u-listed hazardous waste

Q&A: Is this a U-listed hazardous waste?

It all started with a telephone conversation on 09.25.20 but spread into email correspondence (which I prefer). From the telephone conversation:
  • Person had a waste Butanol Solution recovered from a spill.
  • SDS indicated the following:
    • 70-80% nonionic surfactant.
    • 5-10% n-Butyl alcohol (CAS 71-36-3).
    • Flash point of 130 degrees Fahrenheit.
email correspondence began that same day:

I did receive the SDS on the butyl alcohol and it turns out it is a Butanol Solution with a flash point of 130 F. The chemical composition is 70-80% Nonionic Surfactant and 5-10% Butyl Alcohol (the kind that is on the U-list). Do you think this still meets the criteria for a U-listed waste for at this point? I realize it would receive a D001 and WA State Toxic WT02 for the liquid solution itself.

Thank you!

Like this article?

Subscribe to my Monthly Newsletter

No marketing emails!

My reply late on a Friday night (it’s what I do):

Please see below.

  • To be a P- or U-listed Haz Waste it must be pure or technical grade or the sole active ingredient in the solution. It does not seem to me that the U-listed material is the sole active ingredient in the solution so it would not be a U-listed Haz Waste.
  • The product would be a D001 but it is not certain that the recovered spilled material would still be below the fp. But it probably is.
  • I am not certain about the WT02 and its applicability. I would have to do more research.
Inquisitor’s reply even later that Friday night:

Thank you for responding back and on a Friday evening! I was thinking the same in that it would not fall under a U-listed waste since it was an ingredient in a solution at 10% maximum. Also appreciate the feedback on flash point for the recovered material. I did not consider that it may be above benchmarks so I think I will suggest testing to check.

I’ve got the state regs covered so no worries on that 😊.

Again thank you for your help. I will do a review with high marks. Be well and enjoy your weekend!

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!

Conclusion:

Determination of a P- or U-listed hazardous waste is a challenge due to all of the complex requirements of this listed hazardous waste. However, just because it is difficult to determine doesn’t mean you are not a generator of a P- or U-listed hazardous waste. Generators need to take extra care in situations like this one where spilled material is recovered. If you ever have questions about the hazardous waste determination, don’t hesitate to contact me.

Generator Determination of P- & U- Listed Hazardous Waste

A company I am familiar with is a Large Quantity Generator (LQG) of hazardous waste, largely due to the generation of what it has determined to be U-listed hazardous waste.  The point of generation for the waste is an air pollution control device (dust collector) that services a process where several raw materials – some U-listed – are mixed.  It is my opinion that the waste determination in this case is incorrect in that a U-code (and a P-code for that matter) does not apply in this case.  I shared this opinion with company representatives and was met with skepticism.  Let’s review this particular aspect of the P- and U-codes and see what you think.

First, a little background:

P- and U-wastes are identified at 40 CFR 261.33 and along with F- and K-wastes make up the four kinds of listed hazardous wastes.  P- and U- wastes are discarded commercial chemical products, off-specification species, container reisdues, and spill residues thereof.  EPA further described them at the publication of the Final Rule (45 FR 33115):

“EPA intended to encompass those chemical products which possessed toxic or other hazardous properties and which, for various reasons, are sometimes thrown away in pure or undiluted form.  The reasons for discarding these materials might be that the materials did not meet the required specifications, that inventories were being reduced, or that the product line had changed.  The regulation was intended to designate chemicals themselves as hazardous wastes, if discarded, not to list all wastes which might contain these chemical constituents.  In drawing up these lists, the agency drew heavily on previous work by EPA and other organizations identifying substances of particular concern [e.g. ,the Department of Transportation].”  Emphasis mine.

The key to proper determination of a P- or U-listed hazardous waste is the identification of a Commercial Chemical Product (CCP), the regulations include several references to CCP’s, including:

  1. Virgin or unused materials whose name appears on the P- or U-list.Hazardous Waste Accumulation Area
  2. Manufacturing chemical intermediates whose name appears on the P-or U-list.
  3. Off-specification species of listed virgin or chemical intermediates.
  4. Container residues of listed materials that are not “RCRA Empty” per 40 CFR 261.7.
  5. Residue and spill clean-up of listed materials.

A comment included with 40 CFR 261.33(d) clarifies this further:

“Comment: The phrase “commercial chemical product or manufacturing chemical intermediate having the generic name listed in .  .  .” refers to a chemical substance which is manufactured or formulated for commercial or manufacturing use which consists of the commercially pure grade of the chemical, any technical grades of the chemical that are produced or marketed, and all formulations in which the chemical is the sole active ingredient. It does not refer to a material, such as a manufacturing process waste, that contains any of the substances listed in paragraph (e) or (f). Where a manufacturing process waste is deemed to be a hazardous waste because it contains a substance listed in paragraph (e) or (f), such waste will be listed in either §261.31 or §261.32 or will be identified as a hazardous waste by the characteristics set forth in subpart C of this part.”  Once again, emphasis mine.

Once again, the EPA makes clear that both P- and U-codes are meant to be applied to virgin material or a manufacturing chemical intermediate which has not yet been processed or reacted.  P- and U-codes are specifically not to be used for manufacturing process waste.  OK, what is a manufacturing process waste?

Quite simply, a manufacturing process waste is any waste generated once the CCP or manufacturing chemical intermediate has left the “Material Handling Stage” and entered the “Manufacturing Process”.  If the point of generation of the waste (ie. the moment it is or is decided to be discarded) is within the manufacturing process it is a manufacturing process waste.  A manufacturing process waste cannot be a CCP or manufacturing chemical intermediate.  Therefore it cannot be a P- or U-listed hazardous waste.

Please note however that if the P- and U-codes don’t apply, the waste may still be hazardous as a F- or K-listed hazardous waste.  Or, it may be hazardous for one of the four characteristics:  ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity.  It could also be a combination of several of the above.

My example company should remove the U-codes from this waste and, assuming no other listed or characteristic hazards, reclassify it as  a non-hazardous waste.  This will likely change its hazardous waste generator status from LQG to Small Quantity Generator (SQG).

Some mistakes a company makes in its interpretation of the hazardous waste regulations can cost money in fines and violations.  Others, like this one, result in unnecessary waste disposal costs and adherence to overly restrictive regulations (ie. LQG instead of SQG).  Both of these kinds of mistakes can be avoided by attending one of my open enrollment training sessions.  At my training I cover the EPA regulations for hazardous waste personnel in the 1st half of the day (4 hours) and the DOT regulations for the transportation of hazardous materials in the 2nd half (4 hours).  One day is all it takes to get you back in compliance and avoiding costly mistakes like this.