Protection of Stratospheric Ozone
Related Material
[Federal Register: February 18, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 32)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 8038-8043]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18fe99-27]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 82
[FRL-6301-7]
RIN 2060-AG12
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 8039]]
SUMMARY: This action proposes to list as acceptable with restrictions
two substitutes for ozone depleting substances (ODSs) under the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Significant New Alternatives
Policy (SNAP) program. SNAP implements section 612 of the amended Clean
Air Act of 1990, which requires EPA to evaluate substitutes for the
ODSs to reduce overall risk to human health and the environment.
Through these evaluations, SNAP generates lists of acceptable and
unacceptable substitutes for each of the major industrial use sectors.
The intended effect of the SNAP program is to expedite movement away
from ozone depleting compounds while avoiding a shift into substitutes
posing other environmental problems.
On March 18, 1994, EPA promulgated a final rulemaking setting forth
its plan for administering the SNAP program (59 FR 13044), and issued
decisions on the acceptability and unacceptability of a number of
substitutes. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), EPA is
issuing its preliminary decisions on the acceptability of halon
substitutes in the fire suppression and explosion protection sector
which have not previously been reviewed by the Agency. To arrive at
determinations on the acceptability of substitutes, the Agency
completed a cross-media evaluation of risks to human health and the
environment by sector end-use.
DATES: Written comments or data provided in response to this document
must be submitted by April 19, 1999. A public hearing will be held if
requested in writing. If a public hearing is requested, EPA will
provide notice of the date, time and location of the hearing in a
subsequent Federal Register notice. For further information, please
contact the SNAP Coordinator at the address listed below under For
Further Information.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and data should be sent to Docket A-91-42,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAR Docket and Information
Center, Room M-1500, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460. The
docket may be inspected between 8 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. on weekdays.
Telephone (202) 260-7548; fax (202) 260-4400. As provided in 40 CFR,
Part 2, a reasonable fee may be charged for photocopying. To expedite
review, a second copy of the comments should be sent to Kelly Davis at
the address listed below under For Further Information. Information
designated as Confidential Business Information (CBI) under 40 CFR,
Part 2, Subpart B, must be sent directly to the contact person for this
notice. However, the Agency is requesting that all respondents submit a
non-confidential version of their comments to the docket as well.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Davis at (202) 564-2303 or fax
(202) 565-2096, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 6205-J,
401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460. Overnight or courier
deliveries should be sent to our 501-3rd Street, NW, Washington, DC,
20001 location.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Overview of This Action
This action is divided into four sections:
I. Section 612 Program
A. Statutory Requirements
B. Regulatory History
II. Proposed Listing of Substitutes
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
B. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
E. Applicability of Executive Order 13045: Children's Health
Protection
F. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing Intergovernmental
Partnerships
G. The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
IV. Additional Information
I. Section 612 Program
A. Statutory Requirements
Section 612 of the Clean Air Act authorizes EPA to develop a
program for evaluating alternatives to ozone-depleting substances. EPA
is referring to this program as the Significant New Alternatives Policy
(SNAP) program. The major provisions of section 612 are:
Rulemaking--Section 612(c) requires EPA to promulgate rules making
it unlawful to replace any class I (chlorofluorocarbon, halon, carbon
tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, methyl bromide, and
hydrobromofluorocarbon) or class II (hydrochlorofluorocarbon) substance
with any substitute that the Administrator determines may present
adverse effects to human health or the environment where the
Administrator has identified an alternative that (1) reduces the
overall risk to human health and the environment, and (2) is currently
or potentially available.
Listing of Unacceptable/Acceptable Substitutes--Section 612(c) also
requires EPA to publish a list of the substitutes unacceptable for
specific uses. EPA must publish a corresponding list of acceptable
alternatives for specific uses.
Petition Process--Section 612(d) grants the right to any person to
petition EPA to add a substitute to or delete a substitute from the
lists published in accordance with section 612(c). The Agency has 90
days to grant or deny a petition. Where the Agency grants the petition,
EPA must publish the revised lists within an additional six months.
90-day Notification--Section 612(e) requires EPA to require any
person who produces a chemical substitute for a class I substance to
notify the Agency not less than 90 days before new or existing
chemicals are introduced into interstate commerce for significant new
uses as substitutes for a class I substance. The producer must also
provide the Agency with the producer's unpublished health and safety
studies on such substitutes.
Outreach--Section 612(b)(1) states that the Administrator shall
seek to maximize the use of federal research facilities and resources
to assist users of class I and II substances in identifying and
developing alternatives to the use of such substances in key commercial
applications.
Clearinghouse--Section 612(b)(4) requires the Agency to set up a
public clearinghouse of alternative chemicals, product substitutes, and
alternative manufacturing processes that are available for products and
manufacturing processes which use class I and II substances.
B. Regulatory History
On March 18, 1994, EPA published the Final Rulemaking (FRM) (59 FR
13044) which described the process for administering the SNAP program
and issued EPA's first acceptability lists for substitutes in the major
industrial use sectors. These sectors include: refrigeration and air
conditioning; foam blowing; solvent cleaning; fire suppression and
explosion protection; sterilants; aerosols; adhesives, coatings and
inks; and tobacco expansion. These sectors comprise the principal
industrial sectors that historically consume large volumes of ozone-
depleting compounds.
The Agency defines a ``substitute'' as any chemical, product
substitute, or alternative manufacturing process, whether existing or
new, that could replace a class I or class II substance. Anyone who
produces a substitute must provide the Agency with health and safety
studies on the substitute at least 90 days before introducing it into
interstate commerce for significant new use as an alternative. This
requirement applies to chemical manufacturers, but may include
importers, formulators or end-users when they are responsible for
introducing a substitute into commerce.
[[Page 8040]]
II. Proposed Listing of Substitutes
To develop the lists of unacceptable and acceptable substitutes,
EPA conducts screens of health and environmental risks posed by various
substitutes for ozone-depleting compounds in each use sector. The
outcome of these risk screens can be found in the public docket, as
described above in the Addresses portion of this notice.
Under section 612, the Agency has considerable discretion in the
risk management decisions it can make in SNAP. The Agency has
identified five possible decision categories: acceptable; acceptable
subject to use conditions; acceptable subject to narrowed use limits;
unacceptable; and pending. Fully acceptable substitutes (i.e., no
restrictions) can be used for all applications within the relevant
sector end-use. Conversely, it is illegal to replace an ODS with a
substitute listed by SNAP as unacceptable. A pending listing represents
substitutes for which the Agency has not received complete data or has
not completed its review of the data.
After reviewing a substitute, the Agency may make a determination
that a substitute is acceptable only if certain conditions of use are
met to minimize risks to human health and the environment. Use of such
substitutes in ways that are inconsistent with such use conditions
renders these substitutes unacceptable.
Even though the Agency can restrict the use of a substitute based
on the potential for adverse effects, it may be necessary to permit a
narrowed range of use within a sector end-use because of the lack of
alternatives for specialized applications. Users intending to adopt a
substitute acceptable within narrowed use limits must ascertain that
other acceptable alternatives are not technically feasible. Companies
must document the results of their evaluation, and retain the results
on file for the purpose of demonstrating compliance. This documentation
shall include descriptions of substitutes examined and rejected,
processes or products in which the substitute is needed, reason for
rejection of other alternatives, e.g., performance, technical or safety
standards, and the anticipated date other substitutes will be available
and projected time for switching to other available substitutes. Use of
such substitutes in applications and end-uses which are not specified
as acceptable in the narrowed use limit renders these substitutes
unacceptable.
In this NPRM, EPA is issuing its preliminary decision on the
acceptability of certain substitutes not previously reviewed by the
Agency. As described in the March 1994 rulemaking for the SNAP program
(59 FR 13044), EPA believes that, as a general matter, notice-and-
comment rulemaking is required to place any alternative on the list of
prohibited substitutes, to list a substitute as acceptable only under
certain use conditions or narrowed use limits, or to remove an
alternative from either the list of prohibited or acceptable
substitutes.
EPA does not believe that notice and comment rulemaking procedures
are required to list alternatives as acceptable with no limitations.
Such listings do not impose any sanction, nor do they remove any prior
license to use a substitute. Consequently, EPA adds substitutes to the
list of acceptable alternatives without first requesting comment on new
listings. Updates to the acceptable and pending lists are published as
separate Notices of Acceptability in the Federal Register.
The sections below present a detailed discussion of the proposed
substitute listing determinations by major use sector. Tables
summarizing listing decisions in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking are
in Appendix G. The comments contained in Appendix G provide additional
information on a substitute. These comments are not part of the
regulatory decision, and therefore they are not mandatory for use of a
substitute. Nor should the comments listed in Appendix G be considered
comprehensive with respect to other legal obligations pertaining to the
use of the substitute. However, EPA encourages users to apply all
comments listed in the application of these substitutes. In many
instances, the comments simply allude to sound operating practices that
have already been identified in existing industry and/or building-code
standards. Thus, many of the comments, if adopted, would not require
significant changes, if any, in existing operating practices for the
affected industry.
A. Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection
EPA is proposing to list IG-100 and HCFC Blend E as acceptable
halon substitutes subject to certain use conditions. In implementing
its application of conditions to limit the use of alternatives under
the SNAP program, EPA has sought to avoid overlap with other existing
regulatory authorities. EPA believes that section 612 clearly
authorizes imposition of use conditions to ensure safe use of replacing
agents. EPA's mandate is to list agents that ``reduce overall risk to
human health and the environment'' for ``specific uses.'' In light of
this authorization, EPA only intends to set conditions for the safe use
of halon substitutes in the workplace until OSHA incorporates specific
language addressing gaseous agents in OSHA regulation. Under Public Law
91-596, section 4(b)(1), OSHA is precluded from regulating working
conditions currently being regulated by another federal agency. EPA is
specifically deferring to OSHA and has no intention to assume the
responsibility for regulating workplace safety, especially with respect
to fire protection. EPA's workplace use conditions will not bar OSHA
from regulating under its P.L. 91-596 authority.
Additionally, EPA understands that, under the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995, Section 12(d), Pub. L. 104-113,
federal agencies are required to use technical standards that are
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies, using
such technical standards as a means to carry out policy objectives or
activities. EPA will consider adopting such technical standards as they
become available.
1. Proposed Acceptable Subject to Use Conditions
Total Flooding Agents. IG-100 is proposed acceptable as a Halon
1301 substitute for total flooding applications. IG-100, which is
composed of 100% nitrogen, is designed to lower the oxygen level in a
protected area to a level that does not support combustion. The
toxicological issues of concern with inert gas systems differ from
those of halocarbon agent systems, since the endpoint for hypoxic (low
oxygen) atmospheres associated with inert gas systems is asphyxiation,
while the endpoint for halocarbon agents is cardiosensitization leading
to cardiac arrhythmia. Peer reviews by medical specialists considering
specific questions regarding exposure of a typical working population
to inert gas fire suppression systems have provided sufficient
information to support use conditions previously listed for IG-541, IG-
55, and IG-01; EPA has determined these use conditions are appropriate
for IG-100 as well.
Specifically, because the terms No Observed Adverse Effect Level
(NOAEL) and Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level (LOAEL) are not
appropriate when considering the continuum of health effects associated
with hypoxic atmospheres, EPA proposes a ``no effect level'' for inert
gas systems at 12% oxygen, and a ``lowest effect level'' at 10% oxygen.
Thus, consistent with the
[[Page 8041]]
OSHA conditions used by EPA for all total flooding agents, EPA proposes
that an IG-100 system could be designed to an oxygen level of 10% if
employees can egress the area within one minute, but may be designed
only to the 12% level if it takes longer than one minute to egress the
area. If the possibility exists for the oxygen to drop below 10%,
employees must be evacuated prior to such oxygen depletion. A design
concentration of less than 10% oxygen may only be used in normally
unoccupied areas, provided that any employee who could possibly be
exposed can egress within 30 seconds.
EPA does not encourage any employee to intentionally remain in an
area following discharge of IG-100 (or any other total flooding agent),
even in the event of accidental discharge. In addition, the system must
include alarms and warning mechanisms as specified by OSHA.
EPA intends that all personnel be evacuated from an area prior to,
or quickly after, discharge. An inert gas system may not be designed
with the intention of personnel remaining in the area unless
appropriate protection is provided, such as self-contained breathing
apparatuses.
2. Proposed Acceptable Subject to Narrowed Use Limits
Streaming Agents. HCFC Blend E is proposed acceptable as a Halon
1211 substitute for streaming agent uses in nonresidential
applications. This agent is a blend of an HCFC, an HFC, and an
additive. The primary constituent, an HCFC, is currently listed as
acceptable for use in non-residential streaming applications. The
secondary constituent, an HFC, is listed acceptable as a flooding agent
subject to use conditions. Upon combustion, the synergistic effect of
these two compounds can result in the formulation of hydrochloric and
other acids at levels potentially harmful to human health. The
formulation of such byproducts of combustion is similar for many
halocarbon fire extinguishing agents. The manufacturer claims the
presence of the additive might help mitigate these potential effects.
This potential risk of human health effects, although it does not
outweigh the risks associated with fire, necessitate limiting the use
of this blend to non-residential applications only. EPA recommends that
the potential risks associated with the use of this blend, as well as
handling procedures to reduce such risk, be clearly labeled on each
extinguisher containing this blend. Additionally, section 610(d) of the
Clean Air Act and its implementing regulations prohibit the sale and
distribution of HCFCs in fire extinguishers for residential
applications. (See 61 FR 69671, December 4, 1996, and 58 FR 69637,
December 30, 1993.)
EPA has reviewed the environmental impacts of this blend and has
concluded that, by comparison to Halon 1211, it reduces overall risk to
the environment. The ozone-depletion potential of the HCFC is 0.02; no
other constituent in the blend has ozone-depleting characteristics.
EPA's review of environmental and human health impacts of this blend is
contained in the public docket for this rulemaking.
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866, (58 FR 51735; October 4, 1993) the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the
Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as
one that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State,
local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by
another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlement, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy
issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, OMB notified EPA
that it considers this a ``significant regulatory action'' within the
meaning of the Executive Order and EPA submitted this action to OMB for
review. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or recommendations
have been documented in the public record.
B. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
EPA to prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule
that includes a Federal mandate that may result in expenditure of $100
million or more in any one year by state, local, and tribal
governments, in aggregate, or by the private sector. Section 203
requires the Agency to establish a plan for obtaining input from and
informing any small governments that may be significantly or uniquely
affected by the rule. Section 205 requires that regulatory alternatives
be considered before promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact
statement is prepared. The Agency must select the least costly, most
cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the
rule's objectives, unless there is an explanation why this alternative
is not selected or this alternative is inconsistent with law.
Because this proposed rule is estimated to result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments or the private
sector of less than $100 million in any one year, the Agency has not
prepared a budgetary impact statement or specifically addressed the
selection of the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative. Because small governments will not be significantly or
uniquely affected by this rule, the Agency is not required to develop a
plan with regard to small governments. However, this proposed rule has
the net effect of reducing burden from part 82, Stratospheric
Protection regulations, on regulated entities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions. This proposed rule would not have a significant impact
on a substantial number of small entities because costs of the SNAP
requirements as a whole are expected to be minor. In fact, this
proposed rule offers regulatory relief to small businesses by providing
acceptable alternatives to phased-out ozone-depleting substances. The
actions proposed herein may well provide benefits for small businesses
anxious to examine potential substitutes to any ozone-depleting class I
and class II substances they may be using, by requiring manufacturers
to make information on such substitutes available. Therefore, I certify
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
EPA has determined that this proposed rule contains no information
[[Page 8042]]
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq., that are not already approved by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). OMB has reviewed and approved an Information Collection
Request by EPA described in the March 18, 1994 rulemaking (59 FR 13044,
at 13121, 13146-13147); its OMB Control Number is 2060-0226.
E. Applicability of Executive Order 13045: Children's Health Protection
This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045, entitled Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because it does not involve decisions on environmental
health risks or safety risks that may disproportionately affect
children.
F. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing Intergovernmental Partnerships
Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local
or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's rule does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of Executive
Order 12875 do not apply to this rule.
G. The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA), Section 12(d), Pub. L. 104-113, requires federal agencies and
departments to use technical standards that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies, using such technical standards as
a means to carry out policy objectives or activities determined by the
agencies and departments. If use of such technical standards is
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical, a federal
agency or department may elect to use technical standards that are not
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies if the
head of the agency or department transmits to the Office of Management
and Budget an explanation of the reasons for using such standards.
Although this proposed rule includes technical standards for
exposure limits, there are no applicable voluntary consensus standards
on this subject. EPA will consider adopting such technical standards as
they become available.
H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those
governments. If EPA complies by consulting Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected and other representatives of
Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in
the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or
uniquely affect their communities.'' Today's rule does not
significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal
governments, because this regulation applies directly to facilities
that use these substances and not to governmental entities.
Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084
do not apply to this rule.
IV. Additional Information
For copies of the comprehensive SNAP lists or additional
information on SNAP, contact the Stratospheric Protection Hotline at 1-
800-296-1996, Monday-Friday, between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 4:00
p.m. (EST).
For more information on the Agency's process for administering the
SNAP program or criteria for evaluation of substitutes, refer to the
SNAP final rulemaking published in the Federal Register on March 18,
1994 (59 FR 13044). Notices and rulemakings under the SNAP program, as
well as EPA publications on protection of stratospheric ozone, are
available from EPA's Ozone World Wide Web site at (http://www.epa.gov/
ozone/title6) and from the Stratospheric Protection Hotline, whose
number is listed above.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 82
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 10, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 82 is proposed
to be amended as follows:
PART 82--PROTECTION OF STRATOSPHERIC OZONE
1. The authority citation for Part 82 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7414, 7601, 7671-7671q.
2. Subpart G is amended by adding the following Appendix G to read
as follows:
Subpart G--Significant New Alternatives Policy Program
* * * * *
Appendix G to Subpart G--Substitutes Subject to Use Restrictions
and Unacceptable Substitutes Listed in the [FR publication date]
final rule, effective [30 days after FR publication date].
Summary of Proposed Decisions
[[Page 8043]]
Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection Total Flooding Agents
[Substitutes Acceptable Subject to Use Conditions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
End Use Substitute Decision Conditions Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Halon 1301, Total Flooding IG-100.......... Acceptable...... Until OSHA EPA does not
Agents. establishes contemplate
applicable workplace personnel remaining
requirements: in the space after
system discharge
during a fire
without Self-
Contained Breathing
Apparatus (SCBA) as
required by OSHA.
IG-100 systems may be EPA does not
designed to an encourage any
oxygen level of 10% employee to
if employees can intentionally remain
egress the area in the area after
within one minute, system discharge,
but may be designed even in the event of
only to the 12% accidental
oxygen level if it discharge. In
takes longer than addition, the system
one minute to egress must include alarms
the area. and warning
mechanisms as
specified by OSHA.
If the possibility See additional
exists for the comments 1, 2.
oxygen level to drop
below 10%, employees
must be evacuated
prior to such oxygen
depletion.
A design
concentration of
less than 10% many
only be used in
normally occupied
areas, as long as an
employee who could
possibly be exposed
can egress within 30
seconds.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional Comments
1. Must conform with OSHA 29 CFR 1910, Subpart L, Section
1910.160.
2. Per OSHA requirements, protective gear (SCBA) must be
available in the event personnel must re-enter the area.
Fire Suppression and Explosion Protection Streaming Agents
[Substitutes Acceptable Subject to Narrowed Use Limits]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
End use Substitute Decision Limitations Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Halon 1211, Streaming Agents.... HCFC Blend E...... Acceptable........ Nonresidential
uses only.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 99-3992 Filed 2-17-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![[logo] US EPA](https://webarchive.library.unt.edu/eot2008/20081026152419im_/http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}