Shane Havoc Consulting, LLC — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1of Transportation U.S. Department 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 Hazardous Materials Safety Pipeline and Administration MAR 2 3 2006 Dr. Gregory J. Sutherland Ref. No. 06-0039 Shane Havoc Consulting, LLC 1905 English Ivy Ct., Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464 Dear Dr. Sutherland: This is in response to your February 5, 2006 letter requesting clarification regarding the appropriate proper shipping name for your material as specified under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you ask if your client's material, which does not meet the definition of any hazard class except Class 9 for hazardous waste, may be shipped in its original (non-specification) packaging and PG III." described as "Environmentally Hazardous Substances, Liquid, n.o.s. (D002), 9, UN 3082, Under $ 173.22, it is the shipper's responsibility to properly classify a hazardous material and assign it a proper shipping name from the Hazardous Materials Table (HMT). Based on the information provided in your letter and to a member of my staff, it is the opinion of this office that the material should be described as "Hazardous Waste, Liquid, n.o.s (D002), 9, NA 3082, PG III." The material may be offered for transportation in non-bulk packaging in accordance with § 173.203. Section 173.203 does not authorize non-specification packagings; therefore, the original packaging may not be used. I hope this information is helpful. Falls emote Hattie L. Mitchell, Chief Regulatory Review and Reinvention Office of Hazardous Materials Standards 172.101 060039 173.22. 173.203#

Page 2Shane Havoc Consulting, LLC 1905 English Ivy Ct. Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Phone: (843) 849-1463 Fax: (561) 423-3907 Satterthwaite February 5, 2006 Mr. Ed Mazzullo $172:101 U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Hazardous Materials Standards Name 400 Seventh Street, SW Proper Ship ong 3a Washington, DC 20590 Dear Sir, I have a client that has a product that they have tested for Corrosivity as required by 49 CFR 173.137. This product does not corrode skin and the corrosion test results are less than the 6.25 mm corrosion rate on either steel or aluminum. It however has a pH that is 1.9. The DOT non-regulated product is shipped for distribution in a non-UN package to their customers. The package is designed to fit dispensing machinery and a design to UN standards would be difficult to achieve. It is not an ORM-D since they ship to franchise customers and not the general public. The weight of the package is a maximum of 55lbs. The issue that I have been asked to address is the shipment of out of date material for disposal and what is appropriate packaging. The EPA defines materials with a pH < 2.0 as a "D002 Hazardous Wastes Characteristic of Corrosivity", this D002 name does not appear in the 172.101 Hazardous Material Table, but it does appear in the Appendix A to the 172.101 table as a"D002 Unlisted Hazardous Wastes Characteristic of Corrosivity". The Appendix lists the RQ as 100 Ibs. The material as packaged does not meet the definition of a Hazardous Substance as This would indicate that UN packages are not required for the D002 Material. defined for the subchapter as listed in 171.8, since it has less than an RQ in a package. In section 171.3 (a) "No person may offer for transportation or transport a hazardous in accordance with the requirements of this subchapter." Seems to indicate that the waste (as defined in §171.8 of this subchapter) in interstate or intrastate commerce except requirements of the subchapter as defined in 171.8 for Hazardous Substances in packages that weigh less than the RQ should be followed.#

Page 3Shane Havoc Consulting, LLC 1905 English Ivy Ct. Mount Pleasant, SC 29464 Phone: (843) 849-1463 Fax: (561) 423-3907 Since this material when sent to a TSDF for disposal, as required by the EPA regulations, would need to be manifested on the EPA waste manifest as a D002 Unlisted waste, the hoice of proper shipping name and package required is in question Class 9 label. no DOT proper shipping name or labels on the packages as this was prohibited since the Since the material was shipped as a non-regulated material under DOT originally, it has raterial is not a Hazmat as produced and distributed. What I need is a DOT ruling on what is the proper interpretation of the regulations or disposa egarding packaging, shipping and marking, labeling for this material as it is transporte If you need any further clarification to my questions please give me a call at: 843-849-1463 Sincerely, Gregory Sutherland#