Quiero saber acerca de...

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 86 / Thursday, May 6, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2

on training, certification, or service practices for A2L refrigerants. As noted by comments, training is already being provided by some manufacturers and several organizations have developed or are in the process of developing training. In past rulemakings listing flammable refrigerants, we stated our conclusion that training is best left to the industry, and we find no reason to change that conclusion in this action.
We are not aware of any safety issues that have arisen with the equipment covered by those rules and our current understanding based on comments to this rule is that action is already being taken to adequately train service technicians. While we will nonetheless consider these advance comments as we determine what, if any, additional actions we might take, including considering issuing a proposed rulemaking addressing the possibility of mandating certain additional training requirements, our current understanding based on comments to this rule is that the industry in general and interested manufacturers in particular are already preparing for an adequate level of training. As noted above, many additional sources are available, and more are under development, to provide training on the A2L refrigerants in this final rule and on flammable refrigerants in general.
C. Total Flooding: Removal of Powdered Aerosol E From the List of Substitutes Acceptable Subject to Use Conditions Powdered Aerosol E, also marketed under the trade names of FirePro, FirePro Xtinguish, and FireBan, is generated in an automated manufacturing process during which the chemicals, in powder form, are mixed and then supplied to end users as a solid contained within a fire extinguisher. In the presence of heat, the solid converts to an aerosol consisting mainly of potassium salts. EPA listed Powdered Aerosol E as acceptable, subject to use conditions, as a total flooding agent 71 FR 56359, September 27, 2006. The use conditions required that Powdered Aerosol E be used only in areas that are normally unoccupied, because the Agency did not have sufficient information at that time supporting its safe use in areas that are normally occupied. Based on a review of additional information from the submitter to support the safe use of Powdered Aerosol E in normally occupied spaces, EPA subsequently determined that Powdered Aerosol E is also acceptable for use in total flooding systems for normally occupied spaces 83 FR 50026, October 4, 2018. The listing provides that Powdered Aerosol
VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:29 May 05, 2021

Jkt 253001

E is acceptable for total flooding uses, which includes both unoccupied and occupied spaces. In the October 2018
listing action, EPA noted that in a subsequent rulemaking, the Agency would remove the previous listing of Powdered Aerosol E as acceptable, subject to use conditions since the use condition is no longer applicable. We received no comments on the proposal for this listing. Therefore, in this final rule, as proposed, EPA is taking the ministerial action of removing that listing for Powdered Aerosol E.
III. How is EPA responding to other public comments?
EPA received other comments beyond the scope of this final action and addresses them below.
Comment: EIA stated that ODS are still undergoing replacement in the residential and light commercial AC and heat pump end-use and are subject to EPAs authority under the SNAP
Program. EIA urges EPA to promulgate additional SNAP Program regulations listing high-GWP substitutes that pose a considerably higher comparable risk to the five refrigerant blends, as unacceptable for this end-use, including R410A, R404A, R134a, and R
434A.
Response: This final rule lists additional substitutes as acceptable, subject to use conditions, in the residential and light commercial air conditioning end-use. The proposed rule did not discuss finding other substitutes unacceptable in this end-use and such listings are out of scope for this action. Accordingly, this comment requires no further response.
Comment: EIA noted EPAs Ongoing Responsibility to Protect Global Ozone as it relates to methylene chloride CH2Cl2. The commenter stated that the atmospheric concentrations of very short-lived substances VSLS including methylene chloride are increasing and that they are increasingly seen as a threat to the progress made by the Montreal Protocol . . . to protect the ozone layer. In order to address this threat, EIA asks that the agency consider listing methylene chloride and other similar VSLS as unacceptable in some end-uses.
Response: We appreciate EIAs comments on VSLS and note that EPA
has taken domestic action on methylene chloride under the Toxic Substances Control Act TSCA due to its toxicity 84 FR 11420, March 27, 2019. The proposed rule did not discuss listing VSLS as unacceptable and such listings are out of scope for this final action.
Accordingly, this comment requires no further response.

PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

24469

Comment: Trane commented that HFC32, R452B, and R454B should also be approved for scroll chillers.
AHRI requested EPA to find HFC32
and R454B acceptable for positive displacement chillers, and Rheem similarly asked that SNAP list group A2L refrigerants in such equipment.
Johnson Controls suggested listing HFC
32 and all five blends acceptable for positive displacement chillers, to include reciprocating, screw and scroll chillers. The Alliance, Carrier, and Chemours agreed and encouraged listing HFC32 and the five A2L blends acceptable in chillers in general. Carrier pointed out that for chillers, requirements for machine rooms would be needed and held that the ASHRAE 15
standard could serve this purpose.
Response: EPA notes that five of these six refrigerants HFC32, R452B, R
454A, R454B, and R454C have been submitted to the SNAP program for use in chillers and EPA is evaluating them for the chiller end-use, encompassing both the centrifugal chiller and positive displacement chiller end-uses. The other refrigerant, R457A, has been submitted but not for the chiller enduses. The proposed rule addressed listings for certain end-use categories, which did not include the chiller enduse. The proposed rule did not discuss finding these substitutes acceptable in other end uses, and such listings are out of scope for this action. Accordingly, this comment requires no further response.
Comment: Rheem sought clarification as to which SNAP end-use Heat Pump Pool Heaters HPPH and Heat Pump Water Heaters HPWH belong in and for clarification as to whether an end use category currently exists for these types of equipment.
Response: The classification of HPPHs and HPWHs is beyond the scope of this final rule. Accordingly, this comment requires no further response.
Nonetheless, EPA is now aware of this clarification request and we invite Rheem and other manufacturers of such equipment to further pursue this issue separately with EPA and the SNAP
program.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review This action is not a significant regulatory action and was therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget OMB for review.

E:FRFM06MYR2.SGM

06MYR2