[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 223 (Friday, November 18, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 82272-82395]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24215]

Vol. 81

Friday,

No. 223

November 18, 2016

Part V

Book 2 of 3 Books

Pages 82271-82492

 Environmental Protection Agency

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

40 CFR Part 82

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Update to the Refrigerant Management
Requirements Under the Clean Air Act; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 223 / Friday, November 18, 2016 /
Rules and Regulations

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 82

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0453; FRL-9950-28-OAR]
RIN 2060-AS51

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Update to the Refrigerant
Management Requirements Under the Clean Air Act

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Clean Air Act prohibits the knowing release of ozone-
depleting and substitute refrigerants during the course of maintaining,
servicing, repairing, or disposing of appliances or industrial process
refrigeration. The existing regulations require that persons
maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of air-conditioning and
refrigeration equipment containing more than 50 pounds of refrigerant
observe certain service practices that reduce emissions of ozone-
depleting refrigerant. This rule updates those existing requirements as
well as extends them, as appropriate, to non-ozone depleting substitute
refrigerants, such as hydrofluorocarbons. Updates include strengthened
leak repair requirements, recordkeeping requirements for the disposal
of appliances containing more than five and less than 50 pounds of
refrigerant, revisions to the technician certification program, and
revisions for improved readability and compliance. As a result, this
action reduces emissions of ozone-depleting substances and gases with
high global warming potentials.

DATES: This final rule is effective on January 1, 2017. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the
regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of
on January 1, 2017. This rule contains information collection
activities that have been submitted for approval to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).
Under the PRA, comments on the information collection provisions are
best assured of consideration if the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) receives a copy of your comments on or before December 19, 2016.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0453. All documents in the docket are
listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available electronically through
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeremy Arling, Stratospheric
Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Mail Code 6205T,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number
(202) 343-9055; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>You may also visit
www.epa.gov/section608 for further information about refrigerant
management, other Stratospheric Ozone Protection regulations, the
science of ozone layer depletion, and related topics.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. What action is the Agency taking?
    C. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?
    D. What are the incremental costs and benefits of this action?
    E. Judicial Review
II. Background
    A. What are ozone-depleting substances?
    B. What is the National Recycling and Emission Reduction
Program?
    C. What developments have occurred since EPA first established
the National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program?
    D. What are the goals of this rule?
    E. What are the major revisions being finalized in this rule?
    F. Enforcement of Subpart F Regulations
    G. Incorporation by Reference
III. EPA's Authority Under the Clean Air Act
    A. Summary of EPA's Authority for the Revisions to Subpart F
    B. Comments and Responses Related to EPA's Authority
IV. The Revisions Finalized in This Rule
    A. Revisions to the Definitions in Sec.  82.152
    B. Revisions to the Venting Prohibition in Sec.  82.154(a)
    C. Revisions to the Refrigerant and Appliance Sales Restrictions
in Sec.  82.154
    D. Revisions to the Safe Disposal Provisions in Sec.  82.155
    E. Revisions to the Evacuation Requirements in Sec.  82.156
    F. Revisions to the Leak Repair Requirements in Sec.  82.157
    G. Revisions to the Standards for Recovery and/or Recycling
Equipment in Sec.  82.158
    H. Revisions to the Standards for Equipment Testing
Organizations in Sec.  82.160
    I. Revisions to the Technician Certification Requirements in
Sec.  82.161
    J. Revisions to the Technician Certification Program
Requirements in Sec.  82.161
    K. Revisions to the Reclamation Requirements in Sec.  82.164
    L. Revisions to the Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements in
Sec.  82.166
    M. Effective and Compliance Dates
V. Possible Future Revisions to Subpart F
VI. Economic Analysis
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

List of Acronyms

AHRI Air Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute
ARI Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (now AHRI)
ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, Inc.
CAA Clean Air Act
CARB California Air Resources Board
CBI Confidential Business Information
CFC Chlorofluorocarbon
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GWP Global Warming Potential
HCFC Hydrochlorofluorocarbon
HFC Hydrofluorocarbon
HFO Hydrofluoroolefin
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IPR Industrial Process Refrigeration
MMTCO2eq Million Metric Tons Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
MVAC Motor Vehicle Air Conditioner
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
ODP Ozone depletion potential
ODS Ozone-depleting substance
PFC Perfluorocarbon
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RMP Refrigerant Management Program
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SNAP Significant New Alternatives Policy
UL Underwriters Laboratories

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Categories and entities potentially regulated by this action
include those who own, operate, maintain, service, repair, recycle, or
dispose of refrigeration and air-conditioning appliances and
refrigerants, as well as entities that manufacture or sell
refrigerants, products and services for the refrigeration and air-
conditioning industry, including motor vehicle air conditioning.
Regulated entities include, but are not limited to, the following:

                 Table 1--Potentially Affected Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  North American
                                     industry
           Category               classification   Examples of regulated
                                 system  (NAICS)          entities
                                       code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industrial Process              111, 11251,        Owners or operators
 Refrigeration (IPR).            11511, 21111,      of refrigeration
                                 2211, 2212,        equipment used in
                                 2213, 311, 3121,   agriculture and crop
                                 3221, 3222,        production, oil and
                                 32311, 32411,      gas extraction, ice
                                 3251, 32512,       rinks, and the
                                 3252, 3253,        manufacture of
                                 32541, 3256,       frozen food, dairy
                                 3259, 3261,        products, food and
                                 3262, 3324,        beverages, ice,
                                 3328, 33324,       petrochemicals,
                                 33341, 33361,      chemicals,
                                 3341, 3344,        machinery, medical
                                 3345, 3346,        equipment, plastics,
                                 3364, 33911,       paper, and
                                 339999.            electronics
Commercial Refrigeration......  42374, 42393,      Owners or operators
                                 42399, 4242,       of refrigerated
                                 4244, 42459,       warehousing and
                                 42469, 42481,      storage facilities,
                                 42493, 4451,       supermarkets,
                                 4452, 45291,       grocery stores,
                                 48422, 4885,       warehouse clubs,
                                 4931, 49312,       supercenters,
                                 72231.             convenience stores,
                                                    and refrigerated
                                                    transport
Comfort Cooling...............  45211, 45299,      Owners or operators
                                 453998, 512,       of air-conditioning
                                 522, 524, 531,     equipment used in
                                 5417, 551, 561,    the following:
                                 6111, 6112,        hospitals, office
                                 6113, 61151,       buildings, colleges
                                 622, 7121,         and universities,
                                 71394, 721, 722,   metropolitan transit
                                 813, 92.           authorities, real
                                                    estate rental &
                                                    leased properties,
                                                    lodging and food
                                                    services, property
                                                    management, schools,
                                                    and public
                                                    administration or
                                                    other public
                                                    institutions
Plumbing, Heating, and Air-     238220, 811111,    Plumbing, heating,
 Conditioning Contractors.       81131, 811412.     and air-conditioning
                                                    contractors, and
                                                    refrigerant recovery
                                                    contractors,
                                                    including automotive
                                                    repair
Manufacturers and Distributors  325120, 441310,    Automotive parts and
 of Small Cans of Refrigerant.   447110.            accessories stores
                                                    and industrial gas
                                                    manufacturers
Reclaimers....................  325120, 423930,    Industrial gas
                                 424690, 562920,    manufacturers,
                                 562212.            recyclable material
                                                    merchant
                                                    wholesalers,
                                                    materials recovery
                                                    facilities, solid
                                                    waste landfills, and
                                                    other chemical and
                                                    allied products
                                                    merchant wholesalers
Disposers and Recyclers of      423990, 562212,    Materials recovery
 Appliances.                     562920.            facilities, solid
                                                    waste landfills, and
                                                    other miscellaneous
                                                    durable goods
                                                    merchant wholesalers
Refrigerant Wholesalers.......  325120, 42,        Industrial gas
                                 424690.            manufacturers, other
                                                    chemical and allied
                                                    products merchant
                                                    wholesalers,
                                                    wholesale trade
Certifying Organizations......  541380...........  Environmental test
                                                    laboratories and
                                                    services
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding the types of entities that could
potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not
listed in the table could also be affected. To determine whether your
facility, company, business organization, or other entity is regulated
by this action, you should carefully examine the regulations in subpart
F and this rule. If you have questions regarding the applicability of
this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

B. What action is the Agency taking?

    The regulations in 40 CFR part 82, subpart F (subpart F) that are
in effect before this final action takes effect (often referred to in
this notice as the ``prior'' or ``previous'' regulations) require that
persons servicing, maintaining, repairing, or disposing of air-
conditioning and refrigeration equipment observe certain service
practices that reduce emissions of ozone-depleting refrigerant.
Specifically, these provisions include: Restricting the servicing of
appliances and the sale of refrigerant to certified technicians;
specifying the proper evacuation levels before opening an appliance;
requiring the use of certified refrigerant recovery and/or recycling
equipment; requiring the maintenance and repair of appliances that meet
size and leak rate thresholds; requiring that refrigerant be removed
from appliances prior to disposal; requiring that appliances have a
servicing aperture or process stub to facilitate refrigerant recovery;
requiring that refrigerant reclaimers be certified in order to reclaim
and sell used refrigerant; and establishing standards for technician
certification programs, recovery equipment, and quality of reclaimed
refrigerant.
    This rule updates the prior refrigerant management requirements in
subpart F that apply to ozone-depleting refrigerants. It also extends
those requirements, as appropriate, to non-ozone depleting substitute
refrigerants that are not exempt from the venting prohibition,
including but not limited to hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), in order to
interpret, explain, and enforce the venting prohibition.

C. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

    Section 608 of the CAA provides EPA authority for these revisions
to the regulations found at 40 CFR part 82, subpart F. EPA's authority
for this rulemaking is supplemented by section 301(a), which provides
authority to ``prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out
[the EPA Administrator's] functions under this Act,'' and section 114,
which provides authority for the EPA Administrator to require
recordkeeping and reporting in carrying out any provision of the CAA
(with certain exceptions that do not apply here). More detail on EPA's
authority for this action is provided in subsequent sections.

D. What are the incremental costs and benefits of this action?

    The revisions in this rule require certain businesses to take
actions that have associated costs, such as conducting leak
inspections, repairing leaks, and keeping records. Total annual
incremental compliance costs associated with this rule are estimated to
be $24.5 million per year in 2014 dollars using a 7 percent discount
rate. Costs were modeled for a single typical year in which all the
requirements were in effect, based on the appliance distribution
modeled for 2015. Total annual operating savings associated with
reduced refrigerant use are estimated to be $44 million; thus
incremental compliance costs and refrigerant savings combined are
estimated to be approximately $19.5 million per year. A detailed
description of the comments received on the proposed analysis can be
found in Section VI of this preamble as well as the response to
comments document found in the docket. A full description of the
technical analysis can be found in the document Analysis of the
Economic Impact and Benefits of Final Revisions to the National
Recycling and Emission Reduction Program in the docket.
    EPA estimates that this rule will prevent damage to the
stratospheric ozone layer by reducing emissions of ozone-depleting
refrigerants by approximately 114 metric tons per year, weighted by the
ozone-depletion potential (ODP) of the gases emitted. Avoided emissions
of ozone-depleting refrigerants and non-ozone depleting substitutes
will also reduce climate impacts because most of these refrigerants are
potent greenhouse gases. Weighted by their global warming potentials
(GWP) \1\, EPA estimates that the revisions will prevent annual
emissions of greenhouse gases equivalent to 7.3 million metric tons of
carbon dioxide (MMTCO2eq). The reductions in emissions of
GHGs and ODS have benefits for human health and the environment because
of the threats these substances pose to human health and the
environment. Such threats are discussed further in Section II.D of this
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Unless otherwise stated, GWPs stated in this document are
100-year integrated GWPs, relative to a GWP of 1 for carbon dioxide,
as reported in IPCC, 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science
Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment
Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon,
S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor
and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. This document is accessible at
www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/contents.html. For
blends of multiple compounds, we are weighting the GWP of each
component by mass percentage in the blend.

                                  Table 2--Annual GHG and ODS Emissions Avoided
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          GHG emissions avoided (MTCO2eq)         ODS  emissions
                                                 ------------------------------------------------  avoided  (ODP-
                 Rule component                                                                    weighted  MT)
                                                        HFC             ODS            Total     ---------------
                                                                                ODS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leak Repair and Inspection                        ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
Comfort Cooling.................................       1,425,000       2,487,000       3,912,000              78
Commercial Refrigeration........................       1,246,000       1,077,000       2,323,000              30
IPR.............................................         275,000         169,000         444,000               5
Reporting & Recordkeeping                         ..............  ..............  ..............  ..............
Self-sealing Valves on Small Cans                        657,000  ..............         657,000  ..............
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................       3,603,000       3,733,000       7,336,000             114
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals may not sum due to independent rounding.

    Details of the methods used to estimate the benefits are discussed
in Section VI of this notice and the Analysis of the Economic Impact
and Benefits of Final Revisions to the National Recycling and Emission
Reduction Program in the docket.

E. Judicial Review

    Under CAA section 307(b)(1), judicial review of this final action
is available only by filing a petition for review in the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by January 17, 2017. This
final action is a nationally applicable regulation and has nationwide
scope and effect because it makes revisions to the EPA's regulations
for the National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program found at 40
CFR part 82, subpart F, which are nationally applicable regulations
that have nationwide scope and effect. Under CAA section 307(d)(7)(B),
only an objection to this final action that was raised with reasonable
specificity during the period for public comment can be raised during
judicial review. This section also provides a mechanism for EPA to
convene a proceeding for reconsideration, ``[i]f the person raising an
objection can demonstrate to [EPA] that it was impracticable to raise
such objection within [the period for public comment] or if the grounds
for such objection arose after the period for public comment (but
within the time specified for judicial review) and if such objection is
of central relevance to the outcome of this rule.'' Any person seeking
to make such a demonstration to us should submit a Petition for
Reconsideration to the Office of the Administrator, Environmental
Protection Agency, Room 3000, William Jefferson Clinton Building, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, and
the Associate General Counsel for the Air and Radiation Law Office,
Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 2344-A), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.

II. Background

A. What are ozone-depleting substances?

    The stratospheric ozone layer protects life on Earth from the sun's
harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation. ODS are generally man-made
chemicals that, when transported by winds into the stratosphere,
release chlorine or bromine and damage that protective ozone layer. ODS
are used as refrigerants, solvents, foam blowing

agents, aerosol propellants, fire suppression agents, and in other
smaller applications. The Clean Air Act divides ODS into two
categories: Class I and class II substances. The production of new
class I ODS, which includes chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), methyl
chloroform, carbon tetrachloride, halons, and other compounds has been
banned for over a decade. The production of new class II substances,
which are all hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), will be phased down
99.5 percent by 2020.
    The initial concern about the ozone layer in the 1970s led to a ban
on the use of CFCs as aerosol propellants in several countries,
including the United States. In 1985, the Vienna Convention on the
Protection of the Ozone Layer was adopted to formalize international
cooperation on this issue. Additional efforts resulted in the adoption
of the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer in
1987. Today, all Parties to the Montreal Protocol have agreed to phase
out the production and consumption of ODS controlled by the Protocol.

B. What is the National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program?

    Section 608 of the CAA bears the title ``National Recycling and
Emissions Reduction Program.'' Under the structure of section 608, this
program has three main components. First, section 608(a) requires EPA
to establish standards and requirements regarding use and disposal of
class I and II substances, including a comprehensive refrigerant
management program to limit emissions of ozone-depleting refrigerants.
This program is to include regulations that reduce the use and
emissions of class I and II substances to the lowest achievable level
and that maximize the recapture and recycling of such substances. The
second component, section 608(b), requires that the regulations issued
pursuant to subsection (a) contain requirements for the safe disposal
of class I and class II substances. The third component, section
608(c), prohibits the knowing venting, release, or disposal of ozone-
depleting refrigerants and their substitutes during the maintenance,
service, repair, or disposal of air-conditioning and refrigeration
appliances or IPR. This prohibition is also referred to as the
``venting prohibition'' in this action. Section 608 is described in
greater detail in Section III.
    EPA first issued regulations under section 608 of the CAA on May
14, 1993 (58 FR 28660, ``1993 Rule''), to establish the national
refrigerant management program for ozone-depleting refrigerants
recovered during the maintenance, service, repair, and disposal of air-
conditioning and refrigeration appliances. These regulations were
intended to substantially reduce the use and emissions of ozone-
depleting refrigerants.
    The regulations first established in the 1993 Rule require that
persons servicing air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment
containing an ozone-depleting refrigerant observe certain practices
that reduce emissions. They also established requirements for
refrigerant recovery equipment, reclaimer certification, and technician
certification, and restricted the sale of refrigerant so that only
certified technicians could purchase it. In addition, they required the
removal of ODS from appliances prior to disposal, and that all air-
conditioning and refrigeration equipment using an ODS be provided with
a servicing aperture or process stub to facilitate refrigerant
recovery.
    The 1993 Rule also established a requirement to repair leaking
appliances containing 50 or more pounds of ODS refrigerant. The rule
set an annual leak rate of 35 percent for commercial refrigeration
appliances and IPR and 15 percent for comfort cooling appliances. If
the applicable leak rate was exceeded, the appliance must be repaired
within 30 days.
    EPA revised these regulations through subsequent rulemakings
published on August 19, 1994 (59 FR 42950), November 9, 1994 (59 FR
55912), August 8, 1995 (60 FR 40420), July 24, 2003 (68 FR 43786),
March 12, 2004 (69 FR 11946), January 11, 2005 (70 FR 1972), May 23,
2014 (79 FR 29682), and April 10, 2015 (80 FR 19453). EPA also issued
proposed rules to revise the regulations in subpart F on June 11, 1998
(63 FR 32044), elements of which were not finalized, and on December
15, 2010 (75 FR 78558), which was also not finalized. EPA is
withdrawing and therefore not finalizing the 2010 proposed rule.
Instead, EPA re-proposed elements of both the 1998 and the 2010
proposed rules in the notice of proposed rulemaking (80 FR 19453) for
this rule.
    The August 19, 1994, rule amended specific definitions, required
practices, and reporting and recordkeeping requirements, as well as
adopted industry standards for reclaimed ODS refrigerants.
    The November 9, 1994, rule clarified the conditions under which
technician certification programs were grandfathered, allowing
technicians who had participated in voluntary technician training and
certification programs prior to the publication of the 1993 Rule to
receive formal certification. The rule also clarified the scope of the
technician certification requirement and provided a limited exemption
from certification requirements for apprentices.
    The August 8, 1995, rule responded to a settlement agreement
between EPA and the Chemical Manufacturers Association to give
additional flexibility to repair or retrofit IPR appliances containing
ODS. EPA allowed owners or operators additional time beyond 30 days to
complete repairs and more than one year to retrofit appliances where
certain conditions applied (i.e., federally owned equipment located in
areas subject to radiological contamination, unavailability of
necessary parts for IPR, or instances where adherence to local, state,
or federal laws hinder immediate repairs for IPR). EPA also clarified
that purged refrigerants that have been captured and destroyed can be
excluded from the leak rate calculations.
    The July 24, 2003, rule finalized portions of a proposed rulemaking
(61 FR 7858; February 29, 1996) that amended the recordkeeping aspects
of the section 608 technician certification program, refined aspects of
the refrigerant sales restriction, adopted updated versions of ARI
Standards 700 \2\ and 740 \3\, amended several definitions, and set
forth procedures for the revocation and/or suspension of approval to
certify technicians and refrigerant recovery and/or recycling equipment
and revocation and/or suspension procedures for certification as a
refrigerant reclaimer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute Standard
700, Specification for Fluorocarbons and Other Refrigerants,
contains standards for the reclamation of used refrigerants.
    \3\ The Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute Standard
740, Performance Rating of Refrigerant Recovery Equipment and
Recovery/Recycling Equipment, contains standards for the equipment
used to recover refrigerant from air-conditioning and refrigeration
appliances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The March 12, 2004, rule exempted from the venting prohibition
under section 608(c)(2) specific non-ozone depleting substances that
the Agency found did not pose a threat to the environment (69 FR
11946). Notably, EPA did not exempt HFC or perfluorocarbon (PFC)
refrigerants from the venting prohibition. The rule clarified that
regulations affecting the handling and sales of ozone-depleting
refrigerants apply to blends that contain an ODS.
    The January 11, 2005, rule clarified that the leak repair
requirements also apply to blends that contain an ODS (70

FR 1927). The rule amended the required practices and associated
reporting/recordkeeping requirements and clarified certain leak repair
requirements.
    On December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78558, ``proposed 2010 Leak Repair
Rule''), EPA proposed to create a streamlined set of leak repair
requirements that are applicable to all types of appliances containing
50 or more pounds of ozone-depleting refrigerant. The rule also
proposed to reduce the leak repair rates. EPA did not finalize that
rule and EPA has withdrawn that proposal through this rulemaking,
although, as noted above, EPA also re-proposed elements of that
proposal in the notice of proposed rulemaking for this rule.
    Finally, on May 23, 2014 (79 FR 29682), and April 10, 2015 (80 FR
19453), EPA expanded the list of substitute refrigerants that EPA has
exempted from the CAA venting prohibition to include certain
hydrocarbons in specific end-uses.

C. What developments have occurred since EPA first established the
National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program?

1. Phaseout of CFCs and HCFCs
    In 1993, when EPA established the refrigerant management
requirements of subpart F, CFCs and HCFCs were the most commonly used
refrigerants, depending on the specific application. Just six months
prior, in November 1992, the Parties to the Montreal Protocol
accelerated the phaseout schedule for CFCs through the Copenhagen
Amendment, so that there would be a complete phaseout by 1996. The
Copenhagen Amendment also established a phaseout schedule for HCFCs.
The schedule for HCFCs was later amended and now calls for a 35 percent
reduction in production and consumption from each Article 2 Party's
(developed country's) cap by 2004, followed by a 75 percent reduction
by 2010, a 90 percent reduction by 2015, a 99.5 percent reduction by
2020, and a total phaseout by 2030. From 2020 to 2030, production and
consumption at only 0.5 percent of baseline is allowed solely for
servicing existing air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment.
    The United States chose to implement the Montreal Protocol phaseout
schedule on a chemical-by-chemical basis. In 1993, as authorized by
section 606 of the CAA, EPA established a phaseout schedule that
eliminated HCFC-141b first and would greatly restrict HCFC-142b and
HCFC-22 next, due to their high ozone depletion potentials (ODPs),
followed by restrictions on all other HCFCs, and ultimately a complete
phaseout (58 FR 15014, March 18, 1993, and 58 FR 65018, December 10,
1993). EPA continues to issue allowances for the production and
consumption of HCFCs that have not yet been phased out. The allowance
levels reflect not only phaseout schedules but also use restrictions
under section 605(a) of the CAA. The phaseout schedule and allowance
levels can be found at 40 CFR part 82, subpart A.
    EPA established the refrigerant management program shortly before
the CFC phaseout. Similarly, today's rule to update those regulations
closely precedes the phaseout of HCFCs. In 2020, production and
consumption of HCFCs will be limited to 0.5% of baseline, and may not
include HCFC-22, the most commonly used HCFC refrigerant. The reasons
for encouraging a viable CFC recycling program support the same
approach for HCFCs. The 1993 Rule discussed a 1990 advance notice of
proposed rulemaking regarding a national CFC recycling program. As the
1993 Rule discussed, that 1990 notice emphasized that recycling is
important because it would allow the continued use of equipment
requiring CFCs for service past the year in which CFC production is
phased out, thereby eliminating or deferring the cost of early
retirement or retrofit of such equipment. Because of the continued use
of these substances in existing equipment, recycling can serve as a
useful bridge to alternative products while minimizing disruption of
the current capital stock of equipment. (58 FR 28661).
    More than twenty years later, with the experience gained through
the phaseout of CFCs, reducing emissions of HCFCs and maximizing their
recovery and reclamation remains just as important for ensuring the
continued viability of the current stock of equipment. The transition
out of CFC and now HCFC refrigerants is one reason that it is important
to update the refrigerant management regulations in subpart F.
2. Development of Non-ODS Alternatives
    The universe of available refrigerants has expanded dramatically
since EPA first established the refrigerant management regulations in
subpart F. Under the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program
(CAA section 612), EPA identifies substitutes that pose lower overall
risks to human health and the environment and must prohibit the use of
substitutes for which there are other available or potentially
available alternatives posing lower overall risk to human health and
the environment for the same use. Thus, EPA's SNAP program does not
provide a static list of alternatives. Instead, the SNAP list evolves
as EPA makes decisions informed by our overall understanding of the
environmental and human health impacts as well as our current knowledge
about available substitutes. Under SNAP, EPA has reviewed over 400
substitutes in the refrigeration and air-conditioning; fire
suppression; foam blowing; solvent cleaning; aerosols; adhesives,
coatings, and inks; sterilants; and tobacco expansion sectors. To date,
SNAP has issued 31 notices and 20 rulemakings listing alternatives as
acceptable, acceptable subject to use conditions, acceptable subject to
narrowed use limits, or unacceptable for those various end-uses.
    For example, on April 10, 2015, the SNAP Program listed as
acceptable, subject to use conditions, three hydrocarbons, one
hydrocarbon blend, and HFC-32 as substitute refrigerants in a number of
refrigeration and air-conditioning end-uses (80 FR 19454). The SNAP
program has also recently listed a number of additional refrigerant
options, including blends of hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs) and HFCs that
have lower global warming potentials (GWPs) (October 21, 2014, 79 FR
62863; July 20, 2015, 80 FR 42870). EPA anticipates that industry will
continue to develop safer alternatives and that EPA will continue to
review information concerning additional refrigerant options and
determine the appropriate action needed to safeguard human health and
the environment.
    Due to the change in the suite of acceptable refrigerants available
for some end-uses, EPA anticipates that the relative amounts of
different refrigerants in stocks in the United States will change, and
thus that the universe of refrigerants subject to the refrigerant
management program will continue to evolve. The diversity of
refrigerants and the potential for cross-contamination are two reasons
why it is important to clarify how all refrigerants, including non-
exempt substitute refrigerants, should be handled under the refrigerant
management regulations in subpart F.
3. Increased Attention to HFCs as Climate Pollutants
    Domestic and international efforts to protect the ozone layer have
also helped to protect the global climate, because in addition to
damaging ozone in the stratosphere, CFCs and HCFCs are also potent
GHGs. HFCs, which are the predominant class of compounds being used as
replacements for ODS, also can

have high GWPs. As their use has increased, concern has grown over the
environmental damage caused by heat trapped in the atmosphere by HFCs.
    On December 7, 2009, (74 FR 66496) the Administrator issued an
Endangerment Finding regarding GHGs under section 202(a) of the CAA. As
part of this finding, EPA concluded that the current and projected
concentrations of six key well-mixed GHGs in the atmosphere--carbon
dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide
(N2O), HFCs, PFCs, and sulfur hexafluoride
(SF6)--endanger both the health and welfare of current and
future generations. While this finding was made specifically for the
purposes of section 202(a) of the CAA, EPA is cognizant of the global
climate risks generally discussed in the finding in its work to reduce
emissions of HFCs and other GHGs.
i. Climate Action Plan
    In June 2013, the President announced the Climate Action Plan.\4\
Among the many actions called for, the Climate Action Plan outlined a
set of measures to address HFCs. The Climate Action Plan states: ``to
reduce emissions of HFCs, the United States can and will lead both
through international diplomacy as well as domestic actions.'' Part of
this international diplomacy is the proposed Amendment to the Montreal
Protocol discussed below. The Climate Action Plan also directed EPA to
use its authority through the SNAP program ``to encourage private
sector investment in low-emissions technology by identifying and
approving climate-friendly chemicals while prohibiting certain uses of
the most harmful chemical alternatives.'' In July 2015, EPA finalized a
rule that revised the listing status for certain substitutes previously
listed as acceptable under the SNAP program (80 FR 42870). That rule
revised the status of certain HFCs and HCFCs for various end-uses in
the aerosols, refrigeration and air-conditioning, and foam blowing
sectors. EPA made these revisions based on information showing that
other substitutes are available for the same uses that pose lower risk
overall to human health and the environment. A copy of the Climate
Action Plan is available in the docket to this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The President's Climate Action Plan, 2013, https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/image/president27sclimateactionplan.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The President's Climate Action Plan also calls on the federal
government to reduce emissions of HFCs by purchasing alternatives
whenever feasible and transitioning to equipment that uses safer and
more sustainable alternatives to HFCs. To implement the Climate Action
Plan, the Department of Defense, General Services Administration, and
National Aeronautics and Space Administration recently amended the
Federal Acquisition Regulation to encourage the purchase of
alternatives to high GWP HFCs (81 FR 30429; May 16, 2016). This rule is
designed to promote the use of safer chemical alternatives to HFCs by
service and vendor contractors. To help agencies monitor progress, the
amendment requires contractors to keep records of and report on the
amounts of HFCs added or removed during the routine maintenance,
repair, or disposal of appliances with a full charge of 50 or more
pounds of HFC or HFC blend refrigerant.
    Minimizing the emissions and maximizing the recovery and reuse of
ODS and HFC refrigerants are consistent with the Climate Action Plan.
EPA estimates that the revisions finalized in this action will prevent
annual emissions of refrigerant equivalent to 7.3 MMTCO2eq.
Of this amount, 3.6 MMTCO2eq are due to HFCs and 3.7
MMTCO2eq are due to ODS. Because of the significant
environmental benefit to be gained by addressing HFC refrigerants, it
is important to update the refrigerant management regulations in
subpart F.
ii. Trends in HFC Use and Future Projections
    Although HFCs represent a small fraction of current GHG emissions
by weight, their warming impact per kilogram is very strong. The most
commonly used HFC, HFC-134a, has a GWP of 1,430, which means it traps
1,430 times as much heat per kilogram as carbon dioxide does over 100
years. The majority of global, and U.S., HFC use is in the
refrigeration and air conditioning sector. HFC emissions are projected
to increase substantially and at an increasing rate over the next
several decades if their production is left uncontrolled. In the United
States, emissions of HFCs are increasing more quickly than those of any
other group of GHGs, and globally they are increasing 10 to 15 percent
annually. At that rate, emissions are projected to double by 2020 and
triple by 2030.
    HFCs are also rapidly accumulating in the atmosphere. The
atmospheric concentration of HFC-134a has increased by about 10 percent
per year from 2006 to 2012, and the concentrations of HFC-143a and HFC-
125, which are components of commonly used refrigerant blends, have
risen over 13 and 16 percent per year from 2007 to 2011, respectively.
Without action, annual global emissions of HFCs are projected to rise
to about 6,400 to 9,900 MMTCO2eq in 2050, which is
comparable to the drop in annual GHG emissions of ODS of 8,000
MMTCO2eq between 1988 and 2010 (UNEP, 2011).
    As these HFCs accumulate in the atmosphere, they change the balance
between energy entering the Earth's climate from the sun and energy
escaping the Earth into space. The change in the net rate at which
energy enters the atmosphere is called radiative forcing. By 2050, the
buildup of HFCs in the atmosphere is projected to increase radiative
forcing to 0.22-0.25 W m\2\. To appreciate the significance of the
projected HFC radiative forcing within the context of all GHGs, the
forcing from HFCs would be 6-9% of that from CO2 in the
IPCC's representative concentration pathways (RCP6 and RCP8.5) in 2050
(Velders et al., 2015).
iii. Montreal Protocol Amendment Proposal
    For the past six years, the United States, Canada, and Mexico have
proposed an amendment to the Montreal Protocol to phase down the
production and consumption of HFCs. The United States seeks adoption of
an amendment that is acceptable to all Parties. Global benefits of the
amendment proposal would yield significant reductions of over 90
gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2eq) through 2050.
A number of other Parties to the Montreal Protocol have also proposed
amendments to phase down global production and consumption of HFCs.
These proposals were introduced by a group of Island States; the
European Union; and India. On November 6, 2015, the Parties to the
Montreal Protocol adopted the ``Dubai Pathway'' on HFCs, which provides
that the Parties would work together, within the Montreal Protocol, to
adopt an HFC amendment in 2016.
4. Petition From the Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy
    On January 31, 2014, the Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric
Policy (the Alliance) petitioned the Agency to initiate a rulemaking to
apply the section 608 refrigerant management regulations to HFCs and
other substitute refrigerants. In that petition, the Alliance requested
that EPA extend the section 608 regulations relating to refrigerant
sales and distribution restrictions, and the evacuation, certification,
reclamation and recovery, leak repair, reporting and recordkeeping

requirements to HFCs. The petition argues that applying the section 608
requirements to HFCs ``would increase the environmental benefits
already realized from the section 608 regulations, through reduced HFC
emissions, and would complement the United States' goal of a global
phase down in HFC production and consumption.'' The petition cites
sections 608(c)(2) and 301(a) of the CAA as authority for these
revisions. A copy of the petition is included in the docket for this
rulemaking. While EPA is not taking today's action solely as a result
of the Alliance petition, this rulemaking constitutes the Agency's
response to the petition.

D. What are the goals of this rule?

    The Agency has two goals for this rulemaking. The first is to
promote the proper handling and use of ozone-depleting and substitute
refrigerants. Doing so will protect the stratospheric ozone layer by
reducing emissions of ODS refrigerants and protect the climate system
by reducing emissions of refrigerant gases with high GWPs. High-GWP
refrigerants include both ODS refrigerants and most substitute
refrigerants, including HFCs, that EPA has not exempted from the
venting prohibition under CAA section 608. The second goal of this
rulemaking is to harmonize the requirements across all major
refrigerant types and update the regulations in plain language to
reduce uncertainty and complexity for the regulated community, as well
as increase clarity, encourage compliance, and facilitate enforcement.
1. Promoting the Proper Handling of Refrigerants
    Today's rule will reduce the use and emission of refrigerants,
maximize the recapture and recycling of such substances, and further
interpret, explain, and enforce the prohibition on knowingly venting or
releasing refrigerants during the maintenance, service, repair, or
disposal of appliances.
    EPA estimates that this rule will result in annual reductions in
emissions of approximately 114 ODP-weighted metric tons. A separate
support document Analysis of the Economic Impact and Benefits of Final
Revisions to the National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program
contains a full discussion of the benefits of this rule and is
available in the docket.
    Stratospheric ozone depletion decreases the atmosphere's ability to
shield life on the Earth's surface from the sun's UV radiation. The
links between stratospheric ozone depletion and public health concerns
are well established. Emissions of ODS lead to chemical reactions that
reduce the amount of ozone in the stratosphere. Less ozone in the
stratosphere means that more UVA and UVB radiation reaches the earth's
surface and is incident on exposed organisms, including humans. Adverse
health effects associated with exposure to UV radiation include skin
cancer, cataracts, and immune suppression. The Scientific Assessment of
Ozone Depletion,\5\ prepared by the Scientific Assessment Panel to the
Montreal Protocol, and Environmental Effects of Ozone Depletion and its
Interactions with Climate Change,\6\ prepared by the Environmental
Effects Assessment Panel to the Montreal Protocol provide comprehensive
information regarding the links between emissions of ODS, ozone layer
depletion, UV radiation, and human health effects. Both documents are
available in the docket for this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ World Meteorological Organization (WMO), Scientific
Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2014, World Meteorological
Organization, Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project--Report
No. 55, 416 pp., Geneva, Switzerland, 2014.
    \6\ United Nations Environment Programme, Environmental Effects
Assessment Panel, Environmental effects of ozone depletion and its
interactions with climate change: progress report, 2011, Photochem.
Photobiol. Sci., 2012, 11, DOI: 10.1039/c1pp90033a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The most common forms of skin cancer are strongly associated with
UV radiation, and UV exposure is the most preventable cause of skin
cancer (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Surgeon
General's Call to Action to Prevent Skin Cancer. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Surgeon General;
2014). Skin cancer is the most common form of cancer in the United
States, with more than 3.5 million new cases diagnosed annually
(American Cancer Society, Cancer Facts and Figures, 2015). Rates for
new cases of melanoma, the most serious form of skin cancer, have been
rising on average 1.4 percent each year over the last 10 years
(National Cancer Institute, SEER Stat Fact Sheets: Melanoma of the
Skin, available at http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/melan.html,
accessed May 5, 2015). In 2015, it is estimated that 70,000 Americans
will have been diagnosed with melanoma and almost 10,000 will have died
as a result of the disease (American Cancer Society, Cancers Facts and
Figures, 2015).
    Non-melanoma skin cancers are less deadly than melanomas, but if
left untreated they can spread, causing disfigurement and more serious
health problems. There are two primary types of non-melanoma skin
cancers. Basal cell carcinomas are the most common type of skin cancer
tumors. Basal cell carcinoma grows slowly, and rarely spreads to other
parts of the body. It can, however, penetrate to the bone and cause
considerable damage. Squamous cell carcinomas are tumors that may
appear as nodules or as red, scaly patches. This cancer can develop
into large masses and can spread to other parts of the body.
    Other UV-related skin disorders include actinic keratoses and
premature aging of the skin. Actinic keratoses are skin growths that
occur on body areas exposed to the sun. The face, hands, forearms, and
neck are especially susceptible to this type of lesion. Although
premalignant, actinic keratoses are a risk factor for squamous cell
carcinoma. Chronic exposure to the sun also causes premature aging,
which over time can make the skin become thick, wrinkled, and leathery.
    Research has shown that UV radiation increases the likelihood of
certain cataracts. (Taylor, H.R., et al., 1988. Effect of ultraviolet
radiation on cataract formation, New England Journal of Medicine, 319,
1429-33; West, S. et al., 2005. Model of Risk of Cortical Cataract in
the US Population with Exposure to Increased Ultraviolet Radiation due
to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion, American Journal of Epidemiology,
162, 1080-1088.) Cataracts are a form of eye damage in which a loss of
transparency in the lens of the eye clouds vision. If left untreated,
cataracts can lead to blindness. Although curable with modern eye
surgery, cataracts diminish the eyesight of millions of Americans.
Other kinds of eye damage caused by UV radiation include pterygium
(i.e., tissue growth that can block vision), skin cancer around the
eyes, and degeneration of the macula which contains the part of the
retina where visual perception is most acute.
    Another benefit of reducing refrigerant emissions is protection of
the climate system. Many refrigerants, including ODS and substitutes
for ODS, are potent GHGs, having GWPs thousands of times higher than
that of carbon dioxide (CO2), which has a GWP of one. For
example, HCFC-22 has a GWP of 1,810. R-404A, a commonly used HFC
refrigerant blend, has a GWP of 3,922. Other common HFC refrigerants,
with their GWPs, include R-134a (1,430), R-410A (2,088), R-407A
(2,107), and R-507A (3,985). EPA estimates that today's rule will
reduce GWP-weighted emissions by approximately 7.3 MMTCO2eq
per year.

    To briefly summarize, GHGs cause climate change by trapping heat on
Earth. The Earth is constantly receiving energy from the sun in the
form of radiation, while at the same time, energy is radiating away
into space, mostly as infrared radiation. By absorbing and scattering
radiation that otherwise would escape into space, GHGs throw off the
balance between incoming and escaping radiation, resulting in more
energy in the Earth's climate system.
    As described in the EPA's 2009 Endangerment Finding (74 FR 66496)
and subsequent reports by the IPCC, the United States Global Change
Research Program, and the National Research Council, climate change
impacts threaten the health of Americans in multiple ways and touch on
nearly every aspect of public welfare. For more information on GHGs and
climate change in the United States, visit www.epa.gov/climatechange.
2. Improving Rule Effectiveness
    The second goal of today's rule is to improve the clarity and
effectiveness of the subpart F regulations. Achieving the health and
environmental benefits of these rules depends on widespread compliance,
and understanding of the regulations by the regulated community
enhances compliance.
    EPA has begun an initiative to improve the effectiveness of its
rules called Next Generation Compliance. The vision for this initiative
is to make it easier for the regulated community to understand and
comply with environmental laws and inform the public about their
performance. Most importantly, this initiative will help ensure that
all Americans are protected from significant risks to human health and
the environment and have access to information that allows them to more
fully engage in environmental protection efforts.
    The Agency has identified several interconnected components in the
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance's 2014-2017 strategic
plan for its Next Generation Compliance initiative that can improve the
effectiveness of rules:
     Effective Regulations: Design regulations that are clear,
as easy to implement as possible, and that contain self-reinforcing
drivers. For example, where possible, design regulations such that
regulated facilities can take steps to monitor their own performance to
prevent violations, or be certified by an independent 3rd party.
     Advanced Monitoring: Use advanced monitoring technology
for the government, industry, and the public to more easily find
information on pollutant discharges/emissions, environmental
conditions, and noncompliance.
     Electronic Reporting: Implement electronic systems to make
reporting easier, more efficient, and less costly. For the user, these
systems offer speed, convenience, expanded information choices, and
filing capabilities. For government, they offer the ability to increase
transparency, improve our ability to spot pollution and compliance
issues, and respond quickly to emerging problems.
     Transparency: Make the information we have today more
accessible, and make new information obtained from advanced monitoring
and electronic reporting publicly available.
     Innovative Enforcement: Use Next Generation Compliance
principles and tools in enforcement planning and cases.
    Effective Regulations. The Agency and industry have more than 20
years of experience implementing and operating under the refrigerant
management regulations in subpart F. Through that experience, it has
become clear that there are elements of the program that could be made
more effective. This rule revises the structure of these regulations to
clearly lay out the process for repairing refrigerant leaks and adds
steps to ensure that the repairs were successful. This rule also for
the first time addresses chronically leaking systems in a manner that
minimizes the burden on compliant systems. EPA has reorganized the
subpart so affected entities can more easily find the provisions that
apply to them, including recordkeeping and reporting. This rule removes
outdated requirements and, where appropriate, removes unnecessary
distinctions between refrigerants, appliance types, and recovery
equipment types. Clearer regulations will also be supported by
comprehensive compliance assistance materials for each industry segment
affected by this final regulation. EPA hopes to make it easier for the
regulated community to understand their obligations when handling
refrigerants, thereby improving compliance and reducing damage to the
environment.
    Advanced Monitoring. EPA is encouraging owners/operators of
appliances containing 50 or more pounds of refrigerant to install
automatic leak detection equipment. Such systems provide continuous
information about whether a system is leaking, allowing leaks to be
caught sooner. This can reduce both refrigerant costs and labor costs
of manually inspecting refrigeration systems.
    Electronic Reporting. EPA has established the email address
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and this rule requires that all reports that do not
contain confidential business information be submitted to EPA at that
address. EPA is also revising the regulations to explicitly state that
owners and operators of appliances subject to the leak repair
provisions may use electronic systems to track when and how much
refrigerant is added to equipment and to keep other required records.
    Transparency. EPA is requiring members of the regulated community
to post additional information online that is of use to this sector.
For example, equipment testing organizations must post lists of
certified recovery and/or recycling equipment on their Web sites rather
than submit paper reports to EPA. Certifying organizations must also
publish lists of technicians that they certify online to assist
technicians who have lost their certification cards. EPA also posts to
its Web site data on the amount of ODS refrigerant reclaimed each year.
Under this final rule EPA will begin collecting and making available
reclamation data for non-exempt substitute refrigerants which should
provide EPA and the general public a greater understanding of the
extent of HFC recovery and reclamation.
    Innovative Enforcement. EPA has incorporated innovative enforcement
principles into subpart F since its inception, and this rule updates
and strengthens those principles. For example, the refrigerant sales
restriction is an effective way to ensure that anyone maintaining,
servicing, or repairing an appliance is a certified technician. EPA has
also required certification of refrigerant recovery equipment by
independent third parties (i.e., UL and Air Conditioning, Heating, and
Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)) to ensure that recovery equipment meets
the applicable standards. This ensures that technicians who use these
devices to recover refrigerant are also using equipment that, when
following the manufacturer's instructions, will meet the minimum
refrigerant evacuation requirements. EPA also relies on third parties
to administer the technician certification exam.

E. What are the major revisions being finalized in this rule?

    EPA is finalizing most of the proposed revisions to the regulations
for the National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program. Some of
these revisions strengthen the existing program, in particular by
requiring owners and operators to repair systems

that leak at lower rates than what is currently required and to verify
that those repairs were successful. Others extend, as appropriate, the
regulations to HFCs and other non-exempt substitute refrigerants. Still
other revisions improve the effectiveness of the regulations. After
considering comments, EPA has decided not to finalize certain aspects
of the proposal. This section briefly discusses the major proposed
revisions and the final actions that EPA is taking. Detailed
discussions of all of the revisions to the regulations finalized in
this action, changes from the proposal, and responses to significant
comments are in Section IV of this notice. EPA also summarizes and
responds to all significant comments on the proposed action in the
comment response document in the docket.
1. Extend the Regulations To Cover Substitute Refrigerants
    EPA is finalizing the proposed extension of the requirements of the
National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program to substitute
refrigerants that have not been exempted from the venting prohibition
(also referred to in this action as ``non-exempt substitutes'').
2. Strengthen Leak Repair Requirements
    Prior to this rule, the leak rates for ODS equipment were 35
percent for IPR and commercial refrigeration appliances, and 15 percent
for comfort cooling and other appliances. EPA proposed leak rates of 20
percent for IPR and commercial refrigeration and 10 percent for comfort
cooling and other appliances. Based in part on comments received on the
proposal, EPA is finalizing leak rates for ODS equipment as follows: 30
percent for IPR, 20 percent for commercial refrigeration appliances,
and 10 percent for comfort cooling and other appliances. EPA is also
extending the new leak rates to equipment using HFCs and other
substitute refrigerants that are not exempt from the venting
prohibition.
    After considering public comments, EPA is modifying the proposed
leak inspection requirements in this final rule. EPA proposed to
require quarterly or annual leak inspections for all appliances with a
full charge of 50 pounds or greater, with the more frequent inspections
applying to larger systems. In the revisions finalized in this rule,
EPA is requiring quarterly or annual leak inspections only for
appliances that have exceeded the applicable leak rate. Similar to the
proposal, owners or operators can forgo leak inspections if they
install, continuously operate, and maintain automatic leak detection
systems.
    Based on comments, EPA has given particular attention to situations
where the proposed regulations would have required the retrofit or
retirement of an appliance. EPA has modified the final rule in numerous
places to support the proper repair of leaking systems. Most notably,
EPA is modifying the proposed chronic leaker provision. EPA proposed
that appliances containing 50 or more pounds of ODS or substitute
refrigerant that leak more than 75 percent of the appliance's full
charge in each of two consecutive 12-month periods would have to be
retired or mothballed. EPA is finalizing a requirement that owners or
operators of appliances that leak 125 percent of their full charge in a
calendar year must submit a report to EPA detailing their repair
efforts. The report must be submitted no later than March 1 following
the calendar year of the >=125 percent leak.
3. Extend the Sales Restriction to Substitute Refrigerants, With an
Exception for Small Cans of MVAC Refrigerant
    EPA is finalizing the proposed restriction that non-exempt
substitute refrigerants may only be sold to technicians certified under
sections 608 or 609 of the CAA. In the case of MVAC refrigerant, EPA is
exempting the sale of small cans of non-ODS substitutes to allow the
do-it-yourself (DIY) community to continue servicing their personal
vehicles. EPA is requiring that small cans of non-exempt substitute
refrigerant be outfitted with self-sealing valves by January 1, 2018.
Based on comments, EPA is not finalizing the proposal to prohibit the
sale of small cans that do not contain self-sealing valves that were
manufactured or imported prior to that requirement taking effect.
4. Establish Recordkeeping for Appliances Containing More Than 5 and
Less Than 50 Pounds of ODS and Non-Exempt Substitute Refrigerant
    EPA is finalizing revisions to the regulations that require that
technicians, or the company employing technicians, keep records when
disposing of appliances containing more than five and less than 50
pounds of refrigerant. These records include the company name, location
of the appliance, date of recovery, and type of refrigerant recovered
for each appliance. EPA is also finalizing, with some modification, the
revision to the regulations requiring that technicians keep records of
the amounts of ODS and non-exempt substitute refrigerant transferred
for reclamation by refrigerant type.
    EPA is reducing the burden in this final rule by only requiring
maintaining records typically generated in the field during the normal
disposal of appliances. Therefore, EPA is not finalizing the proposed
requirement to keep records indicating the amount of refrigerant
recovered from each appliance. Instead, EPA is finalizing a requirement
to record the total amount of refrigerant, by type, recovered from all
appliances they disposed of over a calendar month. This tally can be
performed less frequently and at a central location.
5. Update the Technician Certification Program
    EPA is finalizing the requirement that technicians be certified to
handle HFCs and other non-exempt substitutes, as proposed. EPA is also
finalizing the proposed requirement for certifying organizations to
publish lists or create online databases of technicians that they
certify.
6. Improving Readability and Restructuring the Requirements
    EPA is finalizing the extensive revisions to the regulations in
subpart F to more clearly state the requirements of the National
Recycling and Emission Reduction Program and to remove potentially
ambiguous language, with minor changes from the proposal. EPA is
modifying some of the proposed revisions to address additional
suggestions raised by commenters. EPA's intent with these edits is to
improve readability, not to change the substantive content or
requirements of the regulations. For edits to the regulations that are
intended to be substantive, EPA is discussing those revisions in this
notice. EPA is adding to the docket a red-line version of the final
regulatory text from subpart F that shows the final revisions to the
prior regulations to assist the regulated community in identifying the
differences.

F. Enforcement of Subpart F Regulations

    Subpart F regulations must be enforced to realize their full
environmental and human health benefit. This section briefly presents
examples of recent actions that EPA has taken to enforce the venting
prohibition, leak repair, and safe disposal provisions of subpart F.
Several provisions that EPA is finalizing in this rule are based on
lessons learned in taking these enforcement actions. These revisions
are intended to encourage compliance and facilitate potential future
enforcement of

the requirements actions of these and other sections of the subpart F
regulations. EPA's Web site contains more information on these
enforcement actions.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ https://www.epa.gov/ozone-layer-protection/enforcement-actions-under-title-vi-clean-air-act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Some commenters stated that EPA should seek better ways to enforce
the pre-existing regulations for Class I and II ODS. One commenter
encouraged EPA to continue to identify cost-effective means of ensuring
that the entire regulated community supports and follows lawful
policies and regulations. Another commenter wrote that venting of HFCs
above de minimis levels must be severely penalized for the rule to be
as effective as possible. That commenter encouraged EPA to reiterate
that EPA welcomes information and reporting on an anonymous basis
regarding parties known to be venting ODS, HFCs, and any non-exempt
substitute.
    EPA responds that the Agency has enforced and continues to enforce
these regulations in actions that range from civil fines to criminal
prosecutions. EPA encourages anyone who suspects or witnesses unlawful
releases of refrigerants or other violations of CAA regulations to
report an environmental violation to EPA (www.epa.gov/enforcement/report-environmental-violations). In 2014 and 2015, EPA brought or
assisted in three cases against individuals for violating the venting
prohibition when cutting into the refrigerant lines to steal metal from
HCFC-22 containing air conditioners. Under the plea agreement in a case
from 2014, the individual cutting the refrigerant line must serve 31
months in federal prison and then remain under court supervision for an
additional 12 months during which time he must perform 200 hours of
community service.
    EPA entered into consent decrees with the supermarket chains
Safeway in 2013, Costco in 2015, and Trader Joe's in 2016 for
violations of the leak repair provisions of subpart F for their
commercial refrigeration units. In 2015, EPA obtained corrective action
with the United States Navy to resolve allegations of failing to
perform leak rate calculations when servicing comfort cooling
equipment, and with DuPont for improper maintenance and repair of two
large IPR units. In 2012, EPA executed consent decrees with Icicle
Seafoods, American Seafoods Co. LLC, and Pacific Longline Co. LLC for
failure to repair refrigerant leaks at chilling units aboard its
fishing vessels and failure to verify the adequacy of repairs before
resuming operations, among other violations. In March of 2016, Ocean
Gold Seafoods, Inc. and Ocean Cold, LLC entered into a consent decree
with EPA that resolved alleged violations for failing to promptly
repair refrigerant leaks and failing to keep adequate records of the
servicing of their IPR equipment necessary to prevent leaks.
    EPA has executed consent decrees to resolve alleged violations of
the safe disposal regulations in subpart F. These include decrees in
2016 with Parkway Iron and Metal, and in 2015 with Metal Dynamics and
Basic Recycling, as well as at least forty-five non-judicial
settlements against scrap recyclers in 2014 and 2015.
    EPA also continues to take steps to maintain the integrity of the
certification programs under subpart F. EPA recently revoked over a
dozen technician certification programs that had failed to submit the
required biannual activity report (81 FR 28864). EPA is also ensuring
that certified refrigerant reclaimers continue to operate in accordance
with Sec.  82.164 and maintain records and submit reports in accordance
with Sec.  82.166. EPA recently published a notice announcing the
previous revocation of the certification of eight refrigerant
reclaimers and giving a ninth reclaimer notice of impending revocation
(80 FR 75455).

G. Incorporation by Reference

    This action involves technical standards. In some instances, EPA is
deciding to use a modified version of an industry standard for purposes
of this rule; in others, EPA is deciding to use an industry standard by
incorporating it by reference exactly as written. This section
summarizes the technical standards that EPA is incorporating by
reference and describes how interested parties can access those
standards. Sections IV.C (small cans of MVAC refrigerant), Section IV.G
(recovery and/or recycling equipment), and IV.K (reclamation
requirements) contain further discussion of these technical standards
including comments received on EPA's proposal to incorporate certain
standards by reference.
    EPA is incorporating by reference UL 1963, Requirements for
Refrigerant Recovery/Recycling Equipment, Fourth Edition, June 1, 2011
in appendix B4. This establishes standards for refrigerant recovery and
refrigerant recovery/recycling equipment to ensure the equipment can be
used safely with flammable refrigerants. The standard is available at
www.comm-2000.com or by writing to Comm 2000, 151 Eastern Avenue,
Bensenville, IL 60106. The cost is $798 for an electronic copy and $998
for hardcopy. UL also offers a subscription service to the Standards
Certification Customer Library (SCCL) that allows unlimited access to
their standards and related documents. The cost of obtaining this
standard is not a significant financial burden for equipment
manufacturers. Therefore, EPA concludes that the UL standard being
incorporated by reference is reasonably available.
    EPA is not incorporating by reference AHRI Standard 700-2016,
Specifications for Refrigerants. Rather EPA is basing the content found
in appendix A on this standard. This standard establishes purity
specifications for refrigerants, and specifies the associated methods
of testing for acceptability of refrigerants. The standard is available
at www.ahrinet.org or by mail at Air-Conditioning, Heating, and
Refrigeration Institute (AHRI), 2111 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 500,
Arlington, VA 22201. EPA is incorporating by reference publically
available versions of the standards referenced in AHRI Standard 700-
2016. Specifically, these standards are:

--2008 Appendix C for Analytical Procedures for AHRI Standard 700-
2014--Normative. This document establishes definitive test
procedures for determining the quality of new, reclaimed and/or
repackaged refrigerants in support of the standards established in
AHRI-700. An electronic copy of the appendix is available at
www.ahrinet.org. It is also available by mail at Air-Conditioning,
Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI), 2111 Wilson Boulevard,
Suite 500, Arlington, VA 22201. The cost of obtaining this standard
is not a significant financial burden. Therefore, EPA concludes that
the standard being incorporated by reference is reasonably
available.
--2012 Appendix D for Gas Chromatograms for AHRI Standard 700-2014--
Informative Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute.
This appendix provides figures for the gas chromatograms used with
Appendix C to AHRI Standard 700-2015: Normative. An electronic copy
of the appendix is available at www.ahrinet.org. It is also
available by mail at Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration
Institute (AHRI), 2111 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 500, Arlington, VA
22201. The cost of obtaining this standard is not a significant
financial burden. Therefore, EPA concludes that the standard being
incorporated by reference is reasonably available.
--Federal Specification for ``Fluorocarbon Refrigerants,'' BB-F-1421
B, dated March 5, 1982. This section of this standard establishes a
method to determine the boiling point and boiling point range of a
refrigerant. The standard is available in the docket for this
rulemaking. Therefore, EPA concludes that the standard being

incorporated by reference is reasonably available.
--GPA STD-2177, Analysis of Natural Gas Liquid Mixtures Containing
Nitrogen and Carbon Dioxide by Gas Chromatography, 2013, Gas
Processors Association. This standard establishes methods for
analyzing demethanized liquid hydrocarbon streams containing
nitrogen/air and carbon dioxide, and purity products such as ethane/
propane mix that fall within compositional ranges indicated in the
standard. The standard is available at www.techstreet.com or by
writing to Techstreet, 6300 Interfirst Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48108.
The cost of this standard is $55 for an electronic copy or $65 for a
printed edition. The cost of obtaining this standard is not a
significant financial burden. Therefore, EPA concludes that the
standard being incorporated by reference is reasonably available.
_ASTM Standard D1296-01-2012, Standard Test Method for Odor of
Volatile Solvents and Diluents, July 1, 2012, ASTM International.
This test method covers a comparative procedure for observing the
characteristic and residual odors of volatile organic solvents and
diluents to determine their odor acceptability in a solvent system.
The standard is available at www.astm.org or by writing to ASTM, 100
Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.
The cost of this standard is $39. The cost of obtaining this
standard is not a significant financial burden. Therefore, EPA
concludes that the standard being incorporated by reference is
reasonably available.

    EPA is not incorporating by reference AHRI Standard 740-2016,
Performance Rating of Refrigerant Recovery Equipment and Recovery/
Recycling Equipment. Rather EPA is basing the content found in
appendices B3 and B4 on this standard. This standard establishes
methods of testing for rating and evaluating the performance of
refrigerant recovery equipment and recovery/recycling equipment. The
standard is available at www.ahrinet.org or by mail at Air-
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI), 2111 Wilson
Blvd., Suite 500, Arlington, VA 22201. EPA is incorporating by
reference the standards referenced in AHRI Standard 740-2016.
Specifically, these standards are:

--ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 63.2-1996 (RA 2010) Method of Testing Liquid-
Line Filter Drier Filtration Capability, 2010, American National
Standards Institute/American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and
Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. The purpose of this standard is to
prescribe a laboratory test method for evaluating the filtration
capability of filters and filter driers used in liquid lines of
refrigeration systems. The standard is available at www.ashrae.org
or by mail at AHSRAE, 1791 Tullie Circle NE., Atlanta, GA 30329. The
cost is $39 for an electronic copy or printed edition. The cost of
obtaining this standard is not a significant financial burden.
Therefore, EPA concludes that the standard being incorporated by
reference is reasonably available.
_UL Standard 1963-2011, Refrigerant Recovery/Recycling Equipment,
Fourth Edition, 2011, American National Standards Institute/
Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. This standard establishes safety
requirements for and methods to evaluate refrigerant recovery and
refrigerant recovery/recycling equipment. The standard is available
at www.comm-2000.com or by writing to Comm 2000, 151 Eastern Avenue,
Bensenville, IL 60106. The cost is $798 for an electronic copy and
$998 for hardcopy. UL also offers a subscription service to the
Standards Certification Customer Library (SCCL) that allows
unlimited access to their standards and related documents. The cost
of obtaining this standard is not a significant financial burden for
equipment manufacturers. Therefore, EPA concludes that the UL
standard being incorporated by reference is reasonably available.
--AHRI Standard 110-2016, Air-Conditioning, Heating and
Refrigerating Equipment Nameplate Voltages, 2016, Air-Conditioning,
Heating, and Refrigeration Institute. This standard establishes
voltage rating requirements, equipment performance requirements, and
conformance conditions for air-conditioning, heating, and
refrigerating equipment. A free electronic copy of this standard is
available at www.ahrinet.org. It is also available by mail at Air-
Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI), 2111
Wilson Boulevard, Suite 500, Arlington, VA 22201. The cost of
obtaining this standard is not a significant financial burden.
Therefore, EPA concludes that the standard being incorporated by
reference is reasonably available.
--International Standard IEC 60038, IEC Standard Voltages, Edition
7.0, 2009-06, International Electrotechnical Commission. This
standard specifies standard voltage values which are intended to
serve as preferential values for the nominal voltage of electrical
supply systems, and as reference values for equipment and system
design. The standard is available at www.techstreet.com or by
writing to Techstreet, 6300 Interfirst Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48108.
The cost of this standard is $50. The cost of obtaining this
standard is not a significant financial burden. Therefore, EPA
concludes that the standard being incorporated by reference is
reasonably available.

    EPA is not incorporating by reference California Air Resources
Board, Test Procedure for Leaks from Small Containers of Automotive
Refrigerant, TP-503, as amended January 5, 2010. Rather EPA is basing
the content found in appendix E on this standard. This standard
establishes methods for assessing the leak rate from small containers
of refrigerant. A copy of this standard is available in the docket and
www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2009/hfc09/hfc09.htm.

III. EPA's Authority Under the Clean Air Act

A. Summary of EPA's Authority for the Revisions to Subpart F

    The authority for this action is provided primarily by section 608
of the CAA. Section 608 is divided into three subsections, which
together comprise the ``National Recycling and Emission Reduction
Program.'' Among other things, section 608 of the CAA requires EPA to
establish a comprehensive program to limit emissions of ozone-depleting
refrigerants. It also prohibits the knowing release or disposal of
ozone-depleting refrigerants and their substitutes in the course of
maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of air-conditioning and
refrigeration equipment in a manner which permits such a substance to
enter the environment. The three subsections of section 608 are
described in more detail in the following paragraphs.
    Section 608(a) requires EPA to establish standards and requirements
regarding use and disposal of class I and II substances. With regard to
refrigerants, EPA is to promulgate regulations establishing standards
and requirements for the use and disposal of class I and class II
substances during the maintenance, service, repair, or disposal of air-
conditioning and refrigeration appliances or IPR. Regulations under
section 608(a) are to include requirements to reduce the use and
emission of ODS to the lowest achievable level, and to maximize the
recapture and recycling of such substances. Section 608(a) further
provides that ``such regulations may include requirements to use
alternative substances (including substances which are not class I or
class II substances) or to minimize use of class I or class II
substances, or to promote the use of safe alternatives pursuant to
section [612] or any combination of the foregoing.''
    Section 608(b) requires that the regulations issued pursuant to
section 608(a) contain requirements for the safe disposal of class I
and class II substances, including requirements that such substances
shall be removed from such appliances, machines, or other goods prior
to the disposal of such items or their delivery for recycling.
    Section 608(c) establishes a self-effectuating prohibition,
commonly called the ``venting prohibition,'' that generally speaking,
makes it unlawful to knowingly release ODS and substitute refrigerants
in a way that allows the refrigerant to enter the environment

while maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of air-
conditioning or refrigeration equipment. More specifically, section
608(c)(1), effective July 1, 1992, makes it unlawful for any person in
the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of an
appliance or IPR to knowingly vent, release, or dispose of any ODS used
as a refrigerant in such equipment in a manner that permits that
substance to enter the environment. The statute exempts from this
prohibition ``[d]e minimis releases associated with good faith attempts
to recapture and recycle or safely dispose'' of such a substance.
Section 608(c)(2) extends the provisions of (c)(1), including the
prohibition on venting, to substitutes for class I or class II
refrigerants, effective November 15, 1995, unless the Administrator
determines that such venting, release, or disposal ``does not pose a
threat to the environment.'' EPA has determined through prior
rulemakings that specific substances do not pose a threat to the
environment when vented, released, or disposed of and has exempted
those specific substitutes from the venting prohibition. The full list
of substitutes that EPA has exempted from this prohibition is at 40 CFR
82.154(a). For some substitutes that have been exempted from the
venting prohibition under section 608(c)(2) and Sec.  82.154(a) the
exemption only applies when the substitute is used in specified
applications, but for others, the exemption is for the substitute
refrigerant as used in all applications.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ EPA is using the term ``non-exempt substitute'' in this
notice to refer to substitute refrigerants that have not been
exempted from the venting prohibition under CAA section 608(c)(2)
and 40 CFR 82.154(a) in the relevant end-use. Similarly, the term
``exempt substitute'' refers to a substitute refrigerant that has
been exempted from the venting prohibition under section 608(c)(2)
and Sec.  82.154(a) in the relevant end-use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The statutory standards under section 608(a) against which the
regulations concerning the use and disposal of ozone-depleting
substances are to be measured are whether they ``reduce the use and
emission of such substances to the lowest achievable level'' and
``maximize the recapture and recycling of such substances.'' These
standards are often complementary in the context of maintenance,
service, repair, and disposal of air conditioning and refrigerant
equipment. For example, in the context of recycling, maximizing
recycling will also help reduce the use and emission of these
substances to the lowest achievable level. These statutory standards
also bear a relationship to the de minimis releases addressed in
section 608(c). More specifically, emissions that occur while complying
with EPA's recovery and recycling regulations are considered de
minimis, because those regulations set forth practices and requirements
which result in the lowest achievable level of emissions. EPA has
established this interpretation in its regulations under section 608
for ODS refrigerants.
    On May 14, 1993, EPA published the original regulations
implementing subsections (a), (b), and (c)(1) for ODS refrigerants (58
FR 28660). These regulations include evacuation requirements for
appliances being serviced or disposed of, standards and testing
requirements for recovery and/or recycling equipment, certification
requirements for technicians, purity standards and testing requirements
for used refrigerant sold to a new owner, certification requirements
for refrigerant reclaimers, leak repair requirements, and requirements
for the safe disposal of appliances that enter the waste stream with
the charge intact. This rule also stated that the Agency interprets
``de minimis'' to mean releases that occur while the recycling and
recovery requirements of regulations under sections 608 and 609 are
followed. However, those requirements only applied to ODS refrigerants,
and these regulations did not explain how the venting prohibition or
the de minimis exemption applied for substitute refrigerants. Among
other things, this rulemaking addresses that gap in the regulations.
1. Applying Regulations Under Section 608 to Substitute Refrigerants
    In this rule, EPA is extending, as appropriate, provisions of the
refrigerant recovery and/or recycling regulations, which previously had
only applied to ODS refrigerants, to non-exempt substitute
refrigerants. To summarize briefly, EPA's authority for this action
rests largely on section 608(c), which EPA interprets to provide it
authority to promulgate regulations that interpret, explain, and
enforce the venting prohibition and the de minimis exemption, as they
apply to both ODS refrigerants and non-exempt substitute refrigerants.
Accordingly, this rule establishes a comprehensive and consistent
framework that applies to both ODS and non-exempt substitute
refrigerants. This, in turn, provides clarity to the regulated
community concerning the measures that should be taken to comply with
the venting prohibition for non-exempt substitutes and reduces
confusion and enhances compliance for both ODS and non-exempt
substitutes.\9\ EPA's authority to issue regulations for section 608(c)
is supplemented by section 301(a), which provides authority for EPA to
``prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out [the EPA
Administrator's] functions under this Act.'' In addition, EPA's
authority to extend the recordkeeping and reporting requirements to
non-exempt substitutes is supplemented by section 114, which provides
authority to the EPA Administrator to require recordkeeping and
reporting in carrying out provisions of the CAA. Finally, the extension
of requirements under section 608 to non-exempt substitutes in this
rule is also supported by section 608(a) because having a consistent
regulatory framework for non-exempt substitutes and ODS is expected to
reduce emissions of ODS refrigerants, as well as non-exempt
substitutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ EPA used an analogous analysis in promulgating the
regulations for section 608 originally. In that rulemaking, EPA
explained that extending regulatory requirements to class II
substances (rather than only regulating class I substances) would
facilitate compliance with the venting prohibition, in part by
providing clear guidance to technicians recovering class II
substances on what releases do and do not constitute violations of
the prohibition. 58 FR 28667. EPA also explained that it was
desirable to provide a ``clear, consistent framework for fully
implementing the prohibition on venting for all refrigerants'' to
``minimize confusion and maximize compliance with the prohibition.''
58 FR 28666.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 608 of the CAA is ambiguous with regard to EPA's authority
to establish refrigerant management regulations for substitute
refrigerants. As Congress has not precisely spoken to this issue, EPA
has the discretion to adopt a permissible interpretation of the CAA.
Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837,
843-44 (1984). Primarily under the authority of section 608(a), EPA has
established standards for the proper handling of ODS refrigerants
during the maintenance, service, repair, or disposal of an appliance to
maximize the recovery and/or recycling of such substances and reduce
the use and emission of such substances. Section 608(a) expressly
requires EPA to promulgate regulations that apply to class I and class
II substances, but is silent on whether its requirements apply to
substitute substances. On the other hand, section 608(c)(2) contains
provisions for substitute refrigerants which parallel those for ODS
refrigerants in section 608(c)(1). For instance, as for ODS
refrigerants under section 608(c)(1), section 608(c)(2) prohibits
knowingly venting, releasing, or disposing of any substitute
refrigerant in the course of maintaining, servicing, repairing, or
disposing of an appliance

in a manner which permits the substance to enter the environment.\10\
This creates a tension or ambiguity because the regulated community is
subject to an explicit and self-effectuating prohibition on venting,
releasing, or disposing of non-exempt substitute refrigerants while
maintaining, servicing, repairing, or disposing of equipment but at the
same time is not explicitly required by section 608(a) to recover
substitute refrigerant prior to servicing or disposing of equipment or
to engage in any of the practices or behaviors that EPA has established
to minimize the emission and release of ODS refrigerants during such
maintenance, service, repair, or disposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ As noted previously, this venting prohibition does not
apply to substitutes for which the Administrator has made a
determination that such venting, release, or disposal ``does not
pose a threat to the environment'' under CAA 608(c)(2). As indicated
elsewhere in this notice, EPA is not extending the requirements of
the refrigerant management program to substitutes that have been
exempted from the venting prohibition in this action. Where a
substitute has been exempted only in specific uses, the requirements
in this rule apply to uses in which the substitute has not been
exempted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, some amount of refrigerant, whether ODS or substitute, is
inevitably released during the maintenance, servicing, repair, and
disposal of air-conditioning or refrigeration appliances or equipment.
Without a clear regulatory framework for determining what requirements
apply during the maintenance, servicing, repair, and disposal of such
equipment containing a non-exempt substitute refrigerant, the regulated
community and the public would not have the same measure of certainty
as to whether such releases violate the venting prohibition or fall
within the de minimis exemption to that prohibition, and what steps
must be taken to comply with CAA obligations for such substitute
refrigerants in undertaking such actions. Accordingly, this rulemaking
finalizes regulations to interpret and explain how the venting
prohibition and the de minimis exemption apply to non-exempt substitute
refrigerants. In doing so, EPA is clarifying that the regulated
community that uses non-exempt substitute refrigerants may rely on the
de minimis exemption to the venting prohibition if they follow the
amended requirements in subpart F.
    Consistent with the language of sections 608(c)(1) and (2), this
rule aims to avoid knowing releases of non-exempt substitute
refrigerants into the environment in the course of maintaining,
servicing, repairing, or disposing of an appliance or IPR, unless those
releases meet the criteria for the de minimis exemption. Section
608(c)(1) provides an exemption from the venting prohibition for ``[d]e
minimis releases associated with good faith attempts to recapture and
recycle or safely dispose of any such [class I or class II]
substance.'' In this context, EPA interprets this provision to exempt
releases that occur while the recycling and recovery requirements of
regulations under sections 608 and 609 are followed and has promulgated
regulations consistent with that interpretation.
    In particular, EPA has incorporated both the venting prohibition
and the de minimis exemption into the regulations at Sec.  82.154(a).
Further, the last sentence in the existing regulations at Sec.
82.154(a)(2) provides that ``refrigerant releases shall be considered
de minimis only if they occur when'' enumerated regulatory practices in
subpart F or, alternatively, subpart B are followed. These subpart F
requirements are the ones established in the 1993 rule mentioned above,
and as periodically amended. The term refrigerant, however, was defined
in Sec.  82.152 for purposes of subpart F to mean ``any substance
consisting in part or whole of a class I or class II ozone-depleting
substance that is used for heat transfer purposes and provides a
cooling effect.'' This definition did not include substitute
substances. In addition, EPA had not yet applied the recycling and
recovery requirements to non-ODS substitutes, and therefore these
provisions which make clear how to qualify for the de minimis exemption
for ODS refrigerants did not apply to substitute refrigerants.
    EPA interprets section 608(c) such that the statutory de minimis
exemption contained in section 608(c)(1) also applies to substitute
refrigerants. Section 608(c)(2) states that, effective November 15,
1995, ``paragraph 1 shall also apply'' to the venting, release, or
disposal of any substitute substance for class I or class II
substances. As section 608(c)(2) incorporates ``paragraph 1'' it is
reasonable to interpret it to also contain this de minimis exemption,
which is included in paragraph 1 of section 608(c). However, the Act's
exemption applies only to those de minimis releases ``associated with
good faith attempts to recapture and recycle or safely dispose of
refrigerants'' and the Act does not explicitly address what would be
considered such ``good faith attempts to recapture and recycle or
safely dispose'' of either ODS or substitute refrigerants. In fact,
Title VI does not contain any further explanation or definition of
those terms. Moreover, the statutory provisions that require EPA to
promulgate regulations addressing recapturing and recycling
requirements and safe disposal requirements in section 608(a) and
608(b) expressly mention that they apply to ODS refrigerants but are
silent as to application to substitute refrigerants. This silence and
the corresponding tension between these provisions creates an ambiguity
in section 608 and EPA may fill that gap with a permissible
interpretation. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council,
Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 843-44 (1984).
    Consistent with the interpretation of section 608(c)(2) as
incorporating the de minimis exemption, prior to this rulemaking EPA's
regulations at Sec.  82.154(a)(2) stated that ``[d]e minimis releases
associated with good faith attempts to recycle or recover . . . non-
exempt substitutes are not subject to this prohibition,'' thus applying
the statutory de minimis exemption from the venting prohibition to good
faith efforts to recycle or recover non-exempt substitute refrigerants.
However, in contrast to the regulations for ODS refrigerants, the
regulations did not provide any specific provisions to explain what
constitutes such a ``good faith attempt'' with respect to substitute
refrigerants. Thus, the prior regulations were unclear as to what
requirements or practices regulated parties must follow to qualify for
the de minimis exemption, and thereby comply with the venting
prohibition, for non-exempt substitute refrigerants.
    EPA has discussed this issue in previous notices. On June 11, 1998,
EPA proposed to apply the de minimis exemption in section 608(c)(1) to
substitute refrigerants and to issue regulations under section
608(c)(2) that interpret, clarify, and enforce the venting prohibition
for substitutes (63 FR 32044). EPA stated in that proposed rule,
``[w]hile section 608(c) is self-effectuating, EPA regulations are
necessary to define `(d)e minimis releases associated with good faith
attempts to recapture and recycle or safely dispose' of such substances
and to effectively implement and enforce the venting prohibition.'' 63
FR 32046.
    In the final rule issued March 12, 2004 (69 FR 11946), EPA extended
the regulations interpreting and enforcing the 608(c)(1) de minimis
exemption to blends containing an ODS component but not to refrigerants
containing only substitutes. As stated in that rule at 69 FR 11949:

    [V]enting of all substitute refrigerants, including HFC and PFC
refrigerants (and

blends thereof) is prohibited under section 608(c), with the
exception of de minimis releases associated with good faith attempts
to recapture and recycle. The de minimis releases exception,
however, is not self-effectuating, nor is it self-explanatory.
    EPA believes that regulatory clarification is necessary to
define such `[d]e minimis releases' and `good faith attempts to
recapture and recycle or safely dispose of any such substance' and
safely dispose of appliances to effectively implement and enforce
the venting prohibition. Section 608(c)(1) in conjunction with
608(c)(2) of the Act allow for an exemption for de minimis releases
associated with good faith attempts to recapture and recycle or
safely dispose of substitutes for class I and class II ODSs used as
refrigerants. A regulation reflecting the statutory requirement for
recovery of substitute refrigerants is an essential part of a
regulatory framework within which de minimis releases and good faith
attempts to recapture and recycle or safely dispose of substitute
refrigerants can be defined.

    This interpretation that the statutory de minimis exemption applies
to substitutes but is not self-explanatory is consistent with the
interpretation of section 608(c)(1) and (2) that EPA articulates in
this section. However, in the March 2004 Rule EPA did not finalize its
proposal to extend all of the subpart F regulations to substitute
refrigerants. See 69 FR 11953.
    Following the March 12, 2004, rulemaking, the Administrator
promulgated a direct final rule to amend the regulatory definitions of
refrigerant and technician, as well as the venting prohibition, to
correct and clarify the intent of those regulations (70 FR 19273, April
13, 2005). As part of that rule, EPA edited the regulatory venting
prohibition to reflect the statutory de minimis exemption in section
608(c)(2). As explained at 70 FR 19275:

    In accordance with section 608(c)(2) of Title VI of the Clean
Air Act (as amended in 1990), de minimis releases associated with
good faith attempts to recapture and recycle or safely dispose of
such substitutes shall not be subject to the prohibition. EPA has
not promulgated regulations mandating certification of refrigerant
recycling/recovery equipment intended for use with substitutes;
therefore, EPA is not including a regulatory provision for the
mandatory use of certified recovery/recycling equipment as an option
for determining de minimis releases of substitutes. However, the
lack of a regulatory provision should not be interpreted as an
exemption to the venting prohibition for non-exempted substitutes.
The regulatory prohibition at Sec.  82.154(a) reflects the statutory
reference to de minimis releases of substitutes as they pertain to
good faith attempts to recapture and recycle or safely dispose of
such substitutes.
    In order to emphasize that the knowing venting of HFC and PFC
substitutes remains illegal during the maintenance, service, repair,
and disposal of appliances and to make certain that the de minimis
exemption for refrigerants remains in the regulatory prohibition,
Sec.  82.154(a) is amended to reflect the venting prohibition of
section 608(c)(2) of the Act.

    In that action, EPA added the phrase ``[d]e minimis releases
associated with good faith attempts to recycle or recover refrigerants
or non-exempt substitutes are not subject to this prohibition'' to
Sec.  82.154(a)(2) (emphasis added). However, because EPA has not
extended the regulatory recycling and recovery requirements to
substitute refrigerants, the regulations have not provided clarity or
certainty how this exception applies to non-exempt substitute
refrigerants that do not contain an ODS. Moreover, as for ODS, some
amount of substitute refrigerant is released during the maintenance,
servicing, repair, or disposal of appliances, even if precautions to
avoid such releases are taken. For ODS refrigerants, the rules have
provided certainty to the regulated community that if specific
identified practices are followed, regulated entities would not be held
liable for releases of small amounts of refrigerant incidental to these
actions. These regulations have supported the recovery or recycling of
ODS refrigerants and reduced the emissions of such substances. In other
words, for ODS, EPA has reasonably interpreted the de minimis exemption
to apply only to the small amount of emissions that cannot be prevented
by following the regulatory requirements. This interpretation of the de
minimis exemption is equally reasonable for non-exempt substitute
refrigerants. Accordingly, to provide the same clarity and certainty to
the regulated community for substitute refrigerants, it is important to
clarify how this exemption applies to non-exempt substitute
refrigerants that do not contain an ODS. To do so, EPA is finalizing
its proposal to extend the amended regulations concerning emissions
reduction and recapture and recycling of CFC and HCFC refrigerants,
found at 40 CFR part 82, subpart F, to all substitute refrigerants that
have not been exempted from the venting prohibition under Sec.
82.154(a)(1).
    These regulations establish standards and requirements related to
the maintenance, servicing, repair, or disposal of appliances and IPR
that use ODS or non-exempt substitutes as refrigerants. They are
designed to minimize or avoid knowing releases or disposal, in the
course of those activities, of ODS and non-exempt substitute
refrigerants in a manner which allows that substance to enter the
environment. For example, the regulations establish requirements to
minimize emissions during appliance maintenance, servicing, or repair
(e.g., by requiring that technicians recover refrigerant from an
appliance before servicing and by setting standards for the repair of
appliances that have leaked above the applicable threshold), as well as
disposal (e.g., by requiring the use of certified recovery equipment to
remove refrigerant from the appliance before the final disposal).
Accordingly, the regulations finalized in this action fall within the
scope of EPA's authority to interpret and explain the venting
prohibition, and to give regulated entities greater certainty about
what is required to comply.
    EPA is also adopting a broader interpretation of the venting
prohibition under CAA sections 608(c)(1) and (2) in this action. As
discussed in more detail in the proposal for this action (80 FR 69486),
in the 1993 Rule EPA stated that the venting prohibition did not
``prohibit `topping off' systems, which leads to emissions during the
use of equipment'' but explained that the ``provision on knowing
releases does however, include the situation in which a technician is
practically certain that his or her conduct will cause a release of
refrigerant during the maintenance, service, repair, or disposal of
equipment'' or fails to appropriately investigate facts that demand
investigation (58 FR 28672). The proposal also explained that EPA had
subsequently moved toward a broader interpretation of the venting
prohibition in the proposed 2010 Leak Repair Rule (80 FR 69486, quoting
75 FR 78570). EPA concludes that its statements in the 1993 Rule
presented an overly narrow interpretation of the statutory venting
prohibition. Consistent with the direction articulated in the proposed
2010 Leak Repair Rule, EPA is adopting a broader interpretation. When
refrigerant must be added to an existing appliance, other than when
originally charging the system or for a seasonal variance, the owner or
operator necessarily knows that the system has leaks. At that point the
owner or operator is required to calculate the leak rate. If the leaks
exceed the applicable leak rate for that particular type of appliance,
the owner or operator will know that absent repairs, subsequent
additions of refrigerant will be released in a manner that will permit
the refrigerant to enter the environment. Therefore, EPA interprets
section 608(c) such that if a person adds refrigerant to an appliance
that he or she knows is leaking, he or she also violates the venting
prohibition unless he or she has complied with the applicable practices

referenced in Sec.  82.154(a)(2), as revised, including the leak repair
requirements, as applicable.
    This action extending the regulations under subpart F to non-exempt
substitutes is additionally supported by the authority in section
608(a) because regulations that minimize the release and maximize the
recapture and recovery of non-exempt substitutes will also reduce the
release and increase the recovery of ozone-depleting substances.
Improper handling of substitute refrigerants is likely to contaminate
appliances and recovery cylinders with mixtures of ODS and non-ODS
substitutes, which can lead to illegal venting because such mixtures
are difficult or expensive to reclaim or appropriately dispose of.
Under the prior definition of refrigerant, any substance that consists
in whole or in part of a class I or class II ODS and is used for heat
transfer and provides a cooling effect, is a refrigerant and is subject
to the requirements for ODS. However, when a regulated entity believes
it is using a substitute refrigerant, and that substitute becomes
contaminated with ODS, the contamination may not be apparent to the
user, and thus, the user may not be aware that the requirements for
refrigerants apply to that substance. This confusion can also lead to
illegal venting of ODS. In short, the authority to promulgate
regulations regarding the use of class I and II substances encompasses
the authority to establish regulations regarding the proper handling of
substitutes where this is needed to reduce emissions and maximize
recapture and recycling of class I and II substances. Applying
consistent requirements to all non-exempt refrigerants will reduce
complexity and increase clarity for the regulated community and promote
compliance with those requirements for ODS refrigerants, as well as
their substitutes.
2. Recordkeeping Provisions
    In this action, EPA is also establishing new recordkeeping
requirements, as well as extending existing recordkeeping requirements
to non-exempt substitutes. EPA's authority to establish and extend
these requirements is supported by CAA sections 608(a), 608(c), and
114, consistent with the description of these authorities offered
above. These new recordkeeping requirements are an important part of
EPA's efforts to address illegal venting of refrigerants, improve
accounting of refrigerants in affected appliances, and facilitate
enforcement of requirements under section 608. For example, EPA is
establishing a new recordkeeping requirement for the disposal of
appliances containing more than five and less than 50 pounds of
refrigerant. Section 608(a) gives EPA explicit authority to implement
requirements that reduce ODS refrigerant emissions to the lowest
achievable level. This recordkeeping requirement, along with other
recordkeeping requirements in this rule, further the recovery,
reclamation, and/or destruction of ODS refrigerants and discourages the
illegal venting of such refrigerants from affected appliances. Because
it minimizes the emission of ODS refrigerant, EPA has authority for
this requirement as it relates to ODS appliances under 608(a).
Additionally, providing a consistent standard for ODS and non-exempt
substitute refrigerants will facilitate the recovery, reclamation, and/
or destruction of both ODS and non-ODS refrigerants and, accordingly,
will reduce the emission of such refrigerants. EPA will continue to
evaluate how best to use the information to promote the recovery of
refrigerants and compliance with these provisions.
    EPA also has authority under section 114 of the CAA to require that
technicians document that appliances containing an ODS refrigerant or a
non-exempt substitute refrigerant have been properly evacuated prior to
disposal. Section 114 of the CAA provides the primary authority to
establish these recordkeeping and reporting requirements because it
provides EPA authority to require recordkeeping and reporting in
carrying out provisions of the CAA, including the venting prohibition
under CAA sections 608(c) and the requirements under 608(a). Because
these records will help EPA determine whether requirements under
sections 608(c) and 608(a) are being complied with, this requirement
falls within the scope of section 114.
3. Amendments Related to Practices and Requirements for ODS
    In addition to extending the existing regulations in subpart F to
non-exempt substitute refrigerants, EPA is also revising and augmenting
the existing requirements that apply to ozone-depleting substances,
including: Lowered leak rates, periodic leak inspections for equipment
that has leaked above the leak threshold, leak repair verification
tests, and recordkeeping requirements for the disposal of appliances
containing more than five and less than 50 pounds of refrigerant. EPA
is also finalizing its proposal to update and revise subpart F to
improve clarity and enforceability. EPA's authority for these
amendments is based primarily on section 608(a), which requires EPA to
promulgate regulations regarding the use and disposal of class I and II
substances to ``reduce the use and emission of such substances to the
lowest achievable level'' and ``maximize the recapture and recycling of
such substances.'' In addition, because EPA is further elaborating the
requirements and practices that regulated parties must follow to
qualify for the de minimis exemption from the venting prohibition for
ODS, EPA is drawing on its authority under section 608(c)(1). EPA's
authority for these actions is also supplemented by section 301(a) and
114, in the same way as described earlier in this notice.
4. Provisions Related to MVAC and MVAC-Like Appliances
    While section 608 covers all appliances,\11\ section 609 of the CAA
directs EPA to establish requirements to prevent the release of
refrigerants during the servicing of MVACs specifically. MVACs are
defined under EPA's section 608 implementing regulations at 40 CFR part
82, subpart F as ``any appliance that is a motor vehicle air
conditioner as defined in 40 CFR part 82, subpart B.'' 40 CFR 82.152.
Under section 609, in 40 CFR part 82, subpart B, MVACs are defined as
``mechanical vapor compression refrigeration equipment used to cool the
driver's or passenger's compartment of any motor vehicle. . . .'' 40
CFR 82.32(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For EPA's discussion on the definition of appliance, see
Section IV.A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A motor vehicle is defined under subpart B as ``any vehicle which
is self-propelled and designed for transporting persons or property on
a street or highway, including but not limited to passenger cars, light
duty vehicles, and heavy duty vehicles. This definition does not
include a vehicle where final assembly of the vehicle has not been
completed by the original equipment manufacturer.'' 40 CFR 82.32(c).
    Under section 609, no person repairing or servicing motor vehicles
for consideration may perform any service on an MVAC that involves the
refrigerant without properly using approved refrigerant recovery or
recovery and recycling equipment and no such person may perform such
service unless such person has been properly trained and certified.
Refrigerant handling equipment must be certified by EPA or an
independent organization approved by EPA. Section 609 also prohibits
the sale or distribution of any class I or class II MVAC refrigerant in
a container of less

than 20 pounds to any person who is not certified under section 609.
    Regulations issued under section 609 are in 40 CFR part 82, subpart
B, and include information on prohibitions and required practices
(Sec.  82.34), approved refrigerant handling equipment (Sec.  82.36),
approved independent standards testing organizations (Sec.  82.38),
requirements for technician certification and training programs (Sec.
82.40), and certification, recordkeeping, and public notification
requirements (Sec.  82.42). Appendices A-F of subpart B provide
standards for minimum operating requirements for MVAC servicing
equipment.
    Because MVACs are defined in subpart F as an ``appliance'' (Sec.
82.152), the section 608 regulations found in subpart F are generally
applicable to MVAC systems. However, because servicing and technician
training and certification are regulated under section 609, EPA's
section 608 regulations in subpart F defer to those requirements in
subpart B. Procedures involving MVACs that are not regulated under
section 609, such as the disposal of MVACs and the purchase of
refrigerant for use in MVACs besides ODS refrigerant in containers less
than 20 pounds, are covered by section 608. The prohibition in section
608 against venting ODS and substitute refrigerants is also applicable
to refrigerants used in MVAC systems.
    EPA also regulates MVAC-like appliances under subpart B. MVAC-like
appliances are used to cool the driver's or passenger's compartment of
off-road vehicles, including agricultural and construction
vehicles.\12\ While these types of systems are outside of the scope of
the definition of motor vehicle established in subpart B, there are
similarities between MVAC-like appliances and MVAC systems. In the 1993
Rule, under the authority of section 608, EPA adopted requirements for
the certification and use of recycling equipment for MVAC-like
appliances in subpart B. MVAC-like appliances may only be serviced by a
certified technician and this requirement is not limited to those
servicing for consideration, but MVAC-like technicians have the option
to be certified under section 608 or 609.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ We are amending the subpart F definition of ``MVAC-like
appliance'' to replace the term ``off-road motor vehicle'' with the
term ``off-road vehicles or equipment.'' This revision is not
intended to effect a substantive change in the equipment covered by
this definition but rather simply is intended to clarify the
definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Through this rulemaking EPA is finalizing its proposal to apply the
provisions of section 608 to non-exempt ODS substitutes, including
those used in MVAC and MVAC-like appliances. EPA is not extending the
regulations under section 609 as part of this rulemaking because the
609 regulations have been applicable to all substitute substances since
1995.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The Agency has indicated plans to issue a separate proposed
rule to consider adopting standards from the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE) for servicing equipment in 40 CFR subpart B. These
standards are: SAE J2843 R-1234yf Recovery/Recycling/Recharging
Equipment for Flammable Refrigerants for Mobile Air-Conditioning
Systems, SAE J2851 Recovery Equipment for Contaminated Refrigerant
from Mobile Automotive Air Conditioning Systems, and SAE J3030
Automotive Refrigerant Recovery/Recycling Equipment Intended for Use
with Multiple Refrigerants. In a future rulemaking, EPA intends to
propose to incorporate by reference these standards developed by SAE
International's Interior Climate Control Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Consideration of Economic Factors
    Section 608 of the CAA does not explicitly address whether costs or
benefits should be considered in developing regulations under that
section. The statutory standards under section 608(a) against which the
regulations concerning the use and disposal of ozone-depleting
substances are to be measured are whether they ``reduce the use and
emission of such substances to the lowest achievable level'' and
``maximize the recapture and recycling of such substances.'' The phrase
``lowest achievable level'' as used in section 608(a)(3) is not clear
on its face as to whether economic factors should be considered in
determining what is the ``lowest achievable level.'' Title VI does not
further explain or define the term nor does it expressly state whether
economic factors may or must be considered. Thus, EPA has discretion to
adopt a reasonable interpretation. EPA has previously interpreted this
phrase to allow the consideration of economic factors. See 58 FR 28659,
28667 (May 14, 1993). EPA did not propose to revise that interpretation
and has considered economic as well as technological factors in the
development of this rule.
    The phrase ``de minimis releases associated with good faith
attempts to recapture and recycle or safely dispose of any such
substance'' as used in section 608(c)(1) and as applied to substitutes
through section 608(c)(2) is similarly not clear on its face as to
whether economic factors may be considered in determining what is de
minimis. Title VI does not further address this issue. Thus, EPA has
discretion to adopt a reasonable interpretation. EPA interprets this
phrase to allow the consideration of economic factors. The Senate
Manager's Statement for the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 indicates
that ``the exception is included to account for the fact that in the
course of properly using recapture and recycling equipment, it may not
be possible to prevent some small amount of leakage'' (Cong. Rec. S
16948 (Oct. 27, 1990), reprinted in 1 A Legislative History of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, at 929 (1993)). EPA does not read
this statement as expressing an intent that the Agency consider only
technological factors in setting standards for recapture and recycling
equipment and the proper use of such equipment. Rather, EPA understands
it as meaning that once those standards are set, only the small amount
of emissions that cannot be prevented by following such standards
should be exempted.
    Because the statutory language does not dictate a particular means
of taking economic factors into account, if at all, EPA has discretion
to adopt a reasonable method for doing so. In developing this rule, EPA
has not applied a strict cost-benefit test, but rather has focused
primarily on the state of air conditioning and refrigeration best
practices and recovery technology, while also giving consideration to
costs and benefits. The fact that industry has identified and uses
these best practices indicates they are affordable.
    EPA considered cost for many specific aspects of this rule. For
instance, as discussed in the leak repair section (Section IV.F of this
notice), EPA considered what is achievable from a technical
perspective, while also considering the costs of those practices and
technologies and the benefits from their use, when determining whether
to establish new requirements and extending existing requirements to
non-exempt substitute refrigerants. See the technical support document
Analysis of the Economic Impact and Benefits of Final Revisions to the
National Recycling and Emission Reduction Program in the docket for
sensitivity analyses conducted on various options. Generally, the leak
repair requirements finalized in this action take into account that the
variability of those conditions in the field is significant in each
air-conditioning and refrigeration sector. For example, some appliances
generally have more leaks than others. An industrial process
refrigeration appliance can have thousands of pounds of refrigerant
running through miles of piping, resulting in numerous opportunities
for leaks to occur, whereas a household refrigerator typically has
about one pound of refrigerant in a hermetically sealed refrigerant
loop that rarely leaks. The

requirements in this rule reflect that difference.
    As another example, EPA considered the costs of extending the
refrigerant sales restriction to small cans of non-exempt substitutes
used for MVAC servicing. EPA decided a more cost effective method of
reducing emissions is requiring that manufacturers install self-sealing
valves on small cans rather than limiting the sale of small cans to
certified technicians only. As a final example of how EPA considered
costs in this rulemaking, EPA relied heavily on the existing program
and requirements already in place for ODS refrigerants rather than
developing a new and separate set of requirements for non-exempt
substitutes. This will allow the regulated community to in many
instances use or adapt existing compliance procedures for non-exempt
substitutes rather than having to develop wholly new approaches to
managing compliance. This approach should help regulated entities to
better predict and manage compliance costs.

B. Comments and Responses Related to EPA's Authority

    This section summarizes many comments related to EPA's authority
under the Clean Air Act to issue this rule and EPA's responses. Other
comments related to EPA's authority for this action are addressed in
the response to comments document found in the docket for this action.
1. Comment: EPA Does Not Have Authority To Regulate Substitutes That
Have Limited or No Impact on Stratospheric Ozone Under Section 608
    Some comments asserted that EPA does not have the authority to
extend the existing refrigerant management provisions in subpart F to
non-ozone depleting refrigerants. Some commenters stated that under a
plain language reading of section 608(a) it is clear that regulations
to reduce use and emissions apply only to class I and class II
substances and not substitutes. These comments said the language of
section 608 as a whole authorizes a wide range of prescriptive