FAQ: Are PCBs Banned in the United States? [2024 Guide]

Nationwide Ban on PCBs Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)

Are PCBs banned in the United States?

The answer is yes.

While polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were widespread in various industrial and commercial applications from the 1930s to the 1970s, their toxic effects started became apparent to the public and the chemical was subsequently banned for manufacture.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ordered the suspension of PCB manufacture in the country in 1977.

The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) became law on October 11, 1976, and went into effect on January 1, 1977.

Through this law, the EPA banned the use, production, importation, and distribution of PCBs in the United States in 1979.

The TSCA gives the EPA the authority to regulate and restrict toxic substances.

However, the law allows exemptions if they meet specific criteria in particular circumstances.

The EPA regulates eligible cases to minimize the risks associated with PCB exposures.

Specific Regulations on PCBs Under the TSCA

Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are subject to comprehensive regulations that impose strict prohibitions on their manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, and use, with limited exceptions for totally enclosed uses and other specific exemptions approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The EPA has set forth regulations requiring detailed reporting by manufacturers, processors, and distributors on the presence of PCBs in their products, as well as documentation of accidental releases.

TSCA mandates stringent record-keeping practices, obliging relevant entities to maintain records of PCB activities for at least three years, setting maximum allowable PCB levels in air, water, and soil.

TSCA enables the EPA to conduct facility inspections to ensure regulatory compliance and to enforce penalties for violations.

The act outlines strict criteria for the disposal of PCB-containing materials, aimed at reducing exposure risks, and allows the EPA to oversee remediation efforts, including the decontamination of sites contaminated with PCBs such as schools and industrial locations.

Through the TSCA, the EPA has the power to evaluate and approve petitions for exemptions to PCB use restrictions, allowing for their continued application in certain scenarios where alternatives are not available.

The TSCA plays a critical role in managing PCB risks, but due to the nature of these chemicals, risks of exposure to PCBs still persist.

Scope of the PCB Ban

The TSCA has been the primary regulation governing PCB production, use, and disposal in the United States since its inception.

Here is the scope of the PCB ban under the TSCA of 1976:

• Initial Regulation: The TSCA gave the EPA the authority to regulate and restrict the manufacture, processing, distribution, use, and disposal of chemicals, including PCBs. It established a framework for assessing and controlling chemicals’ potential risks to human health and the environment.
• Phased Ban: The TSCA led to a phased ban on PCBs. Under this law, PCBs were classified as “banned chemical substances” and subject to specific regulations aimed at phasing out the use of PCBs in various applications.
• Use Restrictions: The TSCA imposed strict restrictions on using PCBs in multiple applications, particularly those with a high potential for environmental release and human exposure. PCBs were common in electrical transformers and capacitors, hydraulic fluids, heat transfer fluids, and other applications. The TSCA established a phase-out period for these uses.
• Elimination of New Production: The TSCA effectively banned manufacturing new PCBs in the United States in 1977. However, existing PCB-containing equipment and materials were allowed to remain in use.
• Management of Existing PCBs: The TSCA required establishing comprehensive regulations for administering, disposing of, and cleanup of existing PCB-containing equipment and materials. This mandate included regulations for appropriately storing, transporting, and disposing of PCB waste.
• EPA Exemptions: The TSCA allowed some exemptions, such as specific electrical equipment already used before the ban. These exemptions were subject to strict record-keeping and maintenance requirements to minimize the risk of PCB release.
• Health and Environmental Impacts: The TSCA was instrumental in addressing the adverse health effects of PCB exposure, such as cancer and other serious illnesses. It also aimed to mitigate the environmental impact of PCBs, which can persist in the environment for extended periods, leading to soil, water, and wildlife contamination.

Regulatory Enforcement

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plays a pivotal role in overseeing and enforcing the ban on PCBs.

The EPA has implemented various regulations to address PCBs, including disposal and storage requirements for PCB-containing equipment.

They have also issued guidelines for safely handling, transporting, and disposing of PCBs.

Over the years, the EPA has taken significant actions to reduce PCB exposures, such as cleaning up hazardous waste sites contaminated with PCBs.

These efforts are crucial in preventing further contamination and mitigating health risks associated with PCB exposure.

The EPA has also set regulatory standards for PCB levels in the United States.

These standards aim for the maximum contaminant level (MCL) of PCBs in drinking water to be zero and set the enforceable MCL of PCBs in public water systems to 0.0005 ppm (parts per million).

Other regulatory agencies have also established regulations to reduce PCB exposure in workplaces and consumer products:

• Food and Drug Administration (FDA): The FDA established the maximum tolerance level for PCBs in all foods to 0.2 to 3.0 ppm (parts per million). PCB-contaminated fish are a considerable source of PCB exposure, so they set a specific tolerance level of 2 ppm in fish. The FDA also limited PCBs in paper food-packaging materials to 10 ppm.
• Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA): OSHA determined permissible exposure limits (PELs) for PCBs in the workplace based on the highest PCB levels in the air over an eight-hour work shift. The OSHA PEL is a time-weighted average (TWA) of 1.0 mg/m3 (milligrams per cubic meter) for PCBs with 42% chlorine and 0.5 mg/m3 for PCBs with 54% chlorine.
• National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH): NIOSH also established PELs for PCBs in the workplace. They set a 10-hour TWA of 1.0 µg/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter) to minimize occupational exposure to PCBs.
• World Health Organization (WHO): The WHO has also set guidelines for PCB exposure, establishing the allowable daily intake (ADI) for PCBs in food to 6.0 µg/kg (microgram per kilogram) per day. This guideline aims to help protect against long-term exposure to PCBs through food consumption.
• Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO): The FAO set a tolerable daily intake (TDI) for PCBs in food similar to the WHO’s ADI, at 6.0 µg/kg (microgram per kilogram) per day.

PCB Exposure Risks Persist After Ban Under TSCA

Despite the ban on the manufacturing and certain uses of PCBs under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), PCB exposure risks persist, particularly in older buildings including schools.

PCBs, known for their durability and resistance to fire and chemicals, were widely used in various applications such as caulk and fluorescent light ballasts, materials common in school constructions between the 1950s and 1970s.

The longevity and resilience of PCBs mean that they remain in the environment and continue to pose health risks long after their initial use has ceased.

In schools, PCB-containing caulk and ballasts often go undetected due to the lack of mandatory testing, leaving students and staff unknowingly exposed to these toxic substances.

The fact that PCBs can leach into surrounding materials exacerbates the problem, potentially leading to wider environmental contamination and exposure.

Due to their persistent nature, PCBs can accumulate in dust and air, increasing the risk of chronic exposure.

Addressing this hidden hazard requires targeted efforts to test for and remediate PCBs in educational settings, emphasizing the urgent need for regulatory action to ensure a safe learning environment.

The identification and removal of PCB-containing materials, especially in schools, remain critical tasks that demand attention from environmental agencies and school administrations to mitigate direct and indirect health risks associated with these chemicals.

Historical Context of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were first synthesized in the later 1800s, but their commercial production began in 1929, initiated by the Swann Chemical Company, which later became part of Monsanto Co.

Monsanto Co. took over production of PCBs at plants in Anniston, Alabama and Sauget, Illinois.

Monsanto commercialized PCBs extensively, marketing them for various industrial and commercial applications due to their chemical stability and non-flammability.

These applications ranged from electrical insulators and coolants in transformers and capacitors to hydraulic systems and plasticizers in paints, sealants, and plastics.

By the 1930s, reports began to surface about workers exposed to PCBs suffering from chloracne and other skin conditions, indicating the potential health risks associated with PCB exposure.

Despite early evidence of PCBs’ toxicity, internal documents later revealed that Monsanto was aware of the dangers posed by PCBs to human health.

However, instead of discontinuing their production, Monsanto chose to aggressively market PCBs, maximizing profits while downplaying the health risks.

This strategy continued until the late 1970s, when mounting scientific evidence of PCBs’ environmental persistence, bioaccumulation, and carcinogenicity led to regulatory scrutiny and public outcry.

In 1979, facing undeniable evidence of harm and significant legal and public pressure, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) banned the production of PCBs under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

The legacy of Monsanto’s decisions regarding PCBs has left a lasting impact, with widespread environmental contamination and ongoing health risks that persist even decades after the ban.

The history of PCBs is a stark reminder of the consequences of prioritizing commercial interests over public health and environmental safety.

Chemical Information on PCBs

This synthetic chemical is a mixture of approximately 209 individual PCB congeners or chlorinated compounds.

The consistency of a PCB mixture can range from yellow or black waxy solids to thin, light-colored oily liquids, but they can also exist as vapor in the air.

PCBs have no taste or smell.

The versatility and stability of these chemicals made them widely applicable in various industrial settings for decades.

Many industries used PCBs because they had excellent properties, including:

• Non-Flammability: PCBs are highly fire-resistant, making them useful in electrical equipment and other fire-sensitive areas.
• Chemical Stability: They are highly stable and resistant to high temperatures and chemical reactions, making them useful in various manufacturing processes.
• High Boiling Point: PCBs have a high boiling point, which allows for their use in applications requiring materials to remain liquid even at high temperatures.
• Electrical Insulation: PCBs have excellent electrical insulating properties, making them valuable in electrical devices.

What Products Contain PCBs?

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were extensively used in a myriad of applications due to their chemical stability and resistance to heat, making them ideal for use as insulating materials in electrical equipment, hydraulic systems, and other industrial applications.

The non-flammability and electrical insulating properties of PCBs made them highly valued in heavy industrial and commercial settings for enhancing safety and reliability.

The elastic qualities of PCBs also found them to be used in paints, varnishes, lacquers, and caulking.

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were a primary ingredient in many products, including:

• Transformers and capacitors
• Fluorescent light ballasts
• Oil for motors and hydraulic systems
• Lubricants
• Thermal insulation materials
• Caulking
• Carbonless copy paper
• Adhesives, sealants, and coatings
• Inks, dyes, and pigments
• Plasticizers for plastic and rubber products

While PCBs were incredibly beneficial in many industrial and commercial applications, their toxic effects became increasingly evident.

As people began to realize the potential dangers of PCBs, there was a growing concern regarding their use and disposal.

The rise in awareness of PCBs’ harmful effects led to the ban on PCB production and use in the United States in 1979.

However, even after the ban, PCBs still exist in our environment.

The consequences of its widespread usage have been devastating, significantly harming human health and the environment.

Post-Ban Concerns: PCB Exposure Risks

Despite the TSCA ban on PCBs, there are still concerns about legacy PCBs, which remain in older products, electrical equipment, and buildings.

PCBs are persistent organic pollutants (POPs), and do not naturally break down in the environment.

As a result, PCB exposures and environmental impacts persist for decades.

Exposure to PCBs Through Electrical Equipment and Construction Materials

Exposure to PCBs through electrical equipment and construction materials continues to be a significant health concern despite their ban decades ago.

In older buildings and electrical infrastructure, PCBs remain entrenched in transformers, capacitors, and other electrical apparatus, such as old fluorescent lighting fixtures, as these were manufactured with PCBs to enhance their durability and fire resistance qualities.

Similarly, construction materials such as caulking, sealants, and some types of paint used until the late 1970s contain PCBs, posing risks during renovations, demolitions, or even through gradual deterioration over time.

The danger of exposure lies in the fact that these materials can release PCBs into the air, dust, and surrounding environment, leading to indirect exposure routes that are often overlooked, such as inhalation of contaminated air or ingestion of dust, or even skin contact with materials or furniture that have accumulated the chemical.

The inadvertent release of PCBs during improper handling or disposal of these materials can lead to contamination of the soil and waterways, further extending the routes of human exposure through the consumption of contaminated water or food products.

Improper disposal of older electrical equipment containing PCB capacitors may cause PCB leakage in older industrial plants, landfills, and hazardous waste sites.

This ongoing risk underscores the necessity for stringent safety protocols and remediation efforts to identify and safely remove PCB-containing materials, particularly in settings such as schools and older buildings, to protect public health and prevent further environmental contamination.

The Environmental Impact of PCBs

PCBs accumulate in the food chain, with eating contaminated fish and other seafood being a significant source of exposure.

Eating contaminated food can lead to adverse health effects.

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) resist natural degradation processes which allows them to remain in ecosystems for decades.

This persistence is compounded by their ability to bioaccumulate, which entails PCBs “climbing up” the food chain as smaller organisms consumed by larger ones retain PCBs in their fat tissues, leading to higher concentrations in top predators, including humans.

PCBs’ chemical stability, which made them attractive for industrial use, now contributes to their widespread distribution across water bodies, soil, and air, facilitating their movement across great distances from original points of contamination.

The process of biomagnification, where PCB concentrations increase with each step up the food chain, poses significant risks to wildlife, particularly species like eagles, otters, and whales, which consume large amounts of contaminated fish.

Interestingly, PCBs can also undergo a process called “weathering,” where their chlorination level can change due to exposure to natural elements, making them more or less bioavailable to organisms, affecting their potential for bioaccumulation.

Cleanup and Remediation Efforts

Cleanup and remediation efforts for PCB contamination have been critical in addressing the environmental and health impacts of these toxic substances across the United States.

The process of decontaminating areas affected by PCBs involves a comprehensive approach, often requiring multi-year efforts and significant resources.

Below are examples of remediation projects for PCB contamination (excluding schools):

• Anniston, AL: Known for one of the most significant PCB contamination cases due to Monsanto manufacturing facilities, Anniston underwent extensive soil and water remediation, involving the removal and replacement of contaminated soil in residential areas and capping areas of concentrated contamination.
  • Monsanto and Solutia, Inc. (a Monsanto spin-off) agreed to pay $700 million to residents of Anniston in 2003.
• Pittsfield, MA: PCB contamination stemming from General Electric (GE) operations led to extensive cleanup efforts in Pittsfield, focusing on the Housatonic River. Remediation included dredging and capping of river sediments, along with soil remediation in surrounding areas.
  • Residents of Pittsfield, MA are suing GE and Monsanto.
• Rome, GA: A General Electric (GE) plant in Rome contributed to PCB contamination in local waterways. Cleanup efforts focused on sediment removal and habitat restoration to reduce health risks and environmental impacts.
• Sauget, IL: Located near St. Louis, Sauget’s industrial history included PCB manufacturing, leading to its designation as a Superfund site. Cleanup included soil excavation and treatment, as well as groundwater monitoring to prevent further contamination.
  • Aroclor Plant, Sauget, Illinois: This site was directly involved in the production of PCBs by Monsanto.
• Hudson River, NY: One of the largest PCB cleanup efforts involved dredging approximately 2.65 million cubic yards of PCB-contaminated sediment from the Hudson River. This long-term project aimed to reduce PCB levels in the river and mitigate impacts on wildlife and human health.
• Fox River, Wisconsin: A significant cleanup effort involving the removal and capping of PCB-contaminated sediments from the Fox River. Originally designated as a Superfund site, this project aimed to reduce PCB levels in the river system, which were historically impacted by the paper industry.
• New Bedford Harbor, Massachusetts: Contaminated with PCBs from industrial activities, New Bedford Harbor underwent one of the largest harbor cleanup projects in the country. Cleanup efforts included dredging contaminated sediments and creating long-term monitoring and maintenance plans.
• Indiana Harbor and Ship Canal, Indiana: This heavy industrial area near Chicago saw extensive dredging to remove PCB-contaminated sediments from the canal and harbor.
• Waukegan Harbor, Illinois: Once known as the “world’s worst PCB mess,” Waukegan Harbor underwent a comprehensive cleanup that included dredging and on-site treatment of contaminated sediments to address PCB pollution from historical industrial discharges.
• Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Kittery, Maine: Efforts to clean up PCB contamination at this active military installation included the removal of PCB-contaminated materials and soils, and the implementation of measures to prevent future releases.
• St. Lawrence River at Massena, New York: Located near industrial sites that historically released PCBs into the environment, the cleanup involved sediment removal, habitat restoration, and community health studies to address the impacts of contamination.
• Lower Passaic River, New Jersey: Part of the larger effort to clean the Diamond Alkali Superfund Site, the Lower Passaic River cleanup involves ongoing efforts to remove and cap PCB-contaminated sediments to reduce the long-term health risks and environmental impacts.
• Hartwell Superfund Site, Hartwell, Georgia: Cleanup activities at this former capacitor manufacturing facility involved removing PCB-contaminated soils and sediments, demolishing contaminated structures, and restoring affected areas.
• Kalamazoo River, Michigan: PCB contamination from paper recycling mills led to extensive environmental damage. Remediation work has included sediment dredging, bank stabilization, and habitat restoration to mitigate the impact.
• Akron, Ohio: The Summit Equipment & Supplies Inc. site involved PCB contamination due to improper storage and disposal practices. Cleanup activities included the removal of PCB-contaminated soils and the decontamination of equipment.
• Silver Bow Creek, Montana: PCBs were among the contaminants addressed in the cleanup of this site, which was affected by over a century of mining and smelting operations. Remediation efforts have included stream and floodplain restoration.
• Grasse River, New York: Industrial discharges led to PCB contamination in Grasse River. Remediation has included capping of contaminated sediments and monitored natural recovery strategies to reduce PCB levels in fish and sediment.
• Bloomington, Indiana: PCB contamination in Bloomington was associated with electrical capacitor manufacturing facilities. Cleanup efforts have included removal of contaminated soil and sediment, as well as property remediation and groundwater treatment.
• Middlefield-Ellis-Whisman (MEW) Study Area, Mountain View, California: Groundwater contamination by PCBs and other solvents at this Superfund site led to a comprehensive cleanup effort, including soil vapor extraction and groundwater treatment.

Potential Health Effects of PCB Exposure

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) have been recognized as a significant health concern due to their association with both cancerous and non-cancerous health effects, which can vary widely based on exposure conditions and individual susceptibility.

Critical factors influencing health outcomes include the route of exposure, whether through ingestion, inhalation, or dermal contact, and the duration of exposure, with chronic exposures being particularly concerning.

The body’s response to PCB exposure can be influenced by the specific congener profile, as some are known to be more toxicologically significant, impacting the endocrine, reproductive, immune, and neurological systems in nuanced and sometimes irreversible ways.

Individual genetic and physiological factors, such as age, gender, and overall health status, can influence the body’s ability to metabolize and eliminate PCBs, further influencing the range and severity of potential health effects.

Non-Cancer Health Effects of PCB Exposure

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are associated with a myriad of non-cancer health effects due to their ability to disrupt endocrine, reproductive, immune, and neurological systems.

Health effects manifest across a broad spectrum, impacting individuals differently based on exposure levels, duration, and the specific PCB congeners involved.

The range of non-cancer health effects attributed to PCB exposure underscores the compound’s complex toxicological profile and its capacity to interfere with various bodily functions.

Non-cancer health effects of PCBs may include:

• Endocrine disruption
• Reproductive issues
• Developmental effects in children
• Immune system suppression
• Impacts on the nervous system
• Skin conditions such as chloracne
• Liver damage
• Gastrointestinal symptoms
• Respiratory symptoms
• Cardiovascular risks
• Alteration to thyroid hormone levels
• Metabolic changes, including diabetes
• Developmental delays in children
• Behavioral and cognitive issues in children, such as ADHD
• Decreased birth weight and size
• Changes in blood pressure
• Alterations in blood and bone chemistry
• Eye irritation
• Fatigue and headaches
• Muscle and joint pain

Prenatal PCB exposure is also a concern, as these chemicals can pass from a pregnant woman to her developing fetus through the placenta.

This exposure can result in long-term health consequences for the child, including decreased birth weight, developmental delays, and learning disabilities.

Breast milk can also be a source of PCB exposure for infants if the mother has been exposed to higher PCB levels.

PCBs are Cancer Causing Chemicals

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified PCBs as a Group 1 human carcinogen.

The carcinogenic potential of PCBs varies depending on the individual PCB congener chlorination level and the bioaccumulative capacity within human tissue.

Studies have shown an increased risk for certain types of cancer in individuals with significant exposure to PCBs, highlighting the critical need for stringent regulatory measures and remediation efforts to reduce human exposure to these toxic compounds.

PCBs can potentially cause various types of cancer, including:

• Liver cancer
• Breast cancer
• Malignant melanoma
• Gastric cancer
• Intestinal cancer
• Thyroid cancer
• Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma
• Brain cancer
• Lung cancer
• Pancreatic cancer
• Prostate cancer
• Soft tissue sarcoma
• Testicular cancer

Current Perspective on PCBs (Lawsuits and Advocacy)

The perspective on PCBs in the United States is continually evolving.

Ongoing debates and regulatory changes contribute to this evolution.

New studies and research findings, such as those about PCB toxicity and removal, continue to provide insight into the long-term health effects of PCB exposure.

The EPA continues to update regulations related to PCBs, aiming to reduce exposure and contamination.

The public’s growing concern about environmental pollution has also brought attention to PCBs.

Several lawsuits have been filed against Monsanto for PCB exposure in schools:

• In December 2023, individuals exposed to PCBs at Sky Valley Education Center were awarded a $857 million verdict in lawsuits against Monsanto.
  • Monsanto was also hit with jury verdicts of $165 million, $185 million, $275 million, $21.4 million, and $72 million.
• Dozens of Vermont school districts are suing Monsanto for PCB contamination in public school buildings.
  • Individuals who attended Vermont schools suffering from PCB exposure are also suing Monsanto.

Monsanto is also facing lawsuits for remediation of PCB-contaminated areas from state and local governments:

• Bayer agreed to pay $100 million to clean up and restore Pennsylvania’s contaminated lakes and waterways.
• Milwaukee is another city suing the company for PCB contamination of its water systems.

Individual lawsuits against PCB manufacturers and users are also ongoing in various states. These legal actions emphasize the significance of the issue and the need for accountability.

TorHoerman Law: Investigating PCB Exposure in Schools

The ban on PCBs in the United States protects public health and the environment.

However, the persistence of PCBs and ongoing exposure cause serious concerns.

If you have been exposed to PCBs in a school setting and experienced adverse health effects, you may be eligible to take action.

Contact TorHoerman Law today for a free case review.

You can also use the chatbot on this page to find out if you qualify for a PCB lawsuit claim instantly.