{"operation":"document","citation":"02-0258","title":"ExxonMobil Chemical Company — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2002-12-10","effective_on":null,"summary":"02-0258 response to ExxonMobil Chemical Company concerning 171.8, 177.804.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-02-0258.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-02-0258.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-02-0258","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2002/020258.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nof Transportation\nU.S. Department\n400 Seventh St., S.W.\nResearch and\nWashingion, D.C. 20590\nspecial Program:\nAdministration\nDEC 1 0 2002\nMr. Ronald J. Stokes\nRef No. 02-02.58\nExxonMobil Chemical Company\nP.O. Box 3140\nEdison, NJ 08818\nDear Mr. Stokes:\nThis is in response to your September 17, 2002 letter requesting clarification of the Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations. (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to the shipping description of a non-\nhazardous material. Specifically, you state your company ships an item. identified as a spent catalyst on\na standard bill of lading to a separate facility for regeneration and return to your company for continued\nuse. You reference the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) determination in 40 CFR\n261.1(c)(1) & (4) that a spent catalyst is a solid waste, but not a hazardous waste mandating the use of\na manifest. In a subsequent telephone conversation with a member of my staff, you stated that the spent\ncatalyst does not meet any of the hazard classes or divisions under the HMR. Your subsequent\nquestions are paraphrased and addressed as follows:\nQ1.\nIn light of EPA and HMR requirements, can a spent catalyst be described as a waste on a\nstandard shipping document without violating the HMR?\nAl.\nNo. Use of the word \"waste\" preceding a proper shipping name is reserved for a hazardous\nwaste. Materials that are excepted from the hazardous waste manifest requirements of the U.S.\nEPA are not \"hazardous wastes\" as defined in § 171.8 of the HMR. Using the word \"waste\" to\ndescribe a non-hazardous material may confuse a carrier or enforcement official, incorrectly\ncommunicate a hazard warning and could consequently frustrate the shipment. As provided in\nSection 172.101(c)(9), if the word \"waste\" is not included in the hazardous material description\nin Column 2 of the Table, the proper shipping name for a hazardous waste shall include the\nword \"waste\" preceding the proper shipping name of the material. Materials that are excepted\nfrom the hazardous waste manifest requirements of the U.S. EPA are not \"hazardous wastes\"\nas defined in § 171.8 of the HMR. Under your scenario, the shipping paper could show an\nentry such as \"Non-HMR regulated waste catalyst\" or \"Waste catalyst, non-regulated.\"\nQ2.\nIs the word \"waste\" when used in the transport/transportation arena confined to its specified\nuse as noted in the HMR?\nA2.\nThe word \"waste\" when used with a proper shipping description under the HMR indicates\nmaterial that is a federally regulated waste. There could be instances in transportation when the\n020258\npl.\n177.504\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nword \"waste\" is used that do not specifically apply to the regulation of hazardous materials.\nPlease refer to our response to Q1.\nQ3.\nIf use of the word \"waste\" is acceptable on a non-manifest shipping document must the\ntransporter (carrier) of such material be a licensed waste hauler?\nA3.\nInquiries concerning the compliance regulations of carriers should be addressed to the Federal\nprovided in $ 177.804, motor carriers and other persons subject to this part shall comply with\nMotor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) or EPA for \"registered\" waste transporter. As\n49 CFR parts 390 through 397 (excluding §§ 397.3 and 397.9) to the extent those regulations\napply.\nI hope this information is helpful. If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact us.\nSincerely,\nDelmer F. Billings\nChief, Standards Development\nOffice of Hazardous Materials Standards\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nFoster\n8171.2(f)\n732 321 6057 Facsimile\n§172.101(c)9\nSeptember 17, 2002\nEstoniMobil Definition\nChemical\nMr. Edward T. Mazzullo\n02-0258\nU.S. DOT/RSPA (DHM-10)\nDirector, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards\n00 7th Street, S.W\nNashington, DC 20590-000\nRef: $171.2(f)\n9172.101(c)(9)\nDear Mr. Mazzullo:\nPursuant to the referenced requirements, we are looking for guidance concerning the shipping description of a\nind returned for our continued use. We ship this material on a normal bill-of-lading not a waste manifes\non-hazardous material. We ship a material that is a spent catalyst to a facility where it will be regenerate\n(but not a hazardous waste mandating the use of a manifest).\nPursuant to the US EPA's determination in 40 CFR (Paragraph 261.1(c)(1) & (4)) spent catalyst is a solid waste\nis in a package, if the HIM is not present (171.2(f)), and [2] the word \"waste\" is an operative and/or descriptive\nIn light of the EPA rules and in consideration of the HMR requirements. [1] No person shall represent that HM\nto ta ta sping zard waste 172.101(9), can we describe the spent catalyst as a waste\non a non-manifest shipping document without violating the HMR?\nOther specific questioris (Q) concerning this matter are:\nnoted in the HMR?\nQ. Is the word \"waste\" when used in the transport / transportation arena confined to it's specified use as •\n(carrier) of such material be a licensed waste hauler?\nQ. If use of the word \"waste\" is acceptable on a non-manifest shipping document must the transporter\nnumbers shown below.\nShould there be any questions concerning this request, I may be contacted at the above address or telephone\nThanks for your help in this matter.\nSincerely,\nTel (732) 321-6046\nRonald J. Stokes\nFax (732) 321-6057\nEmail: ron.j.stokes@exxonmobil.com","truncated":false,"body_characters":5280}