58730 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 761 

[EPA–HQ–OLEM–2021–0556; FRL–7122– 

02–OLEM] 

RIN 2050–AH08 

Alternate PCB Extraction Methods and 

Amendments to PCB Cleanup and 

Disposal Regulations 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA or the Agency) proposes to 

expand the available options for 

extraction and determinative methods 

used to characterize and verify the 

cleanup of polychlorinated biphenyls 

(PCBs) waste under the federal Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA) 

regulations (also referred to as the PCB 

regulations). These proposed changes 

are expected to greatly reduce the 

amount of solvent used in PCB 

extraction processes, thereby conserving 

resources and reducing waste. In 

addition, the proposed changes are 

expected to result in quicker, more 

efficient, and less costly cleanups, due 

to greater flexibility in the cleanup and 

disposal of PCB waste, while still being 

equally protective of human health and 

the environment. EPA also proposes 

several other amendments to the PCB 

regulations, including the amendment 

of performance-based disposal option 

for PCB remediation waste; the removal 

of the provision allowing PCB bulk 

product waste to be disposed as roadbed 

material; the addition of more flexible 

provisions for cleanup and disposal of 

waste generated by spills that occur 

during emergency situations (e.g., 

hurricanes or floods); harmonizing the 

general disposal requirements for PCB 

remediation waste; and making other 

amendments to improve the 

implementation of the regulations, 

clarify ambiguity and correct technical 

errors. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 21, 2021. Under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 

comments on the information collection 

provisions are best assured of 

consideration if the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

receives a copy of your comments on or 

before November 22, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OLEM–2021–0556, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Do not submit electronically 

any information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information or 

other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. 

• Mail: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, 

OLEM Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery: To make special 

arrangements for hand delivery or 

delivery of boxed information, please 

follow the instructions at https://

www.epa.gov/dockets/where-sendcomments-epa-dockets. 

Additional instructions on 

commenting or visiting the docket, 

along with more information about 

dockets generally, is available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information regarding specific 

aspects of this document, contact 

Jennifer McLeod, Program 

Implementation and Information 

Division, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery, (703) 308– 

8459; email address: mcleod.jennifer@

epa.gov, or Karen Swetland-Johnson, 

Program Implementation and 

Information Division, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery, (703) 308– 

8421; email address: swetlandjohnson.karen@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

This proposed rule potentially affects 

persons that manufacture, process, 

distribute in commerce, use, or dispose 

of PCBs. The following list of North 

American Industrial Classification 

System (NAICS) codes is not intended 

to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 

guide to help readers determine whether 

this document applies to them. 

Potentially affected entities may 

include: 

• Utilities: Electric power and light 

companies, natural gas companies 

(NAICS code 22); 

• Manufacturers: Chemical 

manufacturers, electroindustry 

manufacturers, end-users of electricity, 

general contractors (NAICS codes 31– 

33); 

• Transportation and Warehousing: 

Various modes of transportation 

including air, rail, water, ground, and 

pipeline (NAICS code 48–49); 

• Real Estate: People who rent, lease, 

or sell commercial property (NAICS 

code 53); 

• Professional, Scientific and 

Technical Services: Testing laboratories, 

environmental consulting (NAICS code 

54); 

• Public Administration: Federal, 

state, and local agencies (NAICS code 

92); 

• Waste Management and 

Remediation Services: PCB waste 

handlers (e.g., storage facilities, 

landfills, incinerators), waste treatment 

and disposal, remediation services, 

material recovery facilities, waste 

transporters (NAICS code 562); 

• Repair and Maintenance: Repair 

and maintenance of appliances, 

machinery and equipment (NAICS code 

811); 

To determine whether your entity is 

affected by this action, you should 

carefully examine the proposed changes 

to the regulatory text. If you have 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. What action is the Agency taking? 

EPA proposes to expand the list of 

extraction and determinative methods 

in the PCB regulations (40 CFR part 

761); amend the performance-based 

cleanup option for PCB remediation 

waste under § 761.61(b); remove the 

provision allowing PCB bulk product 

waste to be disposed as roadbed 

material; add more flexible provisions 

for cleaning up spills that occur during 

emergency situations, such as during a 

hurricane or flood; harmonize the 

general disposal requirements for PCB 

remediation waste; and make several 

other amendments to improve the 

implementation of the regulations, 

clarify ambiguity, and correct technical 

errors and outdated information. In 

addition to the proposed regulatory 

changes to 40 CFR part 761 included in 

this notice, EPA has also included a 

redline mark-up of the proposed 

changes as a supporting document in 

the docket, titled Redline Version of 

Proposed Revisions to 40 CFR part 761 

(PCB Regulations; NPRM). This 

transparency will assist the public in 

visualizing what EPA is proposing to 

change in the regulatory text at 40 CFR 

part 761, by showing what is proposed 

to be added to and removed from the 

current version of the regulatory text. 

C. What is the Agency’s authority for 

taking this action? 

The authority to propose this rule is 

found in section 6(e)(1) of TSCA. 

Specifically, section 6(e)(1)(A) gives 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58731 

1Thomas, Xue, Williams, Jones, and Whitaker. 

‘‘Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in School 

Buildings: Sources, Environmental Levels, and 

Exposures’’; Office of Research and Development, 

National Exposure Laboratory; Washington, DC. 

September 2012. 

2ATSDR. Toxicological Profile for 

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); U.S. Department 

of Health and Human Services, Public Health 

Service, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 

Registry. November 2000. 

3ATSDR. Addendum to the Toxicological Profile 

for Polychlorinated Biphenyls; U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, 

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 

April 2011. 

EPA the authority to promulgate rules 

regarding the disposal of PCBs (15 

U.S.C. 2605(e)(1)(A)). 

D. What are the overall economic 

impacts of this action? 

EPA estimated the costs and benefits 

of the proposed rule in an Economic 

Assessment, which is available in the 

docket for this action. Overall, EPA 

estimates that the proposed rule would 

result in quantifiable annual cost 

savings of approximately $13.5 million 

to $15.2 million (annualized at a 

discount rate of seven percent). 

E. What is the scope of this proposed 

rule? 

This proposed rule addresses several 

key issues related to implementing the 

PCB Cleanup and Disposal Program 

under TSCA, including: 

Expand Available Extraction Methods 

EPA proposes to add the following 

extraction methods from SW–846, Test 

Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, to 

the PCB regulations in 40 CFR part 761 

for use on solid matrices: Method 3541 

(Automated Soxhlet Extraction), Method 

3545A (Pressurized Fluid Extraction), 

and Method 3546 (Microwave 

Extraction). EPA is also proposing to 

add the following aqueous extraction 

methods to the PCB regulations: Method 

3510C (Separatory Funnel LiquidLiquid Extraction), Method 3520C 

(Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction), 

and Method 3535A (Solid-Phase 

Extraction). The Agency is proposing to 

incorporate by reference Methods 3541, 

3545A, 3546, 3510C, 3520C, and 3535A 

into § 761.19. 

Remove Ultrasonic Extraction 

EPA proposes to remove SW–846 

Method 3550B (Ultrasonic extraction) 

from the PCB regulations in 40 CFR part 

761. 

Add Determinative Methods 

EPA proposes to add three 

determinative methods to the PCB 

regulations: SW–846 Method 8082A 

(Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) By 

Gas Chromatography); 8275A 

(Semivolatile Organic Compounds 

(PAHs And PCBs) In Soils/Sludges And 

Solid Wastes Using Thermal Extraction/ 

Gas Chromatography/Mass 

Spectrometry (TE/GC/MS)); and Clean 

Water Act (CWA) Method 1668C 

(Chlorinated Biphenyl Congeners in 

Water, Soil, Sediment, Biosolids, and 

Tissue by HRGC/HRMS). 

Amend the Performance-Based Disposal 

Option Under § 761.61(b) 

EPA proposes to amend the 

performance-based disposal option for 

PCB remediation waste under 

§ 761.61(b) to include provisions for 

performance-based cleanup such as 

applicability, cleanup levels, 

verification sampling, recordkeeping 

and notification requirements. EPA is 

also proposing to add RCRA Subtitle C 

permitted landfills to the list of 

allowable performance-based disposal 

options for non-liquid PCB remediation 

waste. 

Remove Regulatory Provision Allowing 

Disposal of PCB Bulk Product Waste as 

Roadbed 

EPA proposes to remove the option in 

§ 761.62(d)(2), which allows for disposal 

of PCB bulk product waste under 

asphalt as part of a roadbed. 

Add Flexible Provisions for Emergency 

Situations 

EPA proposes to add two provisions 

to the existing PCB Spill Cleanup Policy 

in 40 CFR part 761, subpart G, that 

would allow for more flexible 

requirements for cleanup of spills 

caused by and managed in emergency 

situations, such as hurricane or floods. 

Additionally, EPA is proposing to add 

provisions to allow individuals to 

request a waiver from specific 

requirements of §§ 761.60, 761.61, 

761.62, and 761.65, when necessitated 

by an emergency situation. 

Harmonize General Disposal 

Requirements for PCB Remediation 

Waste 

EPA proposes to amend 

§ 761.50(b)(3)(ii) to remove a phrase that 

was added erroneously in 1998, which 

could imply that waste with <50 ppm 

PCBs that met the definition of PCB 

remediation waste in § 761.3 was not 

regulated for disposal. 

Make Changes To Improve Regulatory 

Implementation 

EPA proposes several supplemental 

amendments to improve 

implementation of existing 

requirements, clarify regulatory 

ambiguity and correct technical errors 

in the PCB regulations. 

More information on each of the 

above proposed changes can be found in 

Section III, Detailed Discussion of the 

Proposed Rule. 

II. Background 

A. General Background on 

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and 

This Rulemaking 

What are PCBs? 

PCBs are a group of man-made 

organic chemicals known as chlorinated 

hydrocarbons, which consist of carbon, 

hydrogen and chlorine atoms. PCBs 

were manufactured in the United States 

from 1929 until fabrication was banned 

in 1979. (As allowed by TSCA, the PCB 

regulations provide for excluded 

manufacturing processes, as defined in 

40 CFR 761.3, which include 

inadvertent generation.) The number of 

chlorine atoms and their location in a 

PCB molecule determine many of its 

physical and chemical properties. PCBs 

have no known taste or smell, and range 

in consistency from thin, light-colored 

liquids to yellow or black waxy solids. 

Due to their non-flammability, chemical 

stability, high boiling point and 

electrical insulating properties, PCBs 

were previously used in hundreds of 

industrial and commercial applications 

including: Electrical, heat transfer and 

hydraulic equipment; plasticizers in 

paints, plastics and rubber products; 

pigments, dyes and carbonless copy 

paper; and other industrial applications. 

The PCBs used in these products were 

chemical mixtures made up of a variety 

of individual chlorinated biphenyl 

components known as congeners. Most 

commercial PCB mixtures are known in 

the United States by their industrial 

trade names, the most common being 

Aroclor. Please visit: https://

www.epa.gov/pcbs/learn-aboutpolychlorinated-biphenyls-pcbs for 

more information. 

PCB Exposures and Health Effects 123

PCBs are persistent in the 

environment and can cause both acute 

and chronic health effects. Short-term 

exposure to high concentrations of PCBs 

can lead to skin conditions such as acne 

and rashes and may be associated with 

decreased liver function, neurological 

effects and gastrointestinal effects. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58732 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

4https://www.epa.gov/hw-sw846. 5https://www.epa.gov/cwa-methods. 

These high levels of exposure are 

generally rare in the general population. 

Chronic exposure to lower 

concentrations of PCBs may also cause 

health effects, as PCBs can accumulate 

in people over time. In animal studies, 

PCBs have been shown to cause effects 

on the immune, reproductive, nervous, 

hepatic and endocrine systems. PCBs 

have also been shown to cause cancer in 

animals. Some studies in humans 

provide supportive evidence for some of 

these health effects. Studies also show 

that PCBs in pregnant women can affect 

their children’s birth weight, short-term 

memory and learning. Also, because of 

potential neurotoxic and endocrine 

effects, there is concern regarding 

children’s exposures to PCBs. 

PCBs are highly persistent in the 

environment. As such, they are still 

present in soils and sediments at many 

locations and may be found at low 

levels in ambient air and water, even 

decades after banning them. PCBs can 

be released into the environment from 

hazardous waste sites, illegal or 

improper disposal of industrial wastes 

and consumer products, leaks from old 

electrical transformers and capacitors 

containing PCBs and burning of some 

wastes in incinerators, among other 

sources. PCBs bioaccumulate and may 

be present in foods that people 

consume, such as fish, meat and dairy 

products. Dietary consumption of 

contaminated foods is believed to be an 

important route of background 

exposure. 

Laws and Regulations 

This proposed rule is issued pursuant 

to section 6(e) of the Toxic Substances 

Control Act, 15 U.S.C. 2605(e). Section 

6(e)(1)(A) gives EPA the authority to 

promulgate rules regarding the disposal 

of PCBs (15 U.S.C. 2605(e)(1)(A)). TSCA 

section 6(e)(2) and (e)(3) generally 

prohibit the manufacture, processing, 

distribution in commerce and use (other 

than totally enclosed use) of PCBs (15 

U.S.C. 2605(e)(2) and (e)(3)). TSCA 

section 6(e)(2)(B) gives EPA the 

authority to authorize the use of PCBs 

in other than a totally enclosed manner 

based on a finding of no unreasonable 

risk of injury to health or the 

environment (15 U.S.C. 2605(e)(2)(B)). 

TSCA section 6(e)(3)(B) provides that 

any person may petition EPA for an 

exemption from the prohibition on the 

manufacture, processing, and 

distribution in commerce of PCBs (15 

U.S.C. 2605(e)(3)(B)). EPA may grant an 

exemption based on findings that an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment will not result, and 

that the petitioner has made good faith 

efforts to develop a substitute for PCBs. 

The implementing PCB regulations 

can be found in title 40 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) in part 761. 

For useful interpretations of the 

regulations as well as answers to 

frequently asked questions please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/pcbs/policy-andguidance-polychlorinated-biphenylpcbs. 

Rationale for Updating Portions of the 

PCB Regulations 

Several developments have occurred 

in recent years to warrant an update to 

portions of the PCB regulations, 

including: The emergence of new 

science, advancement of analytical 

methods and technology, new 

information, and repeated requests from 

the regulated community to address 

their concerns and areas of confusion. 

EPA is thus proposing several 

revisions to the PCB regulations to 

better reflect current science and other 

available new information. This 

rulemaking is expected to ease 

regulatory burden and costs on the 

regulated community and on EPA by 

providing greater flexibility while 

maintaining environmental 

protectiveness in the allowable 

extraction and determinative methods 

used to characterize and verify the 

cleanup of PCB waste. This rulemaking 

is also expected to ease regulatory 

burden by improving the 

implementation of the regulations, 

clarifying ambiguity and correcting 

technical errors. 

B. Assumptions and Terminology Used

in Discussion of Various Methods

Sources of the Methods 

There are two important sources of 

EPA methods related to this rulemaking. 

The first source is SW–846, also known 

as The Test Methods for Evaluating 

Solid Waste: Physical/Chemical 

Methods Compendium, which is EPA’s 

collection of methods for use in 

complying with the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). 

SW–846 is organized into chapters 

providing guidance on how to use the 

methods and groups of methods, called 

‘‘series,’’ which are organized by topic. 

The methods change over time as 

updates are published to keep up with 

evolving analytical and measurement 

needs.4 The second source is the Clean 

Water Act (CWA) Methods, which are 

EPA published laboratory methods, or 

test procedures that are used by 

industries and municipalities, to 

analyze the chemical, physical and 

biological components of wastewater 

and other environmental samples.5

Methods for both SW–846 and CWA go 

through an extensive review and 

validation process before they are made 

available. 

Terminology of the Methods 

EPA would like to avoid confusion 

with the variety of methods discussed, 

the source of each method, and the 

numbering of the methods. EPA will use 

streamlined nomenclature in this 

preamble to improve its readability. For 

example, rather than stating, ‘‘SW–846, 

Test Methods for Evaluating Solid 

Waste, EPA Method 3540C (Soxhlet 

Extraction),’’ EPA will only state 

‘‘Method 3540C’’. This terminology 

applies to all subsequent sections in this 

preamble. See Table 1 for a 

comprehensive list of all methods 

referenced in this document. 

TABLE 1—TABLE OF METHODS DISCUSSED IN THIS RULEMAKING

Source Method ID Publication 

year Method type Method name Proposed change 

SW–846 .... Method 3510C ...... 1996 Extraction ...... Separatory Funnel Liquid-Liquid Extraction Propose to Add. 

SW–846 .... Method 3520C ...... 1996 Extraction ...... Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction ............ Propose to Add. 

SW–846 .... Method 3535A ...... 2007 Extraction ...... Solid-Phase Extraction (SPE) ..................... Propose to Add. 

SW–846 .... Method 3500B ...... 2007 Extraction ...... Organic Extraction and Sample Preparation Propose to Remove Reference to Method. 

SW–846 .... Method 3540C ...... 1996 Extraction ...... Soxhlet Extraction ....................................... Remains in regulations. 

SW–846 .... Method 3541 ......... 1994 Extraction ...... Automated Soxhlet Extraction ..................... Propose to Add. 

SW–846 .... Method 3545A ...... 2007 Extraction ...... Pressurized Fluid Extraction ....................... Propose to Add. 

SW–846 .... Method 3546 ......... 2007 Extraction ...... Microwave Extraction .................................. Propose to Add. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58733 

6Allison D. Foley ‘‘Consolidated Petition on 

Behalf of USWAG Members to Use Automated 

Soxhlet Extraction (Method 3541) in Connection 

with June 10, 2014 Risk-Based Approvals to 

Dispose of Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) 

Remediation Waste’’; March 2015. 7M.D. Luque de Castro, L.E. Garcı ́a-Ayuso. 

‘‘Soxhlet extraction of solid materials: An outdated 

technique with a promising innovative future.’’ 

Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of 

Sciences, University of Cordoba. Cordoba, Spain. 

March 1998. 

8U.S. EPA, Method 3541 Automated Soxhlet 

Extraction. Office of Land and Emergency 

Management, Office of Resource Conservation and 

Recovery, Materials Recovery and Waste 

Management Division (5303P). Washington, DC. 

EPA–820–R–10–004. September 1994. 

9U.S. EPA, Method 3545A Pressurized Fluid 

Extraction. Office of Land and Emergency 

Management, Office of Resource Conservation and 

Recovery, Materials Recovery and Waste 

Management Division (5303P). Washington, DC. 

EPA–820–R–10–004. January 1998. 

10U.S. EPA, Method 3546 Microwave Extraction. 

Office of Land and Emergency Management, Office 

of Resource Conservation and Recovery, Materials 

Recovery and Waste Management Division (5303P). 

Washington, DC. EPA–820–R–10–004. February 

2007. 

11U.S. EPA, Method 3510C Separatory Funnel 

Liquid-Liquid Extraction. Office of Land and 

Emergency Management, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery, Materials Recovery and 

Waste Management Division (5303P). Washington, 

DC. December 1996. 

12U.S. EPA, Method 3520C Continuous LiquidLiquid Extraction. Office of Land and Emergency 

Management, Office of Resource Conservation and 

Recovery, Materials Recovery and Waste 

Management Division (5303P). Washington, DC. 

December 1996. 

13U.S. EPA, Method 3535A Solid-Phase 

Extraction. Office of Land and Emergency 

Management, Office of Resource Conservation and 

Recovery, Materials Recovery and Waste 

Management Division (5303P). Washington, DC. 

February 2007. 

TABLE 1—TABLE OF METHODS DISCUSSED IN THIS RULEMAKING—Continued 

Source Method ID Publication 

year Method type Method name Proposed change 

SW–846 .... Method 3550B ...... 1996 Extraction ...... Ultrasonic Extraction ................................... Propose to Remove. 

SW–846 .... Method 8082 ......... 1996 Determinative Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) by Gas 

Chromatography.

Remains in regulations. 

SW–846 .... Method 8082A ...... 2007 Determinative Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) by Gas 

Chromatography.

Propose to Add. 

SW–846 .... Method 8275A ...... 1996 Extraction and 

Determinative.

Semivolatile Organic Compounds in Soil/ 

Sludges and Solid Wastes Using Thermal Extraction/Gas Chromatography/ 

Mass Spectrometry (TE/GC/MS).

Propose to Add. 

CWA ......... Method 1668C ...... 2010 Extraction and 

Determinative.

Chlorinated Biphenyl Congeners in Water, 

Soil, Sediment, Biosolids, and Tissue by 

HRGC/HRMS.

Propose to Add. 

III. Detailed Discussion of the Proposed 

Rule 

A. Expand Available Extraction 

Methods for PCBs 

Background on Extraction Methods for 

PCBs 

Currently, the only extraction 

methods explicitly allowed in the PCB 

regulations for solid matrices are 

Method 3540C (Soxhlet Extraction), 

which is commonly referred to as 

‘Manual Soxhlet Extraction,’ and 

Method 3550B (Ultrasonic Extraction). 

The regulated community has long 

expressed interest in the availability of 

extraction methods at cleanup sites 

beyond those currently allowed under 

the PCB regulations.6 The data on 

Method 3550B indicate that it has the 

potential to produce unreliable and 

inconsistent results. For more 

information on this issue, see Section 

III.B. Remove Ultrasonic Extraction 

(Method 3550B) from the PCB 

Regulations. Manual Soxhlet Extraction 

was invented in the late 1800s and the 

original Method 3540C was created in 

1996. It is a long-standing, effective 

method for PCBs; however, over time it 

has slowly been replaced by newer 

methods in both EPA and commercial 

laboratories.7 This transition has caused 

problems with the availability of 

Manual Soxhlet Extraction in EPA and 

commercial laboratories, which could 

potentially cause delays in getting 

samples extracted and analyzed in a 

timely matter. In addition, Manual 

Soxhlet Extraction takes 16–24 hours 

(whereas other methods may take only 

2–4 hours, or less) to complete the 

extraction of a limited number of 

samples, which could result in further 

delays. 

Although the PCB regulations 

explicitly allow these extraction 

methods, neither of these methods are 

applicable to PCB extraction of aqueous 

samples. Method 8082 is currently the 

only determinative method listed in the 

PCB regulations for extraction from 

aqueous matrices and states that 

‘‘[a]queous samples may be extracted at 

neutral pH with methylene chloride 

using either Method 3510 (separatory 

funnel), Method 3520 (continuous 

liquid-liquid extraction), Method 3535A 

(solid-phase extraction) or other 

appropriate technique or solvents.’’ 

EPA proposes to add the following 

extraction methods to the 40 CFR part 

761 regulations: Method 3541 8

(Automated Soxhlet Extraction), Method 

3545A 9 (Pressurized Fluid Extraction), 

and Method 3546 10 (Microwave 

Extraction) for extraction of PCBs from 

solid matrices; and Method 3510C11

(Separatory Funnel Liquid-Liquid 

Extraction), Method 3520C12

(Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction), 

and Method 3535A 13 (Solid-Phase 

Extraction) for extraction of PCBs from 

aqueous matrices. EPA is also proposing 

to add determinative methods to the 

PCB regulations at 40 CFR part 761 (see 

Section III.C. Proposed Updates to 

Determinative Methods for PCBs). 

Although not explicitly allowable at this 

time for determining PCB 

concentrations for purposes of the PCB 

disposal and cleanup regulations, these 

methods are already widely used in 

both EPA and commercial laboratories 

for PCB extraction under other cleanup 

programs, such as cleanups under the 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) and state-led cleanups. 

These methods are as accurate as and 

offer several significant benefits over 

Manual Soxhlet Extraction, including 

quicker sample processing time (a few 

hours or less compared to 16–24 hours), 

less need for physical space for 

equipment, reduced solvent use and 

energy savings. Because of these 

advantages, most EPA and commercial 

labs already use these Methods for 

extracting PCBs from samples. EPA 

finds, based on reasonably available 

information, that expanding the options 

for alternative extraction methods in the 

PCB regulations would help the 

regulated community investigate, clean 

up and dispose of PCB waste more 

quickly, efficiently, and economically, 

with results that are as accurate as or 

more accurate than the results using 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58734 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

14https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/ 

2015-10/documents/oswer_greencleanup_

principles.pdf. 

3540C. Furthermore, the use of less 

solvent during the extraction procedure 

would advance Agency priorities on the 

use of greener technologies in cleanup 

and disposal actions.14

Therefore, EPA proposes to add 

several additional extraction methods to 

the PCB Regulations, which will allow 

for more flexibility in the allowable 

extraction methods. See the following 

section for more information on EPA’s 

proposed extraction methods. 

Technical Summary of Relevant 

Extraction Methods 

EPA Method 3540C: Soxhlet 

Extraction (aka Manual Soxhlet 

Extraction) is currently the primary 

extraction method used under the PCB 

regulations. When performing a Manual 

Soxhlet Extraction, the solid sample is 

mixed with anhydrous sodium sulfate, 

placed in an extraction thimble or 

between two plugs of glass wool, and 

extracted using an appropriate solvent 

in a Soxhlet extractor. The extract is 

then dried, concentrated (if necessary) 

and exchanged into a solvent 

compatible with the cleanup or 

determinative step being employed (if 

necessary). For certain types of matrices, 

such as non-liquid manufactured 

materials, this method may be the most 

suitable option to ensure effective 

extraction of PCBs for quantitative 

analysis. 

EPA Method 3550B: Ultrasonic 

Extraction (UE) is a method currently 

permissible in the PCB regulations that 

can be used to extract PCBs from solids, 

such as soils, sludges and wastes. There 

are two procedures in the method 

depending on the expected 

concentration of organic compounds. 

Under the low concentration procedure, 

the sample is mixed with anhydrous 

sodium sulfate to form a free-flowing 

powder. The mixture is extracted with 

solvent three times, using an ultrasonic 

extractor, which uses pulsing energy to 

extract the targeted analyte. The extract 

is separated from the sample by vacuum 

filtration or centrifugation. The extract 

is then ready for final concentration, 

cleanup and/or analysis. Under the 

medium/high concentration procedure, 

the sample is mixed with anhydrous 

sodium sulfate to form a free-flowing 

powder. The sample is extracted with 

solvent once, using ultrasonic 

extraction. A portion of the extract is 

then collected for cleanup and/or 

analysis. Because of the limited contact 

time between the solvent and the 

sample, Ultrasonic Extraction may not 

be as rigorous as other extraction 

methods for soils/solids. Therefore, it is 

critical that the method (including the 

manufacturer’s instructions) be followed 

exactly, to achieve the maximum 

extraction efficiency. 

EPA is proposing to add EPA Method 

3546: Microwave Extraction to the PCB 

regulations. This method is known for 

its relatively brief extraction time and 

low equipment costs. In a microwave 

extraction, a sample is prepared for 

extraction by grinding it to a powder 

and then loading it into the extraction 

vessel. The appropriate solvent system 

is added to the vessel, which is then 

sealed. The extraction vessel containing 

the sample and solvent system is then 

heated to the extraction temperature and 

is extracted for the amount of time 

recommended by the instrument 

manufacturer. After the mixture cools, 

the vessel is opened and the contents 

are filtered. The solid material is then 

rinsed multiple times, and the various 

solvent fractions are combined. Finally, 

the extract may be concentrated, if 

necessary, and, as needed, exchanged 

into a solvent compatible with the 

cleanup or determinative procedure to 

be employed. 

EPA is also proposing to add EPA 

Method 3545A: Pressurized Fluid 

Extraction (PFE) to the PCB Regulations. 

When performing a pressurized fluid 

extraction, a sample is prepared for 

extraction either by air drying the 

sample, or by mixing the sample with 

anhydrous sodium sulfate or pelletized 

diatomaceous earth. The sample is then 

ground and loaded into an extraction 

cell. The extraction cell containing the 

ground sample is then heated to the 

extraction temperature, pressurized 

with the appropriate solvent system, 

and extracted for the period of time 

recommended by the instrument 

manufacturer. The solvent is then 

collected from the heated extraction 

vessel and allowed to cool. Finally, the 

extract may be concentrated, if 

necessary, and, as needed, exchanged 

into a solvent compatible with the 

cleanup or determinative step being 

employed. 

EPA Method 3541: Automated 

Soxhlet Extraction would also become 

permissible for PCB extraction under 

this proposed rule. This method shares 

many similarities with Manual Soxhlet 

Extraction (EPA Method 3540C); 

however, it takes less time and solvent 

per sample. When performing an 

Automated Soxhlet Extraction, a moist 

solid sample (e.g., soil/sediment 

samples) may be air-dried and ground 

prior to extraction or chemically dried 

with anhydrous sodium sulfate. The 

prepared sample is then extracted using 

1:1 acetone: Hexane in the automated 

Soxhlet system. 

EPA is proposing to add EPA Method 

3510C: Separatory Funnel Liquid-Liquid 

Extraction to the PCB Regulations. This 

method describes a procedure for 

isolating organic compounds from 

aqueous samples. The method also 

describes concentration techniques 

suitable for preparing the extract for the 

appropriate determinative methods. A 

measured volume of sample, usually 1 

liter, at a specified pH, is serially 

extracted with methylene chloride using 

a separatory funnel. The extract is dried, 

concentrated (if necessary), and, as 

necessary, exchanged into a solvent 

compatible with the cleanup or 

determinative method to be used. 

EPA is also proposing to add EPA 

Method 3520C: Continuous LiquidLiquid Extraction to the PCB 

Regulations. This method describes a 

procedure for isolating organic 

compounds from aqueous samples. The 

method also describes concentration 

techniques suitable for preparing the 

extract for the appropriate determinative 

steps. Method 3520 is designed for 

extraction solvents with greater density 

than the sample. A measured volume of 

sample, usually 1 liter, is placed into a 

continuous liquid-liquid extractor, 

adjusted, if necessary, to a specific pH, 

and extracted with organic solvent for 

18–24 hours. The extract is dried, 

concentrated (if necessary), and, as 

necessary, exchanged into a solvent 

compatible with the cleanup or 

determinative method being employed. 

EPA is also proposing to add EPA 

Method 3535A: Solid-Phase Extraction 

(SPE) to the PCB Regulations. This is a 

procedure for isolating target organic 

analytes from aqueous samples using 

solid-phase extraction (SPE) media. It 

describes conditions for extracting a 

variety of organic compounds from 

aqueous matrices that include 

groundwater, wastewater, and Toxicity 

Characteristic Leaching Procedure 

(TCLP) leachates. The extraction 

procedures are specific to the analytes 

of interest and vary by group of analytes 

and type of extraction media. 

What is EPA proposing for allowable 

extraction methods for PCBs? 

As stated above, EPA proposes to add 

the following extraction methods to the 

40 CFR part 761 regulations: Method 

3541 (Automated Soxhlet Extraction), 

Method 3545A (Pressurized Fluid 

Extraction), and Method 3546 

(Microwave Extraction) for extraction of 

PCBs from solid matrices; and Method 

3510C (Separatory Funnel LiquidLiquid Extraction), Method 3520C 

(Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction), 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58735 

15Stewart, J. ‘‘Intra-Laboratory Recovery Data for 

the PCB Extraction Procedure’’; Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, 37831–6138; October 

1981. 

16U.S. EPA, Method 8082A Polychlorinated 

Biphenyls (PCBs) by Gas Chromatography. Office of 

Land and Emergency Management, Office of 

Resource Conservation and Recovery, Materials 

Recovery and Waste Management Division (5303P). 

Washington, DC EPA–820–R–10–004. February 

2007. 

17B. Richter, Ezzell, J., and Felix, D., ‘‘Single 

Laboratory Method Validation Report. Extraction of 

TCL/PPL (Target Compound List/Priority Pollutant 

List) OPPs, Chlorinated Herbicides and PCBs using 

Accelerated Solvent Extraction (ASE).’’ Document 

101124, Dionex Corporation, December 2, 1994). 

18 George, R. Ph.D., Johnston, R. Ph.D. ‘‘Chemical 

Analysis of Non-Liquid PCBs in Shipboard Solid 

Materials: Extraction Methods Comparison.’’ 

Marine Environmental Support Office–NW, 

Environmental Sciences Branch, January 31, 2008). 

19Osemwengie, L. and Morgan, J., ‘‘PCBs in Older 

Buildings: Measuring PCB Levels in Caulk and 

Window Glazing Materials in Older Buildings.’’ 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National 

Exposure Research Laboratory, Exposure Methods 

and Measurement Division, January 31, 2019). 

20 K. Li, J.M.R. Be ́langer, M.P. Llompart, R.D. 

Turpin, R. Singhvi, and J.R.J. Pare ́, ‘‘Final 

Evaluation of U.S. EPA Method 3546: Microwave 

Extraction, a Microwave Assisted Process (MAPTM) 

Method for the Extraction of Contaminants Under 

Closed-Vessel Conditions,’’ Soil and Sediment 

Contamination, 10 (4), 375–386 (2001). 

and Method 3535A (Solid-Phase 

Extraction) for extraction of PCBs from 

aqueous matrices. EPA is also proposing 

to add Clean Water Act (CWA) Method 

1668C to the PCB regulations. Since it 

includes both extraction and 

determinative steps, the discussion of 

this method is found in Section III.C. 

Proposed Updates to Determinative 

Methods for PCBs. EPA is proposing to 

allow these methods for use, as 

applicable, under the following subparts 

of 40 CFR part 761: Subpart D—Storage 

and Disposal; Subpart K—PCB Waste 

Disposal Records and Reports; Subpart 

M—Determining a PCB Concentration 

for Purposes of Abandonment or 

Disposal of Natural Gas Pipeline: 

Selecting Sites, Collecting Surface 

Samples, and Analyzing Standard PCB 

Wipe Samples; Subpart N—Cleanup 

Site Characterization Sampling for PCB 

Remediation Waste in Accordance with 

§ 761.61(a)(2); Subpart O—Sampling to 

Verify Completion of Self-Implementing 

Cleanup and On-Site Disposal of Bulk 

PCB Remediation Waste and Porous 

Surfaces in Accordance with 

§ 761.61(a)(6); Subpart P—Sampling 

Non-Porous Surfaces for MeasurementBased Use, Reuse, and On-site or OffSite Disposal Under § 761.61(a)(6) and 

Determination Under § 761.79(b)(3); 

Subpart R—Sampling Non-Liquid, NonMetal PCB Bulk Product Waste for 

Purposes of Characterization for PCB 

Disposal in Accordance With § 761.62, 

and Sampling PCB Remediation Waste 

Destined for Off-Site Disposal, in 

Accordance With § 761.61; and Subpart 

T—Comparison Study for Validating a 

New Performance-Based 

Decontamination Solvent under 

§ 761.79(d)(4). These proposed 

modifications to the 40 CFR part 761 

regulations can be found in the 

regulatory language section towards the 

end of this notice; the specific sections 

of the 40 CFR part 761 regulations with 

these proposed changes include: 

§§ 761.61(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iv), 761.253, 

761.272, 761.292, 761.358, and 761.395. 

EPA’s proposal to add Methods 3541, 

3545A and 3546 to the PCB regulations 

for extraction of PCBs from solid 

matrices is based on several factors 

including: Applicability of the method 

to PCBs, frequency of use in EPA and 

commercial laboratories and existing 

data supporting the effectiveness of the 

methods. 

EPA proposes to add Method 3541 

(Automated Soxhlet Extraction) to the 

PCB regulations because this method 

has been validated and approved by 

EPA to be included in the SW–846 

compendium of test methods for use 

with PCBs. A study titled IntraLaboratory Recovery Data for the PCB 

Extraction Procedure was performed for 

the validation of Method 3541, which 

confirms its effectiveness on soils, 

sediments, sludges and waste solids 

containing levels of 1 to 50 ppm (parts 

per million) PCBs.15 As part of this 

study, multi-laboratory accuracy and 

precision data were obtained for PCBs 

in soil. Specifically, eight laboratories 

spiked Aroclors 1254 and 1260 into 

three portions of 10 g of soil on three 

non-consecutive days followed by 

immediate extraction using Method 

3541. Six of the laboratories spiked each 

Aroclor at 5 and 50 ppm and two 

laboratories spiked each Aroclor at 50 

and 500 ppm. The data indicated that 

Method 3541 is an effective method for 

extracting PCBs, and these data are 

listed in Table 8 of Method 8082A, and 

support EPA’s decision to propose 

including Method 3541 in the PCB 

regulations.16

EPA also proposes to add Method 

3545A (Pressurized Fluid Extraction) to 

the PCB regulations because this 

method has been validated and 

approved by EPA to be included in the 

SW–846 compendium of test methods 

for use with PCBs. A study titled, Single 

Laboratory Method Validation Report. 

Extraction of TCL/PPL (Target 

Compound List/Priority Pollutant List) 

OPPs, Chlorinated Herbicides and PCBs 

using Accelerated Solvent Extraction 

(ASE), was performed for the validation 

of Method 3545A, which confirms its 

effectiveness on solid matrices 

containing 1 to 1400 ppm PCBs.17

Extractions of contaminated soil, river 

sediment, sewage sludge and oyster 

tissue were performed, and PCBs were 

spiked on Fuller’s earth (kaolin clay) to 

determine recovery levels. The overall 

average recovery of PCBs from all 

matrices demonstrated that Method 

3545A is equivalent in performance to 

Method 3540C. In addition, a 

comparison study titled, Chemical 

Analysis of Non-Liquid PCBs in 

Shipboard Solid Materials: Extraction 

Methods Comparison, was done on 

electrical cables that were previously 

found to contain elevated levels of 

PCBs.18 The results of the study 

indicated that there are generally no 

significant differences for extractions on 

shipboard solids using either Method 

3540C or Method 3545A. These 

methods provided comparable results, 

which provides additional support for 

EPA’s decision to propose including 

Method 3545A in the PCB regulations. 

Another study titled, PCBs in Older 

Buildings: Measuring PCB Levels in 

Caulk and Window Glazing Materials in 

Older Buildings, was performed on 36 

samples of caulk and glazing 

materials.19 The average percent 

recovery values for Aroclor 1254 in the 

caulk material samples in this study 

indicate how efficient Method 3545A is 

for extracting high PCB concentrations 

from caulk and glazing materials. The 

results of these three studies support 

EPA’s decision to propose including 

Method 3545A in the PCB regulations. 

EPA also proposes to add Method 

3546 (Microwave Extraction) to the PCB 

regulations because this method has 

been validated and approved by EPA to 

be included in the SW–846 

compendium of test methods for use 

with PCBs. A study titled, Final 

Evaluation of US EPA Method 3546: 

Microwave Extraction, a Microwave 

Assisted Process (MAPTM) Method for 

the Extraction of Contaminants Under 

Closed-Vessel Conditions, was 

performed for the validation of this 

method, showing that it is effective for 

soils, clays, sediments, sludges and 

solid wastes containing PCBs at levels 

between 1 to 5,000 ppb (mg/kg).20 Data 

were obtained for PCBs using sediment, 

natural soils, glass fiber and sand 

samples in spiked matrices. PCB 

concentrations varied from 0.2 to 

10 ppm, and sample extracts were 

analyzed by Method 8082A. The 

recovery data are included in Tables 

18–20 of Method 8082A. In addition, a 

study titled, Comparison of Soxhlet 

Extraction, Microwave-Assisted 

Extraction And Ultrasonic Extraction 

For The Determination Of PCBs 

Congeners In Spiked Soils By 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58736 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

21Halfadji, Ahmed; Touabet Abdelkrim; BadjahHadj-Amed, Ahmed-Yacine. Comparison of Soxhlet 

Extraction, Microwave-Assisted Extraction and 

Ultrasonic Extraction for the Determination of PCBs 

Congeners in Spiked Soils by Transformer Oil 

(Askarel). International Journal of Advances in 

Engineering & Technology. Vol. 5, Issue 2, pp. 63– 

75. Jan. 2013. 

22 Viorica Lopez-Avila, Richard Young, Janet 

Benedicto, Pauline Ho, and Robert Kim, ‘‘Extraction 

of Organic Pollutants from Solid Samples Using 

Microwave Energy,’’ Midwest Research Institute, 

California (1995). 

23Sune Sporring, S<ren B<wadt, Bo Svensmark, 

Erland Bjorklund. Comprehensive comparison of 

classic Soxhlet extraction with Soxtec extraction, 

ultrasonication extraction, supercritical fluid 

extraction, microwave assisted extraction and 

accelerated solvent extraction for the determination 

of polychlorinated biphenyls in soil. Journal of 

Chromatography. July 2005. 

24Section 1.4 of Method 3550C states, ‘‘Because 

of the limited contact time between the solvent and 

the sample, ultrasonic extraction may not be as 

rigorous as other extraction methods for soils/ 

solids. Therefore, it is critical that the method 

(including the manufacturer’s instructions) be 

followed explicitly, in order to achieve the 

maximum extraction efficiency. See Sec. 11.0 for a 

discussion of the critical aspects of the extraction 

procedure. Consult the manufacturer’s instructions 

regarding specific operational settings.’’ 

25Halfadji, Ahmed; Touabet Abdelkrim; BadjahHadj-Amed, Ahmed-Yacine. Comparison of Soxhlet 

Extraction, Microwave-Assisted Extraction and 

Ultrasonic Extraction for the Determination of PCBS 

Congeners in Spiked Soils by Transformer Oil 

(Askarel). International Journal of Advances in 

Engineering & Technology. Vol. 5, Issue 2, pp. 63– 

75. Jan. 2013. 

26McMillin, Richard; Spencer, David; Gregg, 

Diane; and Nguyen, Neal. Comparison of Five Soil 

Extraction Techniques for Pesticide and 

Semivolatile Analysis. Waste Testing and Quality 

Assurance Conference. July 1999. 

Transformer Oil (Askarel), focused on 

the variation of the extraction quantities 

for each PCB congener (29 PCBs) with 

three different extraction methods 

(Manual Soxhlet Extraction, Microwave 

Extraction, and Ultrasonic Extraction).21

The comparison made between the three 

methods showed that Microwave 

Extraction is a suitable alternative to 

Manual Soxhlet Extraction for the 

extraction of PCBs in soils, but 

Ultrasonic Extraction did not give a 

good recovery. Specifically, the recovery 

efficiency obtained from Ultrasonic 

Extraction and Microwave Extraction 

were (50.67%–78.27%) on the first 

extraction and (41.15–54.40%) on the 

second extraction, respectively (see 

Section III.B. Proposed Removal or 

Update of Ultrasonic Extraction 

(Method 3550B) from the PCB 

Regulations). Lastly, a study titled, 

Extraction of Organic Pollutants from 

Solid Samples Using Microwave Energy, 

used Method 3546 to determine the PCB 

concentration in two marine sediments, 

soil, freshly spiked topsoil, spiked and 

aged topsoil, and four soils from a 

Superfund site.22 The results for the 

performance of the method on four PCB 

Aroclors are presented in Table 3 of the 

study. The recoveries of Aroclor 1016 

and 1260 were obtained by Microwave 

Assisted Extraction (MAE) and were 

comparable to or higher than those 

achieved by the conventional extraction 

techniques (Manual Soxhlet Extraction 

and Ultrasonic Extraction). The method 

validation study and additional studies 

support EPA’s decision to propose 

including Method 3546 (Microwave 

Extraction) in the PCB regulations. 

The extraction effectiveness of 

Method 3540C (Manual Soxhlet 

Extraction), Method 3541 (Automated 

Soxhlet Extraction), Method 3545A 

(Pressurized Fluid Extraction), Method 

3546 (Microwave Extraction) and 

Method 3550B (Ultrasonic Extraction) 

on soil containing PCBs was compared 

in: Comprehensive comparison of 

classic Soxhlet extraction with Soxtec 

extraction, ultrasonication extraction, 

supercritical fluid extraction, 

microwave assisted extraction and 

accelerated solvent extraction for the 

determination of polychlorinated 

biphenyls in soil.23 An overall 

comparison among the recoveries 

obtained for the different extraction 

techniques is shown in Figure 3 of the 

study. The study concluded that most of 

the extraction techniques can provide 

accurate results (including Methods 

3541, 3545A, and 3546) when the 

extraction conditions and procedures 

are appropriately chosen. In conclusion, 

EPA finds, based on reasonably 

available information, that Methods 

3541, 3545A, and 3546 are technically 

sound methods for the extraction of 

PCBs from solid matrices and provide 

extraction results that are as accurate as 

or more accurate than the results using 

the Manual Soxhlet Extraction method 

(Method 3540C). 

For extraction of PCBs from aqueous 

matrices, EPA proposes to add Method 

3510C (Separatory Funnel LiquidLiquid Extraction), Method 3520C 

(Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction), 

and Method 3535A (Solid-Phase 

Extraction (SPE)) to the PCB regulations 

to reduce confusion about whether these 

methods (which are currently listed in 

Method 8082, the only determinative 

method currently listed in the PCB 

regulations) can be used or if an 

approval is required to use these 

methods. EPA is proposing to add these 

methods to the PCB regulations because 

they have been validated and approved 

by EPA to be included in the SW–846: 

Compendium of Test Methods and 

because they are included in Method 

8082 and 8082A as allowable extraction 

methods for aqueous matrices. EPA 

finds, based on reasonably available 

information, that Methods 3510C, 3520C 

and 3535A are technically sound 

methods for the extraction of PCBs from 

aqueous matrices and is requesting 

comment on the proposed addition of 

these methods to the PCB regulations 

under the following sections: 

§§ 761.61(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iv), 761.272, 

761.292, 761.358, and 761.395. Note 

that these aqueous methods would not 

be added to § 761.253, as it pertains to 

wipe sampling of surfaces and is not 

applicable to aqueous materials. 

EPA is requesting comment on its 

proposal to add Method 3541, Method 

3545A, and Method 3546 to the PCB 

regulations for extraction of PCBs from 

solid matrices. Additionally, EPA is 

requesting comment on adding Method 

3510C, Method 3520C and Method 

3535A to the PCB regulations for 

extraction of PCBs from aqueous 

matrices. EPA also requests the 

submission of any additional data 

regarding the use of these methods on 

samples containing PCBs. 

B. Remove Ultrasonic Extraction 

(Method 3550B) From the PCB 

Regulations 

Background on This Issue 

EPA Method 3550B (Ultrasonic 

Extraction) is a method currently 

permissible in the PCB regulations that 

can be used to extract PCBs from solids, 

such as soils, sludges and wastes. EPA 

Method 3550C (Ultrasonic Extraction) is 

an updated version of Method 3550B 

and is not currently permissible in the 

PCB Regulations. For more information 

on the technical aspects of ultrasonic 

extraction, see Section III.A.2. Technical 

Summary of Relevant Extraction 

Methods. 

The text in EPA Method 3550B and 

Method 3550C includes caveats that 

ultrasonic extraction may not be as 

rigorous as other extraction methods 

and highlights the importance of 

following the method explicitly. By 

comparison, this issue is generally not 

mentioned or highlighted in other SW– 

846 methods.24 Specifically, Method 

3550C further emphasizes, beyond what 

is stated in Method 3550B, the crucial 

importance of conducting the method 

properly, in line with the 

manufacturer’s instructions regarding 

operational settings. 

Previous studies done on the 

extraction efficiency of ultrasonic 

extraction methods have provided 

inconsistent results. Some studies have 

yielded results from ultrasonic 

extraction that were equivalent to the 

results from other extraction methods 

and, in others, ultrasonic extraction had 

a lower extraction efficiency.25 26 For 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58737 

27Erickson, M.D. Analytical Chemistry of PCBs. 

CRC Press, Inc. 1997. 28 Kimbrough, D.E., R. Chin and J. Wakakuwa. 

‘‘Industry-Wide Performance in a Pilot Performance 

Evaluation Sample Program for Hazardous 

Materials Laboratories. 1. Precision and Accuracy of 

Polychlorinated Biphenyls. Environmental Science 

Technology. Vol. 26, Issue 11, pp. 2101–2104. 1992. 

29Sune Sporring, S<ren B<wadt, Bo Svensmark, 

Erland Bjorklund. Comprehensive comparison of 

classic Soxhlet extraction with Soxtec extraction, 

ultrasonication extraction, supercritical fluid 

extraction, microwave assisted extraction and 

accelerated solvent extraction for the determination 

of polychlorinated biphenyls in soil. Journal of 

Chromatography. July 2005. 

30U.S. EPA, Method 8082 Polychlorinated 

Biphenyls (PCBs) By Gas Chromatography. Office of 

Land and Emergency Management, Office of 

Resource Conservation and Recovery, Materials 

Recovery and Waste Management Division (5303P). 

Washington, DC. December 1996. 

31The regulatory text at § 761.60(g)(1)(iii) lists the 

following methods: ‘‘. . . EPA Method 608, 

‘‘Organochlorine Pesticides and PCBs’’ at 40 CFR 

part 136, Appendix A;’’ EPA Method 8082, 

‘‘Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) by Capillary 

Column Gas Chromatography’’ of SW–846, ‘‘OSW 

Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste,’’ which 

is available from NTIS; and ASTM Standard D– 

4059, ‘‘Standard Test Method for Analysis of 

Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Insulating Liquids by 

Gas Chromatography,’’ which is available from 

ASTM.’’ 

example, in a large study, 20 

governmental laboratories and 153 

accredited laboratories were provided 

proficiency samples to extract using 

either ultrasonic extraction or Manual 

Soxhlet Extraction and the results were 

compared. This study showed that 

‘‘results from laboratories using Soxhlet 

extraction were significantly more 

accurate than those obtained using 

ultrasonic extraction, especially at 

higher concentrations.’’ 27 28 The study 

goes on to state that ultrasonic 

extraction required ‘‘more expertise and 

care for the method to yield accurate 

results.’’ Furthermore, this concern was 

amplified for difficult to extract media, 

such as caulk and clay materials, where 

PCBs are sorbed to the material such 

that they are very difficult to extract for 

analysis. Another study tested the 

effectiveness of several extraction 

methods on soil containing PCBs, 

including: Method 3540C, Method 3541, 

Method 3545A, Method 3546 and 

Method 3550B.29 This study found that 

using n-hexane/acetone with 

appropriate choices of extraction time 

and temperature gave nearly identical 

data for all methods tested in the study. 

The study concluded that all extraction 

techniques tested (including Method 

3550B) are capable of providing 

accurate results when the extraction 

conditions and procedures are 

appropriately chosen. 

What is EPA proposing on this issue? 

EPA proposes to remove EPA Method 

3550B (Ultrasonic Extraction) from the 

PCB Regulations. EPA is proposing not 

to include ultrasonic extraction methods 

in the PCB regulations because they do 

not consistently produce reliable results 

and have a higher potential than other 

methods to be conducted improperly. 

The PCB regulatory sections which 

would be affected by this proposal 

include §§ 761.61(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iv), 

761.253, 761.272, 761.292, 761.358, and 

761.395. 

Previous studies arrived at different 

conclusions regarding the effectiveness 

of ultrasonic extraction. The level of 

uncertainty raised by these studies 

causes concerns, especially for difficult 

to extract media, such as caulk and clay 

materials, where PCBs are sorbed to the 

material such that they are very difficult 

to extract for analysis. Compounding 

this, the importance of following the 

method explicitly is uniquely 

highlighted in the ultrasonic extraction 

methods, suggesting that the potential of 

conducting ultrasonic extraction 

improperly is higher relative to other 

methods found in SW–846. Therefore, 

EPA finds, based on reasonably 

available information, that ultrasonic 

extraction is not a reliably effective 

extraction method and is proposing to 

remove it from the PCB regulations. 

EPA also believes that removing 

ultrasonic extraction from the PCB 

regulations would not result in 

increased burden as many laboratories 

do not solely use ultrasonic extraction 

for PCB samples for several reasons, 

including difficulty in meeting quality 

assurance/quality control (QA/QC) 

requirements, problems with low 

recoveries depending on the sample 

matrix, and the fact that Method 3550B 

may be labor intensive relative to other 

commonly used methods, such as 

Method 3545A. In addition, EPA 

believes that if ultrasonic extraction 

were removed from the PCB regulations, 

laboratories would likely use other 

extraction methods with associated 

equipment they likely already have 

available. See the Economic Assessment 

for a full analysis of the costs and cost 

savings. 

EPA requests comment on the impacts 

of removing ultrasonic extraction from 

the PCB regulations due to the 

conflicting data and the challenge of 

conducting this method appropriately to 

obtain reliable results. Any additional 

information or data regarding the 

efficiency of Methods 3550B and 3550C 

would help EPA better evaluate them 

for inclusion in the PCBs regulations. 

C. Add Determinative Methods for the 

PCB Regulations 

Background on This Issue 

Currently, the PCB regulations list 

Method 8082 (Polychlorinated 

Biphenyls (PCBs) by Gas 

Chromatography) as the only 

determinative method for PCB 

samples.30 The only exception in the 

PCB regulations is at § 761.60(g)(1)(iii) 

where it states that ‘‘[a]ny gas 

chromatographic method that is 

appropriate for the material being 

analyzed may be used’’ and then 

suggests several optional determinative 

methods.31 However, this section in the 

PCB regulations is restricted to samples 

of mineral oil dielectric fluid (MODEF) 

and waste oil (see §§ 761.60(g)(1) and 

761.60(g)(2)). Currently, all other 

samples must be analyzed using EPA 

Method 8082, and any alternative 

determinative method would require 

EPA approval. In addition, updated (i.e., 

Method 8082A) or modified versions of 

8082 may not be used, since they are not 

explicitly stated in the PCB regulations. 

While EPA has not received any 

significant concerns from the regulated 

community regarding the availability of 

determinative methods, EPA has 

investigated additional determinative 

methods to include in this rulemaking 

to provide a greater number of 

technically sound options for the 

regulated community. Additional 

determinative methods may reduce the 

administrative burden on the Agency by 

reducing the number of approvals 

processed for alternative methods. 

Additionally, the previously 

mentioned methods referenced in 

§ 761.60(g)(1)(iii) are outdated and EPA 

believes that they should be updated to 

the most current versions. By updating 

these method references, EPA is not 

requiring that only the new specifically 

referenced methods be used, as 

§ 761.60(g)(1)(iii) provides that ‘‘[a]ny 

gas chromatographic method that is 

appropriate for the material being 

analyzed may be used.’’ EPA believes 

this update will avoid confusion by 

referencing the most up-to-date methods 

while still allowing flexibility in this 

regulatory provision. 

What is EPA proposing on this issue? 

EPA proposes to add three 

determinative methods to the PCB 

regulations: Method 8082A 

(Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) By 

Gas Chromatography), Method 8275A 

(Semivolatile Organic Compounds 

(PAHs And PCBs) In Soils/Sludges and 

Solid Wastes Using Thermal Extraction/ 

Gas Chromatography/Mass 

Spectrometry (TE/GC/MS)), and Method 

1668C (Chlorinated Biphenyl Congeners 

in Water, Soil, Sediment, Biosolids and 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58738 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

32U.S. EPA, Method 8082A Polychlorinated 

Biphenyls (PCBs) By Gas Chromatography. Office of 

Land and Emergency Management, Office of 

Resource Conservation and Recovery, Materials 

Recovery and Waste Management Division (5303P). 

Washington, DC. February 2007. 

33U.S. EPA, Method 8275A Semivolatile Organic 

Compounds (PAHs And PCBs) In Soils/Sludges and 

Solid Wastes Using Thermal Extraction/Gas 

Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (TE/GC/MS). 

Office of Land and Emergency Management, Office 

of Resource Conservation and Recovery, Materials 

Recovery and Waste Management Division (5303P). 

Washington, DC. December 1996. 

34U.S. EPA, Method 1668 Chlorinated Biphenyl 

Congeners in Water, Soil, Sediment, Biosolids, and 

Tissue by HRGC/HRMS. Office of Land and 

Emergency Management, Office of Water, Office of 

Science and Technology, Engineering and Analysis 

Division (4303T). Washington, DC. EPA–820–R–10– 

005. April 2010. 

35U.S. EPA, Method 608.3 Organochlorine 

Pesticides and PCBs by GC/HSD. Office of Water, 

Office of Science and Technology, Engineering and 

Analytical Division (4303T). Washington, DC. EPA– 

820–R–10–004. December 2016. 

36Worden, R., ‘‘Method 8275A: Quantitative 

Addendum For SW–846 Method 8275’’, Research 

report to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 

Ruska Laboratories, Inc., Houston, TX, 1993. 

37https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/ 

2015-10/documents/oswer_greencleanup_

principles.pdf. 

38U.S. EPA, Method 1668A Interlaboratory 

Validation Study Report. Office of Water, Office of 

Science and Technology, Engineering and 

Analytical Division (4303T). Washington, DC. EPA– 

820–R–10–004. March 2010. 

39U.S. EPA, Method 8270E Semivolatile Organic 

Compounds by Gas Chromatography/Mass 

Spectrometry. (GC/MS). Office of Land and 

Emergency Management, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery, Materials Recovery 

Waste Management Division (5303P). Washington, 

DC. June 2018. 

40U.S. EPA, Method 680 Determination of 

Pesticides and PCBs in Water and Soil/Sediment by 

Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS). 

Office of Research and Development. Cincinnati, 

OH. November 1985. 

Tissue by HRGC/HRMS).32 33 34 The PCB 

regulatory sections affected by this 

change include 

§§ 761.61(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iv), 761.253, 

761.272, 761.292, 761.358, and 761.395. 

As mentioned in the preceding 

section, EPA also proposes to update the 

outdated referenced methods in 

§ 761.60(g)(1)(iii). EPA Method 608 

would be updated to EPA Method 608.3, 

and EPA Method 8082 would be 

updated to EPA Method 8082A.35

EPA proposes to add Method 8082A 

to the PCB regulations because Method 

8082A has been validated and included 

in the SW–846 compendium of test 

methods and Method 8082A is only a 

minor revision to the method (Method 

8082) currently allowed in the PCB 

regulations. Method 8082A includes 

updated references/validation studies, 

formatting changes and other various 

minor changes, but overall is similar to 

Method 8082. Method 8082A can 

determine the concentrations of PCBs as 

Aroclors or as individual PCB congeners 

in extracts from solid, tissue, and 

aqueous matrices, using open-tubular, 

capillary columns with electron capture 

detectors (ECD) or electrolytic 

conductivity detectors (ELCD). If 

appropriate sample extraction and 

cleanup procedures are employed, 

Method 8082A can work for other 

matrices, such as oils and wipe samples. 

Note that Method 8082A would not 

replace Method 8082, and that both 

methods would be available in the PCB 

regulations. 

EPA also proposes to add Method 

8275A (Semivolatile Organic 

Compounds (PAHs and PCBs) In Soils/ 

Sludges and Solid Wastes Using 

Thermal Extraction/Gas 

Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry 

(TE/GC/MS)) to the PCB regulations for 

several reasons, including the fact that 

this method has been validated and 

approved by EPA to be included in the 

SW–846 compendium of test methods. 

Method 8275A is a thermal extraction 

capillary GC/MS procedure for the rapid 

quantitative determination of targeted 

PCBs and PAHs in soils, sludges and 

solid wastes. The validation data 

presented in the method demonstrates 

that several PCB congeners can be 

reliably analyzed using this method.36

This method is different from the other 

methods because PCBs are extracted, 

without the use of any solvent, by a 

process of heating a stream of inert gas 

to a temperature that is adequate to 

desorb the PCBs out of the sample. The 

desorbed PCBs are then fed directly into 

an analyzer (e.g., GS/MS) to determine 

the PCB concentration. A separate 

extraction method may not be required 

if using Method 8275A and, since no 

solvent is used, there is less waste 

produced and fewer cleanup steps 

involved. EPA finds, based on 

reasonably available information, that 

Method 8275A is appropriate for 

inclusion in the PCB regulations and 

since this method does not require 

solvent, it would advance Agency 

priorities on the use of greener 

technologies.37

EPA also proposes to add Method 

1668C, Chlorinated Biphenyl Congeners 

in Water, Soil, Sediment, Biosolids and 

Tissue by HRGC/HRMS, developed by 

EPA’s Office of Water for use under the 

Clean Water Act (CWA), to the PCB 

regulations. This method determines 

PCB congeners in environmental 

samples by isotope dilution and internal 

standard high-resolution gas 

chromatography/high-resolution mass 

spectrometry (HRGC/HRMS) for use in 

wastewater, surface water, soil, 

sediment, biosolids and tissue matrices. 

Method 1668C is different relative to 

many methods in SW–846, in that it is 

a comprehensive method where 

cleanup, extraction and determinative 

steps are all within Method 1668C. In 

SW–846, these steps are usually 

separated into multiple different 

methods. Additionally, Method 1668C 

allows for certain modifications to be 

made without EPA review provided that 

all performance criteria are met as 

described within the method. EPA 

finds, based on reasonably available 

information, that Method 1668C is 

appropriate for inclusion in the PCB 

regulations because the validation data 

presented in the method demonstrate 

that several PCB congeners can be 

reliably analyzed using this method.38

EPA considered other determinative 

methods but chose against proposing 

those which were judged to be too 

broad, too prescriptive, or not robust 

enough to accurately determine the PCB 

concentration. For example, EPA 

Method 608.3 is prescribed for 

analyzing only Aroclors, which is why 

it will only be allowed under 

§ 761.60(g)(1)(iii) as this section relates 

to chemical analysis of mineral oil 

dielectric fluid. This method was a 

concern for PCB remediation waste 

because spilled PCBs become 

‘weathered’ over time. The weathering 

process is due to repeated wetting and 

drying cycles, which causes the PCBs to 

adsorb to the material and degrade into 

congeners that are different from when 

the PCBs were manufactured as 

Aroclors. As a result, the PCB 

concentration may not be accurately 

determined by a method that only 

analyzes for Aroclors. Another example 

is Method 8270E, which contains a 

limitation that states, ‘‘[i]n most cases, 

this method is not appropriate for the 

quantitation of multicomponent 

analytes (e.g., polychlorinated biphenyls 

(PCBs) as Aroclors, technical toxaphene, 

chlordane, etc.) because of limited 

sensitivity for these analytes or potential 

for measurement bias using gas 

chromatograph/mass spectrometer (GC/ 

MS) technology.’’ 39

Other methods considered but not 

included in today’s proposal were very 

general and were designed for 

‘semivolatile’ compounds rather than 

specifically for PCB analysis. After 

reviewing these methods, EPA found 

that the validation studies did not 

include PCBs and thus EPA is unable to 

determine the effectiveness of these 

methods for PCB samples. Method 680 

was also considered but this method has 

not been maintained, reviewed, or 

updated regularly, like those found in 

the SW–846 compendium.40 As a result, 

this method is over 30 years old and its 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58739 

41PCB Q&A Manual. June 2014. Pg. 91. https:// 

www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/ 

documents/qacombined.pdf. 42https://www.epa.gov/pcbs/managingremediation-waste-polychlorinated-biphenyls-pcbscleanups. 

43The preamble to the 1994 proposed PCB 

Megarule (59 FR 62796). 

44 40 CFR 761.61, introductory paragraph. 

45Manifest data from 2018 and 2019 was 

analyzed to estimate the volume of waste and 

number of sites cleaned up under § 761.61(b). 

46The preamble to the 1994 proposed PCB 

Megarule (59 FR 62796). 47Managing Remediation Waste From 

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Cleanups https:// 

www.epa.gov/pcbs/managing-remediation-wastepolychlorinated-biphenyls-pcbs-cleanups. 

reliability is unclear. Although EPA is 

not proposing Method 608.3 (except for 

use in the chemical analysis of mineral 

oil dielectric fluids under 

§ 761.60(g)(1)(iii)), Method 8270E, or 

Method 680, EPA notes that a person 

may either conduct a Subpart Q 

comparison study or submit an 

appropriate application (i.e., 

§§ 761.61(c), 761.62(c) or 761.79(h)) 

requesting to use or modify a 

determinative method for their project. 

EPA is seeking comment on its 

proposal to add three determinative 

methods (Method 8082A, Method 

1668C, and Method 8275A) to the PCB 

regulations. EPA also requests any 

additional information that may 

supplement or refute the existing 

support for EPA’s findings for this 

proposal. 

D. Revise Performance-Based Disposal 

Under § 761.61(b) 

Background on the Issue 

Currently, there are three options for 

addressing PCB remediation waste, 

listed in § 761.61 under paragraphs (a), 

(b) and (c). Section 761.61(b) (entitled 

‘‘performance-based disposal’’) 

prescribes disposal methods for liquid 

and non-liquid PCB remediation waste 

but does not explicitly require or refer 

to cleanup requirements or cleanup 

levels in the regulations. Specifically, 

section 761.61(b) simply states that any 

person disposing of liquid 

(§ 761.61(b)(1)) and non-liquid 

(§ 761.61(b)(2)) PCB remediation waste 

shall do so by one of the TSCAapproved disposal methods listed 

therein. Section 761.61(b) does not 

currently include provisions for site 

cleanup. The other PCB remediation 

waste options in § 761.61 are ‘‘selfimplementing on-site cleanup and 

disposal of PCB remediation waste’’ in 

§ 761.61(a) and ‘‘risk-based disposal 

approval’’ in § 761.61(c). Section 

761.61(a) describes in detail the 

requirements for notification, site 

characterization, cleanup levels, 

cleanup verification, disposal options 

and more. Section 761.61(c) allows the 

site owner to apply for a risk-based 

approval to ‘‘sample, cleanup, or 

dispose of PCB remediation waste in a 

manner other than prescribed in 

paragraphs (a) or (b).’’ The language of 

section 761.61(b) thus does not conform 

to the other two options in that the 

provision does not state the removal 

requirements of PCB remediation waste 

at any specified concentration nor does 

it provide for procedures to demonstrate 

that on-site cleanup is complete. 

Prior to this rulemaking, EPA had 

stated in guidance related to § 761.61(b) 

that to be completely unregulated for 

disposal off-site without an approval 

from EPA, waste must contain <1 ppm 

PCBs, and that concentration must not 

be the result of dilution during 

remediation (i.e., by mixing with clean 

soil during excavation).41 Similarly, if 

someone were to use § 761.61(b) for 

disposal of waste, but leave materials 

on-site > 1 ppm, they would still have 

TSCA obligations for those remaining 

materials.42

While EPA’s regulatory text and 

preamble statements refer to 

§§ 761.61(a), (b), and (c) as three 

alternatives for PCB cleanup and 

disposal, the absence of cleanup 

provisions, such as cleanup levels and 

sampling requirements, in § 761.61(b) 

could make it challenging for site 

owners to know when EPA would agree 

that on-site cleanup is complete and the 

site is authorized for use under 

§ 761.30(u).43 44 Clear regulatory 

requirements may be warranted as EPA 

estimates that 50 to 60 million kg of PCB 

remediation waste are generated at 430 

to 460 sites cleaned up under 

§ 761.61(b) each year.45

EPA Proposal on This Issue 

EPA proposes to amend § 761.61(b) 

(performance-based disposal) to add 

performance-based cleanup standards, 

while maintaining this option as one 

which does not require prior EPA 

approval and thus remains an expedient 

option for those entities removing PCB 

remediation waste from the site. 

Specifically, EPA is proposing to amend 

§ 761.61(b) to include explicit 

conditions for on-site remediation and 

cleanup of PCB remediation waste. This 

specification includes: (1) Establishing 

cleanup levels for sites remediated 

under § 761.61(b) performance-based 

cleanup; (2) limiting applicability of this 

option to sites that are not near sensitive 

populations or environments; (3) 

verification sampling; (4) recordkeeping 

requirements; (5) post-cleanup 

notification; and (6) allowing for 

disposal of PCB remediation waste in 

RCRA Subtitle C permitted landfills. 

After fulfilling the conditions of 

performance-based cleanup and 

disposal, the site would then be 

authorized for use under § 761.30(u). 

While the proposed conditions for 

performance-based cleanup will require 

additional effort on the part of site 

owners, the proposed conditions will 

also provide site owners confidence that 

they are satisfying the regulatory 

requirements. As always, failure to 

properly characterize PCBs on site is not 

a defense for noncompliant cleanup and 

disposal. Liability for ensuring 

compliance with § 761.61(b), 

performance-based cleanup and 

disposal, lies with the responsible party. 

In addition, while the revisions to 

§ 761.61(b) are designed to be fully selfimplementing, if the remediating party 

has questions as to whether its site 

qualifies to be cleaned up under 

§ 761.61(b)(1)(i) of this provision, it 

would be in the remediating party’s best 

interest, from a compliance assurance 

perspective, to contact the appropriate 

EPA Regional PCB Coordinator prior to 

commencing the cleanup and disposal 

activities. See the EPA PCB website for 

a list of the EPA Regional PCB 

Coordinators www.epa.gov/pcbs/ 

program-contacts. 

First, EPA proposes to establish 

cleanup levels for sites remediated 

under a § 761.61(b) performance-based 

cleanup. Currently, the regulations do 

not reference a specific cleanup level. 

The 1994 preamble provides that 

§ 761.61(b) ‘‘could be used where all 

PCB remediation waste would be 

removed from the environment, or 

where remediation levels were 

established elsewhere in these rules.’’ 46

In guidance, EPA has interpreted ‘‘all 

PCB remediation waste’’ to mean PCB 

remediation waste at >1 ppm PCBs.47

Identifying a numerical cleanup level 

in regulations will help responsible 

parties understand the circumstances 

under which they could expect to have 

no further cleanup responsibility at the 

site under § 761.61(b). EPA is therefore 

proposing to incorporate the following 

cleanup levels directly into § 761.61(b): 

≤1 ppm for bulk PCB remediation waste 

and porous surfaces; the concentrations 

specified in § 761.79(b)(1) and (2) for 

liquids; and the concentrations 

specified in § 761.79(b)(3) for nonporous 

surfaces. EPA notes that the cleanup 

levels for liquids and nonporous 

surfaces are already performance-based 

decontamination standards, so materials 

decontaminated to those levels are 

authorized for use under § 761.79 and 

§ 761.30(u). Additionally, the cleanup 

level for bulk remediation waste and 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58740 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

48Contact information for PCB regional 

coordinators. https://www.epa.gov/pcbs/programcontacts. 

49pg 35410: Megarule Preamble. 1998 ‘‘In 

response to comments seeking consistency with 

PCB remediation waste disposal, EPA added RCRA 

Subtitle C landfills as a disposal option for PCB 

bulk product waste because they are designed and 

operated in the same manner as TSCA chemical 

waste landfills (see § 761.62(a)(3) of the regulatory 

text). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR1998-06-29/pdf/98-17048.pdf. 

porous surfaces is already used in 

§ 761.61(a) as the most stringent cleanup 

level (with certain exceptions 

accommodated in the proposal as 

described below), corresponding to the 

cleanup level for a high occupancy area 

without further conditions. See 

proposed § 761.61(b)(1)(ii). 

Second, EPA proposes an 

applicability provision be included in 

the § 761.61(b) performance-based 

cleanup to exclude the provision’s use 

at sites with specific characteristics that 

merit additional consideration by EPA. 

In the 1998 Megarule, EPA established 

that certain types of sensitive 

environments and populations would 

not be well-served by the cleanup levels 

prescribed in § 761.61(a)(4) and 

therefore excluded these locations from 

the applicability of § 761.61(a). See 

§ 761.61(a)(1). In addition, the 

regulation identifies certain types of 

sites that, while subject to § 761.61(a), 

may call for more stringent cleanup 

levels. See § 761.61(a)(4)(vi). Since the 

proposed performance-based cleanup 

would not require consultation with 

EPA, EPA proposes a list of objective 

characteristics that would exclude a site 

from using performance-based cleanup 

standards, which largely mirrors the 

applicability section in § 761.61(a)(1) 

and the characteristics in 

§§ 761.61(a)(4)(vi), 761.120(a)(2), and 

761.120(d)(2)(iv) of sites that may 

require more stringent cleanup levels or 

site-specific determinations. 

Additionally, the proposed criteria in 

§ 761.61(b)(1)(A) exclude sites where 

PCB remediation waste is found within 

the 100-year floodplain, which would 

allow EPA to give additional 

consideration to the protection of 

waterways by handling the cleanup 

through § 761.61(a) and/or § 761.61(c). 

Responsible parties should be able to 

independently evaluate their site and 

determine whether performance-based 

cleanup would be applicable. EPA’s 

regional PCB Coordinators are available 

to provide site-specific guidance, but 

such consultation should not be needed 

to apply the regulations to a site.48 See 

proposed § 761.61(b)(1)(i)(A). In the 

event that a responsible party is 

precluded from using § 761.61(b) under 

EPA’s proposed applicability criteria, 

they can choose to conduct their 

cleanup under one of the other two 

options, i.e., §§ 761.61(a) or 761.61(c). 

Third, EPA proposes to require 

verification sampling in accordance 

with the PCB regulations to ensure that 

the proposed cleanup levels have been 

met. Currently, EPA expects that 

verification sampling is already 

conducted by responsible parties using 

§ 761.61(b) for site cleanup to ensure 

that PCB remediation waste is removed. 

Under this proposal, EPA is specifying 

that verification sampling be conducted 

in accordance with Subpart O for bulk 

PCB remediation waste and porous 

surfaces, Subpart P or § 761.79(b)(3)(i) 

for nonporous surfaces, and § 761.269 

for liquid remediation waste. EPA is 

also proposing, similar to the cleanup 

option under § 761.61(a), that the 

concentration in every required sample 

analysis result must be below the 

specified cleanup levels for the cleanup 

to be complete. See proposed 

§ 761.61(b)(1)(iii). 

Fourth, EPA is also proposing to 

incorporate explicit recordkeeping 

requirements into performance-based 

cleanup. Currently, responsible parties 

using § 761.61(b) are subject to the 

applicable recordkeeping requirements 

in § 761.180(a) for PCB remediation 

waste shipped off-site. Under the 

proposed provisions for performancebased cleanup, responsible parties 

would need to follow the recordkeeping 

requirements in the PCB Spill Cleanup 

Policy at § 761.125(c)(5) in addition to 

any applicable requirements in 

§ 761.180(a). These requirements are 

also required for self-implementing 

cleanups conducted under § 761.61(a) 

(see § 761.61(a)(9)). Nine specific items 

would be documented in the records, 

and records would be required to be 

maintained for five years. While the 

proposed requirements would present a 

small additional burden to responsible 

parties, EPA believes that recordkeeping 

would benefit responsible parties by 

allowing them to demonstrate to 

regulators, prospective property 

purchasers, or insurers that site cleanup 

was completed according to the 

conditions in § 761.61(b). See the 

Economic Assessment for a full analysis 

of the costs. See proposed 

§ 761.61(b)(1)(iv). 

Fifth, EPA proposes to incorporate a 

post-cleanup notification into the 

proposed performance-based cleanup 

provisions. Under performance-based 

cleanup and disposal, sites would be 

remediated without EPA involvement. 

While EPA understands the value of a 

site remediation option that is selfdirected and expedient, it is also 

reasonable to expect that regulators 

need a way to evaluate performance to 

ensure the conditions, such as cleanup 

levels, were met. EPA is proposing to 

require responsible parties to send a 

notification to EPA within 14 days of 

the final shipment of waste offsite for 

disposal. The proposed notification 

would require information about the site 

and point of contact, the disposal 

facility and waste shipments, and a 

summary of the required records. The 

notification would also include a 

certification, as defined in § 761.3, from 

the responsible party. This basic 

notification would only include 

information that EPA is proposing be 

kept under the recordkeeping provision, 

and thus should not present an 

additional significant burden on the 

responsible party. See the Economic 

Assessment and Information Collection 

Request for specific estimates. EPA, 

state, tribal and local environmental 

agencies could then use the proposed 

notification as way to maintain 

oversight. 

Sixth, EPA proposes to add a RCRA 

Subtitle C landfill disposal option for 

non-liquid PCB remediation waste 

under § 761.61(b). RCRA Subtitle C 

landfills are already allowed to be used 

for the disposal of bulk PCB remediation 

waste under § 761.61(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iii) 

and for PCB bulk product waste under 

§ 761.62(a)(3). EPA has previously 

stated in the preamble to the final 1998 

PCB Disposal Amendments, ‘‘EPA 

added RCRA Subtitle C landfills as a 

disposal option for PCB bulk product 

waste because they are designed and 

operated in the same manner as TSCA 

chemical waste landfills.’’ 49 EPA has 

not received any information in the 

intervening two decades that would 

suggest otherwise. Since EPA has 

already determined that RCRA Subtitle 

C landfills are protective for bulk 

product waste, which typically contain 

very high concentrations of PCBs, the 

Agency finds its proposal to extend the 

use of RCRA Subtitle C landfills for nonliquid PCB remediation waste under 

§ 761.61(b) to be reasonable. By adding 

these landfills to the list of allowable 

disposal options for certain PCB 

remediation wastes, EPA anticipates 

that the transportation costs will 

decrease, as the distance to the closest 

allowable disposal option diminishes. 

Furthermore, the disposal cost per ton 

of non-liquid, nonhazardous PCB waste 

is generally lower at RCRA Subtitle C 

landfills than it is at TSCA chemical 

waste landfills. See the Economic 

Assessment for more information on the 

estimated costs. EPA is requesting 

comment on the proposal to add RCRA 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58741 

50 1994 proposed PCB Disposal Amendments (59 

FR 62796). 

51Eero Priha, Sannamari Hellman, Jaana Sorvari, 

PCB contamination from polysulphide sealants in 

residential areas—exposure and risk assessment, 

Chemosphere, Volume 59, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 537– 

543. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ 

pii/S0045653505001074. 

52Luca Rossi, Luiz de Alencastro, Thomas 

Kupper, Joseph Tarradellas, Urban stormwater 

contamination by polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) 

and its importance for urban water systems in 

Switzerland, Science of The Total Environment, 

Volume 322, Issues 1–3, 2004, Pages 179–189. 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ 

S0048969703003619. 

Subtitle C landfills to the list of 

allowable disposal options for nonliquid PCB remediation waste under 

§ 761.61(b). 

Finally, EPA proposes a change to 

§ 761.125(a)(2) of the PCB Spill Cleanup 

Policy to ensure that the addition of 

RCRA Subtitle C landfills to § 761.61(b) 

does not affect the Spill Cleanup Policy. 

Currently, the PCB Spill Cleanup Policy 

calls for disposal of cleanup debris and 

non-liquid materials in accordance with 

the provisions of Subpart D. The only 

Subpart D disposal options currently 

available for PCB remediation waste 

managed under the Spill Cleanup Policy 

are the options under § 761.61(b). Under 

the current language of the Spill 

Cleanup Policy, the proposed addition 

of RCRA Subtitle C landfills to 

§ 761.61(b) would have the effect of 

adding those landfills as an option for 

disposal under the Spill Cleanup Policy. 

Expanding the disposal options 

available under the Spill Cleanup Policy 

is not an objective of this rulemaking, 

and is outside the scope of this 

rulemaking. Therefore, EPA is 

proposing to revise the language in the 

Policy to specify that only disposal 

facilities with TSCA approvals issued 

under Subpart D of the PCB regulations 

may be used for disposal of cleanup 

debris and materials generated under 

the Spill Cleanup Policy. This change to 

the Spill Cleanup Policy is not 

substantive; rather, it maintains the 

disposal options currently available 

under the Policy. 

EPA notes that the above proposed 

changes would not impact a responsible 

party’s ability 50 to pair disposal under 

§ 761.61(b) with on-site cleanup under 

§ 761.61(a), proposed § 761.61(b), 

§ 761.61(c), or § 761.77 (state-led 

cleanup under a coordinated approval). 

The proposed regulatory text explicitly 

preserves the ability to use § 761.61(b) 

solely as a disposal provision. See 

proposed introductory paragraph in 

§ 761.61(b). 

EPA requests comment on its 

proposed changes to § 761.61(b), as well 

as how often it is currently being used 

in comparison to EPA’s estimate. 

Additionally, EPA is requesting 

comment on the option of requiring a 

pre-cleanup notification in § 761.61(b), 

in addition to the proposed changes 

described above. The pre-cleanup 

notification would include basic 

information such as name, contact 

information, site location and proximity 

to areas identified in § 761.61(b)(1)(i), 

initial site characterization, and planned 

remedial action(s). EPA sees value in 

receiving such a notification in terms of 

providing EPA with an opportunity to 

conduct compliance assistance, increase 

public transparency, and minimize the 

need for the use of enforcement tools 

after the cleanup and disposal are 

complete. EPA also recognizes that precleanup notification would pose 

additional reporting burden and that 

such burden must be balanced with the 

self-implementing nature of § 761.61(b). 

If a pre-cleanup notification were 

incorporated into § 761.61(b), the 

responsible party would not be required 

to wait for a response or receive 

approval from EPA and could begin the 

planned remedial action(s) immediately. 

EPA requests comment on the impacts 

of a pre-cleanup notification and 

whether or not to include the 

notification in the final rulemaking. 

E. Remove Regulatory Provision 

Allowing Disposal of PCB Bulk Product 

Waste as Roadbed 

Background on the Issue 

EPA established a provision allowing 

for disposal of PCB bulk product waste 

as roadbed in 1998 (63 FR 35412 (June 

29, 1998)). In the preamble for that rule, 

EPA stated that ‘‘[b]ecause these 

disposal options have been restricted to 

materials that do not leach and because 

other potential routes of exposure have 

been controlled, EPA has concluded 

that the risk from these disposal options 

is the practical equivalent of disposal in 

a landfill as required in § 761.62(b)(1), 

and therefore that this risk is not 

unreasonable.’’ Since 1998, the 

assumption that PCBs do not migrate 

from bulk product waste has been 

proven incorrect in many scenarios.51

For example, studies show that caulk 

containing PCBs degrades, releasing 

PCBs to the air, stormwater, and 

adjacent soil.52 Considering these 

studies, EPA questions whether 

potential leaching of PCBs from bulk 

product waste used as roadbed could 

lead to environmental releases of PCBs 

and potential exposures to humans and 

wildlife. As a result, EPA no longer has 

a basis to support the determination of 

no unreasonable risk of injury to health 

or the environment that the Agency 

made in 1998. EPA further believes that 

this disposal option is not widely used. 

What is EPA proposing on this issue? 

EPA proposes to remove the option 

currently provided for in § 761.62(d)(2) 

to dispose of PCB bulk product waste 

under asphalt as roadbed because the 

Agency cannot, at this time, determine 

the practice presents no unreasonable 

risk of injury to health or the 

environment. EPA further believes that 

this disposal option is not widely used 

and thus removing it from the 

regulations is not likely to present 

significant burden to the regulated 

community. EPA is seeking comment on 

the proposal to remove this option from 

the regulations. In particular, EPA is 

interested in any concrete information 

about the use of PCB bulk product waste 

as roadbed, especially reports of specific 

placements indicating that the practice 

is more widely used than EPA believes. 

EPA is also interested in any studies 

regarding the potential for the release of 

PCBs from the roadbed. 

F. Add Flexible Provisions for 

Emergency Situations 

Background on the Issue 

The TSCA PCB Spill Cleanup Policy 

was first published on April 2, 1987 (52 

FR 10688), codified at part 761, subpart 

G, and applies only to certain releases 

of PCBs occurring after May 4, 1987. 

The TSCA PCB Spill Cleanup Policy 

requires cleanup of PCBs to different 

levels depending upon spill location, 

the potential for exposure to residual 

PCBs remaining after cleanup, the 

concentration of PCBs initially spilled 

(high concentration or low), and the 

nature and size of the population 

potentially at risk of exposure to 

residual PCBs. Thus, the Policy applies 

the most stringent requirements for PCB 

spill cleanup to non-restricted access 

areas where there is a greater potential 

for human exposures to spilled PCBs. 

The Policy applies less stringent 

requirements for cleanup of PCB spills 

in restricted access areas where the 

nature and degree of human contact 

present a lower potential for significant 

exposure. Finally, even less stringent 

requirements apply to restricted access 

areas where there is little potential for 

human exposures (59 FR 62793). 

When the spilled material contains 50 

to 500 ppm PCBs and the total quantity 

of material spilled involves less than 1 

lb of PCBs, the Policy allows for cleanup 

in accordance with procedural 

performance requirements (i.e., double 

wash/rinse for solid surfaces and 

removal of visible traces plus a 1-foot 

lateral boundary for soil and other 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58742 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

53Letter from Jesse Baskerville to Mary Davis, 

Nov 9, 2005. Guidance for Addressing Spills from 

Electrical Equipment [damaged by Hurricane Rita or 

Katrina]. 

54Correspondence from James Sales, EPA to Mary 

Davis. Aug 29, 2017. PCB Disaster Debris Cleanup 

Guidance. 

55Memo from Alan Farmer to Barnes Johnson, 

Sept 8, 2017. EPA Region 4 Issuance of Disaster 

Waste Guidance. 

56Memo from Susan Hansen to Barnes Johnson. 

Sept 13, 2018. EPA Region 4 Issuance of Disaster 

Waste Guidance. 

57Memo from Susan Hansen to Barnes Johnson. 

Oct 10, 2018. EPA Region 4 Issuance of Disaster 

Waste Guidance. 

58Memo from John Armstead to Barnes Johnson. 

Sept 4, 2019. EPA Region 3 Issuance of Disaster 

Waste Guidance. 

59Memo from Carol J. Monell to Barnes Johnson. 

Sept 3, 2019. EPA Region 4 Issuance of Disaster 

Waste Guidance. 

60Memo from Ronnie Crossland to Barnes 

Johnson. July 11, 2019. EPA Region 6 Issuance of 

Disaster Waste Guidance. 

61Memo from Carol J. Monell to Barnes Johnson. 

July 18, 2019. EPA Region 4 Issuance of Disaster 

Waste Guidance. 

ground media provided that the 

minimum depth of excavation is 10 

inches) rather than requiring sampling 

to verify that numerical cleanup 

standards have been met. When the 

spilled material has greater than 500 

ppm PCBs or the total quantity of 

material spilled involves more than 1 lb 

of PCBs by weight, the Policy provides 

numerical cleanup standards based on 

the accessibility of the area and the 

potential for human exposure. Postcleanup sampling is required to verify 

that the cleanup standards have been 

met. The Policy requires reporting to 

EPA within 24 hours for spills that 

directly contaminate sensitive areas, 

such as drinking water supplies or 

grazing lands, or where a spill exceeds 

10 pounds of PCBs by weight. See 

§ 761.125(a)(1) for details. 

EPA may allow less stringent or 

alternative requirements based upon 

site-specific considerations 

(§ 761.120(a)(4)). EPA has used this 

provision to issue storm-specific 

guidance in Regions 4 and 6 for 

Hurricanes Katrina (2005),53 Harvey 

(2017),54 Irma (2017),55 Florence 

(2018),56 Michael (2018),57 Dorian 

(2019) 58 59 and Tropical Storm Barry 

(2019).60 61 Generally, EPA extended the 

time frame for notification and allowed 

spills to be managed based on the asfound concentration for spills directly 

caused by the emergency situation. 

EPA recognizes that issuing the 

guidance on a case-by-case basis can 

create some inefficiencies. First, since 

disasters can develop without 

forewarning, they can put pressure on 

EPA to develop the guidance quickly so 

that it may be distributed to the 

regulated community in time for 

facilities to use it. Also, the fast-paced 

nature of the response to such events 

means that entities that could use the 

guidance may not become aware that it 

was issued in time to use it. Finally, due 

to uncertainty regarding whether a 

guidance document will be issued, it is 

often challenging for regulated facilities 

to include the flexibilities offered in the 

EPA guidance into their disaster 

preparation protocols. EPA received 

comments from industry requesting a 

more standardized set of flexibilities, 

citing several of these reasons. 

What is EPA proposing on this issue? 

EPA proposes two independent 

changes to make the PCB regulatory 

requirements more practical during 

emergency situations. First, EPA is 

proposing that two additional 

flexibilities for spills caused by 

emergency situations be added to the 

PCB Spill Cleanup Policy in Subpart G. 

Second, EPA is proposing to create an 

option to apply for a waiver from 

various cleanup, storage, and disposal 

requirements for releases caused by 

emergency situations, when meeting 

those requirements as stated in the 

regulations would be impracticable. 

EPA is looking for comment on both 

changes and may finalize either option 

or both options. EPA is also proposing 

to establish a definition of an 

‘‘emergency situation’’ to clarify the 

applicability of the proposed changes. 

a. Definition of ‘‘Emergency Situation’’ 

EPA proposes to add identical 

definitions of ‘‘emergency situation’’ to 

§§ 761.3 and 761.123. Specifically, EPA 

proposes to define an emergency 

situation as adverse conditions caused 

by manmade or natural incidents that 

threaten lives, property, or public health 

and safety and require prompt 

responsive action from the local, state, 

tribal, territorial, or federal government. 

Furthermore, these adverse conditions 

must result in either: (1) A declaration 

by either the President of the United 

States or governor of the affected state 

of a natural disaster or emergency; or, 

(2) an incident funded under the 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) via a Stafford Act disaster 

declaration or emergency declaration. 

Examples of emergency situations may 

include civil emergencies or adverse 

natural conditions, such as hurricanes, 

earthquakes, or tornados. EPA is 

proposing this definition because it is 

sufficiently broad to capture a wide 

range of emergencies that would be 

likely to significantly impact the 

cleanup and disposal of PCB waste. At 

the same time, the definition is 

contingent upon a declaration of 

emergency from an established 

authority, which are generally made in 

an objective and timely manner. EPA is 

seeking comment on the proposed 

definition of an ‘‘emergency situation.’’ 

In particular, EPA would like to know 

if there is a corresponding tribal 

authority able to declare a state of 

emergency that should be included in 

the definition. 

b. Additional Flexibilities Under the 

Spill Cleanup Policy for Spills Caused 

by Emergency Situations 

In this rulemaking, EPA proposes to 

expand the existing flexibilities in the 

Spill Cleanup Policy in Subpart G to be 

available in all emergency situations, 

rather than on a case-by-case basis. 

First, EPA proposes to allow the 

responsible party to clean up a spill 

caused by an emergency situation 

(which would be defined in 40 CFR 

761.123, as discussed above) based on 

the as-found PCB concentration when 

the source concentration cannot readily 

be determined, as is common in 

emergency situations. Specifically, EPA 

is proposing to allow responsible parties 

to use the as-found concentration when 

determining whether the spill can be 

managed under §§ 761.125(b) or 

761.125(c) for actions taken directly in 

response to spills caused by emergency 

situations. To this end, EPA proposes to 

add ‘‘except where authorized in 

§ 761.120(c)’’ to the definition of ‘‘spill’’ 

to accommodate the proposed flexibility 

to manage waste at the as-found 

concentration. EPA believes these 

proposed changes would avoid delays 

associated with searches for the source 

of the spill during or immediately 

following an emergency situation, 

where the search is likely to be timeconsuming and unsuccessful, thereby 

expediting cleanups and reducing any 

potential exposure more quickly. 

Secondly, EPA proposes to add 

flexibility to the timeframe for 

completing notification under the Spill 

Cleanup Policy. Generally, the Spill 

Cleanup Policy specifies that 

notification be made within 24 hours 

after the responsible party was notified 

or became aware of the spill, see 

§ 761.125(a)(1). Under EPA’s proposed 

changes, when the Policy is used for 

cleanup activities undertaken directly in 

response to spills caused by emergency 

situations, as would be defined in 

§ 761.123, the policy would extend the 

timeframe for reporting to seven days 

after the adverse conditions that 

prevented communication have ended. 

Often in emergencies, communication 

networks are stretched thin and 

responsible parties may need extra time 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58743 

62Planning for Natural Disaster Debris. EPA. 

April 2019. p. 66 https://www.epa.gov/sites/ 

production/files/2019-05/documents/final_pndd_

guidance_0.pdf. 

to notify the required entities.62 This 

proposed change would only pertain to 

reporting required under § 761.125(a)(1) 

that is directly impacted by the adverse 

conditions. There is no need to provide 

for flexibility as to the timeframe for 

cleanup completion in emergency 

situations because the Spill Cleanup 

Policy already incorporates this 

flexibility under §§ 761.125(b)(2) and 

761.125(c)(1)(vi). 

EPA believes that the proposed 

flexibilities would not present an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment under the defined 

emergency situations but rather would 

result in a net benefit in protection of 

health and the environment, given that 

they allow those conducting the spill 

response to assess and dispose of waste 

more quickly, and prioritize timesensitive remedial actions. 

c. Waiver From Various Sampling, 

Extraction, Analysis, Cleanup, Storage, 

and Disposal Requirements in 

Emergency Situations 

EPA proposes to create an option to 

apply for a waiver from various PCB 

waste management requirements when 

necessitated by emergency situations. 

Responsible parties would be able to 

request a waiver from the provisions of 

§§ 761.60, 761.61, 761.62, and 761.65, 

which provide requirements for 

sampling, extraction, analysis, cleanup, 

storage, and disposal of all types of 

regulated PCB wastes. 

Cleanup and disposal activities often 

cannot be initiated promptly in 

emergency situations such as 

hurricanes, due to necessary emergency 

response actions taking place. EPA 

recognizes that spills caused by an 

emergency situation may not be 

discovered or be able to be cleaned up 

until after the emergency ends or until 

after the initial emergency response. 

EPA regularly negotiates and 

implements special arrangements 

during emergency situations on a caseby-case basis, which can delay 

implementation of remedial actions. 

EPA is proposing to modify the PCB 

regulations to allow the person 

managing the cleanup and/or disposal 

of PCB waste caused by an emergency 

situation to request waivers from 

applicable PCB sampling, extraction, 

analysis, cleanup, storage, disposal and 

other regulatory requirements when 

there is an emergency situation and the 

existing regulatory requirements (e.g., 

timeframes, sampling protocols) are 

impracticable due to the nature of the 

emergency situation. Due to the varied 

nature of the emergency situations that 

would be covered by this waiver option, 

EPA is proposing to allow requests that 

would modify specific requirements 

from a broad swath of the PCB cleanup 

and disposal regulations. Requests 

would need to be submitted to EPA 

within seven days of discovery of the 

PCB waste. Under the proposed waiver 

provisions, EPA would individually 

evaluate each request and would only 

approve those that provide sufficient 

information to justify modifying select 

requirements upon a determination that 

the modifications would not present an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment. Successful waiver 

requests must identify the specific 

requirements to be waived or modified, 

the adverse conditions caused by the 

emergency situation, why fulfillment of 

those specific requirements would be 

impracticable and the proposed method 

of managing the PCB waste in lieu of the 

waived requirements. EPA expects most 

waivers to be temporary with a specified 

end-date, requiring the recipient of the 

waiver to meet full regulatory 

requirements after the emergency 

conditions no longer impede the ability 

to comply. For example, the waiver 

recipient can perform immediate 

cleanup without fully verifying that 

cleanup levels have been met; however, 

once the emergency conditions are over, 

the recipient would need to determine 

whether cleanup levels have been met, 

and perform additional cleanup, if 

needed. Similarly, EPA intends that the 

disposal options for a given waste will 

rarely, if ever, be modified under the 

waiver option, as the final disposition of 

the waste is, by nature, permanent and 

would therefore outlast the adverse 

conditions. EPA is including disposal 

requirements in the scope of the waiver 

option to accommodate rare or 

extenuating circumstances, for example, 

the disposal of mixed or partially 

characterized waste streams, where 

waste stream segregation or full 

characterization is not practicable. 

Therefore, EPA anticipates that impacts 

to communities near sites where this 

provision is exercised would be limited 

in the short term and as protective in the 

long term. See proposed § 761.66. 

The proposed option allows a person 

to request a waiver by sending site 

information and a sampling, cleanup, 

and/or disposal plan that describes the 

requested deviation from the generally 

applicable regulatory requirements to 

the relevant EPA Regional 

Administrator. The EPA Regional 

Administrator would review the request 

and determine whether compliance 

with the regulatory requirements from 

which a waiver is sought is 

impracticable and whether the action 

approved under the waiver would not 

pose an unreasonable risk of injury to 

health or the environment. The EPA 

Regional Administrator could grant or 

deny such a waiver request or may grant 

the request with changes or conditions 

beyond those described in the waiver 

request, such as design standards, 

marking, or time limits, and would 

communicate those conditions to the 

requestor. EPA is considering posting 

approved waivers publicly on the EPA 

website to promote transparency and 

awareness of the use of the waiver 

option in the local community. EPA is 

requesting comment on the proposed 

waiver option, particularly comments 

on ensuring that the waiver option 

would be used effectively in real-world 

emergency situations without 

presenting an unreasonable risk of 

injury to health or the environment. 

EPA is also requesting comment on 

posting approved waivers online, from 

both the public’s and the requestor’s 

perspectives. 

Independent of EPA’s proposed 

additions above, EPA notes that § 761.61 

currently ‘‘does not prohibit any person 

from implementing temporary 

emergency measures to prevent, treat, or 

contain further releases or mitigate 

migration to the environment of PCBs or 

PCB remediation waste.’’ This means 

that immediate measures may be taken 

to contain PCBs during an emergency 

situation prior to receiving approval 

from the EPA Regional Administrator as 

described in § 761.66(b). Such examples 

might include excavating visibly 

contaminated soil near storm drains or 

removing and storing leaking electrical 

equipment that contains PCB oil before 

the remaining oil is released to the 

environment. 

G. Harmonize General Disposal 

Requirements for PCB Remediation 

Waste 

Background on This Issue 

In the 1998 PCB Megarule (63 FR 

35384), EPA promulgated both the 

definition of PCB remediation waste in 

§ 761.3 and a guide to the cleanup and 

disposal obligations for PCB 

remediation waste in § 761.50(b)(3). At 

the time of the 1998 Megarule, 

§ 761.50(b)(3) failed to account for the 

fact that disposal of PCBs < 500 ppm 

was not regulated between April 18, 

1978, (the effective date of the Disposal 

and Marking Rule, which set the 500 

ppm threshold) and July 2, 1979 (the 

effective date of the PCB Ban Rule, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58744 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

63PCB Q&A Manual. June 2014. Pg. 49 Q.3 

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015- 

08/documents/qacombined.pdf. 

64Nationwide Risk-based PCB Remediation 

Waste Disposal Approvals. https://www.epa.gov/ 

pcbs/nationwide-risk-based-pcb-remediation-wastedisposal-approvals. 65Megarule Preamble 63 FR 35402. 

66Letter from Barnes Johnson to Pamela Lacey. 

Dec 14, 2018. https://www.epa.gov/pcbs/epasresponse-letter-aga-regarding-mdpe-and-hdpe-nonporous-surface. 

67 JANA on behalf of NYSEARCH NGA. Oct 19, 

2018. Assessment of Polychlorinated Biphenyls 

(PCBs) in Polyethylene (PE) Gas Distribution 

Piping. Revision 2. 

which replaced the 500 ppm level with 

50 ppm). A technical amendment to 

correct this discrepancy was issued in 

1999 (64 FR 33755). The preamble text 

addressed changes made to 

§ 761.50(b)(3)(i), which was amended 

accordingly. Section 761.50(b)(3)(ii) was 

also amended, presumably to correct the 

same discrepancy for the time between 

April 18, 1978 and July 2, 1979. 

However, the phrase ‘‘at as-found 

concentrations ≥50 ppm’’ was added to 

§ 761.50(b)(3)(ii) unnecessarily. This 

addition was apparently an error; there 

is no justification in the preamble for 

the change, and it could be read to cut 

against the apparent intent to better 

align § 761.50(b)(3) with the definition 

of PCB remediation waste and the 

general direction in § 761.50(b)(3) that 

PCB remediation waste ‘‘is regulated for 

cleanup and disposal in accordance 

with § 761.61.’’ 

In keeping with the regulatory text 

overall, preamble and guidance 

statements, and interactions with the 

regulated community, EPA does not 

interpret the ‘‘as found’’ language in 

§ 761.50(b)(3)(ii) as limiting the cleanup 

and disposal obligations for PCB 

remediation waste created by releases 

that occurred on or after the dates 

referenced in that clause, where the asfound PCB concentration is <50 ppm. 

Rather, EPA maintains that all materials 

that fit the definition of PCB 

remediation waste in § 761.3—including 

materials which are currently at any 

volume or concentration where the 

original source was ≥500 ppm PCBs 

beginning on April 18, 1978, or ≥50 

ppm PCBs beginning on July 2, 1979— 

are regulated for cleanup and disposal 

under § 761.61. The introductory 

language to § 761.50(b)(3) provides, 

without exception, that ‘‘PCB 

remediation waste . . . is regulated for 

cleanup and disposal in accordance 

with § 761.61.’’ EPA has published 

guidance affirming that PCB 

remediation waste, even if <50 ppm, is 

regulated under § 761.61.63 EPA has 

also issued numerous risk-based 

disposal approvals in the past five years 

that apply only to <50 ppm PCB 

remediation waste.64

In EPA’s view, the function of 

§ 761.50(b)(3)(ii) is to clarify that PCB 

remediation waste created by releases 

that occurred on or after the dates 

referenced in that clause can be 

managed either in accordance with the 

PCB Spill Cleanup Policy if it meets the 

criteria established in the Policy, as 

provided in § 761.50(b)(3)(ii)(A); or in 

accordance with § 761.61, as provided 

in § 761.50(b)(3)(ii)(B) and the 

introductory text to § 761.50(b)(3). This 

intention is reflected in the 1998 

Megarule preamble, which states: ‘‘With 

regard to sites containing PCB 

remediation wastes generated on or after 

April 18, 1978, owners or operators of 

those sites now have two choices: They 

may clean up the wastes in accordance 

with the new § 761.61, or, if applicable, 

they may cleanup the wastes in 

accordance with EPA’s Spill Cleanup 

Policy, part 761, subpart G.’’.65 (In 

contrast, the older PCB remediation 

waste addressed under § 761.50(b)(3)(i) 

is not eligible for management under the 

Spill Cleanup Policy.) Thus, as EPA 

interprets § 761.50(b)(3)(ii), the effect of 

adding the ‘‘as-found’’ limitation to the 

provision was to suggest that PCB 

remediation waste created by releases 

that occurred on or after the dates 

referenced in that clause, where the asfound PCB concentration is < 50 ppm, 

is not eligible for management under the 

Spill Cleanup Policy, but only under 

§ 761.61 as provided in the introductory 

text. EPA did not intend to so limit the 

Policy, which applies to the cleanup of 

certain spills resulting from the release 

of materials containing PCBs ≥50 ppm 

but is not dependent on the as-found 

concentrations of the materials 

contaminated by such spills. 

What is EPA proposing on this issue? 

EPA proposes to change the language 

in § 761.50(b)(3)(ii) by removing the 

phrase ‘‘at as found concentrations ≥50 

ppm.’’ This proposed change would 

avoid potential confusion over the 

meaning of § 761.50(b)(3)(ii) and make 

clear, consistent with the regulatory text 

and guidance, that all PCB remediation 

waste is subject to § 761.61, and that all 

qualifying PCB remediation waste can 

be managed under the Spill Cleanup 

Policy regardless of its as-found 

concentration. Since this regulatory 

change is in line with current EPA 

policy, guidance, and practice, EPA 

estimates no net economic impacts from 

this change. EPA is requesting comment 

on this proposed change. See proposed 

§ 761.50(b)(3)(ii). 

H. Make Changes To Improve 

Regulatory Implementation 

EPA proposes several supplemental 

amendments to improve 

implementation of existing 

requirements, clarify regulatory 

ambiguity, and correct technical errors 

in the PCB regulations. EPA requests 

comment on each proposed change 

listed below. 

Medium Density Plastics as Non-Porous 

Surfaces 

The definition of ‘‘non-porous 

surface’’ in § 761.3 includes several 

examples, including high-density 

plastics. EPA is proposing to modify 

this definition to include mediumdensity plastics as an example of a nonporous surface. In December 2018, EPA 

issued an interpretive letter to the 

American Gas Association which found 

that medium- and high-density 

polyethylene used in natural gas 

distribution piping meet the definition 

of a ‘‘non-porous surface’’ under 

§ 761.3.66 EPA found that the study 

titled, Assessment of Polychlorinated 

Biphenyls (PCBs) in Polyethylene (PE) 

Gas Distribution Piping, conducted by 

NYSEARCH and National Grid, 

demonstrated that the amount of PCB 

absorption into medium- and highdensity polyethylene pipe was minimal, 

and penetration of PCBs beyond the 

immediate surface was limited.67 EPA is 

taking comment on whether the relevant 

properties of medium-density 

polyethylene are representative of 

medium-density plastics generally. See 

proposed § 761.3. 

Temporary Storage in Containers at the 

Site of Generation 

The PCB regulations permit the 

storage of bulk PCB remediation waste 

in piles at the site of generation for up 

to 180 days under § 761.65(c)(9). In 

response to requests from generators, 

EPA is proposing to allow the use of 

non-leaking, covered containers under 

the same provision. Waste stored in 

containers would have to meet all of the 

same criteria as waste stored in piles, 

and thus would not incur additional 

risk. See proposed § 761.65(c)(9). 

Language Modifications for Financial 

Assurance Instruments 

The PCB regulations at § 761.65(g) 

currently require commercial storers of 

PCB waste to establish financial 

assurance for closure of PCB storage 

facilities by choosing from financial 

assurance mechanisms in the RCRA 

regulations under 40 CFR part 264. Part 

264 includes prescribed language that 

must be included in each type of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58745 

68While the text in § 761.180(b)(3)(iii) through 

(vi) is of the format ‘‘PCB waste in PCB Containers,’’ 

due to limited space in Box 14 of the manifest form, 

EPA chose to simplify the language to ‘‘PCB 

Containers’’ or similar. 

69https://www.epa.gov/hwgenerators/uniformhazardous-waste-manifest-instructions-sampleform-and-continuation-sheet. 

financial instrument. Some variation 

from the RCRA instrument wording may 

be necessary for the purposes of 

effectuating the financial assurance 

requirements under TSCA. EPA is 

proposing to allow the Regional 

Administrator (RA) the flexibility to 

modify the language required in 

financial assurance instruments for the 

purposes of implementation under 

TSCA. These proposed changes would 

allow the RA to request modification to 

the terms of those instruments to 

account for the fact that they are being 

used to fulfill a financial assurance 

obligation under TSCA; for example, 

changes to the instrument wording so 

that references to RCRA may be 

replaced with references to TSCA, or 

changes to the instruments to better 

comport with the legal authorities 

under, and applicable to, TSCA. The 

proposed changes must be made 

throughout § 761.65(g), once for each of 

the financial instruments. See proposed 

§§ 761.65(g)(1), 761.65(g)(1)(iv), 

761.65(g)(2), 761.65(g)(3)(i), 

761.65(g)(4)(i), 761.65(g)(5), 

761.65(g)(6), and 761.65(g)(7). 

Remove Manifest Tracking Numbers 

From Annual Reports 

EPA proposes to remove the provision 

at § 761.180(b)(3)(ii) requiring owners or 

operators of PCB disposal facilities or 

commercial storage facilities to record, 

as part of their logs, lists of manifest 

tracking numbers (MTNs) of signed PCB 

manifests either received by or 

generated at the facility for purposes of 

annual reporting. As of June 30, 2018, 

receiving facilities must submit final, 

signed manifests to EPA’s hazardous 

waste electronic manifest (e-Manifest) 

system. Since PCB manifests can now be 

obtained from the e-Manifest system, 

EPA no longer needs this information to 

be submitted as part of the annual 

reporting requirement. In place of the 

aforementioned requirement, EPA 

would mark § 761.180(b)(3)(ii) as 

‘‘[Reserved].’’ See proposed 

§ 761.180(b)(3)(ii). 

Mandatory Form for Annual Reports 

EPA proposes to modify how the 

annual report information is submitted 

to the Agency. While § 761.180(b)(3) 

describes the information EPA requires 

in the annual report, it does not specify 

a format. This lack of clarity has led to 

confusion on the part of both EPA and 

the regulated entities. EPA is proposing 

to require a standard form be used for 

the submission of annual reports. Use of 

the form would standardize the format 

and improve the data quality, allowing 

EPA to process the reports in less time. 

The form will also reduce reporting 

burden on some members of the 

regulated community who submit much 

more than the required information, 

such as facilities that send copies of 

every manifest instead of every manifest 

tracking number. Furthermore, the 

instructions for the form would clarify 

EPA’s expectations; for example, 

facilities should report ‘‘zero’’ in all 

categories for which they did not 

manage PCB waste in that calendar year. 

At present, many facilities omit 

categories, making it unclear as to 

whether this is an oversight or a 

determination that the categories do not 

pertain to them. 

PCB Waste Categories on the Manifest 

EPA proposes to revise the categories 

of PCB waste specified by the generator 

on the manifest to match the categories 

of PCB waste specified by the 

commercial storer or disposer in the 

annual document log and annual report. 

Harmonizing these PCB waste categories 

would streamline recordkeeping for 

commercial storers and disposers, while 

imposing negligible burden on the 

generators. Currently, § 761.207(a) 

requires PCB waste to be listed on the 

manifest as either ‘‘bulk PCBs,’’ ‘‘PCB 

Article Container or PCB Container,’’ or 

‘‘PCB Article not in a PCB Container or 

PCB Article Container.’’ EPA is 

proposing to modify § 761.207(a) to list 

the five categories from 

§ 761.180(b)(3)(iii) through (vi). If 

finalized, the categories in § 761.207(a) 

would be ‘‘bulk PCBs,’’ ‘‘PCB 

Transformers,’’ ‘‘PCB Large High or Low 

Voltage Capacitors,’’ ‘‘PCB Article 

Containers,’’ and ‘‘PCB Containers.’’ 68

The requirements for supporting data 

(unique identification number, weight 

in kilograms, date removed from 

service) would remain the same. EPA is 

also proposing to remove references to 

instructions in the Appendix of Part 262 

because the instructions were recently 

removed from it and are available on 

EPA’s website.69

Define ‘‘As-Found Concentration’’ 

EPA proposes to add a definition of 

‘‘as-found concentration’’ to § 761.3. 

‘‘As-found concentration’’ is used in the 

PCB regulations particularly in 

reference to PCB remediation waste 

(§§ 761.50(b) and 761.61). The proposed 

language clarifies that the as-found 

concentration must be measured from 

samples collected in-situ, unless 

otherwise specifically provided. 

Existing accumulations, as described in 

§ 761.340(a) would be one such 

exception. Often, ex-situ sampling 

reduces the concentration of PCBs in 

environmental media through dilution. 

The proposed definition would 

provide that ‘‘As-found concentration 

means the concentration measured in 

samples of environmental media or 

material collected in-situ (i.e. prior to 

being moved or disturbed for cleanup 

and/or disposal), unless otherwise 

specifically provided. For example, soils 

must not be disturbed, nor may they be 

diluted (e.g., excavated, placed on a 

pile, and sampled after such placement) 

before characterization sampling is 

conducted. Sampling media in piles and 

existing accumulations would be 

considered ‘‘as-found’’ if the media 

were already in piles when the site was 

first visited by the responsible party, 

such as during the redevelopment of 

abandoned properties with historic PCB 

contamination. The as-found 

concentration is distinct from the source 

concentration, which is the 

concentration of the PCBs in the 

material that was originally spilled, 

released, or otherwise disposed of at the 

site.’’ 

Clarify § 761.61(a) Cleanups Must 

Comply With All Applicable 

Requirements 

EPA proposes to clarify that 

responsible parties must ensure that 

notifications submitted under 

§ 761.61(a) comply with all 

requirements of § 761.61(a)(3)(i) in order 

to proceed without EPA approval 30 

days after submission to EPA. EPA is 

also proposing to add language 

clarifying that the subsequent cleanup 

and disposal must comply with all 

applicable requirements in 

§ 761.61(a)(4) through (9). 

The regulations at § 761.61(a) 

establish a 30-day time frame for EPA to 

review and react to self-implementing 

cleanup notifications. If the Agency 

does not respond within 30 days of 

receiving the notification, the person 

may proceed with cleanup and disposal 

in accordance with the information in 

the submitted notification. This 

provision, as currently written, equates 

EPA’s silence over the 30-day period 

with a determination by EPA that the 

notification is complete and accurate. 

EPA believes that the responsible party 

should be responsible for verifying 

completeness and accuracy of the 

notification. 

EPA is proposing to remove the 

section of text that states the responsible 

party may assume that the notification 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58746 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

70https://www.epa.gov/pcbs/tablepolychlorinated-biphenyl-pcb-congeners. 

71https://www.epa.gov/pcbs/table-aroclors. 

72 Institutional Controls: A Guide to Planning, 

Implementing, Maintaining, and Enforcing 

Institutional Controls at Contaminated Sites. 

December 2012. https://www.epa.gov/sites/ 

production/files/documents/final_pime_guidance_

december_2012.pdf. 

73Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Site 

Revitalization Guidance Under the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA). November 2005. 

Page 13. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/ 

files/2015-08/documents/pcb-guid3-06.pdf. 

is complete and acceptable if the 

Agency does not respond within 30 

days. The responsible party may still 

proceed with the cleanup if the Agency 

does not respond within 30 days. 

However, if upon review EPA 

determines that the notification does not 

contain all of the information required 

by § 761.61(a)(3)(i), sufficient to ensure 

compliance with § 761.61(a)(4) through 

(9) at the site, the Agency may require 

the submission of additional 

information. Furthermore, regardless of 

the content of the notification, the 

proposed language states that the 

cleanup and disposal must meet all 

requirements of § 761.61(a)(4) through 

(9). If the applicant has reason to believe 

their implementation of § 761.61(a) may 

not satisfy the regulatory requirements, 

it would be in their best interest, from 

a compliance assurance perspective, to 

contact the appropriate EPA Regional 

PCB Coordinator prior to the end of the 

30-day period (or earlier) or at least 

prior to commencing the cleanup and 

disposal activities. See the EPA PCB 

website for a list of the EPA Regional 

PCB Coordinators www.epa.gov/pcbs/ 

program-contacts. See proposed 

§ 761.61(a)(3)(ii). 

Harmonize PCB Concentration Language 

Regarding Cap Material 

EPA proposes to correct a remediation 

waste cap requirement to provide 

consistency with the rest of the PCB 

regulations. Currently, § 761.61(a)(7) 

requires that ‘‘a cap shall not be 

contaminated at a level ≥1 ppm PCB per 

AroclorTM (or equivalent) or per 

congener.’’ EPA is proposing to delete 

‘‘per AroclorTM (or equivalent) or per 

congener’’ to make this requirement 

consistent with the rest of the PCB 

regulations. A PCB congener is a single 

version of the PCB molecule, with a 

number of chlorine atoms attached to 

the benzene rings in different 

configurations. Theoretically, there are 

209 PCB congeners possible.70 Aroclors 

are mixtures of PCB congeners that were 

manufactured between 1929 and 1979; 

there are sixteen known Aroclors.71

Other than this paragraph, the 

regulations only specify requirements or 

restrictions based on PCB 

concentrations, rather than PCB 

congener concentrations or PCB Aroclor 

concentrations. The PCB regulations at 

§ 761.1(b)(2) state ‘‘Unless otherwise 

provided, PCBs are quantified based on 

the formulation of PCBs present in the 

material analyzed,’’ which means that 

when PCBs are present as Aroclors, e.g., 

in PCB transformer oil, they should be 

measured and reported as Aroclors. 

When PCBs are present as congeners, 

e.g., in weathered environmental 

samples, they should be measured and 

reported as congeners. Furthermore, 

there is no technical or risk-based 

reason why PCB remediation waste cap 

requirements should differ from other 

sections of the PCB regulations. As a 

result, the newly proposed language 

simply requires that ‘‘a cap shall not be 

contaminated at a level ≥1 ppm PCB.’’ 

This designation is consistent with how 

PCB limits are described in the rest of 

the TSCA PCB regulations. See 

proposed § 761.61(a)(7). 

Clarify Applicability of Deed 

Restrictions 

EPA proposes to clarify the 

requirements for deed restrictions 

associated with PCB remediation waste 

being left on-site under a selfimplementing cleanup and disposal 

activity (§ 761.61(a)). The selfimplementing cleanup and disposal 

option for PCB remediation waste 

provides for varying cleanup levels 

based on the occupancy level and the 

presence of a fence or cap. When 

cleanup levels are based upon low 

occupancy of the cleanup area or the 

existence of a fence or cap (either in 

high or low occupancy areas), deed 

restrictions are required (see 

§ 761.61(a)(8)). EPA intends for the 

December 2012 Institutional Controls 

document to provide guidance on how 

to effectively plan, implement, 

maintain, and enforce deed restrictions 

required under § 761.61(a)(8).72 EPA’s 

2005 PCB Site Revitalization Guidance 

confirms that § 761.61(a)(8) requires a 

deed restriction for all cleanups 

requiring caps or fences, and all 

cleanups based on low-occupancy 

uses.73 However, portions of the 

regulatory text could suggest that the 

deed restriction must reference lowoccupancy status and the existence of a 

cap or fence in every case, even though 

some sites with low occupancy 

cleanups will not have caps or fences, 

and some sites with caps or fences will 

not be low-occupancy. In particular, the 

text of § 761.61(a)(8)(i)(A) could suggest 

that all of the elements identified in 

§ 761.61(a)(8)(i)(A)(1) through (3) (i.e., 

low-occupancy and caps or fences) will 

be present at sites subject to the deed 

restriction, whereas EPA plainly 

intended the deed requirement to apply 

to all sites cleaned up to low-occupancy 

levels, and/or requiring caps or fences. 

To remedy any potential for confusion, 

EPA is proposing several minor edits to 

§ 761.61(a)(8) to clarify that deed 

restrictions apply to any area with a cap, 

a fence, or a low occupancy designation. 

In addition, EPA proposes to clarify in 

§ 761.61(a)(8)(i)(A) that the deed 

restriction should designate the portion 

of a property that is subject to the deed 

restriction, when applicable. The deed 

restriction should reference the location 

of the cap, fence, or low occupancy 

portion in a format that makes sense for 

the site, for example, latitude/longitude 

coordinates, street address, or annotated 

areal image. 

Include Alternate Extraction and 

Analysis Under § 761.61(c)—PCB 

Remediation Waste 

EPA proposes to clarify that the riskbased approval under § 761.61(c) can be 

used to modify or replace the extraction 

or analysis methods required for PCB 

remediation waste in lieu of a Subpart 

Q comparison study. EPA’s current 

practice is to allow responsible parties 

to request to modify or replace an 

extraction or analysis method, as they 

are considered part of the sampling 

requirements. The proposed change 

would simply clarify that responsible 

parties have this option, by adding 

‘‘extraction, analysis’’ to the list of 

modifiable requirements under a 

§ 761.61(c) risk-based approval. 

Include Alternate Extraction and 

Analysis Under § 761.62(c)—PCB Bulk 

Product Waste 

EPA proposes to clarify that the riskbased approval under § 761.62(c) can be 

used to modify or replace the extraction 

or analysis methods required for PCB 

bulk product waste in lieu of a Subpart 

Q comparison study. EPA’s current 

practice is to allow responsible parties 

to request to modify or replace an 

extraction or analysis method, as they 

are considered part of the sampling 

requirements. The proposed change 

would simply clarify that responsible 

parties have this option, by adding 

‘‘extraction, analysis’’ to the list of 

modifiable requirements under a 

§ 761.62(c) risk-based approval. 

Include Alternate Extraction and 

Analysis Under § 761.79(h)— 

Decontaminated Material 

EPA proposes to clarify that an 

approval under § 761.79(h) can be used 

to modify or replace the extraction or 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58747 

74 77 FR 2463, Jan. 18, 2012. 

75 57 FR 13323, Apr. 16, 1992. 

76https://compass.astm.org/Standards/ 

WITHDRAWN/D2784.htm. 

77https://compass.astm.org/Standards/ 

WITHDRAWN/D3178.htm. 

analysis methods required for 

decontaminated PCB waste in lieu of a 

Subpart Q comparison study. EPA’s 

current practice is to allow responsible 

parties to request to modify or replace 

an extraction or analysis method, as 

they are considered part of the sampling 

procedure. The proposed change would 

simply clarify that responsible parties 

have this option, by adding ‘‘extraction, 

analysis’’ to the list of modifiable 

requirements under a § 761.79(h) 

approval. 

Clarify Sampling Procedure for NonPorous Surfaces 

EPA proposes to correct an 

inconsistency in the site 

characterization requirements for nonporous surfaces conducted pursuant to 

the self-implementing cleanup option 

for PCB remediation waste (§ 761.61(a)). 

This self-implementing cleanup and 

disposal option states that site 

characterization of non-porous surfaces 

may be conducted using procedures 

included in Subpart N. The method 

found in Subpart N for sampling nonporous surfaces (§ 761.267) specifies 

that the sampling area shall be divided 

into ‘‘square portions approximately 2 

meters on each side’’ and ‘‘[f]ollow[ing] 

the procedures in § 761.302(a).’’ 

However, § 761.302(a), which is the 

section of the regulations pertaining to 

post-cleanup sampling of non-porous 

surfaces, specifies dividing the surface 

into 1 meter square portions instead of 

2 meters. EPA is proposing to amend 

§ 761.267 by adding the following 

italicized language to this provision, 

‘‘Follow the procedures in § 761.302(a), 

with the exception of the sampling grid 

size,’’ to correct this inconsistency. This 

change reflects the way in which the 

EPA has already been addressing the 

inconsistency. See proposed 

§ 761.267(a). 

Add Unit to Concentration in 

§ 761.1(b)(3) 

Currently, § 761.1(b)(3) lists a 

concentration with only partial units of 

reference, ‘‘PCB concentrations of >10/ 

100 cm2,’’ which is meaningless, as 

written. It is clear from context that the 

text should read ‘‘PCB concentrations of 

≥10 mg/100 cm2,’’ which is how the 

referenced concentration otherwise 

appears throughout the PCB regulations, 

for example in § 761.79(b). Thus, EPA is 

proposing to modify the § 761.1(b)(3) 

text to read ‘‘PCB concentrations of ≥10 

mg/100 cm2.’’ EPA is also proposing to 

harmonize the ‘‘greater/less than’’ and 

‘‘greater/less than or equal to’’ symbols 

in this section. See proposed 

§ 761.1(b)(3). 

Update ASTM Methods 

The regulations at § 761.19 

incorporate by reference several ASTM 

test method standards that have since 

been updated. These ASTM standards 

reflect the current consensus of ASTM 

members. EPA proposes to make the 

following changes: 

ASTM D93–09, Standard Test 

Methods for Flash Point by PenskyMartens Closed Tester, was approved by 

ASTM in 2009 and added to the PCB 

regulations in 2012 at §§ 761.71(b)(2)(vi) 

and 761.75(b)(8)(iii).74 EPA is proposing 

to add as an alternative ASTM D8175– 

18, Test Method for Finite Flash Point 

Determination of Liquid Wastes by 

Pensky-Martens Closed Cup Tester. 

ASTM D3278–89, Standard Test 

Methods for Flash Point of Liquids by 

Setaflash Closed-Cup Apparatus, was 

approved by ASTM in 1989 and added 

to the PCB regulations in 1992 at 

§ 761.75(b)(8)(iii).75 EPA is proposing to 

replace it with the updated version, 

ASTM D3278–96 (Reapproved 2011), 

Standard Test Methods for Flash Point 

of Liquids by Small Scale Closed-Cup 

Apparatus, and add ASTM D8174–18, 

Test Method for Finite Flash Point 

Determination of Liquid Wastes by 

Small Scale Closed Cup Tester at 

§§ 761.71(b)(2)(vi) and 761.75(b)(8)(iii). 

EPA is proposing to remove ASTM 

D2784–89, Standard Test Method for 

Sulfur in Liquified Petroleum Gases 

(Oxy-hydrogen Burner or Lamp) from 

§ 761.19 and § 71(a)(2)(vi). This test 

method was withdrawn in June 2016 

because it is archaic and not used in the 

industry.76

EPA is proposing to replace ASTM 

D3178–84, Standard Test Methods for 

Carbon and Hydrogen in the Analysis 

Sample of Coke and Coal, with D5373– 

16, Standard Test Methods for 

Determination of Carbon, Hydrogen and 

Nitrogen in Analysis Samples of Coal 

and Carbon in Analysis Samples of Coal 

and Coke, in §§ 761.19 and 

761.71(a)(2)(vi). ASTM D3178–84 was 

replaced in June 2007 because there was 

no reproducibility statement for 

D3178.77

EPA is proposing to update ASTM 

Standard D–4059, Standard Test 

Method for Analysis of Polychlorinated 

Biphenyls in Insulating Liquids by Gas 

Chromatography, with ASTM D4059–00 

(Reapproved 2018), Standard Test 

Methods for Analysis of Polychlorinated 

Biphenyls in Insulating Liquids by Gas 

Chromatography, in §§ 761.19 and 

761.60(g)(iii). 

EPA is proposing to replace ASTM 

D482–87, Standard Test Method for Ash 

from Petroleum Products, with ASTM 

D482–13, Standard Test Method for Ash 

from Petroleum Products, in 

§ 761.71(a)(2)(vi). EPA is also proposing 

to replace ASTM D3278–89, Standard 

Test Methods for Flash Point of Liquids 

by Setaflash Closed-Cup Apparatus, 

with ASTM D3278–96, Standard Test 

Methods for Flash Point of Liquids by 

Small Scale Closed-Cup Apparatus, in 

§ 761.75(b)(8)(iii) (see above). ASTM 

began building its electronic library of 

standards in the 1990s, so the 1987 

version of ASTM D482 and the 1989 

version of ASTM D3278 are no longer 

available from the ASTM website. 

Therefore, the Agency is updating 

ASTM D482–87 and ASTM D3278–89 to 

list the most recent versions of the 

methods. 

Furthermore, EPA requests public 

comment on whether there are other 

standards that should be incorporated 

by reference or whether there are 

standards that should be removed from 

the regulations entirely. EPA is relying 

on voluntary consensus standards 

developed by ASTM and already in use 

in the laboratory testing sector, which is 

consistent with the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act 

(NTTAA). EPA has found that most of 

the entities that would have to comply 

with these standards are already 

familiar with them, since it would be 

difficult to be in the business of testing 

for PCBs without being familiar with 

these industry consensus standards. The 

standards are all readily available 

electronically or in print and are 

relatively inexpensive. See proposed 

§ 761.19. 

Require a Wipe Sample Under 

§ 761.30(i)(4) 

Currently, § 761.30(i)(4) (covering 

PCB characterization of natural gas 

pipe) reads, in part, ‘‘. . . if no liquids 

are present, they must use standard 

wipe samples in accordance with 

Subpart M of this part.’’ This language 

might be read to mean that all owners 

of natural gas pipe must characterize 

their pipe and must do so using a wipe 

sample if no liquids are present. 

However, the sentence was meant to 

convey that if an owner chooses to 

characterize natural gas pipe that does 

not contain liquids, they must do so 

using wipe samples. Therefore, EPA is 

proposing to replace the existing text 

with ‘‘if no liquids are present and they 

decide, in their discretion, to 

characterize PCB contamination, the 

person must use standard wipe samples 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58748 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

78U.S. EPA, Method 3500B Organic Extraction 

and Sample Preparation. Office of Land and 

Emergency Management, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery, Materials Recovery and 

Waste Management Division (5303P). Washington, 

DC. December 1996. 

79U.S. EPA, Method 3500C Organic Extraction 

and Sample Preparation. Office of Land and 

Emergency Management, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery, Materials Recovery and 

Waste Management Division (5303P). Washington, 

DC. February 2007. 

in accordance with Subpart M of this 

part.’’ See proposed § 761.30(i)(4). 

High Efficiency Boilers Approval 

Application Requirements 

EPA is proposing to correct an 

editorial error in § 761.71. This section 

describes the required operating 

parameters for high efficiency boilers 

that dispose of PCB waste. The 

requirements for high efficiency boilers 

are divided into two sections, a section 

for burning PCB-contaminated mineral 

oil dielectric fluid (§ 761.71(a)) and a 

section for burning any other PCBcontaminated fluids (§ 761.71(b)). 

Mineral oil dielectric fluid is an 

insulating fluid used in electrical 

equipment such as transformers. Other 

PCB-contaminated fluids might include 

used oil, contaminated water, and 

hydraulic fluid. Despite the fact that 

§ 761.71(b) regulates high efficiency 

boilers that burn PCB liquids other than 

mineral oil dielectric fluid, 

§ 761.71(b)(2)(iv) requires persons 

seeking approval to burn these liquids 

to submit to the EPA Regional 

Administrator a statement of ‘‘the type 

of equipment, apparatus, and 

procedures to be used to control the 

feed of mineral oil dielectric fluid to the 

boiler . . .’’ (emphasis added). In that 

sentence, ‘‘mineral oil dielectric fluid’’ 

should, instead, be ‘‘PCB liquids.’’ This 

proposal would amend § 761.71(b)(2)(iv) 

to correct this error by replacing the 

phrase ‘‘mineral oil dielectric fluid’’ 

with ‘‘PCB liquids.’’ See proposed 

§ 761.71(b)(2)(iv). 

Mailing Address for Annual Reports 

Currently, the owner or operator of 

any PCB disposal facility or commercial 

storage facility submits an annual report 

to the EPA Regional Administrator for 

the region in which the facility is 

located, pursuant to § 761.180(b)(3). 

EPA proposes to change the recipient of 

the annual reports from the Regional 

Administrator to the Director of the 

Office of Resource Conservation and 

Recovery, which is the office in EPA 

headquarters that manages the PCB 

cleanup and disposal program. An 

analogous change is also proposed in 

§ 761.3 under the definition of annual 

report. This change would reduce the 

administrative burden on the Agency of 

compiling the data in the annual 

reports, which is used to inform Agency 

actions. The address for submission 

would be displayed prominently on the 

proposed mandatory form. See proposed 

§§ 761.3 and 761.180(b)(3). 

Update Address for Submission of EPA 

Form 7710–53 

EPA proposes to remove the address 

for EPA form 7710–53, ‘‘Notification of 

PCB Activity,’’ from the regulations. 

This change will allow EPA to more 

easily update the mailing address in the 

future without undergoing a regulatory 

change. The mailing address will 

continue to appear on the form itself 

and can be updated through the 

Information Collection Response (ICR) 

process. This proposed change would 

expedite future address changes and 

thus streamline the distribution of mail 

and reduce the processing time for these 

forms. See proposed § 761.205(a)(3), 

§ 761.205(d). 

Add Field for Facility Email Address 

and EPA PCB Email Address to EPA 

Form 7710–53 

EPA form 7710–53, ‘‘Notification of 

PCB Activity,’’ currently does not 

include space for an email address for 

the facility point of contact. EPA 

proposes to change the regulations so 

that an email address must be submitted 

on the notification form. Additionally, 

EPA is adding the EPA PCB email 

address (ORCRPCBs@epa.gov) to the 

notification form to facilitate any 

questions from members of the public. 

These proposed changes would improve 

communication and reduce the 

processing time for these forms. See 

proposed § 761.205(a)(3), § 761.205(d). 

Sample Site Selection Instructions for 

Pipelines 

Subpart M provides a number of steps 

that must be followed when selecting 

the locations for sampling to 

characterize natural gas pipeline. EPA 

found that, due to rounding errors, the 

instructions for a pipeline greater than 

seven segments but shorter than three 

miles in length are, at present, incorrect. 

EPA proposes to modify the instructions 

and the example given in 

§ 761.247(b)(2)(ii)(B) to clarify where 

each sample must be taken along 

pipelines of this length. This change is 

a technical correction and does not 

influence the number of samples taken 

or the burden on the owner of the pipe. 

See proposed § 761.247(b)(2)(ii)(B). 

Remove Reference to Method 3500B 

SW–846 is organized such that several 

similar methods are grouped together in 

a series and the 3500 series contains 

extraction procedures used for the 

preparation of samples for analysis of 

organic parameters. These techniques 

include Liquid-Liquid Extraction, SolidPhase Extraction, Soxhlet Extraction, 

and Supercritical Fluid Extraction, 

among others. Method 3500B (recently 

updated to Method 3500C) is not a 

detailed method where step-by-step 

instructions are discussed.78 79 Rather, 

Method 3500B simply provides general 

guidance for all the methods within its 

series (i.e., 3500 series), including the 

extraction methods proposed to be 

added as part of this rulemaking. Also, 

Method 3500B or 3500C is already 

referenced in every 3500 series method 

EPA is proposing to add to the PCB 

Regulations. Therefore, EPA feels that it 

is unnecessary to reference Method 

3500B in the PCB regulations directly 

and proposes to remove the reference 

from the PCB regulations. The removal 

of Method 3500B from the regulations 

would not influence any of the 3500 

series methods currently in or proposed 

to be added to the PCB regulations. The 

PCB regulatory sections affected include 

§§ 761.61(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iv), 761.253, 

761.272, 761.292, 761.358, and 761.395. 

Correct References to SW–846 

The official title of the EPA 

publication known as SW–846 has been 

updated from ‘‘Test Methods for 

Evaluating Solid Waste’’ to ‘‘Test 

Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste: 

Physical/Chemical Methods.’’ There are 

several references to this publication 

throughout the PCB regulations. EPA 

proposes to update the definition of 

SW–846 in § 761.3 with the current 

official title, and then refer to it as ‘‘SW– 

846’’ throughout the PCB regulations, 

for readability. See proposed §§ 761.3, 

761.60(g)(1)(iii), 761.61(a)(5)(i)(B)(2)(iv), 

761.253(a), 761.272, 761.292, 761.358, 

761.395(b)(1). 

Correct References to EPA’s PCB 

Website 

There are several references 

throughout the PCB regulations to the 

EPA’s PCB website. In 2015, as part of 

a redesign, the URL for the EPA PCB 

web page changed from https://

www.epa.gov/pcb to https://

www.epa.gov/pcbs. EPA proposes to 

update those references throughout the 

PCB regulations. See proposed 

§§ 761.130(e), 761.205(a)(3), 761.243(a), 

761.386(e). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58749 

Change ‘‘he’’ to ‘‘they’’ 

The PCB regulations frequently refer 

to generic individuals such as the 

Regional Administrator or facility 

owners as ‘‘he,’’ ‘‘his,’’ ‘‘he/she,’’ or ‘‘he 

or she.’’ EPA proposes to replace all 

such references with the gender neutral 

‘‘they’’ and ‘‘their.’’ See proposed 

§§ 761.3, 761.20(e)(3)(ii)(B), 

761.20(e)(4)(i), 761.20(e)(4)(ii), 

761.50(b)(3)(i)(A), 761.60(b)(2)(v)(C), 

761.61(a)(8)(i)(B), 761.65(g), 761.65(h), 

761.70(d)(4)(i), 761.75(c)(3)(i), 

761.75(c)(4), 761.77(a)(1)(ii)(B), 

761.77(a)(2), 761.77(b), 761.120(b)(2), 

761.125(c)(3)(iii), 761.125(c)(4)(iv), 

761.180(b)(4), 761.207(c), 761.212(a), 

761.213(a)(4), 761.213(b), 761.214(a), 

761.216(a), 761.217(a)(2)(ii). 

Change ‘‘on site’’ to ‘‘on-site’’ 

The term ‘‘on site’’ is included in the 

definitions at § 761.3, but the PCB 

regulations use the term ‘‘on-site’’ 

throughout. EPA proposes to modify 

§ 761.3 to read ‘‘on-site’’ to improve the 

readability of the PCB regulations. See 

proposed § 761.3. 

Correct Reference to Methods for 

Standard Wipe Test Samples 

Currently, § 761.314 ‘‘Chemical 

analysis of standard wipe test samples’’ 

instructs the reader to ‘‘perform the 

chemical analysis of standard wipe test 

samples in accordance with § 761.272.’’ 

While § 761.272 does contain the 

allowable methods for wipe test 

samples, it also lists several other 

methods that would not be appropriate 

for wipe test samples. This reference is 

proposed to be corrected to § 761.253, 

which is specific to wipe samples. 

Incorporation by Reference 

The Agency is proposing to 

incorporate by reference SW–846 Test 

Methods 3540C, 3541, 3545A, 3546, 

3510C, 3520C, 3535A, 8082, 8082A, and 

8275A into 40 CFR part 761 under 

§§ 761.60, 761.61, 761.253, 761.272, 

761.292, 761.358, and 761.395. The 

Agency is also proposing to incorporate 

by reference Clean Water Act Analytical 

Method 1668C into 40 CFR part 761 

under §§ 761.60, 761.61, 761.253, 

761.272, 761.292, 761.358, and 761.395. 

These test methods are described in 

detail in Section III.A. Expand Available 

Extraction Methods for PCBs and 

Section III.C. Add Determinative 

Methods for the PCB Regulations, above. 

The Agency is also proposing to 

incorporate the following methods by 

refence that involve testing the flash 

points of liquids to evaluate the 

ignitability of liquid wastes: ASTM 

standards D3278–96 (Reapproved 2011), 

D8174–18, and D8175–18. ASTM 

D3278–96 (Reapproved 2011) uses a 

small-scale tester to determine the flash 

point, ASTM D8174–18 also uses a 

small-scale tester but tests whether a 

material does or does not flash at a 

specific temperature, and ASTM 

D8175–18 uses a Pensky-Martens tester 

to determine the flash point. Likewise, 

the Agency is proposing to incorporate 

by reference ASTM standard D482–13, 

which determines the percentage of ash 

generated from distillate and residual 

fuels, gas turbine fuels, crude oils, 

lubricating oils, waxes, and other 

petroleum products. The Agency is also 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

ASTM Standard D4059–00 (R18), which 

is a quantitative determination of the 

concentration of polychlorinated 

biphenyls (PCBs) in electrical insulating 

liquids by gas chromatography. Lastly, 

the Agency is proposing to incorporate 

by reference ASTM Standard D5373–16, 

which is used to determine the 

concentration of hydrogen and nitrogen 

in analysis samples of coal and of 

carbon in analysis samples of coal and 

coke. These methods will be 

incorporated by reference into 40 CFR 

part 761 under §§ 761.60, 761.71, and 

761.75. 

ASTM D93–09, D129–64, D240–87, 

D524–88, D808–87, D923–86, D923–89, 

D1266–87, D1796–83, D2158–89, 

D2709–88, and E258–67 (Reapproved 

1987) were previously approved for 

incorporation by reference on January 

18, 2012. 

The SW–846 Test Methods proposed 

for incorporation by reference are 

published in the test methods 

compendium known as, ‘‘Test Methods 

for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/ 

Chemical Methods,’’ EPA Publication 

SW–846, Third Edition, available at 

https://www.epa.gov/hw-sw846. The 

Clean Water Act Analytical Methods are 

available at https://www.epa.gov/cwamethods. ASTM materials may be 

obtained from ASTM International, 100 

Barr Harbor Dr., P.O. Box C700, West 

Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959, or by 

calling (877) 909–ASTM, or at https://

www.astm.org. All methods proposed 

for incorporation by reference are also 

included in the docket. 

IV. Economic Impacts of the Proposed 

Rulemaking 

One focus of the proposed rule is 

expanding the allowable PCB extraction 

methods, which would impact testing 

laboratories (NAICS code 541380) that 

currently perform PCB extractions 

under TSCA. Based on method-specific 

certifications and communication with 

laboratory personnel, EPA estimates that 

approximately 22 laboratories would be 

impacted by the proposed rule. Further, 

EPA estimates that these 22 laboratories 

perform approximately 65,000 relevant 

extractions each year. Some laboratories 

may experience a one-time cost of 

purchasing equipment used to perform 

one of the proposed extraction methods. 

However, the decreases in solvent and 

labor hours required to perform the 

proposed extraction methods are 

expected to result in net annual cost 

savings of approximately $4.2 million 

(annualized at a discount rate of seven 

percent). 

Updating the permissible PCB 

determinative methods would offer the 

regulated community greater flexibility. 

However, EPA does not anticipate that 

it would have an economic impact, 

since most labs are expected to continue 

using EPA Method 8082 or EPA Method 

8082A as their PCB determinative 

method. 

The proposed revisions to § 761.61(b) 

may impact any facility performing a 

PCB site remediation under § 761.61(b). 

No data are available on the exact 

number of § 761.61(b) remediations 

performed annually, but EPA estimates 

that there would be between 430 and 

460 relevant remediations per year, 

based on an analysis of 2018 and 2019 

hazardous waste manifests. Certain 

aspects of this provision would increase 

burden on the regulated community 

through certain requirements (e.g., 

recordkeeping, notification, sampling). 

However, EPA also proposes to allow 

for disposal of relevant waste at RCRA 

Subtitle C landfills under § 761.61(b), in 

addition to the existing disposal options 

(e.g. TSCA landfills, TSCA incinerators), 

which will decrease transportation and 

disposal costs related to non-hazardous, 

non-liquid PCB waste for the regulated 

community. Overall, the proposed 

revisions to § 761.61(b) are expected to 

result in net annual cost savings 

between $9.2 million and $10.9 million 

(annualized at a discount rate of seven 

percent). 

Disallowing PCB bulk product waste 

to be used as roadbed has the potential 

to create a slight increase in costs for the 

regulated community. Facilities that 

would have used PCB bulk product 

waste on-site as roadbed under asphalt 

would now have to pay to transport the 

waste to a municipal solid waste landfill 

and pay the associated tipping fee for 

disposal. EPA believes that the practice 

of using PCB bulk product waste as 

roadbed is exceedingly rare. However, 

in an effort to incorporate all potential 

impacts of the proposed rule, the 

Economic Assessment modeled a single 

party using PCB bulk product waste as 

roadbed per year. EPA estimates that the 

cost increase for the regulated 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58750 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

community would be between $660 and 

$5,950 per year. 

EPA anticipates that the added 

flexibilities for emergency situations 

would result in cost savings for the 

regulated community. EPA estimates 

that there would be between 12 and 60 

emergencies each year where the 

regulated community may use the 

proposed flexibilities. A lack of data 

prevents an overall quantitative estimate 

of the cost savings from this provision. 

However, impacted parties are expected 

to save money and time by avoiding 

delays associated with searches for the 

source of the spill during an emergency 

situation where the search is likely to be 

time-consuming and unsuccessful, and 

by being able to manage waste under the 

less burdensome procedures of 

§ 761.125(b), rather than § 761.125(c). 

The regulated community is also 

expected to see a decrease in sampling 

and testing expenditures. 

The proposed change to harmonize 

the general disposal requirements for 

PCB remediation waste is in line with 

current EPA policy, guidance and 

practice. Therefore, EPA estimates that 

this change will not have any economic 

impact. 

The Economic Assessment for the 

proposed rule is constrained by the lack 

of relevant data, largely because the 

proposed rule makes changes to 

provisions that are self-implementing 

and/or require no EPA notification. EPA 

has quantified costs and cost savings 

when possible. When quantification has 

not been possible, EPA has analyzed the 

costs and cost savings qualitatively. The 

Economic Assessment associated with 

the proposed rule can be referenced for 

a greater level of detail related to the 

costs and benefits of the proposed 

provisions. EPA requests comments and 

data related to the universe of parties 

impacted by the proposed provisions 

and the economic impact of the 

proposed rule. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is a significant regulatory 

action that was submitted to the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review under Executive Order 12866 (58 

FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 

Executive Order 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). Any changes made in 

response to OMB recommendations 

have been documented in the docket. 

The Economic Assessment is available 

in the docket and is summarized in 

Section I.D What are the projected 

economic impacts of this action? of the 

preamble. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

The information collection activities 

in this proposed rule have been 

submitted for approval to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The 

Information Collection Request (ICR) 

document that the EPA prepared has 

been assigned EPA ICR number 2688.01 

(2050–NEW). You can find a copy of the 

ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is 

briefly summarized here. 

Respondents/affected entities: The 

information collection requirements of 

the proposed rule affect facilities that 

will read the proposed rule, responsible 

parties using § 761.61(b)(1) 

performance-based cleanup, responsible 

parties using § 761.66 waivers in 

emergency situations, commercial 

storers and disposers submitting annual 

reports, and entities submitting 

Notification of PCB Activity forms. 

Respondent’s obligation to respond: 

The recordkeeping and notification 

requirements are required for parties 

performing relevant activities (e.g. using 

§ 761.66 waivers in emergency 

situations). These requirements are 

described in detail in the ICR 

Supporting Statement. 

Estimated number of respondents: 

1,085. 

Frequency of response: On occasion/ 

as necessary. 

Total estimated burden: 8,276 hours. 

Total estimated cost: $979,187. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for the EPA’s regulations in 40 

CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. Submit 

your comments on the Agency’s need 

for this information, the accuracy of the 

provided burden estimates and any 

suggested methods for minimizing 

respondent burden to the EPA using the 

docket identified at the beginning of this 

rule. You may also send your ICRrelated comments to OMB’s Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs via 

email to OIRA_submission@

omb.eop.gov, Attention: Desk Officer for 

EPA. Since OMB is required to make a 

decision concerning the ICR between 30 

and 60 days after receipt, OMB must 

receive comments no later than 

November 22, 2021. The EPA will 

respond to any ICR-related comments in 

the final rule. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. In 

making this determination, the impact 

of concern is any significant adverse 

economic impact on small entities. An 

agency may certify that a rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities if 

the rule relieves burden or has no net 

burden on the small entities subject to 

the rule. These proposed changes would 

reduce the impacts on all small entities 

subject to the rule, so there are no 

significant impacts to any small entities. 

We have therefore concluded that this 

action will relieve regulatory burden for 

all directly regulated small entities. 

Details of this analysis are presented in 

the Economic Assessment, which is in 

the public docket for this action. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain an 

unfunded mandate of $100 million or 

more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 

1531–1538, and does not significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. EPA 

estimates that the proposed rule would 

result in net annual cost savings of 

between $4.3 and $9.1 million, 

assuming a seven percent discount rate. 

As a result, EPA expects that the rule 

would not result in annual expenditures 

exceeding $100 million annually and 

therefore would not be subject to 

requirements of section 202 of UMRA as 

listed above. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the states, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000) because the action is not expected 

to result in any adverse environmental 

or human health impacts on tribal 

entities. In addition, the action is 

expected to result in a cost savings, and 

not expected to result in any adverse 

financial impacts on tribal entities. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58751 

apply to this rule. Consistent with the 

EPA Policy on Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribes, the 

EPA prepared a tribal consultation and 

coordination plan and sent a letter to 

the tribes on July 13, 2021, inviting 

consultation. EPA will provide a 

summary of any tribal consultation 

conducted in the docket. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 (62 FR. 19885, April 23, 

1997) because it is not an economically 

significant regulatory action as defined 

by Executive Order 12866. In addition, 

because the rule would not increase risk 

related to exposure to hazardous 

materials, the Agency does not believe 

the environmental health or safety risks 

addressed by this action present a 

disproportionate risk to children. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

that Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, 

or Use’’ (May 18, 2001) because it is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution or use of 

energy. The proposed rule would not 

directly regulate energy production or 

consumption and is expected to result 

in net cost savings. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This action involves technical 

standards. In this rulemaking, the EPA 

incorporates voluntary consensus 

standards (VCSs) developed by both 

ASTM and the Agency into the 

rulemaking, consistent with the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA). These 

VCSs support PCB cleanups as well 

sampling activities including the 

extraction and analysis of PCBs. For 

more details on the technical standards 

that EPA is using in this rulemaking, 

please see Section III.G—Incorporation 

by Reference. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

EPA believes that this action does not 

have disproportionately high and 

adverse health or environmental effects 

on minority populations, low-income 

populations and/or indigenous peoples, 

as specified in Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In fact, 

this action is expected to benefit these 

populations. 

Generally, the proposed rule would 

modernize PCB regulations, making it 

easier and more affordable to clean up 

contaminated sites, while continuing to 

ensure that the requirements remain 

protective of health and the 

environment. Underserved, 

disadvantaged, and overburdened 

communities are expected to benefit 

from quicker, more cost-effective, 

compliant cleanups under the proposed 

rule. For example, adding explicit 

cleanup provisions under § 761.61(b), 

including the requirements to notify 

EPA and follow specific sampling 

protocols, would provide additional 

assurance that sites are properly 

remediated and enable compliance and 

enforcement. Furthermore, the 

increased flexibility in emergency 

situations would allow the Agency to 

work collaboratively with responsible 

parties during and after the response to 

a natural disaster or other emergency, 

which can disproportionately impact 

such communities. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 761 

Environmental protection, Hazardous 

substances, Incorporation by reference, 

Labeling, Polychlorinated biphenyls 

(PCBs), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Barry N. Breen, 

Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of 

Land and Emergency Management. 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, EPA proposes to amend title 

40, chapter I of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, part 761 as follows: 

PART 761—POLYCHLORINATED 

BIPHENYLS (PCBs) 

MANUFACTURING, PROCESSING, 

DISTRIBUTION IN COMMERCE, AND 

USE PROHIBITIONS 

■ 1. In part 761, the authority citation 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605, 2607, 2611, 

2614, and 2616. 

Subpart A—General 

■ 2. Amend § 761.1 by revising 

paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 761.1 Applicability. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) Most provisions in this part apply 

only if PCBs are present in 

concentrations above a specified level. 

Provisions that apply to PCBs at 

concentrations of <50 ppm apply also to 

contaminated surfaces at PCB 

concentrations of <10 mg/100 cm2. 

Provisions that apply to PCBs at 

concentrations of ≥50 to <500 ppm 

apply also to contaminated surfaces at 

PCB concentrations of ≥10 mg/100 cm2

to <100 mg/100 cm2. Provisions that 

apply to PCBs at concentrations of ≥500 

ppm apply also to contaminated 

surfaces at PCB concentrations of ≥100 

mg/100 cm2. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 761.3 by: 

■ a. Removing in the definition the 

words‘‘On site’’ and adding in its place 

the words ‘‘On-site’’; 

■ b. Adding in alphabetical order the 

definitions ‘‘As-found concentration’’, 

‘‘CWA’’, ‘‘Director, Office Resource 

Conservation and Recovery’’, and 

‘‘Emergency situation’’; and 

■ c. Revising the definitions 

‘‘Administrator’’, ‘‘Annual report’’, 

‘‘ASTM’’, ‘‘NTIS’’, ‘‘Non-porous 

surface’’, and ‘‘SW–846’’. 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 761.3 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Administrator means the 

Administrator of the Environmental 

Protection Agency, or any employee of 

the Agency to whom the Administrator 

may either herein or by order delegate 

their authority to carry out their 

functions, or any person who shall by 

operation of law be authorized to carry 

out such functions. 

* * * * * 

Annual report means the completed 

EPA Form 6200–025 submitted each 

year by each disposer and commercial 

storer of PCB waste to the Director, 

Office of Resource Conservation and 

Recovery. The annual report is a brief 

summary of the information included in 

the annual document log. 

* * * * * 

As-found concentration means the 

concentration measured in samples 

collected in-situ (i.e., prior to being 

moved or disturbed for cleanup and/or 

disposal) from environmental media or 

material, unless otherwise specifically 

provided. For example, media must not 

be disturbed, nor may they be diluted 

(e.g., excavated, placed on a pile, and 

sampled after such placement) before 

characterization sampling is conducted. 

Sampling media in piles and existing 

accumulations would be considered 

‘‘as-found’’ if the media were already in 

piles when the site was first visited by 

the responsible party, such as during the 

redevelopment of abandoned properties 

with historic PCB contamination. The 

as-found concentration is distinct from 

the source concentration, which is the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58752 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

concentration of the PCBs in the 

material that was originally spilled, 

released, or otherwise disposed of at the 

site. 

* * * * * 

ASTM means ASTM International, 

100 Barr Harbor Drive, West 

Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959. 

* * * * * 

CWA means Clean Water Act, also 

known as the Federal Waters Pollution 

Control Act Amendments of 1972 (33 

U.S.C. 12–51–1387, amended ch.23 

1151). 

* * * * * 

Director, Office Resource 

Conservation and Recovery means the 

Director of the Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery of the Office 

of Land and Emergency Management of 

the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency. Submissions to the 

Director shall be sent to 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, MC5303P, 

Washington, DC 20460. 

* * * * * 

Emergency situation means adverse 

conditions caused by manmade or 

natural incidents that threaten lives, 

property, or public health and safety; 

require prompt responsive action from 

the local, state, tribal, territorial, or 

federal government; and result in: (1) A 

declaration by either the President of 

the United States or Governor of the 

affected state of a natural disaster or 

emergency; or, (2) an incident funded 

under the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) via a 

Stafford Act disaster declaration or 

emergency declaration. Examples of 

emergency situations may include civil 

emergencies or adverse natural 

conditions, such as hurricanes, 

earthquakes, or tornados. 

* * * * * 

NTIS means the National Technical 

Information Service, 1401 Constitution 

Ave NW, Washington, DC 20230, 

telephone: (703) 605–6060. 

* * * * * 

Non-porous surface means a smooth, 

unpainted solid surface that limits 

penetration of liquid containing PCBs 

beyond the immediate surface. 

Examples are: Smooth uncorroded 

metal; natural gas pipe with a thin 

porous coating originally applied to 

inhibit corrosion; smooth glass; smooth 

glazed ceramics; impermeable polished 

building stone such as marble or granite; 

and medium- and high-density plastics, 

such as polycarbonates and melamines, 

that do not absorb solvents. 

* * * * * 

SW–846 means the document having 

the title ‘‘SW–846, Test Methods for 

Evaluating Solid Waste: Physical/ 

Chemical Methods,’’ also known as the 

SW–846 Compendium, which is 

available online at https://www.epa.gov/ 

hw-sw846. Hard copies can be obtained 

from NTIS, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Ave NW, 

Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (703) 

605–6060. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Revise § 761.19 to read as follows: 

§ 761.19 Incorporation by reference. 

The materials listed in this section are 

incorporated by reference into this part 

with the approval of the Director of the 

Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) 

and 1 CFR part 51. All approved 

material is available for inspection at 

the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Rm. 

3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001, (202) 566–1744, and is 

available from the sources listed in the 

following paragraphs of this section. It 

is also available for inspection at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, email fr.inspection@

nara.gov or go towww.archives.gov/ 

federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html. 

(a) ASTM International. 100 Barr 

Harbor Dr., P.O. Box C700, West 

Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959, (877) 

909–ASTM, www.astm.org. 

(1) ASTM D93–09, Standard Test 

Methods for Flash Point by PenskyMartens Closed Tester, Approved 

December 15, 2009, IBR approved for 

§§ 761.71 and 761.75. 

(2) ASTM D129–64, Standard Test 

Method for Sulfur in Petroleum 

Products (General Bomb Method), 

Reapproved 1978, IBR approved for 

§ 761.71. 

(3) ASTM D240–87, Standard Test 

Method for Heat of Combustion of 

Liquid Hydrocarbon Fuel by Bomb 

Calorimeter, Approved 1987, IBR 

approved for § 761.71. 

(4) ASTM D482–13, Standard Test 

Method for Ash from Petroleum 

Products, Approved June 2013, IBR 

approved for § 761.71. 

(5) ASTM D524–88, Standard Test 

Method for Ramsbottom Carbon Residue 

of Petroleum Products, Approved 1988, 

IBR approved for § 761.71. 

(6) ASTM D808–87, Standard Test 

Method for Chlorine in New and Used 

Petroleum Products (Bomb Method), 

Approved 1987, IBR approved for 

§ 761.71. 

(7) ASTM D923–86, Standard Test 

Method for Sampling Electrical 

Insulating Liquids, Approved 1986, IBR 

approved for § 761.60. 

(8) ASTM D923–89, Standard 

Methods of Sampling Electrical 

Insulating Liquids, Approved 1989, IBR 

approved for § 761.60. 

(9) ASTM D1266–87, Standard Test 

Method for Sulfur in Petroleum 

Products (Lamp Method), October 1987, 

IBR approved for § 761.71. 

(10) ASTM D1796–83, Standard Test 

Method for Water and Sediment in Fuel 

Oils by the Centrifuge Method 

(Laboratory Procedure), Reapproved 

1990, IBR approved for § 761.71. 

(11) ASTM D2158–89, Standard Test 

Method for Residues in Liquified 

Petroleum (LP) Gases, Approved 1989, 

IBR approved for § 761.71. 

(12) ASTM D2709–88, Standard Test 

Method for Water and Sediment in 

Distillate Fuels by Centrifuge, Approved 

1988, IBR approved for § 761.71. 

(13) ASTM D3278–96 (Reapproved 

2011), Standard Test Methods for Flash 

Point of Liquids by Small Scale ClosedCup Apparatus, Approved June 2011, 

IBR approved for § 761.75. 

(14) ASTM Standard D4059–00 

(Reapproved 2018), Standard Test 

Method for Analysis of Polychlorinated 

Biphenyls in Insulating Liquids by Gas 

Chromatography, Approved December 

2018, IBR approved for § 761.60. 

(15) ASTM D5373–16, Standard Test 

Methods for Determination of Carbon, 

Hydrogen and Nitrogen in Analysis 

Samples of Coal and Carbon in Analysis 

Samples of Coal and Coke, Approved 

September 2016, IBR approved for 

§ 761.71. 

(16) ASTM D8174–18, Test Method 

for Finite Flash Point Determination of 

Liquid Wastes by Small Scale Closed 

Cup Tester, Approved March 2018, IBR 

approved for §§ 761.71 and 761.75. 

(17) ASTM D8175–18, Test Method 

for Finite Flash Point Determination of 

Liquid Wastes by Pensky-Martens 

Closed Cup Tester, IBR approved for 

§§ 761.71 and 761.75. 

(18) ASTM E258–67 (Reapproved 

1987), Standard Test Method for Total 

Nitrogen Inorganic Material by Modified 

KJELDAHL Method, Approved 1987, 

IBR approved for § 761.71. 

(b) U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency material. 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460, 

(202) 272–0167, www.epa.gov; https://

www.epa.gov/cwa-methods and https://

www.epa.gov/hw-sw846. (Note: For hard 

copies of these materials, contact: 

National Technical Information Service, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 

Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161, 

(800) 553–6847 or (703) 605–6000.) . 

(1) CWA Method 1668C, Chlorinated 

Biphenyl Congeners in Water, Soil, 

Sediment, Biosolids, and Tissue by 

HRGC/HRMS, Approved April 2010, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58753 

IBR approved for §§ 761.61, 761.253, 

761.272, 761.292, 761.358, and 761.395. 

(2) SW–846 Method 3510C, 

Separatory Funnel Liquid-Liquid 

Extraction, Approved December 1996, 

IBR approved for §§ 761.61, 761.272, 

and 761.292. 

(3) SW–846 Method 3520C, 

Continuous Liquid-Liquid Extraction, 

Approved December 1996, IBR 

approved for §§ 761.61, 761.272, and 

761.292. 

(4) SW–846 Method 3535A, SolidPhase Extraction (SPE), Approved 

February 2007, IBR approved for 

§§ 761.61, 761.272, and 761.292. 

(5) SW–846 Method 3540C, Soxhlet 

Extraction, Approved December 1996, 

IBR approved for §§ 761.61, 761.253, 

761.272, 761.292, 761.358, and 761.395. 

(6) SW–846 Method 3541, Automated 

Soxhlet Extraction, Approved 

September 1994, IBR approved for 

§§ 761.61, 761.253, 761.272, 761.292, 

761.358, and 761.395. 

(7) SW–846 Method 3545A, 

Pressurized Fluid Extraction (PFE), 

Approved January 1998, IBR approved 

for §§ 761.61, 761.253, 761.272, 761.292, 

761.358, and 761.395. 

(8) SW–846 Method 3546, Microwave 

Extraction, Approved February 2007, 

IBR approved for §§ 761.61, 761.253, 

761.272, 761.292, 761.358, and 761.395. 

(9) SW–846 Method 8082, 

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) By 

Gas Chromatography, Approved 

December 1996, IBR approved for 

§§ 761.61, 761.253, 761.272, 761.292, 

761.358, and 761.395. 

(10) SW–846 Method 8082A, 

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) By 

Gas Chromatography, Approved 

February 2007, IBR approved for 

§§ 761.60, 761.61, 761.253, 761.272, 

761.292, 761.358, and 761.395. 

(11) SW–846 Method 8275A, 

Semivolatile Organic Compounds 

(PAHs And PCBs) in Soils/Sludges and 

Solid Wastes Using Thermal Extraction/ 

Gas Chromatography/Mass 

Spectrometry (TE/GC/MS), Approved 

December 1996, IBR approved for 

§§ 761.61, 761.253, 761.272, 761.292, 

761.358, and 761.395. 

Subpart B—Manufacturing, 

Processing, Distribution in Commerce, 

and Use of PCBs and PCB Items 

■ 5. Amend § 761.20 by revising 

paragraphs (e)(3)(ii)(B), (4)(i), and (ii) as 

follows: 

§ 761.20 Prohibitions and exceptions. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(B) The burner will burn the used oil 

only in a combustion facility identified 

in paragraph (e)(1) of this section and 

identify the class of burner they qualify 

under. 

* * * * * 

(4) * * * 

(i) Marketers. Marketers who first 

claim that the used oil fuel contains no 

detectable PCBs must include among 

the records required by 40 CFR 

279.72(b) and 279.74(b) and (c), copies 

of the analysis or other information 

documenting their claim, and they must 

include among the records required by 

40 CFR 279.74(a) and (c) and 279.75, a 

copy of each certification notice 

received or prepared relating to 

transactions involving PCB-containing 

used oil. 

(ii) Burners. Burners must include 

among the records required by 40 CFR 

279.65 and 279.66, a copy of each 

certification notice required by 

paragraph (e)(3)(ii) of this section that 

they send to a marketer. 

■ 6. Amend § 761.30 by revising 

paragraph (i)(4) to read as follows: 

§ 761.30 Authorizations. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(4) Any person characterizing PCB 

contamination in natural gas pipe or 

natural gas pipeline systems must do so 

by analyzing organic liquids collected at 

existing condensate collection points in 

the pipe or pipeline system. The level 

of PCB contamination found at a 

collection point is assumed to extend to 

the next collection point downstream. 

Any person characterizing multi-phasic 

liquids must do so in accordance with 

§ 761.1(b)(4); if no liquids are present 

and they choose, in their discretion, to 

characterize PCB contamination, the 

person must use standard wipe samples 

in accordance with subpart M of this 

part. 

* * * * * 

Subpart D—Storage and Disposal 

■ 7. Amend § 761.50 by revising 

paragraphs (b)(3)(i)(A) and (3)(ii) to read 

as follows: 

§ 761.50 Applicability. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(A) Sites containing these wastes are 

presumed not to present an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment from exposure to PCBs 

at the site. However, the EPA Regional 

Administrator may inform the owner or 

operator of the site that there is reason 

to believe that spills, leaks, or other 

uncontrolled releases or discharges, 

such as leaching, from the site 

constitute ongoing disposal that may 

present an unreasonable risk of injury to 

health or the environment from 

exposure to PCBs at the site, and may 

require the owner or operator to 

generate data necessary to characterize 

the risk. If after reviewing any such 

data, the EPA Regional Administrator 

makes a finding, that an unreasonable 

risk exists, then they may direct the 

owner or operator of the site to dispose 

of the PCB remediation waste in 

accordance with § 761.61 such that an 

unreasonable risk of injury no longer 

exists. 

* * * * * 

(ii) Any person responsible for PCB 

waste that was either placed in a land 

disposal facility, spilled, or otherwise 

released into the environment on or 

after April 18, 1978, but prior to July 2, 

1979, where the concentration of the 

spill or release was ≥500 ppm; or placed 

in a land disposal facility, spilled, or 

otherwise released into the environment 

on or after July 2, 1979, where the 

concentration of the spill or release was 

≥50 ppm, must dispose of it in 

accordance with either of the following: 

* * * * * 

■ 8. Amend § 761.60 by revising 

paragraphs (b)(2)(v)(C) and (g)(1)(iii) and 

(2)(ii) to read as follows: 

§ 761.60 Disposal requirements. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(v) * * * 

(C) There is other good cause shown. 

As part of this evaluation, the Assistant 

Administrator will consider the impact 

of their action on the incentives to 

construct or expand PCB incinerators. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(iii) Unless otherwise specified in this 

part, any person conducting the 

chemical analysis of PCBs shall do so 

using gas chromatography. Any gas 

chromatographic method that is 

appropriate for the material being 

analyzed may be used, including EPA 

Method 608.3, 40 CFR part 136, 

Appendix A; EPA Method 8082A 

(incorporated by reference, see § 761.19) 

and ASTM D4059–00 (incorporated by 

reference, see § 761.19). 

(2) * * * 

(ii) For purposes of complying with 

the marking and disposal requirements, 

representative samples may be taken 

from either the common containers or 

the individual electrical equipment to 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58754 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

determine the PCB concentration. 

Except, that if any PCBs at a 

concentration of 500 ppm or greater 

have been added to the container or 

equipment then the total container 

contents must be considered as having 

a PCB concentration of 500 ppm or 

greater for purposes of complying with 

the disposal requirements of this 

subpart. For purposes of this paragraph, 

representative samples of mineral oil 

dielectric fluid are either samples taken 

in accordance with ASTM D 923–86 or 

ASTM D 923–89 (both incorporated by 

reference, see § 761.19) 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. 

* * * * * 

■ 9. Amend § 761.61 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) (5)(i)(B)(2)(iv), and 

(7), the introductory text to paragraph 

(a)(8), paragraphs (a)(8)(i)(A) and (B), 

paragraph (b), the subject heading to 

paragraph (c), and (c)(1) to read as 

follows: 

§ 761.61 PCB remediation waste. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(ii) Within 30 calendar days of 

receiving the notification, the EPA 

Regional Administrator will respond in 

writing approving of the selfimplementing cleanup, disapproving of 

the self-implementing cleanup, or 

requiring additional information. If the 

EPA Regional Administrator does not 

respond within 30 calendar days of 

receiving the notice, the person 

submitting the notification may proceed 

with the cleanup according to the 

information the person provided to the 

EPA Regional Administrator. If, upon 

review of the notification, the EPA 

Regional Administrator determines that 

the notification does not contain all of 

the information required by paragraph 

(a)(3)(i) of this section, sufficient to 

ensure compliance with paragraphs 

(a)(4) through (9) of this section at the 

site, they may require the submission of 

additional information. The cleanup 

and disposal must comply with all 

applicable requirements of paragraphs 

(a)(4) through (9) of this section. Once 

cleanup is underway, the person 

conducting the cleanup must provide 

any proposed changes from the 

notification to the EPA Regional 

Administrator in writing no less than 14 

calendar days prior to the proposed 

implementation of the change. The EPA 

Regional Administrator will determine 

in their discretion whether to accept the 

change, and will respond to the change 

notification verbally within 7 calendar 

days and in writing within 14 calendar 

days of receiving it. If the EPA Regional 

Administrator does not respond verbally 

within 7 calendar days and in writing 

within 14 calendar days of receiving the 

change notice, the person who 

submitted it may proceed with the 

cleanup according to the information in 

the change notice provided to the EPA 

Regional Administrator, subject to the 

submission of additional information if 

the Regional Administrator determines 

it is needed to address the elements of 

paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section, and in 

compliance with all applicable 

requirements of paragraphs (a)(4) 

through (9) of this section and other 

applicable requirements of this part. 

* * * * * 

(5) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(B) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(iv) The generator must provide 

written notice, including the quantity to 

be shipped and highest concentration of 

PCBs at least 15 days before the first 

shipment of bulk PCB remediation 

waste from each cleanup site by the 

generator, to each off-site facility where 

the waste is destined for an area not 

subject to a TSCA PCB Disposal 

Approval. The generator must select 

applicable method(s) from the following 

list to extract PCBs and determine the 

PCB concentration from individual and 

composite samples of PCB remediation 

waste: SW–846 Method 3510C, Method 

3520C, Method 3535A, Method 3540C, 

Method 3541, Method 3545A, Method 

3546, Method 8082, Method 8082A, 

Method 8275A, or CWA Method 1668C 

(all incorporated by reference, see 

§ 761.19). Modifications to the methods 

listed in this paragraph or alternative 

methods not listed may be used if 

validated under subpart Q of this part or 

authorized in a § 761.61(c) approval. 

* * * * * 

(7) Cap requirements. A cap means, 

when referring to on-site cleanup and 

disposal of PCB remediation waste, a 

uniform placement of concrete, asphalt, 

or similar material of minimum 

thickness spread over the area where 

remediation waste was removed or left 

in place in order to prevent or minimize 

human exposure, infiltration of water, 

and erosion. Any person designing and 

constructing a cap must do so in 

accordance with § 264.310(a) of this 

chapter, and ensure that it complies 

with the permeability, sieve, liquid 

limit, and plasticity index parameters in 

§ 761.75(b)(1)(ii) through (b)(1)(v). A cap 

of compacted soil shall have a minimum 

thickness of 25 cm (10 inches). A 

concrete or asphalt cap shall have a 

minimum thickness of 15 cm (6 inches). 

A cap must be of sufficient strength to 

maintain its effectiveness and integrity 

during the use of the cap surface which 

is exposed to the environment. A cap 

shall not be contaminated at a level ≥1 

ppm PCB. Repairs shall begin within 72 

hours of discovery for any breaches 

which would impair the integrity of the 

cap. 

(8) Deed restrictions for caps, fences 

and low occupancy areas. When a 

cleanup activity conducted under this 

section includes the use of a fence or a 

cap, the owner of the site must maintain 

the fence or cap, in perpetuity. In 

addition, whenever a fence, a cap, or the 

procedures and requirements for a low 

occupancy area, is used, the owner of 

the site must meet the following 

conditions: 

(i) * * * 

(A) Record, in accordance with State 

law, a notation on the deed to the 

property, or on some other instrument 

which is normally examined during a 

title search, that will in perpetuity 

notify any potential purchaser of the 

property: 

(1) That the land, or the specific 

portion thereof identified in the 

instrument when only a portion is 

subject to the instrument, has been used 

for PCB remediation waste disposal and, 

when applicable, that the area is 

restricted to use as a low occupancy 

area as defined in § 761.3; 

(2) Of the existence of the fence or cap 

and the requirement to maintain the 

fence or cap, when applicable; and 

(3) The applicable cleanup levels left 

at the site, including inside any fence, 

and/or under any cap, or in a low 

occupancy area. 

(B) Submit a certification, signed by 

the owner, that they have recorded the 

notation specified in paragraph 

(a)(8)(i)(A) of this section to the EPA 

Regional Administrator. 

(ii) The owner of a site being cleaned 

up under this section may remove a 

fence, cap, or low occupancy 

designation after conducting additional 

cleanup activities and achieving 

cleanup levels, specified in paragraph 

(a)(4) of this section, which do not 

require a fence, cap, or low occupancy 

designation. The owner may remove the 

notice on the deed no earlier than 30 

days after achieving the cleanup levels 

specified in this section which do not 

require a fence, cap, or low occupancy 

designation. 

* * * * * 

(b) Performance-based cleanup and 

disposal. Any person may clean up and 

dispose of PCB remediation waste at a 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58755 

site in full compliance with the 

performance-based cleanup provisions 

of paragraph (b)(1) of this section and 

disposal provisions of paragraph (b)(2) 

of this section. Alternatively, any person 

may dispose of PCB remediation waste 

in accordance with paragraph (b)(2) of 

this section, but such disposal does not 

relieve the site owner of cleanup and 

disposal obligations for any PCBs that 

remain on-site if the provisions of 

paragraph (b)(1) of this section are not 

complied with. 

(1) Performance-based cleanup of PCB 

remediation waste. 

(i) Applicability. (A) The 

performance-based cleanup option may 

not be used to clean up: 

(1) Surface or ground waters. 

(2) Sediments in marine and 

freshwater ecosystems. 

(3) Sewers or sewage treatment 

systems. 

(4) Any private or public drinking 

water sources or distribution systems. 

(5) Grazing or agricultural lands. 

(6) Vegetable gardens. 

(7) Sites which are adjacent to, 

contain, or are proposed to be 

redeveloped to contain: Residential 

dwellings, hospitals, schools, nursing 

homes, playgrounds, parks, day care 

centers, endangered species habitats, 

estuaries, wetlands, national parks, 

national wildlife refuges, commercial 

fisheries, sport fisheries, or surface 

waters. 

(8) Sites where the PCB 

contamination is in the 100-year 

floodplain. 

(B) The performance-based cleanup 

provisions shall not be binding upon 

cleanups conducted under other 

authorities, including but not limited to, 

actions conducted under section 104 or 

section 106 of CERCLA, or section 

3004(u) and (v) or section 3008(h) of 

RCRA. 

(ii) Cleanup level. All on-site PCB 

remediation waste above the following 

cleanup levels must be disposed of or 

decontaminated in accordance with 

paragraph (b)(2) of this section. 

(A) The cleanup level for bulk PCB 

remediation waste and porous surfaces 

is ≤1 ppm PCBs. 

(B) The cleanup levels for liquids are 

the concentrations specified in 

§§ 761.79(b)(1) and (b)(2). 

(C) The cleanup levels for nonporous 

surfaces are the concentrations specified 

in § 761.79(b)(3). 

(iii) Verification sampling. 

Verification sampling for bulk PCB 

remediation waste and porous surfaces 

must be conducted in accordance with 

Subpart O. Verification sampling for 

nonporous surfaces must be conducted 

in accordance with Subpart P. 

Verification sampling for liquid PCB 

remediation waste must be conducted in 

accordance with § 761.269. When 

analysis of each sample results in a 

measurement of PCBs less than or equal 

to the levels specified in paragraph 

(b)(1)(ii) of this section, on-site 

performance-based cleanup is complete. 

(iv) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping is 

required in accordance with 

§ 761.125(c)(5). 

(v) Cleanup Completion Notification. 

Within 14 days of sending the final 

shipment of waste offsite for disposal 

from a site cleaned up under this 

paragraph, the person in charge of the 

cleanup or the owner of the property 

where the PCB remediation waste was 

located shall notify, in writing, the EPA 

Regional Administrator, the Director of 

the State or Tribal environmental 

protection agency, and the Director of 

the county or local environmental 

protection agency where the cleanup 

was conducted. EPA may require 

additional on-site cleanup upon finding 

that the cleanup level(s) in (b)(1)(ii) of 

this section have not been met. Upon 

review of the cleanup completion 

notification, EPA may request that the 

responsible party submit additional 

information related to the records 

required under (b)(1)(iv) of this section 

to clarify that the cleanup has been 

completed in accordance with the 

requirements of this section. The 

notification shall include: 

(A) Site identification information, 

including the site address and the name, 

phone number, and email address of the 

site contact; 

(B) Disposal facility and shipment 

information, including the disposal 

facility’s name and address, the 

manifest tracking number(s), and the 

quantity of waste shipped; 

(C) A summary of all applicable 

components of the records in 

§ 761.125(c)(5); and 

(D) A certification using the language 

in § 761.3. 

(2) Performance-based disposal. 

(i) Any person disposing of liquid 

PCB remediation waste under this 

subsection shall do so according to 

§ 761.60(a) or (e), or decontaminate it in 

accordance with § 761.79. 

(ii) Any person disposing of nonliquid PCB remediation waste under 

this subsection shall do so by one of the 

following methods: 

(A) Dispose of it in a high temperature 

incinerator approved under § 761.70(b), 

an alternate disposal method approved 

under § 761.60(e), a chemical waste 

landfill approved under § 761.75, a 

facility with a coordinated approval 

issued under § 761.77, or a hazardous 

waste landfill permitted by EPA under 

section 3005 of RCRA, or by a state 

authorized under section 3006 of RCRA. 

(B) Decontaminate it in accordance 

with § 761.79. 

(iii) Any person may manage or 

dispose of material containing <50 ppm 

PCBs that has been dredged or 

excavated from waters of the United 

States: 

(A) In accordance with a permit that 

has been issued under section 404 of the 

Clean Water Act, or the equivalent of 

such a permit as provided for in 

regulations of the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers at 33 CFR part 320. 

(B) In accordance with a permit 

issued by the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers under section 103 of the 

Marine Protection, Research, and 

Sanctuaries Act, or the equivalent of 

such a permit as provided for in 

regulations of the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers at 33 CFR part 320. 

(c) Risk-based cleanup and disposal 

approval. (1) Any person wishing to 

sample, extract, analyze, cleanup, or 

dispose of PCB remediation waste in a 

manner other than prescribed in 

paragraphs (a) or (b) of this section, or 

store PCB remediation waste in a 

manner other than prescribed in 

§ 761.65, must apply in writing to the 

Regional Administrator in the Region 

where the sampling, extraction, 

analysis, cleanup, disposal, or storage 

site is located, for sampling, extraction, 

analysis, cleanup, disposal, or storage 

occurring in a single EPA Region; or to 

the Director, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery, for 

sampling, extraction, analysis, cleanup, 

disposal, or storage occurring in more 

than one EPA Region. Each application 

must include information described in 

the notification required by paragraph 

(a)(3) of this section. EPA may request 

other information that it believes 

necessary to evaluate the application. 

No person may conduct cleanup 

activities under this paragraph prior to 

obtaining written approval by EPA. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. Amend § 761.62 by revising 

paragraphs (c)(1) and (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 761.62 Disposal of PCB bulk product 

waste. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) Any person wishing to sample, 

extract, analyze, or dispose of PCB bulk 

product waste in a manner other than 

prescribed in paragraphs (a) or (b) of 

this section, or store PCB bulk product 

waste in a manner other than prescribed 

in § 761.65, must apply in writing to the 

Regional Administrator in the Region 

where the sampling, extraction, 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58756 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

analysis, disposal, or storage site is 

located, for sampling, extraction, 

analysis, disposal, or storage occurring 

in a single EPA Region; or to the 

Director, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery, for 

sampling, extraction, analysis, disposal, 

or storage occurring in more than one 

EPA Region. Each application must 

contain information indicating that, 

based on technical, environmental, or 

waste-specific characteristics or 

considerations, the proposed sampling, 

extraction, analysis, disposal, or storage 

methods or locations will not pose an 

unreasonable risk or injury to health or 

the environment. EPA may request other 

information that it believes necessary to 

evaluate the application. No person may 

conduct sampling, extraction, analysis, 

disposal, or storage activities under this 

paragraph prior to obtaining written 

approval by EPA. 

* * * * * 

(d) Disposal as daily landfill cover. 

Bulk product waste described in 

paragraph (b)(1) of this section may be 

disposed of as daily landfill cover as 

long as the daily cover remains in the 

landfill and is not released or dispersed 

by wind or other action. 

* * * * * 

■ 11. Amend § 761.65 by revising 

paragraphs (c)(9)(i) and (9)(iii) (A) and 

(B), and introductory paragraphs (g) and 

(g)(1), (1)(iv), (2), (3)(i), (4)(i) and (5), (6) 

and (7), and introductory paragraph (h) 

to read as follows: 

§ 761.65 Storage for disposal. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(9) * * * 

(i) The waste is placed in a pile or 

non-leaking, covered container designed 

and operated to control dispersal of the 

waste by wind, where necessary, by 

means other than wetting. 

* * * * * 

(iii) The storage site must have: 

(A) A liner or container that is 

designed, constructed, and installed to 

prevent any migration of wastes off or 

through the liner or container into the 

adjacent subsurface soil, ground water 

or surface water at any time during the 

active life (including the closure period) 

of the storage site. The liner or container 

may be constructed of materials that 

may allow waste to migrate into the 

liner or container. The liner or container 

must be: 

(1) Constructed of materials that have 

appropriate chemical properties and 

sufficient strength and thickness to 

prevent failure due to pressure gradients 

(including static head and external 

hydrogeologic forces), physical contact 

with the waste or leachate to which they 

are exposed, climatic conditions, the 

stress of installation, and the stress of 

daily operation. 

(2) Placed upon a foundation or base 

capable of providing support to the liner 

or container and resistance to pressure 

gradients above and below the liner to 

prevent failure of the liner due to 

settlement, compression, or uplift. 

(3) In the case of liners, installed to 

cover all surrounding earth likely to be 

in contact with the waste. 

(B) A cover that meets the 

requirements of paragraph (c)(9)(iii)(A) 

of this section, is installed to cover all 

of the stored waste likely to be in 

contact with precipitation, and is 

secured so as not to be functionally 

disabled by winds expected under 

normal seasonal meteorological 

conditions at the storage site. 

* * * * * 

(g) Financial assurance for closure. A 

commercial storer of PCB waste shall 

establish financial assurance for closure 

of each PCB storage facility that they 

own or operate. In establishing financial 

assurance for closure, the commercial 

storer of PCB waste may choose from 

the following financial assurance 

mechanisms or any combination of 

mechanisms: 

(1) The ‘‘closure trust fund,’’ as 

specified in § 264.143(a) of this chapter, 

except for paragraph (a)(3) of § 264.143 

and except when the Regional 

Administrator specifies modifications 

for the purposes of implementation 

under TSCA. For purposes of this 

paragraph, the following provisions also 

apply: 

* * * * * 

(iv) The submission of a trust 

agreement with the wording specified in 

§ 264.151(a)(1) of this chapter, including 

any reference to hazardous waste 

management facilities, shall be deemed 

to be in compliance with the 

requirement to submit a trust agreement 

under this subpart except when the 

Regional Administrator specifies 

modifications for the purposes of 

implementation under TSCA. 

(2) The ‘‘surety bond guaranteeing 

payment into a closure trust fund,’’ as 

specified in § 264.143(b) of this chapter, 

including the use of the surety bond 

instrument specified at § 264.151(b) of 

this chapter and the standby trust 

specified at § 264.143(b)(3) of this 

chapter except when the Regional 

Administrator specifies modifications 

for the purposes of implementation 

under TSCA. The use of the surety 

bonds, surety bond instruments, and 

standby trust agreements specified in 

§§ 264.143(b) and 264.151(b) of this 

chapter, with any modifications 

specified by the Regional Administrator, 

shall be deemed to be in compliance 

with this subpart. 

(3)(i) The ‘‘surety bond guaranteeing 

performance of closure,’’ as specified at 

§ 264.143(c) of this chapter, except for 

paragraph (c)(5) of § 264.143 of this 

chapter and except when the Regional 

Administrator specifies modifications 

for the purposes of implementation 

under TSCA. The submission and use of 

the surety bond instrument specified at 

§ 264.151(c) of this chapter and the 

standby trust specified at § 264.143(c)(3) 

of this chapter, with any modifications 

specified by the Regional Administrator, 

shall be deemed to be in compliance 

with the requirements under this 

subpart relating to the use of surety 

bonds and standby trust funds. 

* * * * * 

(4)(i) The ‘‘closure letter of credit’’ 

specified in § 264.143(d) of this chapter, 

except for paragraph (d)(8) and except 

when the Regional Administrator 

specifies modifications for the purposes 

of implementation under TSCA. The 

submission and use of the irrevocable 

letter of credit instrument specified in 

§ 264.151(d) of this chapter and the 

standby trust specified in 

§ 264.143(d)(3) of this chapter, with any 

modifications specified by the Regional 

Administrator, shall be deemed to be in 

compliance with the requirements of 

this subpart relating to the use of letters 

of credit and standby trust funds. 

* * * * * 

(5) ‘‘Closure insurance,’’ as specified 

in § 264.143(e) of this chapter, utilizing 

the certificate of insurance for closure 

specified at § 264.151(e) of this chapter 

except when the Regional Administrator 

specifies modifications for the purposes 

of implementation under TSCA. The use 

of closure insurance as specified in 

§ 264.143(e) of this chapter and the 

submission and use of the certificate of 

insurance specified in § 264.151(e) of 

this chapter, with any modifications 

specified by the Regional Administrator, 

shall be deemed to be in compliance 

with the requirements of this subpart 

relating to the use of closure insurance. 

(6) The ‘‘financial test and corporate 

guarantee for closure,’’ as described in 

§ 264.143(f) of this chapter except when 

the Regional Administrator specifies 

modifications for the purposes of 

implementation under TSCA, including 

a letter signed by the owner’s or 

operator’s chief financial officer as 

specified at § 264.151(f) of this chapter 

and, if applicable, the written corporate 

guarantee specified at § 264.151(h) of 

this chapter. The use of the financial 

test and corporate guarantee specified in 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58757 

§ 264.143(f) of this chapter, the 

submission and use of the letter 

specified in § 264.151(f) of this chapter, 

and the submission and use of the 

written corporate guarantee specified at 

§ 264.151(h) of this chapter, with any 

modifications specified by the Regional 

Administrator, shall be deemed to be in 

compliance with the requirements of 

this subpart relating to the use of 

financial tests and corporate guarantees. 

(7) The corporate guarantee as 

specified in § 264.143(f)(10) of this 

chapter except when the Regional 

Administrator specifies modifications 

for the purposes of implementation 

under TSCA. 

* * * * * 

(h) Release of owner or operator. 

Within 60 days after receiving 

certifications from the owner or operator 

and an independent registered 

professional engineer that final closure 

has been completed in accordance with 

the approved closure plan, EPA will 

notify the owner or operator in writing 

that the owner or operator is no longer 

required by this section to maintain 

financial assurance for final closure of 

the facility, unless EPA has reason to 

believe that final closure has not been 

completed in accordance with the 

approved closure plan. EPA shall 

provide the owner or operator with a 

detailed written statement stating the 

reasons why EPA believed closure was 

not conducted in accordance with the 

approved closure plan. 

* * * * * 

■ 12. Add § 761.66 to read as follows: 

§ 761.66 Emergency situations 

This section establishes procedures 

that may be used for purposes of the 

cleanup and/or disposal of PCB waste 

resulting from PCB releases caused by 

an emergency situation as defined in 

§ 761.3. This section allows the request 

of a waiver of any of the requirements 

in §§ 761.60, 761.61, 761.62, or 761.65. 

This section does not prohibit any 

person from implementing temporary 

emergency measures to prevent, treat, or 

contain further releases or mitigate 

migration to the environment of PCBs or 

PCB remediation waste. 

(a) Applicability. This section may 

only be applied to the cleanup and/or 

disposal of PCB waste directly resulting 

from PCB releases that are caused by an 

emergency situation as defined in 

§ 761.3. 

(b) Waiver Request. Any person 

intending or planning to sample, 

extract, analyze, clean up, store, and/or 

dispose of PCBs under this section shall 

submit a waiver request to the Regional 

Administrator in the EPA Region where 

the sampling, extraction, analysis, 

cleanup, storage, and/or disposal is, or 

will be, located, in writing and/or by 

email no later than seven (7) days after 

discovery of the release or 

implementation of any temporary 

emergency measures, as applicable. If 

the sampling, extraction, analysis, 

cleanup, storage, or disposal activities 

in the waiver request would be 

conducted in more than one Region, 

then the waiver request must be 

submitted, in its entirety, to the 

Regional Administrators for all affected 

Regions. 

(1) This request shall include: 

(i) The contact information for the 

person requesting the waiver. 

(ii) Location(s) of the release(s). 

(iii) A description of the emergency 

situation and the adverse conditions 

caused by the emergency situation. 

(iv) The type(s) of material(s) that are 

contaminated and the source of the 

release, if known. 

(v) The as-found PCB concentrations 

in the PCB waste, unless the materials 

are being managed as if they contain 

≥500 ppm PCBs. If actual PCB 

concentrations have not yet been 

determined, then estimated 

concentrations may be provided in the 

request. Actual PCB concentrations 

shall be determined before disposal 

activities commence, unless the waste is 

being managed as if it contains ≥500 

ppm PCBs. 

(vi) The provisions of §§ 761.60, 

761.61, 761.62, or 761.65 that the person 

requests to waive or modify (or to use 

alternative procedures for) and an 

explanation of why compliance with the 

existing provisions would be 

impracticable as a result of the 

emergency situation. 

(vii) The plan for how sampling, 

extraction, analysis, storage, cleanup, 

and/or disposal of the PCB waste would 

be conducted if the relief described in 

paragraph (b)(v) of this section were 

granted. The plan shall provide 

information to support how the actions 

described in the plan do not pose an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment. This plan shall be 

based on the as-found PCB 

concentrations in the materials unless 

waste is being managed as if it 

contained PCBs ≥500 ppm. 

(viii) Whether or not the PCB waste is 

near, or likely to impact, surface waters, 

ground waters, drinking water sources 

or distribution systems, wells, 

sediments, sewers or sewage treatment 

systems, grazing lands, vegetable 

gardens, residential dwellings, 

hospitals, schools, nursing homes, 

playgrounds, parks, day care centers, 

endangered species habitats, estuaries, 

wetlands, national parks, national 

wildlife refuges, commercial fisheries, 

or sport fisheries and how those areas 

and potential impacts will be addressed. 

(2) To make changes to submitted 

information described in (b)(1) of this 

section, the requestor shall submit the 

new information to the EPA Regional 

Administrator(s) in writing and/or by 

email. 

(c) Approval of waiver requests. The 

EPA Regional Administrator may 

approve the waiver request, request 

additional information, approve the 

waiver request with specified changes 

or additional conditions, or deny the 

waiver request, in writing, by telephone, 

or by email. An approval, with or 

without changes or conditions, shall be 

based on the Regional Administrator’s 

finding that compliance with the 

regulatory requirements from which a 

waiver is sought is impracticable and 

that the action approved under the 

waiver will not pose an unreasonable 

risk of injury to health or the 

environment. At any point, EPA may 

require additional sampling, extraction, 

analysis, cleanup, storage, and/or 

disposal requirements, or require the 

requestor to delay acting on their 

proposed plan, in order to ensure the 

actions will not pose an unreasonable 

risk of injury to health or the 

environment. 

(d) Sampling, extraction, analysis, 

cleanup, storage, and disposal activities 

as described in the waiver request may 

begin after the EPA Regional 

Administrator responds with approval 

of the waiver request. All sampling, 

extraction, analysis, cleanup, storage, 

and disposal activities shall be 

conducted in compliance with the terms 

of the approval and all applicable 

provisions §§ 761.60, 761.61, 761.62, 

and 761.65 not expressly waived by the 

approval. 

(e) Sampling, extraction, analysis, 

cleanup, storage, and disposal activities 

conducted under this section shall be 

based on the as-found concentration of 

the PCB waste unless the materials are 

being managed as if they contain ≥500 

ppm PCBs. 

(f) Records, manifests, and 

certification. Recordkeeping and 

certification are required in accordance 

with § 761.125(c)(5). The manifesting 

and reporting requirements in Subpart K 

apply to waste disposed of under this 

section. However, if the person 

requesting a waiver has not previously 

submitted a notification of PCB activity 

as described in § 761.205 and the 

requirements of § 761.205 specify that 

such notification is required for the 

cleanup, storage, and/or disposal 

activity, the requestor shall submit the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58758 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

notification within ten (10) business 

days of their waiver request. The 

requestor does not have to wait to obtain 

their EPA identification number before 

initiating cleanup and/or disposal 

activities described in their approved 

waiver request. While waiting for their 

identification number, the requestor 

may use the generic identification ‘‘40 

CFR part 761’’ in lieu of an EPA 

identification number on manifests for 

PCB waste. The requestor may 

alternatively use an EPA identification 

number they previously obtained from 

EPA under RCRA or a state under an 

authorized RCRA program, if they have 

one. Once the requestor receives an EPA 

identification number, they shall use it 

on manifests for PCB waste. 

■ 13. Amend § 761.70 by revising 

paragraph (d)(4)(i) to read as follows: 

§ 761.70 Incineration. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(4) * * * 

(i) Except as provided in paragraph 

(d)(5) of this section, the Regional 

Administrator or the appropriate official 

at EPA Headquarters may not approve 

an incinerator for the disposal of PCBs 

and PCB Items unless they find that the 

incinerator meets all of the requirements 

of paragraphs (a) and/or (b) of this 

section. 

* * * * * 

■ 14. Amend § 761.71 by revising 

paragraph (b)(2)(iv) and (vi) to read as 

follows: 

§ 761.71 High efficiency boilers. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(iv) The type of equipment, apparatus, 

and procedures to be used to control the 

feed of PCB liquids to the boiler and to 

monitor and record the carbon 

monoxide concentration and excess 

oxygen percentage in the stack. 

* * * * * 

(vi) The concentration of PCBs and of 

any other chlorinated hydrocarbon in 

the waste and the results of analyses 

using the ASTM International methods 

as follows: Carbon and hydrogen 

content using ASTM D5373–16, 

nitrogen content using ASTM E258–67 

(Reapproved 1987) or ASTM D5373–16, 

sulfur content using ASTM D1266–87, 

or ASTM D129–64 (Reapproved 1978), 

chlorine content using ASTM D808–87, 

water and sediment content using either 

ASTM D2709–88 or ASTM D1796–83 

(Reapproved 1990), ash content using 

ASTM D482–13, calorific value using 

ASTM D240–87, carbon residue using 

either ASTM D2158–89 or ASTM D524– 

88, and flash point using ASTM D93– 

09, ASTM D8174–18, ASTM D8175–18, 

or ASTM D3278–96 (all incorporated by 

reference, see § 761.19). 

* * * * * 

■ 15. Amend § 761.75 by revising 

paragraphs (b)(8)(iii) and (c)(3)(i) and (4) 

to read as follows: 

§ 761.75 Chemical waste landfills. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(8) * * * 

(iii) Ignitable wastes shall not be 

disposed of in chemical waste landfills. 

Liquid ignitable wastes are wastes that 

have a flash point less than 60 degrees 

C (140 degrees F) as determined by the 

following method or an equivalent 

method: Flash point of liquids shall be 

determined by a Pensky-Martens Closed 

Cup Tester, using the protocol specified 

in ASTM D93–09 or ASTM D8175–18, 

or a Small Scale Closed Cup Tester, 

using the protocol specified in ASTM 

D3278–96 (Reapproved 2011) or ASTM 

D8174–18 (all incorporated by 

reference, § 761.19). 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(i) Except as provided in paragraph 

(c)(4) of this section the Regional 

Administrator may not approve a 

chemical waste landfill for the disposal 

of PCBs and PCB Items, unless they find 

that the landfill meets all of the 

requirements of paragraph (b) of this 

section. 

* * * * * 

(4) Waivers. An owner or operator of 

a chemical waste landfill may submit 

evidence to the Regional Administrator 

that operation of the landfill will not 

present an unreasonable risk of injury to 

health or the environment from PCBs 

when one or more of the requirements 

of paragraph (b) of this section are not 

met. On the basis of such evidence and 

any other available information, the 

Regional Administrator may in their 

discretion find that one or more of the 

requirements of paragraph (b) of this 

section is not necessary to protect 

against such a risk and may waive the 

requirements in any approval for that 

landfill. Any finding and waiver under 

this paragraph will be stated in writing 

and included as part of the approval. 

* * * * * 

■ 16. Amend § 761.77 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(1)(ii)(B), introductory 

paragraph (a)(2), and introductory 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 761.77 Coordinated approval. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(B) Issue a letter granting or denying 

the TSCA PCB Coordinated Approval. If 

the EPA Regional Administrator grants 

the TSCA PCB Coordinated Approval, 

they may acknowledge the non-TSCA 

approval meets the regulatory 

requirements under TSCA as written, or 

require additional conditions the EPA 

Regional Administrator has determined 

are necessary to prevent unreasonable 

risk of injury to health or the 

environment. 

* * * * * 

(2) The EPA Regional Administrator 

may issue a notice of deficiency, revoke 

the TSCA PCB Coordinated Approval, 

require the person to whom the TSCA 

PCB Coordinated Approval was issued 

to submit an application for a TSCA 

PCB approval, or bring an enforcement 

action under TSCA if they determine 

that: 

* * * * * 

(b) Any person who owns or operates 

a facility that they intend to use to 

landfill PCB wastes; incinerate PCB 

wastes; dispose of PCB wastes using an 

alternative disposal method that is 

equivalent to disposal in an incinerator 

approved under § 761.70 or a high 

efficiency boiler operating in 

compliance with § 761.71; or stores PCB 

wastes may apply for a TSCA PCB 

Coordinated Approval. The EPA 

Regional Administrator may approve 

the request if the EPA Regional 

Administrator determines that the 

activity will not pose an unreasonable 

risk of injury to health or the 

environment and the person: 

* * * * * 

■ 17. Amend § 761.79 by revising 

paragraph (h)(3) to read as follows: 

§ 761.79 Decontamination standards and 

procedures. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(3) Any person wishing to sample, 

extract, or analyze decontaminated 

material in a manner other than 

prescribed in paragraph (f) of this 

section must apply in writing to the 

Regional Administrator in the Region 

where the activity would take place, for 

decontamination activity occurring in a 

single EPA Region; or to the Director, 

Office of Resource Conservation and 

Recovery, for decontamination activity 

occurring in more than one EPA Region. 

Each application must contain a 

description of the material to be 

decontaminated, the nature and PCB 

concentration of the contaminating 

material (if known), the 

decontamination method, the proposed 

extraction, analysis, and/or sampling 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58759 

procedure, and a justification for how 

the proposed extraction, analysis, and/ 

or sampling is equivalent to or more 

comprehensive than the extraction, 

analysis, and/or sampling procedure 

required under paragraph (f) of this 

section. 

* * * * * 

Subpart G—PCB Spill Cleanup Policy 

■ 18. Amend § 761.120 by revising 

paragraphs (b)(2) and (c) to read as 

follows: 

§ 761.120 Scope. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) In those situations, the Regional 

Administrator may require cleanup in 

addition to that required under 

§ 761.125(b) and (c). However, the 

Regional Administrator must first make 

a finding, based on the specific facts of 

a spill, that additional cleanup is 

necessary to prevent unreasonable risk. 

In addition, before making a final 

decision on additional cleanup, the 

Regional Administrator must notify the 

Director, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery of their 

finding and the basis for the finding. 

* * * * * 

(c) Flexibility to allow less stringent or 

alternative requirements. (1) EPA retains 

the flexibility to allow less stringent or 

alternative decontamination measures 

based upon site-specific considerations. 

EPA will exercise this flexibility if the 

responsible party demonstrates that 

cleanup to the numerical 

decontamination levels is clearly 

unwarranted because of risk-mitigating 

factors, that compliance with the 

procedural requirements or numerical 

standards in the policy is impracticable 

at a particular site, or that site-specific 

characteristics make the costs of 

cleanup prohibitive. The Regional 

Administrator will notify the Director, 

Office of Resource Conservation and 

Recovery of any decision and the basis 

for the decision to allow less stringent 

cleanup. The purpose of this 

notification is to enable the Director, 

Office of Resource Conservation and 

Recovery to ensure consistency of spill 

cleanup standards under special 

circumstances across the regions. 

(2) In emergency situations, as 

defined in § 761.123, the following 

provisions of this Policy are hereby 

modified as follows: 

(i) For actions taken directly in 

response to spills caused by emergency 

situations, responsible parties may use 

the as-found concentrations in the spill 

materials when determining whether to 

manage the spill under § 761.125(b) or 

(c) of this Policy when it is not possible 

to readily determine the spill source 

concentration at a site. 

(ii) For spills caused by emergency 

situations, the applicable notifications 

in § 761.125(a)(1) must be submitted as 

soon as possible, but no later than seven 

(7) days after the adverse conditions that 

prevented notification have ended. 

* * * * * 

■ 19. Amend § 761.123 by: 

■ a. Adding the definition ‘‘Emergency 

situation’’ in alphabetical order ; and 

■ b. Revising the definitions ‘‘Other 

restricted access (nonsubstation) 

locations’’ and ‘‘Spill’’. 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 761.123 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Emergency situation means adverse 

conditions caused by manmade or 

natural incidents that threaten lives, 

property, or public health and safety; 

require prompt responsive action from 

the local, state, tribal, territorial, or 

federal government; and result in: (1) A 

declaration by either the President of 

the United States or Governor of the 

affected state of a natural disaster or 

emergency; or, (2) an incident funded 

under FEMA via a Stafford Act disaster 

declaration or emergency declaration. 

Examples of emergency situations may 

include civil emergencies or adverse 

natural conditions, such as hurricanes, 

earthquakes, or tornados. 

* * * * * 

Other restricted access 

(nonsubstation) locations means areas 

other than electrical substations that are 

at least 0.1 kilometer (km) from a 

residential/commercial area and limited 

by man-made barriers (e.g., fences and 

walls) or substantially limited by 

naturally occurring barriers such as 

mountains, cliffs, or rough terrain. 

These areas generally include industrial 

facilities and extremely remote rural 

locations. (Areas where access is 

restricted but are less than 0.1 km from 

a residential/commercial area are 

considered to be residential/commercial 

areas.) 

* * * * * 

Spill means both intentional and 

unintentional spills, leaks, and other 

uncontrolled discharges where the 

release results in any quantity of PCBs 

running off or about to run off the 

external surface of the equipment or 

other PCB source, as well as the 

contamination resulting from those 

releases. This policy applies to spills of 

50 ppm or greater PCBs. The 

concentration of PCBs spilled is 

determined by the PCB concentration in 

the material spilled as opposed to the 

concentration of PCBs in the material 

onto which the PCBs were spilled, 

except where authorized in § 761.120(c). 

Where a spill of untested mineral oil 

occurs, the oil is presumed to contain 

greater than 50 ppm, but less than 500 

ppm PCBs and is subject to the relevant 

requirements of this policy. 

* * * * * 

■ 20. Amend § 761.125 by revising 

paragraphs (a)(2), (c)(3)(iii), and (4)(iv) 

to read as follows: 

§ 761.125 Requirements for PCB spill 

cleanup. 

(a) * * * 

(2) Disposal of cleanup debris and 

materials. All concentrated soils, 

solvents, rags, and other materials 

resulting from the cleanup of PCBs 

under this policy shall be properly 

stored, labeled, and disposed of at a 

facility with a TSCA disposal approval 

issued under Subpart D of this part. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(iii) At the option of the responsible 

party, low-contact, indoor, 

nonimpervious surfaces will be cleaned 

either to 10 mg/100 cm2 or to 100 mg/100 

cm2 and encapsulated. The Regional 

Administrator, however, retains the 

authority to disallow the encapsulation 

option for a particular spill situation 

upon finding that the uncertainties 

associated with that option pose special 

concerns at that site. That is, the 

Regional Administrator would not 

permit encapsulation if they determine 

that if the encapsulation failed the 

failure would create an imminent 

hazard at the site. 

* * * * * 

(4) * * * 

(iv) At the option of the responsible 

party, low-contact, outdoor, 

nonimpervious solid surfaces shall be 

either cleaned to 10 mg/100 cm2 or 

cleaned to 100 mg/100 cm2 and 

encapsulated. The Regional 

Administrator, however, retains the 

authority to disallow the encapsulation 

option for a particular spill situation 

upon finding that the uncertainties 

associated with that option pose special 

concerns at that site. That is, the 

Regional Administrator would not 

permit encapsulation if they determine 

that if the encapsulation failed the 

failure would create an imminent 

hazard at the site. 

* * * * * 

■ 21. Amend § 761.130 by revising 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 761.130 Sampling requirements. 

* * * * * 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58760 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

(e) EPA recommends the use of a 

sampling scheme developed by the 

Midwest Research Institute (MRI) for 

use in enforcement inspections: 

‘‘Verification of PCB Spill Cleanup by 

Sampling and Analysis.’’ Guidance for 

the use of this sampling scheme is 

available in the MRI report ‘‘Field 

Manual for Grid Sampling of PCB Spill 

Sites to Verify Cleanup.’’ Both the MRI 

sampling scheme and the guidance 

document are available on EPA’s PCB 

website at https://www.epa.gov/pcbs, or 

from the Program Implementation and 

Information Division, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery (5303P), 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, 

Washington, DC 20460–0001. The major 

advantage of this sampling scheme is 

that it is designed to characterize the 

degree of contamination within the 

entire sampling area with a high degree 

of confidence while using fewer 

samples than any other grid or random 

sampling scheme. This sampling 

scheme also allows some sites to be 

characterized on the basis of composite 

samples. 

* * * * * 

Subpart J—General Records and 

Reports 

■ 22. Amend § 761.180 by: 

■ a. Revising introductory paragraph 

(b)(3), 

■ b. Reserving paragraph (b)(3)(ii); and 

■ c. Revising paragraph (b)(4). 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 761.180 Records and monitoring. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) The owner or operator of a PCB 

disposal facility (including an owner or 

operator who disposes of his/her own 

waste and does not receive or generate 

manifests) or a commercial storage 

facility shall submit an annual report 

using EPA Form XXXX–YY, which 

briefly summarizes the records and 

annual document log required to be 

maintained and prepared under 

paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section 

to the Director, Office Resource 

Conservation and Recovery at the 

address listed on the form, by July 15 of 

each year, beginning with July 15, 1991. 

The first annual report submitted on 

July 15, 1991, shall be for the period 

starting February 5, 1990, and ending 

December 31, 1990. The annual report 

shall contain no confidential business 

information. The annual report shall 

consist of the information listed in 

paragraphs (b)(3)(i) through (vi) of this 

section. 

* * * * * 

(ii) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

(4) Whenever a commercial storer of 

PCB waste accepts PCBs or PCB Items 

at their storage facility and transfers the 

PCB waste off-site to another facility for 

storage or disposal, the commercial 

storer of PCB waste shall initiate a 

manifest under subpart K of this part for 

the transfer of PCBs or PCB Items to the 

next storage or disposal facility. 

* * * * * 

Subpart K—PCB Waste Disposal 

Records and Reports 

■ 23. In § 761.205 revise paragraphs 

(a)(3) and (4)(v) and (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 761.205 Notification of PCB waste 

activity (EPA Form 7710–53). 

(a) * * * 

(3) Any person required to notify EPA 

under this section shall file with EPA 

Form 7710–53. Copies of EPA Form 

7710–53 are available on EPA’s website 

at https://www.epa.gov/pcbs, or from 

the Program Implementation and 

Information Division, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery (5303P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001 ATTN: PCB Notification. 

Descriptive information and 

instructions for filling in the form are 

included in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through 

(vii) of this section. 

(4) * * * 

(v) The facility’s installation contact, 

telephone number, and email address. 

* * * 

(d) Persons required to notify under 

this section shall file EPA Form 7710– 

53 with EPA by mailing the form to the 

address listed on the form. 

* * * * * 

■ 24. Amend § 761.207 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a), 

■ b. Adding paragraphs (a)(4) and (5); 

and 

■ c. Revising the ‘‘Note 2 to Paragraph 

(a) and paragraph (c). 

The revisions and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 761.207 The manifest—general 

requirements. 

(a) A generator who transports, or 

offers for transport PCB waste for 

commercial off-site storage or off-site 

disposal, and commercial storage or 

disposal facility who offers for transport 

a rejected load of PCB waste, must 

prepare a manifest on EPA Form 8700– 

22, and, if necessary, a continuation 

sheet. The generator shall specify: 

(1) For each bulk load of PCBs, the 

identity of the PCB waste, the earliest 

date of removal from service for 

disposal, and the weight in kilograms of 

the PCB waste. (Item 14—Special 

Handling Instructions box) 

(2) For each PCB transformer, the 

serial number if available, or other 

identification if there is no serial 

number; the date of removal from 

service for disposal; and weight in 

kilograms of the PCB waste in each PCB 

transformer. (Item 14—Special Handling 

Instructions box) 

(3) For each PCB Large High or Low 

Voltage Capacitor, the serial number if 

available, or other identification if there 

is no serial number; the date of removal 

from service for disposal; and weight in 

kilograms of the PCB waste in each PCB 

Large High or Low Voltage Capacitor. 

(Item 14—Special Handling Instructions 

box) 

(4) For each PCB Article Container, 

the unique identifying number, type of 

PCB waste (e.g., small capacitors), 

earliest date of removal from service for 

disposal, and weight in kilograms of the 

PCB waste contained therein. (Item 14— 

Special Handling Instructions box) 

(5) For each PCB Container, the 

unique identifying number, type of PCB 

waste (e.g., soil, debris, small 

capacitors), earliest date of removal 

from service for disposal, and weight in 

kilograms of the PCB waste contained 

therein. (Item 14—Special Handling 

Instructions box) 

* * * * * 

Note 2 to Paragraph (A): PCB waste 

handlers should use the EPA Form 8700–22 

instructions as a guide, but should defer to 

the Part 761 manifest regulations whenever 

there is any difference between the Part 761 

requirements and the instructions. The 

differences should be minimal. 

* * * * * 

(c) A generator may also designate on 

the manifest one alternate facility which 

is approved to handle their PCB waste 

in the event an emergency prevents 

delivery of the waste to the primary 

designated facility. 

* * * * * 

■ 25. Amend § 761.212 by revising 

introductory paragraph (a) to read as 

follows: 

§ 761.212 Transporter compliance with the 

manifest. 

(a) The transporter must deliver the 

entire quantity of PCB waste which they 

have accepted from a generator or a 

transporter to: 

* * * * * 

■ 26. Amend § 761.213 by revising 

introductory paragraph (a)(2) and 

introductory paragraph (b) to read as 

follows: 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 58761 

§ 761.213 Use of the manifest-Commercial 

storage and disposal facility requirements. 

(a) * * * 

(2) If a commercial storage or disposal 

facility receives an off-site shipment of 

PCB waste accompanied by a manifest, 

the owner or operator, or their agent, 

shall: 

* * * * * 

(b) If a commercial storage or disposal 

facility receives, from a rail or water 

(bulk shipment) transporter, PCB waste 

which is accompanied by a shipping 

paper containing all the information 

required on the manifest (excluding the 

EPA identification numbers, generator’s 

certification, and signatures), the owner 

or operator, or their agent, must: 

* * * * * 

■ 27. Amend § 761.214 by revising 

paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 761.214 Retention of manifest records. 

(a)(1) A generator must keep a copy of 

each manifest signed in accordance with 

§ 761.210(a) for three years or until they 

receive a signed copy from the 

designated facility which received the 

PCB waste. This signed copy must be 

retained as a record for at least three 

years from the date the waste was 

accepted by the initial transporter. A 

generator subject to annual document 

requirements under § 761.180 shall 

retain copies of each manifest for the 

period required by § 761.180(a). 

* * * * * 

■ 28. Amend § 761.216 by revising 

introductory paragraph (a) and 

paragraph (6) to read as follows: 

§ 761.216 Unmanifested waste report. 

(a) If a facility accepts for storage or 

disposal any PCB waste from an offsite 

source without an accompanying 

manifest, or without an accompanying 

shipping paper as described by 

§ 761.211(e), and the owner or operator 

of the commercial storage or disposal 

facility cannot contact the generator of 

the PCB waste, then they shall notify the 

Regional Administrator of the EPA 

region in which their facility is located 

of the unmanifested PCB waste so that 

the Regional Administrator can 

determine whether further actions are 

required before the owner or operator 

may store or dispose of the 

unmanifested PCB waste, and 

additionally the owner or operator must 

prepare and submit a letter to the 

Regional Administrator within 15 days 

after receiving the waste. The 

unmanifested waste report must contain 

the following information: 

* * * * * 

(6) Signature of the owner or operator 

of the facility or their authorized 

representative; and 

* * * * * 

■ 29. Amend§ 761.217 by revising 

paragraph (a)(2)(ii) to read as follows: 

§ 761.217 Exception reporting. 

(a) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) A cover letter signed by the 

generator or their authorized 

representative explaining the efforts 

taken to locate the PCB waste and the 

results of those efforts. 

* * * * * 

Subpart M—Determining a PCB 

Concentration for Purposes of 

Abandonment or Disposal of Natural 

Gas Pipeline: Selecting Sites, 

Collecting Surface Samples, and 

Analyzing Standard PCB Wipe 

Samples 

■ 30. Amend § 761.243 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 761.243 Standard wipe sample method 

and size. 

(a) Collect a surface sample from a 

natural gas pipe segment or pipeline 

section using a standard wipe test as 

defined in § 761.123. Detailed guidance 

for the entire wipe sampling process 

appears in the document entitled, 

‘‘Wipe Sampling and Double Wash/ 

Rinse Cleanup as Recommended by the 

Environmental Protection Agency PCB 

Spill Cleanup Policy,’’ dated June 23, 

1987 and revised on April 18, 1991. 

This document is available on EPA’s 

website at https://www.epa.gov/pcbs, or 

from the Program Implementation and 

Information Division, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery (5303P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001. 

* * * * * 

■ 31. Amend § 761.247 by revising 

paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(B)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 761.247 Sample site selection for pipe 

segment removal. 

(b) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

(B) * * * 

(2) Divide the total number of 

segments in a pipeline, save one, by six. 

The resulting number is the interval 

between the segments you will sample. 

Do not round this interval. For example, 

cut a 2.9-mile length of pipeline into 

segments of no more than 40 feet by 

first, dividing 2.9 miles (15,312 feet) by 

40 feet per segment, resulting in 382.8 

total segments. Do not round this result. 

Subtract 1 from the total number of 

segments and then divide the remaining 

number of segments, 381.8, by six. The 

resulting number in this example is 

63.6. Do not round. Add 63.6 to the first 

segment (number 1) to select segment 

64.6. Next, add 63.6 to 64.6 to select 

segment 128.3. Continue in this fashion 

to select all seven segments: 1, 64.6, 

128.3, 191.9, 255.5, 319.2, and 382.8. 

Now round these numbers to the nearest 

whole number to determine which 

segment to sample: 1, 65, 128, 192, 256, 

319, and 383. 

* * * * * 

■ 32. Amend § 761.253 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 761.253 Chemical analysis 

(a) Select applicable method(s) from 

the following list to extract PCBs and 

determine the PCB concentration from 

the standard wipe sample collection 

medium: SW–846 Method 3540C, 

Method 3541, Method 3545A, Method 

3546, Method 8082, Method 8082A, 

Method 8275A, or CWA Method 1668C 

(all incorporated by reference, see 

§ 761.19). Modifications to the methods 

listed in this paragraph or alternative 

methods not listed may be used if 

validated under Subpart Q of this part 

or authorized in a § 761.61(c) approval. 

* * * * * 

Subpart N—Cleanup Site 

Characterization Sampling for PCB 

Remediation Waste in Accordance with 

§ 761.61(a)(2) 

■ 33. Amend § 761.267 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 761.267 Sampling non-porous surfaces. 

(a) Sample large, nearly flat, nonporous surfaces by dividing the surface 

into roughly square portions 

approximately 2 meters on each side. 

Follow the procedures in § 761.302(a) 

with the exception of the sampling grid 

size. 

* * * * * 

■ 34. Revise § 761.272 to read as 

follows: 

§ 761.272 Chemical extraction and 

analysis of samples. 

Select applicable method(s) from the 

following list to extract PCBs and 

determine the PCB concentration from 

individual and composite samples of 

PCB remediation waste: SW–846 

Method 3510C, Method 3520C, Method 

3535A, Method 3540C, Method 3541, 

Method 3545A, Method 3546, Method 

8082, Method 8082A, Method 8275A, or 

CWA Method 1668C (all standards 

incorporated by reference in § 761.19). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
58762 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 202 / Friday, October 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

Modifications to the methods listed in 

this paragraph or alternative methods 

not listed may be used if validated 

under Subpart Q of this part or 

authorized in a 40 CFR 761.61(c) 

approval. 

Subpart O—Sampling To Verify 

Completion of Self-Implementing 

Cleanup and On-site Disposal of Bulk 

Remediation Waste and Porous 

Surfaces in Accordance with 

§ 761.61(a)(6) 

■ 35. Revise § 761.292 to read as 

follows: 

§ 761.292 Chemical extraction and 

analysis of individual samples and 

composite samples. 

Select applicable method(s) from the 

following list to extract PCBs and 

determine the PCB concentration from 

individual and composite samples of 

PCB remediation waste: SW–846 

Method 3510C, Method 3520C, Method 

3535A, Method 3540C, Method 3541, 

Method 3545A, Method 3546, Method 

8082, Method 8082A, Method 8275A, or 

CWA Method 1668C (all standards 

incorporated by reference in § 761.19). 

Modifications to the methods listed in 

this paragraph or alternative methods 

not listed may be used if validated 

under Subpart Q of this part or 

authorized in a 761.61(c) approval. 

Subpart P—Sampling Non-Porous 

Surfaces for Measurement-Based Use, 

Reuse, and On-site or Off-Site Disposal 

Under § 761.61(a)(6) and Determination 

Under § 761.79(b)(3) 

* * * * * 

■ 35. Revise § 761.314 to read as 

follows: 

§ 761.314 Chemical analysis of standard 

wipe test samples. 

Perform the chemical analysis of 

standard wipe test samples in 

accordance with § 761.253. Report 

sample results in micrograms per 100 

cm2. 

Subpart R—Sampling Non-Liquid, NonMetal PCB Bulk Product Waste for 

Purposes of Characterization for PCB 

Disposal in Accordance with § 761.62, 

and Sampling PCB Remediation Waste 

Destined for Off-Site Disposal, in 

Accordance With § 761.61 

■ 36. Revise § 761.358 to read as 

follows: 

§ 761.358 Determining the PCB 

concentration of samples of waste. 

Select applicable method(s) from the 

following list to extract PCBs and 

determine the PCB concentration from 

individual and composite samples of 

PCB remediation waste or PCB bulk 

product waste: SW–846 Method 3540C, 

Method 3541, Method 3545A, Method 

3546, Method 8082, Method 8082A, 

Method 8275A, or CWA Method 1668C 

(all incorporated by reference, see 

§ 761.19). Modifications to the methods 

listed in this paragraph or alternative 

methods not listed may be used if 

validated under subpart Q of this part or 

authorized in a § 761.61(c) or § 761.62(c) 

approval. 

Subpart T—Comparison Study for 

Validating a New Performance-Based 

Decontamination Solvent Under 

§ 761.79(d)(4) 

■ 37. Amend § 761.386 by revising 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 761.386 Required experimental 

conditions for the validation study and 

subsequent use during decontamination. 

* * * * * 

(e) Confirmatory sampling for the 

validation study. Select surface sample 

locations using representative sampling 

or a census. Sample a minimum area of 

100 cm2 on each individual surface in 

the validation study. Measure surface 

concentrations using the standard wipe 

test, as defined in § 761.123, from which 

a standard wipe sample is generated for 

chemical analysis. Guidance for wipe 

sampling appears in the document 

entitled ‘‘Wipe Sampling and Double 

Wash/Rinse Cleanup as Recommended 

by the Environmental Protection Agency 

PCB Spill Cleanup Policy,’’ available on 

EPA’s website at https://www.epa.gov/ 

pcbs, or from the Program 

Implementation and Information 

Division, Office of Resource 

Conservation and Recovery (5303P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 

20460–0001. 

* * * * * 

■ 38. Amend § 761.395 by revising 

paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 761.395 A validation study. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) Select applicable method(s) from 

the following list to extract PCBs and 

determine the PCB concentration from 

the standard wipe sample collection 

medium: SW–846 Method 3540C, 

Method 3541, Method 3545A, Method 

3546, Method 8082, Method 8082A, 

Method 8275A, or CWA Method 1668C 

(all incorporated by reference, see 

§ 761.19). Modifications to the methods 

listed in this paragraph or alternative 

methods not listed may be used if 

validated under subpart Q of this part. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2021–19305 Filed 10–21–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2