SEPA
              UniMdStMM
              Envtromnemcl Protection
              Agency
Off ic« of
Soltd Wast* and
Em*rg*ncy R*spon»*
               DIRECTIVE NUMBER: 9443.09(84)
               TITLE: Hazardous Waste Identifications Three Questions

               APPROVAL DATE:  11-29-84
               EFFECTIVE DATE:  u-29-84
               ORIGINATING OFFICE: office of solid waste
               D FINAL
               D DRAFT
                LEVEL OF DRAFT
                  DA — Signed by AA or DAA
                  D B — Signed by Office Director
                  DC — Review & Comment
               REFERENCE (other documents):
  OSWER     OSWER      OSWER
VE   DIRECTIVE   DIRECTIVE   Dl

-------
PART 261  SUBPART C - CHARACTERISTICS
                                                DOC:  9443.09(84)
Key Words:

Regulations


Subject:

Addressee:


Originator:

Source Doc:

Date:

Summary:
Corrosive Wastes, Commercial Chemical Products, Reactive Wastes

40 CFR 261.22(a), 261.33(d)(e)(f), 261.31, 261.32, 261.23(a)(5),
261.20, 261.24

Hazardous Waste Identification:  Three Questions

W.H. Yancy, NL Baroid, NL Industries, Inc., P.O. Box 1675,
Houston, Texas 77251

Irene S. Homer, Studies and Methods Branch

#9443.09(84)

11-29-84
     Physically solid forms of sodium hydroxide and potassium hydroxide (granular
or pellets) are not currently regulated as corrosive hazardous waste.  Title
40 CFR §261.22(a) defines corrosivity for aqueous solutions within given pH
ranges and for liquids that corrode steel faster than a quarter of an inch per
year under specified test conditions.  In 1980, EPA had not seen a demonstrated
need to address corrosive solids in its regulations, the Agency currently
developing a test to evaluate the leachahility of solid-phase corrosives.

    . A product treated with a preservative listed in §261.33(e) or (f) is not
subject to RCRA regulation as a commercial chemical product when discarded.
The comment after 40 CFR §261.33(d) explains that commercial chemical products
are manufactured for commercial use and are commercially pure or technical
grades or formulations in which the chemical is the sole active ingredient.
The comment also says that a waste that contains a chemical listed in §261.33(e)
or (f) is only a RCRA waste if the waste is listed in §261.31 or 261.32 or if
the waste is hazardous by characteristics identified in §261.20 to §261.24.
For example, potato starch treated with formaldehyde would not be a hazardous
waste under the mixture rule because it does not contain a listed commercial
chemical product as defined, since the formaldehyde has been used as a preser-
vative.  The potato starch would be hazardous if it met any of the §261 Sub-
part C criteria.

     40 CFR §261 .23(a)(5) does not presently specify the amount of cyanides or
sulfides that would identify a waste as reactive.  The Agency's regulatory
interpretive letter, RIL #2, suggests that below 10 ppm the waste will not be
considered reactive, and above 200 ppm it will be considered reactive unless the
generator can show why it is not.  Between 10 and 200 ppm, the decision will be
based on the potential releasibility of ^S or HCN on a case-by-case basis.
     Authorized States and territories operate hazardous waste programs in lieu
RCRA, but any State or territory may have additional regulatory standards.

-------
                            29/C84
                                                              9443.09 (84)
NL Baroid
ML Industries, Inc.
Mr. W. u. Yancey
P.O. Mox 1675
Houston, TX 77251

D«ar Mr. Yancey:

     I an glad to clarify the issues of hazardous waste
identification you raised in your letter dated November 15, 1934.

     First, you Basked if physically solid forms of sodium hydroxide
and potassium hydroxide (granular or pellets) are currently
regulated as RCRA corrosive hazardous waste.  The answer is no.
Title 40 CFR S261.22(a) defines corrosivity for aqueous solutions
within given pH ranges and for liquids that corrode steel faster
than a quarter of an inch per year under specified test conditions.
The May 19, 1980, preamble, 45 FR 33109 states:
                  r
       "...there is no demonstrated need to address corrosive
       solids at this tine.  EPA will, however, continue to
       seek information on the dangers presented by these wastes
       and will consider specific regulatory measures if the .
       need for more control becomes apparent."

At this time, the Agency is developing a test protocol to
evaluate the leachability of solid-phase corrosives.  Further-
more, the new RCRA amendments direct EPA to minimize -effects
of hazardous waste on human health and the environment.  So
you can see that the status of corrosive solids may be subject
to change in the future.

     Second, you wondered if products that contain preservatives
any* listed in 40 CFR S261.33(f) are subject to regulation as
RCRA hazardous waste.  In particular, you asked
                                                            _
       that has been treated with_ frtrnial'jqny'l0.  _Tha connent
after 40 CFR S261.J33(d) explainsthat commercial chemical products
are manufactured for commercial use and are commercially pure or
technical grades or formulations in' which the chemical is the
sole active ingredient.  The comment also says that a waste that
contains a chemical listed in $*>261 .33(e) or (f) is only a RCRA
waste if the waste is listed in $5261.31 or 261.32 or if the

-------
 waste is_ha.2?rdciJ9  by characteristics 1 rioni-i.fi P^ jjnqofii ,30  to
-2^1.24 .J The comment is in brackets and thus is no~t~~p-ar t-of-'EKo"'  •
 regulations,  but  it conveys the intended meaning of the definition
 of  comnercia,! chemical products.   Thus, the potato starch,  when
 a waste whether  it  is used or not,  does not contain- a commercial
 chenical product, since the formaldehyde has already been  used
 in  the  mixture as a preservative.   Furthermore, there are  no
 listed  potato starch waste streams.  You should determine  whether
xor  not  the potato starch meets the  criteria for ignitability,
 corrosivity,  reactivity, or E? toxicity.  In any case, the  starch
 is  not  a hazardous  waste by the mixture rule.           ..     "

      Third, as you  know, 40 CFR 5261.23(a)(5) does not specify
 the amount of cyanides or sulfldes  that would identify a waste
 as  reactive.   Presently, EPA is in  the process of developing
 test protocols to quantify the reactive characteristic for
 cyanides and sulfi'des.  In the meantime, the enclosed regulatory
 interpretive letter, RIL £2, outlines the Agency's suggested  ; '-.
 guidelines.  Selow  10 ppnt, the waste will not be considered
 reactive, and above 200 ppn, it will be considered reactive
 unless  the generator can show why  it is not.  Between 10 and  200
 ppm, the decision will be based on  the potential releasibility '•
 of  H2S  or HCN on  a  case-by-case basis.  /  \     •       "'   •. "
                 '•-*,'*.-                            ^
      All but about  seven states and three territories have programs.
 that operate in  lieu of the Federal RCRA program, and eight of
 these programs have received full"authorization.  When a State
 has been granted  authority to operate-,the SCRA program, you are
 subject to the State regulations which nay be slightly different.
 The RCRA/Superfund  Hotline at' (800)424-9346 can send you a'copy
 of  the  State hazardous waste agency^ addresses and phone numbers \.
 if  you  need it.

      If you wish  to discuss these  questions further, please do
 hot hesitate to  call me at (202)332-4804.          '
                           . '*

                                 Sincerely yours,
                                 Irene S. Horner
                                 Studies and Methods Branch
 Attachment

-------