Interpretation Response #05-0235R ([Huntsman] [Clifford W. Lester, MSPH, CIH, EMT’B, DGSA])
Below is the interpretation response detail and a list of regulations sections applicable to this response.
Interpretation Response Details
Response Publish Date:
Company Name: Huntsman
Individual Name: Clifford W. Lester, MSPH, CIH, EMT’B, DGSA
Location State: TX Country: US
View the Interpretation Document
Response text:
Jul 17, 2007
Clifford W. Lester, MSPH, CIH, EMT"B, DGSA Reference No. 05-0235R
Hazardous Communication Specialist
Huntsman
10003 Woodloch Forest Drive
The Woodlands, TX 77380
Dear Mr. Lester:
This serves as a retraction of our June 7, 2006 (Ref. No. 05-0235) letter responding to your request for clarification on how to package and describe spent catalysts being transported to a facility for reclamation under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171- 180). In the scenario described in your letter, the catalysts meet the definitions of various hazard classes under the HMR, and your company enters the appropriate description for each material on a standard bill-of-lading. You also state the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined these materials are solid wastes under 40 CFR 261.1 (c) (1) and (c) (4), but does not require them to be manifested as hazardous waste. Upon further review, we find our previous responses to your questions were incorrect. Your paraphrased questions and the correct answers are specified below. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.
Q1. We currently use new UN standard drums to transport these spent catalysts to a facility for final reclamation because we interpret that the original drums do not conform to § 173.12(c) solely because these material do not meet the definition of a hazardous waste. Is our understanding correct?
Al. Your understanding is not correct. As specified in the preamble of Docket HM-218D (68 FR 48563; August 14, 2003; pertinent pages enclosed), § 173.12(c) authorizes the reuse of packagings for shipments of all wastes, not just waste materials subject to EPA waste manifest requirements, to designated facilities. The preamble further states, "This includes shipments of spent/waste materials which are being returned to or shipped to an EPA licensed and certified Storage or Disposal facility, but are not subject to the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest requirements of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency."
Q2. Is the term waste" as it is used in § 173.12(c) and 173.28 restricted to those materials meeting EPA"s definition of a hazardous waste?
A2. The answer is no. See Al.
Q3. Does a spent catalyst that is not an EPA-manifested waste being transported to a facility for reclamation qualify for inclusion in the exception to reuse the non-bulk packagings authorized for wastes under § 173.12(c).
A3. Yes. See answer Al.
I hope this information is helpful.
Sincerely,
Hattie L. Mitchell, Chief
Regulatory Review and Reinvention
Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
Enclosure
173.12 (2), 173.28