Ever since the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled last year that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could not ban HFCs through its Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program, there has been a lot of confusion. End users who thought they would have to transition from high-GWP HFCs to other refrigerants were suddenly given a reprieve, while states such as California and New York started crafting their own HFC regulations that are far stricter than those of the EPA. Meanwhile, the EPA embarked on a rulemaking process that should eventually lead to a new policy regarding HFCs, although many in the HVACR industry hope the agency simply accepts the phase down schedule recommended in the Kigali Amendment.
All of this has created a great deal of uncertainty in the industry. This was exacerbated in September when the EPA came out with a proposed rule that would roll back parts of Section 608 of its Refrigerant Management Regulations as it applies to HFCs. In November 2016, EPA had updated Section 608, extending the requirements that previously had applied only to refrigerants containing an ozone-depleting substance (ODS) to non-exempt substitute refrigerants such as HFCs. Since the Court of Appeals ruled that the EPA could not ban HFCs under the SNAP program, the agency decided that it also did not have the authority to regulate these refrigerants under Section 608.