{"operation":"document","citation":"16-0101","title":"Belshire Environmental Services, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2016-08-24","effective_on":null,"summary":"16-0101 response to Belshire Environmental Services, Inc. concerning 171.8.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-16-0101.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-16-0101.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-16-0101","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2016/160101.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nWashington, D.C. 20590\n1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE\nPipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety\nAdministration\nAUG 2 4 2016\nMr. Larry Moothart\nManager\nBelshire Environmental Services, Inc.\n25971 Towne Centre Drive\nFoothill Ranch, CA 92610\nReference No. 16-0101\nDear Mr. Moothart:\nThis letter is in response to your June 7, 2016, email requesting clarification of the Hazardous\nMaterials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to the transport of hazardous\nwastes offered by Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQGs).\nIn your letter, you provide the following information:\nUnder 40 CFR 261.5, CESQGs are exempt from most Environmental Protection Agency\n(EPA) hazardous waste management regulations if they:\n• Identify and count all the hazardous waste they generate (less than 220 pounds per\nmonth of non-acute hazardous waste;\n• Store no more than 1,000 kg of non-acute hazardous waste and no more than 1 kg of\nother acute hazardous waste onsite at any time; and\n• Ensure that the hazardous waste they produce is sent to an appropriate offsite\ntreatment, recycling, or disposal facility.\nWe have paraphrased and answered your questions as follows:\nQ1.\nYou ask if CESQGs are required to use the word \"Waste\" before the proper shipping\nname for a Department of Transportation (DOT) hazardous material when that\nmaterial is identified as an EPA hazardous waste that is not subject to the EPA's\nHazardous Waste Manifest Requirements prescribed in 40 CFR Part 262.\nAl.\nThe answer is no. The HMR require use of the word \"Waste\" preceding the proper\nshipping name of a DOT-regulated hazardous material if the material meets the HMR\ndefinition of a \"Hazardous waste.\" Section 171.8 defines a \"Hazardous waste\" as\n\"any material that is subject to the Hazardous Waste Manifest Requirements of the\nU.S. EPA specified in 40 CFR Part 262.\" CESQG wastes generally are not considered\nhazardous wastes under the HMR because they are not subject to EPA's Hazardous\nWaste Manifest Requirements.\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nQ2. You ask if the State of California can require CESQGs to use the word \"Waste\" before\nidentified as an EPA hazardous waste that is not subject to the EPA's Hazardous\nhe proper shipping name for a DOT hazardous material when that material is\nWaste Manifest Requirements prescribed in 40 CFR Part 262.\nA2.\nBased on the limited information you have provided, it would be premature for us to\ncomment on a State requirement. For your information, the Federal hazardous\nmateral transportation law contains strong preemption provisions that allow the\nSecretary of Transportation, upon request, to make a preemption determination of a\nnon-Federal requirement. Generally, a requirement of a State, local, or Tribal\ngovernment that conflicts with requirements in the HMR is preempted, unless\nhe DOT. Conflicts between the HMR and non-Federal requirements are resolve\notherwise authorized by another Federal statute or a waiver of preemption issued by\nthrough this agency's Office of Chief Counsel. This agency makes preemption\ndeterminations applicable to specific non-Federal requirements on a case-by-case\nbasis. The regulatory procedures for administrative determinations of preemption are\nset forth in 49 CFR Part 107, Subpart C.\nI hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.\nSincerely,\nstern Taste\nT. Glenn Foster\nChief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Branch\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n2\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nEdmonson\n§171.1,172,101,172.20\nDodd, Alice (PHMSA)\nAppenablity\nSent:\nFrom:\nRivera, Jordan CTR (PHMSA)\nTuesday, June 07, 2016 4:31 PM\nTo:\nHazmat Interps\nSubject:\nFW: Manifesting waste from a CESQG\nHi Shante/Alice,\nPlease submit this for a letter of interpretation. Please let me know if you have any questions.\nThanks,\nJordan\nFrom: Larry Moothart [mailto:Larry@belshire.com]\nSent: Tuesday, June 07, 2016 11:48 AM\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSubject: Manifesting waste from a CESQG\nDOT hazardous Material Information Center,\nThis email is requesting further clarification to the letter referenced as 11-0128 concerning the manifesting of hazardous\nwaste from RCRA CESQG's.\nThe CESQG requirements are set forth in 40 CFR 261.5. CESQGs are exempt from most hazardous waste management\nregulations if they:\n1. Identify and count all hazardous waste that they generate (< 220 Ibs. per month of non-acute hazardous waste);\n2. Store no more than 1,000 kg of non-acute hazardous waste and no more than 1 kg of other acute hazardous waste\nonsite at any time; and\n3. Ensure that the hazardous waste they produce is sent to an appropriate offsite treatment, recycling, or disposal\nfacility.\nCESQGs are required to make hazardous waste determinations for all of the solid waste they generate at their facility-\njust like all other generators. CESQG's may generate and accumulate EPA hazardous waste in quantities that are in\namounts that qualify them as a CESQG. CESQG's are however not required to manifest the EPA hazardous waste at the\nfederal level. Some States require CESQG's to manifest their waste.\nQuestions:\n1. Are CESQGs required to use the word \"Waste\" preceding the proper shipping name for a DOT Hazardous\nMaterial when the hazardous material is identified as an EPA hazardous waste and is not subject to the\nmanifesting requirement in 40 CFR 262?\n2. Can the State of California require the CESQG to use the word \"Waste\" preceding the proper shipping name for\na DOT Hazardous Material when the hazardous material is identified as an EPA hazardous waste and is not\nsubject to the manifesting requirement in 40 CFR 262 ?\nLarry Moothart\nManager\nBelshire Environmental Services, Inc.\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\n25971 Towne Centre Drive\nFoothill Ranch, CA 92610\n.949-460-5200\n949-460-5210 (fax)\nlarry@belshire.com\nwww.belshire.com","truncated":false,"body_characters":5823}