Safety-Kleen Inc — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1U.S. Department 400 Seventh St., S.W. of Transportation Washington, D.C. 20590 Research and Special Programs Administration JAN 2 6 2001 Ms. Jean M. Soltys Ref. No. 00-0355 Environmental Manager Safety-Kleen Inc. 221 Sutton street North Andover, MA 01845 Dear Ms. Soltys: regarding the use of the shipping name, Ihis 1s in response to your December 12, 2000 letter, "Environmentally Hazardous Materials Hazardous Substance, (liquid or solid), nos" under the Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) - The proper shipping name, "Environmentally Hazardous Substance, (liquid or solid), nos, " may be used for a material not specifically listed in § 172.101, which meets the definition of a Class 9 material. A material need not meet the definition of a hazardous substance in § 171.8 to be A material can meet the Class 9 definition for reasons other than being a hazardous substance. Further, while the United States Environmental Protection Agency does not require the use of a manifest for universal wastes, certain states have not adopted parts or all of the Universal Waste program. Therefore, if a material is subject to the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest in 40 CFR Part 262 in a particular state, the material will, at minimum, meet the definition of a "hazardous waste" under § 171.8. I hope this satisfies your request. Sincerely, / Transportation Regulations Specialist Office of Hazardous Materials Standards 172.101 000355#

Page 2BAH ACIntyre § 112.101 Proper Shiping Name December 12, 2000 00-0355 Mr. Delmer F. Billings Chief, Standards Development Office of Hazardous Material Standards USDOT/RSPA (DHM10) 400 7* Street SW Washington DC 20590-0001 Dear Mr. Billings: This letter is written to request clarification on the use of the proper DOT Shipping Name, Environmentally Hazardous Substance, liquid or solid, nos. Based on the definition of Hazardous Substance found in 49 CFR 171.8, it was our understanding that a material had to meet the definition of a hazardous substance before the use of the shipping name would be appropriate. However, we have placed severa. answer we have received indicated that an item such as universal waste, which would calls to the DOT hotline regarding this question and have received varying answers. One have been shipped as hazardous waste prior to the Universal Waste Rule, should stay as a class 9 material, using the Environmentally Hazardous shipping name, even if the material did not exceed its RQ and was no longer considered a hazardous waste. Conversely, we have obtained a copy of a letter from your office addressed to Jerry Davis of Safety-Kleen in 1998, which indicates the opposite (see attached). Could you please respond in writing to this request so that we may go forward using this shipping name correctly? Thank you for your help. Sincerely, Environmental Manager Jean M. Soltys enclosure SAFETY-KLEEN (NE), INC.#