Council weighs mechanical-code changes to allow low‑GWP refrigerants amid safety concerns

Dustin told the council that two mechanical‑code petitions (GP1112 and GP1113) received about 30–38 comments, roughly evenly split among opposition, support and conditional support. Opposition emphasized safety risks from more flammable A3 refrigerants in residential settings, potential gaps if international IEC standards are used in place of U.S. UL/ASHRAE references, and supply‑chain and workforce readiness concerns.

Supporters and proponents argued adopting pathways for low‑GWP refrigerants (for example, R‑290/propane or CO2 systems) would reduce global warming potential and align Washington with international practice. “These types of refrigerants are lower global‑warming‑potential refrigerants…they align with the international standards,” one staff summary said. Members asked staff to map where CLF or other proponent technical edits and standards references should be added to the CR102/CR10‑2 language and to consider whether adding IEC references would require separate amendments.

Council members also asked for more detailed safety comparisons and for clear cross‑references to UL and ASHRAE standards in the CR102 forms. Members agreed staff and interested council members would prepare amendment packages and coordinate with stakeholders to address certification and safety questions before further deliberation.