HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37341 1982

--

--

=- = -~-

- - -

~""i

Wednesday . August 25, 1982

Part II ---

---

-

=-

-- ~---

-- ---- -- --

-- -- -. - - - -- --

- --- - --=- -~

------ -----

-- --

---

-.=:=: =-.- -

ii: §

Environmental

Protection Agency

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)

Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in

Commerce and Use Prohibitions; Use in

Electrical Equipment
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37342 1982

37342 Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 165 I Wednesday. August 25.1982 I Rules and Regulations

Subpart A, § 761,2 ""....."""."."""."...... Subpart A. § 761.3.

Subpart B, § 761.10"".•" .•"".."""""""" Subpart D, § 761.60.

Subpart C. § 761.20"""" "" " Subpart C, § 761.40.

Subpart D. § 761.30 "" " SUbpart B. § 761.20.

Subpart D, §761.31.. " "" ".."... Subpart B. §761.30.

Subpart E. § 761.42.."." " SUbpart D. § 761.65.

Director. Industry Assistance Office

(T8-799). Office of Toxic Substances.

Environmental Protection Agency. Rm.

&-509.401 M St.. S.W.• Washington, D.C.

20460. Toll free: (800-424-9065). In

Washington. D.C. (554-1404). Outside

the USA: (Operator-202-554-1404).

Copies of this rule and its support

documents can be obtained from the

Industry Assistance Office listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Control Number: 2070-0003.

I. Recodification of 40 CFR Part 761

Title 40 of the Code of Federal

Regulations. Part 761. which regulates

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). has

been reorganized. Notice of the

recodification appears in the Federal

Register of May 6.1982 (47 FR 19527).

This final rule uses the following new

designations:

II. Background

Section 6(e) of the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA) generally prohibits

the use of PCBs after January 1. 1978.

The statute sets forth two exceptions

under which EPA may. by rule. allow a

particular use of PCBs to continue.

Under section 6(e)(2) of TSCA. EPA may

allow PCBs to be used in a "totally

enclosed manner." A "totally enclosed

manner" is defined by TSCA to be "any

manner which will ensure that any

exposure of human beings or the

environment to a polychlorinated

biphenyl will be insignificant. as

determined by the Administrator by

rule." TSCA also allows EPA to

authorize the use of PCBs in a manner

other than a "totally enclosed manner"

if the Agency finds that the use "will not

present an unreasonable risk of injury to

health or the environment."

EPA promulgated j rule, which was

published in the Federal Register of May

31, 1979 (44 FR 31514). to implement

sections 6(e) (2) and (3) of TSCA This

rule is listed in the Code of Federal

Regulations under 40 CFR Part 761. The

rule designated all intact. nonleaking

capacitors. electromagnets, and

transformers other than railroad

transformers as "totally enclosed", thus

permitting their use without specific

authorization or conditions. The

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF)

petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 761

[OPT5-(62015C); TSH-FRL 2184-6]

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)

Manufacturing, Processing,

Distribution In Commerce and Use

Prohibitions; Use In Electrical

Equipment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This final rule amends

portions of the existing PCB rule; this

action is being taken in response to an

order from the U.S. Court of Appeals for

the District of CQlumbia Circuit. This

rule authorizes the use of PCBs in

capacitors and the use and servicing of

PCBs in electromagnets. circuit

breakers, voltage regulators, reclosers,

cable, switches (including sectionalizers

and motor starters). and transformers

other than railroad transformers. It also

provides for the distribution in

commerce and disposal of this electrical

equipment.

DATES: These amendments shall be

considered promulgated for purpose of

judicial review under section 19 of

TSCA at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time

on September 8, 1982. These

amendments shall be effective on

September 24, 1982. As of August 19,

1982, the provisions of the PCB rule (44

FR 31514, May 31, 1979, recodified at 47

FR 19527. May 6. 1982) amended by this

action and the Interim Measures

Program (46 FR 16090), March 10, 1981)

are no longer in effect unless the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the District of

Columbia Circuit has acted to stay

further its mandate. EPA has asked the

court for a stay of the mandate that

would leave the 1979 rule as it applies to

electrical equipment and the Interim

Measures Program in effect until these

amendments become effective. The

court has not acted as of the date of

signa lure of these amendmen ts. If the

court does grant EPA's request. the

court's action wiIllikely be retroactive

to August 19, 1982. As a matter of

Agency policy, EPA will not enforce the

provisions of section 6(e) of TSCA

against any person who complies with

the provisions of the 1979 rule and the

Interim Measures Program between the

expiration of the current stay. August 19,

1982, and the date when the court grants

EPA's request of this rule becomes

effective, whichever comes first.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Douglas G. Bannerman. Acting

Old designation New designation

the District of Columbia Circuit to

review that portion of the PCB rule that

designated the use of intact, nonleaking

capacitors. electromagnets and

transformers (other than railroad

transformers) as "totally enclosed."

(Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v.

Environmental Protection Agency, 636-

F.2d 1267). On October 30. 1980. the

court decided that there was insufficient

evidence in the record to support the

Agency's classification of transformers,

capacitors. and electromagnets as

totally enclosed. The court invalidated

this portion of the rule and remanded it

to EPA for further action. The effect of

this decision would have been to make

the use of capacitors, electromagnets.

and transformers other than railroad

transformers, containing any

concentration of PCBs a violation of

section 6(e) of TSCA An immediate ban

of these uses would not only have

disrupted electric service but would also

have caused severe economic hardship

for the public and United States .

industry. Therefore, EPA concluded that

it was completely impractical to take no

action and allow a total ban o.n the use

of this equipment to go into effect

immedia tely.

On January 21. 1981. EPA. EDF. and

certain industry intervenors in EDFv.

EPA filed a joint motion with the court.

The motion asked for a stay of the

court's mandate setting aside the

classification of transformers.

capacitors. and electromagnets as

totally enclosed. During the period of the

stay, EPA agreed to conduct a

rulemaking on the use of PCBs in

electrical equipment beginning with an

Advance Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (ANPR). In addition, the

Edison Electric Institute (EEl) through

the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group

(USWAG) agreed to develop some of the

factual material necessary for the

rulemaking. The parties also agreed on

interim risk-reduction measures (the

Interim Measures Program) for

transformers containing PCBs at 50 ppm

or greater. They suggested that the court

make these measures a condition of the

eighteen-month stay.

On February 12, 1981. the court

granted the requests of the joint motion

and entered an order. The text of the

court's order was published in the

Federal Register of March 10. 1981, along

with EPA's ANPR on the 'use of PCBs in

electrical equipment (46 FR 16090 and 46

FR 16096. respectively). The court's

order allows the totally enclosed

classification (40 CFR 761.20). to remain

in effect for the duration of the stay.

Therefore, persons who use PCBcontaining transformers, capacitors, and
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37343 1982

Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 165 I Wednesday, August 25, 1982 / Rules and Regulations 37343

electromagnets may use this electrical

equipment during the stay of the court's

mandate, providing that they comply

with the PCB rule and the Interim

Measures Program which is detailed in

the court's order.

The February 12, 1981, court order "

required EPA to promulgate a final rule

within six months of receipt of the study

from EEI/USWAG. Since the final report

of the EEI/USWAG study was received on February 19, 1982, EPA was required

to promulgate this final rule on the use

of PCBs in electrical equipment by .

August 19, 1982. EPA's proposed rule

regarding the use of PCBs in electrical

equipment was published in the Federal

Register of April 22, 1982 (47 FR 17426).

This final rule will become effective

on September 24, 1982. The court·

ordered stay of mandate is currently

scheduled to expire on August 19, 1982.

If that mandate were to issue before this

rule becomes effective. the use of PCB's

in electrical equipment covered by the

use authorizations contained in this rule

would be a violation of section 6(e)(2) of

TSCA until the rule becomes effective.

Therefore, on August 5, 1982, EPA

requested that the court further stay its

mandate until November 1, 1982. As of

the date of signature of these

amendments, the court has not acted on

EPA's request. EPA expects that the

court will grant the further stay and that

the stay will be retroactive to August 19.

1982. However. until the court grants

EPA's request or these amendments

become effective, persons affected by

the amendments will be uncertain about

what rules to follow. As a matter of

Agency policy, EPA will not enforce the

provisions of section 6(e) of TSCA

against any person who complies with

the provisions of the 1979 rule and the

Interim Measure Program between the

expiration of the current stay. August 19,

1982. and the date when the court grants

EPA's request or this rule becomes

effective. whichever comes first.

In order to avoid a "race to the

courthouse" by persons seeking judicial

review of this rule, EPA has decided to

designate the time and date of

"promulgation" of this rule as 1:00 p.m.

Eastern Daylight Time on September 8,

1982. The Agency has previously taken

this approach for rules promulgated

under the Clean Water Act (see 40 CFR

100.01. 45 FR 26048). The Agency will be

considering a general rule for TSCA

similar to 40 CFR 100.01.

m. Electrical Equipment Containing

PCBs

This rulemaking was initiated to deal

with those uses of PCBs which EPA had

formerly classified as totally enclosed

(transformers other than railroad

transformers. capacitors, and

electromagnets). (Any reference to

transformers in this rule does not

include transformers used on

locomotives and self-propelled railroad

cars unless otherwise specified.) In

. general, this equipment falls into two

categories: (1) Equipment designed to

.contain PCBs at a high concentration

and (2) equipment designed to contain

mineral oil. Because of past

manufacturing and servicing practices.

the mineral oil-filled equipment often

contains PCBs at low concentrations.

The 1979 rule defined a PCB

Transformer as one containing more

than 500 ppm and a PCB-Contaminated

Transformer as one containing between

50 and 500 parts per million (ppm). Very

little mineral oil equipment contains

PCBs at a concentration of 500 ppm or

greater. This final rule makes frequent

reference to the three ranges of PCB

contamination: ~50 ppm. 5~5oo ppm.

and greater than 500 ppm.

While administering the May 1979

PCB rule and gathering information for

this rulemaking, EPA has identified five

additional categories of oil-filled

electrical equipment that contain PCB's.

Those are: voltage regulators. switches

(including sectionalizers and motor

starters), circuit breakers, reclosers. and

cable. These uses were not addressed in

the May 1979 PCB rule because EPA

was not aware that these deyices

contained PCBs.

IV. Summary of the Final Rule

This final rule modifies and clarifies

some of the requirements presented il!

the proposed rule because of

information obtained during the

comment period and the public hearing

Uune 7-10. 1982) on the proposed rule.

EPA's responses to various issues raised

during this rulemaking are discussed in

this "preamble" and are presented in

more detail in a document titled

"Support Document for the Electrical

Equipment Use Rule/Response to

Comments." The major elements of the

final rule are summarized in the

following list. with changes from the

proposed rule highlighted. This final

rule:

1. Uses the recodified version of the

PCB rule (40 CFR Part 761).

2. Prohibits the use of PCB

Transformers and PCB-filled

electromagnets (with a PCB

concentration of 500 ppm or greater)

posing an exposure risk to food or feed,

after October 1. 1985, and requires a weekly inspection of this equipment for

leaks of dielectric fluid until that date.

(The proposed rule would have .

authorized the use of this equipment

indefinitely with a requirement for

weekly inspections).

3. Authorizes the use of all other PCB

Transformers for the remainder of their

useful lives, and requires a quarterly

inspection of this equipment for leaks of

dielectric fluid.

4. Authorizes the use of large PCB

Capacitors that are located in restrictedaccess electrical substations for the

remainder of their useful lives. (The

proposed rule would have only

authorized the use of this equipment for

ten years.)

5. Authorizes the u!le of large PCB

Capacitors that are located in contained

and restricted-access indoor

installations for the remainder of their

useful lives. (The proposed rule would

have authorized the use of this

equipment for only ten years.)

6. Prohibits the use of all other large

PCB Capacitors after October 1, 1988.

(The proposed rule would have

authorized the use of this equipment for

ten years.)

7. Eliminates the proposed inspection

requirements for all large PCB

Capacitors.

8. Authorizes the use of all PCBcontaining, mineral oil-filled electrical

equipment for its remaining useful life.

9. Clarifies what constitutes electrical"

equipment posing an exposure risk to

food or feed.

10. Allows oil-filled cable to be

assumed to contain less than 50 ppm

PCBs if the actual PCB concentration is

unknown. (The proposed rule would

have required that the concentration be

assumed to be between 50 and 500 ppm

if it were unknown.)

11. Allows storage for disposal of

nonleaking PCB Large High Voltage

Capicators and PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment outside of qualified

storage facilities after January 1, 1983.

The proposed rule prohibited this

storage after January 1.1983.

. 12. Requires records of inspection and

maintenance histories to be maintained

for at least 3 years after disposing of

PCB Transformers. (The proposed rule

would have required record retention for

five years.)

13. Clarifies that "disposal" includes

leaks of PCBs.

14. Does not include the language

contained in the proposed rule regarding

the required extent of cleanup of PCB

spills. Comments urged EPA to postpone

consideration of this language. and the

IIxtent of cleanup of PCB spills will not

be dealt with at this time.

V. Use Authorizations

As previously described, section

6(e)(2) of TSCA allows uses of PCBs in a
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37344 1982

37344 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 165 / Wednesday, August 25, 1982 / Rules and Regulations

totally enclosed manner to continue

without restriction. Section 6(e)(2)(C)

defines the term "totally enclosed" to

mean "any manner which will ensure

that any exposure of human beings or

the environment to a polychlorinated

biphenyl will be insignificant as

determined by the Administrator by

rule." In the May 31, 1979 rule. EPA

defined insignificant exposure as "not

measurable or detectable by any

scientifically acceptable analytical

method." After examining the

information submitted in response to

this rulemaking. EPA has decided that

no electrical equipment uses should be

categorized as use in a totally enclosed

manner. The leakage data contained in

this information show that all types of

electrical equipment leak during normal

operation. Since this leakage could

result in some detectable exposure of

humans and the environment to PCBs,

EPA believes that it is not appropriate to

classify the use of this equipment as use

in a totally enclosed manner.

This final rule allows the use of

certain electrical equipment containing

PCBs to continue under specified

conditions because EPA has concluded

that the uses will not present an

unreasonable risk of injury to human

health or the environment. This finding

is in accordance with the provisions of

section 6[e)[2)(B) of TSCA. The specific

unreasonable risk findings are made for

each authorized use in later sections of

this preamble.

To determine whether a risk is

unreasonable. EPA balanced the

probability that harm will occur from

the use against the benefits to society of

the proposed regulatory action. In doing

this, EPA has considered the following

factors:

1. The effects of PCBs on human

health and the environment.

2. The magnitude of PCB exposure to

humans and the environment.

3. The benefits of using PCBs and the

availability of substitutes for PCB uses.

4. The economic impact resulting from

the rule's effect upon national economy.

small business. technological

innovation, the environment, and public

health.

These are the same types of

considerations listed in section 6[c) of

TSCA, which describe factors EPA must

consider in deciding whether a chemical

presents an unreasonable risk under

section 6[a) of TSCA,

A. Effects on Human Health and the

Environment

In any regulatory context, agencies

have imperfect data, but they still must

regulate on the basis of the best data

available. There are differing

interpretations of data regarding the

potential risks of PCBs to human health

and the environment. Although

additional study may be suggested. EPA

is concerned about the health and

environmental effects of PCBs on the

basis of the data available now. These

data are sufficient to support EPA's

approach in this rule.

In EDPv. EPA. EPA's regulatory cutoff

of 50 ppm was set aside by the court. As

a result, other rulemaking activities are

currently underway which deal with

PCBs in low concentrations. EPA has

been ordered by the D.C. Court of

Appeals to submit. by November 1. 1982.

a plan for dealing with certain PCBs in

concentrations under 50 ppm. EPA

expects that th;e implementation of this

plan will lead to additional rulemaking.

The health effects data base for PCBs

is continuously increasing. The Agency

will consider any additional pertinent

information on health and

environmental effects and information

on risks associated with PCBs during the

development of that future rulemaking.

Should new information on health

effects or other areas of concern with

PCBs become known, Section 21 of

TSCA provides a mechanism for

interested persons to petition the

Agency to initiate new rulemaking or

modify existing rules.

In determining whether authorizations

are warranted, EPA considered

information regarding the effects of

PCBs on human health and the

environment. The effects of PCBs were

described in various documents which

are part of the rulemaking record for the

May 31, 1979, rule. EPA evaluated this

information. new information submitted

to the Agency, as well as other recent

literature on the effects of PCBs. The

results are presented in the document

"Response to Comments on Health

Effects of PCBs". This document is

included in the rulemaking record.

Copies of this document are available

through the Industry Assistance Office

(see the "FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT"

paragraph).

1. Health effects. Documents on health

effects were submitted to- EPA by (1) the

Edison Electric Institute [EEl) together

with the Utility Solid Waste Activities

Group [USWAG) and the National Rural

Electric Cooperative Association

[NRECA), (2) the National Electrical

Manufacturers Association [NEMA),

and (3) the Chemical Manufacturers

Association [CMA). These documents

are included in the rulemaking record.

These documents concluded that the use

of PCBs in electrical equipment does not,

present a significant risk to human

health.

EPA has reached conclusions different

from those presented in the documents

submitted. While PCBs have not been

found to be uniquely toxic, EPA

concludes that they are toxic and

persistent.

EPA agrees with the comments

submitted that chloracne occurs in

humans exposed to PCBs. Although the

effects of chloracne are reversible. EPA

does not consider it insignificant.

Chloracne is painful. disfiguring and

may require a long period of time before

symptomatology disappear,s. Other

areas of major concern have been

identified by EPA. EPA finds that

reproductive effects, developmental

toxicity, and oncogenicity are areas of

concern and may produce effects in

humans exposed to PCBs.

Available data show that some PCBs

have the ability to alter reproductive

processes in mammalian species,

sometimes even at doses that do not

cause other signs of toxicity. Animal

data and limited available human data

indicate that prenatal exposure to PCBs

can result in various degrees of

developmentally toxic effects. Postnatal

effects have also been demonstrated on

immature animals following exposure

prenatally and via breast milk.

Available animal studies indicate an

oncogenic potential (the degree of which

would be dependent on exposure).

Available epidemiology data are not

adequate to confirm or negate oncogenic

potential in humans at this time. Further

epidemiological research is needed in

order to correlate human and animal

data, but EPA does not find any

evidence to suggest that the animal data

would not be predictive of human

potential.

EPA agrees that little or no mutagenic

activity from PCBs is indicated from

available data. It is EPAs opinion that

more information is needed to draw a

final conclusion on the possibility of

mutagenic effects from PCBs.

EPA does not attribute all the effects

observed with PCBs to be due to toxic

impurities. Relatively pure PCB

congeners have been shown to produce

toxicity equivalent to that found when

testing commercial PCB mixtures

containing higher levels of impurities.

EPA also does not assume!that all

PCBs are equivalent toxicologically. It

cannot be assumed that if one PCB

congener is positive or negative for a

specific health effect, then all PCB

congeners are also positive or negative

for that specific health effect. Research

is just beginning in this area; many more

studies need to be conducted on specific

congeners before conclusions can be
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37345 1982

Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 165 I Wednesday, August 25, 1982 I Rules and Regulations 37345

reached on an isomer or congener

specific basis.

2. Environmental effects. Very little

information was submitted during the

comment period with regards to the

environmental effects of PCBs. EPA has

conducted a literature search to provide

additional information on the

environmental effects of PCBs.

PCBs have been shown to affect the

productivity of phytoplankton and the

composition of phytoplankton

communities. Deleterious effects on

environmentally important freshwater

invertebrates from PCBs have been

demonstrated. PCBs have also been

shown to impair reproductive success in

birds and mammals.

It has been demonstrated that PCBs

are toxic to fish at very low exposure

levels. The survival rate and the

reproductive success of fish can be

adversely affected in the presence of

PCBs. Various sublethal physiological

!'ffects attributed to PCBs have been

recorded in the literature. Abnormalities

in bone development and reproductive

organs have also been demonstrated.

EPA concludes that PCBs can be

concentrated and transferred in

freshwater and marine organisms.

Transfer up the food chain from

phytoplankton to invertebrates, fish, and

mammals can result ultimately in human

exposure through consumption of PCBcontaining food sources. 3. Risks. Toxicity and exposure are

the two basic components of risk. As

indicated above, EPA concludes that in

addition to chloracne there is the

potential for reproductive effects and

developmental toxicity as well as

oncogenic effects in humans based on

animal data. EPA also concludes that

PCBs do present a hazard to the

environment. Potential for exposure of

the environment to PCBs was included

in EPA's consideration of each category

of use of PCBs in electrical equipment.

Minimizing exposure to PCBs should

minimize any potential risk. The

requirements of this rule will result in

the reduction of exposure, and in some

uses eliminate exposure to PCBs,

relative to present exposure levels from

electrical equipment use. EPA's analysis

of alternative conditions for use

authorizations includes examining the

effectiveness of each condition in

reducing exposure, thereby reducing the

associated risk.

B. General Benefits ofUsing Electrical

Equipment

The electrical equipment being

considered in this rulemaking is used

extensively by electric utilities and

other industries to provide efficient and

reliable electrical energy. There are

currently millions of pieces of electrical

equipment in use which contain PCBs.

Although allowing the statutory ban to

become effective is theoretically one

available alternative, EPA believes an

immediate ban on these uses would be

unacceptable since it would disrupt

electric service throughout the United

States. An adequate supply of non-PCB

replacement equipment and storage/

disposal capacity is not immediately

available. The resulting economic

impact associated with an immediate

ban has been conservatively estimated

at about $175 billion in the Regulatory

Impact Analysis prepared for this

rulemaking.

The other factors that EPA considered

to determine whether uses of PCBs in

electrical equipment warrant

authorization, the balancing of these

factors, and EPA's conclusions regarding

unreasonable risks are discussed

separately in this notice for each

category of electrical equipment.

C. Use and Servicing of TraJlsformers

This unit on the use and servicing of

transformers analyzes only those

transformers that do not pose an

exposure risk to food or feed. The

analysis of equipment posing an

exposure risk to food or feed is found in

Unit E of this portion of the preamble.

Transformers ar~ used extensively by

electric utilities and other industries to

transmit and distribute electric power

efficiently. The use of PCBs in

transformers has resulted in the

dielectric fluid of some transformers

containing between 60 and 70 percent

PCBs by design. Transformers designed

to contain mineral oil dielectric fluid

have been contaminated with PCBs

during past servicing and manufacturing

activities.

EPA estimates that there are 39,600

PCB Transformers designed to contain

PCBs in use in the electric utility .

industry and approximately 91,600 in all

other applications. EPA also estimates

that there are over 20 million mineral oil

transformers in use in the electric utility

industry and about 5 million in all other

applications. These estimates are for the

end of 1981 and are summarized in the

proposed rule for this rulemaking (47 FR

17426, April 22, 1982).

Transformers are located throughout

the nation's electrical generation,

transmission, and distribution systems,

many of which are located near

consumers of electric power. However,

transfo~ers designed to contain PCBs

are more rElstricted in their distribution

than other transformers. These PCB

Transformers are located in secure

indoor locations and in electrical

substation's and are not mounted on

utility poles throughout electric service

areas.

1. Magnitude of exposure. EPA is

concerned about releases of PCBs from

all transformers because of the potential

to expose humans and the environment

to PCBs. In general, PCB Transformers

pose grea ter exposure risks due to the

use of higher concentration and larger

quantities of PCBs than mineral oil-filled

transformers. A release of PCBs into the

environment has the potential to reach

acquatic systems, build up in the food

chain and ultimately expose humans

through ingestion of PCBs.

Although it is impossible to measure

exactly the effectiveness of an

inspection and maintenance program in

avoiding releases of PCBs to the

environment. such a program will

reduce the actual amount of PCBs

released from PCB Transformers by

correcting otherwise undetected leaks of

dielectric fluid and reducing the number

of transformer failures due to improper

maintenance. Additional benefits of this

program include containment of active

leaks which are discovered and cleanup

and disposal of leaked material. All of

these benefits will result in reduced

exposure to PCBs. EPA estimates that

without an inspection and maintenance

program as many as 1.3 million pounds

of PCBs could be released from PCB

Transformers over their entire lifetimes.

2. Benefits ofPCBs and availability of

substitutes. Although the electrical

properties of PCBs are not as good as

mineral oil, PCBs have a higher fire

point than mineral oil. It is the fire

resistance of PCBs that makes them an

excellent dielectric fluid in transformers

located where concerns for fire safety

are paramount.

PCB Transformers can be replaced by

comparably rated mineral oil

transformers even where fire safety is

an issue as long as fire codes and

insurance requirements allow it. In most

cases these restrictions require

additional fire prevention measures,

such as vaults. sprinklers. or alarms.

A number of other substitute

dielectric fluids have been developed to

replace PCBs. These fluids can be used

in replacement transformers or used to

refill transformers which contain PCB

dielectric fluid. Many of these fluids

appear to possess acceptable

characteristics. The National Electrical

Manufacturers Association estimates

that new transformers to replace all PCB

Transformers could be manufactured in

five years or less using these substitute

fluids. Substitute fluids for PCBs offer

satisfactory electrical properties and

flammability characteristics which are

much better than mineral oil. The
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37346 1982

",.

37346 Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 165 I Wednesday, August 25, 1982 I Rules and Regulations

persistence and bioaccumulative

properties of PCB substitute fluids are

less those of PCBs.

Persons owning mineral oil

transformers containing PCBs may

substitute for the PCBs by purchasing

new equipment that does not contain

PCBs, replacing the contaminated fluid

with new fluid that does not contain

PCBs, or otherwise servicing the existing

dielectric fluid in order to reduce the

PCB concentration.

3_. Economic and environmental

impacts ofregulatory requirements. As

discussed under "Magnitude of

Exposure," the actual environmental

Impact of a quarterly inspection program

for PCB Transformers that do not pose

an exposure risk to food or feed is

impossible to measure. However, a

quarterly inspection and maintenance

program has been demonstrated for

more than one year under the Interim

Measures Program to be an effective

measure in reducing total releases of

PCBs from these transformers. This fact

was confirmed by comments in response

to the ANPR and the proposed rule.

Comments indicated that this inspection

and maintenance program reduced

releases of PCBs from transformers and

supported it as an effective risk

reduction measure.

EPA estimates that the cost of a

quarterly inspection and maintenance

program is $28.8 million for the electric

utility industry and $47.9 million for

nonutility industries. These estimates

represent total costs of the required

program over the entire useful lives of

the transformers. Additional costs and

benefits associated with the use

authorization and conditions are

discussed in the Regulatory Impact

Analysis developed for this fmal rule.

This document also contains an analysis

of costs and benefits of other regulatory

options considered but not adopted, .

Including some options which were

considered in the development of the

proposed rule.

4. Findings on the use and servicing of

transformers. In the proposed rule, EPA

discussed whether the use of PCBs in

transformers should continue and

analyzed options that would effectively

reduce the risks of exposure from the

use of PCB-containing transformers. The

proposed rule authorized the use of

PCBs in transformers for the remainder

of their useful lives, subject to certain

conditions.

Several comments disagreed with

EPA's proposed rule. These comments

suggested a wide range of alternatives,

from phasing out the use of PCBs In all

transformers in a very short period of

time to authorizing them with no

conditions. However, no comments

provided information that leads EPA to

conclude that its findings in the

proposed ruled were inappropriate.

The cost of imposing the more

restrictive conditions suggested by some

comments are not reasonable in

comparison to the benefits of such

conditions. For example, one comment

suggested that the use of PCBs in all

mineral oil transformers should be

phased out in a very short period of

time, perhaps as short as three years.

Such an approach would cost millions of

dollars per pound of PCB release

avoided. EPA concludes that the

imposition of such a condition is not

reasonable.

On the other hand, some comments

suggested the raising of the upper limit

of the range of contamination of PCBContaminated Transformers from 500

ppm to 5000 ppm. Such an approach

would result in unnecessary and

avoidable exposure to PCBs since there

is information in the rulemaking record

that indicates that technology is

available at reasonable cost to reduce

the PCB concentration in transformers to

below 500 ppm. Comments at the

hearing by people who have performed

such operations or have studied the

subject indicate that concentrations

below 500 ppm have been achieved by

draining, flushing, and refilling followed

by additional servicing.

After reviewing all of the information

submitted in response to the proposed

rule and other information in the

rulemaking record, EPA concludes that

the requirements presented in the

proposed rule for transformers not

posing an exposure risk to food or feed

were reasonable. Details of the

calculations of costs and benefits which

led EPA to this conclusion are found in

the Regulatory Impact Analysis. EPA's

responses to specific comments are

contained in the Support Document for

the Electrical Use Rule-Response to

Comments.

This final rule does not make any

major changes to the proposed .

conditions of the use authorization for

PCB-containing transformers that do not

pose an exposure risk to food or feed.

The few minor changes that were mad/t

are explained in subsequent paragraphs.

To reduce the risks associated with

the release of PCBs from PCB

Transformers, this rule requires

inspection and maintenance procedures

as a condition to the use authorization

for all PCB Transformers. These

conditions vary with the potential for

exposure to PCBs. A quarterly

inspection and maintenance program is

required for all PCB Transformers that

do not pose an exposure risk to food or

feed. However, the inspection frequency

is reduced to annually for any PCB

Transformer which contains less than

60,000 ppm PCBs or has secondary

containment capable of holding at least

100 percent of the transformer's fluid

volume. No inspection or follow-up

maintenance procedures are required fo

transformers containing less than 500

ppm PCBs because of the low

concentration of PCBs involved.

A program of inspection and

maintenance for PCB Transformers

reduces the amowlt of PCBs released

and resultant PCB exposure by finding,

stopping, and cleaning up small leaks of

dielectric fluid. Properly maintained

transformers are less likely to

experience leaks, spills, or equipment

failure. An inspection program also

keeps company personnel informed and

alert to the potential impact of PCBs

discharged from electrical equipment.

Although some data submitted in

response to the proposed rule indicated

that certain government-owned PCB

Transformers leak more than

transformers owned by others, EPA

believes that the required follow-up

maintenance to correct leaks addresses

this problem. In addition, owners of

transformers that have high service

costs to repair recurring leaks have an

incentive to replace it as PCB·

Contaminated Electrical Equipment or

reclassify the transformer.

Servicing restrictions'also apply as a

condition to the use authorization for

transformers that contain PCBs. Any

servicing of a PCB Transformer

(including rebuilding) that requires the

removal of the transformer coil from the

transformer casing is prohibited. This

condition not only reduces the exposure

risks to service personnel, but, also

prevents the use of PCB Transformers

beyond their normal operating lives.

Other servicing conditions primarily

prevent the further contamination of

PCB-containing transformers.

EPA believes that authorizing the use

of PCB-filled transformers and mineral

oil-filled transformers containing PCBs

according to the proposed conditions

does not present an unreasonable risk

for the following reasons:

a. If EPA did not authorize the use of

PCBs in tranformers, it would cost the

public and United States industry

billions of dollars, primarily as a result

of the disruption of electrical service.

The resulting reduction in risk would no

outweigh these substantial costs.

b. The required inspection and

maintenance program reasonably

reduces the exposure risks associated

with the use of PCBs in PCB

Transformers, and the servicing

conditions prevent further PCB
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37347 1982

Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 165 I Wednesday, August 25, 1982 I Rules and Regulations 37347

contamination of transformers. These

measures are much less costly than a

ban on the use of PCBs in transformers

would be.

c. Releases of PCBs to the

environment and exposure to humans

and biological organisms from mineral

oil transformers are minimal. EPA

estimates that these transformers

contain less than 0.15 percent of all the

PCBs used in transformers and release

less than one half of a percent of these

PCBs on an annual basis.

d. The costs associated with other risk

reduction measures such as accelerated

phase-out, reducing the PCB

concentration in the dielectric fluid, or

providing containment for transformers

are not reasonable when compared to

the potential reduction in release of

PCBs achieved if any of these measures

were required for all PCB Transformers.

Several comments said that even

though phase-out, containment, and

reduction of PCB concentration are not

warranted as regulatory requirements,

each of these measures might be costeffective in individual situations on a

volunt!l'ry basis. In fact, some companies

have already initiated such efforts

because of benefits in their specific

cases. EPA agrees with these comments,

and, to recognize the positive effect

those actions have in reducing risks

from PCB Transformers, this rule

provides for less frequent inspections

for those PCB Transformers. For a PCB

Transformer with secondary

containment capacity of at least 100

percent of the transformer's total

dielectric fluid volume, or a PCB

Transformer which contains less than

60,000 ppm (6 percent) PCBs, a visual

inspection is required only once every

12 months. Secondary containment of at

least 100 percent of the transformer's

total dielectric fluid volume will contain

virtually all releases of PCBs from the

transformer. Draining, flushing, and

refilling a PCB Transformer reduces the

amount of PCBs in a transformer by a

factor of between 10 and 15, leaving a

residual PCB concentration of between

30,000 and 80,000 ppm. EPA believes

that, for transformers with these kinds

of reduced risks, it is reasonable to

inspect no more often then once per

year. EPA chose a 60,000 ppm PCB.

concentration cutoff because, on the

basis of numerous demonstrations, it

has been shown to be a consistently

achievable concentration after one

carefully conducted fluid replacement

for a PCB Transformer. Additional

incentives (such as reduced or

eliminated use, servicing and disposal

requirements) exist in the PCB rules

which encourage further reduction in

PCB concentration to 50 and 500 ppm.

Several persons commented that the

visual inspection required by this final

rule could pose an electrical shock

hazard to unqualified personnel. It has

always been EPA's intent that the extent

of a visual inspection should be only as

complete as safely possible, This will

vary, depending on the physical

constraints of each transformer

installation. No visual inspection should

require an electrical shutdown of the

transformer being inspected.

Transformers that require electrical

isolation (shutdown) to be inspected

thoroughly (due to safety precautions,

enclosures, etc.) may be inspected as

completely as possible without

disconnecting the transformer. Future

inspections should then be coordinated

when possible with equipment outages

from the power system so that more

thorough inspections can be completed.

The proposed rule did not specify the

time period in which quarterly and

annual inspections must take place.

Several comments suggested that

inspection frequencies should be

flexible in order to take advantage of

equipment outages which cian occur at

irregular intervals. EPA agrees with this

comment and, for quarterly inspections,

has added regulatory language that

allows inspections for leaks of dielectric

fluid to take place any time during the

quarter (i.e. January-March, April-June,

July-September, and OctoberDecember) as long as there is a

minimum of 30 days between

inspections. Inspections may also take

place any time during the calendar year

for annual inspections as long as there is

a minimum of 180 days between

inspections.

Follow-up maintenance activities to

repair a leak are required only if

corrective action is necessary to stop

the leak. EPA recognizes that some

small leaks of dielectric fluid are

unavoidable in the operation of a

transformer and repairs are not always

required to stop a leak. A leak of

dielectric fluid which has run off or is

about to run off the external surface of

the transformer clearly needs repair to

prevent further leaking. A leak of

dielectric fluid which does not form a

run or drip, i.e. a sweat or a weep, and

does not require repair to prevent

further leaking, only requires proper

cleanup. All leaks must be cleaned up

within 48 hours and the PCBcontaminated materials properly

disposed of in a timely fashion. If

dielectric fluid is actively leaking, the

leak must be contained to prevent the

PCBs from entering the environment and

inspected daily to verify that the leak is

being contained until the leak is

corrected.

This final rule requires recordkeeping

of each PCB Transformer's inspection

and maintenance history. This

requirement will assist companies in the

operation of their inspection and

maintenance program and help

management determine that the

company is meeting the conditions of

the use authorization. These records

may be maintained in any form or

format as long as all of the required

information is available (in hard copy)

upon request by EPA. These records

must be maintained for at least three

years after disposing of the transformer

and should be coordinated with other

records required for the transformer

under the PCB rule (formerly 40 CFR

761.45 and correctly recodified in this

document to 40 CFR 761.180). This time

period was reduced from the five-year

requirement in theproposed rule.

Several comments indicated that five

years was excessive and resulted in

unnecessary costs. EPA has reduced the

period in response to these comments

and because it believes that the threeyear time period provides a sufficient

history for EPA to monitor complianoe

with a reasonable interval between

oompliance inspections.

Because reporting of PCB spills are

mandated under § 311 of the Clean

Water Act for discharges to navigable

waters, and under the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980

(Superfund) for discharges to other

media, this rule does not require any

additional rep~rting.

D. Use ofCapacitors

This section on the use of capacitors

analyzes only those capacitors that do

not pose an exposure risk to food or

feed. Analysis of the exposure risks

associated with equipment that poses an

exposure risk to food or feed is found in

section E.

Large PCB Capacitors (PCB Large

High Voltage and PCB Large Low

Voltage) are also used extensively by

electric utilities and other industries.

Large PCB Capacitors contain more than

3 pounds of dielectric fluid and are

commonly used to improve the voltage

and power factor of the electric power

system. Virtually all capacitors (large

and small) manufactured prior to 1978

were filled with PCB fluid at a

concentration near 100 percent.

Capacitors manufactured after 1978 did

not use PCB dielectric fluid.

EPA estimates that there were

2.800,000 utility-owned large PCB
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37348 1982

37348 Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 165 I Wednesday, August 25, 1982 I Rules and Regulations

Capacitors in service at the end of 1981.

EPA also estimates that the total

population of in-service nonutilityowned large PCB Capacitors was

490.000 at the end of 1981.

Large PCB Capacitors ar~ located

within fenced electrical substations,

within buildings. and on utility poles

throughout the service areas of electric

utilities. Many comments pointed out

that there are significant differences

between the risk posed by Large

Capacitors depending upon their

location. Therefore, this final rule

recognizes the widespread distribution

of large PCB Capacitors and

distinguishes two different exposure risk

categories by capacitor location. The

two categories are: (1) capacitors used

within restricted-access electrical

substations or used in contained and

restricted-access indoor installations,

and (2) capacitors used in all other

locations (primarily in electric utility

distribution systems).

1. Magnitude ofexposure. Large PCB

Capacitors used within restricted-access

electrical substations and in contained

and restricted-access indoor locations

pose comparatively low exposure risk.

A restricted-access electrical substation

is a fenced or walled-in facility that is

restricted to public access and used in

the transmission or distribution of

electric power. Releases of PCBs from

capacitors in these substations beyond

the confines of the substation are

extremely limited. In most cases, PCBs

become intimately bound to the gravel

and soil and very little PCBs evaporate

or dissolve or are driven off by rain. In a

report by Dr. Donald Mackay titled

Environmental Pathways of

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (Volume IV

of the EEI/USWAG study), Dr. Mackay

calculates that the likely extent of

evaporation from a "typical" pure PCB

spill into soil is 0.16 percent per day and

the dissolution rate of a spill into water

is typically a factor of 100 slower than

evaporation. Many comments indicated

that substations are inspected at regular

intervals, often at intervals of one week

or less. Because of these frequent

inspections and because there is

evidence that PCBs usually migrate

slowly from a spill within a substation.

EPA concludes that a very high

percentage of all PCB releases from

capacitors in these locations can be

identified and cleaned up quickly with

very little risk of exposure to humans or

the environment. EPA estimates that

41,073 pounds of PCBs could be released

from large PCB Capacitors in Restrictedaccess electrical substations.

Similarly. certain other facilities.

described in this rule as contained and

restricted-access indoor installations,

also present limited exposure risk

potential. An installation meeting this

description has a roof, walls, and floors

that will contain any release of PCBs

within the indoor installation. This type

of installation also prevents rain from

reaching the large PCB capacitors and

has controlled access to these PCB

capacitors. A building which prevents

PCB releases from escaping, including

escape through drains or expansion

joints, would be acceptable. This type of

contained and restricted-access

installation aHolws proper cleanup of

PCBs with very little exposure to

humans or the environment. EPA

estimates that 25,728 pounds of PCBs

could be released from larg-e PCB

capacitors in contained and restrictedaccess indoor installations.

The second category of large PCB

Capacitor locations represents all other

locations. The capacitors in this

category are primarily located on utility

poles throughout electric service areas.

The exposure risks associated with

those capacitors vary due to their

widespread use. These capacitor

installations are used in residential

neighborhoods, industrial areas, rural

areas, public areas (such as shopping

centers, schools, etc.), and even near

waterways. The capacitors, because of

their locations. have a greater potential

for exposing humans. animals. and the

environment during their use than other

large PCB Capacitors. EPA estimates

that without any risk reduction

measures these capacitors could release

as many as 730,110 pounds of PCBs

during their remaining useful life.

2. Benefits ofPCBs and availability of

substitutes. The electrical properties of

PCBs are so well suited as a dielectric

fluid for capacitors that no other fluids

were commonly used in capacitors prior

to 1978. Since 1978, electric utilities and

other industries have been installing

non-PCB Capacitors with no apparent

replacement or operational problems.

Under this final rule EPA estimates

that 1.087 million large PCB Capacitors

(or 108.7 million KVAR, assuming an

average size of 100 KVAR) will require

removal due to the accelerated phaseout requirements. (KVAR is the

abbreviation for reactive kilovoltampers, which is a standard power

rating for capacitors.) EPA assumes that

companies will take one year to plan for

the phase-out and five years to

implement it. Considering the additional

capacitors that will require replacement

due to failure or obsolescence, EPA

estimates that a peak annual power

capacitor manufacturing capacity of 29

million KVAR (about 145,000 2DO-KVAR

units) will be required to meet the total

demand for replacements. EPA's

estimates for the demand for new power

capacitor applications (unrelated to any

demand for replacements) range from

9.7 million KVAR to 20.3 million KVAR

per year. Therefore, the maximum total

annual demand for power capacitors

should be between 38.7 and 49.3 million

KVAR under this final rule.

In a survey of domestic capacitor

manufacturers by the National Electrical

Manufacturers Association in response

to this rulemaking, four respondents

indicated that production could be

increased 65 percent by 1983 or earlier.

With this increase in production, the

total annual power capacitor

manufacturing capacity would be 47.85

million KVAR.

According to these estimates,

manufacturing capacity is adequate for

companies to comply with the

requirement to phase out these

capacitors over the next six years. The

derivation of the estimates and a further

discussion of the methodology used to

arrive at this conclusion is found in the

Regulatory Impact Analysis prepared for

this final rule.

3. Economic and environmental

impacts ofregulatory requirements. The

economic impact of this final rule was

calculated in terms of the lost economic

value associated with removing PCB

Capacitors before the end of their useful

lives. EPA estimates this cost to be

$135.8 million. EPA estimates that the

net present value of the phase-out cost

for the electric utility industry is only

0.05 percent of the 1979 net value of

assets in electric plant nationally..

It should be noted that the direct costs

of the regulatory requirements for large

PCB Capacitors do not include the

energy savings associated with the use

of more efficient replacement

capacitors. This savings is very

Significant for capacitors that were

manufactured using paper insulation

(approximately pre-1966). The

Regulatory Impact Analysis prepared for

this final rule estimates that the

payback period for capacitors with

paper insulation is approximately 11

years, assuming that the capacitors are

in use 50 percent of the time.

By removing large PCB Capacitors

before the end of their useful service

lives it prevents the release of PCBs

during the remaining years of use. EPA

estimates that this final rule avoids an

estimated 572.000 pounds of PCBs from

release from large PCB Capacitors that

doe not pose an exposure risk to food

and feed. A more complete discussion of

the costs and benefits associated with

the regulatory requirements is presented
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37349 1982

Federala Register I _Vol. 47, No. 165 I Wednesday, _ August 25, 1982_ I Rules and Regulations '_A_,.. 37349

in the Regulatory Impact Analysis

prepared for this final rule.

4. Findings on the use of capacitors.

The proposed rule discussed whether

the use of PCBs in capacitors should

continue and the options EPA

considered to reduce the risks from the

use of PCBs in capacitors. The proposed

rule authorized the use of capacitors for

ten years. Several comments suggested

that capacitors should be categorized on

the basis of difference in potential for

exposure. These differences arise

because of differences in the

accessability of the capacitor location

and differences in the degree of

containment of any PCB spills or leaks

which may occur. EPA agrees with these

comments and has created categories

based on the comments. Other

comments urged EPA to eliminate the

phase-out requirement altogether. With

respect to those capacitors in the

category with comparatively low

exposure potential, EPA agrees with

these comments and has eliminated the

phase-out, but with respect to other

capacitors, EPA has concluded that the

cost of a six-year phase-out is

reasonable because of the large quantity

of PCBs release which will be avoided

and because of the comparatively high

potential for exposure in these locations.

This final rule prohibits the use of -

large PCB Capacitors after October 1,

1988, unless the capacitors are used in

restricted-access outdoor electrical

substations, or in contained and,

restricted-access indoor installations.

EPA finds that the more limited

potential for exposure in these

restricted-access locations warrants

authorizing their use for the remainder

of their useful lives.

.A very large number of comments

stated that the' benefits of an inspection

program for capacitors do -not outweigh

the costs. In most cases, lerge releases

of PCBs from capacitors (ruptures)

happen very suddenly as a result of a

large amount of energy entering the

capacitor in a very short time period.

Inspections of in-service capacitors

cannot detect characteristics which

indicate a capacitor's potential to

release PCBs. EPA agrees that the

effectiveness of an inspection program

for large PCB Capacitors is very limited

in preventing future releases of PCBs.

Therefore, this final rule eliminates the

proposed requirement that large PCB

Capacitors must be inspected for leaks

of dielectric fluid on a quarterly basis.

An inspection program can speed the

detection and cleanup of PCBs in cases

where a release has already occurred

and the release has not been detected or cleaned up. However, EPA has learned

from comments on the proposed rule·

that for large capacitors located on distribution systems that a utility

company or other owner is almost

always notified of PCB releases by the

public or company personnel within a

much shorter time period than the

proposed quarterly inspection

frequency. Furthermore, large PCB

Capacitors located in electrical

substations and indoors are typically

inspected by company crews more

frequently than the proposed quarterly

inspection due to existing concerns for

system efficiency and stability.

EPA finds that authorizing the use of

PCBs in capacitors not posing an

exposure risk to food or feed, under the

required conditions, does not present an

unreasonable risk for the following

reasons:

a. The use of PCBs in large PCB

Capacitors that are located in restrictedaccess indoor installations for their

remaining useful lives is such that PCBs

released from these capacitors are

readily identified and cleaned up with

limited exposure potential to humans

and the environment.

b. The required six-year phase-out

period for large PCB Capacitors should

prevent more than 500,000 pounds of

PCBs from entering the environment and

some unknown percentage of that

quantity from entering the food chain.

This time period also avoids any

disruption of electrical service. c. The cost of the phase-out

requirement is reasonable when

compared to the large amount of PCBs it

prevents from entering the environment

and the costs and benefits of alternative

risk reduction measures. This cost is

only $237 per pound of PCB release

avoided.

5. Small capacitors. PCB Small

Capacitors contain less than 3 pounds of

dielectric fluid. These capacitors

commonly contain between 0.1 and 0.6

pounds of PCBs and are used in

fluourescent light ballasts, household

appliances, and industrial equipment. In

most applications, the equipment

containing the small capacitor in its

circuitry cannot function without it. In

1976, an EPA study estimated that 870

million small capacitors, containing 275

million pounds of PCBs, were in use in a wide variety of applications. Today,

EPA estimates that approximately 500

million of these small capacitors are still

in use. EPA calculated this figure

assuming that 10 percent of these

capacitors are removed from service

annually due to equipment or appliance

obsolescence and capacitor failure.

No data has been submitted to EPA

which indicate that small capacitors

have a different propensity to leak than

other capacitors. Additionally, no

ccmments have identified any practical

and cost-effective use restrictions

regarding the use of PCB Small

Capacitors. Because of the widespread

and diverse nature of their use and the

small amount of PCBs contained within

each individual small capacitor, all

regulatory approaches targeted at

controlling releases from these

capacitors are very expensive when

compared to the potential quantity of

PCBs kept from the environment.

Consequently, EPA has not identified a

reasonable cost-effective regulatory

alternative that would result in

significantly reducing the risks

associated with the remaining PCB

Small Capacitors in service. Therefore,

this final rule does not require any

restrictions regarding the use of PCBs in

small capacitors. However, EPA

encourages commercial and industrial

firms that use and dispose of large

quantities of PCB Small Capacitors to

establish voluntarily a collection and

disposal program that results in waste

capacitors being disposed of in an EPA·

approved incinerator or chemical waste

landfill. Such programs could be

expanded to encourage voluntary

collection and disposal of PCB Small .

Capacitors from the public and qther

firms. Any firm which desires more

information about identifying and

disposing of PCB Small Capacitors

should cqntact the nearest EPA regional

office or the Industry Assistance Office

at 600-424-9065 for assistance.

Since these capacitors contain small

quantities of dielectric fluid and

significant amounts of absorbant

material such as paper, and because

many of these capacitors are

encapsulated, PCBs are rarely released

from these capacitors during their use or

from the equipment using the capacitors.

Therefore, exposure risks to humans,

food, feed, wate:" or the environment

from the use of these capacitors are low.

In conclusion, EPA finds that the use of

small capacitors containing PCBs is not

unreasonable because their use provides

society with the benefits from the use of

millions of pieces of electronic

equipment and consumer products, it

avoids billions of dollars in replacement

costs, and there appear to be no

practical, cost-effective risk reduction

measures.

E. Use ofPCB Transformers. Capacitors.

and Electromagnets That Pose an

Exposure Risk to Human Food and

Animal Feed

EPA estimates that at the end of 1979

there were approximately 47.500 large

PCB Capacitors and 9,560 PCB

Transformers in use on the premises of

..
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37350 1982

37350 Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 165 I Wednesday, August 25. 1982 I Rules and Regulations

food and feed facilities. Because of

comments that much of this equipment

never posed an exposure risk to food or

feed and that, for much of the rest of it.

steps have been taken to eliminate the

risk. EPA estimates that ten percent of

the equipment used on the premises of

food and feed facilities poses an

exposure risk to food or feed products.

Since publication of the proposed rule.

EPA has received a comment that

indicated that electromagnets designed

to contain PCBs are still in use over

grain elevators. EPA was unaware that

this use still existed at the time of the

proposed rule. In 1979, EPA estimated

that a total of 200 PCB-filled

electromagnets were in use with an

unknown percentage of these in use in

coaloperations.

1. Magnitude ofexposure. Human

food and animal feed represent EPA's

greatest concern for exposure because

of the increased health risks associated

with the ingestion of PCBs. Electrical

equipment filled with askarel dielectric

fluid presents the greatest exposure

risks to food and feed due to the high

concentrations and large quantities of

PCBs. Any leakage from such equipment

has the potential to cause severe harm.

One incident, involving a single PCB

Transformer, occurred at a plant

manufacturing animal feed ingredients.

The contaminated feed was fed to

poultry and livestock, resulting in

millions of dollars of damages.

Implicated food and feed products were

. distributed to nineteen states and two

foreign countries.

2. Benefits ofPCBs and availability of

substitutes. The benefits of using PCBs

and the availability of substitutes for

PCBs in transformers and capacitors

that pose an exposure risk to food and

feed are identical to those discussed for

PCB Transformers and PCB Capacitors.

The benefit of using PCBs in

electromagnets is the safety provided by

the fire resistant properties of the PCBs.

The substitutes for PCBs in transformers

are also available and suitable for use in

electromagnets.

3. Economic and environmental

impacts ofregulatory requirements. The

food contamination incident previously

described which involved a single PCB

Transformer demonstrates that the cost

to society of a PCB spill affecting food or

feed can be more than one million

dollars per pound of PCBs spilled.

Therefore. only a very small reduction in

PCB leakage Is needed for a risk

reduction measure to be cost effective in

food and feed facilities. The Regulatory

Impact Analysis contains an

examination of the cost effectiveness of

different accelerated phase-out time

periods and inspection program

frequencies.

The impact of replacing the affected

PCB Transformers and large PCB

Capacitors in food and feed facilities is

estimated to be $16.04 million. and the

impact of replacing the affected

electromagnets is $0.38 million. These

estimates assume that ten percent of the

PCB Transformers imd Capacitors used

by the food and feed industry pose an

exposure risk to food and feed and that

ten percent of the estimated 200 PCBfilled electromagnets In service in 1979

pose an exposure risk to food and feed.

4. Findings on the use ofPCBs posing

an exposure risk to food and feed. In the

proposed rule. EPA found that it was

reasonable to require weekly inspection

of all PCB Transformers and Large PCB

Capacitors that pose an exposure risk to

food or feed and to prohibit the use of

these capacitors after October 1, 1992.

Several comments suggested that EPA

categorize equipment according to

differences in the risk of exposure.

Other comments expressed concern that

EPA was proposing to allow indefinite

use of PCBs in transformers in the areas

of greatest risk. After further analysis of

the cost-effectiveness of various

accelerated phase-out periods and

consideration of these comments, EPA

has decided to establish a prohibition on

the use of PCB Transformers, PCB Large

Capacitors, and PCB-filled

electromagnets that pose an exposure

risk to food and feed. This prohibition

becomes effective in three years for PCB

Transformers and PCB-filled

electromagnets and'in six years for PCB

Large Capacitors. The cost-effectiveness

calculations are contained in the

Regulatory hnpact Analysis.

Other comments urged EPA not to

prohibit the use of any electrical

equipment in food or feed

establishments. but to rely on the

effectiveness of an inspection and

maintenance program. EPA did not

choose this option because, although an

inspection and maintenance program

does have benefits. the need to avoid

contamination of human food with PCBs

justifies the imposition of additional

protective measures.

The three-year time period for

transformers and electromagnets is

based on an estimated one year to

analyze the specifics of the individual

situation. to choose the method to be

used to eliminate the exposure risk to

food or feed. and to develop a plan for

compliance with the regulation and two

years to Implement the plan. Given the

comparatively small amount of

equipment involved. EPA believes that

this period of time is sufficient for

affected persons to avoid logistical

difficulties.

The six-year time period for PCB

Large Capacitors is based on an

estimated one year for planning for

compliance and five years for

implementation of the plan. EPA

decided not to shorten this period. any

further for these capacitors because the

quantity of PCBs iqvolved is much less

than the quantity of PCBs in

transformers posing this exposure risk

and because the cost per pound of

preventing PCB relealle was higher than

for the transformers. --

Prohibiting the use of PCB-containing

equipment in a location that poses an

exposure risk to food or feed represents

the most effective risk reduction

measure of the alternatives EPA has

considered. Persons subject to this

requirement actually have several

choices as to how to comply. They may

replace the equipment. They may

provide secondary containment so that

the exposure risk to food or feed is

eliminated. They may relocate the

equipment to a location which does not

present an exposure risk. For

transformers and electromagnets. they

may service the equipment to reduce the

PCB concentration to less than 500 ppm.

Many comments agreed with EPA's

finding in the proposed rule that a

weekly inspection frequency is not

unreasonable primarily because it is an

effective risk reduction measure.for

equipment such as transformers and

electromagnets and because of the large

exposure risks associated with the use

of PCB Transformers and PCB-mled

electromagnets near food or feed. As

discussed in an earlier section of this

preamble. the effectiveness of an

inspection program for capacitors is

very limited and in most cases rUlJtures

of this equipment are identified in

shorter time frames than the inspection

frequency. Therefore, this final rule

eliminates the proposed weekly

inspection requirement for Large PCB

Capacitors and retains this program for

PCB Transformers and PCB-filled

electromagnets.

Most comments in response to the

proposed rule did not support any use

restrictions for mineral oil-filled

electrical equipment posing an exposure

risk to food or feed since very little of

this equipment is used in food and feed

facilities. In most cases. mineral oil

equipment contains very little PCBs, and

it is expensive to test all the equipment

to determine which items actually

contains PCBs. Therefore, EPA made no

l;hanges in the proposed authorization

for this equipment which allows its use

without restriction.
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37351 1982

Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 165 I Wednesday, August 25, 1982 I Rules and Regulations 37351

~~~ ~- '-~'-~- - Other comments in response to the

proposed rule recommended that EPA

include in the final rule clarifications

that were issued under the Interim

Measures Program. These clarifications

have been incorporated into the final

rule where appropriate and are

discussed in this preamble.

The proposed rule required special

inspection procedures for transformers

which are in a location that pose a rIsk

of exposure to human food or animal

feed. This exposure risk is presumed to

exist in any facility manufacturing,

processing. packaging. or holding human

food or animal feed, or in any federally

inspected meat, poultry product or egg

product establishment. Because several

comments pointed out a need for more

specificity as to which equipment is

subject to inspection requirements, EPA

has further clarified the definition of

posing an exposure risk to food or feed

in this rule under 40 CPR 761.3(11).

This new definition clarifies that PCB

Items pose an exposure risk to food or

feed only when there exists a potential

pathway for PCBs discharged from the

item to contaminate food or feed

products. Food and feed covered by this

definition includes items regulated by

USDA and FDA as food or feed

including additives. Food and feed is

excluded from this definition if it is used

or stored in private residences by the

public because a very small amount of

food would be potentially exposed in a

single incident in a private residence

and because the enforcement of this

requirement in private residences would

place a very large demand on EPA

enforcement resources. This definition,

does cover food and feed that are held

in all other facilities including grocery

stores, restaurants, warehouses, barns,

bins, sheds, silos, and other structures.

and in feedlots, open fields, and animal

grazing areas.

Comments also encouraged the

clarificatidn of the responsibilities

between users and owners of PCBcontaining electrical equipment that

pose an exposure risk to food and feed.

As in the interim Measures Program it is

the responsibility of the user of a PCB

Transformer to fulfill all appropriate

inspection, recordkeeping and

maintenance requirements until the

owner is notified that the transfomter

may pose an exposure risk to food or

feed, or until the owner has other

knowledge indicating that the

transformer may pose an exposure risk

to food or feed. It is the ultimate

responsibility of the owner of the PCBcontaining electrical equipment to

determine if it poses an exposure risk to

food or feed. Although users of PCBTransformers, PCB capacitors, and PCBfilled electromagnets are not responsible

for phasing-out any of this equipment,

users should contact the owner if they

feel that this equipment poses an

exposure risk to food or feed. In any

event, the user still has responsibility

under other Federal laws to insure that

food and feed distributed in commerce

are not contaminated.

In the Federal Register of May 9, 1980,

EPA proposed a rule amendment which

would have prohibited the use of PCB

Items in facilities manufacturing,

processing, or storing fertilizers or

agricultural pesticides. EPA received

comment upon this proposed rule and,

on May 6, 1981, in light of the courtordered rulemaking on the use of PCBs

in electrical equipment, EPA put that

proposed rule in abeyance. Because the

promulgation of this final rule deals with

PCBs that pose an exposure risk to food or feed, EPA has decided not to issue a

final rule from the May 9, 1980 proposed

rule. The final rule on the use of PCBs in

electrical equipment does not recognize

agricultural'pesticides and fertilizers as

food or feed additive or require

additional provisions for PCB Items

which pose an exposure risk to

agricultural pesticides and fertilizers.

The rulemaking recC?rd from the May 9,

1980, proposed amendment has been

incorporated into the record for this

final rule.

F. Use and Servicing of Voltage

Regulators, Switches (Including

SectionaJizers and Motor Starters), and

Electromagnets

Voltage regulators and switches

(including sectionalizers and motor

starters) are used by electric utilities

and industry to control, transmit, and

distribute electric power efficiently.

Almost all of this electrical equipment is

mineral oil-filled and not designed to

contain PCB dielectric fluid. Very few

Items are contaminated with greater

than 500 ppm PCBs. Electromagnets are primarily used over conveyor belts to

remove iron from non-magnetic

commodities and are not commonly

used by the electric utility industry.

Electromagnets designed to contain

PCBs are used in areas such as coal

mines, coal preparation plants, and coalfired generating stations. PCB-filled

electromagnets that pose an exposure

risk to food or feed are discussed in

section E.

1. Magnitude of exposure. The total

pounds of PCBs in oil-filled voltage

regulators, switches, and electromagnets

represent less than 0.01 percent of the

total PCBs in-service in electrical

equipment. EPA estimates from data in

the rulemaking record that the annual

leakage of oil-ruled voltage regulators

and switches would amount to a release

of approximately 85 pounds of PCBs per

year.

Leaks of dielectric fluid from oil-filled

electrical equipment have the potential

for exposing humans or the environment

to low concentrations (parts per million)

of PCBs because some of this equipment

is used in the Nation's electrical

distribution system which is located

near consumers or electric power. In

addition, releases of PCBs anywhere in

the environment have the potential to

reach aquatic systems, build up in the

food chain, and ultimately result in

human exposure. Leaks of PCBs from

electromagnets used in coal-handling

systems, however, present negligible

risks since the coal in these systemf:! is

handled automatically and eventuallyls

burned in combustion devices (such as

high efficiency boilers) capable of

destroying PCBs..

2. Benefits ofPCBs and availability of

substitutes. The PCBs in almost all of

this electrical equipment serve no

specific purpose since the PCBs are in

such small concentrations and are the

result of contamination from servicing

and manufacturing activities. For this

equipment, the PCBs provide no

significant benefits. For any equipment

designed to contain PCBs, the use of

PCBs in the equipment provides the

same safeguards against fire hazards as

that described for transformers.

The availability of substitutes was

discussed in the proposed rule.

3. Economic and environmental

impacts ofregulatory requirements. This

final rule reduces the amount of worker

and environmental exposure associated

with servicing (including rebuilding) this

equipment. This rule also prevents

further PCB contamination of this

equipment.

The economic impacts are discussed

in further detail in the proposed rule and

the Regulatory Impact Analysis

prepared for this final rule. There are no

significant changes from the analysis

done for the proposed rule.

4. Findings on the use and servicing of

this electrical equipment. The proposed

rule contained an authorization for the

use of PCBs in voltage regulators,

switches (including sectionalizers and

motor starters), and electromagnets for

their remaining useful lives with no use

restrictions. It also restricted servicing

activities in order to prevent this

equipment from being further

contaminated with PCBs and to reduce

PCB exposure of servicing personnel

and the environment during these

activities. Comments in response to the

proposed rule did not raise any new
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37352 1982

37352 Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 165 I Wednesday, August 25, 1982 I Rules and Regulations

issues that warranted changes in the

proposal. Th,erefore, EPA reaffirms its

proposed findings in this final rule.

EPA finds that authorizing the use of

PCBs in voltage regulators, switches

(including sectionalizers and motor

starters), and electromagnets with the

servicing conditions does not present an

unreasonable risk for the following

reasons:

a. Allowing' this use of PCBs to

, continue avoids disruption of electric

service and the costs associated with a

prohibition. (This reason does not apply

to electromagnets.)

b. There is little PCB contamination of

this oil-filled equipment and very small

amounts of PCBs are expected to be

released annually.

c. EPA does not believe that the cost

associated with restrictions regarding

the use of this equipment is justified by

the small PCB exposure that would be

prevented by such measures.

d. The servicing restrictions will

prevent easily avoidable human

exposure to PCBs.

This rule authorizes the servicing of

electrical equipment not previously

mentioned in the PCB rule, such as

voltage regulators and switches. Persons

who service this equipment should note

that any processing and distribution in

commerce of PCBs for servicing this

equipment requires an exemption from

the July 1, 1979 ban of these activities.

Procedures for submitting a petition for

exemption from the PCB processing and

distribution in commerce prohibitions

under section 6(e)(3)(B) ofTSCA are

described in 40 CFR Part 750, (44 FR

31556, May 31, 1979).

G. Use and Servicing ofCircuit

Breakers. RecJosers. and Cable

Circuit breakerll, reclosures, and cable

are used primarily by electric utilities to

protect other equipment in the electric

power system from damage caused by

electrical faults and to transmit electric

power. Circuit breakers. reclosers. and

cable are types of oil-filled electrical

equipm~1l1 generally not designed to

contain PCBs. However, available data

indicate that a small percentage of this

"electrical equipment contains PCBs

resulting from past servicing and

manufacturing practices.

1. Magnitude of exposure. Although

approximately 26.3 percent of all oilfilled circuit breakers can be expected

to leak during an average year. this

could amount to a release of only 50.66

pounds of PCBs, according to the EEI/

USWAG study. This same study

indicates that releases of dielectric fluid

from reclosers could amount to 6.64

pounds of PCBs per year. As with other

oil-filled electrical equipment, leaks of

. dielectric fluid have the potential for

exposing humans and the environment

to low concentrations of PCBs because

of the equipment's location throughout

electric power system service areas. 2. Benefits ofPCBs and availability of

substitutes. Both the benefits and

availability of substitutes for PCBs in

circuit breakers, reclosers. and cable are

the same as that discussed for other

mineral oil-filled equipment

(transformers. voltage regulators.

switches. etc.).

3. Economic and environmental

impacts ofregulatory requirements.

Since this electrical equipment may be

assumed to contain less than 50 ppm

PCBs, the economic and environmental

impact of the servicing and disposal

requirements is minimal and difficult to

measure. These requirements would

only apply to equipment that is known

to contain PCBs in excess of 50 ppm (e.g.

from test results). Additional discussion

of the costs and benefits associated with

the regulatory requirements is found in

the proposed rule and the Regulatory

Impact Analysis prepared for this final

rule. There are no significant changes

from the analysis done for the proposed

rule.

4. Findings on the use and servicing of

this electrical equipment. The proposed

rule contained an authorization. with

servicing conditions, which would have

allowed the use of PCBs in circuit

breakers and reclosers for the remaining

useful life of this equipment. No

comments contained data which would

warrant changing this part of the

proposal.

The proposed rule also authorized the

use of oil-filled cable and contained a

requirement that oil-filled cable must be

assumed to contain between 50 and 500

ppm PCBs if the concentration were

unknown. This requirement was

included in the proposal because there

was virtually no data in the rulemaking

record on PCB concentrations in cable.

Comments in response to the proposed

rule contained additional data on the

PCBs concentrations of oil-filled cable,

indicating that virtually none of the

cable is contaminated in excess of 50

ppm. Therefore, this final rule allows the

assumption that oil-filled cable contains

less than 50 ppm PCBs if the actual

concentration is unknown.

EPA authorizes the use and servicing

of PCBs in circuit breakers, reclosers,

and cable for the remainder of their

useful lives, according to the servicing

restrictions of § 761.30(m)(1}. These

servicing conditions prevent further PCB

contamination of equipment containing

less than 50 ppm PCBs. The disposal

requirements of 40 CFR 761.60 and the

servicing requirements of 40 CFR

761.30(h) apply to any oil-filled circuit

breaker, recloser, or cable found to

contain 50 ppm or greater PCBs. EPA

believes that this use authorization with

servicing conditions does not present an

unreasonable risk for the following

reasons:

a. Allowing this use of PCBs to

continue avoids disruption of electric

service and the costs associated with a

prohibition. .

b. There is little PCB contamination of

this oil-filled equipment and very small

amounts of PCBs are expected to be

released annually.

c. EPA does not believe that the cost

associated with restrictions regarding

the use of this equipment is justified by

the small PCB exposure that would be

prevented by such measures.

d.The servicing restrictions will

prevent easily avoidable human

exposure to PCBs and further

contamination of this equipment.

VI. Other Amendments to the PCB Rule

A. PCB-Contaminated Electrical

Equipment

Because this rulemaking has identified

electrical equipment containing PCBs

that was not previously recognized in

the PCB rule, changes have been made

to definitions presented in the rule. This

final rule deletes the definition of a

"PCB-Contaminated Transformer" (40

CFR 761.3(z}) and substitutes a definition

titled "PCB-Contaminated Electrical

Equipment.

"PCB-Contaminated Electrical

Equipment" means any electrical

equipment that contains at least 50 ppm.

but less than 500 ppm PCB.

Electrical equipment includes

transformers (including those used on

railway locomotive!! and self-propelled

cars), capacitors. voltage regulators,

electromagnets, cable, circuit breakers,

reclosers, and switches (including

se.ctionalizers and motor starters).

Although the use of PCBs in certain

electrical equipment is authorized

regardless of PCB concentration, the

disposal requirements of the May 1979

PCB rule make certain distinctions on

the basis of PCB concentration. That is,

different disposal requirements apply to

PCBs at concentrations of 500 ppm or

greater and at concentrations between

50 and 500 ppm. The definition of PCBContaminated Electrical Equipment was

developed in order to refer to the

electrical equipment that contains

between 50 and 500 ppm PCBs.

Prior to publication of the proposed

rule, EPA had received data regarding

the actual PCB concentrations in

different types of electrical equipment.
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37353 1982

Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 165 I Wednesday, August 25, 1982 I Rules and Regulations 37353

These data indicate that approximately

12 to 14 percent of oil-filled

transformers. voltage regulators. and

switches contain PCB concentrations of

50 ppm or greater, but PCB

concentrations greater than 500 ppm in

this equipment are rare, estimated to

occur in less than '2 percent of the

equipment. Because the contamination

was caused by unintentional

manufacturing and servicing practices. it

_. is impossible to determine for certain

which pieces of equipment are

contaminated without testing them all.

EPA estimates the cost of such testing to

be over two billion dollars, based on a

total of cost of $100 per test. Based on

these data, EPA requires that all oilfilled transformers, voltage regulators,

switches. and electromagnets must be

assumed to be PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment unless the oil has

been tested. or otherwise verified, and

found not to contain between 50 and 500

ppm PCBs. In other words, if the actual

PCB concentration of any oil-filled

transformer, voltage regulator. switch, or

electromagnet is unknown. the

equipment must be assumed to contain

more than 50 ppm PCBs and may be

assumed to contain less than 500 ppm

PCBs for purposes of servicing and

disposing of this equipment. This will

allow owners of this equipment to avoid

the cost of testing if they choose. .

Little monitoring data were available

to EPA prior to publication of the

proposed role regarding the PCB

concentration in oil-filled

electromagnets. Comments on the

proposed role added little additional

information. Because electromagnets

use the same kind of oil and are

serviced in the same manner as other

types of oil-filled equipment, there is no

reason to believe its PCB concentration

would frequently exceed 500 ppm.

Therefore. EPA requires that oil-filled

electromagnets be included in the

category of PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment so that they must

be assumed to have a PCB concentration

between 50 and 500 ppm if the

concentration il unknown.

Data in the rolemaking record indicate

that less than two percent of oil-filled

circuit breakers. reclosers. and cable are

contaminated with PCB concentrations

of 50 ppm or greater. EPA estimates that

it would cost approximately forty

million dollars to indentify all of the

circuit breakers. reclosers. and cable

whose PCB contamination exceeds 50

ppm. Because the coat of either testing

all the equipment or treating it al

contaminated in excess of 50 ppm il

bJsb relative to the number of pieces of

equipment that an likely to contain

greater than 50 ppm, EPA allows that

oil-filled circuit breakers, reclosers and

cable need not be classified as PCBContaminated Electrical Equipment if

the PCB concentration is unknown.

B. Clarification ofExisting Definitions

This final rule retains, as proposed,

changes to the defmitions of "Large High

Voltage Capacitor". "Large Low Voltage

Capacitor". "Small Capacitor", and PCB

Article (40 CFR 761.3(d) (1). (2), and (3)

and 761.3(t), respectively). No comments

on the proposed rule raised any new

issues regarding these changes.

. C. Distribution in Commerce

EPA in its April 22, 1982 Federal

Register notice proposed changes to the

list of PCB activities it found to be in a

totally enclosed manner, due to new

information submitted prior to the

proposal. This final rule is identical to

the proposal. To assure that PCBs are

not released from electrical equipment

being distributed in commerce under the

provisions of section 6(e)(3)(C), EPA

finds the distribution in commerce of

only intact and nonleaking transformers

(including transformers used on railway

locomotives and self-propelled cars).

capacitors. electromagnets, voltage

regulators. circuit breakers, reclosers.

switches (including sectionalizers and

switches). and cable to be totally

enclosed activities. Coupled with 40

CFR 761.30(c)(1). this will restrict the

applicability of section 6(e)(3)(C) to

intact. nonleaking equipment. Persons

wishing to distribute in commerce

electrical equipment which is not intact

and nonleaking must apply for an

exemption from the ban on distribution

in commerce. using the exemption

procedures found in 40 CFR Part 750.

D. DisposalRequirements

Since this rulemaking has identified

uses of PCB-containing electrical

equipment not recognized in the earlier

PCB regulations. changes have been

made to the disposal requirements for

PCBs and PCB Items. The major

difference between this final rule and

the proposal is that language specifying

the extent of cleanup required for a PCB

spill has been deleted.

1. Mineral oil dielectric fluid. This

final rule allOWI mineral oil dielectric

fluid from any type of PCBContaminated Electrical Equipment to

be disposed following the requirements

of 40 CFR 761.6O(a)(2). All mineral oil

from transformers. electromagnets.

voltage regulators. and switches is

subject to the dispolal requirements of

this section, unless the oil has been

tested (or otherwise verified) and found

to contain leas than &0 ppm PCBs. No

comments on this proposed change

affected EPA's conclusions regarding the

degree of contamination of this

equipment.

2. PCB items. The proposed rule

established disposal requirements for

PCB-Contaminated Electrical

Equipment. This equipment must be

drained of all free flowing liquid, and

the liquid must be disposed of under 40

CFR 761.60(a)(2). The proposed rule also

regulated the disposal of PCB Articles

with a PCB concentration of 500 ppm or

more under 40 CFR 761.60(b)(5), but did

not regulate the disposition of a PCB

Article containing less than 500 ppm,

once all free flowing liquid has been

drained from the PCB Article. Comments

received generally agreed with these

requirements, and this final rule retains

them as proposed. However. one

comment stated that some capacitors

have been found to contain between 50

and 500 ppm PCBs. These comments

pointed out that capacitors are no't

designed to be drained of dielectric fluid

and would have to be punctured or cut

open. Puncturing or cutting open a Large

. PCB Capacitor poses a potential PCB

exposure risk to workers and the

environment due to the sudden release

of internal pressure that may have built

up in a failed capacitor. In order to

discourage this potentially hazardous

activity, this final rule requires disposal

of capacitors containing between 50 and

500 ppm PCBs in an incinerator that

complies with § 761.70 or in a chemical

waste landfill that complies with

§ 761.75.

Although this rule does not require

testing of mineral oil dielectric fluid for

PCB concentration, some people may

choose to do so. In order to reduce the

costs associated with testing for PCB

concentrations in mineral oil dielectric

fluid. this rule allows. as proposed.

common container collection ("batch

testing") of mineral oil dielectric fluid

from all electrical equipment containing

mineral oil dielectric fluid (see 40 CFR

761.60(g)(1)). Common container

collection is permitted so that mineral

oil from multiple sources can be

collected and tested without requiring a

separate test of each individual piece of

electrical equipment to determine

disposal options. However, in order to

prevent persons from using dilution to

circumvent the disposal rules. dielectric

fluid from oil-filled circuit breakers.

reclosers. or cable. collected in a

common container with untested

dielectric fluid from other oil-filled

eqUipment must be assumed to contain

at least 50 ppm PCBs.

3. SpiJJs and leaks. The proposed rule

clarified the definition of disposal, by
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37354 1982

37354 Federal Register / Vol.. 47. No. 165 / Wednesday, August 25. 1982 / Rules and Regulations :

including leaks in the definition. The

final rule refines this clarification. A

number of comments stated that it was

unfair to charge a party with

unauthorized disposal when PCBs are

spilled or leaked during authorized use of electrical equipment but prompt

cleanup is initiated. It is not the

Agency's intention that § 761.3(h) and

§ 761.60(d) should be applied in this

way. Where the responsible party

shows that: (1) The spill, leak. or

uncontrolled discharge occurred during

authorized use of electrical equipment

and (2) adequate cleanup measures

were initiated within 48 hours, the

Agency will not charge the party with a

disposal violation.

The proposal also contained

requirements for cleanup of PCB

contamination resulting from spills,

leaks. and other uncontrolled discharges

of PCBs. Comments in response to these

provisions varied. Some comments .

stated that a requirement for level of

cleanup should be set, but that cleanup

to a concentration of 50 ppm was

always appropriate. Other comments

expressed concern about setting any

specific requirements for level of

cleanup at this time and about how

these levels would be determined in the

field. Still others approved of the

standards set in the proposed rule.

The Agency has decided not to

include language regarding the required

level of cleanup in this final rule. A part

of § 761.60(d)(2) (formerly § 761.10(d)(2)),

which was sometimes construed as

setting a required level of cleanup has

been deleted.

4. Storage for disposal. The storage for

disposal of nonleaking and structurally

undamaged PCB Large High Voltage

Capacitors and PCB-Contaminated

Transformers on pallets next to

qualified storage facilities was

permitted until January 1, 1983, under

the May 31, 1979, PCB rule (formerly 40

CFR 761.42(c)(2)). This provision was

designed to relieve the burden on PCB

storage facilities until EPA-approved

incineration facilities were

commercially available.

A number of comments pointed out

that if EPA were going to require

accelerated phase-out of capacitors,

there would be additional storage

needed for phased-out equipment

awaiting disposal. After considering

these comments, EPA has decided to

allow this type of storage for disposal

for nonleaking and structurally

undamaged PCB Large High Voltage

Capacitors and PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment after January 1.

1983.

The May 31, 1979, PCB rule did not

envision an accelerated phase-out for

, certain PCB Transformers and large PCB

Capacitors or the use of PCB-containing

oil-filled electrical equipment other than

transformers. In order to lessen the

burden on existing storage facilities and

reduce the need to build additional

facilities, this final rule allows this type

of storage for disposal to continue

indefinitely, according to the provisions

of 40 CFR 761.65(c)(2).

The May 1979 rule exempted PCB

Small Capacitors from the storage

requirements. In the April 22, 1982,

proposed rule, this exemption

(§ 761.10(b)(6)) was printed erroneously.

This error made it appear that EPA was

proposing to exempt PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment from storage

requirements instead of PCB Small

Capacitors. EPA did not intend to

propose any change in the language of

this paragraph. The introductory text to

§ 761.60(b)(6) in this final rule corrects

this error.

E. Reclassification ofElectrical

Equipment Containing PCBs

The May 1979 rule prohibits rebuilding

of PCB Transformers and allows the

PCB concentration in electrical

equipment to be reduced for purposes of

reclassifying the equipment. The

proposed rule retained these provisions.

Under the provisions for reclassification.

the equipment must be'put back into

service for three months before testing

the PCB concentration. Comments on

the proposed rule pointed out that the

proposed servicing restrictions prohibit

reclassification of PCB Transformers

which have failed electrically because

failed transformers can not be put back

into service unless rebuilt. In response

to this comment, EPA has added a

provision to the final rule which allows

the Assistant Administrator for

Pesticides and Toxic Substances to

approve a method of simulating the

loading conditions associated with inservice use. To apply for approval of

any method which uses conditions other

than in-service use. a letter should be

sent to the Assistant Administrator for

Pesticides ana Toxic Substances (TS794), Environmental Protection Agency,

401 M Street S.W., Washington. D.C.

20460. Responses to any applications for

approval will be in writing. All

applications should show that

alternative conditions result in

equivalent or greater release of PCBs

from the internal components of the

equipment into the dielectric fluid as

three months of in-service use. This final rule also clarifies the

definition of in-serrvice use for

transformers by spp.cifying a minimum

dielectric fluid temperature of 50· C.

This temperature has been shown

experimentally to be associated with a

condition of light electrical loading and

to cause release of PCBs from the

internal components of the transformer

into the dielectric fluid. This

clarification also provides guidance as

to what constitutes adequate in-service

use.

VII. Executive Order 12291

Under Executive Order 12291, issued

February 17, 1981, EPA must judge

whether a rule is a "major rule" and,

therefore, subject to the requirement

that a Regulatory Impact Analysis be

prepared. EPA has determined that this

amendment to the PCB rule is not a

major rule as the term is defined in

section l(b) of the Executive Order.

EPA has concluded that the

amendment is not "major" under the

criteria of section l(b) because the

annual effect of the rule on the economy

will be less than $100 million; it will not

cause a major increase in costs or prices

for any sector of the economy or for any

geographic region; and it W!ll not result

in any significant adverse effects on

competition, employment, investment,

productivity, or innovation or on the

ability of United States enterprises to

compete with foreign enterprises in

domestic or foreign markets. In fact, this

rule allows uses of PCBs in electrical

equipment to continue that would

otherwise be prohibited by section 6(e)

of TSCA. This rule avoids the severe

disruption of electric service to the

public and industry that would occur if

the use were prohibited. It also greatly

reduces the economic impact that would

result from a requirement to replace the

equipment as soon as possible.

However, although this proposal is not a

major rule, EPA has prepared a

Regulatory Impact Analysis using the

guidance in the Executive Order to the

extent possible within the time

constraints of the court's order.

This final rule amendment was

submitted to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) prior to publication

as required by the Executive Order.

VIII. Re~ulatory Flexibility Act

Section 604 of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 604, requires

EPA to prepare and make available for

comment a "regulatory flexibility

analysis" in connection with any

rulemaking for which there is a statutory

requirement that a general notice of

proposed rulemaking be published. The

"regulatory flexibility analysis"

describes the effect of a final rule on

small business entities.

Section 605(b) of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, however, provides that
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37355 1982

Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 165 / Wednesday, August 25, 1982 / Rules and Regulations 37355

section 604 of the Act "shall not apply to

any proposed or final rule if the head of

the Agency certifies that the rule will

not, if promulgated, have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities."

The effect of this final rule is to avoid

severe disruption of electric service to

industry and the public and to reduce

the costs of complying with TSCA. In

general. this rule will reduce the burden

on small businesses that would

otherwise be encountered if an

immediate ban on PCB-containing

electrical equipment were to take effect.

If an immediate ban were imposed, large

costs would be incurred by all producers

and users of electricity, including small

businesses.

Since the actual distribution of

electrical equipment ownership is

unknown, EPA estimated the effect of

the capacitor phase-out on different

groups of utilities, including the rural

electric cooperatives, using number of

customers as a predictor of number of

capacitors owned by the utility group.

Four groups were analyzed: private

Investor-owned utilities, local public

utilities, rural electric cooperatives, and

federally owned utilities. The rural

electric cooperative group would be

expected to include the most small

utilities. Using a number of measures of

impact, none of the groups analyzed,

Including the rural electric cooperatives,

would be significantly affected by this

final rule. EPA estimated that the total

costs of the capacitor phase-out for rural

electric cooperatives would be $13.97

million, or 0.072 percent of the net value

of assets in electric plant in 1979. The

maximum annual increase in capitalized

costs as a percent of net investment

would be 0.31 percent for the rural

electric cooperatives. The maximum

revenue requirement increase over the

phase-out period for the rural electric

cooperatives would be 0.084 percent of

1979 revenues.

The Impact of the regulation on the

food and feed industries should also be

very small since most of the industry

has voluntarily moved or replaced their

PCB Transformers and Large Capacitors.

Further, the impact on small food and

feed companies will be negligible since

most small firms do not own their own

transformers and capacitors.

Since the effect of this rule avoids the

economic impact associated with a

disruption of electric service and based

on the regulatory analysis which

indicates that there i8 a net benefit from

the rule, I certify that this rule will not

have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

Therefore, a "regulatory flexibility

analysis" is not required and will not be

prepared for this rulemaking.

VIlt Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980

(PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., authorizes

the Director of the OMB to review

certain information collection requests

by Federal agencies. EPA has

determined that the recordkeeping

requirements set out in 40 CFR 761.30

constitute a "collection of information,"

as defined in 44 U.S.C 3502(4), making

these requirements subject to the terms

ofthePRA.

In 40 CFR 761.30(a) EPA grants

. authorizations for the use of PCBcontaining transformers provided that

records are kept which indicate when

the equipment was inspected for leaks,

whether any leaks were found, and

what action it took if any leaks were

found. The person is required to keep

the records until three years after

disposing of the equipment, and upon

request, to make them available to EPA

for inspection. This requirement has

been reduced from the five-year period

that was in the proposal.

These recordkeeping requirements

minimize paperwork burden and are

designed to obtain only information

necessary to assure that companies are

complying with the rule. By eliminating

the inspection requirements for

capacitors, the paperwork burden of this

final rule has been reduced to less than

six percent of the burden for the

requirements in the proposed rule.

This final rule amendment has been

forwarded to the Director of OMB for

review under the terms of the PRA.

OMB has assigned the following control

number to this final rule: 207ס-סoo3.

IX. Official Record of Rulemaking

In accordance with the requirements

of section 19(a)(3)(E) of TSCA, EPA is

publishing the following list of .

documents, which constitute the record

of this rulemaking. However, public

comments, the transcript of the

rulemaking hearing, or submissions

made at the rulemaking hearing or in

connection with it will not be listed

because these documents are exempt

from Federal Register listing under

section 19(a)(3). A full list of these

materials is available on request by

contacting the Industry Assistance

Office (see listing under "For Further

Information Contact").

A. Previous Rulemaking Records

1. Official Rulemaking Record from

"Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)

Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in

Commerce and Use Prohibitions Rule"

published in the Federal Register of May 31,

1979, (44 FR 31514).

2. Official Rulemaking Record from

"Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Proposed

Restrictions on Use at Agricultural Pesticide

and Fertilizer Facilities," published in the

Federal Register of May 9. 1980. [45 FR

30989).

B. Federal Register Notices

3.44 FR 31514. May 31. 1979. USEPA.

"Polychlorinated Biphenyls [PCBs)

Manufacturing, Processing. Distribution in

Commerce. and Use Prohibitions."

4.45 FR 14232, March 5, 1980. USEPA.

"Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Request

for Information on PCB Transformers,"

5.46 FR 16096. March 10, 1981. USEPA.

"Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)

Manufacturing. Processing. Distribution In

Commerce and Use Prohibitions; Use in

Electrical Equipment; Court Order on

Inspection and Maintenance,"

6.48 FR 16096, March 10,1981. USEPA.

"Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs): Use in

Electrical Equipment."

7.46 FR 25411, May 6. 1981. USEPA.

"Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Proposed

Restrictions on Use at Agricultural Pesticide

and Fertilizer Facilities; Abeyance of

Proposed Rule Amendment,"

8. 46 FR 27614. May 20, 1981. USEPA.

"Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Use in

Electrical Equipment; Interim Measures

Program,"

9.47 FR 17428, April 22. 1982. USEPA.

"Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Use in

Electrical Equipment."

C. Support Documents

10. USEPA, OTS. "Regulatory Impact

Analysis-for the Proposed PCB-Containing

Electrical Equipment Rulemaking."

11. USEPA, OTS "Regulatory Impact

Analysis of the Use Rule for PCB-Containing

Electrical Equipment."

12. USEPA, OTS "Response to Comments

on Health Effects of PCBs submitted by the

Chemical Manufacturers Association and the

Edison Electric Institute."

13. USEPA, OTS "Support Document for

the Electrical Equipment Use Rule-Response

to Comments."

D.Reports

14. Chemical Manufacturers Association,

"Summary of the Health Effects of PCBs."

Prepared by Ecology and the Environment,

Inc.

15. Edison Electric Institute and Utilities

Solid Waste Activities Group, "Comments

and Studies on the Use of Polychlorinated

Biphenyls (PCBs) in Response to an Order of

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of

Columbia Circuit."

Vol I.-Executive Summary and Integrated

Comments [02/12/82)

Vol. n.-Potential Health Effects in the

Human from Exposure to Polychlorinated

Biphenyls and Related Impurities (2/12/82)

Prepared under contract to Drill, friess,

Hays, Loomis a: Shaffer, Inc.

Vol. III.-Report of the Study on PCBs in

EqUipment Owned by the Electric Utility

Industry (02/12/82). Prepared under

contract to Resource Planning Corp.
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37356 1982

37356 Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 165 I Wednesday, August 25, 1982 I Rules and Regulations _"~~*,,,:~,~ ~.~~ ~~'-~c1~~!'~'"

•

(t) "PCB Article" means any

manufactured article, other than a PCB

(h) "Disposal" means intentionally or

accidentally to discard. throwaway, or

otherwise complete or terminate the

useful life of PCBs and PCB Items.

Disposal includes spills, leaks, and other

uncontrolled discharges of PCBs as well

as actions related to containing,

transporting, destroying, degrading,

decontaminating, or confining PCBs and

PCB Items.

PART 761-POlYCHLORINATED

BIPHENYLS (PCBs) MANUFACTURING,

PROCESSING, DISTRIBUTION IN

COMMERCE, AND USE PROHIBITIONS

1. In § 761.3, paragraphs (d)(l), (2), and

(3), (h). (t). and (z) are revised and

paragraph (ll) is added to read itS

follows:

§ 761.3 Definitions.

•

..

• •

•

•

(ll) "Posing an Exposure Risk to Food

or Feed" means being in any location

where human food or animal feed

products could be exposed to PCBs

released from a PCB Hem. A PCB Item'

poses an exposure risk to food or feed if

PCBs released in any way from the PCB

Item have a potential pathway to human

food or animal feed. EPA considers

human food and animal feed to Include

items regulated by the U.S. Department .

of Agriculture or the Food and Drug

Administration as human food or animal

feed; this includes additives. Food or

feed is excluded from this definition if it

is used or stored in private homes.

(z) "PCB-Contaminated Electrical

Equipment" means any electrical

equipment, including but not limited to

transformers (including those used in

railway locomotives lind self-propelled

cars). capacitors. circuit breakers.

rcclosers. voltage regulators. switches

(including sectionalizers and motor

starters), electromagnets. and cable. that

contain 50 ppm or greater PCB, but less

than 500 ppm PCB. Oil-filled electrical

equipment other than circuit breakers.

reclosers. and cable whose PCB

concen.tration is unknown must be

assumed to be PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment. (See § 761.30(a)

and (h) for provisions permitting

reclassification of electrical equipment

containing 500 ppm or greater PCBs to

PCB-Contaminated Electrical

Equipment).

Container. that contains PCBs and

whose surfacers) has been in direct

contact with PCBs. "PCB Article"

includes capacitors. transformers,

electric motors, pumps. pipes and any

other manufactured item (1) which is

formed to a specific shape or design

during manufacture. (2) which has end

use function(s) dependent in whole or in

part upon its shape or dellign during end

use, and (3) which has either no change

of chemical composition during its end

use or only those changes of

composition which have no commerical

purpose separate from that of the PCB

Article.

• •

2. The introductory text of § 761.20 is

revised to read as follows:

§ 761.20 Prohibitions.

Except as lIuthorized in § 761.30 the

activities listed iIi paragraphs (a) and (d)

of this section are prohibited pursuant to

section 6(e)(2) of TSCA. The

requirements set forth in paragraphs (b)

and (c) of this section concerning export

• and import of PCBs for purposes of

• • • •

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 761

Hazardous materials. Labeling,

Polychlorinated biphenyls, Reporting

and recordkeeplng requirements,

Environmental protection.

Dated: August 18, 1982.

John W. Hernandez,

Ading Administrator.

Therefore. 40 CFR Part 761 Is

amended as follows:

(d)· • • (1) "Small Capacitor" means a

capacitor which contains less than 1.36

kg (3 Ibs.) of dielectric fluid. The

following assumptions may be used if

the actual weight of the dielectric fluid

Is unknown. A capacitor whose total

volume is less than 1,639 cubic

centimeters (100 cubic inches) may be

considered to contain less than 1.36 kg

(3 Ibs.) of dielectric fluid and a capacitor

whose total volume is more than 3,278

cubic centimeters (200 cubic inches)

must be considered to contain more than

1.36 kg (3 lbs.) of dielectric fluid. A

capacitor whose volume is between

1,639 and 3,278 cubic centimeters may

be considered to contain less than 1.36

kg (3 Ibs.) of dielectric fluid if the total

weight of the capacitor is less than 4.08

kg (91bs.).

(2) "Large High Voltage Capacitor"

means a capacitor which contains 1.36

kg (3 Ibs.) or more of dielectric fluid and

which operates at 2060 volts (a.c. or d.c.) 01' above.

(3) "Large Low Voltage Capacitor"

means a capacitor which contains 1.36

kg (3 Ibs.) or more of dielectric fluid and

which operates below 2000 volts (a.c. or

d.c.).

Vol. IV.-Environmental Pathways of

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (02/12/82).

Prepared by Donald MacKay. Dep!. of

Chemical Eng. and Applied Chemistry, Ins!.

of Environmental Studies. Univ. of Toronto,

CA.

16. Edison Electric Institute, "Initial Cost

Impact to Utility Companies of the Regulation

of PCBs in Food-Related Industries."

(December 1980J Prepared by Resource

Planning Corp.

17. Edison Electric Institute and Utilities

Solid Waste Activities Group, "Preliminary

Findings of the Study of PCBs in Equipment

Owned by the Electric Utilities Industry,

Task I and II" (10/29/81). Prepared by

Resource Planning Corp.

18. Electric Power Research Institute,

"Equilibrium Study of PCBs Between

Transformer Oil and Transformer Solid

Materials" (December 3, 1981J. Prepared by

RTECorp.

19. ENSCO, "Emission Testing During

Incineration of PCBs at Energy Systems Co."

(December 1981J. Prepared by TRW, Inc.,

Env. Div.

20. National Electric Manufacturers

Association. "Potential Health Effects in the

Human from Exposure to Polychlorinated

Biphenyls (PCBsJ and Related Impurities"

(01/25/82J. Prepared by Drill, Friess, Hays,

Loomis Ii Shaffer, Inc. •

21. Northeast Utilities Service Co.,

"Capacitor Protective Schemes Investigated

by Northeast Utilities." Presented to EPRI

PCB Seminar, Dallas, TX (December 1-3,

1981J. .

22. Rollins Env. Services, "The PCB

Incineration Test Made by Rollins

Environmental Services (TXJ, Inc. at Deer

Park, TX." (November 10-12,1981J.

23. USEPA, OTS, "Summary Data on

Substitutes for Polycholorinated Biphenyls

(PCBs]" (February, 1981J. Prepared by SRI

International.

24. USEPA, OTS, "Assessment of the Use

of Selected Replacement Fluids for PCBs in

Electrical Equipment" (March 1979J. Prepared

by Versar, Inc.

25. USEPA, Reg. 6, AHMD, Solid Waste

Division, "Incineration of PCBs Summary of

Approval Actions-Energy Systems CO.

(ENSCOJ, El Dorado Park, TX" (02/06/81J.

26. USEPA, WH, Marine Protection.

"Marine Protection, Research. and

Sanctuaries Act (Incineration at SeaJ Permit."

X. Statutory Authority

Under seclion 6(e) of TSCA (15 U.S.C.

2605), the Adininistrator may by rule

authorize the manufacture, processing,

distribution in commerce or use (or any

combination of such activities) of any

PCBs in other than a totally enclosed

manner if the Administrator finds that it

will not present an unreasonable risk of

injury to health or the environment. The

Administrator also has authority to

amend or modify the PCB

Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution

in Commerce, and Use Prohibition Rule

(40 CFR Part 761), published in the

Federal Register of May 31. 1979. (44 FR

31514).
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37357 1982

Federal Register I Vol. 47. No. 165 I Wednesday. August 25. 1982 I Rules and Regulations 37357

1781.30 AuthorlzaUona.

(a) Use in and servicing of

transformers (other than railroad

transformers). PCBs at any

concentration may be used in

transformers (other than transformers

for railroad locomotives and selfpropelled railroad cars) and may be

used for purposes of servicing including

rebuilding these transformers for the

remainder of their useful lives. subject

to.the following conditions:

(1) Use conditions. (i) After October 1,

1985. the use and storage for reuse of

PCB Transformers that pose an

exposure risk to food or feed is

prohibited.

(ii) A visual inspection of each PCB

Transformer (as defined in § 761.3(y)) in

use or stored for reuse shall be

performed at least once every three

months. These inspections may take

place any time during the three month

periods; January-March, April-June.

July-September, and October-December '

as long as there is a minimum of 30 days

between inspections. The visual

inspection must include investigation for

any leak of dielectric fluid on or around

the transformer. The extent of the visual

inspections will depend on the physical

constraints of each transformer

installation and should not require an

electrical shutdown of the transformer

being inspected.

(iii) If a PCB Transformer, is found to

have a leak which results in any

quantity of PCBs running off or about to

run off the external surface of the

transformer. then the transformer must

be repaired or replaced to eliminate the

source of the leak. In all cases any

leaking material must be cleaned up and

properly disposed of according to

disposal requirements of § 761.60.

Cleanup of the released PCBs must be

initiated as soon as possible. but in no

case later than 48 hours of its discovery.

Until appropriate action is completed,

any active leak of PCBs must be

contained to prevent exposure of

humans or the environment and

inspected daily to verify containment of

the leak. Trenches, dikes. buckets, and

pans are examples of proper

containment measures.

(iv) Records of inspection and

maintenance history shall be maintained

at least 3 years after disposing of the

transformer and shall be made available

for inspection. upon request, by EPA

(OMB Control Number: 2070-0003). Such

records shall contain the following

information for each PCB Transformer:

(A) Its location.

disposal and PCB Items for purposes of

disposal are established pursuant to

section 6(e)(1) ofTSCA. Subject to any

exemptions granted pursuant to section

6(e)(3)(B) of TSCA, the activities listed

in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section

are prohibited pursuant to section

6(e)(3)(A) ofTSCA. In addition, the

Administrator hereby finds. under the

authority ofsection 12(a)(2) of TSCA,

that the manufacture, processing, and

distribution in commerce of PCBs and

PCB Items for export from the United

States presents an unreasonable risk of

injury to health within the United States.

This finding is based upon the welldocumented human health and

environmental hazard of PCB exposure;

the high probability of human and

environmental exposure to pCBs and

PCB Items from manufacturing,

processing, or distribution activities; the

potential hazard of PCB exposure posed

by the transportation of PCBs or PCB

Items within the United States; and the

evidence that contamination of the

environment by PCBs is spread far

beyond the areas where they are used.

In addition, the Administrator hereby

finds that any exposure of human beings

or the environment to PCBs as measured

or detected by any scientifically

acceptable analytical method is a

significant exposure, as defined in

§ 761.3(dd). Section 761.3(hh) and TSCA

section 6(e)(2)(C) define the term totally

enclosed manner as "any manner which

will ensure that any eXJ>osure of human

beings or the environment to a

polychlorinated biphenyl will be

insignificant· • •." Since any exposure

to PCBs is found to be a significant

exposure. a totally enclosed manner is a

manner that results in no exposure of

humans or the environment to PCBs. The

following activities are considered

totally enclosed: distribution in

commerce of intact, nonleaking

electrical equipment such as

transformers (including transformers

used in railway locomotives and selfpropelled cars), capacitors,

electromagnets, voltage regulators,

switches (including sectionalizers and

motor starters), circuit breakers.

reclosers, and cable that contain PCBs

at any concentration and processing and

distribution in commerce of PCB

Equipment containing an intact,

nonleaking PCB Capacitor. See

paragraph (c) (1) of this section for

provisions allowing the distribution in

commerce of PCBs and PCB Items.

• 3. Section 761.30 is amended by

revising paragraphs (a) and (h) and

adding paragraphs (I) and (m) to read as

follows:

• • • • (8) The date of each visual inspectionand the date that a leak was discovered•

if different from the inspection date.

(C) The person performing the

inspection.

(D) The location of any leak(s).

(E) An estimate of the amount of

dielectric fluid released from any leak.

(F) The date of any cleanup,

containment, repair, or replacement.

(G) A description of any cleanup,

containment, or repair performed.

(H) The results of any containment

and daily inspection required for

uncorrected active leaks.

(v) A reduced visual inspection

frequency of at least once every 12

months applies to PCB Transformers

that utilize either of the following risk

reduction measures. These inspections

may take place any time during the

calendar year as long as there is a

minimum of 160 days between

inspections.

(A) a PCB Transformer which has

impervious, undrained. secondary

containment capacity of at least 100

percent ofthe total dielectric fluid

volume of all transformers so contained,

or

(B) A PCB Transformer which has

been tested and found to contain less

than 60,000 ppm PCBs (after three

months of inservice use if the

transformer has been serviced for

purposes of reducing the PCB

concentration).

(vi) An increased visual inspection

frequency of at least once every week

applies to any PCB Transformer in use

or stored for reuse which poses an

exposure risk to food or feed. The user

of a PCB Transformer posing an

exposure risk to food or feed is

responsible for the inspection,

recordkeeping, and maintenance

requirements under this section until the

user notifies the owner that the

transformer may pose an exposure risk

to food or feed. Following such

notification, it is the owner's ultimate

responsibility to determine whether the

PCB Transformer poses an exposure risk

to food or feed.

(2) Servicing conditions. (i)

Transformers classified as PCB·

Contaminated Electrical Equipment (as

defined in § 761.3(z)) may be serviced

(including rebuilding) only with

dielectric fluid containing lells than 500

ppm PCB.

(ii) Any servicing (including

rebuilding) of PCB Transformers (as

defined in § 761.3(y)) that requires the

removal of the transformer coil from the

transformer casing is prohibited. PCB

Transformers may be serviced
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37358 1982

37358 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 165 / Wednesday, August 25. 1982 / Rules and Regulations

(including topping off) with dielectric

fluid at any PCB concentration.

(iii) PCBs removed during any

servicing activity must be captured and

either reused as dielectric fluid or

disposed of in accordance with the

requirements of § 761.60. PCBs from PCB

Transformers must not be mixed with or

added to dielectric fluid from PCB·

Contaminated Electrical Equipment.

(iv) Regardless of its PCB

concentration. dielectric fluids

containing less than 500 ppm PCB that

are mixed with fluids that contain 500

ppm or greater PCB must not be used as

dielectric fluid in any electrical

equipment. The entire mixture of

dielectric fluid must be considered to be

greater than 500 ppm PCB and must be

disposed of in an incinerator that meets

the requirements in § 761.70.

(v) A PCB Transformer may be

converted to PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment or to a non-PCB

Transformer and a transformer that is

classified as PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment may be reclassified

to a non-PCB Transformer by draining,

refilling and!or otherwise servicing the

transformer. In order to reclassify, the

transformer's dielectric fluid must

contain less than 500 ppm PCB (for

conversion to PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment) or less than 50

ppm PCB (for conversion to a non-PCB

Transfomer) after a minimum of three

months of in-service use subsequent to

the last servicing conducted for the

purpose of reducing the PCB

concentration in the transformer. Inservice means that the transformer is

used electrically under loaded

conditions that raise the temperature of

the dielectric fluid to at least 50°

Centigrade. The Assistant Administrator

may grant. without further rulemaking,

approval for the use of alternative

methods that simulate the loaded

conditions of in-service use. All PCBs

removed from transformers for purposes

of reducing PCB concentrations are

subject to the disposal requirements of

§ 761.60.

(vi) Any dielectric fluid containing 50

ppm or greater PCB used for servicing

transformers must be stored in

accordance with the storage for disposal

requirements of § 761.65.

(vii) Processing and distribution in

commerce of PCBs for purposes of

servicing transformers is permitted only

for persons who are granted an

exemption under TSCA 6(e)(3)(B).

* *

(h) Use in and servicing of

electromagnets, switches and voltage

regulators. PCBs at any concentration

may be used in electromagnets, switches

(including sectionalizers and motor

starters). and voltage regulators and

may be used for purposes of servicing

this equipment (including rebuilding) for

the remainder of their useful lives,

subject to the following conditions:

(1) Use conditions. (i) After October 1,

1985. the use and storage for reuse of

any electromagnet which poses an

exposure risk to food or feed is

prohibited if the electromagnet contains

greater tha 500 ppm PCBs.

(ii) A visual inspection of each

electromagnet subject to paragraph

(h)(l)(i) shall be performed at least once every week according to the conditions

contained in § 761.30(a)(1)(iii) and (iv).

(2) Servicing conditions. (i) Servicing

(including rebuilding) any

electromagnet. switch, or voltage

regulator with a PCB concentration of

500 ppm or greater which requires the

removal and rework of the internal

components is prohibited.

(ii) Electromagnets, switches. and

voltage regulators classified as PCBContaminated Electrical Equipment (as

defined in § 761.3(z)) may be serviced

(including rebuilding) only with

dielectric fluid containing less than 500

ppm PCB. . .

(iii) PCBs removed during any

servicing activity must be captured and

either reused as dielectric fluid or

disposed of in accordance with the

requirements of § 761.60. PCBs from

electromagnets switches, and voltage

regulators with a PCB concentration of

at least 500 ppm must not be mixed with

or added to dielectric fluid from PCBContaminated Electrical Equipment.

(iv) Regardless of its PCB

(concentration, dielectric fluids

containing less than 500 ppm PCB) that

are mixed with fluids that contain 500

ppm or greater PCB must not be used as

dielectric fluid in any electrical

equipment. The entire mixture of

dielectric fluid must be considered to be

gre'ater than 500 ppm PCB and must be

disposed of in an incinerator tbat meets

the requirements of § 761.70.

(v) An electromagnet. switch or

voltage regulator with a PCB

concentration of at least 500 ppm may

be converted to PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment or to a non-PCB

classification and PCB~Contaminated

Electrical Equipment may be reclassified

to a non-PCB classification by draining,

refilling and!or otherwise servicing the

equipment. In order to be reclassified,

the equipment's dielectric fluid must

contain less than 500 ppm PCB (for

conversion to PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment) or less than 50

ppm PCB (for conversion to a non-PCB

classification) after a minimum of three

months of in-service use subsequent to

the last servicing conducted for the

purpose of reducing the PCB

concentration in the equipment. Inservice use means the equipment is used

electrically under loaded conditions.

Tbe Assistant Administrator may grant,

without further rulemaking, approval for

the use of alternative methods that

simulate the loaded conditions of inservice use. All PCBs removed from this

equipment for purposes of reducing PCB

concentrations are subject to the

disposal requirements of § 761.60.

(vi) Any dielectric fluid containing 50

ppm or greater PCB used for servicing

electromagnets. switches, or voltage

regulators must be stored in accordance

with the storage for disposal

requirements of § 761.65.

(vii) Processing and distribution in

commerce of PCBs for purposes of

servicing electromagnets, switches or

voltage regulators is permitted only for

persons who are granted an exemption

under TSCA 6(e)(3)(B).

* *

(I) Use in capacitors. PCBs at any

concentration may be used in

oapacitors, subject to the following

conditions:

(1) Use conditions. (i) After October 1,

1988. the use and storage for reuse of

PCB Large High Voltage Capacitors and

PCB Large Low Voltage Capacitors

which pose an exposure risk to food or

feed is prohibited.

(il) After October 1, 1988, the use of

PCB Large High Voltage Capacitors and

PCB Large Low Voltage Capacitors is

prohibited unless the capacitor is used

within a restricted-access electrical

substation or in a contained and

restricted-access indoor installation. A

restricted-access electrical substation is an outdoor, fenced or walled-in facility

that restricts public access and is used

in the transmission or distribution of

electric power. A contained and

restricted-access indoor installation

does not have public access and has an

adequate roof, walls, and floor to

contain any release of PCBs within the

indoor location.

(2) IReserved]

(m) Use in and servicing of circuit

breakers,reclosers and cable. PCBs at

any concentration may be used in circuit

breakers, reclosers, and cable and may

be used for purposes of servicing this

electrical equipment (including

rebuilding) for the remainder of their

useful lives, subject to the following

conditions: . (1) Servicing conditions. (i) Circuit

breakers, reclosers, and cable may be

serviced (including rebuilding) only with

dielectric fluid containing less than 50

ppm PCB.
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37359 1982

Federal Register I Vol. 47, No. 165 I Wednesday, August 25, 1982 I Rules and Regulations 37359

5. The heading for Subpart D is

revised to read as follows:

(4) PCB-ContaminatedElectrical .

Equipment. All PCB-Contaminated .

Electrical Equipment except capacitors

shall be disposed of by draining all free

(c) * * *

(1) All PCB Transformers not marked

under paragraph (a) of this section

[marking of PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment is not required];

(iii) Any PCB Large High or Low ....

Voltage Capacitor which contains 500

ppm or greater PCBs. owned by any

person. shall be disposed of in

accordance with either of the following:

• * • * •

*

**

*

**

*.

*

*

(c)* * *

(2) Non-leaking and structurally

undamaged PCB Large High Voltage

Capacitors and PCB-Contaminated

Electrical Equipment that have not been

drained of free flowing dielectric fluid

may be stored on pallets next to a

storage facility that meets the

requirements of paragraph (b) of this

section. PCB-Contaminated Electrical

Equipment that has been drained of free

flowing dielectric fluid is not subject to

the storage provisions of § 761.65.

Storage under this subparagraph will be

permitted only when the storage facility

7. In § 761.65, paragraph (c)(2) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 761.65 Storage for disposal.

equipment may be collected in a

common container, provided that no

other chemical substances or mixtures

are added to the container. This

common container option does not

permit dilution of the collected oil.

Mineral oil that is assumed or known to

contain at least 50 ppm PCBs must not

be mixed with mineral oil that is known

or assumed to contain less than 50 ppm

PCBs to reduce the concentration of

PCBs in the common container. If

dielectric fluid from untested, oil-filled

circuit breakers, reclosers, or cable is

.- collected in a common container with

dielectric fluid from other oil-filled

electrical equipment, the entire contents

of the container must be treated as PCBs

at a concentration of at least 50 ppm,

unless all of the fluid from the other oilfilled electrical equipment has been

tested and shown to contain less than 50

ppm PCBs.

(ii) For purposes of complying with the

marking and disposal requirements,

representative samples may be taken

from either the common containers or

the individual electrical equipment to

determine the PCB concentration, except

that if any PCBs at a concentration of

500 ppm or greater have been added to

the container or equipment then the

total container contents must be

considered as having a PCB

concentration of 500 ppm or greater for

purposes of complying with the disposal

requirements of this subpart. For

purposes of this subparagraph,

representative samples of mineral oil

dielectric fluid are either samples taken

in accordance with American Society of

Testing and Materials method D-923 or

samples taken from a container that has

been thoroughly mixed in a manner such

that any PCBs in the container are

uniformly distributed throughout the

liquid in the container.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

(d) Spills. (1) Spills, leaks, and other

uncontrolled discharges of PCBs

const~tute the disposal of PCBs.

(2) PCBs resulting from the clean-up

and removal of spills, leaks, or other

uncontrolled discharges, must be stored

and disposed of in accordance with

paragraph (a) of this section.

(3) These regulations do not exempt

any person from any actions or liability

under other statutory authorities.

including but not limited to the Clean

Water Act, the Resource Conservation

and Recovery Act, and the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act of 1980.

(g) Testing procedures. (1) Owners or

users of mineral oil dielectric fluid

electrical equipment may use the

following procedures to determine the

concentration of PCBs in the dielectric

fluid:

(i) Dielectric fluid removed from

mineral oil dielectric fluid electrical

flowing liquid from the electrical

equipment and disposing of the liquid in

accordance with paragraph (a)(2) or (3)

of this section. The disposal of the

drained electrical equipment is not

regulated by this rule. Capacitors that

contain between 50 and 500 ppm PCBs

shall be disposed of in an incinerator

that complies with § 761.70 or in a

chemical waste landfill that complies

with § 761.75.

(5) Other PCB Articles. (i) PCB

Articles with a PCB concentration of 500

ppm or greater must be disposed of:

(A) In an incinerator that complies

with § 761.70; or

(B) In a chemical waste landfill that

complies with § 761.75, provided that all

free-flowing liquid PCBs have eeen

thoroughly drained from any articles

before the articles are placed in the

chemical waste landfill and that the

drained liquids are disposed of in an

incinerator that complies with § 761.70.

(ii) PCB Articles with a PCB

concentration between 50 and 500 ppm

must be disposed of by draining all free

flowing liquid from the article and

disposing of the liquid in accordance

with paragraph (a)(2) or (3) of this

section. The disposal of the drained

article is not regulated by this rule.

(6) Storage ofPCB Articles. Except for

a PCB Article described in paragraph

(b)(2)(ii) of this section and hydraulic

machines that comply with the

municipal solid waste disposal

provisions described in paragraph (b)(3)

of this section, any PCB Article shall be

stored in accordance with § 761.65 prior

to disposal.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Subpart D-Storage and Disposal

6. In § 761.60 paragraph (b)(lJ(ii) is

removed and reserved and the

introductory text of paragraph (a)(2),

paragraph (b)(2)(i), the Introductory text

of paragraph (b)(2)(iii), paragraph (b)(4)

and (5), paragraph (d), and paragraph

(g)(l) are revised and paragraph (b)(6) is

added to read as follows:

1761.60 Disposal requirement••

(a) * * *

(2) Mineral oil dielectric fluid from

PCB-Contaminated Electrical Equipment

containing a PCB concentration of 50

ppm orgreater, but less than 500 ppm,

must be disposed of in one of the

following:

(b) * * *

(2) PCB Capacitors. (i) The disposal of

any capacitor shall comply with all

requirements of this subpart unless it is

known from label or nameplate

information. manufacturer's literature

(including documented communications

with the manufacturer), or chemical

analysis that the capacitor does not

contain PCBs.

(ii) Any circuit breaker, recloser or

cable found to.contain at least 50 ppm

PCBs may be serviced only in

accordance with the conditions

contained in 40 CFR 761.30(h)(2).

(2) [Reserved]

4. In § 761.40, paragraphs (a)(2) and

(c)(l) are revised to read as follows: ,

§ 761.40 Marking requirements.

(a) * * *

(2) PCB Transformers at the time of

manufacture, at the time of distribution

in commerce if not already marked, and

at the time ofremoval from use if not

already marked. [Marking of PCBContaminated Electrical Equipment is

not required];
HeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37360 1982

37360 Federal Register / Vol. 47, No. 165 / Wednesday. August 25. 1982 / Rules and Regulations

has immediatelv available unfilled

storage space equal to 10 percent of thp

volume of capacitors and llquipmrmt

stored outside the facilitv. The

capacitors and equipme~t temporarily

stored outside the facility shall bp

checked for leaks weekly.

§ 761.45 Correctly designated as

§ 761.180.

8. Section 761.45 which was

incorrectly redesignatpd as § 761.80 in

thr Federal Register uf May 6. 1982 (47

FR 19527) is correctly redesignated as

§ 761.180 in Subpart J. IFR Uur 82-23284 Filed 6-24-82' 8:45 ,lin I

BILLING CODE 656o-50-M