24444 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 3. What are the ASHRAE classifications for AGENCY DC 20460. EPA is temporarily refrigerant flammability? suspending its Docket Center and 4. What are R–32, R–452B, R–454A, R– 40 CFR Part 82 Reading Room for public visitors, with 454B, R–454C, and R–457A and how do they compare to other refrigerants in the [EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0698; FRL–10020–41– limited exceptions, to reduce the risk of same end-use? OAR] transmitting COVID–19. Our Docket 5. Why is EPA finalizing these specific use Center staff will continue to provide conditions? RIN 2060–AU81 remote customer service via email, 6. What additional information is EPA including in these listings? Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: phone, and webform. For further information on EPA Docket Center 7. How is EPA responding to comments on Listing of Substitutes Under the residential and light commercial air Significant New Alternatives Policy services and the current status, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/ conditioning and heat pumps? Program C. Total Flooding: Removal of Powdered dockets. Aerosol E From the List of Substitutes AGENCY: Environmental Protection FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Acceptable Subject to Use Conditions Agency (EPA). Christina Thompson, Stratospheric III. How is EPA responding to other public ACTION: Final rule. Protection Division, Office of comments? Atmospheric Programs (Mail Code IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews SUMMARY: A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Pursuant to the U.S. 6205T), Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency’s Planning and Review and Executive Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Order 13563: Improving Regulation and (EPA) Significant New Alternatives Washington, DC 20460; telephone Policy program, this action lists certain Regulatory Review number: 202–564–0983; email address: B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) substances in the refrigeration and air [email protected]. Notices C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) conditioning sector. For the retail food and rulemakings under EPA’s D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act refrigeration—medium-temperature Significant New Alternatives Policy (UMRA) stand-alone units (new) end-use, EPA is program are available on EPA’s E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism listing three substitutes as acceptable F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation Stratospheric Ozone website at https:// and Coordination With Indian Tribal subject to narrowed use limits. For the www.epa.gov/snap/snap-regulations. residential and light commercial air Governments SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: conditioning and heat pumps (new) G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health end-use, EPA is listing six substitutes as Table of Contents and Safety Risks acceptable subject to use conditions. I. General Information H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Through this action, EPA is A. Executive Summary and Background Significantly Affect Energy Supply, incorporating by reference the 2019 B. Does this action apply to me? Distribution, or Use Underwriters Laboratories (UL) C. What acronyms and abbreviations are I. National Technology Transfer and Standard 60335–2–40, 3rd Edition, used in the preamble? Advancement Act which establishes requirements for the II. What is EPA finalizing in this action? J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions evaluation of electrical air conditioners, A. Retail Food Refrigeration—Listing of R– To Address Environmental Justice in heat pumps, and dehumidifiers, and 448A, R–449A and R–449B as Minority Populations and Low-Income Population safe use of flammable refrigerants. This Acceptable, Subject to Narrowed Use Limits, for Retail Food Refrigeration— K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) action also removes an acceptable Medium-Temperature Stand-Alone Units V. References subject to use conditions listing for the (New) I. General Information fire suppression sector because EPA 1. Background on Retail Food more recently listed the substitute as Refrigeration—Medium-Temperature A. Executive Summary and Background acceptable with no use restrictions. Stand-Alone Units (New) This final rule lists new alternatives DATES: This rule is effective June 7, 2. What are R–448A, R–449A and R–449B and how do they compare to other for the refrigeration and air conditioning 2021. The incorporation by reference of sector and changes an existing listing for certain publications listed in the rule is refrigerants in the same end-use? 3. AHRI Petition the fire suppression sector. Specifically, approved by the Director of the Federal 4. What is EPA’s final listing decision for EPA is: Register as of June 7, 2021. R–448A, R–449A and R–449B? • Listing R–448A, R–449A and R– ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 5. How is EPA responding to comments on 449B as acceptable, subject to narrowed docket for this action under Docket ID retail food refrigeration—medium- use limits, for use in retail food No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0698. All temperature stand-alone units (new)? refrigeration—medium-temperature documents in the docket are listed on B. Residential and Light Commercial Air stand-alone units for new equipment; the https://www.regulations.gov Conditioning and Heat Pumps—Listing • of R–452B, R–454A, R–454B, R–454C, Listing R–452B, R–454A, R–454B, website. Although listed in the index, and R–457A as Acceptable, Subject to R–454C and R–457A as acceptable, some information is not publicly Use Conditions, for Use in Residential subject to use conditions, for use in available, e.g., Confidential Business and Light Commercial Air Conditioning residential and light commercial air Information (CBI) or other information and Heat Pumps End-Use for New conditioning (AC) and heat pumps for whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Equipment; and R–32 as Acceptable, new equipment; and R–32 as acceptable, Certain other material, such as Subject to Use Conditions, for Use in subject to use conditions, for use in copyrighted material, is not placed on Residential and Light Commercial Air residential and light commercial AC and the internet and will be publicly Conditioning and Heat Pumps— heat pumps—equipment other than self- available only in hard copy form. Equipment Other Than Self-Contained Room Air Conditioners, for New contained room air conditioners, for Publicly available docket materials are new equipment; and Equipment • available electronically through https:// 1. What use conditions is EPA finalizing? Removing Powdered Aerosol E from www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 2. Background on Residential and Light the list of fire suppression substitutes the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC, Commercial Air Conditioning and Heat acceptable subject to use conditions in EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Pumps (New) total flooding applications.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24445

EPA is finalizing these new listings Several major provisions of section 612 reviewing a substitute, the Agency may after its evaluation of human health and are: determine that a substitute is acceptable environmental information for these only if certain conditions in the way 1. Rulemaking substitutes under the Significant New that the substitute is used are met to Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program. Section 612(c) requires EPA to minimize risks to human health and the The Agency is taking final action on promulgate rules making it unlawful to environment. EPA describes such these new listings in the refrigeration replace any class I (chlorofluorocarbon substitutes as ‘‘acceptable subject to use and air conditioning sector and the (CFC), halon, carbon tetrachloride, conditions.’’ (40 CFR 82.180(b)(2)). For change to the listings in the fire methyl chloroform, methyl bromide, some substitutes, the Agency may suppression sector based on hydrobromofluorocarbon, and permit a narrowed range of use within consideration of the information that chlorobromomethane) or class II an end-use or sector. For example, the supported the June 12, 2020 Notice of (hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC)) Agency may limit the use of a substitute Proposed Rulemaking (‘‘2020 NPRM’’) ozone-depleting substances (ODS) with to certain end-uses or specific (85 FR 35874), the public comments and any substitute that the Administrator applications within an industry sector. publicly-available information that EPA determines may present adverse effects EPA describes these substitutes as has included in the docket. This action to human health or the environment ‘‘acceptable subject to narrowed use provides additional flexibility for where the Administrator has identified limits.’’ Under the narrowed use limit, industry by providing new options in an alternative that (1) reduces the users intending to adopt these specific uses. overall risk to human health and the substitutes ‘‘must ascertain that other EPA is not taking final action at this environment and (2) is currently or alternatives are not technically time on listings for three foam blowing potentially available. feasible.’’ (40 CFR 82.180(b)(3)). agent blends for extruded polystyrene: 2. Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable In making decisions regarding Boardstock and billet that were also Substitutes whether a substitute is acceptable or unacceptable, and whether substitutes proposed in the 2020 NPRM. Based on Section 612(c) requires EPA to present risks that are lower than or public comments and new information publish a list of the substitutes that it comparable to risks from other that EPA has received after issuing the finds to be unacceptable for specific substitutes that are currently or proposed rule, the Agency is uses and to publish a corresponding list potentially available in the end-uses considering future action on these of acceptable substitutes for specific under consideration, EPA examines the substitutes. EPA’s consideration of uses. options for these substitutes is not criteria in 40 CFR 82.180(a)(7): (i) related to and does not affect this final 3. Petition Process Atmospheric effects and related health action on the remainder of the proposal. Section 612(d) grants the right to any and environmental impacts; (ii) general In this final action, EPA refers to person to petition EPA to add a population risks from ambient exposure listings made in a final rule issued July substance to, or delete a substance from, to compounds with direct toxicity and 20, 2015, at 80 FR 42870 (‘‘2015 Rule’’). the lists published in accordance with to increased ground-level ozone; (iii) The 2015 Rule, among other things, section 612(c). ecosystem risks; (iv) occupational risks; changed the listings for certain (v) consumer risks; (vi) flammability; hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and blends 4. 90-Day Notification and (vii) cost and availability of the from acceptable to unacceptable in Section 612(e) directs EPA to require substitute. various end-uses in the aerosols, any person who produces a chemical Many SNAP listings include refrigeration and air conditioning, and substitute for a class I substance to ‘‘comments’’ or ‘‘further information’’ to foam blowing sectors. After a challenge notify the Agency not less than 90 days provide additional information on to the 2015 Rule, the United States before a new or existing chemical is substitutes. Since this additional Court of Appeals for the District of introduced into interstate commerce for information is not part of the regulatory Columbia Circuit (‘‘the court’’) issued a significant new use as a substitute for a decision, these statements are not partial vacatur of the 2015 Rule ‘‘to the class I substance. The producer must binding for use of the substitute under extent it requires manufacturers to also provide the Agency with the the SNAP program. However, regulatory replace HFCs with a substitute producer’s unpublished health and requirements so listed are binding under substance’’ 1 and remanded the rule to safety studies on such substitutes. other regulatory programs (e.g., worker the Agency for further proceedings.2 The regulations for the SNAP program protection regulations promulgated by The court also upheld EPA’s listing are promulgated at 40 CFR part 82, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health changes as being reasonable and not subpart G, and the Agency’s process for Administration (OSHA)). The ‘‘further ‘‘arbitrary and capricious.’’ 3 This final reviewing SNAP submissions is information’’ classification does not rule is not EPA’s response to the court’s described in regulations at 40 CFR necessarily include all other legal decision. 82.180. Under these rules, the Agency obligations pertaining to the use of the has identified five types of listing substitute. While the items listed are not SNAP Program Background decisions: Acceptable; acceptable legally binding under the SNAP The SNAP program implements subject to use conditions; acceptable program, EPA encourages users of section 612 of the Clean Air Act (CAA). subject to narrowed use limits; substitutes to apply all statements in the unacceptable; and pending (40 CFR ‘‘further information’’ column in their use of these substitutes. In many 1 Mexichem Fluor, Inc. v. EPA, 866 F.3d 451, 462 82.180(b)). Use conditions and (D.C. Cir. 2017). narrowed use limits are both considered instances, the information simply refers 2 Later, the court issued a similar decision on ‘‘use restrictions,’’ as described below. to sound operating practices that have portions of a similar final rule issued December 1, Substitutes that are deemed acceptable already been identified in existing 2016 at 81 FR 86778 (‘‘2016 Rule’’). See Mexichem with no use restrictions (no use industry and/or building codes or Fluor, Inc. v. EPA, Judgment, Case No. 17–1024 (D.C. Cir., April 5, 2019), 760 Fed. Appx. 6 (Mem). conditions or narrowed use limits) can standards. Thus, many of the That rule is not relevant for this action. be used for all applications within the statements, if adopted, would not 3 Mexichem Fluor, 866 F.3d at 462–63. relevant end-uses in the sector. After require the affected user to make

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24446 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

significant changes in existing operating particular entity, consult the person NRDC—Natural Resources Defense Council practices. listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ODP—Ozone Depletion Potential For additional information on the CONTACT section. ODS—Ozone Depleting Substances SNAP program, visit the SNAP portion OMB—United States Office of Management C. What acronyms and abbreviations are and Budget of EPA’s Ozone Layer Protection used in the preamble? OSHA—United States Occupational Safety website at https://www.epa.gov/snap. and Health Administration Copies of the full lists of acceptable Below is a list of acronyms and PFAS—Perfluoroalkyl Substances, substitutes for ODS in all industrial abbreviations used in the preamble of Polyfluoroalkyl Substances sectors are available at https:// this document: PPM—Parts Per Million www.epa.gov/snap/snap-substitutes- AC—Air Conditioning PRA—Paperwork Reduction Act sector. For more information on the ACCA—Air Conditioning Contractors of PTAC—Packaged Terminal Air Conditioner Agency’s process for administering the America PTHP—Packaged Terminal Heat Pump SNAP program or criteria for evaluation ADA—Americans with Disabilities Act RCL—Refrigerant Concentration Limit RCRA—Resource Conservation and Recovery of substitutes, refer to the initial SNAP AEL—Acceptable Exposure Limit AHIA—American Industrial Hygiene Act rulemaking published March 18, 1994 RFA—Regulatory Flexibility Act (59 FR 13044), codified at 40 CFR part Association AHJ—Authority Having Jurisdiction RSES—Refrigeration Service Engineers 82, subpart G. SNAP decisions and the AHRI—Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Society appropriate Federal Register citations Refrigeration Institute SDS—Safety Data Sheet found at: https://www.epa.gov/snap/ AHRTI—Air-Conditioning, Heating, and SIP—State Implementation Plan snap-regulations. Substitutes listed as Refrigeration Technology Institute SNAP—Significant New Alternatives Policy unacceptable; acceptable, subject to Alliance—Alliance for Responsible TLV–TWA—Threshold Limit Value-Time- narrowed use limits; or acceptable, Atmospheric Policy Weighted Average TFA—Trifluoroacetic Acid subject to use conditions, are also listed ANSI—American National Standards Institute TSCA—Toxic Substances Control Act in the appendices to 40 CFR part 82, TWA—Time Weighted Average subpart G. ASHRAE—American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning UL—Underwriters Laboratories Inc B. Does this action apply to me? Engineers UMRA—Unfunded Mandates Reform Act CAA—Clean Air Act VOC—Volatile Organic Compounds The following list identifies regulated CARB—California Air Resources Board VRF—Variable Refrigerant Flow entities that may be affected by this rule CAS Reg. No.—Chemical Abstracts Service VSLS—Very Short-Lived Substances and their respective North American Registry Identification Number WEEL—Workplace Environmental Exposure Industrial Classification System CBI—Confidential Business Information Limit (NAICS) codes: CFC—Chlorofluorocarbon WMO—World Meteorological Organization WSHP—Water-Source Heat Pump • All Other Basic Organic Chemical CFR—Code of Federal Regulations CRA—Congressional Review Act Manufacturing (NAICS 325199) II. What is EPA finalizing in this • CO2—Carbon Dioxide action? Air Conditioning and Warm Air DOE—United States Department of Energy Heating Equipment and Commercial EIA—Environmental Investigation Agency A. Retail Food Refrigeration—Listing of and Industrial Refrigeration EPA—United States Environmental R–448A, R–449A and R–449B as Equipment Manufacturing (NAICS Protection Agency Acceptable, Subject to Narrowed Use 333415) FR—Federal Register Limits, for Retail Food Refrigeration— • Refrigeration Equipment and Supplies GSHP—Ground-Source Heat Pump GWP—Global Warming Potential Medium-Temperature Stand-Alone Merchant Wholesalers (NAICS Units (New) 423740) HARDI—Heating, Air-conditioning, & • Supermarkets and Other Grocery Refrigeration Distributors International As proposed, EPA is listing R–448A, HCFC—Hydrochlorofluorocarbon R–449A, and R–449B as acceptable, (except Convenience) Stores (NAICS HFC—Hydrofluorocarbon 44511 & 445110) HFO—Hydrofluoroolefin subject to narrowed use limits, in new • Convenience Stores (NAICS 445120) HVAC—Heating, Ventilation, and Air equipment only for new medium- • Limited-Service Restaurants (NAICS Conditioning temperature stand-alone units in retail 722513) HPPH—Heat Pump Pool Heaters food refrigeration (hereafter, ‘‘new • Cafeterias, Grill Buffets, and Buffets HPWH— Heat Pump Water Heaters medium-temperature stand-alone (NAICS 722514) ICF—ICF International, Inc. units’’).4 As explained below, we have • Snack and Nonalcoholic Beverage IEC—International Electrotechnical revised the regulatory text from the 2020 Bars (NAICS 722515) Commission NPRM to indicate that failure to comply • IPCC—Intergovernmental Panel on Climate with the Americans with Disabilities Fire Protection (NAICS 922160) Change This list is not intended to be LFL—Lower Flammability Limit Act (ADA) requirements is not the only exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide NAAQS—National Ambient Air Quality reason other alternatives can be deemed for readers regarding entities likely to be Standards infeasible under the narrowed use limit. affected by this action. To determine NAFEM—North American Association of 4 whether your facility, company, Food Equipment Manufacturers EPA previously divided the retail food refrigeration end-use into separate categories, business, or organization could be NAICS—North American Industrial Classification System including stand-alone equipment (76 FR 78832, affected by this action, you should NARA—National Archives and Records December 20, 2011). The Agency further subdivided carefully examine the regulations at 40 Administration stand-alone equipment to distinguish between CFR part 82, subpart G and the revisions NATE—North American Technician medium-temperature equipment, which maintains below. If you have questions regarding Excellence products above 32 °F (0 °C), and low-temperature the applicability of this action to a NPRM—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking equipment, which maintains products at or below 32 °F (0 °C) (80 FR 42870, July 20, 2015).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24447

1. Background on Retail Food as 1,1,1,2,2-pentafluoroethane (CAS four; 13 14 15 and less than one to six; 16 17 Refrigeration—Medium-Temperature Reg. No. 354–33–6); 21 percent HFC– respectively. If these values are Stand-Alone Units (New) 134a, which is also known as 1,1,1,2- weighted by mass percentage, then R– Retail food refrigeration is tetrafluoroethane (CAS Reg. No. 811– 448A, R–449A, and R–449B have GWPs characterized by storing and displaying, 97–2); 20 percent HFO–1234yf, which is of about 1,390, 1,400, and 1,410, generally for sale, food and beverages at also known as 2,3,3,3-tetrafluoroprop-1- respectively. HFC–32 (CAS Reg. No. 75– different temperatures for different ene (CAS Reg. No. 754–12–1); and seven 10–5), HFC–125 (CAS Reg. No. 354–33– products (e.g., chilled and frozen food). percent HFO–1234ze(E), which is also 6), HFC–134a (CAS Reg. No. 811–97–2), Stand-alone units in retail food known as trans-1,3,3,3-tetrafluoroprop- HFO–1234yf (CAS Reg. No. 754–12–1) refrigeration (hereafter, ‘‘stand-alone 1-ene (CAS Reg. No. 29118–24–9). R– and HFO–1234ze(E) (CAS Reg. No. 449A, marketed under the trade name 29118–24–9)—the components of R– units’’) consist of refrigerators, freezers, ® and reach-in coolers (either open or Opteon XP 40, is a weighted blend of 448A, R–449A, and R–449B—are with doors) where all refrigeration 24.3 percent HFC–32, 24.7 percent excluded from the definition of volatile components are integrated and, for the HFC–125, 25.7 percent HFC–134a, and organic compounds (VOC) under CAA 25.3 percent HFO–1234yf. R–449B, regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s)) smallest types, the refrigeration circuit marketed under the trade name Forane® addressing the development of state is entirely brazed or welded. For 449B, is a weighted blend of 25.2 implementation plans (SIPs) to attain purposes of the SNAP program, percent HFC–32, 24.3 percent HFC–125, and maintain the national ambient air medium-temperature stand-alone units 27.3 percent HFC–134a, and 23.2 quality standards (NAAQS). maintain a temperature above 32 °F (0 ° percent HFO–1234yf. Knowingly venting or otherwise C). For further background on this end- EPA previously listed R–448A, R– knowingly releasing or disposing of use, see the 2020 NPRM at 85 FR 35877. 449A, and R–449B as acceptable these refrigerant blends in the course of In the 2015 Rule, EPA changed the refrigerants in a number of other maintaining, servicing, repairing or listing of 31 refrigerants 5 from refrigeration and air conditioning end- disposing of an appliance or industrial acceptable to unacceptable for new uses, including other retail food process refrigeration is prohibited as medium temperature stand-alone units. refrigeration end-use categories (e.g., 80 provided in section 608(c)(2) of the CAA At that time, EPA indicated that it FR 42053, July 16, 2015; 81 FR 70029, and EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR believed that other alternatives that October 11, 2016; 82 FR 33809, July 21, 82.154(a)(1). posed lower risk were available for this 2017; 83 FR 50026, October 4, 2018; 84 Flammability information: R–448A, end use. After the 2015 Rule, as part of FR 64765, November 25, 2019). R–449A, and R–449B as formulated, and a petition from the Air-Conditioning, Redacted submissions and supporting even considering the worst-case Heating, and Refrigeration Institute documentation for R–448A, R–449A, fractionation for flammability, are not 6 (AHRI), described in section 3 below, and R–449B are provided in the docket flammable. EPA received information indicating for this rule (EPA–HQ–OAR–2019– Toxicity and exposure data: Potential that manufacturers were unable to 0698) at https://www.regulations.gov. health effects of exposure to these design certain types of medium- EPA performed an assessment to substitutes include drowsiness or temperature stand-alone equipment examine the health and environmental dizziness. The substitutes may also with the available acceptable risks of each of these substitutes, and irritate the skin or eyes or cause alternatives, and that certain equipment these assessments are also available in frostbite. At sufficiently high configurations would require the docket for this rule.8910 concentrations, the substitutes may significantly larger refrigeration Environmental information: R–448A, cause irregular heartbeat. The equipment that could jeopardize R–449A, and R–449B have an ozone substitutes could cause asphyxiation if compliance with the ADA for those depletion potential (ODP) of zero.11 types of equipment. Their components, HFC–32, HFC–125, 13 Nielsen et al., 2007. Nielsen, O.J., Javadi, M.S., HFC–134a, HFO–1234yf, and in the case Sulbaek Andersen, M.P., Hurley, M.D., Wallington, 2. What are R–448A, R–449A and R– T.J., Singh, R. 2007. Atmospheric chemistry of 449B and how do they compare to other of R–448A, HFO–1234ze(E), have global CF3CF=CH2: Kinetics and mechanisms of gas-phase refrigerants in the same end-use? warming potentials (GWPs) of 675; reactions with Cl atoms, OH radicals, and O3. 3,500; 1,430; 12 less than one to Chemical Physics Letters 439, 18–22. Available R–448A, marketed under the trade online at http://www.cogci.dk/network/OJN_174_ ® CF3CF=CH2.pdf. name Solstice N–40, is a weighted 8 ICF, 2020a. Risk Screen on Substitutes in Retail blend of 26 percent HFC–32,7 which is 14 Hodnebrog ;. et al., 2013. Hodnebrog ;., Food Refrigeration (Medium-temperature Stand- Etminan, M., Fuglestvedt, J.S., Marston, G., Myhre, also known as difluoromethane alone Units) (New Equipment); Substitute: R–448A. G., Nielsen, C.J., Shine, K.P., Wallington, T.J.: (Chemical Abstracts Service Registry 9 ICF, 2020b. Risk Screen on Substitutes in Retail Global Warming Potentials and Radiative Number [CAS Reg. No.] 75–10–5); 26 Food Refrigeration (Medium-temperature Stand- Efficiencies of Halocarbons and Related alone Units) (New Equipment); Substitute: R–449A. percent HFC–125, which is also known Compounds: A Comprehensive Review, Reviews of 10 ICF, 2020c. Risk Screen on Substitutes in Retail Geophysics, 51, 300–378, doi:10.1002/rog.20013, Food Refrigeration (Medium-temperature Stand- 2013. 5 Specifically, FOR12A, FOR12B, HFC–134a, alone Units) (New Equipment); Substitute: R–449B. 15 WMO (World Meteorological Organization), HFC–227ea, KDD6, R125/290/134a/600a (55.0/1.0/ 11 If a compound contains no chlorine, bromine, Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2018, 42.5/1.5), R–404A, R–407A, R–407B, R–407C, R– or iodine, or if it is a solid under conditions of use, Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project— 407F, R–410A, R–410B, R–417A, R–421A, R–421B, its ODP is generally considered to be zero. Unless Report No. 58, 588 pp., Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. R–422A, R–422B, R–422C, R–422D, R–424A, R– otherwise stated, all non-zero ODPs in this Available at: https://ozone.unep.org/sites/default/ 426A, R–428A, R–434A, R–437A, R–438A, R–507A, document are from EPA’s regulations at appendix files/2019-05/SAP-2018-Assessment-report.pdf. In RS–24 (2002 formulation), RS–44 (2003 A to subpart A of 40 CFR part 82. this action, the 100-year GWP values are used. formulation), SP34E, and THR–03. 12 Unless otherwise specified, GWP values are 16 Ibid. 6 AHRI, 2017. Petition Requesting EPA SNAP from IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: The 17 Hodnebrog ;. et al., 2013 and Javadi et al., Approval of R–448A/449A/449B for Medium Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working 2008. M.S. Javadi, R. S

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24448 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

air is displaced by vapors in a confined Although R–448A, R–449A, and R– this petition is relevant to this listing, space. These potential health effects are 449B present a higher overall risk to and EPA’s action in this rulemaking common to many refrigerants. human health and the environment than may be considered responsive to certain The American Industrial Hygiene other acceptable alternatives in this end- aspects of this petition, although EPA is Association (AIHA) has established use category based on significantly not taking formal action on the petition workplace environmental exposure higher GWPs than other available in this rulemaking. We describe the limits (WEELs) of 1,000 parts per alternatives, with GWPs ranging from contents of the petition, including million (ppm) as an eight hour time- zero (ammonia in a secondary loop) to elements that we are not considering in weighted average (8-hr TWA) for HFC– 630 (R–513A), as provided below, EPA this action, in detail in the 2020 NPRM, 32, HFC–125, and HFC–134a, and 500 has determined that other alternatives and the petition is available in the ppm as an 8-hr TWA for HFO–1234yf, may not be available for certain uses docket for this rulemaking. the components of R–448A, R–449A, and users of medium-temperature stand- 4. What is EPA’s final listing decision and R–449B; and 800 ppm as an 8-hr alone equipment. Thus, EPA is listing for R–448A, R–449A and R–449B? TWA for HFO–1234ze(E), also a these substitutes as acceptable subject to component of R–448A. The narrowed use limits in this end-use. EPA is listing R–448A, R–449A, and manufacturer of R–448A recommends Under the SNAP program, when using R–449B as acceptable, subject to an acceptable exposure limit (AEL) of an alternative listed as acceptable with narrowed use limits, for new medium- 890 ppm on an 8-hr TWA for the blend. narrowed use limits, users, including temperature stand-alone units in this The manufacturer of R–449A manufacturers, of new medium- final rule. recommends an AEL of 830 ppm on an temperature stand-alone equipment will EPA understands that to construct 8-hr TWA for the blend. The need to ascertain that the other certain medium-temperature stand- manufacturer of R–449B recommends alternatives are not technically feasible alone units with the available an AEL of 865 ppm on an 8-hr TWA for before using R–448A, R–449A, or R– acceptable refrigerants would require 18 the blend. EPA anticipates that users 449B in such equipment. Consistent significantly larger components, or the will be able to meet the AIHA WEELs with existing SNAP regulations, they addition of multiple refrigeration and manufacturers’ AELs and address must document the results of their systems, which may lead to redesigning potential health risks by following evaluation that showed the other the units in such a manner that could requirements and recommendations in alternatives to be not technically be inconsistent with the ADA the manufacturers’ safety data sheets feasible and maintain that requirements. AHRI’s petition (SDS), in American Society of Heating, documentation in their files. This specifically pointed to R–448A, R– Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning documentation, which does not need to 449A, and R–449B as refrigerants that Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 15, and be submitted to EPA unless requested to would, on the contrary, be feasible in other safety precautions common to the demonstrate compliance, ‘‘shall include such equipment and requested that refrigeration and air conditioning descriptions of substitutes examined those refrigerants be added to the list of industry. and rejected, processes or products in acceptable refrigerants for new medium- Comparison to other substitutes in which the substitute is needed, reason temperature stand-alone units. for rejection of other alternatives, e.g., this end-use: R–448A, R–449A, and R– performance, technical or safety Users under SNAP, including 449B have ODPs of zero, comparable to standards, and the anticipated date manufacturers, using a substitute listed or lower than other acceptable other substitutes will be available and as acceptable, subject to narrowed use substitutes in this end-use, with ODPs projected time for switching to other limits, must ascertain that other ranging from zero to 0.098. available substitutes.’’ (40 CFR substitutes or alternatives are not R–448A’s GWP of 1,390, R–449A’s 82.180(b)(3)).19 technically feasible. As explained in the GWP of 1,400, and R–449B’s GWP of initial SNAP rulemaking (59 FR 13063, 1,410 are higher than those of other 3. AHRI Petition March 18, 1994), under the narrowed acceptable substitutes for retail food AHRI petitioned EPA under CAA use limit, ‘‘[u]sers are expected to refrigeration—medium-temperature section 612(d) to add R–448A, R–449A, undertake a thorough technical stand-alone units (new), including and R–449B to the list of acceptable investigation of alternatives before ammonia absorption, R–744, R–450A, substitutes for new and retrofit medium- implementing the otherwise restricted and R–513A with GWPs ranging from temperature stand-alone units. See 40 substitute’’ (i.e., R–448A, R–449A or R– zero to 630. CFR 82.184 for further information 449B for this rule). Further, ‘‘[t]he Information regarding the regarding petitions under the SNAP Agency expects users to contact vendors flammability and toxicity of other program. EPA and AHRI exchanged of alternatives to explore with experts available alternatives are provided in information related to this petition whether or not other acceptable the listing decisions previously made between March 2017 and November substitutes are technically feasible for (see https://www.epa.gov/snap/ 2018. Information received as part of the process, product or system in substitutes-stand-alone-equipment). question’’ (i.e., in new medium- Flammability and toxicity risks for R– 18 As noted in the proposal, under the SNAP temperature stand-alone units for this 448A, R–449A, and R–449B are regulations the definition of ‘‘use’’ includes ‘‘but rule) to the otherwise restricted [is] not limited to use in a manufacturing process comparable to or lower than or product, in consumption by the end-user, or in substitute. The initial SNAP rule also flammability and toxicity risks of other intermediate uses, such as formulation or packaging explained that ‘‘[a]lthough users are not available substitutes in the same end- for other subsequent uses;’’ hence, this definition required to report the results of their use. Toxicity risks can be minimized by includes the manufacture of a product pre-charged investigations to EPA, companies must with a particular refrigerant. (40 CFR 82.172). use consistent with ASHRAE Standard 19 In the regulatory text of the 2020 NPRM, the document these results, and retain them 15 and other industry standards, description of the information to document was in company files for the purpose of recommendations in the manufacturers’ included in the ‘‘Further information’’ column. demonstrating compliance’’ for up to SDS, and other safety precautions Because this information is required under the five years after the date of creation of existing SNAP regulations at 40 CFR 82.180(b)(3), common in the refrigeration and air we have listed this in the ‘‘Narrowed use limits’’ the records. This information includes conditioning industry. column in this final action. descriptions of:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24449

• Process or product in which the the comments in the sections that these refrigerants. EPA explained why substitute is needed; follow. these alternatives posed higher risk to • human health and the environment than Substitutes examined and rejected; a. Support Listings • Reason for rejection of other other acceptable substitutes in this end- alternatives, e.g., performance, technical Comment: HARDI indicated that it use in the proposal (85 FR 35879– or safety standards; and/or ‘‘supports the overall effort to phase 35880, June 12, 2020) and summarized • Anticipated date other substitutes down the use of HFC refrigerants’’ and those findings again above. In the will be available and projected time for held that the listing of R–448A, R–449A, proposal, EPA noted that the GWPs of switching. and R–449B (and others discussed later these compounds, ranging from 1,390 to An example of a viable explanation in its comments) ‘‘is one part of a larger 1,410, ‘‘are higher than those of other under a narrowed use limit in this process in the industry’s effort to phase acceptable substitutes for retail food circumstance could include information down older refrigerants.’’ Lennox refrigeration—medium-temperature such as a market analysis of the International Inc. also supported the stand-alone units (new)’’ (85 FR 35878, components for other alternatives that proposed listing of R–448A, R–449A, June 12, 2020) and pointed to examples indicate a lack of availability in the and R–449B for use in medium of such acceptable substitutes with required sizes or with required features, temperature stand-alone refrigeration lower GWPs and otherwise similar or design diagrams that indicate applications indicating that ‘‘[t]hese overall risk to human health and the excessive loss of refrigerated volumes or refrigerants generally replace R404[A] environment. For those same reasons, and provide significant environmental failure to meet ADA requirements. As EPA concludes in this final action that benefits while providing the appropriate explained below, we have revised the these alternatives pose higher risk to technology to meet the ongoing regulatory text from the 2020 NPRM to human health and the environment than regulatory requirements.’’ indicate that failure to comply with other acceptable substitutes in this end- Response: The Agency acknowledges ADA requirements is not the only use. By finding these higher-GWP HARDI’s and Lennox’s support for this reason the other alternatives can be blends acceptable subject to narrowed proposed listing. After considering all deemed infeasible under the narrowed use limits, EPA is allowing for these use limit. the public comments on this proposal, we are finalizing this listing, as refrigerants to be used under SNAP as 5. How is EPA responding to comments described in section II.A. long as the requirements for the on retail food refrigeration—medium- Comment: Parker Hannifin narrowed use limit have been met. temperature stand-alone units? Corporation’s Sporlan division ‘‘agrees Further, we note that because EPA evaluates the available or potentially EPA received comments from with AHRI’s positions and statements concerning this proposed listing, and available alternatives for different end- organizations with various interests in use categories separately, given that retail food refrigeration regarding the [they] support it and the narrowed use limits as proposed.’’ each intersection of an alternative and proposed listing of R–448A, R–449A end-use category poses unique risk to and R–449B. Most commenters Response: To the extent this comment refers to comments from the AHRI, we human health and the environment, as supported the proposed listings, well as unique technical challenges and although some supported listing these have responded separately. To the requirements that must be met in order refrigerants as acceptable without extent Sporlan is supporting the for a substitute to be available in a narrowed use limits and others did not proposed listing including the narrowed particular end-use or application, we support the listing at all. Other use limits, we acknowledge this would not necessarily list the same commenters addressed the support. After considering all the public refrigerant as acceptable across multiple environmental impacts of the proposed comments on this proposal, we are end-use or end-use categories. For listing of R–448A, R–449A and R–449B finalizing this listing, as described in example, in low temperature stand- and the proposed narrowed use limits. section II.A. alone equipment, EPA has listed a Other comments unrelated to these b. Support Listings Without Narrowed number of other refrigerants as listings and beyond the scope of this Use Limits acceptable with overall risk, including final action are addressed in section III. GWPs, similar to or greater than the Commenters on these proposed i. Comparison to Other Acceptable overall risk, including GWPs, of R– listings were AHRI, the Alliance for SNAP Listings 448A, R–449A, and R–449B, unlike in Responsible Atmospheric Policy (the Comment: The Alliance, Chemours, medium temperature stand-alone Alliance), North American Association Honeywell and Rheem supported equipment. To the extent industry of Food Equipment Manufacturers finding R–448A, R–449A, and R–449B stakeholders see a benefit for a single (NAFEM), and Heating, Air- acceptable, but they did not support the refrigerant for use across all their conditioning, & Refrigeration proposal to make such listings subject to equipment, and find that the required Distributors International (HARDI), four narrowed use limits. NAFEM also industry organizations; Chemours and supported approval of R–448A, R–449A, analysis to use R–448A, R–449A, or R– Honeywell, two chemical producers; and R–449B without use restrictions ‘‘so 449B under a narrowed use limit does Hussmann Corporation, Johnson that those refrigerants still can be not support such across-the-board use, Controls, Lennox International Inc., allowed for critical applications.’’ we note that there are already several Parker Hannifin Corporation, and Noting that these blends are listed as alternatives that are listed acceptable for Rheem Manufacturing Company, five acceptable for low temperature stand- both medium and low temperature equipment manufacturers; and the alone equipment, Rheem commented equipment that they can pursue. Natural Resource Defense Council that ‘‘a common platform of low-GWP Comment: Chemours notes that R– (NRDC) and the Environmental refrigerants is more beneficial to the 448A, R–449A, and R–449B have been Investigation Agency (EIA), two installer and service personnel as well listed as acceptable in several other end- environmental organizations. as for the manufacturer.’’ uses. They contend that ‘‘EPA fails to We have grouped comments together Response: In this final rule, EPA is provide a rational basis for treating R– and responded to the issues raised by including the narrowed use limits for 448A, R–449A and R–449B differently

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24450 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

in this proposed rule as opposed to past regulations promulgated under CAA warrants the narrowed use limit for approvals.’’ section 605 phasing out the production these alternatives and conforms with the Response: Since the inception of the and import of HCFCs also ban their use instances where listing with a narrowed SNAP program, alternatives are in new equipment. All acceptable non- use limit is justified as discussed in the evaluated on an end-use by end-use (or ozone depleting alternatives for this original SNAP Rule (59 FR 13044, in this case, an end-use category) basis. end-use category have GWPs lower than March 18, 1994) and codified in our There is no reason to believe whether R–448A, R–449A, and R–449B, in some regulations. Specifically, ‘‘[e]ven though and how an alternative is listed in one cases significantly so (e.g., GWPs less the Agency can restrict the use of a end-use would be the same as a than 10 compared to GWPs of substitute based on the potential for different end-use. In this case, as approximately 1,400 for these three adverse effects, it may be necessary to described above and in the proposal, blends). permit a narrowed range of use within EPA finds that, with other criteria being a sector end-use because of the lack of ii. Insufficient Justification for comparable, the GWP of R–448A, R– alternatives for specialized Narrowed Use Limits 449A, and R–449B, each of which has applications’’ (40 CFR 82.180(b)(3)). a GWP of approximately 1,400 that is Comment: The Alliance stated that Here we find there may be specialized higher compared to other acceptable EPA ‘‘does not offer justification why applications where the other acceptable alternatives in the medium temperature the [narrowed] use limits are alternatives are not feasible and use of stand-alone equipment end-use, justifies necessary.’’ Chemours says that ‘‘EPA R–448A, R–449A, or R–449B may be the need for narrowed use limits. Other fails to provide any independent feasible. Thus, although we find R– acceptable alternatives are available for rationale supporting such [narrowed use 448A, R–449A, or R–449B have the this end-use which have GWPs of limits] conditions’’ and Honeywell potential adverse effects due to their approximately 630 or lower, and some added that ‘‘the proposed rule offers no higher GWP compared to the other of which have already been justification for such [narrowed] use alternatives in this end-use category, we implemented in equipment within this limits and indeed they are not find that their use may be justified in end-use category. EPA had not listed R– necessary.’’ Honeywell contended that certain equipment under a narrowed use 448A, R–449A, and R–449B as EPA did not explain the specific reasons limit. acceptable without restriction in this why narrowed use limits are necessary. end-use before this final rule Johnson Controls requested EPA to add iii. Clarification of Narrowed Use Limits specifically because the higher GWPs justification for the narrowed use limits. Comment: Johnson Controls requests indicate they pose a greater overall risk Response: EPA provided justification that EPA provide clarification regarding to human health and the environment. for the narrowed use limits in the the narrowed use limits. After receiving information indicating proposal (85 FR 35879–35880, June 12, Response: Because this comment was that manufacturers were unable to 2020). These alternatives pose higher not specific on what needs to be design certain types of medium- risk to human health and the clarified, no specific response is temperature stand-alone equipment environment than other acceptable possible. However, we note that other with the available acceptable substitutes listed in this end-use. comments had clearer requests for alternatives, we are finding the use of Relying on information submitted by clarification on the narrowed use limits these high-GWP blends acceptable in AHRI in its petition to EPA, the and we have addressed those in this this end-use consistent with the proposal explained that while other final rule. These clarifications may also narrowed use limit established by this acceptable alternatives were available respond to Johnson Controls’ request. final rule. for certain types of equipment within Comment: Hussmann Corporation Comment: Chemours states that R– this end-use, the thermodynamic asked whether the narrowed use limit 448A, R–449A, and R–449B have properties of other acceptable requirement to analyze and document substantially lower GWPs compared alternatives would require larger that the other alternatives are infeasible with current refrigerants. components and potentially lead to before using R–448A, R–449A, or R– Response: EPA understands designs that would fail to comply with 449B is to be performed for each model Chemours’ comment to refer to the ADA for certain equipment. For or a family of models. AHRI also asked substitutes in existing equipment that instance, in its comments, the Alliance whether the justification document have higher GWPs, such as HFC–134a, quoted EPA statements from the would be required for each piece of R–404A or R–507A, with GWPs of proposal to this effect. EPA provided equipment. Similarly, NAFEM stated 1,430, 3,920 and 3,990, respectively. some examples of equipment within the ‘‘EPA is unclear whether documentation EPA changed the listing for these and medium-temperature stand-alone may be kept by product number or for certain other high-GWP refrigerants to equipment category that have been a group of similar products or group of unacceptable in stand-alone equipment manufactured with other acceptable alternatives.’’ NAFEM also quoted the and other end-uses in the 2015 Rule. alternatives that are available and for text in the ‘‘Further information’’ EPA compared the substitutes under which there is no known conflict with column on 85 FR 35893 and stated this consideration in this action with other the ADA requirements. Other was ambiguous in the level of detail available or potentially available commenters such as EIA added to this being requested. They said that it was substitutes and not with unacceptable record. Hence, based on the information important to receive clarification that substitutes which are prohibited under from AHRI and the evidence of existing, EPA’s expectations of the SNAP. While some acceptable available equipment using acceptable documentation ‘‘will be flexible to alternatives for new medium refrigerants, EPA is concluding in this recognize the different ways temperature stand-alone equipment do final action that within this end-use manufacturers may be able to categorize have higher GWPs than the three category, while some models can be products, document by issue, or perhaps refrigerant blends under consideration manufactured using other acceptable individual products based on a in this action, EPA notes that those alternatives, those alternatives might not particular manufacturer’s operations.’’ refrigerants have an ODP being be feasible for other models which Response: EPA’s SNAP regulations do comprised in part of ozone-depleting could be manufactured with R–448A, not specify whether the analysis should chemicals, e.g., HCFCs. However, R–449A, or R–449B. This conclusion be performed or documented for models

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24451

or families of models or group of 448A, R–449A, and R–449B’’ asking timing for these steps. For example, alternatives. A manufacturer or other ‘‘[w]hat type of calculations or test manufacturers could use their technical user wishing to avail itself of the results constitute sufficient proof of expertise to describe the regulations or flexibility provided by the narrowed use design unfeasibility.’’ standards that might need updating and limit under the SNAP program is Response: EPA does not dictate how how those items affect the choice of required to conduct the evaluation a manufacturer or other user must prove refrigerant, what steps must be taken to described in the SNAP regulations (see that other alternatives are not feasible, update the regulations and how long 40 CFR 82.180(b)(3)), document that the as long as the requirements of the those steps are expected to take, and circumstances described in the those regulations regarding narrowed use ultimately what steps are needed to regulations have been met, and retain limits are met. The regulations regarding implement the change in refrigerant in such documentation as required under narrowed use limits likewise give some their equipment and whether those those regulations. NAFEM said ‘‘[t]here leeway in how one determines the need steps can commence even before the can be great variability in these for the otherwise restricted substitute. regulation and standard updates are products, with certain features perhaps The regulations state that the user must final. On this last item of implementing customized for particular customers.’’ ascertain that other alternatives are not the new refrigerant, EPA believes the Thus, a single analysis might not be able technically feasible and that the additional three years in AHRI’s to adequately cover an entire family of documented analysis must include the comments could be reasonable for this models for these products or their other substitutes examined and rejected, type of equipment in appropriate customized design. EPA can envision the products where the alternatives (R– circumstances. We note this is similar to scenarios where an analysis that shows 448A, R–449A, or R–449B) are needed, the three years and five months found other alternatives are infeasible could and the reason for rejecting the other as an achievable transition time in cover more than one model, however. alternatives. EPA responds to several previous regulations specifically for For instance, models of similar size that comments, summarized below, that small medium temperature stand-alone differ in some characteristics—facings, address the suitability of certain types of equipment (80 FR 42870, July 20, 2015). shelf placements, etc.—without information that could be used and retained as part of the analysis required iv. Grounds for Utilizing the Narrowed affecting the load, the required Use Limits refrigeration equipment, and the under the narrowed use limits. determination that other alternatives are Comment: AHRI asked whether ‘‘a Comment: The Alliance requested clarification on whether R–448A, R– not feasible (e.g., due to ADA concerns) description of the enabling regulations 449A, and R–449B may be used in might be grouped together under a needed plus a period of time for products that did conform with the single analysis. Another example might preparation might be sufficient documentation’’ to meet the ADA requirements but for other reasons include a model that is offered with requirements to use R–448A, R–449A, the other alternatives are not able to be doors and without. If the analysis or R–449B under the narrowed use used. AHRI maintained that ADA addresses both types of equipment and limits. They provided as an example compliance ‘‘would not be the only concludes the with-doors version ‘‘higher charge limits allowed for A2L reason that would allow for the use of cannot use the other alternatives due to refrigerant plus three years to prepare these products’’ and requested refrigeration equipment sizes leading to for the transition.’’ clarification of such. noncompliance with ADA, and the Response: The regulations pertaining Response: The Alliance did not open-type version is of higher capacity to narrowed use limits require provide specifics on what these other and requires even larger refrigeration manufacturers or other users to include reasons could be, so EPA is not equipment to maintain the refrigeration an anticipated time other alternatives addressing whether a given reason load that has increased because the case might be available and a projected time would or would not justify the use of R– is open to the surrounding air rather for switching to other alternatives. 448A, R–449A, or R–449B under the than enclosed by the doors, then the Therefore, information such as what narrowed use limit. In considering this analysis could be applied to both AHRI describes could be useful as part comment, EPA acknowledges that under models. In any such situation the of addressing this portion of the analysis the existing requirements in the SNAP analysis and any other documentation that must be performed and regulations for utilizing a substitute would need to address the factors listed documented before relying on the under a narrowed use limit, it is in 40 CFR 82.180(b)(3), including listing flexibility under SNAP provided by the possible that there are other reasons the different products being evaluated, narrowed use limit that allows use of R– beside ADA requirements that the other the reasons for rejection of other 448A, R–449A, or R–449B in alternatives could not be used and that alternatives, the anticipated date other appropriate circumstances. As described inclusion of the phrase ‘‘due to the alternatives will be available, and the elsewhere, other information must also inability to meet ADA requirements’’ in projected time for switching to available be included in this analysis. EPA does the regulatory text as part of the alternatives. If the analysis relies on a not generally believe, however, an open- narrowed use limit could unnecessarily conclusion that the inability of one ended time period (e.g., when ‘‘enabling limit users’ ability to meet the product to use the other acceptable regulations’’ are completed) would meet requirements for using these substitutes alternatives also logically means the the intent of the requirement to address under the narrowed use limit. additional product(s) would not be able the anticipated time other alternatives Accordingly, EPA concludes that it is to use the other alternatives, the basis might be available and the projected appropriate to clarify the text as the for that conclusion should be explained. time for transitioning to other comment requests and is finalizing the Comment: Hussmann Corporation substitutes because that kind of general regulatory text without this phrase asked what would be required to show statement does not speak directly to the included in the narrowed use limit. that other alternatives are not feasible, anticipated timing for availability or the Thus, compared to the regulatory text of giving examples of testing results and projected timing for making the the proposed rule (85 FR 35892), under calculations. Rheem similarly requested transition. Instead, EPA anticipates that the ‘‘Narrowed use limits’’ column, EPA that EPA ‘‘[c]larify the burden of proof manufacturers would use their technical in this final action is not including the required for Narrowed Use Limits for R– expertise to describe the projected phrase ‘‘due to the inability to meet

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24452 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

ADA requirements’’ but maintains the unnecessary burden on the industry’s in order to justify the need for R–448A, information in the ‘‘Further transition away from high global R–449A, or R–449B as the only available information’’ column that mentions warming potential (‘GWP’) refrigerants.’’ alternatives that would comply with the ADA requirements as a possible reason They stated that other alternatives have ADA. They held that knowing the for rejection of other alternatives. Under GWPs up to 65% higher than those of layout of each location where a unit is the final action, a manufacturer relying R–448A, R–449A, and R–449B and placed was an unreasonable burden. As on ‘‘other reasons’’ for the narrowed use implied that approving these three such, they concluded that EPA should limit would need to document their blends without the narrowed use limit list these alternatives as acceptable analysis justifying this use, including would support industry transition from without imposing narrowed use limits. the required information as described in high GWP refrigerants. Response: EPA disagrees that the existing SNAP regulations, the same Response: EPA disagrees that the manufacturers would necessarily need as those that found ADA requirements narrowed use limits impose to know the layout of the store to meet would be violated using the other unnecessary burden. As described the requirements of the narrowed use alternatives must document their above, EPA finds that the narrowed use limit. For example, information in the analysis. limits are necessary in this circumstance AHRI petition contended certain Comment: NAFEM noted the and without their inclusion, the Agency equipment models would not comply proposed rule pointed to the possible would not be able to find these three with the ADA using other available inability to comply with the ADA with refrigerants acceptable for this specific alternatives due to counter height the other alternatives as a justification to end-use. These refrigerants present an requirements. If the required analysis use R–448A, R–449A, and R–449B. overall greater risk to human health and shows that other alternatives are NAFEM contended that other reasons the environment due to their higher technically infeasible in such models may exist that would render the other GWP but for other factors have similar due to counter height requirements and alternatives not feasible for new risks to other acceptable alternatives. the ADA requirements, that could medium temperature stand-alone All other zero-ODP alternatives that are support a manufacturer’s justification equipment. They listed technical acceptable within this end-use category for reliance on the narrowed use limit challenges such as ‘‘[s]afety standards, have lower GWPs than the three found in this equipment without knowledge of user space constraints, energy efficiency acceptable subject to narrowed use store layouts. In addition, as noted requirements, and other performance limits in this action. The listing of these above, there may be justifications other considerations’’ as reasons where use of three refrigerants subject to narrowed than ADA compliance that could be R–448A, R–449A, or R–449B might be use limits under the SNAP regulations used for relying on the narrowed use justifiable. provides an option to use R–448A, R– limit, as long as the requirements of 40 Response: EPA agrees that there could 449A, or R–449B, despite the higher CFR 82.180(b)(3) are met. be other reasons to determine that other GWP and higher overall risk to human Comment: Chemours also states that alternatives are infeasible under the health and the environment that these conducting a pre-manufacture analysis narrowed use limit. EPA concludes that refrigerants pose compared to other to justify the use of R–448A, R–449A, or in reviewing the AHRI petition and acceptable refrigerants, when use of the R–449B based on ADA issues would not similar information such as that other lower GWP alternatives is account for situations in which a unit supplied in NAFEM’s comments, determined to be technically infeasible. was moved within a store or perhaps including the September 1, 2015 letter Comment: Chemours contends that transferred to another retail location attached to their comments, requesting manufacturers should not be required to where a unit manufactured with another R–448A and R–449A be acceptable for conduct the technical analysis to justify alternative would be feasible. They held this equipment, the Agency considers the use of R–448A, R–449A, and R– that this possibility of a user moving a ADA compliance to be one possible 449B under the narrowed use limit unit would make the narrowed use limit reason for the use of these high-GWP because AHRI has already completed requirement to justify the use of the blends. That said, we cannot predict if this effort. alternative ineffective and therefore all the other challenges listed by Response: EPA disagrees with this argued for removing those narrowed use NAFEM, or any future challenges, might comment. While EPA relies on limits. render the other alternatives technically information provided by AHRI to justify Response: EPA understands that infeasible for certain equipment in this the listing of these high GWP blends, equipment may be moved or sold on a end use, but acknowledge that such AHRI did not provide an analysis on secondary market. However, the intent situations could arise. In this final rule, any specific model that manufacturers of this action is that for those availing we clarify that compliance with the offer and did not perform such analysis themselves of the narrowed use limits ADA is one example that a for all types of equipment that fall provided in this rule conduct the manufacturer might find makes the within this end-use category. necessary analysis and maintain the other alternatives technically infeasible, Accordingly, the AHRI petition does not necessary documentation. Such and thereby justify the use of R–448A, satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR documentation provides the R–449A, or R–449B under the narrowed 82.180(b)(3) for users who wish to avail justification to use these refrigerants use limit, but that other reasons, if themselves of the flexibility provided by under SNAP which otherwise would be supported by the manufacturer’s the narrowed use limit to use R–448A, unacceptable due to the higher risk to analysis under the SNAP regulations, R–449A, and R–449B where other human health and the environment that might likewise justify use of these high- alternatives are found to be technically they impose. If a chemical manufacturer GWP blends under the narrowed use infeasible. or original equipment manufacturer is limit. Comment: Chemours points out that concerned with downstream users, they how a unit is placed within a store could consider options such as v. Narrowed Use Limits Are could impact aisle widths and including relevant information about Burdensome compliance with ADA. Chemours says the narrowed use limit with their sales Comment: Chemours was opposed to that manufacturers would need to know documentation. In addition, as noted the narrowed use limits and stated that the layout of any store that would use above, there may be justifications other the narrowed use limits ‘‘impose a medium temperature stand-alone unit than ADA compliance that could be

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24453

used for relying on the narrowed use projected time for switching to other better alternatives, ‘‘R–513C, R–290, and limit, as long as the requirements of 40 available substitutes.’’ (emphasis R–600a’’ exist and pointed to three CFR 82.180(b)(3) are met. added). Thus, EPA does not view these different manufacturers that offer a wide Comment: Chemours says the requirements as requiring manufacturers range of equipment that meets ADA narrowed use limits ‘‘unreasonably to provide a precise date of what will be requirements and uses lower-GWP discourage the use of R–448A, R–449A available and when a transition will refrigerants. NRDC likewise noted and R–449B’’ as compared to finding occur, but rather a reasonable SNAP-acceptable alternatives for this these refrigerants acceptable without assessment of such dates based on their end-use category include lower-GWP use restrictions. They say that instead technical expertise. It would be options such as ‘‘ammonia vapor approving, without narrowed use limits, reasonable to assume chemical compression with secondary loop, these refrigerants with a GWP lower producers and suppliers could assist in carbon dioxide, R–290, R–441A, R– than the currently used refrigerants this evaluation for users that choose to 450A, R–513A, and isobutane’’ and would meet the Agency’s duty to avail themselves of the flexibility stated that ‘‘[s]everal companies are evaluate when an alternative would offered by listing these refrigerants already producing and selling compliant reduce overall risk to human health and subject to narrowed use limits. products that use already-approved, the environment. Accordingly, EPA disagrees that it low-GWP refrigerants’’ without Response: Although EPA lists should find these refrigerants acceptable identifying those companies. refrigerants under CAA section 612, we without narrowed use limits based on Response: EPA agrees there is a do not encourage or discourage the use the uncertainties identified in this variety of equipment using other of any particular refrigerant. There are comment. acceptable alternatives with lower several alternatives listed as acceptable, Comment: Chemours further argues GWPs in medium temperature stand- some with use conditions, some, as in against including the narrowed use alone equipment and therefore did not this final rule, with narrowed use limits, limits by indicating that the requirement and some without use restrictions. In propose to list the three refrigerants as to retain any analysis that supports the acceptable but instead included a this final rule, we have evaluated these use of R–448A, R–449A, or R–449B in refrigerants under the SNAP program’s narrowed use limit to address specific medium temperature stand-alone circumstances that would render the comparative risk framework and equipment is to support potential concluded the narrowed use limits are other refrigerants as technically enforcement actions, and that infeasible in particular applications appropriate because they present an developing such documentation overall greater risk to human health and within this end use. EPA is aware of including a transition plan is such equipment using R–290, R–600a the environment due to their higher unreasonable ‘‘when the Agency cannot GWP but for other factors have similar (isobutane), and R–744 (carbon dioxide). concurrently provide clarity for this We also noted in the 2015 Rule that R– risks to other acceptable alternatives. segment.’’ Given that R–448A, R–449A and R– 450A and R–513A were designed as Response: EPA is not addressing HFC–134a replacements and therefore 449B were not listed as acceptable for enforcement in this final rule. However, medium temperature stand-alone were potentially available for medium we note that the existing regulations temperature stand-alone units that equipment prior to this final rule, the covering narrowed use limits, as quoted listing, even with a narrowed use limit, previously relied on HFC–134a. (We are in the proposal, require a manufacturer not aware of a refrigerant being would not limit the use of these to ‘‘retain the results on file for purposes refrigerants. Rather, it could serve to designated R–513C as noted by EIA and of demonstrating compliance.’’ increase the use of these refrigerants believe it may have been a (emphasis added). As the requirement to should manufacturers choose to adopt typographical error for R–513A; retain the analysis is consistent with the them based on their analyses. regardless R–513C is not listed Comment: Chemours indicated that existing SNAP regulations, which are acceptable for this end-use category.) requirements of a narrowed use limit not modified in this action, EPA EPA also pointed to examples of including the need for a documented disagrees with the suggestion that it medium temperature stand-alone transition plan to other alternatives are should not finalize the narrowed use equipment using lower-GWP unworkable, as they require limits based on the points identified in refrigerants in our proposed rule. We understanding when other substitutes this comment. The comment was further note that even manufacturers will be available and a timeline for unclear on what type of ‘‘clarity for this that do offer such equipment using the transitioning. They say users would not segment’’ Chemours is seeking; available alternatives may find such know what future regulations or however, we have provided clarity for alternatives technically infeasible for requirements may exist, or what new this end-use category including the some applications. Other information in alternatives may be introduced in the listings to date of multiple alternatives the record elaborates on the limitations future, and would therefore need to as acceptable and the listing in this final of the other acceptable alternatives in speculate on these aspects in their rule providing flexibility to use R–448A, certain circumstances. For instance, in analysis to justify the use of R–448A, R– R–449A, and R–449B under SNAP its comments on the 2020 NPRM, 449A, or R–449B. As such, Chemours subject to narrowed use limits. Hussmann Corporation stated says these refrigerants should be found c. Oppose Listings ‘‘[f]lammable and non-flammable acceptable without narrowed use limits. refrigerant options currently approved Response: EPA finalized regulations i. Other Alternatives Available With by SNAP have less capacity and may on narrowed use limits in 1994 and has Lower GWP require the use of multiple condensing implemented such narrowed use limits Comment: The EIA and the NRDC units. This in turn creates additional in past decisions with no indication that opposed the listing of R–448A, R–449A heat rejection into stores, an increase in such listings are unworkable. EPA and R–449B as acceptable subject to noise, store infrastructure issues that further notes that the existing narrowed use limits. They indicated don’t have the capacity for the electrical regulations, quoted in the proposal, that because of these refrigerants’ high loads, increased design feasibility risks require an ‘‘anticipated date other GWP, they should not be listed for this for the stand-alone units due to substitutes will be available and type of equipment. EIA claimed that increased piping, and increased

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24454 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

difficulty for servicing. Other refrigerant substitutes would be available and a manufacture equipment under these options may also require redesign due to projected time for switching. end-uses; however, the comment is the larger sizes of the condensing units unclear as to whether NAFEM is d. Narrowed Use Limits Description which will limit the equipment requesting EPA ‘‘to expand the product installation due to narrow aisle and i. Narrowed Use Limits Should Be uses’’ for these other end-uses where R– doorway openings.’’ Accordingly, EPA Temporary 448A, R–449A, and R–449B are already concludes that the fact that other lower Comment: AHRI requested that R– listed as acceptable. To the extent GWP refrigerants are listed as acceptable 448A, R–449A, and R–449B be listed as NAFEM is referring to a broader list of under SNAP for this end use does not acceptable without narrowed use limits circumstances in medium-temperature mean that it should not list R–448A, R– but felt that was only needed ‘‘until stand-alone equipment only, the 449A and R–449B as acceptable subject additional alternatives become specific types of such equipment were to narrowed use limits. available.’’ not defined, and thus EPA cannot judge whether they fit in the subject end-use ii. Adoption of Safety Standard UL Response: To the extent that this category or another end-use or if the 60335–2–89 2nd Ed. comment suggests that R–448A, R– 449A, and R–449B may not be needed end-use category might be further Comment: EIA notes that a proposal broken down into separate end-use in the future, EPA agrees. Even if the to modify UL 60335–2–89 is being subcategories. Accordingly, EPA is not current acceptable refrigerants are not considered. The proposal would allow expanding the product uses in which R– currently feasible in this equipment, up to 500 grams of R–290, or 13 times 448A, R–449A, and R–449B may be additional alternatives being the lower flammability limit (LFL) of used in this final rule. Likewise, NRDC investigated, if added to the list of other A3 refrigerants such as R–600a. did not specifically list the product acceptable substitutes, may take the EIA expects the revision to be complete subtypes in their comments, except to place of these high-GWP blends. As in March 2021 and urges EPA to adopt mention that more equipment could explained above, should additional it when available. EIA expects that feasibly use lower GWP refrigerants in alternatives become available in the adoption by EPA would further limit the future should EPA adopt revised use any need for R–448A, R–449A, or R– future, or use conditions of existing conditions for certain acceptable 449B as it would allow feasible designs, alternatives change in the future, a refrigerants based on a UL standard e.g., requiring a single refrigeration manufacturer using R–448A, R–449A, or under development. Because circuit as opposed to a physically larger R–449B under the narrowed use limit information was not presented that multi-circuit approach, over a broader may need to consider the implications would allow EPA to distinguish the range of equipment. With respect to the of such a change for its future use of R– product types within the medium- listing of R–448A, R–449A, and R–449B 448A, R–449A, or R–449B under the temperature stand-alone equipment under narrowed use limits, NRDC narrowed use limits for new medium end-use category that are and are not agreed that ‘‘EPA should revisit this temperature stand-alone equipment. feasible with the acceptable alternatives, approval upon adoption of safety ii. Scope of Narrowed Use Limits EPA is not limiting or expanding the standard UL 60335–2–89 2nd Ed. which narrowed use limits beyond new will make it simpler to design compliant Comment: NAFEM stated that the medium-temperature stand-alone products with low-GWP refrigerants.’’ proposal to list R–448A, R–449A, and equipment as proposed. As discussed in Further, NRDC maintained that any R–449B as acceptable subject to other responses, should additional rulemaking listing R–448A, R–449A or narrowed use limits ‘‘is too narrowly alternatives be listed in this end-use R–449B should only apply ‘‘until defined and there should be other category, a manufacturer utilizing R– products can be designed and sold to circumstances under which these 448A, R–449A, or R–449B under the the specifications of the new UL refrigerants can be used for medium narrowed use limits may need to standard.’’ temperature applications.’’ NAFEM consider the implications of such a Response: EPA acknowledges the pointed out that their member change for its future use of R–448A, R– ongoing process to update on UL companies produce a wide range of 449A, or R–449B under the narrowed 60335–2–89. We also note that revisions equipment types and held that some of use limits for new medium temperature to this standard were released for public these do not fit neatly into EPA’s end- stand-alone equipment. comment in December 2020. As EIA use category of medium temperature notes, if we were to change use stand-alone equipment and requested iii. Routinely Submit Narrowed Use conditions that currently exist for R– ‘‘EPA to expand the product uses in Limits Information 290, R–600a and R–441A in stand-alone which R–448A, R–449A, and R–449B Comment: Notwithstanding their equipment (both medium and low may be used.’’ NRDC however felt that argument against the listing, NRDC temperature), we would undertake a should EPA list these refrigerants urged that if R–448A, R–449A, and R– rulemaking to do so. We cannot predict acceptable subject to narrowed use 449B were listed for this equipment, if or when we would do so before that limits—which NRDC did not support— EPA should ‘‘require that users of these standard is finalized and we can EPA should limit the listing ‘‘to only three blends actively and periodically evaluate it to assess whether a change in specific product subtypes for which no submit to EPA the specified required use conditions is warranted; therefore, alternatives are currently or potentially information under the narrowed use we have not limited the time that the available.’’ limits.’’ listing of R–448A, R–449A, and R–449B Response: EPA has previously listed Response: Regulations for listing applies as NRDC suggests. That said, R–448A, R–449A, and R–449B as alternatives subject to narrowed use manufacturers availing themselves of acceptable under several end-uses, some limits were established in the original the flexibilities offered by these SNAP of which may operate at medium SNAP rule (59 FR 13044, March 18, listings subject to narrowed use limits temperature, including supermarket 1994) and were not reopened in the could assess the status of this UL systems, refrigerated transport, cold 2020 NPRM. The 1994 final regulations Standard and the possibility of adoption storage, refrigerated food processing and do not require or provide for users to by EPA as part of their analyses that dispensing equipment, and others. We submit their analysis, except when require an anticipated date other expect that some NAFEM members requested to demonstrate compliance.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24455

To the extent the comment is suggesting B. Residential and Light Commercial Air has adopted similar use conditions in that EPA should add a separate Conditioning and Heat Pumps—Listing the past when listing flammable submission requirement for this of R–452B, R–454A, R–454B, R–454C, refrigerants acceptable, including the particular listing, EPA is not and R–457A as Acceptable, Subject to listing of HFC–32 for some of the establishing such a requirement because Use Conditions, for Use in Residential equipment types that are included in doing so would be inconsistent with the and Light Commercial Air Conditioning the listing of the five refrigerant blends requirements of narrowed use limits and Heat Pumps End-Use for New in this final rule (e.g., 76 FR 78832, that have existed for 27 years and as Equipment; and R–32 as Acceptable, December 20, 2011; 80 FR 19454, April indicated in this document and the Subject to Use Conditions, for Use in 10, 2015). Further discussion of these proposal, EPA’s intention is to maintain Residential and Light Commercial Air use conditions is in section 5 below. consistency with those existing Conditioning and Heat Pumps— Under this listing, use of these requirements. If EPA decides in the Equipment Other Than Self-Contained refrigerants under the SNAP program future that additional reporting may be Room Air Conditioners for New requires adhering to all of the following needed under narrowed use limits, Equipment use conditions: either in general or for specific As proposed, EPA is listing R–452B, a. UL Standard alternatives so listed, we can consider R–454A, R–454B, R–454C, and R–457A any relevant changes and if any These refrigerants may be used only (hereafter called ‘‘the five refrigerant in AC equipment, both self-contained revisions to this final rule should be blends’’) as acceptable subject to use proposed. equipment and split-systems, that meet conditions as substitutes in residential all requirements listed in the 3rd e. Approve for Retrofits and light commercial air conditioning edition, dated November 1, 2019, of UL and heat pumps for both self-contained Comment: Chemours requests that the Standard 60335–2–40, ‘‘Standard for and split systems, and R–32 as Safety for Household And Similar Agency list R–448A, R–449A, and R– acceptable subject to use conditions in Electrical Appliances—Safety—Part 2– 449B as acceptable for retrofits of residential and light commercial air 40: Particular Requirements for medium temperature stand-alone conditioning and heat pumps for split Electrical Heat Pumps, Air Conditioners equipment. systems and for specific types of self- and Dehumidifiers’’ (UL Standard).21 Response: EPA has consistently contained systems that are part of the The UL Standard contains requirements viewed refrigerant listings for new residential and light commercial air for the types of equipment covered here, equipment and for retrofitting existing conditioning and heat pump end-use including testing, charge sizes, equipment separately, as the overall risk but for which R–32 has not been ventilation, usage space requirements, to human health and the environment previously listed. and certain hazard warnings and differs depending on whether We note references to hydrocarbons markings, among other topics. In cases equipment is newly manufactured (for mistakenly included in the ‘‘Further where this final rule includes this equipment, in a factory information’’ column of the regulatory requirements more stringent than those environment) compared to retrofitted text in the 2020 NPRM are not included of UL Standard 60335–2–40, the (e.g., in the field or at a service center). in this final rule. Also, in the 2020 appliance will need to meet the We appreciate Chemours’ comments; NPRM we used the term ‘‘mildly requirements of this final rule in place however, we did not propose the use of flammable’’ in the ‘‘Further of the requirements in the UL Standard. R–448A, R–449A, and R–449B in information’’ column of the regulatory See section II.B.5 below for further retrofits. There is not enough text. Based on comments received, we discussion on the requirements of this information in the record to make a have changed that term to UL Standard that EPA is incorporating determination for retrofits of this ‘‘flammable.’’ 20 Finally, we note that by reference. equipment in this rule, but we will take where the use requirement for red EPA finds, as in past rules, that it is the suggestion under advisement for markings appeared in regulatory text of appropriate to reference consensus potential future listings. the 2020 NRPM, we indicated initially standards that set conditions to reduce f. Request for Cost-Benefit Analysis that it must be applied to ‘‘pipes, hoses, risk. As in past listings of flammable or other devices through which the refrigerants, we find that such standards Comment: NAFEM ‘‘encourages EPA refrigerant passes.’’ In this final action have already gone through a to consider a benefit-cost analysis before we are adding ‘‘service ports’’ there to development phase that incorporates finalizing this rulemaking.’’ be consistent with the sentence that the latest findings and research. Response: The listing of R–448A, R– follows. We offer clarification on this Likewise, such standards have gone 449A, and R–449B as acceptable subject requirement below. through a vetting and refinement to narrowed use limits imposes no costs 1. What use conditions is EPA process that provides the affected compared to the previous state where finalizing? parties an opportunity to comment. For such refrigerants were not listed as the U.S. stationary air conditioning and acceptable for the subject end-use EPA is finalizing the use conditions as refrigeration industry, EPA sees UL category. Instead, this final rule allows proposed, except for a revision, standards in general as a pervasively these three refrigerants to be used in explained in subsections II.B.1.b and used body of work to address risks and instances where they were not allowed II.B.5.a below, to what constitutes these standards are the most applicable before and thus provides additional ‘‘new’’ equipment. The use conditions and recognized by the U.S. market. flexibilities under SNAP that were proposed and are finalized as a Most, and likely nearly all, covered manufacturers may choose to pursue. means to reduce the risk that exists equipment in the U.S. is listed as While there may be costs borne by those when using flammable refrigerants. EPA complying with the appropriate UL pursuing these refrigerants, it is a standard. In this case, UL 60335–2–40 manufacturer’s decision whether to 20 In the NPRM, EPA used the term ‘‘mildly flammable’’ to describe A2L refrigerants. Based on covers, with modifications, equipment pursue these alternatives and not a comment as explained below, this is not the correct requirement that EPA is imposing on term used in ASHRAE Standard 34 and hence it has 21 All references to UL Standard 60335–2–40 are the manufacturer. been revised throughout this final rule. to the third edition unless otherwise noted.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24456 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

also covered by other UL standards due to Flammable Refrigerant Used. presence of a flammable refrigerant to previously finalized and incorporates Follow Handling Instructions Carefully those who may come into contact with the works of international standards in Compliance with National it in potentially dangerous quantities setting bodies; specifically, the Regulations’’ and situations (i.e., in concentrations International Electrotechnical v. On the indoor unit 22 near the above the LFL and in the presence of an Commission (IEC) standard IEC 60335– nameplate: ignition source). 2–40 was used in the development of (a) At the top of the marking: EPA believes that it would be difficult UL 60335–2–40. ‘‘Minimum Installation height, X m (W ft)’’. This marking is only required if the to see warning labels with the minimum b. New Equipment Only similar marking is required by the UL lettering height requirement of 1⁄8 inch These refrigerants are being listed Standard. The terms ‘‘X’’ and ‘‘W’’ shall provided in the UL Standard. Therefore, under SNAP only for use in new be replaced by the numeric height as consistent with the use conditions in equipment designed specifically and calculated per the UL Standard. Note our previous rules listing flammable clearly identified for the refrigerant; i.e., that the formatting here is slightly refrigerants, including HFC–32, none of these substitutes are being listed different than the UL Standard; acceptable subject ot use conditions for use as a conversion or ‘‘retrofit’’ specifically, the height in Inch-Pound (e.g., 76 FR 78832, December 20, 2011; refrigerant for existing equipment. In the units is placed in parentheses and the 80 FR 19454, April 10, 2015), the 2020 NPRM, we stated in a footnote that word ‘‘and’’ has been replaced by the minimum height for lettering must be 1⁄4 we intended ‘‘new’’ equipment to opening parenthesis. inch as opposed to 1⁄8 inch, which will include a new compressor, evaporator, (b) Immediately below the warning make it easier for technicians, label indicated in (a) above or at the top condenser and refrigerant tubing (85 FR consumers, retail storeowners, and of the marking if (a) is not required: 35884). Based on consideration of emergency first responders to view the public comments on the 2020 NPRM, ‘‘Minimum room area (operating or 2 2 warning labels. we conclude that existing tubing can be storage), Y m (Z ft )’’. The terms ‘‘Y’’ inspected and if suitable re-used and the and ‘‘Z’’ shall be replaced by the d. Markings system would still be considered ‘‘new’’ numeric area as calculated per the UL Standard. Note that the formatting here Equipment must have distinguishing for the purpose of this final rule. ® Given the possible ignition sources is slightly different than the UL red (Pantone Matching System (PMS) that exist in equipment designed for Standard; specifically, the area in Inch- #185 or RAL 3020) color-coded hoses non-flammable refrigerants, EPA finds Pound units is placed in parentheses and piping to indicate use of a that retrofitting such equipment to use and the word ‘‘and’’ has been replaced flammable refrigerant. The air flammable refrigerants presents by the opening parenthesis. conditioning equipment shall have vi. For non-fixed equipment, additional risks not adequately marked service ports, pipes, hoses and including portable air conditioners, addressed by this standard. This other devices through which the window air conditioners, packaged position is widely supported by the equipment’s refrigerant circuit is terminal air conditioners and packaged comments as described below. serviced. Markings shall extend at least terminal heat pumps, on the outside of 1 inch (25mm) and shall be replaced if c. Warning Labels the product: ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire removed. As noted in comments below, or Explosion—Store in a well-ventilated The following markings, or the there were some questions of what this equivalent, must be provided in letters room without continuously operating flames or other potential ignition.’’ use condition requires; EPA clarifies no less than 6.4 mm (1⁄4 inch) high and vii. For fixed equipment, including this requirement as follows. For must be permanent: rooftop units and split air conditioners, equipment that contain field- i. On the outside of the air ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire—Auxiliary constructed parts (i.e., finished at the conditioning equipment: ‘‘WARNING— devices which may be ignition sources site where the installation occurs), the Risk of Fire. Flammable Refrigerant shall not be installed in the ductwork, connections to be finished in the field Used. To Be Repaired Only By Trained other than auxiliary devices listed for shall be marked red as described. For Service Personnel. Do Not Puncture use with the specific appliance. See equipment with service ports, the Refrigerant Tubing’’ instructions.’’ service ports and/or piping extending ii. On the outside of the air The text of these labels is nearly therefrom shall be marked red as conditioning equipment: ‘‘WARNING— identical to those in UL 60335–2–40, Risk of Fire. Dispose of Properly In described. We note equipment might fit with slight modifications noted above. both categories above and hence must Accordance With Federal Or Local We highlight this difference above and Regulations. Flammable Refrigerant have both sets of red markings. For self- repeat those labels whose text we have contained equipment without service Used’’ not changed here to emphasize the ports, the location the manufacturer iii. On the inside of the air importance of including such labels and recommends as the place to access the conditioning equipment near the to provide the labels we are requiring in compressor: ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire. a single place. We find labels as one of refrigerant circuit (e.g., process tube) Flammable Refrigerant Used. Consult two marking conventions (the other shall be marked red as described. Repair Manual/Owner’s Guide Before being red markings as explained in Attempting to Service This Product. All section II.B.1.d below) that combined Safety Precautions Must be Followed’’ will provide adequate warning of the iv. For any equipment pre-charged at the factory, on the equipment 22 This labeling is required for split systems and packaging: ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire self-contained equipment alike.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24457

The reason to include red markings in 3. What are the ASHRAE classifications room, and various types of split combination with warning labels is for refrigerant flammability? systems. noted above. EPA finds that when The six refrigerants that we are listing R–452B, also known by the trade combined with labels, such markings name ‘‘OpteonTM XL 55,’’ and also in this final rule for residential and light ® will provide adequate warning of the commercial AC and heat pumps are all known as ‘‘Solstice L41y,’’ is a blend presence of a flammable refrigerant to assigned a safety group classification of with lower flammability consisting of 67 those who may come into contact with ‘‘A2L’’ by The American National percent by weight HFC–32; seven it in potentially dangerous quantities Standards Institute/American Society of percent HFC–125, also known as and situations (i.e., in concentrations Heating, Refrigerating and Air 1,1,1,2,2-pentafluoroethane (CAS Reg. above the LFL and in the presence of an Conditioning Engineers (ANSI/ No. 354–33–6); and 26 percent HFO– ignition source). As in previous ASHRAE) Standard 34–2019. ASHRAE 1234yf, also known as 2,3,3,3- rulemakings on flammable refrigerants classifies Class A refrigerants as tetrafluoroprop-1-ene (CAS Reg. No. cited above, we conclude that the red refrigerants for which toxicity has not 754–12–1). R–454A, also known by the trade name ‘‘OpteonTM XL 40,’’ is a markings will provide an additional been identified at concentrations less blend with lower flammability warning for technicians, consumers, than or equal to 400 ppm by volume, consisting of 35 percent HFC–32 and 65 retail storeowners, first responders, and based on data used to determine threshold limit value-time-weighted percent HFO–1234yf. R–454B, also those disposing the appliance to TM average (TLV–TWA) or consistent known by the trade names ‘‘Opteon understand that a flammable refrigerant XL 41’’ and ‘‘Puron AdvanceTM,’’ is a is used and appropriate caution should indices. The flammability classification ‘‘2L’’ is given to refrigerants that, when blend with lower flammability be taken. Furthermore, the red consisting of 68.9 percent HFC–32 and markings, as with symbols required by tested, exhibit flame propagation, have a heat of combustion less than 19,000 31.1 percent HFO–1234yf. R–454C, also the UL Standard, provide a more TM kJ/kg (8,169 BTU/lb), have an LFL known by the trade name ‘‘Opteon XL universally-understood warning greater than 0.10 kg/m3, and have a 20,’’ is a blend with lower flammability demarcation, which would be useful for maximum burning velocity of 10 cm/s consisting of 21.5 percent HFC–32 and those who may not be able to read or or lower when tested in dry air at 73.4 78.5 percent HFO–1234yf. R–457A, also ® understand the English language labels. °F (23.0 °C) and 14.7 psia (101.3 kPa). known by the trade name ‘‘Forane The regulatory text of our decisions ASHRAE Standard 34–2019 requires 457A,’’ is a blend with lower for the end-uses discussed above testing at that temperature to determine flammability consisting of 70 percent appears in tables at the end of this if flame propagation exists and if not, HFO–1234yf, 18 percent HFC–32, and document. This text will be codified in tests at 140 °F (60 °C) are conducted to 12 percent HFC–152a, which is also appendix W of 40 CFR part 82 subpart determine the refrigerant flammability known as ethane, 1,1-difluoro (CAS Reg. No. 75–37–6). G. EPA notes that there may be other classification. For further information legal obligations pertaining to the on the ASHRAE safety group Redacted submissions and supporting documentation for R–32 and the five manufacture, use, handling, and classifications, see the 2020 NPRM at 85 refrigerant blends are provided in the disposal of the refrigerants that are not FR 35882. docket for this rule (EPA–HQ–OAR– included in the information listed in the 4. What are R–32, R–452B, R–454A, R– 2019–0698) at https:// tables (e.g., the CAA section 608(c)(2) 454B, R–454C and R–457A and how do www.regulations.gov. EPA performed an prohibition on knowingly venting or they compare to other refrigerants in the assessment to examine the health and otherwise knowingly releasing or same end-use? environmental risks of each of these disposing of substitute refrigerants in R–32 is a refrigerant with lower substitutes, and these assessments are the course of maintaining, servicing, flammability, and the five refrigerant also available in the docket for this repairing or disposing of an appliance or blends are refrigerant blends with lower rule.23 24 25 26 27 28 industrial process refrigeration, or flammability, all with an ASHRAE Environmental information: R–32, R– Department of Transportation safety classification of A2L. The 452B, R–454A, R–454B, R–454C and R– requirements for transport of flammable respective CAS Reg. Nos. of R–32 and 457A have ODPs of zero. gases). Flammable refrigerants being the components of the five refrigerant recovered or otherwise disposed of from blends are listed below. 23 ICF, 2020d. Risk Screen on Substitutes in residential and light commercial air R–32 is also known as HFC–32 or Residential and Light Commercial Air-Conditioning conditioning appliances are likely to be difluoromethane (CAS Reg. No. 75–10– and Heat Pumps (New Equipment); Substitute: HFC–32. hazardous waste under the Resource 5). EPA previously listed R–32 as an 24 ICF, 2020e. Risk Screen on Substitutes in Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) acceptable refrigerant for some types of Residential and Light Commercial Air-Conditioning (see 40 CFR parts 260–270). residential and light commercial air and Heat Pumps (New Equipment); Substitute: R– conditioning and heat pumps end-use 452B. 2. Background on Residential and Light categories, specifically self-contained 25 ICF, 2020f. Risk Screen on Substitutes in Commercial Air Conditioning and Heat Residential and Light Commercial Air-Conditioning room air conditioners such as window and Heat Pumps (New Equipment); Substitute: R– Pumps (New) units, packaged terminal air 454A. conditioners (PTACs), packaged 26 ICF, 2020g. Risk Screen on Substitutes in The residential and light commercial terminal heat pumps (PTHPs), portable Residential and Light Commercial Air-Conditioning air conditioning and heat pumps end- room AC, and wall-mounted AC (80 FR and Heat Pumps (New Equipment); Substitute: R– use includes equipment for cooling air 454B. 19454, April 10, 2015). As noted in the 27 in individual rooms, in single-family ICF, 2020h. Risk Screen on Substitutes in 2020 NPRM, this action adds a listing Residential and Light Commercial Air-Conditioning homes, and in small commercial for this substitute to include rooftop and Heat Pumps (New Equipment); Substitute: R– buildings. This end-use includes both units, ground-source heat pump 454C. self-contained and split systems. For 28 ICF, 2020i. Risk Screen on Substitutes in (GSHPs) and water-source heat pump Residential and Light Commercial Air-Conditioning further background on this end-use, see (WSHPs), which are typically self- and Heat Pumps (New Equipment); Substitute: R– the 2020 NPRM (85 FR 35881–35882). contained but not sized for a single 457A.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24458 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

R–32 has a GWP of 675. The five substitutes include drowsiness or common in the refrigeration and air refrigerant blends are made up of the dizziness. The substitutes may also conditioning industry. components HFC–32, HFC–125, HFO– irritate the skin or eyes or cause Although flammability risk may be 1234yf and HFC–152a, which have frostbite. At sufficiently high greater than flammability risks of other GWPs of 675, 3,500, less than one to concentrations, the substitutes may available substitutes in the same end- four, and 124, respectively.29 30 31 32 If cause irregular heartbeat. The use, this risk can be minimized by use these values are weighted by mass substitutes could cause asphyxiation if consistent with ASHRAE 15 and other percentage, then R–452B, R–454A, R– air is displaced by vapors in a confined industry standards such as UL 60335–2– 454B, R–454C and R–457A have GWPs space. These potential health effects are 40, recommendations in the of about 700, 240, 470, 150 and 140 common to many refrigerants. manufacturers’ SDS, and other safety respectively. ASHRAE Standard 34–2019 classifies precautions common in the refrigeration HFC–32 (CAS Reg. No. 75–10–5), HFC–32 and the five refrigerant blends and air conditioning industry. The use HFC–125 (CAS Reg. No. 354–33–6), under the toxicity classification A conditions reduce the potential risk HFC–152a (CAS Reg. No. 75–37–6), and (‘‘lower toxicity’’). The AIHA has associated with the flammability of HFO–1234yf (CAS Reg. No. 754–12–1)— established WEELs of 1,000 ppm as an these alternatives so that they will not the components of the five refrigerant 8-hr TWA for HFC–32 and the pose significantly greater risk than other blends—are excluded from the component refrigerants HFC–125 and acceptable substitutes in this end-use. definition of VOC under CAA HFC–152a; the AIHA has established a regulations (see 40 CFR 51.100(s)) 5. Why is EPA finalizing these specific WEEL of 500 ppm as an 8-hr TWA for use conditions? addressing the development of SIPs to HFO–1234yf. The manufacturer of R– attain and maintain the NAAQS. 452B, R–454A, R–454B, and R–454C As finalized, the use conditions in Knowingly venting or otherwise recommends AELs, respectively, of 874, this SNAP listing include: Use only in knowingly releasing or disposing of 690, 854, and 615 ppm on an 8-hr TWA new equipment, which can be these refrigerants in the course of for these blends. EPA anticipates that specifically designed for the refrigerant; maintaining, servicing, repairing or users will be able to meet the AIHA use consistent with the UL 60335–2–40 disposing of an appliance or industrial WEEL and manufacturers’ AELs and industry standard, including testing, process refrigeration is prohibited as address potential health risks by charge sizes, ventilation, usage space provided in section 608(c)(2) of the CAA following requirements and requirements, and certain hazard and EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR recommendations in the manufacturers’ warnings and markings; and warnings 82.154(a)(1). SDS, in ASHRAE Standard 15, and and markings on equipment to inform Flammability information: R–32 and consumers and technicians of potential the five refrigerant blends are other safety precautions common to the refrigeration and air conditioning flammability hazards. Each of these is designated under ASHRAE flammability described in greater detail below. The classification of 2L, which is a industry. Comparison to other substitutes in listings with specific use conditions are classification for refrigerants also intended to allow for the use of these referred to as ‘‘lower flammability’’ (i.e., this end-use: R–32 and the five refrigerants with lower flammability in lower than those designated as 2 or 3) refrigerant blends all have an ODP of a manner that will ensure they do not in ASHRAE Standard 34–2019. See zero, the same as other acceptable pose a greater overall risk to human section 3 above for information on substitutes in this end-use. health and the environment than other ASHRAE classifications. R–32 and the five refrigerant blends’ Toxicity and exposure data: Potential GWPs, ranging from about 140 to about substitutes in this end-use. health effects of exposure to these 700, are higher than some of the a. New Equipment Only; Not Intended acceptable substitutes for residential for Use as a Retrofit Alternative 29 Unless otherwise specified, GWP values are and light commercial air conditioning from IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: The and heat pumps, including ammonia Under this listing, these refrigerants Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working absorption, R–290, and R–441A with may be used under the SNAP program Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the 33 GWPs ranging from zero to three. R–32 only in new equipment designed to Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. S. address concerns unique to flammable Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. and the five refrigerant blends’ GWPs Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller are lower than some of the acceptable refrigerants—i.e., this listing does not (eds.). Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, substitutes for residential and light allow these substitutes to be used as a United Kingdom 996 pp. commercial air conditioning and heat conversion or ‘‘retrofit’’ refrigerant for 30 Nielsen et al., 2007. Nielsen, O.J., Javadi, M.S., existing equipment. These flammable Sulbaek Andersen, M.P., Hurley, M.D., Wallington, pumps, such as HFC–134a, R–410A, and T.J., Singh, R. 2007. Atmospheric chemistry of R–507A with GWPs of 1,430, 2,087.5 refrigerants were not submitted under CF3CF=CH2: Kinetics and mechanisms of gas-phase and 3,985 respectively. the SNAP program to be used in reactions with Cl atoms, OH radicals, and O . 3 Information regarding the toxicity of retrofitted equipment, and no Chemical Physics Letters 439, 18–22. Available information was provided on how to online at http://www.cogci.dk/network/OJN_174_ other available alternatives are provided CF3CF=CH2.pdf. in the listing decisions previously made address hazards if these flammable 31 Hodnebrog ;. et al., 2013. Hodnebrog ;., (see https://www.epa.gov/snap/ refrigerants were to be used in Etminan, M., Fuglestvedt, J.S., Marston, G., Myhre, substitutes-residential-and-light- equipment that was designed for non- G., Nielsen, C.J., Shine, K.P., Wallington, T.J.: flammable refrigerants. Global Warming Potentials and Radiative commercial-air-conditioning-and-heat- Efficiencies of Halocarbons and Related pumps). Toxicity risks for R–32 and the b. UL Standard Compounds: A Comprehensive Review, Reviews of five refrigerant blends are comparable to Geophysics, 51, 300–378, doi:10.1002/rog.20013, Under this listing, the flammable or lower than toxicity risks of other 2013. refrigerants may be used under the 32 available substitutes in the same end- WMO (World Meteorological Organization), SNAP program only in equipment that Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2018, use. Toxicity risks can be minimized by meets all requirements in UL Standard Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project— use consistent with ASHRAE 15 and Report No. 58, 588 pp., Geneva, Switzerland, 2018. Available at: https://ozone.unep.org/sites/default/ other industry standards, 33 This is intended to mean a completely new files/2019-05/SAP-2018-Assessment-report.pdf. In recommendations in the manufacturers’ refrigeration circuit containing a new compressor, this action, the 100-year GWP values are used. SDS, and other safety precautions evaporator, and condenser.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24459

60335–2–40, Edition 3 for air installation location and the type of air other features are required. Additional conditioning equipment. This UL circulation of the location or of the requirements exist for charge sizes Standard indicates that refrigerant appliance. In some applications the exceeding three times the LFL. charges greater than a specific amount introduction of outdoor air into a space, i. Incorporation by Reference (called ‘‘m3’’ in the UL Standard and also known as ventilation, is required. based on the refrigerant’s LFL) are Within Annex GG, Table GG.1 describes Through this action, EPA is beyond its scope and that national how to apply the requirements to allow incorporating by reference the 2019 UL standards might apply, such as for for safe use of flammable refrigerants. Standard 60335–2–40, 3rd Edition, instance ANSI/ASHRAE 15–2019. The UL Standard contains provisions which establishes requirements for the Those participating in the UL 60335– for safety mitigation. These mitigation evaluation of electrical air conditioners, 2–40 consensus standards process requirements were developed to ensure heat pumps, and dehumidifiers, and (hereafter ‘‘UL’’) have tested equipment the safe use of flammable refrigerants safe use of flammable refrigerants. The for flammability risk in residential over a range of appliances. In general, as standard is discussed in greater detail applications and evaluated the relevant larger charge sizes are used, more elsewhere in this preamble. This scientific studies. Further, UL has stringent mitigation requirements are approach is the same as that used to developed safety standards including required. In certain applications incorporate the 8th edition of UL requirements for construction and refrigerant detection systems (as Standard 484 in our previous rule in system design, for markings, and for described in Annex LL, Refrigerant which we listed R–32 as acceptable, performance tests concerning refrigerant detection systems for A2L refrigerants) subject to use conditions, for use in self- leakage, ignition of switching must be factory installed as part of the contained room air conditioners for components, surface temperature of equipment. Likewise, in some cases residential and light commercial AC (80 parts, and component strength after refrigerant sensors (as described in FR 19454, April 10, 2015). being scratched. Certain aspects of Annex MM, Refrigerant sensor location The 2019 UL Standard 60335–2–40, system construction and design, confirmation tests) are required. The 3rd Edition, is available at https:// including charge size, ventilation, and standard does not require audible www.shopulstandards.com/ installation space, and greater detail on alarms in most cases and instead relies ProductDetail.aspx?UniqueKey=36463, markings, are discussed further below in on sensors/detectors to initiate a and for purchase by mail at: Comm this section. The UL Standard was mitigation strategy such as activating 2000, 151 Eastern Avenue, Bensenville, developed in an open and consensus- ‘‘fan operation and air circulation or IL 60106; Email: orders@ based approach, with the assistance of ventilation’’ if refrigerant concentrations shopulstandards.com; Telephone: 1– experts in the air conditioning industry are found to exceed certain thresholds. 888–853–3503 in the U.S. or Canada as well as experts involved in assessing Where mechanical ventilation (i.e., fans) (other countries dial 1–415–352–2178); the safety of products. While similar is required in accordance with Annex internet address: https:// standards exist from other bodies, such GG or Annex 101.DVG, it must be www.shopulstandards.com. The cost of as the IEC, we are relying on a specific initiated by a separate refrigerant the 2019 UL Standard 60335–2–40, 3rd UL standard because it is the most detection system either as part of the Edition is $440 for an electronic copy applicable and recognized by the U.S. appliance or installed separately. In a and $550 for hardcopy. UL also offers a market. This approach is the same as room with no mechanical ventilation, subscription service to the Standards that in previous rules on flammable Annex GG provides requirements for Certification Customer Library that refrigerants (e.g. 76 FR 78832, December openings to rooms based on several allows unlimited access to their 20, 2011; 80 FR 19454, April 10, 2015). factors, including the charge size and standards and related documents. The A description of the requirements of the room area. The minimum opening is cost of obtaining this standard is not a UL 60335–2–40 as they affect the significant financial burden for refrigerants and end-use addressed in intended to be sufficient so that natural ventilation would reduce the risk of equipment manufacturers and purchase this section of our final rule follows. is not necessary for those selling, This description is offered for using a flammable refrigerant. The standard also includes specific installing, and servicing the equipment. information only and does not provide Therefore, EPA concludes that the UL a complete review of the requirements requirements for split system appliances using A2L refrigerants covering standard being incorporated by in this standard. reference is reasonably available. Under this SNAP listing, the construction, instruction manuals, and refrigerant charge size for residential allowable charge sizes, mechanical c. Labeling and light commercial air conditioning ventilation, safety alarms, and, for As a use condition, EPA is requiring and heat pumps is limited in variable refrigerant flow (VRF) systems, labeling of residential and light accordance with the UL Standard. EPA shut off valves. commercial air conditioning and heat is requiring as a use condition In addition to Annex GG and Table pump equipment. EPA is requiring the adherence to the standard; hence, GG.1 mentioned above, UL 60335–2–40 warning labels on the equipment charge size limits for each of the has a requirement for the maximum contain letters at least 1⁄4 inch high. The refrigerants by equipment type in charge for an appliance using an A2L label must be permanently affixed to the accordance with the UL Standard apply refrigerant. If the appliance is a portable equipment. Warning label language to this SNAP listing. Annex GG of the appliance, a non-fixed factory-sealed requirements are described in section standard provides the charge limits, air single package, or a cord-connected II.B.1.c of this rule as well as in the circulation requirements and appliance which may be periodically or regulatory text. The warning label requirements for secondary circuits. The seasonally relocated (excluding language is similar to or exactly the standard specifies requirements for servicing) by the end user, there are no same as that required in UL 60335–2– installation space of an appliance (i.e., additional requirements for room area 40. room floor area) and/or air circulation or and air circulation if the charge is other requirements which are sufficiently small—under three times d. Markings determined according to the refrigerant the LFL; however risk mitigation for Our understanding of the UL charge used in the appliance, the labeling, ignition source controls and Standard is that red markings, similar to

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24460 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

those EPA has applied as use conditions consumers, retail store owners, building in the user making significant changes in past actions for flammable owners and operators, first responders, in existing operating practices. refrigerants (76 FR 78832, December 20, and those disposing the appliance. This EPA notes that Annex HH of UL 2011; 80 FR 19454, April 10, 2015), are sleeve or other marking would be of the 60335–2–40, Competence of service required by the UL Standard for A2 and same red color (PMS #185 or RAL 3020) personnel, provides guidelines for A3 refrigerants but not A2L refrigerants. and could also be boldly marked with service personnel to ensure they receive The final use condition requires that a graphic to indicate the refrigerant was training specifically to address potential such markings apply to these A2L flammable. This could be a cost- risks of servicing equipment using refrigerants as well to establish a effective alternative to painting or flammable refrigerants. Annex HH common, familiar and standard means dyeing the hose or pipe. provides recommendations that such of identifying the use of a flammable In this SNAP listing, EPA is requiring training cover several aspects relevant to refrigerant. the use of color-coded service ports, flammable refrigerants including These red markings will help hoses or piping as a way for technicians recognition of ignition sources, technicians immediately identify the and others to recognize that a flammable information about refrigerant detectors, use of a flammable refrigerant, thereby refrigerant is used in the equipment. and other safety concepts. The training potentially reducing the risk of using This will be in addition to the use of information recommended in Annex HH sparking equipment or otherwise having warning labels discussed above. EPA would address the proper working an ignition source nearby. The AC and believes having two such warning procedures for equipment refrigeration industry currently uses methods is reasonable and consistent commissioning, maintenance, repair, red-colored hoses and piping as means with other general industry practices. decommissioning and disposal. The for identifying the use of a flammable This approach is the same as that Agency notes that this section of the UL refrigerant based on previous SNAP adopted in our previous rules on Standard is described as informational, listings. Likewise, distinguishing flammable refrigerants (e.g., 76 FR rather than ‘‘normative,’’ i.e., it is coloring has been used elsewhere to 78832, December 20, 2011; 80 FR 19454, intended to provide information but not indicate an unusual and potentially April 10, 2015). to be an absolute requirement under the UL standard. Because Annex HH is dangerous situation, for example in the 6. What additional information is EPA informative, rather than normative, it is use of orange-insulated wires in hybrid including in these listings? electric vehicles. Currently in SNAP not a requirement of the UL Standard listings, color-coded hoses or pipes EPA is including recommendations, and following it is not required under must be used for ethane, HFC–32, found in the ‘‘Further information’’ the use conditions finalized in this isobutane, propane, or R–441A in column of the regulatory text at the end action. Nonetheless, EPA is providing as certain types of equipment. All such of this document, to inform personnel of ‘‘Further information’’ some information SNAP listings indicate that the tubing, other practices to protect them from the on training, including a hoses, etc. must be colored red PMS risks of using flammable refrigerants. recommendation that personnel follow #185 or RAL 3020 to match the red band Similar to our previous listing of Annex HH. flammable refrigerants for this end-use displayed on the container of flammable 7. How is EPA responding to comments (80 FR 19454, April 10, 2015), EPA is refrigerants under the AHRI Guideline on residential and light commercial air including information on the OSHA N, ‘‘2016 Guideline for Assignment of conditioning and heat pumps? Refrigerant Container Colors.’’ EPA is requirements at 29 CFR part 1910, requiring red markings in this SNAP proper ventilation, personal protective EPA received several comments from final action to ensure that there is equipment, fire extinguishers, use of organizations with various interests in adequate notice for technicians and spark-proof tools and equipment residential and light commercial AC. others that a flammable refrigerant is designed for flammable refrigerants, and Most commenters supported the being used within a particular piece of training. proposed listing decision in general. equipment or appliance. These Since this additional information is Major topics raised by commenters requirements are also intended to not part of the regulatory decision, these included the proposed use conditions, provide adequate notification of the statements are not binding for the use of industry standards, and training for presence of flammable refrigerants for the substitutes under the SNAP technicians. Other comments unrelated personnel disposing of appliances program. However, the information so to these listings and beyond the scope containing flammable refrigerants. listed may be binding under other of this final action are addressed in Consistent with a previous SNAP rule, regulatory programs (e.g., worker section III below. one mechanism to distinguish hoses and protection regulations promulgated by Commenters included AHRI, Air pipes is to add a colored plastic sleeve OSHA). The ‘‘Further information’’ Conditioning Contractors of America or cap to the service tube. (80 FR 19465, identified in the listing does not (ACCA), the Alliance, and HARDI, four April 10, 2015). The colored plastic necessarily include all other legal industry organizations; Chemours and sleeve or cap would have to be forcibly obligations pertaining to the use of the Honeywell, two chemical producers; removed in order to access the service substitutes. While the items listed Carrier, Daikin, Johnson Controls, tube. Likewise, red tape adhered to or would not be legally binding under the Lennox International Inc., the Sporlan around the tube would meet the intent SNAP program, EPA encourages users of division of Parker Hannifin Corporation of this use condition. These types of red substitutes to apply all statements in the (Sporlan), Rheem Manufacturing markings would signal to the technician ‘‘Further information’’ column in their Company, and Trane Technologies that the refrigeration circuit that she/he use of these substitutes. In many (Trane), seven equipment was about to access contained a instances, the information simply refers manufacturers; and two environmental flammable refrigerant, even if all to sound operating practices that have organizations, NRDC and EIA. warning labels were somehow removed already been identified in existing We have grouped comments together or were illegible or not understood (e.g., industry and/or building codes or and responded to the issues raised by for non-English speakers), and would standards. Thus, many of the the comments in the sections that provide similar notification to statements, if adopted, would not result follow.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24461

a. Substitutes and End-Use Proposed the description of the ASHRAE standard due to their higher minimum ignition Comment: Several commenters voiced testing procedures to determine energies.’’ general support for the proposed listing flammability classification in section Response: EPA noted in the proposal of HFC–32, R–452A, R–454A, R–454B, II.B.3 above. and reiterates in this final rule that the R–454C, and R–457A as acceptable Comment: AHRI provided additional information on spark-free tools is subject to use conditions in residential detail on requirements contained in UL included in the ‘‘Further information’’ and light commercial air conditioning 60335–2–40 and stated that some of the column of the regulatory text and so is and heat pumps. Chemours likewise summary information EPA provided (85 not a requirement of the rule. While we supported the proposal. Daikin voiced FR 35884–34885, June 12, 2020) may be believe the use of spark-free tools strong support and encouraged EPA to taken out of context or be incorrect. For provides additional risk mitigation for approve HFC–32 quickly, noting that instance, they stated alarms might not technicians working with flammable ‘‘[o]ver 100 million R–32 split system be required for most systems and if refrigerants, it was not proposed as a air conditioners have been sold since refrigerant concentrations are found to requirement and in this final rule we 2012’’ and provided a list showcasing exceed certain thresholds a mitigation maintain the recommendation in the their and other manufactures’ strategy such as ‘‘fan operation and air ‘‘Further information’’ column. circulation or ventilation’’ would be implementation of air conditioning c. Use Conditions products using A2L refrigerants in other activated; shut-off valves are only an countries. HARDI supported these option for VRF systems; connected i. Standards space requirements exist for duct-free listings as ‘‘one part of a larger process Comment: Daikin supported EPA’s equipment but are not required for in the industry’s effort to phase down reliance on UL Standard 60335–2–40 as ducted systems with sensors/detectors; older refrigerants.’’ a basis for listing as acceptable with a mitigation requirements for labeling, Response: EPA acknowledges these use condition requiring adherence to ignition source controls, and other commenters’ general support for this that standard. NRDC, speaking in part proposed listing and appreciates the features are required for portable appliances with charge sizes less than about the UL Standard, stated that additional information provided by ‘‘EPA’s approach of reviewing, adjusting Daikin on the use of HFC–32. We add three times the LFL; that similar requirements exist for fixed appliances as needed, and then adopting these to that information that it has been standards’ safe use requirements is reported that products using HFC–32 where the charge is less than six times the LFL; that detectors are required to be sound.’’ are operating in over 90 countries.34 Response: EPA acknowledges Daikin’s After considering all the public factory installed, qualified and listed with the product for equipment above a and NRDC’s support for these aspects of comments on this proposal, we are the proposed listing. After considering finalizing this portion of the rule as charge size calculated per the standard; outdoor air ventilation is required all the public comments on this proposed with only a few modifications proposal, we are finalizing this listing, discussed elsewhere in this final rule. ‘‘[o]nly in a few cases;’’ and while Annex HH is informative as EPA stated as described in section II.B, including b. Clarifications in the proposal, installation and service the use conditions related to UL 60335– 2–40. Comment: AHRI suggested that rather instructions are required by the UL Comment: Pointing to ASHRAE 15– than ‘‘mildly flammable refrigerants’’ standard and that these instructions 2019 and the third edition of UL 60335– EPA use the term ‘‘refrigerants with would tailor Annex HH 2–40, Chemours stated that the lower flammability’’ to remain recommendations to the specific ‘‘[a]pplication and product standards for consistent with ASHRAE classifications. product. Carrier pointed out that Annex Response: EPA acknowledges this DD of the standard, while also the end-uses referenced in the proposed correction and has used the ‘‘lower informative, provides guidance on what rule are complete.’’ AHRI stated that flammability’’ description for the A2L information should be included in industry has proposed requirements to refrigerants in the preamble to this final operation, service and installation reduce risk with A2L refrigerants in UL rule. In the ‘‘Further information’’ manuals. Standard 60335–2–40, ASHRAE column of the regulatory text in this Response: EPA acknowledges these Standard 15, and ASHRAE Standard final rule, we have used the term clarifications and we agree with the 15.2. They provided some examples of ‘‘Flammable’’ to replace the term commenters’ more detailed these including air circulation as well as ‘‘Mildly flammable’’ that was contained characterization of certain aspects of UL control of ignition sources and hot in the 2020 NPRM. Standard 60335–2–40. Our description surface temperatures. Trane stated Comment: AHRI pointed out that EPA in section II.B.5 above is offered only for EPA’s use conditions should be linked indicated class 2L flammability is informational purposes and is not meant to the current and future versions of determined based on testing at 73.4 °F to be an exhaustive summary of the ASHRAE 15 and ASHRAE 15.2, the (23.0 °C). They noted that ASHRAE standard. We emphasize that our use latter of which they expected to be Standard 34–2019 requires testing at conditions are not reliant on that published in early 2021. They noted that temperature to determine if flame informational description but rather that these standards govern the propagation exists and if not, tests at adherence to the actual requirements in installation, operation and maintenance 140 °F (60 °C) are conducted to the standard, which is incorporated by of heating, ventilation, and air determine the refrigerant flammability reference in this rulemaking. conditioning (HVAC) systems using A2L classification. Comment: AHRI stated that the refrigerants in commercial and Response: EPA acknowledges this proposed rule would require the use of residential occupancies. clarification, which is incorporated in spark-free equipment but states such Response: EPA understands that other tools ‘‘are not required for A2L risk mitigation requirements have been 34 The Air Conditioning, Heating, and refrigerants as these refrigerants have a proposed by the standards project Refrigeration News, An HVAC Technician’s Guide high minimum ignition energy and committee for ASHRAE 15 and to R–32, November 12, 2020. Available at https:// www.achrnews.com/articles/144053-an-hvac- sparks from tools and even some ASHRAE 15.2 and may be used by the technicians-guide-to-r-32?oly_enc_ electrical devices is not a competent HVAC industry, just as mitigation id=8731J4776701J6C. ignition source for an A2L refrigerant requirements have already been

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24462 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

included in the UL Standard that is EPA to wait until the 4th edition is ‘‘industry is now well prepared to take adopted as a use condition in these final published before finalizing these listings this important step forward’’ in the use SNAP listings. Nonetheless, we find that of the A2L refrigerants and noted that of lower-GWP—and lower overall risk to these A2L refrigerants can be used the 3rd edition ‘‘does not cover human health and the environment— safely provided the use conditions in mitigation measures for external fires refrigerants in this end-use. If and when this rule are followed, including caused by refrigerant leaks.’’ AHRI also a 4th edition of the UL Standard is compliance with the requirements of the pointed out that there is an ongoing released, EPA can consider any relevant UL Standard. In certain clauses, the UL effort to harmonize the relevant safety changes and if any revisions to this final Standard requires compliance with standards and recommended that EPA rule should be proposed. ASHRAE 15. We also note that other update references to requirements for Further, as mentioned by AHRI and authorities might impose additional compliance with product safety Daikin, the UL standards are under requirements, such as adoption of standards as new editions and revisions continuous maintenance—as are ASHRAE 15 and 15.2 in building codes, become available. Referencing both the ASHRAE Standards 15 and 15.2—and that would provide an additional layer third and fourth edition of UL 60335– hence may change again even after the of safety above what EPA is requiring. 2–40 as well as ASHRAE 15–2019 and mentioned editions are published. If in the future EPA were to determine the proposed ASHRAE 15.2, Johnson Nonetheless, most commenters that additional requirements are needed Controls called for the acceptability supported moving forward with the rule after this rulemaking to ensure safe use listing of these A2L refrigerants to be using the third edition of the UL of the refrigerants in the residential and ‘‘contingent upon the completion and Standard. Daikin, for instance, light commercial AC and heat pumps harmonization of the governing UL and ‘‘endorses EPA’s determination that this end-use, EPA could consider any ASHRAE standards for the safe design consensus safety standard adequately relevant changes and if any revisions to and application of stationary air protects against the reasonably this final rule should be proposed. conditioning.’’ Honeywell made a foreseeable risks associated with the use of R–32 in the applications being Comment: The Alliance noted that the similar point, referencing ASHRAE considered.’’ Chemours added that standard proposed to be incorporated by Standards 15 and 15.2, and suggested that these A2L listings be delayed until ‘‘[a]pplication and product standards for reference, UL 60335–2–40, 3rd edition, this harmonization process was the end-uses referenced in the proposed will likely be updated again. Daikin complete. rule are complete’’ and that ‘‘these noted the standard is a ‘‘continuous Response: EPA acknowledges the updated standards sufficiently address maintenance standard’’ supporting information on further developments in the risks associated with the use of A2L reference to the current edition. AHRI the UL 60335–2–40 standard and solutions.’’ EPA concludes that reliance also pointed out that ‘‘new and updated ASHRAE standards processes. After on the current UL Standard and our standards will become more important considering all the public comments on other use conditions allows applicable as standards sunset in the coming this proposal, we are finalizing this products to be used safely. years.’’ The Alliance expected the fourth listing, as described in section II.B. EPA Regarding Honeywell’s comment on edition ‘‘soon,’’ and forecasted that most is incorporating by reference the 3rd external fires, we note that a leak, even products manufactured to this standard edition of the UL standard (the existing of a flammable refrigerant, does not with the six A2L refrigerants would version of the standard). As addressed ‘‘cause’’ a fire. It would require an likely be certified to that fourth edition. below, we conclude, and several ignition source and a concentration of They asked that ‘‘the UL 60355–2–40 commenters agree, that this version the refrigerant higher than the lower [sic] standard update to include adequately addresses the use of these flammability limit and below the higher refrigerants that meet all the A2L refrigerants in the equipment flammability limit. Requirements in the requirements listed in the fourth edition proposed. UL Standard mitigate the risk of the as well.’’ More generally they asked that As we noted above, in certain cases equipment serving as an ignition source. ‘‘references to the standards be updated the UL Standard refers to ASHRAE 15– As noted above, AHRI pointed out that as new editions become available for the 2019 for compliance. We are not, ‘‘[f]or almost all applications air products listed in SNAP Rule 23 and however, providing a use condition circulation will be sufficient to dilute other rules.’’ Carrier also suggested EPA based on one or more future editions of the refrigerant concentration in the align with new safety standards ‘‘as new this standard, nor do we feel it event of a catastrophic leak to below editions and future revisions become necessary or appropriate to rely on 25% of the LFL. Only in [a] rare case available’’ and Chemours offered similar future standards and harmonization will ventilation be used to introduce suggestions. Sporlan and Trane efforts. Not only does EPA not know outside air.’’ Further, the industry is suggested the use condition reference exactly what these future standards may actively studying the behavior of A2L the latest edition of the UL Standard, entail, those commenting on the refrigerants (presuming a leak does such that the reference remains up to proposed rule have not had the occur) in a structural fire. Should the date. Sporlan suggested ‘‘this use opportunity to review those updates, as results of this research or other condition be modified to reference the they have not yet been finalized. information lead in the future EPA to latest released edition of this same Similarly, we do not find it necessary or determine that additional requirements standard, instead of tying Rule 23 appropriate to wait for such actions to are needed after this rulemaking to exclusively to the 3rd Edition.’’ Trane be finalized before taking this action. ensure safe use of the refrigerants in the noted that future editions of the UL The third edition of the UL Standard residential and light commercial AC and Standard are already underway and included extensive revisions heat pumps end-use, EPA could predicted the fourth edition would be specifically to address flammability consider any relevant changes and if complete within two years (i.e., by July risks of A2L refrigerants and reach any revisions to this final rule should be 27, 2022). Honeywell also supported industry-wide consensus. We further proposed. referencing a 4th edition and indicated note that Chemours’ comments on the We understand that the Alliance is that the process for writing such would 2020 NPRM called finalization of this asking EPA to modify the use condition start in August 2020 and expected rule ‘‘critical’’ and ‘‘timely’’ and stated so that it requires adherence to the completion in 2021. Honeywell asked that with this final rule, the HVAC fourth edition once the fourth edition

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24463

publishes, similar to suggestions from demonstrated gives support to listing used to retrofit systems using A1 (‘‘no other commenters, and to also consider these now. Further, we note that flame propagation’’) refrigerants, such as revising the listing beyond the six regardless of the status of building R–410A. Carrier added that such a use refrigerants in this rulemaking to others. codes, alternative means and measures condition continues EPA’s precedent If in the future an updated standard is exist under which interested parties from similar listings of flammable published, or the harmonization with may present to the Authority Having refrigerants that were only listed for other standards is completed, EPA Jurisdiction (AHJ) evidence to new equipment. could consider any relevant changes demonstrate a similar level of safety as Response: EPA acknowledges these and if any revisions to this final rule provided under the existing building commenters’ support of our proposed should be proposed. In a similar codes and receive an exception to use use condition that finds these manner, and through the normal SNAP an A2L refrigerant. For these reasons, refrigerants acceptable for new submission review, we can consider the Agency determines it is appropriate equipment and not for retrofits. After taking future action to list, or propose to to finalize this final rule now. If and considering all the public comments on list with use conditions, other when building codes are updated as this proposal, we are finalizing this refrigerants if we were to determine we indicated by the comment, EPA can listing, as described in section II.B., had enough information to do so. consider any relevant changes and if including that use condition. Comment: Honeywell predicted that any revisions to this final rule should be Comment: AHRI, Carrier, Chemours, ASHRAE Standard 15.2 would be proposed. Daikin, Johnson Controls, and Rheem published in late 2021 or early 2022 and Comment: Rheem asked EPA to sought clarification on footnote 33 in then adopted into model building codes ‘‘[p]rovide revised guidance for charge the proposed rule, which sought to in 2024. They asked EPA to delay limits for R–32 refrigerant, currently distinguish a ‘‘new’’ system from a finalization of this rule listing of A2L defined in SNAP Notice 25 and based ‘‘retrofitted’’ system. AHRI noted that refrigerants until these actions occurred. on unit capacity, to be governed by the since the inception of the International They stated that ‘‘[c]urrent model safety standards.’’ Building Codes in the 1990s, nail strips mechanical and fire codes prohibit Response: We believe Rheem is have been required to be used to mildly flammable refrigerants to be used referring to SNAP Rule 19 (80 FR 19454, support existing piping within 1.5 in direct HVAC systems.’’ April 10, 2015) wherein EPA found inches of a wall when a new system is Response: EPA has not participated in HFC–32 acceptable, subject to use installed. AHRI also indicated that any the revisions to the model codes conditions, for self-contained room air ‘‘[e]xisting external piping must be discussed by Honeywell, and we find conditioners. One use condition pressure-tested, leak-checked and that these SNAP listings can be finalized referenced parts of the August 3rd, 2012 vacuum-checked per the safety before Honeywell’s prediction that a version of UL Standard 484, Edition 8 standards during the installation proposed standard would be adopted and another set charge size limits based process,’’ a point also noted by Johnson into such codes, consistent with how we on the type of equipment (window unit, Controls. Daikin pointed to provisions have proceeded with other listings in portable room AC, etc.) and cooling in UL Standard 60335–2–40 that past SNAP actions that could be affected capacity. In the proposal for this final address situations where ‘‘partial units’’ by anticipated revisions to building rule we noted that we were not (as defined in the Standard) are codes. As noted both in the proposal proposing to revisit or modify the installed without new refrigerant tubing and above in this final rule, however, existing requirements from SNAP Rule between indoor and outdoor information listed in the ‘‘Further 19, and consistent with that proposal, components. They also noted that information’’ column of the listings we are not finalizing changes to these clause DD.3.1DV.2 of the UL Standard might refer to ‘‘sound operating requirements. EPA understands that the provides mandatory requirements, practices that have already been standard we relied on in Rule 19 might including strength test, leak tightness identified in existing industry and/or ‘‘sunset’’ in the future. Therefore, we checks, and compliance with national building codes or standards.’’ (85 FR will continue to evaluate the market for and local codes, for field-installed 35885, June 12, 2020). The listings in the equipment addressed in that rule, refrigerant tubing and as such tubing this final rule find certain refrigerants including HFC–32 in self-contained meeting those conditions may be acceptable and establishes EPA’s use room air conditioners, and whether to reused. Carrier stated that ‘‘[l]ine sets, conditions, and do not require any establish new or revised use conditions however, have been safely re-used in the particular entity to use these that reference UL 60335–2–40. If in the HVACR field for decades’’ and noted refrigerants. Should other requirements future we wish to revise the existing that equipment manufacturer or standards also apply, such as requirements for HFC–32 self-contained installation instructions and standards, building codes as Honeywell states, room air conditioners, EPA could such as UL 60335–2–40 and ASHRAE other authorities would be responsible consider any relevant changes and if 15, allow for reuse of line sets provided for ensuring such requirements are any revisions to this final rule, or SNAP they meet requirements including ‘‘line addressed and enforced. We also note Rule 19, should be proposed. sizing, as well as pressure and vacuum that some states are in the process of testing of the line sets to ensure they are updating their building code ii. New Equipment free of leaks.’’ Chemours offered similar requirements to allow for refrigerants Comment: AHRI, Carrier, Daikin, EIA, observations. Rheem asked that with lower flammability (e.g., 2Ls), Honeywell, Johnson Controls and ‘‘external field-erected line sets’’ be which will address Honeywell’s Lennox strongly support the proposed excluded from the definition of a new concern that such codes ‘‘prohibit use condition that these A2L unit, observing that replacement of mildly flammable refrigerants.’’ Further, refrigerants may only be used in new these should be left to the AHJ such as we are aware of the safe use of 2L equipment and not retrofits. AHRI noted a building code inspector. Carrier and refrigerants in the end-uses covered by that ‘‘refrigerants from a higher Chemours offered alternative language this rule in other countries. While other ASHRAE flammability classification’’ for the footnote and suggested providing states’ building codes might currently should not be used to retrofit existing such guidance in appendix W of the prohibit use of these refrigerants, the equipment; i.e., these A2L lower proposed regulatory text where the adoption by some states and the safe use flammability refrigerants should not be listing is provided. On the other hand,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24464 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

Honeywell states that the definition of the future content of a standard for iii. Labels ‘‘new system’’ should require the certain until it is finalized. Comment: AHRI, the Alliance, installation of new refrigerant piping, Comment: Carrier brought up the Carrier, Chemours, Daikin, Johnson tubing or linesets and later stated that possibility that an outdoor condensing Controls, Lennox, and Rheem suggested ‘‘the tubing must be replaced, or at least unit using a non-flammable refrigerant that EPA rely on the labeling inspected and reinforced to meet (e.g., HCFC–22 or R–410A) might requirements found in UL 60335–2–40, proposed requirements under ASHRAE illegally be replaced with one of the six including the font size requirement in 15.2.’’ They said that existing tubing refrigerants in the listings in this final the standard. Carrier held that the 1⁄8- was not likely to meet minimum safety rule. Carrier urged EPA to work with the inch font size specified in the standard regulations. Trane said ‘‘[b]asing the industry concerning the replacement of is ‘‘easily readable’’ and further noted proposed use conditions on ASHRAE 15 all components, e.g. including the that ‘‘visual icons and flammability and ASHRAE 15.2 incorporates indoor unit, as these instances will symbols’’ are required by the standard. appropriate piping guidance and avoids exhibit ‘‘inspection and enforcement Lennox felt this size, which is half the the potential of unnecessary and costly challenges.’’ size required in other EPA listings (e.g., restrictions.’’ Response: EPA notes that the final 80 FR 19454, April 10, 2015), was Response: After consideration of these listings of these six refrigerants require comments, EPA concludes that the use justified given the refrigerants proposed they be used in a new system, including have lower flammability (A2L) whereas of existing piping that is consistent with the replacement of the indoor unit of an the use conditions finalized—such as the referenced listings were for higher existing HCFC–22 or R–410A system flammability refrigerants (A3). adherence to the UL 60335–2–40 when the corresponding outdoor unit is Standard and the inclusion of markings Chemours stated that using a larger font replaced. We support education and ‘‘disproportionally emphasizes and labels as required—and the safety training across the industry to improve protocols mentioned should not pose flammability versus other safety aspects awareness of and compliance with the including electrical or pressure additional risk. We have clarified this in requirements of this final rule. EPA section II.B.5.a and likewise in the text requirements.’’ Rheem said that intends to continue to work with diverging from the UL Standard ‘‘adds of the corresponding footnote in section industry towards these goals. II.B.1.b of this final rule by not unnecessary complexity’’ and Johnson Comment: Carrier and Chemours including ‘‘refrigerant tubing’’ in the Controls held that ‘‘[t]he introduction of sought clarification where EPA stated in description of new equipment in this new, unique requirements could lead to footnote 33 that the use condition for final action. As such, existing piping confusion in the field and thus increase ‘‘new equipment’’ meant a ‘‘completely does not need to be replaced for the safety risks.’’ EIA, on the other hand, new circuit.’’ Chemours noted that a equipment to be considered ‘‘new’’ ‘‘strongly supports the labelling literal translation of that might be to while a new compressor, evaporator, requirements . . . outlined on the require that an entire system be and condenser are all required to be proposed rulemaking.’’ considered ‘‘new.’’ We believe this replaced, even if in the future a repair Response: As in other regulations preamble text sufficiently indicates our was being conducted on a system using promulgated under CAA section 612, intention and so have not included one of the six A2L refrigerants in this EPA concludes that the proposed 1 additional discussion in the regulatory final rule. labeling requirement to use ⁄4-inch text. Response: EPA acknowledges fonts provides for an easier-to-read label As noted by other comments, Carrier’s and Chemours’ comments than the 1⁄8-inch fonts in the standard; discussed elsewhere in this final rule, pointing out this potential hence, the large font size provides an the UL Standard 60335–2–40, which is misinterpretation of the use condition. extra layer of risk mitigation for incorporated by reference through this Under the use conditions finalized in technicians, consumers, retail store rule, addresses the situations where this rule, EPA intends that once systems owners, building owners and operators, existing tubing might be used when using these A2L refrigerants are first responders, and those disposing of installing a new system using a installed, technicians, using proper the equipment to readily understand the refrigerant in this rule. Consistent with safety procedures, may service the possibility that the equipment contains the use conditions established in this equipment similarly to servicing current a flammable refrigerant. Accordingly, rule, EPA finds that this standard day equipment using A1 refrigerants. EPA is finalizing the larger text size as provides appropriate criteria by which This intention to allow servicing and proposed. an installer would decide when exiting not strand equipment prematurely is The only differences to the actual text tubing may be used or needs to be consistent with prior SNAP decisions, of the label between UL 60335–2–40 replaced. Accordingly, EPA concludes it as well as with approaches that we have and the requirement proposed and is not necessary or appropriate to define taken under other provisions of Title VI finalized in this rule are to the label(s) a ‘‘new’’ system to require installation of of the CAA to achieve a smooth on the indoor unit, where for instance new refrigerant piping, tubing or phaseout and transition to safer the minimum installation height in linesets. If the existing tubing and alternatives. Such service would meters (m) and feet (ft) is to be referred linesets do not meet existing regulations include replacing components including to in the format ‘‘X m (Y ft)’’ rather than separate from the UL Standard and our the condensing unit, and other ‘‘X m and Y ft’’ as in the UL Standard, other use conditions, e.g. applicable adjustments. In those cases where one of with X and Y calculated per the building codes, other regulations or the heat exchangers needs replacing, standard (85 FR 35881, June 12, 2020). other authorities may require EPA recommends that outdoor units EPA believes the format is appropriate installation of new refrigerant piping, and indoor units be properly matched, and would help avoid possible tubing or linesets. EPA also does not including for instance replacing a confusion if an installer were to find it appropriate to adopt ‘‘proposed functioning indoor A2L evaporator unit interpret the label as called for in the UL requirements,’’ including those if warranted when the original A2L Standard to mean X meters plus Y feet proposed in October for ASHRAE 15.2, outdoor unit is replaced with a higher- (i.e., 4.28 times Y feet or 1.305 times X as those have not been finalized and efficiency outdoor unit using that same meters). Likewise, we proposed and are neither commenters nor EPA can know A2L refrigerant. finalizing the same change in text

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24465

format for the minimum room area addressed in this rule. Thus, any refrigerants the same is likely to cause label. conclusions about the adequacy of the confusion to end-users, especially Comment: AHRI and Daikin indicated label requirements for that standard are technicians responsible for installation EPA could in the future submit a not the same as a conclusion that the and maintenance of systems.’’ Daikin, proposed change to UL to modify the label requirements for the UL standard Lennox, and Rheem commented that the labeling requirements. AHRI also addressed in this final rule is sufficient, UL Standard was adequate and as such pointed out that there is an ongoing including the font size. For example, as the proposed requirement for red effort to harmonize the relevant safety the 60335–2–89 standard covers markings was not warranted. EIA, on standards and recommended that EPA commercial refrigeration equipment, it the other hand, ‘‘strongly supports . . . update references to requirements for is reasonable to assume that the fire the required red markings on piping and compliance with product safety service personnel were only evaluating hoses outlined on the proposed standards as new editions and revisions the label requirements for the types of rulemaking.’’ become available. They also suggested appliances covered by that standard, Response: EPA is finalizing the EPA consider incorporating application and not necessarily agreeing to the proposed requirement for red markings. standards such as ASHRAE 15 when adequacy of those requirements for the Consistent with other rules promulgated this harmonization process is complete. equipment covered in this final rule, under CAA section 612, EPA’s Response: As explained above, EPA considering that much of the equipment requirements of red markings add an finds that these A2L refrigerants can be in the residential and light commercial extra layer of safety on top of the labels used safely provided the use conditions AC and heat pumps end-use has higher required under the UL standards, and in this final rule are followed, including refrigerant charge sizes than the EPA concludes this extra protection is compliance with the current (3rd appliances covered in the 60335–2–89 appropriate for this listing under SNAP. edition) UL 60335–2–40. Accordingly, standard. As described elsewhere in this As noted above, these types of red EPA is taking final action on the action, we are concluding that the larger proposal without waiting for the markings would signal to the technician font size is appropriate under SNAP to that the refrigeration circuit that she/he harmonization process to be completed. reduce risks to technicians, consumers, EPA understands that it could submit a was about to access contained a retail store owners, building owners and flammable refrigerant, even if all change proposal to UL and if in the operators, first responders, and those warning labels were somehow removed future EPA were to determine that disposing the appliance, consistent with or were illegible or not understood (e.g., additional use conditions are needed EPA’s approach in other prior SNAP for non-English speakers), and would after this rulemaking to ensure safe use rules. of the refrigerants in the residential and Comment: Daikin stated that the UL provide similar notification to light commercial AC and heat pumps Standard was drafted under a consensus consumers, retail store owners, building end-use, EPA could consider any process and requested that EPA’s owners and operators, first responders, relevant changes and if any revisions to proposed use conditions regarding and those disposing the appliance. We this final rule should be proposed, for labels be removed, allowing the understand that UL 60335–2–40 treats instance by proposing to reference a standard to address any such A2L and A3 refrigerants differently; revised standard and specific requirements. however, our proposal and this final application standards. Given the time Response: EPA understands that this rule do not cover the A3 refrigerants. required to propose, discuss, and UL standard was drafted following EPA relied on different standards when finalize any change to the UL Standard, consensus practices, as were standards we previously listed A3 refrigerants as EPA understands that such a revised UL referenced in past EPA listings of acceptable subject to use conditions and standard would not have been finalized flammable refrigerants (e.g., 76 FR hence we are not treating these two for this final rule, nor did we expect the 78832, December 20, 2011; 80 FR 19454, classes of refrigerants the same. For this harmonization effort to be complete. If April 10, 2015). In those cases, as in this SNAP listing, as in our past listings for and when a 4th edition of the UL action, we find that the extra level of A3 (and also A2L) refrigerants, EPA Standard is released, EPA can consider safety provided by EPA’s labeling concluded that it is most important to any relevant changes and if any requirement is appropriate under SNAP warn technicians that there is a revisions to this final rule should be and that the larger font size will reduce flammable refrigerant present, not proposed. risks to technicians, consumers, retail whether it is specifically an A2L, A2, or Comment: Carrier stated that ‘‘[t]he store owners, building owners and A3 refrigerant. Once warned, we would consensus safety standard CSA/UL operators, first responders, and those expect the technician then seek to know 60335–2–89 committee included disposing the appliance. Accordingly, which refrigerant is used and to proceed representatives from fire service which EPA is finalizing the use conditions accordingly. While we see that the concluded that the proposed label regarding labels as proposed. flammability risk can be considered requirements replicated from UL/CSA ‘‘lower’’ when using A2L refrigerants 60335–2–40 in addition to label iv. Red Markings compared to A3 refrigerants, a risk does requirements for buildings in building Comment: Chemours indicates that exist and we find that the red markings codes were sufficient from their using the same use condition for red will provide an additional warning to perspective.’’ Lennox made the same markings for these A2L refrigerants as technicians, consumers, retail store point, saying the committee that was used for A3 refrigerants previously owners, building owners and operators, developed the CSA/UL 60335–2–89 listed acceptable amounts to a ‘‘one size first responders, and those disposing the standard ‘‘included representatives from fits all’’ approach. They disagreed that appliance. We also note that the use of fire services which concluded that the this should be done and specifically red markings is already required for UL label requirements were sufficient.’’ drew attention to the UL 60335–2–40 HFC–32 as well as A3 refrigerants in Response: EPA appreciates learning standard, which provides different self-contained room air conditioners that fire service personnel were part of requirements for equipment with A2L based on previous regulations (80 FR the consensus process for the 60335–2– refrigerants compared to equipment 19454, April 10, 2015), and we are not 89 standard but notes that this is a with A3 refrigerants. They indicated aware that the marking requirements different UL standard from the one that ‘‘treating A2 [sic] and A3 have led to any confusion.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24466 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

Comment: AHRI read the proposal to exists for flammable refrigerants, information and note Sporlan’s be proposing all tubing be red, but including HFC–32, in other end-uses, comment, which supports EPA’s finding thought the intent was to only require and we are not aware that such coloring that the flammability risk of A2L such markings for service ports. has led to any confusion. refrigerants can be safely addressed. Response: EPA did not intend to Comment: Chemours stated that the After considering all the public propose that all tubing in equipment requirement of red markings would be comments on this proposal, we are using A2L refrigerants be red and we are difficult to implement in certain types finalizing this listing, as described in not finalizing such a requirement in this of residential and light commercial air section II.B. final rule. We are finalizing this use conditioning equipment. As an Comment: HARDI indicated that the condition as proposed and clarifying in example, they indicated that quick- industry is supporting updates to the section II.B.1.d that where the red release Schrader valves ‘‘may be building, mechanical, and fire codes as markings would be applied depends impossible to get in red color.’’ well as transportation regulations to primarily on the equipment design. The Response: EPA does not see evidence allow new equipment to use new intent in the proposed rule and finalized that the construction of red-colored refrigerants, including the A2L ones in this rule is for the red marking to be Schrader valves is impossible. In fact, listed in the proposed rule. HARDI is present at all service ports for Chemours’ comments may point to the working with the industry ‘‘to ensure a equipment that includes such service reason why they say such valves are not smooth and safe transition takes place.’’ ports, and for the marking to extend one available. Chemours pointed out that Response: EPA acknowledges inch from those ports. Likewise, if the equipment types where flammable HARDI’s information on their efforts to connections need to be made in the field refrigerants are currently acceptable support the safe use of these refrigerants as opposed to at a factory, the one-inch subject to use conditions were self- in residential and light commercial red marking is required at those contained equipment generally using equipment as well as other types of connection points. If, however, process tubes rather than Schrader equipment not covered by this final equipment is provided without such valves. Thus, there may have been no rule. service ports, the one-inch red marking reason to develop them in the past. Comment: Honeywell commented would be required at the point in the However, that does not mean that such that EPA should update the Risk equipment where any service involving valves will not become available if there Screens for R–32 and R–454B included the refrigerant, including the evacuation is demand for such valves in the future. in supporting documents for the of the refrigerant prior to equipment Although we cannot confirm that such proposed rule. They suggested that disposal, would occur. On smaller valves do not exist at all, it is important because ASHRAE Standard 15 mandates use of a refrigerant concentration limit appliances, we have noted in the past to note that other means of applying the (RCL), and ASHRAE Standard 34 sets that a process tube is often provided for red marking may be used. The the RCL to be 25% of the LFL, EPA such service, and that the red marking regulatory text proposed and finalized should use that amount rather than the would be required there. As we have in this rule states the red ‘‘color must be also noted previously, the manufacturer 100% of LFL. applied at all service ports;’’ hence, Response: EPA has consistently must decide the method of providing items such as a red plastic sleeve or the red marking, for instance via paint, evaluated alternatives through a risk shrink wrap at both sides of the port, screen process that begins with a highly plastic sleeve, shrink wrap, tape, etc. rather than the entire port itself, would Comment: AHRI described the conservative worst-case scenario, such be acceptable means of meeting this use labeling requirements of the UL as where the entire refrigerant charge of condition. standard for service ports and indicated a specific equipment type leaks out that ‘‘use of red markings and the use of d. SNAP Criteria rapidly in a specific room size. If a substitute’s concentrations remain red hoses may cause some confusion.’’ i. Flammability Risks and Safety The reason the commenter provided below 100% of the LFL and relevant was that typical gage sets currently use Comment: AHRI and Lennox pointed toxicity limits in the worst-case scenario red housing for the higher-pressure side, to an approximately $7 million research with highly conservative assumptions, a comment echoed by Carrier. effort with the U.S. Department of we do no further assessment. If the Response: EPA does not agree that the Energy (DOE), the California Air substitute’s concentrations exceed the similarity of color between the gage set Resources Board (CARB) and other LFL or a relevant toxicity limit in the and the servicing port would lead to stakeholders on the behavior and safe worst-case scenario, then we consider confusion. Given that connections in the use of next generation refrigerants, more typical scenarios based on less gage set also exist for the low-pressure including the lower toxicity, lower conservative assumptions. EPA’s risk side, we feel that technicians would flammability (A2L) refrigerants in the screens indicate that none of the types understand that a red marking of a proposed rule. Lennox emphasized that of equipment in this rule with these service port does not mean that only the such research was used to develop the refrigerants came close to 100% of the red hose of a gage set must be connected safety standards and develop training. LFL, although they did exceed the 25% there. Other EPA requirements, such as Sporlan said this research on 2L mark under the most conservative the venting prohibition under section refrigerants is ‘‘of mature enough nature scenarios analyzed. 608(c) of the CAA and technician that they will be able to be safely To the extent ASHRAE 15 is training requirements, have existed applied in new systems designed for 2L incorporated into building codes—as since the early 1990s, and thus EPA flammable refrigerants.’’ AHRI detailed Honeywell indicates—that requirement believes technicians will be able to use the extensive use of A2L refrigerants in to adhere to the ASHRAE RCL would gage sets without confusion. Further, the United States and other countries provide an additional layer of safety training on flammable refrigerants and noted that ‘‘it has yet to find above the use conditions set in this final which several commenters have pointed incidents related to A2L refrigerants.’’ rule. More generally, the use of risk to would reinforce the understanding of Response: The Agency acknowledges screens was developed in the original red service ports and the use of gage AHRI’s and Lennox’s support for this SNAP Rule issued in 1994 and was not sets. Finally, EPA notes that a similar proposed listing. EPA acknowledges meant to incorporate every possible risk red coloring requirement use condition AHRI and Lennox for providing this factor. In fact, in that rule we stated

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24467

‘‘[w]henever the initial risk screen likewise finds that the data on TFA is restrictions that they would consider indicated a potential risk, the substitute not sufficient to propose or establish warranted. was evaluated further to ascertain additional restrictions under SNAP at EPA intends to continue monitoring whether the potential risk was this time. We further note that the the scientific research on PFAS in the accurately estimated and if management venting prohibition under section 608(c) future and consider whether this controls could reduce any risk to of the CAA, codified at 40 CFR information is relevant for the SNAP acceptable levels.’’ In this case, in the 82.154(a), and accompanying refrigerant program. worst-case scenario where the 25% RCL management requirements reduce e. Training was exceeded, we concluded that the emissions of these refrigerants. EPA additional risk mitigation offered by the intends to continue reviewing the Comment: ACCA argues that training UL Standard and our other use research on potential impacts from TFA and certification of technicians on the conditions adequately addressed any in the future. handling of A2L refrigerants is such risk. Comment: NRDC asked EPA to revise necessary for safety and consumer peace the Agency’s analysis of the substances of mind. ACCA indicated it and others ii. Toxicity and PFAS included in this rulemaking that are were developing training and guidelines Comment: EIA indicated there are polyfluoroalkyl or perfluoroalkyl on A2L refrigerants and provided a list ‘‘concerns regarding potential risks to substances (PFAS), citing two recent of several aspects that they are human health and the environment due papers on the subject.36 37 addressing. Carrier noted that industry to toxicity of trifluoroacetic acid (‘TFA’) Response: EPA acknowledges these has developed an exam for flammable and other by-products of breakdown of references. Upon review of these papers, refrigerants under the North American HFO–1234yf, which is a component of EPA does not conclude that any Technician Excellence (NATE) the five refrigerant blends.’’ They revisions to the evaluation of overall certification organization. Chemours pointed to scientific literature that finds risk to human health and the also pointed to NATE and ACCA HFO–1234yf has a 100% conversion environment of the refrigerants training as well as that by the rate into TFA. They noted that increased addressed in this final rule is necessary Refrigeration Service Engineers Society use of alternative refrigerants including at this time. While the papers NRDC (RSES), AHRI, and that provided by HFOs has increased ecosystem levels of referenced indicate there are potential refrigerant producers and equipment anthropogenic TFA. EIA advised EPA to health effects due to accumulation of manufacturers. Daikin also noted that lead with caution but did not, however, PFAS in the environment, they do not AHRI is developing guidelines for A2L recommend that additional restrictions provide information concerning the refrigerants and that equipment be placed on these refrigerant blends incremental effect that adoption of the manufacturers are providing training to based on TFA concerns. NRDC noted five refrigerants listed in this rule for the their service personnel. Chemours that ‘‘EPA’s risk analyses do not residential and light commercial air stated that ‘‘[t]echnician training, evaluate the potential human health and conditioning end-use would have or guidelines, informational brochures, environmental impacts of approving how those effects would compare to and certifications for flammable additional uses for substances known to effects from other available substitutes refrigerants have been or are currently degrade into [TFA].’’ NRDC pointed to in this end-use. being developed by a number of the previous analyses EPA performed on Both papers reference decision IV/25 industry organizations’’ and that TFA and requested that EPA revise by parties to the Montreal Protocol on ‘‘recovery machines, leak detectors, those studies to include the potential Substances that Deplete the Ozone service cylinders and fittings are also use of the five blends in the air- Layer. That decision concerns applying available to the industry.’’ HARDI conditioning sector. specific criteria and procedures in indicated the industry is supporting Response: EPA does not agree that assessing an essential use for the ‘‘the development of training to allow increased controls on HFOs or other purposes of the control measures in contractors to install newly designed refrigerants is warranted to address Article 2 of the Protocol and therefore equipment.’’ ACCA asked EPA to work generation of TFA. EPA studied the is not directly relevant to the SNAP with them and other industry potential generation of TFA when we program. Cousins et al. reviewed several stakeholders ‘‘to develop and first listed neat (i.e., 100%, not in examples of PFAS uses to assess implement training standards for the blends) HFO–1234yf as acceptable whether they would consider those uses handling of flammable refrigerants.’’ subject to use conditions in motor to be ‘‘essential,’’ and those uses did not Carrier similarly encouraged industry vehicle air conditioners. The myriad include the refrigerants considered in stakeholder engagement and Chemours studies we referenced all concluded that this final rule. Kwiatkowski et al. stated that given the number of the additional TFA from HFO–1234yf likewise did not provide an overview of programs that already exist, EPA should did not pose a significant additional refrigerants to indicate any additional collect a wide range of comments and risk, even if it were assumed to be used move forward with a separate rule on as the only refrigerant in all refrigeration Ozone Depletion: 2018, World Meteorological training that incorporates stakeholder Organization, Global Ozone Research and feedback. Rheem agreed that EPA and air conditioning equipment (76 FR Monitoring Project—Report No. 58, 67 pp., Geneva, 17492–17493, March 29, 2011). More Switzerland, 2018. Available at https:// should not undertake the creation of recently, the World Meteorological ozone.unep.org/sites/default/files/2019-04/SAP- new training requirements in this rule Organization (WMO) concluded that 2018-Assessment-report-ES-rev%20%281%29.pdf. and went further to say they were not 36 ‘‘[t]here is increased confidence that Cousins, Ian T, et al. The concept of essential in favor of a separate rulemaking, use for determining when uses of PFASs can be believing industry should create any [TFA] produced from degradation of phased out. Environmental Science: Processes & HFCs, HCFCs, and HFOs will not harm Impacts. The Royal Society of Chemistry. May 28, new training requirements. the environment over the next few 2019. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/ Response: EPA acknowledges the articlelanding/2019/em/c9em00163h#!divAbstract. commenters’ information related to their decades’’ while also calling for periodic 37 35 Kwiatkowski, Carol F. et al. Scientific Basis for work to educate and train technicians reevaluation of this conclusion. EPA Managing PFAS as a Chemical Class. Environmental Science & Technology Letters. June on the proper and safe use of flammable 35 World Meteorological Organization (WMO), 30, 2020. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ refrigerants, including the A2L Executive Summary: Scientific Assessment of acs.estlett.0c00255. refrigerants in this final rule. In the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24468 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

proposed rule (85 FR 35886, June 12, questions in the future if appropriate. grace period for servicing companies to 2020), EPA indicated it would take As noted above, EPA will consider these bring technicians into compliance advance comments on the possibility of advance comments as we determine before such training becomes proposing, in a separate rule, training what, if any, additional actions we mandatory.’’ They noted EPA could and service requirements, and we thank might take, including considering partner with the Department of Labor to the industry for their advance issuing a proposed rulemaking ‘‘support the transition to low-GWP comments. We will take these addressing the possibility of mandating alternatives, particularly to small comments into consideration to certain additional training requirements. businesses and women or minority determine whether we should propose Comment: In their support of a owned companies,’’ possibly such a rule on training or undertake separate rulemaking to update training complementary to apprenticeship other future action. We note that certain and certification requirements for A2L programs under the Workforce safety requirements for refrigerant refrigerants, Carrier suggested that a Opportunity and Innovation Act. recovery and/or recycling equipment are rulemaking provide ‘‘training and Response: EPA appreciates EIA’s already included in 40 CFR part 82, service requirements for anyone concern with respect to technicians’ subpart F, under EPA’s Refrigerant purchasing A2L refrigerants or servicing handling of refrigerants. We further note Management Program. We also equipment containing A2L refrigerants,’’ that EPA’s current CAA section 608 indicated in our proposal, as we did in noting that Australia and Japan have technician certification test bank previous rules finding flammable credited such requirements in their includes questions concerning topics refrigerants acceptable subject to use successful adoption of such refrigerants. such as environmental impacts, laws conditions (e.g. 76 FR 78832, December Johnson Controls recommended a and regulations (including the venting 20, 2011; 80 FR 19454, April 10, 2015), licensing system, delivered by trade prohibition and its applicability), safety, that industry may be better suited than schools and accredited by established flammable refrigerants, and safe EPA to develop appropriate training, contractor trade organizations, for disposal. Under the current regulations, and we see that this development has handling A2L refrigerants. They EPA can make changes to the test bank. already started across multiple fronts. emphasized the need for hands-on EPA observes that while our proposed Comment: AHRI ‘‘strongly supports training, including ‘‘demonstration of rulemaking took advance comment on incorporation of new refrigerant and skills as it relates to the brazing, the possibility of proposing training and requirements regarding A2L refrigerants evacuating, charging, handling, storage, service requirements for certain into existing certification transportation, etc. of mildly flammable, flammable refrigerants through a requirements.’’ The Alliance likewise A2L refrigerants.’’ separate rulemaking, we neither supported this position asking EPA to Response: EPA acknowledges the proposed to create a complementary update the training and certification suggestion of undertaking a rulemaking technician training and certification framework. Rheem ‘‘encourages EPA to to provide training and service program in the current rulemaking, nor incorporate group A2L and group A3 requirements for technicians and the did we propose to modify our existing refrigerants into any requirements for suggestion that it cover those CAA 608 technician certification training and certification that currently purchasing A2L refrigerants and program in the current rulemaking. We exist for group A1 refrigerants.’’ servicing equipment containing them. appreciate EIA’s suggestions and as (emphasis in original). EIA Likewise, we acknowledge Johnson noted above we will take these recommended that ‘‘EPA mandate Controls’ recommendations of hands-on comments into consideration in training and servicing requirements for training and the topics suggested to be determining whether to propose a rule all flammable refrigerants’’ holding that included in a licensing training or undertake other future action on such ‘‘[i]n addition to putting consumers at curriculum. As noted above, EPA is training or service requirements. risk, not mandating such training would taking these advance comments into Comment: Honeywell stated that create confusion for contractors if EPA consideration for possible future ‘‘[a]ny transition to A2L refrigerants has different rules and standards for industry engagement and possible should also be accompanied by a different refrigerants.’’ rulemaking or other future action. comprehensive training program’’ Response: Although AHRI and Rheem Comment: EIA commented that covering the installation and did not indicate which existing training industry has ‘‘an aging and diminishing maintenance of equipment containing and certification requirements to which workforce that need to be retrained.’’ In A2L refrigerants. They held that such a they were referring, we believe it would addition to flammability, they opined training program should be established, include the existing technician the training needs to cover other safety through rulemaking, by EPA before certification required under regulations aspects including health and finalization of this rule. Others, implementing section 608 of the Clean environmental aspects of venting and including manufacturers intending to Air Act. EPA has incorporated accidental release. They also stated that use these A2L refrigerants in their information on flammable refrigerants ‘‘[t]here is significant confusion and equipment, disagreed. For instance, into the question bank for tests for such lack of clarity when it comes to Carrier said they see no reason to delay certification, which is required to applicability of the venting prohibition this rulemaking in order to initiate a service equipment that contains the itself, which still applies to the separate rulemaking on training and refrigerants covered by this rulemaking, maintenance, service, repair, and certification for A2L refrigerants. Daikin and has standards in place for disposal of equipment containing also supported EPA’s approach of not refrigerant recovery and/or recycling HFCs.’’ They noted that ‘‘the workforce proposing specific training or service equipment used with such refrigerants. needs to be provided basic awareness practices at this time, stating that As we consider these advance and education of refrigerant lifecycle manufacturers using A2L refrigerants comments, we note that EPA’s 608 test and impacts at different stages’’ while provide training to their service bank already includes questions also noting that such education and personnel. concerning A2L refrigerants and the training already exists. EIA offered Response: After considering these appliances covered by this rule, and suggestions on how the training comments, we agree with the comments EPA continues to review the test bank program they support could be that it is not necessary to delay this and can consider adding additional managed, such as allowing ‘‘a certain rulemaking to undertake separate action

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24469

on training, certification, or service E is acceptable for total flooding uses, Comment: Trane commented that practices for A2L refrigerants. As noted which includes both unoccupied and HFC–32, R–452B, and R–454B should by comments, training is already being occupied spaces. In the October 2018 also be approved for scroll chillers. provided by some manufacturers and listing action, EPA noted that in a AHRI requested EPA to find HFC–32 several organizations have developed or subsequent rulemaking, the Agency and R–454B acceptable for positive are in the process of developing would remove the previous listing of displacement chillers, and Rheem training. In past rulemakings listing Powdered Aerosol E as acceptable, similarly asked that SNAP list group flammable refrigerants, we stated our subject to use conditions since the use A2L refrigerants in such equipment. conclusion that training is best left to condition is no longer applicable. We Johnson Controls suggested listing HFC– the industry, and we find no reason to received no comments on the proposal 32 and all five blends acceptable for change that conclusion in this action. for this listing. Therefore, in this final positive displacement chillers, to We are not aware of any safety issues rule, as proposed, EPA is taking the include reciprocating, screw and scroll that have arisen with the equipment ministerial action of removing that chillers. The Alliance, Carrier, and covered by those rules and our current listing for Powdered Aerosol E. Chemours agreed and encouraged listing understanding based on comments to III. How is EPA responding to other HFC–32 and the five A2L blends this rule is that action is already being public comments? acceptable in chillers in general. Carrier taken to adequately train service pointed out that for chillers, technicians. While we will nonetheless EPA received other comments beyond requirements for machine rooms would consider these advance comments as we the scope of this final action and be needed and held that the ASHRAE 15 determine what, if any, additional addresses them below. standard could serve this purpose. actions we might take, including Comment: EIA stated ‘‘that ODS are still undergoing replacement in the Response: EPA notes that five of these considering issuing a proposed six refrigerants (HFC–32, R–452B, R– rulemaking addressing the possibility of residential and light commercial AC and heat pump end-use and are subject to 454A, R–454B, and R–454C) have been mandating certain additional training submitted to the SNAP program for use requirements, our current EPA’s authority under the SNAP Program. EIA urges EPA to promulgate in chillers and EPA is evaluating them understanding based on comments to for the chiller end-use, encompassing this rule is that the industry in general additional SNAP Program regulations both the centrifugal chiller and positive and interested manufacturers in listing high-GWP substitutes that pose a displacement chiller end-uses. The particular are already preparing for an considerably higher comparable risk to other refrigerant, R–457A, has been adequate level of training. As noted the five refrigerant blends, as submitted but not for the chiller end- above, many additional sources are unacceptable for this end-use, including uses. The proposed rule addressed available, and more are under R–410A, R–404A, R–134a, and R– listings for certain end-use categories, development, to provide training on the 434A.’’ which did not include the chiller end- A2L refrigerants in this final rule and on Response: This final rule lists use. The proposed rule did not discuss flammable refrigerants in general. additional substitutes as acceptable, subject to use conditions, in the finding these substitutes acceptable in C. Total Flooding: Removal of Powdered residential and light commercial air other end uses, and such listings are out Aerosol E From the List of Substitutes conditioning end-use. The proposed of scope for this action. Accordingly, Acceptable Subject to Use Conditions rule did not discuss finding other this comment requires no further Powdered Aerosol E, also marketed substitutes unacceptable in this end-use response. under the trade names of FirePro, and such listings are out of scope for Comment: Rheem sought clarification FirePro Xtinguish, and FireBan, is this action. Accordingly, this comment as to which SNAP end-use Heat Pump generated in an automated requires no further response. Pool Heaters (HPPH) and Heat Pump manufacturing process during which the Comment: EIA noted EPA’s ‘‘Ongoing Water Heaters (HPWH) belong in and for chemicals, in powder form, are mixed Responsibility to Protect Global Ozone’’ clarification as to whether an end use and then supplied to end users as a as it relates to methylene chloride category currently exists for these types solid contained within a fire (CH2Cl2). The commenter stated that the of equipment. extinguisher. In the presence of heat, the atmospheric concentrations of very Response: The classification of HPPHs solid converts to an aerosol consisting short-lived substances (VSLS) including and HPWHs is beyond the scope of this mainly of potassium salts. EPA listed methylene chloride are increasing and final rule. Accordingly, this comment Powdered Aerosol E as acceptable, that they are ‘‘increasingly seen as a requires no further response. subject to use conditions, as a total threat to the progress made by the Nonetheless, EPA is now aware of this flooding agent (71 FR 56359, September Montreal Protocol . . . to protect the clarification request and we invite 27, 2006). The use conditions required ozone layer.’’ In order to address this Rheem and other manufacturers of such that Powdered Aerosol E be used only threat, EIA asks that the agency consider equipment to further pursue this issue in areas that are normally unoccupied, listing methylene chloride and other separately with EPA and the SNAP because the Agency did not have similar VSLS as unacceptable in some program. sufficient information at that time end-uses. supporting its safe use in areas that are Response: We appreciate EIA’s IV. Statutory and Executive Order normally occupied. Based on a review comments on VSLS and note that EPA Reviews of additional information from the has taken domestic action on methylene A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory submitter to support the safe use of chloride under the Toxic Substances Planning and Review and Executive Powdered Aerosol E in normally Control Act (TSCA) due to its toxicity Order 13563: Improving Regulation and occupied spaces, EPA subsequently (84 FR 11420, March 27, 2019). The Regulatory Review determined that Powdered Aerosol E is proposed rule did not discuss listing also acceptable for use in total flooding VSLS as unacceptable and such listings This action is not a significant systems for normally occupied spaces are out of scope for this final action. regulatory action and was therefore not (83 FR 50026, October 4, 2018). The Accordingly, this comment requires no submitted to the Office of Management listing provides that Powdered Aerosol further response. and Budget (OMB) for review.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24470 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act significant regulatory action under (UMRA) Executive Order 12866. This action does not impose any new information collection burden under the This action does not contain any I. National Technology Transfer and PRA. OMB has previously approved the unfunded mandate as described in Advancement Act UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does information collection activities not significantly or uniquely affect small contained in the existing regulations This action involves technical governments. The action imposes no and has assigned OMB control number standards. EPA uses and incorporates by enforceable duty on any state, local, or 2060–0226. The approved Information reference portions of the 2019 UL tribal governments or the private sector. Collection Request includes five types Standard 60335–2–40, which of respondent reporting and E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism establishes requirements for the evaluation of residential air recordkeeping activities pursuant to This action does not have federalism SNAP regulations: Submission of a conditioning equipment and safe use of implications. It will not have substantial flammable refrigerants, among other SNAP petition, filing a TSCA/SNAP direct effects on the states, on the things. The standard is discussed in Addendum, notification for test relationship between the National greater detail in section II.B.5 of this marketing activity, recordkeeping for Government and the states, or on the preamble. substitutes acceptable subject to use distribution of power and restrictions, and recordkeeping for small responsibilities among the various The 2019 UL Standard 60335–2–40 is volume uses. This rule contains no new levels of government. available at https:// requirements for reporting or www.shopulstandards.com/ F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation recordkeeping. ProductDetail.aspx?UniqueKey=36463, and Coordination With Indian Tribal and may be purchased by mail at: C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) Governments Comm 2000, 151 Eastern Avenue, I certify that this action will not have This action does not have tribal Bensenville, IL 60106; Email: orders@ implications as specified in Executive a significant economic impact on a shopulstandards.com; Telephone: 1– Order 13175. It will not have substantial substantial number of small entities 888–853–3503 in the U.S. or Canada direct effects on tribal governments, on under the RFA. In making this (other countries dial 1–415–352–2178); the relationship between the Federal determination, the impact of concern is internet address: https:// Government and Indian tribes, or on the any significant adverse economic www.shopulstandards.com. The cost of distribution of power and impact on small entities. An agency may the 2019 UL Standard 60335–2–40 is responsibilities between the Federal certify that a rule will not have a $440 for an electronic copy and $550 for Government and Indian tribes, as significant economic impact on a hardcopy. UL also offers a subscription specified in Executive Order 13175. service to the Standards Certification substantial number of small entities if Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not the rule relieves regulatory burden, has apply to this action. EPA periodically Customer Library that allows unlimited no net burden or otherwise has a updates tribal officials on air regulations access to their standards and related positive economic effect on the small through the monthly meetings of the documents. The cost of obtaining this entities subject to the rule. This action National Tribal Air Association and will standard is not a significant financial allows the additional options under share information on this rulemaking burden for equipment manufacturers SNAP of using R–32, R–448A, R–449A, through this and other fora. and purchase is not necessary for those R–449B, R–452B, R–454A, R–454B, R– selling, installing, and servicing the 454C, and R–457A in the specified end- G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of equipment. Therefore, EPA concludes uses, but does not mandate such use. Children From Environmental Health that the UL standard incorporated by Users who choose to avail themselves of and Safety Risks reference is reasonably available. this flexibility for R–448A, R–449A, and This action is not subject to Executive J. Executive Order 12898: Federal R–449B must make a reasonable effort to Order 13045 because it is not Actions To Address Environmental ascertain that other substitutes or economically significant as defined in alternatives are not technically feasible Executive Order 12866 and because EPA Justice in Minority Populations and and must document and keep records of does not believe the environmental Low-Income Population the results of such investigations. health or safety risks addressed by this EPA believes that it is not feasible to Because equipment for R–452B, R– action present a disproportionate risk to quantify any disproportionately high 454A, R–454B, R–454C, and R–457A is children. EPA has not conducted a and adverse human health or not manufactured yet in the U.S. for the separate analysis of risks to infants and residential and light commercial air environmental effects from this action children associated with this rule. Any on minority populations, low-income conditioning and heat pumps end-use, risks to children are not different than no change in business practice is populations and/or indigenous peoples, the risks to the general population. This as specified in Executive Order 12898 required to meet the use conditions, action’s health and risk assessments are resulting in no adverse impact (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because contained in the comparisons of toxicity for all affected populations there is no compared to the absence of this rule. for the various substitutes, as well as in Equipment for R–32 already being requirement to use any of the the risk screens for the substitutes that alternatives listed in this action. manufactured has been subject to are listed in this final rule. The risk similar use conditions, resulting in no screens are in the docket for this K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) adverse impact compared to the absence rulemaking. of this rule. Thus, this final rule would This action is subject to the CRA, and not impose new costs on small entities. H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That EPA will submit a rule report to each We have therefore concluded that this Significantly Affect Energy Supply, House of the Congress and to the action will not impose a significant Distribution, or Use Comptroller General of the United adverse regulatory burden for all This action is not subject to Executive States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ directly regulated small entities. Order 13211, because it is not a as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24471

V. References Conditioning and Heat Pumps (New Kinetics and mechanisms of gas-phase Equipment); Substitute: R–452B. reactions with Cl atoms, OH radicals, Unless specified otherwise, all ICF, 2020f. Risk Screen on Substitutes in and O3. Chemical Physics Letters 439, documents are available electronically Residential and Light Commercial Air- 18–22. Available online at http:// through the Federal Docket Management Conditioning and Heat Pumps (New www.lexissecuritiesmosaic.com/ System, Docket number EPA–HQ–OAR– Equipment); Substitute: R–454A. gateway/FedReg/network_OJN_174_ 2019–0698. ICF, 2020g. Risk Screen on Substitutes in CF3CF=CH2.pdf. Residential and Light Commercial Air- The Air Conditioning, Heating, and AHRI, 2017. Petition Requesting EPA SNAP Conditioning and Heat Pumps (New Refrigeration News, 2020. ‘‘An HVAC Approval of R–448A/449A/449B for Equipment); Substitute: R–454B. Technician’s Guide to R–32,’’ November Medium Temperature, Stand-Alone ICF, 2020h. Risk Screen on Substitutes in 12, 2020. Available online at: https:// Retail Food Refrigeration Equipment. Residential and Light Commercial Air- www.achrnews.com/articles/144053-an- Submitted March 20, 2017. Conditioning and Heat Pumps (New hvac-technicians-guide-to-r-32?oly_enc_ ASHRAE, 2019. ANSI/ASHRAE Standard Equipment); Substitute: R–454C. id=8731J4776701J6C 34–2019: Designation and Safety ICF, 2020i. Risk Screen on Substitutes in UL 60335–2–40, 2019. Standard for Safety for Classification of Refrigerants. Residential and Light Commercial Air- Household And Similar Electrical Cousins, et al., 2019. Cousins, I.T., Conditioning and Heat Pumps (New Appliances—Safety—Part 2–40: Goldenman G., Herzke, D., Lohmann, R., Equipment); Substitute: R–457A. Particular Requirements for Electrical Miller, M., Ng, C.A., Patton, S., IPCC, 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Heat Pumps, Air-Conditioners and Scheringer, M., Trier, X., Vierke, L., Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Dehumidifiers. Third Edition. November Wang, Z., and DeWitt, J.C. (2019). The Working Group I to the Fourth 1, 2019. concept of essential use for determining Assessment Report of the when uses of PFASs can be phased out. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82 Environ. Sci.: Processes Impacts, 2019, Change. Solomon, S., Qin, D., Manning, 21, 1803–1815. Available online at: M., Chen, Z., Marquis, M., Averyt, K.B., Environmental protection, https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/ Tignor, M., and Miller, H.L. (eds.). Administrative practice and procedure, articlelanding/2019/em/c9em00163h# Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, Air pollution control, Incorporation by !divAbstract. United Kingdom and New York, NY, reference, Reporting and recordkeeping Hodnebrog, et al., 2013. Hodnebrog, ;., USA. Available online at: www.ipcc.ch/ requirements, Stratospheric ozone layer. Etminan, M., Fuglestvedt, J.S., Marston, publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ G., Myhre, G., Nielsen, C.J., Shine, K.P., contents.html. Michael S. Regan, and Wallington, T.J. (2013). Global Javadi et al., 2008. Javadi, M.S., S

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24472 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

■ 3. Add appendix W to subpart G of Appendix W to Subpart G of Part 82— part 82 to read as follows: Substitutes Listed in the May 6, 2021 Final Rule—Effective June 7, 2021 REFRIGERANTS—SUBSTITUTES ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO NARROWED USE LIMITS

End-use Substitute Decision Narrowed use limits Further information

Retail food refrigera- R–448A, R–449A, Acceptable Subject Acceptable only for use in new medium-tem- A possible reason for rejection of one or more tion— medium- R–449B. to Narrowed Use perature stand-alone units where reasonable other alternative(s) could be based on ADA temperature Limits. efforts have been made to ascertain that requirements. stand-alone units other alternatives are not technically feasible. (new only). Users are required to document and retain the results of their technical investigation of alter- natives for the purpose of demonstrating com- pliance. Information shall include descriptions of: • Process or product in which the sub- stitute is needed; • Substitutes examined and rejected; • Reason for rejection of other alternatives, e.g., performance, technical or safety standards; and • Anticipated date other substitutes will be available and projected time for switch- ing.

REFRIGERANTS—SUBSTITUTES ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information

Residential and light R–452B, R–454A, R– Acceptable Subject to These refrigerants may be used only in new equipment Applicable OSHA requirements at 29 CFR part 1910 commercial air con- 454B, R–454C and Use Conditions. specifically designed and clearly identified for the re- must be followed, including those at 29 CFR 1910.94 ditioning and heat R–457A. frigerants (i.e., none of these substitutes may be used (ventilation) and 1910.106 (flammable and combustible pumps (new only). as a conversion or ‘‘retrofit’’ refrigerant for existing liquids), 1910.110 (storage and handling of liquefied equipment designed for other refrigerants). petroleum gases), and 1910.1000 (toxic and haz- These substitutes may only be used in air conditioning ardous substances). equipment that meets all requirements in the 3rd edi- Proper ventilation should be maintained at all times dur- tion of UL 60335–2–40. 123 In cases where this ap- ing the manufacture and storage of equipment con- pendix includes requirements more stringent than taining flammable refrigerants through adherence to those of UL 60335–2–40, the appliance must meet the good manufacturing practices as per 29 CFR requirements of this appendix in place of the require- 1910.106. If refrigerant levels in the air surrounding the ments in the UL Standard. equipment rise above one-fourth of the lower flamma- The charge size for the equipment must not exceed the bility limit, the space should be evacuated and reentry maximum refrigerant mass determined according to UL should occur only after the space has been properly 60335–2–40 for the room size where the air condi- ventilated. tioner is used. The following markings must be attached at the locations Technicians and equipment manufacturers should wear provided and must be permanent: appropriate personal protective equipment, including (a) On the outside of the air conditioning equipment: chemical goggles and protective gloves, when han- ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire. Flammable Refrigerant dling flammable refrigerants. Special care should be Used. To Be Repaired Only By Trained Service taken to avoid contact with the skin which, like many Personnel. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing.’’ refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin. (b) On the outside of the air conditioning equipment: A class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire. Dispose of Properly In kept nearby. Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Technicians should only use spark-proof tools when Flammable Refrigerant Used.’’ working on air conditioning equipment with flammable (c) On the inside of the air conditioning equipment refrigerants. near the compressor: ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire. Any recovery equipment used should be designed for Flammable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair flammable refrigerants. Only technicians specifically Manual/Owner’s Guide Before Attempting To trained in handling flammable refrigerants should serv- Service This Product. All Safety Precautions Must ice refrigeration equipment containing these refrig- be Followed.’’ erants. Technicians should gain an understanding of (d) For any equipment pre-charged at the factory, on minimizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flam- the equipment packaging: ‘‘WARNING—Risk of mable refrigerants safely. Fire due to Flammable Refrigerant Used. Follow Room occupants should evacuate the space immediately Handling Instructions Carefully in Compliance with following the accidental release of this refrigerant. National Regulations.’’ Personnel commissioning, maintaining, repairing, decom- (e) On the indoor unit near the nameplate: missioning and disposing of appliances with these re- a. At the top of the marking: ‘‘Minimum Installa- frigerants should obtain training and follow practices tion height, X m (W ft)’’. This marking is only consistent with Annex HH of UL 60335–2–40, 3rd edi- required if required by UL 60335–2–40. The tion.123 terms ‘‘X’’ and ‘‘W’’ shall be replaced by the CAA section 608(c)(2) prohibits knowingly venting or oth- numeric height as calculated per the UL erwise knowingly releasing or disposing of substitute Standard. Note that the formatting here is refrigerants in the course of maintaining, servicing, re- slightly different than the UL Standard; spe- pairing or disposing of an appliance or industrial proc- cifically, the height in Inch-Pound units is ess refrigeration. placed in parentheses and the word ‘‘and’’ Department of Transportation requirements for transport has been replaced by the opening paren- of flammable gases must be followed. thesis. Flammable refrigerants being recovered or otherwise dis- b. Immediately below (a) above or at the top of posed of from residential and light commercial air con- the marking if (a) is not required: ‘‘Minimum ditioning appliances are likely to be hazardous waste room area (operating or storage), Y m2 (Z under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ft2)’’. The terms ‘‘Y’’ and ‘‘Z’’ shall be replaced (RCRA) (see 40 CFR parts 260–270). by the numeric area as calculated per the UL Standard. Note that the formatting here is slightly different than the UL Standard; spe- cifically, the area in Inch-Pound units is placed in parentheses and the word ‘‘and’’ has been replaced by the opening paren- thesis.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 24473

REFRIGERANTS—SUBSTITUTES ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information

(f) For non-fixed equipment, including portable air conditioners, window air conditioners, packaged terminal air conditioners and packaged terminal heat pumps, on the outside of the product: ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire or Explosion—Store in a well ventilated room without continuously oper- ating flames or other potential ignition.’’ (g) For fixed equipment, including rooftop units and split air conditioners, ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire— Auxiliary devices which may be ignition sources shall not be installed in the ductwork, other than auxiliary devices listed for use with the specific appliance. See instructions.’’ (h) All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1⁄4 inch) high. The equipment must have red Pantone Matching System (PMS) #185 or RAL 3020 marked service ports, pipes, hoses, or other devices through which the refrigerant passes, to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be applied at all service ports and other parts of the system where service puncturing or other actions creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected and must extend a minimum of one (1) inch (25mm) in both di- rections from such locations and shall be replaced if removed. Residential and light R–32 ...... Acceptable Subject to These refrigerants may be used only in new equipment Applicable OSHA requirements at 29 CFR part 1910 commercial air con- Use Conditions. specifically designed and clearly identified for the re- must be followed, including those at 29 CFR 1910.94 ditioning and heat frigerants (i.e., none of these substitutes may be used (ventilation) and 1910.106 (flammable and combustible pumps (new only), as a conversion or ‘‘retrofit’’ refrigerant for existing liquids), 1910.110 (storage and handling of liquefied excluding self-con- equipment designed for other refrigerants). petroleum gases), and 1910.1000 (toxic and haz- tained room air con- These substitutes may only be used in air conditioning ardous substances). ditioners. equipment that meets all requirements in the 3rd edi- Proper ventilation should be maintained at all times dur- tion of UL 60335–2–40.123 In cases where this appen- ing the manufacture and storage of equipment con- dix includes requirements more stringent than those of taining flammable refrigerants through adherence to UL 60335–2–40, the appliance must meet the require- good manufacturing practices as per 29 CFR ments of this appendix in place of the requirements in 1910.106. If refrigerant levels in the air surrounding the the UL Standard. equipment rise above one-fourth of the lower flamma- The charge size for the equipment must not exceed the bility limit, the space should be evacuated and reentry maximum refrigerant mass determined according to UL should occur only after the space has been properly 60335–2–40 for the room size where the air condi- ventilated. tioner is used. The following markings must be attached at the locations Technicians and equipment manufacturers should wear provided and must be permanent: appropriate personal protective equipment, including (a) On the outside of the air conditioning equipment: chemical goggles and protective gloves, when han- ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire. Flammable Refrigerant dling flammable refrigerants. Special care should be Used. To Be Repaired Only By Trained Service taken to avoid contact with the skin which, like many Personnel. Do Not Puncture Refrigerant Tubing.’’ refrigerants, can cause freeze burns on the skin. (b) On the outside of the air conditioning equipment: A class B dry powder type fire extinguisher should be ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire. Dispose of Properly In kept nearby. Accordance With Federal Or Local Regulations. Technicians should only use spark-proof tools when Flammable Refrigerant Used.’’ working on air conditioning equipment with flammable (c) On the inside of the air conditioning equipment refrigerants. near the compressor: ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire. Any recovery equipment used should be designed for Flammable Refrigerant Used. Consult Repair flammable refrigerants. Only technicians specifically Manual/Owner’s Guide Before Attempting To trained in handling flammable refrigerants should serv- Service This Product. All Safety Precautions Must ice refrigeration equipment containing this refrigerant. be Followed.’’ Technicians should gain an understanding of mini- (d) For any equipment pre-charged at the factory, on mizing the risk of fire and the steps to use flammable the equipment packaging: ‘‘WARNING—Risk of refrigerants safely. Fire due to Flammable Refrigerant Used. Follow Room occupants should evacuate the space immediately Handling Instructions Carefully in Compliance with following the accidental release of this refrigerant. National Regulations’’ Personnel commissioning, maintaining, repairing, decom- (e) On the indoor unit near the nameplate: missioning and disposing of appliances with this refrig- a. At the top of the marking: ‘‘Minimum Installa- erant should obtain training and follow practices con- tion height, X m (W ft)’’. This marking is only sistent with Annex HH of UL 60335–2–40, 3rd edi- required if required by UL 60335–2–40. The tion.123 terms ‘‘X’’ and ‘‘W’’ shall be replaced by the CAA section 608(c)(2) prohibits knowingly venting or oth- numeric height as calculated per the UL erwise knowingly releasing or disposing of substitute Standard. Note that the formatting here is refrigerants in the course of maintaining, servicing, re- slightly different than the UL Standard; spe- pairing or disposing of an appliance or industrial proc- cifically, the height in Inch-Pound units is ess refrigeration. placed in parentheses and the word ‘‘and’’ Department of Transportation requirements for transport has been replaced by the opening paren- of flammable gases must be followed. thesis. Flammable refrigerants being recovered or otherwise dis- b. Immediately below (a) above or at the top of posed of from residential and light commercial air con- the marking if (a) is not required: ‘‘Minimum ditioning appliances are likely to be hazardous waste room area (operating or storage), Y m2 (Z under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ft2)’’. The terms ‘‘Y’’ and ‘‘Z’’ shall be replaced (RCRA) (see 40 CFR parts 260–270). by the numeric area as calculated per the UL Standard. Note that the formatting here is slightly different than the UL Standard; spe- cifically, the area in Inch-Pound units is placed in parentheses and the word ‘‘and’’ has been replaced by the opening paren- thesis. (f) For fixed equipment, including rooftop units and split air conditioners, ‘‘WARNING—Risk of Fire— Auxiliary devices which may be ignition sources shall not be installed in the ductwork, other than auxiliary devices listed for use with the specific appliance. See instructions.’’ (g) All of these markings must be in letters no less than 6.4 mm (1⁄4 inch) high.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2 24474 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations

REFRIGERANTS—SUBSTITUTES ACCEPTABLE SUBJECT TO USE CONDITIONS—Continued

End-use Substitute Decision Use conditions Further information

The equipment must have red Pantone Matching System (PMS) #185 or RAL 3020 marked service ports, pipes, hoses, or other devices through which the refrigerant passes, to indicate the use of a flammable refrigerant. This color must be ap- plied at all service ports and other parts of the system where service puncturing or other actions creating an opening from the refrigerant circuit to the atmosphere might be expected and must ex- tend a minimum of one (1) inch (25mm) in both di- rections from such locations and shall be replaced if removed. 1 UL 60335–2–40, Standard for Safety for Household And Similar Electrical Appliances—Safety—Part 2–40: Particular Requirements for Electrical Heat Pumps, Air-Conditioners and Dehumidi- fiers, Third edition, Dated November 1, 2019. 2 You may purchase the material from UL by mail: Comm 2000; 151 Eastern Avenue; Bensenville, IL 60106; email: [email protected]; phone: 1–888–853–3503 in the U.S. or Can- ada (other countries dial +1–415–352–2168); or web: www.shopulstandards.com. 3 The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All approved material is available for inspection at U.S. EPA’s Air and Radiation Docket; EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC, 202–566–1742 and is available from Underwriters Laboratories Inc. (UL), 333 Pfingsten Road, Northbrook, IL 60062, 877.854.3577, www.ul.com. It is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the avail- ability of this material at NARA, email [email protected], or go to: www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

[FR Doc. 2021–08968 Filed 5–5–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:29 May 05, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06MYR2.SGM 06MYR2 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2