fluid pumps, referred to as
recirculating coolers, and those that rely on natural convection
currents, known as thermosyphons.
b. Very Low Temperature
Refrigeration
Medical freezers, freeze-dryers, and other small
appliances
require extremely reliable refrigeration cycles. These systems
must meet stringent technical standards that do not normally
apply to refrigeration systems. They usually have very small
charges. Because they operate at very high vapor pressures, and
because performance is critically affected by any charge loss,
standard maintenance for these systems tends to reduce leakage to
a level considerably below that for other types of refrigeration
and air conditioning equipment.
c. CFC-13, R-13B1, and
R-503 Industrial Process
Refrigeration
This end-use differs from other types of industrial
refrigeration only in the extremely low temperature regimes that
are required. Although some substitutes may work in both these
extremely low temperatures and in systems designed to use R-502,
they are acceptable only for this end-use because of global
warming and atmospheric lifetime concerns. These concerns are
discussed more fully below.
2. Corrections from the March 18, 1994
FRM
In the FRM, the components of two refrigerants, R-404A
and
R-507, were inadvertently reversed. R-507 consists of HFC-125
and HFC-143a, and R-404A consists of HFC-125, HFC-143a, and HFC-
134a. These blends were listed as acceptable for the same end-
uses, so the reversal had no effect on the acceptable status of
either refrigerant.
Also in the FRM, EPA listed HFC-134a as acceptable in
several CFC-12 end-uses. In the descriptive text, EPA wrote
"while HFC-134a is compatible with most existing refrigeration
and air conditioning equipment parts, it is not compatible with
mineral oils currently used in such systems. An ester-based
lubricant should be used rather than mineral oils." EPA's
intention was to alert users to the need to use lubricants other
than current mineral oils, rather than to recommend a particular
type of new oil. While it remains true that mineral oils are
incompatible with HFC-134a, it is not true that polyol ester oils
are the only replacement. Polyalkylene glycol oils are also
available, and are in fact the predominant choice of the
automobile manufacturers. Therefore, the portion of each listing
for HFC-134a should have read "An appropriate ester-based,
polyalkylene glycol-based, or other type of lubricant should be
used." In addition, specifically in the Motor Vehicle Air
Conditioning end-use, the listing for HFC-134a should have
included the recommendation to consult the original equipment
manufacturer or the retrofit kit manufacturer for further
information. For clarity, these changes have been incorporated
into the listing for HFC-134a in Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning
in the NPRM.
3. Substitutes for Refrigerants
Substitutes fall into eight broad categories. Seven of
these categories are chemical substitutes used in the same vapor
compression cycle as the ozone-depleting substances being
replaced. They include hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs),
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), hydrocarbons, refrigerant blends,
ammonia, perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and chlorine systems. The
eighth category includes alternative technologies that generally
do not rely on vapor compression cycles. Please refer to the
final SNAP rule (59 FR 13044) for more discussion of these broad
categories.
Listing Decisions
a. Acceptable Substitutes
These determinations are based on data submitted to EPA
and
on the risk screen described in the draft background document
entitled "Risk Screen on the Use of Substitutes for Class I
Ozone-Depleting Substances: Refrigerants". In accordance with
the guiding principles for SNAP, substitutes were compared both
to the substance they replace and to each other.
EPA believes the use of all acceptable substitutes
presents
lower overall risk than the continued use of an ozone-depleting
substance. Not all substitutes will necessarily be appropriate
choices for all systems within an end-use. Engineering decisions
must take into account factors such as operating temperatures and
pressures, ambient conditions, and age of equipment, especially
during retrofits. For example, substitutes listed under
industrial process refrigeration may be listed as acceptable for
retrofits for both CFC-12 and R-502 systems. However, these
substances exhibit significantly different thermodynamic
characteristics, and a substitute for one may not be appropriate
for use as a substitute for the other. EPA believes such
decisions are most appropriately made by the equipment owner,
manager, or contractor.
Users of HCFCs should be aware that an acceptability
determination shall not be construed to release any user from
compliance with all other regulations pertaining to class II
substances. These include: (a) the prohibition against venting
during servicing under section 608, which was effective July 1,
1992; (b) recycling requirements under section 608, which were
effective July 13, 1993; (c) section 609 regulations regarding
MVACS which were effective August 13, 1992; and (d) the revised
production phaseout of class II substances under section 606,
which was published on December 10, 1993. In addition, users of
refrigerants that do not contain chlorine should be aware that an
acceptability determination shall not be construed to release any
user from compliance with the venting prohibition under section
608(c)(2), which takes effect November 15, 1995, at the latest.
Substitutes are listed as acceptable by end-use. These
substitutes have only been found acceptable for use in the
specific end-uses for which they have been reviewed, as described
in this section. Users of blends should be aware that EPA has
evaluated and found acceptable in each case only the specific
percentage composition submitted for review; no others have been
evaluated. EPA strongly recommends that users of alternative
refrigerants adhere to the provisions of ASHRAE Standard 15 -
Safety Code for Mechanical Refrigeration when applicable. ASHRAE
Standard 34 - Number Designation and Safety Classification of
Refrigerants is a useful reference on refrigerant numerical
designations. Users are also strongly encouraged to contain,
recycle, and reclaim all refrigerants.
(1) R-500
Centrifugal Chillers, Retrofit
(a)
R-406A
R-406A, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and
isobutane,is acceptable as a substitute for R-500 in retrofitted
centrifugal chillers. Because HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b contribute
to ozone depletion, this blend is considered a transitional
alternative. Regulations regarding recycling and reclamation
issued under section 608 of the Clean Air Act apply to this
blend. HCFC-142b has one of the highest ODPs among the HCFCs.
The GWPs of HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b are somewhat high. Although
HCFC-142b is flammable, the blend is not. After significant
leakage, however, this blend may become weakly flammable.
(2) CFC-11,
CFC-12, and R-502 Industrial
Process
Refrigeration, Retrofit
Please note that different temperature regimes may
affect
the applicability of substitutes within this end-use.
(a)
HCFC-123
HCFC-123 is acceptable as a substitutes for CFC-11,
CFC-12,
and R-502 in retrofitted industrial process refrigeration.
Because HCFC-123 contributes to ozone depletion, it is considered
a transitional alternative. Since it poses much lower
ozone-depleting risk than continued use of CFCs, EPA has
determined that its use is acceptable for certain end-uses. In
addition, HCFC-123's GWP and atmospheric lifetime are
significantly lower than almost all other alternatives. HCFC-123
is not flammable. EPA strongly recommends that users of HCFC-123
adhere to any requirements provided in ASHRAE Standards 15 and
34. Worker-monitoring studies conducted by EPA demonstrate that
in office building equipment rooms, HCFC-123's 8-hour
time-weighted average concentration can be maintained at or under
1 ppm (less than the industry-established AEL of 30 ppm),
provided that such standards are followed. HCFC-123 is
acceptable for use in commercial building chillers and should
pose no hazard in industrial uses.
(b)
R-406A
R-406A, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and
isobutane,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502 in
retrofitted industrial process refrigeration. See the discussion
on R-406A under retrofitted R-500 centrifugal chillers.
(c)
R-407A and R-407B
R-407A and R-407B, which consist of HFC-134a, HFC-32,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-
502 in retrofitted industrial process refrigeration. None of the
components contribute to ozone depletion. However, HFC-125 has a
very high GWP and HFC-134a has a moderate GWP. EPA strongly
encourages recycling and reclamation of this blend in order to
reduce its direct global warming impact. Although HFC-143a is
flammable, the blend is not. Leak testing has demonstrated that
its composition never becomes flammable.
(d)
HCFC Blend Epsilon
HCFC Blend Epsilon, which consists of HCFC-22, HFC-143a,
and
HFC-125, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-11, CFC-12, and
R-502 in retrofitted industrial process refrigeration. Because
HCFC-22 contributes to ozone depletion, this blend is considered
a transitional alternative. Regulations regarding recycling and
reclamation issued under section 608 of the Clean Air Act apply
to this blend. HFC-125 and HFC-143a have very high GWPs, and the
GWP of HFC-22 is somewhat high. Although HFC-143a is flammable,
the blend is not. Leak testing has demonstrated that its
composition never becomes flammable.
(3) CFC-11,
CFC-12, and R-502 Industrial
Process
Refrigeration, New
Please note that different temperature regimes may
affect
the applicability of substitutes within this end-use.
(a)
HCFC-123
HCFC-123 is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-11,
CFC-12,
and R-502 in new industrial process refrigeration. Because
HCFC-123 contributes to ozone depletion, it is considered a
transitional alternative. Since it poses much lower
ozone-depleting risk than continued use of CFCs, EPA has
determined that its use is acceptable for certain end-uses. In
addition, HCFC-123's GWP and atmospheric lifetime are
significantly lower than almost all other alternatives. HCFC-123
is not flammable. EPA strongly recommends that users of HCFC-123
adhere to any requirements provided in ASHRAE Standards 15 and
34. Worker-monitoring studies conducted by EPA demonstrate that
in office building equipment rooms, HCFC-123's 8-hour
time-weighted average concentration can be maintained at or under
1 ppm (less than the industry-established AEL of 30 ppm),
provided that such standards are followed. HCFC-123 is
acceptable for use in commercial building chillers and should
pose no hazard in industrial uses.
(b)
R-407A and R-407B
R-407A and R-407B, which consist of HFC-134a, HFC-32,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-
502 in new industrial process refrigeration. See the discussion
on these blends under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502
industrial process refrigeration.
(4) CFC-13,
R-13B1, and R-503 Industrial
Process
Refrigeration, Retrofit and New
This type of refrigeration requires temperatures well
below
those achieved with R-502 or HCFC-22. A limited number of
substitutes have been identified that are capable of meeting
technical requirements. These substitutes all contain components
with extremely high GWPS, and EPA is concerned about their
potential contribution to global warming. However, under SNAP,
EPA intends to only find those substitutes unacceptable that
clearly present greater overall risk. Given this framework, EPA
finds these high-GWP substitutes acceptable. At the same time,
EPA strongly urges industry to develop new alternatives for this
end-use that do not contain substances with such high GWPs and
long lifetimes.
(a)
HFC-23
HFC-23 is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-13, R-13B1,
and
R-503 in retrofitted and new industrial process refrigeration.
HFC-23 has an extremely high 100-year GWP of 9000 relative to CO2
and a lifetime of 280 years. Its GWP is the highest among the
HFCs, and its lifetime is exceeded only by the PFCs. EPA
believes HFC-23 could contribute significantly to global warming.
In addition, the long lifetime of HFC-23 means any global warming
or other effects would be essentially irreversible. While the
current rule issued under section 608 of the CAA does not require
recycling and recovery of HFC-23, or leak repair for systems
using HFC-23, EPA strongly encourages users to anticipate future
rulemakings with voluntary compliance. In particular, EPA urges
users to reduce leakage and recover and recycle HFC-23 during
equipment servicing and upon the retirement of equipment. HFC-23
is nonflammable and does not deplete stratospheric ozone.
(b)
R-403B
R-403B, which consists of HCFC-22, R-218, and propane,
is
acceptable as a substitute for CFC-13, R-13B1, and R-503 in
retrofitted and new industrial process refrigeration. Because
HCFC-22 contributes to ozone depletion, this blend is considered
a transitional alternative. Regulations regarding recycling and
reclamation issued under section 608 of the Clean Air Act apply
to this blend. R-218, or perfluoropropane, is an extremely long-
lived substance with an extremely high GWP. EPA believes this
blend could contribute significantly to global warming. In
addition, the long lifetime of R-218 means any global warming or
other effects would be essentially irreversible. R-403B is only
acceptable as a substitute for this end-use. The GWP of HCFC-22
is also somewhat high. Although propane is flammable, the blend
is not. Leak testing has demonstrated that the blend's
composition never becomes flammable. In a proposed rulemaking
soon to be issued, EPA intends to propose R-403B unacceptable as
a substitute for R-502 in all end-uses because other substitutes
have been identified which do not exhibit such extreme GWPs or
lifetimes.
(c) PFC
Blend Alpha
PFC Blend Alpha, which contains HFC-23 and R-116, is
acceptable as a substitute for CFC-13, R-13B1, and R-503 in
retrofitted and new industrial process refrigeration. Both
components of this blend exhibit extremely high GWPs and long
lifetimes. HFC-23 has a GWP of 9,000 and a lifetime of 280
years, and R-116, perfluoroethane, has a GWP of 9,000 and a
lifetime of 10,000 years. EPA believes this blend could
significantly contribute to global warming if allowed to escape
refrigeration systems. In addition, the long lifetimes of R-116
and HFC-23 mean any global warming or other effects would be
essentially irreversible. While the current rule issued under
section 608 of the CAA does not require recycling and recovery of
this blend, or leak repair for systems using it, EPA strongly
encourages users to anticipate future rulemakings with voluntary
compliance. In particular, EPA urges users to reduce leakage and
recover and recycle this blend during equipment servicing and
upon the retirement of equipment. This blend is nonflammable and
does not deplete ozone.
(5) CFC-12 and
R-502 Ice Skating Rinks,
Retrofit and
New
Please note that different temperature regimes may
affect
the applicability of substitutes within this end-use.
(a)
R-407A and R-407B
R-407A and R-407B, which consist of HFC-134a, HFC-32,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-12 and R-502 in
new and retrofitted ice rinks. See the discussion on these
blends under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502 industrial
process refrigeration.
(6) CFC-12 and
R-502 Cold Storage
Warehouses,
Retrofit
Please note that different temperature regimes may
affect
the applicability of substitutes within this end-use.
(a)
R-406A
R-406A, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and
isobutane,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in retrofitted
cold storage warehouses. See the discussion on R-406A under
retrofitted R-500 centrifugal chillers.
(b)
R-407A and R-407B
R-407A and R-407B, which consist of HFC-134a, HFC-32,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-12 and R-502 in
retrofitted cold storage warehouses. See the discussion on these
blends under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502 industrial
process refrigeration.
(c)
HCFC Blend Epsilon
HCFC Blend Epsilon, which consists of HCFC-22, HFC-143a,
and
HFC-125, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in
retrofitted cold storage warehouses. See the discussion on HCFC
Blend Epsilon under retrofitted industrial process refrigeration.
(7) CFC-12 and
R-502 Cold Storage
Warehouses,
New
Please note that different temperature regimes may
affect
the applicability of substitutes within this end-use.
(a)
R-407A and R-407B
R-407A and R-407B, which consist of HFC-134a, HFC-32,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-12 and R-502 in
new cold storage warehouses. See the discussion on these blends
under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502 industrial process
refrigeration.
(8) CFC-12,
R-500, and R-502 Refrigerated
Transport,
Retrofit
Please note that different temperature regimes may
affect
the applicability of substitutes within this end-use.
(a)
R-406A
R-406A, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and
isobutane,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12, R-500, and R-502 in
retrofitted refrigerated transport. See the discussion on R-406A
under retrofitted R-500 centrifugal chillers.
(b)
R-407A and R-407B
R-407A and R-407B, which consist of HFC-134a, HFC-32,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-12, R-500, and R-
502 in retrofitted refrigerated transport. See the discussion on
these blends under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502
industrial process refrigeration.
(c)
HCFC Blend Gamma
HCFC Blend Gamma, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b,
and
HCFC-124, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12, R-500, and
R-502 in retrofitted refrigerated transport. Because HCFC-22,
HCFC-142b, and HCFC-124 contribute to ozone depletion, this blend
is considered a transitional alternative. Regulations regarding
recycling and reclamation issued under section 608 of the Clean
Air Act apply to this blend. HCFC-142b has one of the highest
ODPs among the HCFCs, while HCFC-124 has one of the lowest. The
GWPs of HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b are somewhat high. Although
HCFC-142b is flammable, the blend is not. Leak testing has
demonstrated that its composition never becomes flammable.
(d)
HCFC Blend Epsilon
HCFC Blend Epsilon, which consists of HCFC-22, HFC-143a,
and
HFC-125, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12, R-500, and
R-502 in retrofitted refrigerated transport. See the discussion
on HCFC Blend Epsilon under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502
industrial process refrigeration.
(9) CFC-12,
R-500, and R-502 Refrigerated
Transport,
New
Please note that different temperature regimes may
affect
the applicability of substitutes within this end-use.
(a)
R-407A and R-407B
R-407A and R-407B, which consist of HFC-134a, HFC-32,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-12, R-500, and R-
502 in new refrigerated transport. See the discussion on these
blends under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502 industrial
process refrigeration.
(10) CFC-12 and
R-502 Retail Food
Refrigeration, Retrofit
Please note that different temperature regimes may
affect
the applicability of substitutes within this end-use.
(a)
R-406A
R-406A, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and
isobutane,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in retrofitted
retail food refrigeration. See the discussion on R-406A under
retrofitted R-500 centrifugal chillers.
(b)
R-407A and R-407B
R-407A and R-407B, which consist of HFC-134a, HFC-32,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-12 and R-502 in
retrofitted retail food refrigeration. See the discussion on
these blends under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502
industrial process refrigeration.
(c)
HCFC Blend Gamma
HCFC Blend Gamma, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b,
and
HCFC-124, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in
retrofitted retail food refrigeration. See the discussion on
HCFC Blend Gamma under retrofitted CFC-12, R-500, and CFC-502
refrigerated transport.
(d)
HCFC Blend Epsilon
HCFC Blend Epsilon, which consists of HCFC-22, HFC-143a,
and
HFC-125, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in
retrofitted retail food refrigeration. See the discussion on
HCFC Blend Epsilon under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502
industrial process refrigeration.
(11) CFC-12 and
R-502 Retail Food
Refrigeration, New
Please note that different temperature regimes may
affect
the applicability of substitutes within this end-use.
(a)
R-407A and R-407B
R-407A and R-407B, which consist of HFC-134a, HFC-32,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-12 and R-502 in
new retail food refrigeration. See the discussion on these
blends under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502 industrial
process refrigeration.
(12) CFC-12 and
R-502 Commercial Ice
Machines,
Retrofit
Please note that different temperature regimes may
affect
the applicability of substitutes within this end-use.
(a)
R-406A
R-406A, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and
isobutane,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in retrofitted
commercial ice machines. See the discussion on R-406A under
retrofitted R-500 centrifugal chillers.
(b)
R-407A and R-407B
R-407A and R-407B, which consist of HFC-134a, HFC-32,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-12 and R-502 in
retrofitted commercial ice machines. See the discussion on these
blends under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502 industrial
process refrigeration.
(c)
HCFC Blend Gamma
HCFC Blend Gamma, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b,
and
HCFC-124, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in
retrofitted commercial ice machines. See the discussion on HCFC
Blend Gamma under retrofitted CFC-12, R-500, and CFC-502
refrigerated transport.
(d)
HCFC Blend Epsilon
HCFC Blend Epsilon, which consists of HCFC-22, HFC-143a,
and
HFC-125, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in
retrofitted commercial ice machines. See the discussion on HCFC
Blend Epsilon under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502
industrial process refrigeration.
(13) CFC-12 and
R-502 Commercial Ice
Machines, New
Please note that different temperature regimes may
affect
the applicability of substitutes within this end-use.
(a)
R-407A and R-407B
R-407A and R-407B, which consist of HFC-134a, HFC-32,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-12 and R-502 in
new commercial ice machines. See the discussion on these blends
under retrofitted CFC-11, CFC-12, and R-502 industrial process
refrigeration.
(14) CFC-12 and
R-502 Vending Machines,
Retrofit
(a)
R-404A
R-404A, which consists of HFC-125, HFC-143a, and
HFC-134a,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in retrofitted
vending machines. None of this blend's constituents contains
chlorine, and thus this blend poses no threat to stratospheric
ozone. However, HFC-125 and HFC-143a have very high GWPs, and
the GWP of HFC-134a is somewhat high. EPA strongly encourages
recycling and reclamation of this blend to reduce its direct
global warming impact. Although HFC-143a is flammable, the blend
is not. Leak testing has demonstrated that its composition never
becomes flammable.
(b)
R-406A
R-406A, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and
isobutane,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in retrofitted
vending machines. See the discussion on R-406A under retrofitted
R-500 centrifugal chillers.
(c)
R-507
R-507, which consists of HFC-125 and HFC-143a, is
acceptable
as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in retrofitted vending
machines. None of this blend's constituents contains chlorine,
and thus this blend poses no threat to stratospheric ozone.
However, HFC-125 and HFC-143a have very high GWPs. EPA strongly
encourages recycling and reclamation of this blend in order to
reduce its direct global warming impact. Although HFC-143a is
flammable, the blend is not. It is an azeotrope, so it will not
fractionate during operation. Leak testing has demonstrated that
its composition never becomes flammable.
(d)
HCFC Blend Gamma
HCFC Blend Gamma, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b,
and
HCFC-124, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in
retrofitted vending machines. See the discussion on HCFC Blend
Gamma under retrofitted CFC-12, R-500, and CFC-502 refrigerated
transport.
(15) CFC-12
Vending Machines, New
(a)
R-404A
R-404A, which consists of HFC-125, HFC-143a, and
HFC-134a,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in new vending
machines. See the discussion on this blend under retrofitted
CFC-12 and R-502 vending machines.
(b)
R-507
R-507, which consists of HFC-125 and HFC-143a, is
acceptable
as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in new vending machines.
See the discussion on this blend under retrofitted CFC-12 and
R-502 vending machines.
(16) CFC-12 Water
Coolers, Retrofit
(a)
R-406A
R-406A, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and
isobutane,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 in retrofitted water
coolers. See the discussion on R-406A under retrofitted R-500
centrifugal chillers.
(b)
HCFC Blend Gamma
HCFC Blend Gamma, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b,
and
HCFC-124, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 in retrofitted
water coolers. See the discussion on HCFC Blend Gamma under
retrofitted CFC-12, R-500, and CFC-502 refrigerated transport.
(17) CFC-12
Household Refrigerators, Retrofit
(a)
R-406A
R-406A, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and
isobutane,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 in retrofitted household
refrigerators. See the discussion on R-406A under retrofitted
R-500 centrifugal chillers.
(b)
HCFC Blend Gamma
HCFC Blend Gamma, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b,
and
HCFC-124, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 in retrofitted
household refrigerators. See the discussion on HCFC Blend Gamma
under retrofitted CFC-12, R-500, and CFC-502 refrigerated
transport.
(18) CFC-12 and
R-502 Household Freezers,
Retrofit
(a)
R-402A and R-402B
R-402A and R-402B, which consist of HCFC-22, propane,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-11, CFC-12, and
R-502 in retrofitted household freezers. HCFC-22 contributes to
ozone depletion, and will be phased out according to the
accelerated schedule (published 12/10/93, 58 FR 65018), although
it has a lower ODP than CFC-12. The GWP of HFC-125 is very high
and that of HCFC-22 is somewhat high. Although these blends
contain one flammable constituent, propane, the blends themselves
are not flammable. In addition, while testing demonstrated that
the vapor and liquid compositions changed during leaks, neither
phase became flammable.
(b)
R-404A
R-404A, which consists of HFC-125, HFC-143a, and
HFC-134a,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in retrofitted
household freezers. See the discussion on this blend under
retrofitted CFC-12 and R-502 vending machines.
(c)
R-406A
R-406A, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and
isobutane,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 in retrofitted household
freezers. See the discussion on R-406A under retrofitted R-500
centrifugal chillers.
(d)
R-507
R-507, which consists of HFC-125 and HFC-143a, is
acceptable
as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in retrofitted household
freezers. See the discussion on this blend under retrofitted
CFC-12 and R-502 vending machines.
(e)
HCFC Blend Gamma
HCFC Blend Gamma, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b,
and
HCFC-124, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 in retrofitted
household freezers. See the discussion on HCFC Blend Gamma under
retrofitted CFC-12, R-500, and CFC-502 refrigerated transport.
(19) CFC-12 and
R-502 Household Freezers, New
R-402A
and R-402B
R-402A and R-402B, which consist of HCFC-22, propane,
and
HFC-125, are acceptable as substitutes for CFC-11, CFC-12, and
R-502 in retrofitted household freezers. See the discussion on
R-402A and R-402B under retrofitted household freezers.
(b)
R-404A
R-404A, which consists of HFC-125, HFC-143a, and
HFC-134a,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in new
household freezers. See the discussion on this blend under
retrofitted CFC-12 and R-502 vending machines.
(c)
R-507
R-507, which consists of HFC-125 and HFC-143a, is
acceptable
as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-502 in new household freezers.
See the discussion on this blend under retrofitted CFC-12 and
R-502 vending machines.
(20) CFC-12 and
R-500 Residential
Dehumidifiers, Retrofit
Please note that different temperature regimes may
affect
the applicability of substitutes within this end-use.
(a)
R-406A
R-406A, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b, and
isobutane,
is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-500 in retrofitted
residential dehumidifiers. See the discussion on R-406A under
retrofitted R-500 centrifugal chillers.
(b)
HCFC Blend Gamma
HCFC Blend Gamma, which consists of HCFC-22, HCFC-142b,
and
HCFC-124, is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 and R-500 in
retrofitted residential dehumidifiers. See the discussion on
HCFC Blend Gamma under retrofitted CFC-12, R-500, and CFC-502
refrigerated transport.
(21) CFC-12
Automobile Air Conditioners,
Retrofit and
New
A smooth transition to the use of substitutes strongly
depends on the continued purity of the recycled CFC-12 supply.
The existence of several substitutes in this end-use may
increased the likelihood of significant cross-contamination. To
address this increased risk, EPA is proposing several use
conditions on the use of all motor vehicle air conditioning
refrigerants. Please refer to the notice of proposed rulemaking,
soon to be issued, for more information.
(22) CFC-12
Non-Automobile Motor Vehicle Air
Conditioners,
Retrofit and New
(a)
HCFC-22
HCFC-22 is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-12 in
retrofitted and new CFC-12 Non-Automobile Motor Vehicle Air
Conditioners. In some situations, HCFC-22 may be used as a
retrofit refrigerant in bus and rail car air conditioning systems
originally designed to use CFC-12. In addition, while HCFC-22 is
the primary refrigerant in these uses, EPA is listing it as an
acceptable substitute for CFC-12 in new systems in order to
remove confusion about its usefulness. Please note that HCFC-22
is only acceptable in motor vehicles other than automobiles.
Design differences render HCFC-22 ineffective in cars. In fact,
HCFC-22 may damage automobile air conditioners. HCFC-22 does
contribute to ozone depletion and will therefore be phased out
according to the accelerated schedule (published 12/10/93, 58 FR
65018). It is therefore covered by regulations issued under
section 608 of the CAA. HCFC-22 is nonflammable.
(23)
Non-mechanical Heat Transfer, Retrofit
and New
EPA did not review substitues for this end-use as part
of
the SNAP FRM, nor did it propose to include this end-use in the
refrigeration and air conditioning sector in the NPRM (58 FR
28094). However, the Agency has developed a better understanding
of the volumes likely to be used as coolants, and this new
information has led EPA to reconsider its earlier position that
heat transfer systems constitute small uses. Therefore, EPA has
included this end-use within the refrigeration and air
conditioning sector. In a subsequent proposal, EPA plans to
propose narrowed use limits for several substitutes in this end-
use.
(24) CFC-13,
R-13B1, and R-503 Very Low
Temperature
Refrigeration, Retrofit and
New
This type of refrigeration requires temperatures well
below
those achieved with R-502 or HCFC-22. Because these systems are
used for purposes such as freezing blood or for simulating
extreme conditions for testing, extremely low leakage rates are
essential. A limited number of substitutes have been identified
that are capable of meeting technical requirements. These
substitutes all contain components with extremely high GWPS, and
EPA is concerned about their potential contribution to global
warming. However, under SNAP, EPA intends to only find those
substitutes unacceptable that clearly present greater overall
risk. Given this framework, EPA finds these high-GWP substitutes
acceptable. At the same time, EPA strongly urges industry to
develop new alternatives for this end-use that do not contain
substances with such high GWPs and long lifetimes.
(a)
HFC-23
HFC-23 is acceptable as a substitute for CFC-13, R-13B1,
and
R-503 in retrofitted and new very low temperature refrigeration.
HFC-23 has an extremely high GWP of 9000 and a lifetime of 280
years. Its GWP is the highest among the HFCs, and its lifetime
is exceeded only by the PFCs. EPA believes it could contribute
significantly to global warming. In addition, the long lifetime
of HFC-23 means any global warming or other effects would be
essentially irreversible. While the current rule issued under
section 608 of the CAA does not require recycling and recovery of
HFC-23, or leak repair for systems using HFC-23, EPA strongly
encourages users to anticipate future rulemakings with voluntary
compliance. In particular, EPA urges users to reduce leakage and
recover and recycle HFC-23 during equipment servicing and upon
the retirement of equipment. HFC-23 is nonflammable and does not
deplete ozone.
(b)
R-403B
R-403B, which consists of HCFC-22, R-218, and propane,
is
acceptable as a substitute for CFC-13, R-13B1, and R-503 in
retrofitted and new very low temperature refrigeration. Because
HCFC-22 contributes to ozone depletion, this blend is considered
a transitional alternative. Regulations regarding recycling and
reclamation issued under section 608 of the Clean Air Act apply
to this blend. R-218, or perfluoropropane, is an extremely long-
lived substance with an extremely high GWP. EPA believes this
blend could significantly contribute to global warming. In
addition, the long lifetimes of R-218 means global warming and
other effects would be essentially irreversible. R-403B is only
acceptable as a substitute for the refrigerants listed above.
The GWP of HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b are also somewhat high.
Although propane is flammable, the blend is not. Leak testing
has demonstrated that the blend's composition never becomes
flammable. In a proposed rulemaking soon to be issued, EPA
intends to propose R-403B unacceptable as a substitute for R-502
in all end-uses because other substitutes have been identified
which do not exhibit such extreme GWPs or lifetimes.
(c) PFC
Blend Alpha
PFC Blend Alpha, which contains HFC-23 and R-116, is
acceptable as a substitute for CFC-13, R-13B1, and R-503 in
retrofitted and new very low temperature refrigeration. Both
components of this blend exhibit extremely high GWPs and long
lifetimes. HFC-23 has a GWP of 9,000 and a lifetime of 280
years, and R-116, perfluoroethane, has a GWP of 9,000 and a
lifetime of 10,000 years. EPA believes this blend could
significantly contribute to global warming if allowed to escape
refrigeration systems. In addition, the long lifetimes of R-116
and HFC-23 mean any global warming or other effects would be
essentially irreversible. While the current rule issued under
section 608 of the CAA does not require recycling and recovery of
this blend, or leak repair for systems using it, EPA strongly
encourages users to anticipate future rulemakings with voluntary
compliance. In particular, EPA urges users to reduce leakage and
recover and recycle HFC-23 during equipment servicing and upon
the retirement of equipment. This blend is nonflammable and does
not deplete ozone.
B. Foams
1. Clarification from March 18, 1994
Final Rulemaking
In Section IX.E. Foams, under the listing decisions for
rigid polyurethane and polyisocyanurate laminate boardstock (59
FR 13085), the narrative under substitute (e) HCFC-22/HCFC-141b
incorrectly reads as follows: "The HCFC-22/HCFC-142b blend is
acceptable as a substitute for CFC-11 in rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminate boardstock foams." This sentence
should read HCFC-22/HCFC-141b. The Agency regrets any confusion
this error may have caused.
Further, the end-use titled "Phenolic Insulation Board"
requires clarification. In this end-use the Agency includes foam
products manufactured from both the discontinuous block (or bun)
process and the continuous lamination process. Henceforth, this
end-use will be referred to as "Phenolic Insulation Boardstock
and Bunstock Foam."
2. New Listing Decisions
a. Acceptable Substitutes
(1) Rigid
Polyurethane and Polyisocyanurate
Laminated
Boardstock
(a)
Electroset Technology
The Electroset Manufacturing Technology is an acceptable
substitute for CFC-11 blown rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock foams. This proprietary
manufacturing process, developed by the U.S. Navy, transforms
organic casting resins into electrosettable foaming compounds.
These compounds are made electrically semiconductive with the
addition of electrically polarizable particles, and if necessary,
an electrically conductive fluid. This process enables foam
manufacturers to electrically accelerate the speed at which they
set (i.e., harden) and cure (i.e. solidify). Other
characteristics such as density, compressibility, adhesion, and
shear strength can also be electrically controlled. Potential
health and environmental risks for this technology are considered
similar to or less than those of other acceptable substitutes for
this end-use. Risk is expected to vary based on the quantity of
electrically polarizable particles added in the polymer and
whether other electrically conductive fluids are added to the
formulation. Of the six potential electrically foaming agents
reviewed by the Agency, none represented a significant risk under
the SNAP criteria for evaluation. Adequate workplace precautions
such as workplace ventilation were presumed. For additional
detail see, "SNAP Evaluation for Electroset Technology."
(2) Rigid Polyurethane
Appliance
(a)
Electroset Technology
The Electroset Manufacturing Technology is an acceptable
substitute for CFC-11 blown rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock foams. See discussion
above.
(3) Rigid
Polyurethane Spray and Commercial
Refrigeration, and Sandwich Panels
(a)
Electroset Technology
The Electroset Manufacturing Technology is an acceptable
substitute for CFC-11 blown rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock foams. See discussion
above.
(4) Rigid
Polyurethane Slabstock and Other
Foams
(a)
Electroset Technology
The Electroset Manufacturing Technology is an acceptable
substitute for CFC-11 blown rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock foams. See discussion
above.
(5) Polystyrene
Extruded Boardstock and
Billet
(a)
HFC-143a
HFC-143a is acceptable as an alternative to CFC-12 in
polystyrene boardstock and billet foams. HFC-143a has a higher
global warming potential (GWP) than other acceptable substitutes
for this end-use.
(b)
Electroset Technology
The Electroset Manufacturing Technology is an acceptable
substitute for CFC-11 blown rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock foams. See discussion
above.
(6) Phenolic
Insulation Boardstock and
Bunstock Foam
(a)
Electroset Technology
The Electroset Manufacturing Technology is an acceptable
substitute for CFC-11 blown rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock foams. See discussion
above.
(7) Polyurethane
Flexible
(a)
Saturated Light Hydrocarbons C3-C6
Saturated light hydrocarbons C3-C6 (and blends thereof)
are
acceptable as substitutes for CFC-11 and methyl chloroform in
polyurethane flexible foam. Saturated light hydrocarbons C3-C6
offer the potential of a non-ozone-depleting alternative to the
use of CFC-11 blowing agents in polyurethane flexible foams.
Plant modifications, however, may be necessary to accommodate the
flammability of hydrocarbons. Saturated light hydrocarbons C3-C6
are VOCs and are subject to control as such under Title I of the
Clean Air Act.
(b)
Electroset Technology
The Electroset Manufacturing Technology is an acceptable
substitute for CFC-11 blown rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock foams. See discussion
above.
(8) Polyurethane
Integral Skin
(a)
Electroset Technology
The Electroset Manufacturing Technology is an acceptable
substitute for CFC-11 blown rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock foams. See discussion
above.
(9) Polystyrene
Extruded Sheet
(a)
Electroset Technology
The Electroset Manufacturing Technology is an acceptable
substitute for CFC-11 blown rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock foams. See discussion
above.
(10) Polyolefin
Foam
(a)
Methylene Chloride
Methylene chloride is acceptable as a substitute for
CFC-11,
CFC-12 and CFC-114 in polyolefin foams. Methylene chloride is a
non-ozone-depleting and non-global warming alternative blowing
agent. Nevertheless, it does pose potential health and safety
concerns. In addition to occupational and worker safety
standards, some local and regional restrictions apply to the use
of methylene chloride. To assess risks in the Polyolefin foam
sector, EPA used data collected by the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) for the proposed revision of the
permissible exposure level (PEL) for methylene chloride. The
Agency's estimate for total population risk for methylene
chloride was based on average plant emissions derived from OSHA's
analysis, and while not negligible, was within the range of
existing Agency decisions on acceptable risk. For further
detail, refer to the SNAP background document entitled, "Risk
Screen on the Use of Methylene Chloride in Polyolefin Foams for
Class I Ozone-Depleting Substances: Foams, June, 1994." Users
of this substitute should note that methylene chloride will be
subject to future controls for hazardous air pollutants under
Title III section 112 of the Clean Air Act.
(b)
Polyolefin Chemical Blend A
Polyolefin Chemical Blend A is an acceptable substitute
for
CFC-11, CFC-12 and CFC-114 in polyolefin foams. Polyolefin
Chemical Blend A is a proprietary combination of blowing agents
submitted by a polyolefin foam manufacturer.
(c)
HFC-152a / Saturated Light
Hydrocarbons C3 - C6 Blends
HFC-152a/Saturated Light Hydrocarbons C3-C6 blends are
acceptable substitutes for CFC-11, CFC-12 and CFC-114 in
polyolefin foams. Both HFC-152a and saturated light hydrocarbons
C3-C6 are flammable. Plant modifications may be necessary to
accommodate this characteristic. Saturated light hydrocarbons
C3-C6 are volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and are subject to
control as such under Title I of the Clean Air Act.
(d)
Electroset Technology
The Electroset Manufacturing Technology is an acceptable
substitute for CFC-11 blown rigid polyurethane and
polyisocyanurate laminated boardstock foams. See discussion
above.
C. Solvent Cleaning
1. New Listing Decisions
a. Acceptable Substitutes
(1) Metals
Cleaning
(a)
Trans-1,2-dichloroethlyene.
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene is acceptable as an
alternative
to MCF and CFC-113 in metals cleaning.
(b)
Volatile Methyl Siloxanes
Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxanes and decamethylcyclo
pentasiloxanes are acceptable alternatives to MCF and CFC-113 in
metals cleaning. Evaluation of other VMS's is ongoing.
(2) Electronics Cleaning
(a)
Trans-1,2-dichloroethlyene.
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene is acceptable as an
alternative to MCF and CFC-113 in electronics cold cleaning.
(b)
Volatile Methyl Siloxanes
Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxanes and
decamethylcyclopentasiloxanes are acceptable alternatives to MCF
and CFC-113 in electronics cleaning. Evaluation of other VMS's
is on-going.
(3)
Precision Cleaning
(a)
Trans-1,2-dichloroethlyene.
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene is acceptable as an
alternative
to MCF and CFC-113 in precision cleaning.
(b)
HCFC-123
HCFC-123 is an acceptable substitute for CFC-113 and MCF
in
precision cleaning. New toxicity data has led to an upward
revision of the company set workplace exposure limit (AEL) of 30
ppm. The Agency believes that under normal conditions of use
this limit is attainable.
(c)
Volatile Methyl Siloxanes
Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxanes and decamethylcyclo
pentasiloxanes are acceptable alternatives to MCF and CFC-113 in
precision cleaning. Evaluation of other VMS's is ongoing.
D. Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection
1. Weight and Volume Equivalence of
Halon Substitutes
In the SNAP Rulemaking published March 18, 1994 (59 FR
13043), EPA included weight and volume equivalence data in the
discussion of halon substitutes. This data was derived from
either of two sources. EPA used manufacturer data when
available, otherwise the data was taken from the background
document entitled "Characterization of Risk from the Use of
Substitutes for Class I Ozone-Depleting Substances: Fire
Extinguishing and Explosion Protection (Halon Substitutes)."
While this data was presented in the Rulemaking for informational
purposes only to establish a relative concept, the variability of
methodologies for calculating these values has generated some
confusion in the regulated and user community. Therefore, at
EPA's request, the Technical Committee of the Halon Alternatives
Research Corporation has developed an agreed upon set of data for
determining weight and volume equivalence of halon substitutes.
The following table presents weight and volume
equivalents
for certain halon substitutes when compared to Halon 1301. The
equivalents were calculated using a single, fuel-specific design
concentration (heptane); therefore, they do not represent the
exact weight or volume of the agent needed to protect any
specific space against any specific hazard. The information used
to calculate the equivalents was obtained from agent
manufacturers and NFPA 2001, "Standard on Clean Agent Fire
Extinguishing Systems." Equivalents are included for general
comparison and informational purposes only.
Fire suppression agents must be evaluated in the context
of
the fire extinguishing system equipment with which they are used.
Design concentration, and weight and volume equivalents are only
meaningful when evaluated in specific system hardware
configurations. This is especially important when comparing
storage volume where storage container fill density varies with
the equipment used. Agent fire suppression performance will vary
with the system used and the detailed design of the system.
Therefore, fire suppression agent manufacturers do not generally
recommend design concentrations as these are also a function of
the system hardware in which they are used. Hence, these data
are provided for general guidance only and do not reflect a
recommendation for system design or a basis for rigorous
quantitative comparison.
Weight and volume equivalencies based on cup burner data
are
much less meaningful for streaming agents than for total flood
agents. One needs to consider performance of the agents and
equipment in larger-scale standardized tests.
2. Use of CFCs and HCFCs in Portable
Extinguishers
In this notice, EPA is clarifying the relationship
between
CAAA section 610 and section 612 regulations. Under section
610(b) (58 FR 4768; January 15, 1993), CFCs are banned from sale
or distribution in all portable fire extinguishers. Under
section 610(d) (58 FR 69637, December 30, 1993), HCFCs in
pressurized dispensers are banned from sale or distribution.
However, section 610(d) excludes HCFCs which are part of an
installed 'system,' and therefore exempted total flooding systems
and those streaming applications which incorporate fixed,
automatic systems (58 FR 69646). Further, section 610(d) only
allows the sale of a portable fire extinguisher containing HCFCs
where other agents are not suitable for the intended
applications. Suitability includes the commercial availability
of the agent and the ability of the agent to suppress a fire in
progress without damaging the equipment requiring protection (58
FR 69648). Because alternatives are available for residential
consumer uses, section 610(d) banned the sale and use of HCFCs in
portable fire extinguishers for residential consumer
applications. However, in commercial (including industrial and
military) settings, the variety of hazards are too broad to make
a standard rulemaking, and therefore under section 610(d) EPA has
established industry-based mechanisms for controlling the sale of
HCFCs to commercial users and owners of watercraft and aircraft.
Because section 610(d) already bans CFCs in portable fire
extinguishers and HCFCs in residential applications, it is not
necessary for them to be listed as unacceptable under SNAP.
The HCFCs and HCFC Blends that are listed as acceptable
under SNAP, but that are not acceptable under section 610(d) in
residential streaming applications are: HCFC-123, HCFC-124,
[HCFC Blend] B, [HCFC Blend] C, and [HCFC Blend] D.
3. New Listing Decisions
a. Acceptable Substitutes
(1) Streaming
Agents
(a)
HCFC-124
HCFC-124 is acceptable as a Halon 1211 substitute.
HCFC-124
has an ODP of 0.02, a 100-year GWP of 440 and an atmospheric
lifetime of 7 years. Its extinguishment concentration, based on
cup burner tests, is 7.0 per cent, while its cardiotoxic level
(LOAEL) is 2.5 per cent in the dog, with no effect (NOAEL)
apparent at 1.0 per cent. Actual exposures were assessed using
personal monitoring devices, and the Agency concludes that likely
exposure levels from its use as a streaming agent do not exceed
safe levels when used in a well ventilated area. The
manufacturer of portable extinguishers using these agents should
include cautionary language on the label indicating the need for
ventilation.
This agent is subject to regulations under section
610(d) of
the CAA, which stipulates that HCFCs may only be used in portable
fire extinguishers where other commercially available agents are
not as effective for the fire hazard. Under section 610(d),
HCFCs may not be used in residential extinguishers.
(b)
[HCFC Blend] C
[HCFC Blend] C is acceptable as a Halon 1211 substitute.
This agent is a proprietary blend of HCFC-123, HCFC-124, HFC-
134a, and an additive. The cardiotoxic LOAEL and NOAEL for HCFC-
123 is, respectively, 2.0 per cent and 1.0 per cent; the LOAEL
and NOAEL for HCFC-124 is 2.5 per cent and 1.0 per cent; and the
LOAEL and NOAEL for HFC-134a is 8.0 per cent and 4.0 per cent
respectively. While the manufacturer may, in the future, conduct
personal monitoring studies of actual exposure levels of this
agent, previous studies conducted for pure HCFC-123 and for pure
HCFC-124 have shown that exposure in the breathing zone does not
exceed cardiotoxicity values.
The ODP of both HCFC-123 and HCFC-124 is 0.02 while
HFC-134a
has no ODP since it contains no chlorine. The respective GWP
values for HCFC-123, HCFC-124, and HFC-134a are 90, 440, and
1200, relative to CO2, while their respective atmospheric
lifetimes are 2 years, 7 years and 16 years.
This agent is subject to regulations under section
610(d) of
the CAA, which stipulates that HCFCs may only be used in portable
fire extinguishers where other commercially available agents are
not as effective for the fire hazard. Under section 610(d),
HCFCs may not be used in residential extinguishers.
(c)
[HCFC Blend] D
[HCFC Blend] D is acceptable as a Halon 1211 substitute.
This blend is comprised of HCFC-123 plus a proprietary additive,
and is intended for large outdoor uses such as wheeled
extinguishers. HCFC-123 is currently listed as acceptable for
use in non-residential streaming applications. This agent is
subject to regulations under section 610(d) of the CAA, which
stipulates that HCFCs may only be used in portable fire
extinguishers where other commercially available agents are not
as effective for the fire hazard. Under section 610(d), HCFCs
may not be used in residential extinguishers.
(d)
Gelled Halocarbon/Dry Chemical
Suspension (formerly Powdered
Aerosol B)
Gelled Halocarbon/Dry Chemical Suspension is acceptable
as a
Halon 1211 substitute. This class of agents is comprised of a
variety of blends developed for particular markets. Each blend
contains one or more halocarbons, a dry chemical, and a gel which
keeps the powder and gas uniform. Both the halocarbon and the
dry chemical act on the fire, while the gel is consumed by the
fire.
EPA's acceptability listing is extended to any blend
comprised of a halocarbon with a cardiotoxic LOAEL of at least
2.0 per cent, in combination with a dry chemical or multipurpose
dry chemical that is currently widely used, including
monoammonium phosphate (ABC powder), potassium bicarbonate
(Purple K powder), and sodium bicarbonate. This listing decision
also includes ammonium polyphosphate.
The manufacturer of this technology proposes using
several
different halocarbons singly and in blends, in combination with
one of several dry chemicals or multipurpose dry chemical
powders. The halocarbons included in the SNAP submission include
HFC-227ea, HFC-125, HFC-134a, and HFC-125 blended with HFC-134a.
The cardiotoxic LOAEL and NOAEL of HFC-227ea is, respectively,
10.5 per cent and 9.0 per cent; the LOAEL and NOAEL of HFC-125 is
10.0 per cent and 7.5 per cent; and the LOAEL and NOAEL of HFC-
134a is 8.0 per cent and 4.0 per cent respectively. Previous
personal monitoring tests of streaming agents using pure HCFC-123
(LOAEL 2.0 per cent; NOAEL 1.0 per cent) and HCFC-124 (LOAEL 2.5
per cent; NOAEL 1.0 per cent) indicate that actual exposure to
the breathing zone does not exceed these values. Such tests with
agents which pose greater risk of cardiosensitization indicate
that HFC-227ea, HFC-125 and HFC-134a can also be used safely in
well-ventilated areas. In addition, the quantity of the
halocarbons in this technology is approximately half of what a
pure halocarbon extinguisher would contain and thus there is a
built-in margin of safety as it relates to cardiotoxicity.
While all of the proposed halocarbons have no ODP, the
GWP
and atmospheric lifetime of HFC-227ea is 2050 and 31 years; of
HFC-125 is 3400 and 41 years; and of HFC-134a is 1200 and 16
years.
The dry chemical powders proposed by the manufacturer
include ammonium polyphosphate, monoammonium phosphate (MAP),
potassium bicarbonate, and sodium bicarbonate. Sodium
bicarbonate was among the original dry chemical extinguishers,
followed by potassium bicarbonate and monoammonium phosphate
which were developed in the 1960s. Thus, these dry chemical
agents have been in use for decades. These powders have been
considered generally nontoxic, although if not used according to
manufacturers directions they can cause temporary breathing
difficulty during and immediately after discharge. Discharge in
large quantities may decrease visibility. These powders
typically have particle sizes of less than 10 microns up to 75
microns, with most being optimized at 20 to 25 microns. Ammonium
polyphosphate has previously been used as a fire retardant
additive to products and coatings, and the manufacturer is
introducing it for use as a streaming agent.
Monoammonium phosphate, commonly known as ABC powder, is
a
general purpose agent which can be used for class A, B and C
fires. However, it is corrosive on hard surfaces. Potassium
bicarbonate (Purple K) and sodium bicarbonate cannot be used on
class A fires, but are used for specific class B and C
applications, generally in the commercial sector. Ammonium
polyphosphate is most suitable for military uses, because it is
not corrosive.
An initial assessment of inhalation toxicology of fine
particulates indicates that some risk is posed when the particles
are below a certain size compared to the mass per cubic meter in
air. Particle sizes less than 10 to 15 microns and a mass above
the ACGIH nuisance dust levels raise concerns which need to be
further studied should these agents be used in a total flooding
application. However, in a streaming application, it is unlikely
that the exposure level will exceed ACGIH dust levels.
The particle size distribution for these powders was
analyzed with a Micromeretics Sedigraph using Sedisperse A-11 as
the settling medium. Mesh of various sizes ranging from 40 mesh
(420 microns) to 325 mesh (45 microns) is used to filter the
powders into a pan, thus leaving a 'pan fraction' of powder
particles which are smaller than 45 microns.
A sample of the sediment in the pan is mixed in the Sedisperse
medium, which is a heavy, high viscosity fluid. An X-ray beam
shines through the sample and counts the particles as they drift
down.
Using this method, 50 to 75 per cent of the monoammonium
phosphate is smaller than 45 microns. Of that portion which is
smaller than 45 microns, the median particle size is 20 microns,
with 19.5 per cent of the particles being smaller than 10
microns, and 3.0 per cent being smaller than five microns. Thus,
up to 15 per cent (.75 x .195) of the entire MAP product is
smaller than 10 microns.
Seventy-four to 88 per cent of the potassium bicarbonate
is
smaller than 45 microns, with a median size of the pan fraction
being 17.4 microns. With 28.4 per cent of the pan fraction being
ten microns in size, then up to 25 per cent (.284 x 88) of the
total potassium bicarbonate product is under ten microns. 11.3
per cent of the pan fraction is under five microns.
Seventy-five to ninety per cent of the sodium
bicarbonate is
retained in the pan, and therefore is smaller than 45 microns.
The median particle size of the pan fraction is 15.0 microns.
With 12.2 per cent of the pan fraction being smaller than ten
microns, then 11 per cent of the total product is smaller than
ten microns. One per cent of the pan fraction is smaller than
five microns.
The manufacturer's data indicate that there are two
mixtures
of ammonium polyphosphate. The P40 mixture has a particle size
distribution with 50% of the particles less than 10 microns. The
intended market for this agent is military applications. The P30
mixture has a distribution with 20% of particles less than 10
microns and 50% less than 30 microns. The intended market for
this agent is for use in domestic and industrial kitchens.
E. Sterilants
1. EtO/CO2 Systems
In the March 18, 1994 Final Rulemaking, EPA described
ethylene oxide/carbon dioxide (EtO/CO2) substitutes for use in
medical sterilization. Recently, the Agency has become aware of
more information concerning the design and use of EtO/CO2
systems, which is described in this Notice.
EtO/CO2 is stored in tanks as a liquified compressed gas
mixture. A tube in the tank draws the liquid mixture from the
bottom for use as a sterilant. By Department of Transportation
(DOT) regulations, the tank can be filled with liquid to only 60
per cent of its capacity. The remaining 40 per cent capacity
above the liquid is called the "headspace."
Liquified compressed gases will vaporize into the
headspace
of a tank until equilibrium is reached. Each gas in a mixture
vaporizes at its own specific rate. In EtO/CO2 systems, the CO2
vaporizes much more readily than does the EtO. The CO2 vaporizes
to fill the headspace, and virtually all the EtO remains in the
liquid mixture.
The starting liquid/compressed gas mixture is 8.5 per
cent
EtO and 91.5 per cent CO2. When a tank is filled, some CO2
vaporizes to fill the headspace. Because the liquid mixture
loses some CO2 to form this vapor, the percentage of EtO in the
mixture is now greater than 8.5 per cent. As liquid leaves the
tank, the headspace increases. More CO2 continues to vaporize
into the headspace and the percentage of EtO in the remaining
liquid mixture continues to increase. This results in a liquid
mixture that grows increasingly EtO-rich until the liquid is
fully depleted. At a certain point during depletion, the
percentage of EtO in the liquid mixture increases to a point
where the mixture may become flammable.
Once the liquid mixture is fully depleted, only the
CO2-rich
vapor phase remains in the tank. If the depletion is not noted,
the sterilizer could attempt a sterilization cycle using the CO2-
rich vapor. Under these conditions, the vapor will not sterilize
effectively.
Two methods of supply control effectively address these
problems. The first uses one-tank-per-cycle "unit dose" tanks.
The second uses larger, multiple-cycle tanks and a weight-sensing
system.
Unit dose tanks hold only enough EtO/CO2 for a single
sterilization cycle. Unit dose tanks are available for several
sizes of sterilizer chambers. After a cycle, the depleted tank
is replaced with a fresh one. Using all of the gas in one
discharge avoids the risks of flammability and ineffective
sterilization which occur in multiple-cycle tanks. However,
replacing the tank after each cycle is inconvenient. It also
increases the risk of accidental exposure.
A weight-sensing system uses the tank for more than one
sterilization cycle. To be safe, such a system must sense when a
tank is depleted, before either the liquid mixture becomes
flammable or when only ineffective vapors remain in the tank
headspace.
For many gas mixtures, a pressure gauge can indicate the
amount of gas in a tank. But for EtO/CO2 systems, tank pressure
does not change appreciably during tank depletion. As the liquid
is depleted, more CO2 fills the headspace and keeps the pressure
almost constant. But as a tank of EtO/CO2 is depleted, the
weight of the liquid mixture decreases steadily.
A weight-sensing system monitors the weight of a tank as
it
is depleted. Before the increasingly EtO-rich liquid in the tank
becomes flammable, the system switches to a fresh tank. The
depleted tank can then be replaced.
Such systems are designed with numerous safety features
to
prevent accidental exposure. One drawback is that, when
depleted, a tank still contains a portion of the original EtO/CO2
charge. If more EtO/CO2 were removed, the liquid mixture would
approach the point of flammability.
2. New Listing Decisions
a. Acceptable
(1) [HCFC Blend]
A
[HCFC] Blend A is acceptable as a medical sterilant
substitute for 12/88 CFC-12/EtO. This is the second agent listed
under SNAP that can serve as a virtual drop-in replacement for
12/88, enabling users to transition away from CFC-12 without
replacing their existing equipment.
Under Title III of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,
the
Agency is required to regulate any of the 189 hazardous air
pollutants (HAPs). Ethylene oxide is a HAP, and the user is
alerted to follow all upcoming regulations concerning the use of
ethylene oxide, whether used alone or in a blend. Manufacturers
and users are alerted to the fact that the Agency has issued a
Proposed Rulemaking which includes EtO used in all sterilizers
except hospital systems (59 FR 10591, March 7, 1994).
This agent has been registered under FIFRA.
F. Aerosols
1. New Listing Decisions
A. Acceptable Substitutes
(1) Aerosol Solvent
a.
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene
Trans-1,2-dichloroethylene is acceptable as a solvent
substitute for CFC-113 and MCF in aerosols.
IV. Substitutes Pending Review
The Agency describes submissions as pending if data are
incomplete or for which the 90-day review period is underway and
EPA has not yet reached a final decision. For submissions that
are incomplete, the Agency will contact the submitter to
determine a schedule for providing the missing information if the
Agency needs to extend the 90-day review period. EPA will use
its authority under section 114 of the Clean Air Act to gather
this information, if necessary. Any delay of the review period
does not affect a manufacturer's ability to sell a product 90
days after notification of the Agency. Substitutes currently
pending completion of review are listed in Appendix A.
V. Additional Information
Contact the Stratospheric Protection Hotline at
1-800-296-
1996, Monday-Friday, between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 4:00
p.m. (Eastern Standard Time).
For more information on the Agency's process for
administering the SNAP program or criteria for evaluation of
substitutes, refer to the SNAP final rulemaking published in the
Federal Register on March 18, 1994 (59 FR 13044). Federal
Register notices can be ordered from the Government Printing
Office Order Desk (202) 783-3238; the citation is the date of
publication. This notice can also
Top of page
![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}