Jump to main content.
Proposed Rule on the Listing of Ozone Depleting Substitutes in Foam Blowing Fact Sheet
ACTION
- EPA is proposing two things in this rule:
- to list HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b as unacceptable
substitutes for HCFC-141b in the foam end-uses of
commercial refrigeration and sandwich panels, slabstock
and other foam applications and,
- to list HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b as unacceptable
substitutes for CFC-11 and CFC-12 in all foam-end
uses.
- There will be a 30-day comment period on this rule
after publication in the Federal Register. For more
information, please see the How to Comment section.
What are the Effects of Today’s Action?
- If finalized, this rule would prohibit any new use of
HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b in all foam end- uses effective 30
days after publication of the final rule in the Federal
Register. Existing use of HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b would be
grandfathered until January 1, 2010.
- This rule is noncontroversial because the majority of
the foam industry has either already transitioned to
non-ozone depleting alternatives or is allowed to use
HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b until January 1, 2010.
Background
- Under the Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP)
program (Section 612 of the Clean Air Act), EPA reviews
alternatives to Class I and Class II ozone depleting
substances (ODS) and approves use of alternatives which
reduce the overall risk to public health and the
environment. A major goal of the SNAP program is to
expedite the transition from ODS to alternatives.
- Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) are compounds made of
hydrogen, chlorine, fluorine, and carbon. HCFCs deplete the
ozone layer to a lesser extent than chlorofluorocarbons
(CFCs).
- A separate, unrelated regulation established a phaseout
schedule for HCFCs. The elimination of production and
import for most end-uses of HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b will
begin on January 1, 2010.
- OAR is initiating this rulemaking based on information
and activities since the publication of a final rule on
July 22, 2002, part of which was challenged by Honeywell
International in a suit filed in the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the Court).
Honeywell alleged that EPA improperly considered costs in
allowing narrowed use of HCFC-22 and HCFC-142b in specific
foam applications. While EPA argued that the decision was
based solely on technical feasibility, the Court upheld
that part of Honeywell’s challenge. In light of the
Court’s decision, EPA is required to reassess its
action with respect to the acceptability of HCFC-22 and
HCFC-142b as substitutes for HCFC-141b in commercial
refrigeration and sandwich panels, slabstock and other
foam.
How to Comment
- EPA will accept comments on this proposal for 30 days
after publication in the Federal Register. If a hearing is
requested the comment period will be extended for an
additional 30 days.
- All comments should be identified by Docket ID No.
OAR-2004-0507 and be submitted by one of the following
methods:
- Federal eRulemaking portal
www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments;
- Agency Website:
www.epa.gov/edocket.
EDOCKET, EPA’s electronic public docket and comment
system, is EPA’s preferred method for receiving
comments. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments;
- Fax comments to (202) 566-1741; or
- Mail/hand delivery: Submit comments to Air and
Radiation Docket at EPA West, 1301 Constitution Avenue
NW, Room B108, Mail Code 6102T, Washington, DC 20460,
Phone: (202) 566-1742.
For Further Information
- Additional information on the use of HCFCs and
alternatives in foam can be found at the following address:
http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap
Jump to main content.
![[logo] US EPA](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/eot2008/20080918004749im_/http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}