Hazardous Waste Determination

Q&A: Is my auto shop wastewater an F-listed hazardous waste?

Question:

I have a question regarding haz waste determination specifically about applicability of F-listed waste. Situation I have:

In the car repair shop floor, we have a small pit that collects water (rainwater/snow melting from cars and every now and then hosing the floor down with just water, no soap, solvent or degreaser).

We had collected that water from the pit into a 55 gallon drum (only about 3/4 full) and tested it through a laboratory for disposal. But surprisingly there was 14.3 PPM acetone and 0.09 Toluene from VOC TCLP test. We are guessing this is maybe from some paint can sprays we use in the shop that got washed down to the pit as the paint cans do have them in the ingredients. In this case, will the drum be applied F list code?

Some additional information:

  • We have variety of car paint aerosol cans (such as rust-oleum, dupli-color and other brands) and almost all of them have some Acetone and Toluene as ingredient. From the spec sheet, it typically shows 20% acetone, 10% toluene but it’s listed as % by weight. I’m not sure if that means the same as concentration.
  • These paint cans are used for painting only. The only other thing I can think of that might have those same solvent ingredients is brake cleaner spray cans used to clean brake parts when we do brake jobs. We have collection containers for waste aerosol cans.

Question for you:

  • Is there threshold number for acetone and toluene? or it’s solely dependent on if it meets the type of operation (even if very low number ppm)?
  • If because of some mist from brake cleaner spray cans or car paint spray cans getting onto the floor and going into the pit when we clean our work area will cause the whole drum to be hazardous, is there anything we can do to prevent this? The only product we use for cleaning floor as I found out today is simple green.

Thank you for your help,

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/
Answer:

Thank you for contacting me. I will try to answer your questions and provide guidance based on the available information. In sum:

  • If the source of the F-listed solvents in the pit wastewater are the aerosol paint cans, then the waste is not an F-listed hazardous waste.

However…

  • If the source of the F-listed solvents in the pit wastewater are the brake cleaner aerosols, then it may be an F-listed hazardous waste.

Please see below for an explanation:

  • To be an F-listed hazardous waste each of the following conditions must be present:
    • An F-listed solvent must be present in the waste. FAQ: What are the F-listed solvents?
    • The F-listed solvent must be in a concentration of 10% or more in solution before use.
    • The F-listed solvent must be used for its solvent properties; i.e., cleaning or degreasing.
    • The F-listed solvent must be discarded once it is used and spent.

Read: F-Listed Spent Solvent Hazardous Waste

  • So, let’s compare the above criteria to your situation:
    • Both acetone and toluene are F-listed solvents (F003 & F005, respectively).
    • The spec sheet indicates a concentration of 20% acetone and 10% toluene. This concentration – before use – meets the threshold criteria for an F-listed hazardous waste.
    • F-listed solvents that are formulation ingredients of a paint are not being used for their solvent properties and can’t be an F-listed hazardous waste. But, F-listed solvents in a brake cleaner used for cleaning or degreasing are being used for their solvent properties.
    • In either case (paint or brake cleaner) the F-listed solvent is being discarded as used and spent when the overspray or spillage ends up in the pit wastewater.

Your Questions:

Q: Is there threshold number for acetone and toluene? or it’s solely dependent on if it meets the type of operation (even if very low number ppm)?

A: There is no threshold number (aka: concentration) of F-listed solvent in the waste. One drop is enough if the above criteria are met.

Q: If because of some mist from brake cleaner spray cans or car paint spray cans getting onto the floor and going into the pit when we clean our work area will cause the whole drum to be hazardous, is there anything we can do to prevent this? The only product we use for cleaning floor as I found out today is simple green.

A: The overspray or waste from aerosol paints that contain F-listed solvents will not be an F-listed Haz Waste since the solvent used in the paint is not being used for its solvent properties.
Brake cleaner is a different story. If it is used to clean brake parts it would be used for its solvent properties. It is possible – unless you can prove otherwise – that solvent from the brake cleaner, once used, then got into your pit wastewater. The best way to avoid generating an F-listed hazardous waste is to find a brake cleaner that does not contain any F-listed solvents. e.g., Isoproply alcohol is not F-listed.

Please note, some state regulations are more stringent and more broad than the Federal regulations of USEPA addressed here.

Conclusion:

The determination of a spent organic solvent as an F-listed hazardous waste can be very difficult. My explanation above does not take into account all the complexities of this determination. For a full explanation, read: The Hazardous Waste Determination for a Spent Organic Solvent as an F-Listed Hazardous Waste.

FAQ: What are the F-listed solvents?

FAQ: What are the F-listed solvents?

The USEPA regulations for the determination of a listed hazardous waste from non-specific sources (F001 – F039) are at 40 CFR 261.31. Waste codes F001 – F005 represent spent organic solvents that are a listed hazardous waste under certain conditions.

For a full explanation of the hazardous waste determination for spent organic solvents (F001 – F005), read this article: F-Listed Spent Solvent Hazardous Waste

This article will identify the solvents that are possible to be an F-listed hazardous waste as a spent organic solvent.

Here they are:
Hazardous Waste CodeHazardous Waste
(Solvent Name)		Hazard Code
F001Tetrachloroethylene(T)
Trichloroethylene(T)
Methylene chloride(T)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane(T)
Carbon tetrachloride(T)
Chlorinated fluorocarbons(T)
F002Tetrachloroethylene(T)
Methylene chloride(T)
Trichloroethylene(T)
1,1,1-Trichloroethane(T)
Chlorobenzene(T)
1,1,2-Trichloro-1,2,2-trifluoroethane(T)
Ortho-dichlorobenzene(T)
Trichlorofluoromethane(T)
1,1,2-Trichloroethane(T)
F003Xylene(T)
Acetone(T)
Ethyl acetate(T)
Ethyl benzene(T)
Ethyl ether(T)
Methyl isobutyl ketone(T)
n-butyl alcohol(T)
Cyclohexanone(T)
Methanol(T)
F004Cresols & cresylic acid(T)
Nitrobenzene(T)
F005Toluene(T)
Methyl ethyl ketone(T)
Carbon disulfide(T)
Isobutanol(T)
Pyridine(T)
Benzene(T)
2-Ethoxyethanol(T)
2-Nitropropane(T)

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/

Question: So, what if I use a solvent – e.g., isopropyl alcohol or isopropanol – that meets all of the criteria of an F-listed hazardous waste?

Answer: Neither isopropyl alcohol nor isopropanol are identified as F-listed solvents, therefore, neither – nor any other solvent not identified at §261.31 – can be an F-listed hazardous waste.

Q&A: Are discarded sodium-sulfur batteries eligible for a RCRA exclusion if the sodium is reclaimed for use?

A question on June 24, 2020:

Daniel,

I’ve come across some of your training online – quite informative – and was wondering if I could run a RCRA question past you. I have a client with some sodium-sulfur batteries that are no longer needed for their intended purpose. There are very few recyclers globally who can handle sodium-sulfur batteries and this is mainly due to the presence of sodium which is reactive and when thermally treated is detrimental to the refractory liner in the furnace.

We are exploring an option where we would reclaim the sodium from the cell, which can be used in, or to make, other products. In this case, would the company extracting the sodium require a TSDF permit? Based on the following logic, I would argue they are not a TSDF because the reclaimed sodium is not a hazardous waste. They would, however, be considered a waste generator with respect to the remainder of the battery:

  • In order for a waste to be a hazardous waste, it must first be considered a solid waste (40 CFR 261.3).
  • Sodium is a by-product of the chemical reaction in a sodium-sulfur battery – it is not present when produced at 0% SOC and is generated through chemical reaction when charging the battery and is consumed when discharging the battery. The process is not fully reversible so there is always some residual sodium present. For this scenario, where the sodium is desired to be extracted, it is more advantageous for the battery to not be discharged to 0% SOC.
  • According to 40 CFR 261.2, Table 1, by-products exhibiting a characteristic of hazardous waste (sodium is reactive – D003) are not considered solid wastes when reclaimed. Per US EPA interpretations (which I have seen leveraged in your training) an analogy to this situation is a thermometer being reclaimed for its mercury. Because mercury is a Commercial Chemical Product, per 40 CFR 261.2, Table 1, it is not solid waste and therefore cannot be a hazardous waste.
  • The act of extracting the sodium now makes the remainder of the cell waste and the generator (the entity who extracted the sodium) would need to classify it for its hazardous properties. Assuming it is hazardous, the generator would likely take advantage of the universal waste option for management and disposal.

If you have time and are willing, I would appreciate your feedback on the above.

Stay safe and well,

My reply seeking more information that same day:

Thank you for contacting me. Please see below.

  • Q1: Is the battery a solid waste?
  • Q2: If it is a solid waste, is it a hazardous waste?
  • After that is determined, we can proceed to Table 1:
    • Q3: What category of hazardous waste is it? (left-hand column of Table 1).
    • Q4: What type of recycling are you practicing? (top row of Table 1).

Please clarify my understanding on the first two bullet points.

Note: an image of 40 CFR 261.2 – Table 1 is included below:

RCRA Table of Solid Waste Exclusions

40 CFR 261.2 – Table 1

Read: Categories of Waste to Consider When Determining a RCRA Recycling Exclusion From Solid Waste

Like this article?

Subscribe to my Monthly Newsletter

No marketing emails!
Back with more information:

Daniel,

Where I find the RCRA rules difficult is that there are two situations not one. There is the sodium and then there is the remainder of the battery. The questions do not allow this differentiation.

  • Q1: Is the battery a solid waste?
    • A1: Yes, because the battery will be recycled by reclamation.
  • Q2: If it is a solid waste, is it a hazardous waste?
    • A2: Yes, sodium possesses a hazardous characteristic – reactivity (D003)
  • After that is determined, we can proceed to Table 1:
    • Q3: What category of hazardous waste is it? (left-hand column of Table 1).
      • A3: The battery would be considered spent, the sodium would be considered a by product.
    • Q4: What type of recycling are you practicing? (top row of Table 1).
      • A4: Reclamation. The battery will be smelted to recover metals for use in making products. The sodium will be reclaimed in its current form and used to make other products.
My reply:

Please see below.

  • I agree that the battery is a solid waste. This is because it is being discarded. Recycling is a form of discarding.
  • The presence of sodium does not by itself make the battery a reactive hazardous waste. The battery – not the sodium – when spent would have to display the characteristic of Reactivity (D003). Let’s presume it is a D003 Reactive hazardous waste.
  • Table 1 contains some of the exclusions from regulation as a solid waste for materials that are recycled.
  • It may be that the battery is considered to be a spent secondary material. However, the sodium is not a waste that is a by-product. It is part of the battery.
  • If reclaiming, the reclaimed materials may be excluded from regulation as a solid waste and therefore cannot be a hazardous waste. This would mean the process of reclamation would not require a RCRA permit.
  • Any waste generated during reclamation would have to be managed by the generator of the waste, that is, the person conducting the reclamation.

Please contact me with any other questions.

Later that same day with two more questions:

Thanks for your assessment. I would like to discuss further if you are open to it. My two follow-up questions:

  1. Given the scenario below would the entity reclaiming the sodium be considered a TSDF? Since it is not a hazardous waste I would assume not.
  2. While I follow your point, an intact sodium-sulfur battery does not demonstrate the characteristic because the cells are hermetically sealed. There is no possibility of water intrusion and thus no reactivity concern. The battery will be intact when it first becomes solid waste (abandon or recycled) but at some point in the process will demonstrate the characteristic because the cells will be breached. So when does the hazardous characteristic need to be demonstrated to be considered hazardous waste? I would argue that most intact industrial batteries do not demonstrate a characteristic hazardous waste when intact, yet nearly all are managed as universal waste (which inherently implies it demonstrates a hazardous characteristic).
I had more answers:

Please see below.

  • If the battery is excluded from regulation as a solid waste then its recycling by reclamation would not require a RCRA permit.
  • You’re correct that the hazardous waste determination is made at the point of generation for the entire battery. If the battery contains a reactive element (sodium) it would likely be a D003 Reactive hazardous waste.

I am available all day (06.25.20) to discuss. Can we schedule a time?

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/
Some more discussion took place over the phone (no transcripts available) but then another email on July 5th:

Daniel,

I hope you enjoyed the Independence Day holiday. I had a follow-up question on the definition of a commercial chemical product (CCP). RO 14012 states “For purposes of Section 261.2, CCP means all types of unused commercial products, whether chemicals or not.” The mercury thermometer example refers to new, off-spec thermometers. In my case, I have a used battery from which we will reclaim the sodium (which recall is produced through a chemical reaction during battery charging).

Through RO 14012, I found reference to an EPA memo which provides checklist to assist in evaluating whether CCPs are hazardous waste under the RCRA. In that memo, they state: “In the RCRA hazardous waste management regulations the term commercial chemical product generally refers to materials that would, under usual circumstances, be considered products and not wastes…”. It doesn’t specifically state ‘unused’ but rather “product”. I would argue that the reclaimed sodium from a used battery is useable product, which is also consistent with the definition of reclamation in 40 CFR 261.1(d).

I’ll submit this to state regulators but was curious of your opinion.

My reply July 06, 2020:

Please see below.

  • You are correct – and something I should have mentioned – that for the purposes of the recycling exclusions at 40 CFR 261.2 a commercial chemical product must be unused. The batteries you are considering are used and therefore are not eligible for inclusion with CCP as defined at 40 CFR 261.2.
  • Also, from McCoy Guidance: “Although Table 1 in 261.2(c) specifies ‘commercial chemical products listed in 40 CFR 261.33,’ EPA interprets the term to also include those products that are not listed in 261.33, but exhibit one or more characteristics of hazardous waste. [April 11, 1985; 50 FR 14219, RO 11713, 11726, 13356, 13490, 14883] So, a battery could be a CCP per 40 CFR 261.2 but only if unused.
  • I believe the USEPA memo you refer to confirms the requirement the CCP be unused, “…would…be considered products and not wastes…” If it does not state unused here, it clearly does elsewhere.
  • I don’t believe the status of the sodium in the battery or how it is recycled is any longer an issue. If the battery is not CCP per 40 CFR 261.2, it is not subject to the exclusion no matter how it is recycled.

Please contact me with any other questions.

If you like this article, please share it using any of the social media platforms identified at the bottom of this article.

You’ll look real smart recommending my articles!
No further communication after that – at least not yet.

It’s clear to see that knowledgeable persons can disagree about the exclusions from regulation in RCRA. In this situation I think the questioner did not fully understand that the hazardous waste determination – and thus any exclusions from regulation – begin at the point of generation. Subsequent treatment of a waste does not affect it’s eligibility for exclusions from regulation. But, perhaps, I wasn’t understanding his situation properly. It takes knowledge and careful research of the regulations to make a hazardous waste determination.

FAQ: Are wastes associated with COVID-19 a hazardous waste?

FAQ: Are wastes associated with COVID-19 a hazardous waste?

No.  Wastes such as used medical equipment or personal protective equipment contaminated with the coronavirus are not regulated as a hazardous waste under USEPA regulations.

Regulations codified under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) identify solid waste as a any discarded material not excluded by regulation.  The used medical equipment, personal protective equipment (PPE), or COVID-19 test kits generated in connection with the diagnosis, treatment, or immunization of persons infected – or suspected of being infected – with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) will be a solid waste.

Like this article?

Subscribe to my Monthly Newsletter

No marketing emails!

To meet the criteria of a hazardous waste, a solid waste must be one – or both – of the following according to USEPA regulations:

  • Identified on one of the lists of hazardous waste at 40 CFR 261, subpart D; i.e., a listed hazardous waste.
  • Display one of the characteristics of a hazardous waste identified at 261, subpart C; i.e., a characteristic hazardous waste.
Lists of hazardous waste:UN3291 Regulated Medical Waste
  • F001-F039 – Hazardous waste from non-specific sources.
  • K001-K181 – Hazardous waste from specific sources.
  • U001-U411 – Discarded commercial chemical products, off-specification species, container residues, and spill residues thereof (toxic).
  • P001-P205 – Discarded commercial chemical products, off-specification species, container residues, and spill residues thereof (acutely toxic).
Characteristics of hazardous waste:
  • D001 – Characteristic of Ignitability.  Liquid, solid, or gas that can self-ignite and burn vigorously or is capable of ignition at a temperature below a regulatory threshold.  It also includes oxidizers.
  • D002 – Characteristic of Corrosivity.  Liquid of low (acid) or high (alkaline) pH or liquid capable of corroding steel.
  • D003 – Characteristic of Reactivity.  Includes: waste that is unstable and readily undergoes violent change without detonation; waste that reacts violently with water; waste that emits toxic levels of cyanide or sulfide gas, waste that is capable of detonation.
  • D004-D043 – Characteristic of Toxicity. Waste that contains an identified toxin that is leachable from the waste and is above a regulatory threshold.

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/

USEPA regulations do not define wastes as hazardous due to their infectious nature, including those contaminated by the novel coronavirus which causes COVID-19.  It is up to the generator of the waste to complete the hazardous waste determination.  However, I can, with some confidence, write that it is unlikely a solid waste contaminated with SARS-CoV-2 will either be a listed hazardous waste or display a characteristic of a hazardous waste.

Non-hazardous solid waste – including waste contaminated with SARS-CoV-2 – is subject to state regulatory programs.  This includes states that lack RCRA authorization, e.g., Iowa, Alaska, and Puerto Rico.  State regulations for the management of medical waste vary between the states.  For example, not all states refer to this waste as medical waste, but I will for this article.  This website is a great place to start to determine the regulations of your state for the management of medical waste.
BioHazard red bag

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has helpful guidance for medical waste generated by healthcare facilities:

Medical waste (trash) coming from healthcare facilities treating COVID-2019 patients is no different than waste coming from facilities without COVID-19 patients. CDC’s guidance states that management of laundry, food service utensils, and medical waste should be performed in accordance with routine procedures. There is no evidence to suggest that facility waste needs any additional disinfection.

More guidance about environmental infection control is available in section 7 of CDC’s Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations for Patients with Confirmed COVID-19 or Persons Under Investigation for COVID-19 in Healthcare Settings.

If you are a healthcare provider, medical facility, hospital, community-based testing site, or some other commercial or government facility generating a waste potentially contaminated with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, you should do the following regarding that waste:

  1. Conduct a documented hazardous waste determination.
  2. If a hazardous waste (unlikely), manage it according to USEPA and state regulations as a hazardous waste.  Be sure to inform the transporter and designated facility it may be contaminated with the coronavirus.
  3. If not a hazardous waste, research your state regulations to determine your cradle-to-grave responsibility for its on-site and off-site management as a medical waste.
  4. Follow CDC and OSHA guidelines to ensure worker protection.
  5. Comply with USDOT/PHMSA regulations for its off-site transportation as a Division 6.2 Infectious Substance.
  6. Keep records of all activities.
  7. Be safe.

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/

USEPA and most states do not regulate the wastes generated by a homeowner.  Even California does not currently regulate home-generated medical waste, with the exception of sharps (i.e., needles).  Therefore, household waste that has come in contact with someone who has COVID-19 should be managed with prudence but is not subject to regulation.  This fact sheet from the Illinois EPA contains information helpful to any homeowner for management of this waste and related items.

Q&A: How do I determine the characteristic of toxicity for a liquid waste?

A question May 04, 2018:

can tclp 20 x rule be used for liquid waste or is it only for solid?

My reply May 08, 2018:

Thank you for contacting me.  I will try to answer your question below.

  • Neither TCLP (Toxicity Characteristic Leachate Procedure) nor the “Rule of 20” may be used on a liquid waste for the purpose of determining the characteristic of toxicity.
  • The point of TCLP analysis is to extract a leachate from a representative solid sample of waste and determine the concentration of specified toxins in the liquid.
  • Regulated toxins are identified by USEPA in Table 1 of 40 CFR 261.24(b).  They include:
    • Arsenic (D004)
    • Lead (D008)
    • 2,4-D (D016)
    • Lindane (D013)
    • Silver (D011)
    • Toxaphene (D015)
    • 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol (D042)
    • More…

Interested in site specific training at your site that covers this topic, and more!

Ask me about my Onsite Training
  • The “Rule of 20” (I believe this is what the questioner meant by “20 x rule”) is a less expensive option than TCLP for analysis to determine a characteristic of toxicity for a solid.  The procedure for using the Rule of 20 on a solid sample is briefly summarized as follows:Lab personnel
    • Analyze to determine the total concentration of regulated toxin(s) in the sample.
    • The total results are then divided by 20 to determine the Maximum Theoretical Leachate Concentration (MTLC).
    • The MTLC is compared to the regulatory threshold of the toxin(s) at §261.24.
    • If the MTLC does not equal or exceed the regulatory thresholds, then the sample cannot exhibit the characteristic of Toxicity.
  • A liquid sample of a waste is analyzed directly for the total concentration of toxins.  The total results are compared directly to the regulatory thresholds to determine if it exhibits the characteristic of Toxicity.
  • To better understand the Rule of 20, Please read:  How to Determine the Toxicity Hazardous Waste Characteristic Without TCLP

I hope this helps.  Please contact me with any other questions.

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services, Inc.

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/
Conclusion:

Analysis of a sample to determine the characteristic of Toxicity is just one step in the responsibility of a hazardous waste generator to conduct a hazardous waste determination.  Using the Rule of 20 can save you a lot of money in lab costs.  Contact me to determine if there are any other methods available to you to save money and ensure compliance.

The Fifty Foot Rule Revised by the Generator Improvements Rule

The Fifty Foot Rule Revised by the Generator Improvements Rule

The Generator Improvements Rule went into effect on May 30, 2017.  “Into effect” however, only in the federal regulations of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and those states without an authorized hazardous waste program (read:  What is the status of the Generator Improvements Rule in my state?)  The new rule made over 60 changes to the regulations of the USEPA, mostly those applicable to the generator of a hazardous waste.  The purpose of this article is to explain the revisions the new rule made to what is commonly known as the Fifty Foot Rule. (more…)

Q&A: How Must I use TCLP to Determine the Toxicity of my Hazardous Waste?

This series of questions came from a frequent reader of my newsletter:

Like this article?

Subscribe to my Monthly Newsletter

No marketing emails!

Good afternoon Daniel,

I appreciate the link to your google site. I knew I could come up with a question if I thought a little bit.

(1)  The filters on the aerosol can puncturing systems – may they be discarded as regular solid waste?   According to “New Pig”, the maker of the aerosol can puncturing system that my company sells, the filters may be discarded as regular solid waste.

(2)  In your experience with Black Beauty and its use as a sandblast material for unpainted metals, does used Black Beauty usually pass TCLP?  I know this is a very subjective question and I realize the parameters involved.  Just want your opinion.

(3)   How frequently do you see the use of the SPLP test vs. the TCLP?  Is it coming into more common use?

That’s all for now – and again, no pressing issues; these are simply some questions I have dragging around in the trunk of my car!

Feel free to call if you’d rather.

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/

My reply was vague but helpful:

I will take a look at your questions and strive to get you an answer soon.

I did reply, a few days later:

I apologize for my delay in responding.  Please see below for my attempt to answer your questions.

1)  The filters on the aerosol can puncturing systems – may they be discarded as regular solid waste?   According to “New Pig”, the maker of the aerosol can puncturing system that my company sells, the filters may be discarded as regular solid waste.

  • New Pig is correct in its direction but may not have provided all of the necessary information.  Any material upon the point of discard becomes a solid waste per USEPA regulations.  This does not mean that it is solid as it could be a liquid, gas, or semi-solid.  The USEPA defines a solid waste at 40 CFR 261.2.  So, “yes” the filter is a solid waste when discarded.  However, the generator of a solid waste must conduct a hazardous waste determination to determine if it is a hazardous waste, what exclusions or exemptions may apply, and, if applicable, its hazardous waste codes.  This determination is the sole responsibility of the generator of the waste.  Since it is unlikely in my opinion that a spent carbon filter would be a listed hazardous waste (unless the aerosols punctured were pesticides), the generator would have to determine if it displays a characteristic:  Ignitability (unlikely), Corrosivity (unlikely), Reactivity (unlikely), or Toxicity (possible depending on what was in the cans punctured).  If the generator determines it is not a hazardous waste, then they may be disposed of as a non-hazardous waste which might – depending on state regulations – allow for disposal with common trash and garbage at a municipal solid waste facility.

(2)  In your experience with Black Beauty and its use as a sandblast material for unpainted metals, does used Black Beauty usually pass TCLP?  I know this is a very subjective question and I realize the parameters involved.  Just want your opinion.

  • Black Beauty is a coal slag blasting abrasive.  The question of whether or not it passes TCLP depends on one assumption and two criteria:
    1. Assumption:  The concern is regarding toxic levels of heavy metals.  I don’t think any other toxins will be an issue.
    2. Criteria 1:  Are there toxic levels of heavy metals in the coal slag prior to use?  I don’t think this is likely but without analytical from the supplier or some other source it is impossible to tell.
    3. Criteria 2:  Are toxic levels of heavy metals derived from the unpainted metal surface?  This is quite possible depending on the steel alloy treated.
  • Answer:  It is quite difficult to determine if a used sandblast material contains toxic levels of heavy metals without analysis.  I suggest analysis of random samples to determine if the characteristic of toxicity is present.  If several samples show no or little presence of leachable toxins, then I think the generator could with confidence state that the waste is non-hazardous.

(3)   How frequently do you see the use of the SPLP test vs. the TCLP?  Is it coming into more common use?

  • I have not heard of SPLP at all prior to your email (I had to google it).  I have not heard anything from USEPA indicating they intend to accept anything for determination of the characteristic of Toxicity other than TCLP or the “Rule of 20”.
I hope this helps.
 
Please don’t hesitate to contact me with any other questions.

Interested in a Webinar that covers this topic, and more!

My Webinar Training Schedule

I think my answers were what she was looking for:

Thank you very much for your thorough response to my questions.  I don’t know if the Rule of 20 is used very much in Florida, but it’s certainly good to know about.  I do remember something about…but I had to pull it out from my memory bank.

Love being on your mailing list and receiving the newsletter.

Have a great week.

Answering questions is what I do.  Whether it’s through my training (Onsite or Webinar), my consulting services, or by responding to the questions I get from EHS professionals like you.

Q&A: Hazardous Waste Determination for Lab Waste

A question from a former customer of mine on June 14, 2016:

Hello again Dan,

I’m sorry to bother you with another question but I’m having trouble deciphering this information.  I’m looking to do some lab tests.  I was first reviewing the SDS for the reagents involved and two include hazardous waste disposal.

The  Peroxydisulfuric Acid, Dipotassium Salt in the Metals Prep set Reagent B  and potassium cyanide in Lead TNT Reagent Vial.  (Safety Data Sheets were attached to the email)

Could you please explain disposal considerations for both of these (how they must be disposed of and why).  Is there any quantity guidelines (like you told me about As)?

Once again I greatly appreciate your help!

I replied a few days later on June 16th:

I will try to answer your questions and provide the answers you need.

  • The Safety Data Sheet (SDS) is authorized and required to be used by OSHA, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration.  While its information can be useful, it is not authorized by the USEPA.  Specifically, sections 1 through 11 and 16 of the SDS are authorized and required by OSHA.  Sections 12 through 15 – including section 13 Disposal Considerations  – is not authorized or required by OSHA.  Information in these unauthorized sections of the SDS is provided voluntarily the manufacturer and may not be relied upon for compliance.
  • The generator of a waste must determine if a waste is hazardous and then manage it properly from “cradle-to-grave.”
  • Based on the information on the SDS for the product Metals Prep Set Reagent B it is 100% Potassium persulfate and an oxidizer.  If it retains the characteristic of an oxidizer at its point of generation as a waste, i.e. when you discard it, then it will be a hazardous waste for the characteristic of Ignitability (D001).
  • Based on the information on the SDS for the product Lead TNT Reagent Vial it contains 60-70% potassium cyanide which is a p-listed material.  It may be a p-listed hazardous waste if it is disposed of unused.  If it is used then the P-code will not apply.  It is also possible – but unlikely – that it could also be a hazardous waste for the characteristic of Reactivity (D003) if it emits cyanide gas at toxic levels.

Summary:

While the SDS can be a good source of information, it is not the final word on the determination of whether or not a waste is hazardous.  It is important to note that the SDS describes an unused product and may not be an accurate description of that product when it becomes a waste.
The responsibility for the hazardous waste determination is solely the generator’s.
I hope this helps.
Please don’t hesitate to contact me with any questions or if you require HazMat Employee Training or Hazardous Waste Personnel Training.
That seemed to settle it!

Q&A: Hazardous Waste Determination for Sodium Arsenite

May 6, 2016, a question from a past attendee of one of my Training Seminars (unfortunately, I don’t provide Training Seminars anymore.  Check out my website for other training options:  Onsite Training or Webinar Training).

Hi Dan
I took a class with you a couple years ago.
I have another question for you. I figure if you don’t know the answer you might be able to direct me to where I’d find it.
We would like to do a lab test which requires sodium arsenite which is a hazardous waste. In the test, the sodium arsenite will be greatly diluted. Does the diluted solution then become hazardous waste?
I would greatly appreciate any direction you can give me.

My reply the next day (May 7, 2016):

I will try to answer your question.

  • If the diluted solution of sodium arsenite is to be discarded, it must be managed as a solid waste.  The term “solid waste” as used by USEPA and most states is not limited to wastes in a solid form.  A “solid waste” could be a solid, liquid, semi-solid, or containerized gas.
  • The generator of a solid waste must conduct a hazardous waste determination.
  • Sodium arsenite and the process of generation you indicate does not appear to be a listed hazardous waste.  It does not appear on any of the following codifications of listed hazardous waste:
    • Hazardous waste from non-specific sources (F-codes).
    • Hazardous waste from specific sources (K-codes).
    • Discarded commercial chemical products, off-specification species, container residues, and spill residues thereof (P-codes for acutely toxic and U-codes for toxic).
  • Sodium arsenite does not appear to display the characteristic of any of the following hazardous wastes:
    • Ignitability (D001)
    • Corrosivity (D002)
    • Reactivity (D003)
  • Arsenic is a toxin identified by the USEPA at 40 CFR 261.24.  It is possible, therefore, that it displays the characteristic of toxicity (D004 – D043) for arsenic (D004).
  • A waste containing arsenic may be a toxic hazardous waste (D004) if it contains a leachable concentration of arsenic above the regulatory threshold of 5.0 mg/L.  In other words, if it displays the characteristic of toxicity.
  • Analysis by the Toxicity Characteristic Leachate Procedure (TCLP) is one way to determine the concentration of a toxin in leachate derived from a waste in a solid form.  If the waste is already in a liquid form, the total concentration of the toxin must be determined.
  • Another – and less expensive – method to determine if your waste displays the characteristic of toxicity is the “Rule of 20”.  Read more about TCLP and alternatives to it here.
  • It is possible, if greatly diluted, that the waste you discard may not be a toxic hazardous waste.
Thank you and please don’t hesitate to contact me if you have any other questions.

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/
My reply appears to have been satisfactory:
Thank you VERY much!  That makes a lot of sense.
Have a great weekend!

Q&A: Determination of Hazardous Waste Generation for the Characteristic of Toxicity

Contact me with any questions you may have about the generation, identification, management, and disposal of hazardous waste

Daniels Training Services

815.821.1550

Info@DanielsTraining.com

https://www.danielstraining.com/
A question to my website on April 29, 2016:

My question is: If your waste is considered a haz waste due to one chemical determined by the TCLP process. Do we count the weight of the chemical in the waste or the total weight of the waste that determines how much you generate. Thanks.

My reply later that same day:

If a representative sample of a waste is analyzed by TCLP and determined to have a leachable toxin above the regulatory threshold, then the entire waste from which the representative sample was derived is assigned the applicable hazardous waste code.  Therefore, the entire weight of the waste – not just the weight of the toxin in the waste – is used for the purpose of determining hazardous waste generation and the hazardous waste generator status.

I hope this helps.
Please don’t hesitate to contact me with any other questions.