Can a homeowner without a Section 608 EPA license legally connect his own gauges to his own air conditioner if the unit uses 410a refrigerant?

Question

It has been suggested by at least one moderator on this site that EPA Section 608, which restricts who can purchase and handle refrigerant, including who can connect a set of manifold gauges to a unit, applies only to CFC and HCFC refrigerants (class I and II refrigerants).

Can someone please clarify if it is legal or illegal for a homeowner without an EPA license to attach his own manifold gauges to his own equipment if it is charged with an HFC such as 410a?

From reading sections of the statute (not just the EPA summary) it is my understanding that effective November 15, 1995, Section 608 applies not only to CFC and HCFC refrigerants, but also their "substitutes." [The EPA has separately stated the term "substitutes" is not meant to restrict the sale of refrigerants that do not contain Ozone Depleting Compounds, such as 410a. Federal Register/ Vol. 70, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 13, 2005 / Rules and Regulations / ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY /40 CFR Part 82 [FRL–7899–3]. ]

Best answer from the EPA website: http://www.epa.gov/ozone/title6/phaseout/technicians_contractors_faq.html

Is EPA technician certification required to service R-410A systems?

No, at this time EPA technician certification (i.e., EPA Section 608 certification) is not required in order to service R-410A systems or other stationary refrigeration and air conditioning systems containing HFCs.

It appears this activity is legal, provided the 410a is not intentionally released into the atmosphere. +100 to Tyler for being first and closest to this answer.

Answer 1

The law against "unlicensed" refrigerant handlers (whatever that means) does not specify any penalties, it just says it is "prohibited", so from a legal standpoint it is an unenforceable law. In order for a law to be prosecuted it must have a penalty specified, otherwise it is moot in court. For this reason, noone has ever been indicted for violating this so-called "prohibition".

In general, only companies are sued by the EPA for refrigerant issues, not individuals, with the exception of refrigerant "smugglers" who are indicted on trade laws, not Clean Air Act violations. In the last 10 years only one (individual not company) person has ever been domestically convicted of a Freon-related violation. That was a guy who was brazenly selling Freon on Craigslist. Even in this case, he was convicted of filing false documents with the Feds, not of actually selling the Freon.

No individual householder has ever been criminally charged for maintaining, charging or otherwise working with refrigerants, illegal or otherwise, in their own home or business.

Answer 2

For what its worth; I've seen all of the tools necessary to evacuate, collect, store and than recharge residential and automotive refrigerant systems sold on the open consumer market. Northern tools, Harbor freight... What I haven't noticed is the actual refrigerant; the old stuff the EPA banned (r-12?) nor the newer stuff (r-410?).

Answer 3

This is the important part below, IMO: (AFAIK, other then to work on commercial equipment, the certification allows you to buy refrigerant from compliant sellers requiring you to produce ID)

EPA has also established that refrigerant recovered and/or recycled can be returned to the same system or other systems owned by the same person without restriction. If refrigerant changes ownership, it must be reclaimed (i.e., cleaned to the ARI 700-1993 Standard of purity) by an EPA certified refrigerant reclaimer. –www.epa.gov 608fact.html

As long as your equipment is certified and up to date, you can put your refrigerant into any of your equipment (without having to send it off to be recovered).

---

Require persons servicing or disposing of air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment to certify to EPA that they have acquired refrigerant recovery and/or recycling equipment and are complying with the requirements of the rule.

Notice the wording here, "certify to" as opposed to "certified by" (what are you supposed to do, send them a letter?*) Also notice such wording as, "good faith attempt".

*Apparently, yes:

EPA requires that persons servicing, disposing, or recycling air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment certify to the appropriate EPA Regional Office that they have acquired (built, bought, or leased) refrigerant recovery or recycling equipment and that they are complying with the applicable requirements of this rule. This certification must be signed by the owner of the equipment or another responsible officer and sent to the appropriate EPA Regional Office.

Again, I'm a little fuzzy on this wording: "complying with the applicable requirements of this rule". Does that mean good faith attempt, or has at the very least a Type I certification...

---

Let's reword a little: Are you going to get into trouble for adjusting the refrigerant levels on your own equipment? I highly doubt it (frostbite, notwithstanding).

Answer 4

One main reason homeowners should not adjust the levels (charge or recover) is safety. You can mess with R410a or R134a however, it is strongly recommended not to. Refrigerants are commonly used at high pressures. Let's take the average residential AC for an example. The "low side" runs around 130 PSI and the high side can run in excess of 450 PSI. The pressure alone should be an indicator not to mess with but if you unintentionally release some refrigerant from the high side you are releasing liquid refrigerant, R410a at atmospheric pressure is -60°F. At that temperature you will give yourself serious burns. So word of advise from a pro, DON'T TOUCH IT. Vehicle systems are a different animal you can easily ruin the AC but it operates at pressures a lot lower than your house AC. It is also illegal and very much enforceable to release any refrigerant with chlorine or that has a GWP, such as everything except CO2 the finest are extreme, I think they can be in excess of $100,000

Answer 5

The EPA DOES have authority over the potential release of any refrigerant that can deplete ozone or add to global warming. R410 does not deplete ozone but contributes significantly to global warming. EPA has stated that no one without Section 608 training and certification can work on a system with those refrigerants if there is a danger of releasing refrigerant. You can change non-refrigerant related hardware like a fan motors, etc, but you cannot play with the valves/piping that contain refrigerant, add refrigerant, etc.

There are fines in excess of $44K per day for each violation, and they do pay a reward ($10K)for info leading to violators.

Is this authority exercised over homeowner individuals?: Well the targets have primarily been companies employing technicians, and other illegal operations to distribute substances....

Is it legal for an individual homeowner to work on their own system to add R-410 or even to put a new system into operation? No.

Can you do it? That's your decision. You have the info.

Answer 6

It seems that "epatest.com," a website by "Mainstream Engineering Corporation" unaffiliated with the EPA, believes purchasing 410a without a license is legal, but handling it without a license is illegal. From the website's FAQs on getting certified to handle 410a:

Are you required to have a license or to be certified to handle and purchase R-410A?

You are required to have an EPA Section 608 Type II or Universal certification license to handle R-410A but no license is legally necessary for purchase. A refrigeration supply house may have its own rules regarding who they are willing to sell R-410A to (they will typically require Section 608 Type II even though the EPA doesn’t require it for safety and liability reasons). "

The above information can be found at the following URL:

http://www.epatest.com/faq/R410A/#G1

Beats me how the EPA could possibly enforce this.

If you want to pass their certification test, "illegal" is the answer, but since they do not provide the reference to the actual EPA on this issue I am not going to count this as the correct answer to my question (hat tip to Tester101 for pointing this out).