United States Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response

October 20, 1993

Mr. Jeff R. Bowman, REA
Operations Manager
Environmental Dynamics
1916 Grandstand Drive
San Antonio, Texas 78238

Dear Mr. Bowman:

Thank you for your letter dated July 16, 1993, regarding the hazardous waste
regulations under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). I will also
take this opportunity to respond to the letter you attached from Mr. Andrew B.
Wallace dated March 31, 1993. I apologize for the delay in responding to both letters.
In both letters, specific questions were asked regarding the hazardous waste
identification and generator regulations, and I have attempted to answer each one
based on the federal RCRA regulations using the information you have provided. For
convenience, I have enumerated the answers to match the incoming questions.

     1. Assuming that the waste you have described is a solid waste (as
     defined in 40 CFR 261.2), and that this waste does not meet the other
     definitions of ignitable in 40 CFR 261.21(a)(2) through (4), this waste
     does not appear to meet the definition of ignitability in 40 CFR
     261.21(a)(1). You are correct in asserting that the absence of free liquids
     precludes the application of the ignitability characteristic as defined in
     261.21(a)(1) (see footnote one). However, you should be aware that
     EPA has recently proposed amending SW-846 with respect to how the
     presence of free liquids is determined when testing a waste for ignitability
     and corrosivity. I have enclosed a copy of this proposed rule, dated
     August 31 1993, and encourage you to comment on it if you wish. [Note:
     this response is applicable to the questions raised in the March 31, 1993
     letter from Mr. Wallace.]

     2. The relative proportions of the chemicals you described in the paint
     stripper add up to only 90 percent. Assuming that the other 10 percent
     consists of inert materials that do not contribute to the function of the
     product, the paint stripper being disposed that you described would be
     classified as U080 if the methylene chloride were the sole active
     ingredient of the product, or as U220 if the toluene were the sole active
     ingredient. In each of these cases, the hazardous characteristics of this
     waste would need to be evaluated in order to comply with the Part 268
     LDRs (see 40 CFR 262.11(c)). If both methylene chloride and toluene
     are active ingredients, neither listing applies and the material would need
     to be evaluated as to whether or not it exhibits any RCRA characteristic.

     3. If the material described were used to strip paint, it would be classified
     as F002 and F005, due to the presence of at least 10 percent before use
     of each of these chemicals. The hazardous characteristics of this waste
     would need to be evaluated in order to comply with the Part 268 T and
     Disposal Restrictions (LDRs) (see 40 CFR 262.11(c)). If this particular
     paint stripper contains any amount of a solvent listed under F003 as well,
     that listing would also apply.

     4. The federal RCRA regulations do not specifically address this
     situation. The regulations in 40 CFR 262.20(d) describe the general
     situation where hazardous waste shipped under a Uniform Hazardous
     Waste Manifest is redirected to an alternate facility. Because you are
     asking about compliance with a State hazardous waste manifest (the use
     of which is mandated by that State), I would recommend contacting the
     RCRA-authorized State(s) where the alternate TSD facilities are located,
     as well as the State in which the generator is located. Where a State is
     not RCRA-authorized, the EPA Regional office would be the
     appropriate contact for making situation-specific determinations such as

     5. The federal RCRA regulations do not specifically address this
     situation. The proper labelling and marking of containers is outlined in 40
     CFR 262.31, 262.32, and 262.34(a). I would suggest that you label and
     mark containers holding hazardous waste dearly and in a manner that
     avoids any confusion.

     6. I cannot make any generic determinations as to whether or not the
     situation you described is a violation of RCRA. The federal RCRA
     regulations do not specify the number of drums that may be open at any
     one time in a container storage area. If a facility has a RCRA Part B
     storage permit, this permit might delineate specific procedures tailored to
     that particular facility. Otherwise, generators must comply with the
     requirement in 40 CFR 265.173(a) that containers remain closed except
     when adding or removing hazardous waste.

     7. See number 6 above.

     8. The RCRA generator regulations do not preclude the consolidation (or
     bulking) of several small containers into a larger container, provided the
     large container is clearly labelled and marked, and the wastes are
     compatible. If you planned to ship the large container containing the
     smaller containers, you would need to ensure that this configuration meets
     applicable State and federal DOT requirements, and that the manifest
     identifies all applicable EPA hazardous waste codes.

     9. The generator must designate on the manifest all of the transporters
     that will be used to transport hazardous waste. The federal RCRA
     regulations do not address the situation where, for whatever reason,
     another transporter not identified on the original manifest is needed to
     continue the transportation of the shipment. The regulations in 40 CFR
     263.20(d) describe the requirements for one transporter delivering a
     manifested shipment to another transporter.

     10. The regulation at 40 CFR 262.11(c) requires that generators must
     determine whether or not any listed hazardous waste also exhibits a
     hazardous characteristic, for purposes of compliance with the Part 268
     LDRs. This is because the LDRs require that if a listed waste also
     exhibits one or more hazardous characteristics, the waste must be treated
     to meet the treatment standard for each of the waste codes, with one
     exception. Where the Part 268 treatment standard for a listed hazardous
     waste also addresses the characteristic(s) exhibited by that waste, the
     treatment standard for the listed waste operates in lieu of the standard for
     the relevant characteristic(s). I have enclosed a copy of some preamble
     language from one of the final rules on LDRs (June 1, 1990 Federal
     Register; 55 FR 22659) that explains in more detail the overlap of listed
     and characteristic waste codes.

     With regard to how waste codes should be entered on the manifest,
     please note that information in the section of the Uniform Hazardous
     Waste Manifest for Waste Number (Section I) is not required by Federal
     law, but that States may require one or more waste codes in this section.
     Of course, the RCRA waste code(s) may be part of the proper U.S.
     DOT Shipping Description, and should be entered in Line 11 if required
     by DOT. If you have additional questions on the U.S. DOT regulations,
     please contact the DOT helpline at (202) 366-4488.

     11. See Number 10 above.

     12. See Number 10 above.

     13. The Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest requires that the information
     required in item 11 of the manifest be entered for each waste. If
     additional space is needed, use the appropriate continuation sheet.

Please be aware that under Section 3006 of RCRA (42 U.S.C Section 6926)
individual States can be authorized to administer and enforce their own hazardous
waste programs in lieu of the federal program. When States are not authorized to
administer their own program, the appropriate EPA Region administers the program
and is the appropriate contact for any case-specific determinations. Please also note
that under Section 3009 of RCRA (42 U.S.C Section 6929) States retain authority to
promulgate regulatory requirements that are more stringent than federal regulatory

I hope that the answers I was able to provide will help clarify some or most of your
questions. In some cases I could not provide a complete answer; many of your
questions appear to be derived from specific circumstances at your facility or facilities,
or those of your clients. I would therefore recommend that to the extent any of your
questions are situation-specific, and particularly for the questions that I did not address
completely, that you contact the State agency authorized for the hazardous waste
program in the State where your facility, or your client's facility, is located. Where a
State is not RCRA-authorized, the EPA Regional office would be the appropriate
contact for making situation-specific determinations such as these.

If you have any additional questions concerning the information I have provided,
please contact Ross Elliott of my staff at 202/260-8551. Thank you for your interest in
the safe management of hazardous waste.

Bruce Weddle
Acting Director
Office of Solid Waste

cc: Mr. Andrew B. Wallace, Environmental Dynamics, Inc.

     1 I should also point out that although there may be instances where a
     solid waste does not contain free liquids (and therefore would not be
     classified as D00l under 261.2(a)(1)), some type of flashpoint
     determination may still be required by waste management facilities as a
     condition of accepting the waste.