Before we begin…

The content of this Q&A is based on the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration within the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT/PHMSA).

PCBs – or Polychlorinated biphenyls – are a highly toxic product whose production was banned by United States federal law in 1978, and by the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants in 2001. It is an organic chlorine compound.

RCRA is the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. It is the primary source of law upon which the Federal hazardous waste regulations of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) are based.

The Question (11.21.20):

Subject: DOT training for PCB

Message Body:
Is DOT hazmat training required to sign the hazardous waste manifest when it is used for PCB transportation pursuant to 40 CFR 761.207? I understand it is for RCRA hazardous waste shipments.

My Answer (11.30.20):

I will try to answer your question below.

• HazMat Employee training is required for any person with a direct affect on the safe transport of HazMat. This includes preparation, review, and signing / certifying of a hazardous material shipping paper.
• A uniform hazardous waste manifest is a type of hazardous material shipping paper.
• A hazardous waste subject to the regulations of the USEPA is one type of a hazardous material regulated by USDOT/PHMSA.
• USDOT/PHMSA defines a hazardous waste at 49 CFR 171.8 as a material subject to the Hazardous Waste Manifest Requirements of the USEPA at 40 CFR part 262.
• The Hazardous Waste Manifest Requirements of 40 CFR part 262 apply solely to a large quantity generator of hazardous waste (LQG) and a small quantity generator of hazardous waste (SQG). A very small quantity generator of hazardous waste (VSQG) – formerly conditionally exempt small quantity generator of hazardous waste (CESQG) – is not subject to 40 CFR part 262.

• The USDOT does not extend applicability to the manifest requirements of 40 CFR 761.207 which is the manifest general requirements for PCB waste.

So…

• The use of the uniform hazardous waste manifest alone does not make the shipment subject to the HMR and therefore require HazMat Employee training.

However…

• PCB waste may be a HazMat for other reasons:
  • It may contain a concentration of PCBs and be transported in a manner that classifies it as a marine pollutant. Generally speaking this would require a concentration of PCBs in solution of 1% or more and the waste must be transported by vessel or in a bulk packaging by highway or rail. Read: What is a marine pollutant?
  • It may contain a concentration and weight of PCBs in a single container that classifies it as a RQ of a hazardous substance. In general, this will require a PCB concentration of 20 parts per million or more and a quantity of 1 pound or more in a single package.
• So, more information is required before I can fully answer your question. At a minimum I require:
  • The concentration of PCB in the – I presume – oil.
  • The size and type of packaging.
  • The mode of transport.

Regardless, HazMat Employee training is always a good idea!

Please contact me with any other questions.

No reply.

I did not hear anymore from that questioner. Perhaps my answer was enough? The Hazardous Materials Regulations of USDOT/PHMSA can be difficult to comply with all on their own. If the transportation involves a waste subject to USEPA regulations – or those of your state – it can become even more complicated. Make sure you understand the relationship between the Federal regulations of the USDOT/PHMSA and USEPA when arranging for the off-site transportation of waste.

Yes.

I’ll just let that sink in…

Usually it will be the company represented by the signor, i.e., the generator or offeror of the hazardous waste that is subject to enforcement actions. However, in situations of egregious or criminal violations, the signor could be held personally liable.

Read question #3 of RO 14687

Handlers of hazardous waste have expressed to USEPA their concern with the customer interaction required to obtain the generator’s signature on the uniform hazardous waste manifest and requested that transporters be allowed to sign the name of the generator on the Manifest to maintain social distancing during the COVID-19 public health emergency. USEPA responded to this concern May 18, 2020 with a memorandum explaining a temporary policy to allow for transporter signature for the generator on the Manifest. This temporary policy was set to expire on August 31, 2020. However, on August 20, 2020 USEPA released another memorandum updating and revising this policy in light of some states experiencing an increase in COVID-19 cases following efforts to reopen.

The purpose of this article is to explain USEPA’s new temporary policy for obtaining the necessary signatures on the uniform hazardous waste manifest during the COVID-19 public health emergency as it was updated and revised by the USEPA memorandum of August 20, 2020.

(more…)

Sooner or later most generators of hazardous waste must prepare that waste, and offer it, for transportation to an off-site treatment, storage, and disposal facility (TSDF) for final disposal. The off-site transportation of the hazardous waste must be done in compliance with Federal regulations of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), a state environmental agency if the state has an authorized hazardous waste program, and the Federal regulations of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration within the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT/PHMSA). At a minimum this will require the completion of the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest (the Manifest), which must be completed by the generator of the hazardous waste, and signed by both the generator / offeror of the hazardous waste and the initial transporter before it can begin transportation to the designated facility.

Handlers of hazardous waste have expressed concern with customer interaction to obtain the generator’s signature on the Manifest and have requested that transporters be allowed to sign the name of the generator on the Manifest to maintain social distancing during the COVID-19 public health emergency. USEPA responded to this concern with a memorandum issued May 18, 2020 explaining a temporary policy.

The purpose of this article is to explain USEPA’s temporary policy of May 18, 2020 for obtaining the necessary signatures on the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest during the COVID-19 public health emergency.

(more…)

A question from my website (October 10, 2017):

Do i need to print the entire name of a waste receiving facility as permitted, or can I abbreviate it?

My reply that same day:

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

• The USEPA instructions for completing the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest include the following:

Item 8. Designated Facility Name, Site Address, and U.S. EPA ID Number
Enter the company name and site address of the facility designated to receive the waste listed on this manifest. Also enter the facility’s phone number and the U.S. EPA twelve digit identification number of the facility.

• There is nothing that I can find in EPA regulations that prohibits the abbreviation of the designated facility. Nor is it specifically allowed.
• USDOT regulations at 49 CFR 172.201(a)(3) prohibit the use of abbreviations in the shipping description unless specifically authorized by regulations. However, the designated facility is not part of the shipping description.
• State regulations may be more strict than those of the USEPA and may contain a prohibition on the use of abbreviations, though I doubt it. You may wish to check with the state of both the generator and designated facility.

• In sum:  I don’t recommend abbreviating information on the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest but cannot find anything in the regulations – either USDOT or USEPA – that specifically prohibits it.

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

At that seemed to do it because I didn’t hear anymore from him.

While I prefer to give clear answers based on precise language of the regulations, sometimes that isn’t possible.  As in this instance, the regulations don’t always address every possible circumstance.  In those situations I think it best to be conservative and play it safe.