# Belshire Environmental Services, Inc. — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

- **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:** Not available
- **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>>>

U.S. Department
of Transportation
Washington, D.C. 20590
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety
Administration
AUG 2 4 2016
Mr. Larry Moothart
Manager
Belshire Environmental Services, Inc.
25971 Towne Centre Drive
Foothill Ranch, CA 92610
Reference No. 16-0101
Dear Mr. Moothart:
This letter is in response to your June 7, 2016, email requesting clarification of the Hazardous
Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to the transport of hazardous
wastes offered by Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators (CESQGs).
In your letter, you provide the following information:
Under 40 CFR 261.5, CESQGs are exempt from most Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) hazardous waste management regulations if they:
• Identify and count all the hazardous waste they generate (less than 220 pounds per
month of non-acute hazardous waste;
• Store no more than 1,000 kg of non-acute hazardous waste and no more than 1 kg of
other acute hazardous waste onsite at any time; and
• Ensure that the hazardous waste they produce is sent to an appropriate offsite
treatment, recycling, or disposal facility.
We have paraphrased and answered your questions as follows:
Q1.
You ask if CESQGs are required to use the word "Waste" before the proper shipping
name for a Department of Transportation (DOT) hazardous material when that
material is identified as an EPA hazardous waste that is not subject to the EPA's
Hazardous Waste Manifest Requirements prescribed in 40 CFR Part 262.
Al.
The answer is no. The HMR require use of the word "Waste" preceding the proper
shipping name of a DOT-regulated hazardous material if the material meets the HMR
definition of a "Hazardous waste." Section 171.8 defines a "Hazardous waste" as
"any material that is subject to the Hazardous Waste Manifest Requirements of the
U.S. EPA specified in 40 CFR Part 262." CESQG wastes generally are not considered
hazardous wastes under the HMR because they are not subject to EPA's Hazardous
Waste Manifest Requirements.

<<<PAGE 2>>>

Q2. You ask if the State of California can require CESQGs to use the word "Waste" before
identified as an EPA hazardous waste that is not subject to the EPA's Hazardous
he proper shipping name for a DOT hazardous material when that material is
Waste Manifest Requirements prescribed in 40 CFR Part 262.
A2.
Based on the limited information you have provided, it would be premature for us to
comment on a State requirement. For your information, the Federal hazardous
materal transportation law contains strong preemption provisions that allow the
Secretary of Transportation, upon request, to make a preemption determination of a
non-Federal requirement. Generally, a requirement of a State, local, or Tribal
government that conflicts with requirements in the HMR is preempted, unless
he DOT. Conflicts between the HMR and non-Federal requirements are resolve
otherwise authorized by another Federal statute or a waiver of preemption issued by
through this agency's Office of Chief Counsel. This agency makes preemption
determinations applicable to specific non-Federal requirements on a case-by-case
basis. The regulatory procedures for administrative determinations of preemption are
set forth in 49 CFR Part 107, Subpart C.
I hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
stern Taste
T. Glenn Foster
Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Branch
Standards and Rulemaking Division
2

<<<PAGE 3>>>

Edmonson
§171.1,172,101,172.20
Dodd, Alice (PHMSA)
Appenablity
Sent:
From:
Rivera, Jordan CTR (PHMSA)
Tuesday, June 07, 2016 4:31 PM
To:
Hazmat Interps
Subject:
FW: Manifesting waste from a CESQG
Hi Shante/Alice,
Please submit this for a letter of interpretation. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Jordan
From: Larry Moothart [mailto:Larry@belshire.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2016 11:48 AM
To: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)
Subject: Manifesting waste from a CESQG
DOT hazardous Material Information Center,
This email is requesting further clarification to the letter referenced as 11-0128 concerning the manifesting of hazardous
waste from RCRA CESQG's.
The CESQG requirements are set forth in 40 CFR 261.5. CESQGs are exempt from most hazardous waste management
regulations if they:
1. Identify and count all hazardous waste that they generate (< 220 Ibs. per month of non-acute hazardous waste);
2. Store no more than 1,000 kg of non-acute hazardous waste and no more than 1 kg of other acute hazardous waste
onsite at any time; and
3. Ensure that the hazardous waste they produce is sent to an appropriate offsite treatment, recycling, or disposal
facility.
CESQGs are required to make hazardous waste determinations for all of the solid waste they generate at their facility-
just like all other generators. CESQG's may generate and accumulate EPA hazardous waste in quantities that are in
amounts that qualify them as a CESQG. CESQG's are however not required to manifest the EPA hazardous waste at the
federal level. Some States require CESQG's to manifest their waste.
Questions:
1. Are CESQGs required to use the word "Waste" preceding the proper shipping name for a DOT Hazardous
Material when the hazardous material is identified as an EPA hazardous waste and is not subject to the
manifesting requirement in 40 CFR 262?
2. Can the State of California require the CESQG to use the word "Waste" preceding the proper shipping name for
a DOT Hazardous Material when the hazardous material is identified as an EPA hazardous waste and is not
subject to the manifesting requirement in 40 CFR 262 ?
Larry Moothart
Manager
Belshire Environmental Services, Inc.
1

<<<PAGE 4>>>

25971 Towne Centre Drive
Foothill Ranch, CA 92610
.949-460-5200
949-460-5210 (fax)
larry@belshire.com
www.belshire.com
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 5823