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 EquipmentHeinOnline -- 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 ofToxic 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 ofthis rule and its support documents can be obtained from the Industry Assistance Office listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Control Number: 2070-0003.

I. Recodification of40 CFR Part 761

Title 40 ofthe Code ofFederal Regulations. Part 761. which regulates polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). has been reorganized. Notice ofthe recodification appears in the Federal Register ofMay 6.1982 (47 FR 19527). This final rule uses the following new designations:

II. Background

Section 6(e) ofthe Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) generally prohibits the use ofPCBs afterJanuary 1. 1978. The statute sets forth two exceptions under which EPA may. by rule. allow a particularuse ofPCBs to continue. Under section 6(e)(2) ofTSCA. 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 ofhuman beings or the environment to a polychlorinated biphenyl will be insignificant. as determined by the Administratorby rule." TSCA also allows EPA to authorize the use ofPCBs in a manner other than a "totally enclosed manner" ifthe Agency finds that the use "will not present an unreasonable risk ofinjury to health or the environment."

EPA promulgated j rule, which was published in the Federal Register ofMay 31, 1979 (44 FR 31514). to implement sections 6(e) (2) and (3) ofTSCA This rule is listed in the Code ofFederal 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 ofAppeals 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 ofthe existing PCB rule; this action is being taken in response to an order from the U.S. Court ofAppeals for the District ofCQlumbia Circuit. This rule authorizes the use ofPCBs 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 ofthis 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 September24, 1982. As ofAugust 19, 1982, the provisions ofthe 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 longerin effect unless the U.S. Court ofAppeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has acted to stay further its mandate. EPA has asked the
court for a stay ofthe 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 ofthe date of signalure ofthese amendments. 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 ofsection 6(e) ofTSCA against any person who complies with the provisions ofthe 1979 rule and the Interim Measures Program between the expiration ofthe current stay. August 19, 1982, and the date when the court grants EPA's request ofthis rule becomes effective, whichever comes first.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Douglas G. Bannerman. Acting Old designation New designation the District ofColumbia Circuit to review that portion ofthe PCB rule that designated the use ofintact, nonleaking capacitors. electromagnets and transformers (other than railroad transformers) as "totally enclosed." (EnvironmentalDefenseFund, Inc. 

### v. EnvironmentalProtectionAgency, 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 oftransformers, capacitors. and electromagnets as totally enclosed. The court invalidated this portion ofthe rule and remanded it
to EPA for further action. The effect of this decision would have been to make the use ofcapacitors, electromagnets. and transformers other than railroad transformers, containing any concentration ofPCBs a violation of section 6(e) ofTSCA An immediate ban ofthese 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 ofthis equipment to go into effect immediately.

On January 21. 1981. EPA. EDF. and certain industry intervenors in EDFv. EPA filed ajoint motion with the court. The motion asked for a stay ofthe court's mandate setting aside the classification oftransformers. capacitors. and electromagnets as totally enclosed. During the period ofthe stay, EPA agreed to conduct a rulemaking on the use ofPCBs in electrical equipment beginning with an Advance Notice ofProposed Rulemaking (ANPR). In addition, the Edison Electric Institute (EEl) through the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group (USWAG) agreed to develop some ofthe 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 ofthe eighteen-month stay.

On February 12, 1981. the court granted the requests ofthejoint motion and entered an order. The text ofthe court's order was published in the Federal Register ofMarch 10. 1981, along with EPA's ANPR on the 'use ofPCBs 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 ofthe stay. Therefore, persons who use PCBcontaining transformers, capacitors, andHeinOnline -- 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 ofthe 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 ofreceipt ofthe study from EEI/USWAG. Since the final report ofthe EEI/USWAG study was received

on February 19, 1982, EPAwas required
to promulgate this final rule on the use ofPCBs in electrical equipment by

. August 19, 1982. EPA's proposedrule regarding the use ofPCBs in electrical equipment was published in the Federal Register ofApril 22, 1982 (47 FR 17426).

This final rule will become effective

on September24, 1982. The court· ordered stay ofmandate is currently scheduled to expire on August 19, 1982. Ifthat mandate were to issue before this rule becomes effective. the use ofPCB's in electrical equipment covered by the

use authorizations containedin 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 ofsignature ofthese amendments, the courthas not acted on EPA's request. EPA expects that the
courtwill grant the further stay and that the stay will be retroactive to August 19. 1982. However. until the courtgrants EPA's request orthese amendments become effective, persons affected by the amendments will be uncertain about whatrules to follow. As a matter of Agency policy, EPAwill not enforce the provisions ofsection 6(e) ofTSCA against anyperson who complies with the provisions ofthe 1979rule and the InterimMeasure Programbetween the expiration ofthe current stay. August 19, 1982. and the date when the courtgrants EPA's request orthis rule becomes effective. whichever comes first.

In order to avoid a "race to the courthouse" by persons seekingjudicial review ofthis rule, EPA has decided to designate the time and date of "promulgation" ofthis rule as 1:00p.m. Eastern DaylightTime on September 8, 1982. The Agency has previously taken this approach forrules promulgated under the Clean WaterAct (see 40 CFR 100.01. 45 FR 26048). The Agency will be considering a general rule for TSCA similarto 40 CFR 100.01.



## m. Electrical Equipment Containing PCBs

This rulemaking was initiated to deal with those uses ofPCBs which EPAhad formerly classified as totally enclosed (transformers otherthan 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 equipmentfalls into two

categories: (1) Equipment designed to

.contain PCBs at a high concentration and (2) equipment designed to contain mineral oil. Because ofpast manufacturing and servicing practices. the mineral oil-filled equipment often contains PCBs at low concentrations. The 1979rule defined a PCB Transformer as one containing more than 500 ppm and a PCB-Contaminated Transformer as one containing between 50 and 500 parts permillion (ppm). Very little mineral oil equipment contains PCBs at a concentration of500 ppm or greater. This final rule makes frequent reference to the three ranges ofPCB contamination:**~50** ppm.**5~5oo** ppm. and greaterthan 500 ppm.

While administering the May 1979 PCB rule and gathering information for this rulemaking, EPA has identified five additional categories ofoil-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 containedPCBs.

IV. Summary ofthe Final Rule

This final rule modifies and clarifies

some ofthe requirements presented il! the proposedrule because of information obtained during the
commentperiod and the public hearing Uune 7-10. 1982) on the proposedrule. 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 majorelements ofthe final rule are summarized in the following list. with changes from the proposed rule highlighted. This final rule:

1. Uses the recodified version ofthe PCB rule (40 CFR Part 761).

2. Prohibits the use ofPCB Transformers and PCB-filled electromagnets (with a PCB concentration of500 ppm orgreater) posing an exposure risk to food orfeed, after October 1. 1985, and requires a weekly inspection ofthis equipmentfor leaks ofdielectric fluid until that date. (The proposed rule would have

. authorized the use ofthis equipment indefinitely with a requirement for weekly inspections).

3. Authorizes the use ofall otherPCB Transformers for the remainder oftheir useful lives, and requires a quarterly inspection ofthis equipment for leaks of dielectric fluid

.

4. Authorizes the use oflarge PCB Capacitors that are located in restrictedaccess electrical substations for the remainder oftheiruseful lives. (The proposed rule would have only authorized the use ofthis equipment for
ten years.)

5. Authorizes the u!le oflarge PCB Capacitors that are located in contained and restricted-access indoor installations for the remainder oftheir useful lives. (The proposed rule would have authorized the use ofthis equipment for only ten years.)

6. Prohibits the use ofall otherlarge PCB Capacitors after October 1, 1988. (The proposed rule would have authorized the use ofthis equipment for
ten years.)

7. Eliminates the proposed inspection requirements for all large PCB Capacitors.

8. Authorizes the use ofall PCBcontaining, mineral oil-filled electrical equipment for its remaining useful life.

9. Clarifies what constitutes electrical" equipment posing an exposure risk to food orfeed.

10. Allows oil-filled cable to be assumed to contain less than 50 ppm PCBs ifthe actual PCB concentration is unknown. (The proposed rule would have required that the concentration be assumed to be between 50 and 500 ppm ifit were unknown.)

11. Allows storage for disposal of nonleaking PCB Large High Voltage Capicators and PCB-Contaminated Electrical Equipment outside ofqualified storage facilities afterJanuary 1, 1983. The proposedrule prohibited this storage afterJanuary 1.1983.

. 12. Requires records ofinspection 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 ofPCBs.

14. Does not include the language contained in the proposedrule regarding the required extent ofcleanup ofPCB spills. Comments urged EPA to postpone consideration ofthis language. and the IIxtent ofcleanup ofPCB spills will not be dealt with at this time.

V. Use Authorizations

As previously described, section 6(e)(2) ofTSCA allows uses ofPCBs in aHeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37344 1982 

### 37344 Federal Register / 

### Vol. 47, 

### No. 165 / Wednesday, August 25, 1982 / Rules and Regulations

totally enclosed manner to continue withoutrestriction. Section 6(e)(2)(C) defines the term "totally enclosed" to

mean "any manner which will ensure that any exposure ofhuman beings or the environment to a polychlorinated biphenyl will be insignificant as determined by the Administratorby 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 ofthis 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 ofinjury to human health or the environment. This finding is in accordance with the provisions of section 6[e)[2)(B) ofTSCA. 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 occurfrom the use against the benefits to society of the proposed regulatory action. In doing this, EPA has considered the following factors:

1. The effects ofPCBs on human health and the environment.

2. The magnitude ofPCB exposure to humans and the environment.

3. The benefits ofusing PCBs and the availability ofsubstitutes 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) ofTSCA,

A. Effects on Human Health andthe Environment

In any regulatory context, agencies have imperfect data, but they still must regulate on the basis ofthe best data available. There are differing interpretations ofdata regarding the potential risks ofPCBs to human health and the environment. Although additional study may be suggested. EPA is concerned about the health and environmental effects ofPCBs on the basis ofthe data available now. These data are sufficient to supportEPA's approach in this rule.

In EDPv. EPA. EPA's regulatory cutoff of50 ppm was set aside by the court. As

a result, otherrulemaking 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 ofthis plan will lead to additional rulemaking.

The health effects data base for PCBs is continuously increasing. The Agency will considerany additional pertinent information onhealth and environmental effects and information

on risks associated with PCBs during the development ofthat future rulemaking.

Should new information on health effects or other areas ofconcern 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 ofPCBs were described in various documents which

are part ofthe rulemaking record for the May 31, 1979, rule. EPA evaluatedthis information. new information submitted
to the Agency, as well as otherrecent literature on the effects ofPCBs. The results are presented in the document "Response to Comments on Health Effects ofPCBs". This document is included in the rulemaking record. Copies ofthis 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 ChemicalManufacturers Association [CMA). These documents

are included in the rulemaking record. These documents concluded that the use ofPCBs 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 notbeen 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 ofchloracne are reversible. EPA does not considerit insignificant. Chloracne is painful. disfiguring and
may require a long period oftime before symptomatology disappear,s. Other

areas ofmajor concern have been identifiedby 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 alterreproductive
processes in mammalian species, sometimes even at doses that do not

cause othersigns oftoxicity. 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 ofwhich 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, butEPA does not find any evidence to suggest that the animal data would not be predictive ofhuman 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 ofimpurities.

EPA also does not assume!that all PCBs are equivalent toxicologically. It
cannot be assumed that ifone 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 beHeinOnline -- 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 orcongener specific basis.

2. Environmentaleffects. Very little information was submitted during the
comment period with regards to the environmental effects ofPCBs. EPA has conducted a literature search to provide additional information on the environmental effects ofPCBs.

PCBs have been shown to affect the productivity ofphytoplankton and the composition ofphytoplankton communities. Deleterious effects on environmentally important freshwater invertebrates from PCBs have been demonstrated. PCBs have also been shown to impairreproductive 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 offish 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. Transferup the food chain from phytoplankton to invertebrates, fish, and mammals can result ultimately in human
exposure through consumption ofPCBcontaining food sources.

3. Risks. Toxicity and exposure are the two basic components ofrisk. As indicated above, EPA concludes thatin 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 ofeach category ofuse ofPCBs in electrical equipment.

Minimizing exposure to PCBs should minimize any potential risk. The requirements ofthis rule will result in the reduction ofexposure, and in some

uses eliminate exposure to PCBs, relative to present exposure levels from electrical equipmentuse. EPA's analysis ofalternative conditions for use authorizations includes examining the effectiveness ofeach condition in reducing exposure, thereby reducing the associated risk.

B. GeneralBenefits ofUsing Electrical Equipment

The electrical equipmentbeing considered in this rulemaking is used extensively by electric utilities and other industries to provide efficient and reliable electrical energy. There are currently millions ofpieces ofelectrical 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 itwould disrupt electric service throughout the United States. An adequate supply ofnon-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 thatEPA considered
to determine whetheruses ofPCBs in electrical equipment warrant authorization, the balancing ofthese factors, and EPA's conclusions regarding unreasonable risks are discussed separately in this notice for each category ofelectrical equipment.

C. Use andServicing ofTraJlsformers

This unit on the use and servicing of transformers analyzes only those transformers that do notpose an exposure risk to food orfeed. The analysis ofequipmentposing an exposure risk to food orfeed is found in UnitEofthis portion ofthe preamble.

Transformers**ar~** used extensively by electric utilities and otherindustries to transmit and distribute electric power efficiently. The use ofPCBs in transformers has resulted in the dielectric fluid ofsome 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 5million in all other applications. These estimates are for the end of1981 and are summarized in the proposedrule for this rulemaking (47 FR 17426, April 22, 1982).

Transformers are located throughout the nation's electrical generation, transmission, and distribution systems, many ofwhich are located near

consumers ofelectric power. However,**transfo~ers** designed to contain PCBs

are more rElstricted in their distribution than other transformers. These PCB Transformers are located in secure indoorlocations and in electrical substation's and are notmounted on utility poles throughout electric service

areas.

1. Magnitude of exposure. EPA is concerned about releases ofPCBs from all transformers because ofthe potential
to expose humans and the environment
to PCBs. In general, PCB Transformers
pose greater exposure risks due to the

use ofhigher concentration and larger quantities ofPCBs than mineral oil-filled transformers. A release ofPCBs into the environment has the potential to reach acquatic systems, build up in the food chain and ultimately expose humans through ingestion ofPCBs.

Although it is impossible to measure exactly the effectiveness ofan inspection and maintenance program in avoiding releases ofPCBs to the environment. such a program will reduce the actual amount ofPCBs released from PCB Transformers by correcting otherwise undetected leaks of dielectric fluid and reducing the number oftransformer failures due to improper maintenance. Additional benefits ofthis
program include containment ofactive leaks which are discovered and cleanup and disposal ofleaked 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 ofPCBs could be released from PCB Transformers over their entire lifetimes.

2. Benefits of PCBs andavailabilityof substitutes. Although the electrical properties ofPCBs are not as good as mineral oil, PCBs have a higherfire point than mineral oil. It is the fire resistance ofPCBs that makes them an excellent dielectric fluid in transformers located where concerns for fire safety

are paramount.

PCB Transformers canbe 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.

Anumber ofother substitute dielectric fluids have been developed to replace PCBs. These fluids can be used in replacement transformers orused to refill transformers which contain PCB dielectric fluid. Many ofthese 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 orless using these substitute fluids. Substitute fluids forPCBs offer satisfactory electrical properties and flammability characteristics which are much betterthan mineral oil. TheHeinOnline -- 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 ofPCB substitute fluids are less those ofPCBs.

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, orotherwise servicing the existing dielectric fluid in orderto reduce the PCB concentration.

3_. Economic andenvironmental impacts of regulatoryrequirements. 

### As discussed under "Magnitude of Exposure," the actual environmental Impact ofa quarterly inspectionprogram for PCB Transformers that do not pose

an exposure risk to food orfeed is impossible to measure. However, a quarterly inspection and maintenance
programhas been demonstrated for

more than one yearunderthe Interim Measures Program to be an effective

measure in reducing total releases of PCBs from these transformers. This fact

was confirmed by comments inresponse to the ANPR and the proposedrule. Comments indicated that this inspection and maintenance program reduced releases ofPCBs from transformers and supported it as an effective risk reduction measure.

EPA estimates that the cost ofa 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 ofthe required program overthe 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 ofcosts and benefits ofotherregulatory options considered but not adopted,

. Including some options which were considered in the development ofthe proposed rule.

4. Findings on the use andservicing of transformers. In 

### the proposedrule, EPA discussed whetherthe use ofPCBs in transformers should continue and analyzed options that would effectively reduce the risks ofexposure from the

use ofPCB-containing transformers. The proposedrule authorized the use of PCBs in transformers for the remainder oftheiruseful lives, subject to certain conditions.

Several comments disagreed with EPA's proposed rule. These comments suggested a wide range ofalternatives, from phasing out the use ofPCBs In all transformers in a very shortperiod 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 ofimposing the more restrictive conditions suggested by some comments are notreasonable in comparison to the benefits ofsuch conditions. Forexample, one comment suggested that the use ofPCBs in all mineral oil transformers should be phased out in a very shortperiod of time, perhaps as short as three years. Such an approach would cost millions of dollars perpound ofPCB release avoided. EPA concludes that the imposition ofsuch a condition is not reasonable.

On the otherhand, some comments suggested the raising ofthe upperlimit ofthe range ofcontamination ofPCBContaminatedTransformers from 500 ppm to 5000ppm. 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 atreasonable cost to reduce the PCB concentration in transformers to below 500ppm. Comments at the hearingby people who have performed such operations orhave studied the subject indicate that concentrations below 500ppmhave been achievedby draining, flushing, and refilling followed by additional servicing.

Afterreviewing all ofthe information submitted inresponse to the proposed rule and otherinformation in the rulemaking record, EPA concludes that the requirements presented in the proposedrule for transformers not posing an exposure risk to food orfeed

were reasonable. Details ofthe calculations ofcosts and benefits which ledEPA to this conclusion are found in the Regulatory ImpactAnalysis. 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 majorchanges to the proposed

. conditions ofthe use authorization for PCB-containing transformers that do not pose an exposure risk to food or feed. The few minorchanges that were mad/t

are explained in subsequent paragraphs.

To reduce the risks associated with the release ofPCBs 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 orhas secondary containment capable ofholding at least 100

### percent ofthe transformer's fluid volume. No inspection orfollow-up maintenance procedures are required fo transformers containing less than 500 

### ppm PCBs because ofthe low concentration ofPCBs involved.

A program ofinspection and maintenance for PCB Transformers reduces the amowlt ofPCBs 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, orequipment failure. An inspection program also keeps company personnel informed and alert to the potential impact ofPCBs discharged from electrical equipment.

Although some data submitted in
response to the proposed rule indicated that certain government-owned PCB Transformers leakmore than transformers ownedby others, EPA believes that the required follow-up maintenance to correct leaks addresses this problem. In addition, owners of transformers thathave high service
costs to repairrecurring leaks have an incentive to replace it as PCB· ContaminatedElectrical Equipment or reclassify the transformer.

Servicing restrictions'also apply as a condition to the use authorization for transformers that contain PCBs. Any servicing ofa PCB Transformer (including rebuilding) thatrequires the removal ofthe transformercoil from the transformercasing is prohibited. This condition not only reduces the exposure risks to service personnel, but, also prevents the use ofPCB Transformers beyond theirnormal operating lives. Other servicing conditions primarily prevent the further contamination of PCB-containing transformers.

EPA believes that authorizing the use ofPCB-filled transformers and mineral oil-filled transformers containing PCBs according to the proposed conditions does notpresent an unreasonable risk for the following reasons:

a. IfEPA did not authorize the use of PCBs in tranformers, it would cost the public and United States industry billions ofdollars, primarily as a result ofthe disruption ofelectrical 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 ofPCBs in PCB Transformers, and the servicing conditions prevent further PCBHeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37347 1982 

### Federal Register 

## I Vol. 47, No. 165 

## I Wednesday, August 25, 1982 

## I Rules and Regulations 37347



### contamination oftransformers. These

measures are much less costly than a ban on the use ofPCBs in transformers would be.

c. Releases ofPCBs to the environment and exposure tohumans and biological organisms from mineral oil transformers are minimal. EPA estimates that these transformers contain less than 0.15 percent ofall the PCBs used in transformers andrelease less than one halfofa percent ofthese PCBs on an annual basis.

d. The costs associatedwith otherrisk reduction measures such as accelerated phase-out, reducing the PCB concentration in the dielectric fluid, or providing containment for transformers

are notreasonable when compared to the potential reduction inrelease of PCBs achieved ifany ofthese measures

were required for all PCB Transformers.

Several comments said that even though phase-out, containment, and reduction ofPCB concentration are not warranted as regulatory requirements, each ofthese measures might be costeffective in individual situations on a volunt!l'ry basis. In fact, some companies have already initiated such efforts because ofbenefits 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 Transformerwith secondary containment capacity ofat least 100 percent ofthe transformer's total dielectric fluid volume, or a PCB Transformerwhich contains less than 60,000 ppm (6 percent) PCBs, a visual inspection is required only once every 12 months. Secondary containment ofat least 100percent ofthe transformer's total dielectric fluid volume will contain virtually all releases ofPCBs from the transformer. Draining, flushing, and refilling a PCB Transformerreduces the
amount ofPCBs in a transformerby a factor ofbetween 10 and 15, leaving

# a residual PCB concentration ofbetween 30,000 and 80,000ppm. EPA believes that, for transformers with these kinds ofreduced risks, it is reasonable to inspect no more often then once per year. EPA chose a 60,000 ppm PCB. concentration cutoffbecause, on the basis ofnumerous 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 furtherreduction in PCB concentration to 50 and 500ppm.

Severalpersons commented thatthe visual inspectionrequiredby this final rule couldpose an electrical shock hazard to unqualifiedpersonnel. It 

### has always beenEPA's intent thatthe extent ofa visual inspection shouldbe only as complete as safelypossible, This will
vary, depending on the physical constraints ofeach transformer installation. No visual inspection should require an electrical shutdown ofthe transformerbeing inspected. Transformers thatrequire 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 thatmore thorough inspections canbe completed.

The proposedrule 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 orderto take advantage of equipment outages which cian occur at irregularintervals. EPA agrees with this
comment and, for quarterly inspections, has added regulatory language that allows inspections for leaks ofdielectric 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 of30 days between inspections. Inspections may also take place any time during the calendaryear for annualinspections as long as there is

a minimum of180 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 ofdielectric fluid are unavoidable in the operation ofa transformer and repairs are not always required to stop a leak. A leak of dielectric fluid which has run offor is about to run offthe external surface of the transformer clearly needs repairto prevent further leaking. A leak of dielectric fluid which does notform a

run ordrip, 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 ofin 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 thatthe leak is being contained until the leak is corrected.

This final rule requires recordkeeping ofeach PCB Transformer's inspection and maintenancehistory. This requirement will assist companies in the operation oftheirinspection 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 ofthe required information is available (in hard copy)
upon requestby EPA. These records
must be maintained for at least three
years after disposing ofthe 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 requirementin theproposedrule. Several comments indicated that five
years was excessive and resulted in
unnecessary costs. EPA has reduced the period inresponse to these comments and because itbelieves that the threeyear time periodprovides a sufficient history forEPA to monitorcomplianoe with areasonable interval between oompliance inspections.

Becausereporting ofPCB spills are mandatedunder 

### § 311 ofthe Clean WaterActfor discharges to navigable waters, and underthe Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of1980 (Superfund) for discharges to other media, this rule does notrequire any additional**rep~rting.** D. Use ofCapacitors



### This section on the use ofcapacitors analyzes only those capacitors that do
not pose an exposure risk to food or feed. Analysis ofthe exposure risks associated with equipment that poses an exposure risk to food orfeed 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 otherindustries. Large PCB Capacitors contain more than 3 pounds ofdielectric fluid and are commonly used to improve the voltage and power factor ofthe electric power system. Virtually all capacitors (large and small) manufactured prior to 1978

were filled with PCB fluid at a concentration near 100percent. Capacitors manufactured after 1978 did
not use PCB dielectric fluid.

EPA estimates that there were 2.800,000 utility-owned large PCBHeinOnline -- 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 of1981. EPA also estimates that the total population ofin-service nonutilityowned large PCB Capacitors was 490.000 at the end of1981.

Large PCB Capacitors**ar~** 

### located within fenced electrical substations, withinbuildings. and on utility poles throughout the service areas ofelectric utilities. Many comments pointed out that there are significantdifferences between the riskposed by Large Capacitors depending upon their location. Therefore, this final rule recognizes the widespread distribution oflarge PCB Capacitors and distinguishes two different exposure risk categories by capacitorlocation. The
two categories are: (1) capacitors used within restricted-access electrical substations orused in contained and restricted-access indoorinstallations, and (2) capacitors used in all other locations (primarily in electric utility distribution systems).

1. Magnitude of exposure. 

### Large PCB Capacitors used within restricted-access electrical substations and in contained and restricted-access indoorlocations pose comparatively low exposure risk. Arestricted-access electrical substation is a fenced orwalled-in facility that is restricted to public access and used in the transmission ordistribution of electric power. Releases ofPCBs from capacitors in these substations beyond the confines ofthe substation are extremely limited. In 

### most cases, PCBs become intimately bound to the gravel and soil and very little PCBs evaporate

ordissolve or are driven offby rain. In a reportby Dr. DonaldMackay titled Environmental Pathways of PolychlorinatedBiphenyls (Volume IV ofthe EEI/USWAG study), Dr. Mackay calculates that the likely extent of evaporation from a "typical" pure PCB spill into soil is 0.16percentperday and the dissolution rate ofa spill into water is typically a factor of100 slower than evaporation. Many comments indicated that substations are inspected atregular intervals, often at intervals ofone week

orless. Because ofthese frequent inspections and because there is evidence thatPCBs usually migrate slowly from a spill within a substation. EPA concludes that a very high percentage ofall PCB releases from capacitors in these locations can be identified and cleaned up quickly with
very little risk ofexposure to humans or the environment. EPA estimates that 41,073 pounds ofPCBs could be released from large PCB Capacitors in Restrictedaccess electrical substations.

Similarly. certain otherfacilities. described in this rule as contained and restricted-access indoorinstallations, also present limitedexposure risk potential. An installation meeting this description has a roof, walls, and floors that will contain any release ofPCBs within the indoorinstallation. This type ofinstallation also prevents rain from reaching the large PCB capacitors and has controlled access to these PCB capacitors. Abuilding which prevents PCB releases from escaping, including
escape through drains orexpansion joints, wouldbe acceptable. This type of contained and restricted-access installation aHolws propercleanup of PCBs with very little exposure to humans orthe environment. EPA estimates that 25,728 pounds ofPCBs couldbe released from larg-e PCB capacitors in contained and restrictedaccess indoorinstallations.

The second category oflarge PCB Capacitorlocations 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 inresidential neighborhoods, industrial areas, rural

areas, public areas (such as shopping centers, schools, etc.), and even near waterways. The capacitors, because of theirlocations. have a greaterpotential for exposing humans. animals. and the environment during theiruse than other large PCB Capacitors. EPA estimates that without any riskreduction

measures these capacitors couldrelease

as many as 730,110pounds ofPCBs during theirremaining useful life.

2. Benefits of PCBs andavailabilityof substitutes. 

### The electricalproperties of PCBs are so well suited as a dielectric fluid for capacitors that no otherfluids

were commonly used in capacitors prior
to 1978. Since 1978, electric utilities and otherindustries have beeninstalling non-PCB Capacitors with no apparent replacement oroperational problems.

Under this final rule EPA estimates that 1.087 million large PCB Capacitors (or 108.7 million KVAR, assuming an average size of100KVAR) will require removal due to the acceleratedphaseout requirements. (KVAR is the abbreviation for reactive kilovoltampers, which is a standard power rating for capacitors.) EPA assumes that companies will take one yearto plan for the phase-out and five years to implement it. Considering the additional capacitors that will require replacement due to failure orobsolescence, EPA estimates that a peak annual power capacitor manufacturing capacity of29 million KVAR (about 145,0002DO-KVAR units) will be required to meet the total demand forreplacements. EPA's estimates for the demand for new power capacitorapplications (unrelated to any demand forreplacements) range from 9.7 million KVAR to 20.3 million KVAR
peryear. Therefore, the maximum total annual demand forpowercapacitors shouldbe between 38.7 and49.3 million KVAR under this final rule.

In a survey ofdomestic capacitor manufacturers by the National Electrical Manufacturers Association in response to this rulemaking, four respondents indicated thatproduction could be increased 65 percent by 1983 or earlier. With this increase in production, the total annual powercapacitor manufacturing capacity wouldbe 47.85 million KVAR.

According to these estimates, manufacturing capacity is adequate for companies to comply with the requirement to phase out these capacitors overthe next six years. The derivation ofthe estimates and a further discussion ofthe methodology used to arrive at this conclusionis found in the Regulatory ImpactAnalysis prepared for this final rule.

3. Economicandenvironmental impacts of regulatoryrequirements. 

### The economic impactofthis final rule was calculated in terms ofthe lost economic value associated with removing PCB Capacitors before the end oftheiruseful lives. EPA estimates this cost to be $135.8 million. EPA estimates that the
net presentvalue ofthe phase-out cost for the electric utility industry is only 0.05 percent ofthe 1979 net value of
assets in electric plantnationally

..

It 

### should be noted that the direct costs ofthe regulatory requirements for large PCB Capacitors do not include the
energy savings associated with the use ofmore efficientreplacement capacitors. This savings is very Significantfor capacitors that were manufactured using paper insulation (approximately pre-1966). The Regulatory ImpactAnalysis prepared for this final rule estimates that the payback period for capacitors with paperinsulation is approximately 11
years, assuming that the capacitors are in use 50percent ofthe time.

By removing large PCB Capacitors before the end oftheir useful service lives itprevents the release ofPCBs during the remaining years ofuse. EPA estimates that this final rule avoids an estimated 572.000pounds ofPCBs from release from large PCB Capacitors that doe not pose an exposure risk to food and feed. Amore complete discussion of the costs and benefits associated with the regulatory requirements is presentedHeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37349 1982 

### Federal 

### Register 

## I Vol. 47, No. 165 

## I Wednesday, August 25, 1982 

## I Rules and Regulations 37349

a

_ _ _ 

### '_A_,..

in the Regulatory Impact Analysis prepared for this final rule.

4. Findings on the use of capacitors. The proposed rule discussed whether the use ofPCBs in capacitors should continue and the options EPA considered to reduce the risks from the

use ofPCBs in capacitors. The proposed rule authorized the use ofcapacitors for
ten years. Several comments suggested that capacitors should be categorized on the basis ofdifference in potential for
exposure. These differences arise because ofdifferences in the accessability ofthe capacitorlocation and differences in the degree of containment ofany 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 ofa six-yearphase-out is reasonable because ofthe large quantity ofPCBs release which will be avoided and because ofthe 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 outdoorelectrical 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 oftheir useful lives.

.A very large number ofcomments stated that the'benefits ofan inspection
programfor capacitors do-not outweigh the costs. In most cases, lerge releases ofPCBs from capacitors (ruptures) happen very suddenly as a result ofa large amount ofenergy entering the capacitorin a very short time period. Inspections ofin-service capacitors
cannot detect characteristics which indicate a capacitor's potential to release PCBs. EPA agrees that the effectiveness ofan inspection program for large PCB Capacitors is very limited in preventing future releases ofPCBs. Therefore, this final rule eliminates the proposed requirement thatlarge PCB Capacitors must be inspected for leaks ofdielectric fluid on a quarterly basis.

An inspection program can speed the detection and cleanup ofPCBs 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 ofPCB 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 ofPCBs 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 ofthat quantity from entering the food chain. This time period also avoids any disruption ofelectrical service.

c. The cost ofthe phase-out requirement is reasonable when compared to the large amount ofPCBs it prevents from entering the environment and the costs and benefits ofalternative risk reduction measures. This cost is only $237 per pound ofPCB release avoided.

5. Smallcapacitors. PCB Small Capacitors contain less than 3pounds of dielectric fluid. These capacitors commonly contain between 0.1 and 0.6 pounds ofPCBs and are used in fluourescent light ballasts, household appliances, and industrial equipment. In
most applications, the equipment containing the small capacitorin its circuitry cannot function without it. In 1976, an EPA study estimated that 870 million small capacitors, containing 275 million pounds ofPCBs, were in use in a wide variety ofapplications. Today, EPA estimates that approximately 500 million ofthese small capacitors are still in use. EPA calculated this figure assuming that 10 percent ofthese capacitors are removed from service annually due to equipment or appliance obsolescence and capacitorfailure.

No data has been submitted to EPA which indicate that small capacitors have a differentpropensity to leak than other capacitors. Additionally, no ccmments have identified any practical and cost-effective use restrictions regarding the use ofPCB Small Capacitors. Because ofthe widespread and diverse nature oftheir use and the small amount ofPCBs 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 notrequire any restrictions regarding the use ofPCBs in small capacitors. However, EPA
encourages commercial and industrial firms that use and dispose oflarge quantities ofPCB Small Capacitors to establish voluntarily a collection and disposal program that results in waste capacitors being disposed ofin an EPA· approved incinerator orchemical waste landfill. Such programs could be expanded to encourage voluntary collection and disposal ofPCB Small

. Capacitors from the public and qther firms. Any firm which desires more information about identifying and disposing ofPCB Small Capacitors should cqntact the nearestEPA regional office or the Industry Assistance Office
at 600-424-9065 for assistance.

Since these capacitors contain small quantities ofdielectric fluid and significant amounts ofabsorbant material such as paper, and because
many ofthese capacitors are encapsulated, PCBs are rarely released from these capacitors during theiruse or from the equipment using the capacitors. Therefore, exposure risks to humans, food, feed, wate:" or the environment from the use ofthese capacitors are low. In conclusion, EPA finds that the use of small capacitors containing PCBs is not unreasonable because theiruse provides society with the benefits from the use of millions ofpieces ofelectronic equipment and consumerproducts, it avoids billions ofdollars in replacement costs, and there appear to be no practical, cost-effective risk reduction

measures.
E. Use of PCB Transformers. Capacitors. andElectromagnets ThatPose an ExposureRisk to Human Foodand AnimalFeed

EPA estimates that at the end of1979 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 ofthis equipment

never posed an exposure risk to food or feed and that, for much ofthe rest ofit. steps have been taken to eliminate the risk. EPA estimates that ten percent of the equipmentused on the premises of food and feed facilities poses an exposure risk to food orfeed products.

Since publication ofthe proposed rule. EPA has received a comment that indicated that electromagnets designed
to contain PCBs are stillin use over grain elevators. EPA was unaware that this use still existed at the time ofthe proposed rule. In 1979, EPA estimated that

## atotal of200 PCB-filled electromagnets were in use with an unknown percentage ofthese in use in coaloperations.

1. Magnitude of exposure. Human food and animal feed represent EPA's greatest concern for exposure because ofthe increased health risks associated with the ingestion ofPCBs. 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 ofdollars ofdamages. Implicated food and feed products were

. distributed to nineteen states and two

foreign countries.

2. Benefits of PCBs andavailabilityof substitutes. The benefits ofusing PCBs and the availability ofsubstitutes 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 ofusing PCBs in electromagnets is the safety provided by the fire resistant properties ofthe PCBs. The substitutes for PCBs in transformers

are also available and suitable for use in electromagnets.

3. Economic andenvironmental impacts of regulatoryrequirements. The food contamination incidentpreviously described which involved a single PCB Transformer demonstrates that the cost
to society ofa PCB spill affecting food or feed can be more than one million dollars perpound ofPCBs 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 ofthe cost effectiveness of different accelerated phase-out time periods and inspection program frequencies.

The impact ofreplacing the affected PCB Transformers and large PCB Capacitors in food and feed facilities is estimated to be $16.04 million. and the impact ofreplacing the affected electromagnets is $0.38 million. These estimates assume that ten percent ofthe PCB Transformers imd Capacitors used by the food and feed industry pose an exposure risk to food and feed and that
ten percent ofthe estimated 200 PCBfilled electromagnets In service in 1979
pose an exposure risk to food and feed.

4. Findings on the use of PCBsposing

an exposure risk tofoodandfeed. In the proposed rule. EPA found that it was reasonable to require weekly inspection ofall PCB Transformers and Large PCB Capacitors that pose an exposure risk to food orfeed 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 ofexposure. Other comments expressed concern that EPA was proposing to allow indefinite

use ofPCBs in transformers in the areas ofgreatestrisk. After further analysis of the cost-effectiveness ofvarious accelerated phase-out periods and consideration ofthese comments, EPA has decided to establish a prohibition on the use ofPCB 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.

Othercomments urged EPAnot to prohibit the use ofany electrical equipment in food orfeed establishments. but to rely on the effectiveness ofan 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 ofhuman food with PCBs justifies the imposition ofadditional protective measures.

The three-year time period for transformers and electromagnets is based on an estimated one year to analyze the specifics ofthe individual situation. to choose the method to be used to eliminate the exposure risk to food orfeed. 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 oftime 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 ofthe plan. EPA decided not to shorten this period.any further for these capacitors because the quantity ofPCBs iqvolved is much less than the quantity ofPCBs in transformers posing this exposure risk and because the cost perpound of preventing PCB relealle was higher than for the transformers.

--

Prohibiting the use ofPCB-containing equipment in a location that poses an exposure risk to food orfeed represents the most effective risk reduction

measure ofthe 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 riskto food orfeed 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 itis an effective riskreduction measure.for equipment such as transformers and electromagnets and because ofthe large
exposure risks associated with the use ofPCB Transformers and PCB-mled electromagnets near food orfeed. As discussed in an earlier section ofthis preamble. the effectiveness ofan inspection program for capacitors is
very limited and in most cases rUlJtures ofthis 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 orfeed 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 proposedrule recommended thatEPA include in the final rule clarifications that were issued underthe Interim Measures Program. These clarifications have been incorporated into the final rule where appropriate and are discussed in this preamble.

The proposedrule required special inspection procedures for transformers which are in alocation thatpose a rIsk ofexposure to human food or animal feed. This exposure risk is presumed to exist in any facility manufacturing, processing. packaging. orholding human food or animal feed, orin any federally inspected meat, poultry product oregg 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 orfeed in this rule under40 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 orfeed products. Food and feed covered by this definition includes items regulated by USDA and FDA as food orfeed including additives. Food and feed is excluded from this definition ifitis 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 ofthis requirement in private residences would place a very large demand on EPA enforcement resources. This definition, does coverfood 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 ofthe responsibilities between users and owners ofPCBcontaining electrical equipment that
pose an exposure risk to food and feed. As in the interim Measures Program it is the responsibility ofthe user ofa 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 ownerhas other knowledge indicating that the transformer may pose an exposure risk
to food orfeed. It is the ultimate responsibility ofthe ownerofthe PCBcontaining electrical equipment to determine ifit poses an exposure risk to food orfeed. Although users ofPCBTransformers, PCB capacitors, and PCBfilled electromagnets are notresponsible for phasing-out any ofthis equipment,

users should contactthe ownerifthey feel that this equipmentposes an exposure risk to food orfeed. In any event, the user still has responsibility under otherFederal laws to insure that food and feed distributed in commerce

are not contaminated.

In the Federal RegisterofMay 9, 1980, EPA proposed a rule amendment which would have prohibited the use ofPCB Items in facilities manufacturing, processing, or storing fertilizers or agricultural pesticides. EPA received
commentupon this proposedrule and,

on May 6, 1981, in light ofthe courtorderedrulemaking on the use ofPCBs in electrical equipment, EPA put that proposed rule in abeyance. Because the promulgation ofthis final rule deals with PCBs thatpose an exposure risk to food

orfeed, EPA has decided not to issue a final rule from the May 9, 1980proposed rule. The final rule on the use ofPCBs in electrical equipment does notrecognize agricultural'pesticides and fertilizers as food orfeed additive orrequire 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 amendmenthas been incorporated into the record for this final rule.

F. 

### Use andServicing ofVoltage Regulators, Switches (Including SectionaJizers andMotorStarters), and Electromagnets

Voltage regulators and switches (including sectionalizers and motor starters) are used by electric utilities and industry to control, transmit, and distribute electric powerefficiently. Almost all ofthis electrical equipment is mineraloil-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 conveyorbelts 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 preparationplants, and coalfired generating stations. PCB-filled electromagnets thatpose an exposure riskto food or feed are discussed in sectionE.



### 1. Magnitude of exposure. The total pounds ofPCBs in oil-filled voltage regulators, switches, and electromagnets represent less than 0.01 percent ofthe total PCBs in-service in electrical equipment. EPA estimates from data in the rulemaking record that the annual leakage ofoil-ruled voltage regulators and switches would amount to a release of approximately 85 pounds ofPCBs per year.

Leaks ofdielectric fluid from oil-filled electrical equipment have the potential for exposing humans or the environment
to low concentrations (parts permillion) ofPCBs because some ofthis equipment is used in the Nation's electrical distribution system which is located

near consumers orelectric power. In addition, releases ofPCBs anywhere in the environmenthave the potential to reach aquatic systems, buildup in the food chain, and ultimatelyresult in human exposure. Leaks ofPCBs 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 of PCBs andavailabilityof 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 ofcontamination 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 equipmentprovides the

same safeguards against fire hazards as that described for transformers.

The availability ofsubstitutes was discussed in the proposedrule.



### 3. Economic andenvironmental impacts of regulatoryrequirements. This final rule reduces the amount ofworker and environmental exposure associated with servicing (including rebuilding) this equipment. This rule also prevents further PCB contamination ofthis 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 andservicing of this electricalequipment. The proposed rule contained an authorization for the

use ofPCBs in voltage regulators, switches (including sectionalizers and
motor starters), and electromagnets for theirremaining useful lives with no use restrictions. It also restricted servicing activities in order to prevent this equipmentfrom being further contaminated with PCBs and to reduce PCB exposure ofservicing personnel and the environment during these activities. Comments in response to the proposed rule did not raise any newHeinOnline -- 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 ofPCBs to

,continue avoids disruption ofelectric 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 ofPCBs are expected to be released annually.

c. EPA does not believe that the cost associated with restrictions regarding the use ofthis 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 ofPCBs for servicing this equipment requires an exemption from the July 1, 1979 ban ofthese 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 andServicing ofCircuit Breakers. RecJosers. andCable

Circuitbreakerll, 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. Circuitbreakers. reclosers. and cable are types ofoil-filled electrical**equipm~1l1** generally not designed to contain PCBs. However, available data indicate that a small percentage ofthis "electrical equipment contains PCBs resulting from past servicing and manufacturing practices.

1. Magnitude ofexposure. Although approximately 26.3 percent ofall oilfilled circuit breakers can be expected
to leak during an average year. this could amount to a release ofonly 50.66 pounds ofPCBs, according to the EEI/ USWAG study. This same study indicates that releases ofdielectric fluid from reclosers could amount to 6.64 pounds ofPCBs peryear. As with other oil-filled electrical equipment, leaks of . dielectric fluid have the potential for exposing humans and the environment
to low concentrations ofPCBs because ofthe equipment's location throughout electric power system service areas.

2. Benefits of PCBs andavailabilityof substitutes. Both the benefits and availability ofsubstitutes for PCBs in circuitbreakers, reclosers. and cable are the same as that discussed for other mineral oil-filled equipment (transformers. voltage regulators. switches. etc.).

3. Economicandenvironmental impacts of regulatoryrequirements. Since this electrical equipment may be assumed to contain less than 50 ppm PCBs, the economic and environmental impact ofthe 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 of50 ppm (e.g. from test results). Additional discussion ofthe costs and benefits associated with the regulatory requirements is found in the proposed rule and the Regulatory ImpactAnalysis prepared for this final rule. There are no significant changes from the analysis done for the proposed rule.

4. Findings on the use andservicing of this electricalequipment. The proposed rule contained an authorization. with servicing conditions, which would have allowed the use ofPCBs in circuit breakers and reclosers for the remaining useful life ofthis equipment. No
comments contained data which would
warrant changing this part ofthe proposal.

The proposed rule also authorized the

use ofoil-filled cable and contained a requirement that oil-filled cable must be assumed to contain between 50 and 500
ppm PCBs ifthe 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 ofoil-filled cable, indicating that virtually none ofthe cable is contaminated in excess of50
ppm. Therefore, this final rule allows the assumption that oil-filled cable contains less than 50 ppm PCBs ifthe actual concentration is unknown.

EPA authorizes the use and servicing ofPCBs in circuit breakers, reclosers, and cable for the remainder oftheir useful lives, according to the servicing restrictions of § 761.30(m)(1}. These servicing conditions prevent furtherPCB contamination ofequipment containing less than 50 ppm PCBs. The disposal requirements of40 CFR 761.60 and the servicing requirements of40 CFR 761.30(h) apply to any oil-filled circuit breaker, recloser, or cable found to contain 50 ppm or greaterPCBs. EPA believes that this use authorization with servicing conditions does not present an unreasonable risk for the following

reasons:

a. Allowing this use ofPCBs to continue avoids disruption ofelectric service and the costs associated with a prohibition.

.

b. There is little PCB contamination of this oil-filled equipment and very small
amounts ofPCBs are expected to be released annually.

c. EPA does notbelieve that the cost associated with restrictions regarding the use ofthis 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 ofthis equipment.

VI. OtherAmendments to the PCB Rule

A. PCB-ContaminatedElectrical 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 ofa "PCB-ContaminatedTransformer" (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 ofPCBs in certain electrical equipment is authorized regardless ofPCB concentration, the disposal requirements ofthe May 1979 PCB rule make certain distinctions on the basis ofPCB concentration. That is, different disposal requirements apply to PCBs at concentrations of500 ppm or greater and at concentrations between 50 and 500 ppm. The definition ofPCBContaminated Electrical Equipment was developed in order to refer to the electrical equipment that contains between 50 and 500 ppm PCBs.

Prior to publication ofthe proposed rule, EPA had received data regarding the actual PCB concentrations in different types ofelectrical 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 ofoil-filled transformers. voltage regulators. and switches contain PCB concentrations of 50 ppm or greater, butPCB concentrations greaterthan 500 ppmin this equipment are rare, estimated to

occurin less than'2 percent ofthe equipment. Because the contamination

was caused by unintentional manufacturing and servicing practices. it

_. is impossible to determine for certain whichpieces ofequipment are contaminated without testing them all. EPA estimates the cost ofsuch testing to be overtwo billion dollars, based on a total ofcost of$100 per test. Based on these data, EPA requires that all oilfilled transformers, voltageregulators, 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, ifthe actual PCB concentration ofany oil-filled transformer, voltage regulator. switch, or electromagnetis unknown. the equipmentmustbe assumed to contain

more than 50ppm PCBs and may be assumed to contain less than 500 ppm PCBs for purposes ofservicing and disposing ofthis equipment. This will allow owners ofthis equipment to avoid the cost oftesting 

### ifthey choose.

.

Little monitoring data were available
to EPA priorto publication ofthe proposedrole regarding the PCB concentration in oil-filled electromagnets. Comments on the proposedrole added little additional information. Because electromagnets

use the same kind ofoil and are servicedin the same manner as other types ofoil-filled equipment, there is no

reason to believe its PCB concentration would frequently exceed 500ppm. Therefore. EPA requires that oil-filled electromagnets 

### be included in the category ofPCB-Contaminated ElectricalEquipment so that they must be assumed to have a PCB concentration between 50 and 500ppm 

### ifthe concentration il unknown.

Data in the rolemaking record indicate that less than two percent ofoil-filled circuitbreakers. reclosers. and cable are contaminated with PCB concentrations of50ppm orgreater. EPA estimates that it would cost approximately forty million dollars to indentify all ofthe circuitbreakers. reclosers. and cable whose PCBcontamination exceeds 50
ppm. Because the coat ofeithertesting all the equipmentortreating it al contaminatedin excess of50ppmil 

## bJsbrelative to the numberofpieces of equipmentthat

### an likely to contain greaterthan 50 ppm, EPA allows that oil-filled circuit breakers, reclosers and cable need notbe classified as PCBContaminatedElectrical Equipment if the PCB concentration is unknown.

B. Clarification of Existing 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 ofPCB activities it found to be in a totally enclosed manner, due to new information submittedprior to the proposal. This final rule is identical to the proposal. To assure that PCBs are notreleased from electrical equipment being distributed in commerce under the provisions ofsection 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. circuitbreakers, reclosers. switches (including sectionalizers and switches). and cable to be totally enclosed activities. Coupledwith40 CFR 761.30(c)(1). this 

### will restrict the applicability ofsection 6(e)(3)(C) to intact. nonleaking equipment. Persons wishing to distribute in commerce electrical equipment which is notintact and nonleaking must apply for an exemption from the ban on distribution in commerce. using the exemption procedures found in 40 CFR Part750.

D. DisposalRequirements

Since this rulemaking has identified

uses ofPCB-containing electrical equipmentnotrecognized in the earlier PCB regulations. changes have been made to the disposal requirements for PCBs andPCB Items. The major difference between this final rule and the proposal is thatlanguage specifying the extentofcleanup required for a PCB spill has been deleted.

1. Mineraloildielectricfluid. This final rule allOWI mineral oil dielectric fluid from any type ofPCBContaminatedElectrical Equipment to be disposed following the requirements of40 CFR 761.6O(a)(2). All mineral oil from transformers. electromagnets. voltage regulators. and switches is subjectto the dispolalrequirements of this section, unless the oil has been tested (orotherwise verified) andfound
to contain leas than &0 ppmPCBs. No comments on this proposed change affected EPA's conclusions regarding the degree ofcontamination ofthis equipment.

2. PCB items. The proposed rule established disposal requirements for PCB-Contaminated Electrical Equipment. This equipmentmust be drained ofall free flowing liquid, and the liquid mustbe disposed ofunder 40 CFR 761.60(a)(2). The proposed rule also regulated the disposal ofPCB Articles with a PCB concentration of500 ppm or

more under40 CFR 761.60(b)(5), but did
not regulate the disposition ofa 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 ofdielectric fluid and would have to be punctured or cut open. Puncturing or cutting open a Large

. PCB Capacitorposes a potential PCB

exposure risk to workers and the environment due to the sudden release ofinternal pressure that mayhave built
up in a failed capacitor. In orderto discourage this potentially hazardous activity, this final rule requires disposal ofcapacitors containing between 50 and 500ppm PCBs in an incineratorthat complies with § 761.70 orin a chemical
waste landfill that complies with § 761.75.

Although this rule does notrequire testing ofmineral oil dielectric fluid for PCB concentration, some people may choose to do so. In order to reduce the
costs associated with testing forPCB concentrations in mineral oil dielectric fluid. this rule allows. as proposed.

common containercollection ("batch testing") ofmineral oil dielectric fluid from all electrical equipmentcontaining mineral oil dielectric fluid (see 40 CFR 761.60(g)(1)). Common container collection is permitted so thatmineral oil from multiple sources can be collected and tested withoutrequiring a separate test ofeach individual piece of electrical equipment to determine disposal options. However, in orderto preventpersons from using dilution to circumventthe disposal rules. dielectric fluid from oil-filled circuitbreakers. reclosers. orcable. collectedin a

commoncontainerwith untested dielectric fluid from otheroil-filled eqUipmentmustbe assumed to contain
at least 50ppm PCBs.



### 3. SpiJJs 

### andleaks. The proposedrule clarified the definition ofdisposal,byHeinOnline -- 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 ofcomments stated that it was unfairto charge a party with unauthorized disposal when PCBs are spilled or leaked during authorized use ofelectrical equipmentbutprompt 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 ofelectrical 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 ofPCB contaminationresulting from spills, leaks. and otheruncontrolled discharges ofPCBs. 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 of50 ppm was always appropriate. Othercomments 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 ofthe standards set in the proposed rule.

The Agency has decided not to include language regarding the required level ofcleanup 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 ofcleanup has been deleted.

4. Storagefordisposal. The storage for disposal ofnonleaking 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 ofcomments pointed out that ifEPA were going to require accelerated phase-out ofcapacitors, there would be additional storage needed for phased-out equipment awaiting disposal. After considering these comments, EPA has decided to allow this type ofstorage for disposal for nonleaking and structurally undamaged PCB Large High Voltage Capacitors and PCB-Contaminated Electrical Equipment afterJanuary 1. 1983.

The May 31, 1979, PCB rule did not envision an acceleratedphase-out for 

# , certain PCB Transformers and large PCB Capacitors or the use ofPCB-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 ofstorage for disposal to continue indefinitely, according to the provisions of40 CFR 761.65(c)(2).

The May 1979 rule exempted PCB Small Capacitors from the storage requirements. In theApril 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 ofPCB 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 of Electrical Equipment ContainingPCBs

The May 1979rule prohibits rebuilding ofPCB 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 ofPCB Transformers which have failed electrically because failed transformers can not be putback 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 ofsimulating the loading conditions associated with inservice use. To apply for approval of
any method which uses conditions other than in-service use. a letter shouldbe
sent to the Assistant Administratorfor Pesticides ana Toxic Substances (TS794), Environmental Protection Agency, 401 MStreet 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 orgreaterrelease ofPCBs from the internal components ofthe equipment into the dielectric fluid as three months ofin-service use.

This final rule also clarifies the definition ofin-serrvice use for transformers by spp.cifying a minimum dielectric fluid temperature of50· C. This temperature has been shown experimentally to be associated with a condition oflight electrical loading and
to cause release ofPCBs from the internal components ofthe transformer into the dielectric fluid. This clarification also provides guidance as to what constitutes adequate in-service

use.
VII. Executive Order 12291

UnderExecutive Order 12291, issued February 17, 1981, EPA mustjudge whether a rule is a "majorrule" and, therefore, subject to the requirement that a Regulatory ImpactAnalysis be prepared. EPA has determined that this amendment to the PCB rule is not a majorrule as the term is defined in section l(b) ofthe Executive Order.

EPA has concluded that the amendment is not "major" under the criteria of section l(b) because the annual effect ofthe rule on the economy will be less than $100 million; it will not

cause a majorincrease in costs orprices for any sector ofthe economy orfor any geographic region; and itW!ll not result in any significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, or innovation or on the ability ofUnited States enterprises to compete with foreign enterprises in domestic or foreign markets. In fact, this rule allows uses ofPCBs in electrical equipment to continue that would otherwise be prohibitedby section 6(e) ofTSCA. This rule avoids the severe disruption ofelectric service to the public and industry that would occurif 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 majorrule, EPA has prepared a Regulatory Impact Analysis using the guidance in the Executive Order to the
extent possible within the time constraints ofthe court's order.

This final rule amendment was submitted to the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) prior to publication

as required by the Executive Order.

VIII.**Re~ulatory** Flexibility Act

Section 604 ofthe 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 ofa final rule on small business entities.

Section 605(b) ofthe Regulatory Flexibility Act, however, provides thatHeinOnline -- 47 Fed. Reg. 37355 1982 

### Federal Register / Vol. 47, 

### No. 165 / Wednesday, August 25, 1982 / Rules and Regulations 37355



### section 604 ofthe Act "shall not apply to any proposed orfinal rule ifthe head of the Agency certifies that the rule will not, if

### promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities."

The effect ofthis final rule is to avoid

severe disruption ofelectric service to industry and the public and to reduce the costs ofcomplying with TSCA. In 

### general. this rule will reduce the burden

on small businesses that would otherwise be encountered ifan immediate ban on PCB-containing electrical equipmentwere to take effect. If

### an immediate ban were imposed, large
costs would be incurred by all producers and users ofelectricity, including small businesses.

Since the actual distribution of electrical equipment ownership is unknown, EPA estimated the effect of the capacitorphase-out on different
groups ofutilities, including the rural electric cooperatives, using number of
customers as apredictorofnumber of capacitors ownedby the utility group. Fourgroups were analyzed: private Investor-owned utilities, local public utilities, rural electric cooperatives, and federally ownedutilities. The rural electric cooperative group wouldbe expected to include the most small utilities. Using a numberofmeasures of impact, none ofthe groups analyzed, Including the rural electric cooperatives, wouldbe significantly affectedby this final rule. EPA estimated that the total
costs ofthe capacitorphase-out for rural electric cooperatives would be $13.97 million, or0.072 percentofthe net value ofassets in electric plantin 1979. The maximum annual increase in capitalized
costs as a percent ofnet investment wouldbe 0.31 percent for the rural electric cooperatives. The maximum

revenue requirement increase overthe phase-outperiod for the rural electric cooperatives wouldbe 0.084 percent of 1979revenues.

The Impactofthe regulation on the food and feed industries should also be
very small since most ofthe industry has voluntarily moved orreplaced their PCB Transformers and Large Capacitors. Further, the impacton small food and feed companies will be negligible since
most small firms 

### do not own their own transformers and capacitors.

Since the effect ofthis rule avoids the economic impact associated with a disruption ofelectric service and based

on the regulatory analysis which indicates thatthere i8 a netbenefitfrom the rule, Icertify thatthis rule will not have a significanteconomic impacton a substantial number ofsmall entities. Therefore, a "regulatory flexibility analysis" is notrequired and will notbe prepared for this rulemaking.

VIlt PaperworkReduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act of1980 (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 

### etseq., authorizes the Directorofthe OMB to review certain information collectionrequests by Federal agencies. EPA has determined that the recordkeeping requirements set out in 40 CFR761.30 constitute a "collection ofinformation,"

as defined in 44 U.S.C 3502(4), making these requirements subject to the terms ofthePRA.

In 

### 40 CFR 761.30(a) EPAgrants

.authorizations for the use ofPCBcontaining transformers providedthat records are kept which indicate when the equipment was inspectedfor leaks, whether any leaks were found, and what action it tookifany leaks were found. The person is required to keep the records until three years after disposing ofthe equipment, and upon request, to make them available to EPA for inspection. This requirementhas beenreduced from the five-yearperiod that was in the proposal.

These recordkeeping requirements minimize paperworkburden and are designed to obtain only information
necessary to assure that companies are complying with the rule. By eliminating the inspectionrequirements for capacitors, the paperworkburden ofthis final rule has beenreduced to less than six percent ofthe burden for the requirements in the proposed rule.

This final rule amendmenthas been forwarded to the DirectorofOMB for review under the terms ofthe PRA. OMB has assigned the following control number to this final rule:**207ס-סoo3.** 

### IX. Official Record ofRulemaking

In accordance with the requirements ofsection 19(a)(3)(E) ofTSCA, EPA is publishing the following list of

. documents, which constitute the record ofthis rulemaking. However, public comments, the transcript ofthe rulemakinghearing, or submissions made at the rulemaking hearing orin connection with itwill not be listed because these documents are exempt from Federal Registerlisting under section 19(a)(3). A full listofthese materials is available onrequestby contacting the Industry Assistance Office (see listing under "ForFurther Information Contact").

A. Previous Rulemaking Records

1. Official Rulemaking Record from "PolychlorinatedBiphenyls (PCBs) Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce and Use Prohibitions Rule" published in the Federal RegisterofMay 31, 1979, (44 FR31514). 2. Official Rulemaking Record from "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Proposed Restrictions on Use at Agricultural Pesticide and FertilizerFacilities," published in the Federal RegisterofMay 9. 1980. [45 FR 30989).

B. Federal RegisterNotices

3.44 FR 31514. May 31. 1979. USEPA. "PolychlorinatedBiphenyls [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. "PolychlorinatedBiphenyls (PCBs): Use in Electrical Equipment."

7.46FR 25411, May 6. 1981. USEPA. "Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Proposed Restrictions on Use at Agricultural Pesticide and FertilizerFacilities; Abeyance of Proposed Rule Amendment,"

8. 46 FR27614. May 20, 1981. USEPA. "PolychlorinatedBiphenyls (PCBs); Use in Electrical Equipment; Interim Measures Program,"

9.47 FR 17428, April 22. 1982. USEPA. "PolychlorinatedBiphenyls (PCBs); Use in Electrical Equipment."

C. SupportDocuments

10. USEPA, OTS. "Regulatory Impact Analysis-for the Proposed PCB-Containing Electrical Equipment Rulemaking."

11. USEPA, OTS "Regulatory Impact Analysis ofthe Use Rule for PCB-Containing Electrical Equipment."

12. USEPA, OTS "Response to Comments

on Health Effects ofPCBs 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 ofthe Health Effects ofPCBs." Prepared by Ecology and the Environment, Inc.

15. Edison Electric Institute and Utilities Solid Waste Activities Group, "Comments and Studies on the Use ofPolychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in Response to an Order of the U.S. Court ofAppeals 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 contractto Drill, friess, Hays, Loomis

### a: Shaffer, Inc. Vol. III.-Report ofthe 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 ofPCBs and PCB Items. Disposal includes spills, leaks, and other uncontrolled discharges ofPCBs as well

as actions related to containing, transporting, destroying, degrading, decontaminating, orconfining 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

orFeed" 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 orfeed 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

. ofAgriculture or the Food and Drug Administration as human food or animal feed; this includes additives. Food or feed is excluded from this definition ifit is used or stored in private homes.

(z) "PCB-ContaminatedElectrical Equipment" means any electrical equipment, including butnot limited to transformers (including those used in railway locomotives lind self-propelled cars). capacitors. circuitbreakers. rcclosers. voltage regulators. switches (including sectionalizers and motor starters), electromagnets. and cable. that contain 50 ppm orgreaterPCB, butless than 500 ppm PCB. Oil-filled electrical equipmentotherthan circuit breakers. reclosers. and cable whose PCB concen.tration is unknown mustbe assumed to be PCB-Contaminated Electrical Equipment. (See § 761.30(a) and (h) for provisions permitting reclassification ofelectrical equipment containing 500 ppm orgreaterPCBs to PCB-Contaminated Electrical Equipment). Container. that contains PCBs and whose surfacers) has been in direct
contactwith PCBs. "PCB Article" includes capacitors. transformers, electric motors, pumps. pipes and any othermanufactured 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 eitherno change ofchemical composition during its end

use or only those changes of composition which have no commerical
purpose separate from that ofthe 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) ofthis section are prohibitedpursuant to section 6(e)(2) ofTSCA. The requirements set forth in paragraphs (b) and (c) ofthis section concerning export

• and import ofPCBs for purposes of 

## • • • 

## • List ofSubjects in 40 CFR Part 761

Hazardous materials. Labeling, Polychlorinatedbiphenyls, Reporting and recordkeeplng requirements, Environmental protection.

Dated: August 18, 1982.
John W. Hernandez, AdingAdministrator.

Therefore. 40 CFR Part761 Is amended as follows:

(d)· • • (1) "Small Capacitor" means a capacitorwhich contains less than 1.36 kg (3 Ibs.) ofdielectric fluid. The following assumptions may be used if the actual weight ofthe dielectric fluid Is unknown. A capacitorwhose total volume is less than 1,639 cubic centimeters (100 cubic inches) may be considered to contain less than 1.36kg (3 Ibs.) ofdielectric fluid and a capacitor whose total volume is more than 3,278 cubic centimeters (200 cubic inches)
mustbe considered to contain more than 1.36 kg (3 lbs.) ofdielectric fluid. A capacitorwhose volume is between 1,639 and 3,278 cubic centimeters may be considered to contain less than 1.36 kg (3 Ibs.) ofdielectric fluid ifthe total weight ofthe capacitor is less than 4.08 kg (91bs.).

(2) "Large High Voltage Capacitor"

means a capacitorwhich contains 1.36 kg (3 Ibs.) or more ofdielectric fluid and which operates at 2060 volts (a.c. or d.c.)

01' above.

(3) "Large Low Voltage Capacitor"

means a capacitorwhich contains 1.36 kg (3 Ibs.) ormore ofdielectric 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!. ofEnvironmental Studies. Univ. ofToronto, CA.
16. Edison Electric Institute, "Initial Cost Impact to Utility Companies ofthe Regulation ofPCBs in Food-Related Industries." (December 1980J Prepared by Resource Planning Corp.

17. Edison Electric Institute andUtilities Solid Waste Activities Group, "Preliminary Findings ofthe Study ofPCBs 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 ofPCBs Between Transformer Oil and Transformer Solid Materials" (December 3, 1981J. Prepared by RTECorp.

19. ENSCO, "Emission Testing During Incineration ofPCBs 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 byDrill, Friess, Hays, Loomis Ii Shaffer, Inc. •

21. Northeast Utilities Service Co., "CapacitorProtective Schemes Investigated by Northeast Utilities." Presented to EPRI PCB Seminar, Dallas, TX (December 1-3, 1981J.

.

22. Rollins Env. Services, "The PCB Incineration TestMade 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 ofthe Use ofSelected Replacement Fluids for PCBs in Electrical Equipment" (March 1979J. Prepared by Versar, Inc.

25. USEPA, Reg. 6, AHMD, Solid Waste Division, "Incineration ofPCBs 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 SeaJPermit."

X. Statutory Authority

Under seclion 6(e) ofTSCA (15 U.S.C. 2605), the Adininistrator may by rule authorize the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce or use (or any combination ofsuch activities) ofany PCBs in other than a totally enclosed

manner ifthe Administrator finds that it will not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. The Administrator also has authority to amend ormodify the PCB Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in Commerce, and Use Prohibition Rule (40 CFR Part 761), published in the Federal Register ofMay 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 andservicing of transformers (otherthan railroad transformers). PCBs at any concentration may be used in transformers (other than transformers for railroad locomotives and selfpropelledrailroad cars) and maybe used for purposes ofservicing including rebuilding these transformers for the remainderoftheir 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 orfeed is prohibited.

(ii) A visual inspection ofeach 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 of30 days between inspections. The visual inspection must include investigation for
any leak ofdielectric fluid on or around the transformer. The extent ofthe visual inspections will depend on the physical constraints ofeach transformer installation and should not require an electrical shutdown ofthe transformer being inspected.

(iii) Ifa PCB Transformer,is found to have a leakwhich results in any quantity ofPCBs running offor about to

run offthe external surface ofthe transformer. then the transformer must be repaired orreplaced to eliminate the

source ofthe leak. In all cases any leaking material mustbe cleaned up and properly disposed ofaccording to disposal requirements of § 761.60. Cleanup ofthe released PCBs mustbe initiated as soon as possible. but in no

case laterthan 48 hours ofits discovery. Until appropriate action is completed,
any active leak ofPCBs 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 ofproper containmentmeasures.

(iv) Records ofinspection and maintenance history shall be maintained
at least 3 years after disposing ofthe 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 andPCB Items for purposes of disposal are establishedpursuantto section 6(e)(1) ofTSCA. Subjectto any exemptions granted pursuant to section 6(e)(3)(B) ofTSCA, the activities listed in paragraphs (b) and (c) ofthis section

are prohibited pursuant to section 6(e)(3)(A) ofTSCA. In addition, the Administratorhereby finds. under the authority ofsection 12(a)(2) ofTSCA, that the manufacture, processing, and distribution in commerce ofPCBs 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 ofPCB exposure; the high probability ofhuman and environmental exposure to pCBs and PCB Items from manufacturing, processing, or distribution activities; the potential hazard ofPCB exposure posed by the transportation ofPCBs orPCB Items within the United States; and the evidence that contamination ofthe environment by PCBs is spread far beyond the areas where they are used. In addition, the Administratorhereby finds that any exposure ofhuman 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) andTSCA section 6(e)(2)(C) define the term totally enclosed manner as "any manner which will ensure that any eXJ>osure ofhuman 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 ofintact, 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), circuitbreakers. reclosers, and cable thatcontain PCBs
at any concentration and processing and distribution in commerce ofPCB Equipment containing an intact, nonleaking PCB Capacitor. See paragraph (c) (1) ofthis section for provisions allowing the distribution in

commerce ofPCBs 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 ofeach visual inspection and the date that a leak was discovered• ifdifferent from the inspection date.

(C) The person performing the inspection.

(D) The location ofany leak(s). (E) An estimate ofthe amount of dielectric fluid released from any leak.

(F) The date ofany cleanup, containment, repair, orreplacement.

(G) A description ofany cleanup, containment, orrepairperformed.

(H) The results ofany containment and daily inspection required for uncorrected active leaks.

(v) A reduced visual inspection frequency ofat least once every 12 months applies to PCB Transformers that utilize either ofthe following risk reduction measures. These inspections
may take place any time during the calendaryear as long as there is a minimum of160 days between inspections.

(A) a PCB Transformer which has impervious, undrained. secondary containmentcapacity ofat least 100 percent ofthe total dielectric fluid volume ofall transformers so contained,

or(B) A PCB Transformer which has been tested and found to contain less than 60,000 ppm PCBs (afterthree months ofinservice use ifthe transformerhas been serviced for
purposes ofreducing the PCB

concentration).

(vi) An increased visual inspection frequency ofat least once every week applies to any PCB Transformerin use

or stored for reuse which poses an exposure risk to food or feed. The user ofa PCB Transformerposing an exposure risk to food or feed is responsible for the inspection, recordkeeping, and maintenance requirements under this section until the

user notifies the ownerthat the transformer may pose an exposure risk
to food orfeed. Following such notification, it is the owner's ultimate responsibility to determine whether the PCB Transformerposes an exposure risk
to food orfeed.

(2) Servicing conditions. (i) Transformers classified as PCB· ContaminatedElectrical 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) ofPCB Transformers (as defined in § 761.3(y)) that requires the removal ofthe transformer coil from the transformer casing is prohibited. PCB Transformers may be servicedHeinOnline -- 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 mustbe captured and eitherreused as dielectric fluid or disposed ofin accordance with the requirements of § 761.60. PCBs from PCB Transformers must notbe mixed with or added to dielectric fluid from PCB· Contaminated Electrical Equipment.

(iv) Regardless ofits PCB concentration. dielectric fluids containing less than 500 ppmPCB that

are mixed with fluids that contain 500
ppm orgreaterPCB must notbe used as dielectric fluid in any electrical equipment. The entire mixture of dielectric fluid must be considered to be greaterthan 500 ppm PCB and mustbe disposed ofin an incineratorthat meets the requirements in § 761.70.

(v) A PCB Transformermay 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 Transformerby draining, refilling and!orotherwise servicing the transformer. In orderto reclassify, the transformer's dielectric fluid must contain less than 500 ppmPCB (for conversion to PCB-Contaminated Electrical Equipment) orless than 50
ppm PCB (forconversion to a non-PCB Transfomer) after a minimum ofthree months ofin-service use subsequentto the last servicing conducted for the
purpose ofreducing the PCB concentration in the transformer. Inservice means that the transformeris used electrically underloaded conditions thatraise the temperature of the dielectric fluid to at least 50° Centigrade. The Assistant Administrator
may grant. withoutfurther rulemaking, approval for the use ofalternative methods that simulate the loaded conditions ofin-service use. All PCBs removed from transformers for purposes ofreducing PCB concentrations are subject to the disposal requirements of § 761.60.

(vi) Any dielectric fluid containing 50
ppm orgreaterPCB used for servicing transformers mustbe stored in accordance with the storage for disposal requirements of § 761.65.

(vii) Processing and distribution in

commerce ofPCBs for purposes of servicing transformers is permitted only for persons who are granted an exemption underTSCA 6(e)(3)(B).

* *

(h) 

### Use in andservicing of electromagnets, switches andvoltage 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 ofservicing this equipment (including rebuilding) for the remainder oftheiruseful 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 orfeed is prohibited ifthe electromagnet contains greatertha 500ppm PCBs.

(ii) A visual inspection ofeach 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, orvoltage regulatorwith a PCB concentration of 500 ppm orgreaterwhich requires the removal and rework ofthe internal components is prohibited.

(ii) Electromagnets, switches. and voltage regulators classified as PCBContaminatedElectrical Equipment (as defined in § 761.3(z)) may be serviced (including rebuilding) only with dielectric fluid containing less than 500 ppmPCB.

. .

(iii) PCBs removed during any servicing activity must be captured and eitherreused as dielectric fluid or disposed ofin accordance with the requirements of § 761.60. PCBs from electromagnets switches, and voltage regulators with a PCB concentration of
atleast 500 ppm must not be mixed with

or added to dielectric fluid from PCBContaminatedElectrical Equipment.

(iv) Regardless ofits PCB (concentration, dielectric fluids containing less than 500ppm PCB) that

are mixed with fluids that contain 500
ppm orgreaterPCB 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 ofin an incinerator tbat meets the requirements of § 761.70.

(v) An electromagnet. switch or voltage regulator with a PCB concentration ofat 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) orless than 50
ppm PCB (for conversion to a non-PCB classification) after a minimum ofthree months ofin-service use subsequent to the last servicing conducted for the
purpose ofreducing the PCB concentration in the equipment. Inservice use means the equipment is used electrically underloaded conditions. Tbe AssistantAdministratormay grant, withoutfurther rulemaking, approval for the use ofalternative methods that simulate the loaded conditions ofinservice use. All PCBs removed from this equipment for purposes ofreducing PCB concentrations are subject to the disposal requirements of § 761.60.

(vi) Any dielectric fluid containing 50
ppm orgreaterPCB used for servicing electromagnets. switches, orvoltage regulators mustbe stored in accordance with the storage for disposal requirements of§ 761.65.

(vii) Processing and distribution in

commerce ofPCBs for purposes of servicing electromagnets, switches or voltage regulators is permitted only for
persons who are granted an exemption underTSCA 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 capacitoris 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 orwalled-in facility that restricts public access andis used in the transmission or distribution of electric power. A contained and restricted-access indoorinstallation does nothave public access and has an adequate roof, walls, and floor to contain any release ofPCBs within the indoorlocation.

(2) IReserved] (m) 

### Use in andservicing of circuit breakers,reclosers andcable. PCBs at any concentration may be used in circuit breakers, reclosers, and cable and may be used for purposes ofservicing this electrical equipment (including rebuilding) for the remainder oftheir 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 SubpartD is revised to read as follows:

(4) PCB-ContaminatedElectrical

. Equipment. All PCB-Contaminated

. Electrical Equipmentexcept capacitors shall be disposed ofby draining all free

(c) * * * (1) All PCB Transformers not marked underparagraph (a) ofthis section [marking ofPCB-Contaminated Electrical Equipment is notrequired];

(iii) Any PCB Large High orLow

.... Voltage Capacitorwhich contains 500 ppm orgreaterPCBs. ownedby any person. shall be disposed ofin accordance with eitherofthe following: 

### • * • * • *

** 

### *

** *.



### * *

(c)* * *

(2) Non-leaking and structurally undamaged PCB Large High Voltage Capacitors and PCB-Contaminated Electrical Equipment thathave notbeen drained offree flowing dielectric fluid may be stored on pallets next to a storage facility that meets the requirements ofparagraph (b) ofthis section. PCB-ContaminatedElectrical Equipment thathas been drained offree 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 ormixtures

are added to the container. This

common container option does not permit dilution ofthe collected oil. Mineral oil that is assumed orknown to contain at least 50 ppmPCBs 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, orcable is

.- collected in a common containerwith dielectric fluid from otheroil-filled electrical equipment, the entire contents ofthe containermustbe treated as PCBs
at a concentration ofatleast 50 ppm, unless all ofthe fluid from the otheroilfilled electrical equipmenthas been tested and shown to contain less than 50
ppmPCBs.

(ii) Forpurposes ofcomplying 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 ifany PCBs at a concentration of 500 ppm orgreaterhavebeen added to the containerorequipment then the total containercontents must be considered as having a PCB concentration of500 ppm orgreaterfor
purposes ofcomplying with the disposal requirements ofthis subpart. For
purposes ofthis subparagraph, representative samples ofmineral 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 ofPCBs**const~tute** the disposal ofPCBs.

(2) PCBs resulting from the clean-up and removal ofspills, leaks, or other uncontrolled discharges, must be stored and disposed ofin accordance with paragraph (a) ofthis section.

(3) These regulations do not exempt any person from any actions orliability under other statutory authorities. including butnotlimited to the Clean WaterAct, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of1980.

(g) Testingprocedures. (1) Owners or

users ofmineral oil dielectric fluid electrical equipment may use the following procedures to determine the concentration ofPCBs in the dielectric fluid:

(i) Dielectric fluid removed from mineral oil dielectric fluid electrical flowing liquid from the electrical equipment and disposing ofthe liquid in accordance with paragraph (a)(2) or (3) ofthis section. The disposal ofthe drained electrical equipment is not regulated by this rule. Capacitors that containbetween 50 and 500 ppm PCBs shall be disposed ofin an incinerator that complies with § 761.70 orin a chemical waste landfill that complies with § 761.75.

(5) OtherPCBArticles. (i) PCB Articles with a PCB concentration of500
ppm orgreatermust 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 ofin an incinerator that complies with § 761.70.

(ii) PCB Articles with a PCB concentration between 50 and 500 ppm must be disposed ofby draining all free flowing liquid from the article and disposing ofthe liquid in accordance with paragraph (a)(2) or (3) ofthis section. The disposal ofthe drained article is notregulated by this rule.

(6) Storage of PCBArticles. Except for

a PCB Article described in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) ofthis section and hydraulic machines that comply with the municipal solid waste disposal provisions described in paragraph (b)(3) ofthis 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 ofparagraph (a)(2), paragraph (b)(2)(i), the Introductory text ofparagraph (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-ContaminatedElectrical Equipment containing a PCB concentration of50
ppm orgreater, but less than 500 ppm, mustbe disposed ofin one ofthe following:

(b) * * * (2) PCB Capacitors. (i) The disposal of
any capacitor shall comply with all requirements ofthis subpartunless it is known from label ornameplate information. manufacturer's literature (including documented communications with the manufacturer), orchemical analysis that the capacitordoes 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 ofdistribution in commerce ifnot already marked, and
at the time ofremoval from use ifnot already marked. [Marking ofPCBContaminated 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 ofthp volume ofcapacitors 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 ufMay 6. 1982 (47 FR 19527) is correctly redesignated 

### as § 761.180 in Subpart

### J.

IFR Uur 82-23284 Filed 6-24-82' 8:45 ,linI

BILLING CODE 656o-50-M