The Texas A&M University System — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1of Transportation U.S.Department 400 Seventh Street, S.W Washington, D.C 20590 Research and pecial Program MAR 17 2000 dministration Mr. Jeff R. Bowman The Texas A&M University System Ref. No. 99-0310 Public Service Training Division 600 Hemis Fair Plaza Way, Building 227 San Antonio, Texas 78205-3223 Dear Mr. Bowman: This is in response to your letter regarding the requirements for inclusion of a technical name(s) for a hazardous waste described by generic or n.o.s. description under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). You stated that a common practice of emergency response contractors is to perform a hazard characterization ("HAZCAT") field test as a method to determine the hazard category for unknown hazardous wastes from an emergency response cleanup, and selection of a generic or n.o.s. description to identify the waste materials. Disposal sites often accept these unknown wastes identified under the HAZCAT field test method. Once the waste is received at the disposal site, additional analysis, if required, may then be performed. You asked how the technical name should be shown for generic or n.o.s. proper shipping names (PSNs), other than "Hazardous waste liquid or solid, n.o.s.". Can it be assumed that since additional testing may be performed by the disposal site, these generic PSNs are excepted from the technical name(s) requirement as specified in § 172.203(k)(2)(ii)? The answer is no. The technical name exception in § 172.203(k)(2)(ii) only applies to a hazardous material for which the hazard class is to be determined by testing under the criteria of § 172.101(c)(11). This does not include analysis performed at a disposal site. I hope this satisfies your inquiry. If we can be of further assistance, please contact us. Sincerely, Delmer F. Billings Chief, Standards Development Office of Hazardous Materials Standards 172,203 990310#

Page 2The Texas A&M University System Texas Engineering Extension Service 600 HemisFair Plaza Way Public Sector Training Division norem Building 227 9 n 20 San Antonio Texas 78205-3223 99-0310 October 29, 1999 US Department of Transportation RSPA 400 Seventh Street S.W. Washington D.C. 20590 Attn.: Thomas G. Allan Dear Mr. Allan: I am in receipt of a copy of your letter dated August 6, 1999 to Mr. Paul Bomgardner regarding the use of EPA waste codes to satisfy the requirements for a technical name. As a provider of EPA and DOT compliance training, many of our students provide emergency response services for the illegal disposal of unknown/unmarked hazardous waste drums and containers. It has been, and continues to be, a common practice of emergency response contractors to perform a hazard characterization (HAZCAT) field test as a method to determine the hazard category by which a generic, or n.o.s., proper shipping name can be chosen. Unknown waste from an emergency response cleanup can oftentimes be accepted by a disposal site using the HAZCAT as identification. Once received, additional analysis, if required, can then be performed. As per 49 CFR 172.203(k) these PSNs require technical names in association with the basic description. Due to public and environmental health concerns, it is often not practicable to leave these containers on site while analysis is performed to determine the technical constituents of each container. In emergency response type situations such as this, how should the technical name be shown for generic PSNs other than hazardous waste liquid or solid, n.o.s.? Can we assume that since additional testing may be performed by the disposal site, these generic PSNs are then exempt from requiring technical names under 49 CFR 172.203(k)(3)(ii)? Your clarification on this matter will be greatly appreciated. Thank you: JeffR. Bowman Envitonmental Compliance (210)208-9314 -#