Document BykQGMO5mQmLEKbGV8emaKBXJ

To: Cc: From: Sent: Subject: Pruitt, ScottfPruitt.Scott@epa.gov] Jackson, Ryan[jackson.ryan@epa.gov]; Gunasekara, Mandy[Gunasekara.Mandy@epa.gov] Chiang, Amy Wed 8/23/2017 9:09:40 PM Letter regarding Request for Appeal; Mexichem Fluor v. EPA August 23, 2017 The Honorable Scott Pruitt Administrator United States Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20460 Re: Request for Appeal; Mexichem Fluor v. EPA Dear Administrator Pruitt: We request that you appeal en banc the decision reached by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on August 8 in Mexichem Fluor Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency. We believe that the Court wrongly vacated EPA's rule establishing restrictions on the use of some hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) through the Significant New Alternatives Program (SNAP). The 1994 final rule implementing the SNAP program summarized, "In section 612 of the CAA, the Agency is authorized to identify and restrict the use of substitutes for class I and II ozone-depleting substances where the Administrator has determined that other alternatives exist that reduce overall risk to human health and the environment." This authority has driven industry to innovate, invest and continuously improve the product offerings for markets subject to SNAP regulation, and in the process increasing U.S. competitiveness and creating a significant number of jobs. Our hope is that a successful appeal results in the preservation of this SNAP tenet which 17cv1906 Sierra Club v. EPA ED_001523_00001879-00001 leverages the strengths of U.S. industry. The Court's decision will have a significant negative economic impact on the global business for ozone-depleting substances (CDS) and hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) substitutes including hydrofluoro-olefins (HFO), hydrofluoroethers (HFE), fluoroketones (FK), and the equipment and systems that use them. The companies signing this letter have invested heavily over the past 20 years in developing these unique products and the capacity to manufacture them in the United States, and some companies are currently investing hundreds of millions of dollars to construct and expand manufacturing facilities in support of compliance with this regulation. After years of U.S. policy and regulatory signals that these were sound investments, the Court's decision creates uncertainty for the future use of these innovative solutions. For example, U.S. companies have invested well over $1 billion in the development and manufacture of HFOs and products containing HFOs to meet U.S. and global demand while the foreign competitors who brought this lawsuit have not invested in the R&D, process technology or manufacturing capital to commercialize these alternatives. At stake are thousands of U.S.-based jobs supporting local economies, including manufacturing plants throughout the U.S. The impacted rules are essential to economic growth and job creation in the U.S., and foster American competitiveness in this industry. The decisions made by EPA in this area have global implications as other countries will follow the U.S.'s lead. ODS and HFC substitutes, and products utilizing substitutes such as air conditioning and refrigeration equipment, foam insulation, aerosols, fire suppression systems, and solvents are exported from the U.S. to enable other countries to meet global commitments in phasing away from ODSs and HFCs. If this ruling stands, the American companies who innovated new technology will need to reevaluate the investments to date and any future investment plans. American companies lead the world in innovation and this ruling, instigated by two foreign competitors, discourages U.S. industry from making similar future investments. Sincerely, / .. 'z if ct 17cv1906 Sierra Club v. EPA ED_001523_00001879-00002 Kurt Werner, Environmental Affairs Manager 3M Electronics Materials Solutions Division William Lowery, President All Weather Insulated Panels Eugene Silberstein AC&R Safety Coalition Bob Dwyer Carbon Monoxide Safety Association 17cv1906 Sierra Club v. EPA ED_001523_00001879-00003 Paul Kirsch, President - Fluoroproducts The Chemours Company. Paul Valle, President & CEO Demilec / Jerry Weiss, Chairman ESCO Institute 17cv1906 Sierra Club v. EPA ED_001523_00001879-00004 Renee Tomlinson Green Mechanical Council George Koutsaftes, Vice President and General Manager Honeywell Howard S Weiss, Executive Vice President HVAC Excellence 17cv1906 Sierra Club v. EPA ED_001523_00001879-00005 Lei Schlitz, Executive Vice President ITW Food Equipment Group Doug Kramer, President & CEO La Polla Industries Inc Chip Holton, President NCFI Polyurethanes 17cv1906 Sierra Club v. EPA ED_001523_00001879-00006 G William Northrup, CEO North Park Innovations Bob Guarasci, President VGI Training 17cv1906 Sierra Club v. EPA ED_001523_00001879-00007