[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 188 (Monday, September 29, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58266-58270]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-23104]



40 CFR Part 761

[EPA-HQ-RCRA-2013-0396; FRL-9917-21-OSWER]
RIN 2050-AG79

Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs): Manufacturing (Import) 
Exemption for the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.


SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) 
is taking final action on a petition from the United States Defense 
Logistics Agency (DLA) to import foreign-manufactured polychlorinated 
biphenyls (PCBs). For purposes of the Toxic Substances Control Act 
(TSCA), ``manufacture'' is defined to include the import of chemical 
substances into the customs territory of the United States. With 
certain exceptions, section 6(e)(3) of TSCA bans the manufacture, 
processing, and distribution in commerce of PCBs. One of these 
exceptions is TSCA section 6(e)(3)(B), which gives the EPA authority to 
grant petitions to import PCBs into the customs territory of the United 
States for a period of up to 12 months, provided the EPA can make 
certain findings by rule. On April 23, 2013, the EPA received a 
petition from DLA, a component of the United States Department of 
Defense (DOD), to import PCBs that DOD currently owns in Japan for 
disposal in the United States. The EPA is granting DLA's petition as of 
October 1, 2014. This decision to grant the petition allows DLA to 
``manufacture'' (i.e., import) certain PCBs for disposal. Without an 
exemption granted by the EPA, DLA would not be allowed to import the 
PCB waste to the U.S. for proper disposal.

DATES: This final rule is effective October 1, 2014.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2013-0396. All documents in the docket are 
listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the 
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet 
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically through 
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the RCRA Docket, EPA/DC, WJC 
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public 
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public 
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the RCRA 
Docket is (202) 566-0270.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Noggle, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery, (MC: 
5304P), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 703-
347-8769; or by email: [email protected].


I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    This action applies to the petitioner, the U.S. Defense Logistics 
Agency. However, you may be potentially affected by this action if you 
process, distribute in commerce, or dispose of the PCB waste imported 
by DLA, i.e., you are an EPA-permitted PCB waste handler. Potentially 
affected categories and entities include, but are not necessarily 
limited to:
     Waste treatment and disposal (North American Industrial 
Classification System (NAICS) code 5622), e.g., facilities that store 
or dispose of PCB waste.
     Materials recovery facilities (NAICS code 56292), e.g., 
facilities that process and/or recycle metals.
     Public administration (NAICS code 92), e.g., the 
petitioning agency (i.e., the DLA).
    This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides 
a guide for readers regarding entities potentially affected by this 
action. Other types of entities not listed in this section could also 
be affected. The NAICS codes have been provided to assist you and 
others in determining whether this action might apply to certain 
entities. To determine whether you or your business may be affected by 
this action, you should carefully examine the applicability provisions 
in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 761. If you have any 
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular 
entity, consult the person listed under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section of this document.

II. Background

    Section 6(e)(3)(A) of TSCA prohibits the manufacture, which 
includes the import of chemical substances into the customs territory 
of the United States, processing, and distribution in commerce of PCBs, 
except for the distribution in commerce of PCBs that were sold for 
purposes other than resale before April 1, 1979. Section 6(e)(1) of 
TSCA also authorizes the EPA to regulate the disposal of PCBs 
consistent with the provisions in section 6(e)(2) and (3) of TSCA.
    Section 6(e)(3)(B) of TSCA, however, stipulates that any person may 
petition the EPA Administrator for an exemption from the prohibition on 
the manufacture, processing, and distribution in commerce of PCBs. The 
Administrator may by rule grant an exemption if the Administrator finds 
    (i) An unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment 
would not result, and (ii) good faith efforts have been made to develop 
a chemical substance which does not present an unreasonable risk of 
injury to health or the environment and which may be substituted for 
such polychlorinated biphenyl. (15 U.S.C. 2605(e)(3)(B)(i)-(ii)).
    The Administrator may prescribe terms and conditions for an 
exemption and may grant an exemption for a period of not more than one 
year from the date the petition is granted. In addition, section 
6(e)(4) of TSCA requires that a rule under section 6(e)(3)(B) of TSCA 
be promulgated in accordance with sections 6(c)(2), (3) and (4) of 
TSCA, which provide for publication of a proposed rule, the opportunity 
for written comments and an informal hearing, if requested, and 
publication of a final rule.
    EPA's procedures for rulemaking under section 6 of TSCA are found 
under 40 CFR part 750. This part includes Subpart B--Interim Procedural 
Rules for Manufacturing Exemptions, which describes the required 
content for manufacturing exemption petitions and the procedures that 
the EPA follows in rulemaking regarding these petitions. These rules 
are codified at 40 CFR 750.10 through 750.21.

[[Page 58267]]

III. Findings Necessary to Grant Petitions

A. No Unreasonable Risk Finding

    Before granting an exemption petition, section 6(e)(3)(B)(i) of 
TSCA requires the Administrator to find that granting an exemption 
would not result in an unreasonable risk of injury to health or to the 
environment. The EPA expects a petitioner to demonstrate in its 
petition that the activity will not pose an unreasonable risk. (See 40 
CFR 750.11).
    To determine whether a risk is unreasonable, the EPA balances the 
probability that harm will occur to health or to the environment 
against the benefits to society from granting or denying each petition. 
See generally, 15 U.S.C. 2605(c)(1). Specifically, the EPA considers 
the following factors:
    1. Effects of PCBs on human health and the environment. In deciding 
whether to grant an exemption, the EPA considers the magnitude of 
exposure and the effects of PCBs on humans and the environment. The 
following discussion summarizes EPA's assessment of these factors. A 
more complete discussion of human health and environmental effects of 
PCBs is provided in the advance notice of proposed rulemaking for the 
reassessment of PCB use authorizations in the Federal Register of April 
7, 2010 (75 FR 17645) (Ref. 5). The Agency for Toxic Substances and 
Disease Registry (ATSDR) Toxicological Profile for PCBs (2000) has also 
provided a recent review of PCB human health and environmental effects 
(Ref. 6).
    a. Health effects. The EPA has determined that PCBs cause 
significant human health effects, including cancer (classified as a 
probable human carcinogen), immune system suppression, liver damage, 
skin irritation, and endocrine disruption. PCBs also exhibit 
neurotoxicity, as well as reproductive and developmental toxicity. PCBs 
are readily absorbed through the skin and are absorbed at even faster 
rates when inhaled. Because PCBs are stored in animal fatty tissue, 
humans are also exposed to PCBs through ingestion of animal products.
    b. Environmental effects. Certain PCB congeners are among the most 
stable chemicals known, and decompose very slowly once they are 
released into the environment. PCBs are absorbed and stored in the 
fatty tissue of higher organisms as they bioaccumulate up the food 
chain through invertebrates, fish, and mammals. Significantly, 
bioaccumulated PCBs appear to be even more toxic than those found in 
the ambient environment, since the more toxic PCB congeners are more 
persistent and thus more likely to be retained. PCBs also have 
reproductive and other toxic effects in aquatic organisms, birds, and 
    c. Risks. Toxicity and exposure are the two basic components of 
risk. The EPA has concluded that exposure of humans or the environment 
to PCBs may be significant, depending on such factors as the quantity 
of PCBs involved in the exposure and the effect of exposure. Minimizing 
exposure to PCBs should minimize potential risk. As shown through the 
40 CFR part 761 regulations that detail proper disposal and storage 
options, the EPA has previously determined that some activities, 
including the disposal of PCBs in accordance with those regulations, 
pose no unreasonable risks. Other activities, such as long-term storage 
of PCB waste, are generally considered by the EPA to pose unreasonable 
    2. Benefits and costs. The benefits to society of granting an 
exemption vary, depending on the activity for which the exemption is 
requested. The reasonably ascertainable costs of denying an exemption 
also vary, depending on the individual petition. As discussed in 
Section IV of this preamble, the EPA has taken benefits and costs into 
consideration when evaluating this exemption petition.

B. Good Faith Efforts Finding

    Section 6(e)(3)(B)(ii) of TSCA requires the Administrator to find 
that ``good faith efforts have been made to develop a chemical 
substance which does not present an unreasonable risk of injury to 
health or the environment and which may be substituted for [PCBs].'' 
The EPA expects a petitioner to demonstrate in its petition how this 
standard is met. (See 40 CFR 750.11.) The EPA considers several factors 
in determining whether good faith efforts have been made. For each 
petition, the EPA considers the kind of exemption the petitioner is 
requesting. In each case, the burden is on the petitioner to show 
specifically what was done to substitute non-PCB material for PCBs or 
to show why it was not feasible to substitute non-PCBs for PCBs.
    To satisfy this finding for requests for an exemption to import 
PCBs for disposal, a petitioner must show why such activities should 
occur in the United States and what steps have been taken to develop a 
substitute. While requiring a petitioner to demonstrate that good faith 
efforts to develop a substitute for PCBs makes sense when dealing with 
exemption petitions for traditional manufacture and distribution in 
commerce, the issue of the development of substitute chemicals seems to 
have little bearing on whether to grant a petition for exemption that 
would allow the import into the United States for disposal of PCB 
waste. However, because section 6(e)(3)(B) allows a petitioner to 
request an exemption from any of the prohibitions listed in section 
6(e)(3)(A), it is appropriate to apply the standard in a way that is 
relevant to the particular exemption requested. Therefore, the relevant 
``good faith'' issue for an exemption request to import PCBs for 
disposal in the customs territory of the United States is whether the 
disposal of the waste could and/or should occur outside the United 

IV. Final Disposition of This Exemption Petition

A. The Petition: April 23, 2013 Petition to Import PCBs Located in 

    On April 23, 2013, DLA submitted a petition seeking a 1-year 
exemption to import PCBs and PCB Items currently in storage at U.S. 
military installations in Japan (Ref. 1). DLA estimates as much as 
1,014,222 pounds of waste contaminated with PCBs could be generated in 
Japan through calendar year 2014. The material in Japan consists of 
transformers (drained and un-drained), large and small capacitors, 
voltage regulators, switches, electromagnets, circuit breakers, 
reclosers, electrical cable, electric light ballasts, used dielectric 
fluids containing PCBs, and PCB-contaminated soil and debris (e.g., 
rags, small parts, packaging materials). Ninety four percent of the 
waste is at PCB concentrations below 50 ppm. Details of the particular 
amounts and concentrations DLA is petitioning to import can be found in 
Attachment 1 of the DLA petition, which can be found in the docket to 
this rulemaking. The EPA has concluded that import of the DLA PCBs will 
not cause a shortage of domestic PCB storage or disposal capacity. In 
addition, the EPA has concluded the amounts of PCBs available for 
import are small in comparison to domestic generation, and pose little 
threat of overwhelming domestic disposal capacity (Ref. 4).
1. Information Regarding No Unreasonable Risk Provided by the 
    DLA will package, transport, treat, and dispose of these PCBs in 
the same manner as PCBs identified in its previous petitions, which the 
EPA granted in 2003 and 2007 to allow the import of up to 4,293,621 and 

[[Page 58268]]

pounds of waste contaminated with PCBs, respectively (Ref. 2, 3). 
Specifically, DLA notes its adherence to applicable modal and inter-
modal national and/or international packaging, marking, labeling and 
shipping paper regulations, such as the United Nations Performance 
Oriented Packaging (UNPOP) standards, the International Maritime 
Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code/International Maritime Organization (IMO) 
requirements, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) 
Technical Instructions, requirements of the International Air Transport 
Association (IATA), United Nations (UN) Recommendations on the 
Transport of Dangerous Goods Code, and provisions of the Hazardous 
Materials Regulations at 49 CFR 100-199. DLA further notes that proper 
handling and shipping will include blocking, bracing, over packing, and 
inclusion of spill containment devices, as required by applicable 
transportation regulations.
    DLA further indicates it will handle and dispose of all PCBs and 
PCB Items in conformance with the PCB regulations at 40 CFR part 761. 
DLA has considerable experience and expertise in awarding and 
administering disposal contracts for PCBs and PCB Items in the U.S. and 
will award contracts with commercial firms in accordance with all 
applicable Federal procurement statutes and the Federal Acquisition 
Regulations (FAR). DLA additionally notes only companies with the 
required Federal and/or state-permits for the transportation, storage, 
treatment and disposal of PCBs and PCB Items would be considered as 
eligible for award of such contracts. DLA's exemption petition does not 
request to limit the storage, treatment or disposal of PCBs and PCB 
Items imported from Japan to management at a particular facility; 
rather DLA requests any storage, treatment, or disposal facility that 
has the appropriate Federal and/or state permits for PCBs and PCB Items 
and for which DLA has entered a contract be allowed to manage these 
    DLA notes that it and its contractors have extensive experience in 
safely returning PCBs and PCB Items to the United States for treatment 
and disposal, and that DLA has returned several million pounds of PCBs 
and PCB Items for compliant disposal in the United States, including 
3.6 million pounds of foreign-manufactured PCBs and PCB Items imported 
under the two previously granted exemptions. As noted previously, DLA 
had authority to import up to 5.5 million pounds of PCBs and PCB Items 
under the previous two exemptions. Throughout the course of this 
experience, DLA has used the same standards and procedures discussed 
above without spills or safety problems affecting human health or the 
2. Information Regarding Good Faith Efforts Provided by the Petitioner
    DLA states in its petition that disposal of its PCBs and PCB Items 
in Japan is not an available disposal option. Specifically, as DLA 
noted in its exemption request, there are significant impediments to 
disposal on DOD military installations in Japan. For example, while 
there may exist certain mobile technology capable of treating some of 
the PCBs and PCB Items generated by United States military forces in 
Japan, there are also significant impediments to obtaining the permits 
that would be required to have that technology approved for use on 
United States military installations, where residual wastes and metals 
would still need to be taken off-installation for disposal. 
Complicating the situation further is any transfer or sale of property 
from the U.S. military installations into Japanese commerce is 
considered an ``import'' of property. Japan has banned the importation 
of PCBs and PCB Items at any detectable concentration, including 
concentrations below the very stringent 0.5 ppm level at which Japan 
regulates domestic PCBs. DLA's market research suggested a potential 
option could exist for disposal of some limited waste streams in newly 
permitted Japanese facilities (i.e., ``off- installation'' disposal). 
However, DLA has not been able to identify any change in Japanese law 
that would allow off-installation disposal in Japan nor the existence 
of any properly permitted vendor or technology that would be currently 
available to properly treat the DOD generated PCBs and PCB Items within 
the confines of the United States installations in Japan. Accordingly, 
on-site treatment does not present a reasonable alternative to the 
import of these wastes for proper disposal in the United States in 
compliance with the TSCA Section 6(e)(3).
    DLA further notes disposal of this waste in another country is not 
a viable option. DLA cites its 1999 Report to Congress as background on 
the difficulty it faces in finding suitable disposal alternatives for 
PCBs and PCB Items generated or owned by DOD overseas. In particular, 
DLA discusses the difficulty of shipping waste from Japan to other 
countries as a result of the Basel Convention. Prior to its previous 
petitions, DLA and its primary disposal contractor made extensive 
contacts over a period of several years with Japanese officials and 
disposal facilities in numerous locations outside the United States in 
an effort to identify firms who could dispose of such PCBs and PCB 
Items while satisfying the Basel Convention requirements. At that time, 
the DOD also consulted at length with State Department officials in 
Japan and in the United States whose responsibilities include 
international environmental matters. The variety of problems identified 
in these contacts regarding overseas disposal of certain PCB Items 
resulted in a consensus that use of existing facilities in other 
developed countries was not a reasonable alternative. Even if other 
countries had the physical capacity to accept these wastes, non-
governmental organizations might be expected to oppose the DOD's 
disposal of its waste in third countries (that is, countries other than 
Japan and the United States) because the United States has the 
technical capability to properly dispose of the hazardous materials 
    DLA concludes that its diligent but so far unsuccessful attempts to 
locate appropriate disposal sites outside the United States demonstrate 
its good faith efforts to pursue alternatives to disposal within the 
United States and fulfill the requirements of TSCA 6(e)(3)(B).

B. What comment did the EPA receive and how is it addressed?

    On April 2, 2014, the EPA published a direct final rule with an 
accompanying proposed rule in the Federal Register (79 FR 18471). In 
that rule, we noted if adverse comments or a request for an informal 
hearing were received, then the EPA would publish a timely withdrawal 
in the Federal Register informing the public that this rule would not 
take effect based on the direct final rule. We also stated that we 
would then address all public comments in any subsequent final rule 
based on the proposed rule which accompanied the direct final rule.
    During the public comment period, the EPA received one adverse 
comment and request for informal hearing. The comment received states 
in part, ``In brief, since the first two permissions were granted in 
2003 and 2007, there have been alarming increases in previously rare 
malignancies such as melanoma and liver carcinoma. Additionally even 
common malignancies such as breast cancer have had substantial rises. 
PCBs have also been linked to endocrine disorders such as diabetes and 
obesity both of which have seen dramatic increasing trends'' (Docket 
Document ID EPA-HQ-RCRA-2013-0396-0004). The comment did not include 
specific information to support

[[Page 58269]]

the claim of increased numbers of cancers nor did the comment include 
any support for the claim that this increase is due to PCB exposures.
    On June 13, 2014, the EPA published a withdrawal of the direct 
final rule and notice of informal hearing (79 FR 33867). During the 
informal hearing, held on July 8, 2014, the EPA received one 
presentation, which was submitted by the same person who submitted the 
adverse comment and request for an informal hearing. The presentation 
included a request for the EPA to update EPA's classification of PCBs 
from a probable human carcinogen to a known human carcinogen, as well 
as included citations to studies purportedly indicating a connection 
between certain types of cancers and PCBs (Docket Document ID EPA-HQ-
RCRA-2013-0396-0011). In the direct final rule for this action, as well 
as re-stated in this final rule, the EPA recognizes cancer as a 
possible health effect from exposure to PCBs. Therefore, neither 
information in the comment nor in the presentation characterizes risks 
of PCBs that were not previously considered by the EPA, and the 
information does not change EPA's evaluation that granting this 
exemption will not result in an unreasonable risk of injury to health 
or the environment. Specifically, the additional research states cancer 
has been associated with PCB exposure, and argues PCBs are causal for a 
specific cancer (e.g., non-Hodgkin lymphoma), is insufficient to 
demonstrate that proper disposal in accordance with our regulations 
would result in an unreasonable risk. The PCB wastes under this 
exemption must be properly disposed of according to the regulations set 
forth in 40 CFR part 761.

C. EPA's Final Decision on the Petition: April 23, 2013 Petition; EPA 
is Granting This Petition

    1. No unreasonable risk determination. The EPA finds generally that 
the disposal of imported PCBs and PCB Items at an EPA-approved PCB 
disposal facility poses no unreasonable risks as these facilities have 
been approved on the basis of that standard. In addition, as with the 
previous two petitions, the EPA concurs with DLA's assessment that 
transportation of this waste will pose no unreasonable risk if 
conducted in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations. 
Therefore, for the following reasons, the EPA finds there is no 
unreasonable risk from importing the PCBs and PCB Items by DLA from 
Japan to the United States for disposal, as outlined below.
    i. PCBs are hazardous and pose a potential risk to health and the 
environment. Proper disposal in accordance with the 40 CFR part 761 
regulations would reduce PCB-associated risks.
    ii. Risk results from a combination of exposure (likelihood, 
magnitude and duration) and the probability of effects occurring under 
the conditions of exposure. Because the probability of a transport 
accident occurring is low (Ref. 4), the likelihood of exposure to PCBs 
is commensurately low. Consequently, the probability of adverse effects 
to human health or the environment is low.
    iii. The PCB-containing materials will be packaged in a manner 
consistent with Federal, State, and local regulations addressing the 
risks associated with the storage and transportation of hazardous 
wastes. In addition, PCB waste will be continuously monitored during 
the ocean transport from Japan to the United States. Contingency plans 
are required by the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code and 
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to be in place before and after 
the import of PCB-containing items to the United States. Moreover, the 
PCB Items that will be transported to the United States generally have 
a low combustion likelihood, which will make the probability of fires 
low. Together, these contingency measures will minimize exposure to 
humans and the environment in the event of an accident or emergency 
during ocean transport.
    iv. Given the aforementioned information, the exposure likelihood, 
frequency, and duration are so low that even though PCBs are considered 
to be highly hazardous, any risk resulting from the combined exposure 
and hazard potential would not be unreasonable to human health or the 
    v. The potential for human health risks are further mitigated by 
the limited duration of potential exposure. Under the transport 
scenario proposed, any exposures to humans (i.e., accidental or 
emergency situation) would be of very short duration. Hence, the low 
probability of exposure occurring combined with the short-term duration 
of exposure, should one occur, further support a qualitative conclusion 
that there is no unreasonable risk to human health.
    vi. The long-term concern is the potential for accumulation in the 
ecological environment. Under a worst case scenario where all of the 
PCBs were released due to an unforeseen and unlikely catastrophic event 
during transport, PCB-exposed biological receptors could be adversely 
affected. However, this scenario would require a failure of all 
safeguards that will be in place. Furthermore, the alternative of 
storing the PCBs indefinitely seems to pose more risk than transport. 
Moreover, should an accident occur, emergency response authorities 
would be invoked to mitigate and/or remediate exposures.
    2. Good faith efforts to find substitutes met. Section 
6(e)(3)(B)(ii) of TSCA requires the Administrator to make an additional 
finding, that ``good faith efforts have been made to develop a chemical 
substance that does not present an unreasonable risk of injury to 
health or the environment and which may be substituted for such 
polychlorinated biphenyl.'' The EPA has interpreted this provision to 
require that a petitioner has the burden of demonstrating that it has 
made the requisite good faith efforts to identify alternatives to 
management of the PCB waste in the United States. (See 40 CFR 750.11).
    The EPA finds that DLA has demonstrated good faith efforts to find 
alternatives to disposal of this PCB waste in the United States. The 
EPA acknowledges the restrictions to disposing of this waste in Japan. 
DLA has also explored exporting this waste to other countries as an 
alternative. However, DLA has indicated, and the EPA acknowledges, the 
peculiar circumstances of DOD's PCBs and PCB Items, which, while 
present in one country (i.e., Japan), are generated by another 
country's government, leading to significant difficulty in providing 
Basel Convention notification to third countries. Given these 
difficulties, the EPA concurs with DLA's conclusion that disposal in a 
third country (that is, countries other than Japan and the United 
States) is not a viable alternative for this waste.
3. Benefits of Granting the Petition
    i. Avoiding the risks of long-term storage. The EPA believes 
granting the petition to DLA to import 1,014,222 pounds of waste 
contaminated with PCBs (94% of which is less than 50 ppm) will benefit 
the United States and the environment in general. As DLA notes, the 
continued long-term storage of PCB waste on U.S. military facilities in 
Japan poses risks to U.S. personnel and the environment--risks that can 
be eliminated through the action finalized in the petition.
    ii. Ensuring proper and safe disposal. Granting the petition allows 
the United States to accept responsibility for the PCBs and PCB Items 
it generates by assuring proper and safe disposal in domestic permitted 
disposal facilities.
    iii. Ensuring the safety of Japanese citizens. The EPA considers 
the reduction of risk to Japanese citizens to

[[Page 58270]]

be advantageous, especially in light of the heightened concerns over 
PCBs in that country. Granting the petition is the only practical 
mechanism to remove this waste from Japan; otherwise, the U.S. military 
would be required to explain to its Japanese hosts that it cannot 
remove its own toxic waste from their country because U.S. law does not 
allow the waste to be sent to the United States.
    For all these reasons, the EPA finds DLA has satisfied the 
exemption criteria of TSCA section 6(e)(3)(B) and is granting the 

V. References

    1. DOD, DLA. Petition from David Rodriguez, Director to EPA. 
Subject: Petition to the United States Environmental Protection 
Agency For an Exemption Under the Toxic Substances Control Act to 
Import Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) and PCB Items for Disposal. 
April 23, 2013. 19 pp.
    2. EPA, OPPT. Polychlorinated Biphenyls; Manufacturing (Import) 
Exemption. Final Rule. Federal Register (72 FR 53152, September 18, 
2007) (FRL-8143-4). Available on-line at https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2007/09/18/E7-18345/polychlorinated-biphenyls-manufacturing-import-exemption, Document 
ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0042-0008.
    3. EPA, OPPT. Polychlorinated Biphenyls; Manufacturing (Import) 
Exemptions. Final Rule. Federal Register (68 FR 4934, January 31, 
2003) (FRL-7288-6). Available on-line at http://www.federalregister.com/Browse/Document/usa/na/fr/2003/1/31/03-2344, 
Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2002-0013-0041.
    4. EPA, OPPT. Disposal of Polychlorinated Biphenyls; Import for 
Disposal. Final Rule. Federal Register (61 FR 11095, March 18, 1996) 
(FRL-5354-8). Available on-line at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/1996/March/Day-18/pr-24122.txt.html.
    5. EPA, OPPT. Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); Reassessment of 
Use Authorizations. Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Federal 
Register (75 FR 17645, April 7, 2010). (FRL-8811-7). Available on-
line at http://www.regulations.gov, Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-
    6. The U.S. Department of Agriculture, Public Health Service, 
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) 
Toxicological Profile for Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) (November 
2000). Available online at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp17.pdf.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 
Executive Order 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), this action is 
not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore not subject to 
OMB review. Because this action is not subject to notice and comment 
requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other 
statute, it is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 
601 et seq.) or Sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act of 1999 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4). In addition, this action does not 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action does 
not create new binding legal requirements that substantially and 
directly affect Tribes under Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 
November 9, 2000). This action does not have significant Federalism 
implications under Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 
1999). Because this final rule has been exempted from review under 
Executive Order 12866, this final rule is not subject to Executive 
Order 13211, entitled Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly 
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) 
or Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 
1997). This final rule does not contain any information collections 
subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., nor does it require any special considerations 
under Executive Order 12898, entitled Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). This action does not 
involve technical standards; thus, the requirements of Section 12(d) of 
the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 
272 note) do not apply. This action is subject to the Congressional 
Review Act, and the EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the 
Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. Under the 
CRA, a ``major rule'' cannot take effect until 60 days after it is 
published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' 
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 761

    Environmental protection, Hazardous substances, and Polychlorinated 

    Dated: September 19, 2014.
Mathy Stanislaus,
Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the 
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:


1. The authority citation for Part 761 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605, 2607, 2611, 2614, and 2616.

Subpart E--[Amended]

2. Section 761.80 is amended by revising paragraph (j) to read as 

Sec.  761.80  Manufacturing, processing and distribution in commerce 

* * * * *
    (j) The Administrator grants the United States Defense Logistics 
Agency's April 23, 2013 petition for an exemption for 1 year beginning 
on October 1, 2014, to import up to 1,014,222 pounds of PCBs and PCB 
Items stored or in use in Japan as identified in its petition for 
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-23104 Filed 9-26-14; 8:45 am]